Asian shares slip as worries about U.S. debt send Wall St tumbling

TOKYO (AP) — Asian shares fell Thursday after Wall Street slumped under pressure from the Treasury bond market and worries about surging U.S. debt.
U.S. futures were little changed, while Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 shed 0.8% to 36,988.36.
Hong Kong's Hang Seng lost 0.5% to 23,711.58, while the Shanghai Composite was virtually unchanged, inching up less than 0.1% to 3,387.58.
Australia's S&P/ASX 200 slipped 0.5% to 8,348.10. South Korea's Kospi dropped 1.3% to 2,591.95.
Rising yields for U.S. Treasury bonds are a canary in the coal mine, Stephen Innes of SPI Asset Management said in a commentary.
'The U.S. still has the biggest markets, the deepest liquidity, and the dollar's inertia working in its favor. But even inertia can't outrun compound interest and structural deficits forever,' he wrote.
The declining U.S. dollar also weighed on regional markets, according to some analysts, because some Asian nations have significant holdings in dollars.
A weak dollar also hurts Asian exporters, such as Japanese automakers and electronics companies, by reducing the value of their overseas earnings when they are converted into yen.
In currency trading, the U.S. dollar fell to 143.25 Japanese yen from 143.68 yen. It had been trading at 150 yen levels a year ago. The euro cost $1.1343, up from $1.1330.
Investors remain worried over President Donald Trump's actions, including tariff policies that directly affect Asian companies and decisions on major legislation such as a funding bill now in Congress.
'U.S. equities slumped in a 'Sell America' move as things turned ugly on Trump's 'big, beautiful tax bill.' ' said Tan Jing Yi, analyst at Mizuho Bank in Singapore.
On Wednesday, shares tumbled on Wall Street after the U.S. government released the results for its latest auction of 20-year bonds.
The government regularly sells such bonds, which is how it borrows money to pay its bills. In this auction, the U.S. government had to pay a yield as high as 5.047% to attract enough buyers to lend it a total of $16 billion over 20 years.
That helped push up yields for all kinds of other Treasurys, including the more widely followed 10-year Treasury. Its yield climbed to 4.59% from 4.48% late Tuesday and from just 4.01% early last month. That's a notable move in the bond market.
The S&P 500 fell 1.6% for a second straight drop after breaking a six-day winning streak, closing at 5,844.61.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 1.9% to 41,860.44, while the Nasdaq composite sank 1.4% to 18,872.64.
Stocks had been drifting only modestly lower early in the day, after Target and other retailers gave mixed forecasts for upcoming profits amid uncertainty caused by President Donald Trump's trade war.
Treasury yields have been on the rise in part because of concerns that the tax cuts currently under consideration in Washington could pile trillions of more dollars onto the U.S. government's debt.
Bond yields have been on the rise recently for developed economies around the world as governments borrow more to pay their bills while central banks like the Federal Reserve have cut back on their own holdings of government bonds.
When the U.S. government has to pay more interest to borrow money, that can push interest rates higher for U.S. households and businesses too, including for mortgages, auto loans and credit cards.
That in turn can slow the economy. Higher yields can also make investors less inclined to pay high prices for stocks and other kinds of investments.
A growing number of companies have recently said tariffs and uncertainty about the economy are making it difficult to guess what the upcoming year will bring. Others, including Walmart, have said they'll have to raise prices to offset Trump's tariffs.
U.S. stocks had recently recovered most of their steep losses from earlier in the year after Trump delayed or rolled back many of his stiff tariffs. Investors are hopeful that Trump will lower his tariffs more permanently after reaching trade deals with other countries.
In energy trading, benchmark U.S. crude fell 15 cents to $61.42 a barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, slipped 17 cents to $64.74 a barrel.
___
AP Business Writer Stan Choe contributed.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

Trump claims tariffs could 'eliminate' income tax for Americans making under $200,000

