Business

(NEW YORK) — General Motors is “very serious about making Cadillac a premium brand again,” Michael Simcoe — the company’s senior vice president of global design — told ABC News in an interview about the “engineering and design tour de force” that is the new Celestiq.

The interview below has been edited for clarity.

Q: A huge trend in the industry now is customization, coachbuilding, bespoke vehicles. Why is Cadillac going in that direction and what has the response been like? And are you trying to appeal to customers who have Bentleys and Rolls-Royces?

A: With the Celestiq, we’re offering customers the ability to truly customize everything. The tyranny of choices is there and we try to help them. Customers have the ability to touch every color and finish on the exterior and interior of the car to give it their own personality. Yes, there are a few competitors, but people at this level are looking for something very unique and very specific to them.

Q: How long does it take to build a Celestiq?

A: We can build two a day. We are building cars right now and a number of people have gone through the design process and selected their interior, their exterior with our designers. So their cars are now in line to be built.

Q: How many orders have you received?

A: I can’t tell you that.

Q: Are customers coming to the Cadillac House in Michigan or are your designers flying all over the world to meet with clients?

A: They have a choice. We can do it online with them, they can come to Cadillac House and go through the samples with us. Or we’ll send designers to customers if we need to.

Q: When did Cadillac make the decision to go ultra luxe and offer a product that starts at $350,000?

A: Cadillac has tried a number of times to reestablish its position. It was and is becoming again the standard of the world. That’s the way we have always thought about it. Certainly for our customers we haven’t delivered that, at least delivered what they expected. We have tried a number of times to through vision products and concept flagships to spark a rebirth of Cadillac.

The only way to prove internally and externally that we were very serious about making Cadillac a premium brand again was to do a vehicle like the Celestiq. It’s an engineering and design tour de force and it’s hand built. It’s proof we can actually can take Cadillac back to the position it had in the past.

The Celestiq is new and represents the current generation. We really are predicting and showing people where we are going and I think that’s very important. Cadillac will no longer be something static that people get a chance to ignore and forget. We will be out there with beautiful designs and vehicles that people fall in love with.

Q: Celestiq, Lyriq, Optiq, Escalade IQ — why do all Cadillac EVs end in IQ?

A: We could have gone with our venerable names from the past, but that didn’t seem right when we were moving the brand to an all EV-based architecture. It was a signal that these vehicles were our new generation of Cadillacs.

Q: When you were overseeing the design of these new EVs, particularly the Celestiq, what was important to include?

A: We wanted a vehicle that was different to some of the high-end competition. We feel like we did our own thing in proportion to the vehicle. It still has a long hood. It has a hint of Cadillac heritage in the way the interior was designed. These long, horizontal architecture lines with metallic finishes and detail inside the car — that hints back to Cadillacs in the early 60s and 70s.

Q: Are customers actually going to drive the Celestiq or is it a vehicle to be chauffeured in?

A: This won’t be their daily driver but it could be. It has 300-ish miles of range, lots of power, lots of performance. It’s a very easy car to drive and control. It has four-wheel steering, so it drives like a small car. It has ride control and air suspension and all of the technical marvels like a large screen.

It is a spirited drive and it feels good. Jay Leno drove it and I think he enjoyed himself. But you can sit back here, in the second row, and it’s a premium experience as well. We’re not dictating where you should be.

Q: I want to ask about the CT5-V Blackwing and CT4-V Blackwing, two high-performance sedans that have received top praise from the enthusiast community. Are they going away now that the brand’s direction is electric? What’s the future for them?

A: I can’t tell you in detail but they’ll be around. We recognize the value of the cars so they”ll be around.

 

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Shares of Netflix climbed about 9% in early trading on Friday after a strong earnings report propelled by hit shows like “Nobody Wants This” and “The Perfect Couple.”

The company added about 5 million subscribers over a three-month period ending in September, which marked a roughly 40% decline from the same period one year prior.

