U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening to impose tariffs on another $267 billion worth Chinese imports, which would cover virtually all the goods China imports to the United States.

The potential tariffs would come on top of punitive levies on $50 billion in Chinese goods already in place, as well as tariffs on another $200 billion worth of goods that Trump says “could take place very soon.”

He told reporters traveling with him to Fargo, North Dakota, on Friday that “behind that, there’s another $267 billion ready to go on short notice if I want.”

“That changes the equation,” he added.

Such a move would subject virtually all U.S. imports from China to new duties.

The president’s comments came one day after a public comment period ended on his proposal to add duties on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports. White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Friday that the Trump administration would evaluate the public comments before making any decisions on the new proposed tariffs.

The U.S. trade representative’s office received nearly 6,000 comments during seven days of public hearings on the proposal.

The Trump administration has argued that tariffs on Chinese goods will force China to trade on more favorable terms with the United States. It has demanded that China better protect American intellectual property, including ending the practice of cybertheft. The Trump administration has also called on China to allow U.S. companies greater access to Chinese markets and to cut its U.S. trade surplus.

China has retaliated against the U.S. tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese imports with import taxes on an equal amount of U.S. goods. It has also threatened to retaliate against any new tariffs. However, China’s imports from the United States are worth $200 billion a year less than American imports from China, so it would run out of room to match U.S. sanctions.
…

Millions of people covered under the Affordable Care Act will see only modest premium increases next year, and some will get price cuts. That’s the conclusion from an exclusive analysis of the besieged but resilient program, which still sparks deep divisions heading into this year’s midterm elections.

The Associated Press and the consulting firm Avalere Health crunched available state data and found that “Obamacare’s” health insurance marketplaces seem to be stabilizing after two years of sharp premium hikes. And the exodus of insurers from the program has halted, even reversed somewhat, with more consumer choices for 2019.

The analysis found a 3.6 percent average increase in proposed or approved premiums across 47 states and Washington, D.C., for next year. This year the average increase nationally was about 30 percent. The average total premium for an individual covered under the health law is now close to $600 a month before subsidies.

For next year, premiums are expected either to drop or increase by less than 10 percent in 41 states with about 9 million customers. Eleven of those states are expected to see a drop in average premiums. In six other states, plus Washington, D.C., premiums are projected to rise between 10 percent and 18 percent.

Insurers also are starting to come back. Nineteen states will either see new insurers enter or current ones expand into more areas. There are no bare counties lacking a willing insurer.

Even so, Chris Sloan, an Avalere director, says, “This is still a market that’s unaffordable for many people who aren’t eligible for subsidies.”

Nearly nine in 10 ACA customers get government subsidies based on income, shielding most from premium increases. But people with higher incomes, who don’t qualify for financial aid, have dropped out in droves.

It’s too early to say if the ACA’s turnabout will be fleeting or a more permanent shift. Either way, next year’s numbers are at odds with the political rhetoric around the ACA, still heated even after President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans failed to repeal the law last year.

Trump regularly calls “Obamacare” a “disaster” and time again has declared it “dead.” The GOP tax-cut bill repealed the ACA requirement that Americans have health insurance or risk fines, effective next year. But other key elements remain, including subsidies and protection for people with pre-existing conditions. Democrats, meanwhile, accuse Trump of “sabotage,” driving up premiums and threatening coverage.

The moderating market trend “takes the issue away from Republican candidates” in the midterm elections, said Mark Hall, a health law and policy expert at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. “Part of the mess is now their fault, and the facts really don’t support the narrative that things are getting worse.”

Market stability also appears to undercut Democrats’ charge that Trump is undermining the program. But Democrats disagree, saying the ACA is in danger while Republicans control Washington, and that premiums would have been even lower but for the administration’s hostility.

“Voters won’t think that the Trump threat to the ACA has passed at all, unless Democrats get at least the House in 2018,” said Bill Carrick, a strategist for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., whose re-election ads emphasize her support for the health law.

As if seconding Democrats’ argument, the Trump administration has said it won’t defend the ACA’s protections for pre-existing conditions in a federal case in Texas that could go to the Supreme Court. A new Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that Americans regardless of partisan identification said those protections should remain the law of the land.

