Business and Economy

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has announced new economic sanctions on Tehran, describing the measures as an “economic D-Day” as the US war on Iran approaches the six-month mark.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the sanctions on Monday, alongside a naval blockade of Iranian ports.

Bessent said the sanctions target key sources of Iran’s revenue, including its oil and gas industry, and called on countries around the world to cut economic ties with Tehran.

What are the sanctions?

The Treasury Department said the sanctions will target Iran’s aviation, digital assets, gold, technology and shipping sectors, as well as impose sanctions on 60 specific individuals and vessels.

“The main point is that Iran seems to have much less room than it did in previous years to simply work around sanctions,” Peiman Salehi, a Tehran-based geopolitical analyst, told Al Jazeera.

Bessent also said on Monday that the new sanctions expose Tehran’s trade partners to secondary penalties. According to a Treasury Department release on Monday, the targets include ships based in or associated with countries including Singapore, China, and Hong Kong.

“Today’s sanctions are mostly incremental, but are part of trying to intimidate remaining trading partners into cutting ties [with Iran],” said Rachel Ziemba, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security think tank.

“There’s a lot of signalling and bluster aimed at getting other countries to crack down on entities involved in grey-zone trade, but new measures are mostly incremental for now,” she said. Grey-zone trade refers to both illegal, underground trade and trade that is unsanctioned but difficult.

The Treasury Department said Iran has used cryptocurrency to circumvent its longtime sanctions and facilitate transactions involving the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and members of the Iranian regime. The department also said Iran has used gold to help prop up the value of its currency amid economic instability.

The new shipping sanctions target Iran’s state-linked shipping fleet, which the Treasury Department alleges is being used to transport oil as well as “sensitive weapons components”.

The technology sanctions are intended to restrict Iran’s acquisition of materials that could be used in its weapons programmes. The aviation sanctions target Iranian airlines that the Treasury Department alleges are being used to transport weapons and military personnel, as well as financial resources to Iran’s proxies.

Washington also indefinitely suspended several broad exceptions to its ongoing sanctions on Iran, including those covering academic exchanges, personal money transfers and certain sporting activities. Organisations currently engaged in those activities have until September 8 to wind down their operations.

Ziemba says these measures “will have more effect on Iranians, not just the regime”.

What sanctions were already in place?

Washington’s sanctions on Iran have been in place since 1979, after students took hostages at the US Embassy in Tehran, and increased over the next 45 years. Sanctions were briefly paused, however, after the administration of President Barack Obama and world powers signed a nuclear deal with Tehran in 2015. But the Trump administration withdrew from the deal during its first term, in 2018, bringing back old penalties while adding new ones.

Washington imposed new sanctions during Trump’s second term, many of them before the US and Israel first struck the country on February 28.

In February 2025, the Treasury Department sanctioned 30 individuals and vessels involved in the “brokering [of] the sale and transportation of Iranian petroleum-related products”, according to a department release. The targets were based in several countries, including India and China.

In December 2025, Washington sanctioned 29 vessels it accused of being part of a so-called shadow fleet used to transport Iranian petroleum. It also sanctioned Egyptian businessman Hatem Elsaid Farid Ibrahim Sakr over his businesses’ alleged ties to seven of those 29 vessels. The measures continued the 1979 sanctions campaign against Iran’s oil industry.

The Treasury Department stepped up the sanctions again in April 2026, targeting another two dozen individuals, companies and vessels operating within the network of Iranian oil shipping magnate Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, the son of now-deceased senior Iranian security official Ali Shamkhani.

Later that same month, the Treasury also targeted what it described as “regime-linked cryptocurrency” and said it had seized nearly half a billion dollars from so-called “shadow banking networks”.

How have sanctions affected US consumers?

Pressure on the Iranian oil market, both through existing sanctions as well as the current war, has tightened the rest of the globe’s oil supply and affected countries that buy Iranian oil.

China, for example, is the primary destination for Iranian oil, buying roughly 90 percent of Iran’s crude oil exports. Beijing bought 1.4 million barrels per day in 2025.

At the same time, Asian markets, China included, also heavily rely on oil travelling through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, where roughly one-fifth of the globe’s oil transited before Iran choked off the route.

This has put pressure on the global oil supply, meaning the benchmark for crude oil has ticked up, translating to higher prices on fuel and food.

For US consumers, that has been most apparent at the petrol pump. The average price for a gallon of petrol (3.78 litres) is $4.09, up from $2.98 on February 28 when the US and Israel first struck Iran, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks daily petrol prices.

Experts warn that if Iran retaliation accelerates, it could hit Americans hard.

“If sanctions provoke Iranian retaliation against Gulf shipping, materially reduce oil exports, or cause insurers and shipping companies to avoid the region, then Americans could feel it very quickly through gasoline, diesel, airfares, freight costs and ultimately inflation,” John Deal, managing director of capital markets at Post Oak Group investment bank, told Al Jazeera.

The economy and Iran are emerging as key issues heading into the US midterm elections, with voters expressing dissatisfaction on both fronts. That could put pressure on Republicans in competitive races, including in traditionally red states such as Texas.

A late-July Reuters/Ipsos poll suggested that only about a third of Americans supported the war, while just 28 percent of respondents in a CNN poll approved of Trump’s handling of Iran.

On the economy, an AP/NORC poll suggested that 32 percent of Americans approved of Trump’s performance. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, meanwhile, suggested that Democrats were narrowly ahead of Republicans on which party voters trust more to handle the economy—the first Democratic advantage in roughly a decade.

How are the sanctions affecting markets?

The latest sanctions announcement is weighing on Wall Street as well as the oil and gold markets.

On the heels of the announcement, the price of gold, largely considered a safe investment during times of economic uncertainty, jumped by 0.8 percent to $4,639.49 per ounce (28 grams) in midday trading, ticking up to its highest level since mid-May.

As for oil, prices pulled back on Monday after two weeks of gains. The price of the global benchmark Brent crude tumbled by more than 2 percent on Monday to $85.22 a barrel.

On Wall Street, the major indices are mixed amid the latest sanctions news as well as Trump’s announcement of new tariffs on Canada. The Nasdaq is down 0.5 percent, and the S&P 500 is down 0.2 percent. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, however, is trending in positive territory, 0.2 percent higher than the market open on Monday.

The oil sector is taking a hit. Chevron is down 0.8 percent, ExxonMobil tumbled 0.9 percent, BP fell more than 2 percent, and Shell is down 0.2 percent.

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, (MBS), is on the second day of his two-day state visit to France, where he’s meeting President Emmanuel Macron.

In this explainer, we outline what they are expected to discuss and examine how their latest meetings build on an already evolving relationship.

What is on the agenda?

MBS’s visit to Paris began on Sunday evening alongside President Macron at the closing ceremony of the Esports World Cup. It was the first time the Esports tournament, which includes competitions ranging from video games to chess, had been held outside Saudi Arabia.

On Monday, Macron and Bin Salman are expected to sign several agreements on health, transport and energy.

French media reported that a deal to build a Dragon Ball-themed amusement park, backed by a Saudi investment fund and inspired by the iconic Japanese manga series, could be signed.

Valerie Pecresse, President of the Regional Council of Île-de-France in Greater Paris, told French broadcaster TF1 that the regional government had been working on the project for 18 months.

“There is a very important meeting at the Elysee today that may result in the signing of this agreement. We are waiting for the signature,” she said, describing the project as “on the scale of Disneyland”.

Bin Salman and Macron are also holding bilateral discussions on regional security and their economic ties.

That is expected to include discussions about energy routes that bypass the Strait of Hormuz, such as new pipelines, capacity upgrades and alternative port networks.

France is a major buyer of Saudi oil and mineral products.

Since the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran on February 28, shipping has been severely disrupted in the Strait of Hormuz – the vital waterway on which oil exporters in the Gulf are heavily reliant and where 20 percent of the world’s oil and natural gas supplies are shipped from during peacetime. The disruption sent oil prices soaring.

Before the war, a barrel of Brent crude – the global benchmark – cost about $66. Over the course of the conflict, prices have climbed above $100 – hitting a high of $119 early on in the war.

On Monday, Brent was trading around $93 a barrel.

Bin Salman and Macron are also expected to discuss the war in Iran, the bloodshed in Palestine, as well as developments in Syria and Lebanon, where Israel occupies around one-fifth of its territory.

Other expected topics on Monday’s agenda include global events that Saudi Arabia is set to host in the coming years, including Expo 2030, focusing on sustainability and urban innovation, and the 2034 football World Cup.

How much trade does Saudi Arabia do with France?

The two countries have a fairly equal trading balance.

