Obamacare Enrollment Trails 2025 By Less Than Expected

Authored by Lawrence Wilson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Plan selections in the Affordable Care Act Marketplace were 3.5 percent behind 2025’s number with two weeks left in open enrollment, but the drop-off has not been as severe as some analysts predicted.

An Affordable Care Act sign sits in front of an insurance agency in Miami on Nov. 12, 2025. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Some 22.8 million people had selected a plan by Jan. 3, about 830,000 fewer than at the same point in 2025. The program, popularly known as Obamacare, appears on track for its second-highest enrollment ever.

The open enrollment period began on Nov. 1, 2025, and ends on Jan. 15 in most states. During open enrollment, anyone can sign up for Obamacare. Outside that period, only those who report a qualifying life event such as a birth, divorce, or job change can enroll.

The decline for 2026, if it continues through the final weeks of open enrollment, will mark the first drop in participation since 2020.

Subsidies Boosted Enrollment

Since its inception, Obamacare enrollments started slower than predicted, taking three years to reach 12.7 million in 2016. From there, enrollment decreased by about 10 percent over four years.

Enrollment was bolstered by enhanced subsidies starting in 2021, more than doubling to 23.4 million by 2025.

The scheduled expiration of the enhanced subsidies in December 2025 sparked heated debate in Congress on the affordability of the program without them.

Congressional Democrats sought to make the enhanced subsidies permanent. That effort failed to advance in the Senate despite Democrats’ willingness to withhold federal government funding throughout the fall in an attempt to force negotiations.

The enhanced subsidies were implemented in 2021 as a two-year measure to ensure the affordability of health coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic era. They were later extended through 2025.

Health insurers judged that middle-class Americans who had opted into Obamacare in recent years would opt out again when the subsidies expired, dramatically changing the risk profile of remaining enrollees and shifting it toward those with chronic conditions or higher medical needs.

In response, insurers raised premiums by an average of 27 percent, according to data from health policy research group KFF.

Drop Less Than Predicted

Many observers predicted a huge drop in enrollment in 2026 based on both the decrease in subsidies and the increase in premium costs.

Jason Levitis, senior fellow at Urban Institute, told senators in November that 4.8 million people would lose health coverage in 2026 if the enhanced subsidies expired, based on a report from his organization.

The expiration of the subsidies would “leave millions uninsured or forced to make impossible choices,” according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Although the initial 3.5 percent drop of 830,000 enrollees is significant, it does not approach those predictions.

At 22.8 million enrollees, the 2026 figure is 12 percent ahead of 2024 and 43 percent ahead of 2023.

Over the past four years, the number of plan selections increased by an average of 3.7 percent during the final two weeks of open enrollment. In 2025, the increase was 2.4 percent.

On the current track, the number of 2026 plan selections would be the second-highest ever.

Further Decline Likely

Yet some analysts say there will be a further drop after open enrollment closes.

“While we do eventually expect to see declines in Marketplace enrollment, following the expiration of the enhanced premium tax credits at the end of 2025, it is too soon to tell how much it will change,” said Jared Ortaliza, a policy analyst at KFF studying the Affordable Care Act.

The data available now indicate marketplace plan selections, which become “effectuated” enrollments when consumers begin paying premiums.

The vast majority of 2026 plan selections so far—20 million—are 2025 customers who were automatically reenrolled in the plan, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Those automatic plan selections do not always become premium-paying enrollees, according to Ortaliza.

“The extent of [Affordable Care Act] enrollment changes likely won’t be known until this summer, when effectuated enrollment data are typically released,” he said.

In 2025, the number of effectuated enrollments was about 4 percent less than the number of plan selections.

Brian Blase, president of Paragon Health Institute, theorized that much of the decline in plan selection, and a likely further decline in effectuated enrollments, is attributable to improper or fraudulent enrollments.

“The decline in enrollment from ’25 to ’26 means that some of the fraudulent enrollment exited the market,” Blase wrote on social media.

Blase estimated that about 5 million enrollments in 2024 and 6.4 million in 2025 were improper, with many being fraudulently enrolled in plans with $0 premiums. He said many will disappear as people do not effectuate coverage, which involves paying a premium.

“This means that people who are unaware of their enrollment, in other coverage, or ‘fake’ people will not pay their share of the premium and should (assuming insurers follow the rules) be removed,” Blase wrote.

An effort to reinstate the enhanced subsidies is ongoing in Congress.

Open enrollment in Kentucky and Maine closes on Jan. 16 and in Massachusetts on Jan. 23. Open enrollment closes in California, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Washington state, and Washington on Jan. 31.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 17:30

Is It Time To Realign State Borders?

Authored by John Kudla via American Thinker,

Let’s pretend you are a liberal living in a red state.  If you feel aggrieved about the condition of the world and believe that conservatives are to blame, you can find a few like-minded souls, print up some signs covered in half-clever phrases, and go protest.  In most cases, unless you chain yourself to a railing on the courthouse steps or attack the police, you will usually be ignored.

Image: Don Hankins via Flickr, CC BY 2.0 

On the flip side, let’s pretend you are a conservative living in a deep blue state.  If you don’t like the school policy, E.V. mandates, high electricity prices, or restrictive gun laws, and you dare to complain, not only will you not be ignored, but you might be harassed, shunned, or canceled.  Your solution to the hard blue insanity is a four-letter word: move.

Now let’s pretend you live in a state with a blue megalopolis somewhere over the horizon, but you don’t want to move.  Let’s also pretend you have lived in your community all of your life and have roots there — a job or a farm or a business that would be difficult to replicate somewhere else.  Why should you suffer because once upon a midnight dreary, councilors to a long dead king or a few drunk senators drew a line on a map that ignored rational boundaries?

Generally speaking, I don’t have a problem with people living the way they want to.  That is called freedom.  However, I object to some of our more right-leaning or left-leaning citizens forcing their ideas on everyone else, then treating those who disagree with them as second-class citizens.  In some cases, this has prompted states to heavily gerrymander congressional districts, which disenfranchises both liberal and conservative voters.  One solution is to adjust state boundaries to more adequately reflect local political values.

Ever since the founding of the republic, various groups and political movements have sought to redraw state boundaries.  Some have been successful.  Maine was originally part of Massachusetts, and the states of Kentucky and West Virginia were created from land originally part of Virginia.  Other partitions to existing boundaries have been suggested, but none has been adopted.  The reason is that the Constitution requires both the blessings of the partitioned state and the U.S. Congress.

Ask yourself a simple question.  Why would any state governor or legislature willingly give up territory if it is not forced to?  The serfs — excuse me, taxpayers — there help balance the state budget.  How they feel about their lives or the number of potholes in their roads is secondary to ensuring that state budgets are met and the state programs, even those for non-citizens, continue.

Despite the obstacles, secession movements continue.  Let’s look at three of the more recent secession ideas.

In 2014, residents of western Maryland, reportedly unhappy with taxes and gun control policy, started signing petitions to secede from Maryland and form a new state.  Later in 2021, Republican lawmakers in Allegany, Garrett, and Washington counties in Maryland sent a letter to the West Virginia legislature asking if the Mountain State would be willing to annex them.

The Maryland panhandle, an artifact of English colonial land grants, is a mountainous area more similar to West Virginia than the rest of Maryland.  The three counties have a combined population of just over a quarter of a quarter million.  That is probably not enough to take a congressional seat from Maryland or give one to West Virginia.  Will it change the U.S. political structure if these counties are allowed to switch states?  Not really.

The state of Oregon is divided almost in half by the Cascade Mountain Range.  The majority of the population lives on the western or Pacific Coast side of the mountains, either in the city of Portland or towns in the Willamette Valley.  In 2021, five counties in eastern Oregon, unhappy with the liberal state government, voted to take steps to secede from Oregon and join Idaho.

By 2024, a total of thirteen Oregon counties had voted to join Idaho.  The population in these counties is roughly 240,000, or about 5.5% of Oregon’s population — again, probably not enough to change the number of congressional seats between the states.

A third secession movement is active in Illinois.  Since 2011, more than one attempt has been made to separate the city of Chicago from the rest of Illinois or individual counties from the state.  The issue here is the dominance of Chicago and Chicago politics over the rest of Illinois.  As of 2024, 33 counties had voted to secede, about a third of the state’s counties.

In 2025, lawmakers in Indiana discussed annexing those counties, although only twenty-seven of them are contiguous with the Indiana border.  The others are on the western side of Illinois and would be a better fit with Missouri.  The twenty-seven counties represent nearly half a million residents.  This would almost certainly take a congressional seat from Illinois and add one to Indiana.

Besides liberal political values, another reason people are moving from blue states or seeking to join red states is that blue states typically have higher tax burdens than red states.  Call it an issue of affordability. 

There is an easy way to check this.  Let’s take the median income in the U.S., which was roughly $84,000 in 2024, multiply it by the average tax burden in the blue state of origin, do the same for the red state destination, and then subtract the two numbers.

