More Than 300 Arrested In Washington Amid Federal Crackdown On Crime: Bondi

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

More than 300 people have been arrested following the federal takeover of law enforcement at the District of Columbia police department, according to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Bondi said that 68 people were arrested overnight on Aug. 16 after President Donald Trump federalized policing in the nation’s capital. This brings the total number of arrests to more than 300 since the operation began earlier this month.

“Just last night, our federal and DC law enforcement partners made 68 arrests and seized 15 illegal firearms,” Bondi stated in an Aug. 17 post on X.

“Homicide suspects, drug traffickers, and more are being charged. I’ll continue to stand with you as we make DC safe again!”

Those arrested face charges including assault on a federal officer, aggravated assault, felony grand larceny, and driving under the influence (DUI), according to FBI Director Kash Patel.

Trump announced a federal takeover of D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) on Aug. 11, deploying hundreds of National Guard troops to the nation’s capital to curb crime.

Bondi then appointed DEA administrator Terry Cole as D.C.’s “emergency police commissioner,” granting him full authority over the MPD.

Bondi, however, revised the order following a federal judge’s ruling issued in response to legal challenges from D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb, who alleged that the federal government violated the Home Rule Act by attempting to replace MPD Chief Pamela Smith.

In her updated order, Bondi stated that Cole will serve as her “designee” at the MPD, and allowed Smith to remain in charge of its operations. The order will still require D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to assist with enforcing federal immigration law and locating illegal immigrants.

Spokesperson for the U.S. AG’s office, Chad Gilmartin, said the revised order is stronger than the initial one “because instead of requiring D.C. to rescind just one MDP order, @AGPamBondi has now REQUIRED full cooperation with federal immigration authorities.”

Trump also ordered law enforcement to patrol the nation’s capital around the clock. He invoked Section 740 of the Home Rule Act, which allows the president to control the city’s police department for up to 30 days, with any extension requiring congressional approval.

Schwalb has accused the Trump administration of infringing on the district’s right to self-governance and abusing its authority under the Home Rule Act by declaring “a hostile takeover” of the MPD.

“These orders far exceed the President’s limited authority to request services from MPD, which can only be done on a temporary basis, under emergency circumstances, and solely for federal purposes,” his office said on Aug. 15.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson has defended the federal takeover of the MPD, saying it’s necessary “due to the emergency that has arisen in our nation’s capital as a result of failed leadership.”

“The Democrats’ efforts to stifle this tremendous progress are par for the course for the Defund the Police, Criminals-First Democrat Party,” Jackson told The Epoch Times.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 14:40

There have been a number of stories about the ways Trump has hurt the people who supported him in November 2024 and his declining approval among two groups who moved toward him in the last election –Hispanics and young men. He does not seem to have suffered much erosion in rural populations generally despite his […]

The post Buyers Regret? appeared first on Angry Bear.

Tech Giants Spend Over $45mn Protecting CEOs Amid Rising Threats

Large tech groups including Meta, Alphabet, Nvidia, Amazon and Palantir are sharply increasing spending on personal protection as executives face rising hostility and a bigger role in US politics, according to Financial Times,

The FT found security budgets for 10 major tech CEOs exceeded $45mn in 2024, with several firms raising spending by more than 10% year on year.

Meta leads the pack: it spent $27mn last year securing Mark Zuckerberg and his family, far more than peers because it covers relatives as well as him. Nvidia spent $3.5mn protecting Jensen Huang, up from $2.2mn. Amazon has consistently funded Jeff Bezos’s protection at $1.6mn annually and spent $1.1mn last year on CEO Andy Jassy. Tesla reported only $500,000 in 2024 for Elon Musk but acknowledged this was a fraction of the real cost, with Musk sometimes traveling with 20 guards and even founding his own firm, Foundation Security.

Financial Times writes that spending has surged after high-profile killings, including the December 2024 shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. “The first half of this year was as busy for us than all of 2024,” said Joe LaSorsa of LaSorsa Security, citing a “remarkable increase” in attacks on executives’ homes.

Security experts warn of a shift. “Previously, we’d see executives targeted by someone with a personal grievance... but the direction of violence towards the top of company leadership has changed,” said Lianne Kennedy-Boudali of Control Risks. James Hamilton of Hamilton Security added: “I’ve never seen the threat or the concern higher than it is today.”

Palantir’s Alex Karp, whose fortune jumped by almost $7bn, has faced death threats linked to the firm’s military contracts and now moves with a 24/7 detail. Nvidia’s Huang, worth more than $153bn, is mobbed by fans at public events. Musk said: “We actually did have two homicidal maniacs in the last roughly seven months come to aspirationally try to kill me.”

Beyond tech, JPMorgan, Fox, Lockheed Martin, and healthcare companies have also expanded protection. CVS and Anthem even removed executives’ photos from websites.

Security firms are increasingly asked to guard against kidnapping, stalking, home invasions and AI-driven fraud, not just assassination attempts. “People are fixating on the leader of a company as the representation of all that is wrong with the world,” Hamilton warned.

Crypto leaders have also become early adopters of private security. Coinbase spent $6.2mn protecting CEO Brian Armstrong in 2024, while Blockdaemon founder Konstantin Richter noted: “Every time the market pumps things get weird... Keeping a low profile is key.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 14:20

Victor Hanson: Putin, Trump, & The Elusive "Peace"

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

At the August 15 Alaska summit, Vladimir Putin performed as expected. He desperately wants an end to Western sanctions, détente with the U.S., and assurances that the U.S. will not impose a disastrous anti-Russian secondary boycott—and, apparently, some additional Ukrainian territory.

Consequently, Putin, in his media synopsis, talked more about restored friendship with a “neighborly” United States under Trump. He scarcely mentioned Ukraine directly—other than to imply to Westerners that he seeks not merely to annex a foreign country, but to reclaim what he views as a former Soviet province with ancient ties to the Russian people.

Trump did not get his ceasefire with Putin. But he quickly pivoted to remind us that the table is set for a supposedly comprehensive peace without first requiring a temporary cessation of arms.

Trump addressed the media more succinctly and with greater discretion than Putin, appearing more optimistic that the Russian-American hostility was thawing. And he views normalization as a necessary step toward comprehensive peace in the weeks to come.

The left lambasted Trump for speaking politely of Putin and vice versa. There was additional criticism of a Fox interview in which Trump mentioned “land swaps” and for his supposed prior naïveté in believing he could obtain a ceasefire with Putin.

Yet for all the posturing, we have known for some time the general outlines of a peace, how it could come about, and why it has not yet happened.

Ukraine will not join NATO, but will likely be fully armed by the West. Ukraine lacks the power to retake Crimea or the Donbass, but with Western aid, it can preserve most of its territory.

Russia is worn out, but it is not yet ready to give up and may not be even after the envisioned destructive secondary sanctions. Putin will only make peace when his dictatorship feels it has advanced far enough westward (perhaps 100 miles west of the border) to justify to the oligarchy and military his foolhardy invasion and the needless toll of one million Russians dead, wounded, missing, or captured.

