Author: Uponbiz

The United States must show sincerity if it is to hold meaningful trade talks, China said on Friday, after U.S. President Donald Trump dramatically raised

the stakes with a potentially devastating blow to Chinese tech giant Huawei.

China has yet to say whether or how it will retaliate against the latest escalation in trade tension, although state media has taken an increasingly strident tone, with the ruling Communist Party’s People’s Daily publishing a front-page commentary that evoked the patriotic spirit of past wars.

China’s currency slid to its weakest in almost five months, although losses were capped after sources told Reuters that the central bank would ensure the yuan did not weaken past the key 7-per-dollar level in the immediate term.

The world’s two largest economies are locked in an increasingly acrimonious trade dispute that has seen them level escalating tariffs on each other’s imports in the midst of negotiations, adding to fears about risks to global growth and knocking financial markets.

Foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang, asked about state media reports suggesting there would be no more U.S.-China trade talks, said China always encouraged resolving disputes between the two countries with dialog and consultations.

“But because of certain things the U.S. side has done during the previous China-U.S. trade consultations, we believe if there is meaning for these talks, there must be a show of sincerity,” he told a daily news briefing.

The United States should observe the principles of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, and they must also keep their word, Lu said, without elaborating.

On Thursday, Washington put telecoms equipment maker Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, one of China’s biggest and most successful companies, on a blacklist that could make it extremely difficult for the telecom giant to do business with U.S. companies.

That followed Trump’s decision on May 5 to increase tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports, a major escalation after the two sides appeared to have been close to reaching a deal in negotiations to end their trade battle.

‘Wheel of destiny’

China can be expected to make preparations for a longer-term trade war with the United States, said a Chinese government official with knowledge of the situation.

“Indeed, this is an important moment, but not an existential, live-or-die moment,” the official said.

“In the short term, the trade situation between China and the United States will be severe, and there will be challenges. Neither will it be smooth in the long run. This will spur China to make adequate preparations in the long term.”

The impact of trade friction on China’s economy is “controllable,” the state planner said on Friday, pledging to take countermeasures as needed, Meng Wei, a spokeswoman for the National Development and Reform Committee (NDRC), told a media briefing.

The South China Morning Post, citing an unidentified source, reported that a senior member of China’s ruling Communist Party said the trade war with the United States could reduce China’s 2019 growth by 1 percentage point in the worst-case scenario.

Wang Yang, the fourth-most senior member of the Communist Party’s seven-member Standing Committee, the top decision-making body, told a delegation of Taiwan businessmen on Thursday that the trade war would have an impact but would not lead to any structural changes, the paper said, citing an unidentified source who was at the meeting.

One company that says it has been making preparations is Huawei’s Hisilicon unit, which purchases U.S. semiconductors for its parent.

Its president told staff in a letter on Friday that the company had been secretly developing back-up products for years in case Huawei was one day unable to obtain the advanced chips and technology it buys from the United States.

“Today, the wheel of destiny has turned and we have arrived at this extreme and dark moment, as a super-nation ruthlessly disrupts the world’s technology and industry system,” the company president said in the letter.

The letter was widely shared on Chinese social media, gaining 180 million impressions in the few hours after it was published on the Weibo microblogging site.

“Go Huawei! Our country’s people will always support you,” wrote one Weibo user after reading the letter.
…

A record number of 8.34 million university graduates are set to enter the Chinese job market this summer amid escalating trade tensions between Washington and Beijing.

Observers say that as China’s export-dependent economy braces for more hits from tariff hikes, which U.S. President Donald Trump recently imposed, the country’s job markets will be tighter for everyone including fresh graduates.

And the impact of a job mismatch among college graduates has long weighed on their actual employment rate at only 52% this year, according to a recent survey.

That means more than 4 million graduates will soon join the ranks of those unemployed, although many of them may opt to pursue higher education, the survey found.

Tightening job market

“Graduate employment has always been problematic in China. Given the current situation with the trade war, I think we should expect it to be even more so this year,” said Geoffrey Crothall, spokesperson at China Labor Bulletin.

“And there’s always been a mismatch between the expectations of graduates, the reality of the job markets and particularly the expectations of employers,” he added.

Graduates will either take longer to find a job or settle with one that has lower pay or poor career prospects, Crothall said.

Making matters worse, the number of job opportunities in China is on the wane as China tries to move away from labor-intensive industries, said Wang Zhangcheng, head of the Labor Economics Institute at the Zhongnan University of Economics and Law.

“The transformation of industrial structure and the U.S.-China trade war [is making the situation worse]. Also, China’s economy no longer grows at a fast pace. Instead, it has matured with mid- to low-paced growths. Under such circumstances, the demand for labor has declined,” Wang said.

“Plus, many jobs have been replaced by robots as a result of the development of artificial intelligence in the past two years. That surely adds pressure on job seekers,” he added.

Fewer jobs, more seekers

A recent report by Renmin University of China (RUC) and career platform Zhaopin.com found that the number of job seekers in China grew 31% year-on-year in the first quarter – the highest growth in workers since 2011 — while the number of job vacancies shrank by 11% at the same time.

China’s job market prosperity index has dropped to a record low since 2014, it concluded.

However, the latest available state statistics paint a slightly different picture.

Official data showed that China’s surveyed unemployment rate in urban areas stood at 5.2% in March, down 0.1 percentage points from February.

Analysts described the country’s job markets as “stable overall” although the surveyed unemployment rate in 31 major cities went up 0.1 percentage points month-on-month, to 5.1% in March – the highest since late 2016.

Still, China’s State Council has made “saving jobs” one of its top policy priorities since late last year, offering incentives for firms with no or few layoffs and subsidies for internships or on-the-job training.

And college graduates remain a focal point of the council’s employment stabilization plan, along with migrants and laid-off workers.

Distorted graduate employment

China used to boast a graduate employment rate of more than 90% as universities rushed graduates to sign so-called “tripartite employment agreements” with potential employers.

Any refusal may risk their chances of thesis defense or diplomas.

Such agreements are nonbinding on the employers to offer jobs, but distort the overall graduate employment rate, which has allowed universities to attract new students – a fraud that the Ministry of Education now forbids.

In a recent notice, the ministry has disallowed universities from withholding graduates’ degree certificates if they refuse to sign such agreements.

In spite of the ban, graduates still complain about “being forcefully employed.”

