Inflation

Tehran municipality has launched a series of welfare initiatives to help residents cope with soaring living costs, but the measures have raised questions about their financing and effectiveness, as well as whether the local authority is taking on responsibilities better handled by Iran’s national government.

The local authority has launched four projects it says are aimed at protecting citizens, including a housing project, freezes on the prices of 12 basic goods, and a maternity package.

Questions have been raised about how they will be funded and whether the municipality is overstepping its traditional functions.

In Iran, municipalities are responsible for local services and urban management, while the national government oversees broader economic policy, including efforts to control inflation.

Iranian law does give municipalities some responsibilites beyond conventional urban services, but Article 55 of Iran’s Municipal Law does call for municipalities to provide for public food markets, make certain essential goods more affordable, and provide social welfare facilities and low-cost housing.

The dispute is therefore less about whether Tehran municipality can provide the services, and more about their scale and financing.

The municipality’s price-freezing initiative, dubbed the “Zero Inflation” project, has been the most controversial. It comes as year-on-year inflation reached nearly 90 percent last month, while annual food inflation hit 108.8 percent.

Doubts have been raised about how the project will be funded and its effectiveness. Others believe that the measures could fuel inequality between the capital and other cities.

They are viewed as steps to address the huge economic challenges faced by Tehran residents, worsened since the United States and Israel launched a war on Iran on February 28.

Tehran Mayor Alireza Zakani said the municipality had recently guaranteed prices ranging between 5 percent and 50 percent below market rates for the next six months.

Yousef Akandeh, a political activist, told Al Jazeera that freezing the prices of some goods or providing free services will not reduce inflation to zero alone.

“Even if we assume that the Tehran municipality succeeded in stabilising the prices of 12 basic goods, what about the rise in rents, medicines, transportation prices, and the rest of living expenses,” Akandeh asked.

Real steps to tackle inflation, Akandeh said, would have to begin with controlling liquidity growth and monetary discipline, which he said are nearly impossible amid the ongoing war.

The municipality has also introduced a maternity support programme offering mothers of children born this year monthly credits worth up to 40 million rials ($15) for two years for each newborn.

Akandeh raised the issue of institutional overlap, noting that a similar national scheme already exists.

“The government implements a similar package and provides monthly financial amounts for all newborns across the country and not just in Tehran, and if the municipality’s package is independent of it, the Tehrani family may benefit from the national and municipal programme simultaneously,” Akandeh said.

Receiving support from both programmes would not, in itself, indicate wrongdoing. But critics are instead raising the question of whether it is an appropriate use of Tehran’s municipal resources, particularly when the city faces competing spending demands.

Amir Dabiri Mehr, a former adviser in the Tehran municipality, told Al Jazeera that although supporting the homeless falls under the municipality’s social responsibilities, the problem lies in a lack of transparency. The municipality is funded by taxes and building density licences.

“The people have the right to know what the municipality spends within the framework of its original tasks, and in tasks it has chosen for itself, and where it gets its resources from?” Dabiri Mehr said.

The municipality-affiliated Hamshahri newspaper said that the “Zero Inflation” project is not funded by municipal budget subsidies, but through direct purchases from producers and reducing commercial profit margins in council-run stores.

The biggest crisis facing Tehran’s residents is housing, which is the national government’s responsibility, Mehr said. Food and living expenses are the national government’s responsibility.

“If the goal is to solve the people’s problems, it seems that the biggest problem facing the residents of Tehran today is the housing crisis, and this dilemma cannot be solved by building an apartment building consisting of a few residential units,” he said.

Al Jazeera attempted to contact the Tehran municipality for comment but received no response.

Tehran Mayor Zakani has, however, defended the financing arrangements, telling a local newspaper, Hamshahri, that the Zero Inflation initiative would not rely on direct subsidies from the municipal budget, but instead on purchasing goods directly from producers and reducing commercial profit margins in city-run stores.

Zakani also said that the programme would draw on municipal resources, bank financing, and partnerships.

Economists divided on Fed rate hike as inflation creates uncertainty in run-up to US midterm elections in a tense market.

United States consumer prices jumped in September in the final inflation report before the midterm elections, increasing chances of an interest rate hike later this month.

Annual inflation accelerated to 3.7 percent, up from 3.4 percent in August. On a monthly basis, prices rose by 0.6 percent, according to the Consumer Price Index report released by the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on Wednesday.

Petrol prices led the surge as tensions between the US and Iran, as well as Russia and Ukraine, weighed on global energy prices. Petrol prices rose 9.1 percent in September, accounting for more than half of the CPI monthly increase, according to the BLS. They were up 34.2 percent from the same time a year ago.

“The directionless war in Iran continues to disrupt global supply chains, driving up the prices of food and fuel,” Kyle Moore, chief economist at The Century Foundation, an economic think tank, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

Petrol prices have continued to climb. The average price for a gallon of petrol is $4.33 ($1.14 per litre), compared with $4.31 a month ago, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks daily petrol prices. Diesel prices are higher, at $6.29 per gallon (1.66 per litre), compared with $6.23 a month ago.

In a post on X, Patrick DeHaan, head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy, said, “2026 has now seen more days with average gas prices over $4/gal than any year before: 158 days.”

Shelter costs also jumped 0.4 percent from the previous month, following a 0.3 percent increase in August. Food costs were a bright spot in the report, remaining unchanged overall.

Food away from home, including restaurant meals, rose 0.2 percent, but that increase was offset by a 0.1 percent decline in food-at-home prices, which track grocery costs.

At the grocery store, poultry prices jumped 0.7 percent, fruit and vegetable prices rose 0.5 percent, and juice prices increased 1.1 percent. However, milk prices dropped 2.1 percent and beef prices fell 0.9 percent.

Amid heavy investment in AI infrastructure, prices for computer software and accessories have jumped 28 percent from the same time last year.

“The AI boom is playing a huge part, and we have all read about the hundreds of billions being poured into data centers, AI firms, and models,” Rami Cassis, principal of Parabellum Investment, said in comments provided to Al Jazeera.

Fed pressures

The inflation data comes days before the US Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision later this month. Last month, the US central bank raised rates by 25 basis points, bringing the target range to 3.75–4.00 percent, the first hike in three years.

Economists are divided over whether the Fed will raise rates again or hold them steady. According to CME FedWatch, which tracks the likelihood of monetary policy decisions, there is a 52.9 percent chance that rates will remain in the 3.75–4.00 percent range, while a 47.1 percent chance of a quarter of a percentage point hike that would bring them to 4.00–4.25 percent.

The inflation data puts pressure on Republicans before the midterm elections on November 3. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that about 78 percent of Americans blamed US President Donald Trump’s policies for price increases.