In 2024, France exported $4.5bn worth of goods to Saudi Arabia and imported $4.6bn worth, according to data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), an online platform that compiles and visualises international trade statistics.

Refined petroleum accounted for 72 percent of Saudi Arabia’s exports to France in 2024. Besides refined petroleum, Saudi Arabia exported crude petroleum and other mineral products to France. It also exported small amounts of machinery, chemicals and cars.

France’s exports to Saudi Arabia in 2024 were more diverse, including airliners, helicopters, gas turbines, pharmaceutical products and perfume, among other products.

What have relations between Saudi Arabia and France been like?

Sunday’s visit marked the third time MBS has visited France after trips in 2022 and 2023.

In December 2024, Macron visited Riyadh, where the two countries founded the Saudi-French Strategic Partnership Council, which formalised and upgraded political and economic ties between Saudi Arabia and France.

The current visit is also MBS’s first international trip since the August 7 signing of the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, known as the Mecca pact – the mutual defence agreement between Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan.

Signed by the prince, Turkiye’s President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif, the agreement commits all three states to treat an armed attack on any one of them as an attack on all three.

Analysts say the pact shows that Saudi Arabia is taking steps to diversify its security partnerships beyond Washington.

EXPLAINER

At least 145 countries have reported increases in petrol prices since the attacks on Iran by the US and Israel began on February 28.

Since the United States and Israel launched their war on Iran six months ago, petrol prices have risen in at least 145 countries, adding to the burden on consumers worldwide.

The figures are based on data from GlobalPetrolPrices, which tracks fuel prices in 170 countries and territories. Petrol prices in Myanmar rose the most, increasing by 56 percent from $0.77 per litre of 95-octane fuel on February 23 to $1.20 on August 17. Bhutan recorded the next-largest increase at 55 percent, followed by Cuba at 51 percent, the UAE at 50 percent and 48 percent in Nigeria.

In 25 other countries, most of them oil producers with heavily subsidised fuel, prices have either remained unchanged or fallen by single digits.

The table below lists the 145 countries where petrol prices at the pump increased over the past six months.

How higher fuel costs shrink your driving range

Before the war, the US national average for a gallon [3.78 litres] of regular petrol was $2.94. It now costs $4.09, an increase of 39 percent, according to AAA Fuel Prices, which tracks retail fuel prices for the American Automobile Association (AAA).

The extra cost directly affects how far people can travel. Before the war, $50 worth of fuel in the US could take a family sedan roughly 718 km (446 miles). Today, the same amount takes you about 536 km (333 miles) – 183 km less, a 25 percent reduction in driving distance.

That gap varies depending on where you live.

Set your country, car and budget below to see how far your money takes you. If you’re filling up in the US, you can also select a state and fuel grade.

How high oil costs drive up the price of food

Oil prices and food prices move in lockstep, with energy prices affecting every stage of the food supply chain, from the fertilisers used in the fields to the trucks that carry food from field to supermarket shelf.

Rising oil prices also directly impact shipping and the cost of transport.

“The lifeblood of the global economy is transport,” economist David McWilliams told Al Jazeera. “It’s getting stuff from A to B – it’s a logistics problem, a supply chain problem and ultimately transportation is the energy of the global economy.”

In lower-income countries, where populations spend a far greater share of their earnings on food and import large quantities of grain and fertiliser, rising oil prices could rapidly translate into food shortages.

What products are made from oil and gas?

Oil and gas are used for far more than just fuel. They are raw materials for thousands of everyday products.

Plastics, including water bottles, food packaging, phone casings and medical syringes, are all derived from crude oil.

Crude oil is also the hidden ingredient in synthetic fabrics, such as polyester, nylon and acrylic, which are used to make everything from sportswear to carpets. It also underpins the cosmetics industry, as it is used to make products such as petroleum jelly (Vaseline), lipsticks and concealers.

Household items also rely on oil-based ingredients, with laundry detergents, dishwashing liquids and paints all derived from petroleum products.

The global food supply is essentially built on natural gas in the form of fertilisers, used to enhance crop yields and ensure that food production can meet demand.

For the first time since becoming vice president of the United States, JD Vance has returned to his hometown of Middletown, Ohio, with a goal of rallying Republican voters ahead of November’s pivotal midterm elections.

Vance delivered Friday’s speech at a symbolic location: the steel plant where his late grandfather once worked.

