Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell speaks during a press conference following the Federal Open Markets Committee meeting at the Federal Reserve on December 10, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The Federal Reserve on Wednesday will issue its latest announcement on interest rates as gasoline prices in the U.S. reach their highest level in four years. The move marks what may be the central bank’s final decision on borrowing costs under the leadership of Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
The policy announcement is set to arrive at an uneasy moment for the central bank. The Iran war set off a rapid acceleration of price increases, posing a challenge for policymakers bedeviled by elevated inflation and sluggish hiring.
Investors overwhelmingly expect the Fed to leave rates unchanged on Wednesday, according to the CME FedWatch Tool, a measure of market sentiment.
A standoff between the White House and Congress, meanwhile, has cast doubt over succession plans for Powell as his term comes to a close next month.
President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Fed, Kevin Warsh, has faced a bipartisan stonewall in the Senate Banking Committee over a federal criminal investigation into Powell.
The Department of Justice moved to drop the probe last week, paving the way for Warsh to advance in a committee vote. If his nomination advances, Warsh would face a confirmation vote on the Senate floor.
The investigation into Powell focuses on alleged false testimony to Congress about an office renovation. Powell, who was appointed by Trump in 2017, has rebuked the probe as a politically motivated effort to influence interest-rate policy.
Powell’s term as Fed chair ends on May 15, but he said last month he would stay in the position until Warsh is confirmed.
Even after his successor is confirmed, Powell could remain on the Fed’s 12-member policymaking board until 2028, retaining a role in the central bank’s interest-rate policy. Powell has not indicated whether he intends to remain on the board.
Elevated price increases have coincided with a slowdown of economic growth, threatening to intensify an economic double-whammy known as “stagflation,” which poses difficulty for the Fed.
If the Fed opts to lower borrowing costs, it could spur growth but risk higher inflation. On the other hand, the choice to raise interest rates may slow price increases but raises the likelihood of a cooldown in economic performance.
The Fed held interest rates steady last month at its first meeting since the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran drove up gasoline prices and risked a wider bout of inflation.
The central bank’s move marked the second consecutive time it has opted to maintain interest rates at current levels since the outset of 2026. Before that, the Fed cut interest rates a quarter-point three straight times.
Warsh, a former Fed official, is currently a fellow at a conservative think tank called the Hoover Institution, which is based at Stanford University.
During his term as a Fed governor in the late 2000s and early 2010s, Warsh gained a reputation as an interest-rate “hawk,” meaning he generally preferred higher interest rates as a means of ensuring low and stable inflation.
In recent months, however, Warsh has voiced support for lower interest rates, rebuking the Fed’s concern about inflation risk posed by a flurry of new tariffs issued last year.
Markets peg a roughly 80% chance of interest rates holding steady for the remainder of this year, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.
A gas pump stands at a station in Manhattan on April 21, 2026 in New York City. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Gasoline prices in the United States hit their highest level in four years on Tuesday as negotiations over the Iran war appeared to show little signs of a resolution.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Elon Musk arrives to court for his lawsuit against OpenAI at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building on April 28, 2026 in Oakland, California. (Benjamin Fanjoy/Getty Images)
(OAKLAND, Calif.) — Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk and prominent AI executive Sam Altman are facing off in court with major implications for OpenAI, the San Francisco-based tech giant led by Altman.
The federal case, which concerns OpenAI’s evolution from nonprofit to profit-seeking, kicked off on Monday in Oakland, California. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is managing proceedings alongside nine jurors and no alternates, according to a court filing last month.
The star-studded list of potential witnesses includes Altman, Musk and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, among other tech luminaries, a court filing showed.
Musk sued OpenAI and Altman, its CEO, in 2024, alleging that the company abandoned its mission of benefiting humanity in a sprint toward profits.
Musk, a co-founder of OpenAI, said he reached an agreement with the company’s leaders on the nonprofit course of the firm when it launched in 2015. The company later breached that “Founding Agreement,” Musk said in a 2024 court filing, when it made ChatGPT-4 available for use by Microsoft — the tech giant got access to the then-most powerful version of its popular chatbot under an exclusive licensing agreement.
Microsoft and OpenAI have renegotiated the exclusive licensing agreement, allowing OpenAI to strike deals with other tech firms.
OpenAI has rebuked the charges, calling them “baseless.” Microsoft has also denied any wrongdoing. Musk, the world’s richest person, counts $839 billion in wealth, according to Forbes. He is seeking $150 billion in damages from the tech companies.