US markets trended downward following the inflation report. The Nasdaq fell 0.8 percent and the S&P 500 dropped 0.6 percent, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average was roughly flat in midday trading.

Rising borrowing costs have pushed mortgage applications to lowest level since February 2025.

Mortgage rates in the United States have hit their highest level in nearly three years, as cost-of-living concerns weigh on Americans less than a month before the midterm elections.

The average cost for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage jumped 19 basis points to 7.49 percent for the week ending October 2 , according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s weekly report released on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, applications for mortgages tumbled 4.2 percent from the previous week, according to the report. Applications are at their lowest level since February 2025 and have fallen by almost half since the beginning of the year.

“Very few homeowners have an incentive to refinance at these rates, and the jump in borrowing costs has caused many potential borrowers to step back from the purchase market,” Joel Kan, vice president and deputy chief economist at the Mortgage Bankers Association, said in a press release.

Mortgage rates are closely tied to US 10-year Treasury notes. Earlier this week, those hit a 24-year high of 5.3 percent amid surging oil prices tied to ongoing tensions with Iran.

Meanwhile, the yield on 30-year Treasury bonds rose to its highest level since 2002, at 5.7 percent on Wednesday.

Mortgage rates have jumped since late February, when the US and Israel first struck Iran. Since the strikes, mortgage rates have climbed 1.4 percent. Inflation, which has risen by 3.4 percent from a year ago, is also putting pressure on mortgage rates.

It comes as the cost of living is top of mind for voters as they approach the congressional midterm elections that could decide the balance of power in Washington, DC. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll in late August, 47 percent of voters said that the cost of living was the single most important issue ahead of the midterms.

In a separate Reuters/Ipsos poll in September, 17 percent of voters said they approved of US President Donald Trump’s handling of cost of living-related issues.

Brazil’s closely watched presidential election is heading to a second round between leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and right-wing Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, prolonging a deeply polarised race with major implications for the country and the wider region.

Brazil’s electoral court confirmed on Sunday that the two candidates will advance to a run-off on October 25 after neither won the majority needed to secure the presidency outright, with Bolsonaro leading at 55.8 million votes to Lula’s almost 53.2 million.

Lula, 80, is seeking a fourth, non-consecutive term after a political career spanning nearly five decades.

Bolsonaro, 45, is the eldest son of former President Jair Bolsonaro and is trying to return his father’s right-wing movement to power, even as the former president serves a 27-year prison sentence for plotting a coup after losing the 2022 election.

The election comes at a pivotal time for Latin America’s largest economy. Brazilians are grappling with concerns over crime and the cost of living, while the country faces an increasingly tense relationship with the United States. The vote is also being closely watched across a region that has shifted sharply to the right in a series of recent elections.

While a second round was widely expected, the first-round result did not play out quite as pollsters had predicted.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the election so far.

Brazil is heading for another Lula-Bolsonaro run-off

With nearly 99 percent of votes reported, Bolsonaro had about 47 percent of valid votes, compared with 44.9 percent for Lula. Neither reached the 50 percent threshold needed to win in the first round.

That sets up another Lula-Bolsonaro showdown, four years after Lula narrowly defeated former President Jair Bolsonaro. This time, he will face the former president’s eldest son.

The race could be extremely close, as polling ahead of Sunday’s vote suggested Lula and Flavio Bolsonaro were roughly tied in a potential run-off.

That puts voters who backed one of the other 10 candidates in the first round at the centre of the fight for the presidency over the next three weeks.

Ronaldo Caiado and Renan Santos, who together received about 5.3 million votes, have previously said they will not endorse either candidate in the run-off.

Flavio Bolsonaro did better than polls suggested

Most polls leading up to election day predicted the race would be pushed into the second round, but had Lula finishing the first round ahead of Bolsonaro.

Instead, Bolsonaro emerged with a lead of two percentage points, raising questions about why the final polls underestimated his support.

On Sunday, Bolsonaro said the results showed that Brazilians want change.

Analysts told the Reuters news agency that Bolsonaro may have benefitted from “protest votes” from people who may have preferred another candidate but saw defeating Lula as the priority. Many had been expected to shift their support to Bolsonaro only in a second round, meaning this could have consequences for his support in three weeks.

“The protest vote foreshadows what is to come in the run-off,” political analyst Rafael Favetti told Reuters. “While this should benefit Flavio Bolsonaro now, his growth potential in the second round drops precisely because that support has already been front-loaded.”

After the results came in, Lula said the votes were “unexpected” but that he would come back stronger in the run-off.

“I admit, I was convinced I would win in the first round. The game is about to start. We are in extra time. In extra time, we will win over the Brazilian people,” the 80-year-old said.

The right had a strong night in Congress, too

Bolsonaro’s surprising performance in the first round was part of a broader show of strength for Brazil’s right.

Right-wing parties, led by Bolsonaro’s Liberal Party (PL), were performing strongly in both houses of Congress, with the PL on track to emerge as the largest force in the Chamber of Deputies and making gains in the Senate.

This included victories for other members of the Bolsonaro family, including former First Lady Michelle Bolsonaro, Flavio’s stepmother, who won a Senate seat in the Federal District, her first elected office.

His brother, Carlos Bolsonaro, was elected to the Senate in Santa Catarina.

The results show that the political movement built around former President Jair Bolsonaro – known as “bolsonarista” – remains a powerful electoral force, even with the former president barred from running himself.

“The fact that far-right candidates for the legislature have exceeded all expectations suggests a deeper popular grounding for the bolsonarista project than many expected,” Andre Pagliarini, an assistant professor of history and international studies at Louisiana State University and author of a book on Lula, told Al Jazeera.

“Millions of Brazilians right now evidently feel the right best reflects their values and vision for the future,” he added.

The congressional results matter beyond election night, too. Both houses were already dominated by conservative lawmakers, and a stronger right-wing presence could make it even harder for Lula to push through his agenda if he wins another term.

A Bolsonaro victory, meanwhile, could give him more room to pursue his own priorities, including his pledge to seek an amnesty for his father.

President Trump is promising more payments to voters just ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm elections — this time, to more than 20 million seniors, who each would get $90 to help pay for Medicare premiums.

The announcement, made late Friday night by Trump on social media, comes after he said last month about 1 million people would get rebate checks of $500 for Affordable Care Act premiums. It also comes after his One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year slashed funding for Medicare, disqualifying thousands from eligibility and raising fees for the rest, and for the ACA, raising premiums for millions by eliminating tax credits.

Trump has also promised on the campaign trail to send every American adult $5,000 if Republicans retain control of the House and Senate in the midterm elections.

