10-year Treasury – Trump Economic Disaster https://trumpeconomicdisaster.com Daily economic accountability Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:24:18 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.1 https://i0.wp.com/trumpeconomicdisaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/cropped-gasprices.webp?fit=32%2C32&ssl=1 10-year Treasury – Trump Economic Disaster https://trumpeconomicdisaster.com 32 32 245212694 Mortgage Rates Just Hit 7%. Trump’s Promise of Cheaper Housing Is Moving Backward. https://trumpeconomicdisaster.com/mortgage-rates-today-hit-7-trump-housing-affordability-moving-backward/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=mortgage-rates-today-hit-7-trump-housing-affordability-moving-backward Fri, 11 Sep 2026 13:22:14 +0000 https://trumpeconomicdisaster.com/?p=513 The post Mortgage Rates Just Hit 7%. Trump’s Promise of Cheaper Housing Is Moving Backward. appeared first on Trump Economic Disaster.

]]>

Housing & Public Cost

Mortgage Rates Just Hit 7%. Trump’s Promise of Cheaper Housing Is Moving Backward.

Mortgage News Daily’s benchmark reached 7.07%, while Freddie Mac’s lagging weekly average was 6.76%. On a $400,000 loan, the move from February’s 5.99% rate adds about $284 a month and cuts borrowing power by more than $42,000.

Daily 30-year mortgage 7.07% Mortgage News Daily’s September 10 index—the highest since May 2025.
Freddie Mac weekly average 6.76% A prior-days average, not a contradiction of the newer daily reading.
$400K payment increase +$284/mo Difference between 7.07% and February’s 5.99%, principal and interest only.
Existing-home sales 3.98M Seasonally adjusted annual rate in August, the lowest in 14 months.

The 30-year mortgage rate crossed 7% Thursday afternoon.

Mortgage News Daily’s daily index reached 7.07%, up from 6.97% one day earlier and 6.89% two days earlier. It was the highest reading since May 21, 2025 and the first time the benchmark had moved above 7% in more than a year.

That number is not the rate every borrower will receive. Individual offers depend on credit score, down payment, loan size, property type, occupancy, discount points and the lender’s pricing. It is a national benchmark for a top-tier conventional borrower, not a universal quote.

It is still a major reversal.

The same daily index reached a 52-week low of 5.99% earlier this year after President Donald Trump announced that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would buy mortgage-backed securities to push borrowing costs down. By Thursday, the entire decline had been erased.

On a $400,000, 30-year loan, the principal-and-interest payment rises from approximately $2,396 at 5.99% to $2,680 at 7.07%. That is about $284 more every month, before property taxes, homeowners insurance, mortgage insurance, association fees or maintenance.

The housing-affordability crisis is often discussed as though it is a future problem requiring a future solution. For a household trying to lock a loan today, the cost is present.

Trump briefly pushed mortgage rates below 6%. The market has now repriced the war, inflation, debt and strong economy back above 7%.

Why One Source Says 7.07% and Another Says 6.76%

Freddie Mac released a different number on the same day.

Its Primary Mortgage Market Survey put the 30-year average at 6.76%, up from 6.71% one week earlier and 6.35% one year earlier.

The two figures do not mean one survey is false.

Freddie Mac’s figure is a weekly average based on mortgage applications submitted by lenders during the prior Thursday-through-Wednesday period. Mortgage News Daily publishes a weekday index around 4 p.m. Eastern and adjusts its comparisons for the effect of discount points.

Mortgage News Daily specifically warned that the Freddie number lagged Thursday’s market. The average lender moved approximately one-eighth of a percentage point higher during the day, after the weekly Freddie collection window had largely closed.

The proper description is therefore precise: the latest daily benchmark reached 7.07%, while the latest Freddie Mac weekly average was 6.76%.

Friday’s final daily mortgage index was not yet available at this article’s source cutoff. Mortgage-backed securities were trading somewhat better early Friday, which could pull some lender quotes lower. The 7.07% figure is the latest completed daily reading, not a prediction of where every lender will finish today.

