Europe
BBC Business

We split bills equally even when one of us earned a lot more

Hannah and Max have always split their money equally even when one has earned considerably more than the other. "We've always wanted to do things 50/50," Max, 31, says. "We made a commitment to each other that what's mine is yours, and vice versa." The couple got married after two years together, when Max was earning £70,000 a year working in tech, and Hannah, who works in the charity sector, was earning considerably less. Their salaries go into a joint account and their mortgage, bills, food, petrol and other household costs are paid out of this. If one of them wants to buy clothes, make-up or go to the pub they can do that without feeling watched and "it means we aren't accountable to each other for those things", says Max. They also divide money into different pots, including savings and smaller funds for predictable spending like haircuts. The pair came into the relationship with very different attitudes to money - Hannah's family discuss finances openly whereas for Max, "money was totally taboo". "We never spoke about money so as an adult I was left without any knowledge of things like what's a good salary or how to negotiate my pay," he says. When it came to buying a home together they had to be honest about how much they earned, how much they had for a deposit and what they could realistically afford. "As first-time buyers, there are costs you don't think about, like stamp duty and solicitor fees, so it was important we both knew exactly how much money we had," Hannah says. "Just this morning we were talking about what we can do to help improve our financial situation in the future," Hannah says. Research from wealth manager Quilter suggests almost half of couples do not share financial planning equally, with 46% acting alone in some way and more than one in 10 leaving one partner solely responsible.

We split bills equally even when one of us earned a lot more
North America
CNBC Finance

Why three automakers dominate the fast-growing hybrid vehicle market

Just three automakers control the majority of one of the hottest segments in the U.S. car market — and none of them are American companies. In the first half of 2026, sales of hybrid cars — not long ago considered a bridge to fully electric vehicles — have risen nearly 20% year over year to a record market share of 15.4%, according to the Center for Automotive Research, almost three times the share of pure EVs. "The only growth we're seeing is in hybrid market share," said Elizabeth Krear, CEO of the Center for Automotive Research. "All other propulsion systems have lost market share year to date." It has been a boon to the few automakers that invested heavily in the hybrid vehicle market. Toyota, Hyundai Motor Group and Honda together control 86% of it, according to automotive market analysis firm Baum & Associates. "Consumers want the vehicles. The problem is there are relatively few automakers that offer those vehicles," said Alan Baum, principal at Baum & Associates. Toyota sold more than 600,000 hybrids in the first half of 2026 between its two brands, Toyota and Lexus. It controls half the market. Toyota's hybrid lineup has pushed overall U.S. volumes closer to top seller General Motors, which has bet big on EVs and has only one hybrid in its U.S. lineup in the Corvette E-Ray. GM told CNBC in an email that "hybrids do have a role in our future product plans." The other automaker that has invested heavily in hybrids is Hyundai Motor Group, which owns the Hyundai, Genesis and Kia brands. It just barely surpassed Honda in the first half of 2026, according to data from Baum & Associates. Honda is still the second-bestselling hybrid brand in the country behind Toyota. Hybrids account for 31% of American Honda's sales, according to the company, and it set a U.S. hybrid sales record in the first half of 2026. "We're, extremely happy with how our hybrids have been doing," said Gary Robinson, vice president of auto strategy at American Honda Motor Co., the Japanese carmaker's U.S. arm. High fuel prices, broader selection and lingering skittishness around EV range and charging are pushing an unprecedented number of buyers toward hybrids. Historically, hybrid versions of cars have cost more up front than gas vehicles, due to the more complex powertrains required, Krear said. But buyers can save somewhere between 30% and 50% on fuel costs, given hybrids' better economy, Krear said. A hybrid buyer can recover the added up-front cost in two to three years, she added. "The consumer value proposition wasn't as compelling as it is today," Krear said. "Gas prices were lower, so the up-front premium was harder to justify. Early hybrids were mostly small cars, while American consumers were moving towards SUVs and trucks. It took time for the consumers to understand the value proposition and the economics, as well as for the product availability to align up with consumer preferences."

