Implications:  Tariff concerns remain top of mind for both the Fed and the markets, but producer prices have been telling a different story.  Following outsized increases in December and January, prices have been trending comfortably below the Fed’s 2% inflation target ever since, including flat to down readings in three of the past four months.  The typically volatile food and energy categories stayed true to their reputation in June, with energy prices rising 0.6% and food prices up 0.2%.  Meanwhile “core” producer prices – which exclude food and energy – were unchanged in June and are up 2.6% versus a year ago, as a rise in goods prices were offset by declines in prices for services.  While some may point to the rise in goods prices as a sign that tariffs are raising costs for producers – and goods would logically seem the area most exposed to higher import costs – it must be noted that good prices are up at a modest 1.5% annualized rate over the last three months, and at a slower 0.8% annualized rate over the last six months.  In June, communications equipment was the key category that led goods costs higher, while prices for services, which represent a much larger share of the economy, declined 0.1%, led lower by a 4.1% drop in traveler accommodation, which more than offset higher prices for machinery, equipment, parts, and supplies wholesaling.  As we noted in yesterday’s CPI report, tariffs can raise prices for tariffed items, but they leave less money left over for other goods and services. They shuffle the deckchairs on the inflation ship, not how high or low the ship sits in the water.  That’s up to the money supply, which is up less than a percentage point since April 2022.  Since January, consumer prices have risen at a 1.8% annualized rate, while producer prices are up at a 0.2% rate.  We believe monetary tightness will keep inflation relatively subdued in the months ahead and that there is already room for some modest rate cuts.

Click here for a PDF version

Implications:   Inflation came in as expected in June, with the Consumer Price Index rising 0.3%, and the year-ago comparison moving up to 2.7%.  Although some analysts may interpret this as proof that tariffs are finally influencing inflation figures, we believe this connection is overstated.  Yes, tariffs can raise prices for the tariffed items, but they leave less money left over for other goods and services. They shuffle the deckchairs on the inflation ship, not how high or low the ship sits in the water.  That’s up to the money supply, which is up less than a percentage point since April 2022.  We believe this relative monetary tightness is why inflation will resume its bumpy path downward in the months ahead.   Notably, in the past five months, overall prices are up at only a 1.8% pace while “core” prices, which exclude food and energy, are up at a moderate 2.1% pace.  Diving into the details, the volatile category for energy led the overall index higher in June, increasing 0.9%, while food prices rose 0.3%.  “Core” prices, which strip out food and energy, rose 0.2% in June versus a consensus expected +0.3%, the fifth month in a row coming in below consensus expectations.  The main driver of core inflation has been housing rents, which continue to outpace most categories (+0.3% in June), though not as much as in years prior. Notably, prices continue to fall for new and used autos (-0.3% and -0.7%, respectively), the third month in a row where both have declined.  We also like to follow “Supercore” inflation – a subset category of prices that excludes food, energy, other goods, and housing rents.  Fed Chair Jerome Powell said back in 2022 that they follow this category closely, though he stopped mentioning it when this measure stopped showing progress versus inflation.  However, it appears that tide has also turned for the category, with supercore prices up at a 1.1% annualized pace in the last five months, while the year-ago comparison has fallen from 4.1% in January to 3.0% in June.  Notable decliners this month within the supercore category were once again prices for hotels (-3.6%) and airline fare (-0.1%), now the fourth month in a row where both have declined: a potential sign of a slowing economy. Although inflation is still above the Fed’s 2.0% target, given the lags in monetary policy and slow growth in the M2 measure of the money supply, we believe it’s time for the Fed to consider reducing short-term rates slightly in the months ahead.  In other recent news, new claims for unemployment insurance declined 5,000 two weeks ago to 227,000.  Continuing claims rose 10,000 to 1.965 million.  These figures are consistent with continued job growth but at a slower pace.  On the manufacturing front, the Empire State Index – a measure of manufacturing sentiment in the New York region – rose to 5.5 in July from -16.0 in June.

Click here for a PDF version

With the recent passing of the budget reconciliation bill commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), conversations about tax fairness are once again taking center stage. In this week’s edition of “Three on Thursday,” we delve into the most recent IRS tax data from 2022 to provide a clearer picture of the federal income tax landscape. For further insight, click on the link below.

Click here to view the report

In the immediate aftermath of Friday’s much anticipated Employment Report it seemed like the judgement from analysts, talking heads, and even markets was unanimous (or nearly so) that there was good news to celebrate.