What the payment math assumes

The article’s $284 monthly difference assumes a $400,000, 30-year fixed-rate loan with equal monthly principal-and-interest payments at 5.99% and 7.07%. It excludes taxes, insurance, points, fees and refinancing. If held for the full 30 years, the difference would total about $102,388—but many borrowers sell or refinance before maturity.

Seven Percent Removes More Than $42,000 of Borrowing Power

The monthly payment is only one way to measure the damage.

A buyer who could afford the $2,396 principal-and-interest payment on a $400,000 loan at 5.99% can finance only about $357,551 at 7.07% while keeping the same payment.

That is a loss of approximately $42,449 in loan capacity, or 10.6%.

With a constant 20% down-payment structure, the buyer’s maximum home price falls from approximately $500,000 to $446,939—a reduction of about $53,061.

That is how an interest-rate move becomes a housing-market move. Buyers do not merely decide whether to accept a larger payment. Many must bid on a smaller home, bring more cash, leave a more expensive neighborhood or stop shopping.

The effect is even clearer against the latest national price.

The median existing-home price was $429,100 in August. With 20% down, the loan would be $343,280. Principal and interest would be approximately $2,300 per month at 7.07%, compared with $2,056 at 5.99%—a difference of about $244 each month.

A real buyer may put down far less than 20%, which can add mortgage insurance and increase the financed amount. The illustration is conservative in the sense that it excludes those additional costs.

The Housing Market Was Already Stalling Before 7% Arrived

Existing-home sales fell 2% in August to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 3.98 million, the lowest level in 14 months. Sales declined in the Northeast, Midwest and South and were unchanged in the West.

Those closings largely reflect contracts signed in June and July, before Thursday’s 7.07% daily rate. The newest financing shock will appear, if it persists, in later contract and closing data.

Inventory is no longer moving in only one direction. The number of existing homes for sale rose to 1.62 million, the highest since November 2019. Supply reached 4.9 months at the current sales pace, the most in more than a decade.

More listings ordinarily help buyers. But the median price still rose 1.6% from one year earlier to $429,100. Higher inventory has not yet produced a national price decline large enough to offset the financing increase.

First-time buyers represented 30% of sales. That was better than the prior month, but below the 40% share the National Association of Realtors considers consistent with a robust market.

The housing market is therefore experiencing a peculiar freeze: more homes are available, sales are falling, prices remain elevated and new borrowers face financing costs near a 15-month high.

Trump’s Mortgage-Bond Intervention Worked—Briefly

Trump can point to one housing-policy action that had an immediate market effect.

In January, he directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds. The goal was explicit: push mortgage rates and monthly payments lower.

The announcement helped narrow the spread between mortgage rates and Treasury yields, and the daily mortgage benchmark fell to 5.99%. The policy deserved credit for helping produce that short-term movement.

Economists warned that the scale was unlikely to overpower the much larger mortgage market or solve affordability without additional housing supply. The market has now demonstrated the limit of the intervention.

Mortgage-backed-security purchases can affect the spread lenders charge above Treasury yields. They cannot permanently suppress the Treasury benchmark when investors are repricing inflation, Federal Reserve policy, oil, fiscal deficits and competing demand for capital.

The policy did not necessarily fail because rates later increased. It addressed one component of the price. The administration’s broader economic environment overwhelmed it.

The 10-Year Treasury Is Driving the New Increase

Mortgage rates do not directly follow the federal-funds rate. They tend to move with mortgage-backed securities and longer-term Treasury yields, particularly the 10-year.

The 10-year Treasury yield rose as high as 4.979% early Friday, its highest level since late 2023. The 30-year Treasury reached its highest level since 2007.

Investors are demanding more compensation for several reasons.

Oil is above $100

Brent crude approached $110 during the week as attacks around key Middle East shipping routes intensified. Higher energy prices increase the risk that headline inflation remains elevated and that transportation costs spread into other categories.

Producer inflation was hotter

The Producer Price Index rose 0.4% in August and 5.4% over the year. Energy goods rose 4.2% during the month, while diesel producer prices jumped 24.1%.

