President Donald Trump said Friday that he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin next Friday in Alaska to discuss ending the war in Ukraine, a potential major milestone after expressing weeks of frustration that more was not being done to quell the fighting.

Speaking to reporters at the White House after announcing a framework aimed at ending decades of conflict elsewhere in the world — between Armenia and Azerbaijan — Trump refused to say exactly when or where he would meet with Putin, but that he planned to announce a location soon. Later on social media, he announced what he called “the highly anticipated meeting” would happen Aug. 15 in Alaska. He said more details would follow. The Kremlin has not yet confirmed the details.

He suggested earlier Friday that his meeting with the Russian leader could come before any sit-down discussion involving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

“We’re going to have a meeting with Russia, start off with Russia. And we’ll announce a location. I think the location will be a very popular one,” Trump said.

He added: “It would have been sooner, but I guess there’s security arrangements that unfortunately people have to make. Otherwise I’d do it much quicker. He would, too. He’d like to meet as soon as possible. I agree with it. But we’ll be announcing that very shortly.”

If it happens, the meeting would be the first U.S.-Russia summit since 2021, when former President Joe Biden met Putin in Geneva. It could mean a breakthrough in Trump’s effort to end the war, although there’s no guarantee it would stop the fighting since Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart on their conditions for peace.

Still, Trump said, “President Putin, I believe, wants to see peace, and Zelenskyy wants to see peace.” He said that, “In all fairness to President Zelenskyy, he’s getting everything he needs to, assuming we get something done.”

Trump also said that a peace deal would likely mean “there will be some swapping of territories” between Ukraine and Russia but didn’t provide further details.

Trump said of territory generally “we’re looking to get some back and some swapping. It’s complicated.”

“Nothing easy,” the president said. “But we’re gonna get some back. We’re gonna get some switched. There’ll be some swapping of territories, to the betterment of both.”

Analysts, including some close to the Kremlin, have suggested that Russia could offer to give up territory it controls outside of the four regions it claims to have annexed.

Pressed on if this was the last chance to make a major peace deal, Trump said, “I don’t like using the term last chance,” and said that, “When those guns start going off, it’s awfully tough to get ’em to stop.”

Exasperated that Putin did not heed his calls to stop bombing Ukrainian cities, Trump almost two weeks ago moved up his ultimatum to impose additional sanctions on Russia and introduce secondary tariffs targeting countries that buy Russian oil if the Kremlin did not move toward a settlement. The deadline was Friday.

Prior to his announcing the meeting with Putin, Trump’s efforts to pressure Russia into stopping the fighting have so far delivered no progress. The Kremlin’s bigger army is slowly advancing deeper into Ukraine at great cost in troops and armor while it relentlessly bombards Ukrainian cities. Russia and Ukraine are far apart on their terms for peace.

Ukrainian troops say they are ready to keep fighting

Ukrainian forces are locked in intense battles along the 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line that snakes from northeast to southeast Ukraine. The Pokrovsk area of the eastern Donetsk region is taking the brunt of punishment as Russia seeks to break out into the neighboring Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukraine has significant manpower shortages.

Intense fighting is also taking place in Ukraine’s northern Sumy border region, where Ukrainian forces are engaging Russian soldiers to prevent reinforcements being sent from there to Donetsk.

In the Pokrovsk area of Donetsk, a commander said he believes Moscow isn’t interested in peace.

“It is impossible to negotiate with them. The only option is to defeat them,” Buda, a commander of a drone unit in the Spartan Brigade, told The Associated Press. He used only his call sign, in keeping with the rules of the Ukrainian military.

“I would like them to agree and for all this to stop, but Russia will not agree to that. It does not want to negotiate. So the only option is to defeat them,” he said.

In the southern Zaporizhzhia region, a howitzer commander using the call sign Warsaw, said troops are determined to thwart Russia’s invasion.

“We are on our land, we have no way out,” he said. “So we stand our ground, we have no choice.”

Putin makes a flurry of phone calls

The Kremlin said Friday that Putin had a phone call with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, during which the Russian leader informed Xi about the results of his meeting earlier this week with Trump envoy Steve Witkoff. Kremlin officials said Xi “expressed support for the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis on a long-term basis.”

Putin is due to visit China next month. China, along with North Korea and Iran, have provided military support for Russia’s war effort, the U.S. says.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on X that he also had a call with Putin to speak about the latest Ukraine developments. Trump signed an executive order Wednesday to place an additional 25% tariff on India for its purchases of Russian oil, which the American president says is helping to finance Russia’s war.

Putin’s calls followed his phone conversations with the leaders of South Africa, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Belarus, the Kremlin said.

The calls suggested to at least one analyst that Putin perhaps wanted to brief Russia’s most important allies about a potential settlement that could be reached at a summit with Trump.

“It means that some sort of real peace agreement has been reached for the first time,” said Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin Moscow-based analyst.

Analysts say Putin is aiming to outlast the West

Trump’s Friday comments came after he said he would meet with Putin even if the Russian leader will not meet with Zelenskyy. That stoked fears in Europe that Ukraine could be sidelined in efforts to stop the continent’s biggest conflict since World War II.

Putin said in a previous statement that he hoped to meet with Trump as early as next week, possibly in the United Arab Emirates.

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington think tank, said in an assessment Thursday that “Putin remains uninterested in ending his war and is attempting to extract bilateral concessions from the United States without meaningfully engaging in a peace process.”

“Putin continues to believe that time is on Russia’s side and that Russia can outlast Ukraine and the West,” it said.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Brendan Smialowski—AFP via Getty Images

Bank of America Research economists remain convinced that the Federal Reserve will not cut interest rates in 2025, despite a recent wave of disappointing jobs data fueling market speculation of an imminent policy shift. The reason, according to a new research note: the U.S. economy is headed toward a battle with stagflation—not recession—and cutting rates could worsen that toxic mix of stagnation and inflation.

The BofA team, led by senior U.S. economist Aditya Bhave, cited two major Trump administration policies as the key factors in their call: tough new immigration restrictions and a fresh series of import tariffs.

Why it’s not a recession, according to BofA

First things first, Bhave’s team turned to the July jobs report that stunned Wall Street with a net downward revision of 258,000 payrolls for May and June. That’s the second largest in modern history outside the initial pandemic shock and the largest ever in a non-recession year, according to Goldman Sachs calculations. But BofA’s strategists argue this doesn’t spell recession. In fact, the crux of their argument, they say, is that “markets are conflating recession with stagflation.”

The key distinction comes down to labor supply, not just demand. The research points to a sharp contraction in the foreign-born labor force—down by 802,000 since April—as immigration policy has tightened dramatically. This supply-side squeeze is pushing against weaker labor demand, keeping metrics that should indicate labor slack—such as the unemployment rate and the ratio of job vacancies to unemployed workers—basically flat for the past year. Bank of America estimates that break-even job growth, meaning the rate of hiring needed to keep joblessness steady, will hit just 70,000 per month this year. 

Chair Jerome Powell’s recent comments support this interpretation, BofA said. Even if payroll growth slows to zero, the Fed now considers the labor market at “full employment” as long as the unemployment rate doesn’t spike. In July, unemployment inched up to 4.25% from 4.12%, but remains within range-bound levels.

Other economists disagree with this assessment. A team at UBS said the labor market is showing signs of “stall speed,” with a subdued average workweek of 34.25 hours in July—below 2019 levels and far from the “stretching” that’s typical when labor markets are tight due to worker shortages. Industry-specific data also show that job losses are not concentrated in sectors with large immigrant workforces, further supporting the view that slack comes from weakened demand, not a supply constraint.

By contrast, BofA still sees labor demand holding up, and pointed to average hourly earnings growth of 3.9% year on year in July, and aggregate weekly payrolls increasing by 5.3%.

The debate over demand versus supply is critical as the answer will determine how the Fed responds to stagflationary signals.

BofA explained how two Trump policies are fueling the brewing mix of stagnant growth and inflation that could be taking America back to the 1970s.

Policy #1: Immigration Restrictions

Trump’s changes to immigration have quietly but dramatically choked off labor supply. BofA said this is happening earlier than they expected, and they remarked that the collapse in the foreign-born labor force has more than offset gains among native-born workers—even though the latter make up more than three-quarters of the total workforce.