No one knows where a hypothetical DMZ line might eventually be drawn. But for now, it depends on which army has the greater wherewithal and momentum to push its enemy backward before there is a general consensus to stop the madness.

These contours of peace can be shaped by promises of trade deals and normalization between Russia and the West. Or, contrarily, they can be realized by threats of tougher sanctions and boycotts, as well as by security guarantees to Ukraine, by near-permanent aid to Ukraine to maintain its quite formidable army and deterrence, or by internal erosion from the war either in Ukraine or Russia.

Yet few critics of the administration address the unmentionables that likely account for the above general outlines of a settlement.

There are some realities that serve as subtexts to any possible agreement that cannot be simply thought away.

1. Ukraine could only regain Crimea and the Donbass and return to its pre-2022 borders by a historic transference of U.S. and European arms, intelligence, logistical support, and financial aid that would be little short of actively fighting nuclear Russia.

Europe talks grandly of unlimited support. But some Europeans still buy Russian energy, slow-walk aid, seem exhausted by the war, and are likely in time to peel away as they once did from the endless “no-fly zones” over Saddam’s Iraq after the first Gulf War. Europe sounds as if it fields vast armies, but in truth, Putin believes European support will erode more quickly than Ukrainian resistance or American help.

So, for all the talk of an “exhausted” Russia, there is a silent consensus that a depopulated and broken Ukraine cannot sustain its current levels of resistance without a much greater Western profile. And that is unlikely to happen.

2. Notably, the left never really dwells on the likely 1.5 million dead, wounded, missing, and captured from three and a half years of war. It is a humanitarian nightmare, a modern Stalingrad that makes Gaza look like child’s play.

Yet Westerners are far more likely to posture on the human costs of the “genocide” in the distant Mideast wars than on Europe’s doorstep. Perhaps Germany or France feels it can influence Netanyahu by performance-art declarations of statehood for the Palestinians (on the quiet assumption that Israel is Western, friendly, and more likely to listen to Euro-moralizing than is a proximate, hostile, and dangerous Putin’s Russia).

Strangely, Trump alone seems to be lamenting the needless loss of thousands of lives each month, with no end in sight. It is fine to demand zero concessions to Putin or to accuse any who seek negotiations through land swaps as appeasers. But it is quite another to lay out a strategic plan for victory and complete recovery of pre-2014 Ukrainian territory, the likely costs necessary for such an ambitious strategy, and who, and for how long, will pay the tab.

3. There is a long history, both peaceful and hostile, between Russia and Ukraine that Westerners often ignore due to the current naked aggression of Putin and the murderous nature of his regime. Nonetheless, most recently, since 1939, the borders of present-day Ukraine have been fluid and changeable between Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. There still remains strong Russian influence and even support in Eastern Ukraine. And there has been a Western naivete since the end of the Cold War about pre-Putin Russia’s trip-wire sensitivity to the eastward trajectory of Western military alliances toward Russia and the more insidious Westernization of former and still mostly Russian-speaking areas of the old Soviet Union.

The current tensions with Canada and the U.S. would certainly boil over if China were to begin overtly championing the Canadian cause. Americans remember the 1962 U.S. response to Castro’s Cuba when Nikita Khrushchev broke Cold War conventions by strategically arming a third-nation proxy on America’s doorstep.

4. Talking to a monstrous Putin is not treasonous, foolhardy, or unnecessary. FDR openly courted, joked with, and even praised (“Uncle Joe”) an even greater monster in Joseph Stalin, who by 1941 had the blood of nearly 20 million Russians on his hands. Stalin had already invaded pro-Western Finland and Poland. And between September 1, 1939, and June 22, 1941, he had enabled Adolf Hitler to overrun much of Western Europe, hoping Germany would destroy both the West and itself in the process.

Nixon did not just “go to China” but sought to change the geostrategic nuclear landscape by courting Mao Zedong, the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century.

Not calling Putin a “killer” and “murderer” at the summit is hardly appeasement but more like art-of-the-deal, speaking softly while carrying a big stick, rather than Biden-style loud rhetoric while carrying a twig. Who is the greater humanitarian—the inert and anemic blowhard who resorts to name-calling a “murderous thug,” or the president willing to meet face-to-face with a monster to explore costly ways of halting the mass slaughter?

5. Finally, few seem to remember that Trump is a latecomer to the Ukrainian-Russian mess.

In the end, we should remember it was not Trump who once talked grandly of a soon-to-be NATO Ukraine or who for years welched on the promise to spend a meager 2 percent of GDP on defense.

It was not Trump who pushed a plastic red button to embark on a “Russian reset” with a voracious Putin. It was not Trump who invited Russia back into the Middle East after a nearly 40-year hiatus.

It was not Trump who, after the reset’s failure, moved on to concoct “Russian collusion” and “Russian disinformation” to use Russia to destroy a political rival. It was not Trump who went to Ukraine, threatened to hold up aid, and fired a prosecutor looking into his son’s selling to Ukrainians the influence of his father’s vice presidency.

It was not Trump on whose watch Putin invaded Georgia, the Donbass, and Crimea, and sought to absorb Kyiv.

It was not Trump who dreamed up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to subsidize green energy fantasies—while still buying Russian energy.

And it was not Trump who conditioned his possible reaction to Putin’s invasion based on whether it might be “minor.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 14:00

CBO announces the release schedule for several publications next month that provide updated information on the federal budget, demographic trends, and the short-term economic outlook.

A Cybertruck passed us this morning on the way back from the south shore of Rhode Island. My wife remarked that it looked like a rolling dumpster. I’ve certainly never understood the appeal. Apparently, my aesthetic is shared. “Once one of the world’s most-hyped vehicles, sales and production numbers for Tesla’s Cybertruck have fallen sharply. […]

The post Alas, Cybertruck, we hardly knew ye appeared first on Angry Bear.

"When Bubbles Happen...": Sam Altman Says AI Hype Compares To Dot Com Boom Before 2000 Crash

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says investor enthusiasm for artificial intelligence may already look like a bubble., according to CNBC.

“Are we in a phase where investors as a whole are overexcited about AI? My opinion is yes. Is AI the most important thing to happen in a very long time? My opinion is also yes,” he told reporters last week. “When bubbles happen, smart people get overexcited about a kernel of truth.”

Altman compared the surge in AI spending to the dot-com boom of the 1990s, when hype drove valuations before the Nasdaq lost nearly 80% of its value.

He isn’t alone. Alibaba co-founder Joe Tsai, Bridgewater’s Ray Dalio, and Apollo Global Management economist Torsten Slok have issued similar warnings. Slok recently argued the AI boom could be “bigger than the internet bubble,” with today’s market leaders more overvalued than those in the 1990s.

Not all analysts agree. Ray Wang of Futurum Group said Monday that “from the perspective of broader investment in AI and semiconductors... I don’t see it as a bubble. The fundamentals across the supply chain remain strong.” Still, he noted “an increasing amount of speculative capital” chasing weaker companies.