On Weibo, China’s Twitter-like microblogging platform, one user wrote, “Our school still forces you to sign the agreements. The career adviser calls every day, pulling a long face.”

Another student from Rizhao Polytechnic in Shandong province noted, “Those who have signed the agreements have completed their thesis defense while many of us who haven’t signed the agreements can do nothing but wait.”

One user urged that unless the government writes the ban into law and imposes penalties, no universities would comply.

Job mismatch

Another cause of concern for graduate employment is the long-standing mismatch between the knowledge and skills students have acquired from years of studies in universities, and the private sector’s actual job requirements, professor Wang said.

Given the shifts of production paradigms and “widening structural gaps in labor forces allocations, many of our universities have set up professional courses which may not keep up with the changing [requirements] of the labor markets. That leads to the scenario that many graduates may not find the right career fit for their skills,” the professor said.

As a solution, the education ministry has encouraged universities to focus on fundamentals by providing multifaceted cultivation of talents, so graduates leaving school will meet what different jobs require.
…

Juhyun Lee contributed to this report.

SEOUL — As U.S. President Donald Trump intensifies his trade battle with China, one of the hardest-hit countries could be South Korea.

Asia’s fourth-largest economy, South Korea is especially vulnerable to the tariff war because of its reliance on foreign trade — in particular, exports to its two biggest trading partners: China and the United States.

After U.S.-China trade talks broke down, Trump last week raised tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports, and threatened to do so with $300 billion more. China retaliated with tariffs on $60 billion of U.S. goods.

The trade war escalation, which rattled markets and threatened to hold back global growth, comes at an especially bad time for South Korea, whose economy unexpectedly contracted in the first quarter.

“South Korea is particularly vulnerable,” says Xu Xiao Chun, an economist who monitors South Korea for Moody’s Analytics. “It’s not inconceivable that you could see a second consecutive quarter of contraction of GDP, which would make it a technical recession.”

Trade war exacerbates tech woes

As the world’s leading producer of memory chips that go into consumer electronics, such as cellphones and computers, South Korea benefited from years of rapid and consistent growth in the global smartphone market.

But global demand for smartphones has plateaued. That, combined with a slowdown in China and sluggish global growth, has hurt South Korea’s export-driven economy.

In April, South Korea’s exports declined for the fifth consecutive month, falling 2% compared to the same period a year earlier.

“South Korea’s economy was already going down the wrong path… but the latest escalation in the trade war really puts a spanner (obstacle) in the works,” Xu said.

South Korea was always likely to be hurt by the U.S.-China trade war just by virtue of its proximity to China, its biggest trading partner and top export destination.

South Korea’s exports to China could be cut by about $1.3 billion a year, said An Sung-bae with the state-run Korea Institute for International Economic Policy.

But the U.S.-China tariffs also pose a more specific threat to South Korea’s crucial semiconductor industry.

Here’s how it works:

South Korea sends semiconductors to China, where they are placed into smartphones and other electronics. China then ships many of those assembled products to the United States.

Trump’s tariffs could drastically raise the price of those electronics. For example, the cost of an iPhone XS could go up by around $160 if Trump follows through on all his tariff threats, one analyst at Morgan Stanley estimated.

Those higher prices would result in fewer shipments of electronics from China to the United States. Which means South Korea would be selling a lot fewer semiconductors to China.

That could put a major dent in South Korea’s economy, since semiconductors make up nearly half of its total shipments to China.

“Companies that mainly target the Chinese market will suffer… and the South Korean export business relies heavily on the Chinese market,” said Mun Byung-Ki, a senior researcher at the Korea International Trade Association.

A bright spot?

But some analysts say the situation may not be that dire. One reason: even if South Korean exports to China decline, it may make up the gap by shipping more products to the United States — a situation that could potentially provide a major boom for South Korea’s tech industry.

Alex Holmes, a Singapore-based analyst at Capital Economics, says that already may be happening. Though South Korea’s overall export numbers are suffering, its shipments to the United States are growing, he says.

That’s particularly the case for Korean electronics that fall under U.S. tariffs. Those tariffed goods have well out-performed non-tariffed items, Holmes says, “which suggests that U.S. companies have already switched suppliers as a result of tariffs.”

The increased shipments to the United States almost cover the equivalent hit South Korea has taken as a result of the tariffs, Holmes adds.

Manufacturing shift?

The tariffs could also have a long-term impact on manufacturing in Asia, as companies shift their production bases away from China as a way to shield themselves from the trade war.

A growing number of Asian companies, including some South Korean memory chipmakers, have already begun shifting their manufacturing centers to fast-growing and cheaper countries in Southeast Asia.

“If South Korea wants to find cheaper factories in say Vietnam or one of the ASEAN countries, it could make its money back or potentially even grow more than it would have if it relied on Chinese manufacturing,” Xu said. “But those sort of actions take a lot of time, a lot of capital, and there is a lot of risk involved.”

With no end in sight to the U.S.-China trade tensions, it’s a pattern that could be repeated, threatening China’s reputation as a low-cost production base.

“The knock-on effect of this trade war will be to locate a lot more production capabilities in other countries in Asia,” Xu said.
…

As the U.S. and China escalate their trade standoff, consumers in both countries are starting to see the impact. VOA’s Mykhailo Komadovsky reports from Washington.
…

The acting head of the Federal Aviation Administration defended the way his agency certifies airline safety after two deadly crashes of the now-grounded Boeing 737 Max jet.

Daniel Elwell called the system in which FAA-approved employees at plane manufacturers inspect the aircraft they built themselves “a good system.”

But skeptical Democrats on the House Transportation Committee questioned the agency’s credibility.

They told Elwell that the closeness between Boeing and the FAA may be one of the reasons it took the agency a relatively long time to ground the Boeing jets.

“The public perception is you were in bed with those you were supposed to be regulating,” Nevada’s Dina Titus said, while committee chairman Peter DeFazio wanted to know “How can we have a single point of failure on a modern aircraft?”

A Boeing 737 Max crashed off the coast of Indonesia in October and another 737 Max crashed in Ethiopia in March, killing a total of 346 people.

Both planes were equipped with a system designed to push the nose downward to prevent a midair stall.

Faulty sensor readings kept pushing the planes down while the pilots struggled to regain control.

The pilots did not know the planes were equipped with the anti-stall system and their manuals had no explicit information.

Elwell defended the FAA’s approval of the system on the Boeing jets, but admitted the system should have been better explained in the pilots’ operational and flight manuals.

