Berliner Boersenzeitung - Unexpected economic twist

EUR -
AED 4.231726
AFN 75.502746
ALL 92.965
AMD 422.064949
ANG 2.062582
AOA 1056.634887
ARS 1719.76132
AUD 1.634442
AWG 2.074092
AZN 1.965102
BAM 1.954686
BBD 2.321877
BDT 141.969088
BGN 1.955463
BHD 0.434754
BIF 3446.450739
BMD 1.152273
BND 1.475066
BOB 13.597251
BRL 5.977305
BSD 1.152843
BTN 109.840829
BWP 15.519088
BYN 3.443083
BYR 22584.55651
BZD 2.318579
CAD 1.607254
CDF 2621.422124
CHF 0.937777
CLF 0.02677
CLP 1053.580997
CNY 7.770758
CNH 7.773351
COP 3627.252616
CRC 523.703801
CUC 1.152273
CUP 30.535242
CVE 110.199804
CZK 24.227123
DJF 205.292999
DKK 7.475909
DOP 67.311929
DZD 153.326063
EGP 57.890902
ERN 17.284099
ETB 186.476931
FJD 2.553324
FKP 0.852914
GBP 0.854008
GEL 3.007425
GGP 0.852914
GHS 13.19942
GIP 0.852914
GMD 85.267943
GNF 10127.272165
GTQ 8.796101
GYD 241.23147
HKD 9.040431
HNL 30.900523
HRK 7.532992
HTG 150.797329
HUF 364.422547
IDR 20591.123716
ILS 3.438155
IMP 0.852914
INR 109.91944
IQD 1510.232728
IRR 1583943.672863
ISK 141.994931
JEP 0.852914
JMD 182.505194
JOD 0.81697
JPY 183.615869
KES 148.885092
KGS 100.766599
KHR 4668.440629
KMF 493.173008
KPW 1037.045738
KRW 1632.229249
KWD 0.356191
KYD 0.960748
KZT 536.781746
LAK 26011.062791
LBP 103237.306454
LKR 385.358702
LRD 209.239841
LSL 18.627726
LTL 3.402364
LVL 0.696999
LYD 7.352809
MAD 10.708151
MDL 19.98487
MGA 4961.150991
MKD 61.489955
MMK 2419.596483
MNT 4145.843888
MOP 9.318049
MRU 46.078938
MUR 54.329848
MVR 17.813799
MWK 1999.052017
MXN 19.658471
MYR 4.709914
MZN 73.633939
NAD 18.627403
NGN 1569.983733
NIO 42.426004
NOK 10.942298
NPR 175.743602
NZD 1.975492
OMR 0.443033
PAB 1.152843
PEN 3.896146
PGK 5.099116
PHP 70.705787
PKR 320.220551
PLN 4.307001
PYG 6879.079445
QAR 4.203059
RON 5.238469
RSD 117.308312
RUB 95.529629
RWF 1698.124829
SAR 4.342357
SBD 9.293016
SCR 15.893459
SDG 691.940947
SEK 11.044897
SGD 1.475192
SHP 0.85368
SLE 28.288052
SLL 24162.592104
SOS 658.821663
SRD 43.40595
STD 23849.730699
STN 24.486151
SVC 10.087207
SYP 14981.857107
SZL 18.608991
THB 38.147738
TJS 10.663676
TMT 4.032957
TND 3.385115
TOP 2.774397
TRY 55.049067
TTD 7.81851
TWD 37.08972
TZS 3053.521932
UAH 51.512019
UGX 4276.544136
USD 1.152273
UYU 46.403352
UZS 13785.023945
VES 881.936984
VND 30002.315822
VUV 136.653422
WST 3.146603
XAF 655.580524
XAG 0.017755
XAU 0.000263
XCD 3.114076
XCG 2.077707
XDR 0.815332
XOF 655.583367
XPF 119.331742
YER 273.261977
ZAR 18.626957
ZMK 10371.841681
ZMW 21.696635
ZWL 371.03153
  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    72.16