The following results are based on a combination of income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes.  If the Oregon counties join Idaho, residents earning $84,000 would save about $250 per year, or about 0.3 percent of their income.  If the Illinois counties join Indiana, their residents would save over $750 per year or about 0.9 percent of their income.  And if the three Maryland counties joined West Virginia, residents there would save about $924 per year or about 1.1 percent of their income.  Remember, these are ballpark numbers and will change depending on income and other individual circumstances.

As the country approaches the 250th anniversary of its founding, perhaps it is time to consider a constitutional amendment to facilitate changes to state boundaries.  After all, most of our state boundaries were arbitrary to begin with.

Counties wishing to become a separate state would have to follow the rules for statehood.  Imagine Chicago as the 51st state, along with New York City plus Long Island as the 52nd.  Upstate New York and downstate Illinois could then breathe a sigh of relief.

Until then, you can still move.

On a similar note, I hear the Canadian province of Alberta is thinking about leaving Canada.  Maybe Trump can talk the Canadians into a straight-up swap of Alberta for Minnesota.  It couldn’t hurt to try.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 16:30



 

 

 

At The Money: Better Results By NOT Investing with Dictators, with Perth Toll, (January 14, 2026)

Full transcript below.

~~~

About this week’s guest:

Perth Toll is the founder of the Life and Liberty indexes and the creator of the Freedom 100 EM Index (symbol FRDM). She was named one of 10 to watch in 2020 by Wealth Management Magazine and one of the 100 people transforming Business by Business Insider in 2021.

For more info, see:

Professional/Personal website

Masters in Business

LinkedIn

Twitter

~~~

 

Find all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT:

 

Intro:

Freedom (I won’t let you down)
Freedom (I will not give you up)
Freedom (gotta have some faith in the sound)
You’ve got to give what you take (it’s the one good thing that I’ve got)

 

Barry Ritholtz: There are many problematic countries on the world stage. Not only are their political behaviors bad, but they’re also unhealthy for your investment dollars.

Most emerging market indexes, however, invest broadly across all of these countries regardless of their political activity. If only there was a way to avoid authoritarian regimes, dictators, and other bad actors that destroy your investing capital.

As it turns out, there’s a fund to do just that, investing in emerging markets without steering money to the worst countries on the planet.  I’m Barry Ritholtz, and on today’s edition of At The Money, we’re gonna discuss how to avoid those countries that are dangerous to your wealth.

To help us unpack all of this and what it means for your portfolio, let’s bring in Perth Toll. She is the founder of the Life and Liberty indexes and the creator of the Freedom 100 EM. Index (ETF, symbol FRDM). She was named one of 10 to watch in 2020 by Wealth Management Magazine and one of the 100 people transforming Business by Business Insider in 2021.

Her Freedom 100 EM Index, ETF now manages over $2 billion and has beaten the S&P 500 500 over 1, 2, and 3 years.

In 2025, freedom was up 67% versus the S&P 500 up almost 18%. Perth, let’s just start with the basic concept. Why screen emerging market companies for a concept like. Freedom. How does screening out dictators, authoritarians, and other bad actors impact market performance?

Perth Tolle: I think the, the problem we’re trying to solve here is that emerging markets investors, um, previously did not have a way to get a diversified emerging markets allocation without funneling money to autocracies.

Traditionally, the way indices are weighted is by market cap, and so the largest autocracies in the emerging market space like China, Russia and Saudi Arabia historically has gotten the, you know, biggest weights. Those three countries prior to the war were all in the top 10 of most EM indices. During the height of COVID China was, uh, 41% of the MSEI emerging markets. Index and now it is still upwards of close to 30%.

Some of these large autocracies get a very large weight in the emerging markets indices. And so that’s really the problem that we’re trying to solve by freedom weighting instead of market cap.

Barry Ritholtz: I’m really fascinated by the origin story of the Freedom Index and the ETF. What made you decide traditional emerging market benchmarks were broken? Yeah, so I grew up in both China and the US. I was born in Beijing and I came to the US when I was 9, and then I worked in Hong Kong after college for about a year. There I saw the difference between the US market, the Hong Kong market at the time, this was 2004, and, the mainland Chinese market.

I saw that policies impacted the future of a society and the future of markets. You know, one policy that really struck me was the one child policy under which I, you know, was born and grew up in, in China. That policy has caused the biggest demographic crisis in the world today, and probably we won’t recover from that in our lifetimes.

That’s one of the things that made me realize that governance, on the country level actually has an impact on society and markets.

Coming back to the us I worked at Fidelity for 10 years as a financial advisor. And I had clients in the LA and Houston markets who said, I don’t wanna, for example, I had a Russian client that said, “I don’t wanna invest in Russia because it’s like funding terrorism.” That was in 2014. So you can see how prescient that was.

I wanted to have a way for allocators to always have that emerging markets allocation without, you know, uh, funding autocracies, which is usually not the intention of most investors.

Barry Ritholtz: Really, really interesting. You created this freedom index with some of your partners. Define freedom for our audience in market terms; when we say this is a freedom weighted portfolio as opposed to a market-cap weighted portfolio, what exactly is being measured? How does that translate into an index?

Perth Tolle: The first thing is we’d need those quantitative metrics for freedom. And so we use a third party index and dataset called the Human Freedom Index and Dataset by the Cato Institute and the Frazier Institute. And these are two think tanks that are completely privately funded. They don’t take any government money, not even from the US or Canadian governments, um, where they’re based.

They look at 87 different variables for freedom, and that includes things like civil freedoms, includes political freedoms and economic freedoms. You’re looking at both personal and economic freedoms, which was important to me coming from a country that had issues with both.

Things like terrorism, trafficking, torture are in the civil freedoms category, freedom of speech, media expression, civil procedure, criminal procedure political freedom category. And then economic freedoms are things we’re all more familiar with, like taxation, business regulations, private property rights, rule of law, um, soundness of monetary policy, freedom to trade internationally. The higher the free trade, the better, um, and the freedom to hold, you know, uh, offshore bank accounts and so forth.

All of these things added together — the 87 different variables and sub-variables — combine into the composite country score, which we use as the main input into our methodology. With that country score that measures freedom by a third party, we turn that into country weights and allocations, and then invest accordingly.

So the higher freedom countries. Get a higher weight. The lower freedom scoring countries get a lower weight and the worst offenders are automatically excluded as part of the freedom waiting process.

Barry Ritholtz: 24 emerging market countries, how many companies do you look at? And then how many end up in the index and in the index, once it’s freedom scored, I’m assuming it’s also market cap weighted?

Perth Tolle: On the country level, it is a hundred percent freedom weighted, before we embark on freedom weighting, though, we do have a, um, a screen for market size and liquidity. So markets that are too small or too illiquid. Are not part of the eligible universe. So we do have a 24-country initial universe, and then about an 18-country eligible universe.

Because countries like Czech Republic, for example, are very free, but not big enough. Peru, very free, but not liquid enough, so those are not. Included in the freedom weighting, process. So about 18 countries are left once you have that eligibility, process down. And those are a hundred percent freedom weighted with.

So the highest freedom countries have the highest weight, and the way the methodology works is that you have to be above average among those 18 peer countries in your score to be included. We are providing,  the the freest emerging market countries in the eligible universe, and there are some very borderline countries that go in and out every year.

Barry Ritholtz: Give us some examples.

Perth Tolle: India is a borderline country. That is, the score for India is just about average among all the 18 country peers. So this is including countries like Taiwan, Chile, Poland, South Korea on the freer side, and then countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey on the less free side.

India is about the middle. Sometimes it’s in, and sometimes it’s out.

Barry Ritholtz: Once you have this list of countries, how do you screen through all of those companies within the favored top nine, top 10 countries to put together the index and how many companies go into the index?

Perth Tolle: Once we have the freedom-weighted country weights within each country, we take the 10 largest, most liquid constituents, and those are market capitalization weighted within their freedom-weighted country weights. We do exclude state-owned enterprises –

that’s just to bring the economic freedom theme all the way through.

The less government interference in private markets, the better. That’s the only thing we do on the security level. So we wanted to really isolate the freedom factor. It’s mostly a top-down country-level strategy on this, on this product.

Barry Ritholtz: What first attracted me to this, uh, has been China – you grew up in China and you worked in Hong Kong. You have a whole lot of insight into this.

Whenever I discuss China with investors, they’re always shocked when I say, Hey, you know, over the past 30 years, since 1995, China’s markets essentially down a couple of digits. If you want to include total return and dividends, it’s up about about 100 percent. The total return for the S&P 500 over the same 30-year period is over 2700%.

China has turned out to be a fairly terrible investment for Western investors. Why do you think China has been such a laggard?

Perth Tolle: The main problem with investing in Chinese companies is that these are country, these are companies that have to put state interests first. They are, you know, not gonna try to succeed the most by providing the best value for their clients. They’re going to try to curry favor with the government. When your interests are divided like that, investors are subsidizing the cost of putting the state’s interests first. And as we know with China specifically, the state’s interest may be in contradiction with American interests or interests of foreign investors in general?

Some of these companies, for example, Tencent has an app called WeChat. And you know, it was well known back in the day when, all the Uyghur news was coming out that the government was using WeChat to crack down on dissidents and on the Uyghur population.