He also faulted Boeing for failing to inform airlines and the FAA that a light that is supposed to flash when there is a faulty reading from the sensors did not work.

But Elwell said pilot error may have also contributed to the Indonesian and Ethiopian disasters.

The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation of Boeing, and Congress is looking into the relationship between Boeing and federal regulators.

Boeing plans to submit changes to the 737 Max software to the FAA, which will study the new software and carry out tests flights. Boeing will train pilots before allowing the planes to fly again.

 
…

The costs seem to be mounting in the U.S. from President Donald Trump’s tit-for-tat trade tariff war with China, both for farmers whose sales of crops to China have been cut and U.S. consumers paying higher prices for imported Chinese products.

The government said Wednesday that to date it has paid out more than $8.5 billion to American farmers to offset their loss of sales to China and other trading partners because of foreign tariffs imposed by Beijing and other governments.​

​WATCH: Consumers Start to Feel Pinch From US, China Trade Standoff

Trump last year pledged up to $12 billion in aid to farmers — chiefly soybean, wheat and corn growers, and those who raise pigs. Trump says he could ask Congress for another $15 billion if U.S. farmers continue to be hurt by China’s tariffs of as much as 25%  on U.S. agricultural imports.

The U.S. had been shipping $12 billion worth of soybeans a year to China, but Beijing’s imposition of the tariff severely cut down on the U.S. exports as China bought the beans from other countries.

Trump said Tuesday on Twitter, “Our great Patriot Farmers will be one of the biggest beneficiaries of what is happening now. Hopefully China will do us the honor of continuing to buy our great farm product, the best, but if not your Country will be making up the difference based on a very high China buy. This money will come from the massive Tariffs being paid to the United States for allowing China, and others, to do business with us. The Farmers have been ‘forgotten’ for many years. Their time is now!”

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow acknowledged to a television interviewer last weekend that “to some extent” U.S. consumers will bear the brunt of higher costs on Chinese goods after Trump’s tariffs have been levied on the imported goods.

Trade Partnership Worldwide, a Washington economic consulting firm, estimates in a new study the typical American family of four people would pay $2,300 more annually for goods and services if Trump imposes a 25% tariff on all Chinese imports, as he says he is considering.

Such higher tariffs would hit an array of Chinese-produced consumer goods — clothing, children’s toys, sports equipment, shoes and consumer electronics — that are widely bought by Americans.

If that does not happen, but the existing U.S. tariffs remain in place, the research group says the average U.S. family would pay $770 in higher costs each year.

The U.S. imported almost $540 billion in Chinese goods in 2018, while the U.S. exported $120 billion, a trade imbalance that Trump is seeking to even out with imposition of the tariffs. The U.S. exported almost $59 billion in services to China, while importing only $18 billion, but services are not directly affected by tariffs.
…

Ford Motor Co plans to start production of new luxury Lincoln models in China for that market as they are launched, starting with the new Corsair later this year, to benefit from lower costs and avoid the risk of tariffs, a top executive said Monday.

“It’s a huge, huge opportunity for Lincoln because we see China as ground zero for Lincoln given the size of the market and how well the brand has been received,” Chief Financial Officer Bob Shanks said at a Goldman Sachs conference in New York.

Ford has lower levels of localized production than rivals General Motors Co or Volkswagen AG, who make more vehicles in China for Chinese consumers, benefiting from lower labor and material costs, and avoiding tariffs in the burgeoning trade war between the United States and China.

Shanks said all new Lincoln models, with the exception of the Navigator assembled in Louisville, Kentucky, will also be produced in China.

He declined to say how much Ford will save through localized production.

Ford has been struggling to revive sales in China, the automaker’s second-biggest market. Ford sales slumped 37 percent in 2018, after a 6 percent decline in 2017.

Shanks said that all of the problems the automaker experienced in China last year were related to the Ford brand, not Lincoln, which is popular with Chinese customers.
…

The typical routines of life on a family farm carry a heavier burden these days for Pam Johnson.

“First thing I do is make a pot of coffee,” she told VOA in an interview in one of the cavernous sheds that contain her green and yellow John Deere farming equipment. Once she has that coffee, she “(goes) to the computer and look at what grain prices have done overnight and usually do a gut clutch, because they’ve been going down. They’re at five-month lows.”

Driven there in part by retaliatory tariffs imposed by one of the largest importers of U.S. soybeans – China.

Johnson and her husband are proud sixth-generation farmers but say they are dealing with some of the harshest economic conditions of their lives.

“We’re all tightening our belts,” she says.

The ongoing trade dispute between the United States and China, initially sparked by U.S. tariffs on imported aluminum and steel, is now impacting most farms across the country. 

As U.S. farmers head to the fields to plant this spring, they are facing a potential sixth consecutive year of declining farm income, because of international tariffs that have depressed prices for their grain products as well as increased costs for the materials to produce and store them.

​Short-term concern over U.S. trade policy is turning into long-term fear for farmers, who face uncertainty over congressional support for a new trade agreement with Canada and Mexico, and the impact of China’s retaliatory tariffs on U.S. grain exports. 

“We hear it may be out to 2025 before we see some of those markets come back to us, if they ever do,” Johnson said. “I think that’s the thing that hurts the most is, what is the damage being done that is irreparable?”

It is damage her son Ben Johnson, the seventh generation in the family business, may eventually have to deal with.

“All farms are going to suffer because of this,” he explained. “There’s a difference between ‘making it’ and flourishing.”

The Johnsons feel there is a growing disconnect between farmers and the rest of the American workforce, fueled by politicians increasingly hostile to trade policies the agricultural industry depends on.

“We need as much trade as we can and to be openly trading with as many places as we can,” Ben Johnson says. “It’s no different to any business – you want as many customers as you can. And to intentionally discourage them is frustrating.”

Neither Johnson nor his mother voted for President Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, largely because if his trade positions, they say. 

​Nothing that has happened since the election has eased Pam Johnson’s concerns.

“Saying that ‘I’m a tariff man’ and that ‘trade wars are easy to win’ concerns me,” she says, quoting comments the president has made. “There are still a lot of farmers who still support President Trump. I think there are more seeds of doubt being planted as we look forward into 2019 and no resolution and the light at the end of the tunnel seems to be getting dimmer about getting these things done.”

Politics aside, Pam Johnson admits success for her family business is closely tied to U.S. trade policy.

“I don’t want to see President Trump fail in these trade endeavors. We all need him to make this work so that all of us win,” she says.