    0%

  • RYCEF

    0.5500

    21.1

    +2.61%

  • CMSC

    0.0100

    21.45

    +0.05%

  • NGG

    0.4100

    80.68

    +0.51%

  • CMSD

    -0.0400

    21.59

    -0.19%

  • RELX

    -0.8200

    34.55

    -2.37%

  • BTI

    -0.9700

    55.84

    -1.74%

  • GSK

    -0.6000

    50.3

    -1.19%

  • RIO

    0.2300

    101.22

    +0.23%

  • BCE

    -0.2400

    23.13

    -1.04%

  • VOD

    0.1900

    16.09

    +1.18%

  • BCC

    -1.2800

    84.25

    -1.52%

  • BP

    -0.2300

    42.93

    -0.54%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    12.71

    -0.16%

  • AZN

    -0.2500

    158.5

    -0.16%


Unexpected economic twist




When Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, he promised that the United States would usher in a “roaring” era of prosperity. He hailed his tariff regime as a catalyst for domestic manufacturing, claimed that energy independence would insulate the country from geopolitical shocks and boasted that record‑high stock indices were evidence of his economic stewardship. By the end of his first year back in office, growth was respectable and inflation had eased from the peaks that plagued the previous administration. Yet, as 2026 unfolds, the economic narrative has shifted dramatically. Job creation has stalled, energy prices have surged on the back of conflict in Iran, and corporate leaders are bracing for a downturn. This unexpected twist has renewed debate about whether Trump’s policies – and his confidence in them – were justified.

Labour markets show renewed fragility
The most immediate sign of trouble has emerged in the labour market. After modest job gains in January 2026, the economy shed around ninety thousand non‑farm positions in February, and revisions to earlier months showed that employment was already weaker than initially reported. The unemployment rate for people born in the United States has edged higher, while participation has slipped as more workers drop out of the labour force. Monthly data are inherently volatile, but the pattern suggests that growth in employment has evaporated, with losses spreading beyond manufacturing into transportation, construction, information and professional services. Even health care, a sector that had cushioned previous slowdowns, saw a strike‑related decline.

This weakness contrasts sharply with Trump’s pledge that “jobs are going to people born in the United States.” The share of U.S.‑born workers who are unemployed has climbed to levels not seen since the depths of the pandemic. At the same time, American households are increasingly pessimistic about their prospects. A survey by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York showed that the perceived probability of finding a new job if laid off fell to near record lows. In other words, workers feel secure in their current roles but fear they will struggle to secure new employment should they be dismissed.

Corporate sentiment mirrors that unease. The Conference Board’s quarterly CEO Confidence index tumbled from 59 to 47 between the first and second quarters of 2026, signalling that pessimists now outnumber optimists. Only fifteen per cent of chief executives say the economy is better than six months ago, while almost half believe conditions will deteriorate further. Nearly a third of respondents plan to reduce staff over the coming six months, exceeding those intending to expand headcount. Such belt‑tightening suggests that labour market weakness may deepen.

Energy shocks and surging prices
Trump has long argued that cheap energy is the linchpin of low inflation. Early in 2025 his administration touted falling gasoline prices as proof that his policies were working. But the conflict in Iran has upended that narrative. Strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities triggered a sharp jump in oil prices; Brent crude surged from around $71 per barrel at the start of the conflict to over $100 by early March. Gasoline prices in the United States have risen about nineteen per cent in the past month, lifting the national average to roughly $3.45 per gallon. Goldman Sachs warns that if elevated energy prices persist, inflation could climb back toward three per cent by the end of the year.

Trump insists that the spike is temporary and frames the conflict as a necessary cost for national security. Yet higher fuel costs ripple through the economy, eroding households’ purchasing power and increasing production expenses for businesses. This dynamic places the Federal Reserve in a policy bind: cutting interest rates to support growth risks reigniting inflation, while holding rates too high could stifle investment and employment. Analysts refer to this predicament as a stagflation threat – a situation in which both inflation and unemployment rise simultaneously.

Tariffs and the cost of protectionism
Trade policy is another pillar of Trump’s economic agenda. In 2025 he implemented sweeping tariffs that raised the effective duty rate on imports from roughly two per cent to nearly twelve per cent. The administration argues that these levies protect domestic industries and reduce dependence on foreign supply chains. Evidence suggests a more complicated picture. Economists estimate that more than half of the tariff burden is passed on to consumers, raising prices of everyday goods. Goldman Sachs calculates that the tariff regime could add about one percentage point to inflation between the second half of 2025 and the first half of 2026. Tariffs also increase costs for U.S. manufacturers by raising the price of imported components, undermining the very sectors the policy is intended to support.