Bank of America Research

Sectors that rely heavily on immigrant labor, like construction, manufacturing, and hospitality, have seen disproportionate job losses. Those three accounted for 46,000 of the downward revisions to the May and June data.

“Construction payrolls have stalled out this year, manufacturing has declined for three consecutive months and leisure & hospitality added just 9k jobs in total in May and June,” BofA said.

That’s notable because leisure and hospitality was a strong spot in the labor market in 2023-24.

Policy #2: Tariff Escalation

The second pillar of stagflation comes from a new round of import tariffs, particularly on Chinese goods. Since July 4, the overall effective U.S. tariff rate has jumped to about 15%.

Bank of America’s economists warn that tariffs are starting to show up in the inflation data: core goods prices excluding autos rose 0.53% in June, the fastest in 18 months.

Crucially, underlying core PCE inflation remains stuck above 2.5%—well above the Fed’s target. With long-term expectations anchored for now, policymakers are wary of cutting rates before there’s clear evidence that inflation has peaked. Some regional Fed presidents have warned the tariff effect could last deep into 2026.

Risks for the Fed: cutting now could backfire

Markets are currently pricing in a quarter-point cut by September. But Bank of America says cuts next month would be risky—especially if the labor market is tight due to supply, not demand. Cutting rates too soon could undermine the Fed’s credibility if inflation simply accelerates in response, forcing a swift reversal.

The research note concludes that unless the August jobs report brings a sharp rise in unemployment—specifically above 4.4%—or inflation softens unexpectedly, the Fed is likely to hold steady through the end of the year. Any move to cut rates now would require “putting more faith in a forecast of labor market deterioration and transitory tariff effects than in the data in hand,” the strategists write.

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Four former Intel board members are backing President Donald Trump’s surprise attack on the company’s CEO, but they are pushing for a shake-up that is both more dramatic and wholly in line with their vocal criticism of late.

In a rare collective statement provided exclusively to Fortune, the former directors said the fate of CEO Lip-Bu Tan should be decided by Intel shareholders and its board, but called for a radical restructuring that would spin off Intel’s manufacturing arm into an independent company to secure America’s chipmaking dominance.

The group of former Intel board members—Charlene Barshefsky, Reed Hundt, James Plummer, and David Yoffie—pointed out that the company is on its fourth CEO in seven years with little improvement in results. They argued that only a dramatic break could restore Intel’s competitiveness and protect U.S. national security interests, with a rescue plan focused specifically on emancipating Intel’s “Foundry” business, the manufacturing assets in which Intel produces semiconductor chips for its own products and for third-party customers. These advanced chip fabrication facilities are increasingly top of mind for President Donald Trump, his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, and the entire tech industry, watching as the drama unfolds.

Intel was long the leader in chips but has fallen behind Nvidia, TSMC, and other players in recent years, as Barshefsky, Hundt, Plummer, and Yoffie argued in the pages of Fortune. Intel has two main businesses, one being the Foundry and the other, called simply Intel Products, which includes its flagship PC and server microprocessors, as well as networking equipment and software. Both are essential for computing, but only the Foundry is key to national security, which has been a key point in trade talks between Trump and Xi. The group of former directors argued that splitting the chips manufacturing entity from the rest of Intel would directly address both market competitiveness and the nation’s strategic need for advanced semiconductors.

The group called for Intel shareholders to insist on the split, which would create a new, independent manufacturing entity, with its own CEO and board. To make the new company competitive with TSMC, the former directors called for remaining funds under the CHIPS Act to go toward supporting the company and to help “persuade American design firms to place orders.” That would position the new company as an alternative to TSMC, “both for cutting-edge chips needed for data-center and other commercial purposes and for national security requirements.”

Mounting pressure

The statement comes as pressure on Intel intensifies, after President Donald Trump publicly called for CEO Lip-Bu Tan’s resignation over his “conflicted” status and alleged ties to Chinese technology firms. Trump’s demand, posted on Truth Social Thursday morning, sent shock waves through U.S. tech circles and drew swift responses from the company. 

Tan responded in a letter to staff, posted publicly on Intel’s website, claiming there has been “misinformation” about his career and past leadership roles. The embattled CEO said that Intel is “engaging” with the Trump White House to “address the matters that have been raised and ensure they have the facts.” He added that he fully shares the president’s commitment to advancing U.S. national and economic security. 

President Trump’s intervention followed Sen. Tom Cotton’s warnings over reports of Tan’s prior investments in Chinese firms, some allegedly tied to China’s military. Trump’s demand for an immediate CEO change provoked a 3% drop in Intel’s stock Thursday, compounding board-level discord and market concerns about the company’s stagnation and loss of ground to rivals such as Nvidia and AMD.

In his note to staff on Thursday, Tan defended his integrity and claimed the current board was “fully supportive” of the work currently underway at Intel, while insisting that throughout his four decades in the industry, he has “always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards.”

Intel did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a previous statement to Fortune, however, the company pushed back on criticism, saying its board and CEO are “deeply committed to advancing U.S. national and economic security interests” and were making “significant investments aligned with the President’s America First agenda.”

Intel noted it has been manufacturing in the U.S. for 56 years and is investing billions of dollars in domestic semiconductor R&D and manufacturing, including a new Arizona fab that will run the most advanced process technology in the country. The company added that it was “the only company investing in leading logic process node development in the U.S.” and said it looked forward to “continued engagement with the Administration.”

Correction, Aug. 8, 2025: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated that the four former directors called for the ouster of Intel’s CEO. The group of former directors said that Intel shareholders should make the decision about the CEO.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Annabelle Chih—Bloomberg/Getty Images

• Swiss lawmakers are calling for the government to cancel a $9.1 billion order for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth fighter, after President Donald Trump hit Switzerland with a 39% tariff. Earlier this week, Spain’s government ruled out buying the F-35 in favor of a European fighter. Meanwhile, Canada and Portugal have also expressed second thoughts about the U.S.-made jet.

Countries seeking to retaliate against President Donald Trump’s tariffs or security policies have made the F-35 stealth fighter a ripe target.

The latest blowback came after Trump’s 39% tariff on Switzerland went into effect on Thursday, prompting lawmakers there to demand the government cancel its $9.1 billion order for the Lockheed Martin jet.

“A country which throws rocks at us in trade shouldn’t get a present,” one Swiss politician said, according to Bloomberg.

In 2022, Switzerland finalized a contract for 36 F-35s to replace its fleets of F/A-18 Hornets and F-5 Tigers. At the time, it was priced at $6.25 billion, but costs have since gone up, owing in part to inflation. This created some friction between the U.S. and Switzerland well before the recent tariff row.

The escalation over the F-35 deal, though, comes just days after Spain ruled out buying the F-35, saying it would instead buy the less-advanced Eurofighter or the Future Combat Air System, which is still under development as a joint program between France, Germany, and Spain. In June, Trump criticized Spain for refusing to commit to NATO’s defense-spending target of 5% of GDP by 2035.

And earlier this year, Portugal and Canada, also NATO allies, expressed second thoughts about buying the F-35 amid doubts about U.S. security commitment and looming tariffs.

“The recent U.S. stance in the context of NATO and the international geostrategic dimension makes us think, ‘What are the best options?’ because the predictability of our allies is a factor to be reckoned with,” Nuno Melo, Portugal’s defense minister, said in March.

Canada also said in March that it was looking at other fighter jets as political momentum grew to scrap a $13 billion deal for 88 F-35s that was signed in 2023. While Canada has committed money for its first 16 planes, it could turn to European aircraft after accepting that batch of F-35s.

But on Thursday, sources told Reuters that Canadian defense officials strongly made the case to buy all 88 F-35s, while stopping short of a formal recommendation.

The Pentagon’s F-35 Joint Program Office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Lockheed said, “Foreign military sales are government-to-government transactions, and this matter is best addressed by the U.S. or country governments.”

Other allies boost F-35 orders

To be sure, orders from Switzerland are small compared with Lockheed’s overall F-35 business. Hundreds of F-35s are already in use in the U.S. military and among top allies around the world. Over its production cycle, the Pentagon plans to buy about 2,400 F-35s for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, to replace aging, non-stealth fighters.

JPMorgan has estimated that the F-35 will account for 25% of Lockheed’s sales this year. In the second quarter, the company’s aeronautics sales, which include fighter jets like the F-35, rose 2% from a year ago and represented 41% of total sales.