In solidly Republican Arkansas, Democratic state legislator and cancer survivor Clarke Tucker is using the ACA in his campaign to try to flip a U.S. House seat from red to blue. Tucker, 37, says part of what made him want to run is the House vote to repeal the ACA last year and images of Trump and GOP lawmakers celebrating at the White House.

Business analysts say the relatively good news for 2019 is partly the result of previous premium increases, which allowed insurers to return to profitability after losing hundreds of millions of dollars.

“They can price better, and they can manage this population better, which is why they can actually make some money,” said Deep Banerjee of Standard & Poor’s.

Repeal of the ACA’s requirement to carry insurance doesn’t seem to have had a major impact yet, but Banerjee said there’s “a cloud of uncertainty” around the Trump administration’s potential policy shifts. Yet some administration actions have also helped settle the markets, such as continuing a premium stabilization program.

April Box of Spokane Valley, Washington, lives in a state where premiums could rise substantially since insurers have proposed an 18 percent increase. In states expecting double-digit increases, the reasons reflect local market conditions. Proposed increases may ultimately get revised downward.

Box is self-employed as a personal advocate helping patients navigate the health care system. She has an ACA plan, but even with a subsidy her premiums are expensive and a high deductible means she’s essentially covered only for catastrophic illness.

“I’m choosing not to go to the doctor, and I’m saying to myself I’m not sick enough to go to the doctors,” Box said. “We need to figure out how to make it better and lower the price.”

Now in her 50s, Box was born with dislocated hips. She worries she could be uninsurable if insurers are allowed to go back to denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. She might need another hip surgery.

“It needs to be a level playing field for everybody,” said Box. “We need to have universal coverage – that is really the only answer.”

Tennessee is a prime example of the ACA’s flipped fortunes.

Last year, the state struggled to secure at least one insurer in every county. But approved rates for 2019 reflect an 11 percent average decrease. Two new insurers – Bright Health and Celtic_ have entered its marketplace, and two others – Cigna and Oscar – will expand into new counties.

Tennessee Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander called that a “welcome step,” but argued rates could have been even lower if congressional Democrats had supported a market stabilization bill. Democrats blame Republicans for the failure.

To calculate premium changes, Avalere and The Associated Press used proposed overall individual marketplace rate filings for 34 states and D.C., and final rates for 13 states that have already approved them. Data was not available for Massachusetts, Maryland and Alabama. The average rate change calculations include both on-exchange and off-exchange plans that comply with ACA requirements. The government isn’t expected to release final national figures until later this fall.

 
…

Hiring picked up in August as U.S. employers added a strong 201,000 jobs, a sign of confidence that consumers and businesses will keep spending despite the Trump administration’s conflicts with U.S. trading partners.

The Labor Department said Friday the unemployment rate remained 3.9 percent, near an 18-year low. 

Americans’ paychecks grew at a faster pace in August. Average hourly wages rose last month and are now 2.9 percent higher than they were a year earlier, the fastest year-over-year gain in eight years. Still, after adjusting for inflation, pay has been flat for the past year.

The economy is expanding steadily, fueled by tax cuts, confident consumers, greater business investment in equipment and more government spending. Growth reached 4.2 percent at an annual rate in the April-June quarter, the fastest pace in four years.

Most analysts have forecast that the economy will expand at an annual pace of at least 3 percent in the current July-September quarter. For the full year, the economy is on track to grow 3 percent for the first time since 2005. 

Consumer confidence rose in August to its highest level in nearly 18 years. Most Americans feel that jobs are widely available and expect the economy to remain healthy in the coming months, according to the Conference Board’s consumer confidence survey.

The buoyant mood is lifting spending on everything from cars to restaurant meals to clothes. Consumers’ enthusiasm is even boosting such brick-and-mortar store chains as Target, Walmart and Best Buy, which have posted strong sales gains despite intensifying competition from online retailers.

In August, factories expanded at their quickest pace in 14 years, according to a survey of purchasing managers. A manufacturing index compiled by a trade group reached its highest point since 2004. Measures of new orders and production surged, and factories added jobs at a faster pace than in July.

Not all the economic news has been positive. Higher mortgage rates and years of rapid price increases are slowing the housing market. Sales of existing homes dropped in July for a fourth straight month.

And wages are still rising only modestly, even after more than nine years of economic expansion and an ultra-low unemployment rate.