There is also legal uncertainty. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on whether the president overstepped his authority in imposing many of these duties. A negative judgment could provide cover for a rollback. However, observers note that previous opportunities to retreat have been ignored, and the administration continues to threaten new tariffs in geopolitical disputes. Persisting with protectionism may therefore exacerbate inflationary pressure just as the labour market cools.

Fiscal strains and limited policy room
Beyond tariffs and energy, the budgetary backdrop is deteriorating. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal deficit will be about 5.8 per cent of gross domestic product in fiscal year 2026, well above the fifty‑year average of 3.8 per cent. Public debt is projected to climb from 101 per cent of GDP to 120 per cent by 2036, surpassing levels seen after the Second World War. Outlays, at 23.3 per cent of GDP, exceed their historical norm, while revenues, at 17.5 per cent of GDP, remain relatively flat. The 2025 reconciliation act, which included tax cuts and increased spending, has expanded deficits by $4.7 trillion over the projection period, partially offset by $3.0 trillion in tariff revenue.

High deficits limit the government’s ability to stimulate the economy during downturns. Financial markets are already fretting about the national debt, now around $39 trillion. This concern feeds into broader recession fears. Goldman Sachs recently raised its estimate of recession probability in 2026 from 25 per cent to 30 per cent, citing the confluence of higher oil prices, a fatigued labour market and the fading support of earlier fiscal stimulus. Other banks, including JPMorgan and Bank of America, warn that persistent geopolitical tensions could further raise the risk of a downturn.

Productivity gains and the K‑shaped recovery
One area where Trump can point to success is productivity. Business sector labour productivity increased by 2.8 per cent in the final quarter of 2025, thanks partly to investment in artificial intelligence and automation. Higher productivity should, in theory, lead to rising wages and living standards. Yet the gains have not been evenly shared. Labour’s share of income fell to a record low last year, and analysts describe the economy as “K‑shaped,” with high‑income households benefiting from soaring asset prices while lower‑income workers struggle with debt and stagnant pay. Productivity gains have translated into higher corporate profits rather than broader wage growth.

Moreover, the overall pace of economic growth under Trump has lagged his predecessor’s. In his final year, the Biden administration oversaw growth of 2.8 per cent, compared with 2.2 per cent in 2025 under Trump. Inflation, measured by the personal consumption expenditures index, remained at 2.6 per cent in both 2024 and 2025. Trump has avoided the price spikes that haunted earlier years, but he has not delivered stronger growth or more hiring.

Stock markets, sentiment and the political lens
Financial markets, which Trump often cites as barometers of success, have delivered mixed messages. The Dow Jones Industrial Average peaked above 50,000 in early 2026 but has since fallen by about five per cent. Investors remain jittery about the war in Iran, the trajectory of interest rates and the durability of corporate earnings. Consumer sentiment data reveal a split: households with stock investments feel more optimistic, while those without exposure remain pessimistic. The divergence underscores how asset ownership influences perceptions of prosperity and adds to the sense of unequal recovery.

The political implications of these economic developments are significant. Trump’s party faces midterm elections later this year, and the administration has staked much of its narrative on delivering a stronger economy than its Democratic predecessor. A faltering labour market, rising energy costs and waning business confidence risk undermining that message. On the other hand, if the Middle East conflict eases and oil prices fall, inflation could moderate quickly, boosting purchasing power and allowing the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates. Fiscal support from tax rebates scheduled for later in the year could also lend households some relief.

Was Trump right?
The question of whether Trump was “right” about the U.S. economy hinges on which metrics one emphasises. His supporters can point to moderate inflation, rising productivity and stock market records as evidence that his policies are working. Critics counter that these gains mask underlying fragility: employment is stalling, wages are not keeping pace with profits, and tariffs are raising prices rather than revitalising factories. The surge in oil prices and the prospect of stagflation illustrate how vulnerable the economy remains to global shocks despite claims of energy independence. High deficits and debts constrain the government’s ability to respond, while the Federal Reserve must balance competing mandates under unprecedented pressure.

In sum, the U.S. economy’s unexpected turn in early 2026 reflects a complex interplay of policy choices and unforeseen events. Trump’s declarations of an economic “roar” have met the reality of a labour market slowdown, rising costs and heightened uncertainty. Whether his blueprint ultimately proves successful may depend less on rhetoric and more on how quickly geopolitical tensions ease, energy markets stabilise and policymakers adapt to the challenges ahead.