Connect with us

Business

If there isn’t a China trade deal soon, U.S. soybean farmer warns ‘they’re going to bypass us altogether’

Published

on



 President Donald Trump is planning a significant aid package to U.S. soybean farmers to help them survive China’s boycott of American beans in response to his trade war even as the president says he is still seeking a soybean deal with Beijing.

But farmers are worried that time is quickly running out to reach a deal in time to sell any of this year’s crop to their biggest customer.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Thursday said on CNBC that the public could expect news of “substantial support for our farmers, especially the soybean farmers” as soon as Tuesday.

Details of the aid package are unknown, but it would come as the world’s two largest economies have been unable to reach a trade deal and China has halted purchases of U.S. beans. China, the biggest foreign buyer of American soybeans for many years, last bought American beans in May and has not bought any for this harvest season, which began in September.

“The Soybean Farmers of our Country are being hurt because China is, for ‘negotiating’ reasons only, not buying,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Wednesday. “We’ve made so much money on Tariffs, that we are going to take a small portion of that money, and help our Farmers.”

“I’ll be meeting with President Xi, of China, in four weeks, and Soybeans will be a major topic of discussion,” Trump wrote.

The soybeans that China imports largely for oil extraction and animal feed are an important crop for U.S. agriculture because they are the top U.S. food export, accounting for about 14% of all farm goods sent overseas and China has been buying 25% of all American soybeans in recent years.

U.S. farmers grew $60.7 billion worth of soybeans, or nearly 4.3 billion bushels, in the 2022-2023 marketing year, according to the American Soybean Association. Just over half were exported. Illinois is the top soybean growing state, but Iowa, Nebraska and Minnesota are also large producers.

Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to meet on the sidelines of the annual summit of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation grouping, to be held at the end of October in South Korea.

In Trump’s first trade war with China, he gave American farmers more than $22 billion in aid payments in 2019 and nearly $46 billion in 2020, though the latter also included aid related to the COVID pandemic.

Time is running out

Caleb Ragland, a Kentucky farmer who serves as president of the American Soybean Association, welcomed Trump acknowledging the difficulties faced by farmers. He said actions are needed to prevent many farmers from going out of business.

Before the trade war, farmers were already pinched by high costs and low crop prices, he said. Then, their biggest customer vanished.

“It’s just unfortunate that we’re being used as a bargaining chip in this trade war that’s not of our own doing,” Ragland said.

He said time is running low for the two governments to strike a deal, because China has already ordered soybeans from countries such as Brazil and Argentina for deliveries through December and, if there’s no soybean deal soon, China could skip the U.S. entirely.

“If they get another couple months, they’re into new crop soybeans in Brazil and Argentina. And they’re going to bypass us altogether if we’re not careful,” Ragland said.

Deal is still likely

China has slapped 20% tariffs on U.S. soybeans since Trump announced his tariffs on the world in the spring, making U.S. beans uncompetitive in price.

The retaliatory tariffs are in response to Trump’s new import taxes on Chinese goods over allegations that Beijing has failed to stem the flow of chemicals used to make fentanyl as well as Trump’s across-the-board “Liberation Day” tariffs, which have been reduced to the 10% baseline rate.

Observers say China could ease tariffs on U.S. farm goods should the White House walk back on fentanyl-related tariffs. That has yet to happen.

The White House “has not prioritized fentanyl” since this spring, said Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Washington-based think tank Stimson Center. She said Wang Xiaohong, China’s public security minister, showed up in Geneva in May but met no counterpart from the U.S. to negotiate with.

But it is not time yet to write off a soybean deal, she said. “China still needs to have something to show for at the leadership meeting in South Korea,” Sun said.

Gabriel Wildau, managing director of the consultancy Teneo, said a soybean deal is “the lowest-hanging fruit” for both governments.

“China needs beans, and the U.S. has them to sell. It costs China basically nothing to shift towards U.S. beans and away from Brazil and Argentina,” Wildau said. “If Washington and Beijing can’t reach a deal on soybeans, then they don’t have much hope of reaching a deal on thornier issues like export controls.”

Argentina is a sore subject for U.S. farmers right now because on September 24, Beijing took advantage of a tax holiday in Argentina and ordered nearly 2 million tons of Argentine soybean and soy products. The tax holiday came after the U.S. signaled it would provide a $20 billion support package to help stabilize the Latin American country’s economy.

“That situation was angering to many farmers,” Ragland said. “And while I don’t think the specific intent was just to give a big chunk, give $20 billion to Argentina so that they could send China soybeans. That was the result. And the optics of it look absolutely terrible.”

Farmers prefer trade over aid

Government aid might be necessary to help farmers get through this year if they cannot sell to China, but farmers say they would rather sell their crops on the market.

“All farmers are proud of what they do and they don’t like handouts. We’d rather make it with our own two hands than have it handed to us,” Iowa farmer Robb Ewoldt said.

Meanwhile, farmers like Ryan Mackenthun, a fifth-generation farmer in south-central Minnesota, say they will do everything they can to survive.