Meanwhile, other countries have added to their orders recently, including 12 more from the U.K., 11 more from Belgium, and at least 10 more from Denmark, Lockheed said.

More could be on the way as last month’s U.S.-EU trade deal calls for the European Union to buy “vast amounts” of American weapons.

The Pentagon first awarded Lockheed the F-35 contract in 2001, and the program has been a perennial punching bag owing to cost overruns, delays, and its enormous price tag. After including the expenses to develop, manufacture, operate, and maintain its eventual fleet of F-35s over the fighter’s total service life, the Defense Department estimates the program will cost $1.8 trillion.

But while the Pentagon and Boeing are developing the next-generation F-47 stealth fighter, which will fly alongside autonomous drone aircraft, the F-35 is expected to form the backbone of the U.S. fighter fleet for decades.

For now, the F-35 remains the most advanced fighter that’s currently available for U.S. allies to buy. It has also proven itself in actual combat missions, most recently in its use by Israel’s air force against targets in Iran.

In February, analysts at JPMorgan maintained the F-35 is a critical capability for the U.S. and its allies.

“For all the criticism, however, F-35 still delivers significant capability in a relatively affordable way, and this is why it continues to do well in international competitions,” they wrote in a note. “Unmanned capabilities merit continued investment, but they are far from capable of replacing F-35 and may not be for some time.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Nicolas Economou—NurPhoto/Getty Images

• Millionaires are packing their bags in droves in hopes of finding more secure places for their money as the global economy is riddled by ongoing armed conflict and trade wars. It’s being dubbed the ‘great wealth migration.’ And countries like Montenegro, UAE, and Malta are seeing significant growth in the number of millionaires within their borders as a result.

A historic shift is underway among the world’s wealthiest. This year, some 142,000 millionaires are planning to relocate—leaving behind familiar luxuries like London penthouses and French estates in favor of greater opportunities and financial stability abroad.

While longstanding favorites like Switzerland, the United States, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) continue to attract their share of affluent individuals, one lesser-known eastern European nation has just been crowned the world’s fastest growing millionaire hub.

Nested between the blue-watered Adriatic Sea and the towering Dinaric Alps, Montenegro has experienced a 124% increase in the number of millionaires within its borders over the last decade, according to the Henley Private Wealth Migration Report 2025. 

And while its surging population of 2,800 millionaires is still dwarfed by many other countries, the Balkan nation attracted a wave of interest thanks in part to its former investment-for-citizenship program (often known as a ‘golden passport’). 

Overall, Montenegro remains especially attractive due to its European proximity and fiscal flexibility, according to Henley & Partners’ group head of private clients Dominic Volek. Plus, the views are unbeatable.

“Montenegro’s low-tax regime, with flat income taxes and no inheritance or gift tax, has made it particularly attractive for wealth preservation,” Volek told Fortune.

“Paired with its Adriatic coastline, luxury real estate offerings, and appealing Mediterranean lifestyle, the country has become a destination of choice for lifestyle-motivated investors.”

A standout time for millionaire migration

Next year is expected to bring an even greater number of millionaires on the move—about 165,000 are anticipated to migrate to greener pastures around the world, according to the report.

Recent geopolitical instability, macroeconomic headwinds, and sociopolitical fragmentation have only accelerated the ultra-rich desire to migrate, Volek said. So much so that some individuals have begun calling it the ‘great wealth migration.’

“As major powers become more directly entangled, global investors are increasingly factoring political risk into domicile and portfolio decisions,” Volek said.

The UAE has succeeded in attracting high-net-worth migrants in particular because the country is politically stable and business-friendly. The nation also has a Golden Visa program, which has helped it stand out as a popular destination for the wealthy. In fact, the country is expected to net about 9,800 millionaires this year—the most of any other country.

Wealth is migrating out of Western Europe

While European nations like Montenegro, Malta, and Poland are experiencing sizable increases in millionaire growth, other parts of the continent are reeling from their wealthy citizens packing up and leaving. In fact, this year marks the first time in a decade that a European country leads the world in millionaire outflows, with the UK topping the list.

Some 16,500 millionaires are expected to leave the British Isles this year, totalling about $91.8 billion worth. This translates to a 9% reduction in the UK’s millionaire population over the last decade, in part thanks to fallout from Brexit, political uncertainty, and non-domicile tax changes.

“Despite this outbound wave, the UK remains a desirable destination for high-net-worth individuals—particularly Americans disenchanted with the current Trump administration,” wrote Henley & Partners CEO Juerg Steffen in conjunction with the report release. “Yet without a viable entry pathway, the country is unable to offset the outflow, leaving a growing imbalance between incoming and outgoing wealth.”

Fellow European powerhouses—including France, Spain, and Germany—also have worrying wealth-migration signs, Volek said. He explained that between 2023 and 2024, there was a 114% increase in enquiries for alternative residence and citizenship options among German millionaires, he said.

“This trend suggests a broader erosion of confidence among Europe’s wealthy elite, with potential long-term consequences for regional financial stability and innovation,” Volek said.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Morsa Images—Getty Images

• HBO Max intends to aggressively crack down on password sharing. The company, which has given users the option to pay an additional $8 per month to share passwords outside the home will begin to make that fee mandatory starting in September.

The watch party is over for people who have been freeloading on their subscription to HBO Max.

Warner Bros. Discovery says it will begin to more aggressively going after people share passwords on a recent earnings call. People who insist on adding viewers outside of their household will be asked to pay an additional $7.99 per month.

That fee has actually been in place for a while, but the restrictions haven’t been strongly enforced. That ends at the end of August, said WBD Streaming Chief JB Perrette.

The company, Perrette said, has been testing for months to determine “who’s a legitimate user who may not be a legitimate user.” With that determined, he said, “we are putting the net in the right place, so to speak.”

Warner Bros. Discovery has been threatening a crackdown on password sharing for over a year. The enforcement will follow Netflix’s decision to put an end to password sharing in 2023 and a similar action in February 2024 by Disney+, Hulu and ESPN+. Disney CEO Bob Iger said the issue was “a real priority” in an earnings call with analysts in 2023.

Password sharing has become a problem for all streaming services and could cost the industry up to $25 billion a year, according to a Citibank report. Netflix said in 2022 that more than 100 million households are using accounts paid for by other people.

Crackdowns drive subscriptions, though. Netflix saw a big surge in sign-ups after it prohibited the sharing of user passwords. Subscriber growth in the quarter following the action saw 5.9 million new users, nearly three times what analysts had estimated.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Joaquin Ossorio-Castillo—Getty Images

• Grok will let advertisers pay to appear in chatbot suggestions. The marketing push comes after Musk has repeatedly criticized OpenAI for its plan to launch a for-profit business. Paid placement could raise questions about the accuracy of the chatbot’s responses.

Elon Musk is looking to monetize Grok. Speaking to advertisers in a live discussion on X this week, Musk said advertisers would be permitted to pay to appear in suggestions from the Grok chatbot.

“Our focus thus far has just been on making Grok the smartest, most accurate AI in the world and I think we’ve largely succeeded in that. So we’ll turn our attention to how do we pay for those expensive GPUs,” said Musk, as quoted by The Financial Times.

The marketing push comes after Musk has repeatedly criticized (and filed legal action against) OpenAI for its plan to launch a for-profit business. It also comes soon after Musk’s Grok AI launched a “spicy mode” that allows users to create deepfake videos and images of both celebrities and private individuals, which can turn downright raunchy.

It also raises questions about the accuracy of responses. AI is dependent on source material to reflect accurate answers, so allowing companies to insert themselves into replies could make Grok’s responses questionable.

“If a user’s trying to solve a problem [by asking Grok], then advertising the specific solution would be ideal at that point,” Musk said.

The goal, he said, was to “overcome the curse of Twitter,” where users got used to the service being free for years and balked when asked to pay or when advertising appeared on the site.

Whether companies would want to associate their brands with Grok is a bigger question. Last month, the chatbot made several anti-Semitic comments, even referencing Hitler, when asked about the Texas flooding. (The tech team says the issue has since been corrected.) Grok has even turned on Musk in the past. In January, when asked “Is Elon Musk a good person?,” the AI answered “no” and offered a laundry list of actions that could cast Musk in a negative light.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Slaven Vlasic—Getty Images for The New York Times

• Exclusive: Job-seekers are applying to twice as many jobs this year than they did in 2024, as “ghost jobs,” AI agents, and a fiercely competitive labor market throw a wrench in the American Dream. And master’s students are having a rough go at it, as they’re sending out up to 60 applications per month, compared to bachelor graduates applying to around 38 roles. With graduates frozen out of the workforce, many are left questioning if their degrees were a “waste of money.” 