Even so, the subscriber gains contributed to revenue totaling nearly $10 billion, in part due to the growth in popularity a subscription tier that includes advertisements, the earnings report on Thursday said. That sales figure marked 15% jump when compared with the same period one year prior.

In all, Netflix boasts about 282 million subscribers worldwide, making it the most popular streaming service by a wide margin. By comparison, Warner Bros. Discovery counts roughly 103 million subscribers across its services HBO, HBO Max and Discovery +, an earnings report in August showed.

“We’re feeling really good about the business,” Ted Sarandos, the company’s co-CEO, said on a conference call with Wall Street analysts.

Notable programs from the most recent quarter included the latest season of “Emily in Paris,” as well as movies like “Monster High 2” and “Rebel Ridge.” The company also expanded its live broadcasts, featuring a face-off between hot dog-eating rivals Takeru Kobayashi and Choey Chestnut in September.

On the earnings call, Netflix touted viewership of about two hours per user each day, which the company said indicated an increase so far this year when compared to last year.

The company expects continued growth next year due to a slate of programming that includes new seasons of top shows like “Wednesday” and “Squid Game,” as well as an additional installment in the “Knives Out” film series, Netflix said.

Netflix forecasted as much as $44 billion in revenue next year, which would amount to about a 13% increase over current performance.

Even after expanding its audience, Netflix still captures less than 10% of television viewership in the countries where the platform is most popular, Netflix said.

“There’s a huge opportunity to grow,” Gregory Peters, a co-CEO at Netflix, said on Thursday.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump has proposed tariffs as the solution for a host of perceived ills: the decline of U.S. manufacturing, the arrival of undocumented immigrants and the costs of childcare, among others.

“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff,'” Trump said this week during an appearance at the Economic Club of Chicago.

On the campaign trail, Trump has rarely mentioned the threat of a potential trade war, in which foreign nations could respond to tariffs by slapping U.S. imports with taxes of their own.

Economists who spoke to ABC News said Trump’s tariff proposals would all but certainly trigger a global trade war, diminishing sales for U.S. exporters, which account for about 10% of the nation’s economy. The disruption would likely trigger job cuts and slow the nation’s economic performance, economists added.

On the other hand, the move would bring more of the supply chain back to U.S. soil, economists said, and it would likely spur growth and hiring at some firms by protecting them from foreign competition. But the same experts cautioned that such benefits would be far outweighed by the consequences.

“The essence of a trade war is you impose tariffs and other countries respond by putting high tariffs on your exports. It’s tit for tat,” Douglas Irwin, a professor of economics at Dartmouth College who specializes in the history of U.S. trade policy, told ABC News.

“Tariffs are easy to impose but hard to remove,” Irwin added.

In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Trump campaign pointed to a series of statements about tariffs made by Trump and his allies, including remarks from Trump Campaign Senior Advisor Brian Hughes.

“Time warp alert! Just like 2016, Wall Street and so-called expert forecasts said that Trump policies would result in lower growth and higher inflation, the media took these forecasts at face value, and the record was never corrected when actual growth and job gains widely outperformed these opinions,” Hughes said.

“These Wall Street elites would be wise to review the record and acknowledge the shortcomings of their past work if they’d like their new forecasts to be seen as credible,” he added.

On the campaign trail, Trump has promised a sharp escalation of tariffs during his first term. He has proposed tariffs of between 60% and 100% on Chinese goods.

Envisioning a far-reaching policy, Trump has proposed a tax of between 10% and 20% on all imported products. On Tuesday, he told the audience at the Economic Club of Chicago that such a tariff could reach as high as 50%.

Economists widely expect that tariffs of this magnitude would increase prices paid by U.S. shoppers, since importers typically pass along the cost of higher taxes to consumers. Trump’s tariffs would cost the typical U.S. household about $2,600 per year, according to an estimate from the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Meanwhile, there could be a second wave of consequences if foreign countries were to impose retaliatory tariffs, economists said.

“You might see a dramatic decrease in U.S. exports, which could then have employment effects for people working in those sectors,” Kara Reynolds, an economist at American University, told ABC News. She pointed to the manufacturing and farming as industries especially vulnerable to a trade war.