Why three automakers dominate the fast-growing hybrid vehicle market
North America
CNBC Finance

Eli Lilly says it will file for approval of next-generation obesity drug in 2027 as it clears two more trials

Eli Lilly on Thursday said it will file for approval of its next-generation obesity drug in the first quarter of 2027, as the treatment succeeds in two more late-stage trials. The pharmaceutical giant previously said it would submit an application as early as this year for the weekly injection, retatrutide, which works differently and appears to be more effective than existing shots and pills. In a statement to CNBC, Lilly said it needs more time to gather and verify the manufacturing and quality-control data required by regulators before it can seek approval. In two separate phase three trials, retatrutide delivered significant weight loss and improvements in a key measure of blood sugar levels in adults with obesity and two major complications, Type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. Based on the data, the company believes it has the data necessary to file for approval globally for retatrutide as a potential treatment for obesity, knee osteoarthritis pain and obstructive sleep apnea, Kenneth Custer, president of Lilly Cardiometabolic Health, said in a release. In one trial, adults with obesity and diabetes taking the drug lost up to an average of 20.8% of their weight, or nearly 50 pounds, at 80 weeks. That population typically struggles to lose weight. In another trial, adults with severe obesity and established cardiovascular disease, with or without diabetes, on the treatment lost up to an average of 22.6% of their weight, or 55.8 pounds, at 80 weeks. Retatrutide meaningfully reduced certain cardiovascular risk factors in patients, Lilly added. The side effects associated with the drug were consistent across the two trials, as well as previous studies on the treatment. The most common included diarrhea, nausea and constipation, which are also seen across the broader GLP-1 class. There are now positive results from five late-stage trials on retatrutide, which Lilly is positioning as the next pillar of its obesity portfolio after its injection Zepbound and newly launched pill, Foundayo. In a January note, TD Cowen analysts estimated that retatrutide could rake in sales of $3.8 billion in 2030. Retatrutide is also critical to the drugmaker's plan to maintain its market share majority over Novo in the booming market for weight loss and diabetes drugs. Some analysts estimate the segment could be worth about $100 billion by the 2030s. Dubbed the "triple G" drug, retatrutide targets GLP-1, GIP and glucagon rather than just one or two of those hormones like existing treatments. That appears to have more potent effects on a person's appetite and satisfaction with food than other treatments. Tirzepatide, the active ingredient in Zepbound, mimics GLP-1 and GIP. Novo Nordisk's semaglutide, the active ingredient in Wegovy, mimics only GLP-1. Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.

Eli Lilly says it will file for approval of next-generation obesity drug in 2027 as it clears two more trials
Europe
BBC Business

Gary Lineker among millionaires asking Andy Burnham to tax them more

Image source, Getty Images / ShutterstockImage caption, (left to right) Gary Lineker, Val McDermid and Gary Stevenson are some of the signatories asking to be taxed more. Millionaires including former footballer Gary Lineker and music producer Brian Eno have written to new prime minister Andy Burnham asking to be taxed more. In an open letter, 120 well-off Britons told Burnham: "We can afford it. We're not talking about higher taxes on those who get up and go to work for their income every day, but on the very richest whose income is derived from the wealth they hold." Organised by Patriotic Millionaires, the letter said it would lead to a more equal society, and urged a "devolution of wealth and power from the very richest". People can already give money or stocks voluntarily to the Treasury using a donation facility. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Lineker is "very welcome to pay more tax he can write a cheque to the Treasury, no one is stopping him." "Millionaires are a patriotic bunch," the letter states. "We love this country and we want it to succeed. "But success requires investment and a primary source of untouched capital investment is sitting with us, in untaxed potential." Other signatories include Richard Curtis, director of Notting Hill and Ian Gregg, the former managing director of Greggs and son of the bakery chain's founder. Scottish crime writer Val McDermid and former financial trader turned equality campaigner Gary Stevenson also signed the letter. Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Emma Reynolds, said she would welcome UK millionaires increasing the amount of tax they pay but said any major changes would be announced during a Budget. "I welcome the fact that people of good means are saying that they want to pay more. They can pay more," she said and pointed to the Treasury's donation link. The renewed call for higher tax on the wealthy follows a similar campaign in previous years.