Many economists also worry President Donald Trump will soon follow through on a threat to impose tariffs of up to 25 percent on $200 billion of imports from China. That would be in addition to $50 billion in duties already imposed. That move could shave as much as a quarter-point off growth over the next year, Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, has estimated. 

For now, there’s little sign that companies are worried enough about a trade war to slow hiring. Businesses are increasingly reluctant to even lay off workers, in part because it would be difficult to replace them at a time when qualified job applicants have become harder to find.

On Thursday, the government said the number of people seeking unemployment benefits — a proxy for layoffs — amounted to just 203,000 last week, the fewest total in 49 years.
…

Britain risks huge disruptions to its economy and society, including trade, transport, health care and citizens’ rights, if it leaves the European Union next March without a deal. That’s the conclusion of a new report on the short-term risks of a so-called ‘no-deal Brexit.’ The report comes as lawmakers return to London after a six-week summer break to face growing uncertainty over Britain’s future relations with the EU. Henry Ridgwell reports from London.
…

She is many things that would seem to irritate President Donald Trump: a liberal Canadian former journalist.

That makes Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland an unusual choice to lead Canada’s negotiations over a new free trade deal with a surprisingly hostile U.S. administration.

Recruited into politics by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Freeland has already clashed with Russia and Saudi Arabia. Those who know her say she’s unlikely to back down in a confrontation with Trump.

“She is everything the Trump administration loathes,” said Sarah Goldfeder, a former official with the U.S. Embassy in Canada.

Freeland, a globalist negotiating with a U.S. administration that believes in economic nationalism and populism, hopes to salvage a free trade deal with Canada’s largest trading partner as talks resumed Wednesday in Washington. The 50-year-old Harvard graduate and Rhodes scholar speaks five languages and has influential friends around the world.

“I have enormous sympathy for her because she is negotiating with an unpredictable, irrational partner,” said CNN host Fareed Zakaria, a friend of Freeland’s for 25 years.

Freeland cut short a trip to Europe last week after Trump reached a deal with Mexico that excluded Canada. Talks with Canada resumed but Trump said he wasn’t willing to make any concessions.

The Trump administration left Canada out of the talks for five weeks not long after the president vowed to make Canada pay after Trudeau said at the G-7 in Quebec he wouldn’t let Canada get pushed around in trade talks. Freeland then poked the U.S. when she received Foreign Policy magazine’s diplomat of the year award in Washington.

“You may feel today that your size allows you to go mano-a-mano with your traditional adversaries and be guaranteed to win,” Freeland said in the June speech. “But if history tells us one thing, it is that no one nation’s pre-eminence is eternal.”

Despite being the chief negotiator with the Trump administration, Freeland has criticized it when few other leaders of Western democracies have.

“She’s an extremely strong-willed and capable young woman, and I think Trump generally has a problem with that,” said Ian Bremmer, a longtime friend and foreign affairs columnist and president of the Eurasia Group. “She’s not going to bat her eyelashes at Trump to get something done. That’s not Chrystia. She doesn’t play games.”

After Freeland and her department tweeted criticism of Saudi Arabia last month for the arrest of social activists in the kingdom, Canada suffered consequences. The Saudis suspended diplomatic relations and canceled new trade with Canada and sold off Canadian assets.

Peter MacKay, a former Canadian foreign minister, said public shaming like that doesn’t work and said some Americans viewed her June speech in Washington as something less than diplomatic.

“It was around that time, within days, that the U.S. threw Canada out of the room,” MacKay said. “There is sometimes concern that she is taking the lead from her prime minister by playing a little bit to a domestic audience.”

Trudeau personally recruited Freeland to join his Liberal Party while it was the third party in Parliament in 2013. Freeland had a senior position at the Reuters news agency but was ready to move on after setbacks in her journalism career, said Martin Wolf, an influential Financial Times columnist and longtime friend.

Freeland previously had risen rapidly at the Financial Times where she became Moscow bureau chief in her mid-20s during the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Freeland also served as deputy editor of the Globe and Mail in Toronto and the Financial Times. She had designs on becoming editor of the Financial Times but left after a clash with the top editor. She was familiar to many TV viewers in the U.S. because of her regular appearances on talk shows like Zakaria’s.

“She was a godsend for us, frankly, because she is so bright and so talented and articulate,” Zakaria said. “She is as about as impressive a person as I have met.”