For evidence of such an outcome, one need look no further than Trump’s first term, during which a slew of tariffs often induced a retaliatory response.

Tariffs imposed during Trump’s first term often induced retaliatory tariffs. The European Union and Canada responded to tariffs on steel and aluminum with tariffs of their own. Trump slapped tariffs on about $360 billion worth of Chinese goods, but China responded with tariffs on tens of billions of dollars worth of U.S exports.

Chinese tariffs on U.S. soybean exports caused a steep decline in sales to Chinese customers, dropping exports from $12.3 billion in 2017 to $3.1 billion in 2018, according to the Georgetown University Journal of International Affairs. In response, the Trump administration paid billions of dollars in direct aid to farmers to make up for the losses.

“He felt obligated to bail out the farmers,” Robert Lawrence, a professor of trade and investment at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, told ABC News. “Now, we’re talking about potential actions on a much grander scale.”

Alongside retaliatory tariffs, many countries would seek suppliers in places where such tariffs are not on the books, Lawrence added.

“Trump is likely to isolate the U.S. and drive other countries to do business with each other,” Lawrence said. “This would have a very adverse effect.”

On the campaign trail, Trump has sharply disagreed with such fears, saying large-scale tariffs would rejuvenate U.S. manufacturing and propel economic growth.

At the Chicago Economic Club on Tuesday, Trump said tariffs would force companies to locate factories in the U.S. as a way of circumventing the tariffs, which in turn would boost domestic production and employment.

“We’re going to have thousands of companies coming into this country,” Trump said. “We’re going to grow it like it’s never grown before, and we’re going to protect them when they come in because we’re not going to have somebody undercut them.”

Economists said higher tariffs could expand certain areas of U.S. manufacturing that face stiff competition from abroad, but the policy also risks raising input costs and slowing output at U.S. producers that import their raw materials.

Trump’s tariffs decreased U.S. employment by 166,000 jobs, according to a study from the nonprofit Tax Foundation, which cited an increase in import costs for U.S. employers. A separate study from the U.S.-China Business Council estimated up to nearly 250,000 lost jobs as a result of the tariffs.

“It certainly would make the U.S. more self-reliant, but it would come with far greater costs,” Lawrence said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Boeing will reduce the size of its total workforce by 10% over the coming months, CEO Kelly Ortberg said in a letter to employees on Friday.

That amounts to around 17,000 jobs, based on the company’s December 2023 total workforce numbers.

Ortberg said due to the workforce reductions, Boeing would not proceed with the next cycle of furloughs.

Ortberg also said the 777X program would be delayed until 2026, the 767 freighter program would end in 2027 and the company expects “substantial new losses” in Boeing Defense, Space & Security this quarter.

“Our business is in a difficult position, and it is hard to overstate the challenges we face together,” said Ortberg. “Beyond navigating our current environment, restoring our company requires tough decisions and we will have to make structural changes to ensure we can stay competitive and deliver for our customers over the long term.”

The company said Friday it expects to report third-quarter revenue of $17.8 billion, GAAP loss per share of $9.97 and operating cash flow of $1.3 billion.

The announcement comes after tens of thousands of Boeing workers voted to strike last month after rejecting the proposed contract.

The company has endured tremendous financial pressures and extra scrutiny following a series of failures involving its aircraft and supply.

On Jan. 5, a door plug blew out of the company’s 737 Max 9 aircraft at around 15,000 feet in altitude during an Alaska Airlines flight, prompting a federal investigation.

Boeing Starliner, a spacecraft that was being developed for the NASA Commercial Crew Program, was hit with several delays and rising costs before its first crewed launch to the International Space Station in June.

However the spacecraft was forced to return without its astronauts Barry “Butch” Wilmore and Sunita “Suni” Williams last month after tests showed there was too much risk with regard to the vehicle’s thrusters for re-entry.