Of course, WeChat has to give all the data over to the government that they want because their in their own business interests and other interests of their stakeholders do not come first, but the government’s interests come first.

These are kinda the dangers of investing in a country where all the companies are more subject to the state’s interest than their own.

Barry Ritholtz: And when we look at an app like TikTok, the question is how involved is, uh, China’s surveillance state  and security and their their version of the CIA tracking, managing, manipulating what US teenagers see.

This is really an issue with Chinese companies, isn’t it?

state It is, but TikTok is, is a whole separate issue altogether where you’re talking about, you know, interference in in foreign interest in foreign governments. And so yeah, that’s, that’s a totally different issue that we don’t even address in this, in this index, but absolutely. Um, dictatorship and authoritarianism is, um, in a globalized world is contagious, but so is freedom.

We believe that the more people invest in freedom and especially, in the finance world on Wall Street, we are in a position of Privilege and power. It’s a position of power to be able to direct assets, whether it’s your own assets or other people’s assets. And in emerging markets, investing, you know, there is no neutral. You’re either, you know, directing assets for good or in some cases for. Evil, unfortunately. And so we don’t wanna be in the position of directing assets for, um, to enable more authoritarianism.

And if we can, we want to be in the places that are promoting freedom in the world.

Barry Ritholtz: Let’s talk a little bit about, uh, another country where authoritarianism rules, Russia, I suspect a lot of people first recognized the merit of your approach to, uh, emerging market investing when Russia invaded Ukraine, and effectively their stocks plummeted to zero. If you were holding Russian stocks, they pretty much get marked down to nothing in everybody’s portfolio. Tell us a little bit about how Russia has fared in the Freedom Index and what’s been going on in that country?

Perth Tolle: Russia has never been an included country in the, FRDM index and when Russia invaded Ukraine, you know, we were the only emerging markets index that did not have Russia in it for this particular reason.

When their market went to zero, no one saw that coming. Um, so this was definitely not something that was priced in at the time as a possibility it was. Actually in the top 10 country holdings in the MSCI emerging markets indices.

Investors got hit quite hard during that time. And that was the time when, as I recall, most investors woke up to autocracy risk. So China, Russia, a lot of countries with state-run economies.

Barry Ritholtz: Walk us through your decision instead of just underweight them, just totally exclude them. What’s the thinking there?

Perth Tolle: Even if we underweight auto, see, you know, the, we would still be funneling money towards them. Our fund has $2 billion right now in it. MSCI, indices has hundreds of billions tracking them. Even a little bit in an autocracy is really not what we want. We don’t believe that’s the best place to invest.

We believe that there’s so many good opportunities in the emerging markets universe outside of autocracies; people only think of the BRICs because of the BRIC acronym, but there’s countries like Chile and Poland that get less than 1% weight in the cap-weighted indices, but that have the market size and liquidity. To have scale in a product like an ETF and investors can participate in the tremendous growth that has gone on in in those countries. And our investors have been able to benefit from that.

We believe those are the countries where you can find the places that have the best growth stories in the future – and that’s where we wanna be.

Barry Ritholtz: So to wrap up, if you’re an investor that wants exposure internationally, if you want global emerging market exposure, but you don’t wanna funnel money to countries that really engage in some of the worst behaviors there are on the international stage, and have seen their stock markets perform poorly because of it. Consider a fund that’s based on freedom on political, civil, and economic freedom. Uh, to give you that sort of exposure without all of the downsides.

Take a look. For example, at the Freedom 100 Index and the ETF FRDM, it’s really a fascinating story.

I’m Barry Ritholtz. This is Bloomberg’s at the Money.

