Connect with us

Business

Even Trump’s allies fear he’s leading America into a recession with his tariffs. Here are some off-ramps

Published

on



President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” last week was more like a Day of Economic Infamy. With the announcement of sweeping new tariffs on friends and foes alike, he certainly made history. 

The open question: Is it all a negotiating ploy? Or does the president really want to isolate the U.S. from the rest of the world, start a trade war, and collapse relationships that have kept the world relatively peaceful since World War II? The announcement certainly accomplished one goal—making news. The executive orders imposing a 10% baseline tariff on all countries and far higher rates on major U.S. trading partners sparked a media frenzy, with commentators, economists, and historians noting parallels to the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, which are widely recognized as a contributor to the Great Depression.

Even Trump’s allies are speaking out against the tariffs. “We are in the process of destroying confidence in our country as a trading partner, as a place to do business, and as a market to invest capital,” wrote Pershing Square CEO Bill Ackman, who endorsed Trump last summer, in an X post on Sunday. Ackman proposed a 90-day timeout to “negotiate and resolve unfair asymmetric tariff deals.”

It’s no surprise that Wall Street and the markets hate these tariffs. Corporate leaders are in shock—reorganizing priorities, halting investments, freezing hiring, and beginning shutdowns, all while trying to keep stakeholders calm. Retailers are flummoxed.

On Capitol Hill, the tariffs also prompted predictable reactions. Democrats are delighted as newfound proponents of free trade. Republican politicians have discovered the joy of tariffs. Some unions are excited. Others are skeptical. Meanwhile, Americans are split and foreign leaders are horrified.

I see it from a different perspective as the head of the Consumer Technology Association, which represents some 1,300 tech companies. Last week, I spoke strongly against these tariffs. In doing so, I felt I was saying the obvious: These are massive tax hikes on Americans that will drive inflation, kill jobs, and may cause a recession. The Day of Economic Infamy marked the beginning of not only a global trade war, but the severing of our ties with longtime allies and trade partners. The markets agreed, with more than $5.6 trillion (and climbing) in lost stock market value since the announcement.

President Trump clearly has a plan, but I worry that his view of our country is stuck in the past. I keep hearing President Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick talk about huge new American factories. But in a high-employment environment, it’s not clear that factories are where Americans aspire to work. Even if they did, Secretary Lutnick has acknowledged that highly automated factories will employ few Americans, other than those who build them and fix them.

The reality is that not everything can be made in the United States, and not everything should be. Beyond goods with national security implications like ships and planes, Americans are better served by investing in strong supply chains that bring low-cost goods from around the globe.

So, what’s the solution? One possible off-ramp—and possibly the preferred option for President Trump—is dealmaking. The Trump wish list may include lower tariffs from these countries, commitments to buy American goods, or investment in the U.S. If President Trump cuts a deal with Vietnam or another major manufacturing country, others will follow, and markets will calm. In fact, rumors abound that those deals are already made and will soon be announced. This is a best-case scenario, pushing the world to lower or even zero tariffs.

Another option is action from Congress, which granted President Trump tariff authority and can take it back. Policymakers are already hearing from unhappy constituents. If they face the prospect of a blue wave in the 2026 midterms, they may decide that risk outweighs the president’s wrath.

We are already starting to see some Republican rebellion. Last Wednesday, a bipartisan group of senators passed a resolution refuting the “economic emergency” justifying tariffs on Canada. Senators Chuck Grassley and Maria Cantwell have also proposed giving Congress the right to reverse new tariffs. Every few hours we hear another Republican politician publicly questioning the wisdom of President Trump’s approach to tariffs. If the markets continue their nosedive, more leaders will speak up.

Of course, President Trump is a master of rhetoric. If he sees the economy go south and public anger rise, he may attempt to turn around public sentiment by doubling down on claims that tariff revenue is needed to fund economy-boosting tax cuts. While changes to tax law require action from Congress, new framing could help bolster political support.

A final option is litigation. A plain reading of the statute President Trump used to apply these tariffs makes it clear that it was written for genuine emergencies, and these tariff actions stretch that term well beyond any rational meaning. By the time you read this, lawsuits will likely have been filed in federal courts seeking tariff injunctions. However, judges rule slowly, appeals take time, and the judicial approach is fraught with risk, tardiness, and a certain randomness.

If President Trump and our political leadership refuse these off-ramps, the result will be a trade war that wreaks economic havoc on the world. Let’s hope at least some of our leaders are focused on helping Americans truly get “liberated.”

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Read more:

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Defense Secretary Hegseth shared Yemen airstrike details in second Signal chat with his wife and brother

Published

on

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth created another Signal messaging chat that included his wife and brother where he shared similar details of a March military airstrike against Yemen’s Houthi militants that were sent in another chain with top Trump administration leaders, The New York Times reported.

A person familiar with the contents and those who received the messages, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, confirmed the second chat to The Associated Press.

The second chat on Signal — which is a commercially available app not authorized to be used to communicate sensitive or classified national defense information — included 13 people, the person said. They also confirmed the chat was dubbed “Defense ‘ Team Huddle.”

The New York Times reported that the group included Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, who is a former Fox News producer, and his brother Phil Hegseth, who was hired at the Pentagon as a Department of Homeland Security liaison and senior adviser. Both have traveled with the defense secretary and attended high-level meetings.

The White House late Sunday dismissed the report as a “non-story,” suggesting that disgruntled former Pentagon employees were spreading false claims.