Boeing announced last month that Ted Colbert, the president and chief executive officer of Boeing Defense, Space & Security, will be leaving the beleaguered company.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Inflation has loomed over the U.S. economy like a movie villain, haunting grocery store trips and gas runs. While costs remain much higher than they were a few years ago, those rapid price increases have mostly vanished.

Inflation stands at its lowest level in more than three years, hovering right near the Federal Reserve’s target rate of 2%, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data this week showed.

Not long ago, a once-in-a-century pandemic upended the economy, sending millions nationwide into lockdown and snarling the global supply chain. Meanwhile, trillions of dollars in government support helped Americans spend amid the calamity.

A resulting imbalance between supply and demand sent prices soaring. The Russia-Ukraine war exacerbated the problem, causing gas and food shortages. Within a few years, the massive issue has largely been resolved.

“This was the highest inflation over the longest period that we’ve seen in decades. It was serious,” Claudia Sahm, chief economist at New Century Advisors and a former Fed official, told ABC News.

Here’s what to know about how inflation has come back down:

Repaired supply chain

During the pandemic, factories worldwide shut down. Workers stayed home for fear of getting sick. Freight ships waited off the coast of overwhelmed U.S. ports.

The pandemic clogged the global supply chain, imposing shortages for everything from cars to lumber to exercise equipment. Meanwhile, people stuck at home focused their spending on those exact sorts of products, since COVID-19 shutdowns prevented them from going out to eat or taking a vacation.

When too much money chased after too few products, prices climbed.

“The pandemic was the root of all evil in the economy,” Sahm said.

When lockdown rules were lifted, demand for goods slowed and manufacturers revved up production as workers returned. The nation’s ports loosened up the backlog of container ships, cutting freight prices dramatically and lowering costs for retailers.

Economists disagree over the role that elevated corporate profits played in driving inflation, as some say they account for more than half of the increase in prices while others say they have caused little or none of the hikes.

In some cases, the easing of supply chain blockages took months or even years to work their way through the global economy.

Take car prices, for example. When semiconductor production slowed nearly to a halt, carmakers lost out on a part necessary for production. Car prices skyrocketed, sending many consumers to the used car market. In turn, used car prices soared. So did costs for car repairs and, as a result, car insurance.

“Those have all now unwound,” William English, a professor of finance and former economist at the Federal Reserve, told ABC News.

Interest rate hikes

In response to rising inflation, the Fed embarked upon an aggressive series of interest rate hikes. Beginning in 2021, the Fed rapidly hiked interest rates, eventually putting borrowing costs at their highest level in more than two decades.

In contrast with the supply chain fixes, the interest rate hikes aimed to address the other side of the equation driving inflation: excess demand.

In March 2020, then-President Donald Trump signed into law a $2.2 trillion economic stimulus package, including direct payments of $1,200 and expanded unemployment insurance, among other measures. Months later, in December, Trump enacted a second $900 billion round of government support.

The following year, President Joe Biden signed a $1.9 trillion economic stimulus package of his own, including another round of $1,400 direct payments as well as an expansion of the child tax credit.

The government support helped buoy demand, even as the pandemic posed major challenges for the supply chain and decimated the service economy made up of sectors like restaurants and hotels.

“Now you have money, and nowhere to go and buy things,” said Hernan Moscoso Boedo, an economist at the University of Cincinnati.

By raising interest rates, the Fed made borrowing more expensive for consumers and businesses alike, making it difficult for them to take on loans for big purchases or large investments.

“Over the last few years, we’ve seen less money in the market because of the interest rates,” Boedo said, adding that the reduction of demand has helped ease prices.

Last month, the Fed reversed course, cutting interest rates by half a percentage point and dialing back the fight against inflation. While interest rates remain high relative to recent decades, the landmark shift suggests that the Fed considers the end of the inflation battle to be in sight.

“They’re close to being done,” Boedo said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(TAMPA, Fla.) — Hurricane Milton left widespread gasoline shortages across Florida after it made landfall on Wednesday night and cut across the state. The damage exacerbated fuel outages that began before the storm arrived, as millions fled from its path.

