One country down, only 194 more to go. This week, the announcement of a "framework" for President Trump's first trade deal and the first high-level meeting between the U.S. and China encouraged investors.

 

Wall Street's enthusiasm was somewhat tempered, given that the United Kingdom was an easy deal to make. The terms of trade have always favored the U.S., where we have run a capital trade surplus for years. We have long exported far more to the UK than they have sold to America. Nonetheless, it did provide movement on the tariff question that has troubled the markets since "Liberation Day."

 

On the China front, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent will meet with his counterpart in Switzerland this weekend; on Friday, President Trump floated the idea of a possible decline in U.S. trade tariffs to 80 percent, which he said "seems right." It was a clear message to the Chinese that he wanted to de-escalate his trade war.

 

The administration is reportedly lining up deals with several other countries. India, South Korea, Japan, and Australia are in the queue, although the timing is still a question mark. India would have been first out of the box, but the government's attention has been focused elsewhere over the past two weeks. The delay in an announcement is due to the present hostilities between India and its neighbor, Pakistan.

 

Given the news on tariffs, this month's Federal Open Market Committee meeting came and went with hardly a blip. The Fed announced that they were going to sit on their hands for the foreseeable future. Chairman Jerome Powell made it clear just how uncertain the future was, particularly in relation to the Trump administration's policies and their potential impact on inflation, the economy, and employment.

 

None of this was a surprise. Few on Wall Street had expected anything more from the Fed than the word "uncertain" when describing Fed policy in the future. In the meantime, stocks climbed higher while precious metals, the dollar, and interest rates continued to be volatile. Gold traders were whipsawed as bullion prices have swung in $50-$100 increments daily this week. The U.S. dollar, which has been in freefall for a month, has also been erratic, while bond yields are in a trading range lately with no significant moves either way.

 

Both foreign and domestic traders believe the U.S. dollar will fall further. As such, they are looking at currency alternatives to place bets. Gold was the first go-to asset, but speculation has driven the price too far, too soon. Cryptocurrencies appear to be an acceptable alternative for the time being. Bitcoin reclaimed the $100,000 price level on Thursday and seems destined to climb to the old highs at around $120,000.

 

Last week, I wrote, "For markets to continue their recovery, we need to see the following. A peace deal, the tariffs disappear, China and the U.S. come to a trade agreement, the Fed cut rates, and/or no recession." I forgot one more option: the successful passage of Trump's tax bill, which could significantly impact the market dynamics.

 

Any two of the above will be enough to stave off a re-test of the lows. Thus far, we have made progress on the tariff front (U.K., China, etc.). However, tariffs will not disappear altogether. It appears that no matter what, a 10 percent tariff on imports is here to stay.

 

I would guess the possibility of the passage of Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" is high, given that the Republican Congress now functions as a rubber stamp on the wishes of the president. We will not see a recession this year, although I see a decline in GDP in the second quarter to plus-1.3 percent and plus-1.28 percent for the third quarter, which fits with my stagflation scenario.

 

As I keep reminding readers, markets are heavily influenced by Trump's decisions. This week, his statements gave stocks and other assets a boost. We did breach 5,700 on the S&P 500 Index intraday before falling back but have yet to reach my short-term target of 5,750.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at [email protected].

The lifeblood of emerging markets has always been their exports within a framework of robust global trade. The advent of U.S. tariffs worldwide has placed these countries between a rock and a hard place.

 

The rock is clearly the size and extent of U.S. tariffs. These new tariffs have dwarfed the imposition of levies during the first Trump presidency. Back then, the U.S.-China trade war benefited some emerging market (EM) countries by attracting increased foreign direct investment and manufacturing as alternatives to Chinese trade.

 

It also meant increased exports in some cases, especially in agricultural products. In response to the U.S. tariffs on their goods, China hit back by raising their own barriers to U.S. imports. China reduced agricultural imports from the U.S. and increased its purchases of soybeans from Latin America.

 

In addition, since the last trade war, foreign direct investment into key emerging markets such as Mexico, Vietnam, and Indonesia have steadily increased. A large part of this new investment came from China and Hong Kong. Faced with a continued rise in U.S. tariffs and restrictions under the Biden presidency, China relocated some of its manufacturing to regions that had avoided U.S. tariffs. This allowed Chinese exporters to end run tariffs and continue selling to the U.S. market through other countries. Trump 2.0 is closing that loophole.

 

However, China has upped its trade game in response. As tariffs bite and domestic demand remains subdued, China pivots away from U.S. trade. Chinese imports into the U.S. have declined from 21 percent in 2018 to 14 percent in 2023. That total has dropped further since then. Economists estimate that total trade with the U.S. today only accounts for 2 percent of China's Gross Domestic Product. To compensate for the American market shortfall, China has turned its attention to exporting its excess capacity to other developed markets in direct competition with other EM exporters.