Gary Lineker among millionaires asking Andy Burnham to tax them more
Europe
The Guardian

US senator accuses Barclays of ‘failure’ to investigate ex-CEO’s ties to Epstein

Jes Staley was forced to step down as CEO of Barclays over his links with Jeffrey Epstein. Photograph: Bloomberg/GettyView image in fullscreenJes Staley was forced to step down as CEO of Barclays over his links with Jeffrey Epstein. Photograph: Bloomberg/GettyBarclaysUS senator accuses Barclays of ‘failure’ to investigate ex-CEO’s ties to EpsteinExclusive: Elizabeth Warren claims bank did not ‘meaningfully investigate’ Jes Staley’s links with sex offender The leading US senator Elizabeth Warren has called for urgent answers from Barclays over what she claimed was its “apparent failure to meaningfully investigate” ties between the bank’s former boss, Jes Staley, and the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In a letter sent privately to Barclays’s chair, Nigel Higgins, and seen by the Guardian, Warren – the most senior Democrat on the US senate banking committee – said it was “deeply unclear how Barclays, supposedly investigating Staley’s connection to Epstein, failed to uncover this decades-long relationship”. The letter, sent also on behalf of the Congress members Ro Khanna and Raja Krishnamoorthi, gave Barclays two weeks to answer a series of questions about how they handled information on the links between its former chief executive and Epstein, who died while awaiting trial on child sex trafficking charges in 2019. The questions included whether the bank conducted any reviews into “deficiencies” in its executive hiring process, which had “allowed the board to hire a CEO who held extensive professional and personal ties to a convicted sex offender”. The US lawmakers raised a string of concerns about information arising from a UK court hearing last year, in which Staley unsuccessfully tried to overturn the regulator’s decision to ban him from the British banking industry, four years after he was forced to step down as boss of Barclays. View image in fullscreenElizabeth Warren, a Democrat, tells Barclays it ‘simply took him [Jes Staley] at his word’. Photograph: Allison Robbert/APThose concerns included Higgins’s admission that he had not asked Staley about his last contact with Epstein before Higgins’s declaration to the Financial Conduct Authority that the last contact had been “well before” the CEO joined Barclays. “It appears that neither you nor any other member of the board conducted any deeper due diligence to verify Staley’s claims and simply took him at his word,” the letter said, referring to exchanges between the executive and board members during Staley’s tenure. “It is unclear what specific actions, if any, Barclays took to investigate Staley and Epstein’s personal ties.” The US lawmakers said the episode sparked questions about how the bank was managed. “Barclays’s apparent failure to meaningfully investigate or address Staley’s relationship with Epstein raises significant governance questions regarding the bank’s ability to hold senior executives accountable for wrongdoing,” the letter said. The signatories also warned that it was a “privilege” to hold local banking licences and operate in the US, where the bank had “extensive” operations and held about $200bn (£150bn) in assets. That privilege “is contingent on the ongoing character and fitness of management and the ability of the firm to conduct its operations in a safe and sound manner”. The letter was sent hours before Staley was due to be grilled in a closed-doors hearing by the House Oversight Committee, on which the letter’s co-signatories, Khanna and Krishnamoorthi, both sit. Staley originally met Epstein in 2000 after he became head of JP Morgan’s private bank, where Epstein was a client. He later took over as chief executive of Barclays in 2015, but was forced to step down in 2021, after City regulators launched an investigation into the nature of the relationship between the two men.

US senator accuses Barclays of ‘failure’ to investigate ex-CEO’s ties to Epstein
North America
CNBC Economy

Kevin Warsh has homed in on three key phrases. How Fed watchers interpret them

He's not quite at the level of obscurity of former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, but new Fed chief Kevin Warsh has settled on a few phrases that are notable for their repetition and lack of clarity. In five public appearances, starting with his nomination hearing in April, through his first press conference, roundtable in Portugal and two congressional testimonies, Warsh has used the phrase "family fight" 13 times, returning to "first principles" 11 times and "inflation is a choice" for the Fed six times. But what those phrases mean for monetary policy is more challenging than counting their usage. Yet, with a chairman who has decided to say less than his predecessors, there's a premium on understanding the words he does choose. CNBC asked five close Fed watchers their views on what these three phrases mean to them. "If Chair Warsh encourages more open debate around policy and creates an environment where prevailing assumptions can be challenged rather than simply accepted, that should ultimately lead to better policymaking. The benefit is less about changing the outcome of any individual meeting and more about improving the quality of the decision-making process over time." "Ensuring the environment at the [Federal Open Market Committee] meeting allows for all views/arguments to be heard. I note that this was already the atmosphere when I was on the FOMC. I never felt constrained in what I said or the policy case I argued. In reality, it is 19 people around the table so there has to be some order or else maybe it is only the loudest voice in the room that gets heard and you will actually have fewer views expressed since it will be hard to jump in." "FOMC meetings tend to be highly scripted affairs, with prepared remarks read aloud and limited conversation. Warsh wants a livelier back-and-forth — a style he is more comfortable with. The format is unlikely to affect the policy decision, and 19 participants is a large group for a free-for-all conversation. " "To Kevin, this is his aphorism for the natural debate going on inside the FOMC and the Board. It implies obvious disagreements, but like all 'family fights' is best kept to members of the family and not revealed too much to the public. I think it's the second part that his committee colleagues (and market participants) are finding problematic, and doesn't fit the priors. Members of the committee are clearly willing to disagree in public, or at least state their opinions much more openly (than Chairman Warsh). It's also a way of deflecting his responsibility from external pressure (POTUS, CONGRESS, MARKETS)." "I guess the family fight is him trying to be folksy, but it doesn't depart from the tradition under [Ben] Bernanke of (publicly) welcoming dissenting opinions." "This is vague enough to mean whatever Warsh wants it to mean, but in context, it appears to be the basis for the decision making and structural reform he is manifesting. Over the summer (in Sintra) he said his Central Banking leadership colleagues shared a 'willingness to go back to first principles' as he questioned the whole process of monetary policy making. I'd think his re-introduction of the monetary aggregates, his cute "monetary policy should have something to do with money," is cut from the same general cloth as 'first principles.' Sadly, the science of monetary policy and other workhorses of monetary policy (The Phillips Curve), economic forecasting even appear to be unhelpful in Warsh's first principled approach. He's not been shy about slamming the year-after-year misses in inflation and blaming [Jerome] Powell and company. The low level of interest rates, the balance sheet, the failure to tighten sooner, FAIT and so on, all of that (to Warsh) was a departure from 'first principles.'" "'First principles' is code for 'question everything.' Warsh has said repeatedly that he wants "regime change" at the Fed and questioning the basic assumptions of how monetary policy is done fits that agenda. I am skeptical that Warsh will be able to rewrite first principles. Showing that an assumption is flawed is not enough; it requires offering a better replacement. Even with his task forces, Warsh is likely to come up short on new first principles — no regime change in monetary policy, but some incremental improvements to how it's done." "Rethink the way the Fed goes about achieving its dual mandate goals of price stability and maximum employment without preconceived notions or assumptions, or precluding approaches because they may differ from the current approach. Think first about what the best approach is for communications, inflation and labor market assessment, balance sheet and operating framework, and data sources. Then consider how to transition to these new approaches."

Kevin Warsh has homed in on three key phrases. How Fed watchers interpret them
North America
CNBC Finance

Senate panel advances China auto bill that could bar Mercedes-Benz from U.S.

The Senate Commerce Committee advanced bipartisan legislation Wednesday aimed at toughening a ban on Chinese automakers from the U.S. market, even as Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, warned that it could unintentionally bar Mercedes-Benz from selling vehicles in the country. Cruz said during the committee's markup of the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act of 2026 that the bill's 15% Chinese ownership threshold would cover Mercedes-Benz because two Chinese investors collectively own nearly 20% of its shares. "We would never consider" banning Mercedes-Benz, Cruz said, adding that the bill would need to be changed before becoming law. Mercedes-Benz's two largest individual shareholders are Chinese state-owned automaker BAIC, formerly the Beijing Automotive Industrial Corp., with a 9.98% stake, and Geely founder Li Shufu, with 9.69%. The bill would codify federal restrictions intended to keep Chinese-linked vehicle technology out of the U.S. over national security concerns that connected cars could collect sensitive data. "We're preventing an absolute, total, and complete destruction of our industrial base," said Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, who introduced the bill with Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich. Mercedes-Benz previously declined to comment on the legislation but said it employs more than 10,000 people in the U.S. and operates assembly plants in Alabama and South Carolina. Moreno said during the markup that Mercedes-Benz would have until 2030 to comply with the ownership limit and could seek a waiver. During the markup, Cruz also accused General Motors of supporting the provision in an effort to weaken Mercedes-Benz and make Cadillac more competitive. "GM is pushing for this provision to get Mercedes-Benz out of the market," Cruz said. GM and Mercedes-Benz did not immediately respond to requests for comment. GM is the top-selling automaker in the U.S. Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.