He used the appearance to tout a $1bn investment from the steel manufacturer Cleveland-Cliffs that was supported by $500m in government awards.

That funding, he said, illustrated his party’s commitment to the manufacturing sector and reinvigorating the US economy overall.

“I’m not saying it’s going to be easy – or it’s all going to happen overnight – but in just 18 months, we have seen an explosion of rebuilding in the American heartland,” Vance said, crediting the growth to policies under President Donald Trump.

Vance’s speech comes at a critical time for the Republican Party and Trump in particular.

November’s midterm races will decide whether Republicans are able to maintain control over both chambers of Congress. Should their hold on the legislature slip, Democrats could stymie Trump’s policy priorities for the last two years of his presidency — or even impeach him, as Trump himself has suggested.

Polls have shown that the state of the economy remains the top issue ahead of the midterms.

But how voters perceive each party’s ability to address economic strain has shifted. Before the start of Trump’s second term, the Pew Research Center found that voters were more likely to favour Republican policies on the economy.

In July, however, the dynamic had switched: Thirty-seven percent of those surveyed backed the Democratic approach to the economy, compared with 36 percent for Republicans.

Another poll this month from the news agency Reuters and the firm Ipsos likewise found slightly more respondents siding with the Democrats on economic policy than Republicans, upending a longtime trend that stretched back to 2017.

Trump, for his part, has publicly appeared to dismiss cost-of-living issues as a partisan invention, calling questions of affordability a “hoax” and a “con job” engineered by Democrats.

At Friday’s speech, Vance took a different approach, trying to assuage concerns about the administration’s handling of the economy.

“We got a lot of work to do, but we’re making progress on all the things that matter the most,” Vance said, citing efforts to make homeownership more affordable.

The speech is part of an intensifying campaign under Trump to boost the prospects of Republican candidates ahead of the midterms, with the president and other top officials holding rallies for their party’s candidates.

Ohio, part of a historic manufacturing region known as the Rust Belt, has become increasingly conservative since Trump’s first White House victory in 2016.

But amid rising dissatisfaction with Republican leadership, Democrats see a chance to win back the state’s governor’s office, as well as the US Senate seat left vacant when Vance became vice president.

Whoever wins the special election in November will serve the remainder of Vance’s Senate term, which would have ended in January 2029.

The Republican nominee in the race, Senator Jon Husted, joined Vance on stage at the Middletown rally on Friday. Husted was appointed to fill Vance’s Senate seat until a special election could be held.

Vance, for his part, dedicated part of his speech to attacking Husted’s Democratic rival, former Senator Sherrod Brown, who lost his re-election race to Republican Bernie Moreno two years ago.

He accused Brown of being among the politicians “who pretend to be friends of the workers in this facility”, while instead advancing their own priorities.

“It’s hard to understand what these modern Democrats actually stand for,” Vance said, characterising the party as having strayed from its ideals.

He pointed to Brown’s record of siding with the policies of former Democratic President Joe Biden, who defeated Trump in the 2020 presidential race.

“[Brown] was a man who claimed to represent this state but never once raised his voice against Joe Biden’s border crisis or against the inflation that was brought on by Joe Biden underinvesting and trying to destroy American industry,” Vance said.

The vice president also singled out Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed, repeating a false claim that the Democratic Senate candidate called for “Sharia law” in the US.

“I’d love to go back in time and tell my papaw that there’s a man who claims to stand for working people, who says not only should we have Sharia law, but if you criticise it, you are a white supremacist,” Vance said about El-Sayed.

Trump’s approval rating currently sits at 33 percent, according to Reuters-Ipsos polling from this month.

The El Nino weather phenomenon is expected to increase the likelihood of drought and excess heat across the region.

The Panama Canal is expected to limit traffic starting in early September, as it prepares for lower water levels due to the El Nino weather phenomenon.

On Thursday, the Panama Canal Authority, the body that oversees the waterway, announced that daily transit caps would be set to address concerns about the drier weather conditions ahead.

Under the new measures, 34 vessels will be permitted to sail through the canal as of September 4. A further reduction will start on September 15, when the limit will be 32 ships.

The travel restrictions are a reversal for the Panama Canal Authority. Officials told the news service Reuters in May that they had no plans to limit crossings this year, citing water conservation measures imposed last year.

The canal, which handles about 5 percent of global maritime trade, usually has capacity to accommodate about 40 vessels per day.  Since June, it has seen a daily average of 35 transits.

Any significant decrease in travel through the canal is likely to translate into slower international shipping for industries that rely on the waterway. That, in turn, could increase costs.

A severe drought in 2023, for instance, cut traffic through the Panama Canal by roughly 36 percent, leading to disruptions in global supply chains.

The declining water levels that year were also attributed to El Nino, as well as climate change accelerated by human activities.

El Nino is a naturally occurring weather phenomenon that takes place every two to seven years, when the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean is warmer than usual.

The resulting weather patterns can have an impact across the region and even globally, putting some areas at risk of excessive heat and drought, while others suffer from flooding

Scientists expect a particularly strong El Nino in the coming months, potentially among the strongest on record. That could lead to an increase in cases of extreme weather events.

Panama Canal authorities have previously imposed vessel limits in order to conserve water.

The canal relies on a lock system that lifts and lowers vessels as they travel from the Pacific Ocean to the Caribbean Sea, and vice versa.

But the canal is fed, in part, by freshwater from nearby lakes and reservoirs, most notably Gatun Lake.

Panamanians rely on that lake as well to supply drinking water to nearby cities, including the capital Panama City, putting additional strain on the waterway during times of drought.

Walmart sales are slumping as US consumer spending pulls back, with the economic impact of tariffs and the United States’ tensions with Iran weighing on consumers, the big-box retailer’s most recent earnings report shows.

US same-store sales rose 2.6 percent in the second quarter, according to the company’s earnings released on Thursday, falling short of the 3.8 percent forecast by analysts at LSEG. That marked the slowest quarterly increase in six years.

The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer said heightened petrol prices are to blame for the slowdown in spending.

“When fuel prices increase and get above $4, perhaps there’s a psychological impact to that … consumers are making trade-offs,” CFO John David Rainey said on a call with analysts on Thursday.

Prices are continuing to jump. The average price for a gallon (3.78 litres) of petrol rose to $4.10 on Thursday, up from $4.07 a week ago, according to the American Automobile Association, which tracks daily petrol prices. By comparison, the average price was $2.98 when the US and Israel first struck Iran.

The big-box retailer also said it expected $2bn in incremental fuel-related costs above its original guidance.

Sales dropped in Walmart’s US pharmacy business and also dipped elsewhere. Overall, quarterly revenue rose 3.4 percent, the slowest pace since the first quarter of fiscal 2023.

Consumers are spending more in the checkout line — 1.1 percent higher than the previous quarter — but it is still well below the 3.1 percent jump this time last year.

That comes as consumer inflation ticked up last month by 0.1 percent from the month prior and 3.4 percent from this time last year, according to the US Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

The price of fresh fruit jumped 2.2 percent from a month ago, butter by 0.8 percent, and fresh fish by 1 percent, according to the BLS report.

This as overall retail sales dipped in July, dropping 0.6 percent, marking the biggest decrease since May 2025, according to the US Commerce Department data released last week.

Walmart also announced price cuts on Wednesday on 11,000 items, to be fuelled in part by the $2.9bn in tariff refunds it has received – a one-time boon – and a strategy also being deployed by rivals including Target.

Walmart said, however, that price changes took effect in July, so the effects might be more apparent in the company’s next earnings report.

“You don’t necessarily expect to have that offsetting benefit to the lower prices in the immediate period,” Rainey said.

However, fewer consumers are venturing into brick-and-mortar stores, with foot traffic increasing by 1.5 percent for the quarter, a drop from 3 percent in the previous quarter. However, Walmart’s e-commerce sales are on the upswing, with sales jumping 24 percent in the US.

As a result, Walmart upgraded its forecast for net sales growth, from 3.5–4.5 percent to 4–5 percent.

But that is limited because in-store sales are still the company’s premier offering.

“The bread and butter of the company is still in-store and in-person shopping,” Melius Research analyst Jacob Aiken-Phillips told the Reuters News Agency.

Mixed big-box earnings

Other big-box retailers also reported earnings in the last couple of days, with a pullback in consumer spending being an undertone. TJX, the parent company of TJ Maxx and Marshalls, reported sales growth of 1 percent for the quarter, a slowdown from 6 percent the quarter before.

“Our fear is that it relates to lower ticket [less purchases per shopping trip] given wider signs of consumer weakness and price increases over the last year-and-a-half,” William Blair analyst Dylan Carden told Reuters.

That comes alongside earnings from Target, one of Walmart’s closest competitors. On Wednesday, the Minneapolis, Minnesota-based big-box retailer reported net sales jumping 5.3 percent for the quarter compared to this time last year, at $26.5bn.

That was driven by a 3.6 percent rise in in-store traffic. The company has also cut prices over the last year on more than 10,000 items and received a $1bn tariff refund.

On Wall Street, Walmart is taking a hit on the heels of its earnings report, with shares down by 9.6 percent since the market opened. Other big-box retailers are lower, but not showing nearly as stark a drop. TJX stock was down 1.7 percent, and Target was down by 0.1 percent.

Social media giant Meta is facing a landmark trial that could impact its future.

Opening statements began on Tuesday in a US federal court case brought by 29 state attorneys general, who have accused Facebook and Instagram’s parent company of designing platforms to encourage infinite scrolling and keep their youngest users hooked, despite allegedly knowing they could fuel addictive behaviour. The company is also accused of collecting data on minors.

The case is expected to last as long as six weeks. If the attorneys general get their way, the Silicon Valley-based tech company might have to make structural changes to its platform and pay as much as $1.4 trillion in fines.

While Meta denies the allegations, the potential consequences of this case could be significant for the company, which is already facing low employee morale, waves of layoffs and a series of lagging investments.

Significant financial impact

The potential exposure to Meta is significant. State penalties could reach as high as $1.4 trillion, Meta has said, although that is unlikely, as the coalition of states said it is seeking $200bn in damages.

To put that in context, the amount is roughly the equivalent of Meta’s revenue last year. In 2025, the tech giant generated nearly $201bn in revenue, and it had $83.2bn in operating income.

The $200bn ask is significantly higher than any penalty the company has had to face so far. In March, a jury in a separate New Mexico lawsuit ordered Meta to pay $375m in civil penalties, and another $567m was ordered by a judge earlier this month.

At the time of the March penalty, financial services firm Morningstar said it was not overly concerned about the impact of the looming court cases on Meta’s valuation, even if governments around the world use these cases as a reason to push for structural changes to the business.

“We think that any algorithmic changes imposed on the firm via legislation are also a manageable risk, given the firm’s monetizable user base, which is overwhelmingly adult, thereby insulating the firm against such legislation,” a Morningstar analyst note said.

While no one can predict which way the coalition case will go, Meta’s problems extend to concerns about significant financial exposure in some of its investments and business units.

For instance, Reality Labs, the division responsible for Meta’s virtual and augmented reality tools and software like the metaverse, has lost $70bn since 2020.

Meta has also ramped up spending to build out AI infrastructure as growing concerns about an AI bubble loom over the sector.

Cash flow for the business fell significantly, from $12bn in the first quarter to $784m in the second quarter, although it did not go into negative territory as some analysts had expected.

“I think it’s [Meta] in an unenviable spot, because it’s facing pressure from multiple fronts,” Aleksandar Tomic, associate dean for strategy, innovation, and technology at Boston College, told Al Jazeera.

“These verdicts are going to put pressure on their advertising business. The AI development seems to have stalled, and the virtual reality thing seems to be dead on arrival, at least for now. So the only bright spot is that they might be able to get into the AI infrastructure game, but that is no guarantee.”

Meta itself is worried about the financial strain. “There can be no assurances that a favorable final outcome will be obtained in all our cases, and defending any lawsuit is costly and can impose a significant burden on management and employees,” the company said in a January Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing.

Can the lawsuit impact its core product?

While financial penalties might be a strain, a legal requirement to fundamentally alter the machinery that makes Instagram and Facebook so valuable to advertisers would be much harder for Meta to absorb.

The lawsuit calls for changes to its business model, including eliminating the infinite scroll that allows users to continually look at new posts. Meta’s advertising business is dependent on impressions, or the number of times a content appears on a user’s screen. The longer someone is on the app, the more impressions they can see.

“Our financial performance has been and will continue to be significantly determined by our success in adding, retaining, and engaging active users of our products that deliver ad impressions, particularly for Facebook and Instagram,” the company said in an SEC filing.

“User growth and engagement are also impacted by a number of other factors, including competitive products and services, such as TikTok, that have reduced some users’ engagement with our products and services,” the filing added.

In 2025, Meta reported 12 percent more advertisement impressions than in 2024, while the average price per advertisement jumped by 9 percent.