His latest promise — which, like the others, would require approval from Congress — would probably cost more than $1 trillion, adding to the ballooning deficit and worsening inflation.

Polls show Americans increasingly blame Trump for the high cost of gasoline and groceries, with just 17% approving of his handling of inflation. Rising healthcare costs are also a key component of the affordability struggles many face across the country.

The president has sought to shrug off concerns about affordability, claiming the economy is booming.

The White House said the $90 payments for seniors would come from the Medicare Improvement Fund, established by Congress in 2008 as flexible funding to improve program operations and payments to healthcare providers.

As proposed, Medicare Part B enrollees would receive a one-time payment in October, either through direct deposit or by check, the White House said. Total monthly costs for the program — which covers costs like doctor’s visits, ambulance services and lab tests — start around $200 and vary with income.

To be eligible, seniors must be living in the U.S. and not be already receiving premium assistance from Medicaid or paying adjusted monthly premiums based on income, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage, a private plan alternative to traditional Medicare coverage, would not be eligible for the payment. More than half of eligible Medicare beneficiaries have Medicare Advantage, according to healthcare research nonprofit KFF.

Previous administrations have not used the Medicare Improvement Fund in this way, although Congress has periodically taken out money from the fund to pay for other priorities, said Larry Levitt, KFF’s executive vice president for health policy. For example, $20.74 billion was used for the creation of the Affordable Care Act in 2010.

“The Medicare Improvement Fund language is quite broad and gives substantial discretion to the administration,” Levitt said.

Goldin writes for the Associated Press.

Rising goods and fuel costs are cited as key factors in the sharp drop in consumer confidence.

United States consumer confidence has fallen to its lowest level since 2014, just over one month before the congressional midterm elections.

Consumers pointed to higher costs for goods and services as the primary reason for the decline, according to The Conference Board, which released its monthly report on Tuesday.

“The Consumer Confidence Index deteriorated notably in September, following two prior months of softening,” Dana M Peterson, chief economist at The Conference Board, said in a release announcing the report.

Consumers pointed to higher prices at the pump as one of the driving factors. The average price for a gallon (3.78 litres) of petrol has jumped 37 cents over the past month, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks daily petrol prices. The average price stood at $4.45 on Tuesday, compared with $4.08 a month ago.

“Oil and gas prices in particular rose to new heights, reflecting September’s surge in fuel costs. Comments about war/conflict eased this month but remained elevated,” Peterson said.

The consumer confidence report comes a day ahead of a key inflation report that the Federal Reserve uses to gauge the state of inflation, the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) index, which was up 3.7 percent in June from a year earlier.

The US central bank raised interest rates for the first time in three years earlier this month, driving up costs of credit cards and car and bank loans. It is set to make another decision on interest rates at its October 27-28 meeting, putting pressure on Republicans as consumer sentiment tumbles across political affiliations.

Consumer confidence fell among all political affiliations, according to the report, the second-to-last major consumer confidence reading before the midterm elections, which will determine the balance of power in Washington, DC.

US consumers think the Democratic Party would handle the economy better than their Republican counterparts, with 42 percent saying Democrats would do a better job compared with 34 percent for Republicans, according to a recent Marist poll.

US markets are only slightly lower as the trading day comes to a close. The tech-heavy Nasdaq closed down 0.08 percent, the Dow Jones Industrial Average declined 0.2 percent and the S&P 500 was down 0.1 percent.

ANOTHER UK airport is hiking its drop-off fees while making time limits shorter in a double blow for travellers.

The transport hub has confirmed that the cost of dropping passengers off at the departures terminal will go up by £3.

East Midlands Airport has introduced the higher fee after Gatwick, Heathrow, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Bristol, Stansted, Leeds Bradford and more did the same earlier this year.

The Derby-based airport will charge £8 for a 10-minute stay at its rapid drop-off zone as of September 29 at 3pm.

The price is up by £3 for less time allowed, with drivers previously being charged £5 for a 15-minute stay.

Airport bosses confirmed that the hike was brought in as a result of “significant inflationary pressures”.

EXPLORE MORE

The sneaky European travel pass that lets you visit 33 countries for £227

SANDS GOOD

10 of the best travel destinations & experiences from ‘flightseeing’ to surfing

The extra money is also set to go towards paying for an ongoing £120million investment to improve the airport.

Prior to the recent increase, the fee remained unchanged for five years.

Last year, the airport swapped its barrier system and introduced automatic number plate recognition cameras to improve the flow of the drop-off system.

Along with the ANPR tracking, new drop-off fee and shorter drop-off window, customers have until midnight the day after their airport visit to pay the charge.

The fee can be paid online or via phone – and those who do not pay in time are slapped with a £100 fine.

While the fine is dropped to £60 if paid within 14 days, North West Leicestershire MP Amanda Hack has hit back at the scheme.

Arguing that the new drop-off rules is “setting people up to fail”, she said: “The announcement by East Midlands Airport of changes to its rapid drop-off pricing and a reduction in the permitted waiting time is frustrating.

“While I welcome the investment the airport has made over the last couple of years, the way the rapid drop-off is currently set up feels stacked against consumers.”

The MP added hat having less time to complete drop-offs and the responsibility to remember to pay will no doubt mean more users face hefty fines.

“I already deal with numerous complaints from constituents and people across the UK who have received a £100 parking penalty notice because they simply forgot to pay,” she told the BBC.

“Increasing the price while simultaneously reducing the time allowed is only likely to make this situation worse.”

Hack says that she has asked the airport to install machines that allow them to pay the drop-off fee there and then.

“My concern has always been that the current arrangement at East Midlands Airport appears to set people up to fail,” she added.

Responding to the criticism over the new fee, East Mindlands Airport said in a statement: “Airport drop-off areas help to manage on-site congestion, with charges managing what is the most polluting form of transport to the airport.

“The new fees are proportionate in the context of inflationary increases and brings East Midlands Airport in line with other UK airports.

“The airport is well served by frequent 24/7 bus services from Nottingham, Derby and Leicester and surrounding communities, with stops close to the terminal.”

Gold hits seven-week low; silver follows suit and records a nearly 5 percent loss.

Gold prices are falling as concerns of rising fuel prices stoke inflation worries on the back of the war between the United States and Iran.

Spot gold prices fell by 3.3 percent to reach a more than seven-week low at $4,146.51 per ounce on Monday.

Rising oil prices, a higher US dollar and Treasury yields stoked inflation concerns, creating further headwinds for the metal.

This is the lowest level for gold values since August 5. US gold futures also fell by 3.3 percent to $4,178.40.