Senate panel advances China auto bill that could bar Mercedes-Benz from U.S.
North America
CNBC Finance

GM beats on earnings, raises guidance amid 'resilient' consumer, pricing

DETROIT — General Motors raised several key 2026 earnings forecasts Tuesday after beating Wall Street's second-quarter expectations as the automaker's North American operations continue to drive its results. The Detroit automaker attributed its guidance change to consistent vehicles transaction prices, lower warranty costs and narrowing all-electric vehicle losses as it wraps up a multibillion-dollar pullback in EVs. "These results are very consistent with what we've been doing for the last several years," GM CFO Paul Jacobson said Tuesday during CNBC's "Squawk Box." "Our first half earnings per share is 25% higher than the first half at any time in our history." Jacobson said GM's "momentum is palpable," while referring to the company's stock as a "bargain" at roughly $75 a share, up more than 40% compared to a year ago. He described the company's consumer demand as "resilient." The raised guidance includes full-year adjusted earnings before interest and taxes of between $14 billion and $16 billion, or $12 and $14 adjusted EPS, up from previous guidance of $13.5 billion to $15.5 billion, or $11.50 and $13.50 adjusted EPS, previously. It also raised its expectations for adjusted automotive free cash flow to $9.5 billion to $11.5 billion, up from $9 billion to $11 billion. The Detroit automaker, however, lowered its expectations for net income attributable to stockholders to be between $8.4 billion and $9.8 billion, down from a previously lowered guidance of between $9.9 billion and $11.4 billion. This is the second consecutive quarter GM has lowered its net income attributable to stockholders guidance while raising other forecasts. In April, GM altered its guidance to reflect a $500 million tariff rebate. The company's North American operations led GM's results, which also include expanding its digital services revenue by 20% and improving its EV losses by between $1 billion to $1.5 billion this year compared with 2025. "Our 8.6% EBIT-adjusted margin in North America was up 2.5 points from a year ago, and we continue to lower our warranty costs, reduce EV losses, and increase operating efficiency. In addition, GM International, inclusive of our China joint ventures, was profitable," GM CEO and Chair Mary Barra said in a letter to shareholders. Barra also noted consistent vehicle pricing and a "very attractive lineup" of pickup trucks and SUVs contributed to its results. The automaker said its average vehicle transaction price was $52,000 during the quarter as it remains disciplined regarding incentives. The company said Tuesday it has "substantially" completed material charges involving its pullback in all-electric vehicles, which have included $10.9 billion in EV-related charges since the second half of last year. GM on Tuesday said it has paid $4.5 billion of an expected $7.2 billion in cash charges related to its EV pullback through the second quarter.

GM beats on earnings, raises guidance amid 'resilient' consumer, pricing
Europe
BBC Business

Ryanair profits drop as Iran war puts off passengers and lifts fuel costs

Image source, Getty ImagesByEmer MoreauBusiness reporterPublished20 July 2026, 08:26 BSTUpdated 1 hour agoRyanair's profits have fallen sharply as war in the Middle East sent jet fuel prices soaring and customers reluctant to book flights. The Irish airline's pre-tax profits dropped 34% to €593m (£503m) between April and June while sales were flat as the company was forced to cut fares to stimulate demand. Ryanair also said it expects summer fares to be slightly lower than last year due to "consumer hesitancy" around air travel. The price of fuelling a plane has jumped since the US and Israel launched strikes against Iran in February and while Ryanair said it had "hedged" or struck deals for the most future fuel costs, those not included in these arrangements had more than doubled. Crude oil prices hit $90 (£67) a barrel for the first time in a month on Monday, before falling back slightly, after a weekend of intense exchanges of fire between the US and Iran. Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — an essential route for global oil and gas supplies — has ground to a halt. An interim peace deal last month brought some respite to oil and energy prices, but they spiked again as negotiations broke down and fighting resumed. The airline warned that its results for the year will be "highly sensitive" to external factors such as conflict escalation in the Middle East and Ukraine as well as the price of unhedged jet fuel. Fares for for the key summer period between July and September are on track to be "modestly" lower than last year, with many passengers booking closer to departure than normal. The firm's finance chief, Neil Sorahan, said flights on its popular Mediterranean routes were still full. "People [are] as keen to get away as ever, albeit booking just a little bit later," he said. While passenger numbers rose 6% to 6.1 million- helped by the Easter holiday in April - fares fell by 6% as the airline reduced fares to entice flyers concerned about the Iran war. Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell, said Ryanair was in a better position than many of its rivals, but nonetheless "visibility is worse than San Francisco airport when the fog sets in".

Ryanair profits drop as Iran war puts off passengers and lifts fuel costs