Category: 3. Business

WASILLA – An upcoming project will install medians along the middle of the Parks Highway on the west side of Wasilla, blocking most left turns from the center lane and lengthening a stop light turn lane on Palmer-Wasilla Highway Extension heading toward Home Depot, state and city officials said last month.

The update also includes extending a right-turn lane at the Palmer-Wasilla Highway stop light below Home Depot to allow more space for vehicles turning right onto the Parks Highway away from Wasilla, they said.

Officials said the projects are intended to reduce collisions and improve traffic flow near the Parks and Palmer-Wasilla Highway intersection.

The area has been the site of dozens of vehicle accidents since 2018, including at least four that resulted in a fatality or serious injury, according to Matanuska-Susitna Borough accident data. About 38,000 vehicles travel the thoroughfare each day, according to state traffic data.

Work on the $3.5 million project could start this summer but will likely continue into 2027, transportation officials said.

Crews will add a median blocking left turns over about 1.5 miles between the Parks and Palmer-Wasilla Highway intersection and Broadview Avenue, officials said. A pre-existing median near the Palmer-Wasilla Highway intersection will be updated to eliminate a left-hand turn into MATCOM or from the Target shopping area.

The median will include new turn pockets at designated intervals to allow for some left turns across oncoming traffic in certain locations, they said. No new turn signals are planned.

Exactly where those turn areas will be placed will be determined through a traffic analysis, said Chris Bentz, a Department of Transportation project manager.

“We’re going to evaluate during the course of this effort to figure out what we can do to, firstly, reduce the amount of left-turning traffic with the median. But secondly, where will it be prudent to maintain some amount of left turn?” he said.

Known for its mile-long evening rush hour backup, collisions and vehicle standoffs in the center two-way lane as drivers attempt to make offset left turns, the corridor is also the center of rapid business growth. A new 107-room Hilton Home2 Suites hotel is expected to open in the area in 2027, the first national hotel chain to open a new property in the Mat-Su in decades.

That growth means the traffic problems must be addressed now, said Wasilla City Council member Ian Crafton, who proposed a resolution in late 2024 requesting that the state tackle the project.

The changes will ultimately force shoppers to alter how they enter and exit some businesses along the corridor – including Lowe’s, Evangelos, and the Sun Mountain Shopping Center – changes that are likely to cause heartburn among some of the area’s business owners, Crafton said.

“I’m hoping we’re going to minimize the access to these businesses, and really the goal here is safety,” he said. “Sometimes that means road changes we could not foresee. Nobody knew this was going to grow like this.”

Traffic along the area may eventually also be eased by a separate project to extend Herman Road from where it starts near Lowe’s north to connect with the Palmer-Wasilla Highway. Construction on that project is expected to start in 2027, according to a state fact sheet.

How traffic flows along the Sun Mountain frontage road and through the series of three-way stop signs will be addressed in a future project, Bentz said. Those intersections are also the site of regular collisions, according to borough traffic data.

This story originally appeared in the Mat-Su Sentinel and is republished here with permission.

The 15% increase in the average U.S. tariff rate in 2025 was the largest in the modern era. Assessing the likely impacts of such a large and sudden change, or tariff shock, on unemployment and inflation is crucial for monetary policy discussions. In general, if a tariff shock raises inflation, tighter monetary policy could help tame the inflation increase, if other factors remain constant. By contrast, if a tariff shock has little effect on inflation but leads to an increase in unemployment, loosening monetary policy could be helpful. 

However, there is little consensus on the overall economic effects of tariff shocks—mainly because there have not been such large changes in tariff rates for decades. Since World War II, global tariffs have steadily fallen under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), dropping from 10% in 1945 to under 3% by January 2025. The last time average tariffs were above 15% was during the interwar period between World Wars I and II.

In this Economic Letter, we take a historical perspective and study the effects of tariff rate changes in past eras, specifically when changes were similar in speed and magnitude to those in 2025. In particular, we look back at the so-called first wave of globalization—the period of increased global economic integration in trade and finance between 1870 and 1913—as well as the interwar period. These two eras saw large fluctuations in tariff rates.

Analysis shows that shifting policy priorities—rather than reactions to contemporaneous economic conditions—were the main drivers of tariff adjustments from past eras. We find that these tariff hikes raised unemployment, which slowed economic activity, while simultaneously lowering inflation.