CNBC writes that investor concern has grown alongside rising competition. Earlier this year, Chinese start-up DeepSeek claimed to train a cutting-edge model for under $6 million, far below the billions spent by U.S. giants like OpenAI—though those claims remain disputed.

Altman, meanwhile, has acknowledged challenges at OpenAI. He told CNBC the company is on track for $20 billion in annual recurring revenue but remains unprofitable. The rollout of its GPT-5 model drew mixed reviews, forcing OpenAI to restore GPT-4 access for paying users.

He has also begun questioning whether “artificial general intelligence” remains a useful term, saying it may be losing relevance despite earlier predictions it could arrive in the “reasonably close-ish future.”

Investor faith, however, hasn’t wavered. OpenAI is preparing a $6 billion stock sale valuing the firm at roughly $500 billion, just months after raising $40 billion at a $300 billion valuation—the largest private tech round ever.

Looking ahead, Altman said OpenAI could spend “trillions of dollars” on data centers, hinted at expansion into consumer hardware and brain-computer interfaces, and even suggested buying Chrome if regulators forced Google to sell.

Asked if he’d still be OpenAI’s CEO in three years, he replied: “I mean, maybe an AI is in three years. That’s a long time.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 13:05

"When Bubbles Happen...": Sam Altman Says AI Hype Compares To Dot Com Boom Before 2000 Crash

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says investor enthusiasm for artificial intelligence may already look like a bubble., according to CNBC.

“Are we in a phase where investors as a whole are overexcited about AI? My opinion is yes. Is AI the most important thing to happen in a very long time? My opinion is also yes,” he told reporters last week. “When bubbles happen, smart people get overexcited about a kernel of truth.”

Altman compared the surge in AI spending to the dot-com boom of the 1990s, when hype drove valuations before the Nasdaq lost nearly 80% of its value.

He isn’t alone. Alibaba co-founder Joe Tsai, Bridgewater’s Ray Dalio, and Apollo Global Management economist Torsten Slok have issued similar warnings. Slok recently argued the AI boom could be “bigger than the internet bubble,” with today’s market leaders more overvalued than those in the 1990s.

Not all analysts agree. Ray Wang of Futurum Group said Monday that “from the perspective of broader investment in AI and semiconductors... I don’t see it as a bubble. The fundamentals across the supply chain remain strong.” Still, he noted “an increasing amount of speculative capital” chasing weaker companies.

CNBC writes that investor concern has grown alongside rising competition. Earlier this year, Chinese start-up DeepSeek claimed to train a cutting-edge model for under $6 million, far below the billions spent by U.S. giants like OpenAI—though those claims remain disputed.

Altman, meanwhile, has acknowledged challenges at OpenAI. He told CNBC the company is on track for $20 billion in annual recurring revenue but remains unprofitable. The rollout of its GPT-5 model drew mixed reviews, forcing OpenAI to restore GPT-4 access for paying users.

He has also begun questioning whether “artificial general intelligence” remains a useful term, saying it may be losing relevance despite earlier predictions it could arrive in the “reasonably close-ish future.”

Investor faith, however, hasn’t wavered. OpenAI is preparing a $6 billion stock sale valuing the firm at roughly $500 billion, just months after raising $40 billion at a $300 billion valuation—the largest private tech round ever.

Looking ahead, Altman said OpenAI could spend “trillions of dollars” on data centers, hinted at expansion into consumer hardware and brain-computer interfaces, and even suggested buying Chrome if regulators forced Google to sell.

Asked if he’d still be OpenAI’s CEO in three years, he replied: “I mean, maybe an AI is in three years. That’s a long time.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 13:05

Treasury Department Releases New Guidance Restricting Wind, Solar Tax Credits

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Treasury Department on Friday unveiled guidance that tightens the criteria for wind and solar energy projects to receive federal tax credits.

Giant wind turbines are powered by strong winds in front of solar panels in Palm Springs, Calif., on March 27, 2013. Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

The guidance follows President Donald Trump’s July 7 executive order directing the department to enforce the One Big Beautiful Bill Act he signed into law on July 4, which effectively ends renewable energy tax credits for projects that have not begun construction.

The new rules narrow down the definition of projects considered to have begun construction, replacing the previous rule that allowed developers to qualify after incurring 5 percent of the project costs.

It stated that the “Five Percent Safe Harbor” is no longer available for determining “whether a wind or solar facility has met the beginning of construction deadline and, thus, is not subject to the credit termination date.” However, small projects below 1.5 megawatts could still be considered for the provision.

Developers will need to prove they started “physical work of a significant nature” to establish that solar or wind projects have begun construction, and those projects must be continuous, according to the guidance.

“Provided that physical work performed is of a significant nature, there is no fixed minimum amount of work or monetary or percentage threshold required to satisfy the Physical Work Test,” it stated.

The newly released guidance counts activities such as setting anchor bolts into the ground, excavating land, and pouring concrete pads of the foundation as qualified work in progress.

Preliminary activities such as mapping, clearing a site, test drilling, or excavating to change the contour of the land are not considered as having begun construction, according to the updated rules.

It also stated that solar or wind facilities must be operational by the end of the fourth calendar year after construction begins, in order to fully qualify under the new rules.

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) criticized the guidance as a “blatant rejection” of congressional approval and said that it threatens small businesses supporting the U.S. clean energy sector.

“American families and businesses will pay more for electricity as a result of this action, and China will continue to outpace us in the race for electricity to power AI,” SEIA CEO Abigail Ross Hopper said in a statement.

Clean Energy Buyers Association CEO Rich Powell said the guidance provides the business community with certainty “by honoring existing contracts” while ensuring proper use of taxpayer money.

“Meeting these new standards will be challenging, but we are confident that American energy buyers will help developers rise to the challenge of delivering all sources of power critical to the continued growth of the U.S. economy,” Powell stated.

The executive order to end federal subsidies for wind and solar energy projects cited concerns over the reliability of these energy sources and dependence on foreign-controlled supply chains.

In his order, Trump stated that reliance on “so-called ‘green’ subsidies” poses a national security risk by making the United States dependent on supply chains controlled by foreign adversaries.

“Ending the massive cost of taxpayer handouts to unreliable energy sources is vital to energy dominance, national security, economic growth, and the fiscal health of the nation,” the order stated.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 12:45

Treasury Department Releases New Guidance Restricting Wind, Solar Tax Credits

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Treasury Department on Friday unveiled guidance that tightens the criteria for wind and solar energy projects to receive federal tax credits.

Giant wind turbines are powered by strong winds in front of solar panels in Palm Springs, Calif., on March 27, 2013. Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

The guidance follows President Donald Trump’s July 7 executive order directing the department to enforce the One Big Beautiful Bill Act he signed into law on July 4, which effectively ends renewable energy tax credits for projects that have not begun construction.

The new rules narrow down the definition of projects considered to have begun construction, replacing the previous rule that allowed developers to qualify after incurring 5 percent of the project costs.

It stated that the “Five Percent Safe Harbor” is no longer available for determining “whether a wind or solar facility has met the beginning of construction deadline and, thus, is not subject to the credit termination date.” However, small projects below 1.5 megawatts could still be considered for the provision.