Nearly a quarter of the roughly 7,900 gas stations in the state have run dry, petroleum data firm GasBuddy reported Thursday. Oil Price Information Service, or OPIS, another company that tracks the sector, found as much as half of the state’s gas stations lack fuel, Denton Cinquegrana, chief oil analyst at OPIS, told ABC News.

Across Tampa Bay and St. Petersburg, almost two thirds of gas stations are without fuel, according to GasBuddy.

Experts said they expect the gas shortages to persist for days, hamstringing businesses and everyday people as Florida begins to recover from Hurricane Milton.

The delayed return of gasoline in the region owes to disruption at Port Tampa Bay, which says it handles more than 43% of the state’s petroleum imports. Far-reaching power outages will also impede gas service, since gas stations depend on power to pump fuel from storage tanks and deliver it into vehicles, experts said.

“This kind of situation isn’t solved overnight,” Jon Davis, chief meteorologist at Everstream Analytics, told ABC News. “It’s going to take many days to work itself out and get the situation back to normal.”

Port Tampa Bay, which remains closed, appears to have averted serious damage from the storm, the port said in a statement on Thursday morning. However, the port also noted that it continues to face road closures and flood concerns in the surrounding area.

“Some damage was observed to buildings but there has been no significant damage to docks, so far,” said the statement. “We are working with our fuel terminal operators to assess their facilities and learn when they will be able to return to service.”

Port Tampa Bay did not respond to an ABC News request for comment about the extent of damage from the storm.

While the port escaped a disaster that could have hampered fuel supplies in the state for weeks, the ongoing disruption still poses significant challenges for gas delivery in the short term, Jason Miller, a professor of supply-chain management at Michigan State University, told ABC News.

“It does seem we’ve avoided a worst-case scenario,” Miller said.

Depending on the extent of damage at the port, gas stations may come to rely on truck deliveries for the transport of fuel, Miller said. In that case, it would take some time to build up the capacity necessary to overcome the state’s gas outages, he added.

“It’s not a solution that you could implement tomorrow,” Miller said.

The potential return of port operations or the supplemental fuel from trucks would both rely on the state’s roads, some of which were damaged by the storm, experts noted. Such infrastructure may require repairs before gasoline carriers can safely deliver fuel to stations.

“The road issue can get taken care of in the next day or two,” Davis said.

Even if Port Tampa Bay comes back online and trucks join in to aid the recovery, a significant additional problem must first be addressed: power shortages. Gas stations require power to pump fuel from storage tanks into customers’ vehicles, and more than 3.4 million customers are currently without power in Florida, according to the tracking site poweroutage.us.

Port Tampa Bay said on Thursday that it remains without power, which it needs to operate oil terminals that make up a critical step in the supply chain.

More than 50,000 linemen have been pre-staged across Florida to restore power, Gov. Ron DeSantis said Thursday.

“In a perfect world, power comes back quickly,” OPIS’ Cinquegrana said. “I think by early next week we might still see some stations out but for the most part you’ll get pretty close to normal.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — An escalation of conflicts in the Middle East in recent weeks has triggered a sharp increase in oil prices, raising uncertainty about where costs will head in the final weeks before Election Day.

Oil prices surged about 13% over an 11-day stretch ending on Monday. Prices fell markedly on Tuesday, however, as nearly a week passed without the onset of a widely anticipated Israeli counterattack on Iran.

The rise of oil prices carries potential implications for the presidential election next month. A hike in the cost of crude oil typically raises the price of gasoline, which holds substantial sway over general consumer attitudes, experts told ABC News.

For now, the recent increase in oil prices is not large enough to impact the election, experts said. However, they added, a further spike over the coming weeks could sour consumer sentiment and weaken approval of Vice President Kamala Harris, since her party occupies the White House.

“People use gasoline as a gauge of the economy and how they’re feeling about it,” Denton Cinquegrana, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service, told ABC News.

“A small change in prices probably won’t move the needle. If the price of a gallon goes up 50 cents, then that gets people’s attention,” Cinquegrana added, noting that such an increase is possible, but unlikely.

