Inflation fell more than expected in June as gas prices eased

(NEW YORK) — The top financial officer in New York City on Thursday warned that artificial intelligence could put thousands of workers in the nation’s largest metropolis out of a job as soon as this year, while acknowledging that the ultimate impact of AI remains uncertain.

The only sure thing, New York City Comptroller Mark Levin said in a new report: AI promises a “radical transformation” in the globe’s financial capital, influencing everything from wages to pension payments to Wall Street profits.

Levin, a Democratic former New York City Council member, predicted a range of scenarios both positive and negative, gauging the likelihood of outcomes as bullish as a broad-based productivity boom and as detrimental as mass layoffs.

City policymakers stand to play a central role in the technology’s ultimate fate, Levin added, calling for urgent steps like creating a multi-billion dollar financial cushion in case economic calamity strikes.

“There is no city in America – and perhaps none on earth – more exposed to both the promise and peril of artificial intelligence than New York City. And there are few places with more power to steer the transformation ahead,” Levin said in the report.

New York City hosts “hundreds of firms competing to make New York the capital of applied AI,” Levine added, as well as roughly one million workers who labor in Manhattan office towers, many of whom stand at risk of AI disruption. The high stakes exemplify a reckoning likely to play out in cities nationwide, he said.

“Uncertainty is not an excuse for inaction,” Levin said, saying local policies should complement much-needed efforts at the federal level. “We are not helpless.”

The report comes as the stock market and the economy overall have both come to increasingly rely on massive spending on AI to propel continued growth, even as companies warn of job losses tied to the technology.

A wave of thousands of job cuts attributed to artificial intelligence over recent months has taken hold in industries as diverse as tech and airlines. In April, AI company Anthropic opted against releasing its latest model, Mythos, expressing concern that the tool could be used to bypass cybersecurity protections across the internet.

Blockbuster earnings from chip giant Nvidia on Wednesday, meanwhile, rebuked fears of a slowdown in the rip-roaring pace of growth for the artificial intelligence behemoth.

In his report, Levin assessed five potential scenarios for AI uptake in New York City, focusing on potential economic downsides and benefits of each. The forecast draws upon national AI scenarios developed by Moody’s Analytics, adapting them for New York City, Levin said.

In the most likely outcome, dubbed the “AI-Empowered Economy,” Levin predicted that AI would improve productivity while delivering moderate economic growth, including an average of about 52,000 jobs added each year through 2030. Levin pegged the likelihood of this outcome at 35%.

A more pessimistic scenario, which Levin called “AI Falls Flat,” foresees a drop-off in AI investment and an accompanying stock market slide. If this outcome comes to pass, New York City would lose about 52,500 jobs as soon as this year, suffering temporary ill-effects akin to those that coincide with a recession, Levin said. The probability of this scenario, he added, stands at 25%.

Other possible outcomes include “faster-than-expected AI” adoption that improves productivity but replaces jobs, as well as an “AI shockwave” that upends white-collar employment.

The “most optimistic” of the five scenarios, Levin says, is a “Productivity Boon,” in which AI-driven productivity growth complements job growth, rather than displacing it, boosting compensation in the process. Levin puts the likelihood of this outcome at 15%.

To be sure, Levin said, the potential economic impact of AI remains highly uncertain. Other economic trends unrelated to AI could also hold significant implications for the city’s economy, Levin added, pointing to a historic oil shock that has driven up fuel and grocery prices.

Levin touted the role of local government in responding to the changes wrought by AI, whether they prove favorable or otherwise.

“These are not questions we can leave to Silicon Valley, Washington, or the market alone. New Yorkers must help shape the future ourselves,” Levin said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(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.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Inflation jumped for a third consecutive month as the Iran war continued to drive up prices in May, surpassing 4% for the first time in three years. The reading matched economists’ expectations.

Prices rose 4.2% in May compared to a year earlier, marking an increase from a year-over-year inflation rate of 3.8% in the prior month, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data showed.

As recently as February, inflation clocked in just a few ticks above the Federal Reserve’s target level of 2%.

The Middle East conflict prompted the Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a maritime trading route that facilitates the transport of about one-fifth of global oil supply. The standoff triggered one of the largest oil shocks ever recorded.

Energy prices — a broad index that includes gasoline — soared 23% in May compared to a year earlier, data showed.

As a result, gasoline prices surged. The price of an average gallon of gas stood at $4.15 as of Wednesday, AAA data showed — an increase of $1.17 per gallon since the war began on Feb. 28. That amounts to a nearly 40% price jump in about three-and-a-half months.

The oil shortage also drove up diesel prices, putting upward pressure on grocery prices. Diesel is the lifeblood of the food supply chain, fueling trucks and ships. Higher fuel costs for suppliers mean price hikes in grocery aisles as the increased costs are passed down the supply chain.

Prices for tomatoes soared 32% in May compared to a year earlier, government data showed. Seafood prices jumped 6% over that period, while beef prices climbed nearly 13%.

A persistent increase in consumer prices may put pressure on the Fed to raise interest rates as a means of dialing back inflation.

For now, futures markets overwhelmingly expect the Fed to hold interest rates steady when policy makers meet next week, according to the CME FedWatch Tool, a measure of investor sentiment.

The meeting will be the first since Kevin Warsh began a four-year term atop the central bank.

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.

Last year, however, Warsh voiced support for lower interest rates, rebuking the Fed’s concern about inflation risk posed by a flurry of new tariffs.

At his Senate confirmation hearing in April, Warsh emphasized the threat posed by elevated inflation.

“When inflation surges — as it has done in recent years — grievous harm is done to our citizens, especially to the least well-off,” Warsh said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.