Stocks fall as Trump threatens tariffs on European countries over Greenland
Photo of Wall Street (Matteo Colombo/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Stocks tumbled in early trading on Tuesday as President Donald Trump threatened tariffs on multiple European countries as part of a push for U.S. control of Greenland.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 735 points, or 1.4%, while the S&P 500 declined 1.5%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq dropped 1.8%.
The selloff came in the first trading session since Trump announced the new tariffs in a social media post on Saturday.
Under the proposed plan, eight European nations — including Denmark, France, Germany and the United Kingdom — will be slapped with 10% tariffs beginning on Feb. 1. Those levies are set to escalate to 25% on June 1, Trump said.
“This Tariff will be due and payable until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland,” Trump added.
Trump escalated the trade confrontation with Europe on Tuesday, threatening a 200% tariff on French wine if French President Emmanuel Macron opts to forego participation in Trump’s proposed “Board of Peace” for Gaza.
Greenland is a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark. Trump first raised the prospect of acquiring the minerals-rich island in his first term. Danish and Greenlandic politicians have repeatedly rebuffed such proposals.
European leaders, meanwhile, continued to push back on Trump’s ambitions and publicize their coordination efforts on the issue.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a post on X that she met with a bipartisan congressional delegation to discuss both Russia’s war in Ukraine and recent tensions around Greenland.
Von der Leyen said she “addressed the need to unequivocally respect the sovereignty of Greenland and of the Kingdom of Denmark. This is of utmost importance to our transatlantic relationship.”
Treasury yields jumped on Monday, suggesting possible concern about economic instability stemming from the confrontation between Trump and European nations.
Since bonds pay a given investor a fixed amount each year, the specter of inflation risks devaluing the asset and, in turn, makes bonds less attractive. When demand for U.S. treasuries falls, bond yields rise.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
ABC News’ David Brennan contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — A thaw in the housing market may deliver relief for homebuyers left out in the cold over recent years, analysts told ABC News.
After the pandemic, a rapid rise in home prices coincided with stubbornly high mortgage rates, shutting out potential buyers.
Glimmers of hope have started to emerge, however. Mortgage rates are falling, wages are rising faster than home prices and homebuyers are scooping up their biggest discounts in years, some analysts told ABC News.
“Housing is becoming more affordable. Are we there yet? No. But we’re on the right path,” Ken Johnson, a real estate economist at the University of Mississippi, told ABC News.
The average interest rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage stands at 6.09%, Freddie Mac data last week showed. A little more than a year ago, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate exceeded 7%.
Each percentage point decrease in a mortgage rate can save thousands or tens of thousands in additional costs each year, depending on the price of the house, according to Rocket Mortgage.
“It looks like mortgage rates are settling down,” Lawrence Yun, chief economist at the National Association of Realtors (NAR), told ABC News. “That’s great news for homebuyers.”
A measure of housing affordability issued by NAR has improved for seven consecutive months, rising to its highest level since 2022, Yun said. The surge in home prices has slowed while income gains have accelerated, bolstering the purchasing power of homebuyers, some analysts noted.
“Incomes are growing faster than home prices,” Johnson said.
Despite these positive signals, the housing market still faces significant challenges, some analysts said, pointing to a fundamental shortage of housing supply.
The housing market is suffering from a phenomenon known as the “lock-in” effect, Lu Liu, a professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, told ABC News.
While mortgage rates have fallen, they remain well above the rates enjoyed by most current homeowners, who may be reluctant to put their homes on the market and risk a much higher rate on their next mortgage.
“The degree of lock-in is unprecedented in the U.S.,” Liu said, noting the prevalence of 30-year mortgages and the inability for homeowners to transfer a current loan to a new property.
Existing home sales declined by 8.4% in January from the previous month, the NAR said in a report last week.
Alongside the lock-in effect, construction has failed to make up for a years-long shortage of new homes, exacerbating the shortfall.
While the lock-in effect remains a significant factor, its impact may be waning as some home owners encounter major life events or other circumstances that force them to move, even if it entails taking on a loan with a higher mortgage rate, Liu said.
“If they really do have to move, maybe they would be more willing to yield to this economic logic,” Liu added.
If homebuyers do move forward with a purchase, they may benefit from major price discounts, Redfin found this month. In 2025, homebuyers received average discounts that amount to 7.9% off a home’s initial listing price, Redfin said, making it the largest average discount in 13 years.
“Homebuyers are more likely to get discounts than they were in recent years because it’s the strongest buyer’s market in recent history,” said Lily Katz and Asad Khan, co-authors of the Redfin report.
Positive signals for homebuyers will likely continue as elevated mortgage rates weigh on consumer demand, slowing the rise in prices, some analysts said. But, they cautioned, an unexpected spike in mortgage rates could hike borrowing costs for homebuyers or an economic slowdown may crimp purchasing power.
“There is uncertainty over the outlook for interest rates,” Liu said. “So the overall price outlook is uncertain.”
A gas pump is seen in a vehicle on November 26, 2025 in Austin, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump has repeatedly touted the opportunity for U.S. companies to extract and sell oil from Venezuela, which holds the largest oil reserves in the world.
“We’re going to be taking out a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground,” Trump said on Saturday, just hours after a U.S. military attack removed Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro.
Venezuelan oil, however, will likely provide little relief for gas prices paid by Americans over the coming months, analysts told ABC News. They cited the relatively small amount of oil at stake in the near term and the glut of crude already flooding global markets.
A more substantial amount of oil could be accessed over the coming years, leading to a potentially noticeable decline in prices at the pump, they added. But that outcome remains uncertain, since oil companies face significant political and logistical hurdles in Venezuela, while wider market conditions could shift in the meantime.
“I would not expect to see a sharp drop because of this event,” Richard Joswick, head of near-term oil analysis at S&P Global Commodity Insights, told ABC News.
Oil executives are set to meet with President Donald Trump at the White House on Friday to discuss investments in Venezuela, a White House official confirmed to ABC News.
Venezuela boasts the biggest proven oil reserve of any country, amounting to roughly 303 billion barrels or about 17% of the world’s reserves, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, or EIA, a federal agency.
For decades, however, the nation has struggled to match those holdings with similarly stratospheric output due to lackluster infrastructure and government mismanagement.
Venezuela exported about 749,000 barrels per day last year, totaling less than 1% of global supply, according to data and analytics company Kpler.
In a social media post on Tuesday, Trump said Venezuela would hand over 30 to 50 million barrels of oil to the U.S., which in turn would sell them at their market price. The resulting funds — as much as $2.8 billion at current prices — will “benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States,” Trump said.
Trump has not provided details about the timing of such sales.
The plan proposed Tuesday would likely have little or no effect on U.S. gasoline prices, analysts told ABC News. The amount of oil stipulated by Trump is relatively small, making up the equivalent of between one-third and half of the oil consumed worldwide in a single day, according to data compiled by the EIA.
“Short term, I don’t think we’ll see much of an impact,” Tucker Balch, a finance professor at Emory University, told ABC News. “It’s not a lot of oil right now.”
Even more, oil prices are hovering near their lowest levels since 2021, meaning it will prove difficult to bring prices down further anytime soon, analysts added. Low oil prices stem from a glut of oil alongside relatively slow global economic growth, which has constricted demand for fossil fuels.
“There’s an oversupply and weak demand. More crude won’t make a big difference in the overall price,” Ramanan Krishnamoorti, a professor of petroleum engineering at the University of Houston, told ABC News.
After the military operation, Trump outlined a long-term role for U.S. oil companies in Venezuela, saying the firms would spend money to improve the nation’s infrastructure and output.
“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies — the biggest anywhere in the world — go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure,” Trump said during a press conference on Saturday at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida.
A U.S.-led effort to extract and sell the massive Venezuelan oil reserves could inject a substantial amount of oil into global markets and noticeably reduce gasoline prices, some analysts said.
Venezuelan oil production topped out at 3.5 million barrels per day in the 1990s, Kpler said. A return to that output would amount to about 4% of global oil supply, S&P’s Joswick, adding that the influx could push down gasoline prices.
“Prices are set on the margin and small imbalances in volume can lead to large shifts in prices,” Joswick said.
A long-term venture would encounter challenges, however, some analysts said.
The infrastructure necessary to ramp up oil production would require tens of billions of dollars of investment over several years, while oil companies involved in the effort would face political risks, according to analysts.
Chevron is currently the only U.S. oil firm operating in Venezuela, as part of a joint venture with the country’s state-owned oil outfit.
ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips stopped doing business in Venezuela in 2007, after former President Hugo Chavez nationalized the sector. Citing the unlawful seizure of assets belonging to the two oil giants, the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment ordered Venezuela to pay the firms billions of dollars. Venezuela has only paid a small share of the debt it owes to ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.
The policy approach in Venezuela is uncertain over the coming years, while the same goes for the U.S. as a presidential election approaches in 2028, Krishnamoorti said.
“It’s unlikely the oil companies are going to take the bait to go after some significantly difficult oil to produce in a very uncertain U.S. policy and global policy situation,” Krishnamoorti added.
Joswick noted, however, that possible success in accessing Venezuelan oil over the next few years could be a “big incentive for the continuation of similar policies.”
While touting potential U.S. oil interests in Venezuela, the Trump administration has described the operation as a law enforcement function rather than a military attack.
Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, are among six defendants named in a four-count superseding indictment that accused them of conspiring with violent, dangerous drug traffickers for the last 25 years. Maduro was indicted on related charges in 2020. He has long denied all the allegations, and he pleaded not guilty on Monday. Flores also pleaded not guilty.
So far, the major oil firms have yet to speak publicly about Trump’s plans.
In a previous statement to ABC News, ConocoPhillips said the firm is keeping tabs on the ongoing situation.
“ConocoPhillips is monitoring developments in Venezuela and their potential implications for global energy supply and stability. It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments,” the company said.
Chevron said it continues to focus on its current operations.
“Chevron remains focused on the safety and wellbeing of our employees, as well as the integrity of our assets. We continue to operate in full compliance with all relevant laws and regulations,” it said in a statement.
ExxonMobil did not respond to a request for comment.
US President Donald Trump speaks during a press conference at the White House, Washington, D.C., US on February 20, 2026. Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump rushed to enact new tariffs and vowed to preserve others after a recent Supreme Court ruling knocked out most of his levies.
Businesses and consumers now face a different set of tariffs, which amount to taxes paid by importers for goods shipped into the U.S. Oftentimes, importers pass along tariff-related costs to consumers, raising retail prices.
The nation’s overall tariff rate has dropped, meaning some products have gained relief from tariff-related price pressures, some analysts told ABC News. But levies remain in place for nearly all imported goods, including duties as high as 50%, hiking costs for some companies and shoppers, they added.
“In general, we’ve seen tariffs pushing up on prices. That won’t go away,” Jason Miller, a professor of supply chain management at Michigan State University, told ABC News.
The high court ruled on Friday that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEPPA) does not authorize Trump to impose levies, nullifying 70% of Trump’s tariffs after they collected more than $140 billion through December, the Yale Budget Lab found.
During his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, Trump criticized the Supreme Court decision, describing at as a “very unfortunate ruling,” and asserting that he retains the ability to impose tariffs under “fully approved and tested alternative legal statutes.”
In a social media post on Monday, Trump affirmed what he said was his authority to issue tariffs, saying he does not need to consult Congress before erecting new trade levies.
Trump also reiterated his commitment to his policy approach, warning other countries that they may face a “much higher Tariff, and worse.”
A 10% global tariff took effect on Tuesday, marking the first duty enacted by Trump since the high court’s decision. Trump issued the levy under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to hike tariffs for 150 days as means of addressing “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits, or disparities between a country’s total payments in transactions with other nations and its total earnings. In order to extend the Section 122 tariffs beyond 150 days, Trump would need to secure congressional approval.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said this week that Democrats would oppose an extension of Section 122 tariffs, which could deny Trump the 60 votes necessary to overcome a potential Senate filibuster.
Trump has vowed to hike the Section 122 tariff to 15%. As of Tuesday, however, the president had not issued an order formalizing that increase.
A 15% Section 122 tariff would result in price increases amounting to $800 in additional costs for an average U.S. household over the next 150 days, the Yale Budget Lab projected.
“That’s hundreds of dollars that you’re going to be paying as a result of these tariffs,” Raymond Robertson, professor for trade, economics and public policy at Texas A&M University, told ABC News.
Robertson noted the ultimate cost impact may be slightly lower than projected as consumers shift away from products that display noticeable tariff-induced price hikes. But, he added, tariff-impacted products will be all but impossible for shoppers to avoid.
“These tariffs are hitting across the board,” Robertson said.
The Trump administration also plans to maintain sector-specific tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and conclude pending investigations that could authorize additional levies, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement on Friday.
That statute permits the White House to levy tariffs on products of importance to national security. Under the law, the White House must await the result of an investigation undertaken by the Commerce Department before imposing a tariff.
Under Section 232, for instance, steel and aluminum face a 50% tariff, putting upward pressure on prices for tableware, motorcycles, canned goods and assorted children’s products, analysts previously told ABC News.
A 50% tariff also applies to some copper products, while 25% tariffs remain for cars and auto parts. Those levies exclude a host of goods compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, a free trade agreement.
To be sure, some products will experience a reduction of tariffs in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision. Products from China, Brazil, Vietnam and India will likely gain notable tariff relief, since those nations faced significant tariffs under the legal authority that was struck down by the Supreme Court, Miller said.
Electronics and clothing are among the products that could benefit from softer tariffs.
If the Supreme Court had opted to uphold tariffs issued under IEPPA, the nation’s effective tariff rate would have remained at 16%, the Yale Budget Lab said. Taking into account Section 122 tariffs, the effective tariff rate now stands at 13.7%, the group said.
“The good news for consumers is there’s an overall decrease in tariff rates,” Miller said. “What creates a challenge is we don’t know exactly what the new landscape will look like.”
