Four Economic Reports, One Message: No Fed Panic

A Hold-Steady Case

Team,

Hot off the press, this is my analysis of today’s economic indicator reports: the Fed’s preferred PCE (personal consumption expenditures) inflation gauge, the third estimate of first-quarter GDP, durable-goods orders, and weekly jobless claims.

You can also read my piece HERE in RealClearMarkets.

So, what do we have?

A hotter headline inflation environment driven heavily by energy. Core inflation still elevated but not exploding. Growth revised higher. Consumer spending still positive. Real disposable personal income rising. Capital-goods orders beating expectations. Initial jobless claims falling. Continuing claims drifting higher but not alarming.

That is not a Fed-hike case. It is a hold-steady case.

The financial commentariat, of course, wants a simpler story. Reuters led with PCE inflation topping 4 percent and raised the prospect that the Fed may have to hike. The Wall Street Journal emphasized that the Fed’s preferred gauge remains above target and that attention has shifted toward possible hikes. MarketWatch had already warned of hidden PCE triggers that could force a rate hike.

That is the wrong frame. The right question is not whether one inflation gauge is above 2 percent. The right question is whether the inflation is the kind monetary policy can cure.

If inflation is driven by excessive demand, a too-hot labor market, or broad wage-price acceleration, the Fed has a case to tighten. But if inflation is driven by energy, geopolitics, and supply-side price shocks, the Fed’s tool is blunt, costly, and potentially counterproductive.

Peter

Four Economic Reports, One Message: No Fed Panic

By Peter Navarro

June 25, 2026

The financial commentariat went into today’s economic-data dump looking for a reason to panic. The preferred storyline was obvious before the numbers even hit: inflation is back, the Fed is behind the curve, and rate hikes are coming.

That is not what the data say.

Today delivered a full suite of economic indicators: the Fed’s preferred PCE inflation gauge, the third estimate of first-quarter GDP, durable-goods orders, and weekly jobless claims. Taken together, they point to a much more disciplined conclusion. Inflation remains elevated, but the shock is still heavily energy-led. Growth is holding firm. Business investment remains strong. The labor market is not collapsing. And there are no alarm bells here that justify raising interest rates into the teeth of an oil-price shock.

Start with PCE inflation. The headline PCE price index rose 0.4 percent in May, below expectations of 0.5 percent. Over the past year, headline PCE inflation rose 4.1 percent, up from 3.8 percent in April. Core PCE, excluding food and energy, rose 0.3 percent for the month and 3.4 percent over the year.

That is not an all-clear report. Core inflation remains above the Fed’s target, and no serious analyst should pretend otherwise. But the policy question is not whether inflation is above target. The policy question is what kind of inflation this is — and whether a rate hike would cure it or merely punish consumers and businesses for enduring it.

The answer remains clear: this is still primarily an energy-shock story. Energy prices rose 4 percent in May after rising 3.9 percent in April. Energy prices were 24.3 percent higher than a year earlier. Food prices rose only 0.1 percent in May. Goods prices excluding food and energy actually fell 0.1 percent. Housing services rose 0.3 percent, down from April’s 0.5 percent increase.

In other words, the PCE report confirms the message already visible in CPI and PPI: the inflation impulse is coming through the energy channel, not from generalized overheating across the domestic economy.

That distinction matters. Demand inflation, wage-price inflation, tariff inflation, housing inflation, and energy-shock inflation are not the same animal. They do not have the same cause. They do not require the same policy response. Most importantly, they are not all cured by higher interest rates.

A rate hike cannot drill a barrel of oil, refine a gallon of gasoline, secure a sea lane, or deter Iran. It can, however, slow housing, chill investment, raise financing costs, and turn an energy shock into a broader recession.

The initial reaction of the bond market seemed to understand that point better than much of the commentariat. Rather than selling off on a rate-hike panic, yields fell across the curve in the immediate aftermath of the reports. That is not the market behavior one would expect if today’s numbers truly screamed “Fed emergency.” It looked more like a market saying: inflation is hot, but not out of control; growth is firm, but not runaway; the Fed should stay vigilant, not lunge for the rate-hike lever.

The growth data reinforce that interpretation. First-quarter real GDP was revised up to 2.1 percent annualized, above expectations and up from the second estimate of 1.6 percent. That is not recessionary. It is not boom-time overheating either. It is steady expansion.

The composition also matters. Business fixed investment contributed 1.42 percentage points to first-quarter growth. Consumer spending contributed 0.37 percentage points. Government expenditures contributed 0.74 percentage points, with some rebound from the prior shutdown drag. Net exports remained a partial offset.

The economy is not buckling under the weight of the energy shock. But neither is it running so hot that the Fed must crush demand. That is the sweet spot for monetary patience.

Durable-goods orders tell a similar story. Headline durable-goods orders fell 4.5 percent in May, but that was a smaller decline than expected and heavily affected by volatile transportation and aircraft orders. Strip out transportation, and durable-goods orders rose 1.3 percent, more than double expectations. More important, core capital-goods orders — nondefense capital goods excluding aircraft — rose 1.6 percent, far above expectations of 0.6 percent.

That is a strong business-investment signal. Core capital goods are a proxy for future productive capacity. When those orders rise, it tells us businesses are still investing in equipment, productivity, and future output.

This is exactly the part of the economy the Fed should not want to smother. If America is rebuilding domestic manufacturing capacity, increasing equipment investment, and expanding the capital base, higher interest rates would work directly against that progress.

Weekly jobless claims complete the picture. Initial claims fell by 12,000 to 215,000. Continuing claims did rise to 1.821 million, and the four-week averages have moved up. That bears watching. But the insured unemployment rate remains just 1.2 percent. This is not a labor market in collapse. It is also not a labor market obviously generating runaway wage-price inflation.

So what do we have? A hotter headline inflation environment driven heavily by energy. Core inflation still elevated but not exploding. Growth revised higher. Consumer spending still positive. Real disposable personal income rising. Capital-goods orders beating expectations. Initial jobless claims falling. Continuing claims drifting higher but not alarming.

That is not a Fed-hike case. It is a hold-steady case.

The commentariat, of course, wants a simpler story. Reuters led with PCE inflation topping 4 percent and raised the prospect that the Fed may have to hike. The Wall Street Journal emphasized that the Fed’s preferred gauge remains above target and that attention has shifted toward possible hikes. MarketWatch had already warned of hidden PCE triggers that could force a rate hike.

That is the wrong frame. The right question is not whether one inflation gauge is above 2 percent. The right question is whether the inflation is the kind monetary policy can cure.

If inflation is driven by excessive demand, a too-hot labor market, or broad wage-price acceleration, the Fed has a case to tighten. But if inflation is driven by energy, geopolitics, and supply-side price shocks, the Fed’s tool is blunt, costly, and potentially counterproductive.