A win her son Ben says can’t come soon enough.

“We’ve already missed the peak soybean export season, so in a way, it’s already too late… I guess it’s never too late, but before now would have been great,” he says.

While negotiations continue, the Trump administration says it is actively working on a new financial assistance program to help farmers weather the continuing trade storm.
…

The ongoing trade dispute between the United States and China is having an impact on most farmers across the country. Their corn and soybean crops are subject to tariffs and increasing competition from other suppliers. As VOA’s Kane Farabaugh reports, U.S. farmers aren’t just concerned about their bottom lines this year. They’re also worried about the long term consequences of a trade war on the only business many have ever known.
…

For sale: waterfront property with sweeping views of the Atlantic Ocean. Waves erode beach regularly. Flooding gets worse every year. Saltwater damage to lawn.

Asking price: anyone’s guess.

Some research suggests rising sea levels and flooding brought by global warming are harming coastal property values. But other climate scientists note shortcomings in the studies, and real estate experts say they simply haven’t seen any ebb in demand for coastal homes.

So how much homeowners and communities should worry, and how much they should invest in remedies, remains an open question.

Nancy Meehan, 71, is considering putting her coastal condo in Salisbury up for sale this year, but she worries buyers will be turned off by the winter storms that churn the seas beside the summer resort town. Her home has been largely spared in the nearly 20 years she’s lived there, she said, but the flooding appears to be worsening along roads and lower properties.

‘My life savings’

“All my life savings is in my home,” Meehan said of the four-bedroom, two-bathroom condo, which she bought for $135,000. “I can’t lose that equity.”

Nearby, Denis Champagne can’t be sure that rising seas are hurting his waterfront home’s value. The three-story, four-bedroom home has views of a scenic marsh, has been renovated and is blocks from the ocean — yet was assessed around $420,000.

“Do I feel that it should be worth more than that?” Champagne said recently in his sun-soaked living room. “I mean, I’m biased, but where can you find this for that price — anywhere?”

Community relies on real estate taxes

A drop in home values could shatter a community like Salisbury, which relies almost exclusively on beachfront real estate taxes to fund schools, police and other basic services, researchers warn. And, they say, families could face financial ruin if they’ve been banking on their home’s value to help foot the bill for pricey college tuitions or retirement.

“People are looking at losing tens of thousands of dollars of relative value on their homes,” said Jeremy Porter, a data scientist for the First Street Foundation, which describes itself as a “not-for-profit organization of digitally driven advocates for sea level rise solutions” on its Facebook page. “Not everyone can sustain that.”

Still, home prices in coastal cities have been rising faster than those of their landlocked counterparts since 2010, according to data provided by the National Association of Realtors.

And waterfront homes are still generally more expensive than their peers just one block inland, said Lawrence Yun, the association’s chief economist.

“The price differential is still there,” he said. “Consumers are clearly mindful that these climate change impacts could be within the window of a 30-year mortgage, but their current behavior still implies that to have a view of the ocean is more desirable.”

One $16 billion estimate

A nationwide study by the First Street Foundation suggests climate change concerns have caused nearly $16 billion in lost appreciation of property values along the Eastern Seaboard and Gulf Coast since 2005.

The study singles out Salisbury as the hardest-hit community in Massachusetts. Coastal homes there would be worth $200,000 to $300,000 more if not for frequent tidal flooding and powerful coastal storms, the study suggests. Champagne’s property, for example, would be worth about $123,000 more, according to Flood iQ, a property database the group has developed.

In another recent study, researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder’s School of Business found coastal properties most exposed to sea level rise sold, on average, for 7% less than equivalent properties the same distance from shore but not as threatened by the sea.

And in Florida’s Miami-Dade County, higher-elevation properties are appreciating faster than lower ones as companies and deep-pocketed buyers increasingly consider climate change risks, a study in the publication Environmental Research Letters found last year.

​Studies laudable, but may be flawed

The three studies are laudable because they attempt to quantify what the insurance industry and federal government had long suspected: that climate change is having tangible harm on home values, said S. Jeffress Williams, a scientist emeritus with the U.S. Geological Survey in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, who wasn’t involved with any of the research.

But Williams and other researchers note the First Street Foundation study uses sea-level rise predictions from the Army Corps of Engineers that are more dire than figures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which usually provides the go-to numbers for such studies.

The decision to use Army Corps projections has “minimal impact” on the study’s assessment of current property values since those figures are based on where flooding is already happening, but it does factor into the study’s future estimates, said Steven McAlpine, a data scientist for the foundation.

“We feel it is a reasonable projection,” he said.

The other two studies largely rely on data from Florida, which is so low and highly developed that in many ways it is an outlier, unaffiliated researchers point out. They also focus only on single-family homes, leaving out huge numbers of condos, high-rises and other multifamily properties.

Just build a seawall

In Salisbury, real estate broker Thomas Saab insists something is happening with home prices but is not sure whether climate change is behind it.

Two clients in the otherwise strong real estate market, he said, were recently forced to lower their asking prices by tens of thousands of dollars when prospective buyers voiced concerns about storm damage and risks.

“Do I worry prices are coming down? Sure,” Saab said. “Fewer buyers are willing to take the risk. People don’t want to live through nor’easter after nor’easter with no protection.”

He argues there’s a simple solution: Invest in sturdy seawalls as Hampton Beach, the lively resort town just over the border in New Hampshire, did generations ago.

“We can overcome any kind of rising seas if you just let us protect our properties,” Saab said. “Who cares about the climate change? You build a seawall and this whole discussion goes away.”
…

Stocks climbed on Tuesday and clawed back a chunk of their losses from Monday’s rout, the latest whipsaw move as investors weigh just how badly the escalating U.S.-China trade war will hurt the economy. 

The day’s rally was nearly a mirror image of Monday’s plunge, when the S&P 500 had its worst day since early January, just not as severe: Technology companies led the way higher after bearing the brunt of the selling on Monday, Treasury yields rose modestly and gold gave back a bit of its gains. 

The S&P 500 rose 22.54 points, or 0.8%, to 2,834.41. It recovered nearly a third of its loss from Monday, and would now need to rise 3.9% to regain the record it set a couple weeks ago. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 207.06, or 0.8%, to 25,532.05, and the Nasdaq composite index jumped 87.47, or 1.1%, to 7,734.49. 