OpenAI, which is not publicly traded, valued itself at $852 billion after a round of funding in March. Microsoft’s value — as measured by market capitalization — stands at about $3.1 trillion.
After jury selection, the case will take place in two sections, Gonzalez Rogers said in a court filing. An initial phase will focus on liability to determine whether any of the defendants committed illegal acts. A subsequent remedies portion will assess potential damages.
Musk and the OpenAI defendants will each be afforded 22 hours to present their case during the liability phase, Gonzalez Rogers said in a court filing earlier this month. Microsoft, also a defendant, will be given five hours for its case.
Musk will plead two claims against OpenAI: unjust enrichment and breach of charitable trust, according to a legal filing last week.
“OpenAI, Inc. has been transformed into a closed-source de facto subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world: Microsoft,” Musk said in the lawsuit.
Typically, deals established between a top investor and company leadership are set out in writing with concrete terms, some experts previously told ABC News, leaving Musk in a difficult position as he attempts to invoke what they say appear to be spoken commitments made years ago without a formal contract.
For his part, Musk says in the lawsuit that the agreement was memorialized in a legal filing when OpenAI was incorporated.
In the lawsuit, Musk alleges that Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman reaffirmed the founding agreement in written messages over the ensuing years.
“[I] remain enthusiastic about the non-profit structure!” Altman wrote to Musk in 2017, according to the lawsuit.
Musk, who helped bankroll OpenAI, launched a rival AI company in 2023 called xAI, which built a chatbot that competes with ChatGPT.
Acknowledging his previous criticism of the pace and ambitions of AI development, Musk said in a conference call on X in July 2023 that he entered the industry reluctantly.
In the lawsuit, Musk alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair business practices.
Musk is seeking a legal order that requires OpenAI to abide by its alleged founding mission of aiding humanity and retaining its nonprofit form, as well as compensation for the funds received by OpenAI while it carried out allegedly unfair business practices.
A General Motors Co. Chevrolet dealership in Colma, California, US, on Friday, Jan. 23, 2026. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — General Motors said on Monday it expects to receive $500 million in refunds from tariffs that were ruled illegal by the Supreme Court.
The automaker is now boosting its full-year profit forecast by $500 million, GM CEO Mary Barra said in a letter to shareholders as the company announced its Q1 results. Barra also cited strong sales of its full-size pickup trucks, despite rising gas prices.
The federal government opened last week its refund portal to allow companies to apply to get tariff money back. The Supreme Court ruled in February that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not give President Donald Trump the power to unilaterally impose tariffs.
GM is one of more than 330,000 importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs that were invalidated, totaling $166 billion.
The IEEPA tariffs alone cost the typical American household $700 last year, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.
Ships are anchored along the shoreline of the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, April 22, 2026 in Bandar Abbas, Iran. (Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Thousands of canceled flights in Europe over a spike in jet fuel prices. An energy emergency declaration in the Philippines. A two-week school holiday in Pakistan to conserve fuel used by commuters.
The U.S.-Israeli war with Iran triggered dramatic steps in a slew of countries bent on weathering one of the worst oil shocks in history, stoking concern by some about a possible global recession.
Economists disagree about whether the standoff in the Strait of Hormuz will ultimately drive the world’s economy into a downturn, in part because the duration of the waterway’s effective closure remains murky. The outcome holds implications for the livelihoods of billions of people and the performance of companies big and small across the globe.
Some analysts said they fear the oil shortage will soon become so dire that crude prices could rise sharply driving up costs for an array of goods and hammering shoppers. The fallout could squeeze businesses and shrink growth, they said.
Others proved more optimistic, pointing to a smaller rise in oil prices than some feared and a recent track record of economic resilience in the face of trade wars and other turmoil. A worldwide downturn, they said, would require a much more prolonged closure of the strait.
“The longer this drags on, the costlier it becomes,” Ryan Sweet, chief global economist at Oxford Economics, told ABC News.
Still, Sweet added: “Whether or not this will cause a global recession, it’s premature to say.”
The conflict, which began on Feb. 28, prompted Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway that facilitates the transport of about one-fifth of the global supply of oil and natural gas.
The vast majority of oil that passes through the strait is bound for Asian markets. But since oil prices are set on a global market, prices have climbed for just about everyone as buyers chase fewer barrels of crude.
On Tuesday, Trump extended a ceasefire with Iran, averting a resumption of wide hostilities, although the move left the strait under Iran’s effective control. The U.S., meanwhile, has mounted a blockade of Iranian ports in the strait, squeezing a key source of government funds derived from oil exports, while exacerbating the global petroleum shortage.
The Brent futures price, the benchmark index for global oil trading, registered at about $106 a barrel on Friday. That price stood about 50% higher than its pre-war level.
Higher oil and gasoline prices risk a pinch at the pump, as well as additional costs for just about every product delivered across the globe on trucks or ships that run on diesel fuel.
“Oil feeds into inflation, which reduces raw purchasing power — how much bang for their buck people have,” Sweet said. “That slows the economy.”
Still, oil prices remain below the highs reached after some previous economic shocks. In 2022, the price of Brent crude surged above $139 per barrel in March, just weeks after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. During the 2008 financial crisis, U.S. gasoline prices shot up as high as $147 a barrel.
Some economic forecasts issued in recent weeks projected that global economic growth could escape the crisis relatively unscathed, as long as the war reaches a resolution in short order and oil prices avoid a steeper climb.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) last month predicted that global gross domestic product (GDP) growth would “remain broadly stable” at 2.9% in 2026. That forecast matched projections issued by the OECD in December, before the war.
The OECD touted strong tech investment and lower-than-expected tariffs, citing “carry-over from robust outcomes in 2025.”
Earlier this month, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) projected that GDP growth would register at a solid pace of 3.1% in 2026, noting that the global economy had withstood “higher trade barriers and elevated uncertainty last year.”
The forecasts from the OECD and IMF worked under the assumption of a resolution to the conflict by the middle of this year, acknowledging the impact could worsen if it stretches on for longer.
Some economists, by contrast, consider the economic threat a more urgent risk.
Paul Krugman, an economics professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center and a former columnist at the New York Times, criticized the IMF projection on Substack on Monday, faulting the group for “seriously underestimating how badly the global economy could be hit.”
“In my view, a full-on global recession is more likely than not if the Strait remains closed for, say, another three months, which seems all too possible,” he said.
Rosier forecasts fail to adequately factor in the risk of a significant rise in oil prices over the near term, Krugman said, warning of widespread “demand destruction” as oil becomes increasingly scarce. Under such a scenario, a surge in oil prices would make it unaffordable for many buyers, forcing them to find alternatives or forgo energy use altogether.
Technical definitions vary about what constitutes a global recession, but the gist is a period of sluggish or negative economic growth. For the World Bank, a global recession amounts to a contraction in global per capita GDP; while the IMF considers GDP growth below 2% sufficient to warrant the label of a recession.
A six-month impasse in the strait could push global oil prices as high as $190 in August, Oxford Economics said in a blog post last month. That price shock would send global inflation to 7.7%, near its peak in 2022, the independent economic advisory firm said.
“But unlike 2022, when the global economy kept growing through the price shock, the severity of this disruption tips the world into outright contraction,” Oxford Economics added.
In addition to its optimistic baseline projection, the IMF issued a downbeat prediction in the event of a more severe disruption of oil markets that stretches into next year. Under those circumstances, the global economy “would come close to experiencing a recession,” the IMF said, noting that it defines a global recession as annual GDP growth below 2%.
Growth below 2% has happened four times since 1980, the group said.
Across the board, economists acknowledged a high degree of uncertainty as the Iran war unfolds. Plus, some said, the negative effects will be unevenly distributed, hitting harder in low-income countries as well as those who depend on oil that passes through the strait.
While the full extent of economic wreckage remains unknown, the prospect of an extended global impact is all but certain, Sweet said.
“This will take a long time to get back up to resembling anything close to normal,” he added.
David Zaslav, CEO & President, Warner Bros. Discovery at TCL Chinese Theatre on April 07, 2026 in Hollywood, California. (Monica Schipper/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders on Thursday voted to approve the Paramount Skydance takeover bid, completing a major step toward the $111 billion media mega-deal.
The offer from Paramount encompasses the HBO Max streaming service, the Warner Bros. film production company, and cable channels such as CNN. Assets owned by Paramount include CBS, Paramount Pictures and Comedy Central, among others.
Shareholders cast ballots “overwhelmingly” in support of the Paramount takeover, Warner Bros. Discovery said in a statement.
“Today’s stockholder approval is another key milestone toward completing this historic transaction that will deliver exceptional value to our stockholders. We will continue to work with Paramount to complete the remaining steps in this process that will create a leading, next-generation media and entertainment company,” Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav said in the statement.
Shares of Paramount fell nearly 5% in the minutes following the announcement on Thursday morning.
In December, Paramount launched a hostile takeover bid to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, just days after Netflix struck a deal to purchase a large part of the media giant.
The rival, multi-billion-dollar efforts to acquire streaming platform Warner Bros. Discovery threatened to upend the media industry and shape content viewed by hundreds of millions of people.
Paramount appeared to gain the upper hand in the bidding war in recent months. In February, the Warner Bros. Discovery board of directors voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Paramount takeover.
Under the terms of the deal, shareholders will receive $31 per share, which amounts to a 147% premium, Warner Bros. Discovery said in March.
Kevin Warsh, former governor of the US Federal Reserve, during the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank Spring meetings on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s selection to chair the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, testified in a Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday as his nomination faces bipartisan opposition centered on a federal criminal investigation into the central bank’s current leader.
The probe into Fed Chair Jerome Powell, which focuses on alleged false testimony to Congress about an office renovation, threatens to derail or delay Warsh’s nomination.
Powell, who was appointed by Trump in 2017, has rebuked the probe as a politically motivated effort to influence interest-rate policy.
In his opening remarks, Warsh voiced support for the independence of the Fed in its role setting interest rates. He used the term “monetary policy” to describe the central bank’s task of adjusting benchmark borrowing costs.
“Monetary policy independence is essential. Monetary policymakers must act in the nation’s interest,” said Warsh, a former Fed official.
Still, Warsh defended the right of public officials, including presidents, to voice their views on interest-rate policy, saying such comments do not infringe on Fed independence.
“Central bankers must be strong enough to listen to a diversity of views from all corners,” Warsh said.
Warsh said he welcomes collaboration with the White House and Congress on “non-monetary matters that are part of the Fed’s remit,” such as banking regulation.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., the top Democrat on the committee, responded directly to Warsh’s defense of a president’s right to criticize the Fed, saying the federal investigation of Powell amounts to a pressure campaign that extends beyond public criticism of Fed policies.
“You said it’s perfectly fine for elected officials to state their views on interest rates. But that’s not what Donald Trump is doing,” Warren said, addressing Warsh.
The investigation of Powell, Warren added, is “designed to threaten all the members of the Fed to do Trump’s bidding.”
Warsh may become Trump’s “sock puppet” atop the Fed, Warren said.
By contrast, Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, praised Warsh, saying the Fed nominee would focus Fed policy on economic stewardship. During the tenure of President Joe Biden, Scott claimed, the Fed shifted some of its attention to the implications of issues like climate change.
“An independent Federal Reserve is essential to achieving its mission. That independence must be protected,” Scott said.
“Kevin Warsh is battle-tested and brings the necessary experience,” Scott added.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., a potentially decisive vote on the committee, says he will not move to advance Warsh’s nomination until the Department of Justice resolves its unprecedented investigation into Powell.
Powell’s term as Fed chair ends on May 15, but he said last month he would stay in the position until Warsh is confirmed. For his part, Trump told Fox Business last week he would fire Powell if the current Fed chair attempts to remain in office past the end of his term.
Warsh, who previously worked on Wall Street and in the President George W. Bush administration, brings experience in finance and policymaking.
He is currently a fellow at a conservative think tank called the Hoover Institution, which is based at Stanford University. He also works as a partner at the Duquesne Family Office, an investment firm founded by billionaire and former hedge fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller.
In 2006, Bush appointed Warsh to serve on the Fed’s Board of Governors, a top policymaking body that helps set the level of interest rates, where he served until 2011. His tenure overlapped with the 2008 financial crisis, during which he helped manage the central bank’s response under then-Chair Ben Bernanke.
The nomination of Warsh arrives at a delicate moment for the Fed, as it grapples with a challenging combination of elevated inflation and sluggish hiring. An interest-rate hike could help ease inflation but risks a further cooldown of the labor market, while a rate cut may boost hiring but threatens higher inflation.
During his term as a Fed governor in the late 2000s and early 2010s, Warsh gained a reputation as an interest-rate “hawk,” meaning he generally preferred higher interest rates as a means of ensuring low and stable inflation.
In recent months, however, Warsh has voiced support for lower interest rates, rebuking the Fed’s concern about inflation risk posed by a flurry of new tariffs issued last year.
Those remarks came before the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, however, which sent inflation soaring last month.
The rapid acceleration of price increases could complicate interest rate policy at the Fed, which may be reluctant to lower borrowing costs as inflation climbs.
Kevin Warsh, former governor of the US Federal Reserve, during the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank Spring meetings on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s selection to chair the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, will testify in a Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday as his nomination faces bipartisan opposition centered on a federal criminal investigation into the central bank’s current leader.
The probe into Fed Chair Jerome Powell, which focuses on alleged false testimony to Congress about an office renovation, threatens to derail or delay Warsh’s nomination.
Powell, who was appointed by Trump in 2017, has rebuked the probe as a politically motivated effort to influence interest-rate policy.
Warsh, a former Fed official, will likely face scrutiny from some lawmakers eager for assurance that he will set interest rates based on economic conditions, even if it puts him out of step with Trump’s preference for low interest rates.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., a potentially decisive vote on the committee, says he will not move to advance the nomination until the Department of Justice resolves its unprecedented investigation into Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
Powell’s term as Fed chair ends on May 15, but he said last month he would stay in the position until Warsh is confirmed. For his part, Trump told Fox Business last week he would fire Powell if the current Fed chair attempts to remain in office past the end of his term.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., the top Democrat on the committee, voiced concern in a statement last week about what she considers Warsh’s perceived lack of independence, saying he may end up being “Donald Trump’s sock puppet.”
By contrast, Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, has dismissed such worries in a post on X last week.
Under Warsh, Scott said, the Fed will “be focused solely on strengthening the American economy.”
Warsh, who previously worked on Wall Street and in the George W. Bush administration, brings experience in finance and policymaking.
He is currently a fellow at a conservative think tank called the Hoover Institution, which is based at Stanford University. He also works as a partner at the Duquesne Family Office, an investment firm founded by billionaire and former hedge fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller.
In 2006, Bush appointed Warsh to serve on the Fed’s Board of Governors, a top policymaking body that helps set the level of interest rates, where he served until 2011. His tenure overlapped with the 2008 financial crisis, during which he helped manage the central bank’s response under then-Chair Ben Bernanke.
The nomination of Warsh arrives at a delicate moment for the Fed, as it grapples with a challenging combination of elevated inflation and sluggish hiring. An interest-rate hike could help ease inflation but risks a further cooldown of the labor market, while a rate cut may boost hiring but threatens higher inflation.
During his term as a Fed governor in the late 2000s and early 2010s, Warsh gained a reputation as an interest-rate “hawk,” meaning he generally preferred higher interest rates as a means of ensuring low and stable inflation.
In recent months, however, Warsh has voiced support for lower interest rates, rebuking the Fed’s concern about inflation risk posed by a flurry of new tariffs issued last year.
Those remarks came before the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, however, which sent inflation soaring last month.
The rapid acceleration of price increases could complicate interest rate policy at the Fed, which may be reluctant to lower borrowing costs as inflation climbs.
Stock Market Wall Street (Matteo Colombo/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Stocks closed slightly lower and oil prices rose on Monday as tensions mounted in the Strait of Hormuz, putting pressure on the ceasefire between the U.S and Iran a day before it’s set to expire.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average ticked down 4 points, or 0.01%, while the S&P 500 dipped 0.2%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq declined 0.2%.
U.S. Marines seized an Iran-flagged container ship in the Gulf of Oman on Sunday, according to CENTOM, just a day after two Indian ships came under fire in the Strait of Hormuz.
A potential second round of peace talks between the U.S. and Iran remained in doubt on Monday. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Monday that Iran has not yet made any decision regarding additional talks.
West Texas Intermediate futures, the benchmark index for U.S. oil prices, climbed more than 5% on Monday, registering at about $88 a barrel. U.S. oil prices stand about 35% higher than before the war.
The escalating tensions appeared to undo a brief thaw on Friday, when a senior Iranian official declared the strait “completely open” for tanker traffic. Within minutes, President Donald Trump celebrated the announcement as a major breakthrough.
The glimmer of relief for the critical waterway sent stock prices soaring and oil prices plummeting on Friday.
Markets have swung dramatically over the weeks following the start of the U.S.-Israel attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, as investors weathered a historic global oil shock and digested mixed signals from Trump.
Stocks have moved higher on a largely consistent basis in April, however, in response to an apparent willingness on the part of both sides to end fighting and negotiate a temporary truce.
The U.S. continues to mount a naval blockade of Iranian ports in the Strait of Hormuz, exerting pressure on Tehran by choking off a key source of revenue.
Last week, the commander of the Khatam Al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of Iran’s armed forces said the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports is a “violation of the ceasefire,” in a statement published by the official Islamic Republic News Agency.
The war prompted Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime trading route that facilitates the transport of about one-fifth of the global supply of oil and natural gas.
The disruption amounted to the “most severe oil supply shock in history,” the International Energy Agency (IEA) said in a report last week. Oil and gasoline prices soared, prompting some economists to warn of a possible recession.