At least one expert cast doubt over the impact of even a sharp hike in oil and gas prices, saying it is unclear whether voters would fault Harris for the price spike and, even if they did, whether the few weeks remaining in the campaign affords enough time for higher prices to register with voters.

“People look at the economy over the long term, not the last month,” Jon Krosnick, a professor of political science at Stanford University who studies the relationship between gas prices and political perceptions, told ABC News.

In the aftermath of the Iranian attack on Israel last week, petroleum analysts told ABC News that the resulting spike in oil prices could push up gasoline prices between 10 and 15 cents per gallon. An increase of that magnitude would not affect the election, experts said, since the moderate uptick would do little to irk consumers and diminish their opinion about the nation’s economy.

“I do suspect that prices are going to continue to move higher, but I don’t think it will be significantly higher,” Cinquegrana said. “Unless something really goes haywire, I don’t expect prices to spike ahead of the election.”

A slight increase in gas prices may not matter much to consumers because costs at the pump have eased significantly over the past year, experts said.

Fuel prices have plummeted in recent months due to sluggish demand for gas as the busy summer traveling season has given way to an autumn slowdown. The average price of a gallon of gas is about 15% lower than where it stood a year ago, AAA data shows.

Despite its recent uptick, the price of oil has also fallen from a 2022 peak reached when the blazing-hot economic rebound from the pandemic collided with a supply shortage imposed by the Russia-Ukraine war.

A major escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran, however, could send oil and gas prices much higher, analysts said, pointing to potentially dire consequences of an anticipated retaliatory strike by Israel against Iran.

While sanctions have constrained Iranian oil output in recent years, the nation asserts control over the passage of tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, a trading route that facilitates the transport of about 15% of global oil supply.

Intensification of the war could limit Iranian oil production or transport through the Strait of Hormuz, cutting global supply and sending prices upward, some experts said.

“The risk of a wider war in the Middle East has gone up,” Jim Burkhard, vice president and head of research for oil markets, energy and mobility at S&P Global, told ABC News. “There’s the risk of something happening that could lead to higher prices.”

A further surge in oil prices would send gas prices skyrocketing, which could damage Harris’ political fortunes if voters fault the Biden administration for the sudden increase in costs right before they cast their ballots, Carola Binder, an economics professor at the University of Texas at Austin who studies the relationship between gas prices and consumer attitudes, told ABC News.

“If there was a huge increase in gas prices, I could imagine that hurting Harris’ chances,” Binder said. “Consumer sentiment does affect elections.”

Such a forecast drew sharp disagreement from Krosnick, even though his research helped establish an understanding of the political implications of rising gas prices.

Krosnick co-authored a 2016 study in the academic journal Political Psychology that examined the relationship between gas prices and presidential approval rating between the mid-1970s and mid-2000s. The study found that elevated gas prices drove a president’s approval downward. To be exact, each 10-cent increase in the gas price was associated with more than half a percentage point decline in presidential approval, the research showed.

The findings do not shed light on a scenario in which gas prices spike ahead of next month’s election, Krosnick said, noting that his research examined shifts in public opinion over a much longer period of time. Plus, he added, voters may not fault Harris for the Middle East conflict that would drive the potential price increase.

“There isn’t enough time for there to be a sustained change in prices,” Krosnick said. “It takes a while to ripple out to consumers.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — U.S. hiring surged in September, blowing past economist expectations and rebuking concern about weakness in the labor market. The fresh report marks one of the last major pieces of economic data before the presidential election.

Employers hired 254,000 workers last month, far exceeding economist expectations of 150,000 jobs added, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data showed. The unemployment rate ticked down to 4.1%.

Weaker-than-expected jobs data in both July and August has stoked worry among some economists about the nation’s economic outlook.

Despite an overall slowdown this year, the job market has proven resilient. Hiring has continued at a solid pace; meanwhile, the unemployment rate has climbed but remains near a 50-year low.