Of course, stocks are still lower than they were last week, following China’s pledge to raise tariffs on U.S. goods. Stocks also remain lower than they were on May 5, when President Donald Trump ignited this latest round of fear for markets by announcing on Twitter that the U.S. would raise tariffs on Chinese goods. 

Tuesday’s rally came after another round of morning Trump tweets on trade. He said, “When the time is right we will make a deal with China,” and he cited his “unlimited” respect for and friendship with China’s leader.

Investors are looking for a “place of equilibrium,” said Mark Hackett, chief of investment research for Nationwide Investment Management.

“My skepticism is that there’s really not a lot of news driving the rally,” he said. “It feels like an attempted recovery that may not have legs.”

‘Looking for path to progress’

In the meantime, any further hints of resolution on the trade dispute — or Twitter storms — could drive markets into their next swing. 

“We’re not counting on a full resolution,” said John Lynch, chief investment strategist at LPL Financial. “But, we’re looking for a path to progress.”

The worries about trade have shattered what had been a remarkably steady rise for stocks at the start of this year. As 2019 began, investors increasingly bet that a trade deal would happen, and the Federal Reserve said it would take a pause in raising interest rates, which helped the S&P 500 rocket to its best start to a year in decades. 

If the trade dispute gets worse, or lasts longer than many expect, it could hurt confidence among businesses and households. If that in turn drives spending lower, it would lead to lower economic growth and corporate profits. 

On Tuesday, at least, such worries eased. An index known as Wall Street’s “fear gauge,” which measures how much traders are paying to protect themselves from upcoming price swings for stocks, dropped 12.1%. A day earlier, it had spiked 28.1%. 

The VIX index remains higher than it’s been for much of the past five years, but fear is considerably lower than it was during the market sell-off late last year sparked by worries about a possible recession. 

Tech companies post gains

Investors also returned to stocks of tech companies, which may have the most to lose from a protracted U.S.-China trade battle because many of their customers and suppliers are abroad. Tech stocks in the S&P 500 jumped 1.6%, with semiconductor companies making particularly big gains. 

A day earlier, tech stocks had taken the market’s heaviest losses. 

On the flip side were utility stocks, which were the only one of the 11 sectors that make up the S&P 500 to fall. A day earlier, when all the fear in the market put an alluring spotlight on the utility sector’s steady profits and dividends, they had been the only S&P 500 sector to manage a gain. 

Other investments seen as safe harbors also dropped, such as U.S. government bonds. When a bond’s price falls, its yield rises, and the yield on the 10-year Treasury rose to 2.41% from 2.40% late Monday. It was at 2.45% at the end of last week. 

Gold is another investment that tends to do fade when investors are feeling more optimistic, and it fell $5.50 to settle at $1,296.30 per ounce. 

In overseas stock markets, European indexes gained. The French CAC 40 jumped 1.5%, the German Dax rose 1% and the FTSE 100 in London climbed 1.1%. Asian markets were mixed. The Hang Seng in Hong Kong dropped 1.5%, Japan’s Nikkei 225 fell 0.6% and South Korea’s Kospi ticked up 0.1%.

Silver jumps 4 cents

In the commodities markets, silver rose 4 cents to $14.81 per ounce, and copper gained a penny to $2.73 per pound.

Benchmark U.S. oil rose 74 cents to settle at $61.78 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, gained $1.01 to $71.24 a barrel. 

Natural gas rose 4 cents to $2.66 per 1,000 cubic feet, heating oil rose 2 cents to $2.06 per gallon and wholesale gasoline rose a penny to $1.98 per gallon. 

The dollar rose to 109.64 Japanese yen from 109.34 yen late Monday. The euro slipped to $1.1207 from $1.1231, and the British pound fell to $1.2905 from $1.2965. 
…

A U.S. labor agency has concluded that ride-hailing company Uber Technologies Inc’s drivers are independent contractors and not its employees, which could prevent them from joining unions.

The National Labor Relations Board’s general counsel, in a memo released on Tuesday, said Uber drivers set their hours, own their cars and are free to work for the company’s competitors, so they cannot be considered employees under federal labor law.

San Francisco-based Uber in a statement said it is “focused on improving the quality and security of independent work, while preserving the flexibility drivers and couriers tell us they value.”

Uber shares were up 6.4 percent at $39.46 in late trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

The memo dated April 16 came in an NLRB case against Uber that has yet to reach the five-member board, which is independent of the general counsel.

Under the National Labor Relations Act, independent contractors cannot join unions and do not have legal protection when they complain about working conditions.

In January, President Donald Trump’s appointees to the NLRB adopted a new test making it more difficult for workers to prove they are a company’s employees.

Uber, its top rival Lyft Inc, and many other “gig economy” companies have faced scores of lawsuits accusing them of misclassifying workers as independent contractors under federal and state wage laws.

Employees are significantly more costly because they are entitled to the minimum wage, overtime pay and reimbursements for work-related expenses under those laws.

Uber, in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission last week, said it would pay up to $170 million to settle tens of thousands of arbitration cases with drivers who claim they were misclassified. Uber denied any wrongdoing, but said settling the cases was preferable to drawn-out litigation.

The company has agreed to pay an additional $20 million to end long-running lawsuits by thousands of drivers in California and Massachusetts.

The U.S. Department of Labor in a memo released last month said an unidentified “gig economy” company’s workers were not its employees under federal wage law because it did not control their work.

The company, which appeared from the memo to provide house-cleaning services, had a similar relationship with its workers as Uber does with drivers. The memo signaled a shift from the Obama administration, which maintained that most workers should be considered companies’ employees.
…

Technology stocks led the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq higher on Tuesday, with U.S. stocks reclaiming ground lost to Monday’s steep sell-off as investors took heart from a tonal shift in ongoing U.S. trade negotiations with China.

All three major U.S. indexes were in the black, recovering some ground from their worst one-day percentage losses in months. The bellwether S&P 500 was hovering more than 3% below its most recent all-time high reached two weeks ago.

Investors’ nerves were calmed after U.S. President Donald Trump referred to the escalating trade war with China as “a little squabble,” adding that “we have a good dialogue going.”

Beijing echoed that sentiment, with a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman telling reporters: “My understanding is that China and the United States have agreed to continue pursuing relevant discussions.”

“Either this is a bargain-hunting rally or a dead cat bounce, or there is some consensus that something meaningful is going to come out of the trade talks in the next four to six weeks,” said Bucky Hellwig, senior vice president at BB&T Wealth Management in Birmingham, Alabama.