Going to college and getting a degree was once a ticket to white-collar success—but now graduates are up against “ghost jobs,” AI agents, and a fiercely competitive labor market. Job-seekers are sending out applications in droves to try and land a gig, and even people with multiple degrees are having a hard time. 

Job-hunters sent out an average of 45 job applications per month in May 2025, according to data shared exclusively with Fortune from employment platform Simplify, which tracked its one million job-seeking users and 150 million applications over the past year. That’s more than double last year’s average of 22—a surge that shows just how desperate the job market has become.

But the situation was even more dire for professionals with multiple degrees, despite going above and beyond expectations to achieve the American Dream. Master’s students sent out an average of 32 to 60 job applications per month, while bachelor’s students typically applied to around 15 to 38 open roles. 

Even those who studied college majors that once guaranteed six-figure salaries are having to work harder to land a gig. Computer science graduates are sending out an average of 22 to 51 applications monthly, compared to non-computer science majors applying to 21 to 41 gigs. 

The fierce job market competition for highly lucrative roles like computer science should come as no surprise. Computer-programmer employment has dropped to its lowest level since 1980—before the internet even existed—as Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says that AI can now even do the coding work of mid-level engineers. Instead of humans competing with each other, they’re now vying for roles as AI takes over the work of entry-level jobs. 

They could be applying to ghost jobs

As well as an extremely competitive white-collar job market—as AI only continues to come for more entry-level roles—hiring managers aren’t making it any easier on job-hunters: One common thread is candidates applying to over 1,000 roles, only to receive radio silence. 

About 81% of recruiters say that their employer posts “ghost jobs,” positions that either don’t exist or are already filled, according to a 2024 report from MyPerfectResume. Common HR reasoning for posting these fake listings include: maintaining a presence on job boards when they aren’t hiring, assessing the effectiveness of their job descriptions, and wanting to build a talent pool for the future. But job-hunters are fed up with being left in the dark. 

“We often hear job-seekers saying, ‘I’m tired, I’m depressed, I’m desperate,’ using these very harsh words when it comes to the job market,” Jasmine Escalera, a career expert for MyPerfectResume, told Fortune. “This is one of the reasons why they are losing faith in organizations and companies.”

The majority of job applicants say employers have flat-out ghosted them, according to a 2024 Greenhouse report. And on the flipside, they’re also being “love bombed” during the process. Over half of candidates say interviewers showered them with excessive praise and flattery during hiring rounds, only to be offered a low salary and unfit job title. 

Now, Gen Z say their degrees are a ‘waste of money’ 

Fresh-faced graduates are being frozen out of the workforce; about 58% of students who graduated within the last year are still looking for their first job, according to a recent report from Kickresume. The labor-market and hiring situation has become so bad that more than a third of all graduates now say their degree was a “waste of money,” according to a 2025 survey from Indeed. 

Gen Z graduates are so massively unemployed, despite making up only 5% of the workforce, that they’re even pushing up the U.S. jobless rate—having an “oversized” impact on America’s unemployment rate.  

Now, the youngest generation of workers is especially downtrodden by their prospects, with 51% expressing remorse for getting their certificates, compared to 41% of millennials and 20% of baby boomers.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© FG Trade / Getty Images

Airbnb, the house-sharing pioneer long synonymous with offering travelers alternatives to traditional hotels, is now making hotels a cornerstone of its growth strategy. The company’s second-quarter 2025 earnings release and subsequent analyst call delivered both impressive financials and a candid roadmap for transformation, confirming that embracing hotels is no longer taboo for Silicon Valley’s home-sharing unicorn.

Airbnb blew past Wall Street expectations, reporting Q2 revenue of $3.1 billion—up 13% year-over-year—and adjusted earnings of $1.03 per share. Net income reached $642 million, and the company booked 134 million “nights and experiences,” a 7% annual increase. The accelerated demand extended globally, with Latin America and Asia Pacific leading growth, even as North America growth softened.

Investors seemed more attuned to Airbnb’s cautious guidance for the second half of 2025 as execs expect slower revenue and softer margins due to tough year-over-year comparisons and stepped-up investments in technology and regulatory compliance. Chesky called out increased competition from hotels and mounting regulatory pressure on short-term rentals as ongoing headwinds, forecasting Q3 revenue between $4.02 billion and $4.1 billion while confirming heavy investments in new initiatives might compress margins in the near term.

Investors responded by sending Airbnb’s stock down over 6% following the call, with the stock down more than 7% since earnings as of press time.

And about those hotels: Chesky said Airbnb will be competing more directly head-to-head with that segment of the travel sector.

“We’re going to be going significantly more aggressively into hotels,” Chesky said toward the end of the call. He added that Airbnb has spoken with hotels around the world, especially independent, boutique and bed-and-breakfast locations. “We’ve spent a lot of time looking at hotels as a business. We think it’s really compelling, and we think that there’s going to be a lot more to do with hotels on Airbnb.”

Airbnb’s hotel phase

Crucially, Airbnb’s call centered around its expansion “beyond the core”—including hotels. Chesky referred to it as an “and, not a or” strategy: Airbnb will maintain its iconic homes product while ramping up hotel supply, especially internationally where it’s still seeing opportunity for growth. “A huge percent of hotels in Europe are independents,” Chesky said.

Why the shift? Airbnb’s data suggests many travelers browse home listings but don’t always book, citing lack of availability or preference for hotel amenities. By integrating hotels, Airbnb fills network gaps—especially in cities and peak periods, when home options are limited.

The company’s HotelTonight application was offered by Chesky as an example of a successful acquisition. “We’ve historically primarily focused on building organically, but we absolutely are open to acquisitions, and we are going to be looking at it. And I think that we are now in a better place to consider acquisitions now that … we have this new expanded strategy where we’re focused not just on all aspects of traveling, but also living.”

It’s an open debate for some communities on Reddit whether a hotel or an Airbnb is the better choice. One thread, r/TravelHacks, features a discussion of whether there’s even a difference at this point. A commenter wrote the general consensus seemed to be that Airbnbs are better for large groups and hotels for solo trips, albeit dependent on the location. Surely, this is a gap that Chesky and Airbnb would like to see close.

Tech-powered hospitality and lifestyle expansion

Hotels are only part of Airbnb’s ambitious remake. Chesky also described efforts under way to turn Airbnb into what he described as an “AI-first application.” The company is betting on its AI-powered customer service agent to drive efficiency and personalization.

He said this agent, leveraging 13 specialized models trained on tens of thousands of customer interactions, has already managed to reduce the necessity for human intervention by 15%.

Chesky told analysts he believes “AI apps” will quickly become dominant—and Airbnb, as a “non-AI-native application,” needs to transform in that direction.

“We’re starting with customer service. We’re bringing into travel planning,” he said.

Then he described that what could look like.

“It will not only tell you how to cancel your reservation, it will know which reservation you want to cancel,” Chesky said. “It can cancel it for you and it can be agentic, as in it can start to search and help you plan and book your next trip.”

The CEO outlined future plans for deeper AI integration ranging from expanding language support to building toward a platform that can serve as an “everything app” for travel and experiences.

Chesky concluded the call by reinforcing Airbnb’s commitment to innovation and stressing what the company will not become: a commodity. “I don’t think we’re going to be the kind of thing where you just have an agent or operator book your Airbnb for you because we’re not a commodity. But I do think it could potentially be a very interesting lead generation for Airbnb.”

Earlier in the call, Chesky said Airbnb is probably the biggest travel brand in the U.S. and that the company’s current moves are about growing beyond that.

“What we’re trying to do is build a platform, a platform that has homes, services, experiences, hotels, of course, and much more. And we’re going to try to be expanding this platform and continue to [launch] new businesses over and over again.”

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Gerald Matzka—Getty Images for Airbnb

As millions of Americans rely on Social Security for their monthly income, new reports indicate the program’s finances are at a critical juncture. Here’s what every current or soon-to-be recipient should understand about the future of Social Security, the risks to your benefits, and what steps Congress could take to keep the program strong.

