Connect with us

Economics

Why this week’s positive inflation reports won’t look as good to the Fed

Published

on

Watermelons from Mexico are displayed on a shelf at a Target store on March 5, 2025 in Novato, California.

Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

On the surface, February’s inflation data released this week brought some encouraging news. But underneath, there were signs likely to keep the Federal Reserve on hold when it comes to interest rates.

While the consumer and producer price indexes both were lower than anticipated, that won’t necessarily be reflected in the main measure the Fed uses to gauge inflation.

Because of some byzantine math and trends in a few key areas beneath the headline readings, policymakers are unlikely to take a lot of comfort in these numbers, according to multiple Wall Street economists.

“In short, progress on inflation has started off 2025 on the wrong foot,” Bank of America economist Stephen Juneau said in a note. “Our forecast for PCE inflation reinforces our view that inflation is unlikely to fall enough for the Fed to cut this year, especially given policy changes that boost inflation. We maintain our view that policy rates will stay on hold through year-end unless activity data really weakens.”

Markets agree, at least for now. Traders are assigning virtually no probability to a cut at next week’s Federal Open Market Committee meeting and only about a 1-in-4 chance of a reduction in May, according to CME Group calculations.

Treasury Sec. Bessent: We're focused on ‘real economy,' not concerned about ‘a little’ volatility

While the Fed pays attention to the two Bureau of Labor Statistics gauges, it considers the last word on inflation to be the Commerce Department’s personal consumption expenditures price index.

Central bank officials believe the PCE reading — in particular the core that excludes food and energy prices — to be a broader look at price trends. The index also more closely reflects what consumers are buying rather than just the prices of individual goods and services. If consumers are, say, substituting chicken for beef, that would be more indicated in PCE rather than CPI or PPI.

Most economists think the latest PCE reading, scheduled for release later this month, will show the year-over-year inflation rate at best holding steady at 2.6% or perhaps even ticking up a notch — further away from the Fed’s 2% goal.

Specifically, Thursday’s PPI report, which measures wholesale costs and is thus considered an indicator for pipeline inflation, “confirms our fears that the benign February inflation print would map across to a hotter than expected inflation print on the Fed’s preferred PCE inflation gauge,” wrote Krishna Guha, head of global policy and central bank strategy at Evercore ISI.

“Rather than decline steadily through early [second quarter], PCE inflation looks instead set to be bumpy and choppy,” he added.

Some of the areas that will feed through from PPI and elevate PCE include higher prices for hospital care as well as insurance prices and air transportation, according to Sam Tombs, chief U.S. economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics.

“The outturn almost certainly will make the Fed wince,” Combs wrote.

Combs predicts the core PCE reading for February will show an inflation rate of 2.8%, a 0.2 percentage point increase from January. That’s about in line with others on the Street, as Bank of America and Citigroup see the core inflation rate at 2.7%. Either way, it’s moving in the wrong direction. The consumer price index showed a core inflation rate of 3.1%, the lowest since April 2021.

However, there could be some good news yet.

As much as the expectation is for a bounce from February, many forecasters see inflation pulling back beyond that, even with the impact from tariffs.

Citi thinks March will see a “much more favorable” reading, with the firm predicting an out-of-consensus call of the Fed resuming its rate cuts in May. Market pricing currently indicates a much greater likelihood of a June cut.

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