Connect with us

Business

Which Interest Rate Should You Care About?

Published

on

Which Interest Rate Should You Care About?

Watch out for interest rates.

Not the short-term rates controlled by the Federal Reserve. Barring an unforeseen financial crisis, they’re not going anywhere, especially not after the jump in inflation reported by the government on Wednesday.

Instead, pay attention to the 10-year Treasury yield, which has been bouncing around since the election from about 4.8 to 4.2 percent. That’s not an unreasonable level over the last century or so.

But it’s much higher than the 2.9 percent average of the last 20 years, according to FactSet data. At its upper range, that 10-year yield may be high enough to dampen the enthusiasm of many entrepreneurs and stock investors and to restrain the stock market and the economy.

That’s a problem for the Trump administration. So the new Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, has stated outright what is becoming an increasingly evident reality. “The president wants lower rates,” Mr. Bessent said in an interview with Fox Business. “He and I are focused on the 10-year Treasury.”

Advertisement

Treasuries are the safe and steady core of many investment portfolios. They influence mortgages, credit cards, corporate debt and the exchange rate for the dollar. They are also the standard by which commercial, municipal and sovereign bonds around the world are priced.

What’s moving those Treasury rates now is bond traders’ assessments of the economy — including the Trump administration’s on-again, off-again policies on tariffs, as well as its actions on immigration, taxes, spending and much more.

Mr. Bessent, and President Trump, would like those rates to be substantially lower, and they’re trying to talk them down. But many of the president’s policies are having the opposite effect.

The president needs the bond market on his side. If it comes to disapprove of his policies, rates will rise and the economy — along with the fortunes of the Trump administration — will surely suffer.

Mr. Bessent may be focusing on Treasury rates, or yields, partly to relieve pressure on the Federal Reserve, which President Trump frequently berated in his first term and on the campaign trail.

Advertisement

The Fed’s independence is sacrosanct among most economists and many investors. During the campaign, Mr. Trump repeatedly called on the Fed to lower rates. Yet any threat to the Fed’s ability to operate freely could panic the markets, which, clearly, is not what Mr. Trump wants.

To the contrary, when the markets are strong, he frequently cites them as a barometer of his popularity. In 2017, he boasted about the performance of the stock market an average of once every 35 hours, Politico calculated.

Shortly after the November election, I wrote that the markets might restrain some of Mr. Trump’s actions. But I wouldn’t go too far with this now. Few government departments or traditions seem to be off limits for the administration’s aggressive changes in policy or reductions in work force, masterminded by Mr. Trump’s sidekick, the billionaire disrupter-in-chief, Elon Musk. Just look at The Times’s running tabulation of the actions taken since Jan. 21. It’s dizzying.

Still, so far, at least, the administration has been remarkably circumspect when it comes to the Fed. That doesn’t mean President Trump has entirely constrained himself: He has continued to mock the Fed, saying in a social media post that it has “failed to stop the problem they created with Inflation” and has wasted its time on issues like “DEI, gender ideology, ‘green’ energy, and fake climate change.”

Nonetheless, Mr. Bessent said specifically that Mr. Trump “is not calling for the Fed to lower rates.” Instead, the Treasury secretary said, “If we deregulate the economy, if we get this tax bill done, if we get energy down, then rates will take care of themselves and the dollar will take care of itself.” The president has not contradicted him. So far, trying to control the Fed is a line that Mr. Trump hasn’t yet crossed. The bond market is another matter.

Advertisement

Treasury rates haven’t usually garnered the big headlines frequently devoted to the Federal Reserve.

The Fed is easier to explain. When it raises or lowers short-term rates, it’s clear that somebody took action and caused a measurable change.

In reality, when we report that the Fed is cutting or increasing rates, we mean that it is shifting its key policy rate, the federal funds rate. That’s what banks charge one another for borrowing and lending money overnight. It’s important as a signal — a red or green light for stock traders — and “it influences other interest rates such as the prime rate, which is the rate banks charge their customers with higher credit ratings,” according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “Additionally, the federal funds rate indirectly influences longer- term interest rates.”

