Speaking at the APEC CEO Summit in Lima, Peru, on Nov. 14, Dimon criticized the regulatory environment for hindering lending, highlighting stringent capital requirements introduced after the financial crisis of 2008–09 that have forced banks to reduce their loan-to-deposit ratios.

“A lot of bankers, they’re, like, dancing in the street because they’ve had successive years and years of regulations, a lot of which stymied credit,” the JPMorgan chief said, according to a Bloomberg video of his remarks at the summit. “You could have kept the banks equally safe but had them do more credit.”

He noted that banks now lend only $65 for every $100 in deposits, compared to $100 previously, which he said stifles economic growth.

Dimon suggested that these regulations, while well-intentioned, have become a headwind for the economy.

“And if that’s what you want, if for some reason the regulators think they’re geniuses and that’s the best way to run the banking system, so be it,” Dimon said, adding that he believes it is possible to maintain financial stability without hindering lending.

Deregulation, he said, could benefit industries beyond banking. Dimon pointed to the slow permitting process for rare-earth mining in the United States as another example of regulatory inefficiency hampering economic growth.

“Ten years—they haven’t got their permits yet,” he said of companies seeking to extract critical minerals crucial for technology and defense industries. “It’s a shame. And we’re doing this to ourselves, and it’s a mistake.”

Dimon also praised President-elect Donald Trump’s proposal for a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which aims to streamline bureaucracy.

“You could talk to any industry and they’ll give you examples of regulation that could be reduced to make it easier for them to do business while keeping the country safe,” he said.

When asked about the market’s strong reaction to Trump’s election victory, Dimon said it reflects optimism for a “pro-growth shock” as businesses prepare to make aggressive capital investments.

“You’ve already seen the markets have responded quite well,” he noted. “And I think America needs a growth strategy, so I literally applaud that,” he said.

Dimon emphasized that the agenda should go beyond slashing red tape to include broader reforms like improving the efficiency of the permitting process. “Collaboration between government and business is the way to have growth,” he said.

While the Trump administration appears poised to pursue a deregulatory agenda, the administration of President Joe Biden has emphasized consumer protections and systemic risk management.

Under the Biden administration, for example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has seen a significant restoration of its authority, reversing the more hands-off approach taken during Trump’s first term. Since 2021, the CFPB has ramped up its oversight, launching investigations and enforcement actions against financial institutions accused of engaging in predatory lending, discriminatory practices, or misleading marketing. It has also cracked down on banks for practices such as “junk fees,” unauthorized account openings, and withholding of credit card rewards.

Also, during Biden’s term, U.S. banking regulators have focused more heavily on addressing systemic risks in the financial system, with a particular emphasis on implementing the final phase of Basel III reforms, often referred to as the “Basel III endgame.”

These reforms, developed in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, aim to bolster the resilience of the banking sector by increasing capital requirements, enhancing risk-weighting measures, and introducing stricter leverage ratios.

Critics, including Dimon, have said that the stricter rules would not have prevented past bank failures and could have a negative impact on the economy.

The foreign influence campaigns, which include the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to generate divisive content, are expected to intensify as Election Day nears—and persist after polls close through Inauguration Day in January, according to an Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) security update and a National Intelligence Council declassified memo, both announced on Oct. 22.

“Foreign actors—particularly Russia, Iran, and China—remain intent on fanning divisive narratives to divide Americans and undermine Americans’ confidence in the U.S. democratic system consistent with what they perceive to be in their interests, even as their tactics continue to evolve,” reads the security update.

Social media posts, some of which are likely to be enhanced or entirely generated by AI, were identified as the most common type of election-related influence operation by foreign adversaries.

As an example, the ODNI pointed to Russian influence actors manufacturing and amplifying inauthentic content claiming that Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, was engaged in illegal activity during his earlier career. While the report did not go into specifics, it could relate to claims circulating on social media that Walz sexually assaulted a student while he was a high school teacher.