Although gold is traditionally considered an inflation hedge, higher interest rates dent ⁠its appeal as investors prefer yield-bearing assets.

“There might be no notable direct impact on regular people due to that. However, investors who had turned to gold will see a hit, especially under the current high inflation rates,” Sherif Othman, CEO of the Maryland-based Poise Investment Advisors, told Al Jazeera.

“Gold does not yield interest, so when Treasury yields go up, investors turn away from gold, impacting its value”, he added.

The Fed lifted benchmark rates by a quarter ⁠percentage point earlier this month and flagged that at least one more hike is likely in the coming months.

The US dollar was steady near a two-month high, and oil prices spiked about 3 percent as US President Donald Trump rejected an Iranian offer ⁠to resolve the conflict and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Such factors triggered several policymakers to warn that inflation risks remain elevated and that interest rates may need to rise, with Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack among the latest officials to reiterate that view.

Higher Treasury yields and the US dollar are “creating a perfect storm to push the metals prices sharply lower,” according to Jim Wyckoff, a market analyst at American Gold Exchange.

Spot silver also fell by 4.7 percent to $61.27 per ounce, platinum declined 2.9 percent to $1,726.30 and palladium lost 4.4 percent to $1,211.45.

Beef prices are soaring in China. Across the Pacific Ocean in the United States, cattle farmers are complaining that their businesses are becoming increasingly unsustainable. And in India, poultry rearers are slashing their production targets because they cannot afford feed.

More than 90 percent of the world’s population eats meat in one form or another — and a looming meat crisis threatens to affect what they buy at the market, what they cook at home, and what’s served on the table.

At the heart of this is a chain of decisions and uncertainties that consumers rarely see. A cow has to be raised for years before it can become beef. Chickens need feed, much of it tied to global grain and soya bean markets. Farmers need land, water and weather conditions that allow them to keep animals alive and productive.

When any link in this chain is disrupted, a spiralling crisis ensues.

So what is putting the pressure on meat production, and what does it mean for billions of people around the world?

Declining cattle stocks in Brazil, US and China

Brazil, the US and China are the world’s three biggest beef producers, together supplying more than half of the world’s beef. But their cattle herds are shrinking at the same time.

According to a March estimate by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Brazil’s total herd this year is estimated at 177.4 million cattle — a nearly 8 percent drop from 192.5 million in 2024.

Over in the US, cattle numbers are at a historic low.

The USDA counted 86.2 million cattle and calves on farms on January 1, 2026. The number of beef cows — the females needed to produce future calves — was 27.6 million, down 1 percent from a year earlier. The 2025 calf crop was also down 2 percent.

In China, the USDA estimated a cattle head count of 94 million in January 2026, down 14 percent from 105 million in January 2024.

In all three cases, beef production is also projected to be down in 2026.

The USDA predicts a 2 percent decline in Brazil’s beef production and a 5 percent fall in exports. As for the US, beef production in 2026 is likely to be 4 percent lower than last year. China’s total beef supply this year is projected to be 12 percent lower than 2024.

The decline in domestic production, coupled with shrinking supplies that can be imported, has sent prices soaring in China — the world’s largest beef consumer and importer.

What’s driving down cattle herds and beef production?

The reasons are many, and they vary from country to country.

Brazil counts China and the European Union as two major markets for its beef exports. But both have imposed import restrictions that have disincentivised Brazilian beef manufacturers. That is partly responsible for the country’s decreased cattle head count, according to an analysis by Augusto Neto at S&P Global, the market intelligence firm.

Additionally, Brazil is currently in what is known as a cattle reversion cycle — when rearers reduce the slaughter of animals and instead try to preserve their female stock to help rebuild their herd — according to the USDA.

In the US, droughts have hit 60 percent of the country’s cattle-rearing area, according to a report by Sampad Nandy of S&P Global. With grazing areas decreasing, feed costs have risen.

Three major organisations, representing breeders in the states of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, issued a joint statement this week arguing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids were disrupting their already strained operations. The meat industry depends heavily on immigrant workers.

If beef prices are rising, shouldn’t rearers want to produce more beef?

In theory, yes. But in practice, high prices do not automatically mean that more cattle can be produced quickly.

Cattle production is constrained by biological supply cycles, Kenneth Foster, professor of agricultural economics at Purdue University, told Al Jazeera. It can take a couple of years for a producer who receives a signal from the market to expand production and actually see the resulting animals enter the beef supply. The quickest way to rebuild a herd is to keep female cattle that might otherwise have been sold and use them for breeding. That is what Brazil is now doing.

But that creates a difficult economic calculation. A producer can sell an animal today at a high price, or keep it for breeding and wait for the next generation. That means carrying the costs and risks of keeping the animal while waiting for it to reproduce.

The result is a market in which strong demand and limited supply can persist even when prices are already high.

The USDA expects the cattle herd to begin rebuilding in the US, but the process is gradual.

The US and Brazil cases illustrate one of the central problems facing meat production: sometimes the constraint is not technology, land or money.

It is time.

Europe’s move from beef to poultry

Meanwhile, Europe presents a different picture. The continent is witnessing a structural change in what consumers are eating.

The EU produced about 42.7 million tonnes of meat in 2025. But EU meat production is projected to decline by about 3 percent between 2025 and 2035, with beef production projected to fall by 10 percent and pork by 7 percent. Poultry is the exception: production is projected to rise by 5 percent.

This shift is also visible in consumption.

Consumption of EU beef and pigmeat is projected to decline through 2035, while poultry consumption is expected to increase by 9 percent.

Beef and pork require longer production cycles and face different economic and environmental pressures. Poultry, by contrast, can respond much more quickly to changes in demand because chickens reach market weight within weeks rather than years.

That difference is becoming increasingly important. The OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook expects poultry to be the fastest-growing major meat category globally over the next decade, helped by its relatively low cost and short production cycle.

Europe is therefore becoming an example of how a meat system can adapt without simply producing more of everything. Some forms of meat become harder or more expensive to produce, while others expand to fill part of the space.

Poultry has problems too — as India shows

Yet the poultry industry faces its own challenges, with India offering an example.

In June, a large section of India’s poultry industry announced plans to cut production by 25 percent after soya meal prices rose by more than 40 percent in a month.

The decision was announced by the All India Poultry Breeders’ Association after producers faced sharply higher feed costs and a seasonal decline in demand. Producers also began culling parent breeder stocks — birds needed to produce future generations of poultry.

Soya meal is an important protein source in animal feed. When its price rises sharply, poultry producers face a choice: absorb higher costs, raise prices, or reduce the number of birds they produce.

In India’s case, producers chose to cut production.

The consequences extended beyond individual farms. The Reuters news agency reported in May that Indian soya meal prices had risen 41 percent in one month to a four-year high of 66,000 rupees ($687.5) per tonne. India subsequently cancelled 25,000 tonnes of soya meal export contracts and began turning to soya bean imports from African countries.

The takeaway: a shock in one part of the agricultural system can move quickly through the meat supply chain globally.

As farmers try to protect their livelihoods and families try to keep food on the table, changing climates, rising prices, shifting dietary preferences and growing trade barriers are together reshaping the future of meat — and what we eat.

The Venezuelan economy has had a modest recovery after years of contraction under US sanctions. In this interactive infographic, we break down indicators, facts, and figures to examine the recent economic trends and, most importantly, their impact on the Venezuelan people.

(Click on the crosses for more information and scroll between plots.)

(Click here to download the full infographic.)

Diesel prices have hit record highs as the tensions between the United States and Iran, along with the war between Russia and Ukraine, disrupt key oil and fuel trade routes.

On Friday, the average price for a gallon (3.79 litres) of diesel was $6.50, up from $5.61 a month earlier, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks fuel prices daily.

The spike has prompted the administration of US President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers to consider restricting US diesel exports ahead of upcoming midterm elections.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in August found that 47 percent of voters said the cost of living was the single most important factor in deciding how they would vote in the midterms — more than twice the share who cited the next-most important issue, “democratic values and norms”.

A new Marist poll also found that Americans have more confidence in Democrats than Republicans to handle the economy, with 42 percent choosing Democrats compared with 34 percent for Republicans.

Amid that voter sentiment, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Thursday that he was in touch with major oil refiners to gauge interest in a potential voluntary restriction on diesel exports, according to the Reuters news agency.

That followed remarks by Trump on Tuesday that he supported restricting diesel exports from the US, the world’s largest diesel exporter.

Energy analysts and industry groups have warned that an export ban could have unintended consequences, potentially pushing up fuel prices in the US and abroad.

Why are diesel prices so high?

Even though the US is the world’s largest diesel exporter, diesel is traded on a global market.

Disruptions to refineries in Russia and the Middle East have reduced the amount of fuel available worldwide, putting more pressure on US producers to fill the gap. In Russia, for example, drone attacks have damaged major refineries, forcing a cutback or halt in production.

“While US refineries are running at full tilt and higher than normal, the global gaps remain,” Rachel Ziemba, senior adjunct fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Al Jazeera.

It comes as US diesel supplies are also shrinking. As of September 11, inventories had fallen to 107.9 million barrels, the lowest in more than four decades, according to the US Energy Information Administration.

With global supplies tightening, diesel prices have risen around the world — including in the US. Because American producers can sell their fuel into the global market, they are drawn to the soaring global prices rather than simply setting a lower price for domestic consumers.

Why is the US considering an export ban?

In Washington, DC, leaders have flirted with the idea of pushing US companies to stop or slow exporting diesel.

Republicans have been pushing for a slowdown or outright ban of exports in an effort to lower costs for consumers ahead of the pivotal midterm elections, where cost of living is becoming a critical issue.

Such a move, they hope, would reduce local diesel prices, which is significant as diesel is used in trucks to haul food and most products, Ziemba said, adding that US diesel exports are equivalent to about 40 percent of domestic consumption.

On Tuesday, Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, called on the president to put in place a temporary halt on exports.

“I encourage President Trump to put a temporary embargo on diesel exports through executive action,” Grassley said.

Republican Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska made a similar call: “The cost of diesel is just too damn high. I’m calling for a temporary pause of American diesel exports so that we can rebuild our reserves ahead of winter,” Sullivan said in a statement on Tuesday.

In the House of Representatives, Congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee introduced two bills that would restrict US diesel exports: One would impose a ban through January 2027, while the other would restrict exports if the national average price reaches $5 a gallon.

The administration has not made any official policy announcements, and the White House told Al Jazeera that the president is evaluating all options.

Oil and gas industry experts say that a ban could drive up prices rather than bringing them down.

“Diesel trades on a world market, just like corn. farmers don’t sell cheaper to Americans, and refiners can’t either since they buy crude at global prices. force a lower price and they’ll make less diesel. less supply means higher prices, not lower,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said in a post on X.

How would an export ban work?

A ban would prevent or restrict US refiners from selling diesel to buyers overseas, theoretically leaving more fuel available in the domestic market.

Analysts at Wood Mackenzie, a research and consulting firm, say that keeping more diesel stateside would ultimately fill up US storage tanks but also force refineries to cut production. That could affect other markets that rely heavily on US fuel, including Latin America and Europe, forcing them to compete with other global buyers for supplies and driving up prices for the global market.

Wood Mackenzie says China is the only major producer with enough spare refining capacity to potentially make up much of the shortfall.

“China is currently the only country with material spare refining capacity that could cover the loss of US refinery throughputs. However, China may well decide it is not in its interest to intercede,” analysts said.

Wood Mackenzie has warned that a ban could quickly fill US diesel inventories, forcing refiners to cut crude runs and potentially increasing US petrol imports.

That was also the view of an S&P Global analysis, which found that a complete ban could also mean that production would be reduced as storage capacity is filled up with unsold diesel. According to the analysis, that could lead to production cuts of as much as 750,000 barrels a day, which could put the US into being a net importer of petrol in the fourth quarter of this year.

Who would an export ban affect?

An export ban would affect US refiners and consumers, as well as countries that rely on US diesel.

“They [export bans] may provide temporary relief, but diesel is a global commodity. Treat one part of the system, and the effects travel elsewhere. Trade-offs are inevitable. Refiners are unlikely to cheer a blanket ban. Voluntary, controlled export reductions would generally be less disruptive in the short term,” Maksim Sonin, visiting scholar at Stanford University’s Precourt Institute for Energy, told Al Jazeera.

Disruptions to US exports could reduce the amount of fuel available on the global market. Wood Mackenzie analysts say countries in Europe and Latin America that rely heavily on US fuel could be forced to compete with other producers for supplies.

“If implemented, it would lead to European and Asian product prices increasing as the buyers of US fuel, mostly in Latin America, scramble to find new supplies, bidding up supplies. European crack spreads could widen, and overall we might see more disruptions,” Ziemba added.

“Given these issues, the US may opt for a mixture of carrots and sticks aiming to incentivise refineries to keep producing, perhaps including penalties if they cut production. There may be voluntary export quotas rather than a formal ban, and there may be exemptions for countries that provide crude oil to the US, like Mexico,” Ziemba said.

That could put pressure on consumers not only at the petrol pump but in the skies as well.

Airlines for America, an airline industry trade group, has also warned that an export ban could lead to higher prices for airlines and travellers, according to the Reuters news agency. The trade group did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

The broader concern from analysts is that restricting exports could reduce US refinery production rather than simply redirecting diesel to US consumers, potentially putting upward pressure on fuel prices both domestically and internationally.

“It’s unlikely to help US consumers much given how it fails to solve underlying problems and could backfire if refineries hold on to production. The best way to address this is to end the conflicts prompting the shortages,” Ziemba said.

Tehran, Iran – Amid dire fuel shortages and mounting economic challenges, the Iranian government is seeking cost-saving measures for government workers and other citizens to deal with the crisis.

On Saturday, the government set office attendance hours for 8am to 1pm from September 23 to the end of the current Iranian year (late March 2027), with the remaining contractual hours to be completed remotely.

Agencies must also designate one day a week when employees and managers travel to work by public transport. In recent days, government ministers have released videos showing themselves using the metro to commute to work as part of the campaign.

Metro and bus rapid transit (BRT) systems will also be free of charge until mid-November in a bid to encourage commuters to leave their cars at home. Worn-out government vehicles will also be replaced with electric, gas-powered or hybrid alternatives, although this is expected to take years to implement.

The reopening of universities is expected to be staggered and partial, with some lessons shifted online by authorities.

Government-linked offices are required to switch off heating and turn off lights after working hours, while schools, universities, healthcare facilities and operational services are to follow separate arrangements to be announced later.

President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a directive on September 12 instructing government agencies to facilitate remote work for suitable employees to save on petrol, electricity and natural gas costs for the state.

“We have begun consumption savings with the government,” Pezeshkian said earlier this month. This is seen as effectively framing remote work and other measures for government workers as in line with other energy-saving measures that the government has asked of the rest of the population.

Resource-rich Iran has dealt with energy crises before, rooted in mismanagement and dated infrastructure, when similar cost-saving measures were implemented. But the added pressure of war with the United States and Israel has forced the government to think of creative solutions to energy shortfalls.

In early September, the cash-strapped government raised the price of fuel for the third tier of quotas for a second time in less than a year, meaning that people will pay double for any petrol use beyond 110 litres (29 gallons) per month. Imported vehicles and some other categories of cars are also limited to the most expensive tier of fuel.

For the first five months of the current Iranian year, which ended on August 22, average daily petrol production was 122 million litres while consumption was at 132 milion litres, highlighting a shortfall in supply versus demand. In the first half of the sixth month, the gap between production and consumption was around the same, at a 10 million litre shortfall.

The US naval blockade of Iran’s southern ports in place since July has halted fuel imports that previously helped balance the gap. The blockade has also stopped Iran from exporting its oil via supertankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz, affecting its foreign currency income. Crude stored on open waters beyond the blockade line is still being gradually sold to China.

Oil and gas facilities, petrochemical companies and major fuel depots were also bombed by the US and Israel, impacting production and distribution. Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad said in early September that “a significant portion of production capacity has now been restored, and the process is continuing”.

As rampant inflation continues to squeeze most Iranians, data released this week by the Statistical Center of Iran also highlighted the damage the war with the US has dealt to the economy.

Iran experienced a massive 10.1 percent year-on-year fall in real gross domestic product (GDP) and a 26.4 percent fall in oil and gas extraction between late March and late June 2026, the centre’s data showed.

Including oil, industries and mining were down 14.7 percent, while construction was down by 6.4 percent, services overall by 4.8 percent, and transport, storage and communications by 17 percent.

The government has not released any information on how many workers are estimated to be affected by the remote work directive, or how it expected efficiency to be impacted.

But after decades of mismanagement, corruption and inefficiency among government-linked organisations, some Iranians believe it highlights a wider issue of state inefficiency.

“My unpopular opinion is that if 85-90 percent of government sector personnel are fired and 70 percent of ministries closed down, absolutely no problem will occur in the country,” a user named Mohsen wrote on X.

Zabihollah Salmani, a deputy head of the Administrative and Employment Organisation of Iran, told reporters during a press conference in August that more than 2.43 million were on its payroll.

If council, fire brigades, social security and non-government organisation workers were included, this would bring the number to more than four million people. The average monthly pay for government personnel at the end of the previous Iranian year in late March 2026 was around 240 million rials ($104 at the current exchange rate).

Asked by reporters how many of these employees could potentially be taken off the payroll without hurting output, Salmani said, “We do not yet have these figures.” He added that agencies were being asked to submit that information.

About 1,075,000 people are on the payroll of the Education Ministry, including teachers and trainee staff, while 600,000 employees work under the Ministry of Health and its affiliated networks, according to official figures.

Amir-Hossein, a young man working at a research centre linked with the government-funded University of Tehran, said that since the start of the month, he had been assigned two days of remote work. Working hours were set for 7am-1pm before, but are to be shifted to 8am-1pm starting from Wednesday, per the government.

His work can be done on his laptop, but might require some coordination on the phone or short commutes to other centres, he said. Overall, the remote work lifestyle has been beneficial.

“Sometimes I get more work done than I would have at the office,” he told Al Jazeera, asking not to use his full name due to security reasons.

As Amir-Hossein regularly uses online ride-hailing services to commute to and from his job, working from home has been financially beneficial for him.

An Iran-based economist who spoke to Al Jazeera on background said the government measures are essentially crisis control at best, and not a long-term solution to the problem.

Political parties in Morocco are intensifying campaign efforts before legislative elections on September 23, which will ultimately decide Morocco’s next government.

Twenty-seven political parties are competing for 395 seats in the House of Representatives and the vote comes at a crucial time for the country.

Rising living costs, pressure on public services, and high youth unemployment – currently at 37.3 percent for Moroccans aged 15 to 24 – are all issues being hotly debated.

Party headquarters across Morocco and sites at packed city neighbourhoods and markets have been transformed into electioneering operation rooms. Campaign teams navigate crowded streets with loudspeakers, music, and leaflets to catch the attention of Morocco’s 15.8 million registered voters.

“We choose communication locations carefully; we start from a field map where we define the spaces where citizens meet naturally, then we divide the team according to tasks between direct communication and recording observations,” al-Wali al-Shtouki, campaign manager for the Justice and Development Party (PJD) in the Medina-Sidi Youssef Ben Ali district, told Al Jazeera.

“We also hold small meetings at the headquarters because they allow a calm and direct dialogue to understand what the citizen actually expects. What we hear in the field is what guides our daily work. After every tour or meeting, we collect observations and repeated questions and discuss them within the team, then we distinguish between local issues that need follow-up and those related to public policies and parliamentary work.”

While physical headquarters serve as hubs for election campaigns, a party’s success ultimately relies on its roots within a community, Jawad al-Shafdi, head of the Moroccan Observatory for Political Participation, said.

“In the Moroccan case, the strength of the candidate, their local extension, their network of relationships, and their electoral record also play essential roles,” al-Shafdi told Al Jazeera.

“We may find a party with limited organisational presence in a specific district achieving a significant result thanks to a strong candidate, and vice versa. Winning votes is achieved through a more complex system that combines party organisation, candidate strength, local extension, networks of elected officials, direct and digital communication, in addition to the party’s image and political offering.

“Therefore, the true criterion is not the number of people who enter the headquarters, but its ability to convert organisational movement into electoral mobilisation, mobilisation into votes, and votes into seats.”

Digital, direct engagement

The competition has forced political groups to adopt multi-channel strategies that balance street-level outreach with digital campaigns to reach a broader audience.

Fatima al-Tamni, a candidate for the Left Alliance in the Ain Sebaa – Hay Mohammadi district in Casablanca, highlighted the necessity of direct engagement with voters rather than superficial campaign displays.

She believes that party campaigns should serve as a space to listen to the concerns of the electorate and propose solutions, while building a strategic vision for transport, housing, pollution and other issues.

“We do not want to speak to the citizen from above, nor turn the campaign into a festival of pictures and slogans… We want to speak with them in clear language, and hear from them before we speak in their name,” she said. “[It] is not an end in itself, but the beginning of a new political relationship with citizens based on clarity, accountability, and fulfilling commitments.”

Youssef Ait Sidi Said, a political activist with the Progress and Socialism Party in the Chichaoua province, said campaigning remains an evolving process.

“For the party, this campaign is no longer just a specific period to introduce candidates and the electoral programme, but has become an opportunity for direct and continuous communication with the population and listening to their concerns and expectations,” Ait Sidi Said told Al Jazeera.

“Digital platforms allow reaching broad groups, especially youth, and grant them the possibility to interact, ask questions, and express their opinions. However, we do not consider that digitisation can replace direct communication. On the contrary, we see that each tool has its function.”

Ultimately, direct engagement with voters should remain the hallmark of party campaigns, he said.

“Field communication allows direct listening to the citizen, while digital platforms allow expanding the reach, interaction, and documenting activities,” Ait Sidi Said added.

Tehran, Iran – Hossein, a 32-year-old marketing specialist based in Tehran, has been thinking of replacing his 13-year-old Iranian-made car with a newer model.

Even though he earns about four-and-a-half times the minimum wage after a recent pay rise – his salary is now close to 900 million rials (about $390 at the current exchange rate) – imported vehicles are not even remotely affordable for him.

Even finding a locally made car might be out of his budget, with an economic crisis gripping the country since the United States and Israel launched a surprise war on Iran on February 28 and later enacted a crippling siege and sanctions on the country.

“I’m losing hope of ever being able to buy a new domestic production car too, unless the country opens up and becomes a bit more normal again,” Hossein, who asked to keep his full name confidential for security reasons, told Al Jazeera.

His old manual Peugeot 206 model, an originally French-made car but now produced domestically after foreign counterparts left Iran due to sanctions, can fetch up to 10 billion rials ($4,350) if he sells it towards making a new purchase. However, his replacement options are limited.

Upgrading to a slightly improved Peugeot 207 with an automatic gearbox could cost him 28 billion rials ($12,170) now. This means that, after selling his car, he would need more than 20 months of his entire salary.

A domestic sedan Shahin model costs more than 31 billion rials ($13,480), and a crossover Reera is priced at more than 43 billion rials ($18,700).

With these options, he would need to save about 24 months and 37 months of his whole salary, respectively, and that is if prices remain stable and he does not spend a rial on anything else. But the reality of the fast-rising living costs and lagging incomes in Iran means he can barely put aside any money, let alone afford a new car.

Domestic car prices have mostly risen 40 to 80 percent since the start of the war, while some vehicles sell for more than 130 percent of their September 2025 costs.

The costs of maintaining the vehicles are also rising much faster than people’s salaries. Domestically produced tyres, motor oil, brake pads and clutch kits have at least doubled since last year, with some car parts having more than tripled in price.

Domestic vehicles have generally low safety standards, meaning that they contribute to staggering road accident deaths. At least 1,609 Iranians have been killed so far on intercity roads in the current month of Shahrivar of the solar Hijri calendar, which ends on September 22. More than 20,000 people lose their lives on the roads every year. In comparison, fewer people in the whole of the European Union, nearly five times Iran’s population, died on roads last year.

Iran’s fuel-guzzling cars also contribute to smoke-congested city streets, degrade vehicles faster and increase fuel costs, just as petrol prices have risen for users.

How did we get here?

Experts say, due to a combination of protected state-linked businesses, privileged access, economic isolation and a curtailing of imports, Iranian households have no choice but to pay exorbitant prices – compared with their salaries – to buy low-quality cars.

The damage from the war, including the extensive bombing of multiple steel giants by Israel and the US, has only added insult to injury. The naval blockade of Iran’s southern ports has prevented goods coming in from popular neighbouring markets like the United Arab Emirates.

Under such circumstances, domestic vehicle manufacturers have little incentive to improve.

End customers are also beset by government charges, currency and financing costs, margins levied by murky intermediaries – and in numerous documented cases, industry corruption.

“People are forced to buy expensive low-quality cars whose real prices should be a quarter of global prices, and this is a direct harm done to them,” Mohammad Rashidi, a member of the presiding board of Iran’s parliament, told local media on Saturday. “The traces of a mafia system are visible throughout the process.”

His claims echo those of other officials and state-linked media, who have openly described the industry as resembling an organised crime operation.

According to the latest figures released by state media, about 233,000 cars were manufactured or assembled in Iran in the first five months of 2026, compared with 366,000 the year before. Only about 25,000 vehicles were imported in that period.

Only a handful of state-linked companies or intermediaries are allowed to import vehicles, with duties plus value-added tax increasing final prices up to 200 percent.

The government and parliament have discussed lowering import tariffs this year, with no agreement announced so far.

The premiums are more visible for high-end cars, with a 2026 Toyota Land Cruiser VXR going for approximately 660 billion rials ($287,000) in Iran at the moment, while the same model is available for about $86,000 in the UAE. The same story applies to most other models, at different rates depending on the rarity of the vehicle and the availability of parts.

The price of a mid-range Chinese-designed SUV sold as Exeed VX in international markets is listed at about $32,000 in China, while it is priced at about $42,000 in the UAE. The same car, assembled from imported parts by a state-linked company in Iran under a different name, currently costs Iranian customers the equivalent of $53,000.