PPI is not a direct forecast of consumer inflation, and one month does not establish a trend. It was strong enough to increase concern that the Federal Reserve may need to raise rather than cut rates.

The labor market was stronger than expected

Payrolls increased by 162,000 in August and unemployment remained 4.1%. Strong employment is good for workers and household income. It also reduces the urgency for the Fed to provide monetary support.

Federal borrowing remains heavy

Large deficits require the Treasury to sell more securities. The amount of debt is not the only factor determining yields, but investors must be willing to absorb the supply at a price they find attractive.

Reuters described the current move as a combination of oil-driven inflation fears, expected central-bank tightening and persistent concern over government borrowing. No one factor explains the full mortgage rate.

The Federal Reserve Cannot Simply Announce a 5% Mortgage

Trump has repeatedly demanded lower interest rates. Homebuyers may share that demand.

The Federal Reserve sets a target range for an overnight interbank rate. The current federal-funds target is 3.50% to 3.75%. The Fed does not set a retail 30-year mortgage rate.

A Fed rate cut can reduce expected future short-term rates and help lower Treasury yields. It can also fail to lower mortgages if investors conclude that the cut will allow inflation to remain higher.

That distinction is why presidential pressure can backfire. If markets believe the central bank is being pushed to prioritize election-year affordability over price stability, lenders may demand more compensation for long-term inflation risk.

Before Friday’s CPI report, futures markets placed a roughly 72% probability on a quarter-point Fed increase at the September 15–16 meeting. That probability is volatile and may change sharply after the inflation data.

The point is not that a hike is certain. It is that Trump’s demand for an immediate cut is colliding with market expectations moving in the opposite direction.

Seven Percent Is Not Historically Unprecedented

A 7% mortgage is not the highest rate in American history. Rates exceeded 8% in 2023 and were far higher during the inflationary decades before the modern low-rate era.

Historical comparison does not settle affordability.

A mortgage rate interacts with the home price, down payment, income, taxes, insurance and other debts. A rate that was manageable when homes cost much less relative to income can be punishing when the median existing home costs $429,100.

The relevant question for a buyer is not whether a parent once paid a higher nominal interest rate. It is whether the current household income can support the current home price at the current rate.

Lower Rates Alone Would Not Solve Housing

The administration’s desire for lower mortgage rates is understandable, but financing is only one side of the market.

Housing supply depends on land use, permitting, infrastructure, labor, materials, insurance and local construction economics. A lower mortgage rate can stimulate demand more quickly than builders can add homes.

If supply does not expand, cheaper financing can be capitalized into higher sale prices. Buyers may obtain a lower monthly rate while competing more aggressively for the same limited number of desirable homes.

When Freddie Mac’s weekly rate fell to 5.98% in February, economists warned that the decline alone was unlikely to create a housing boom without more supply. The warning remains valid now that rates have moved in the opposite direction.

A durable affordability program requires both cheaper, stable financing and more housing where people need to live. Neither can substitute completely for the other.

What Buyers Can—and Cannot—Control

A national benchmark is not a personal mortgage offer.

Borrowers can compare multiple lenders, negotiate fees, improve credit, increase a down payment, evaluate FHA or VA eligibility, and decide whether paying discount points makes sense for the expected holding period.

Mortgage News Daily’s September 10 page listed lower benchmark rates for FHA and VA loans than for top-tier conventional loans, though those products include different eligibility rules, insurance charges and funding fees.

Adjustable-rate mortgages and temporary buydowns can reduce the initial payment. They can also shift risk into later years. A temporary subsidy is not the same as a permanently lower rate, and an adjustable loan can become more expensive if market rates remain high.

Shopping can save money. It cannot restore the national rate environment to February.

The Verdict

Mortgage rates have crossed 7% on the latest daily benchmark.

The weekly Freddie Mac average is lower because it measures a different period with a different methodology. The two figures describe the same direction: borrowing costs are rising.

For a $400,000 loan, the increase from 5.99% to 7.07% adds approximately $284 per month and removes about $42,449 of loan capacity from a payment-constrained buyer.