What causes shifts in longer-term rates is much harder to pinpoint because they are set by an amorphous force: the market, with Treasuries at the core. Day to day, you won’t hear much about it unless you’re already a bond maven.

How does any market set prices? Supply and demand, the preferences of buyers and sellers, trading rules — the textbooks say these and other factors determine market prices. That’s true for tangible things like milk, eggs, gasoline, a house or a car. Treasury prices — and those of other bonds, which use Treasuries as a reference — are more complicated. They include estimates of the future of interest rates, of inflation and of the Fed’s intentions.

Advertisement

The Fed sets overnight rates, which are involved indirectly in bond rates for a simple reason. The interest rate for a 10-year Treasury reflects assumptions about many, many days of overnight rates, chained together until they span the life of whatever bond you buy. Inflation matters because when it rises more quickly than anticipated, it will reduce the real value of the stream of income you receive from standard bonds.

That happened in 2022. Inflation soared and so did yields, while bond prices, which move in the opposite direction, fell — creating losses for bond funds and for individual bonds sold under those conditions.

That’s why the increase in inflation in January, to an annual rate of 3 percent for the Consumer Price Index from 2.9 percent the previous month, immediately pushed up the 10-year Treasury yield, which stands above 4.5 percent. Trump administration policies are weighing on bond prices and yields, too.

Mr. Bessent has pointed out that oil prices are a major ingredient in inflation and, therefore, bond yields. But whether Mr. Trump will be able to bring down oil prices by encouraging drilling — while eliminating subsidies and regulations that encourage the development of energy alternatives — is open to question.

Some Trump policies being sold as promoters of economic growth — like cutting regulations and tax rates — could have that effect. But others, like reducing the size of the labor force — which his deportations of undocumented immigrants and restrictions on the arrival of new immigrants will do — could slow growth and increase inflation.

Advertisement

So could the tariffs that he has been threatening, delaying and, in some cases, already imposing. Expectations for future inflation jumped in the University of Michigan’s monthly survey in January. Joanne Hsu, the survey’s director, said that reflects growing concerns about the Trump tariffs among consumers.

“These consumers generally report that tariff hikes will pass through to consumers in the form of higher prices,” she wrote. She added that “recent data show an emergence of inflationary psychology — motives for buying-in-advance to avoid future price increases, the proliferation of which would generate further momentum for inflation.”

None of that augurs well for the 10-year Treasury yield. Nor does a warning issued by five former Treasury secretaries — Robert E. Rubin, Lawrence H. Summers, Timothy F. Geithner, Jacob J. Lew and Janet L. Yellen — who served in Democratic administrations.

They wrote in The New York Times that incursions of Mr. Musk’s cost-cutting team into the Treasury’s payment system threaten the country’s “commitment to make good on our financial obligations.” They applauded Mr. Bessent for assuring Congress in writing that the Treasury will safeguard the “integrity and security of the system, given the implications of any compromise or disruption to the U.S. economy.”

But they decried the need for any Treasury secretary to have to make such promises in his first weeks in office.

Advertisement

Other potential flash points for Treasury yields loom. The Fed has in the past manipulated the market bond supply by buying and selling securities. It’s reducing its holding now, which could put upward pressure on interest rates — and make the Fed an irresistible Trump target. At the same time, Secretary Bessent is financing the government debt mainly with shorter-term bills but may not be able to avoid increasing the supply of longer-term Treasuries indefinitely, as the federal deficit swells. Yet Congress is reluctant to raise the debt ceiling, which will bite later this year.

These are difficult times. So far, the 10-year yield hasn’t shifted all that much. The markets, at least, have been holding steady.

Business

With a big $46-million opening for ‘Hoppers,’ Disney and Pixar see a return to form

Published

on

With a big -million opening for ‘Hoppers,’ Disney and Pixar see a return to form

Walt Disney Co. and Pixar’s “Hoppers” took the box office crown this weekend in an encouraging sign for the company’s original animated films.

The film generated $46 million in ticket sales in the U.S. and Canada, marking the highest domestic opening for an original animated movie since 2017’s “Coco,” according to studio estimates. The global box office total for “Hoppers” was $88 million.

The zany movie features a young environmental advocate who “hops” her consciousness into a robotic beaver and bands together with other woodland creatures to stop a planned freeway expansion through a glade.