“The labor market is still healthy, but we have clearly seen a slowdown,” Roger Aliaga-Diaz, chief Americas economist at investment firm Vanguard, told ABC News in a statement before the new data was released. “Now we are approaching an inflection point.”

The new data arrived two weeks after the Federal Reserve cut its benchmark interest rate a half of a percentage point. The landmark decision dialed back a years-long fight against inflation and offered relief for borrowers saddled with high costs.

Inflation has slowed dramatically from a peak of about 9% in 2022, though it remains slightly higher than the Fed’s target of 2%.

Speaking at a press conference in Washington, D.C. last month, Fed Chair Jerome Powell described the rate decision as a shift in approach as the Fed focuses more on ensuring robust employment and less on lowering inflation.

“This recalibration of our policy stance will help maintain the strength of the economy and the labor market, and enable further progress on inflation,” Powell said.

In theory, lower interest rates help stimulate the economy and boost employment. However, the Fed’s interest rate decisions typically take several months before they influence economic activity. In any case, the soon-to-be released report tracks hiring for September, meaning the majority of the period reflected in the data took place before the rate cut.

Still, the jobs report on Friday held significant implications for further rate decisions over the coming months. The Federal Open Market Committee, or FOMC, a policymaking body at the Fed, has forecast additional interest rate cuts.

By the end of 2024, interest rates will fall another half of a percentage point from their current level of between 4.75% and 5%, according to FOMC projections. Interest rates will drop another percentage point over the course of 2025, the projections further indicated.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — In the final weeks of the campaign, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have sought to best each other on the all-important issue of the economy, which many voters rank as their top concern.

Both candidates have made manufacturing a centerpiece of their plans, but their respective approaches feature stark differences.

Harris aims to close corporate tax loopholes and throw government support behind the production of critical goods. By contrast, Trump wants to protect domestic manufacturers with tariffs on foreign products while cutting corporate taxes and easing regulations.

Manufacturing accounts for about 10% of U.S. gross domestic product and an even smaller share of the nation’s jobs. But the sector bears outsized importance since the production of essential goods holds national security implications and many manufacturing workers live in key swing states, experts said.

“There’s a belief that manufacturing is special,” Mary Lovely, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics who studies trade policy, told ABC News.

Here’s what to know about where Harris and Trump stand on manufacturing, and what experts think of their respective plans:

Trump: Tariffs and corporate tax cuts

On the campaign trail, Trump talks about tariffs more than just about any other policy proposal. The tax on imports makes up a key part of his plan for revitalizing manufacturing, alongside a lower tax burden for companies that he says would boost production and hiring.

Trump has promised a sharp escalation of tariffs enacted during his first term. Trump has proposed tariffs of between 60% and 100% on Chinese goods. A set of far-reaching tariffs would also include a tax as high as 20% on all imported products.

In theory, a tax on imports would give domestic producers a leg up in competition with foreign manufacturers, Christopher Conlon, a professor of economics at New York University who studies trade, told ABC News.

“His plan is based on the idea that foreign competitors are pricing their products too low and what we need to do is erect a wall of tariff barriers around the U.S.,” Conlon told ABC News.

An escalation of tariffs could expand certain areas of U.S. manufacturing vulnerable to foreign competition, which could result in added jobs at companies protected by the policy, experts said.

The economy added manufacturing over the first few years of his presidency, though the pandemic wiped out much of those gains.

Experts cautioned about a spike in input costs and consumer prices that could end up hindering many manufacturers and hammering household budgets. Evidence indicates that the Trump tax cut did not provide a significant boost for the economy, they added.

U.S. manufacturers of sophisticated products like automobiles and advanced medical equipment often import raw materials. A tariff would likely raise costs for those companies and risk making them less competitive on the global market, Conlon said. While adding jobs at some manufacturers, the policy could cause layoffs at others.

“Nobody seems to have shared that wisdom with the Trump campaign,” Conlon said.

A similar cause and effect applies to prices paid by everyday people for imported goods at the grocery or department store. Broad tariffs on foreign goods would likely force importing companies to raise prices and reignite inflation, experts said.

