Bloomberg Surveillance TV: May 29, 2025
34:20 Share

This is an iHeart Podcast.

Trading at Schwab is now powered by Ameritrade. Unlocking the power of thinkorswim, the award-winning trading platforms loaded with features that let you dive deeper into the market. Visualize your trades in a new light on thinkorswim desktop with robust charting and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly.

Learn more at Schwab.com slash trading. Did you know that 92% of U.S. hiring decision makers expect to face challenges?

Finding qualified candidates this year? The costs of recruiting, advertising, interviewing, and onboarding can add up quickly. But Express Employment Professionals is your hiring solution. Go to expresspros.com today. Express streamlines your hiring process, saving both time and money. Whether you need contract staff or your core team member, visit expresspros.com.

Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts. Radio. News.

This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Farrow, along with Lisa Abramowitz and Anne-Marie Hordern. Join us each day for insight from the best in markets, economics and geopolitics. From our global headquarters in New York City, we are live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from 6 to 9 a.m. Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen. And as always, on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App.

President Donald Trump's Liberation Day tariffs. Joining us now to discuss the senior White House trade advisor, Peter Navarro. Dr. Navarro, welcome back to the program, sir. First of all, I think we've got to get into the ruling overnight. Have you spoken to the president? And ultimately, what's his reaction to what we heard?

I haven't spoken to the president yet, but I've spoken to people who have spoken to the president. Look, we're in a situation now, big picture here is IEPA. We were using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. There's no question that there's an economic emergency with respect to both uses that we had. One is we are in a world where...

China has killed over a million Americans with fentanyl poison

And we took this step to stop that. We will continue to press on that. At the same time, we invoked that rule to stop what has been 20 million illegal aliens streaming into our country, driving down wages, taking jobs away. That's an economic emergency. On top of that, the world continues to steal about a trillion dollars a year as measured by the trade deficit.

And that's an economic emergency because it's transferring our wealth abroad. So we think we have a strong case, yes.

We will immediately appeal and try to stay the ruling but at the same time the court interestingly enough Basically said we were right just use different rules and laws So nothing has really changed here in that sense We're still as we speak having countries call us and tell us they want a deal So these deals are going to happen

So that's kind of where we're at and it's troublesome here because if you look broadly at the pattern, we've got courts in this country

who are basically engaged in attacks on the American people. The president ran on stopping the fentanyl poisoning, stopping international trade unfair practices from stealing our factories and jobs. And courts keep getting in the way of that. The courts get in the way of our trying to deal with the border issues. Now they're getting in the way of our trying to deal with the fentanyl crisis.

And that's where we stand here. And I think part of what's going to be important about this ruling is

demonstrates yet again to the American people that the judiciary in this country has been weaponized in ways which are contrary to their interests. Well, Peter, you would have heard a lot of people come on this program and ultimately say you still have tons of options, and you've alluded to one of them. You will, of course, appeal, but could you describe what you might do in the interim, the way you might pursue your ultimate objective anyway with the tools you have still available to you?

I'm going to let Jameson Greer, the USTR, inform you on that, and you'll be hearing from him soon on that. But look, any trade lawyer knows there's just a number of different options we can take. If you look at the kind of things we've already done, it kind of gives you

uh... a road map on that there's uh... all sorts of numbers out there there's one twenty two there's three oh one there's two thirty two uh... is three three eight there's all sorts of things uh... we can do well within the law but look we think that what we've done already

is perfectly appropriate. So that's why the appeal will take case. But you know, it's like, interestingly enough, I was scheduled to come on the program today to talk about the bond market and the big beautiful tax bill, but there is a bridge to that. And if I may, we have a situation where the bond market, we've seen like a 50 basis point increase in yields in the 10 year.

since April 2nd. And a lot of the hysteria around the big, beautiful tax bill centers on the Congressional Budget Office scoring that bill in a way which says there's going to be a $3.7 trillion addition to America's national debt over the next 10 years. And so, of course, you've got to finance that, and that drives interest rates up and heads explode. When, in fact...

If you do the math properly and you look at the history of the CBO forecast, you actually see about a $5 trillion swing to a $2 trillion surplus

From the bill and I'd like to get you walk you through rock you through the math there. It's like the CBO the Congressional Budget Office historically Has been very bad at estimating impacts of tax bills in the 2017 tax cut that President Trump did they got that totally that wrong they underestimated the GDP growth by a full percentage point and

And what that does, if they make that same mistake here, which they have done, when you add that, that's about $2 trillion of additional revenue because you've got greater economic activity. And then... Peter, you also have the revenue from the tariffs, which...

I saw your opinion piece in The Hill. I just want to get back to the tariffs because you don't have that revenue. Well, that's another $2 trillion. If you don't have the legal authority to use it, though. But can I just ask? You mentioned Ambassador Greer. We're going to hear from him soon. Are we going to hear from USTR about the bridge, potentially what John was talking about, if you can't use IEPA, potentially you're going to come out, the administration say we're going to use 122 in the interim?

Well, the court did in some sense tell us to do that, which was interesting. But look, here's the thing. Fentanyl, I just, people need to wrap their heads around the fact that every day here in America, people die because of

Communist China puts 50-gallon barrel, 50-gallon drums full of these chemicals that come over to the Mexican cartels and then are made not just into fentanyl. They use the fentanyl to spike heroin, to spike methamphetamines, to spike ecstasy. And they're even putting it in prescription drugs like Xanax and Valium.

And people are dying. It's been over a million people, a million Americans. And it's an economic emergency because a lot of those people are prime age working force here in America. So this kind of court ruling, the judge, I mean, look, the lead judge in this case is...

- The ruling said, Peter, and we've been talking about this, page 34, 35, they say basically you're in your right if you use section 122. Why didn't you guys do that from the beginning? - Well, section 122 only gives you 150 days.

So there's your answer right there. So Section 122, if you use this now for 158, would it be a bridge to 301 or a bridge to 232? What are you thinking more long term? You can be the strategist on that, but those are the kinds of thoughts. And look, if anybody thinks this caught the administration by surprise, think again. Because you could see...

in the oral arguments where those judges were going and the lead judge in this. I mean, the problem with that court, it's such an obscure court, but it's consistently been globalist, pro-importer, giving us bad rulings. The lead judge there ruled against the 232s originally.

uh... and had to get overturned by the appeals court so that gives you an idea of the the bias against the president's terror policy right on that court but i'll get i think the big picture here is we've got a very strong case with i eat book but the court basically tells us if we lose that we just do some other things so nothing's really change i want to say this to the world you're cheating us

We're coming after you. Deal. And let's make this right. Because ultimately what's at stake here is the global international environment getting in a way where it's fair to America. And thereby, if it's fair to America and we restructure this thing in a way, we'll have just more stability in terms of financial flows and capital and everything like that.

Dr. Navarro. It's wildly out of balance now. We've got to run, but it's great to catch up with you, sir, and we look forward to seeing your next steps. I've just got to tell you one thing. Anytime, John. You're not allowed to hire Anne-Marie. She's with us, all right? The senior White House trade advisor, Peter Navarro. Peter, thank you, sir. Dr. Navarro there.

It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly.

Learn more at Schwab.com slash trading. Hiscox Small Business Insurance knows there is no business like your business. Across America, over 600,000 small businesses, from accountants and architects to photographers and yoga instructors, look to Hiscox Insurance for protection. Find flexible coverage that adapts to the needs of your small business with a fast, easy online quote at Hiscox.com. That's H-I-S-C-O-X dot com.

There's no business like small business. Hiscox Small Business Insurance. So here's the latest this morning. Investors are waiting another read on the state of the labor market with initial jobless claims due out in just under two hours time. Bob Michael of J.P. Morgan Asset Management writes in the following. In the end, it's all about jobs and the labor market. With the Fed generally looking past near-term inflation data, the labor data becomes very

the motivating factor. Bob joined us now for more. Bob, good morning. Good morning. We've got a lot to get through, so let's start with growth. Do you think this bond market should be pricing in a step down in growth or a step up in growth?

I think probably a step up in growth and that seems to be what they're pricing in today. We were looking at effective tariff rates yesterday morning were about 15%. Today, when I read Mike Semble's stuff and you look at where the courts came in, but you assume the 232

section tariffs go through, you're talking about 10% effective rate. The economy could absorb that. And then you've got Congress. You've got the budget reconciliation package, which we estimate adds another $3 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. So there's an upward impulse to growth today.

Does that make you revise some of your expectations for how high yields can go? Because what you just expressed was resilient growth, the idea that the Fed can't cut rates as easily if the data doesn't roll over as quickly, and the idea that supply is going to be coming out at a time where inflation could potentially stay sticky.

Yeah, let's start with the Fed. We looked at the minutes yesterday. Our AI program, let's call it Kelsey, determined that there were 13 references to inflation expectations, whereas there were three references

a couple months ago at the March meeting. So the Fed is clearly focused on inflation and keeping inflation expectations anchored. As you think about the way things could play out, you're looking at higher prices first that may create demand destruction, which then causes you to raise the probability of recession, but you have to get through the higher prices and see how businesses and households react to that.

Now you've got to enter Congress, and Congress is trying to push through not only extension of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, but incremental spending. And you have to gauge, will that offset some of the impact of the tariffs? And it looks like it probably will. I don't know how Kelsey Barrow feels about being sort of connected to a chat GPT program. Kelsey, if you're watching, please write in and let us know what you think. I am curious, though, whether you have up

your expectation for yields. You didn't answer that because you had expected yields to be going down much more significantly when there was this overhang of potentially slower growth, the drag from tariffs, the drag from policy uncertainty.

Yeah, I'd be happy if yields held in around here. I think there is going to be an upward impulse because first we're going to see higher prices and then it does feel that businesses and households can absorb that and you're going to get some package out of Congress which will help to offset some of that.

I would say my greatest frustration of the last year is we hadn't actually been higher. I would have loved the two-year to have been anchored around the Fed funds rate, 4.38%. I would have loved the 10-year to be at 5%. To me, that would have been a relatively normal curve, and yet we still have the two-year and the five-year trading below the Fed funds rate. So it makes it challenging for clients

who want to get into the bond market. I'm still not having a single conversation with clients about wanting to get out of the bond market. It's all about where do we get into the bond market and how. And it's all about the belly of the curve, which is what we saw yesterday in the auctions. It went very well yesterday for the five-year. Today we've got seven-year. How closely are you watching to see, particularly with longer duration, whether you see a repeat of what happened in Japan, in the United States with real pushback about long-term bonds?

So far, we're not seeing that. We're seeing flows coming in to the U.S. bond market for overseas, and we are seeing the long-duration buyers, pension funds and insurance companies, get interested, particularly in longer credit. So we're not seeing it. Certainly, Secretary Besant has a couple tools. One is to either cancel or dial down the 30-year offer.

And that's something we heard out of Japan. It's something we saw out of the UK. That would certainly help to stabilize the market. Cancel or dial down? Do you think there's real potential for that in the US? 100%.

100%. Do you see enough in the market right now to force that kind of corrective action? Treasurers are telling us, if there's no demand, why am I selling? I don't need to do that. And you've got a Treasury Secretary who has put out there, we're focused on the long end of the curve. We're focused on the 10-year. By the way, I think he's right. I think you've got to look...

at the mortgage market, you've got to look at the housing data. That's another bit of data we're watching. Housing should be fairly strong at this point in the cycle. It's not because of housing affordability and mortgage rates are a big part of that. So is that a strong argument to re-engage with the long end of the curve right now?

Okay, I quoted Kelsey. I'm going to quote another one I've heard you quote. Please do. Priya Misra. Sure, I love Priya. The 10 and 30-year part of the curve are risk assets. I don't want to be the one to stand in front of the steamroller right now. So I'm just going to pack into the intermediate part of the curve. There's lots for me to buy there in...

and in securitized and in foreign bond markets. I'll let somebody else help stabilize the long end. That sounds like you think it needs to get worse before it gets better. I'm concerned that it's going to get worse before it gets better. Can you describe what worse looks like? Yeah, if I start with the 10-year period,

I think going to 495, we've been there. The market can support that. In my mind, where pain really starts to get felt is 100 basis points shift up from where the steady state was. And the steady state's been around 440. So once you break above 5%,

If we get to 540, that path between 5 and 540 becomes almost unbearable for bond investors. And I've lived through those 100 basis point shocks before. It always seems to be 100, and then things tend to stabilize.

Where does that put the long end? You know, add another 25 basis points on top of that for the 30-year. To me, that would be real pain. You'd need to see policy response both from the Treasury and from the Fed. Bob Michael, this was fantastic. Deeply thoughtful stuff. A special thanks to Bob Michael, to Kelsey Barrow, to Priya Misra of JPMorgan Asset Management.

Reigniting AI optimism after beating earnings expectations.

Well, we got a whole bunch of engines firing right now. The biggest one, of course, is the reasoning AI inference. The demand is just off the charts. You see the popularity of all these AI services now. Joining us now to discuss Angelo Zeno of CFRA was a buy rating and a $165 price target on the stock. Great to catch up with you, Angelo. Let's just start with the basics. What jumped out for you yesterday afternoon?

Yeah, I mean, I actually think you guys hit it in terms of, you know, the China side of things. I think that's where all eyes were going into the print. And we saw them really kind of navigating the uncertainty, you know, from China right now and that $8 billion in lost revenue in terms of the guidance.

extremely well. We're not necessarily surprised by the fact that they're navigating it really well, because if there was a company that could do it right now, NVIDIA would be that company because of the immense amount of demand that they're seeing right now. I'd say the other thing right now is just the commentary surrounding these reasoning models, right? I think, you know, back at GTC, Jensen was talking about potentially 100x, 150x

you know, increased need for compute from these reasoning models. I think he even went as far as going somewhere along the lines of a thousand X on the poll last night. So you're kind of seeing the fact that there is just an enormous amount of demand from the shift to AI agents here that we think will continue to ramp in 2025 and into 2026.

And that is given really NVIDIA some really strong momentum. And, you know, not to mention Blackwell is this really kind of shift towards, you know, the infrastructure and the system side of things completely different from what we saw in Hopper. And I think the upside we're seeing from Blackwell is stronger than I think most analysts here had anticipated.

There was a lot of positive discussion around Nvidia's performance. There also is this existential threat, and you talked about it with China, this question of if there is some sort of decoupling and regulatory overhang, can Nvidia continue and maintain its model? And Jensen Duane came out and said you cannot underestimate the importance of the China market. This is the home of the world's largest population of AI researchers. The company that wins China wins this war. Do you think the market's overly complacent about the risk that Nvidia gets locked out of that country?

Well, I think there's two sides to this, right? I mean, I think one point here with regards to China is they've essentially de-risked China in many respects. And I think that's the side that the market is taking right now. It's like it's one of those situations where, all right, we took the $8 billion hit. It was more than we thought.

was going to take place here in the July quarter. But we're not going to see another quarter where China is going to be a huge negative headwind for this company looking ahead. But that said, the other side of this is when you kind of look here two, three years down the road, it is a huge opportunity cost if they can't get back into China. Our belief is that they will be able to get back into China at some point in time. I think the market also has expectations

just given the move we're seeing here, that eventually NVIDIA will be able to find its way back, whether it be from some sort of deal that the administration creates or whether it be some sort of maybe performance-laden type operation

of chips that they can somehow find their way through into China, albeit at significantly lower revenue potential than what they could have gotten. But nonetheless, I think there is just belief out there that eventually Nvidia needs to find a way back into China. Jensen isn't giving up on that hope that China

will be a part of their business in the future. So I think that's why the stock is moving the way it is as well. - Do you think that the ruling that happened overnight really built on that belief in markets that Nvidia will find its way back into China?

Yeah, I mean, listen, I think when you look at just semiconductors in general, I mean, they're largely exempt from all this tariff-oriented stuff as well. They do fall under the more sectoral semiconductor investigation that we're waiting on right now. I think some of the comments that you guys earlier alluded to in terms of Jensen supporting the whole

you know, the tariff situation. I think it's partly due to the fact that he is trying to position himself really well in terms of semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S., not to mention a lot of the servers that he's making are coming from Mexico. So he's almost well kind of insulated, at least for now, from some of the uncertainty and some of the commentary that we've heard overnight or even over the last month or two tied to a lot of the country-specific issues

tariffs that we've heard about. We do have the Trump administration, though, moving to restrict the sale of chip design software to China. And what the reports basically suggest is this is a choke point. They want to cut off at the start where China can get access to this type of technology. But you sound optimistic that NVIDIA can still make its way back in China. How? When the administration seems to be clearly saying we are going to decouple when it comes to national security concerns.

Yeah, I mean, listen, I think and in that EDA software, you know, ban that we're seeing here, I actually think, you know, it actually took longer than we anticipated. We expected to hear it sooner than that. It'll be it'll also be interesting to see how aggressive the administration really wants to get here. I mean, there are other, you know,

levers that they can throw out there tied to the semiconductor equipment industry, for instance. So we'll see how far the administration wants to go with this. But as far as NVIDIA is concerned, I think ultimately the administration has a price for anything as long as they can kind of get their terms on the deals. So

I think, you know, NVIDIA is going to be a hot topic when the two sides try to come together and have conversations in the coming weeks and months. So that is why we personally believe that there is potential for NVIDIA to kind of get back into China. Not to mention, we do think the administration isn't necessarily against NVIDIA's

selling into China as much as, you know, especially if they can somehow, you know, cut the, you know, the expansion effort for the local semiconductor industry out in China. So we'll wait and see. There's going to be, I think there are a lot of moving parts here and you never know what's going to come from the administration. Angelo, let's just finish on that point.

Getting access and granting access to Nvidia chips is becoming a foreign policy tool. It's something we discussed on this program just yesterday. What kind of characteristics does that introduce to the stock and how it trades?

You know, I think that's a great point. I think it's a potential catalyst here for the shares. I think there's more upside than downside from that. You kind of look here over the next couple of weeks, months. I think you're going to see more kind of Saudi Arabia oriented type deals, sovereign AI related deals. You've got Jensen himself saying he's going to be traveling out to Europe here over the next couple of days, maybe.

You know, so it'll be interesting to kind of see when the timing of more announcements come tied to sovereign AI. But even Colette, you know, alluded to the point yesterday that you are going to see more, you know, more sovereign AI oriented deals. It's just they wouldn't put their hat on when you're going to see these deals. Angelo, appreciate your time. As always, sir. Busy night for you, I'm sure. Angelo Zena there of CFRA with NVIDIA. Nicely high on the pre-market.

♪♪♪

Trading at Schwab is now powered by Ameritrade. Unlocking the power of Thinkorswim, the award-winning trading platforms loaded with features that let you dive deeper into the market. Visualize your trades in a new light on Thinkorswim desktop with robust charting and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. Thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly.

Learn more at Schwab.com slash trading. Hiscox Small Business Insurance knows there is no business like your business. Across America, over 600,000 small businesses, from accountants and architects to photographers and yoga instructors, look to Hiscox Insurance for protection. Find flexible coverage that adapts to the needs of your small business with a fast, easy online quote at Hiscox.com. That's H-I-S-C-O-X dot com.

There's no business like small business. Hiscox Small Business Insurance. Here's the latest this morning. A federal court blocking President Trump from imposing his sweeping Liberation Day tariffs. The White House is vowing to appeal. Libby Cantrell of PIMCO joins us now for more. Libby, good morning. Good morning. What's the message from you to the clients this morning?

- Yeah, I think what the message is is that the worst case has been avoided for sure. I think that like your previous guest, we are not gonna seem unlikely to see 145% tariffs rolling back on in China. However, it is not an all clear. And that's for the very reason that you just mentioned,

which is that the president has wide latitude using other statutory authorities, whether it's something called Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. That allows him to impose up to 15% tariffs for 150 days. I would not be surprised if we saw him actually move forward with that, replacing that 10% baseline that was just

obviously ruled back by the courts and using that authority. He also has Section 301, which he could impose tariffs on China immediately. That's a live, active investigation. And there's something called Section 338 from the 1930 Tariff Act. So I think the upshot here is that IEAPA provided him with a lot of flexibility, a lot of negotiating power, 'cause he could roll tariffs on or roll tariffs off. These statutes are more limited.

usually require some investigation and what have you. But the upshot here is that we are not, there is not an all clear from a tariff policy perspective. We will see additional tariffs. Again, I would not be surprised if we didn't see them over the next few days or so. Well, let's explore the 122, which everyone, even this court thinks Trump should have used. Is that the end destination or is it bridged to another authority like a 338 or 301? Yeah, I mean, I think that's an excellent question because section 122 does have these sort of limitations. You can only impose them for 150 days and then they have

to basically go back to Congress to move forward. You know, I think that it will look likely a bridge to something else, probably to Section 301. Again, I think that if you kind of go back to January 20th when President Trump was inaugurated, those were the authorities that I think many of us thought he was going to use. I mean, there was wide question about the

legal ability for him to use IEPA in this very broad-based way. And then of course, to use them on countries with whom we have trade surpluses, I think did call into question whether this was sort of a national emergency and what have you. So I think if you, again, all those authorities that were available to him January 20th that we thought he was going to use, I think those seem more likely. But again, those do have some guardrails. Some of them do require some investigation, so they're longer-based. I would just say the upshot though is they're more legally durable.

So, they're not going to be as vulnerable to a legal challenge as certainly IEPA obviously was. What happens with the UK right now? Because that is a deal that's already been struck but kept a 10% baseline. Now the court is saying that 10% baseline is illegal.

Yes. So I think that remains to be seen. Now, I don't think, you know, the UK had not really seen, we hadn't really seen that deal materialize. That was a little bit name only. So I think, you know, again, it's open question what happens to that deal, but then also to all these open negotiations, whether it's with the EU or Japan. I think importantly, though, some of the more punitive tariffs as it relates to, say, Japan, this Section 232, 25% tariffs on autos, those stick around, right? So that is...

a legal authority that is durable, that has not been overturned by this court decision. So that is an important kind of, you know, something to factor in. - If you're a corporate executive, there are a couple different ways to look at this. On one hand, you could say the path of travel is still clear. There are going to be other methods of tariffs that are put on. The other way you could look at it is, this all feels very fungible, changes on the day. If I waited out for a couple years, I can just keep my plans in place, maybe delay things, but keep everything kind of the way it was before. Which path are they picking?

Yeah, I think that's also an open question. And I think obviously depends on the sector. Yeah, I think what we've seen from some companies is that they have announced some future investment, whether that investment actually comes to fruition or not, I think, again, remains to be seen. So obviously a lot of open questions here. But I do think this underscores for a company just how much uncertainty there is around this agenda.

And the fact that President Trump is only going to be in office for the next three and a half years. Regardless of what happens, he is not going to be running for re-election. We will have a different president come 2029. And so if you are a corporate executive, that obviously is going to inform your perspective. I only highlight that because I do think if this were the first few months of his first administration, then those corporations may be more willing to make those investments. And they are now just because of the shorter period.

time. So let's build on that. Each delay, does it matter? In the sense that, yeah, it's just, okay, 10 days, 20 days, two months, it's not that big of a deal if the path of travel is still the same. Or does it? Are some of these delays actually crucial for these companies to understand how to navigate this? Yeah, and again, I think this is what, I mean, I think we should watch over the next few days because if they do, you know, move forward with a, say, universal tariff under Section 122, then I think it's going to be a reminder that, again, these tariffs...

maybe via different statutory avenues or what have you are going to be here to stay. So I do think it matters, but I think the upshot for investors, for our clients is that the worst case scenario has been avoided. That 30% effective tariff rate that we were all looking at in those first weeks of April, that is very unlikely to come to fruition just because of the limitations around these other statutes. But again, I think this is not an all clear.

And from a financial markets perspective, I think that's a really important message. Do you think, though, it changes the White House strategy of wanting to get this all wrapped up by July 9th?

Well, yeah, I think that July 9th sort of becomes that deadline becomes a little bit irrelevant, right? I mean, I don't know if you're the EU, do you still have that same sort of, you know, immediacy or a sense of urgency in terms of negotiating or making concessions with the Trump administration? You know, probably not. Now, again, if we think that the Section 122, say a universal tariff is a bridge to a Section 301 tariff, which can be, you know, deeper

and more broad-based tariffs on countries specific, then I think that will bring negotiating partners to the table. But I do think this really sort of changes the calculus. One last thing I will just say, though, and something I think our traders have already asked me last night, is does this change sort of the calculus around the tax bill, right? If you're a member of Congress and you were expecting $250, $300 billion of annual revenue from tariffs,

You know, does this make you a little bit more queasy to actually vote for sort of this big, you know, $3 trillion plus bill? I think probably not. I actually don't think this really does change. But I think intellectually or academically, you might think that it would. I just don't think it does. - Does it change the bond market's response?

I do think, I mean, I think, you know, you're seeing a little bit of relief in the bond market. Maybe from an institutional perspective, this sort of reminds foreign investors in particular that there are some checks and balances on presidential power. I think a lot of our foreign clients had thought, you know, we thought that there was, you know, the Congress and the judiciary. And I do think this sort of reasserts the fact that yes, there are going to be some limits.

the president and his team i think by design want to push that limits of executive authority and but they're obviously and there are some checks the bond market but also the courts more importantly and this is actually an argument opinion of our made an opinion piece just yesterday's catching up with a little bit later this morning making the argument that he was complaining about the scoring down in washington that it didn't account for the tariff revenue in this might be an explanation as to why didn't any still pushing for this idea of the external revenue service this

basically what we already have with the customs, to bring in all of that money to offset the tax plan. But to Libby's point,

It doesn't really matter. Libby, just quickly, for anyone playing trade section bingo this morning, 301, unfair trade practices. Why didn't they start that this time around? They did in the first term. Why not in the second term? Because that does require months-long investigation. It's a little bit of a nuance. There's an open investigation on China, this 301, Section 301 investigation. So they could have imposed tariffs just on China using that open investigation. But for any other

country, they would have to actually pursue another kind of months-long investigation. But again, as to our conversation earlier, I think they could use Section 122, a temporary tariff, to get to a broader destination in terms of more tariffs on other country specifics. Libby, this was a clinic, as we expected it to be. We appreciate it. Thank you. Libby Cantrell-Bent of PIMCO. Sand in the gears. We've heard all sorts so far this morning. But ultimately, it doesn't change the president's pursuits.

of his ultimate objective, which is to put tariffs up on some of our trade partners. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast, bringing you the best in markets, economics and geopolitics. You can watch the show live on Bloomberg TV, weekday mornings from 6am to 9am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen. And as always, on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App.

Hiscox Small Business Insurance knows there is no business like your business. Across America, over 600,000 small businesses, from accountants and architects to photographers and yoga instructors, look to Hiscox Insurance for protection. Find flexible coverage that adapts to the needs of your small business with a fast, easy online quote at Hiscox.com. That's H-I-S-C-O-X dot com.

There's no business like small business. Hiscox Small Business Insurance. Every business starts with an idea. How can you go from daydreamer to industry leader? Amazon Business accelerates your journey. With smart business buying, get everything you need to grow in one familiar place, from office supplies to IT essentials and maintenance tools. Amazon Business takes the buying experience you know and love from Amazon, plus tools that help you save costs and make insights-based decisions.

Ready to bring your visions to life? Learn how at AmazonBusiness.com. This is an iHeart Podcast.