The film is directed by Daniel Chong, who created the Cartoon Network animated series “We Bare Bears.”

The muscular debut for “Hoppers,” as well as the strong performance from Sony Pictures Animation’s “Goat” last month, has been a positive sign for audience interest in original animated films.

Advertisement

Since the pandemic, theatrical returns for animated sequels have far surpassed that of original films. Disney’s “Zootopia 2,” for instance, has grossed more than $1.8 billion in global box office revenue, with more than $426 million domestically. Disney and Pixar’s 2024 hit “Inside Out 2” also crossed more than $1.6 billion globally.

By contrast, Disney and Pixar’s 2025 original film “Elio” brought in about $154 million in worldwide box office revenue.

Original films are vital to Pixar’s future, as the Emeryville, Calif.-based studio built its reputation on its string of nearly uninterrupted original blockbuster hits, including 1995’s “Toy Story” and 2004’s “The Incredibles.”

Paramount Pictures and Spyglass Media Group’s “Scream 7” came in second at the box office with $17.3 million in its second weekend in theaters. Warner Bros. Pictures’ “The Bride!,” Sony’s “Goat” and Warner Bros.’ “Wuthering Heights” rounded out the top five at the box office, according to data from Comscore.

With several strong releases, as well as popular holdover films from 2025 that continue to bring in revenue, the first few months at the box office have been a notable improvement over last year’s dismal first quarter.

Advertisement

Domestic box office revenue so far is up more than 12% compared with the same time period in 2025, according to Comscore.

Continue Reading

Business

Hundreds of applications, no jobs and AI competition: California’s brutal tech work landscape

Published

on

Hundreds of applications, no jobs and AI competition: California’s brutal tech work landscape

Laid-off tech worker Joseph Tinner has spent almost a year hunting for a job. It has been a depressing crash course on the sea change in Silicon Valley.

The former product instructor from the San Francisco Bay Area has ridden the tech wave throughout his career, easily jumping from Verizon to Fitbit to Workday. Since losing his job early last year, the 59-year-old has hit a wall.

He applied for hundreds of roles — sometimes going through multiple rounds of consideration — only to get rejected again and again.

“It’s been a roller coaster,” he said. “It just takes a lot of resilience, honestly, to be in this job market.”

He isn’t alone.

Advertisement

Tech companies that aggressively hired during the COVID-19 pandemic have been slashing tens of thousands of jobs. For workers like Tinner, it has been a rough realization that the Silicon Valley shakeout is stretching into another year.

Just last week, Block — the financial tech company that owns payment services Square, Cash App and Afterpay — said it is laying off 4,000 people, or half of its workforce.

Many other tech companies outside the hot artificial intelligence sector are slashing staff. Block blamed AI, saying the powerful technology means it no longer needs as many people.

“The intelligence tools we’re creating and using, paired with smaller and flatter teams, are enabling a new way of working which fundamentally changes what it means to build and run a company,” Jack Dorsey, the co-founder of Block and a founder of Twitter, said in a post on X.

U.S.-based tech employers announced more than 33,000 job cuts from January to February, up 51% compared with the same period last year, the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas said Thursday.

Advertisement

Andy Challenger, workplace expert and chief revenue officer for the firm, said he used to be skeptical that companies could replace workers with AI, but he’s starting to become convinced.

“Artificial intelligence has overtaken the attention of these companies in such a dramatic way,” he said.

Mass layoffs in the tech industry started in 2022, after a hiring surge during the pandemic, when demand for online services increased as people were stuck at home.

But many of the world’s most powerful tech companies have continued cutting, even as their profits have grown. They’ve cited various reasons for layoffs, from strategic shifts and restructuring to pivoting to smaller teams and fewer managers.

An advertisement promoting an AI-powered company is seen downtown on Thursday, Oct. 16, 2025 in San Francisco, CA.

Advertisement

(Manuel Orbegozo/For The Times)

Tech companies such as EBay, Meta, Google, Autodesk, Pinterest, Salesforce and others have been shrinking their workforces. Layoffs have also hit the media and entertainment companies, including Los Angeles video game developer Riot Games.