“Breaking: Tim Walz’s former student, Matthew Metro, drops a shocking allegation-claims Walz s*xually assaulted him in 1997 while Walz was his teacher at Mankato West High School. Metro was a senior at the time. If this is true, it’s a political earthquake,” reads an Oct. 16 post on X, which shared a since-deleted video of a man making the sexual assault allegations. The real Matthew Metro told The Washington Post that the speaker in the video was not him and that no such interaction with Walz had taken place. Further, the man’s brother, Micheal Metro, told AFP that the circulating video was “definitely not him.”

Darren Linvill, co-director at Clemson University’s media forensics hub, told WIRED that the video appeared to be a deepfake bearing the hallmarks of Storm-1516, a group that Microsoft described as a “Kremlin-aligned troll farm” that has put out various deepfakes, including one about Vice President Kamala Harris’s supposed involvement in a hit-and-run accident.

Microsoft’s threat assessment team issued an Oct. 23 report that dovetails with the ODNI update but provides more details about disinformation campaigns from China, Iran, and Russia, including an AI-enhanced deepfake video linked to Storm-1516 that accuses Harris of illegal poaching in Africa.

Despite the heightened influence efforts, the ODNI security update stressed that there is no evidence that foreign actors have attempted to interfere with vote tabulation or election administration processes.

“Even if they decided to try, foreign actors almost certainly would not be able to manipulate election processes at a scale that would materially impact the outcome of the Presidential election without detection,” states the security update.

This message is consistent with earlier remarks made by Jen Easterly, director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), who said at the beginning of October that U.S. election systems are so secure that foreign adversaries won’t be able to manipulate the outcome of the 2024 presidential election in a “material” way.

Further, the intelligence community assessed that foreign actors will at minimum conduct information operations after Election Day through Inauguration Day, according to both the ODNI security update and the National Intelligence Council declassified memo.

“They might also consider stoking unrest and conducting localized cyber operations to disrupt election infrastructure,” the memo states. “However, we judge that operations that could affect voting or official counts are less likely because they are more difficult and bring a greater risk of US retaliation.”

Foreign adversaries, which the memo says are “better prepared” than in previous election cycles to undertake influence operations after Election Day, are expected to “almost certainly” conduct such operations after polls close.

Their overarching aim is to sow doubt about the integrity of the November election, and create confusion and friction more generally around democratic processes in the United States. Other aims include acquiring voter registration data and nonpublic information on local election officials, which they could exploit in future cyber or influence operations.

“US adversaries’ longstanding interest in undermining American democracy suggests it will be difficult to dissuade them from engaging during the post-election period,” the memo reads.

The warnings contained in the ODNI security update and National Intelligence Council memo echo those made by the FBI and CISA on Oct. 18, which raised the alarm on AI-assisted influence operations targeting U.S. elections.

The Fed’s Beige Book, released on Oct. 18, revealed a broad contraction in manufacturing across the United States, reflecting weaker demand and sluggish production.

Most of the Fed’s 12 districts reported declining manufacturing activity, exacerbated by difficulties in finding qualified workers and, in some cases, persistently weak sales.

The Fed’s data on the manufacturing slump was echoed by the Conference Board’s Leading Economic Index (LEI) report, released on Oct. 21, which recorded a 0.5 percent drop in September—an acceleration from August’s 0.3 percent decline. A significant factor in September’s decline was a sharp decrease in new factory orders, contributing to a 2.6 percent decrease in the index over the past six months.

The LEI, which is designed to forecast economic turning points, points to weak economic growth heading into 2025.

“Weakness in factory new orders continued to be a major drag on the US LEI in September as the global manufacturing slump persists,” Justyna Zabinska-La Monica, a senior manager at the Conference Board, said in a statement. “Overall, the LEI continued to signal uncertainty for economic activity ahead and is consistent with The Conference Board expectation for moderate growth at the close of 2024 and into early 2025.”

The persistent downturn in U.S. manufacturing has become a focal point in the 2024 presidential race.

Meanwhile, economic sentiment has taken a downward turn recently.

Even though inflation has eased since the June 2022 recent peak of 9 percent, the Fed’s Beige Book indicates that many districts reported increasing price sensitivity among inflation-weary consumers. Input costs rose faster than selling prices in September, compressing profit margins and further pressuring U.S. businesses, including manufacturers.

Data from the Federal Reserve, released on Oct. 17, showed a 0.3 percent decline in industrial output, following a downwardly revised 0.3 percent gain in August. Analysts had predicted a smaller drop of 0.2 percent for the month.

According to the Fed, the larger-than-expected decline was due in part to disruptions from Hurricanes Helene and Milton, along with the ongoing Boeing machinists’ strike. The aerospace sector, in particular, took a significant hit, with production of aerospace and miscellaneous transportation equipment falling by 8.3 percent, dragging down the overall index.

The broader picture also looks bleak, with industrial output for the third quarter down 0.6 percent. This aligns with other recent indicators pointing to ongoing challenges in the U.S. manufacturing sector.

The latest S&P Global U.S. Manufacturing PMI, a key survey-based measure, showed the sharpest contraction in factory activity in over a year for September. Factory output and new orders dropped sharply, driven by weakened demand.

“The September PMI survey brings a whole slew of disappointing economic indicators regarding the health of the U.S. economy,” Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said in a statement. “Factories reported the largest monthly drop in production in 15 months in response to a slump in new orders, in turn driving further reductions in employment and input buying as producers scaled back operating capacity.”

The deepening decline in U.S. manufacturing, highlighted by the S&P Global report, was reinforced by the Fed’s latest industrial production data. It showed a 0.4 percent month-over-month fall in manufacturing output for September and a 0.5 percent drop compared with the previous year.

Similarly, the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) reported a contraction in U.S. manufacturing for September, marking the sixth straight monthly decline and the 22nd contraction in the past 23 months. Timothy Fiore, chair of the ISM’s Manufacturing Business Committee, noted that demand remains sluggish, with companies hesitant to invest in capital and inventory.

The ongoing slump in U.S. manufacturing has become a key issue on the presidential campaign trail, with both major candidates offering plans to revive the sector.

Speaking in Michigan in late September, former President Donald Trump vowed to “reclaim America’s manufacturing power,” promising tariffs on foreign imports and pledging to provide domestic manufacturers with lower energy costs, taxes, and regulatory burdens.

The IMF’s latest Fiscal Monitor report, released on Oct. 15, projects that global public debt will exceed $100 trillion—equal to about 93 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP)—in 2024, and that it could approach 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade. The United States, in particular, faces significant risks if fiscal policies are not adjusted urgently.

The report emphasizes that countries, including the United States, need to address debt risks with carefully crafted fiscal strategies. It warns that debt levels could be worse than anticipated because of large spending pressures, sizeable unidentified debt, and overly optimistic debt projections.

Unidentified debt, which refers to liabilities that do not appear explicitly in budget documents—such as contingent liabilities, losses at federally owned enterprises such as the U.S. Postal Service, and other off-balance-sheet obligations—poses a significant risk to debt sustainability, according to the IMF.

“There are good reasons to believe that future debt levels could be higher than currently projected,” the report’s executive summary states, highlighting that actual debt-to-GDP ratios three years ahead tend to be about 6 percentage points higher than originally forecasted, on average.

The IMF attributes the potential underestimation of debt levels to several factors, including a political climate increasingly favoring higher government spending. This spending is being driven by concerns around security, an aging population, and the push to invest in green transitions.

“Rebuilding fiscal buffers in a growth-friendly manner and containing debt is essential to ensure sustainable public finances and financial stability,” the report urges.

In a related blog post titled “Global Public Debt Is Probably Worse Than It Looks,” IMF economists assert that current efforts to curb debt growth are insufficient. Delays in fiscal actions, they argue, will lead to even higher costs and greater risks.

“Experience shows that high debt and lack of credible fiscal plans can trigger adverse market reaction, constraining room to maneuver in the face of turbulence,” the economists wrote, emphasizing the need for proactive measures such as paring back spending.

The IMF’s analysis shows that planned fiscal adjustments—such as reducing spending by 1 percent of GDP over six years—are insufficient to stabilize debt. Instead, a cumulative tightening of 3.8 percent of GDP is needed to significantly cut debt levels, the economists contend, with the effort required in the United States being “substantially greater.”

Without substantial fiscal adjustments, U.S. debt will continue on an unsustainable path, the report warns. The country faces mounting spending demands, largely because of health care costs, an aging population, and defense needs, all of which are exacerbated by growing geopolitical tensions.

The IMF identifies the reform of mandatory spending programs, such as Social Security and Medicare, as a crucial step. These programs account for a large and inflexible share of the U.S. budget, and reforming them could help rein in expenditures. Besides spending cuts, the IMF suggests that the United States could raise revenues by raising taxes or removing tax exemptions.

The IMF’s newly developed “debt-at-risk” framework—a tool used to estimate potential debt outcomes under different economic conditions—indicates that U.S. public debt could rise sharply under adverse scenarios.

Stronger fiscal governance is also essential, according to the IMF, which describes it as “key to mitigating the buildup of unidentified debt and containing debt vulnerabilities.” Countries with better fiscal governance—marked by budget transparency and adherence to fiscal rules—tend to have lower levels of unidentified debt, even during times of financial stress.

The automaker, which filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Oct. 3, seeks a ruling that UAW Local 230’s decision to hold a strike authorization vote breaches the terms of the collective bargaining agreement reached last year.

On the same day, UAW Local 230 in Los Angeles voted overwhelmingly to request a strike authorization if an agreement can’t be reached.

The automaker’s complaint centers on Letter 311 of their 2023 bargaining agreement, which outlines Stellantis’s $19 billion in planned investments in U.S. facilities, including the Belvidere Assembly Plant in Illinois.

Stellantis argues that these investments were never unconditional, asserting they were always subject to approval by the company’s product allocation committee and “contingent upon plant performance, changes in market conditions, and consumer demand continuing to generate sustainable and profitable volumes.”

The complaint alleges that the UAW has ignored these conditions, engaging in a sustained, multi-month campaign to pressure Stellantis into making investments irrespective of the agreed-upon contingencies. The company alleges that UAW President Shawn Fain and the union filed “sham grievances” and misrepresented the terms of the agreement to justify the strike threats.

“Defendants’ sham grievances do not authorize Defendants to engage in mid-contract strikes, and Defendants have acted in bad faith and thus violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing incorporated into the [collective bargaining agreement],” the complaint reads.

The lawsuit directly challenges Fain, accusing him of misleading union members by falsely claiming that Stellantis’s planned investments were “promises” or “commitments,” despite the contract’s explicit conditional language.

“Fain baselessly alleged Stellantis engaged in ’serious violations’ of the [agreement] and recommended to the UAW membership that they authorize a strike,” the automaker’s attorneys allege in the complaint, which asks the court to award Stellantis any monetary damages that result from the strike.

In response, Fain has dismissed the company’s legal threats as “desperate actions” and that the union’s lawyers have “complete confidence in our right to strike.”

In a letter to union members on Oct. 4, Fain accused Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares of trying to gut the company’s U.S. operations to cut costs, claiming that “the only sham is Stellantis’s promises.”

“We will not sit back and watch this company violate our agreement and threaten our jobs, our plants, and our communities,” Fain wrote, while vowing to protect American jobs.

“We are united and we are defiant,” he added.

The dispute stems from Stellantis’s decision to delay several planned investments, including a $1.5 billion project to retool its Belvidere plant to produce mid-size trucks by 2027. The company has cited economic reasons for the delays, claiming the investments are contingent on evolving market conditions.

In August, the automaker acknowledged that it was delaying some investments and said it “firmly stands by its commitment” to carry out the investments at some point.

Reuters contributed to this report.