Moneywise and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue through links in the content below. President Donald Trump says tariffs could deliver a financial windfall for everyday Americans — by wiping out their income taxes. 'When tariffs cut in, many people's income taxes will be substantially reduced, maybe even completely eliminated,' Trump declared in a Truth Social post on April 27. 'Focus will be on people making less than $200,000 a year.' That's a bold promise, especially considering that only 14.4% of U.S. households earned more than $200,000 annually in 2023, according to Census Bureau data. In other words, if Trump's vision holds true, the vast majority of Americans would pay no income tax at all. Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has an important message for the next wave of American retirees — here's how he says you can best weather the US retirement crisis Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) But don't celebrate just yet. While Trump is optimistic, experts say the math simply doesn't add up. Economists Erica York and Huaqun Li of the Tax Foundation were blunt, explaining in a response on April 28 that 'the individual income tax raises more than 27 times as much revenue as tariffs currently do,' and 'even eliminating income taxes for a subset of taxpayers, such as those earning $200,000 or less, would require significantly higher replacement revenues than tariffs could generate.' They estimate that the tariffs Trump has imposed and scheduled as of April 2025 would generate nearly $167 billion in new federal tax revenue in 2025 — covering less than 25% of the cost of eliminating income taxes for people earning below $200,000. While Trump's proposal faces serious doubts, policy changes aren't the only route to lowering tax bills. Here are two powerful assets that everyday investors can use to their advantage. Scott Galloway, professor of marketing at New York University's Stern School of Business, once said that if you're trying to build wealth, you have 'an obligation to pay as little tax as possible.' His advice? Keep it simple: 'You buy stocks, you never sell them, you borrow against them.' Galloway broke it down with an example: 'You own $100 in Amazon stock. You need money to buy something. Instead of selling the stock, and let's say it's gone up 50% ... You would have to realize a capital gain and pay long-term capital gains [tax] on that $50 gain. No, just borrow against it and let the stock continue to grow.' This strategy allows investors to tap into the value of their portfolios without triggering a taxable event. Because capital gains are only taxed when realized, borrowing against appreciated assets lets investors access cash while deferring taxes. Meanwhile, the investments themselves can continue to grow. And since the interest on the loan is often smaller than the tax bill from a sale, this approach can be a powerful tool for preserving and compounding wealth over time. Of course, not all investors want to pick individual stocks — and you don't have to. Warren Buffett, one of the most successful investors of our time, recommends a much simpler path: buying a cross-section of the American economy. 'In my view, for most people, the best thing to do is own the S&P 500 index,' Buffett has stated, meaning invest in an S&P 500 index fund. This straightforward approach gives investors exposure to the top American companies on the stock market, providing diversified exposure without the need for constant monitoring or active trading. The beauty of this approach is its accessibility — anyone, regardless of wealth, can take advantage of it. Read more: Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — Real estate has long been a go-to asset for building wealth — and one of the reasons is the generous tax treatment it receives. When you earn rental income from an investment property, you can claim deductions for a wide range of expenses, such as mortgage interest, property taxes, insurance and ongoing maintenance and repairs. Real estate investors also benefit from depreciation — a tax deduction that recognizes the gradual wear and tear of a property over time. Today, you don't need to be a millionaire or buy property outright to benefit from real estate investing. For example, Homeshares opens the door to the $30-plus trillion U.S. home equity market — a space that was once reserved almost exclusively for institutional investors. With a minimum investment of $25,000, accredited investors can gain direct exposure to hundreds of owner-occupied homes in top U.S. cities through their U.S. Home Equity Fund — without the headaches of buying, owning or managing property. With risk-adjusted target returns ranging from 14% to 17%, this approach provides an effective, hands-off way to invest in owner-occupied residential properties across regional markets. If you're an accredited investor looking for larger returns through commercial real estate, First National Realty Partners (FNRP) could be a better fit with a $50,000 minimum investment requirement. Specializing in grocery-anchored retail, FNRP offers a turnkey solution for investors, allowing them to passively earn distribution income while benefiting from the firm's expertise and deal leadership. FNRP has developed relationships with the nation's largest essential-needs brands, including Kroger, Walmart and Whole Foods, and provides insights into the best properties both on and off-market. And since the investments are necessity-based, they tend to perform well during times of economic volatility and act as a hedge against inflation. You can engage with experts, explore available deals and easily make an allocation, all in one personalized, secure portal. JPMorgan sees gold soaring to $6,000/ounce — use this 1 simple IRA trick to lock in those potential shiny gains (before it's too late) This tiny hot Costco item has skyrocketed 74% in price in under 2 years — but now the retail giant is restricting purchases. Here's how to buy the coveted asset in bulk This is how American car dealers use the '4-square method' to make big profits off you — and how you can ensure you pay a fair price for all your vehicle costs Millions of Americans now sit on a stunning $35 trillion in home equity — here's 1 new way to invest in responsible US homeowners This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. Sign in to access your portfolio

Politico

an hour ago

• Politico

The winners and losers in Trump's NATO arms race

NATO members are rushing to show President Donald Trump they're shoveling money into defense — some with a dose of creative math — as Russia's battle with Ukraine grinds on and war threatens to consume the Middle East. The group's summit this week in The Hague, which Trump plans to attend, will attempt to set a deadline for members to spend 5 percent of GDP on defense. Trump has complained about European defense budgets since his first term, claiming the U.S. gets ripped off by countries that rely on Washington for a security blanket. The way allies approach this at the summit is critical. Leaders will need to walk a tightrope between staying on the president's good side — and continuing to benefit from America's role in NATO — and declaring more independence from Washington. As Trump increases pressure, members are touting new investments and shuffling around money — from a 'defense-adjacent' Sicilian bridge to a stopgap German fund. A POLITICO analysis reveals telling gaps between the big spenders in Eastern Europe and those further afield from Russia, who are still creeping toward a decade-old target. The 32 member states break down into three groups: the winners, the risers and the laggards. Most countries occupy a crowded middle ground, not quite racing toward the new 5 percent goal, but making solid progress in exceeding the current 2 percent mark. 'Most of NATO recognizes that it has to be better,' said a U.S. Defense Department official, who like others, was granted anonymity to discuss internal conversations. 'We're looking at these meetings as a very public chance, with the president watching, for them to step up.' Here's how NATO members are faring in the race to spend. Poland has led the pack for the last several years, spending 4.7 percent of its GDP on defense as it splurges on everything from drones to fighter planes. The country, which borders Russia and has dealt with errant missiles killing citizens, is keenly aware of the threat from its eastern flank. That kind of wake-up call has spurred Warsaw to ask the European Commission to shift $6.9 billion of its funding in green projects to defense. The bigger spending has made Poland a favorite in Washington. The Poles are getting creative in their weapons purchases by mixing systems and suppliers from multiple countries to get equipment delivered faster. Poland was the first NATO member to spend billions on South Korean long-range artillery and other systems — a move that other countries frustrated with delayed shipments of U.S. weapons, such as Finland, are emulating. Countries will do 'whatever works' to get to 5 percent, said a diplomat from a NATO member country, including folding infrastructure upgrades into defense spending to push the overall number higher. Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia — former Russian territories that tend to march in lockstep when it comes to defense spending — have outlined plans to hit 5 percent by next year or soon after. They're already among the alliance's top spenders. Baltic officials are embracing a 'porcupine' strategy, modeled off Taiwan's efforts to ward off a Chinese invasion. This involves using small, mobile and lethal weapons fired from shore at any Russian Baltic Sea fleet ships that might threaten them. Greece is a surprise spender on defense, bucking the trend of most Mediterranean countries by dishing out more than 3 percent of its GDP. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis in April announced a 12-year, $28 billion defense strategy that will focus on uncrewed vehicles, munitions, drones, satellites and its Achilles' Shield air defense system. The U.S. spends more than any other member on defense, but it still only reaches 3.4 percent of GDP. The country faces its own political challenges in reaching the NATO goal, even with a potential 2035 deadline that allies may recommend at the summit. The United Kingdom and France, Europe's two nuclear states, have made steady increases in recent years but face issues behind the scenes. Britain's defense budget rose from 2.2 percent of GDP in 2023 to 2.3 percent in 2024, with a sharp increase in research and development spending. It also paid extra for major operations such as air defense in the Red Sea and aircraft carriers deployed to the Pacific. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has promised to take that figure to 2.6 percent by 2026 — thanks in part to folding in intelligence and slashing spending on foreign aid. But he's beset by severe budget issues and has not yet set out a path to his goal of hitting even 3 percent. Paris has steadily increased defense spending since President Emmanuel Macron came to power in 2017. But it only hit 2 percent last year. France is one of the European Union's most indebted countries, and public finances are dire. It's unclear how the government would find extra money to reach the 5 percent goal, especially as Macron has ruled out raising taxes. Germany and Sweden have both rewritten their debt rules as they reach 2 percent and aim higher. German governments saw the NATO target as non-binding for years, and only the advent of war in Europe — dubbed the Zeitenwende, or turning point, by former German Chancellor Olaf Scholz — prompted the country to change course. Berlin in 2024 reported 2.1 percent of GDP on defense spending, exceeding the alliance benchmark for the first time since 1990. But the increase doesn't boost combat strength and relies on some fancy accounting. A sizable chunk of the 2024 defense budget came from a special temporary spending fund. Sweden's defense spending surged following its 2024 accession to NATO from 1.5 percent to 2.2 percent of GDP last year. Stockholm is tweaking its debt rules to allow for up to about $30 million in defense loans by 2035. Then there's Turkey. While Ankara has missed the 2 percent mark in recent years, it has a well-developed arms industry and punches above its spending weight in weapons and the size of its military — the second-largest in NATO. Several strategically vital countries hang well below the 5 percent goal, particularly Canada, Spain and Italy. All three have made pledges to catch up. But politics, accounting tricks and historical habits are slowing progress. Canada spends just 1.37 percent of GDP on defense, with key equipment gaps across its forces. Prime Minister Mark Carney this month promised to hit 2 percent 'this fiscal year,' bringing forward a target initially set up for 2029. The lag has deep roots. Ottawa has long relied on U.S. defense guarantees while prioritizing social spending and climate goals. Carney is framing rearmament as a sovereignty issue in light of Trump's threats to annex Canada, but that would require a rapid ramp-up in procurement and industrial capacity. Spain remains NATO's lowest spender, aside from Iceland, which has no army. Madrid spent 1.3 percent of GDP on defense in 2024. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has rolled out an €11 billion military upgrade plan to reach 2 percent this year. It's the country's most ambitious defense posture in decades. But Sánchez is boxed in by his governing coalition. Left-wing allies remain opposed to higher military budgets, and previous attempts to raise spending triggered a backlash. He asked Rutte this month, in a letter obtained by POLITICO, for a carveout to the new spending target. 'It is the legitimate right of every government to decide whether or not they are willing to make those sacrifices,' he wrote, saying it would jeopardize the country's welfare system. Italy was only slightly higher at 1.5 percent last year. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said the government will hit the 2 percent target this year, but officials suggest that may happen more through clever accounting. Rome wants civilian infrastructure, such as a planned bridge to Sicily, to count as a defense-adjacent goal. Defense spending remains a politically fraught topic as the country faces high debt levels and strong pressure to protect pensions and welfare. This text is a collaboration of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. Paul McLeary reported from Washington, Chris Lunday reported from Berlin and Esther Webber reported from London. Jacopo Barigazzi in Brussels, Mike Blanchfield in Ottawa, Jack Detsch in Washington, WELT's Philipp Fritz in Warsaw, Max Griera in Brussels, WELT's Thorsten Jugholt in Berlin and Laura Kayali in Paris contributed to this report.