Freeland, who is of Ukrainian heritage, also wrote a well-received book on Russia and left journalism for politics in 2013 when she won a district in Toronto. She has been a frequent critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who banned her from traveling to the country in 2014 in retaliation for Western sanctions against Moscow.

She remains chummy with journalists, even bringing them frozen treats in 90-degree heat last week while they waited outside the U.S. Trade Representative office in Washington.

Bremmer, who met Freeland in Kiev in 1992, good-naturedly chided her for a strange foible: a habit of writing notes on her hands even when she has notepads.

“I have seen in her environments with foreign ministers and heads of state with stuff on her hands,” he said with a laugh.

Throughout her career, Freeland has cultivated an impressive group of friends. Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, is a godfather to one of her three children. Friends include Larry Summers, the former U.S. treasury secretary, and billionaires George Soros and Stephen Schwarzman, the Blackstone Group chief executive who once led one of Trump’s disbanded business councils.

“I always found her to be extremely smart and easy to talk with,” Schwarzman said. “She accessible and direct and quick. You don’t get to be a Rhodes scholar by accident.”

Summers is a mentor from Harvard.

“Her clarity of thought, straightforwardness and deep sense of principle make her an ideal leader of the international community as it responds to highly problematic American policy,” Summers said in an email.

Bremmer said Freeland has serious globalist credentials, “but right now, momentum is not with that group globally.”

When Trudeau became prime minister in 2015, he named Freeland to his Cabinet. She served as international trade minister and worked on ensuring that a free trade deal with the European Union didn’t unravel. At one point, she left stalled talks near tears after saying it had been impossible to overcome differences. An agreement was reached not long after that, and Freeland received credit.

Now she’s facing her toughest challenge with the North American Free Trade Agreement, since the U.S. represents 75 percent of Canada’s exports.

“Canada is stuck with the United States. That’s Canada’s trade,” Bremmer said. “Canadians are going to have to swallow a fair amount of pride. They are going have to pretend they like this guy a lot more than they obviously do or they risk getting much more economically punished. That’s just the reality.”
…

Trump administration officials and Canadian negotiators are resuming talks to try to keep Canada in a North American trade bloc with the United States and Mexico.

“We are looking forward to constructive conversations today,” Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland told reporters as she entered a meeting with U.S. Trade Rep. Robert Lighthizer.

Last week, the United States and Mexico reached a preliminary agreement to replace the 24-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement. But those talks excluded Canada, the third NAFTA country.

Freeland flew to Washington last week for four days of negotiations to try to keep Canada within the regional trade bloc. The U.S. and Canada are sparring over issues including U.S. access to Canada’s protected dairy market and American plans to protect some drug companies from generic competition.

 
…

An international money transfer company has launched an online service for East Africans to send and receive money more easily. Analysts say WorldRemit will lower the cost of transferring money and boost African trade and economies.

Africa has become a thriving market for money transfer companies as its telecommunication facilities improve and its economies grow.

WorldRemit, a British-based money transfer company, recently launched a new digital service in four East African countries. The company facilitates the transfer of at least $1.6 billion to Africa each year.

The co-founder and the head of WorldRemit, Ismail Ahmed, told VOA how money transfers in Africa have changed over the years.

“When we launched our services, 99 percent of remittances were cash both on the sending and receiving side. But today that is changing fast and in the next few years we think as much as 50 to 60 percent of international remittances would move from traditional physical cash, traditional remittances, to digital. And that’s why our services has grown very fast in the last few years,” he said.

Ahmed said that as transactions become digital, the cost of each transfer comes down, and tracking money becomes easier.

“It’s easier for businesses and individuals to move within countries but also across countries. It’s easier to fight financial crime because once the transaction becomes digital, there is an audit trail compared to cash where there is no audit trail,” he said.

Gerrishon Ikiara is an international economic affairs lecturer at the University of Nairobi. He said digital money transfers will boost trade within Africa — but notes that some countries still lack the necessary connections.

“Obviously, the main challenge is the level of infrastructure, because a country without the good infrastructure in terms of electricity and telecommunication infrastructure will make it a bit difficult,” said Ikiara.