 

~~~

Find our entire music playlist for At the Money on Spotify.

 

The post At the Money: Better Results By NOT Investing with Dictators! appeared first on The Big Picture.

Need To Escape Socialism? Come To Florida!

Authored by Jeffrey Folks via American Thinker,

The difference between red and blue states is not just a matter of degree; it is a qualitative difference based on the loss of freedom in blue states and an entirely different attitude in the red states.  The best example is the contrast between what now exists in New York and Florida.  Whereas New York, especially New York City, is slipping into a socialist nightmare, Floridians are living the dream.  In New York, freedom is constrained by high taxes and regulations, and things are only getting worse.  In Florida, taxes are low and getting lower, and the sun almost always shines.

Image: Donkey Hotey via Flickr, CC BY 2.0.

Florida voters understand the importance of limited government, and they have created a well governed, fiscally sound state.  Eliminating the state income tax in its entirety was only the beginning: Now there is movement toward lowering property taxes or eliminating them altogether, which would benefit nearly everyone in the state.

Gov. Ron DeSantis is perhaps the biggest supporter of property tax reform.  The governor proposed eliminating property taxes for all Floridians in his 2025 State of the State address, in which he said forcing citizens to pay property taxes for life is like “renting one’s property from the government.”  The governor’s proposal would apply to all property, including commercial and rental property.  There is widespread support for some form of property tax relief, but the devil is in the details.

An interim plan to rebate approximately $1,000 to owners of primary residences was proposed in March 2025.  In response, Senate Bill 7034 was introduced to create a legislative commission to study the feasibility of eliminating all or part of the state’s property taxes and with the likelihood of a state constitutional amendment to appear on the 2026 ballot.  Other legislative proposals include an increase in the state’s homestead exemption (currently totaling $50,000 for the primary residence), a tax exemption of $100,000 on all types of property, or a reduction in the state’s sales tax.  Republican lawmakers generally support some form of tax relief, whereas Democrats oppose it, but since Republicans outnumber Democrats by 84 to 33 in the state House and 27 to 11 in the Senate, it seems likely that some form of tax reform will become law.

Meanwhile, states like California and New York are moving the opposite direction.  The marginal income tax rate in California is 12.3%, and this on top of state property taxes, sales taxes of 7.25%, and numerous other local taxes and fees.

As for New York, the statewide income tax is a marginal 10.9% (14.78% for high earners in New York City), with state and local sales taxes as high as 8.875%, property tax rates averaging more than twice those in California, and numerous other state and local taxes and fees (including a ludicrous $9 “congestion zone” fee for entering lower Manhattan).  On top of this, New York is one of a handful of states that still charges a death tax, with a marginal rate of 16% on qualifying estates, and this on top of the marginal federal estate tax of 45%.

Mayor Mamdani has vowed to raise corporate taxes from 8.85% to 11.5% and to impose a 2% surcharge on those earning over one million, on top of existing taxes.  According to the Cato Institute, “the income-tax increase would tempt high earning New Yorkers to relocate to Long Island and the lower Hudson Valley, where they can still be close to the city,” if not out of state altogether.

To recap, Floridians pay a total of 6% in state taxes and average property tax rates that are already half of what they are in New York and may be further lowered in 2026 or 2027.  Adding it up, affluent New Yorkers pay marginal rates of at least 36% (including the estate tax) or nearly 40% in New York City — and all of this on top of federal income and estate taxes.  There is not much left for individuals, and this level of taxation is an assault on personal liberty.  There’s not much difference between communism, where the state owns everything, and an American city where government takes 80%.

One should also note that the public debt ratio in New York is already 442%, while California has twice as much debt in absolute terms ($500 billion).  Under Gov. DeSantis, Florida’s debt ratio is 2.6%, a 25-year low.

Clearly, New York and California are moving in the wrong direction, whereas Florida is moving very much in the right direction, and this because Florida is a well run conservative state filled with well informed voters.  What will be the effect of these continuing high and potentially higher taxes in blue states?  Migration of wealthy and middle-class residents, and it’s already happening.  Affluent citizens are leaving New York “in a steady stream.”  Between 2019 and 2020 alone, nearly 10% of high earners left New York City.  More recently, the exodus has continued.

California is experiencing its own outward migration of wealthy and middle-class residents, and not merely for tax reasons.  California ranks 6th in the nation for “high violent crime” and 8th for property crime.  The cost of living is the third highest in the U.S.  Homelessness is at a record high, with 24% of the nation’s homeless living in California.  And California’s public schools, once near the top, now come out well below average.

One could cite many other blue states, including Illinois, as evidence of liberal mismanagement, and other red states like Texas and Tennessee for proof of sound conservative governance.  The fact is that all human beings want much the same thing: safety, security, prosperity, and freedom (including freedom from government restrictions and high taxes).  Today in America, Florida offers that freedom.  New York and California do not.

In America, the red states are keeping the American Dream alive.  Personal liberty includes freedom from government confiscation of wealth, whether that confiscation takes the form of Soviet-style direct  confiscation or seizure through taxation.  Voters in New York and California have not learned the lesson that high taxes and regulation lower the quality of life and infringe on freedom.  Fortunately, we live in a country, unlike communist China or North Korea, where one can relocate freely to another state.  Freedom may be dying in New York, but the sun is still shining in Florida.

Jeffrey Folks is the author of many books and articles on American culture, most recently Heartland of the Imagination (2011).

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 15:40

Trump Appears To De-Escalate Iran Rhetoric, 'Killing Has Stopped' - Oil Tumbles

There are reports that President Trump is listening to the non-interventionists in his cabinet, as he says Wednesday afternoon he's been told that the killing in Iran is stopping, and with no plan for executions. WTI futures immediately dropped on the newswires: 

• WTI fell from USD 62.30 to lows of 59.80/bbl over 7 minutes.
• Brent fell from 66.80 to 64.20 over the same time frame.
• With Trump noting Iran has no plans for executions, it drastically reduces the chances of the US attacking Iran, particularly a kinetic attack.
• Expectations of an attack had been building today with reports suggesting it could happen within 24 hours, which saw crude gain throughout the session; several nations urged citizens to leave Iran.
• S&P 500 ENERGY INDEX PARES GAINS AFTER TRUMP IRAN COMMENTS
• Iran FM: There is calm, we are in full control, Fox News reports

Via Bloomberg... Trump has an "out" and Iran strikes appear to be off:

President Donald Trump said he had been assured that Iran would stop killing protesters, in a signal he could hold off on a threatened military response to the repression of widespread demonstrations in the nation. “We’ve been told that the killing in Iran is stopping - it’s stopped,” Trump told reporters Wednesday in the Oval Office. “And there’s no plan for executions or an execution.”

The US president said he would be “very upset” if the information proved untrue and the violent crackdown continued. The comments come after Trump urged Iranians to continue protests against the government of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and said he would “act accordingly” after being briefed on how many demonstrators have been killed. He posted on social media that “help is on the way” to those protesting in Iran.

BREAKING — Trump says he has been told that killing in Iran has topped and there would be no executions

“I've been told that on good authority” he says and if they occur “we would be upset”

pic.twitter.com/fTl99jyXKD

— Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) January 14, 2026

Dangerous indicators there was (before this 'change of mind') about to be a strike?

The bulk of the US Navy's strike group has remained in the Caribbean Sea after the Trump-ordered Venezuela operation to oust Maduro, and there's as yet nothing to signal a new build-up of naval power in the Mediterranean or anywhere in the Central Command (CENTCOM) area of operations. However there are signs that logistics transport flights have increased.

However, there are other signs President Trump might be serious about an attack on Iran. Various news sources including Reuters is reporting Wednesday that the United States is pulling some staff out of major regional bases as a precaution amid rising tensions related to the Iran protests and a potential US military response.

via Associated Press

This comes after a senior Iranian official earlier stated that Tehran has warned neighboring countries hosting US forces that American bases would be targeted if Washington launched strikes.

Reuters writes, "Earlier today, some personnel were advised to leave the US military's Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar by this evening. Al Udeid is the Middle East’s largest US base, housing around 10,000 troops. Ahead of the US airstrikes on Iran in June some personnel were moved off US bases in the Middle East."

In the last instance where Iran faced attack by the US and Israel, Iran launched ballistic missiles at Al Udeid Air Base outside Doha. All or most were intercepted, with no reports of troop casualties. This attack occurred on June 23, one day after the US struck three Iranian nuclear facilities with deep penetrating bunker-buster bombs.

Backing down or covering up his plans to launch an attack like last time? https://t.co/yw6bELZBtf

— Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) January 14, 2026

The aforementioned warning from a senior Iranian official stated as follows: "Tehran has told regional countries, from Saudi Arabia and the UAE to Turkey, that US bases in those countries will be attacked if the US targets Iran."

While the week started with talk of some kind of dialogue between Washington and Tehran toward de-escalation, Trump quickly changed his mind, and by Tuesday said he cancelled all meetings with Iranian officials, citing the brutal crackdown on protesters. He wrote on Truth Social that "help is on its way" for Iranians.

"Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING - TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price," Trump wrote.

"I have cancelled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON ITS WAY. MIGA [Make Iran Great Again]!!!" he added.

However, there's ample evidence that many dozens of security personnel have been killed and wounded as well. Clearly in many locales rioters have deadly weapons, and Tehran says it is facing the beginnings of a foreign backed terror operation and insurgency.

Tehran Governor:

• 1,000 passenger cars and 26 administrative centers in Tehran province have been damaged

• Commercial shops, residential units, buses, ambulances, fire trucks, 44 mosques and Hosseiniyehs were damaged pic.twitter.com/nMXClOvnK7

— Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) January 14, 2026

But it should be obvious by now that organizations like the CIA, MI6, and Mossad are constantly looking for ways to take advantage of the situation and destabilize the country, ripening it for regime change. Trump has just dodged another interventionist disaster in the Middle East by choosing not to pull the trigger.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 15:26

"Everything's On The Table": JPM CFO Signals Possible Fight With Trump Over Credit Card Rate Cap

Wall Street has benefited greatly from the Trump administration's economic policies and "Make America Great Again" agenda and has largely been supportive of the president. That relationship abruptly fractured last Friday when the president called for a one-year cap on credit card interest rates at 10%.

All it took was President Trump's Truth Social post prioritizing working-class Americans over Wall Street, in which the president said, "AFFORDABILITY! Effective January 20, 2026, I, as President of the United States, am calling for a one-year cap on credit card interest rates of 10%," to put big bank CEOs on notice, with some now preparing to mount a fight against the White House.

