politicizing the american heroes is an insult to their sacrifice. the president once again mocked elizabeth warren, calling the senator pocahontas and reference to her claims about being part native american. rex tillerson is seeking to reassure europe the united states remains fully committed to european security, fighting threats from russia. triedary tillerson today to dispel concerns that the trump administration is pulling back from nato demanding european members spend more on their own defenses. in indonesia, closed for a second day. it is one of asia's most popular tourist destinations.

the coal industry's wearing off on the trump administration's plan to appeal a plan to limit carbon emissions. the state is heavily dependent on coal mining. global news powered by 2700 journalists and analysts in 120 countries. this is bloomberg. julia: live from bloomberg headquarters in new york, -- [laughter] julia: sorry.

scarlet: we are 30 minutes from the close of trading. jay powell talked of deregulation. joe: what'd you miss? scarlet: let's move on to the headlines. we begin with the tax overhaul. the budget committee vowed to advance it. john joins us from a third ranking republican in the senate. and a positive picture of the u.s. economy. for investors it was his take on regulating big banks that stole the spotlight. and the trade agreement was supposed to help jump start the economy but had the opposite effect. what'd you miss? president trump will speak shortly from the white house. we'll bring you the latest when that happens.

a scramble to 50. >> we are trying to get to 50. we do have a few members who have concerns. we know we would not be able to go forward until we get 50 people satisfied. that is what we are working on. julia: the bill did take steps forward passing on a partyline vote. we are joined now by john of south dakota. great to have you with us. can i ask what president trump said to the senator today to rally support? >> he made the argument for why this is so important. we are on the cusp of getting growth back up to that 3% range

and reforming the tax code is essential to that. it was about what we can do to , to helpcountry businesses prosper and thrive in a way that will create better paying jobs and higher wages. also, the importance of succeeding. we need to put points on the scoreboard. >> among the demands of your colleagues to move this forward, this idea of triggering the out .ears one plausible situation could be revenues declining because of a week economy. could we be faced in a situation where we see tax i in the face of a weak economy in the future? >> what we are trying to accomplish with this is to create certainty and

predictability to advance, expand and grow. there are a number of things, the immediate expanse that businesses will take full advantage of. we have members and our caucus who are concerned if we don't see small modest amounts of growth in the economy that there will be some snap back in tax rates to compensate for that. we are trying to work with them anyway that provides certainty and predictability but at the same time provides assurance to those members there's going to be a measure in place that will protect against big deficits in the event that we don't see the growth we expect. 1% growthking 4/10 of year over year. we can certainly achieve 2.3% growth. plausible, you say

it is not the desired situation but it is plausible. the mechanism in place to deal with that could be higher taxes. is if thewer agreement is made with some members who need this to move forward to get to 50 votes, we may have to end up agreeing to something along those lines but we believe that we are going to see that growth and obviously if we put something like that in think we aret going to have to worry about that. i think the economy is going to generate forward momentum and we are going to see growth from these policies that are going to create incentives for people to make america an attractive place to do business. scarlet: would you like a phase in or tax hikes if necessary if revenues are not flowing.

or a tax trigger trigger? >> i don't like those alternatives. i don't want to see these phases saying we need to get changes made and cut this economy lose. start unleashing what will be a tremendous amount of investment. there are firms waiting on the sidelines to do that. run itthink in the long is not in our best interest to have a mechanism that would create a tax increase but as i said, this is a delicate balancing act. we have members in our conference. we can only lose to votes. we're trying to accommodate as many concerns and address those in the best way possible without undermining the overall goal, regard certainty with regards to the conditions good for economic growth. deeper taxson once a

cut at and is indicated he will not vote for the bill as it is currently written. is there a fix? >> i think there is. we are continuing to dialogue with senator johnson. we had a number of conversations today with him. we want to get where he is comfortable moving to a yes vote . we think there are some accommodations we can make to lessen the perceived gap between them when it comes to the rate of taxation. we have done our best to maintain parity between business types. i think we have been effective doing that. we have members who think we can do better to get to a point where we have the 50 votes necessary to get across the finish line. julia: what are your

constituents saying? are you getting pushed back? >> i think in the end we are getting feedback of course from people who are impacted by this in various ways. we've had a lot of feedback from small businesses watching carefully what we are doing. on the individual side most people when they understand what this bill does from doubling of the standard eduction, lowering of rates, realize this is going to be a good thing for them. going to see a $2200 tax cut. 60% tax cut over what they are paying today. when they hear it talked about in the generic sense, perhaps maybe aren't that favorable. when they realized the individual benefits they will see i think this is a pretty good idea.

julia: earlier you mentioned -- joe: earlier you mentioned it would put points on the scoreboard for your party. how much is the fact that your party in power hasn't done much in this first year motivating senators to make this happen? >> i would take issue with the premise we haven't done a lot. there has been a lot done on the regulatory front and the courts. this is a huge agenda item. elected to do things like this. i was a young staffer in 1986. we need to reform our tax bill. when he to move to a territorial system. item we is a big ticket need to succeed on and the american people want to see that the majority's we have in the congress and the presidency can make a difference.