The World Bank says $37.8 billion was sent to Africa through remittances in 2017. This year, the amount is expected to be $39 billion.
…

First it was Argentina, quickly followed by Turkey. Now anxious investors and policy-makers are watching with alarm the plummeting currencies of several emerging-market economies, most of which have borrowed heavily in dollars.

The nosediving currencies are prompting fears of a repeat of the 1997 Asian financial crash or the “Tequila Effect” of Mexico’s 1994 financial crisis. Or is something even worse coming — a financial contagion to compare with 2008?

Argentina’s peso dropped 29 percent against the U.S. dollar in August, the worst performer among major emerging-market currencies. Turkey’s currency followed closely, with a 25 percent slide.South Africa’s rand saw an almost 10 percent drop. The Indonesian rupiah fell to its weakest level since the 1997 Asian financial crisis, while India’s currency slid into unprecedented territory against the dollar.

September has seen no major uplift in those currencies. The Turkish lira is down 40 percent to the U.S. dollar this year, sparking mounting alarm over the sustainability of the country’s sizable dollar-denominated debts held primarily by its banks and businesses rather than the government.

The foreign exchange markets are jittery with traders watching to see if more countries start joining the troubled list, which would indicate contagion is underway. African countries like Angola, Ghana, Ethiopia, and Mozambique could be vulnerable. And in a worst-case scenario even more developed economies like Chile, Poland and Hungary, which are also shouldering large foreign-currency debts above 50 percent of their GDPs, could be impacted, say some financial analysts.

Corporate debt in emerging and developing economies is significantly larger than it was before the 2008 global financial crisis.The bigger the debt, the harder the fall.

“The risk is increasing in those countries,” Bertrand Delgado, director of global markets for Societe Generale in New York, has warned.

There is general consensus why emerging markets are in turmoil. Three main developments are blamed:

1 – The impact on market sentiment from U.S. President Donald Trump’s tit-for-tat trade war with China and others

2 – Rising U.S. interest rate that has prompted global investors to exit emerging markets to chase yield in dollar investments

3 – The winding down of post-2008 quantitative easing by the U.S. Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank, which has reduced liquidity and the availability of cheap money for governments and businesses in emerging markets to borrow.

A global financial crash?

Marcus Ashworth of Bloomberg cautioned last week the emerging-markets sell-off looks contagious.

“The difficulties for emerging markets have entered a new phase.What were once clearly country-specific crises, well contained within their borders, are bleeding across the world,” he warned.

Ashworth, a columnist and a veteran of the banking industry, most recently as chief markets strategist at Haitong Securities in London, added, “One emerging country’s problems have become other emerging countries’ problems, and it’s hard to see how to break the cycle.”

Other analysts dispute that contagion is underway, saying each of the troubled states have their own idiosyncratic problems and country-specific challenges, although they acknowledge the turmoil could mount with the U.S. Federal Reserve expected to raise interest rates several times this year.

In a note to investors, DBS, a Singapore-based international financial services group, warned the currencies of Argentina and Turkey “have been struggling with rising U.S. rates since the start of the year, due to deficits in their fiscal and current account balances.

“Heightened trade tensions threatening to erupt into a full-blown trade war could prompt, DBS said, disorderly capital outflows leading to “financial instability, especially in countries that have high external debt levels.”

Britain’s The Economist magazine argues the weakness in emerging-market currencies “is not fundamentally contagious” and the fallout can be contained.Western lenders including banks will be impacted, it said, as emerging-market borrowers struggle to repay dollar and other foreign-currency debts now worth more in terms of their own currencies. “But it would not threaten their [Western lenders’] solvency,” it said.

Optimists say for all the wider currency woes and the economic weakness of Argentina and Turkey, many major emerging-market countries are doing well.

India’s GDP was growing at an 8 percent rate ending June. Mexico’s peso is steady and it appears to have concluded trade negotiations with the Trump White House, which markets are viewing favorably.

The optimists say the global scare is being fanned by screaming, doom-laden headlines, pointing out that in 2013, when the U.S. Federal Reserve started to cease Quantitative Easing, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Turkey and South Africa all suffered from currency depreciation, but they soon regained their footing.

The biggest emerging-market risk, though, is that rattled global investors could be so alarmed by currency turmoils that they ignore economic fundamentals and stampede away from emerging-market countries, compounding currency falls, triggering indirect contagion, and adding to debt burdens.
…