Superficially, it’s not hard to see why that view of the report quickly became the conventional wisdom.  Payrolls rose a respectable 147,000 in June and were revised up 16,000 in prior months, outstripping the consensus expected 106,000.  At the same time, the unemployment rate, which the consensus expected to tick up slightly to 4.3% (from a prior 4.2%) instead ticked down to 4.1%.

The news was especially welcome because the ADP report released the day before showed a decline of 33,000 private payrolls.  Unfortunately, while the ADP report probably overstated the weakness, the Labor Department’s report overstated the strength.  We expect weaker job growth and higher unemployment in the months ahead.

Why aren’t we in the cheerleading chorus?  Because private payrolls were up only 74,000 in June and were revised down 16,000 for prior months, bringing the net gain to a tepid 58,000.  In other words, the overall payroll gain in June itself was roughly half due to government and all of the upward revisions in prior months were due to the government, as well.  Long term, more government jobs are not a sign of a healthy economy nor are they going to make it healthier in the future.

We like to follow payrolls excluding three sectors: government, education & health services, and leisure & hospitality, all of which are heavily influenced by government spending and regulation (including COVID lockdowns and re-openings).  This measure of “core payrolls” increased only 3,000 in June, the smallest gain so far this year. 

Meanwhile, the main reason the unemployment rate ticked down in June was because of a 130,000 drop in the labor force (people who are either working or looking for work).  Fewer people looking for work means a lower unemployment rate but also a questionable job market.  Again, not good news.

Average hourly earnings increased a mild 0.2% in June, bringing the increase so far this year to 3.5% annualized.  In a world with a 2.0% inflation target at the Federal Reserve and a long-term growth rate of 1.5%+ for productivity (output per hour of work), policymakers should anticipate 3.5% growth in wages and see it as a sign that monetary policy has been tight enough for long enough to control inflation. 

Yes, real GDP is likely to rebound in the second quarter from the 0.5% annualized decline in Q1, but that should largely reflect the end of companies and consumers front-running the Trump Administration’s tariffs earlier this year.  It won’t represent a lasting shift in the underlying trend in the economy.

Yes, President Trump recently signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which made permanent the tax rate cuts on individuals from back in 2017 as well as some business incentives, like bonus depreciation and faster expensing for R&D.  In addition, the law reduces the growth of welfare spending, which could induce more participation in the workforce.  But the tax policies that are being extended permanently were already in place for the past several years, while the recent budget cuts are not large compared to total government entitlement spending, so don’t expect a sudden miracle boost to economic growth.  While the bill is an overall plus for the economy, it’s not nearly as powerful as the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980s. 

For the time being, we are withholding judgement on the US’s fiscal outlook until we see the extent of spending cuts the Administration can get out of Congress later this year during the appropriations battles over Fiscal Year 2026, which starts October 1.   Serious budget cuts would be good for the long run, but might cause some very short term economic pain.  

In the meantime, manufacturing production is up only 0.5% from a year ago and Fed Chairman Jerome Powell seems determined to make excuses why short-term rates have to stay where they are for the time being, even though they remain well above the Fed’s long-run average estimate of 3.0% on the federal funds rate.  

We think Powell may be letting politics cloud his judgement, which is why we like Trump’s apparent plan to name Powell’s successor well in advance of the end of Powell’s tenure as chairman next spring.  That way Powell will remain on the job, but the public and investors can also listen to how the next chairman (as well as some current Fed members who disagree with Powell) will handle the same economic situations.  

The economy is not in recession yet, but markets are not pricing in enough of a risk of a recession in the year ahead.

Brian S. Wesbury – Chief Economist

Robert Stein, CFA – Deputy Chief Economist

Click here for a PDF version

It’s been a turbulent but ultimately rewarding first half for the stock market. In this week’s edition of Three on Thursday, we spotlight the S&P 500 Index—one of the most trusted gauges of U.S. equity performance. Remarkably, it closed June at all-time highs.  Click the link below for a deeper understanding of the events that shaped the first half of the year.

