Connect with us

Economics

If Trump wants rate cuts, he would likely need to replace the Fed’s full board

Published

on

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media during the annual White House Easter Egg Roll, on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 21, 2025.

Leah Millis | Reuters

President Donald Trump’s public criticism of Fed Chair Jerome Powell has fueled concern that he will try to fire the central bank chief, but even that historic and legally questionable move may not be enough for Trump to bend monetary policy in his preferred direction.

Even firing Powell won’t necessarily get Trump the rate cuts he wants, according to multiple economists.

“In all likelihood, however, firing Powell would just be the first step in dismantling the Fed’s independence. If Trump is set on lowering interest rates then he will have to fire the other six Fed Board Members too, which would trigger a more severe market backlash, with the dollar falling and rates at the long end of the yield curve rising,” said Paul Ashworth, chief North America economist at Capital Economics, in a recent note.

Powell is chair of both the Fed board of governors and the Federal Open Market Committee, which sets interest rate policy. Ashworth pointed out that, while FOMC members usually choose to make the president-appointed board of governors chair to lead them, they can buck Trump and choose someone else as head of the rate-setting committee. And JPMorgan’s chief U.S. economist, Michael Feroli, said in a note Monday that “most of the power of the leadership stems from the historical deference” rather than the actual mechanics of the job.

Deutsche Bank senior economist Peter Sidorov echoed the idea that individual Fed members might vote against the wishes of a new leader if they feel Trump has overstepped.

“Note that while the Fed Chair has significant influence over the FOMC, monetary policy actions are taken by a majority vote so removing Powell could lead to increased pushback from other members against pressure on the Fed to deliver easier policy,” Sidorov said in a note to clients Tuesday.

This discussion on Wall Street comes after Trump has criticized Powell multiple times in recent days, including calling the Fed chair “a major loser” in a social media post Monday that rocked financial markets. White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said last week that the president and his team were exploring the possibility of removing the Fed chair.

It is unclear whether Trump even has the authority to remove Powell before his term as board of governors chair ends next year. Powell has previously said he does not believe it is legally allowed for the president to fire him. The Supreme Court is set to hear an appeal about Trump’s firing of board members at other federal organizations in a case that could shed light on what’s next for the Fed.

The speculation about changes at the Fed, along with the ongoing tariff uncertainty, appears to have hurt investor confidence in the United States. U.S. stocks, bonds and the dollar have all fallen in recent weeks.

Wall Street pros worry that changes at the Fed could lead to further sell-offs and fears of higher inflation.

“Any reduction in the independence of the Fed would add upside risks to an inflation outlook that is already subject to upward pressures from tariffs and somewhat elevated inflation expectations,” Feroli said in a note to clients.

“It has been hoped that these adverse consequences would dissuade the president from threatening Fed independence, though so far the president has often followed through on his intentions,” he added.

— CNBC’s Michael Bloom contributed reporting.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending