Happy Monday! The highlight on this week's economic calendar will take place on Friday, when Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is set to deliver a closely watched speech at the Kansas City Fed's annual conference in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. But today, the world was watching the White House, where President Trump and European leaders were meeting in search of a path to end the war in Ukraine.
Here's your evening update.
Trump Hosts Zelensky, European Leaders for High-Stakes Talks
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and seven other European leaders visited President Trump at the White House today, following Friday's summit between Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
Today's meetings went much more smoothly than Zelensky's last White House visit, back in February, which famously devolved into a fiery clash in front of the television cameras. (Zelensky wore a suit this time and thanked Trump early and often, avoiding the landmines that helped lead to the blowup last time.)
Both Trump and Zelensky said they hoped that today's talks could lead to trilateral negotiations involving Putin.
"I called President Putin, and began the arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy," Trump wrote in a social media post Monday evening. "After that meeting takes place, we will have a Trilat, which would be the two Presidents, plus myself. Again, this was a very good, early step for a War that has been going on for almost four years."
Earlier, Trump was caught on a hot mic telling French President Emmanuel Macron that Putin may want to strike an agreement. "I think he wants to make a deal for me. You understand that? As crazy as it sounds," he said.
Before Monday's meetings, Trump put added pressure on Zelensky with a Sunday night post that said Zelensky "can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight." Trump seemed to suggest that Ukraine should concede that it won't join NATO and that Crimea will stay part of Russia.
But Monday's talks focused more on the security guarantees that Ukraine insists it must have before it agrees to a peace deal. And the friendly tone of the discussions, the simple fact that the meeting took place at all and the group photo of the leaders standing together - Trump and Zelensky flanked by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte - all served to deliver a message to Putin and, perhaps, to allay some fears that Trump was aligning himself with Moscow and backing the Russian leader's terms for ending the war.
"I'm optimistic that collectively we can reach an agreement that would deter any future aggression against Ukraine," Trump said. "I think that the European nations are going to take a lot of the burden. We're going to help them, and we're going to make it very secure."
Trump did not offer specifics about how any security guarantees might be structured or what role the United States would play, though he did not rule out involving American troops.
Read more about Monday's meetings at the Associated Press, Reuters or CNN.
US May Take 10% Stake in Intel
The federal government is in talks to take a roughly 10% ownership stake in embattled American semiconductor giant Intel, according to White House officials cited by Bloomberg News.
One way a federal investment could occur is by transforming the $10.9 billion in grants provided to the troubled chipmaker through the CHIPS and Science Act into an equity stake in the company. Signed into law in 2022 by President Joe Biden, the $280 billion CHIPs Act aimed to boost semiconductor manufacturing and technology development in the United States.
If the investment goes through, it will not be the first for the Trump administration. Nippon Steel gave President Trump a "golden share" as part of an agreement allowing the Japanese firm to take over U.S. Steel, providing him with sweeping veto powers over decisions made by the American company. And the Department of Defense announced last month that it would take a $400 million ownership stake in MP Materials Corp., a producer of rare earth materials.
Analysts expect to see more state investments in firms operating in strategically important industries, especially those competing with powerful Chinese manufacturers.
Critics, though, have expressed concerns about the nature of these investments and questioned Trump's seemingly ad hoc forays into industrial policy and corporate governance.
"[T]he government's interest in Intel as a national-security matter is real. But taking a stake in the company could have vast unintended consequences, especially given Trump's recent propensity for trying to exert direct influence over private business decisions," write Dan Gallagher and Asa Fitch at The Wall Street Journal.
Others have noted the irony in Trump's decidedly statist approach and his frequent attacks calling Democrats "radical" socialists or communists.
"The Democrat would have been accused of being a communist and a lot of other Republicans probably would not have felt comfortable moving in this particular direction because of their greater commitment to market principles," Sarah Bauerle Danzman of the Atlantic Council told CNBC after the U.S. Steel takeover was announced. Danzman added that government investments can distort markets, laying the foundation for "a cascade of new market failures" in the future.
