Connect with us

News

‘Stretched’ US consumers start to pull back on spending

Published

on

‘Stretched’ US consumers start to pull back on spending

Evidence is mounting that many Americans have reached their limit for tolerating higher prices, raising questions about how much consumer expenditures will continue to power US economic growth this year.

After spending freely with savings built up during the coronavirus pandemic and income fuelled by a healthy job market, consumers are becoming more cautious, according to comments from retail and consumer goods executives and official data.

Retail sales increased 0.6 per cent in February from the previous month, missing expectations by economists for a 0.8 per cent gain, according to Census Bureau data released this week. The increase reversed a 1.1 per cent decline from December to January.

“We did not begin the year with healthy robust consumer spending that we had at the end of last year,” said Steve Ricchiuto, chief economist at Mizuho Securities. “The economy is losing some momentum.”

January’s figure was revised lower from a previous estimate, the fourth downward revision in a row.

Advertisement

Jeffrey Roach, chief economist at LPL, said the first half of the year was “certainly” going to be “quite sluggish” but that he expected growth to rebound in the second half, as inflation continues to decelerate and the Federal Reserve loosens monetary policy.

Although inflation is down about two-thirds from its peak in the summer of 2022, consumer price growth unexpectedly rose to 3.2 per cent in February, which was largely driven by price pressures for services.

The University of Michigan’s US consumer sentiment reading edged down in March to a level well above the worst of inflation in the summer of 2022, but below readings that were common before the pandemic.

“Inflation is back down . . . but the compounding of those prices for a year and a half means that prices are higher, so consumers are feeling that much more than they did a year and a half ago,” said Stephanie Cegielski, vice-president of research at ICSC, a shopping centre industry group.

After Kraft Heinz enacted a series of price rises in 2023, the maker of Heinz ketchup and Grey Poupon mustard last month reported declining organic net sales for the first time since 2021, with volumes also sliding, with a crucial driver being weak demand in North America.

Advertisement

Similarly, PepsiCo chief executive Ramon Laguarta said in a statement in February that consumer behaviour had reverted back to pre-pandemic norms.

“We’re seeing a bit of a slowdown in the US, both the food category and the beverage category in [the fourth quarter],” he said on a call with investors. “Part of that is a slowdown due to pricing and disposable income.”

Many retailers had raised prices to pass on higher commodity and operating expenses, causing some companies to report bumper sales growth, but as inflation decelerates and consumers reject higher prices, many of those groups expect sales growth to slow this year.

McDonald’s in February reported softer sales in the US in its most recent quarter as lower-income customers purchased cheaper menu items, and forecast same-store sales growth to return to a historical average between 3-4 per cent, down from 9 per cent last year.

“The days of sales growth being driven by these big price increases, those are probably over,” said Brian Yarbrough, an analyst at Edward Jones.

Advertisement

Big-box retailer Target said last week that it expected consumers to continue to face price pressures this year.

“Consumers say they still feel stretched,” said Christina Hennington, Target’s chief growth officer. “They are balancing a lot and having to make trade-offs to meet the needs of their families . . . We expect consumers will remain highly value conscious.”

Although traffic at Target’s stores improved in the holiday quarter it still declined 1.7 per cent from a year ago, while the average transaction amount slid 2.8 per cent as shoppers sought out deals.

Some consumers have also started to pull back spending on services such as travel. Marriott warned in February of slower revenue growth this year and Expedia last month forecast softer growth in sales and bookings as the post-pandemic travel boom fades.

After gains in real wages and savings boosted consumer spending that helped the economy re-emerge from the depths of the pandemic, Americans have become more cautious, as savings melt away and wage gains moderate.

Advertisement

“Real wages by all measures are below where they were in January 2021 when President [Joe] Biden took office,” said Steve Englander, a strategist at Standard Chartered. “They have been catching up a bit, but there is something to the argument that people are dissatisfied because they have jobs but unsatisfactory purchasing power.”

January’s personal consumption and expenditures report showed that consumer spending, adjusted for inflation, declined 0.1 per cent from December. Although the personal savings rate ticked up to 3.8 per cent, it is still far below pre-pandemic levels. The personal savings rate in January 2020 was 7.9 per cent.

“In the holiday season we saw people start to go through the last amount of savings that they had,” said Katie Thomas, who leads the Kearney Consumer Institute, a management consulting firm.

Although inflation has hit low-income consumers the hardest, some retailers have noticed higher-income consumers feeling the squeeze.