Developers will need to prove they started “physical work of a significant nature” to establish that solar or wind projects have begun construction, and those projects must be continuous, according to the guidance.

“Provided that physical work performed is of a significant nature, there is no fixed minimum amount of work or monetary or percentage threshold required to satisfy the Physical Work Test,” it stated.

The newly released guidance counts activities such as setting anchor bolts into the ground, excavating land, and pouring concrete pads of the foundation as qualified work in progress.

Preliminary activities such as mapping, clearing a site, test drilling, or excavating to change the contour of the land are not considered as having begun construction, according to the updated rules.

It also stated that solar or wind facilities must be operational by the end of the fourth calendar year after construction begins, in order to fully qualify under the new rules.

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) criticized the guidance as a “blatant rejection” of congressional approval and said that it threatens small businesses supporting the U.S. clean energy sector.

“American families and businesses will pay more for electricity as a result of this action, and China will continue to outpace us in the race for electricity to power AI,” SEIA CEO Abigail Ross Hopper said in a statement.

Clean Energy Buyers Association CEO Rich Powell said the guidance provides the business community with certainty “by honoring existing contracts” while ensuring proper use of taxpayer money.

“Meeting these new standards will be challenging, but we are confident that American energy buyers will help developers rise to the challenge of delivering all sources of power critical to the continued growth of the U.S. economy,” Powell stated.

The executive order to end federal subsidies for wind and solar energy projects cited concerns over the reliability of these energy sources and dependence on foreign-controlled supply chains.

In his order, Trump stated that reliance on “so-called ‘green’ subsidies” poses a national security risk by making the United States dependent on supply chains controlled by foreign adversaries.

“Ending the massive cost of taxpayer handouts to unreliable energy sources is vital to energy dominance, national security, economic growth, and the fiscal health of the nation,” the order stated.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 12:45

 – by New Deal democrat Forecasting has always been hard, and moreso since the supply chain issues of 2021-22 made reading the interest rate signals from the long leading indicators muddled. But at least the short leading indicators were intact. But now we have the additional wrench in the works in the form of a mafia-style […]

The post The muddied historical picture of PPI vs. CPI appeared first on Angry Bear.

Today, in the Calculated Risk Real Estate Newsletter: 3rd Look at Local Housing Markets in July

A brief excerpt:

First, here are some comments from the Houston Association of REALTORS®: HOUSTON HOME PRICES EASE IN JULY AS SUPPLY HITS RECORD HIGH

According to the Houston Association of Realtors' July 2025 Housing Market Update, single-family home sales increased 9.2 percent year-over-year. A total of 8,300 homes were sold compared to 7,601 last year, when Hurricane Beryl temporarily halted market activity for several days.

July marked the largest year-over-year decline in home prices since 2023. The median price was down 3.1 percent to $339,000. The average price was $434,664, which is 1.9 percent below last year’s level.

Active listings reached an all-time high in July, exceeding 40,000 available homes in the Houston area. This represents a 38.2 percent increase from the same time last year.
emphasis added

Active listings hit an all-time high in Houston leading to some price declines. This is something we are seeing everywhere inventory has increased sharply. Note that sales were partially up year-over-year in Houston due to the hurricane depressing sales last year.
...
In July, sales in these markets were down 0.6% YoY. Last month, in June, these same markets were up 4.3% year-over-year Not Seasonally Adjusted (NSA).

Important: There were the same number of working days in July 2025 (22) as in July 2024 (22). So, the year-over-year change in the headline SA data will be similar to the NSA data.
...
More local markets to come!

There is much more in the article.

Trump Issues Clearest Greenlight For Netanyahu's Offensive To 'Confront & Destroy' Hamas To Date

President Trump on Monday issued a scorching message aimed at Hamas as well as the growing internationall and domestic critics of America's Israel policy. He called for the total destruction of Hamas and the return of the hostages, in that order.

"The sooner this takes place, the better the chances of success will be," he wrote on Truth Social. This is one of the clearest 'greenlights' for Netanyahu's expanded Gaza operations to date, and it cleary backs his government's pursuit of a military solution, as opposed to attempting to renew or prioritize negotiations for a hostage exchange.

In bizarre language which sounds more like an enthusiastic gambler preparing to enter the casino, Trump declared after reviewing his recent Middle East 'accomplishments': "Play to WIN, or don't play at all!"

This comes on the heels of a weekend which saw more mass anti-Netanyahu protests across Israeli cities, especially in Tel Aviv. Also, President Trump held a phone call with PM Netanyahu on Sunday.

Netanyahu's office said they "discussed Israel's plans to take control of the remaining Hamas strongholds in Gaza in order to bring an end to the war through the release of the hostages and the defeat of Hamas."

Trump in a follow-up interview with Axios said of the terror group, "they can't stay there" - and explained: "I have one thing to say: remember October 7, remember October 7."

Netananyahu told a Sunday press briefing that he has requested the Israel Defense Forces to present plans for "taking over" Gaza City.

There are reports saying the Israeli government is planning to 'move' Palestinian civilians into massive tent cities, with tents being provided and erected by the Israelis - but international war monitors and human rights groups have decried this as ethnic cleansing - but dressed up in humanitarian language, given the creation and publicizing of yet more sprawling refugee camps.

Thousands of Israelis stayed home from work, flooded city streets and blocked roads and highways across the country on Sunday, staging some of the largest anti-war protests in months as the military prepares for a major assault on Gaza City. https://t.co/S4eBx4BWzE pic.twitter.com/OunIurUPEg

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) August 17, 2025

Below is a Monday update of some of the latest major developments via Al Jazeera:

• The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza says the death toll from Israel’s war has surpassed 62,000 with 60 people killed and 344 injured in the latest 24-hour reporting period.
• Hospitals say 27 people seeking aid have been killed and 281 injured over the past day, bringing the total death toll of aid seekers to 1,965.
• The ministry also confirms five new deaths from famine and malnutrition, including two children, raising the overall toll from hunger-related causes to 263, among them 112 children.
• Israel continues its attacks across the Gaza Strip, including a strike on the Daraj neighbourhood in Gaza City that killed three Palestinians, among them a child.
• Amnesty International has accused Israel of enacting a “deliberate policy” of starvation in Gaza, citing testimony from displaced Palestinians and doctors treating malnourished children.
• Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar says he has revoked visas of Australian representatives to the Palestinian Authority after Canberra denied entry to far-right Israeli MP Simcha Rothman.
• Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, says it will exclude six companies tied to Gaza and the West Bank from its portfolio after a review of Israeli investments.

Tent cities have already been expanding outside Gaza city and in various districts.

Gaza City, via X

Food scarcity has continued to be an immense and dire problem, and something expected to worsen as civilians are driven out of Gaza City by the looming new Israeli ground offensive.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 12:25

Trump Issues Clearest Greenlight For Netanyahu's Offensive To 'Confront & Destroy' Hamas To Date

President Trump on Monday issued a scorching message aimed at Hamas as well as the growing internationall and domestic critics of America's Israel policy. He called for the total destruction of Hamas and the return of the hostages, in that order.