Two months later... https://t.co/POf3Y4jlrq pic.twitter.com/D4BlY4PD1i

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 10, 2026

Leading that charge appears to be JPMorgan Chase CFO Jeremy Barnum, who signaled during an earnings call on Tuesday that banks could challenge Trump's move to cap credit card interest rates for a year.

"If you wind up with weakly supported directives to radically change our business that aren't justified, you have to assume that everything's on the table," Barnum told analysts following JPMorgan's fourth-quarter earnings report (read here). "We owe that to shareholders."

Barnum argued that a rate cap would backfire by shrinking credit availability rather than lowering borrowing costs, ultimately hurting consumers, spending, and the broader economy. His warning echoed concerns raised earlier this week by UBS analysts Erika Najarian and Tim Chiodo.

"Our belief is that actions like this will have the exact opposite consequence to what the administration wants for consumers," Barnum said. "Instead of lowering the price of credit, we'll simply reduce the supply of credit, and that will be bad for everyone: consumers, the wider economy, and yes, at the margin, for us."

Additional color via X user The Transcript ...

$JPM CFO warns that capping credit card interest rates could "severely reduce access to credit, especially for those who need it most."

Also says that it would be "severely negative consequences for consumers....for the economy" and "obviously be bad for us as well." https://t.co/dWyY2Blgut pic.twitter.com/cmAGD4zaGg

— The Transcript (@TheTranscript_) January 13, 2026

The average U.S. credit card APR is about 20%, according to the latest data from Bankrate. Rates are much higher for subprime and store cards.

A stalled bill proposed by Josh Hawley and Bernie Sanders would have imposed a 10% cap for 5 years, versus Trump's 1-year cap. Consumer-heavy industries beyond banking warned of ripple effects of less credit in the system, such as Delta Air Lines.

House Speaker Mike Johnson urged caution, warning that efforts to lower costs could have unintended consequences: "We have a lot of work to go [on] consensus around it, but you got to be very careful as we go forward in that in our zeal to bring down costs ... you don't want to have negative secondary effects."

Read more about why UBS analysts say Trump's 10% one-year cap on credit card interest rates is "unlikely" here.

Trump's incoming fight with big banks on capping credit card rates is not unexpected given his administration's massive push for affordability this year.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 15:15

Minnesota Stealing: Reason To Rethink Government Welfare

Authored by Larry Elder via The Epoch Times,

As for the estimated $8 billion in government (taxpayer) money stolen by crooks in Minnesota, people demand answers to many questions.

But the 800-pound elephant/question goes unasked: Why is government in the business of welfare in the first place?

Where in the Constitution does it permit the federal government to extract money from taxpayers for charity?

Years ago, I worked full time one summer as a “loaned executive” for the United Way of Cleveland. My job was to meet with CEOs of companies, tell them the story of the United Way and hopefully arrange for me to make a presentation to the company’s employees, take questions and then ask for donations.

Through this process, the United Way raised and donated money to other nonprofits involved in community activities such as preschooling, counseling “at-risk” youths, after-school academic programs, care for the sick and elderly and youth sports programs, among other local initiatives. There was a rigorous application process before the nonprofit could receive any money. There was regular and rigorous follow-up to make sure the money was spent properly and efficiently based on previously agreed-on criteria. If, after receiving funds, the nonprofit did not meet these goals, it lost its funding.

The reason for the rigorous review and follow-up was simple. Donors are more likely to give if they feel their money is being spent effectively to achieve the promised result. In fact, “How do I know my money will be spent properly?” was my most frequently asked question.

Because so many worked for the United Way as volunteers, as I did, nearly 90 percent to 95 percent of each dollar donated reached the intended beneficiaries. Government welfare programs, riddled with waste, fraud and abuse, do not come close to this level of efficiency.

Government welfare represents what economist Milton Friedman called the least efficient, least effective and most wasteful spending: somebody else’s money on somebody else. Through most of our country’s history, charity was people to people—house of worship to people, nonprofit to people—not government to people.

James Madison, known as the Father of the Constitution, opposed a 1794 bill that would appropriate $15,000 for French refugees. “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents,” Madison said.

In 1831, Madison said: “With respect to the words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers (enumerated in the Constitution) connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville, who traveled to America in the 1830s, marveled at the large number of volunteer “mutual aid societies.” Tocqueville wrote: “Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. ... Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools. Finally, if it is a question of bringing to light a truth or developing a sentiment with the support of a great example, they associate.”

There is a question of whether no-questions-asked public welfare induces dependency and negatively affects the work ethic. A Center for Immigration Studies profile of Somalis in Minnesota found nearly half of working-age Somali adults who have lived In American more than 10 years cannot speak English “very well.”

You cannot watch television without seeing a pitch for money for wounded soldiers, for police officers and firefighters wounded in the line of duty, for a children’s hospital that does not charge patients, for cats and dogs in need of rescue and so on. Imagine the solicitations in a world where government got out of the business of welfare and allowed its citizens, the most generous in the world, to step in and step up.

Private welfare, compared to public welfare, is less likely to create a sense of entitlement, will get a bigger bang for a buck and is less dependency-inducing than no-questions-asked public welfare.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 14:50

Nuclear Reactors On The Moon By 2030

First it was data centers in space. Now it's nuclear reactors on the moon.

The global space race is heating up again, but it’s more than about just reaching the moon. International partners are teaming up to develop and establish remote posts on the moon utilizing nuclear reactors as the primary energy supply. The Russians are teaming up with the Chinese, the French are teaming up with the Italians, and the Americans are teaming up with… well, more Americans.

We have news! We're partnering with @ENERGY to get a lunar nuclear reactor ready by 2030. Continuous, reliable power means we stay, build infrastructure, and push to Mars.

We are following through on the President's directive in the national space policy through American… pic.twitter.com/lSVdZLmVIG

— NASA (@NASA) January 13, 2026

The US announced an intention to develop lunar nuclear reactors last summer along with a similar announcement from China and Russia. This was eventually followed up with an executive order titled Ensuring American Space Superiority which explicitly directed the initial establishment of a permanent lunar outpost, including the launch of a lunar reactor, by 2030.

The latest development involves the DOE and NASA signing an MOU to collaborate on deploying reactors on the moon. Instead of pairing up with an international ally in the same way other countries have, the US intends to accomplish this new mission on its own.

“History shows that when American science and innovation come together, from the Manhattan Project to the Apollo Mission, our nation leads the world to reach new frontiers once thought impossible,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. “This agreement continues that legacy.”

It’s important to note that this is not the first time moon reactors have been discussed. Years ago, NASA launched a fission surface power project with the target of deploying a 40 kW reactor on the moon. The concept introduces unique challenges: due to the low gravity, the fluids used for coolants won’t behave exactly as they do on earth, and surface temperature swings on the moon introduce additional problems on top of that.

Premium subs are already well informed on the potential participants in the new space race, but this latest venture for deploying reactor technology on the lunar surface introduces new potential beneficiaries.

The earlier moon reactor program incorporated six major participants organized into three teams: Lockheed Martin paired with BWXT, Westinghouse joined Aerojet Rocketdyne, and X-energy teamed up with Intuitive Machines.

Given the environment on the moon, the reactor is most likely to be a high-temperature, gas-cooled design, limiting the field of possible reactor developers. There are other novel concepts being developed by companies like Antares Industries, but here are some potential public market participants to consider: BWXT, Westinghouse (Cameco), Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Nano Nuclear, and Terra Innovatum.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 14:10

In Some Minnesota Schools, The Focus Is Reading, Writing, And Resistance

Authored by Aaron Gifford via The Epoch Times,

In the Twin Cities, schools play a key role in fostering a culture where resistance and anti-authoritarianism thrive.

A Minneapolis charter school located near where 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed last week by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent is centered on social justice and has a long history of left-wing political activism, according to its website.

“We integrate social justice into every grade level, telling the stories of the people, not the people in power, and helping students understand history and their role in making the world a better place,” says the website for Southside Family Charter School.

The ongoing ICE protests coincide with a new statewide mandate requiring ethnic studies, which the state Department of Education defines as analyzing ways in which “race and racism have been and continue to be social, cultural, and political forces, and the connection of race to the stratification of other groups.”

Around the time of the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, several schools in Minneapolis and St. Paul took it upon themselves to require one high school semester of ethnic studies courses before it became a state mandate.

The ethnic studies offerings in the Minneapolis district currently include a course on race and identity, and “culturally sustaining” African American, Chicanx/Latinx, American Indian, Asian American, Hmong, and Somali studies, according to its website.

Moreover, private schools and taxpayer-funded charters like Southside attract families seeking more progressive social justice-related curriculum than the public schools offer.

“Activist-bent parents chose the school knowing what they’re going to get,” Katherine Kersten, a senior fellow at the Minnesota-based Center of the American Experiment think tank and policy center. “Kids are being told to study left-wing activism and view the activists as models to follow.”

Other Twin City area schools that prioritize social justice beyond the level of traditional public schools include the St. Paul School of Northern Lights, the Angela Day School for Liberation and Progressive Education, and the Prairie Creek Community School.

Kersten said “identity and resistance” are two main pillars of the ethnic studies mandate. Approved instruction for stand-alone high school ethnic studies courses that must be implemented ahead of the fall semester—in addition to the embedded requirement for all other subject areas in K–12, as they are reviewed and then updated periodically—most likely include definitions and examples of identity and resistance, she said.

University of Minnesota’s Center for Race, Indigeneity, Disability, Gender, and Sexuality Studies developed a free curriculum for the state mandate endorsed by teachers unions and state officials. Its middle school instructional materials, “Protest Art & the Movement for Black Life,” require students to learn about the 13 guiding principles of the Black Lives Matter movement, create protest art “for a cause of their choice,” and “describe how mural artists transformed the landscape of Minneapolis during the 2020 Uprising,” according to the center’s webpage.

This kind of classroom rhetoric only emboldens anti-authoritarian sentiment in the community, even if protesters don’t fully understand their cause, Kersten said.

“We’ve seen people crossing the line, and destruction of property, and our elected leaders are encouraging this—[saying] that authority figures are racist and that this resistance is noble,” she said. “To have the state working with and relying on some of the most extreme, self-interested activists to create standards is so egregious.”

Kersten’s organization is urging public school districts across Minnesota to consider less extreme instructional materials that are endorsed by nonpartisan academic institutions and will still meet the state requirements, including 1776 Unites and the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism (FAIR), both of which oppose identity politics.

The Center for the American Experiment recently presented its suggested instructional materials to Anoka-Hennepin schools, the largest district in the state, and was greeted outside by a long line of protestors summoned from Minneapolis and St. Paul, Kersten said.

“Anyone who criticizes is automatically called a racist,” she said, adding that, beyond a few parents who took advantage of a state law that allows them to opt their child out of instructional materials they find objectionable, there has been very little pushback against Minnesota’s ideological education movement.

“It’s so damaging to celebrate these events as a great Civil Rights statement,” she said. “It’s important for schools to push back and make the case for reasonable academic learning.”

In social media posts last week, Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) called on the executive branch to revoke all federal funding to the Southside Family Charter School.

“This institution radicalizes students and pushes a left-wing agenda that demonizes ICE agents,” his Jan. 9 posts on Facebook and X said. “The federal government should not subsidize anti-American education.”

The Epoch Times reached out to the Southside Family Charter School, Gov. Tim Walz’s office, the Minnesota Department of Education, and the Minneapolis and St. Paul school districts. No responses were received in time for publication.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 13:55

Trump Freezes All Visa Processing For 75 Countries: The Full List

The US government announced Wednesday it will pause or suspend immigrant visa issuance for 75 countries, with Iran among the countries listed, at a moment President Trump is said to be mulling some kind of US military intervention after two weeks of protests - but which largely seemed to have died down at this point.

The new visa pause order will take effect January 21, and will also impact Iraq, Russia, Afghanistan, Brazil, Egypt and Nigeria, and dozens of others.

"The State Department will use its long-standing authority to deem ineligible potential immigrants who would become a public charge on the United States and exploit the generosity of the American people," State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggott said in a statement. 

"Immigration from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassess immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits." Somalia and Minnesota should of course come to mind in this context.

A State Dept memo "directs consular officers to refuse visas under existing law while the department reassesses screening and vetting procedures."

According to Fox News, the full list of countries includes the following in alphabetical order...

Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan and Yemen. 

Some of these countries have been focus of geopolitical headlines of late - such as Nigeria, Somalia, and Syria - all subject to bombings of military operations by US forces.

But it's unclear why some like the Bahamas, Georgia, or Modolva would make the list. Presumably this also impacts Americans who have married or gotten engaged to someone abroad, and where said US citizen wants to bring them to the United States. But it's unclear as yet whether there will be exceptions made for certain categories of visas.

Already, visa services at embassies abroad have been very slow moving under Trump, but this ensures what will be a likely permanent backlog.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 13:40

US Designates Chapters Of Muslim Brotherhood As Foreign Terrorist Organizations

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Trump administration has followed through on its stated goal of designating three branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations, sanctioning the groups and their members in accordance with President Donald Trump’s plan to strengthen national security.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks during a press conference as President Donald Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth listen at Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla., on Jan. 3, 2026. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The Lebanese, Jordanian, and Egyptian chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood were designated by the U.S. State Department as foreign terrorist organizations on Jan. 13.

The designations are a first step in support of Trump’s November order that aims to eliminate chapters of the organization that pose security threats to the United States and its allies.

The group’s leader, Muhammad Fawzi Taqqosh, has also been named as a specially designated global terrorist.

The Department of the Treasury also named the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood as specially designated global terrorists for providing material support to the Hamas terrorist group.

“These designations reflect the opening actions of an ongoing, sustained effort to thwart Muslim Brotherhood chapters’ violence and destabilization wherever it occurs,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement on Jan. 13. “The United States will use all available tools to deprive these Muslim Brotherhood chapters of the resources to engage in or support terrorism.”

The State Department designated the Lebanese branch a foreign terrorist organization, the most extreme label, which makes providing support to the group a criminal offense.

The Jordanian and Egyptian branches were listed by the Treasury as specially designated global terrorists for providing support to Hamas.

“The Muslim Brotherhood has inspired, nurtured, and funded terrorist groups like Hamas, that are direct threats to the safety and security of the American people and our allies,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorist and Financial Intelligence John Hurley in a statement.

Following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack in Israel, the Lebanese Muslim Brotherhood, also known as al-Jamaa al-Islamiyah, reactivated its al-Fajr Forces and launched rockets in coordination with Hamas and the Hezbollah terrorist group from Lebanon into northern Israel.

In March 2024, the Israel Defense Forces launched an attack against the Lebanese operatives who were preparing terrorist attacks against Israel, according to the State Department.

The Lebanese Army dismantled a covert military training camp in July 2025 that was used by the Lebanese Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas fighters. Under Taqqosh’s leadership, the brotherhood has pushed for a more formal partnership with Hezbollah and Hamas.

Jordanian demonstrators waving green Muslim Brotherhood flags and other banners shout anti-Israel slogans during a mass rally held outside the parliament building in Amman, Jordan, in this file photo. Khalil Mazraawi/AFP via Getty Images

Hamas, formed in 1988, is a self-described wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Palestinian territories and a designated specially designated global terrorist organization since 2001, according to the State Department.

The Muslim Brotherhood was formed in Egypt in the 1920s and was one of the most influential Islamist organizations in the world, mixing religious teaching with political activism and social welfare programs, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

Trump considered the idea of a terrorist designation during his first term, supported by U.S. House Republicans on the National Security Committee. Florida and Texas designated the group as a terrorist organization this year.

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain have also designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 13:20

Disruptions Reported At Major US Cellular Carriers, Downdetector Shows

Downdetector, the website that tracks real-time outages and service disruptions across the internet, reported moments ago that users of Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon Fios, and U.S. Cellular are experiencing disruptions and outages that began within the last hour.

At a more granular level of the Verizon outage, reports indicate that outages and disruptions are being logged across the Washington-Baltimore region, New York, Chicago, Atlanta, Houston, and areas near Seattle.

Reports of AT&T outages and disruptions appear more widespread in the central US.

Reports of T-Mobile outages appear widespread as well.

This report is based solely on Downdetector data and has not yet been confirmed by the carriers.

*Story is developing...

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 13:06

Crude Stocks Rise Most In Two Months As US Oil Production Finally Drops

While oil prices keep rising on mounting geopolitical tensions in Iran, the production glut refuses to go away, and as today's DOE report showed, there was a material increase across almost all products, with the exception of Distillates which were flat. Of note, amid expectations for a modest crude draw, we saw a 3.4MM barrel increase, the largest since the start of November. 

Here is what the EIA reported in its weekly inventory report

• Crude +3.391MM, Exp.-1.682MM
• Gasoline +8.977MM, Exp. +2.0MM
• Distillates -29K, Exp. -662K
• Cushing +745K

Of note here is that while we saw a sizable build in most products, with Crude rising the most in two months, it was gasoline where the stocking was most notable: the nearly 9 million barrels added were the most since December 29, 2023.

Some more details:

Crude Build

• Nationwide crude stockpiles rose to 422.4 million barrels. The weekly gain of about 3.4 million barrels is the largest build since early November. Stockpiles at Cushing, Oklahoma, continue to climb. The storage hub has seen a rise in inventories for the fourth consecutive week. Stocks now sit at about 23.6 million barrels, the highest since September.

Imports

• The build in crude inventories can be partly explained by an increase in imports. They rose to the highest since November of 2024. Imports from the Middle East edged higher, driven by a 62% increase in the amount of crude arriving from Iraq. Inflows from Brazil, Mexico, Colombia and Ecuador all jumped.

Refinery Runs

• Refinery runs have now risen in 9 of the past 10 weeks countrywide, inching closer to the highest since the pandemic. In the Midwest, refineries are processing the most crude on record on a seasonal basis. West Coast refinery runs are now at the highest level since late-September.

While Cushing draws reversed for a 4th consecutive week, stocks remain not too far from tank bottoms.

Yet there is some hope that US production is finally moderating: while US Crude production hovers near record highs despite the continuing decline in rig count, last week saw a notable drop in total production, dropping by 58K barrels to 13.753 million, the lowest since the end of October.

Despite the sizable build in crude stock, WTI is holding gains as attention remains glued to what happens in Iran next...

On the bright side, the broadly weaker trend on crude oil prices has dragged gas (pump) prices down to their lowest since May 2021...

While it's not exactly 'drill, baby, drill', it's certainly what Trump wanted (the question is, will the lower price push shale producers to cut production... and round and round we go).

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 11:03

The post Trump Takes Responsibility for Post-Pandemic Inflation appeared first on CEPR.

Are Central Bankers Willing To Truly Upset Markets So Trump Backs Off?

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Officially it’s 2,000, but reportedly as many as 12,000 Iranian protestors could have been killed by their own government over the past few days. While the West has seen none of the mass protests that the last two-plus years have been full of, President Trump told those on Iran’s streets to keep going and that “Help is coming,” adding if the government starts hanging those it’s arrested, matters will be even worse. What might this mean though? It’s unclear. The Wall Street Journal reports that US Gulf Allies, led by Saudi Arabia, have been lobbying the US not to get involved (as the Trump admin labelled three Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist organisations).

The intricacies of the Middle East defy the space available here (or on protesters’ placards), but alongside tensions in Yemen/South Yemen and Somalia/Somaliland, a key takeaway is that the Western assumption of a more moderate Saudi-led GCC is perhaps being called into question. Rather, it looks as if there is a Saudi-UAE split, with the former moving closer to Qatar, Turkey, and Pakistan as it loses fear of Iran as a regional hegemon and instead works with those it sees as able to fill that power vacuum who aren’t Israel (see ‘From partners to rivals: What the Saudi-UAE rupture means for Europeans’). That will matter hugely ahead, if so; and for now it’s wait and see on what the US will do in Iran.

That isn’t the only energy story, as two Russian tankers were hit by drones in the Black Sea; that’s as 70% of Kyiv’s power went down as Russia goes all out to try to plunge Ukraine into darkness. Europe is also going to redouble efforts to stop China and India buying Russian oil: how, without sanctions or Trump-style tariffs? (One asks, as the EU is now close to dropping tariffs on Chinese EVs in favor of a minimum price – which effectively means the EV is the same price for the consumer but the tariff flows to China instead of the EU. Realpolitik is hard for some.)

On Greenland and NATO, tensions remain high. Greenland’s PM said the territory chooses Denmark over the US, which Trump rejected; Russia trolled that Greenland might vote to join it, not the US; US senators introduced a bill to prevent the US from invading NATO territory; and France continued to lobby for the EU military aid package for Ukraine to only be spent on EU weapons – which they cannot provide in the volumes required, in the same way that the US underlines that they can’t actually provide adequate forces to cover Greenland.  

Meanwhile, help came for embattled Fed Chair Powell. Not the CPI print of 0.3% m-o-m and 2.7% y-o-y headline and 0.2% and 2.6% core, which frankly don’t matter much against the current backdrop. Rather, we saw ‘Central bankers of the world, unite!’ as the BIS, ECB, BoE, RBA, Riksbank, SNB, BCB, BoK, BoC, and the Norges Bank  --all institutionally opposed to unionization, "because markets" -- said they “Stand in full solidarity" with Fed Chair Powell, who is facing a possible criminal investigation by the DoJ. (Something that isn't new to one of those central bankers.) “The independence of central banks is a cornerstone of price, financial and economic stability in the interest of the citizens that we serve. It is therefore critical to preserve that independence, with full respect for the rule of law and democratic accountability," was their defiant collective message.

(Of course, this overlooks that their track record on those fronts is questionable, and that for most of global history we didn't have independent central banks and did fine - better than recently, in fact, if you look at post-WW2 growth and inflation.)

But where was the BoJ? That omission speaks volumes about realpolitik and a central bank with a balance sheet amounting to a terrifying % of GDP (as a snap February election looms, JPY falls, and the 5-year JGB yield just hit the highest since 2000: somebody can’t afford to annoy the US right now).

Where was the RBI, as India is close to trade deal with the EU, and German Chancellor just stated he wants to build deep economic and defense relationships with it.

Where was the PBoC, from the world's second largest economy and the largest in PPP terms? That obvious absence speaks volumes about how little the West grasps that its 'liberal world order’ doesn't speak for the world – and, increasingly, all liberals.

Where was this collective outrage when Bank of Poland Governor Glapinksi was being leaned on by his liberal government? Is Poland --which just overtook the UK in GDP per capita, and which will soon have the second most powerful conventional army in Europe at a time when that really matters-- 'just an EM'? Protests are variable, it seems.

On the specifics of the Powell case, the US DoJ stated, “None of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach,” which makes the case that the Fed doth protest too much. However, the FT claims Powell sent a letter to US senators with details of his Fed refurbishment project following his testimony, which makes the investigation look political. (At least this isn’t happening in South Korea, where the impeached former president now faces the death penalty for his recent actions.)

Yet in reality everyone is rallying round Powell, not Poland, because if the Fed is part of economic statecraft, not neoliberal global establishment monetary policy, then there isn't a neoliberal global establishment.

Free trade has gone – as Canada’s Carney walks a tightrope on a trip to Beijing to try to diversify away from the US, while Trump stated the USMCA is “irrelevant” during a Ford Motor factory tour. Free movement of people is going.

Free movement of capital is declining. The fiscal rules are being ripped up as fiscal dominance rules. And, as shown back in 2016's 'Thin Ice', if central bank cooperation collapses, it's game over. Realistically, what would the ECB and BoE, etc., do if the Fed was politicised under US neo-mercantilism?

Equally logical is the fact that the Fed is a vital part of any true Gramscian revolution, and would ideally be flipped well before the looming mid-term elections. Did you not notice Trump using an executive order to de facto institute MBS QE last week? Those are the real stakes.

Yet given Powell is gone in a few months anyway, what will this resistance achieve vs Trump that the slew of lawfare didn't in the run-up to the 2024 election? That’s as BlackRock's Rieder emerges as a new Fed Chair tip in the home stretch: is that the gamekeeper turning poacher or vice versa? Do central bankers really think Trump will retreat when called out? Or are they willing to truly upset markets so he backs off?

In short -- and unlike in Iran, where things are hard to call -- this looks like a battle that the establishment probably can't win. Indeed, while a brighter day might be on the horizon for the Iranian people, no help is coming for the liberal world order.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 10:30

FBI Raids WaPo Reporter's Home In Classified Docs Case

The FBI executed a search warrant on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson as part of a probe into "a government contractor accused of illegally retaining classified government materials," the paper announced Wednesday. 

Natanson, was at her Virginia home when the agency showed up with a warrant. According to the outlet, "law enforcement was investigating Aurelio Perez-Lugones, a system administrator in Maryland who has a top secret security clearance and has been accused of accessing and taking home classified intelligence reports that were found in his lunchbox and his basement." The journalist's home and devices were search. 

According to her X bio, Natanson covers "the Trump administration's reshaping of the government and its effects."

Perez-Lugones is a US citizen who was born in Miami and now resides in Laurel, Maryland according to the FBI's criminal complaint. He has been a government contractor since 2002 and holds top secret security clearance. 

According to the complaint, at least one document found in Pererz-Lugones' basement was related to national defense. WaPo reports that Natanson has been part of its most sensitive coverage in the 2nd Trump administration. She told WaPo that the FBI seized a phone and a Garmin watch. 

According to AG Pam Bondi: "his past week, at the request of the Department of War, the Department of Justice and FBI executed a search warrant at the home of a Washington Post journalist who was obtaining and reporting classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor. " 

This past week, at the request of the Department of War, the Department of Justice and FBI executed a search warrant at the home of a Washington Post journalist who was obtaining and reporting classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor. The leaker is…

— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) January 14, 2026

Developing...

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 10:08

"Defining Moment": Saks Global Files For Bankruptcy After Botched Neiman Marcus Takeover

Luxury department store conglomerate Saks Global filed for bankruptcy protection late Tuesday night, in one of the largest US retail collapses since the Covid era and, among other things, what appears to be a casualty of the menacing K-shaped economy.

Saks Global has been weighed down by heavy debt following its $2.7 billion, debt-fuelled acquisition of Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman in 2024. Slowing luxury sales, a K-shaped economy, and dwindling cash levels led Saks to delay payments to suppliers, prompting some vendors to halt shipments or demand cash on delivery, which further pressured sales. The retailer missed a $100 million interest payment in December.

Despite the bankruptcy filing, Saks secured $1.75 billion in financing, including $1.5 billion from senior secured bondholders, and appointed former Neiman Marcus chief Geoffroy van Raemdonck as CEO. The restructuring will wipe out existing equity holders, including newer investors such as Amazon and Salesforce.

"This is a defining moment for Saks Global, and the path ahead presents a meaningful opportunity to strengthen the foundation of our business and position it for the future," said van Raemdonck, adding, "In close partnership with these newly appointed leaders and our colleagues across the organization, we will navigate this process together with a continued focus on serving our customers and luxury brands. I look forward to serving as CEO and continuing to transform the Company so that Saks Global continues to play a central role in shaping the future of luxury retail."

The future of the Saks Global empire will be much clearer in the weeks and months ahead as bankruptcy proceedings begin and new investors enter the picture. It's important to note that van Raemdonck is a luxury retail veteran who has played key leadership roles in Louis Vuitton and Ralph Lauren.

Saks' demise appears to stem from slowing luxury sales and the Neiman Marcus deal, as well as ...

"In a market where luxury brands are moving direct-to-consumer and shoppers expect personalization and speed, that (merger) was always going to fail," said Brittain Ladd, a strategy and supply-chain consultant at Florida-based Chang Robotics, who was quoted by Reuters.

In markets, the Goldman Luxury European Index (GSXELUXG), a sell-side benchmark tracking luxury heavyweights including LVMH, Hermès, Richemont, Burberry, Ferrari, and others, has traded largely sideways since 2022.

Morningstar analyst David Swartz recently noted, "Rich people are still buying ... just not so much at Saks."

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 09:55

How Independent Is The Federal Reserve?

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Justice has opened an investigation into cost overruns in the Federal Reserve’s renovation project, with particular focus on Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and his testimony to Congress in June 2025. The question is whether he perjured himself concerning what he knew and when.

Powell responded with a highly unusual video message to the public. He defended himself and further speculated that this investigation is merely a tactic to interfere with the Fed’s independence.

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president,” he said. “This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”

He speaks to a long-running dispute on the relationship between the Fed and the executive branch. The organizational chart of the federal government puts the central bank clearly under the authority of the president. That said, there is a long-running understanding that its operations would be politically independent and that presidents would not and could not interfere.

The courts have affirmed its independence in passing, but the status of the institution in constitutional law remains murky.

Powell’s certain supposition that this is not really about the renovation project might in fact be incorrect. In July 2025, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) referred Powell for criminal investigation over false testimony. Powell had denied to lawmakers that the renovation involved a “VIP dining room, premium marble, water features, and a roof terrace garden.”

But Luna found the plans submitted to the National Capital Planning Commission that clearly had all those features, requiring cost overruns of $600 million. Looking through the plans, the sheer opulence and scale are what stand out. Powell grants that costs have ballooned but blames unexpected discoveries of new needs and, ironically, inflation.

Contrary to Powell’s dismissals, this is actually serious. The subpoena is based on genuine grievances that Powell simply lied to Congress.

Independence is one thing, but spending $600 million without congressional authorization is another matter entirely.

In his statement, Powell said, “I have carried out my duties without political fear or favor, focused solely on our mandate of price stability and maximum employment.”

Here we have another problem. We have just lived through the second worst inflationary bout in a century of monetary policy. The great inflation of 2021–2024 reduced the overall purchasing power of the dollar by 25 percent to 30 percent for a broad index of goods and services. Some particulars show far higher price increases. You can probably think of examples in which the posted price has doubled since 2019.

In other words, this is not the most opportune time for Powell to cite the Fed’s dedication to price stability.

What’s more, the inflation that shocked the country was a direct consequence of Powell’s decision in March 2020 to flatline interest rates to make possible vast funding that would flow as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. He had spent the two previous years gradually increasing rates as a means of patching up the Fed’s broken balance sheet.

The problem he had sought to solve with higher rates traced all the way back to 2008 under the leadership of Ben Bernanke. The Fed adopted a zero interest rate policy to bail out financial institutions following the collapse of the market for mortgage-backed securities. Part of the scheme involved paying banks for deposits at a higher rate than the market would bear, thus forestalling inflationary pressure.

The downside of such a policy involved grave distortions in industrial production structures plus a Fed holding on to useless debt assets. Powell had been determined to reverse this error and at least get the Fed on a sound financial footing.

All was going well until the first week of March. Someone, somehow, got to him and persuaded him to completely reverse course. The result was a default back to zero interest rates for the next two years, with disastrous results.

The rate of money creation during this period broke all records. Unlike the quantitative easing of 2005, the new money was sent directly to Americans’ bank accounts and became hot money on the street. This fueled inflation never before experienced by anyone younger than 45. Far from being transitory, it was devastating, wiping out the whole value of the stimulus payments.

There can be no question that the Fed was responsible.

As the inflation roared, Powell stepped in with the fastest rate increases on record. This policy likely contributed to the taming of the inflationary beast. And yet just as we were approaching the national election of 2024, he reversed policy yet again, in a manner that could easily be interpreted as a boon to then-Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign and the Democrats.

Looked at in total, these are not the actions of an independent Fed but rather one that changes policy based on political pressure. Powell denies it, but the evidence is rather clear.

This was perhaps not the best time for the Fed to renovate its headquarters with luxury accommodations and $600 million in cost overruns. Even leaving aside the sheer power of the central bank to manipulate political outcomes, it surely needs some oversight from the people’s elected representatives. For the central bank to claim that it is an institution dedicated entirely to economic science and the public interest is a real stretch.

The Constitution includes no mention of an independent central bank. Its mentions of money include only a provision that only gold and silver can be coined as money by states, an implicit rebuke of unsound money. This is why the institution of a national bank has invited so much controversy over the years.

On July 10, 1832, President Andrew Jackson issued a veto of the chartering of the Second National Bank. It is one of the most famous presidential vetoes in U.S. history. It was also a genius move, bolstering his standing and guaranteeing his reelection. The United States was thereby protected against a central bank until one emerged in secret in 1913.

The truth is that central banking has never been popular in U.S. history. This is for good reason. Inflation is a genuine trauma. Since the Fed’s creation, the value of the dollar has been on a long downward slide, and is now worth about 3 cents from 1913. This is not a record about which any chairman of the Fed should feel pride.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 09:40

Trump To Speak At Globalist WEF Forum

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

President Trump is set to crash the World Economic Forum in Davos, bringing his America First agenda straight into the heart of the globalist elite’s annual gathering. As the multilateralism devotees scramble to maintain their facade of openness Trump’s presence signals a direct challenge to their open borders and free trade obsessions that have long undermined U.S. sovereignty.

All eyes will be on the President as he heads to the Swiss ski resort for the confab, where the theme this year is ironically dubbed “A Spirit of Dialogue.”

“We’re pleased to welcome back President Trump,” said Borge Brende, the forum’s chief executive, during an online press conference. He noted this marks six years since Trump’s previous in-person appearance during his first term.

BREAKING: Donald Trump will lead the "largest and most senior" US delegation to Davos ever, say officials at the World Economic Forum.

The organisation's annual meeting will start on 19 January in the Swiss town.https://t.co/5MpePzQTlm

? Sky 501 and YouTube pic.twitter.com/nSxwteEmLO

— Sky News (@SkyNews) January 13, 2026

Trump will arrive with the largest U.S. delegation ever, including key figures like Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, as well as Steve Witkoff, his special envoy for the Middle East and Ukraine.

“The interest is to come together at the beginning of the year to try to connect the dots, decipher, and also see areas where we can collaborate,” Brende claimed, adding “Dialogue is not a luxury. Dialogue is really a necessity.”

Yet, Trump’s track record of protectionist tariffs and disdain for traditional alliances casts a long shadow over any hopes for cozy collaboration. Brende noted that the summit unfolds against “the most complex geopolitical backdrop since 1945.”

Economist Karen Harris at Bain & Co., remarked “2025 will ultimately be seen as the year in which neoliberal globalisation ended and … the post-globalisation era began.”

She described it as one where “the US prioritises national security, its own security, and uses the economy as a tool to achieve some of those goals.”

Attendees include China’s Vice Premier He Lifeng, EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, setting up potential flashpoints on issues from Ukraine and Venezuela to Gaza, Greenland, and Iran.

Trump’s video address to Davos last year, just after his second inauguration, laid bare his stance: he warned nations to shift manufacturing to the U.S. or face tariffs, rejecting decades of unchecked global trade.

? ?? BREAKING: President Trump is set to attend the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland NEXT WEEK, where he is expected to deliver the keynote address to the globalists.

In his virtual address last year at Davos 2025, President Trump fiercely rejected… pic.twitter.com/8nEx8YUT5h

— JJ?? (@jesseyjay94) January 9, 2026

This rejection extends to multilateral institutions, as Philippe Dauba-Pantanacce, head of geopolitical analysis at Standard Chartered, observed: it “is precisely a broad rejection of multilateral institutions, on the view that international cooperation is inconsistent with ‘winning’ a global competition that is seen as a zero-sum game.”

“With his tariffs, trade ‘is a subject where Trump has made a lot of noise’,” said Pascal Lamy, former head of the World Trade Organization, adding “But unlike what has been the case with geopolitics, whether it’s Ukraine, China, Iran or Venezuela, the impact on the global economy has been limited so far.”

Among the 850 CEOs attending are Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, underscoring the forum’s blend of business and politics.

Trump’s Davos appearance follows his decisive action just days ago, where he pulled the U.S. out of 66 international organizations, including climate bodies like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and UN-linked groups on gender equality and human settlements.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio slammed these as “redundant in their scope, mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful, poorly run, captured by the interests of actors advancing their own agendas contrary to our own, or a threat to our nation’s sovereignty, freedoms, and general prosperity.”

Rubio further critiqued their evolution into “a sprawling architecture of global governance, often dominated by progressive ideology and detached from national interests.” Trump’s move saves billions in taxpayer dollars, rejecting the inertia of funding entities that push DEI mandates, climate orthodoxy, and sovereignty-eroding policies.

At Davos, expect Trump to double down on this America First reset, exposing the forum’s multilateral mantra as a cover for globalist control that prioritizes unelected bureaucrats over national priorities.

Trump’s presence in Davos isn’t about playing nice—it’s a reminder that the era of subsidizing globalist schemes at America’s expense is over. By showing up with his powerhouse team, he’s forcing the elite to confront the reality of a U.S. that puts its own people first, free from the entanglements that have drained resources for too long.

First time Trump spoke at Davos, he told them to their face he rejects their totalitarian ‘climate change’ agenda “to dominate, transform and control every aspect of our lives.”

He’s going again to tell the WEF
their dream of a global government is OVER. pic.twitter.com/JQP82qg43X

— ??Ø?Ø?? (@KAGdrogo) January 11, 2026

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 09:05

US Producer Prices Come In Hot On Heels Of Mysterious Energy Cost Surge

US wholesale inflation picked up slightly in November from a month earlier on a jump in energy costs, even as prices for services were unchanged.
The producer price index rose 0.2% after climbing 0.1% in the prior month, according to much-heralded BLS.

Source: Bloomberg

PPI Final demand goods:

• The index for final demand goods advanced 0.9 percent in November, the largest rise since moving up 0.9 percent in February 2024. Over 80 percent of the November increase can be traced to prices for final demand energy, which jumped 4.6 percent.

  • The index for final demand goods less foods and energy advanced 0.2 percent, while prices for final demand foods were unchanged.

Product detail:

• More than half of the November rise in the index for final demand goods is attributable to prices for gasoline, which moved up 10.5 percent.

• The indexes for electric power, diesel fuel, fresh fruits and melons, jet fuel, and light motor trucks also increased. (Most new-model-year passenger cars and light motor trucks were introduced into the PPI in October and November.

• In contrast, prices for residual fuels declined 8.6 percent. The indexes for beef and veal and for basic organic chemicals also decreased. (See table 2.)

PPI Final demand services:

• Prices for final demand services were unchanged in November following a 0.3 percent increase in October.

  • In November, the indexes for final demand services less trade, transportation, and warehousing and for final demand transportation and warehousing services both advanced 0.3 percent.

  • Conversely, margins for final demand trade services fell 0.8 percent.

Product detail:

• Within final demand services in November, prices for bundled wired telecommunications access services rose 4.6 percent.

• The indexes for machinery and vehicle wholesaling, portfolio management, outpatient care (partial), and game software publishing also moved up.

• In contrast, margins for health, beauty, and optical goods retailing decreased 4.3 percent.

• The indexes for automobile retailing (partial), chemicals and allied products wholesaling, guestroom rental, and food and alcohol retailing also declined.

Excluding food and energy, the PPI was unchanged from the prior month and climbed 3% from November 2024.

Source: Bloomberg

Economists and investors closely track the PPI because several of its components feed into the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge, the personal consumption expenditures price index.

Among those categories, portfolio management fees advanced 1.4% while costs of airline passenger services fell 2.6%. The costs of physican care and hospital inpatient care rose slightly, while hospital outpatient care saw a bigger increase.

However, we are not quite sure where the prices surge seen in PPI data is coming from, as oil prices were still plummeting when this data was 'created'...

Source: Bloomberg

Still, the lack of a PhD on our side means we are surely too dumb to comprehend this divergence.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/14/2026 - 08:53