The chief executive of cut-price retailer Dollar Tree, Rick Dreiling, said on a call with investors this week that its fastest-growing customer demographic earns more than $125,000 a year.

Advertisement

Similarly, Walmart’s chief executive John Rainey said in February that one of the biggest contributors to market share gained from other retailers in its fourth quarter was from consumers who make more than $100,000.

“A lot of people want to feel like they’re getting the best bang for their buck,” said Thomas at Kearney Consumer Institute. “People on both sides of the income spectrum are feeling a little bit more stretched than they were a year ago.”

News

California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell

Published

on

California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell

Candidates in California’s volatile race for governor will meet Wednesday night for the first televised debate since Eric Swalwell dropped out, each looking to seize momentum in the tight contest.

The debate, being held at the television studio of KRON4 in San Francisco, will include four Democrats and two Republicans who are tightly bunched in recent polls, with many voters still undecided less than six weeks before the June 2 primary.

Mr. Swalwell, a Democrat, had just begun to emerge as a Democratic front-runner when his campaign swiftly collapsed after he was accused of sexual assault in news reports on April 10.

Candidates have taken relatively few risks so far in debates around the state, but every candidate is now eyeing a chance to jump to the front of the pack.

“Even though we have seen some movement in the last couple of weeks, it continues to be a fairly crowded, fractured field,” said Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “So candidates need to be able to grab attention in a debate like this.”

Advertisement

The debate comes as Xavier Becerra, a Democrat and former California attorney general, has enjoyed a surge of support in polls since Mr. Swalwell dropped out of the race.

Mr. Becerra and Matt Mahan, the mayor of San Jose, did not originally meet the threshold to participate in Wednesday’s debate when Mr. Swalwell was running. But they both qualified after receiving enough support in a follow-up poll that debate organizers commissioned once Mr. Swalwell had dropped out.

The other Democrats scheduled to participate are Tom Steyer, a former hedge fund manager, and Katie Porter, a former congresswoman, each of whom have been polling near the top of the Democratic field for several weeks. The Republicans in the debate are Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host who has been endorsed by President Trump, and Chad Bianco, the sheriff of Riverside County.

All candidates run on the same ballot in California’s nonpartisan primary, with the two who receive the most votes advancing to the general election, regardless of their party affiliation. The large number of Democratic candidates has created fear among state party leaders that their voters could splinter, potentially allowing two Republicans to sweep the primary in this heavily Democratic state.

The odds of that happening have decreased since Mr. Swalwell dropped out and another Democrat, Betty Yee, withdrew on Monday. But Rusty Hicks, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, still believes there are too many Democrats in the race and has urged those lagging in polls to end their campaigns. (The actual ballot will include 61 candidates for governor, most of whom are completely unknown to voters.)

Advertisement

The messy race to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for re-election because of term limits, has played out as the most unpredictable contest California has seen in a generation. It has attracted a sprawling field but no one with the star power of former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger or the political might of Mr. Newsom or former Gov. Jerry Brown.

Much of California’s Democratic establishment is still figuring out whom to back in the turbulent race.

Mr. Newsom has not endorsed anyone, saying he trusts voters to elect someone “who reflects the values and direction Californians believe in.” Representative Nancy Pelosi, the influential former House speaker from San Francisco, and Senator Alex Padilla also have not announced their favorites. Senator Adam Schiff endorsed Mr. Swalwell earlier this year but quickly withdrew his support after the accusations against him were published.

On Tuesday, Ms. Yee endorsed Mr. Steyer, praising his work to fight climate change and engage young voters. Mr. Steyer has swamped his competitors with a raft of advertising by pouring $134 million from his personal fortune into his campaign.

Also on Tuesday, Mr. Becerra, whose campaign had appeared to be flailing until Mr. Swalwell dropped out, received the endorsement of Robert Rivas, the Democratic speaker of the California State Assembly. Mr. Rivas said he had encouraged Mr. Becerra to run for governor because he was impressed by his work as California’s attorney general during President Trump’s first term.

Advertisement

“He understands both the policy and the politics,” Mr. Rivas said in an interview. “And he has a track record, in my opinion, of delivering results under pressure.”

The 90-minute debate on Wednesday begins at 7 p.m. PT and will be broadcast and streamed by KRON and other California stations.

Continue Reading

News

Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like

Published

on

Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like

Virginians approved a new congressional map on Tuesday that would aggressively gerrymander the state in the Democrats’ favor, giving the party as many as four more U.S. House seats.

