'The Conners' is happening, without Roseanne Barr, ABC says
"The Conners" is the working title of the re-rebooted sitcom.
It will be a "spinoff" of "Roseanne," the network announced Thursday night.
"Roseanne Barr will have no financial or creative involvement in the new series," ABC said in a press release.
ABC and the show's production company, Carsey Werner, had been working behind the scenes to strike this deal ever since "Roseanne" was canceled on May 29.
The talks were tricky because of thorny contracts, some of which were signed many years ago when the original "Roseanne" television show was on the air.
ABC revived the show to great fanfare earlier this year, and it instantly became the No. 1 new show of the television season.
But Barr's controversial behavior on Twitter was a constant headache for ABC. When she posted a racist comment about Valerie Jarrett and offensive comments about Chelsea Clinton and other political figures, the network decided it had to cancel the show.
The swift cancellation stunned the TV industry. The show's writers were just about to return to work on the second season. ABC executives were out selling the new season to potential advertisers.
But the executives in charge of ABC and its parent company, Disney, felt that they had no choice but to cut ties with Barr.
And in the heat of the moment, there was no time to strike a deal for a Barr-less version of the show.
There were immediate regrets about the potential loss of 200-plus jobs. And there were almost immediate talks about some kind of possible revival.
Sure enough, "Roseanne" co-stars like John Goodman, Laurie Metcalf and Sara Gilbert were all interested in keeping the show going in some fashion.
In a joint statement on Thursday, the remaining cast members said, "We have received a tremendous amount of support from fans of our show, and it's clear that these characters not only have a place in our hearts, but in the hearts and homes of our audience."
Now they'll be back at work soon. ABC ordered ten episodes of the new show.
The network said it'll occupy the same time slot, Tuesdays at 8 p.m., that "Roseanne" would have had in the fall.
For now, the premiere date is vague -- just "fall 2018," according to the network.
In a new statement on Thursday night, Barr said she regrets "the circumstances that have caused me to be removed" from her show.
"I agreed to the settlement in order that 200 jobs of beloved cast and crew could be saved, and I wish the best for everyone involved," she said.
Goldman Sachs: Buckle up. Trade war fears will likely get worse
Here's why: President Trump's use of tariffs as a negotiating tool requires him to show America's trading partners that he's deadly serious about his crackdown on trade. Yet that effort is also likely to spook Wall Street.
"We do not expect the Trump Administration to be able to convince trading partners these proposals are real without also convincing financial markets," Goldman Sachs economists wrote to clients on Wednesday night.
The investment bank warned that "further escalation seems likely" between the United States and China, although it may occur slowly.
Goldman Sachs noted that no formal trade negotiations have been announced before the July 6 deadline to impose the first round of tariffs that were proposed in March.
And while investors would likely cheer talks, Goldman Sachs said it would be "extremely hard" for the two sides to quickly reach a deal to reform China's policies on intellectual property, technology transfer and state-owned enterprises.
Worries about Trump's trade agenda have rattled Wall Street this week. The Dow on Thursday fell for the eighth day in a row, something that hasn't happened since March 2017. The 30-stock index is particularly exposed to disruptions to trade because its member include multinational companies like Nike and Boeing that do tons of business in China.
The Nasdaq, powered by the likes of Netflix and Facebook, hasn't really been fazed.
The latest volley of threats between Washington and Beijing is looking more and more like the start of a trade war. The fear is that tit-for-tat tariffs will dent consumer and business confidence, hurt economic growth and lift inflation.
The Trump administration said last week it would impose a 25% tariff on $50 billion of Chinese exports. China quickly vowed to retaliate and claimed that the United States had "launched a trade war"
Investors were further alarmed when Trump threatened this week to impose tariffs on another $200 billion of Chinese goods if Beijing retaliates against the latest US tariffs.
"Right now, we think it's just shots being fired, not a full-blown war," said Ben Phillips, chief investment officer at EventShares, a firm that manages policy-driven ETFs.
But Phillips said if global trade is significantly hurt, "you will see an asset price decline across the board."
Goldman Sachs thinks the escalation of trade tensions will be drawn out because it takes time to implement tariffs and Trump could face a backlash from voters and the business community.
"The political costs will grow as the amount of imports subject to tariff does," the report said.
For instance, Beijing could fight back by targeting US-based companies that operate in China. And China has already threatened to put tariffs on American crops, leaving farmers in states that voted for Trump caught in the middle.
"The agricultural community is politically influential," Goldman Sachs said, noting that its opposition could slow tariffs.
Some companies are already warning that the trade tensions will hurt their bottom lines. Mercedez-Benz owner Daimler slashed its profit forecast on Thursday, blaming the emerging trade war between the United States and China.
The good news is that for now, Goldman Sachs expects the fundamental economic impact of the trade skirmish to be "relatively modest, even if they escalate."
However, the lingering uncertainty threatens to create a cloud over what is otherwise a strong economy.
Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell said on Wednesday that concerns in the business world about trade developments are "rising."
"For the first time, we're hearing about decisions to postpone investment, postpone hiring, postpone making decisions. That's a new thing," Powell said.
Charles Krauthammer, legendary conservative intellectual, dies at 68
Krauthammer's death was confirmed by the Washington Post, where he had been a columnist for more than 30 years - an extraordinary run that was a testament to his larger-than-life status.
Krauthammer was one of the best-known columnists in America. He won the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary in 1987. He also earned a National Magazine Award in 1984.
But he had to curtail his work last summer for health reasons. And on June 8, Krauthammer announced that he had "only a few weeks left to live."
He was confronting an aggressive form of cancer, so he informed his readers that he was ending his column.
"I leave this life with no regrets," he wrote in the farewell message. "It was a wonderful life -- full and complete with the great loves and great endeavors that make it worth living. I am sad to leave, but I leave with the knowledge that I lived the life that I intended."
The Post's executive editor Marty Baron said Thursday that Krauthammer's death was "a huge loss to vigorous and civil debate on public policy."
Krauthammer was also a longtime commentator on Fox News. Fox's programs and websites mourned his death on Thursday evening.
FoxNews.com called him the "dean of conservative commentators" and "arguably a Renaissance man," describing his mastery "in such disparate fields as psychiatry, speech-writing, print journalism and television."
Indeed, Krauthammer was a master of multiple mediums. Krauthammer regularly appeared on Fox's "Special Report" program until last summer. On Thursday's program, panelist Charles Lane said Krauthammer's position at the table -- instantly recognizable to Fox viewers -- should be retired, the same way a hall of famer's number is retired.
"Special Report" anchor Bret Baier tweeted on Thursday, "R.I.P. good friend. I am sure you will be owning the panel discussion in heaven as well. And we'll make sure your wise words and thoughts -- your legacy -- will live on here."
Fox will continue to pay tribute to Krauthammer through an hour-long special on Friday at 9 p.m. Eastern.
The Washington Post is publishing a full page dedicated to Krauthammer in Friday's paper, featuring some of his work over the decades and a column by George F. Will.
Noting how Krauthammer was "paralyzed from the neck down" in a college accident, Will said he "drew on reserves of energy and willpower to overcome a multitude of daily challenges, any one of which would cause most people to curl up in a fetal position."
Multiple generations of journalists, commentators and politicians said they were heartbroken by his passing.
"Gutted by this news," Meghan McCain tweeted. "The greatest political commentator of my generation - a true conservative icon. I will miss him and his commentary terribly."
"God rest Charles Krauthammer's soul," CNN commentator Amanda Carpenter wrote. "Let us reflect on the thoughtfulness, curiosity, and class he brought to our national conversations."
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement he was "deeply saddened to learn of the passing of my friend Charles Krauthammer."
"As a writer, speaker, and commentator, Charles served our society as a public intellectual in the truest sense," McConnell said.
Krauthammer had to step away from his jobs last August for surgery to remove what he called "a cancerous tumor in my abdomen." There were numerous complications.
When Krauthammer shared the devastating news about his prognosis earlier this month, Vice President Mike Pence paid tribute to him in a statement.
Pence said the columnist's "wit, his wisdom, and his tireless defense of Western values have made an indelible mark on the minds of millions of Americans."
Rupert Murdoch, the executive chairman of Fox News, said in a statement at the time, "Charles has been a profound source of personal and intellectual inspiration for all of us at Fox News. His always principled stand on the most important issues of our time has been a guiding star in an often turbulent world, a world that has too many superficial thinkers vulnerable to the ebb and flow of fashion, and a world that, unfortunately, has only one Charles Krauthammer. His words, his ideas, his dignity and his integrity will resonate within our society and within me for many, many years to come."
Supreme Court rules states can force online retailers to collect sales tax
The 5-4 decision overturns a 1992 Supreme Court precedent that effectively barred states from collecting such taxes, and could leave consumers paying more for online purchases as cash-strapped states tap a rich vein of new revenue.
In making their decision, justices ruled that South Dakota can collect sales taxes from online retailers like Wayfair, which was sued by the state. In doing so, the court reversed a 1992 ruling that allowed states to levy taxes only on those businesses with a brick-and-mortar location within the state. The court said that law effectively incentivized businesses to "avoid physical presence" in states and led to "a judicially created tax shelter." Ultimately, the justices deemed the current law outdated.
"The Internet's prevalence and power have changed the dynamics of the national economy," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion. "The expansion of e-commerce has also increased the revenue shortfall faced by States seeking to collect their sales and use taxes."
Sucharita Kodali, a retail analyst with Forrester, called the ruling "bad news" for thousands of major online retailers. "Now those companies have to assess taxes on customers or they get sued. For products like furniture, jewelry, electronics, people will likely start to shop local again," she said.