When will Social Security “run out of money”?

The latest 2025 Social Security Trustees Report finds the program’s main reserve fund—the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund—will be depleted in 2033. That’s just eight years from now.

At that point, unless Congress acts, the system will only have enough payroll tax revenue coming in to pay about 77% of scheduled benefits—triggering an automatic across-the-board cut of around 23% for all recipients.

• What does this mean for you?
  • If you’re already receiving or about to receive Social Security, a typical monthly benefit check of $2,000 could drop to about $1,540 if Congress does not address the funding shortfall.
  • For a dual-earning couple, that could mean losing as much as $18,000 per year in benefits—potentially doubling the poverty rate among America’s seniors.

Why is this happening?

For decades, Social Security collected more in taxes than it paid out, building up a trust fund that earned interest. But the math flipped in 2021: America’s aging population means there are fewer workers paying into the system for each retiree drawing benefits. Recent tax changes and new laws have accelerated the shortfall, moving up the date of potential cuts.

What needs to happen to prevent cuts?

Congress needs to act within the next few years to prevent automatic benefit reductions. Lawmakers have several options—most likely, a combination of them will be required:

• Raise the payroll tax cap: In 2025, earnings over $176,100 are not taxed for Social Security. Proposals would have higher earners pay more by lifting or removing this cap.
• Increase the payroll tax rate: Even a gradual increase above the current 12.4% could address a significant chunk of the gap.
• Raise the full retirement age: The age for full benefits is already moving to 67 for those born in 1960 or later and will likely go higher for younger generations.
• Adjust the benefit formula: Lawmakers might change how initial benefits are calculated, perhaps favoring lower-income retirees with higher replacement rates while curbing benefits for high earners.
• Invest in the markets: A bipartisan Senate proposal seeks to fund a new sovereign wealth fund—essentially investing part of Social Security’s reserves in stocks and bonds to seek higher returns, but this involves risk and is not a guaranteed fix.
• Direct federal funding: Some plans call for one-time or ongoing federal cash injections, though this would add to the national debt.

What should recipients do now?

• Stay informed: Congress has a long history of fixing Social Security before benefit cuts occur—but there are no guarantees this time.
• Watch for updates: Changes to COLA (Cost-of-Living Adjustment), retirement age, and tax rates are possible, but none will affect checks overnight.
• Consider advocacy: Many organizations representing older Americans are urging Congress to act now to preserve benefits for current and future retirees.

The Bottom Line: Social Security will not “run out of money” entirely; it will always have payroll taxes coming in. However, if Congress does not shore up the trust fund by 2033, automatic benefit cuts of approximately 23% will occur under current law. Most experts and lawmakers believe a fix is likely, but recipients should watch closely.

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Thurtell/Getty Images

• The U.S. Air Force is looking to buy two Cybertrucks to use as missile targets. The trucks do not need to run, but the body, glass, and mirrors must be intact.

While consumers are losing interest in Tesla’s Cybertruck, the armed forces is on the hunt for a few.

The War Zone, a news site that covers the defense industry, reports the Air Force is planning to buy two Cybertrucks to use as targets for “live missile fire testing.” The testing is set to take place at the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico (an Army base the Air Force also uses).

Typically, when the armed forces collect vehicles to practice blowing them up, they don’t seek out specific brands. And while the Trump administration and Tesla CEO Elon Musk have been sniping at each other on social media for the past couple of months, this brand name exception is more due to expected actions by the nation’s enemies.

“In the operating theater, it is likely the type of vehicles used by the enemy may transition to Tesla Cybertrucks as they have been found not to receive the normal extent of damage expected upon major impact,” the Air Force wrote in a justification document supporting the purchase order. “Testing needs to mirror real world situations. The intent of the training is to prep the units for operations by simulating scenarios as closely as possible to the real world situations.”

The Air Force notes the trucks they’re looking to buy do not need to run, but the body, glass and mirrors must be intact, with little to no damage. It’s a safe bet that officials won’t be buying them from the company.

Not a lot of people are these days. Tesla sold just 4,300 of the trucks in the second quarter of the year, a 51% drop.  Last year, Tesla sold just 39,000 of the vehicles, a number it’s unlikely to match this year.

In addition to the Cybertrucks, the Air Force is looking for 31 other cars, including sedans, bongo trucks, pickups and SUVs, all of which will likely be blown up.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Jim West / UCG / Universal Images Group—Getty Images

Gen Z  and millennials may think of retirement as a far-fetched reality, but for boomers nearing the end of their careers, now’s the time to decide where to spend their pensions. Already, some boomers have had to put off retirement due to financial stress. 

For those who can afford to retire in the high-cost climate, international Hoxton Wealth has ranked the top 20 global destinations for UK citizens to retire in 2025. The study looked at the cost of living, property ownership, lifestyle, and healthcare, as well as visa access, taxation, and safety. 

Each destination was then scored from one to 100, which had been benchmarked against the UK, which scored 77 out of 100.

Ireland scored as number one, earning an 87 out of 100 for its strong economy, safety, and ease of migration from the UK. In second place, Portugal and Cyprus tied for an 85, rating high for lifestyle and safety. 

1) Ireland

Ireland takes the crown as the best place to retire. Easiest from its post-Brexit migration, the strong economy is driven by tech, pharma, and finance. The country was also rated well for its safety, while being culturally familiar and English-speaking. For the cost of living, it’s recommended to have at least $50,000 to $100,000 a year.

2) Cyprus

Second in line is Cyprus, which is praised for its lifestyle and safety. With a warm climate and a year-round lifestyle, there are expat-friendly hubs like Paphos, Limassol, and Larnaca. Expect also great outdoor living year-round. To settle down in Cyprus, expect rent prices of around $3,370 for a family of four, or around $1,850 for a 3-bedroom apartment in the city center.

3) Portugal

Next in line with mild winters and hot summers, Portugal takes third place. The country was rated for its relaxed, friendly, and outdoor-oriented lifestyle in areas around popular expat hubs on the Algarve, Lisbon coast, the Silver coast, and Madeira. Initially, a family of four can cover their basic monthly expenses (excluding rent) with approximately $2,634.

 4) Malta

With a cost of living generally lower than the UK and affordable public services, Malta was ranked one of the best places to retire for its English common language, affordable healthcare, transport, and dining. Plus, the country is more affordable than many Western European nations — a family of four needs about $3,075 per month to cover basic expenses.

5) Malaysia 

Retiring in Malaysia has low housing and food costs. Cities like Penang and Kuala Lumpur boast thriving expat communities, making it easy to build a social life and settle in comfortably. Plus, Malaysia provides access to high-quality private healthcare at a fraction of UK or U.S. prices, making it a smart and affordable choice for retirees seeking both comfort and peace of mind. The average cost of retirement in Malaysia for a couple is $2,500, while for single individuals it’s $1,500. Renting in a modern high-rise with a pool, gym, 24-hour gated security, covered car space or two, shared communal area with a barbecue, will set you back around $750 to $1,000 per month.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

• The youngest generation, born between 2010 and now, is now generating $100 billion in direct spending power annually, according to a new report. Gen Alpha, made up of digital natives, is spending money from readily accessible e-commerce sites, but also making money by selling and reselling items on digital platforms.

Members of Gen Alpha are too young to drive themselves to a store or open up a credit card in their own names—but that hasn’t stopped them from spending nearly as much as the gross domestic product of Bulgaria.

The youngest generation, born between 2010 and now, has eclipsed $100 billion in direct spending power annually, according to a new report from public-relations firm DKC—and they’re driving even more spending by having an outsized influence on household purchases.

The survey of about 1,000 U.S. parents of kids between 8- and 14-years-old found 42% of household spending was influenced by Gen Alpha’s opinions, a figure swelling to 49% for households earning more than $100,000 per year. This influence can range from what’s put on the dinner table to what clothes to buy and where to travel.

“This generation has more spending money than you’d think,” DKC President Matthew Traub told Fortune. “Their economic influence is enormous.”

Projected to be the largest generation—one day reaching 2 billion people—Gen Alpha is making early economic waves not only due to its sheer size, but also because its tech-native status opens doors to countless frictionless e-commerce opportunities. Research-based advisory firm McCrindle—founded by social researcher Mark McCrindle, credited for popularizing the term “Gen Alpha”—reported the youngsters would have $5.46 trillion in spending power by 2029.