"The sooner this takes place, the better the chances of success will be," he wrote on Truth Social. This is one of the clearest 'greenlights' for Netanyahu's expanded Gaza operations to date, and it cleary backs his government's pursuit of a military solution, as opposed to attempting to renew or prioritize negotiations for a hostage exchange.

In bizarre language which sounds more like an enthusiastic gambler preparing to enter the casino, Trump declared after reviewing his recent Middle East 'accomplishments': "Play to WIN, or don't play at all!"

This comes on the heels of a weekend which saw more mass anti-Netanyahu protests across Israeli cities, especially in Tel Aviv. Also, President Trump held a phone call with PM Netanyahu on Sunday.

Netanyahu's office said they "discussed Israel's plans to take control of the remaining Hamas strongholds in Gaza in order to bring an end to the war through the release of the hostages and the defeat of Hamas."

Trump in a follow-up interview with Axios said of the terror group, "they can't stay there" - and explained: "I have one thing to say: remember October 7, remember October 7."

Netananyahu told a Sunday press briefing that he has requested the Israel Defense Forces to present plans for "taking over" Gaza City.

There are reports saying the Israeli government is planning to 'move' Palestinian civilians into massive tent cities, with tents being provided and erected by the Israelis - but international war monitors and human rights groups have decried this as ethnic cleansing - but dressed up in humanitarian language, given the creation and publicizing of yet more sprawling refugee camps.

Thousands of Israelis stayed home from work, flooded city streets and blocked roads and highways across the country on Sunday, staging some of the largest anti-war protests in months as the military prepares for a major assault on Gaza City. https://t.co/S4eBx4BWzE pic.twitter.com/OunIurUPEg

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) August 17, 2025

Below is a Monday update of some of the latest major developments via Al Jazeera:

• The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza says the death toll from Israel’s war has surpassed 62,000 with 60 people killed and 344 injured in the latest 24-hour reporting period.
• Hospitals say 27 people seeking aid have been killed and 281 injured over the past day, bringing the total death toll of aid seekers to 1,965.
• The ministry also confirms five new deaths from famine and malnutrition, including two children, raising the overall toll from hunger-related causes to 263, among them 112 children.
• Israel continues its attacks across the Gaza Strip, including a strike on the Daraj neighbourhood in Gaza City that killed three Palestinians, among them a child.
• Amnesty International has accused Israel of enacting a “deliberate policy” of starvation in Gaza, citing testimony from displaced Palestinians and doctors treating malnourished children.
• Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar says he has revoked visas of Australian representatives to the Palestinian Authority after Canberra denied entry to far-right Israeli MP Simcha Rothman.
• Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, says it will exclude six companies tied to Gaza and the West Bank from its portfolio after a review of Israeli investments.

Tent cities have already been expanding outside Gaza city and in various districts.

Gaza City, via X

Food scarcity has continued to be an immense and dire problem, and something expected to worsen as civilians are driven out of Gaza City by the looming new Israeli ground offensive.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 12:25

Today's Outcome In DC Could Leave The US Much Stronger, And Europe Far Weaker

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Following what was expected to be a Friday of high geopolitical drama for markets, but wasn't, today may prove that event instead. Yes, President Trump just failed to get a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire; but today he’s pushing for a full peace deal. The UK PM, key EU leaders (though none who border Ukraine), and NATO's Rutte will join President Zelenskyy in D.C. to hear (or be told to sign on to?) Trump’s latest proposal.

According to most reports, Ukraine will have to cede the land Russia has already taken, with debate over whether Moscow gets all of Donetsk oblast on a plate when it only controls part of it now. Weeks ago, Europe and Zelenskyy were insisting not one inch of land would be ceded: now it looks like 20%, with key resources and a geostrategic location, is gone for good.

That’s a very bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow, for which Kyiv is rightly demanding security guarantees. According to Trump envoy Witkoff, Putin is accepting this will involve troops on the ground in Ukraine, as well as an Article 5 pledge to defend its new borders. But whose troops and whose guarantee?

For those expecting the US to do more on physical support for Ukraine --presumably everyone visiting the White House-- the counterargument is Trump won an election specifically on avoiding that outcome, simply put, and the US is not going to fight Russia for Ukraine.

So, on security guarantees, Europe will say, “The US”; the US will say, “Europe’; and the US will win. Just as Trump told Zelenskyy “You don’t have the cards,” the UK and Europe don’t either.

For those expecting the US and Europe to do more economically, i.e., secondary sanctions on buyers of Russian oil and/or action vs. Russian oil at sea, neither is prepared for the pain and geopolitical / geoeconomic escalation it would involve: if they were, such sanctions would have been placed on China already, as one example. Obviously, they haven’t, and Trump just made clear they likely won’t be – Europe didn’t even need to say it.

Indeed, a hypothetical removing of US sanctions on Russian energy ahead, for example, would allow even lower prices, offsetting US tariff inflation now just starting to show, a boon to it; but for Europe/the UK it would mean far less ability to use economic statecraft, so logically then requiring much more military statecraft.

As such, the burden of rearming rapidly, locking themselves into a Cold War with Russia, and the risks of hot war with it, will likely fall on Europe/the UK. Some might think that’s already priced in, but though NATO has (mostly) promised to spend 5% of GDP on defence, that’s a broad umbrella covering things like bridges to Sicily. Moreover, it’s scheduled to be phased in slowly most places, “because markets.” Yet if Russia keeps ramping up military production helped by China’s massive industrial muscle, what is Europe going to do - stick to tough fiscal rules and timid rules of engagement and assume this dissuades Moscow?

Russia will probably be assuming Europe can’t and won’t stick to the painful political-economy and geopolitical risk-appetite changes defending Ukraine against it would require, more so given it has local escalation dominance given its political unity, ruthlessness, location, and interests.

Meanwhile, US grand macro strategy remains a pivot to Asia while staying top dog in the Middle East, by proxy as much as possible. Ukraine is a secondary issue for them, and a primary one for Europe.

Logically, it suits the US to sell the arms to Europe needs to protect Ukraine to cement Europe’s need to rebuild its military within US value chains; and to accelerate a Reverse Marshall Plan for Europe to pay to build US factories behind tariff barriers to make those weapons. Naturally, this would also make any future European rejection of USD stablecoins that could de facto dollarize its economy much harder, further boosting the US realpolitik hand in ways Europe is just waking up to now, again too late.

A Ukraine deal could also reduce US tensions with Russia --now treated as a Great Power again, one of its key goals-- as at least a partial ‘Noxin’ play that gets China worried about where it sits with Moscow longer term.

A Ukraine deal could additionally mean at least a partial US U-turn on tariffs on India, stopping its drift away from the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) back towards the BRICS. Notably, US-India trade talks set to be held before stacked-up 50% tariffs are due to kick in were just delayed past that key date, but may be rescheduled, while New Delhi is this morning reported to be open to allowing Chinese investment back into its manufacturing sector again. (Though there are serious views that China has no desire to allow India to develop this sector at scale to prevent any potential rival emerging.)

