Connect with us

News

Federal Reserve cuts interest rates by quarter-point but signals slower pace of easing

Published

on

Federal Reserve cuts interest rates by quarter-point but signals slower pace of easing

Stay informed with free updates

The Federal Reserve cut its benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point but signalled a slower pace of easing next year, sending the dollar racing higher and US stocks lower. 

The Federal Open Market Committee voted on Wednesday to reduce the federal funds rate to 4.25-4.5 per cent, its third cut in a row. The decision was not unanimous, with Cleveland Fed president Beth Hammack casting a dissenting vote, with a preference for holding rates steady.

Officials’ economic projections released alongside the rate decision pointed to fewer reductions than previously forecast for 2025, underscoring policymakers’ concern that cutting borrowing costs too quickly could undermine efforts to cool price growth across the world’s biggest economy. Policymakers also lifted their projections for inflation.

Advertisement

Fed chief Jay Powell said that following Wednesday’s cut, the central bank’s policy settings were “significantly less restrictive” and could now be “more cautious” as they consider additional easing. He also characterised the December decision as a “closer call” than at previous meetings.

Inflation was moving “sideways”, Powell added, while risks to the labour market had “diminished”.

Wall Street bank Morgan Stanley said the Fed’s forecasts for 2025 were “much more hawkish than we anticipated”.

US government bonds fell in price after the Fed decision, with the policy-sensitive two-year Treasury yield rising 0.08 percentage points to 4.33 per cent. The dollar jumped 1 per cent against a basket of six peers, while Wall Street’s S&P 500 share index dropped 1 per cent.

The Fed’s goal is to apply enough pressure on consumer demand and business activity to push inflation back to the US central bank’s 2 per cent target without harming the jobs market or the economy more broadly.

Advertisement

Officials now expect to cut the benchmark rate by half a percentage point next year to 3.75-4 per cent, down from the full percentage point reduction predicted in September’s “dot plot”. Four officials pencilled in one or no additional cuts next year.

Most saw the policy rate falling to 3.25-3.5 per cent by the end of 2026, also higher than in the forecast from three months prior. 

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

They also raised their forecasts for inflation once food and energy prices are stripped out to 2.5 per cent and 2.2 per cent in 2025 and 2026, respectively, while they predicted the unemployment rate would steady at 4.3 per cent for the next three years.

“In considering the extent and timing of additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks,” it said.

Advertisement

In a sign that the Fed is preparing to skip rate cuts at forthcoming meetings, the FOMC amended its language regarding future changes to its policy settings in its statement.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Wednesday’s decision was not the first this year that was opposed by a Fed official, after Michelle Bowman cast a dissent to September’s half-point reduction. That was the first time a governor voted against a decision since 2005.

The quarter-point cut was widely expected by financial markets, but came amid debate among officials over how quickly inflation was retreating towards the Fed’s 2 per cent target. The core personal consumption expenditures price index, the central bank’s preferred inflation gauge that strips out food and energy prices, rose at an annual rate of 2.8 per cent in October.

The Fed kicked off a new rate-cutting cycle in September with a bumper half-point cut, but fears about the labour market have ebbed since then and the economic outlook has brightened. That healthy state of the US economy has changed the calculus for officials as they try to settle on a “neutral” rate that neither constrains growth or drives it too high.

The central bank has described recent cuts as a “recalibration” of policy that reflects its success in knocking inflation from a peak of about 7 per cent in 2022.

Advertisement

On Wednesday, Powell said the Fed was in a “new phase in the process”, suggesting that the bar for future cuts would move higher as rates approached estimates of neutral.

Fed officials raised that estimate for the neutral rate again, with a majority now pencilling it in at 3 per cent. This time last year, they gauged it was 2.5 per cent.

The Fed meeting came just weeks before Donald Trump returns to the White House, having vowed to raise tariffs, deport immigrants and slash taxes and regulations. Economists recently polled by the Financial Times said the policy combination could trigger a new bout of higher inflation and hit growth.