Background from historical data

While numerous theoretical studies have analyzed the economic effects of changes in tariffs (see, for example, Rodríguez-Clare, Ulate, and Vasquez 2025), there has been little empirical work on the topic, and recent studies have been limited to post-1960 variation (see, for example, Schmitt-Grohé and Uribe 2025).  Since World War II, global tariffs have steadily fallen under GATT agreements, dropping from 10% in 1945 to under 3% by January 2025. Figure 1 illustrates the average tariff rate in the United States since 1865, showing that the last time average tariffs were above 15% was before World War II. Major tariff changes have been absent in recent history until 2025.

However, during the first wave of globalization—the period of increased global economic integration in trade and finance between 1870 and 1913—and the interwar period, tariff rates displayed large fluctuations that were similar in size and speed to the 2025 average tariff rate increase. Indeed, while the general trend has been downward over the past 150 years, earlier periods show that tariffs occasionally rose or fell as much as 20 percentage points in a year.

Estimating the effects of unexpected tariff changes on the economy

The large and abrupt tariff changes in the historical data can provide some insights into how tariffs affect inflation and economic activity. However, it could be misleading to assume that the data depict a relationship between the two. If tariff rates could change in response to economic conditions, subsequent economic activity may simply reflect the normal evolution of the economy rather than the effects of tariffs. For example, if policymakers thought that higher tariffs helped raise employment in the short run by making imports more expensive and thereby boosting spending on domestic goods, they might raise tariffs whenever the unemployment rate started increasing to protect domestic workers. In that case, the data might appear to mistakenly suggest a correlation between higher tariffs and higher unemployment.

To learn about the causal effects of tariff changes, one must isolate the changes in tariffs that are independent of the state of the economy, such as those associated with policy shifts following elections. For example, in the 1888 presidential election, Benjamin Harrison defeated incumbent Grover Cleveland by a narrow margin, when the economy was neither in a recession nor overheating. The Harrison victory led to the Tariff Act of 1890—also known as the McKinley tariff—which raised average tariffs to almost 50%. That change was driven by the new administration’s policy stance that tariffs were needed to protect domestic industries from cheaper foreign competition. Since the tariff change was motivated by long-run considerations, we can study its effect by observing how inflation and economic activity fared in the years afterward. We acknowledge that other developments could have also influenced the economy. However, by averaging over many such tariff changes, we can isolate the effects of tariffs on the economy in that period.

In Barnichon and Singh (2025), we carefully reviewed the major historical tariff changes in the United States since 1870. We found no systematic relationship between the state of the economic cycle and the direction of tariff changes. This reflects that, throughout the 19th century and up until 1935, elected officials from different parties held opposite views on the desirability of tariffs. One side favored higher tariffs to protect their constituents in industrialized regions. The other favored lower tariffs because their constituents were focused less on industry and more on imported goods. Since changes in the economic cycle are not associated with either side winning elections, there was no general relationship between the direction of tariff changes and the state of the economy. Thus, relying on this “narrative identification” approach, we can study the causal effects of tariff shocks using simple regressions of economic activity or inflation on tariff changes.

Estimating tariff effects

The dots in Figure 2 show each case of a change in the average tariff rate, either positive or negative, on the horizontal axis and the changes in inflation in the year of that tariff change on the vertical axis. The data suggest a strong negative correlation between changes in tariffs and inflation: A 1 percentage point increase in tariffs is associated with a 0.6 percentage point decline in inflation. Focusing only on large tariff changes that can be directly tied to shifting policy priorities gives very similar results, as indicated by the red dots in the figure.

Next, to estimate the dynamic effects of tariff changes, we use a statistical model called a vector autoregression, which allows us to capture the effects of shocks over time after making mild assumptions about the underlying economic structure (see Barnichon and Singh 2025 for details). Figure 3 shows the responses of inflation and unemployment over time following a 1 percentage point increase in the tariff rate.

The figure suggests that a temporary tariff increase leads to a rise in unemployment (blue line) and a decline in inflation (red line) that both last up to two years after the initial shock before becoming statistically insignificant. In other words, and perhaps surprisingly, our estimates show that an increase in tariffs decreases inflation.

How can higher tariffs lower inflation?

One prominent theory about tariff shocks is that they tend to drive up domestic production costs through more expensive imported inputs while raising the prices of final goods that are made abroad (see, for example, Werning, Lorenzoni, and Guerrieri 2025). Under this framework, higher tariffs would be expected to lead to lower economic activity and higher inflation in the short run.

Our estimates suggest the opposite, however, with shocks from higher tariffs leading to both higher unemployment and lower inflation. A possible explanation relies on the effects of uncertainty: A tariff shock tends to coincide with an uncertain economic environment, which by itself depresses economic activity by lowering consumers’ and investors’ confidence and puts downward pressure on inflation (see, for example, Leduc and Liu 2016). Another possible explanation is that an adverse tariff shock leads to a drop in asset prices, which then depresses overall demand and leads to higher unemployment and lower inflation.