 

At the same time, imports from China have exploded higher throughout emerging markets. And it is not just intermediate goods that make up more of the advanced products they routinely re-exported to America. Final goods from China are now flooding into EM countries, which are displacing local industries and jobs.

 

This surge of "Made in China" imports has forced several countries to raise tariffs (with the urging of the U.S.) on Chinese imports. Their domestic companies simply could not compete against this flood of cheaper-than-cheap imports.

 

In desperation, Mexico has raised tariffs on textile and apparel imports from China to 35 percent. Thailand and Malaysia have levied a 7 percent and 10 percent value-added tax. Even Russia, which relies on China's trade, recently imposed restrictions on Chinese auto imports for the same reasons.

 

Many EM nations acknowledge that China still plays a crucial role in their medium-term growth and development, especially in Asian countries. This places them in a hard place to preserve their domestic industries while maintaining good relations with the world's No. 2 economy.

 

And yet, Southeast Asia nations were also among the hardest hit on "Liberation Day." On July 4, when the 90-day temporary reduction expires, that region's tariffs will skyrocket to almost 50 percent. That will be a devastating blow to EM economies. Many economists predict that the gross domestic product among EM countries could be cut in half if those tariffs are implemented.

 

The implicit message from both of the world's leading economies is that emerging markets should decide which side to back. The rock and the hard place for many nations will be choosing between the U.S. and China. Retribution for picking the wrong partner could be costly on several fronts.

 

Chinese President X Jinping calls on his trading partners to "uphold the common interests of developing nations." He argues that the "Global South," a term referring to a collection of countries (that now number 134 nations), should pull together. This so-called "Group of 77," mainly in the southern hemisphere, are considered developing or less developed countries than those in the Global North.

 

These nations, mainly in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Oceania, often have lower income levels or share common political and economic interests. Many of these countries are now developing trade and other strategic alliances, often with the support of China.  

 

In contrast to China, the U.S., over the last 100 days, has made it clear that "America First" means just that on both the geopolitical and economic front. Relationships between America's traditional allies and trading partners have been upended.

 

Given the U.S. backpedaling in its support for Ukraine, Canada, Mexico, and others, many nations worldwide, including those in emerging markets, have concluded that while powerful, the U.S. has become an unreliable partner. They walk a fine line between these two powers and have little room for error.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at [email protected].

Wednesday's release of the nation's first-quarter Gross Domestic Product stunned investors since it was the first quarterly decline in the economy since 2022. Looking beyond the headline number, however, the results told a different story.

 

At first blush, the minus-0.3 percent decline in GDP sent stocks lower, with the NASDAQ down 3 percent on the day at one point. The culprit behind the numbers was a 41.3 percent rise in imported goods and services. If we import more than we export, as we did substantially in the quarter, the economy's growth decreases.

 

The surge in imports began after the November 2024 elections and continues today. These higher imports result from President Trump's intention to levy tariffs on all our trading partners. U.S. corporations have been scrambling to get ahead of these tariffs by ordering products before the deadline. Trump's second 90-day reprieve has only heightened the trend toward importing even more goods from overseas.

 

The decline in GDP  was also the first substantive instance where the "hard" economic data matched so-called soft data. Over the last three months, the University of Michigan sentiment numbers, the AAII Institutional investor surveys, and consumer confidence polls have indicated that investors and consumers are growing steadily more negative about the economy and market.

 

The president was quick to cast the blame for the disappointment on the prior administration, although, to my knowledge, neither Biden nor candidate Harris had any intention of waging a tariff war. He also indicated that if the economy weakens in the second quarter, he will blame Biden again.

 

However, if the president had just looked under the GDP hood, he might not have been so quick to duck the blame. If you strip out the import data, the economy grew by 3 percent. Private business investment was up while government spending fell. Business equipment and machinery investment rose 22.5 percent. That is a powerful upswing.

 

The Trump administration could have taken credit for that result. Trump promised that when Congress passes his "One Big Beautiful Bill," he would give business and factory investment a 100 percent immediate depreciation write-off retroactive to Jan. 20, 2025. That means the cost of these purchases would be tax-deductible in year one instead of being stretched out and deducted over the life of the equipment. How much of those purchases were related to avoiding tariffs and how much was a genuine willingness to invest in America will likely show up in the data in the months ahead.

 

In addition, the Fed's favorite inflation indicator, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (PCE), came in weaker than expected, indicating that inflation has not increased, at least for now. I expect April's Consumer Price Index to be weaker still.

 

Jobs, on the other hand, is a different story. U.S. jobless claims rose to a nine-month high, but Friday's non-farm payroll employment report drew the market's attention. The number beat estimates, coming in at 177,000 jobs gained compared to 138,000 expected. That helped markets rise to top off a good week of gains.

 

Some on Wall Street are betting that a weaker economy, steady inflation, and the threat of rising unemployment might be a sufficiently worrisome combination for the Fed to alter its wait-and-see point of view. The bond market has upped its probability that the Fed will cut rates at least four times this year. It could provide cover for Fed Chair Jerome Powell to give in to the president's continued pressure to cut interest rates now instead of waiting. 

 

Last week, the market could continue to rally, providing quarterly earnings came in better than expected. Fortunately, that is what happened. We have made progress. I could see 5,700-5,750 before a pullback occurs on the S&P 500 Index. That is a mere 50-100 points away.

 

In the meantime, my warning to wait before chasing gold proved to be the correct call. I expected at least a 10 percent correction in the yellow metal, which would take the price down to $3,150.

 

For markets to continue their recovery, we need to see the following. A peace deal, the tariffs disappear, China and the U.S. come to a trade agreement, the Fed cut rates, and/or no recession. That's a long list, so let's say just two of the above need to happen for further gains.

 

A June Fed cut is a good bet, and China said on Friday that it is at least willing to talk to the U.S. on trade at this point. A Russia/Ukraine deal and/or a U.S. recession remain a 50/50 bet. I am afraid some tariffs are here to stay. If none of the above occur, we remain in a 500-point trading range (5,200-5,700) on the S&P 500. Until these issues are solved, we remain Trump-dependent. 

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at [email protected].

As the flow of container ships to the U.S. slows and the number of trucks needed to distribute Chinese goods declines, retail shelves will soon begin to empty. Unless the tariff war is reversed, consumers should expect shortages.

 

Tariffs (so the story goes) will fuel a U.S. manufacturing renaissance, leading to higher middle-class wages and more stable families and communities. This manufacturing resurgence will promote research, development and innovation leading to economy-wide productivity gains.

 

History and most economists indicate that tariffs will not deliver the desired benefits. But let's not be naysayers. After all, most Americans believe that our trade relations with the world have been overly generous since at least World War II and need some right-sizing. The problem is that even if all of what the administration hopes for comes true, it will take years, if not decades, to achieve. In the meantime, we have to deal with the impact of tariffs in 2025.

 

The economy has already begun to slow due to tariffs registering its first down quarter since 2022. By the end of May, we should begin to see layoffs in the transportation and retail sectors. As tariffs set in within a few months, the first signs of scarcity will show up in toys, low-cost clothing, foot ware, dog toys, and budget home goods. Unfortunately, many American big box retailers are also our most popular go-to stores. Most of them, such as Walmart, IKEA, and Home Depot, have significant imports from China.

 

Last year, China accounted for 37 percent of all U.S. apparel imports and 58 percent of U.S. footwear imports. According to the American Apparel and Footwear Association, the average tariff rate for those imports from China was roughly 18.5 percent, although additional duties have substantially increased that number. If you add another 145 percent to 160 percent in duties, the total can be above 200 percent.

 

It is one reason my wife just ordered a new pair of hiking shoes from Amazon. She worries that they won't be available or, if they are, the costs will double before the end of the summer.

 

A neighbor who regularly purchases heavily discounted consumer goods from Temu, an online marketplace operated by the Chinese e-commerce company PDD Holdings, canceled her latest order after the price of her product rose from $10 to $40, including shipping.

 

That should come as no surprise. Chinese companies that benefited from the de-minimis tax exemption, a loophole that allowed shipments worth less than $800 to enter the U.S. duty-free, have been closed. Chinese companies have already jacked up their prices, in many cases, by more than 300 percent. American shoppers who are regular users of Chinese e-commerce sites will struggle to find replacement items that are close to the same price.

 

At this time of year, U.S. retailers would normally increase orders for the back-to-school season and the winter holidays. Not this year. The president's tariffs on China have caused companies to pull back on orders and cancel existing orders. The abruptness of the tariff hikes has left most companies little to no time to plan for alternative sources to import these goods. The National Retail Federation expects imports to drop by 20 percent in the second half of the year if tariffs continue at their current rate.  

 

Low-margin, fast-moving goods  will disappear first since the retail industry is built on speed and scale, where inventories of these items are replaced "just in time." Think tees, socks, kids' clothing, and basics. Consumer electronics will also feel the heat since many of the cheaper components are made in China. And nearly all dog toys are made in China, so stock up now unless you want to start buying marrow bones.

 

According to the New York Times story "Your Home Without China," other essential items we use daily are imported almost entirely from China (90 percent plus). They include first-aid kits, alarm clocks, toasters, baby strollers, thermoses, microwaves, children's books, charcoal grills, umbrellas and parasols, combs, flashlights, fireworks, bathroom scales, and bamboo shelves. The list goes on. By the end of the article, I realized that a good part of our daily life and its gadgets would not be possible without China.

 

What should readers do to get a jump on the coming tariffs? I suggest buying items that you already planned to purchase now. Washing machines, dryers, ovens, and electronics top that list. Most, if not all, those products are made overseas and will be subject to tariffs. To save money, switch to less expensive brands and models. In addition, shop for older models, one or two years old. For many products, seek out American-made options manufactured in the U.S.

 

Resist the temptation to panic shop unless you can't live without that matching set of dishes or some other item and are convinced there are no substitutes anywhere in the world. Holding off on discretionary purchases such as a vacation, front-row seats to an expensive concert, or frivolous spending may also be a good idea. Many economists are predicting a recession by the end of the year because of these tariffs, so it might be a good idea to wait until it's clear how tariffs will affect your personal finances. 

 

At this point, even if Donald Trump has a change of heart and reduced Chinese tariffs across the board, the disruption that has already occurred in supply chains will take weeks, if not months, to unravel. We learned that lesson during the COVID pandemic. My advice is to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at [email protected].

This week, statements from the president and his treasury secretary indicating a possible thaw in relations with China triggered a bout of FOMO among traders. Markets gained more than 6 percent for the week on a hope and a prayer. Was it justified?

 

On Monday, investors woke up to President Trump calling Fed Chair Jerome Powell "a major loser." That triggered fears that Trump was on the verge of dismissing the head of the U.S. central bank. Markets appeared to be once again rolling over. The stock market cratered.

 

By the end of the day, markets were off by more than 2 percent. It looked as if stocks were ready to roll over and at least re-test if not break the recent lows. Since the U.S. relationship with China was also worsening and with no other tariffs deals insight, traders were positioned for further declines on Tuesday.

 

However, cooler heads prevailed within the Oval Office. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Chief Howard Lutnick, both Wall Street pros, intervened and worked to convince the president to tamp down the rhetoric. The last thing the administration needs right now is more turmoil in financial markets, they argued. Lo and behold, by Tuesday morning the president announced that he had "no intention of firing" Powell. A day later both Bessent and Trump changed their tune over sticking it to China.

 

Last week I wrote that "I believe there is a concerted effort by the administration, after the major meltdown of two weeks ago, to provide a continuous stream of positive, short-term narratives on deals they are negotiating to support markets." We saw that this week.

 

By mid-week, Trump assured the markets that the tariffs on China would "come down substantially," and his negotiations with China would be "very nice." Secretary Bessent chimed in. He expected a de-escalation in the trade war with China, which he said was unsustainable. Both men claimed that talks were ongoing with the Chinese.

 

I noticed a lot of "may do this and may do that" but no "we will do this" in their conversations. To me, the flow of positive statements was an obvious ploy to talk markets higher and it worked. The war of words with China, however, plays both ways.

 

China's Ministry of Commerce released a statement denying talks were being held. "At present, there are absolutely no negotiations on the economy and trade between China and the U.S." The Chinese authorities insisted that before substantive talks can take place, U.S. tariffs must be rolled back. And yet, China is considering exempting tariffs on some U.S. goods shortly.

 

As this drama unfolds, the markets are betting Trump will roll back his tariff war and that his bark is worse than his bite. In addition, many think that as Trump continues to pressure Powell to lower interest rates, at some point he will if the economy falters.

 

Despite the headline risk, corporate earnings are better than expected although only 34 percent of the S&P 500 have reported so far. Google, the first of the Magnificent Seven to report beat on earnings and sales, which heartened tech investors. The remaining mega-cap companies are scheduled to report this coming week.

 

Financial markets continue to be held hostage by the headlines. Over the last two weeks, the president has softened his stance on the tariff front. The 90-day reprieve on reciprocal tariffs and the intention to exempt some U.S. sectors from the worst fallout have relieved investors of their worst fears. A soon-to-be-announced tariff deal with India should also help sentiment.

 

Do the recent stock market gains indicate that we are out of the woods? Remember that the biggest rallies happen during bear markets and some of these rebounds can be breathtaking. The S&P 500 Index had eleven 10 percent rallies during the Financial Crisis and still lost 57 percent over a year and a half. At the turn of this century, during the Dot.Com bubble, the same index chalked up seven rallies that averaged 14 percent but still lost 49 percent over two and a half years.

 

The S&P 500 Index has gained roughly 7 percent this week. Compare that to a 9 percent return per year, which is the long-term average for the S&P 500, so these returns over a short period of time are astounding. And almost every time these bounces occur, investors convince themselves that the bottom is in only to be handed their heads in subsequent downturns.

 

At this point, there is simply too much uncertainty ahead for me to call an "all clear" in the markets. We could see a bit more upside into the beginning of May provided earnings continue to come in better than expected. But I would need to see another 200 points tacked onto the S&P before changing my tune. In the meantime, if you have discovered that your risk tolerance is not as accurate as you thought, take the time to adjust your investments to a more defensive stance.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at [email protected].