Additional reporting by Eva Xiao in New York

Advertisement

News

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

Published

on

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

President Trump announced a three-week extension of a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon that had been set to expire in a few days, after hosting a meeting between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats at the White House on Thursday.

Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group that has been attacking Israel from southern Lebanon, did not have representatives at the meeting and did not immediately comment on the announcement. The prime minister of Israel and the president of Lebanon also did not comment.

A successful peace agreement would hinge upon Hezbollah halting attacks, which Lebanon’s government has little power to enforce because it does not control the militia. Lebanon’s military has mostly stayed out of the fighting and is not at war with Israel.

The cease-fire, which was scheduled to end on April 26, would last until May 17 if it takes effect as Mr. Trump described it. Before the cease-fire was brokered last week, nearly 2,300 people were killed in Lebanon and 13 in Israel. Since then, the number of Israeli airstrikes and Hezbollah attacks have been dramatically reduced, though the two sides have continued exchanging fire.

The Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh, credited Mr. Trump for extending the cease-fire, saying that “with your help and support, we can make Lebanon great again.” Mr. Trump replied, “I like that phrase, it’s a good phrase.”

Advertisement

Asked about the potential of a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, Mr. Trump said that “I think there’s a great chance. They are friends about the same things and they are enemies on the same things.”

But Lebanon and Israel have periodically been at war since Israel’s founding in 1948. Israel has invaded Lebanon for the fifth time since 1978, incursions that have destabilized the country and the delicate balance of power between Muslim, Christian and Druze communities.

In the hours before the president’s announcement on social media, Israel and Hezbollah were trading attacks in southern Lebanon, testing the existing cease-fire.

Mr. Trump said the meeting at the White House had been attended by high-ranking U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon.

Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli strike near the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh killed three people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. Hezbollah claimed three separate attacks on Israeli troops who are occupying southern Lebanon, though none were wounded or killed.

Advertisement

Hezbollah set off the latest round of fighting last month by attacking Israel soon after the start of the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran. Israel responded to Hezbollah’s attacks by launching airstrikes across Lebanon and widening a ground invasion of the country’s south.

Continue Reading

News

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Published

on

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Smoke rises from Port of La Guaira in Venezuela on Jan. 3, 2026 after U.S. forces seized the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images

Federal prosecutors on Thursday unsealed an indictment against a U.S. Army soldier, accusing him of using his insider knowledge of the clandestine military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January to reap more than $400,000 in profits on the popular prediction market site Polymarket.

The Justice Department says Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, who was stationed at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, was part of the team that planned and carried out the predawn raid in Caracas earlier this year that resulted in the apprehension of Maduro.

The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed the actions against Van Dyke, the first time U.S. officials have leveled criminal charges against someone over prediction market wagers.

Advertisement

According to the indictment, Van Dyke now faces counts of wire fraud, commodities fraud, misusing non-public government information and other charges.

Trading under numerous usernames including “Burdensome-Mix,” Van Dyke allegedly traded about $32,000 on the arrest of Maduro, resulting in profits exceeding $400,000.

“Prediction markets are not a haven for using misappropriated confidential or classified information for personal gain,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York. “Those entrusted to safeguard our nation’s secrets have a duty to protect them and our armed service members, and not to use that information for personal financial gain.”

Van Dyke’s defense lawyer is not yet publicly known. Polymarket did not return a request for comment.

The charges against Van Dyke come at a sensitive time for the prediction market industry, which has been growing exponentially, despite calls in Washington and among state leaders for the sites to be reined in.

Advertisement

Van Dyke is the first to be charged in the U.S. for suspected Polymarket insider trading, but Israeli authorities in February arrested several people and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets about military operations in Iran on Polymarket.

Continue Reading

News

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

Published

on

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

The Senate early Thursday morning adopted a Republican budget blueprint that would pave the way for a $70 billion increase for immigration enforcement and the eventual reopening of the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans pushed through the plan on a nearly party-line vote of 50 to 48. It came after an overnight marathon of rapid-fire votes, known as a vote-a-rama, in which the G.O.P. beat back a series of Democratic proposals aimed at addressing the high cost of health care, housing, food and energy. The debate put the two parties’ dueling messages on vivid display six months before the midterm elections.