To study the plausibility of these two mechanisms, we use our statistical model to estimate the effects of tariff shocks on a common stock price index and on stock market volatility as a proxy for uncertainty. Figure 4 shows that both uncertainty (blue line) and a drop in stock prices (red line) are plausible explanations for the economic effect of tariffs. The immediate effect of higher tariffs on stock prices is negative, but the effect quickly fades within the first year. Stock market volatility increases notably after the tariff shock, although the estimates are statistically precise only in the first and second year after a tariff increase.

Conclusion

In this Letter, we show that large and abrupt tariff increases before World War II were associated with lower inflation and higher unemployment, potentially spurred by higher uncertainty and lower wealth. Because many aspects of the economy were different a hundred or more years ago, those historical experiences may not fully apply to current conditions. For instance, the share of imported inputs in production is higher today than in the past, which means a tariff shock may be more likely to raise inflation (Bergin and Corsetti 2023). Nevertheless, our analysis of historical data highlights a possibility that the large tariff increase of 2025 could put upward pressure on unemployment while putting downward pressure on inflation.

References

Barnichon, Regis, and Aayush Singh. 2025. “What Is a Tariff Shock? Insights from 150 Years of Tariff Policy.” FRB San Francisco Working Paper 2025-26.

Bergin, Paul, and Giancarlo Corsetti. 2023. “The Macroeconomic Stabilization of Tariff Shocks: What Is the Optimal Monetary Response?” Journal of International Economics 143(103758).

Leduc, Sylvain, and Zheng Liu. 2016. “Uncertainty Shocks Are Aggregate Demand Shocks.” Journal of Monetary Economics 82, pp. 20–35.

Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, Mauricio Ulate, and Jose P. Vasquez. 2025. “The 2025 Trade War: Dynamic Impacts Across U.S. States and the Global Economy.” FRB San Francisco Working Paper 2025-09.

Schmidt-Grohé, Stephanie, and Martin Uribe. 2025. “Transitory and Permanent Import Tariff Shocks in the United States: An Empirical Investigation.” NBER Working Paper 33997.

Werning, Iván, Guido Lorenzoni, and Veronica Guerrieri. 2025. “Tariffs as Cost-Push Shocks: Implications for Optimal Monetary Policy.” NBER Working Paper 33772.

Recall of specific batches of various SMA infant formula and follow-on formula products due to the possible presence of cereulide

Monday, 05 January 2026

Alert Summary
Category 1:	For Action
Alert Notification:	2026.01
Product Identification:	Please see table below for product details.
Batch Code	Please see table below for implicated batch codes. Please note, batch codes can be found on the base of the tin or box for powdered formulas or the base of the outer box and on the side/top of the container for ready-to-feed formulas.

Message:

Nestlé is recalling the below batches of its SMA infant formula and follow-on formula products due to the possible presence of cereulide.

Recall notices will be displayed at point-of-sale. 

Questions and answers. 

Nestlé is advising its customers that have purchased any of these batches to contact them: 

Via its online form, sharing a photo of the product and the batch code: www.nestle.co.uk/en-gb/getintouch

By calling its careline on 1800 931 832. 

Product name	Pack size	Batch code	Expiry date
SMA Advanced First Infant Milk	800g	51450742F1	May-27
SMA Advanced Follow on Milk	800g	51240742F2 51890742F2	May-27 Aug-27
SMA Comfort	800g	52620742F3	Sep-27
SMA First Infant Milk	200ml	53070295M 52860295M 52870295M 53220295M 53230295M	Nov-26 Oct-26 Oct-26 Nov-26 Nov-26
SMA First Infant Milk	800g	51590346AB 52750346AE	Jun-27 Oct-27
SMA GOLD PREM 2	800g	53090742F2	Nov-27
SMA LITTLE STEPS First Infant Milk	800g	51540346AD	Jun-27
SMA Alfamino	400g	51200017Y3 51210017Y1 51250017Y1 51460017Y1 51710017Y1	Apr-27 Jan-27 May-27 Oct-27 Jun-27

 

Nature Of Danger:
Cereulide toxin is produced by the bacterium Bacillus cereus. The toxin may be pre-formed in a food and is extremely heat resistant. Consumption of foods containing cereulide toxin can lead to nausea and severe vomiting. Symptoms can appear within five hours. The duration of illness is usually 6 to 24 hours.

Action Required:

Manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, caterers & retailers:
Retailers are requested to remove the implicated batches from sale and display recall notices at point-of-sale. 

Wholesalers/distributors are requested to contact their affected customers and recall the implicated batches and provide a point-of-sale recall notice to their retailer customers. 

Consumers:
Parents, guardians and caregivers are advised not to feed the implicated batches to infants or young children. 

January 5, 2026

LANGUAGE PRESERVATION

Mvskoke Language Learner’s Circle
Coming to Koweta

KOWETA, OK—Join the Mvskoke Language Program at the monthly Mvskoke Language Learner’s Circle! This is a meeting for language learners to create community, find practice partners, and get language resources. Coming to the Koweta Indian Community Center: Tuesday, January 20 @ 5pm

Registration is required. Walk-in registration is allowed, but must have Muscogee Citizenship or CDIB.

Tuesday, January 20 @ 5pm–9pm
Mvskoke Language Learner’s Circle
Koweta Indian Community

###

The Wegovy pill launched Monday, and the starting dose is now available at pharmacies around the country with higher doses arriving by the end of the week.

The Food and Drug Administration approved the pill for obesity on Dec. 22. It’s also approved to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients who are obese or overweight.

The pill follows the blockbuster success of Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy injection, which has been on the market since 2021 and became so popular that it was in short supply until February 2025.

The pill version of the drug helped patients lose about as much weight as the injection. In a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, a 25 milligram Wegovy pill led to a 13.6% reduction in weight on average over 64 weeks. Patients taking a placebo in the study lost 2.2% of their weight. For patients who stayed on the treatment, reduced their calorie intake and exercised, Novo Nordisk estimates they would have a 16.6% reduction in their weight.

However, patients need to take the Wegovy pill on an empty stomach and wait a half hour before eating anything else for the medicine to be properly absorbed. The most common side effects with the Wegovy pill are similar to the injection and include nausea, diarrhea and vomiting.

When Novo Nordisk announced its drug-pricing deal with the Trump administration in November, it promised to make the obesity pill available for $149 a month to patients not using their health insurance. However, that’s only the starting dose for the direct-to-consumer price. The higher doses will be available for $299 a month.

The price that affects insurance coverage, called a list price, is the same as the Wegovy injection: $1,349 a month.

Insurance coverage for obesity drugs became more restrictive in 2025, according to an analysis from GoodRx, a website that helps patients find discounts on prescription drugs. But Novo Nordisk says patients with insurance coverage can get the Wegovy pill for as low as $25 a month.

Although the Wegovy pill is the first of its kind to win FDA approval, Novo Nordisk’s Type 2 diabetes pill, Rybelsus, is already on the market. It contains the same active ingredient, semaglutide, but the doses are different.

Eli Lilly, which makes the Zepbound injection, applied to the FDA in late 2025 for approval of its competing obesity pill. The agency gave the company a voucher for a priority review and a decision could come early this year.

NEW YORK – January 5, 2026 – The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (NYSE:GS) today announced that Hans Swildens, Justin Burden, and Roland Reynolds have joined Goldman Sachs as Partners in its Asset and Wealth Management business.  

The three will join the firm’s External Investing Group (XIG) within Goldman Sachs Asset Management as part of the closing of the Industry Ventures acquisition. In their roles, they will continue to focus on managing key parts of the Industry Ventures business, including investment processes, operations, and limited partner relationships. 

Hans Swildens founded Industry Ventures, and served as its CEO, managing the overall business. He brings decades of experience to the firm as an early pioneer of the modern secondary market for venture capital and early supporter of the development of a new class of venture capital partnerships focused on seed and early stage investing during the last decade.

Earlier in his career, Hans co-founded and acted as president of Microline Software. He also helped start Speedera Networks (acquired by Akamai) and provided board advisory services to Discovery Mining (acquired by Interwoven), nCircle Network Security (acquired by Tripwire), and StepUp Commerce (acquired by Intuit).

Hans earned an MBA from Columbia Business School and a BA with distinction from the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Justin Burden served as senior managing director at Industry Ventures. In this capacity, he has focused on originating, valuing, and managing secondary investment opportunities in later-stage, venture-backed companies and venture capital funds. He has also been actively involved in fundraising and maintaining limited partner relationships. Justin joined Industry Ventures in 2004.

Previously, Justin worked at GE Equity in San Francisco, the venture capital arm of the General Electric Company, where he sourced, structured, and managed investments in the technology, consumer, media, and telecom sectors. Prior to GE Equity, Justin worked at Wells Fargo’s high yield fund purchasing debt securities in buyout transactions.

Justin earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of California, Berkeley and an MSc from the London School of Economics.