“No matter how many times the legacy media tries to resurrect the same non-story, they can’t change the fact that no classified information was shared,” said Anna Kelly, White House deputy press secretary. “Recently-fired ‘leakers’ are continuing to misrepresent the truth to soothe their shattered egos and undermine the President’s agenda, but the administration will continue to hold them accountable.”

The revelation of the additional chat group brought fresh criticism against Hegseth and President Donald Trump’s wider administration after it has failed to take action so far against the top national security officials who discussed plans for the military strike in Signal.

“The details keep coming out. We keep learning how Pete Hegseth put lives at risk. But Trump is still too weak to fire him,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer posted on X. “Pete Hegseth must be fired.”

The first chat, set up by national security adviser Mike Waltz, included a number of Cabinet members and came to light because Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, was added to the group.

The contents of that chat, which The Atlantic published, shows that Hegseth listed weapons systems and a timeline for the attack on Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen last month.

The National Security Council and a Pentagon spokesperson did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment about the additional chat group.

Hegseth has previously contended that no classified information or war plans were shared in the chat with the journalist.

The Times reported Sunday that the second chat had the same warplane launch times that the first chat included. Multiple former and current officials have said sharing those operational details before a strike would have certainly been classified and their release could have put pilots in danger.

Hegseth’s use of Signal and the sharing of such plans are under investigation by the Defense Department’s acting inspector general. It came at the request of the leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee — Republican Chairman Roger Wicker of Mississippi and ranking Democratic member Jack Reed of Rhode Island.

Reed urged the IG late Sunday to probe the reported second Signal chat as well, saying that Hegseth “must immediately explain why he reportedly texted classified information that could endanger American servicemembers’ lives.”

“I have grave concerns about Secretary Hegseth’s ability to maintain the trust and confidence of U.S. servicemembers and the Commander-in-Chief,” he added.

The new revelations come amid further turmoil at the Pentagon. Four officials in Hegseth’s inner circle departed last week as the Pentagon conducts a widespread investigation for information leaks.

Dan Caldwell, a Hegseth aide; Colin Carroll, chief of staff to Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg; and Darin Selnick, Hegseth’s deputy chief of staff, were escorted out of the Pentagon.

While the three initially had been placed on leave pending the investigation, a joint statement shared by Caldwell on X on Saturday said the three “still have not been told what exactly we were investigated for, if there is still an active investigation, or if there was even a real investigation of ‘leaks’ to begin with.”

Caldwell was the staff member designated as Hegseth’s point person in the Signal chat with Trump Cabinet members.

Former Pentagon spokesman John Ullyot also announced he was resigning last week, unrelated to the leaks. The Pentagon said, however, that Ullyot was asked to resign.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

China warns nations not to cut U.S. trade deals at its expense

Published

on

China warned countries against striking deals with the U.S. that could hurt Beijing’s interests, upping the ante in the trade war with Washington and showing how others risk getting caught in the middle.

While it respects nations resolving their trade disputes with the U.S., Beijing “resolutely opposes any party reaching a deal at the expense of China’s interests,” the Ministry of Commerce said in a statement Monday. 

If that happens, Beijing “will never accept it and will resolutely take reciprocal countermeasures,” the ministry added. “China is willing to strengthen solidarity and coordination with all parties, jointly respond and resist unilateral bullying acts.”

The warning comes as countries prepare for talks with the U.S. to seek reductions or exemptions from the sweeping tariffs that President Donald Trump imposed and later paused on around 60 trading partners. In exchange, Washington is pushing them to curb trade with China and rein in Beijing’s manufacturing power to ensure the nation doesn’t find ways around the tariffs.

Trump’s top economic advisers have been discussing asking representatives from other nations to impose so-called secondary tariffs — essentially a monetary sanction — on imports from certain countries with close China ties, Bloomberg News reported earlier, citing a person familiar with the process. Washington also wants trading partners to refrain from absorbing excess goods from China, other people said.

Vietnam is getting ready to crack down on Chinese shipments flowing across its borders on the way to the U.S., Reuters reported earlier.

China has in the past targeted countries whose cooperation with the U.S. it saw as damaging. Back in 2016, the U.S. and South Korea agreed to deploy a missile defense system known as Thaad that Washington said was intended to counter threats from North Korea. China complained the system would disrupt the region’s strategic balance and that its powerful radar would allow for spying on its missile systems.

China retaliated by suspending sales of package tours to South Korea and hindering the operations of Korean companies. Beijing and Seoul later agreed to move past the spat, though Thaad batteries remained in South Korea.

Last year, China declared it was banning both the sale of dual-use items to the American military and also the export to the U.S. of materials such as gallium and germanium, adding that companies and people overseas will be subject to the restrictions.

China is world’s top supplier of dozens of so-called rare earth minerals critical to the communications and defense industries, and concerns about its dominance have mounted in Washington since Beijing placed initial controls on exports of gallium and germanium. 

Earlier this month, China retaliated against new tariffs by the Trump administration by not only announcing levies of its own, but by exacting export controls on rare earths. Exports of the materials were all but on hold as producers grappled with tighter permit requirements.

In an effort to counter some of the U.S.’s recent moves, China has stepped up its diplomatic outreach to Southeast Asia and Europe. President Xi Jinping toured Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia last week to rally an “Asian family” that can better deal with the risks resulting from Trump’s tariffs.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

More CHROs are getting appointed to corporate boards—but rookies directors may have less luck

Published

on

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.