Trump deserves credit for an intervention that helped lower mortgage rates earlier this year. He does not get to treat the reversal as an unrelated market accident.

Strong jobs are part of the pressure—and strong jobs are good. The other forces include producer inflation, oil above $100, federal borrowing and concern that the Fed may need to tighten again. Trump’s war, tariff and fiscal choices do not explain every basis point. They are part of the environment investors are pricing.

The president promised mortgage rates and monthly payments would move down.

At 7.07%, they have moved the other way.

Primary Documentation and Reporting

  1. Mortgage News Daily: September 10 daily mortgage-rate index, methodology explanation, prior daily readings and loan-type comparisons.
  2. Freddie Mac: September 10 weekly Primary Mortgage Market Survey and explanation of its prior-days averaging method.
  3. The Wall Street Journal: Report that the daily 30-year mortgage benchmark reached 7.07%, the first reading above 7% in more than a year.
  4. Reuters: August existing-home sales, inventory, median price, first-time buyers and mortgage-rate context.
  5. Associated Press: Freddie Mac weekly mortgage-rate increase and national housing-affordability context.
  6. Reuters: Global bond selloff, 10-year Treasury yield near 5%, oil prices and market-implied Fed expectations.
  7. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: August producer-price increase, annual PPI, energy prices and diesel-price detail.
  8. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: August employment report, including payroll growth and unemployment.
  9. Federal Reserve Board: Current federal-funds target range and July statement on employment and inflation.
  10. Federal Reserve Board: Official September 15–16, 2026 FOMC meeting calendar.
  11. Reuters: Trump’s January direction for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds.
  12. Reuters: February mortgage rate below 6% and the warning that lower rates alone would not solve limited supply.
  13. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Official September 11 release schedule for the August Consumer Price Index.

This morning edition was prepared from information available by 7:15 a.m. Central Time / 8:15 a.m. Eastern Time on September 11, 2026. The August Consumer Price Index had not yet been released. Mortgage News Daily’s 7.07% figure is its completed September 10 daily index; Friday’s final daily reading was not yet available. Mortgage rates, mortgage-backed securities, Treasury yields and Federal Reserve probabilities can change throughout the day. The payment and purchasing-power examples assume 30-year fixed-rate loans and exclude taxes, insurance, points, fees, mortgage insurance and refinancing.

The post Mortgage Rates Just Hit 7%. Trump’s Promise of Cheaper Housing Is Moving Backward. appeared first on Trump Economic Disaster.

]]>
513
Trump Wants a Fed Cut. His Economy Argues Against It. https://trumpeconomicdisaster.com/trump-wants-fed-rate-cut-economy-making-hardertrump-wants-fed-rate-cut-economy-making-harder/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=trump-wants-fed-rate-cut-economy-making-hardertrump-wants-fed-rate-cut-economy-making-harder Wed, 09 Sep 2026 14:49:52 +0000 https://trumpeconomicdisaster.com/?p=502 The post Trump Wants a Fed Cut. His Economy Argues Against It. appeared first on Trump Economic Disaster.

]]>

Interest Rates & Debt

Trump Wants the Fed to Cut Rates. His Economy Is Making That Harder.

August added 162,000 jobs, PCE inflation is 3.7%, oil is above $100, the 10-year Treasury is near 4.8% and mortgages have reached 6.85%. Those conditions give the Federal Reserve less—not more—room to deliver the cut Trump demands.

Federal-funds target 3.50–3.75% Current range maintained by the Fed in July.
July PCE inflation 3.7% Fed’s preferred annual gauge; core PCE was 3.3%.
August payroll growth +162K Nearly three times the consensus forecast; unemployment held at 4.1%.
30-year mortgage rate 6.85% MBA average for the week ending September 4, the highest since June 2025.

Donald Trump wants the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates.

His economic argument is that a strong country deserves cheap money, that high rates put American businesses at a disadvantage and that lower borrowing costs would unlock housing, investment and growth.

The affordability problem inside that argument is real. A 6.85% mortgage is punishing. Credit-card rates, vehicle loans and business financing remain expensive. A lower rate environment would help households and companies that need to borrow.