The bizarre situation was on full display during a three-day “international” car exhibition in Tehran last week that mostly featured Chinese-manufactured vehicles. These remain available in Iran despite the US sanctions, since Tehran exports almost all of its oil to China and barters this for goods, including cars.

Some domestic manufacturers and importers were absent, either because they had no products to offer or because they had angry customers who registered months ago to get vehicles they never received. Spare parts for some of the vehicles on display are currently either not available in the Iranian market or cost several times their price in international markets.

Even the cheapest vehicles offered at the exhibition were completely unaffordable to the average Iranian. It would take a worker on the minimum wage with standard allowances 50 years to buy an XPENG G9, a Chinese-made electric SUV priced at 120 billion rials ($52,150), on his or her salary, without spending a rial on food, housing or clothing.

Still, there were huge queues outside the exhibition centre each of the three days.

“It was sad because most people just came to take pictures with the cars they knew they could never afford,” a young man who attended the exhibition told Al Jazeera. “The doors of the cars were locked too.”

President Trump came to battleground North Carolina doubling down on a tantalizing and implausible midterm promise. “If we win,” he said, “we’re going to get you $5,000. So that’s it. Very simple.”

The Republican candidates who spoke at the rally had nothing to say about it.

Their silence reflects a broader pattern. About a week after the president unveiled his “Trump dividend” pledge at the party’s unusual midterm convention in Dallas, there is little evidence that Republicans in competitive races have incorporated it into their campaigns.

The pledge hasn’t been a staple of television advertising, whether from Trump’s own political operation or his party’s candidates. It usually only comes up when reporters ask about it, prompting most Republicans to sidestep the idea.

The Republican National Committee considers the proposed payments part of Trump’s broader economic vision and says candidates should get behind it.

“Of course we encourage all Republican candidates to run on his agenda, and that includes efforts to put more money in the pockets of the American people,” spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said.

There are some exceptions. Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who is seeking reelection in a battleground Wisconsin district, has praised the proposal.

The idea comes as the economy confronts rising interest rates, continuing inflation and climbing fuel costs. Republicans are fighting to keep their majorities in the House and Senate.

Trump previously promised to use savings from his White House advisory team, which he calls the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and revenue from tariffs on imports to distribute payments of $2,000 or more, but none of that came to pass. The president has said he did not think congressional approval would be needed for the idea, which could cost more than $1 trillion, but House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) indicated the promise would require lawmakers to act.

Democrats point to those previous suggestions for a payout to raise skepticism about the $5,000 pledge.

“This idea is nothing more than a recycled broken promise that voters know Republicans will never deliver,” said Viet Shelton, a spokesperson for the House Democratic campaign arm.

Republican campaign advertising has largely focused on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including provisions that temporarily cut taxes on tips and overtime. Other candidates are concentrating on local issues or attacks against their opponents.

Doug Heye, a Republican strategist and former Republican National Committee communications director, said there is little mystery about why candidates have been reluctant to embrace the pledge.

“It’s a dumb idea,” Heye said. “There’s no way to pay for it and it would spike inflation.”

Catalini writes for the Associated Press.

Bank of Japan raises benchmark interest rate from 1 to 1.25 percent, pledging to help counter inflation risks.

The Bank of Japan (BoJ) has raised interest rates by 0.25 to 1.25 percent, pushing borrowing costs to their highest level in 31 years, amid rising inflation and wages, and pressure from Washington.

The move on Friday marked the first hike since June, and takes interest rates closer to levels the BoJ deems neutral to the economy, marking another step away from decades of ultra-low rates that cemented the yen’s status as a cheap global funding currency.

Japan is grappling to contain inflation, which is being driven by factors including rising energy prices, global supply pressures and domestic inflation exceeding the 2 percent target.

Core consumer inflation held steady near the target in August, data showed on Friday, as companies continued to pass on rising costs for a wide range of food and grocery items.

The country also faced a “slow-moving demographic shock” with a shrinking labour pool lifting wages, a structural factor that ⁠cannot be dismissed as temporary, BoJ Executive Director Koji Nakamura said on Monday.

The Federal Reserve’s rate hike on Wednesday, and the prospect of another one later this year, have added pressure on the BoJ to keep pace.

Further widening of the United States-Japan rate gap risks weakening the yen and lifting inflation through higher import costs, analysts told the Reuters news agency.

Its policy rate also remains lower than the European Central Bank, which raised its key rate to 2.5 percent last week.

Such pressure could affect the tone of BoJ Governor Kazuo Ueda’s post-meeting briefing, which will be closely watched by markets for clues on the timing and pace of further increases.

Published on
17/09/2026 – 13:17 GMT+2

The ‘Old Lady of Threadneedle Street’ has chosen to wait, though not unanimously.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The Monetary Policy Committee voted by a majority of six to three on Thursday to leave borrowing costs unchanged, with the dissenting trio pushing for a quarter-point increase to 4%.

The decision puts the Bank of England at odds with the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank, both of which have tightened within the past week.

Despite holding, the central bank expects the situation to worsen before it improves.

Inflation “is likely to rise further over coming quarters,” the committee said, pointing to crude and refined energy prices that have climbed again since its last meeting and remain “more volatile and higher than pre-conflict.”

Watching for second-round effects

The case for holding rests on what has not yet happened.

“There has been little evidence so far of material second-round effects in price and wage-setting,” the statement read, meaning expensive energy is not yet feeding into broader wages and prices.

However, that reprieve may be temporary.

The risk of such effects “is greater the longer higher energy prices persist or are more volatile,” the committee warned, adding that risks to the inflation outlook are “tilted to the upside, and more so than at the time of the July Monetary Policy Report.”

Brent crude and UK wholesale gas prices have risen 36% and 78% respectively since July, with Brent at $106 a barrel and gas at 207 pence per therm on 14 September.

Refinery pressures have kept crack spreads, the gap between refined fuel prices and crude, well above pre-conflict levels.

Economic activity has held up slightly better than expected, while a soft labour market and the higher borrowing costs households and businesses have faced since the conflict began should bring inflation down over time.

A crowded week for central banks

The Fed raised its benchmark on Wednesday to a range of 3.75% to 4%, its first increase since 2023 and a unanimous decision, while signalling more to come.

The ECB lifted its deposit rate to 2.5% last week.

The sequence concludes on Friday with the Bank of Japan, where markets expect a hike.

That would leave the Bank of England as the only major central bank to have stood still this week, though on Thursday’s evidence not by much.

Additional sources • AP