“It’s definitely tighten the belt, to look at the inputs, look at the previous investments I made in fertilizer and see if I can stretch another year or two out of them to reduce costs but maintain the same yield projections, run equipment longer,” Mackenthun said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Quant who said passive era is ‘worse than Marxism’ doubles down

Published

on



Inigo Fraser Jenkins once warned that passive investing was worse for society than Marxism. Now he says even that provocative framing may prove too generous.

In his latest note, the AllianceBernstein strategist argues that the trillions of dollars pouring into index funds aren’t just tracking markets — they are distorting them. Big Tech’s dominance, he says, has been amplified by passive flows that reward size over substance. Investors are funding incumbents by default, steering more capital to the biggest names simply because they already dominate benchmarks.

He calls it a “dystopian symbiosis”: a feedback loop between index funds and platform giants like Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Nvidia Corp. that concentrates power, stifles competition, and gives the illusion of safety. Unlike earlier market cycles driven by fundamentals or active conviction, today’s flows are automatic, often indifferent to risk.

Fraser Jenkins is hardly alone in sounding the alarm. But his latest critique has reignited a debate that’s grown harder to ignore. Just 10 companies now account for more than a third of the S&P 500’s value, with tech names driving an outsize share of 2025’s gains.

“Platform companies and a lack of active capital allocation both imply a less effective form of capitalism with diminished competition,” he wrote in a Friday note. “A concentrated market and high proportion of flows into cap weighted ‘passive’ indices leads to greater risks should recent trends reverse.” 

While the emergence of behemoth companies might be reflective of more effective uses of technology, it could also be the result of failures of anti-trust policies, among other things, he argues. Artificial intelligence might intensify these issues and could lead to even greater concentrations of power among firms. 

His note, titled “The Dystopian Symbiosis: Passive Investing and Platform Capitalism,” is formatted as a fictional dialog between three people who debate the topic. One of the characters goes as far as to argue that the present situation requires an active policy intervention — drawing comparisons to the breakup of Standard Oil at the start of the 20th century — to restore competition.

data-srcyload

In a provocative note titled “The Silent Road to Serfdom: Why Passive Investing is Worse Than Marxism” and written nearly a decade ago, Fraser Jenkins argued that the rise of index-tracking investing would lead to greater stock correlations, which would impede “the efficient allocation of capital.” His employer, AllianceBernstein, has continued to launch ETFs since the famous research was published, though its launches have been actively managed. 

Other active managers have presented similar viewpoints — managers at Apollo Global Management last year said the hidden costs of the passive-investing juggernaut included higher volatility and lower liquidity. 

There have been strong rebuttals to the critique: a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. study showed the role of fundamentals remains an all-powerful driver for stock valuations; Citigroup Inc. found that active managers themselves exert a far bigger influence than their passive rivals on a stock’s performance relative to its industry.

“ETFs don’t ruin capitalism, they exemplify it,” said Eric Balchunas, Bloomberg Intelligence’s senior ETF analyst. “The competition and innovation are through the roof. That is capitalism in its finest form and the winner in that is the investor.”

Since Fraser Jenkins’s “Marxism” note, the passive juggernaut has only grown. Index-tracking ETFs, which have grown in popularity thanks to their ease of trading and relatively cheaper management fees, are often cited as one of the primary culprits in this debate. The segment has raked in $842 billion so far this year, compared with the $438 billion hauled in by actively managed funds, even as there are more active products than there are passive ones, data compiled by Bloomberg show. Of the more than $13 trillion that’s in ETFs overall, $11.8 trillion is parked in passive vehicles. The majority of ETF ownership is concentrated in low-cost index funds that have significantly reduced the cost for investors to access financial markets. 

In Fraser Jenkins’s new note, one of his fictitious characters ask another what the “dystopian symbiosis” implies for investors. 

“The passive index is riskier than it has been in the past,” the character answers. “The scale of the flows that have been disproportionately into passive cap-weighted funds with a high exposure to the mega cap companies implies the risk of a significant negative wealth effect if there is an upset to expectations for those large companies.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Why the timing was right for Salesforce’s $8 billion acquisition of Informatica — and for the opportunities ahead

Published

on



The must-haves for building a market-leading business include vision, talent, culture, product innovation and customer focus. But what’s the secret to success with a merger or acquisition? 

I was asked about this in the wake of Salesforce’s recently completed $8 billion acquisition of Informatica. In part, I believe that people are paying attention because deal-making is up in 2025. M&A volume reached $2.2 trillion in the first half of the year, a 27% increase compared to a year ago, according to JP Morgan. Notably, 72% of that volume involved deals greater than $1 billion. 

There will be thousands of mergers and acquisitions in the United States this year across industries and involving companies of all sizes. It’s not unusual for startups to position themselves to be snapped up. But Informatica, founded in 1993, didn’t fit that mold. We have been building, delivering, supporting and partnering for many years. Much of the value we bring to Salesforce and its customers is our long-earned experience and expertise in enterprise data management. 

Although, in other respects, a “legacy” software company like ours — founded well before cloud computing was mainstream — and early-stage startups aren’t so different. We all must move fast and differentiate. And established vendors and growth-oriented startups have a few things in common when it comes to M&A, as well. 