i think tax reform does that because i think you will see as a result of a more robust economy better paying jobs and wage increases which americans have not seen for the better part of a decade. the president has made it clear that failure is not an option. do you believe senators are afraid to break with the party line? onaid to defy the president whether or not it is best for voters? , my colleague and i in south dakota will be in the same place on this, people are going to vote for this if they think it is the best interest of the people they represent. when you start looking at individual pieces, some of the features of the bill they come to the conclusion this is a good thing for the people they represent. it is nice to have a president pushing it.

we want to have successes and victories not only for the president of the american people but the work we are doing here in the congress. if we can get this done we can point to it and say this is something meaningful in the lives of the american people. this is impact the legislation that will impact all americans. i think that is going to be the compelling logic. senator, thank you. >> thank you. taxlet: will corporate cut's lead to higher wages, lower prices? highlights from our conversation coming up. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: most traders have regarded the trump administration as pro-growth but it could be disinflationary. the chief market strategist at jefferies spoke earlier on daybreak america. , it is mainly a corporate tax cut. it is not an individual tax cut. it is mucked up with the state and local deductions. it doesn't look what a tax cut for someone in new york or california. pretty good for my home state of florida but if you think about a corporate tax cut, how it can be delivered back to the economy can either come through higher share prices, higher wages for lower prices. that is the only three ways it can come back to benefit the

economy. the big debate has been will it go directly to shareholders or wage earners. that seems to be the liberal versus conservative debate. another part that says businesses may use this to lower ,rices and be more competitive especially in a world where deregulation will reduce barriers to entry. there is a story in this tax cut that actually you can see quite a lot of disinflationary pressure because his nurses will use the windfall to landgraf and do what many have been doing for quite a while, use lower prices to get more customers. scarlet: that is the amazon playbook. you can see it happening in retail and drug services. >> and financial services people. they want people to come back in and by mutual funds.

i think for me, a corporate tax cut is different from an individual tax cut. an individual tax cut stimulates aggregate demand. prices go up. that is what jim was talking about. that is not the corporate tax playbook. when i cut corporate taxes i start to stimulate businesses to engage in more activity. they hire better workers, they can invest in capital. they could just pay shareholders or lower prices to get market share. there is only capital, labor and goods prices. i have been using that to discuss with our clients why there is a misconception that this tax plan is necessarily

inflationary. it sounds textbook that it should be because you are cutting taxes but that is not necessarily true if it is a tax increase to fund a tax cut on businesses. >> we can debate this for quite a while. plug that being into the treasury market. what is your strategy? it is a modest flattening of the curve. the fed is going to keep going a little bit each year. notmarket looks like it is much. over the next couple of years we are going to have a flat yield curve. funds right here, maybe even long bond here. version,et that in that will be the signal that within 9-12 months we are going to get a recession which is

typical. not an overly exciting rate. the risk is, we start to see .ther forces of disinflation technological advances, demographics, a lot going on. i summit a broken record. marketthat was the chief strategist for jeffries earlier. scarlet: time for a stock of the hour. regal entertainment shares are currently halted after jumping on reports it is in talks for a merger. >> reuters reporting it. the two companies are in talks. it is unclear what it would look like. ld made the overture but

it is the smaller company, even before this surge we saw. they are roughly between two and a half and $3 billion in terms of market cap. they are working with advisers as they discuss a combination. nothing may end up happening. to selltable they tried back in 2014 but a deal did not emerge at that time. will see here if something ends up coming out. the stock has halted which could mean we could have a comment from them. it is not fantastic. that should not be any surprise. they have been down this year. they are popping.

year comes down 50%. regal has not done is badly. imax is done 15%. it does have to do with attendance. box office down in 2017 domestically. ,f you look at the year to date a lot of this is due to streaming and people staying home to watch. figures,ok at revenue foreign box office keeps going up. you are looking at overall ticket sales. even in the u.s. it is not as bad. for sweeney covers this bloomberg intelligence. there has been no growth in attendance. the positive is, it is not worse than no growth.

julia: and the lack of big movies. scarlet: wonder woman different story. >> a sequel is on its way. >> coming up, bitcoin. we have that next. ♪

scarlet: president trump is speaking at the white house. let's listen in. president trump: chuck schumer and nancy pelosi did not show up for our meeting today. i am not that surprised. we have a lot of differences. they are weak on crime, illegal immigration. illegal folks to come pouring into our border. although we have stopped it as much as you can without the wall , which we are going to get. meeting, they had

been weak on the military in terms of spending. they wanted for a lot of other things. the military is always secondary. we will not be here without are powerful military. it is stronger and better than ever before. the other thing, they want tax increases. we want decreases. they decided not to show up. they have been all talk and no action. now it is even worse. it is not even talk. they are not showing up to the meeting. ,n light of the missile launch they will be here fairly quickly . that we are in a good position in terms of the meeting we just had at the capitol with the republican senators.

