Get the latest updates on stock markets, economic trends, business insights, personal finance tips, and more
With the trade war with the US heating back up, Canada’s Prime minister Mark Carney has delivered another pledge to deepen his country’s economic and security partnership with the EU.
His statement came after trade talks between Ottawa and Washington collapsed last week, with Canada accusing the US of interfering in its sovereignty by demanding French-language concessions.
In retaliation, US President Donald Trump said on Truth Social that on 1 January 2027, tariffs on cars and trucks will be increased to 50%.
“WE DON’T NEED CANADA, THEY NEED US!” he wrote. “They do 95% of their business with the US, with us, the exact opposite!”
Canada announced later that, as of 8 September, it would enact tariffs ranging from 15% to 50% on over 700 American imports, worth about $20 billion (€17.2 billion).
Since Trump’s return to power in 2025 and his repeated attacks on US-Canada trade relations, Ottawa has been turning several times towards the EU, seeking a stable relationship with a “like-minded” partner.
“This fall we will begin intense discussions with the European Union, the world’s second-largest economy, to build a much stronger and deeper economic and security partnership,” Carney said on Monday.
The Canadian Prime minister has confirmed, according to Politico, that he will attend the State of the EU speech in Strasbourg on 16 September after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen invited him before the trade war with the US broke out.
Since the start of the second Trump administration, Brussels and Ottawa have shared a common objective: diversifying their trade relations away from Washington. But since the EU and Canada are already bound by a trade agreement, how far could a deeper relationship go?
The truth is that both sides have their limits.
From critical raw materials to energy and defence, the last months have seen multiple areas of interest come to the fore, and they will likely set the agenda at the Canada-EU summit this fall.
Canada is planning to offer the EU better access to its critical raw materials. Brussels is desperate to move away from China, which holds the monopoly on the production and processing of rare earths. With strong domestic supplies of lithium, graphite and nickel, Ottawa has a lot to offer to integrate the EU into its metal value chain.
Canada might also make offers on energy, which it currently supplies principally to the US.
“We should be talking about a more viable Canada-EU corridor for energy, and not just in respect of oil and gas, but also of nuclear,” Mark Camilleri, President of the Canada-EU Trade and Investment Association, told Euronews. “The EU’s energy needs are increasing, and its energy supply is still very dependent on imports.”
On defence, Canada is already part of SAFE, the €150 billion defence instrument that supports EU member states that wish to invest in defence industrial production through common procurement. But defence cooperation is already set to go further, with Canada selecting German-Norwegian TKMS to build a new fleet of 12 submarines. Deepening the relationship on Arctic security could be another area of collaboration.
Canadian business, meanwhile, is increasingly interested in the European market, but the diversification will not come overnight. Geography, after all, matters.
“The Canadian economy is very much oriented and integrated to the US and North American economy,” Camilleri added. “We are not looking to untangle the relationship, despite the very distressing political issues taking place.”
The Europeans will also put limits on integration with Canada. The trade agreement struck in 2016 is proof enough that the EU market is not easy to access: the deal has not yet been ratified by all EU member states, and has only been provisionally applied since 2017.
Geography matters not only for the Canadians, but also for the EU.
Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union opens membership to “any European State”. Morocco was not considered European enough in the past to become a member, so how could Canada, located much further away, be considered a “European state”?
Guntram Wolff, senior fellow at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel, points out that there is a new openness in Brussels, and that a strategic alignment “could go far”, even if probably it has to fall short of full membership.
Liberalising trade further than what the current agreement involves could be an option. But how far could the integration of the Canadian market into the EU go?
“One can go to the point where Norway is, which is a single market membership,” Wolff told Euronews. “Whether that is where Canada wants to go and whether that’s where all the European countries want to go, we will see in the coming weeks.”
Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein are members with EU member states of what is called the “European Economic Area”, membership of which involves the implementation of the EU’s four freedoms – free movement of goods, persons, services and capital. These freedoms form the basis of the single market.
But an EU official told Euronews that this option was not on the table yet, and remains a theoretical debate for now.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images News
Biggest stock movers Wednesday: SYRE, INTU, SAP and more
Source link
To ensure this doesn’t happen in the future, please enable Javascript and cookies in your browser.
If you have an ad-blocker enabled you may be blocked from proceeding. Please disable your ad-blocker and refresh.
Private credit firms can still whiff if algorithms do the work, but the onus is on them.
Lenders are leaning on artificial intelligence to score borrowers, monitor portfolios, and automate workflows that once took analysts weeks. Momentum is only building: More than half of private credit portfolio managers—54%—plan to deploy AI in underwriting, according to a March PwC survey of 120 global firms.
But as AI takes on more of that analytical heavy lifting, firms face a tough question: When an algorithm makes a mistake, who bears the blame?
For credit risk expert Naeem Siddiqi, author of Intelligent Credit Scoring and senior risk advisor at SAS, the answer is clear: Don’t fault AI; it’s just a tool.
If the large language model, or LLM, miscalculates a number or uses a prohibited category like race or religion, “then the lender is liable,” he said in an email. The courts already tested that principle — that a company can’t hide behind its own algorithm. Guess what? The company lost.
Take Moffatt v. Air Canada for example. One of the airline’s customers used its chatbot in 2022 to ask about bereavement fares following a death in his family. The chatbot told him he could book a full-fare ticket and apply for a refund within 90 days, advice that contradicted Air Canada’s actual policy requiring passengers to submit such requests before travel.
When the customer tried to collect, Montreal-based Air Canada argued it shouldn’t be held liable, effectively treating the chatbot as a separate entity responsible for its own statements.
The British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal rejected that defense, found Air Canada liable for the error and ordered the airline to pay $812.02 Canadian dollars, including CA$650.88 in damages plus interest and fees.
Siddiqi said the ruling set a precedent: “Companies can’t argue that the AI is a separate independent entity that frees the firm from liability.”
He pointed to a broader wave of AI-related litigation in the U.S. where legal exposure extends far beyond chatbots and the airline industry. Currently, there are copyright suits against LLM developers, including Anthropic. However, in other scenarios, the company wielding the tech bore the brunt of scrutiny.
Last year, facial-recognition company Clearview AI faced privacy litigation while software firm Intuit and HR tech firm HireVue received a discrimination complaint alleging their AI hiring tools disadvantaged a deaf, Indigenous job applicant.
“This is an emerging discipline,” Siddiqi said, “but it’s safe to assume the lender is liable for discriminatory decisions made on its behalf, whether by a human or an AI.”
For private credit firms racing to deploy AI across underwriting and portfolio monitoring, the early case law sends a signal: The technology can do the work, but it doesn’t absorb the risk. That still sits with the lender.
“Legally and regulatory-wise, the buck stops entirely with the lender,” said Omar Abassi, founder of Newport Beach-based lending tech startup LoanFlo AI.
So far, regulators such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development have made it clear: You can’t delegate your compliance obligations to a software vendor, Abassi said.
If an AI algorithm introduces algorithmic bias, violates the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, or fails to provide legally compliant adverse action notices, regulators sue or fine the lender—not the AI company.
Because of this legal exposure, some lenders require vendor platforms to provide audit trails showing exactly what the AI read, and regular back-testing to prove the AI model does not inadvertently produce discriminatory outcomes.
That gap between high market interest and actual operational risk is top-of-mind for technology leaders building loan administration tools.
“There’s a general enthusiasm in the market around AI … and firms are very excited about diverse capabilities,” said David Yahalomi, chief operating officer and co-founder of Tel Aviv-based loan-management platform Hypercore. “But this technology is a statistical-based technology … it can make mistakes, and we’ve all seen that.”
Rather than viewing AI as a replacement for decision-makers, Yahalomi suggested lenders treat AI like a new hire who requires guidance and thorough review.
“We should treat it like it’s an employee,” Yahalomi said. “Even if you feel like you’ve trained your best agent … think about it like you gave a deal to your best person five minutes ago. Would it give you the correct answers, or does it need proper time to actually go and research?”
Ultimately, Yahalomi cautioned against granting agents final authority over deals: “We should not treat it as a person that makes calls … you shouldn’t treat it as an executive.”
The balance between strict regulatory oversight and day-to-day workflow is where human teams feel the pressure most. As LLMs become more ubiquitous, too few humans are taking on too much work and leaning heavily on AI-driven underwriting.
“Underwriters are definitely taking on too much work in traditional setups and being overworked in many cases, which leaves more room for human error,” Abassi said. But don’t expect AI to replace credit risk assessment; instead, it’s closing the gap so that fewer underwriters can underwrite many more loans and be less stressed as a result.
“Eventually, the AI will be so good that human underwriters won’t be able to keep up,” he added. “AI agents will be the ones reviewing the other AI’s work. We aren’t there yet, but ultimately it’s on its way.”
Anthony Noto covers corporate finance and private credit. Contact him at anoto@gfmag.com.
Earnings Call Insights: QumulusAI, Inc. (QMLS) Q2 2026
“This is our first call as a public company,” Michael Maniscalco (Chairman & CEO) said, framing Q2 as a proof point for QumulusAI’s “hyper speed rather than hyperscale” strategy as it “turn[s] signed demand into deployed GPUs.”
Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.
Earnings Call Insights: Semtech (SMTC) Q2 FY2027
Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.
Walter Cicchetti
SpaceX (SPCX) was in focus on Tuesday as J.P. Morgan said it has become “increasingly positive” on the company’s Grok artificial intelligence models and chatbot, especially after the Cursor acquisition.
“Cursor brings ~$4B of ARR (as of June 2026), with ~75% coming from businesses, which should
Rocky Brands leads U.S. footwear stocks as sector faces retail pressure
Source link
Canada plays tariff tit-for-tat with Trump
Source link
Leidos (LDOS) on Tuesday highlighted a Navy contract worth as much as $56.7 million to study psychological health and operational readiness among U.S. military personnel.
The award isn’t new. The Department of Defense originally announced it on July 10, 2025, identifying it
Dynacor Group declares CAD 0.0133 dividend
Source link
There’s a lot of cash, but fewer deals propelled global fintech to the best year since 2022.
When Global Payments completed its roughly $24.3 billion acquisition of London-based Worldpay in January, it would account for nearly a quarter of all global fintech investment in the five months that followed, according to Big Four auditor KPMG International’s latest Pulse of Fintech report released Monday.
That massive transaction captures the central paradox shaping current fintech funding: total capital is surging, yet it is concentrated in fewer hands.
KPMG crunched the numbers using data from PitchBook, which tracks M&A and venture capital activity. Overall fintech investment surged to $103.1 billion across the six-month period — up from $72.2 billion in the second half of last year — putting the sector on track for its strongest annual performance in four years. Overall deal count, however, dropped to a multi-year low.
The shift reflects a strong preference for mature fintechs with proven track records over higher-risk, early-stage startups.
As a result, global deal volume dropped to just 2,100 transactions in the first half of the year. That’s down from 2,501 in the prior six-month period (the last six months of 2025). Instead of spreading capital across early-stage ventures, investors funneled funds into late-stage blockbuster deals.
Ten deals worth $1 billion or more closed during the period. In addition to buying WorldPay, Global Payments Inc. found itself on the sell side. The Atlanta-based company sold its issuer solutions business, Total System Services (TSYS), to Fidelity National Information Services Inc. for $13.5 billion — also in January.
Among the other megadeals of 2026, thus far, are the $8.4 billion buyout of Clearwater Analytics and the $6.4 billion take-private of OneStream. In Europe, Denmark’s Saxo Bank was acquired for $1.2 billion, and Belgium’s Kpler Holding landed a private equity growth equity investment of over $1 billion from global investment firm Sixth Street Partners in June.
Regional Dominance & Slumps
Sub-Sector Winners
The Americas accounted for more than 80% of global fintech investment, drawing $86.9 billion across 1,120 deals. The U.S. alone attracted $80.8 billion across 933 deals — over 75% of worldwide investment and 92% of the region’s total. American merger and acquisition activity more than doubled, rising to $64.6 billion from $27.4 billion in the prior six months.
Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) saw $11.3 billion invested across 626 deals, down from $18 billion in the second half of 2025, putting the region on track for a decade-low in both deal count and value. The UK led Europe with $2.5 billion across 205 deals, followed by Germany ($1.6 billion), the Middle East ($1.4 billion), the Nordics ($1.4 billion), and France ($1.2 billion). KPMG cited geopolitical tension, tariff policy, and inflation concerns tied to the Iran conflict as headwinds.
Asia-Pacific investment slid to $4.6 billion across 350 deals, down from $7.1 billion across 426 deals, with weaker activity in China, Japan and Singapore. India held up better, drawing $2 billion, while South Korea hit a four-year high of $899 million.
Payments, for example, led all categories with $44.2 billion invested, already exceeding all of 2025’s total thanks to the Worldpay deal.
Digital assets, meanwhile, attracted $11.1 billion across 467 deals. Corporate venture arms of major crypto platforms drove much of the activity in that corner. AI-focused fintechs pulled in $21.4 billion combined across venture capital, private equity and M&A.
The dynamics shaping fintech mirror a macro trend sweeping the global dealmaking landscape: total dollars are surging, but transaction activity remains bottlenecked. Across all sectors, PitchBook reported that global M&A deal value posted massive year-over-year gains in H1 2026. It reached $1.6 trillion in Q1 (up 50.5%) and $1.3 trillion in Q2 (up 35.3%). Just as in fintech, capital is concentrating heavily at the top — driven almost entirely by megadeals while overall transaction volume stays flat.
Anthony Noto covers corporate finance and private credit. Contact him at anoto@gfmag.com
AI could put the pound on the spot
Source link
Canada will unveil retaliatory tariffs against the U.S. on Tuesday as tensions escalated with President Donald Trump pressing the Canadian government to “fall in line,” while Prime Minister Mark Carney accused Washington of offering a bad deal.
Canadian officials, including Finance
RBA keeps rates unchanged on restrictive policy concerns despite persistent inflation
Source link
straga/iStock via Getty Images
European natural gas prices may need to jump above €100/MWh ($117) by December for the continent to rebuild enough inventory to last the winter if the Strait of Hormuz crisis persists and keeps spot liquefied natural gas prices in Asia elevated, Goldman
matt_benoit/iStock via Getty Images
Prices for U.S. ethanol blending credits plunged Monday to their lowest levels in more than four months, Reuters reported, after the Environmental Protection Agency extended a September 1 compliance deadline for refiners and ruled on long-pending small refinery exemption requests by
Strategic liquidity and the latest technology are fueling digital transformation.
Modern treasury management is undergoing a profound digital transformation. As corporate finance teams navigate increasing geopolitical complexity, volatility, and the need for instantaneous decision-making, the role of their banking and technology partners has shifted. No longer just providers of standard transaction services, these institutions are becoming architects of sophisticated, data-driven ecosystems that prioritize real-time visibility, automated governance, and seamless liquidity orchestration. The global winners of Global Finance’s Best Treasury & Cash Management Providers 2026 awards demonstrate a clear commitment to this new paradigm, offering tools that do more than just process payments; they empower treasurers to treat liquidity as a strategic, actively managed asset.
METHODOLOGY
Global Finance editors select the winners of the Best Treasury & Cash Management Awards with input from industry analysts, corporate executives, and technology experts. The editors also use entries submitted by financial services providers, as well as independent research, to evaluate a series of objective and subjective factors. It is not necessary to enter to win, but experience shows that the additional information supplied in an entry can increase the chances of success. In many cases, entrants can present details and insights that may not be readily available to the editors of Global Finance.
This year’s ratings are based on the period from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2025.
Global Finance uses a proprietary algorithm with criteria—including knowledge of local conditions and corporate customer needs, quality of product and service offerings, financial strength and safety, market standing, compliance, and excellent customer service—weighted for relative importance. The algorithm incorporates multiple ratings into a single numerical score, with 100 equivalent to perfection. In cases where more than one institution earns the same score, we favor local providers over global institutions and privately owned banks over government-owned ones.
The winners are those financial services providers that best meet the specialized needs of corporations engaged in global business. These top-notch financial institutions are not always the biggest, but rather the best—those with qualities that companies should look for when choosing a provider.
MEET THE WINNERS