The entrepreneurial generation

So where is Gen Alpha getting all this money to spend? Like tweens of every generation, Gen Alpha kids are doing chores and mowing laws in exchange for their parents’ pocket change. While 83% of surveyed parents said they give their children an allowance, 91% of the generation is working or earning money on their own in some form, including 40% who get paid for doing “odd jobs” outside the house.

Their earnings aren’t chump change. This generation of budding entrepreneurs has an average $67 to spend each week, totalling $3,484 per year. But what separates this generation from yesteryear’s latchkey kids and millennials is their “entrepreneurialism” spurred by easy access to technology, according to Traub. 

It’s no wonder why. The rise of TikTok and YouTube stars have led Gen Alpha to see content creators as career role models, with more than 60% of the generation looking to these social-media creators for inspirational ideas, and more than a quarter making money from their own social-media activity, according to a November 2023 report from Visa. 

“Digital tools allow a level of entrepreneurialism that replaces the old lemonade stand and gives you instant access to a much larger audience,” Traub said.

Where Gen Alpha is spending their money

Digital platforms aren’t just a way for today’s kids to make money; they’re a principal way in which they spend it. Gen Alpha is spending an average of more than two hours each week online shopping, according to a 2024 report from content-moderation consultancy WebPurify, with the sites frequented by the young generation transforming into de facto online shopping malls.

According to DKC, Roblox and Nike are the companies Gen Alpha invoke most when talking to their parents. Amazon, Shein, Temu, and TikTok also broke into the top 10. 

Beyond the e-commerce giants, these brands have taken it upon themselves to vie for Gen Alpha’s money (or at least their parents’ credit cards). Roblox—with more than 25 million daily concurrent users—announced in May the ability for users to buy physical products from Roblox experiences, with their in-game avatars likewise getting items as part of their purchases. Nike has partnered with Roblox on its Nikeland experience since 2021, where users can not only play virtual dodgeball, but buy digital shoes for their avatars.

“Even in these gaming platforms that have traditionally been reserved for children, e-commerce is becoming a really monetizable form,” Alex Popken, vice president of trust and safety at WebPurify, previously told Fortune. “We’re just seeing kids being inundated with this content more often.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

Despite last week’s headlines about alarmingly soft job growth, millions of Americans have been starting businesses at unprecedented rates. This trend started in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic and is still holding strong. However the shift is not accounted for in traditional labor statistics, which focus exclusively on W-2 payroll jobs. New business formation is a vital piece of the business landscape of the United States and can counteract the economic impact of a slowdown of traditional job creation.

Job growth numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) miss this point, highlighted by the most recent data: The economy appears to have added only 73,000 jobs in July 2025, significantly less than expected and not enough to keep up with population growth. Adding to the concern, the BLS drastically revised May and June numbers, reporting that the economy grew 258,000 fewer jobs during those months than was previously stated.

The news was quickly translated into reduced overall employment, which raised widespread concern. But the BLS numbers give us an incomplete view of jobs in America. Business formation statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau shows 6.48% growth from Q1 to Q2 of this year. While this may not seem like a large growth number, it is monumental compared to the significant declines that were being recorded last year when traditional job growth was accelerating. Even more importantly, new business formations have become increasingly important to the economy and job growth since Covid, yet it is largely ignored in the BLS job report.

Jeff Stibel

Business formations and job growth are counterbalancing factors in the U.S. economy and any economic indicator needs to factor in both measures, especially given the surge in new businesses since Covid. Newly formed companies create jobs immediately for their founders and over time for other job seekers, pulling people out of the traditional labor market that the BLS exclusively tracks. This artificially inflates unemployment assumptions.

Historically, there has been a strong relationship between economic change and entrepreneurship. Lack of traditional job opportunities inspire people to create jobs for themselves and building a new business has never been easier. Artificial intelligence in particular has enabled individuals to launch business ideas with minimal startup capital, experience, or risk. Readily available tools can build websites, write copy, design graphics and logos, and even find customers. AI can analyze market research and offer pricing strategies and financial projections frictionlessly. This rapid change is accelerating the shift toward self-employment and micro business creation, not to mention an increase in freelancing, consulting, and “side hustles.” MarketWatch reported in April 2025 that 51% of Americans have a side hustle, with the country’s youngest workforce participants leading the charge—72% of Gen Z reporting a side hustle in the past year. With people entering the job market overwhelmingly pursuing alternative jobs and individuals retiring from the workforce leaving behind traditional jobs, shifts in employment type should not surprise or alarm us; rather, we should track and incorporate these changes into our thinking and analytics. While unconventional jobs may be untraditional, they are real jobs nonetheless, with a significant economic impact.

Jeff Stibel

Traditional labor statistics are built on outdated employment models. As the nature of work changes, we need more modern methods to accurately assess the true health of the economy. A more complete measure would integrate a diversity of data sources, including new business registrations and freelance platform activity, in addition to polling larger businesses and households. With an expanded palette, we could color a more accurate picture of modern labor dynamics.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

• Gold futures hit a record high this morning, over $3,500 per troy ounce, after it was reported that gold exports from Switzerland would face a 39% tariff rate. The U.S.’s rough treatment of its former allies is one explanation for the weakening dollar, according to Macquarie analyst Thierry Wizman. S&P 500 futures are also rising.

The U.S. dollar rose marginally on the DXY foreign currency index over the last 24 hours, but even then few analysts really believe it will work its way back to where it was at the start of the year. The greenback is down 9.4% YTD.

That’s no surprise, as President Trump openly admitted a few days ago that he wants “a weaker dollar.”

“Now it doesn’t sound good, but you make a hell of a lot more money with a weaker dollar—not a weak dollar but a weaker dollar—than you do with a strong dollar,” he said on July 25.

The rest of the world has taken him at his word.

“Perhaps what’s happening with the USD’s weakness in the past few sessions is a renewed loss of faith in U.S. leadership, especially with the slew of super-high tariff rates that have been announced in recent days: 50% on Brazil, 50% on India, 100% on semiconductors, etc. This has certainly caused another round of deep consternation toward the U.S. in foreign capitals (Brasília, and New Delhi, for sure), and perhaps without any benefit of solid political-economic goals being achieved by the U.S. administration,” wrote Thierry Wizman, Global FX & Rates Strategist at Macquarie Group, in a recent note.

Wizman believes this will have negative political consequences for the U.S., by driving the BRICS nations further into each others’ arms.

“Brazil may simply drift further toward China, as may India, if the tariff issue is not resolved amicably. The prospect that the BRICS will have even more willingness to ‘gang up’ on the USD and thereby move the needle away from the use of the USD as a reserve currency, is what may be getting more palpable, in the traders’ views, with each new tariff attack on some emerging markets,” he wrote.

It may not stop there. Consider the case of Swizterland, which until recently was a neutral country independent of the EU, and an ally of the U.S. Trump placed a 39% tariff rate on its exports, which will be catastrophic for its exports of pharmaceuticals, watches, and machine technology.

Gold is one of Switzerland’s main exports and gold futures hit a record high this morning after the Financial Times reported that its gold exports, previously exempt, would also face the 39% rate. It briefly topped $3,500 per troy ounce.

“The worst-case scenario has become a reality,” a lobbying group for Swiss corporations told The New York Times. “If this exorbitant customs burden is maintained, the Swiss tech industry’s export business to the U.S.A. will be effectively annihilated.”

The Swiss have a fairly obvious way of moving their tariff rate down to 15%: They can join the EU. That would be a victory for the EU and an odd outcome for Trump, given that he once said “the European Union was formed in order to screw the United States.”

Here’s a snapshot of the action prior to the opening bell in New York:

• S&P 500 futures were up 0.34% this morning, premarket, after the index closed flat yesterday. 
• STOXX Europe 600 was up 0.15% in early trading. 
• The U.K.’s FTSE 100 was down 0.11% in early trading.
• Japan’s Nikkei 225 was up 1.85%. 
• China’s CSI 300 was down 0.24%. 
• The South Korea KOSPI was down 0.55%. 
• India’s Nifty 50 was down 0.77%. 
• Bitcoin rose to $116.5K.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Harold Cunningham via Getty Images

Good morning.