But Hellwig also feels the rollercoaster of the escalating trade war has had an effect on investor psychology.

“I’m starting to see some investors becoming anesthetized on the negotiations and focusing on what the market’s going to look like a year from now,” Hellwig added.

Boeing Co provided the biggest boost to the Dow, rising 2.1% as tariff-sensitive industrials buoyed the blue chip index.

Ralph Lauren Corp dropped 3.8% after the apparel company posted quarterly results.

Uber Technologies and ride-hailing peer Lyft Inc were both trading higher, reversing course after their post-debut slides. Their stocks were up 1.7% and 5.5%, respectively.

Walt Disney Co announced it would take control of Comcast Corp’s Hulu in a move to challenge Netflix and others in the global video streaming war.

Disney stock climbed 2.0%, while Comcast gained 2.4%. Netflix shares were up slightly.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 344.71 points, or 1.36%, to 25,669.7, the S&P 500 gained 39.29 points, or 1.40%, to 2,851.16 and the Nasdaq Composite added 124.25 points, or 1.62%, to 7,771.27.

Of the 11 major sectors of the S&P 500, all but utilities were in the black. Technology stocks had the largest percentage gains, climbing 2.1%.

Chipmakers enjoyed a reprieve, with the Philadelphia SE Semiconductor Index rising 2.7% after suffering its worst one-day percentage loss since Jan. 3.

First quarter earnings season is winding down, with 453 of S&P 500 companies having reported, 75.3% of which beat analyst expectations, slightly below the 76% beat rate for the last four quarters.

Advancing issues outnumbered declining ones on the NYSE by a 3.70-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 2.74-to-1 ratio favored advancers. The S&P 500 posted 23 new 52-week highs and 6 new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 41 new highs and 79 new lows.
…

With the Trump administration locked in an escalating trade war with China, much of the media focus is on the immediate impact of decisions by leaders on both sides to impose sharp tariffs on goods flowing between the two countries. But while consumers and exporters in both countries will suffer in the near-term, an even more disruptive possibility looms in the long term: a “decoupling” of two massive economic systems that have become deeply interdependent over the past several decades.

At the root of the dispute is a U.S. effort to force China to bring its trade policies in line with other major industrialized countries.

Specifically, the U.S. wants to see China stop subsidizing domestic firms to help them compete on the world stage, eliminate the widespread theft of intellectual property by Chinese businesses, and open its markets to foreign competition.

The U.S. is also putting pressure on specific Chinese telecommunications firms, out of concern that they could be used by the Chinese government to spy on global rivals.

In recent days, the two countries have both ratcheted up economic pressures. As negotiations over a major trade deal stalled last week, President Trump announced that he would direct his administration to hike tariffs to 25% on Chinese goods that accounted for $200 billion in imports last year.

He indicated that he would eventually move to place that same levy on all $540 billion of annual Chinese imports. The Chinese government retaliated Monday with the imposition of tariffs on $60 billion worth of U.S. goods that flow into its country, and indicated that it will take more drastic steps if necessary.

While many experts believe that the two countries will strike a deal before the new tariffs really start to bite, there is increasing concern that strife between the world’s two largest economic powers could persist, forcing a disruptive overhaul of global supply chains that would echo around the world.

In fact, there is evidence that companies are already taking the first steps in a significant reorientation of global supply chains.

According to Paul Triolo, practice head for Geo-Technology at the Eurasia Group, there already has been a significant amount of decoupling by companies in the information and communications technology industries, as well as furniture, apparel, and agricultural products.

“US technology companies are already withholding new investment in manufacturing facilities based in China, and shifting parts of supply chains as feasible to southeast Asia and beyond,” he said in an interview. “There is a spectrum of potential options here, and so far most of the ‘easy’ stuff has been moved. The equation becomes much more complicated for things like advanced electronics.”

Understanding why this would be so disruptive requires digging below the surface of most discussions of US-China trade.

Political rhetoric about trade, much of it originating in President Trump’s Twitter feed, tends to oversimplify — and frequently misrepresent — the reality of global trade flows. The exchange of goods between the two countries is portrayed as a zero-sum game, in which U.S. consumers face a simple choice between buying widgets manufactured in China and buying competing products manufactured in the U.S.

Bilateral trade, intermediate goods

The truth is far more complex. Combined exports and imports between the two countries totaled $650 billion in 2018, according to U.S. government figures. Goods moving from China to the U.S. make up just under two-thirds of that total, and they are not limited to the cheap clothes and toys that made up a large portion of Chinese exports a generation ago. Smartphones, appliances, computers and other goods travel in a constant stream across the Pacific to U.S. markets.

Importantly, though, those finished goods often contain key elements, like microchips, that were originally manufactured in the U.S. and exported to China. These “intermediate goods” represent a huge market for U.S. technology firms.

Similarly, intermediate goods made in China find their way into finished products that bear the “Made in the U.S.A.” stamp. As a whole, intermediate goods make up between 60% and 65% of all global trade flows, which further illustrates the complexity of worldwide supply chains.

Restructuring supply chains

These complex manufacturing relationships have grown up over decades, and are very much baked into the way companies in both countries do business. Now, as the trade war escalates, they are facing the real possibility that ongoing conflict between Washington and Beijing could require companies to restructure global supply chains in a way that will provide more certainty and stability in the future.

But doing so would be a long and difficult process, experts warn.

“These value chains, or supply networks are both highly specialized and quite idiosyncratic,” said Scott Miller, a senior adviser to the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Abshire-Inamori Leadership Academy said in an interview. “Company A and Company B might be in the same business, but the way they organize their supply network could be quite different.”

“The idea of ‘decoupling,’ well, if you’re in a business that requires assembly at scale, you’re going to find it hard replacing China,” Miller said. “It can be done, but it’s real work.” The problem is even worse if a company has developed a network of qualified suppliers in China. Replacing them is not like flipping a switch, he said. “It takes time, energy and capital to develop suppliers,” Miller said.

Should it come to that, economists warn, the effects on both countries, at both the macro- and microeconomic levels, could be immense.

Cost of tariffs

Within the U.S. alone, the potential damage from the proposed tariffs would be huge, warned Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics.

Writing in a note to investors on Wednesday, he said, “The hit from 25% tariffs on all imports would be at least 0.6% of GDP, and probably much more as companies would have to rebuild entire supply chains. The hit to earnings growth would be of the order of 10%.”