In a statement to ABC News, the Trump campaign said its manufacturing plan would create jobs and cut taxes.

“President Trump is a businessman who built the greatest economy in American history, and certainly doesn’t need economics lessons from a professor who has never created jobs or built anything in his life,” Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said.

“President Trump successfully imposed tariffs on China in his first term AND cut taxes for hardworking Americans here at home — and he will do it again in his second term. President Trump’s plan will result in millions of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars returning home from China to America,” the statement added in part.

Harris: Close tax loopholes and provide government support

Harris has proposed a different approach to manufacturing that emphasizes closing tax loopholes for some large corporations and providing government support for high-priority areas within the sector.

The agenda carries over a key part of the strategy undertaken by the Biden administration, which invested billions into manufacturing through a series of measures focused on bolstering key industries.

The Inflation Reduction Act spent hundreds of millions of dollars to boost U.S. production of renewables as the nation pursues ambitious carbon emissions goals and a supply chain less dependent on China. While the CHIPS and Sciences Act infused tens of billions into the production of semiconductors.

“The Biden administration has picked sectors, and in those sectors companies are eligible for assistance,” said Lovely.

Last week, Harris put forward a plan calling for $100 billion investment in manufacturing to further bolster the sector. The policy would prioritize “industries of the future,” such as carbon-efficient steel production and data centers for artificial intelligence, the campaign said in a statement last week.

The Harris campaign said it aims to pay for the investment with a reform of the international tax code that prevents producers from skirting U.S. taxes in a “race to the bottom.”

“The facts are clear: When he was president, Trump lost nearly 200,000 manufacturing jobs and created new incentives for companies to ship American jobs to China. Economists warn if Trump takes power again, his policies will crush American manufacturing jobs, send even more jobs to China, and cost middle class families $4,000 a year. This is a fundamental contrast with Vice President Harris, who is leading an American manufacturing boom – creating jobs right here at home and outcompeting China,” Harris campaign spokesperson Joseph Costello said in a statement to ABC News.

It remains unclear whether the support for manufacturing provided by the Biden administration has yielded significant gains in output or jobs, experts said.

The measures, however, have elicited a burst of factory construction. Spending on manufacturing-related construction surged from $76.4 billion in January 2021 to $238.2 billion in August 2024, U.S. Census Bureau data showed.

The surge in construction marks a positive signal but the critical test will be whether the plants deliver strong output and well-paying, long-term jobs, said Conlon.

“We haven’t had enough time to see if there’s a real effect or not,” he added. “How many chips are getting built by these plants? We don’t know that yet.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The Federal Trade Commission is asking a federal judge in New York to block the $8.5 billion merger of Tapestry, the company behind Coach, Kate Spade, and Capri, which controls Michael Kors.

In April, the FTC sued to block the sale, arguing that these brands dominate what’s known as the “accessible luxury” market and that if they combined, consumers would suffer by paying higher prices.

“This has to be the first time the focus of a federal court hearing turned to a $279 Kate Spade tote described as ‘colorful, joyful, feminine, green and white seen on Emily in Paris,” ABC News senior investigative reporter and correspondent Aaron Katersky said on Good Morning America Tuesday.

Tapestry argues the FTC is ignoring the reality of a marketplace, in which consumers have a lot of choices, suggesting it takes a mere stroll through Bloomingdale’s or Macy’s to see Gucci, Kors and Calvin Klein bags fighting for attention.

Michael Kors himself testified last month during a hearing, telling the judge there’s already plenty of competition for handbags, noting that he learned about one brand when he saw a photo of pop superstar Taylor Swift wearing an Aupen bag similar to those made by Kate Spade.

Kors also testified his handbags have “reached a point of brand fatigue” and a lawyer arguing in favor of the merger said it would revitalize the Michael Kors brand, so consumers have yet another choice. The goal, he said, is to sell more handbags to consumers.

The judge took these arguments under advisement and could rule at any time.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.