The current economic data do not establish that the Federal Reserve can safely deliver it.

Employers added 162,000 jobs in August and unemployment remained at 4.1%. PCE inflation is 3.7%. Brent oil is above $100. The 10-year Treasury yield approached 4.8%, and traders entered Wednesday expecting a rate increase to be more likely than another hold.

Those are not the conditions that usually produce an urgent rate cut.

Trump is asking the Fed to price the economy as weak while claiming credit for an economy that is strong.

The Federal Reserve Does Not Set the Rate Trump Sees on a Mortgage

The Federal Reserve currently targets a federal-funds range of 3.50% to 3.75%. That is an overnight interbank rate.

Mortgage rates, corporate borrowing costs and long-term Treasury yields reflect a much larger market. Investors consider the expected path of future Fed policy, inflation, real economic growth, government borrowing, credit risk, liquidity and the compensation required to lock money up for years.

The Fed can influence those rates. It cannot command them.

A politically pressured cut can even move long-term rates in the wrong direction. If investors conclude that the central bank is becoming less committed to price stability, they may demand a larger inflation premium on ten- and thirty-year bonds.

Trump could therefore receive the quarter-point policy cut he wants while households continue facing high mortgage rates—or while the 10-year Treasury rises because confidence in future inflation control has weakened.

Evidence classification

Verified: the Fed target is 3.50% to 3.75%, August payrolls rose 162,000, PCE inflation is 3.7%, mortgages reached 6.85% and the 10-year Treasury approached 4.8%. TED calculation: on a $400,000, 30-year mortgage, 6.85% costs about $228 more per month than 5.98%. Judgment: Trump’s policy mix is not the sole cause of high rates, but it adds inflation, deficit and credibility risks that work against his demand.

Strong Employment Reduces the Case for Emergency Relief

The Fed has a dual mandate: maximum employment and stable prices. A rate cut is easiest to justify when employment is deteriorating rapidly, inflation is at or below target, or both.

Friday’s jobs report weakened the first case.

Payrolls increased by 162,000, nearly three times the consensus estimate. June and July were revised up by a combined 55,000 jobs. Labor-force participation rose to 61.6%, and the number of people working part time because they could not find full-time work fell by 414,000.

The report was not proof of a universal boom. Restaurants and local government education produced most of the gain, and average job growth over the preceding year remained slow.

It was strong enough to reduce the immediate risk of a labor-market contraction—and therefore to reduce the urgency of a cut.

Reuters reported that the jobs surprise shifted market attention back toward a possible September increase. The decision remains dependent on this week’s inflation reports.

Inflation Is Improving, but It Is Not at the Fed’s Target

The July PCE price index was 3.7% above one year earlier, and core PCE was 3.3%. The Fed’s objective is 2%.

The recent trend is better than the 12-month number alone suggests. Governor Christopher Waller said three-month core inflation had fallen to 3.05% through July from 4.76% in February. He argued that underlying inflation was improving and that some measured PCE pressure came from imputed nonmarket-service prices.

That is the strongest case for holding rates steady rather than raising them. It is not a clear case for cutting.

Even Waller described inflation as significantly above target and identified renewed energy prices, technology-goods demand and possible tariff increases as upside risks.

The producer-price report Thursday and CPI Friday will determine whether the recent cooling continued through August. The Fed meets September 15–16.

Trump is demanding the verdict before the evidence arrives.

Oil Above $100 Is a Current Policy Complication

The return of Brent above $100 adds another obstacle to a cut.

The price increase followed renewed U.S.-Iran attacks, tanker losses and threats to energy infrastructure and shipping near the Strait of Hormuz. Trump did not create every military decision or market reaction, but the current U.S. posture is part of the current risk premium.

Higher oil raises gasoline, diesel, jet-fuel and production costs. A temporary shock can fade without becoming persistent inflation. A prolonged shock can influence expectations, contracts and non-energy prices.

The Fed’s July statement explicitly said inflation remained elevated partly because of supply shocks affecting energy. Cutting rates into a renewed energy surge would require confidence that the shock will not spread.