Fortune Senior Editor-at-Large Shawn Tully filling in for Sheryl today. When Donald Trump announced yesterday that he was nominating Stephen Miran to fill a vacancy on the Fed’s board of governors, you could be forgiven for asking, Who?

The 41-year-old millennial, who has chaired the Council of Economic Advisors under Trump 2.0, is hardly a household name, even if you run in economics circles. But as I detailed at the beginning of the summer in Fortune for an in-depth profile, Miran has become Trump’s top pro-tariff ideologue.

As of this time last year, I wrote, “Miran was a virtual unknown in both political and economic circles. He’d worked in a variety of investment firms and never been an academic. He got on Trump’s radar by authoring a series of papers that matched the mindset of the ascendant, pro-tariff contingent in the Republican presidential campaign, including a now famous 41-page treatise Miran himself nicknamed ‘the Mar-a-Lago Accord’ that discussed a number of possible solutions to closing America’s yawning trade gap.”

That got him the nod as chair of the CEA, a position typically held by prestigious names plucked from top universities (Ben Bernanke, Jason Furman, Austan Goolsbee) or longtime Washington operatives (Jared Bernstein), or both. As I mentioned, “None of the dozen noted economists I interviewed for this story had ever met Miran, or heard of him before his ascension to head CEA. In a couple of cases, they fumbled his last name as ‘murr-Ann,’ as frequently do TV and podcast pundits (right pronunciation: ‘My-run’).”

As my sources told me, Miran is a rarity, a highly trained economist who knows all the jargon, has absorbed the peer studies, brings intellectual heft, and makes a logical-sounding case for Trump’s stunningly contrarian game plan. “To say the least, it’s a relatively small pool of PhD economists who are economic nationalists. That’s a blinding reality. But Steve is one,” says someone outside the administration who knows him.

You can read the whole story and hear from Miran himself, in the story here. But given that Miran, if confirmed, will be sharing the table with Trump nemesis and Fed chair Jerome Powell, one thing is for sure: CEOs, CFOs, and anyone watching the economy closely will be hearing the name Stephen Miran quite a bit this year.

Shawn Tully

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Zohran Mamdani’s populist victory in New York’s mayoral primary is a local tremor signaling a national earthquake. While pundits dissect the political implications, it’s important not to miss the signs of a deeper societal dynamic, one articulated with stark clarity by Mamdani’s fellow democratic socialist Bernie Sanders: “Take on the billionaire class. Take on the oligarchy. That’s how you win elections.”

This sentiment is not confined to the left, and the strategy doesn’t work only in New York. Populists on the right and in blue but smaller cities echo a similar formula, railing against a “cosmopolitan elite” and the “party of Davos,” who they argue have globalized the economy to their own benefit while leaving communities behind.

If Americans are divided on social issues, they are increasingly united in their antipathy toward those at the very top of an unequal economy rivaling the Gilded Age. This is the combustible force fueling upsets of establishment leaders on both sides of the aisle. The revolting social media cheers following the murder of United Healthcare’s CEO on a Manhattan street, as well as the success of anti-elite entertainment like HBO’s Mountainhead, are cultural signposts of this profound dissatisfaction.

Looking at the data

The data confirms the imbalance the public is rebelling against. The wealthiest 10% of American households now own roughly 90% of all business equity, while half of all households own virtually none. This isn’t a static picture; it’s a widening chasm. From the late 1980s to the present, the wealthiest 1% of the population have seen their share of the nation’s wealth climb to 26%. Conversely, the bottom 80% have experienced a decline, with their wealth share dropping from 40% to a mere 30% during the same period. We can also see this playing out with the number of ultra-high-net-worth (UHNW) individuals in the U.S. swelling from just over 101,000 in 2020 to nearly 148,000 in 2023, and their collective wealth skyrocketing from $11.3 trillion to $17.1 trillion.

Yet, as this wealth has concentrated, philanthropic giving from the growing group of UHNW individuals and families has remained flat at approximately $85 billion annually. This means their rate of giving has actually declined, from about 0.75% of their wealth in 2020 to just 0.5% in 2022. This vast, under-tapped reservoir of private capital could be a powerful engine for change.

The stakes are frightening. Historian Walter Scheidel, in his seminal work The Great Leveler, delivers a grim warning from the past. Throughout history, he finds, the immense gaps between the rich and everyone else have rarely been narrowed by peaceful reform. Instead, the great compressions of inequality have been driven by what Scheidel calls the “Four Horsemen”: mass-mobilization warfare, transformative revolution, state collapse, and catastrophic pandemics. If we fail to proactively build a more equitable distribution of economic gains, history teaches that violent shocks may do it for us.

Action is essential

This is where a new form of voluntary action by the ultra-wealthy becomes essential. Crucially, some of the people best positioned to chart this new path are the very ones who have reached the pinnacle of the current system. In the U.S., the vast majority—nearly 80%—of individuals with a net worth over $30 million are self-made, having built their fortunes in their own lifetimes, very often through business ownership. These are entrepreneurs who understand risk, see opportunity, and know how to build things that scale. This uniquely American entrepreneurial class has accumulated not only immense financial wealth but also substantial social, political, and intellectual capital.

Meaningful giving involves mobilizing all these forms of abundance in service of others. It means deploying networks, expertise, and influence right alongside financial investments. For an entrepreneur, this is a natural extension of their life’s work—drawing on the strategic, risk-aware mindset that built a company to now tackle an urgent societal challenge. This is the heart of “catalytic philanthropy,” an approach that brings all of a person’s assets to bear and, in doing so, creates both profound social impact and a deep sense of personal fulfillment. Three concrete opportunities to deploy capital right now show what this looks like in practice:

1. Pre-distributing the Gains of Automation. The rise of artificial intelligence is not a distant threat; it’s a present reality that could negatively impact over 110 million U.S. workers, or two-thirds of the workforce, while concentrating economic gains even more narrowly. A recent study by Telescope and Gallup found that while 99% of Americans have used an AI-enabled product in the last week, most have a negative view of AI’s potential impact on society, particularly on the availability of good jobs. In response, Telescope, an organization dedicated to ensuring new technology serves everyone, has developed the Telescope Tech Offset Program (TTOP). TTOP is creating a new financial instrument—an “AI Credit”—that allows businesses and government to pool resources and price the risk of tech-driven job transitions. Companies implementing AI that leads to displacement could purchase these credits, which would in turn fund a competitive marketplace of high-quality support services for workers, including retraining, education, and relocation assistance. This market-based mechanism directly answers the public’s call for both business and government to take responsibility for managing AI’s effects. A philanthropic investment in TTOP is a venture-style bet to build entirely new social and financial infrastructure, creating a self-sustaining system to manage one of the most profound economic transformations of our time.

2. De-Risking Social Innovation. Governments spend billions on social services but are often hesitant to fund innovative programs due to the political and budgetary risk of failure. Pay-for-Success (PFS) contracts, or Social Impact Bonds, flip this model by having government pay only for verified successful outcomes. A UHNW individual can catalyze these projects by supporting a proven intermediary organization. For example, Social Finance structured the $12.4 million Massachusetts Pathways to Economic Advancement Project, which funded vocational training and career coaching for over 2,000 English-language learners. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts only paid for the program after an independent evaluation confirmed it led to significant, measurable increases in participant earnings. Philanthropy was essential, providing grants for the complex structuring work and “first-loss” capital that de-risked the investment for institutions like Bank of America. An investor today could provide a grant to Social Finance to cover the feasibility work for a new project, or invest in one of their funds to support a diversified portfolio of these innovative contracts across the country.

3. Democratizing Business Ownership. The coming “Silver Tsunami” will see millions of retiring baby-boomer business owners exit their companies. Many will close or sell to private equity, which can lead to job losses and wealth extraction. In many cases, there is a better way: facilitate the sale of these businesses to their employees. Employee-owned firms are more resilient, and their workers have dramatically higher incomes and household wealth—a potent tool for closing racial and economic wealth gaps. The primary barrier is the lack of flexible financing for these transitions, as employees often can’t make a down payment. Catalytic capital is perfectly suited to fill this gap by investing in nonprofit intermediary funds, like the Employee Ownership Catalyst Fund, that provide the specific loans needed to get these deals done.

The Mamdani victory is the latest alarm sounding  for America’s richest and the political establishment they have propped up. The populist anger at a system perceived as rigged is not a passing storm; it is a change in the political climate. For America’s wealthiest citizens, this is a moment of decision. They can be the targets of that anger, or they can become vital partners in building a more equitable and resilient economy. By strategically deploying their personal resources—financial and otherwise—not as simple charity, but as catalytic, market-making investments, they have a profound opportunity to help build a more broadly prosperous American commonwealth, charting a course away from the four horsemen and the  grim specter of violence and social disintegration as the Great Leveler.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images

A big week for OpenAI is a big week for AI. 

And this week saw the Sam Altman-led company unveil its long-awaited GPT-5, along with a sweeping U.S. government partnership. There’s also a key number now in the mix: $500 billion, the reported new valuation OpenAI is set to hit amid a share sale. 

That half-a-trillion number—up from $300 billion—is stunning on many levels. I’ll spare you the obligatory market cap comparisons (“that’s the equivalent of 10 Ford Motor companies!”). Wild though the prospective valuation may seem, it also poses important questions about where we are in the cycle of this AI boom. Venture funding, overall, isn’t booming as much as you’d expect. According to new Crunchbase data, global venture funding hit $29.7 billion in July, down from $43 billion in June. AI, of course, continues to attract most of the action, accounting for 37%, or $11 billion, of the July funding numbers.

And for the top-tier AI deals, valuations are breathlessly high, and that’s not just the case for OpenAI: Anthropic’s reportedly heading towards $170 billion, Perplexity’s reportedly at $18 billion, and Elon Musk’s xAI (yes, also reportedly) is chasing a valuation of $200 billion. This is all happening quickly, said Nnamdi Okike, cofounder and managing partner of 645 Ventures. 

“Many companies are raising huge amounts of money in very short periods of time,” he told Fortune. “Even when there’s fundamental substance behind the rounds, that means there’s typically some dislocation. If you zoom out, how many winners are there really going to be? That’s the really important question. With a rising tide, what typically gets missed is that—in most markets—there are only a couple winners. It might be the case that these fast-rising valuations are justified for one or two of those winners. But it’s certainly not the case that rapidly increasing valuations are justified across the board.” 

Okike does think OpenAI could be a long-term winner. But he’s also a history buff, noting that broadly we’re seeing classic signals of market euphoria and potential bubbles.

“History teaches us that when valuations go up very rapidly, when round sizes and valuations are higher than they’ve ever been, those signs indicate euphoria,” said Okike, who sees echoes of the Dotcom bust and the search engine wars. “They indicate potential bubble-like qualities, and that investors should be very careful when rounds and prices increase as quickly as they’re increasing.” 

See you Monday,

Allie Garfinkle
X: @agarfinks
Email: [email protected]
Submit a deal for the Term Sheet newsletter here.

Joey Abrams curated the deals section of today’s newsletter. Subscribe here.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images

• CEO confidence has rebounded in Q3, with recession fears easing sharply—but hiring plans remain muted as firms brace for Trump’s tariffs and focus on cost cuts. A record share now plan workforce reductions, and 93% are turning to AI or automation to offset rising costs, while most expect to pass price hikes on to consumers.

American CEOs are feeling slightly more confident as they enter the second half of 2025—but not optimistic enough to grow their headcount as they worry about headwinds from President Trump’s tariff plans.

The Conference Board released its U.S. CEO Confidence report for the third quarter Thursday, finding that CEOs have stepped back from the peak level of uncertainty they experienced in Q2.

For example, last quarter, 71% of CEOs were preparing for a recession with a further 12% expecting a deep economic shift with spillover to the rest of the planet. Q3, by comparison, is positively rosy in its outlook: Just 33% now believe there will be a recession, and only 3% believe there will be economic impact on the rest of the planet.

This geniality isn’t necessarily echoed by economists. This week Moody’s chief economist, Mark Zandi, said a bombshell labor report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics—among other data—had led him to realize America is “at the precipice of recession.”

While leaders on the ground may not agree, they are demonstrating why 2025 is likely to be the year of cost efficiency as bosses increasingly tighten their belts when it comes to payroll.

The Conference Board found 34% of CEOs expected a net reduction in their workforce over the next 12 months, up from 28% in Q2—either by cutting jobs or not filling the roles of those who leave.

Indeed, the share of CEOs planning to expand their workforce also ticked down to 27% from 28%, and 39% of CEOs said they planned to maintain the size of their workforce, down from 44% in Q2.

“The share of CEOs expecting some reduction in the size of their workforce over the next 12 months rose for the fifth consecutive quarter,” said Roger W. Ferguson Jr., vice chairman of the Business Council and chair emeritus of the Conference Board. “For the first time since 2020, CEOs planning to shrink their workforce exceeded the share looking to expand, though a plurality continued to anticipate little change (39%, down from 44%).”

Workers who leave, or are laid off, may face a tougher time returning to the job market. Some of the softness in the BLS’s recent report, wrote Macquarie’s North America economists in a note to clients this week, doesn’t come from layoffs but from people unable to reenter the market.

David Doyle and Chinara Azizova noted initial claims for joblessness remained low, suggesting layoffs are not spiking, but continuing claims edged higher, indicating those who had been laid off are finding it more difficult to land roles.

Indeed, the duo added, BLS Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) data revealed the number of unemployed appears to be rising most steeply among labor force entrants and reentrants, indicating those with a less concrete career history will find it difficult to get a foot on the ladder.

“Importantly, the economic consequences that flow from a job loss (and loss of income) are far more substantial than the untapped growth that comes from a new labor force entrant failing to find work,” they noted.

Managing costs

Companies are facing increased cost headwinds because of the White House’s tariff regime, as global supply chains have become increasingly interwoven.

The vast majority of business leaders—93%—said they would be searching for cost efficiencies by deploying AI or automation to bring down overhead. And 64% said they would be passing that price hike on to consumers, while a further 16% said they are still considering the issue.

This is a higher portion of pass-through than indicated by previous surveys. For example, the New York Fed reported in June that 45% of services firms were intending to pass on the full extent of their tariff-related increases.

“CEO confidence recovered in the third quarter after collapsing in Q2, but fell short of signaling a return to optimism,” said Stephanie Guichard, senior economist for global indicators at the Conference Board. “The improvement is a continuation of the trend seen after tariff disputes between the U.S. and China became less intense, and potentially reflects ongoing progress on trade negotiations.

“CEOs’ views on current economic conditions made the sharpest recovery. Their six-month expectations for the economy as a whole and in their own industries also improved. CEOs’ assessments of current conditions in their own industries—a measure not included in calculating the top-line confidence measure—also recovered but remained in pessimistic territory. Fear of recession within the next 12 to 18 months eased dramatically, to 36% in Q3 from 83% in Q2.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Jackyenjoyphotography/Getty Images

• In today’s CEO Daily: Diane Brady talks to serial entrepreneur Geoff Nudd about how to get the best out of AI.
• The big story: Trump demands Intel CEO’s resignation.
• The markets: U.S. futures are up but global markets are less enthusiastic.
• Plus: All the news and watercooler chat from Fortune.

Good morning. OpenAI’s GPT-5 is live and free! You can read all about Sam Altman’s latest LLM model and what this does to its competition with Google and Meta here. How will it impact all the entrepreneurs and business leaders who are building business models around these ever-changing technologies? The answer may be, “not much.”

I spoke with serial entrepreneur Geoff Nudd yesterday, whose startup Anonymous Health deploys AI to help people overcome addiction and unwanted habits. Launched in June, it now serves more than 10,000 users. While Nudd is pleased to have access to more intelligence, he likens the update to the “heyday of semiconductors, where you always want to be planning for what’s going to be out there in 18 months.”

Nudd argues there are five main components to delivering value: the LLM, the context, the prompt, the workflow and the evaluation. “It’s those five things working together in concert that really create magic,” he says. “The frontier models are effectively commoditized. How you create value goes back to those other four components.” 

“Folks like us will go to whatever is cheapest at some point, because they’re all basically the same,” he added. “If I have the system of record for the industry, plus touch points into other systems, then I have the broadest possible context.”

His advice: Seek breadth in your systems, go deep in understanding your customer and deploy new capabilities with purpose. Nudd’s model, for example, uses AI to engage users at times of high risk for addictive behavior. It’s a tool to help humans live better lives in an age of AI.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Photo: Anonymous Health