Overall, today’s outcome in D.C. could leave the US in a much stronger geostrategic position and Europe seeing how bad it’s is.

Regular readers may recall that a few years ago we warned that Europe was in deep trouble due to balance of power deficits: well, here we are. It may be hard for Western European markets to grasp this harsh reality, but they and their market acronyms are no longer masters of their own destiny. They are geopolitical price takers.

If Europe tries to step up, it will face one huge set of challenges: Who builds? Who pays? Who decides? Who fights?

If Europe decides it can’t or won’t --and rhetoric, platitudes, and pipedreams aside, that's a real risk-- it will mean Ukraine faces a rocky future, and Europe has a huge headache.

After all, if it fails this clear test of collective will and willingness to sacrifice here for its own security interests, what are the odds of it successfully doing so for any other "faraway countries of which it knows nothing?"… some of which may even be in the EU one day? The implications for Europe's security architecture and so its political unity --forget about strategic autonomy!-- would be extremely worrying.

Of course, in the short term markets could ignore all this and just tsk-tsk at the US; but in the longer run does it really make the case for Europe? They should also hope that a 20% piece in our time is not also 20% peace in our time.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 12:05

Today's Outcome In DC Could Leave The US Much Stronger, And Europe Far Weaker

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Following what was expected to be a Friday of high geopolitical drama for markets, but wasn't, today may prove that event instead. Yes, President Trump just failed to get a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire; but today he’s pushing for a full peace deal. The UK PM, key EU leaders (though none who border Ukraine), and NATO's Rutte will join President Zelenskyy in D.C. to hear (or be told to sign on to?) Trump’s latest proposal.

According to most reports, Ukraine will have to cede the land Russia has already taken, with debate over whether Moscow gets all of Donetsk oblast on a plate when it only controls part of it now. Weeks ago, Europe and Zelenskyy were insisting not one inch of land would be ceded: now it looks like 20%, with key resources and a geostrategic location, is gone for good.

That’s a very bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow, for which Kyiv is rightly demanding security guarantees. According to Trump envoy Witkoff, Putin is accepting this will involve troops on the ground in Ukraine, as well as an Article 5 pledge to defend its new borders. But whose troops and whose guarantee?

For those expecting the US to do more on physical support for Ukraine --presumably everyone visiting the White House-- the counterargument is Trump won an election specifically on avoiding that outcome, simply put, and the US is not going to fight Russia for Ukraine.

So, on security guarantees, Europe will say, “The US”; the US will say, “Europe’; and the US will win. Just as Trump told Zelenskyy “You don’t have the cards,” the UK and Europe don’t either.

For those expecting the US and Europe to do more economically, i.e., secondary sanctions on buyers of Russian oil and/or action vs. Russian oil at sea, neither is prepared for the pain and geopolitical / geoeconomic escalation it would involve: if they were, such sanctions would have been placed on China already, as one example. Obviously, they haven’t, and Trump just made clear they likely won’t be – Europe didn’t even need to say it.

Indeed, a hypothetical removing of US sanctions on Russian energy ahead, for example, would allow even lower prices, offsetting US tariff inflation now just starting to show, a boon to it; but for Europe/the UK it would mean far less ability to use economic statecraft, so logically then requiring much more military statecraft.

As such, the burden of rearming rapidly, locking themselves into a Cold War with Russia, and the risks of hot war with it, will likely fall on Europe/the UK. Some might think that’s already priced in, but though NATO has (mostly) promised to spend 5% of GDP on defence, that’s a broad umbrella covering things like bridges to Sicily. Moreover, it’s scheduled to be phased in slowly most places, “because markets.” Yet if Russia keeps ramping up military production helped by China’s massive industrial muscle, what is Europe going to do - stick to tough fiscal rules and timid rules of engagement and assume this dissuades Moscow?

Russia will probably be assuming Europe can’t and won’t stick to the painful political-economy and geopolitical risk-appetite changes defending Ukraine against it would require, more so given it has local escalation dominance given its political unity, ruthlessness, location, and interests.

Meanwhile, US grand macro strategy remains a pivot to Asia while staying top dog in the Middle East, by proxy as much as possible. Ukraine is a secondary issue for them, and a primary one for Europe.

Logically, it suits the US to sell the arms to Europe needs to protect Ukraine to cement Europe’s need to rebuild its military within US value chains; and to accelerate a Reverse Marshall Plan for Europe to pay to build US factories behind tariff barriers to make those weapons. Naturally, this would also make any future European rejection of USD stablecoins that could de facto dollarize its economy much harder, further boosting the US realpolitik hand in ways Europe is just waking up to now, again too late.

A Ukraine deal could also reduce US tensions with Russia --now treated as a Great Power again, one of its key goals-- as at least a partial ‘Noxin’ play that gets China worried about where it sits with Moscow longer term.

A Ukraine deal could additionally mean at least a partial US U-turn on tariffs on India, stopping its drift away from the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) back towards the BRICS. Notably, US-India trade talks set to be held before stacked-up 50% tariffs are due to kick in were just delayed past that key date, but may be rescheduled, while New Delhi is this morning reported to be open to allowing Chinese investment back into its manufacturing sector again. (Though there are serious views that China has no desire to allow India to develop this sector at scale to prevent any potential rival emerging.)

Overall, today’s outcome in D.C. could leave the US in a much stronger geostrategic position and Europe seeing how bad it’s is.

Regular readers may recall that a few years ago we warned that Europe was in deep trouble due to balance of power deficits: well, here we are. It may be hard for Western European markets to grasp this harsh reality, but they and their market acronyms are no longer masters of their own destiny. They are geopolitical price takers.

If Europe tries to step up, it will face one huge set of challenges: Who builds? Who pays? Who decides? Who fights?

If Europe decides it can’t or won’t --and rhetoric, platitudes, and pipedreams aside, that's a real risk-- it will mean Ukraine faces a rocky future, and Europe has a huge headache.

After all, if it fails this clear test of collective will and willingness to sacrifice here for its own security interests, what are the odds of it successfully doing so for any other "faraway countries of which it knows nothing?"… some of which may even be in the EU one day? The implications for Europe's security architecture and so its political unity --forget about strategic autonomy!-- would be extremely worrying.

Of course, in the short term markets could ignore all this and just tsk-tsk at the US; but in the longer run does it really make the case for Europe? They should also hope that a 20% piece in our time is not also 20% peace in our time.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 12:05

The post The Washington Post Op Ed Page Doesn’t Always Like Free Markets appeared first on CEPR.

The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) reported the housing market index (HMI) was at 32, down from 33 last month. Any number below 50 indicates that more builders view sales conditions as poor than good.

From the NAHB: Builder Confidence Plateaus at Relatively Low Level

Elevated mortgage rates, weak buyer traffic and ongoing supply-side challenges continued to act as a drag on builder confidence in August, as sentiment levels remain in a holding pattern at a low level.