That confidence may ultimately be justified. It is more difficult to assert on the morning oil returns to triple digits.

Tariffs Add a Different Kind of Price Pressure

Tariffs do not operate exactly like an oil shock. They raise the cost of covered imports and can shift demand toward domestic producers. Some foreign suppliers reduce prices, some American firms absorb margins and some costs reach consumers.

Federal Reserve researchers estimate that tariffs implemented through November 2025 raised core-goods PCE prices by 3.1% and overall core PCE prices by 0.8%. Those are cumulative price-level effects, not additions of 3.1 percentage points to the annual rate.

The study found that pass-through from the tariff actions it examined appeared largely complete by February. That supports the administration’s argument that a tariff can create a one-time price increase rather than an endlessly accelerating inflation process.

The higher price level remains. The study also does not cover later tariff changes or Canada’s new counter-tariffs.

Trump can defend tariffs as industrial strategy. He cannot reasonably demand that the Fed ignore their measured price effect while deciding whether inflation is safely returning to target.

Fiscal Policy Is Keeping Long-Term Rates Under Pressure

The federal-funds rate is only one part of the borrowing-cost problem.

CBO projects a $2.1 trillion federal deficit for fiscal 2026. Gross federal debt has crossed $40 trillion. Treasury must issue new securities to finance current deficits and refinance maturing debt.

Government borrowing is not automatically the dominant cause of every yield increase. Strong private demand for capital—especially AI data centers, power systems and semiconductor production—is also competing for funds.

The combination matters. More borrowers are asking investors to commit large amounts of capital while inflation remains elevated.

CBO estimates the 2025 reconciliation law increased projected deficits by $4.7 trillion over 2026–2035, including economic effects and added debt service. The administration argues that stronger growth will offset more of the cost than CBO assumes.

Markets do not have to price a promised future offset as though the revenue has already arrived.

A larger supply of Treasury debt can keep long-term yields elevated even if the Fed trims its overnight target. That is why fiscal policy is part of the rate discussion.

Households Are Already Paying the Difference

The Mortgage Bankers Association’s average 30-year fixed rate rose to 6.85%, the highest since June 2025. Mortgage applications fell 2.7%, and refinancing fell 6.2%.

In late February, Freddie Mac’s weekly average briefly fell to 5.98%. Consider a $400,000 30-year mortgage.

At 5.98%, monthly principal and interest are approximately $2,393. At 6.85%, they are approximately $2,621—a difference of about $228 per month. The calculation excludes taxes, insurance, points, fees and future refinancing.

That affordability problem gives Trump a legitimate reason to want lower rates. It does not give him the power to make inflation, Treasury supply or investor expectations disappear.

A credible route to lower mortgage rates would combine sustained disinflation, reduced war risk, predictable trade policy and a believable fiscal path. Political pressure on the Fed substitutes a demand for that work.

The Strongest Case for a Cut

Trump’s position should not be dismissed as though high rates carry no cost.

Housing construction and transactions are sensitive to financing. Small businesses face difficult credit conditions. Higher federal interest expense consumes revenue that could fund other priorities. A strong dollar associated with higher rates can make U.S. exports less competitive.

Monetary policy also operates with lags. The Fed could keep rates too high after inflation has already begun returning toward target, unnecessarily weakening employment and investment.

The recent monthly CPI and core-inflation readings improved. Wage growth adjusted for productivity does not currently resemble a classic wage-price spiral. Waller has argued that underlying inflation may be better than the headline PCE figures suggest.

Those are arguments for caution and data dependence. They could support a future cut if inflation continues falling.

They do not establish that the Fed should cut next week regardless of Thursday’s PPI, Friday’s CPI, oil above $100 or the strongest payroll report in months.

Political Pressure Can Raise the Rate Trump Wants Lower

Central-bank independence is not a ceremonial tradition. It affects market confidence.

Investors lending for ten or thirty years need to believe the Fed will defend the purchasing power of the dollars used to repay them. If policy appears subordinate to an election calendar or a president’s preferred financing cost, lenders can demand a higher long-term yield.

