A 66.5%. This is the accumulated inflation we have suffered between 2000 and 2025. In only two of these years, the value of money has remained or increased. The rest of the time, our savings have been losing purchasing power. And we don't have to look twenty-five years back to notice it: we only have to think about the last five. The price of homes, cars, or even eggs has skyrocketed.

Summer is approaching and with it, holidays. But this year, the combination of persistent inflation and sky-high oil prices will make travelling more expensive than ever. The impact on flights is direct and unavoidable. Fuel is the main operating cost for any airline, and with oil prices practically doubling since February, their margins have plummeted. The logical consequence is that tickets will go up in price.

The truth is that in January everything looked good: sales growth, controlled inflation and interest rates falling. It seemed like a perfect year from an economic point of view. Today, however, it couldn't be further from reality. Oil at $100 – even if it was only for a month or so – has altered everything. You already know: when energy goes up, all prices go up. And, even though the conflict has cooled down, the price isn't coming down. It's raining on a wet field and we are amplifying inflationary pressure.For families, the impact is increasingly serious. Not only is there inflation, but Euribor has also risen and, consequently, mortgages will become more expensive. Furthermore, interest rates have not fallen and, right now, the best news would be that they do not rise again in the coming months.Meanwhile, stock markets have turned a page on the conflict and are once again marking historic highs. Two months ago it seemed like the world was ending and that no company was worth anything; today, on the other hand, the vast majority are, apparently, essential again. And it is here where the big unknown appears: what has really changed in just a few weeks? The conflict has cooled down, yes, but its effects remain fully in force in the form of high energy costs and pressure on prices. Rarely have I seen the stock market and oil at their highs at the same time.In the current context, not everyone is winning. Energy and banking benefit from high prices and high rates, while families, especially indebted ones, suffer the consequences. Inflation and the rising cost of mortgages reduce consumption and accentuate growing inequality. And, in the end, families keep taking economic blows, one after another, in a situation that has long been critical. I'm sorry, 2026 will not be better.

It seems that artificial intelligence has arrived to stay. As happened with other technological revolutions, the fear has set in that it will end up destroying jobs massively. Nothing new. When the internet appeared, the end of many professions was also announced.Beyond opinions, recent studies point in another direction: AI increases worker productivity by around 4% and, in the short term, no significant job destruction has been detected. This does not mean, however, that there will be no changes. There will be, and many.AI will transform tasks, redefine professional profiles, and force adaptation. Just fifteen years ago, almost no one imagined the current demand for artificial intelligence experts. Similarly, today we don't know what the key jobs will be in fifteen years. And this is not an anomaly: it is the usual functioning of technological progress. However, this impact will not be uniform. Medium and large companies start with an advantage, as they can better afford the initial implementation costs. The question is not whether AI will change the labor market, but how and who it will benefit most.The core issue, however, is whether this increase in productivity will translate into better wages. Recent experience suggests skepticism. In other technological revolutions, gains have been unevenly distributed: more qualified profiles have emerged stronger, while workers with more routine tasks have seen their bargaining power reduced.The challenge, therefore, is not only technological, but also social and political. If the benefits of AI are concentrated in a few companies or profiles, the result will be a more unequal labor market. If, on the other hand, it is accompanied by training, adaptation, and certain guarantees, it can become a tool for shared progress.

Now that we have the draft of the disposable income, I often remember a phrase from a professor of mine many years ago: “I always hope it turns out to be payable.” At that time I didn't understand it. Now I do.

Until 2022, and for more than 10 years, a hamburger chain sold one of theirs for 1 euro. Today, one costs 1.85. This is one of the clearest examples of inflation. And your salary, has it increased by 85% in 3 years? This is one of the best examples of the loss of purchasing power.

When the conflict with Iran began, I warned that the impact on the markets would probably be a matter of days. And, with the information we had then, it was a reasonable assessment: both investors and analysts (like me) expected a short conflict. The reality, however, is quite different.

I wish I could wrap up this series on Iran and our wallets soon. But reality is stubborn: the longer the conflict drags on, the deeper the economic consequences could be. For the moment, there's some respite. The price of fuel has fallen by nearly 20 cents per liter after the VAT reduction (after reaching €2). A great move by the government.

One of the most immediate effects of the war in Iran is the increase in mortgage costs. At first glance, it might seem that a distant war has no relation to the monthly payment of a mortgage loan, but the benchmark index for most variable-rate mortgages, Euribor, maintains a high correlation with interest rates, that is, with the cost of money.

We might think that the war in Iran is far away and doesn't directly affect us. But nothing could be further from the truth. This type of conflict has global economic consequences, and in this case, one of the main ones is the increase in the price of a key commodity: oil. When oil becomes more expensive, fuel also becomes more expensive—something you've probably already noticed—and, consequently, many other prices in the economy end up rising. In fact, this situation could generate inflation of 4% again at current prices.

Lately, we've been witnessing a military operation every month. This time in Iran. Coincidentally, they almost always happen on weekends, with the financial markets closed. But then Monday comes and the stock exchanges reopen. Should we be alarmed?

Today, there are 35 million cryptocurrencies in the market. In the last 24 hours alone, 162,932 new ones have been created. These are all called altcoins and represent alternatives beyond Bitcoin. The total value of the cryptocurrency market—that is, the capital currently invested—amounts to €1,902,400,000,000. A lot of zeros, right? To put it in perspective, this figure is approximately 10% higher than Spain's GDP (an indicator that measures the wealth generated in a territory). Six months ago, it exceeded €3 trillion.

Sometimes politicians surprise us, and not just in our country. This week's financial news comes from the Netherlands: capital gains—such as stock market profits—will be taxed at 36% even if they haven't been realized through closing the position. This measure represents a profound change from the traditional system, under which taxes are only paid when assets are sold. Even in Spain, for example, losses can be offset against future profits over a five-year period. The implementation of this new model could generate significant deviations in financial management and investor behavior.

A dark week in the markets (for some). Gold, silver, bitcoin, technology companies... It seemed like no one was safe. Silver fell 30% in a single day, and Bitcoin plummeted 50% in three months. Everything was in the red. It felt like the end of the world. And a phrase that made me laugh: "I used to lose 5% a year to inflation, and now I'm losing 20% ​​a month investing."

The topic of the week has been the regularization of half a million immigrants. Although you might think it's not an economic issue, it's a topic that comes up in all my economics classes.

The country is experiencing chaotic times, and we can't look the other way. Given the situation with the commuter rail system, a direct consequence of the territorial inequality accumulated over the last fifteen years, I ask myself a simple but uncomfortable question: who really pays for these costs?

Every three months, publicly traded companies must report to the market. These quarterly presentations reveal their financial health: liquidity levels, debt, profits, and growth. It is undoubtedly the moment of greatest uncertainty for investors, as everyone wonders where the stock price will go.

The Christmas and January holidays represent a peak in household spending. Given this reality, the key is not only to have planned ahead, but also to take advantage of the start of the year to establish a solid monthly budget. We're often told to cut back on "small expenses"—like coffee at the bar—but the goal isn't to deprive ourselves of little pleasures, but rather to better manage the big picture. To improve our financial health, there are only two paths: increase income or reduce expenses.

At the end of the year, we usually think about how we can save on income tax. Let's start, however, with some bad news: in Catalonia—compared to other autonomous communities—the possibilities are quite limited. While in other regions everyday expenses like gym memberships can be deducted, here the existing deductions are often difficult for most taxpayers to claim, such as the purchase of an electric vehicle, home renovations with energy efficiency improvements, or compensation for losses on stocks. One of the few truly common options is reducing taxable income through contributions to private pension plans. A few years ago, this instrument was much more attractive, but currently the reduction is limited to a maximum of €1,500 per year for individual contributions, or up to €10,000 in total if the company also contributes. In other words, no matter how much a person contributes, for example, €20,000 to their individual pension plan, they can only reduce their taxable income by €1,500 on their tax return. Although this mechanism offers an immediate tax benefit, in the long run it presents more disadvantages than advantages. On the one hand, the money is locked and can only be withdrawn under certain circumstances stipulated by law. The positive aspect is that it is a financial instrument that ends up yielding a positive result in most cases, given its long-term nature. On the other hand, when the money is withdrawn, it is taxed in full as employment income, applying the personal income tax rate in force at that time. Often, moreover, the future tax rate is higher than the one that applied when the income was generated. Therefore, it is not a real tax saving – the State never forgoes collecting – but simply a deferral of tax payment.

This week the European Union has approved a new tariff measure: charge three euros for each international package that arrives in European territory with a value of less than 150 euros. Although not explicitly stated, the focus is clear: the major platforms ofe-commerce Asian brands, like Shein or Temu. The question is inevitable: will this measure really work?