The new map draws eight safely Democratic districts and two competitive districts that lean Democratic, according to a New York Times analysis of 2024 presidential results. It leaves just one safe Republican seat, compared with the five seats the G.O.P. holds on the current map.

The proposed map was drawn by Democratic state legislators and approved by Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat. It eliminates three Republican-held seats in part by slicing the densely populated suburbs in Arlington and Fairfax Counties and reallocating their overwhelmingly Democratic voters into five congressional districts, some stretching more than a hundred miles into Republican areas.

Perhaps the most extreme new district is the Seventh, which begins at the Potomac River and stretches to the west and south in a manner that resembles a pair of lobster claws. Several well-known Virginia Democrats have already announced their candidacies and begun campaigning in the district.

Reid J. Epstein contributed reporting.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges

Published

on

Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche speaks as FBI Director Kash Patel listens during a news conference at the Justice Department on Tuesday in Washington.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jacquelyn Martin/AP

WASHINGTON — The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted Tuesday on federal fraud charges alleging it improperly raised millions of dollars to pay informants to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan and other extremist groups, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said.

The Justice Department alleges the civil rights group defrauded donors by using their money to fund the very extremism it claimed to be fighting, with payments of at least $3 million between 2014 and 2023 to people affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, the United Klans of America, the National Socialist Party of America and other extremist groups.

“The SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred,” Blanche said.

Advertisement

The civil rights group faces charges including wire fraud, bank fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering in the case brought by the Justice Department in Alabama, where the organization is based.

The indictment came shortly after SPLC revealed the existence of a criminal investigation into its program to pay informants to infiltrate extremist groups and gather information on their activities. The group said the program was used to monitor threats of violence and the information was often shared with local and federal law enforcement.

SPLC CEO Bryan Fair said the organization “will vigorously defend ourselves, our staff, and our work.”

Blanche said the money was passed from the center through two different bank accounts before being loaded onto prepaid cards to give to the members of the extremist groups, which also included the National Socialist Movement and the Aryan Nations-affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club. The group never disclosed to donors details of the informant program, he said.

“They’re required to under the laws associated with a nonprofit to have certain transparency and honesty in what they’re telling donors they’re going to spend money on and what their mission statement is and what they’re raising money doing,” he said.

Advertisement

The indictment includes details on at least nine unnamed informants were paid by the SPLC through a secret program that prosecutors say began in the 1980s. Within the SPLC, they were known as field sources or “the Fs,” according to the indictment. One informant was paid more than $1 million between 2014 and 2023 while affiliated with the neo-Nazi National Alliance, the indictment said. Another was the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America.

The SPLC said the program was kept quiet to protect the safety of informants.

“When we began working with informants, we were living in the shadow of the height of the Civil Rights Movement, which had seen bombings at churches, state-sponsored violence against demonstrators, and the murders of activists that went unanswered by the justice system,” Fair said. “There is no question that what we learned from informants saved lives.”

The center has been targeted by Republicans

The SPLC, which is based in Montgomery, Alabama, was founded in 1971 and used civil litigation to fight white supremacist groups. The nonprofit has become a popular target among Republicans who see it as overly leftist and partisan.

The investigation could add to concerns that Trump’s Republican administration is using the Justice Department to go after conservative opponents and his critics. It follows a number of other investigations into Trump foes that have raised questions about whether the law enforcement agency has been turned into a political weapon.

Advertisement

The SPLC has faced intense criticism from conservatives, who have accused it of unfairly maligning right-wing organizations as extremist groups because of their viewpoints. The center regularly condemns Trump’s rhetoric and policies around voting rights, immigration and other issues.

The center came under fresh scrutiny after the assassination last year of conservative activist Charlie Kirk brought renewed attention to its characterization of the group that Kirk founded and led. The center included a section on that group, Turning Point USA, in a report titled “The Year in Hate and Extremism 2024” that described the group as “A Case Study of the Hard Right in 2024.”

FBI Director Kash Patel said last year that the agency was severing its relationship with the center, which had long provided law enforcement with research on hate crime and domestic extremism. Patel said the center had been turned into a “partisan smear machine,” and he accused it of defaming “mainstream Americans” with its “hate map” that documents alleged anti-government and hate groups inside the United States.

House Republicans hosted a hearing centered on the SPLC in December, saying it coordinated efforts with President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration “to target Christian and conservative Americans and deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech and free association.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending