The UK economy unexpectedly shrank at the start of 2025, piling fresh pressure on Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government over the lack of momentum since Labour returned to power last summer.

Gross domestic product fell 0.1% in a storm-hit January, driven by declines in manufacturing and construction, the Office for National Statistics said Friday. Economists had expected a 0.1% increase. It means output is still barely larger than when Labour won a landslide election victory in July.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves pointed to the global turbulent backdrop for the weakness, warning that “the world has changed and across the globe we are feeling the consequences.”

Reeves is under pressure to start delivering on her promise to boost growth after a dismal run of economic indicators under Labour. She is preparing to announce what’s expected to be a sobering economic update on March 26, when official growth forecasts may be trimmed.

Friday’s figures mean the economy has contracted in four out of the seven months since Labour took office. GDP is only 0.3% higher than it was in June.

The pound extended losses, dropping as much as 0.2% to $1.2924 as traders incrementally added to expectations for more interest-rate cuts. Traders now see 57 basis points of reductions this year.

The weakness in January was partly driven by the UK being hit by the strongest storm for 10 years, suggesting that some sectors could rebound in February.

While economists are predicting a return to steady growth this year, risks to the outlook are mounting with Donald Trump’s escalating trade war sending stocks crashing and triggering fears of a global downturn. The hope is that Britain’s plans for big spending on infrastructure will underpin growth.

“Following the lackluster performance in the second half of 2024, growth remains fragile due to global and domestic uncertainty,” said Hailey Low, economist at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research. “It is crucial that the upcoming Spring Statement provides stability rather than adding to domestic uncertainty.”

What Bloomberg Economics Says…

“The surprise drop in January’s GDP still leaves the UK economy on course for a modest rebound in the first quarter after a sharp slowdown in the second half of 2024. Our view is growth will strengthen a little over the course of 2025. If data continues to disappoint, though, it will be hard for the Bank of England to stick with its gradual approach to policy easing. We still think the risk is for the central bank cutting rates faster than we’re expecting.”

—Read Ana Andrade and Dan Hanson’s REACT on the Terminal

Labour has unveiled a raft of policies to help it meet its promise of boosting growth, including unblocking building projects and green-lighting controversial developments. However, growth was patchy in the second half of last year and sentiment indicators nosedived after a tax-heavy budget in October. 

The ONS said that output fell in eight of the 13 manufacturing sectors in January, with the production of metals and pharmaceuticals experiencing the largest declines. Anecdotal evidence points to construction being hit by storms, rain and snow during the month, it said. Oil and gas production also declined. 

The falls were partly offset by 0.1% growth in services, the largest part of the UK economy. Retailers recorded a strong January thanks to people eating more frequently at home, according to the ONS.

The BOE expects the economy to continue expanding at a tepid pace, predicting a 0.7% expansion in 2025 after last year’s 0.9% rise. Facing an uncertain outlook, BOE rate-setters are expected to leave interest rates on hold next Thursday and warn markets of only gradual cuts.

“We doubt the bad news on GDP will be enough to convince the Bank of England to cut interest rates at its meeting next week,” said Thomas Pugh, economist at RSM UK. “Smooth out the month-to-month volatility and the economy is picking up some momentum, which should allay fears about the UK slipping back into recession.”

Officials are balancing the need to support a stagnant economy against signs of stubborn inflationary pressures and heightened uncertainty. They have flagged the threat of tariffs and the impact of Labour’s increase in employer payroll taxes on the jobs market and prices.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

• Meta spent $23 million to keep Mark Zuckerberg safe, but not everyone in business has personal security guards. One travel risk professional encourages workers to map out their surroundings, and undergo training—all before they leave. Once they get there, he recommends they stay vigilant and avoid sharing details of their stay publicly. 

Corporate America was already worried about the safety of top executives. But the killing of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson amplified that fear. Still, it isn’t only high-profile CEOs who are anxious about work travel, the entire business world is.

Large-cap companies have taken significant steps to tack on more proactive protection protocols like armed guards, defensive drivers, and zero-trust cybersecurity systems. But not everyone in the business world has security personnel. 

Thompson “didn’t have his team with him, and he was alone,” said Jake Newton, chief operating officer for CPPS, a travel risk management training provider. So sometimes it is up to the individual to protect themselves. Rank-and-file executives can undergo hostage situation training, research their destinations, create pre-travel checklists, and do little things like making sure their phones are always charged, said Newton during a Global Business Travel Association event on Thursday. 

So first things first: make a checklist of what you can do before you even leave for your business trip, he said. Pull up a map and check out the area for hospitals, bodies of water, and important routes. Identify local laws, look up crime statistics, and be aware of safety considerations. Notify the state department any time you leave the United States, Newton explained. But there are things your company can do, too.

Companies can put preparation teams in place, where a travel manager, security personnel, and someone in benefits and insurance come together to plan—that’s all before actual training. There’s geographical training that goes hand in hand with the preparation to-do list. There’s training for high-risk travel, where you literally practice hostage situations, he shared. And there’s training for the basics, which begins with understanding your personal risk.

“Every traveler in an organization should have a baseline awareness level training,” Newton said. “So let’s say you have some information that you don’t want getting out to the public, or you have some intellectual property knowledge that maybe if you’re traveling to a country they might desire that information, that increases your risk as an individual.”

Those are scenarios you can anticipate and practice in a safe environment, so that if you’re ever in a dangerous situation, you know what to do. But once you’re actually there, don’t forget the small things: charging your phone and knowing important phone numbers and addresses. 

To mitigate the risk of something bad happening, pay attention, be aware of your surroundings, and try to blend in, Newton explained. Avoid telling people what hotel you’re staying at and what room you’re in. Let’s say you’re at a conference and some tension erupts—don’t stay and watch, just leave, Newton said. 

A new era for corporate security 

After Thompson’s murder some companies escalated their spending on executive security and others were already allocating millions of dollars to protect their bosses. For instance, Meta spent $23.4 million on security for founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, according to its most recent proxy statement. Eli Lilly and Johnson & Johnson increased their spending for security for its top executives last year. The former spent almost $74,000 on security for CEO David Ricks, and that was the first time security costs were disclosed; the latter spent close to $103,000 on security for CEO Joaquin Duato, and that was four times as much as it previously had, per Reuters. 

The average disclosed cost of security for the full executive team was more than $400,000, and the highest disclosed cost was close to $7 million, revealed an analysis of the 500 largest public companies conducted by Compensation Advisory Partners (CAP), a consulting firm that specializes in executive compensation and corporate governance.

For CEO security, the average cost was around $650,000; and, the highest was $23 million in the technology sector. Among the 10 companies that spent the most on CEO security, the median cost was $1.8 million, CAP found. It typically went to home and personal security systems and security personnel.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

BMW AG expects escalating trade conflicts between the US, Europe and China to cost the carmaker about €1 billion ($1.1 billion) this year, Chief Executive Officer Oliver Zipse said. 

“We don’t think that all these tariffs will last very long, though some of them might last longer,” Zipse said Friday in a Bloomberg Television interview. With a cost estimate of €1 billion, “we are quite safe,” he added.

BMW and other European carmakers are bracing to see the full extent of President Donald Trump’s planned tariffs on vehicles imported to the US. The levies threaten to hit not just cars made in Europe but also those produced at plants in Mexico and Canada, which automakers have operated for years under previous trade agreements.

BMW is already facing duties on vehicles it produces at its plant in San Luis Potosi, Mexico, for export to the US. Trump has postponed the tariffs for companies in compliance with the USMCA trade deal, but BMW falls short of local content rules.

At the same time, BMW is being hit by European Union tariffs on vehicles imported from China, where its Mini brand produces an electric car and an SUV. BMW has joined Chinese manufacturers in challenging the levies in court.

“If you overdo it with tariffs, it sends a negative spiral to all market participants,” Zipse said. There are “no winners in that game.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com