First and foremost is a need to ensure that the strategies of the two companies involved are in alignment. That seems obvious, but it’s easier said than done. Are their tech stacks based on open protocols and standards? Are they cloud-native by design? And, now more than ever, are they both AI-powered and AI-enabling? All of these came together in the case of Salesforce and Informatica, including our shared belief in agentic AI as the next major breakthrough in business technology.

Don’t take your foot off the gas

In the days after the acquisition was completed, I was asked during a media interview if good luck was a factor in bringing together these two tech industry stalwarts. Replace good luck with good timing, and the answer is a resounding, “Yes!”

As more businesses pursue the productivity and other benefits of agentic AI, they require high-quality data to be successful. These are two areas where Salesforce and Informatica excel, respectively. And the agentic AI opportunity — estimated to grow to $155 billion by 2030 — is here and now. So the timing of the acquisition was perfect. 

Tremendous effort goes into keeping an organization on track, leading up to an acquisition and then seeing it through to a smooth and successful completion. In the few months between the announcement of Salesforce’s intent to acquire Informatica and the close, we announced new partnerships and customer engagements and a fall product release that included autonomous AI agents, MCP servers and more. 

In other words, there’s no easing into the new future. We must maintain the pace of business because the competitive environment and our customers require it. That’s true whether you’re a small, venture-funded organization or, like us, an established firm with thousands of employees and customers. Going forward we plan to keep doing what we do best: help organizations connect, manage and unify their AI data. 

Out with the old, in with the new

It’s wrong to think of an acquisition as an end game. It’s a new chapter. 

Business leaders and employees in many organizations have demonstrated time and again that they are quite good at adapting to an ever-changing competitive landscape. A few years ago, we undertook a company-wide shift from on-premises software to cloud-first. There was short-term disruption but long-term advantage. It’s important to develop an organizational mindset that thrives on change and transformation, so when the time comes, you’re ready for these big steps. 

So, even as we take pride in all that we accomplished to get to this point, we now begin to take on a fresh identity as part of a larger whole. It’s an opportunity to engage new colleagues and flourish professionally. And importantly, customers will be the beneficiaries of these new collaborations and synergies. On the day Informatica was welcomed into the Salesforce family and ecosystem, I shared my feeling that “the best is yet to come.” That’s my North Star and one I recommend to every business leader forging ahead into an M&A evolution — because the truest measure of success ultimately will be what we accomplish next.

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.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The ‘Great Housing Reset’ is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026

Published

on



Homebuyers may experience a reprieve in 2026 as price normalization and an increase in home sales over the next year will take some pressure off the market—but don’t expect homebuying to be affordable in the short run for Gen Z and young families.

The “Great Housing Reset” will start next year, with income growth outpacing home-price growth for a prolonged period for the first time since the Great Recession era, according to a Redfin report released this week. 

The residential real estate brokerage sees mortgage rates in the low-6% range, down from down from the 2025 average of 6.6%; a median home sales price increase of just 1%, down from 2% this year; and monthly housing payments growth that will lag behind wage growth, which will remain steady at 4%.

These trends toward increased affordability will likely bring back some house hunters to the market, but many Gen Zers and young families will opt for nontraditional living situations, according to the report. 

More adult children will be living with their parents, as households continue to shift further away from a nuclear family structure, Redfin predicted.

“Picture a garage that’s converted into a second primary suite for adult children moving back in with their parents,” the report’s authors wrote. “Redfin agents in places like Los Angeles and Nashville say more homeowners are planning to tailor their homes to share with extended family.”

Gen Z and millennial homeownership rates plateaued last year, with no improvement expected. Just over one-quarter of Gen Zers owned their home in 2024, while the rate for millennial owners was 54.9% in the same year.

Meanwhile, about 6% of Americans who struggled to afford housing as of mid-2025 moved back in with their parents, while another 6% moved in with roommates. Both trends are expected to increase in 2026, according to the report.

Obstacles to home affordability 

Despite factors that could increase affordability for prospective homebuyers, C. Scott Schwefel, a real estate attorney at Shipman, Shaiken & Schwefel, LLC, told Fortune that income growth and home-price growth are just a few keys to sustainable homeownership. 

An improved income-to-price ratio is welcome, but unless tax bills stabilize, many households may not experience a net relief, Schwefel said.

“Prospective buyers need to recognize that affordability is not just price versus income…it’s price, mortgage rate and the annual bill for living in a place—and that bill includes property taxes,” he added.

In November, voters—especially young ones—showed lowering housing costs is their priority, the report said. But they also face high sale prices and mortgage rates, inflated insurance premiums, and potential utility costs hikes due to a data center construction boom that’s driving up energy bills. The report’s authors expect there to be a bipartisan push to help remedy the housing affordability crisis.

Still, an affordable housing market for first-time home buyers and young families still may be far away.

“The U.S. housing market should be considered moving from frozen to thawing,” Sergio Altomare, CEO of Hearthfire Holdings, a real estate private equity and development company, told Fortune

“Prices aren’t surging, but they’re no longer falling,” he added. “We are beginning to unlock some activity that’s been trapped for a couple of years.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.