Click here to view the report

Implications:  The ISM Services index’s brief one-month stint below 50 in May proved to be short-lived, as the index beat expectations and returned to expansion territory (albeit barely) at 50.8 in June.  It’s important to remember that Purchasing Manager’s surveys like the ISM Services index and its counterpart on the manufacturing sector often capture sentiment mixed in with actual activity.  Given the recent weak readings from both, we don’t know whether this is the front end of a much slower economy, or just a sign that uncertainty from U.S. trade policy and, more recently, the conflict in the Middle East, are impacting sentiment and temporarily holding things back.  Looking at the details of the report, new orders and business activity were responsible for the slight increase to the overall index, both climbing back into expansion territory at 51.3 and 54.2, respectively. Uncertainty from trade policy, high interest rates, and rising tensions in the Middle East are all said to be delaying activity and investment.  Service companies – once hamstrung with difficulty finding qualified labor – are now taking a cautious approach with their hiring efforts, as the employment index dropped to 47.2 in June, the third contraction in four months, with nearly twice as many industries (nine) reporting lower employment in June versus higher (five). The highest reading of any category was once again the prices index, which declined to 67.5 in June from 68.7 in May. Besides last month, that’s the highest level since late 2022, but still far from the worst we saw during the COVID supply-chain disruptions, when the index reached the low 80s. Though inflation pressures remain – the M2 measure of the money supply is barely up versus three years ago – which means we are likely to see lower inflation and growth in the year ahead.

Click here for a PDF version

Implications: The U.S. trade deficit widened to $71.5 billion in May, as exports fell by $11.6 billion while imports declined by $0.3 billion.  Imports jumped at a massive rate in the first quarter as businesses were front-running President Trump’s new tariffs.  Now all that is reversing.  We like to focus on the total volume of trade, imports plus exports, as it shows the extent of business and consumer interaction across the US border.  This measure declined by $11.9 billion in May but is up 4.2% compared to a year ago, before businesses started adjusting to higher tariffs.  In May itself, nonmonetary gold led the way lower for exports dropping by $5.5 billion for the month.  Because imports subtract from GDP in national accounting, the surge in Q1 became a major drag on growth; net exports alone shaved roughly five percentage points off Q1’s growth rate, pulling real GDP down at a 0.5% annualized pace.  But now, as tariff front-running peaked in March, imports should continue to be unusually soft for the next few months and so trade should add to the GDP calculations for the current quarter.  However, erratic trade policy out of Washington adds a great deal of uncertainty in translating recent trade reports into GDP projections.  Meanwhile, the landscape of global trade continues to shift.  China, once the top exporter to the U.S., has fallen to third place behind Mexico and Canada. Also in today’s report, the dollar value of US petroleum exports exceeded imports once again. This marks the 39th consecutive month of the US being a net exporter of petroleum products.  In other recent news, cars and light trucks were sold at a 15.3 million annual rate in June, down 1.7% from May, but up 2.3% from a year ago.

Click here for a PDF version

Implications:  No cheerleading today’s employment report.  Yes, the headline looks good: nonfarm payrolls rose 147,000 in June, beating the consensus expected 106,000.  Payrolls were also revised up 16,000 in prior months, bringing the net gain to a solid 163,000.   Meanwhile, the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.1% in June.  So why not celebrate?   Because private payrolls were up only 74,000 in June and were revised down 16,000 for prior months, bringing the net gain to 58,000.  In other words, the gain in June itself was roughly half due to government and all the upward revisions were due to the government, as well.  We like to follow payrolls excluding three sectors: government, education & health services, and leisure & hospitality, all of which are heavily influenced by government spending and regulation (including COVID lockdowns and re-openings).  This measure of “core payrolls” increased only 3,000 in June, the smallest so far this year.  Perhaps the worst news was a 0.3% decline for total private-sector hours worked.  Meanwhile, civilian employment, an alternative measure of jobs that includes small-business start-ups (but is volatile on a month-to-month basis) rose 93,000 in June.  So why did the unemployment rate tick down if job growth was tepid?  Because the labor force (people who are either working or looking for work) dropped 130,000, not a good sign.  Notably, in the past five months the native-born labor force is up while the foreign-born labor force is down, a sign of efforts against illegal immigration.  On the inflation front, average hourly earnings rose a tepid 0.2% in June while up 3.7% versus a year ago.  This is very close to the 3.5% gain we think the Federal Reserve would like to see and a sign that it has room for modest rate cuts in the months ahead.   Although some may claim the increase in government payrolls shows the Trump Administration is failing to trim the federal government, that’s not what the data say.  In the five months since January, federal payrolls (excluding the Post Office and Census-related jobs) are down 2.4%, the steepest drop for any 5-month period since the 1990s.  Instead, it’s been hiring by state and local governments, particularly for education jobs, that’s kept total government growing.  In other news this morning, new claims for unemployment insurance declined, 4,000 last week to 233,000.  Continuing claims remained at 1.964 million.  These figures are consistent with continued job growth but at a slower pace.