Newsweek

2 hours ago

• Newsweek

What Trump's Strikes on Iran Mean for Gas Prices As Oil Costs Surge

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Amid the conflict between Israel and Iran, oil prices have been surging, and after President Donald Trump announced on Saturday the U.S. would be joining the attack on Iran's nuclear sites, concern has been raised over what this means for gas prices in America. The U.S. dropped bombs on Iran's three main nuclear sites on Saturday night—Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan—escalating fears of an expansion of the Middle Eastern conflict that could throw the oil market into turmoil. With much of the West already seeing spikes in costs, further increases could be looming as the conflict continues. Why It Matters After the U.S. attack, the Iran's reaction will reveal whether the conflict could develop into a major regional or even international conflict. Iran may retaliate against U.S. forces in the region, cut off a global oil supply route or try to accelerate its nuclear program. Although, Trump has warned of further military action if Tehran does not now decide to make peace. File photo: Fuel prices on a fuel pump at a Mobil gas station. File photo: Fuel prices on a fuel pump at a Mobil gas station. Aaron M. Sprecher/AP What To Know In the past week, Brent Crude oil stocks have already jumped 11 percent since Israel attacked Iran and is expected to continue rising on Monday, according to Emirati newspaper Gulf News, although prices have been fluctuating. The oil market had stabilized on Friday, according to Reuters, after the U.S. imposed new Iran-related sanctions, which fueled hopes that a negotiated agreement could be made between the two countries. That relief in the market was only temporary as after Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil chokepoint, in response to the U.S. strikes. Fears that Iran could attack U.S. oil infrastructure in the region, and levy its power over the Straits of Hormuz could "combine to make prices and speculation rise about the security and dependability of supply," Greg Kennedy, director of the Economic Conflict and Competition Research Group at King's College London told Newsweek. "Lack of clarity of how long this condition will last will also lead to hoarding or preemptive purchasing by other nations, so there are competition supply fears that will drive up prices," he added. Reflecting on the knock-on effect this would have on U.S. gas prices, Kennedy said that in the long term, the conflict "will most certainly see energy prices go up at the pumps." "This is not an act that just stays in the Gulf region, it has wider global strategic ripples," he said. Kennedy said that higher oil prices could also mean that Russia is able to gain more money—oil from the Urals region has already increased by 26 percent in the past month. "This is making war in Ukraine last longer now as well as it gives [President Vladimir] Putin both political and economic ammunition to continue his war efforts and avoid the need for peace talks." What People Are Saying Greg Kennedy, director of the Economic Conflict and Competition Research Group at King's College London told Newsweek: "The overall impact of actions that make the world look even less safe than it was previously was is always a cost to the civilian sector and society as a whole." What Happens Next As the conflict, and its repercussions, continue to unfold in the next few days, it will become more clear how significant the prices hikes will be.