The uncomfortable new normal for the U.S. economy: spending growth concentrated at the top of the income ladder, a split largely explained by wealth gains from financial assets.

Why it matters: The K-shaped economy is real, though it is not particularly new. That's the conclusion of research out this morning from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

• It confirms an economic risk lurking beneath an economy that is navigating relentless disruption — a war driving energy prices higher, AI uncertainty and more — where spending growth is concentrated in a single cohort that could pull back sharply with a market downturn.
• Low-income households have been squeezed by inflation running persistently above the national average, leaving them with little buffer against any additional shock.

What they're saying: "Reliance on a single segment of the economy has important implications for spending growth and its fragility, as well as for economic vulnerability and policy," New York Fed researchers wrote in a blog post.

The big picture: Since January 2023, real retail spending has grown at an uneven pace across income groups, according to the New York Fed data.

• High-income households — those earning more than $125,000 annually — saw cumulative real spending growth of about 7.6% through March 2026.
• Middle-income households gained about 3%. Low-income households, earning under $40,000, gained just over 1%.

Zoom in: Before the COVID-19 pandemic, lower-income households actually outpaced the wealthy in spending growth. The divergence opened in 2023 after pandemic-era relief programs for lower- and middle-income households ran out.

• Researchers say that the split has been sustained, and "the recent growth in retail spending has been mostly due to the high-income households."
• The New York Fed data shows real spending has turned negative across all income groups in recent months, even as the gap between high- and low-income households persists.

The intrigue: Wage growth has been mixed across income groups, making it an incomplete explanation of the K-shaped dynamic. The New York Fed points to wealth and inflation as the more powerful drivers.

Strong consumer spending among the richest consumers is helped by huge asset returns.

• Since 2023, the real net worth of the top 1% of earners has climbed more than 25%, fueled largely by surging financial assets, while the middle 40% of households has gained less than 10%, the New York Fed finds.
• "The substantial role played by financial assets raises questions regarding the potential vulnerability of retail spending to a financial market correction," New York Fed researchers wrote.

What to watch: As we wrote earlier this year, economists have cast doubt on the K-shaped narrative.

• For instance, Pantheon Macroeconomics argued that the wealthiest households have accounted for a roughly stable 40% share of total consumer spending for 25 years, a finding that doesn't necessarily contradict New York Fed research.
• But it cuts at a more pressing question: whether the economy's reliance on a single cohort is a new vulnerability or a long-standing norm of American consumption.

The big surprise out of Wednesday's Fed policy statement was that four officials dissented — the most since 1992. This morning, three laid out their case.

The big picture: Minneapolis Fed president Neel Kashkari, Cleveland Fed president Beth Hammack and Dallas Fed president Lorie Logan, in separate statements, expressed worry that the central bank is making a mistake by continuing to suggest it's locked in on an interest rate cut as the next policy change.

• They see a meaningful chance a rate hike will be in order amid ongoing inflation pressure that has only been exacerbated by the Iran war and resulting surge in energy prices.
• They weren't opposed to leaving rates unchanged at this meeting, but wanted to remove language in the accompanying statement about what policymakers would consider in weighing "additional adjustments" to interest rates, which implies that the next move will continue last year's rate cuts.

What they're saying: "Given the uncertainty about the path of the conflict and the resulting effects on inflation, employment and economic growth, I believe the FOMC should offer a policy outlook that signals that the next rate change could be either a cut or a hike, depending on how the economy evolves," Kashkari wrote in an essay.

• "This could tighten financial conditions somewhat today, pushing back against a high-inflation scenario that could require an even stronger monetary policy response in the future," he added.
• Hammack, in a statement, said that inflation pressures "continue to be broad based, and rising oil prices present an additional source of inflationary pressure."
• Logan said that "it could plausibly be appropriate for the FOMC's next rate change to be either an increase or a cut," depending on whether the inflation outlook improves.

Between the lines: Kashkari, Hammack and Logan were the formal hawkish dissenters this week, but it's clear that skepticism of further rate cuts is wider.

• Chair Jerome Powell said Wednesday that the center of the committee is shifting in a hawkish direction. Several officials without a vote this year have previously sounded a similar tone.
• If incoming chair Kevin Warsh wants to make a rate cut happen early in his tenure, he has some work to do to persuade the rest of the policy committee to come along.