South Dakota's law applies only to those businesses with more than $100,000 in sales, or at least 200 transactions, in the state each year. Thirty-one states already levy online sales taxes of some sort. It remains unclear whether Thursday's ruling will prompt them to revise their laws, or encourage the remaining 19 states to impose taxes on retailers even smaller than those affected by South Dakota's law.
"I imagine most states will adjust their laws," Joseph Bishop-Henchman, executive VP at Tax Foundation, told CNNMoney. If states have a much lower sales threshold, or no threshold at all, "this ruling would not directly apply. It'd be a new case."
"I could see states trying it," he added, "but if I was their legislative counsel I would advise against it."
Thursday's ruling means you're probably going to pay more for that sofa from Wayfair or a rug from Overstock.
"If you are buying a lot of furniture that you are having delivered to your house from a pretty big seller, you are going to start paying taxes," said Stephanie Martz, senior VP and general counsel at the National Retail Federation.
That said, you probably won't pay more for the artisanal products offered by small retailers on Etsy or eBay. eBay, a home to thousands of small sellers, framed the ruling "limited to large online retailers" in a statement to CNNMoney. It also says the ruling shows "small businesses are clearly viewed differently by the Court." Still, eBay called on Congress "to provide clear tax rules with a strong small business exemption."
Jonathan Johnson, an Overstock board member, echoed that call in a statement. "To lessen the potential impact of today's ruling on internet innovation," he said, "Congress can, and should, pass sound legislation allowing states to accomplish their aims while still permitting small internet business to thrive."
The justices disagreed on that point when they heard the case in April, and again in their ruling. In his majority opinion, Justice Kennedy said it was "inconsistent" for the Supreme Court to ask Congress to "address a false constitutional premise of this Court's own creation."
In a separate statement, Wayfair said it welcomed the "additional clarity" from the Supreme Court decision, while reiterating its support for "a legislative solution that would establish a level playing field for brick-and-mortar and online retailers."
Shares of Amazon, Overstock, Wayfair, Etsy and eBay in trading immediately after the ruling.
State and local governments had grown increasingly agitated as sales from brick and mortar retailers gave way to online retail, which now comprises approximately 9.5% of the dollar value of total purchases.
Prohibitions against collecting sales taxes from online retailers cost states as much as $13.4 billion last year, according to the Government Accountability Office. Although the IRS requires consumers to tally their purchases and pay all applicable taxes with their regular filing, few people do.
Many large online retailers, including Amazon and Wal-Mart, already collect sales taxes because they have a large enough physical presence in each state to qualify as taxable by states. But plenty of smaller players, such as home furnishings websites Overstock.com and Wayfair, don't have widespread enough operations to be subject to state taxing authority, giving them a substantial price advantage over traditional brick and mortar businesses.
It's unlikely the court ruling will halt the rapid ascent of ecommerce, which was fueled in part by the 1992 decision.
"Physical stores think this will level the playing field, but honestly it's too little too late to ever help the likes of Sears or JCPenney," Kodali said.
The evidence of that can be found in a staggering statistic cited in Justice Kennedy's majority opinion. "In 1992, mail-order sales in the United States totaled $180 billion," he wrote. "Last year, e-commerce retail sales alone were estimated at $453.5 billion."
Intel CEO resigns after 'past consensual relationship' with employee
"An ongoing investigation by internal and external counsel has confirmed a violation of Intel's non-fraternization policy, which applies to all managers," the company said in an announcement on Thursday.
Chief Financial Officer Robert Swan will serve as interim chief executive officer, effective immediately.
A source familiar with the matter said the company has a strict non-fraternization policy that prevents managers from engaging in relationships with employees. Employees who see inappropriate workplace behavior are required to report it to management.
The source said Intel recently learned of Krzanich's past relationship with an employee.
The Intel board said it accepted Krzanich's resignation, noting all employees are expected to respect Intel's values and code of conduct.
Krzanich, 58, joined the chipmaker in 1982 as an engineer. He became CEO and an elected a member of the board of directors in May 2013. Krzanich previously served in senior leadership roles, including COO, at Intel.
Earlier this year, he came under fire for selling about half his stock after learning that critical flaws affected Intel's microchips. But the company publicly said the stock sale was not related to chip's issues.
Krzanich previously served on President Trump's now disbanded manufacturing council. In August, he and the CEOs of Merck and Under Armour stepped down after fallout over Trump's response to violence at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.
"I resigned because I want to make progress, while many in Washington seem more concerned with attacking anyone who disagrees with them," he said at the time.
Krzanich had previously stressed the importance of engaging with the government. In February 2017, he stood next to the president in the White House to announce a $7 billion investment in a new US factory.
In addition to the news about Krzanich's departure on Thursday, Intel raised its second quarter guidance from its previous forecast. It expects revenues of about $16.9 billion with adjusted earnings of $.99 a share.
Still, Intel stock dipped as much as 2% on Thursday morning after the news broke.