Roland Reynolds served as senior managing director at Industry Ventures. In this role, he has focused on originating, valuing, and managing primary fund commitments, early secondary limited partnership investments, and direct company investments for the Industry Ventures Direct and Partnership Holdings team. He has also been actively involved in fundraising and maintaining limited partner relationships.

Previously, Roland was founder of Little Hawk Capital Management LLC, which was acquired by Industry Ventures. He also spent five years as Principal with Columbia Capital, a leading communications and information technology venture capital firm. Earlier in his career, Roland was an investment banker with JP Morgan & Co. in New York.

Roland graduated from Princeton University with high honors and earned his MBA from Harvard Business School.

###

About Goldman Sachs Asset Management

Goldman Sachs Asset Management is the primary investing area within Goldman Sachs, delivering investment and advisory services across public and private markets for the world’s leading institutions, financial advisors, and individuals. The business is driven by a focus on partnership and shared success with its clients, seeking to deliver long-term investment performance drawing on its global network and deep expertise across industries and markets. Goldman Sachs Asset Management is a leading investor across fixed income, liquidity, equity, alternatives, and multi-asset solutions. Goldman Sachs oversees approximately $3.5 trillion in assets under supervision as of September 30, 2025. Follow us on LinkedIn.

About Goldman Sachs Alternatives

Goldman Sachs Alternatives is one of the leading investors globally, with approximately $576 billion in assets as of September 30, 2025 and more than 30 years of experience. The business invests in the full spectrum of alternatives including private equity, growth equity, private credit, real estate, infrastructure, sustainability, and hedge funds. Clients access these solutions through direct strategies, customized partnerships, and open-architecture programs. The business is driven by a focus on partnership and shared success with its clients, seeking to deliver long-term investment performance drawing on its global network and deep expertise across industries and markets.

 

Goldman Sachs Media Relations

Mary Athridge

+1 212 902 5400

mary.athridge@gs.com

Goldman Sachs Investor Relations

Jehan Ilahi

+1 212 902 0300

Jehan.ilahi@gs.com

Paris, January 5, 2026 – Meeting on January 5, 2026, the Board of Directors of Capgemini SE took due note of Ms. Megan Clarken‘s resignation as a director and decided to appoint by co-option[1] a new director, Ms. Lila Tretikov, following a proposal by the Ethics and Governance committee.

Ms. Lila Tretikov, a French and American national, is currently Head of AI Strategy, at New Enterprise Associates, Inc., a global venture capital firm. She will bring to the Board her technological skills and her expertise in Artificial Intelligence as well as business transformation through technology.

The Board considers Ms. Lila Tretikov to be independent pursuant to the criteria of the AFEP-MEDEF Code to which the Company refers.

Ms. Lila Tretikov’s nomination is effective from January 5, 2026.  This nomination is in line with the Board’s ambition to enrich the diversity of its profiles and deepen its industry expertise.

The Board of Directors warmly thanked Ms. Megan Clarken for her contribution to the work of the Board and the Strategy & CSR Committee on which she sat.

As of January 5,2026, the Board of Directors therefore comprises 15 directors, including two directors representing employees and one director representing employee shareholders. 83% of its members are independent[2], 40% have international profiles and 42% are women².

BIOGRAPHY

Ms. Lila Tretikov

Ms. Tretikov is a leading expert on Artificial Intelligence and innovation-driven business transformation. Since 2024, she has been Partner, and Head of AI Strategy, at New Enterprise Associates, Inc., a global venture capital firm based in Silicon Valley.

Ms. Tretikov studied computer science (specializing in AI) and visual art at the University of California, Berkeley.

Prior to joining New Enterprise Associates, Ms. Tretikov was employed by Microsoft Corporation since 2018. She notably held the position of Corporate Vice President & Deputy Chief Technology Officer from April 2020 to January 2024, driving large-scale AI transformation.

Previously, Ms. Tretikov served as Senior Vice President of Engie SA, a multinational energy company, and Chief Executive Officer and Vice Chairman of the Terrawatt Initiative, a non-profit corporation launched by Engie, Total, IBM, and other multinationals to accelerate decarbonization of global industries. She was previously Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director of The Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia Endowment, which support Wikipedia. Ms. Tretikov sits on the Board of Directors of UBS Group AG, Volvo Car Corporation, and Xylem Inc.

---

[1] Ms. Lila Tretikov will serve the remainder of Ms. Clarken’s mandate until 2027 at the AGM convened to approve the 2026 statutory accounts. Ms. Megan Clarken left her position on December 31, 2025.

[2] The Directors representing employees and employee shareholders are not taken into account in calculating this percentage, in accordance with the provisions of the AFEP-MEDEF Code and the French Commercial Code.