It is also apparent that many of the supposed benefits of decoupling won’t necessarily accrue to the United States. President Trump has suggested that his trade policies will bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., but by all indications, the manufacturers who are already starting to move away from China are relocating to other low-wage countries, like Vietnam and Mexico.

As grim as some of these predictions are, there is a school of thought in which the divisions between the U.S. and China, and their global impacts, become much, much worse.

Worst scenario

In an appearance on the television program Face the Nation on Sunday, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson warned that if China and the U.S. successfully isolate themselves from one another — particularly in the realm of technology — the result could be a bifurcated global system that will devastate economic relationships.

“The real risk is that both countries through their actions will throw up or create an economic iron wall which means we’ll be decoupling global supply chains, right?” said Paulson, who also served as CEO of the investment bank Goldman Sachs.

“We’ll be having two systems with incompatible standards and rules,” he added. “And so as I look at it the defining strength of America is innovation and we need to protect our technology, need to protect our innovation. But if we close ourselves off from other, you know, other innovative economies and entrepreneurs, we jeopardize our leadership position in the world and we’re much less attractive as a destination for foreign investment.”

Triolo, of the Eurasia Group, gave voice to a concern that fewer commentators are willing to discuss out loud, but which must lurk in the back of many business leaders’ minds.

“Many companies are now for the first time factoring in the potential for the trade and tech conflict to morph into a real shooting conflict, either by accident or miscalculation or deliberately,” he said. “The potential for actual conflict has now gone way up for the period 3-5 years out, and this has to be taken into account when multinationals are looking at global supply chain risk.

“The best case scenario, a trade truce with China making some limited concessions, will not necessarily improve this dynamic,” he said. “U.S. focus on the nature of China’s political system, the control of the Party over information, [Chinese President] Xi’s unwillingness to cede more state control of the economy, etc. are all contributing to the ‘clash of civilizations’ meme which is gaining traction among the extreme factions on each side, diminishing the room for rebuilding trust, which is now arguably at an all time low.”
…

U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said U.S. tariffs on China bring billions of dollars into U.S. coffers. He said China’s retaliatory tariffs can have no effect on the U.S. economy. The escalation of the U.S.-China trade war sent stock markets tumbling on Monday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling more than 600 points. Earlier, China announced new tariffs of up to 25 percent on $60 billion worth of U.S. goods, starting June 1. VOA’s Zlatica Hoke has more.
…

As Washington and Beijing impose ever-higher tariffs, prompting financial markets to falter, U.S. lawmakers are expressing hope for a swift but comprehensive resolution of America’s deepening trade disputes with China. 

Unease prevailed on Capitol Hill after China retaliated against a new round of American tariffs by hiking duties on U.S.-made goods. Even so, senators of both parties say China must be confronted. 

“We need to challenge China to change a lot of its trade practices and its domestic business practices.”said Maryland Democrat Chris Van Hollen. “For example, they’ve been stealing U.S. (technological) secrets for a long time.”

But Van Hollen faults President Donald Trump’s focus on tariffs.

“What I see is a tariff-only strategy. I don’t see a more comprehensive strategy towards China,” Van Hollen said. “American consumers are paying more and more by the day. It’s not all about how many sales they (Chinese producers) are making and how many sales the United States is making to China.”

Among the most vocal about trade war concerns are American farmers. Republican Senator Roy Blunt represents agriculture-rich Missouri.

“We (Missouri farmers) were selling about one out of every four rows of soybeans just to China,” Blunt said. “Soybeans, corn, livestock  that’s a great market that’s being disrupted.”

But Blunt believes Americans understand that short-term economic pain is necessary to secure better trading terms with China.

“If there’s a trade fight worth having, it’s the trade fight with China,” Blunt said. “They have not been fair traders.”

While the U.S.-China dispute is grabbing most headlines, Blunt also urged Congress’ swift consideration of a new U.S.-Canada-Mexico free trade pact.
…

A drop in the consumer outlook for inflation and intensifying trade tensions drew caution from Federal Reserve officials on Monday as policymakers faced fresh market volatility and a renewed set of risks.

While Fed officials have largely discounted the trade war so far as unlikely to derail the U.S. economic expansion, officials emphasized Monday that a protracted tit-for-tat battle between the United States and China was a different matter that might require a Fed response.

“If the impact of the tariffs — and whatever financial market reaction to those tariffs is — causes more of a slowdown, then we do have the tools available to us, including lower interest rates,” Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren, a voter this year on Fed rate policy, said in an interview with Reuters.

While Rosengren said he was “not necessarily” expecting a rate cut to be necessary, the market sell-off Monday was deep and potentially disruptive to the Fed’s core expectation that interest rates will remain on hold for some time to come.

Major U.S. equity markets were down between 2% and 3.5% on Monday, while bond investors sharply increased their bets that the Fed would be forced to cut rates this year. A closely watched spread between long- and short-term bonds turned negative, seen by some officials as a sign of weakened market confidence in the economic outlook.

After the collapse of U.S.-China talks last week and the threat of tariffs ratcheting ever higher, there was more reason to believe the tensions will last a while.

“If it’s the worst-case scenario and it’s ever-increasing tariffs for an extended period of time, that could change things, that could have a real effect on U.S. GDP growth,” Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari said on CNBC. Traders and analysts on Monday said the volatility is likely to continue.

“You cannot game what two leaders … are going to do from day to day,” said Anthony Saglimbene, global market strategist with Ameriprise Financial Services in Troy, Michigan, of the high-stakes standoff between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Rate cuts back on radar 

Fed officials have been careful to say that nothing yet has changed their core outlook, which envisions rates to be held in their current range of between 2.25% and 2.5% until either growth demonstrably weakens and inflation falls further, justifying a rate cut, or faster inflation makes higher rates warranted.

As the trade war intensified over the last few days, however, traders in the federal funds futures market have moved decisively in favor of expecting a Fed rate cut in coming months. 

Data from the CME Group now sees the Fed cutting rates in October, with a near 10 percentage point shift since Friday in the probability of a rate reduction at that Fed meeting. The pressure on the Fed could come from several directions.

Economic growth overall could slow if the tariff wars continue and global trade declines; “wealth effects” could directly impact business and household confidence and spending if the stock declines continue; higher costs could hit company profits, and discourage hiring.

A further complication for the Fed: The inflation outlook among U.S. consumers dipped sharply in April, countering Fed policymaker hopes that inflation dynamics will improve and the pace of price increases soon rise toward their target level.