Builder confidence in the market for newly built single-family homes was 32 in August, down one point from July, according to the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index (HMI) released today. Builder sentiment has now been in negative territory for 16 consecutive months and has hovered at a relatively low reading between 32 and 34 since May.

“Affordability continues to be the top challenge for the housing market and buyers are waiting for mortgage rates to drop to move forward,” said NAHB Chairman Buddy Hughes, a home builder and developer from Lexington, N.C. “Builders are also grappling with supply-side headwinds, including ongoing frustrations with regulatory policies connected to developing land and building homes.”

“Housing affordability is central to the outlook for economic growth and inflation,” said NAHB Chief Economist Robert Dietz. “Given a slowing housing market and other recent economic data, the Fed’s monetary policy committee should return to lowering the federal funds rate, which will reduce financing costs for housing construction and indirectly help mortgage interest rates.”

In further signs of a soft housing market, the latest HMI survey also revealed that 37% of builders reported cutting prices in August, down from 38% in July. This share has remained at 37% or 38% for the past three months. Meanwhile, the average price reduction was 5% in August, the same as it’s been every month since last November. The use of sales incentives was 66% in August, up from 62% in July and the highest percentage in the post-Covid period.
...
The HMI index gauging current sales conditions fell one point in August to a level of 35 while the component measuring sales expectations in the next six months held steady at 43. The gauge charting traffic of prospective buyers posted a two-point gain to 22 but remains at a very low level.

Looking at the three-month moving averages for regional HMI scores, the Northeast fell one point to 44, the Midwest gained one point to 42, the South dropped one point to 29 and the West declined one point to 24.
emphasis added

Click on graph for larger image.

This graph shows the NAHB index since Jan 1985.

This was below the consensus forecast.

Key Events This Week: All Eyes On Zelensky At The White House And Powell At Jackson Hole

As we arrive at a new week, DB's Henry Allen writes that the focus is still on Ukraine this morning, as the world reacts to the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska last Friday. The main headline was that no deal was reached on a ceasefire, but multiple outlets reported that Putin wanted Ukraine to withdraw from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and he offered Trump a freeze across the rest of the frontline in return. Moreover, Trump himself posted that he now wanted to “go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.” 

After the summit, Trump then spoke with European leaders, although the joint statement from the European leaders made clear that “It will be up to Ukraine to make decisions on its territory.” Then today, Trump is meeting President Zelensky at 1:15pm ET, before a multilateral leading with European leaders at 3:00pm ET. That group will include UK PM Starmer, French President Macron, German Chancellor Merz and Commission President Von der Leyen. In his post, Trump also said that “If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin.”

Clearly, we’ll have to wait and see what happens today, but Trump was saying yesterday morning that there had been “BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!” And separately, Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff said on CNN that “We got to an agreement that the US and other nations could effectively offer Article 5-like language to Ukraine”, which is the NATO article which says that an attack on one member will be considered an attack on all. Trump has also been calling on Zelensky to make a deal, and just a few hours ago, he posted that Zelensky “can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight.” However, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio downplayed expectations of a deal yesterday, saying that “We are not at the precipice of a peace agreement.” 

In terms of the week ahead, the main focus away from the White House will be the Fed’s symposium at Jackson Hole, where we’ll hear central bankers including Fed Chair Powell and ECB President Lagarde. Bear in mind that the Fed Chair’s speech at Jackson Hole has often been used to send important policy signals, and it was last year that Powell said the “time has come for policy to adjust” before they then cut rates at the next meeting for the first time since the pandemic. This time around, we don’t have the full agenda yet, but the subtitle for Powell’s speech on the Fed’s website says “Economic Outlook and Framework Review”, so we can expect some insight on those topics. 

The last time the Fed had a review in 2020, that resulted in a shift towards average inflation targeting. In essence, they said that after periods when inflation had been persistently beneath 2% (like the 2010s), then monetary policy could seek to reach inflation a bit above 2% to counteract that. The Fed also reinterpreted their approach to full employment, in that a tight labor market alone wasn’t a reason to raise rates. So that implied a move away from the pre-emptive approach whereby the Fed would tighten policy to get ahead of future inflation as the labour market tightened. Of course, we now know that shortly after the framework review, there was then a major burst of inflation, and although it had many drivers, our US economists concluded in a Friday note (link here) that the new framework was a contributor to that overshoot. So this time around, they expect Powell’s speech to call for rolling back the 2020 modifications and restoring a primary role for pre-emption. 

When it comes to the near-term path for policy, futures are still pricing in a September rate cut as the most likely outcome. But there was a clear shift last Thursday, as the PPI inflation release for July showed the fastest monthly inflation since March 2022. So that made it clear that a September cut still wasn’t a done deal, particularly with the emerging signs of tariff-driven inflation. And we still know there’s more to come on the tariff front, as Trump said on Friday that he'd be “setting tariffs next week and the week after, on steel and on, I would, say chips — chips and semiconductors, we’ll be setting sometime next week, week after”. So that’s one to keep an eye on, and Trump also suggested that the semiconductor rate could be as high as 300%. 

Staying on inflation, we’ve got some more releases out this week, including from Japan, the UK and Canada. The UK will be an important one, as the June reading was unexpectedly strong, with headline inflation rising to +3.6%. Moreover, our UK economist expects it to take another step up in July to +3.8%. By contrast in Japan, our economist sees headline inflation easing a bit to +3.1% in July, down from 3.3% in June. Otherwise, the main data release will be the August flash PMIs on Thursday, which will offer an initial indication on the global economy’s performance this month, particularly with the latest tariffs that have been imposed. 

Elsewhere this week, we’ve got a few more earnings releases coming out, although it’s very much the end of the current season with over 90% of the S&P 500 having reported by now. This week’s highlights include several US retailers, including Walmart and Target, which should offer a fresh insight into consumer spending. Last Friday, the US retail sales numbers were pretty robust in July, with the headline reading up +0.5% (vs. +0.6% expected), alongside an upward revision to June as well. However, the University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment index painted a weaker picture for August, with the headline index unexpectedly falling to 58.6 (vs. 62.0 expected), alongside an uptick for inflation expectations.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Monday August 18

• Data: US August New York Fed services business activity, NAHB housing market index, Japan June Tertiary industry index, Eurozone June trade balance, Canada July housing starts, June international securities transactions
• Earnings: BHP, Palo Alto Networks

Tuesday August 19

• Data: US July building permits, housing starts, Italy June current account balance, ECB June current account, Canada July CPI
• Earnings: Home Depot, Medtronic

Wednesday August 20

• Data: China 1-yr and 5-yr loan prime rates, UK July CPI, RPI, June house price index, Japan July trade balance, June core machine orders, Germany July PPI, Denmark Q2 GDP
• Central banks: FOMC meeting minutes, Fed's Waller and Bostic speak, ECB's Lagarde speaks, RBNZ decision, Riksbank decision
• Earnings: TJX, Lowe's, Analog Devices, Target, Estee Lauder
• Auctions: US 20-yr Bonds ($16bn)

Thursday August 21

• Data: US, UK, Japan, Germany, France and the Eurozone August PMIs, US August Philadelphia Fed business outlook, July leading index, existing home sales, initial jobless claims, UK July public finances, Eurozone August consumer confidence, June construction output, Canada July industrial product price index, raw materials price index, Norway Q2 GDP
• Central banks: Jackson Hole symposium, through August 23
• Earnings: Walmart, Workday
• Auctions: US 30-yr TIPS (reopening, $8bn)

Friday August 22

• Data: UK August GfK consumer confidence, July retail sales, Japan July national CPI, France August business confidence, July retail sales, Canada June retail sales
• Central banks: Fed's Chair Powell speaks at the Jackson Hole symposium

Finally, looking at just the US, the key economic data release this week is the Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index on Thursday. The minutes to the FOMC's July meeting will be released on Wednesday. There are several speaking engagements by Fed officials this week, including Governors Bowman and Waller, and remarks from Chair Powell at the 2025 Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium. 

