Even Rich People Are Starting to Get Nervous About Trump’s Economy
3 min
If U.S. stock prices continue to fall, wealthy consumers could slow their spending, putting further pressure on the U.S. economy and markets.
That could mean everything from fewer luxury cars and handbags being sold to reduced demand for top-end homes and fancy vacations.
Broadly, retail sales rose a less-than-expected 0.2% in February from January, the Census Bureau reported earlier this week. There are signs affluent consumers are holding back, too. Major airlines cut their guidance for the first quarter last week on expectations of weak demand. And U.S. credit-card spending on top luxury brands declined 5% year over year in February, Citi reported on March 11.
Though it’s “too early to tell” whether spending will contract, every dollar decline in the value of assets, such as stocks or real estate, leads to a two cent decline in spending among “upper-end consumers,” according to Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM U.S.
Brusuelas’ calculation describes the so-called negative wealth effect, when a decline in investment portfolio value affects consumer attitudes toward how much they can spend.
Today, the S&P 500 is struggling, down just over 1% on Tuesday , leading to a 4.5% decline year to date, after slipping into correction territory last Thursday.
Even that 10% decline doesn’t mean a pullback in spending by the affluent is imminent, Brusuelas told Barron’s .
But the “volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity,” in geopolitical, economic, and market news coming out of the U.S. doesn’t bode well for luxury spending in particular, according to Erwan Rambourg, global head of consumer and retail research at HSBC.
“Luxury demand is holding up in the U.S., but I’m not sure for how long,” Rambourg told Barron’s . “There might be a lag between the data points, the markets, and the actual spending.”
In addition to sharp declines in stocks and cryptocurrency since mid-February, affluent Americans are facing a decline of 5.39% in the value of the U.S. dollar against the euro this year. By contrast, the euro lost 6.2% against the dollar last year.
The dollar’s decline not only affects the price of luxury goods—many of which are made in Europe—but the desire of U.S. consumers to travel and spend across the Atlantic, according to HSBC.
Another challenge is the uncertain trajectory of tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, and Europe.
“I’ve always thought that you bought luxury not because you were wealthy, but because you were confident about the future,” Rambourg said. “The whole tariff conversation—the reversals on Canada and Mexico—one day it’s 25%, the following day it’s postponed by a month, the following day, you have some exceptions…if you’re a business manager and if you’re a consumer, obviously that will affect your confidence in a big way.”
Still, wealthier consumers have a significant buffer in their investment portfolios, which have grown substantially over several years of upward equity returns, according to Katie Nixon, CIO of Northern Trust Wealth Management.
“In any given year, you expect to have 5% pullbacks almost routinely,” Nixon said. “It’s just that we haven’t had one in a while so this feels kind of extreme.”
Investors know that markets can fall significantly, as happened during the financial crisis in 2008 or during the early days of pandemic, according to Scott Zelniker, private wealth advisor at UBS Wealth Management. “More often than not, the market was up significantly 12 months later,” Zelniker told Barron’s .
One topic of conversation among Zelniker’s clients, however, is whether to buy the cars they are leasing when their agreements expire instead of re-leasing them as usual, considering the potential for tariffs to lead to higher-priced automobiles, he said. “They already have a contract with a price.” Why buy, or lease, a new car?
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
Records keep falling in 2025 as harbourfront, beachfront and blue-chip estates crowd the top of the market.
A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.
JPMorgan Chase has a ‘strong bias’ against adding staff, while Walmart is keeping its head count flat. Major employers are in a new, ultra lean era.
3 min
It’s the corporate gamble of the moment: Can you run a company, increasing sales and juicing profits, without adding people?
American employers are increasingly making the calculation that they can keep the size of their teams flat—or shrink through layoffs—without harming their businesses.
Part of that thinking is the belief that artificial intelligence will be used to pick up some of the slack and automate more processes. Companies are also hesitant to make any moves in an economy many still describe as uncertain.
JPMorgan Chase’s chief financial officer told investors recently that the bank now has a “very strong bias against having the reflective response” to hire more people for any given need. Aerospace and defense company RTX boasted last week that its sales rose even without adding employees.
Goldman Sachs , meanwhile, sent a memo to staffers this month saying the firm “will constrain head count growth through the end of the year” and reduce roles that could be more efficient with AI. Walmart , the nation’s largest private employer, also said it plans to keep its head count roughly flat over the next three years, even as its sales grow.
“If people are getting more productive, you don’t need to hire more people,” Brian Chesky , Airbnb’s chief executive, said in an interview. “I see a lot of companies pre-emptively holding the line, forecasting and hoping that they can have smaller workforces.”
Airbnb employs around 7,000 people, and Chesky says he doesn’t expect that number to grow much over the next year. With the help of AI, he said he hopes that “the team we already have can get considerably more work done.”
Many companies seem intent on embracing a new, ultralean model of staffing, one where more roles are kept unfilled and hiring is treated as a last resort. At Intuit , every time a job comes open, managers are pushed to justify why they need to backfill it, said Sandeep Aujla , the company’s chief financial officer. The new rigor around hiring helps combat corporate bloat.
“That typical behavior that settles in—and we’re all guilty of it—is, historically, if someone leaves, if Jane Doe leaves, I’ve got to backfill Jane,” Aujla said in an interview. Now, when someone quits, the company asks: “Is there an opportunity for us to rethink how we staff?”
Intuit has chosen not to replace certain roles in its finance, legal and customer-support functions, he said. In its last fiscal year, the company’s revenue rose 16% even as its head count stayed flat, and it is planning only modest hiring in the current year.
The desire to avoid hiring or filling jobs reflects a growing push among executives to see a return on their AI spending. On earnings calls, mentions of ROI and AI investments are increasing, according to an analysis by AlphaSense, reflecting heightened interest from analysts and investors that companies make good on the millions they are pouring into AI.
Many executives hope that software coding assistants and armies of digital agents will keep improving—even if the current results still at times leave something to be desired.
The widespread caution in hiring now is frustrating job seekers and leading many employees within organizations to feel stuck in place, unable to ascend or take on new roles, workers and bosses say.
Inside many large companies, HR chiefs also say it is becoming increasingly difficult to predict just how many employees will be needed as technology takes on more of the work.
Some employers seem to think that fewer employees will actually improve operations.
Meta Platforms this past week said it is cutting 600 jobs in its AI division, a move some leaders hailed as a way to cut down on bureaucracy.
“By reducing the size of our team, fewer conversations will be required to make a decision, and each person will be more load-bearing and have more scope and impact,” Alexandr Wang , Meta’s chief AI officer, wrote in a memo to staff seen by The Wall Street Journal.
Though layoffs haven’t been widespread through the economy, some companies are making cuts. Target on Thursday said it would cut about 1,000 corporate employees, and close another 800 open positions, totaling around 8% of its corporate workforce. Michael Fiddelke , Target’s incoming CEO, said in a memo sent to staff that too “many layers and overlapping work have slowed decisions, making it harder to bring ideas to life.”
A range of other employers, from the electric-truck maker Rivian to cable and broadband provider Charter Communications , have announced their own staff cuts in recent weeks, too.
Operating with fewer people can still pose risks for companies by straining existing staffers or hurting efforts to develop future leaders, executives and economists say. “It’s a bit of a double-edged sword,” said Matthew Martin , senior U.S. economist at Oxford Economics. “You want to keep your head count costs down now—but you also have to have an eye on the future.”
BMW has unveiled the Neue Klasse in Munich, marking its biggest investment to date and a new era of electrification, digitalisation and sustainable design.
From Italy’s $93,000-a-night villas to a $20,000 Bowral château, a new global ranking showcases the priciest Airbnbs available in 2026.