Click here for a PDF vesion

Implications:  Activity in the manufacturing sector continued to decline in June, but not by as much as the consensus expected. This makes four consecutive months that the ISM Manufacturing Index has been below 50.  The index was below 50 for all of 2023 and 2024.  Many thought this contraction was over in January and February when the index jumped over 50.  Today’s reading, and the last four months of weak readings, are reason for caution. We don’t know whether this is the front end of a much slower economy, or just a sign that uncertainty from U.S. trade policy and, more recently, escalating conflict in the Middle East, is temporarily holding things back.  Looking at the details of the report, half of the eighteen major industries reported growth in June, versus six that reported contraction, and three that reported no change.  The slight increase in the overall index was due to the production and inventories index normalizing to more moderate levels at 50.3 and 49.2, respectively, after they contracted sharply in April (likely the reversal of tariff front-running).   Order books were already weak before this year and the added business uncertainty from on-again/off-again tariffs has put many customer orders on pause until stability returns.  That effect can be seen in the new orders index, which slipped to 46.4 in June, as well as the survey comments, which were peppered with complaints of trade policy that’s making it extremely difficult to make near-term plans and budgets.  In turn this has hurt hiring efforts, as the employment index fell to an three-month low at 45.0, with more than double the industries (ten) reporting lower employment in June versus higher (four).  Perhaps the worst part of the report is that inflation pressures remain even while manufacturing stagnates.  The prices index rose to 69.7, which is high by historical standards, but below post COVID inflation levels.  We will be watching the M2 measure of the money supply closely – which has been roughly flat for three years – as a signal for if these pressures will turn inflationary.  In other news this morning, construction spending declined 0.3% in May, led by a large drop in homebuilding as well as commercial projects.

Click here for a PDF version

In 1852, Karl Marx said "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered and transmitted from the past."

He obviously knew about the Magna Carta (1215) and the English Parliament’s Bill of Rights (1689), which created a separation of powers between the King and elected representatives. What he didn’t pay much attention to was how the United States broke with history and improved upon these documents with the Declaration of Independence and Constitution so well thought out that it has only been amended twenty-seven times in 235 years.  Men and women can make their own history here.  Karl Marx was wrong.  No one puts it better than Ronald Reagan; the excerpt below comes directly from his Commencement Address at the University of Notre Dame back on May 17, 1981.

"This Nation was born when a band of men, the Founding Fathers, a group so unique we've never seen their like since, rose to such selfless heights. Lawyers, tradesmen, merchants, farmers – fifty-six men achieved security and standing in life but valued freedom more. They pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Sixteen of them gave their lives. Most gave their fortunes. All preserved their sacred honor.”

“They gave us more than a nation. They brought to all mankind for the first time the concept that man was born free, that each of us has inalienable rights, ours by the grace of God, and that government was created by us for our convenience, having only the powers that we choose to give it. This is the heritage that you're about to claim as you come out to join the society made up of those who have preceded you by a few years, or some of us by a great many.”

“This experiment in man's relation to man is a few years into its third century. Saying that may make it sound quite old. But let's look at it from another viewpoint or perspective. A few years ago, someone figured out that if you could condense the entire history of life on Earth into a motion picture that would run for 24 hours a day, 365 days – maybe on leap years we could have an intermission – this idea that is the United States wouldn't appear on the screen until 3.5 seconds before midnight on December 31st. And in those 3.5 seconds not only would a new concept of society come into being, a golden hope for all mankind, but more than half the activity, economic activity in world history, would take place on this continent. Free to express their genius, individual Americans, men and women, in 3.5 seconds, would perform such miracles of invention, construction, and production as the world had never seen.”

America has proven that men and women not only can make their own history, but they can make it as they please, with circumstances chosen by themselves. Happy 4th of July to you all.  Let’s take time this week to step back and realize just how fortunate we are to live in a time and place where the fire of invention still burns hot, course corrections (however messy they may be) still take place, and the future remains bright.  May we continue to honor the legacy of those who came before us by striving to uphold the principles that have made this country a beacon of hope and freedom for the world.

(We first published a version of this same Monday Morning Outlook in celebration of July 4th, 2023.)

Brian S. Wesbury – Chief Economist

Robert Stein, CFA – Deputy Chief Economist

Click here for a PDF version