Survey data released by the New York Federal Reserve on Monday showed consumer expectations of the inflation rate over the next year fell to 2.6% from 2.82% in the March survey.

The nearly quarter point drop was the third-largest since the survey was launched in mid-2013. The outlook for inflation over the next three years also fell, to 2.69% from 2.86%, evidence that medium-term expectations have also weakened in recent weeks.

Following the Fed’s most recent meeting, Chairman Jerome Powell and others said they felt recent weak inflation readings were driven by “transitory” factors that would disappear over time and allow overall inflation to rise.

But a drop in inflation expectations is another matter, and could be evidence that households and businesses are losing faith in the Fed’s ability to deliver on its inflation goal — a worrying development for central bankers who feel their ability to keep expectations set around their inflation target is critical to meeting the goal.

As of the Fed’s last policy statement on May 1, officials said they felt expectations remained stable.

While consumer surveys are discounted by some officials as overly influenced by things like changes in gasoline prices and other costs that consumers closely monitor, some broader market expectation measures have also shifted.

Since late April, for example, a St. Louis Federal Reserve measure of the inflation rate expected five years from now, based on trading in different types of bonds, dipped to 1.9% from 2.1%, a sign traders also see weaker inflation ahead.
…

The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged more than 500 points Monday as investors sought shelter from an escalating trade war between the U.S. and China.

The Dow and S&P 500 index each fell more than 2% as investors sold trade-sensitive shares in a broad sell-off that extended the market’s slide into a second week.

Technology stocks led the way lower, with digital storage companies and chipmakers among the big decliners. Heavy equipment makers Deere and Caterpillar drove losses in the industrial sector.

The world’s largest economies had seemed on track to resolve the ongoing trade dispute that has raised prices for consumers and pinched corporate profit margins. Investor confidence that the two sides were close to a resolution had helped push the market to its best yearly start in decades.

Those hopes are now being dashed and replaced by concerns that the trade war could crimp what is otherwise a mostly healthy economy. Analysts have warned that failed trade talks and the deterioration in relations will put a dent in the U.S. and China’s economic prospects.

“The larger issue with the tariffs isn’t the specific amounts of tariffs at any given time, but the uncertainty that’s surrounding these tariffs and the `what’s-next?’ of an escalating trade war,” said Willie Delwiche, investment strategist at Baird. “That weighs on the global economy and could then weigh on the U.S. economy.”

The Dow dove 544 points, or 2.1%, to 25,398 as of 3:08 p.m. Eastern Time. Earlier, it was down 719 points. Boeing and Caterpillar fell the most in the Dow. Both companies get a significant amount of revenue from China and stand to lose heavily if the trade war drags on. Boeing slid 4.2% and Caterpillar was 4.4% lower.

The broader S&P 500 index fell 2.1%. The benchmark index is coming off its worst week since January, though it’s still up sharply for the year. The Nasdaq, which is heavily weighted with technology stocks, slid 2.9%, on track for its biggest daily loss of the year.

Technology stocks were bearing the heaviest losses. Apple fell 5% and Cisco slid 3.4%. Chipmakers and other technology companies have warned that uncertainty over the trade war’s outcome is prompting a slowdown in orders.

Bank stocks also fell sharply. Bank of America dropped 3.8% and JPMorgan Chase fell 2.1%.

Safe-play holdings were the only winners as traders sought to reduce their exposure to risk. Utilities were the only sector to rise on the stock market, and prices for U.S. government bonds, which are considered ultra-safe investments, rose sharply, sending yields lower. The yield on the 10-year Treasury fell to 2.40% from 2.45% late Friday.

Overseas markets also fell. European indexes mostly finished more than 1% lower. In Asia, the Shanghai Composite index fell 1.2%. Japan’s Nikkei 225 index gave up 0.7% and South Korea’s Kospi fell 1.4%.

In another sign of how nervous investors were feeling, an index known as Wall Street’s “fear gauge,” which measures how much volatility the market expects in the future, spiked 27%. The VIX, however, is still far below the elevated levels it reached at the end of last year when the S&P 500 came extremely close to entering a bear market, meaning a decline of 20% or more from a recent peak.

Trade talks between the U.S. and China concluded Friday with no agreement and with the U.S. increasing import tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods to 25% from 10%. Officials also said they were preparing to expand tariffs to cover another $300 billion of goods.

China on Monday announced tariff increases on $60 billion of U.S. imports, particularly farm products like soybeans. The price of soybeans slid 0.8% to $8.03 a bushel. They were trading around $9 a bushel last month and are now at their lowest price since December 2008. The falling price has put pressure on U.S. farmers.

Analysts have said investors should prepare for a more volatile stock market while the trade dispute deepens. Many are still confident that both sides will eventually reach a deal.

“Since we see a trade accord being reached in the not-too-distant future, we don’t expect the market to endure more than a short-lived spate of indigestion,” said Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at CFRA.

The deteriorating trade negotiations follow what has been a mostly calm period of trading where solid economic data and corporate earnings helped push the market steadily higher. The S&P 500 is still up 12.5% of the year with technology stocks blowing away rest of the market with 18.8% gains.

Investors have so far made it through the bulk of first quarter corporate earnings reports in decent shape. Earlier in the year they had expected earnings to severely contract. The results so far show less than a 1% drop in profit.

The escalating trade war threatens to spoil an expected earnings recovery in the second half, however.

“Investors are increasingly worried an anticipated second-half profit rebound may now evaporate as President [Donald] Trump’s threat to tariff the remaining $325 billion in Chinese imports would disproportionately target consumer products like iPhones, thereby posing a greater threat to the consumption-driven US economy,” said Alec Young, managing director of global markets research at FTSE Russell.

Elsewhere in the market, generic drug developers are sinking after many of them were accused of artificially inflating and manipulating prices. The lawsuit from attorneys general in more than 40 states alleges that for many years the makers of generic drugs worked together to fix prices.

Teva, which was specifically mentioned, sank 15.1%. Mylan slumped 9.8%.

Ride-sharing company Uber tumbled another 11% on its first full day of trading following its rocky debut on the stock market Friday. The stock had priced at $45 at its initial public offering but is now trading just below $37.

Gold mining companies were some of the few stocks making gains amid the broad market slump as the price of gold, another safe-play asset, rose 1% to $1,301 an ounce. Newmont Goldcorp rose 2.8%.
…