On LinkedIn, laid-off workers who have been out of work — some for more than two years — have been asking for help finding a job. They’ve been sharing stories about their financial and emotional struggles, including losing their confidence, homes and savings as they search for work.

Tech workers who have seen their employers grow over the last decade have noticed a shift in corporate culture. Workers who have been laid off before said it has been tougher and taken longer to land a new job than in previous years.

Advertisement

A longtime Salesforce employee, who was recently laid off and asked to remain anonymous, concerned that speaking to the media could affect their severance, said the sales software company used to be more focused on helping its employees. Salesforce broadcast this value by highlighting its “ohana,” culture, using the Hawaiian word for family.

“I was just incredibly grateful every day to be able to wake up and make a positive change in the world,” the worker said. “I thought that the company was devoted to the same thing.”

But the tone at Salesforce shifted in 2023 as the company faced pressure to cut costs and increase profits. New leaders came in, and the focus changed.

“The company is trying to erase any semblance of the way that it used to be,” the worker said.

Salesforce has said AI is helping it squeeze more profit from fewer people.

Advertisement

“AI is doing 30% to 50% of the work at Salesforce now,” the company’s co-founder and Chief Executive Marc Benioff told Bloomberg.

Salesforce didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Marc Benioff, CEO of Salesforce Inc., during a Bloomberg Television interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos,

Marc Benioff, CEO of Salesforce Inc., during a Bloomberg Television interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos,

(Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Although technology is changing the way people work, experts and even some AI executives think companies sometime use AI as an excuse to cut workers in what’s referred to as “AI washing.”

Advertisement

Enrico Moretti, a professor of economics at UC Berkeley, said other factors besides AI are fueling layoffs. As a company grows larger and matures, it doesn’t hire as much as before.

“It’s a shift in their position and the maturing of their product, and therefore the technologies and their employment needs,” he said.

Roger Lee, an entrepreneur who created a website to track layoffs, Layoffs.fyi, in 2020, said in an email that tech companies are pouring billions of dollars into AI investments, and cutting headcount helps offset those costs.

When he started tracking layoffs six years ago, Lee wanted to create awareness around tech layoffs and help laid-off workers find their next job. He never anticipated the layoffs would continue today.

“I do think 6 years of persistent layoffs have led many tech workers to re-evaluate the perceived ‘safety’ of tech jobs and their relationship with the industry overall,” he said in an email.

Advertisement

According to Layoffs.fyi’s latest count, there have been more than 35,000 layoffs in the tech sector worldwide so far this year.

Close to half of that total is from Amazon alone.

Unemployed tech worker Tinner was laid off from Workday, a Pleasanton company that provides a platform to businesses, universities and organizations to manage payroll, benefits, finances and other tasks.

In 2025, Workday slashed roughly 1,750 jobs, or 8.5% of its global workforce, citing a prioritization of investments in artificial intelligence and platform development. Then in February, the company said it plans to cut 2% of its workforce, or roughly 400 employees.

As job cuts pile up, Tinner is up against intense competition in a job market flooded with talent from the top companies in tech.

Advertisement

As he ponders his next career steps, he’s also redefining his identity and relationship with work.

He’s even tried pouring beer for fun or thought about doing more artwork.

“Maybe what I need to do is just celebrate all I’ve done instead of getting back into this rat race, on this treadmill, and look for something totally different,” he said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

State Farm reaches deal to keep 17% hike in home insurance rates

Published

on

State Farm reaches deal to keep 17% hike in home insurance rates

A brokered deal with regulators and consumer advocates will allow State Farm General to keep controversial increases in home insurance rates that took effect last year in the wake of the devastating Los Angeles wildfires.

The agreement sent to a judge late Friday cements a $530-million emergency hike in home insurance rates Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara negotiated with the insurer last summer.

“The agreement will provide financial relief to many policyholders while ensuring continued coverage for State Farm policyholders while California’s insurance market stabilizes,” the insurance department said in a news release.

State Farm argued the emergency hike was necessary because catastrophic fire losses jeopardized its financial ratings.