Trump has threatened to curtail trade with countries where the United States runs deficits unless the Fed cuts. Trade balances are not part of the central bank’s statutory mandate, and using tariffs as leverage against the Fed could add price pressure to the very economy the central bank is evaluating.

The threat therefore contains a feedback loop: cut rates, or the administration will pursue a policy that may make inflation control and rate cuts more difficult.

The bond market can respond to that credibility risk even when the Fed refuses.

What Can Be Concluded on September 9

Verified policy setting

The federal-funds target is 3.50% to 3.75%, and the Fed meets September 15–16.

Verified economic strength

August payrolls rose 162,000, unemployment held at 4.1%, and participation improved.

Verified inflation obstacle

PCE inflation was 3.7%, core PCE was 3.3%, and oil returned above $100 before the next price reports.

Verified household cost

The average 30-year mortgage reached 6.85%, and mortgage applications and refinancing declined.

Strongest case for Trump

High borrowing costs damage housing and investment, recent underlying inflation has improved, and monetary policy can remain restrictive too long.

Editorial conclusion

Trump’s demand is undermined by the strength he celebrates and by the inflation, tariff, war and deficit risks his administration is helping sustain.

The Bottom Line

Trump is right that 6.85% mortgages are a problem.

He is wrong that a strong economy automatically deserves the lowest interest rate.

Strong hiring reduces the need for emergency support. Inflation above target limits the room to ease. Oil above $100 adds a new price risk. Tariffs have raised goods prices. Large deficits increase the amount of debt markets must absorb.

The Fed may hold next week. Cooler inflation could strengthen the case for a later cut. A hotter report could produce another increase.

What the central bank cannot do credibly is begin with Trump’s preferred answer and work backward to the data.

The president wants the benefits of a strong economy, the financing cost of a weak economy and no interest-rate consequence for the policies creating inflation and debt risk.

The Federal Reserve does not have a button that can make those contradictions disappear.

Primary Documentation and Reporting

  1. Federal Reserve Board: July FOMC decision maintaining a 3.50% to 3.75% target and describing inflation as elevated.
  2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: August payroll growth, unemployment, participation and revisions.
  3. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis: July PCE inflation of 3.7% and core PCE inflation of 3.3%.
  4. Federal Reserve Board: Governor Waller’s September 3 assessment of current inflation and possible policy choices.
  5. Reuters: September 4 analysis connecting the strong jobs report, Trump’s rate-cut demand and possible Fed tightening.
  6. Reuters: Trump’s threat to curtail trade unless the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates.
  7. Reuters: September 9 mortgage rate, Treasury-yield, mortgage-application and refinancing data.
  8. Reuters: September 9 Brent move above $100 and associated inflation risk.
  9. Federal Reserve Board: Measured consumer-price effects of tariffs implemented through November 2025.
  10. Congressional Budget Office: Latest full-year fiscal 2026 deficit estimate of $2.1 trillion.
  11. Congressional Budget Office: Estimated $4.7 trillion deficit increase from the 2025 reconciliation law over 2026–2035.
  12. Congressional Budget Office: Sensitivity analysis showing how persistently higher rates increase projected federal deficits.
  13. Freddie Mac: February 26 mortgage-rate reading of 5.98% used in the illustrative payment comparison.
  14. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Official September 10 release schedule for August producer prices.
  15. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Official September 11 release schedule for August consumer prices.
  16. Federal Reserve Board: Official September 15–16 FOMC meeting calendar.

This September 9 morning edition was prepared from public information available by 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time. Treasury yields, oil prices, mortgage rates and market-implied Federal Reserve probabilities can change rapidly. August producer prices are scheduled for September 10, consumer prices for September 11 and the FOMC decision for September 16. The mortgage illustration assumes a $400,000, 30-year fixed loan with equal principal-and-interest payments and excludes taxes, insurance, points, fees and refinancing.

The post Trump Wants a Fed Cut. His Economy Argues Against It. appeared first on Trump Economic Disaster.

]]>
502