i had tremendous support. i was just informed that a unanimous vote from the .epublican side at least unanimous vote on the tax bill. it goes to the next that. i think it is going to pass and it is going to be popular. is going to have lots of adjustments. verynd result will be massive. the largest in the history of our country. lots of good things are going to happen including bringing back to our country -- it will end up being over $4 trillion money offshore that is stagnant that companies are just not able to bring it back. over $4 trillion. corporate will be able to compete now against the world. you look at many of the 15%.ries, china is at they are lower than us.

we are getting it lower or right in the ballpark so we can compete better with our companies. that means jobs and other things. i'm happy to see the consumer confidence level is about the highest it has ever been. i don't want to make any mistakes in front of the press, to the best of my knowledge it is the highest it has ever been. consumer confidence setting records. people leaving their country. i will say i think it is going to go better and better. , think this vote on taxes which are really tax cut's and reform is going to be important. we had a good day today. a phenomenal meeting with the republican senators. we had -- it was special. i wish you could have been inside the room. camaraderie.l

somewhat of a love that. want to see it happen for the country. they know how important it is. trust when. he will start with paul ryan. where we stand with different things. paul ryan: i think it is regrettable are democratic colleagues chose not to join us today. congress has to pass a bill. the president signs the bill. congress and the white house negotiate legislation. we have a military in need of our support. network needs to happen now. it is regrettable our democratic colleagues chose to not participate because we have to negotiate these bills to get this work done for the people who we are present. i hope that our friends in

leadership on the other side of the aisle will choose to participate. >> i have been in this position under previous presidents. i cannot recall turning down an opportunity to the white house. only one person in america can sign a bill into law. you cannot negotiate the year-end spending bill without the person who signs the bill in the room. so, i think democratic leaders in the house and senate need to understand the way the government works. the administration has to be a part of the ultimate negotiation over what the spending level is going to be for the next year. trump: we are very far apart. -- even over the last

two hours, with respect to the missile launch, we want our military funded now. is going to be bigger, stronger than it already is. want our military funded, and we wanted funded now. that is the difference from this morning. way, wayld them we are far away. with that, i may have general mattis say just a couple words about what he has found out. do you want to say just a couple pieces of information? >> the speaker said a little over two and a half hours ago, north korea launched an intercontinental ballistic missile. it went higher, frankly, than any previous. the research and development effort on their part, could threaten everywhere in the world, basically.

in response, the south koreans have fired missiles out into the water to make certain north korea understands they could be taken under fire by our allies. the bottom line is, it is a , a ballisticort missile threat, that endangers world peace, and the united states. you, general.hank and we will take care of that situation. thank you very much. does it change anything about your basic approach? pres. trump: nothing changes. we have a serious approach, and nothing changed. we take it seriously. would you blame democrats if that happened? pres. trump: if it happens, i would absolutely blame the democrats. if that happens, it will be over

illegals pouring into the country, crime pouring into the country, no border walls. which everyone wants. i got elected partially because of the border wall. you look at the military, we want strong funding for the military, they don't. so many things. they want high taxes, we want to cut taxes. we are going to reform, simplify. they want high taxes, we want low taxes. there are a lot of big differences. we will see what happens. but right now things have changed over the past two hours because two hours ago a missile launched. ont will have a huge effect shuman and pelosi. i think. they should be calling immediately to say, i want to see you. but probably they won't, has nothing to them is important other than raising taxes. that is the only thing they like doing, raising taxes. thank you very much.

thank you very much, everybody. thank you. that was president donald trump and mitch mcconnell speaking just a few moments ago. three main issues he covered, tax or form. he said he expects to sign the tax bill by year end. researching what he said previously, there would be an adjustment to tax legislation on north korea. he said, our situation, our approach is not changed. saying norths koreans have launched a missile, the projectile was higher than it had been before. finally he said he is not surprised that chuck schumer and nancy pelosi skipped the meeting they were supposed to be holding today. he said he would blame them if there was a shutdown of the negotiations, that he would blame the democrats. this following his tweet that the two want immigrants flooding and our country, unchecked,

he said he does not see a deal. i want to bring and cried gordon from new york. great to have you here. let's start with that. i should've pointed out [indiscernible] one was for chuck schumer and one is for nancy pelosi. they were making it clear that meeting did not go ahead. for a guy that claims he wants a conversation with chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, he makes it almost impossible for them to come to the white house because he shamed them on twitter, verbally, and digitally, with the two empty seats. i am not sure how that gets us closer to an actual shutdown. that he has a plan here. joe: do we have :00 closer to midnight? >> we are a couple minutes closer to midnight.

those of us in the washington bureau for bloomberg did not think it would be shut down. republicans want to get tax reform done, they do not want way, butto get in the this gets in the way. trumps actions today makes a shutdown more likely. they will be working to the final minute. he is making it difficult for the democrats to want to make a deal with him. last time schumer and pelosi went to the white house, they there were deals he was open to doing. now he seems to be pulling that off the table. remember that the , they always need democrats to join them and the house of representatives to get a budget bill through. julia: policing on the border wall, can the get away with it? scarlet: it does not seem like investors are that concerned.

everything went up as it had throughout the trading session. let's go back to the victory today for republicans. the tax bill passed the senate 12-11.ee, he said adjustments need to be made, what kind? >> there was a lot of work to be done. the republicans and donald trump had a good day on tax reform. through perhaps get it in the early part of next year. on the senate bill, some voted for it today. maybe not a yes when it gets to the floor. the hard work starts to reconcile the senate bill with the house bill, where there are differences on state and local tax. a really important step for them to take. i give them full credit for getting this move through the senate committee. yeses in aurned to big way. was pushing him quite

hard on a tax increase in the future. the deficit is at risk of ingtening further -- widen further. these tax cuts i guess you could argue benefit corporations at the cost of individuals. it will be a tough sell for the government. >> they essentially said, if -- taxes will go up to avoid the gap. the republicans hate the trigger, increasing taxes even as a backstop. vote today.ker's

but john thune and others hate this idea because it is really complicated. people just want to know, is it a little, or a lot? it is a bill they are already having trouble selling to the public. for theple think it is wealthy, not the middle class. you have him doing handstands. thank you so much, craig jordan -- craig gordon. scarlet: "what'd you miss?" as congress grapples with a tax bill, our next guest says it is already priced into the market in a meaningful way. insight,s with more matt maley. priced in in any meaningful way, walk us through what that means. the senate committee passes the bill, which means it goes to the floor as early as next week, thursday. if it gets passed, then what happens?

mr. maley: there is a decent chance we will get a new situation. but you have to look at the way it acted over the past two months or so. it is much more sensitive to the tax proposal because the arel-cap companies domestically situated. they will get the most advantage out of this. the specifics on this proposal, one goes up,e another goes down. speaker ryan was able to get the votes together to get this thing past in the middle of this month. but it has outperformed nicely ever since. when we get to the conference, the reconciliation, there is a good chance someone will stand up and say, let's get something area, so hee or his

can barter for something for his own state. that might cause the market to move down a bit. as the previous guest said, the gop has to get this done. it should provide a good opportunity to buy out weakness. but i do not think there will be a huge amount of upside. joe: it is all priced in, basically. you layout theoretical downside if there are any hiccups, whether it does not pass or -- what could drive this market higher? mr. maley: one of the things -- it is kind of funny. we are about to move to december. mutual funds or pension funds, they say they are long-term investments, and they are. but everyone becomes a short-term investor at the end of the year.

if the market moves higher, they have to be in. they will not be selling it all. it is what i call performance fear, that could certainly happen again this year. the last few months it has moved progressively higher. not only did we not go down in september and october, but the rallies continued. julia: if we look at the energy market, oil over the last few months, you coined the term perfectly. particularties in were leading indicators you point out. what we're saying is softness. to throwpec this week, more controversy into the equation, as well. seen iny: what we have these energy stocks, they stopped going up. energy etf,the xle it has not made a higher high,

like crude. this tells us this thing will run its course for the near-term. it is a breather over a short-term basis, the next week or two good. we have the opec meeting this week, but i think the larger , you look at what everyone was saying, as soon as oil gets to the mid-$50's, u.s. will drill, drill, drill. we have not seen that, to a big degree. opec is so important, but not as important as it used to be. if any news comes out of that meeting, that little breather, which is healthy and normal, will take this higher. abovesee the xle break its november highs, you will see money pour into that group. especially cut some have done so well, like tech stops. scarlet: speaking of momentum,

and the fact to bring up short-term investors take hold at the end of the year, is that what is driving bitcoin to new highs, over and over? 75.got to $99 within spitting distance of $10,000. mr. maley: it is such a hard about, i am to talk on both sides of the fence. it could go higher. an asset goes straight up over a short period of time, it usually does not top out until a huge amount of people are in the investment. and a lot of those people have added leverage. at this point, very few people own it. however, that should change in december. futures exchanges will start trading in bitcoin. that will allow people to create etf's for it.

that will bring a whole group of people that have not bitcoin into the asset, and that could take it higher. andree with jamie dimon others that say it will end in tears. that is a chance, too. bitcoin could change the world. amazon change the world, too. bubble, it into a fell 95%. things cannot fall more than 100%. it is a dicey situation. joe: that is only problem with bubbles. if you knew when they would peak out, you could make a fortune. it is not exciting, but important -- we had hearings for jerome powell to be the next fed chief. it seems the news is he did not make much news, which is probably his goal.

to slide in, not cause much controversies. seemed like he accomplished that today. mr. maley: he certainly did. part of the reason the market rallied so strongly today. it is funny, when the fed chair speaks, it is funny how often the market rallies. that is a soothing thing for the market. but we do have to realize, the fed is tightening. and they are shrinking their balance sheet. me overg that concerns the longer-term period as we moved to 2018, the acceleration of that shrinkage. kind of a play on words. they are shrinking the balance sheet by $10 billion a month, but that will move to $20 billion a month in the first quarter, $30 billion in the second quarter, and so on. they will only strengthen the balance sheet by $30 billion. but in 2018, by over $400

billion. we will have a much less accommodative fed than people are prepared for. they used to say, don't fight the fed. pushed aside because small increases in interest rates have not heard just the markets. it could play a key role in 2018. you looking at china as a potential problem. specifically, what might be a trigger for a risk off in markets? mr. maley: we saw earlier in the , the chinese government and central bank of china started engaging in a deleveraging process. they started to clamp down on lending and leverage in the markets. and we saw the market react from march until may. the bond yields on 10 year yields in china went from 3.2%

to 2.7%. then they rolled from that because of their internet -- because of their national congress. now that is over, we see rates moving back up. they almost got back to 4% on their 10 year yields. and their stock market is rolling up a little bit. -- has been a big engine of growth in the last few years. i do not think they will crash. but we have a u.s. said pulling back a little bit on their liquidity situation. and if china is doing the same thing, it will be of a jet problem for 2018. it is not even a yellow flag yet, but something to watch closely. break above 4%, it will be something to raise a yellow flag. julia: max, great to chat with you, matt maley from miller tabak. "what'd you miss?" hearings,firmation

jerome powell told the senate banking committee he will not increase financial regulations. in his written testimony he said he would revisit financial rules for rollback purposes. senator elizabeth warren countered by saying, are there any laws he thinks should be made stronger? >> there are a lot of problems to address and the banking system. i do think we have had eight years of writing new rules. i cannot think of a place where we are lacking an important role. i think we have the rules we need. now we have to deal with things from a supervisory standpoint. fed hasl the roles the issued in your time, five years, on capital, leverage, liquidity, stress test, you do not think a single one should become for? >> -- should be tougher? >> i think they are tough enough. julia: here on more with what the u.s. will look like under

jay powell, is senator tellis. show,to have you on the thank you for joining us. you must be pleased with what jay powell said today. senator tillis: i love the answer. that is someone who is coming to the committee, someone seeking confirmation. he give a very honest answer, we have fleshed it out the regulatory framework. but we need to figure out if we can improve the burden on financial services institutions the -- by being clear on who does the regulations, and more the way we apply the regulations for the business operations. financiallot of services regulators who are coming in, overlapping with one another. havejay is saying, we enough, let's execute more efficiently and effectively. julia: why would he be better at janet atbetter than that? senator tillis: i think we had

over reaction with dodd-frank. there were words about trying to claw back, but i have not seen much evidence. i have not seen evidence for the nearly year i have been on the committee. we talkator tillis, about regulation in the abstract. look at specifics and the way the financial services industry is overregulated, or rules that are perhaps inconsistent and need to be modified, when you look at the landscape, where you see the most pressing need for change? thetor tillis: you will see most immediate relief coming next week when we begin to markup bill that changes the asset thresholds for certain regulatory regimens in applied. -- being applied. there is still a need to look at the nature of these financial institutions.

some say have assets of lower may have moreion, regulations or oversight applied, while some above, should not. we still have to apply a relief to the larger institutions. it is absurd to think that a stress test, the result of that 100,000 page document is a useful piece of evidence. there has to be a more streamlined way of doing it. scarlet: should there not be stress tests anymore? should we cease that? senator tillis: we need to recognize the industry standards, three or four times year, a self-imposed stress test. maybe we get of insider transparency, a regulator decides what needs to be done to satisfy concerns they may have. it is not turning a blind eye to the areas of banking operations that could have contributed to some of the problems with the

financial crisis. it is a matter of doing it in the least intrusive way. at the end of the day, these regulatory costs are not paid by corporations. people withing by deposits, credit cards, at other financial institutions. regulatoryeduce the burden and free up capital for those applying for loans right now. scarlet: senator, i want to get your take what is going on at the consumer protections financial bureau. there seem to be compete -- competing bids. how do you see this playing out? there is a lawsuit that has been filed, and a lawsuit that could be pending. i think theis: president's position will prevail and mick mulvaney will take that acting capacity until we are able to confirm somebody. i think they have a strong case to be made. i do not think it is a game he is going to win.

i think we will prevail and mick mulvaney will be the acting head of the group until he get a presidential confirmation in congress. scarlet: should he step down? senator tillis: if it continues to exist, first and foremost, it should seek appropriations from the congress. and it should come under congressional oversight. we should at least have that discussion, then decide to what extent it needs to play a role, versus things it has expanded into, could be embraced by the regulatory agencies. i think it needs to be looked at. it is a part of the overreaction to a legitimate regulatory exposure after the 2008 financial crisis. but i think it was an overreaction that reminds me a lot of the overreaction we saw after the enron crash, and the

financial crash after the turn-of-the-century. i was a partner of price waterhouse at the time. i remember how the demand for regulatory compliance resources came on. we have a full spectrum of regulations we should go back to, and look at them from a reasonable standpoint. keepexist to mitigate, that on the books, and ask, can you do that in a leaner, more efficient matter? joe: i want to turn to tax cuts and the bill moving out of committee into the general senate. it seems it will have some provision that would trigger higher revenues, if revenue in the future comes below expectations, if the deficit is projected. how do you feel about such a trigger? senator tillis: it is problematic. if i am a business making a long-term business decision, i have to assume a worst-case scenario or heavily discount what would otherwise be a

positive outlook over 10 years, if i know that trigger is looming. to be honest with you, based on the method we are using, i am not sure it was passed the so-called byrd test, the way the triggers would be implemented. it could a moot point, not sit with regulation. even if it could, i am sure it should. heavily talk about how discounted we have projected the economic benefit of this tax package, we're talking about 40 basis points from gdp. i think it will be more than that. i do not think we have to anticipate a crisis, it is not likely to occur. discussions in north carolina, no one is talking about raising taxes these days in north carolina. we are talking about how to accommodate the business expansion we have seen over the past five years. julia: if these triggers are included, will you vote no to the tax passage? senator tillis: i will have to look at it.

there is a very high bar for me to vote no to this tax passage. i do believe this is a generational opportunity. we have not done it since 31 years ago. i was even young back then. we are looking at maybe the last opportunity to do this. i think the market will react negatively. we will not be any political position to do this again for many of our political lifetimes. that is on us. if we make a mistake or identify somethings that need to be adjusted, we can still be in the majority, while we have time to execute that bill. we will have time to adjust it. there is so much good in this bill. the triggers will slow down growth a little bit. but it will still fit in with our 0.4% gdp. i have seen what aggressive, bold tax reform has done in my own state. scarlet: what about an amendment or mandate to repeal the

individual mandate? i got my words mixed up. senator tillis: you got it right. i like having it in their. -- there. pay for.t of p -- a $338 billion is a benefit to the american taxpayer, a benefit to the small business person. it is also derived rum repealing a mandate for you to buy insurance. if you choose to continue to buy the insurance, you were qualified for subsidies. all we are doing is cutting a tied for someone who says, i cannot afford the health care. julia: senator, i have to stop you, we are running out of time. thank you, senator tell us.

for the record, we think you're still young, sir. [laughter] julia: this is bloomberg. ♪

mark: i am mark crumpton, with first word news. without offering details, president trump said today, we will take care of it, following north korea's latest missile launch. the president told reporters, it is a situation we will handle. the techgon said it did a single north korean missile launch, and believes it was an intercontinental ballistic missile. it traveled 620 miles and landed in the sea of japan. unfazed by protesters, republicans on the senate voting committee today passed the gop's tax cut, advancing the measure to the full senate. sarah huckabee sanders said in a statement that president trump

is applauding the committee for taking an important step toward passing historic tax relief and reform, and the tax cuts and jobs act this afternoon. but committee democrats laid into their republican colleagues. >> this committee has just completed a key discussion on the budget foundation for $10 trillion worth of tax policy changes, in less time than it takes to wash a car. mark: the committee voted 12-11 to advance the bill. they hope to have the full senate take it on later this week. french president emmanuel macron appraised stronger economic development, culture and education across the continent. president macron addressed university students for nearly two hours today, and met with the country's president at

length. he called for a crackdown on human smuggling networks between africa and europe. the kenyan opposition leader opposed inauguration day in nairobi. he said the presidency is a legitimate -- illegitimate. police fired tear gas shortly after he made the statement, and forced him to flee. a seven-year-old boy was killed by a stray bullet. global news 24 hours a day, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i am mark crumpton, this is bloomberg. let's get a recap of today's market action. record highs for u.s. stocks as the senate budget committee -- passes the senate tax bill and moves it to the senate floor vote as early as next thursday. joe: definitely momentum for the

tax bill. julia: "what'd you miss?" this cyber monday, the most lucrative sales day in history, 17% more thanion, last year. amazon expected to have made a windfall in profits. they confirmed items like the echo have seen their best. let's bring in tom forte, davidson.at d.a. this is the first holiday season where they have stores. mr. forte: the story of holiday shopping, amazon has a greater physical presence. 465 whole foods locations, a couple handfuls of bookstores, and a strategic relationship with coals -- kohl's. they noted echo devices sold very well. moreyear they will do even

for physical stores and holiday sales. scarlet: how do you see this playing out with their potential licenses to sell drugs, and the talk about how they might be going into apparel? the whole foods store of today and tomorrow will be very different. at the minimum, you could see them use their amazon go technology. you enter whole foods, get prepared salads, and exit without seeing a cashier. they could expand amazon-branded hardware within whole foods, and have a pharmacy in there, as well. you will see a change over time. some more amazon-branded hardware. julia: you mentioned apparel, what about the apparel opportunities? historically, m&a, by approach to first, build second. i am of the belief they are at a

point where they need to divide. them,mon make sense for go after the strongest category within apparel, which is athleisure. joe: obviously, they made a lot of money, cyber monday, doing great. who else? when you look at this year's shopping patterns, compared to a year ago, is someone making strides that last year was not in the game? mr. forte: walmart is much than they were a year ago. they are doing a good job of leveraging physical stores in creative ways to drive online sales. that will push amazon. joe: what specifically are they doing? as a new yorker, i do not see walmart's very often. -- walmarts very often. mr. forte: the minimum, they are giving you discounts. you buy something online and

pick it up at the store, it is cheaper than if you get it in the store. they are motivating you for a habit of buying online and picking up in-store. they are employing walmart associates to drive a product to your house. it may not work, but it is creative about leveraging their physical for print. julia: we spoke to a morgan stanley analyst last week. they believed the numbers for the fourth quarter would be the worst they have seen since the financial crisis, or the 2008, 2009 recession. iphone sales, would actually cannibalize all the other sales we might have seen. do you agree? mr. forte: i do agree. if you look at the strength of black friday and cyber monday sales and electronics and toys, typically when you have a cycle like apple and the iphone x, it is bad news for apparel. if you look at the winners and

losers of holiday sales, it could be tough for apparel. scarlet: i wonder how much we can take away from holiday sales. black friday begins earlier and earlier. joe: i got an email from amazon on friday, and is said cyber monday week, which already does not make sense, is already here. which doubled is not make sense. it was complete nonsense. scarlet: added urgency, right? mr. forte: in theory, black friday will be the big discount day for physical stores, and cyber monday will be the big discount they for online. next thing we know, black friday will be halloween. between now and christmas, what else will you be watching to see how things are shaking out? mr. forte: i cover at sea -- etsy, they have made adjustments to become more relevant. in december, they cannot get products to the consumer fast enough.

they are making adjustments, you can get them on a faster basis. what you will see is how companies leverage and embrace amazon rather than compete with amazon. in the second quarter, more than 50% sold on amazon was third-party. julia: if you can't beat them, join them. thatet: you have guests are paying early on, and then the procrastinators. tom forte from d.a. davidson, thank you. new developments in at&t-time warner merger. a day before the doj suit to block the inside billion dollar deal, they launched an unsuccessful last-ditch attempt to break the lawsuit. what went down on this meeting and what does it mean for the merger? let's speak to the reporter who broke the story. this happened mid-november, before thinks giving? before the friday

monday the doj came out with this merger. randall stephenson flew down with his main lawyer. meeting a very short with senior people from the doj, including the head of the doj. at&t propose something they thought was significant enough to get the doj to step back from trying to block this deal. apart, quite quickly. cameflew back and the doj back to sue. julia: how serious was the proposal they took to the department of justice? did they match what was seen previously in vertical integration? >> it is a really interesting question, we will be doing more work on it in the coming weeks.

exactly what they offer, we do not yet know. but it was significant enough to get the justice to go back from this hostile language in the buildup to them coming out ensuing -- and suing. they previously offered the doj a variety of solutions. they strongly leaped any do best at sure of assets was not on the long. -- law. enough hoped it would be to dissuade the doj, we do not know. wanted to convince, we will be good actors in the merger. julia: cnn? >> definitely not. they told us on the record, we have never [indiscernible] is staying on cnn the auspices of at&t.

joe: what is the next date to watch in this saga, in terms of the legal battle? >> the way it is playing out, at&t are making the argument this has been with the doj for a long time. they had plenty of time to look at the merits of thereof of the -- merits, or lack thereof, of the case. they are saying they want more time to build up a case against, to make sound arguments for why this merger should never fly. i think we're looking at early next year. how early will be dependent on where the two parties get in negotiations. scarlet: is there anything the doj is looking for at&t to offer up? give upsaid they would cnn, the doj would say it is ago? >> if they give up turner, cnn is contained within that. if they gave up cnn, it would be

to obviously political. that would allow this to go through, is if they gave up directv, which is very, very unlikely. impact theterially financial logistics of doing this deal in the first place. there are other things they could look at, via sports. that would give up their power in the market. but these are assets at&t values highly. julia: we make the supposition that offering what has traditionally worked in the past simply has not worked. the game has changed, clearly. >> the game seems to be changing. in court,r arguments these have worked in the past, and have allowed to be used, to allow these murders to go through. they will say it is enough. the doj will say, the landscape has changed.

when things things have gone through before under behavior remedies, companies have proven despite their best intentions, they have been bad actors. julia: nice work. coming up, one of the world's biggest tech investors, one of the most valuable unicorns. softbank and uber with a 30% discount. this is bloomberg. ♪ oomberg. ♪

scarlet: "what'd you miss?" softbank and a group of investors are trying to buy a stake in uber and a major discount, to the company's $69 billion valuation. billion,offering $6

30% lower than the valuation it fetched in its most recent round of fund raising. joining us to discuss is bloomberg editor at large, cory johnson. didn't softbank invest $1 billion in uber? invested one billion dollars, at a $69 billion overall valuation of the company. buy $6y are offering to billion worth of shares from existing uber shareholders, at a lot lower valuation. scarlet: what happened? >> that is a great question. joe? [laughter] uber is not worth $69 billion anymore, and softbank knows that, so why would they pay that? the answer may be, that it -- those are the conditions. would they be allowed to then go in and make an offering of the shares? let's look at this chart. this is incredible.

if you were an early investor, you can see why you would want to sell shares. it is possible bit -- to a very wereround investor, they promised there would be no down round, or they would be issued more shares to make up for it. it is a ratchet, and it is very common for the liquidation process. it says, if you ever do a down round, you have to give me more shares. with square ipo, when they went public at a lower valuation, they were issued more shares in the company. the way it is structured may somehow skirt that. but a great the false notion they are worth 69 billion -- worth $69 billion, when they aren't anymore. offer.ot exactly a dutch to they have done something

evaluate how many shareholders they would be at a certain price. my suspicion is, they have gone to early venture investors and said, would you be willing to sell a share at this price? we will give you $1 billion for a chunk of your shares. julia: there are ethics that go into this. they have had a lot of bad news. >> it is still an enormous valuation. julia: how much do they have to lift it to get the holdouts on board? >> if you are a benchmark investing in lower than a $1 billion valuation, and have a youive return of 7000%, might want to take some of that money off the table. julia: cory johnson, thank you for joining us. coming up, we assess the pros and cons of nafta. why mexico may be getting the short end of the stick. this is bloomberg. ♪ k. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: nafta was supposed to prospectsomic growth for the u.s., mexico, and canada. but the gap between wages have been -- between the u.s. and mexico have been widening. -- joining us to discuss is eric martin from mexico city. great to speak with you. it is not just wages, gdp. income inequality has widened, and we have seen rampant corruption as well. >> that is true, we have seen the poverty rates and mexico today are exactly the way they were in 1992, before nafta went

into effect. it is the only developing nation itshe g20 that is seen average annual income decrease over the past 10 years. there are a lot of things about nafta that do not seem to be reaching the workers that are in these factories and putting together the exports that are going to the u.s. joe: is the view in mexico that the nafta opportunities for growth and improving the economy were squandered, or that basically, nafta was not that great for mexico's economy, and there was not much that could be done either way? >> generally, the feeling is that nafta was a positive, but it was not enough. a lot of things that should have been done within the mexican economy earlier, such as opening the state-controlled energy, oil

industry, to foreign investment. that took place during this administration, but had been delayed many years. also, investment in infrastructure, to diversify exports, expanding the ports, the ability to get products from central mexico to the coast, export asia or europe. something that has been -- has not been done enough. not enough investment in education. compare this to south korea, where they have a lot of technology and innovation, and mexico is absent. there have been thing since 1994 which have not been addressed, or only addressed recently. julia: there is a lot of aves havey, the h flourished in the have nots have suffered under nafta. do they believe it has helped them?

it does not appear to have done so. >> people generally are supportive of nafta. the ties between mexico and the u.s. are stronger now than they were 25 years ago. it is also a common theme that when you talk to the person on the street in mexico, they are very angry, not just with the ruling party, but parties in general. we had one party that world from 2000 to 2012, interrupting more than seven decades of rule of the previous party. there is an idea by the average person in mexico that politics and politicians in general have not assessed their needs. there was a lot that should have been done, income distribution or better opportunity, that has not come about. there is a dissatisfaction in general with the political class, which is something that dor,candidate, leftist, obra

is exploiting and playing off of. scarlet: sounds familiar, does it -- doesn't it? julia: it does. will a failure of nafta be blamed on president trump? you mentioned the anti-trump play in mexico is to go to the populist and a vote for obrador. certainly people see president trump as the more belligerent party in this relationship. if you look at opinion polls people have of the american government, a drastically change from where they were two years ago. there is a lot more concern on the street here and among the average person, about the relationship with the u.s. but at the same time, there is a feeling that if nafta were to end, mexico would take an economic hit.

but it would not be the end of the mexican economy. they can export to the u.s. under wto rules, look to export more to asia, south america. there is a plan b in mexico. but it is a big area of concern, and one of the biggest besides security, and anticorruption measures, looming over the 2018 vote. julia: plenty of divisive issues. thank you for your perspective. joe: coming up, what you need to know for tomorrow's trading day. this is bloomberg. ♪ day. this is bloomberg. ♪ retail.

under pressure like never before. and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store

near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver. >> in washington, you are watching bloomberg technology. "weout details, trump said following care of it,"

a north korea missile launch. missileagon tracked a launch of what they believe was an intercontinental ballistic missile that traveled 600 miles and landed in the sea of japan. cut plan passed the house and advances to the senate. committee democrats laid into colleagues for forcing the bill through quickly. the committee voted along party lines. hoping the full senate will take it up later this week. suspected found a libyan militants not guilty in charges around the benghazi attack. was of murder. the attacks