Advertisement

The company has reported that it paid out $6.2 billion in claims last year, largely from the wildfires, with most of the costs covered through reinsurance payments. The company has told regulators it anticipates to pay an additional $1 billion in claims.

The deal allows the insurer to keep an average 17% increase in homeowner rates. Local rates for many of the company’s 1 million home customers were much higher.

However, consumer advocates argued the agreement held the line on even higher increases and halted further policy cancellations that have deepened a crisis in the state’s insurance industry.

State Farm, California’s largest home insurer, froze new business in 2023, announced 72,000 mass non-renewals, and sought a series of rate hikes. Its average homeowners premium in California doubled from 2020 to 2024.

Under Friday’s agreement, State Farm agrees to forgo mass non-renewals in 2026 and undergo further review of its rates by 2027.

Advertisement

Additionally, State Farm will be required to return nearly two-thirds of its 15% increase to condominium owners, deliver a small refund to rental property owners and be able to raise premiums for renters a half a percent.

“This rate enables State Farm General to continue serving existing California customers,” the company said in a statement. “We will continue to monitor our capacity to support the risks we insure and maintain the financial strength needed to pay claims and support customers and communities when it matters most.”

If approved by an administrative law judge, the settlement will be forwarded to Lara, who is expected to back it.

The arrangement sidesteps efforts to tie State Farm’s rates to its handling of disaster claims.

Under pressure from community advocates and lawmakers, Lara in May had said he wanted the two issues evaluated together.

Advertisement

In June, Lara announced his department would conduct an “expedited” examination into State Farm’s market conduct. In rate hearing proceedings, agency staff sought to block discussion of State Farm’s claims handling in relation to its quest for premium hikes.

The pact does not directly address complaints of unhappy policyholders who say Lara’s administration has failed to hold State Farm accountable, which the insurance department has disputed.

A department spokesman said Lara would not comment on the matter while the rate settlement is before an administrative judge.

The Jan. 7, 2025, firestorm destroyed at least 16,000 homes, triggering more than 42,000 insurance claims. State Farm has said it has 13,500 fire and auto claims related to the fires.

The insurer has come under heavy criticism from fire victims over its handling of claims, including complaints of low payout offers, denials for toxin testing and delays in payments for living expenses. The company has declined to comment on the complaints.

Advertisement

Some 51,000 State Farm homeowners live in disaster areas struggling to recover from the L.A. firestorm. Regulatory filings show those areas among the hardest hit by the current hikes.

Malibu resident Chad Peters said his bill from State Farm increased 140% in the last year, from $3,500 to $8,400.

Peters said he has battled State Farm for 14 months over smoke and fire damage to his home from the Palisades fire, and that the insurer at one point attempted to cancel his coverage because the house remained unrepaired.

He called rate increases in such circumstances “ludicrous, while they’re giving everyone such a hard time with their insurance … I mean, mine has been a steep uphill battle all year long.”

Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Alhambra) had urged Lara to delay hikes until after the investigation into State Farm’s conduct.

Advertisement

“The fact that I have so many individuals who have not received any of their claims, that are still navigating denials and delays, who are actively running out of [living expense payments] and … facing housing insecurity — it makes me deeply concerned,” Pérez said.

Pérez, along with Sens. Ben Allen (D-Pacific Palisades) and Sade Elhawary (D-Los Angeles), in April pressed Lara to defer rate hikes until State Farm General’s claims practices could be investigated. “This was a big priority for us.”

Pérez said she would seek answers to the market conduct exam as part of a Senate inquiry into the insurance department’s handling of those complaints, along with scrutiny of the department’s discipline of a compliance officer who criticized State Farm’s handling of claims.

State Farm General, an offshoot of national insurance giant State Farm Mutual, contends it has been financially sinking as seasonal wildfires morph into catastrophic urban conflagrations that destroy towns.

In mid-2024, the company asked to raise home premiums by nearly $1 billion. Lara secured an agreement that State Farm Mutual lend its California affiliate $400 million, but the insurer would not agree to cancel plans for dropping 11,000 more policyholders.

Advertisement

The settlement allows State Farm to avoid a public hearing that would have forced the disclosure of solvency records, mass non-renewals and other information it said would help competitors.

Continue Reading

Trending