Republicans, who are using the budget plan to lay the groundwork to eventually push through a filibuster-proof bill providing a multiyear funding stream for President Trump’s immigration crackdown, used the all-night session to highlight their hard-line stance on border security, seeking to portray Democrats as unwilling to safeguard the country.

Democrats tried and failed to add a series of changes aimed at addressing cost-of-living issues, seizing the opportunity to hammer Republicans as out of touch with and unwilling to act on the concerns of everyday Americans.

Here’s what to know about the budget plan and the nocturnal ritual senators engaged in before adopting it.

Advertisement

The budget blueprint is a crucial piece of Republicans’ plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security and end a shutdown that has lasted for more than two months. After Democrats refused to fund immigration enforcement without new restrictions on agents’ tactics and conduct, the G.O.P. struck a deal with them to pass a spending bill that would fund everything but ICE and the Border Patrol. Republicans said they would fund those agencies through a special budget bill that Democrats could not block.

“We can fix this with Republican votes, and we will,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and the Budget Committee chairman. “Every Democrat has opposed money for the Border Patrol and ICE at a time of great peril.”

In resorting to a new budget blueprint, Republicans laid the groundwork to deny Democrats a chance to stop the immigration enforcement funding. But they also submitted themselves to a vote-a-rama, in which any senator can propose unlimited changes to such a measure before it is adopted.

The budget measure now goes to the House, which must adopt it before lawmakers in both chambers can draft the legislation funding immigration enforcement. That bill will provide yet another opportunity for a vote-a-rama even closer to the November election.

Democrats took to the floor to criticize Republicans for supercharging funding for federal immigration enforcement rather than moving legislation that would address Americans’ concerns over affordability.

Advertisement

“This is what Republicans are fighting for,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the Democratic leader. “To maintain two unchecked rogue agencies that are dreaded in all corners of this country instead of reducing your health care costs, your housing costs, your grocery costs, your gas costs.”

Democrats offered a host of amendments along those lines, all of which were defeated by Republicans — and that was the point. The proposals were meant to put the G.O.P. in a tough political spot, showcasing their opposition to helping Americans afford high living costs. Fewer than a handful of G.O.P. senators crossed party lines to support them.

The G.O.P. thwarted an effort by Mr. Schumer to require that the budget measure lower out-of-pocket health care costs for Americans. Two Republicans who are up for re-election this year, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, voted with Democrats, but the proposal was still defeated.

Republicans also squelched a move by Senator Ben Ray Lujan, Democrat of New Mexico, to create a fund that would lower grocery costs and reverse cuts to food aid programs that Republicans enacted last year. Ms. Collins and Mr. Sullivan again joined Democrats.

Also defeated by the G.O.P.: a proposal by Senator John Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, to address rising consumer prices brought on by Mr. Trump’s tariffs and the war in Iran; one by Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, to require the budget measure to address rising electricity prices, and another by Mr. Markey to create a fund to bring down housing costs.

Advertisement

Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat who is up for re-election in Georgia, also sought to add language requiring the budget plan to address health insurance companies denying or delaying access to care, but that, too was blocked by Republicans.

While Republicans had fewer proposals for changes to their own budget plan, they also sought to offer measures that would underscore their aggressive stance on immigration enforcement and dare Democrats to vote against them.

Mr. Graham offered an amendment to allocate funds toward a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the apprehension and deportation of adult immigrants convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor after illegally entering the United States. It passed unanimously.

Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, sought to bar Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and other services, and criticized the organization for providing transgender care to minors. Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, also attempted to tack on the G.O.P. voter identification bill, known as the SAVE America Act. Both proposals were blocked when Democrats, joined by a few Republicans, voted to strike them as unrelated to the budget plan.

The Republicans who crossed party lines to oppose their own party’s proposals for new voting requirements were Ms. Collins along with Senators Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

Advertisement

Ms. Collins and Ms. Murkowski also opposed the effort to block payments to Planned Parenthood.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending