Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

The White House, of course releasing a statement the title which reads as follows, Clarification of Exemptions under Executive Order one four two five seven of April second, twenty twenty five, as amended. The word exemptions is in there, but President Trump says it's fake news to describe this as exemptions or exceptions to his tariffs, because tariffs on these goods things like iPhones other consumer electronics are still coming, just in a different bucket, as he calls it, semiconductor tariffs, which he says are on the way in the not so distant future, in addition to other tariffs he just talked about in the Oval Office as well. So on that note, we go to Bloomberg Tyler Kendall, who is live at the White House, with what we are understanding at this point from the administration when it comes to tariffs.

The White House, of course releasing a statement the title which reads as follows, Clarification of Exemptions under Executive Order one four two five seven of April second, twenty twenty five, as amended. The word exemptions is in there, but President Trump says it's fake news to describe this as exemptions or exceptions to his tariffs, because tariffs on these goods things like iPhones other consumer electronics are still coming, just in a different bucket, as he calls it, semiconductor tariffs, which he says are on the way in the not so distant future, in addition to other tariffs he just talked about in the Oval Office as well. So on that note, we go to Bloomberg Tyler Kendall, who is live at the White House, with what we are understanding at this point from the administration when it comes to tariffs.

It's not just chip tariffs. Tyler that are on the way. The President's looking at pharma too.

It's not just chip tariffs. Tyler that are on the way. The President's looking at pharma too.

Yeah, hey, Kelly, some big headlines, particularly when it comes to those sector specific tariffs, in just the last thirty minutes or so out of the Oval Office. As you mentioned, President Trump doubling down on the idea that pharmaceutical tariffs could be coming. So not necessarily surprising. He's really been talking about this, but we should note the timing is also interesting because the Italian Prime Minister, Georgia Maloney will be here at the White House later this week. We know that the European Union in particular is bracing to get hard, is bracing to get hit hard when it comes to those pharmaceutical tariffs. Then he also made some news about some other sector specific tariffs, saying that he might be interested in granting a reprieve when it comes to automakers who are moving production from Mexico and Canada in a bid to give him a little bit more time when it comes to reshoring. So some big headlines there about how this White House is looking at the timeline and whether or not we could actually see a more long, longer lasting reprieve. The other industry, of course, that is getting at least a fleeting reprieve for now or those tech imports that you mentioned, while we wait for potentially a Section two thirty two investigation to get underway so that those chip products can be a tariff instead under sector specific tariffs instead of the broader, so called reciprocal tariff plan. But when asked on Air Force one last night about if he was willing to grant any exemptions to certain products, here's what President Trump had to say.

Yeah, hey, Kelly, some big headlines, particularly when it comes to those sector specific tariffs, in just the last thirty minutes or so out of the Oval Office. As you mentioned, President Trump doubling down on the idea that pharmaceutical tariffs could be coming. So not necessarily surprising. He's really been talking about this, but we should note the timing is also interesting because the Italian Prime Minister, Georgia Maloney will be here at the White House later this week. We know that the European Union in particular is bracing to get hard, is bracing to get hit hard when it comes to those pharmaceutical tariffs. Then he also made some news about some other sector specific tariffs, saying that he might be interested in granting a reprieve when it comes to automakers who are moving production from Mexico and Canada in a bid to give him a little bit more time when it comes to reshoring. So some big headlines there about how this White House is looking at the timeline and whether or not we could actually see a more long, longer lasting reprieve. The other industry, of course, that is getting at least a fleeting reprieve for now or those tech imports that you mentioned, while we wait for potentially a Section two thirty two investigation to get underway so that those chip products can be a tariff instead under sector specific tariffs instead of the broader, so called reciprocal tariff plan. But when asked on Air Force one last night about if he was willing to grant any exemptions to certain products, here's what President Trump had to say.

Well, there's going to be an anspert soon and we'll we'll be discussing it, but we'll also talk to companies. You know, you have to show a certain flexibility. Nobody should be so rigent. Will you have to have a certain flexibility. And we're doing really well, and financially, our country is going to be stronger than it sever been.

Well, there's going to be an anspert soon and we'll we'll be discussing it, but we'll also talk to companies. You know, you have to show a certain flexibility. Nobody should be so rigent. Will you have to have a certain flexibility. And we're doing really well, and financially, our country is going to be stronger than it sever been.

So some products might lose flexibility for some products, for some products, yeah, maybe.

So some products might lose flexibility for some products, for some products, yeah, maybe.

Of course, the big question is just how flex will this White House be. In the past, when they've imposed Section two thirty two tariffs, they've been at a twenty five percent rate. President Trump declined to comment on what the rate will be when it comes to these chip specific products. But we also have to keep in mind how sector specific tariffs are designed to be stacked on top of existing levies, and Kaylee, President Trump made clear that all of these tech imports are still subject to that baseline twenty percent tariff that was levied against Beijing back in February.

Of course, the big question is just how flex will this White House be. In the past, when they've imposed Section two thirty two tariffs, they've been at a twenty five percent rate. President Trump declined to comment on what the rate will be when it comes to these chip specific products. But we also have to keep in mind how sector specific tariffs are designed to be stacked on top of existing levies, and Kaylee, President Trump made clear that all of these tech imports are still subject to that baseline twenty percent tariff that was levied against Beijing back in February.

Yep, over Fentanel Bloomberg's Tyler tend to live at the White House, thank you so much. And on that flexibility point that Tyler was just making, we heard that reiterated by President Trump in the Oval Office earlier today, in which he also noted that he's been talking to the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, and that he doesn't want to hurt anybody. Apple shares right now, well off the highs of the session, they're still up about two point six percent. And it's on that note we turned to Ed Ludlow, co host of Bloomberg Technology. So Ed, when we consider that obviously Apple was stuck in a very difficult place with the tariffs that are that were put into place, especially if China tariffs applied to them, how much can they take advantage of this reprieve if the reprieve is only temporary.

Yep, over Fentanel Bloomberg's Tyler tend to live at the White House, thank you so much. And on that flexibility point that Tyler was just making, we heard that reiterated by President Trump in the Oval Office earlier today, in which he also noted that he's been talking to the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, and that he doesn't want to hurt anybody. Apple shares right now, well off the highs of the session, they're still up about two point six percent. And it's on that note we turned to Ed Ludlow, co host of Bloomberg Technology. So Ed, when we consider that obviously Apple was stuck in a very difficult place with the tariffs that are that were put into place, especially if China tariffs applied to them, how much can they take advantage of this reprieve if the reprieve is only temporary.

Yeah, I think the technology sector kind of accepts that there will be a bucket specific tariff, right, and that the biggest outstanding questions are on timeline because you have the written communication from the White House, which you quite rightly point out literally uses the word exemption. And then take in aggregate the commentary of Trump's cabinet members on weekend television. But something specific at the semiconductor level also branches out to the rest of the electronics industry, right, because the smartphones's laptops all have chips in them, you need to understand what that's going to be. And you know better than I. The biggest kind of unknown here is this section two thirty two investigation, which looks at the impact of tariff policy on national security. Essentially it's a tool that's been used in the steel industry, for example. But you know, looking at history, those investigations take the better part of a year. So answer your question, Apple, you know clearly their strategy has been to shift priority of iPhones built outside of China, largely in India, and move them to the US. But it's just a temporary measure. The other question, and the one that probably in video is the better case study of is what is the end goal of the President's policy. Is it to generate revenue for the country. No, it's probably to onshore manufacturing in America, which is a whole other question.

Yeah, I think the technology sector kind of accepts that there will be a bucket specific tariff, right, and that the biggest outstanding questions are on timeline because you have the written communication from the White House, which you quite rightly point out literally uses the word exemption. And then take in aggregate the commentary of Trump's cabinet members on weekend television. But something specific at the semiconductor level also branches out to the rest of the electronics industry, right, because the smartphones's laptops all have chips in them, you need to understand what that's going to be. And you know better than I. The biggest kind of unknown here is this section two thirty two investigation, which looks at the impact of tariff policy on national security. Essentially it's a tool that's been used in the steel industry, for example. But you know, looking at history, those investigations take the better part of a year. So answer your question, Apple, you know clearly their strategy has been to shift priority of iPhones built outside of China, largely in India, and move them to the US. But it's just a temporary measure. The other question, and the one that probably in video is the better case study of is what is the end goal of the President's policy. Is it to generate revenue for the country. No, it's probably to onshore manufacturing in America, which is a whole other question.

Well, and the President was talking about that earlier in the Oval, touting the announcement today of how in Video is using its pledged billions hundreds of billions of dollars in investment in the US.

Well, and the President was talking about that earlier in the Oval, touting the announcement today of how in Video is using its pledged billions hundreds of billions of dollars in investment in the US.

This is what the President said at It's.

This is what the President said at It's.

One of the great companies of the world, modern, super modern companies controls segments that nobody, you know, sort of controls the world in a sense. And they're coming in here in the biggest way with hundreds of billions of dollars, not like millions of dolls, hundreds of billions of dollars.

One of the great companies of the world, modern, super modern companies controls segments that nobody, you know, sort of controls the world in a sense. And they're coming in here in the biggest way with hundreds of billions of dollars, not like millions of dolls, hundreds of billions of dollars.

And I'm honored by it, and.

And I'm honored by it, and.

I want to thank Jensen and all of the people that we deal with.

I want to thank Jensen and all of the people that we deal with.

My question, ad is one thing. It's one thing to make the pledge of investment. It's another for that investment to actually be realized and result in capacity in the United States. How long is this going to take, not just for in Video, but any tech company who wants to do this.

My question, ad is one thing. It's one thing to make the pledge of investment. It's another for that investment to actually be realized and result in capacity in the United States. How long is this going to take, not just for in Video, but any tech company who wants to do this.

Well, according to Invidia's announcement this morning, four years to develop a US manufacturing capacity for their server designs that go in Stata centers, power AI training. There's an element of fact check here. Yes, the President is right that Invidia essentially has a monopoly on the market for AI accelerators, the chips that train models. He is sort of incorrect to say that it is an investment of hundreds of billions of dollars. What Invidia is saying is that they are moving to establish manufacturing in the States that will produce hundreds of billions dollars value of goods. That is the cost of doing business here in America. But I think most people I speak to in the technology industry, directly involved and related to InVideo investors is this is the result of tariff policy. Because think about Nvidia, right, if you make your high performance systems here in America, they probably cost twenty to twenty five percent more. The cost of doing business here is greater, but then there's a tariff on doing business elsewhere, probably in the long run, and so netnet, if you're in video or you're one of Nvidia's customers, you have to choose what is the best place for us to do business here? And clearly reading the statement from Jensen Wog. He talks about supply chain resilience and talks about making the business more robust. This is a response to the political actions of this administration.

Well, according to Invidia's announcement this morning, four years to develop a US manufacturing capacity for their server designs that go in Stata centers, power AI training. There's an element of fact check here. Yes, the President is right that Invidia essentially has a monopoly on the market for AI accelerators, the chips that train models. He is sort of incorrect to say that it is an investment of hundreds of billions of dollars. What Invidia is saying is that they are moving to establish manufacturing in the States that will produce hundreds of billions dollars value of goods. That is the cost of doing business here in America. But I think most people I speak to in the technology industry, directly involved and related to InVideo investors is this is the result of tariff policy. Because think about Nvidia, right, if you make your high performance systems here in America, they probably cost twenty to twenty five percent more. The cost of doing business here is greater, but then there's a tariff on doing business elsewhere, probably in the long run, and so netnet, if you're in video or you're one of Nvidia's customers, you have to choose what is the best place for us to do business here? And clearly reading the statement from Jensen Wog. He talks about supply chain resilience and talks about making the business more robust. This is a response to the political actions of this administration.

All right, Ed.

All right, Ed.

Ludlaw in San Francisco, Thank you so much, co host of course of Bloomberg Technology.

Ludlaw in San Francisco, Thank you so much, co host of course of Bloomberg Technology.

Much appreciated.

Much appreciated.

This, of course is Bloomberg's balance of power as we consider the intersection of these tariff policies, how they're filtering into the decision making of companies like Nvidia, and ultimately how all that feeds back into financial markets, which have seen at least in the equity market at the relief rally fading. As we've moved through this Monday trading session, and we want to talk more about the outlook now, and turned to Katrina Dudley, who is live in our studios at Global Headquarters in New York. She's Global equity portfolio manager at Franklin Templeton Investments. Joining me here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Katrina, it's been a while, obviously, it has been a month, a week, a year that has been absolutely wild when we're contending with tariff policy. I wonder what you make of this conversation around tech knowledgy oriented exemption, specifically the idea that there is a bit of a reprieve here that the President suggests he will have some flexibility in carving out certain goods from these tariffs. Do you see all of that as good news or is there still enough bad news in terms of the baseline tariff rate that is still in place, the tariffs on China that will remain with no real progress see toward a deal. Is all of that still enough to be dragging on risk appetite?

This, of course is Bloomberg's balance of power as we consider the intersection of these tariff policies, how they're filtering into the decision making of companies like Nvidia, and ultimately how all that feeds back into financial markets, which have seen at least in the equity market at the relief rally fading. As we've moved through this Monday trading session, and we want to talk more about the outlook now, and turned to Katrina Dudley, who is live in our studios at Global Headquarters in New York. She's Global equity portfolio manager at Franklin Templeton Investments. Joining me here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Katrina, it's been a while, obviously, it has been a month, a week, a year that has been absolutely wild when we're contending with tariff policy. I wonder what you make of this conversation around tech knowledgy oriented exemption, specifically the idea that there is a bit of a reprieve here that the President suggests he will have some flexibility in carving out certain goods from these tariffs. Do you see all of that as good news or is there still enough bad news in terms of the baseline tariff rate that is still in place, the tariffs on China that will remain with no real progress see toward a deal. Is all of that still enough to be dragging on risk appetite?

I think, look, when we look at tariffs and the conversation, the key, as you're talking about, is flexibility that the president is willing to listen. He's watching the market, he's watching the reaction, and he's listening to CEOs and he's listening to what they're telling him. And in this case, we've got some CEOs of reacting in terms of we are going to make investments in America, and that from a perspective of an American is really good from us from a resiliency perspective as well as that reassuring if jobs and helping that middle class. And then you've got on the other side the fact that these factories don't just get built overnight, and I think that there is a need to phase in some of these tariffs and phase in those those measures, which I think he's going to do through that exemption mechanism.

I think, look, when we look at tariffs and the conversation, the key, as you're talking about, is flexibility that the president is willing to listen. He's watching the market, he's watching the reaction, and he's listening to CEOs and he's listening to what they're telling him. And in this case, we've got some CEOs of reacting in terms of we are going to make investments in America, and that from a perspective of an American is really good from us from a resiliency perspective as well as that reassuring if jobs and helping that middle class. And then you've got on the other side the fact that these factories don't just get built overnight, and I think that there is a need to phase in some of these tariffs and phase in those those measures, which I think he's going to do through that exemption mechanism.

Well, I guess there's a question of what happens in the interim when we're actually considering the health of these corporations and their financial picture. Knowing we're now in the heart of earning season. I wonder, Katrina, how you expect the uncertainties around this policy that remain the difference in the short and the long term outlook to manifest themselves. And what we're hearing not just about the results looking backward, but what kind of guidance companies are really able to provide going forward.

Well, I guess there's a question of what happens in the interim when we're actually considering the health of these corporations and their financial picture. Knowing we're now in the heart of earning season. I wonder, Katrina, how you expect the uncertainties around this policy that remain the difference in the short and the long term outlook to manifest themselves. And what we're hearing not just about the results looking backward, but what kind of guidance companies are really able to provide going forward.

Look, the impact is being felt actually more in the small and the meadcap sector. If you look at our large cab companies, they've got much more resilience in terms of the balance sheet, their ability to flex their manufacturing. So it's actually going to be in that lower end of the market that you need to focus on the comments that are coming out of them. That's the first side. The second thing is that we've got these initial announcements, but then we've had reversal some of these announcements. We've had adjustments and everything. So I think that the commentary coming out of earning season is going to be we actually had a great quarter, spending held up and so the numbers for the backward looking quarter are going to be okay. It's just going to be that uncertainty that relates to the forward outlook. And I think that CEOs who talk about the variables and talk about what they're looking at and what is causing that variability, will be rewarded by the market.

Look, the impact is being felt actually more in the small and the meadcap sector. If you look at our large cab companies, they've got much more resilience in terms of the balance sheet, their ability to flex their manufacturing. So it's actually going to be in that lower end of the market that you need to focus on the comments that are coming out of them. That's the first side. The second thing is that we've got these initial announcements, but then we've had reversal some of these announcements. We've had adjustments and everything. So I think that the commentary coming out of earning season is going to be we actually had a great quarter, spending held up and so the numbers for the backward looking quarter are going to be okay. It's just going to be that uncertainty that relates to the forward outlook. And I think that CEOs who talk about the variables and talk about what they're looking at and what is causing that variability, will be rewarded by the market.

Well.

Well.

And which would you be more concerned about when we consider the different variables in the forward picture, the idea that it's not clear what the tariff rates will be, so therefore what kind of margin compression companies might be dealing with, or the idea that it's not clear what economic impact the tariffs will have in how much demand there will still be that these corporations get to be on the receiving end of Which would you say is the greater risk here or are they just too entwined Katrina.

And which would you be more concerned about when we consider the different variables in the forward picture, the idea that it's not clear what the tariff rates will be, so therefore what kind of margin compression companies might be dealing with, or the idea that it's not clear what economic impact the tariffs will have in how much demand there will still be that these corporations get to be on the receiving end of Which would you say is the greater risk here or are they just too entwined Katrina.

Both They're actually both risks in the market. The first of all, in terms of the amount of tariffs, the question is how much of that gets passed on to the consumer. The second part of this is how much of the consumer is actually doing forward buying or has been doing forward buying, like buying two or three Apple iPhones ahead of the announcements. So you could have some unevenness in terms of demand patterns, and that's something that we're watching. But if that margin pressure, if you look at corporate margins are very very strong and high levels, so I think that there's some ability of them to absorb some of those tariffs in their own margins. And that doesn't worry us because we think that companies are well positioned.

Both They're actually both risks in the market. The first of all, in terms of the amount of tariffs, the question is how much of that gets passed on to the consumer. The second part of this is how much of the consumer is actually doing forward buying or has been doing forward buying, like buying two or three Apple iPhones ahead of the announcements. So you could have some unevenness in terms of demand patterns, and that's something that we're watching. But if that margin pressure, if you look at corporate margins are very very strong and high levels, so I think that there's some ability of them to absorb some of those tariffs in their own margins. And that doesn't worry us because we think that companies are well positioned.

Well.

Well.

And I wonder what companies you see as best position here, Katrina, Is it staples really that are the safest heven right now? Where else would you be recommending you seek harbor in what has been a pretty incredible storm.

And I wonder what companies you see as best position here, Katrina, Is it staples really that are the safest heven right now? Where else would you be recommending you seek harbor in what has been a pretty incredible storm.

But when you talk about a staple, those staple companies are still subject to goods that have got tariffs on them.

But when you talk about a staple, those staple companies are still subject to goods that have got tariffs on them.

We don't make all project.

We don't make all project.

Produce here in America, and so they're subject to the same characteristics as before. So I think it's actually very unusual because there's so many different factors that people have got to look at that are influencing this market that haven't influenced it before. We talk about the partisanship that's really impacting the ability to trust any type of forward looking sentiment index because you've got that dichotomy between the Republicans and the Democrats, as well as the fact that you know, things like tariffs. We've had them in terms of industry specific tariffs with long investigation periods. Now we've got them, they've being implemented quickly, and they've been implemented in a much more broad brush manner, and that's going to impact the consumer. So it's just a different conversation, and that's what we're kind of working through and listening to companies to see how it impacts the bottom line.

Produce here in America, and so they're subject to the same characteristics as before. So I think it's actually very unusual because there's so many different factors that people have got to look at that are influencing this market that haven't influenced it before. We talk about the partisanship that's really impacting the ability to trust any type of forward looking sentiment index because you've got that dichotomy between the Republicans and the Democrats, as well as the fact that you know, things like tariffs. We've had them in terms of industry specific tariffs with long investigation periods. Now we've got them, they've being implemented quickly, and they've been implemented in a much more broad brush manner, and that's going to impact the consumer. So it's just a different conversation, and that's what we're kind of working through and listening to companies to see how it impacts the bottom line.

Well.

Well.

And then there's the kind of wider macro picture as well.

And then there's the kind of wider macro picture as well.

That is a constant conversation we're having here on Bloomberg TV and Radio Katrina, which is how this all filters into monetary policy, if at all. As the signal we're still getting from the FED is they are in weight and C mode, it doesn't seem that they are super eager to see a FED put come into place here of any kind. Are you anticipating that have you changed your expectations, and and what if we are to get a signal from the Fed that they're willing to step in here would that do to risk appetite.

That is a constant conversation we're having here on Bloomberg TV and Radio Katrina, which is how this all filters into monetary policy, if at all. As the signal we're still getting from the FED is they are in weight and C mode, it doesn't seem that they are super eager to see a FED put come into place here of any kind. Are you anticipating that have you changed your expectations, and and what if we are to get a signal from the Fed that they're willing to step in here would that do to risk appetite.

It's very difficult for the FED to step in because one of the metrics that they're watching is inflation, and they've spent a long period of time getting inflation which was at very high levels and very far away from target back down close to two point six, very close to their target level. And then what we're so that's on the Fed that's kind of looking at. We've got low unemployment numbers, we've got an inflation number that we've kind of got under control, but tariffs potentially are a headwind to that that they could cause inflationary pressure. So the market, though, is pricing in three Fed cuts. I think we're at less than that. We do think that the Fed is going to be very cautious before they step in. I think you've talked about a FED put. I think that President Trump is more likely to make commentary that supports the market versus the Fed.

It's very difficult for the FED to step in because one of the metrics that they're watching is inflation, and they've spent a long period of time getting inflation which was at very high levels and very far away from target back down close to two point six, very close to their target level. And then what we're so that's on the Fed that's kind of looking at. We've got low unemployment numbers, we've got an inflation number that we've kind of got under control, but tariffs potentially are a headwind to that that they could cause inflationary pressure. So the market, though, is pricing in three Fed cuts. I think we're at less than that. We do think that the Fed is going to be very cautious before they step in. I think you've talked about a FED put. I think that President Trump is more likely to make commentary that supports the market versus the Fed.

Well, a lot of people thought we found the Trump put last week when he noted what was happening in the bond markets and issued this ninety day delay in our final minute here, Katrina, though, obviously what happened in the bond market, as well as what we've seen in the weakness of the dollar, has kind of contributed to this, if not narrative question as to whether we are now reconsidering US exceptionalism from an equity standpoint, Do you think the.

Well, a lot of people thought we found the Trump put last week when he noted what was happening in the bond markets and issued this ninety day delay in our final minute here, Katrina, though, obviously what happened in the bond market, as well as what we've seen in the weakness of the dollar, has kind of contributed to this, if not narrative question as to whether we are now reconsidering US exceptionalism from an equity standpoint, Do you think the.

End of US exceptionalism is upon us?

End of US exceptionalism is upon us?

Absolutely not. I think that the America and our resiliency and our ability to adapt is what makes this country so unique. And I don't think that anything that's happened is actually undermined that. If I take a look at the factors that support entrepreneurialism, and I look at the factors that are encouraging investment back into this country by a number of companies, Invidiari is just the latest company that's doing that on top of a TSMC, I think that the American story continues to work here.

Absolutely not. I think that the America and our resiliency and our ability to adapt is what makes this country so unique. And I don't think that anything that's happened is actually undermined that. If I take a look at the factors that support entrepreneurialism, and I look at the factors that are encouraging investment back into this country by a number of companies, Invidiari is just the latest company that's doing that on top of a TSMC, I think that the American story continues to work here.

All right.

All right.

We will leave it on that note. Katrina Dudley of Franklin Templeton Investments, where she is a global equity portfolio manager, joining us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Thank you so much, really appreciate it, and we still have much more ahead here on Balance of Power. Our political panel will be joining me next. Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno will be with me as we consider how all of this is playing out politically for President Trump. We've got some interesting new polling from CBS and Yugov around how people feel about tariffs, and also just a red headline crossing the Bloomberg terminal Harvard rejecting a proposed agreement with the Trump administration. Of course, we've seen a bit of a jockeying between higher ed and this White House.

We will leave it on that note. Katrina Dudley of Franklin Templeton Investments, where she is a global equity portfolio manager, joining us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Thank you so much, really appreciate it, and we still have much more ahead here on Balance of Power. Our political panel will be joining me next. Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno will be with me as we consider how all of this is playing out politically for President Trump. We've got some interesting new polling from CBS and Yugov around how people feel about tariffs, and also just a red headline crossing the Bloomberg terminal Harvard rejecting a proposed agreement with the Trump administration. Of course, we've seen a bit of a jockeying between higher ed and this White House.

We'll get into that with our political panel as well. Up next. Right here on Bloomberg TV and Radio.

We'll get into that with our political panel as well. Up next. Right here on Bloomberg TV and Radio.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

Live in Washington, where we are focused on basically one thing, and that is President Trump's tariff policy, and that seems to be, if not the singular, the primary focus of financial markets as well as Amy was just running US through and it was a big topic of conversation on the Sunday shows this weekend, where you had a number of members of the Trump administration fanning out across the networks to defend and explain President Trump's tariff policy. From the Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik to Trade Advisor Peter Navarro, Kevin Hassett of the National Economic Council, and USTR Jamison Greer all shared their thoughts this weekend.

Live in Washington, where we are focused on basically one thing, and that is President Trump's tariff policy, and that seems to be, if not the singular, the primary focus of financial markets as well as Amy was just running US through and it was a big topic of conversation on the Sunday shows this weekend, where you had a number of members of the Trump administration fanning out across the networks to defend and explain President Trump's tariff policy. From the Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik to Trade Advisor Peter Navarro, Kevin Hassett of the National Economic Council, and USTR Jamison Greer all shared their thoughts this weekend.

The President is on it.

The President is on it.

It's very very important for people to understand, you know, why we're doing what we're doing.

It's very very important for people to understand, you know, why we're doing what we're doing.

What President Trump is doing, and his vision and his leadership is to completely realign the world economy, but in so doing put America first. The world cheats us. They've been cheating us for decades. We have been living under a teriff regime, but it has been the regime of other countries.

What President Trump is doing, and his vision and his leadership is to completely realign the world economy, but in so doing put America first. The world cheats us. They've been cheating us for decades. We have been living under a teriff regime, but it has been the regime of other countries.

The more importantly they cheat us with the so called non tariff barriers.

The more importantly they cheat us with the so called non tariff barriers.

It's the vat tax, is the dumping, the currency manipulation.

It's the vat tax, is the dumping, the currency manipulation.

We can't be relying on China for fundamental things that we need.

We can't be relying on China for fundamental things that we need.

What's going to be up to these countries to come to the table, continue coming to the table.

What's going to be up to these countries to come to the table, continue coming to the table.

And make these kinds of offers.

And make these kinds of offers.

So the administration outlining its vision when it comes to trade. The question is whether it's a vision that the majority of the country and the American electorate actually shares as well. And on that note, some interesting polling came out this weekend from CBS News together with you goev that focused on tariffs and the economy overall.

So the administration outlining its vision when it comes to trade. The question is whether it's a vision that the majority of the country and the American electorate actually shares as well. And on that note, some interesting polling came out this weekend from CBS News together with you goev that focused on tariffs and the economy overall.

Here's a few of the highlights for you.

Here's a few of the highlights for you.

On tariffs, largely, fifty eight percent said they opposed President Trump's new tariffs on imported goods, just forty two percent said they favored them, and seventy five percent said the tariffs will increase prices in the short term. Another forty eight percent said they will increase prices in the long term. Smaller minorities said they would have no impact, or they weren't sure, or that they would decrease prices. Plus another finding in this survey, nearly two thirds think the new tariffs will make the economy worse in the short term. All that said, when we consider President of Trump's overall approval rating, forty seven percent approve, fifty three percent disapprove. So I want to get into these figures now and how the policy is playing politically and turned to our political panel. Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Genie Shanzeno are with me here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Rick, of course as a partner at Stone Court Capital and Republican strategist, Genie democratic analyst and Senior Democracy Fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress.

On tariffs, largely, fifty eight percent said they opposed President Trump's new tariffs on imported goods, just forty two percent said they favored them, and seventy five percent said the tariffs will increase prices in the short term. Another forty eight percent said they will increase prices in the long term. Smaller minorities said they would have no impact, or they weren't sure, or that they would decrease prices. Plus another finding in this survey, nearly two thirds think the new tariffs will make the economy worse in the short term. All that said, when we consider President of Trump's overall approval rating, forty seven percent approve, fifty three percent disapprove. So I want to get into these figures now and how the policy is playing politically and turned to our political panel. Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Genie Shanzeno are with me here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Rick, of course as a partner at Stone Court Capital and Republican strategist, Genie democratic analyst and Senior Democracy Fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress.

Rick, when you look at figures.

Rick, when you look at figures.

Like this, it would suggest that these policies, as much as President Trump believes them and continues to define tariffs or say tariffs is his favorite word in the dictionary, that it's not necessarily favored by the majority of the country. Does it, ultimately, though, make a difference for this White House?

Like this, it would suggest that these policies, as much as President Trump believes them and continues to define tariffs or say tariffs is his favorite word in the dictionary, that it's not necessarily favored by the majority of the country. Does it, ultimately, though, make a difference for this White House?

You know, I think only on the margins. Does it make a difference for this White House? In other words, will they tweak their policies ninety day delays, things like that in order to sort of satisfy consumer demand and also the markets, because, of course, part of what is driving consumers' attitudes is what they see in the market. So the combination platter of you know, robust economy, strong markets, and consumer support is something they have to be considering on a daily basis. And seeing them tweaked their policies, especially around tariffs. In that regard that being said, you know, these consumers are pretty grumpy. We saw last week the Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index came out very similar numbers, worse expectations for inflation since nineteen eighty one.

You know, I think only on the margins. Does it make a difference for this White House? In other words, will they tweak their policies ninety day delays, things like that in order to sort of satisfy consumer demand and also the markets, because, of course, part of what is driving consumers' attitudes is what they see in the market. So the combination platter of you know, robust economy, strong markets, and consumer support is something they have to be considering on a daily basis. And seeing them tweaked their policies, especially around tariffs. In that regard that being said, you know, these consumers are pretty grumpy. We saw last week the Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index came out very similar numbers, worse expectations for inflation since nineteen eighty one.

So the.

So the.

Book is getting written pretty strongly right now that maybe we can't necessarily depend upon consumers to keep this economy running. They're doing a great job right now, but with their concerns about the future, I would say the FED is probably more worried about future inflation than it is inflation today.

Book is getting written pretty strongly right now that maybe we can't necessarily depend upon consumers to keep this economy running. They're doing a great job right now, but with their concerns about the future, I would say the FED is probably more worried about future inflation than it is inflation today.

Well, and I guess it's a question of how far into the future, because when we consider the kind of language in this pulling data, Genie again seventy five percent so that the tariffs will increase prices in the short term. Nearly two thirds think new tariffs will make the economy worse in the short term. House hasn't necessarily pushed back on the idea of there being some detrimental impact in the short term. They keep saying short term pain for long term gain. I guess the question is is it enough for consumers to tolerate that in the short term if they believe in the long term game, or do you think that belief still might be missing as they consider what this is actually going to do to their wallets in household balance sheets.

Well, and I guess it's a question of how far into the future, because when we consider the kind of language in this pulling data, Genie again seventy five percent so that the tariffs will increase prices in the short term. Nearly two thirds think new tariffs will make the economy worse in the short term. House hasn't necessarily pushed back on the idea of there being some detrimental impact in the short term. They keep saying short term pain for long term gain. I guess the question is is it enough for consumers to tolerate that in the short term if they believe in the long term game, or do you think that belief still might be missing as they consider what this is actually going to do to their wallets in household balance sheets.

Yeah, consumers are screaming, we don't want pain of any kind, short term or long term. And quite frankly, the White House isn't listening. And why the White House isn't listening? Donald Trump doesn't have to run again. But who's gonna listen are the Republican members of Congress because they will hear from their constituents who say, hey, wait a minute, all of these exemptions the president is handing out my little store in Oklahoma. I'm not on his radar because I didn't give a million dollars to his inaugural so I can't get in his ear to claim an exemption. And that's what I think we have to ask ourselves, why all these exemptions, Why tariff policies that are so arbitrary? Because Donald Trump wants the power to dole out crony, give out to the people that he feels he are in alignment with him, and he wants to withhold for others. And that's really what this about. It's not about reshoring because exemptions work against that. We are not in an emergency that makes us pay more for sneakers than we would for electronics.

Yeah, consumers are screaming, we don't want pain of any kind, short term or long term. And quite frankly, the White House isn't listening. And why the White House isn't listening? Donald Trump doesn't have to run again. But who's gonna listen are the Republican members of Congress because they will hear from their constituents who say, hey, wait a minute, all of these exemptions the president is handing out my little store in Oklahoma. I'm not on his radar because I didn't give a million dollars to his inaugural so I can't get in his ear to claim an exemption. And that's what I think we have to ask ourselves, why all these exemptions, Why tariff policies that are so arbitrary? Because Donald Trump wants the power to dole out crony, give out to the people that he feels he are in alignment with him, and he wants to withhold for others. And that's really what this about. It's not about reshoring because exemptions work against that. We are not in an emergency that makes us pay more for sneakers than we would for electronics.

So people know this.

So people know this.

I mean, people go to the store and pay more for eggs as Easter is coming up. And we've all heard the one answer people answer when you say, why am I paying more Donald Trump's tariffs? And this will hurt Republicans in the polls. It may not hurt Donald Trump because quite frankly, he just wants the power. He doesn't have to run again, so he doesn't really care about these poles anymore.

I mean, people go to the store and pay more for eggs as Easter is coming up. And we've all heard the one answer people answer when you say, why am I paying more Donald Trump's tariffs? And this will hurt Republicans in the polls. It may not hurt Donald Trump because quite frankly, he just wants the power. He doesn't have to run again, so he doesn't really care about these poles anymore.

Well to that point, Rick, Congress is in recess for the next two weeks for Easter. A lot of them are back home and the districts. I don't know how many of them are planning to get some FaceTime in face to face with constituents in the form of town halls because of concern around blowback around these policies. Just how rough will it be for Republican members, especially in terms of what they're hearing at home.

Well to that point, Rick, Congress is in recess for the next two weeks for Easter. A lot of them are back home and the districts. I don't know how many of them are planning to get some FaceTime in face to face with constituents in the form of town halls because of concern around blowback around these policies. Just how rough will it be for Republican members, especially in terms of what they're hearing at home.

Well, you know, getting back to these numbers, we haven't seen these kinds of numbers in a long time. It really does show frustration on the part of consumers consumers or voters, and angry voters or angry consumers make angry voters. And so if there are some sort of brave enough Republican officeholders who are going to willingly participate in public forums like town halls, they can expect blowback. I mean, what we've seen recently in other breaks is people Republicans, Democrats, Independence coming to these town halls and really expressing their discontent for what they think is a sort of random policy when it relates to just about everything. Prices, the number of people getting slash in departments like Social Security, their fears over Medicaid being cut, and these are all things that we are telling them we're going to do. So in that regard, I think that you're sort of making the bed that you now have.

Well, you know, getting back to these numbers, we haven't seen these kinds of numbers in a long time. It really does show frustration on the part of consumers consumers or voters, and angry voters or angry consumers make angry voters. And so if there are some sort of brave enough Republican officeholders who are going to willingly participate in public forums like town halls, they can expect blowback. I mean, what we've seen recently in other breaks is people Republicans, Democrats, Independence coming to these town halls and really expressing their discontent for what they think is a sort of random policy when it relates to just about everything. Prices, the number of people getting slash in departments like Social Security, their fears over Medicaid being cut, and these are all things that we are telling them we're going to do. So in that regard, I think that you're sort of making the bed that you now have.

To lay in well.

To lay in well.

And so then there's the other side of the partisan equation Genie, which is how Democrats are playing this. You look at the weekend activity of Senator Bernie Sanders and congressom and Alexandria Cossio Cortez as they continue their swing across the country. Bernie Sanders at Coachella. Producer James wishing we had video of that.

And so then there's the other side of the partisan equation Genie, which is how Democrats are playing this. You look at the weekend activity of Senator Bernie Sanders and congressom and Alexandria Cossio Cortez as they continue their swing across the country. Bernie Sanders at Coachella. Producer James wishing we had video of that.

I too.

I too.

Wish we could share that on Bloomberg TV and on YouTube, but they are drawing massive crowds. Genie, is this the messaging that is actually working?

Wish we could share that on Bloomberg TV and on YouTube, but they are drawing massive crowds. Genie, is this the messaging that is actually working?

Yeah, they're hoping, and I agree with you and James. I wish we had video of Bernie Sanders and Coachella. It was very hot. I have no idea if he was wearing his mittens or not, but he got quite a crowd also in La with Alexandra Acosio Cortes, and the message was all about an administration run them up, picking up innocent young people off the streets and putting them in detention for having a political opinion, destroying the economy, breaking the markets, not wanting to support people who are on Medicaid despite working at McDonald's and other jobs. And so Bernie Sanders has a message, unfortunately for the Democratic Party. You know, they don't have a leader right now, so he is giving Democrats a way through this. But whether they're listening or not is a big question. And by the way, we had a sort of split screen with Donald Trump at the UFC in Miami as well, so they were all out sort of gearing up the crowds this weekend.

Yeah, they're hoping, and I agree with you and James. I wish we had video of Bernie Sanders and Coachella. It was very hot. I have no idea if he was wearing his mittens or not, but he got quite a crowd also in La with Alexandra Acosio Cortes, and the message was all about an administration run them up, picking up innocent young people off the streets and putting them in detention for having a political opinion, destroying the economy, breaking the markets, not wanting to support people who are on Medicaid despite working at McDonald's and other jobs. And so Bernie Sanders has a message, unfortunately for the Democratic Party. You know, they don't have a leader right now, so he is giving Democrats a way through this. But whether they're listening or not is a big question. And by the way, we had a sort of split screen with Donald Trump at the UFC in Miami as well, so they were all out sort of gearing up the crowds this weekend.

Yeah, I wish we had video of that too, entering the arena kind of like a fight, er fists in the air, Chance of USA. It's just a remarkable moment we're in in American politics. Genie, knowing you study politics, but you also, of course are professor of political science at I own a university and a lot of time in higher education. I do want to get your take on the headline that just crossed the Bloomberg terminal, Harvard rejecting a proposed agreement with the Trump administration, which of course has threatened to halt nine billion dollars in funding over demands that include things like governance and leadership reforms, merit based hiring reform, merit based admissions reform. Harvard University's lawyers saying they will not accept this deal, unlike Columbia, which, of course, which acquiesced to a lot of demands of the Trump administration.

Yeah, I wish we had video of that too, entering the arena kind of like a fight, er fists in the air, Chance of USA. It's just a remarkable moment we're in in American politics. Genie, knowing you study politics, but you also, of course are professor of political science at I own a university and a lot of time in higher education. I do want to get your take on the headline that just crossed the Bloomberg terminal, Harvard rejecting a proposed agreement with the Trump administration, which of course has threatened to halt nine billion dollars in funding over demands that include things like governance and leadership reforms, merit based hiring reform, merit based admissions reform. Harvard University's lawyers saying they will not accept this deal, unlike Columbia, which, of course, which acquiesced to a lot of demands of the Trump administration.

And I wonder what you make of the news.

And I wonder what you make of the news.

Very welcome news. You know, if Harvard cannot stand up, who can amongst the universities in this country. And I give the president and the faculty who filed a lawsuit credit for this. This is an attempt to undermine the freedom to engage in a liberal arts education, free speech. Harvard does have issues. They've acknowledged that they've been working on issues of anti Semitism, but the fact that Donald Trump can threaten to take away their ability to control their curriculum and other things unless they abide by his wishes is a bridge way too far. And good for Harvard for stepping up. I think Princeton and others will be inspired by this and the law, and hopefully the big shoe law firms will as well going down the road.

Very welcome news. You know, if Harvard cannot stand up, who can amongst the universities in this country. And I give the president and the faculty who filed a lawsuit credit for this. This is an attempt to undermine the freedom to engage in a liberal arts education, free speech. Harvard does have issues. They've acknowledged that they've been working on issues of anti Semitism, but the fact that Donald Trump can threaten to take away their ability to control their curriculum and other things unless they abide by his wishes is a bridge way too far. And good for Harvard for stepping up. I think Princeton and others will be inspired by this and the law, and hopefully the big shoe law firms will as well going down the road.

Well, so, Rick, I'll give you a chance to swing at this one as well. Is this ultimately a fight that Harvard and these universities can win up against administration that's threatening to pull funding.

Well, so, Rick, I'll give you a chance to swing at this one as well. Is this ultimately a fight that Harvard and these universities can win up against administration that's threatening to pull funding.

Well, let's just be clear.

Well, let's just be clear.

There is no freedom of speech right to spending taxpayer dollars, and that's what this debate is all about. There is an enormous amount of taxpayer dollars going into these institutions, and it's up to government to decide what uses they are. This is where elections matter and they have consequences, and the consequences in this election is that Donald Trump wants to turn the clock back to a period of time when you know, people like minded like Donald Trump coett decide what those taxpayer dollars are going to be used for. So he can threaten, he can control, but at the end of the day, his only real leverage is taking away federal funding, and that's a taxpayer issue. So I think that at the end of the day, it puts universities in a very difficult position. They're used to, you know, not being or being insulated against any kind of political pressure, and in this case, that's that's not going to work for them.

There is no freedom of speech right to spending taxpayer dollars, and that's what this debate is all about. There is an enormous amount of taxpayer dollars going into these institutions, and it's up to government to decide what uses they are. This is where elections matter and they have consequences, and the consequences in this election is that Donald Trump wants to turn the clock back to a period of time when you know, people like minded like Donald Trump coett decide what those taxpayer dollars are going to be used for. So he can threaten, he can control, but at the end of the day, his only real leverage is taking away federal funding, and that's a taxpayer issue. So I think that at the end of the day, it puts universities in a very difficult position. They're used to, you know, not being or being insulated against any kind of political pressure, and in this case, that's that's not going to work for them.

All right, Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno our political panel joining us on this Monday here on Balance of Power. Thank you so much, and we still have more coming up as we turn to geopolitics. President Trump talked about both iron and the Russia Ukraine War in the Oval earlier, and we'll have the latest there next. On Bloomberg TV and radio.

All right, Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno our political panel joining us on this Monday here on Balance of Power. Thank you so much, and we still have more coming up as we turn to geopolitics. President Trump talked about both iron and the Russia Ukraine War in the Oval earlier, and we'll have the latest there next. On Bloomberg TV and radio.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Alpa Cockley and Android Otto with the boom Burg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Alpa Cockley and Android Otto with the boom Burg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

We want to focus on commodities and oil specifically as well. With WTI crew down about eight tens ofven percent on the day, we're just shy of sixty one dollars a barrel, so off the lows we experienced last week, but still we're talking about some pretty depressed prices here. And in the face of that, some interesting news from OPEC today, which has cut its forecast for oil demand globally, not just for this year, but next year as well, in the face of President Trump's tariffs.

We want to focus on commodities and oil specifically as well. With WTI crew down about eight tens ofven percent on the day, we're just shy of sixty one dollars a barrel, so off the lows we experienced last week, but still we're talking about some pretty depressed prices here. And in the face of that, some interesting news from OPEC today, which has cut its forecast for oil demand globally, not just for this year, but next year as well, in the face of President Trump's tariffs.

The cartel projecting.

The cartel projecting.

An expansion of one point three million barrels a day, or approximately one percent percent for each year.

An expansion of one point three million barrels a day, or approximately one percent percent for each year.

And we should note that even that reduced.

And we should note that even that reduced.

Forecast is still higher than other forecasts that are out there. So we want to get into this now with Mike mcgloan, who covers commodities for a senior commodity strategist at Bloomberg Intelligence, live in Miami. So, Mike, even with this reduced forecast, do you get the sense that OPEK is still being overly op mystic on demand here?

Forecast is still higher than other forecasts that are out there. So we want to get into this now with Mike mcgloan, who covers commodities for a senior commodity strategist at Bloomberg Intelligence, live in Miami. So, Mike, even with this reduced forecast, do you get the sense that OPEK is still being overly op mystic on demand here?

Yes? I love your question, Kaylee, and your leading. It's perfect.

Yes? I love your question, Kaylee, and your leading. It's perfect.

They are just catching up to the rest of the world. They obviously have a bias for Crudel to go up. They're pointing out the facts of what's really happening. Crudel is going down because it went up a lot to the peak in twenty twenty two, and that shifted some of the world ordered that centivies much more supply out of the US, which is still the case accesses of supply, and by the way, the cost of production US is pushing now towards fifty dollars a barrel, so it's kind of a gravity pool level. We have declining demand out of China, and we have a paradigm shift in the world's shifting to ev so this is a perfect storm for normal reversion in crudeil. The last twenty years, the loads have been around forty dollars a barrel after shooting up above one hundred.

They are just catching up to the rest of the world. They obviously have a bias for Crudel to go up. They're pointing out the facts of what's really happening. Crudel is going down because it went up a lot to the peak in twenty twenty two, and that shifted some of the world ordered that centivies much more supply out of the US, which is still the case accesses of supply, and by the way, the cost of production US is pushing now towards fifty dollars a barrel, so it's kind of a gravity pool level. We have declining demand out of China, and we have a paradigm shift in the world's shifting to ev so this is a perfect storm for normal reversion in crudeil. The last twenty years, the loads have been around forty dollars a barrel after shooting up above one hundred.

Now it's got a good reason to do that.

Now it's got a good reason to do that.

But the bottom line is the US stock market has to go up now, and I think Crudel's realizing the stock market is probably going to go down, which means as amount of time Crudels gets below that.

But the bottom line is the US stock market has to go up now, and I think Crudel's realizing the stock market is probably going to go down, which means as amount of time Crudels gets below that.

Cost of production to shut off those excesses.

Cost of production to shut off those excesses.

Well, so I guess it becomes a question of policy decisions moving forward as well, and at a time when opek is adding more so fly onto the market, cutting instamand forecast, and President Trump is pushing for more supply to come out of the US. Are we just going to end up in a world in which we're incredibly oversupplied or your producer is going to recognize that and make decisions accordingly.

Well, so I guess it becomes a question of policy decisions moving forward as well, and at a time when opek is adding more so fly onto the market, cutting instamand forecast, and President Trump is pushing for more supply to come out of the US. Are we just going to end up in a world in which we're incredibly oversupplied or your producer is going to recognize that and make decisions accordingly.

Yeah, Well, the number one way they really shut off all that except supplies for prices to go down, and then it'll happen below fifty.

Yeah, Well, the number one way they really shut off all that except supplies for prices to go down, and then it'll happen below fifty.

Usually happens around forty. It's a matter of time.

Usually happens around forty. It's a matter of time.

But I see the average price of gasoline this country is still above three.

But I see the average price of gasoline this country is still above three.

Now it's driving season.

Now it's driving season.

We'll stay high for a little while, but by this time next year or midterms drop to two. It's a normal reversion diesel glowing. Lower energy price is also pressure on inflation, and the stated goal of the Trumpet administration have lower interest rates.

We'll stay high for a little while, but by this time next year or midterms drop to two. It's a normal reversion diesel glowing. Lower energy price is also pressure on inflation, and the stated goal of the Trumpet administration have lower interest rates.

So three, it's just a matter of time. The whole tilt is going that way.

So three, it's just a matter of time. The whole tilt is going that way.

I don't see what stops it, but I'll tell you prerequisite for just stable stability, stock market has to stay up. And if it continues downward, which Bloomer Economics base views will drop down to four thousand s and B five hundred, about another twenty percent. In the case of recession, we're going to get normal deflation from the inflation.

I don't see what stops it, but I'll tell you prerequisite for just stable stability, stock market has to stay up. And if it continues downward, which Bloomer Economics base views will drop down to four thousand s and B five hundred, about another twenty percent. In the case of recession, we're going to get normal deflation from the inflation.

That's the trend right now.

That's the trend right now.

Well, and then of course there's the unknown factors to consider here, including geopolitical factors. Mike, just quickly, as we heard President Trump today talking about ongoing talks with Iran over its nuclear program, if that somehow results in sanction relief in more Iranian crude coming onto the market at a time when these other dynamics we just discussed, or and play, what would the impact of that be.

Well, and then of course there's the unknown factors to consider here, including geopolitical factors. Mike, just quickly, as we heard President Trump today talking about ongoing talks with Iran over its nuclear program, if that somehow results in sanction relief in more Iranian crude coming onto the market at a time when these other dynamics we just discussed, or and play, what would the impact of that be.

Perfect storm, The risk is there some kind of supply shock.

Perfect storm, The risk is there some kind of supply shock.

Krudeo basically needs a supply shock to go up, like the grains need some kind of drought supply shock to go up. Otherwise they're heading towards low price cures. So you describe the whole trajectory.

Krudeo basically needs a supply shock to go up, like the grains need some kind of drought supply shock to go up. Otherwise they're heading towards low price cures. So you describe the whole trajectory.

Now.

Now.

The thing is everybody agrees with it. It was a little bit difficult when it was at one hundred and it was heading lower. Now that we're heading towards heading at sixty and lower, everybody agrees.

The thing is everybody agrees with it. It was a little bit difficult when it was at one hundred and it was heading lower. Now that we're heading towards heading at sixty and lower, everybody agrees.

Which is a bit of a bullsh factor.

Which is a bit of a bullsh factor.

But overall, the trends are very bad for very good for lower energy prices.

But overall, the trends are very bad for very good for lower energy prices.

With it that way, consumers love it. It's all good for consumers, all right.

With it that way, consumers love it. It's all good for consumers, all right.

Mike mcloon of Bloomberg Intelligence joining us from Miami, Thank you so much, and I want to focus more on the subject of Iran. Now, of course, there were talks held on Saturday in Oman between the US and around the highest level diplomatic effort to address its nuclear program we've seen in years, and while not much tangible, necessarily was yielded by Steve Whitcoff, the Trump Administration's middlely so envoys, meeting with the Iranian foreign minister. We did get confirmation that there will be a second meeting that will happen in Italy this coming Saturday. So is that alone enough of a sign of progress on that? Returned to Michael Allen, who was here with me in our Washington, d C studio. He's managing director of Beacon Global Strategies, also former Special Assistant to President George W. Bush in the national security sector. Good to see you as always, Thanks for being here on Bloomberg TV and radio. Is the idea that we're having another round of talks in and of itself enough progress to you? Or should we have had more come out of this meeting.

Mike mcloon of Bloomberg Intelligence joining us from Miami, Thank you so much, and I want to focus more on the subject of Iran. Now, of course, there were talks held on Saturday in Oman between the US and around the highest level diplomatic effort to address its nuclear program we've seen in years, and while not much tangible, necessarily was yielded by Steve Whitcoff, the Trump Administration's middlely so envoys, meeting with the Iranian foreign minister. We did get confirmation that there will be a second meeting that will happen in Italy this coming Saturday. So is that alone enough of a sign of progress on that? Returned to Michael Allen, who was here with me in our Washington, d C studio. He's managing director of Beacon Global Strategies, also former Special Assistant to President George W. Bush in the national security sector. Good to see you as always, Thanks for being here on Bloomberg TV and radio. Is the idea that we're having another round of talks in and of itself enough progress to you? Or should we have had more come out of this meeting.

I guess it's progress to say that we've talked enough to at least have a second meeting, But at some point we really need to get to.

I guess it's progress to say that we've talked enough to at least have a second meeting, But at some point we really need to get to.

The details of what they're discussing.

The details of what they're discussing.

I want to make sure, at least from my vantage point, that Whitcoff is very serious about urin enrichment. He seemed to say the red line was only weaponization, which is the process by which you fashion a bomb out of highly enriched uranium that's called weapons grade.

I want to make sure, at least from my vantage point, that Whitcoff is very serious about urin enrichment. He seemed to say the red line was only weaponization, which is the process by which you fashion a bomb out of highly enriched uranium that's called weapons grade.

So I want to make.

So I want to make.

Sure that we have a lot of expert technical expertise into what they're talking about, because if we want to be a deal too badly, we're going to get a bad deal.

Sure that we have a lot of expert technical expertise into what they're talking about, because if we want to be a deal too badly, we're going to get a bad deal.

Well, we heard President Trump in the Oval Office earlier this afternoon saying that Iran has to get rid of the concept of a nuclear weapon. They cannot have a nuclear weapon. But you're suggesting it shouldn't just be about the weapon itself.

Well, we heard President Trump in the Oval Office earlier this afternoon saying that Iran has to get rid of the concept of a nuclear weapon. They cannot have a nuclear weapon. But you're suggesting it shouldn't just be about the weapon itself.

Yeah, that's right.

Yeah, that's right.

I think if they continue to specialize in how to make weapons grade uranium, that's a skill that you're not going to forget. It's a learned technical skill that will be with them forever. And so we'll always constantly be trying to figure out are you burrowing into a new mountain like they've done on two occasions to build centrifuge halls, and what are you doing on weaponization? That's much harder to track than a huge centri huge hall. So if any deal results, it has to have any time, any place inspections by the UN's watchdog agency, which is called the IAEA. That's absolutely a fundamental part of any agreement to be able to check Iran.

I think if they continue to specialize in how to make weapons grade uranium, that's a skill that you're not going to forget. It's a learned technical skill that will be with them forever. And so we'll always constantly be trying to figure out are you burrowing into a new mountain like they've done on two occasions to build centrifuge halls, and what are you doing on weaponization? That's much harder to track than a huge centri huge hall. So if any deal results, it has to have any time, any place inspections by the UN's watchdog agency, which is called the IAEA. That's absolutely a fundamental part of any agreement to be able to check Iran.

And what they're up to.

And what they're up to.

Well, so what position is Iran in coming in to this? Then, when we're considering what an agreement could look like, Knowing we've had many conversations with you, included about how it's been weakened by the weakness of its proxies in the face of ongoing fights with Israel or the US striking the Huthis, what have you? Are they weakened enough that they would actually agree to something that arguably, you could say Iran might not see as super favorable to its interesting So.

Well, so what position is Iran in coming in to this? Then, when we're considering what an agreement could look like, Knowing we've had many conversations with you, included about how it's been weakened by the weakness of its proxies in the face of ongoing fights with Israel or the US striking the Huthis, what have you? Are they weakened enough that they would actually agree to something that arguably, you could say Iran might not see as super favorable to its interesting So.

I'm worried they're not enough adversely affected quite yet. Remember last time, in the first Trump administration, there was a long period of what they call massive sanctions and max pressure, and honestly, I don't know that the Iranians felt it enough or I think they're willing to really take some serious pain before they're going to deal in a very substantial way on the things that we care about very much. And then, of course, as we've talked about with you before, is the wild card of Israel. Israel may be much less trustworthy of an Iranian deal than Trump might be.

I'm worried they're not enough adversely affected quite yet. Remember last time, in the first Trump administration, there was a long period of what they call massive sanctions and max pressure, and honestly, I don't know that the Iranians felt it enough or I think they're willing to really take some serious pain before they're going to deal in a very substantial way on the things that we care about very much. And then, of course, as we've talked about with you before, is the wild card of Israel. Israel may be much less trustworthy of an Iranian deal than Trump might be.

And so what do they do. Do they decide to go ahead.

And so what do they do. Do they decide to go ahead.

And use military action, And I think that's something that's a serious possibility this calendar gear.

And use military action, And I think that's something that's a serious possibility this calendar gear.

Well, there's also the question of US military action too. President Trump was asked by a reporter today about that. He said, if we have to do something harsh, we'll do it. Then, when he was asked specifically if that could include a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, he said, of course it does. Do you see that as actually a likely possible scenario?

Well, there's also the question of US military action too. President Trump was asked by a reporter today about that. He said, if we have to do something harsh, we'll do it. Then, when he was asked specifically if that could include a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, he said, of course it does. Do you see that as actually a likely possible scenario?

I think it's possible.

I think it's possible.

I think his predominant view is what he said in his inaugural that he wants to have fewer wars, not more, and not getting in another war in the Middle East is one of his chief aims. But at the same time, he has set the theater with B two bombers, extra carriers, a lot of military force. I think that's more to reinforce Steve Whitkoff's hand as he negotiates diplomatically.

I think his predominant view is what he said in his inaugural that he wants to have fewer wars, not more, and not getting in another war in the Middle East is one of his chief aims. But at the same time, he has set the theater with B two bombers, extra carriers, a lot of military force. I think that's more to reinforce Steve Whitkoff's hand as he negotiates diplomatically.

But I wouldn't rule it out.

But I wouldn't rule it out.

Because I think if President Trump feels like if he's disrespected or Iran doesn't take this seriously, he might go for it.

Because I think if President Trump feels like if he's disrespected or Iran doesn't take this seriously, he might go for it.

I wonder if you feel that the President might be disrespected by what we saw take place in Ukraine over the weekend. Knowing to your point on him not being a fan of wars, he very much wants to see a negotiated outcome between Russia and Ukraine.

I wonder if you feel that the President might be disrespected by what we saw take place in Ukraine over the weekend. Knowing to your point on him not being a fan of wars, he very much wants to see a negotiated outcome between Russia and Ukraine.

He wants the war to end.

He wants the war to end.

And yet on Palm Sunday, Russia strikes inside Ukraine kills more than thirty people, even as there are these efforts towards some kind of peace deal. Does that signal to you that Putin is not taking this seriously? And what does that mean for the president?