Monday, August 18 

• 10:00 AM NAHB housing market index, August (consensus 34, last 33)

Tuesday, August 19 

• 08:30 AM Housing starts, July (GS -1.0%, consensus -2.2%, last +4.6%): Building permits, July (consensus -0.2%, last -0.1%)
• 02:10 PM Fed Governor Bowman speaks: Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman will speak about fostering new technology in the banking system at the 2025 Wyoming Blockchain Symposium. Speech text is expected. On August 1, Bowman said, "With economic growth slowing this year and signs of a less dynamic labor market, I saw it as appropriate to begin gradually moving our moderately restrictive policy stance toward a neutral setting. In my view, this action would have proactively hedged against a further weakening in the economy and the risk of damage to the labor market."

Wednesday, August 20 

• 11:00 AM Fed Governor Waller speaks: Fed Governor Christopher Waller will speak on payments at the 2025 Wyoming Blockchain Symposium. Speech text and Q&A are expected. On August 1, Waller said that he dissented in favor of cutting the policy rate by 25 basis points in July because "tariffs are one-off increases in the price level and do not cause inflation beyond a temporary increase, ... a host of data argues that monetary policy should now be close to neutral, not restrictive, ... [and] while the labor market looks fine on the surface, once we account for expected data revisions, private-sector payroll growth is near stall speed, and other data suggest that the downside risks to the labor market have increased."
• 02:00 PM FOMC Meeting Minutes: At its July meeting, the FOMC left the target range for the fed funds rate unchanged at 4.25-4.50%. The Committee noted that economic growth had “moderated in the first half of the year” but otherwise made minimal changes to the post-meeting statement. In his press conference, Chair Powell highlighted the softer growth pace in the first half of the year, noted that the labor market remains solid but said six times that it faces “downside risks,” and said that inflation is most of the way back to 2% and that a “reasonable base case” is that tariffs will have only a one-time impact on the price level.
• 03:00 PM Atlanta Fed President Bostic (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic will participate in a moderated conversation on the economic outlook. Q&A is expected. On August 13, Bostic said "I still have one cut in my outlook. That is predicated on the notion that the labor market stays solid." He added that "We have the luxury today to wait to make a policy adjustment because the labor market remains solid."

Thursday, August 21 

• 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended August 16 (GS 225k, consensus 227k, last 224k): Continuing jobless claims, week ended August 9 (last 1,953k)
• 08:30 AM Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index, August (GS 6.5, consensus 5.5, last 15.9)
• 09:45 AM S&P Global US manufacturing PMI, August preliminary (last 49.8): S&P Global US services PMI, August preliminary (last 55.7)
• 10:00 AM Existing home sales, July (GS -1.0%, consensus -0.4%, last -2.7%)

Friday, August 22 

• There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 
• 10:00 AM Fed Chair Powell speaks: Fed Chair Jerome Powell will speak on the economic outlook and the framework review at the 2025 Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium. Speech text is expected. 

Source: BofA, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 09:46

Vestas Wind Shares Surge On Revised Tax Credit Guidance, Wall Street Analysts Breathe Sigh Of Relief

Vestas Wind Systems jumped the most in years after the Internal Revenue Service issued revised guidance on U.S. wind and solar tax credit eligibility that proved far less restrictive than initially feared top Wall Street desks.

President Trump's tax and spending bill dialed back the Biden-Harris regime era renewable subsidies, allowing credits only for projects starting within a year or in service by 2027. Wall Street analysts feared strict rules, but the new IRS guidance, issued last Friday, clarified what counts as "beginning construction" in a way analysts called "close to the best possible outcome."

Analysts at Jefferies, Citi, RBC, and Goldman all viewed the IRS rule change as more favorable than anticipated. 

"We see close to the best possible outcome in the guidance compared to initial talks," analysts at Jefferies wrote in a note to clients. 

Goldman analyst Ajay Patel told clients Monday that the revised rule removes yet "another uncertainty" for Vestas. 

Patel explained more:

US IRA: Revised guidance better than feared... On Friday, the Internal Revenue Service issued its revised guidance for wind and solar tax credit eligibility, stating that a Physical Work Test must be satisfied for projects that have begun construction by July 5, 2026 to qualify, as part of their review on sections 45Y and 48E of the Internal Revenue Code for wind and solar facilities. The new guidelines are only applicable for projects starting construction from September 2, 2025. i.e. a proportion of the current U.S. onshore wind pipeline.

The Physical Work Test requires that "physical work of a significant nature" has begun, focusing on the nature of work rather than the amount of the cost. This replaces the previous legislation within The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which had stated that projects are eligible for wind and solar tax credits if they had started construction by July 2026, defined as 5% of capex, or had been placed in service by the end of 2027. The new guidance states that both off-site and on-site work may be considered to demonstrate physical work of a significant nature, with off-site examples including the manufacturing of components or mounting of equipment, and on-site examples including the beginning of the excavation for the foundation or the setting of anchor bolts into the ground. The guidance explicitly states that physical work of a significant nature does not include preliminary activities, even those such as clearing a site or excavation to change the contour of a land (separate from excavation for a foundation). Further, for facilities that are in service by the end of a calendar year that is no more than four calendar years after the calendar year during which construction began, the project is considered to satisfy the Continuity Requirement, and is eligible for credits.

Another uncertainty clear for Vestas ... We would see the clarity given as a positive for Vestas. American Clean Power (See link) point to a potential 28GW land based wind pipeline. Now we have clarity, and we see a strong order uptick over the coming quarters for Vestas as part of the pipeline converts. We see the tide starting to turn as we progress through H2. Profitability and cash flow should sizeably improve which will likely increase the debate around additional cash returns to shareholders. Higher U.S. order activity should paint a better picture for top-line growth. Working through the ramp-up of offshore this year should reduce the risk it presents.

We expect the Vestas story to gain momentum as we progress over H2, and we remain Buy rated.

In markets, Vestas shares in Copenhagen jumped sharply, up 15.7% - the largest daily increase since July 28, 2022, when shares rose 15.8%. High interest rates, inflation, and the broader downturn in the green energy industry in the Trump era have battered the stock. 

. . .

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/18/2025 - 09:40