Quote of the Day
"When you come across an intervention that reduces child mortality by almost a half, you cannot understate the impact."
− Dr. Miriam Laker-Oketta, a physician at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda, and a senior research adviser at a nonprofit called GiveDirectly, which helps donors send money to people living in poverty.
Laker-Oketta was quoted in a New York Times article describing the newly published results of a study on alleviating poverty conducted in Kenya: "Giving $1,000 to poor families lowered infant mortality rates by nearly half, and deaths in children under 5 by 45 percent," writes the Times's Apoorva Mandavilli. "The outcomes suggest that delivering even smaller amounts of money to families - especially those that live near a hospital - immediately before or after the birth of a child might allow women to seek medical care and drastically improve their children's chances of survival."
Fiscal News Roundup
- One Thing Republicans Agree on Ahead of This Fall's Funding Fight – Politico
- Republican Civil War Erupts Over Earmarks in Funding Bills – The Hill
- Trump Administration in Talks to Take a 10% Stake in Intel – Bloomberg
- Trump's Health Agency Streamlining Goals Hit Roadblock – Roll Call
- Republicans Promote the Big Beautiful Bill, With Care – Wall Street Journal
- Trump's War on Numbers – Axios
- I.R.S. Makes It Harder for Wind and Solar Projects to Claim Tax Breaks – New York Times
- Bessent Ousts 3 More IRS Executives, Asserting Greater Control – Washington Post
- A $45 Treatment Can Save a Starving Child. US Aid Cuts Have Frozen the Supply – New York Times
- Foreign Holdings of Treasuries Climbed to a Record High in June – Bloomberg
- PBS Slashes Budget by 21% Following Congressional Funding Cuts – CBS News
- Post-Pandemic Office Slump Is Now Hitting Cities' Tax Coffers – Washington Post
- 20 States and DC Sue DOJ to Stop Immigration Requirements on Victim Funds – Associated Press
- Republicans Look to Make a U-Turn on Federal Commitment to Electric Vehicles for the Postal Service – Associated Press
- Novo Halves Ozempic Price to $499 a Month for Those Paying Cash – Bloomberg
Views and Analysis
- America Starts to Feel the Squeeze: What We Know About Tariffs and Inflation – Courtenay Brown, Axios
- Global Economy Took Tariff Hike in Its Stride, but Stronger Headwinds Are Ahead – Paul Hannon, Wall Street Journal
- How Global Tensions Are Complicating Tariff-Fueled Inflation Risks – Courtenay Brown, Axios
- Will E.J. Antoni Raise Your Taxes? – Daniel Bunn and Kyle Pomerleau, Wall Street Journal
- Trump Is Pushing India Back Toward China – David Pierson and Alex Travelli, New York Times
- Trump's Rollback of Rules for Mental Health Coverage Could Lead More Americans to Go Without Care – Maya Miller and Jeremy Kohler, ProPublica
- How Your County Is Affected By 'Big Beautiful Bill' Tax Cuts – Emily Peck and Jason Lalljee, Axios
- Why Child Care Costs So Much - and How to Fix It – Jordan McGillis, Washington Post
- The Big Problem With This Aging $8 Billion Fund – Roslyn Layton, Washington Post
- When L'État C'est Trump, the U.S. Goes in for State Capitalism – Harold Meyerson, American Prospect
- Big Business and Wall Street Need to Stand Up for Honest Data – John Cassidy, New Yorker
- Redistricting Push Would Further Divide a Polarized Congress – Carl Hulse, New York Times
- The I.R.S. Is Trying to Uphold a Core Liberal Principle – Benjamin Leff, New York Times
- Reduced ACA Subsidies May Make It Harder for Young Adults to Afford Coverage – Elisabeth Rosenthal, KFF Health News
- America Is Abandoning One of the Greatest Medical Breakthroughs – Rick Bright, New York Times