The plaintiff states want the company to make other changes, including getting rid of algorithms and AI models made from data compiled from minors. The states are also asking the court to compel the company to promote the wellbeing of its users and set time restrictions for its youngest consumers.

Meta has introduced features that have reminded teens of their time use on their platforms. In January 2023, it gave teens ways to manage the kinds of advertisements they could see on Instagram and Facebook. In June 2023, it introduced a feature to notify teen users that they have spent more than 20 minutes on the platform and to set daily time limits.

“We stand by our record of creating strong protections for teens, and look forward to making our case in court,” Stephanie Otway, a Meta spokesperson, told Al Jazeera.

But the lawsuit says that is not enough, alleging that teens could easily dismiss the notification and continue scrolling.

How will this impact future lawsuits?

Meta is currently facing lawsuits from more than 100,000 different parties, according to its SEC filings, including individuals, cities, states, and school districts around the US.

“These first few cases going out are really going to set the standard,” Tre Lovell, a Los Angeles-based media law and entertainment lawyer, told Al Jazeera.

Lovell predicted that, ultimately, there will be a combined settlement.

“We’re going to get close to some type of global settlement, a global resolution. I think, ultimately, that’s where this is going to end.”

Snap, TikTok, and Google’s YouTube have also faced litigation amid allegations that their products are built to encourage compulsive use by young people, Tomic told Al Jazeera. The claims could open the floodgates to the type of litigation that challenged the tobacco industry in the late 1990s, he said.

“This is the tobacco litigation of the information age. They [the plaintiffs in the Meta lawsuit] have identified this addiction component of social networks. Now that there is a judgement against Meta, I would be shocked if we don’t see everybody else getting sued, and once they get sued, it will be pretty much the same,” Tomic said.

In 1998, 46 states settled lawsuits with major cigarette makers over health costs and forced the companies to impose restrictions on advertising, especially targeting younger audiences.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Trump announces pause on 50 percent duty on Canadian exports shortly before midnight deadline.

The United States and Canada have reached a deal to avert steep tariffs on billions of dollars of Canadian goods, US President Donald Trump has announced.

Trump made the announcement shortly before the expiry of a midnight deadline for imposing a 50 percent duty on a wide range of Canadian exports, including electronics, industrial machinery, furniture, and dairy products.

“I have paused the 50% Tariffs against Canada, that were scheduled to kick in tomorrow morning for a three day period, based on the fact that Canada and the U.S.A., subject to the finalization of documents, have a DEAL!” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

“The great Keystone XL Pipeline, long ago killed by Sleepy Joe Biden, may be awoken from the grave!”

More to follow…

Opening statements in a landmark US case brought by a bipartisan coalition of 29 states against Meta – the parent company of Facebook and Instagram – began on Tuesday, with Colorado, California, New Jersey and Kentucky arguing that the company’s popular social media apps were designed in ways that harmed the mental health of young users.

The trial, which is expected to last several weeks, began in a US federal court in California before District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. While there is an eight-person jury, the group is serving in an advisory role as Judge Rogers will ultimately decide the case.

Megan O’Neill, a deputy California attorney general, in her opening statement said that the company designed its products to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public”.

She added that it worked “especially well for kids”.

The lawsuit, which was first filed in 2023, alleges that Meta made decisions to design its apps to hook users and facilitate excessive use among the platforms’ youngest users. The coalition also alleges that the company collected data on children under the age of 13 in violation of federal law.

“Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about those kids that the kids are safe,” O’Neill said.

‘Limited claims’

Meta has long pushed back on allegations against the Silicon Valley social media behemoth.

In a statement before the trial, a Meta spokesperson said the states’ claims are unsubstantiated, and the company stands by its record of creating strong protections for teenagers, including launching Instagram Teen Accounts in 2024, which limit who can contact underage users, as well as a feature that allows parents to set time limits on usage.

“The State AGs may call this a landmark case, but their limited claims are unsubstantiated and their financial demands are vastly disproportionate,” Stephanie Otway, a Meta spokesperson, told Al Jazeera in a statement.

“The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled, claim benign features like having an additional Instagram account somehow harmed their residents, and attempt to penalize Meta for industry-wide challenges like age verification. Rather than sticking to the facts or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout.”

The potential impact on Meta’s bottom line is existential. The company could face fines as high as $1.4 trillion, which is just shy of its $1.5 trillion market cap. However, the coalition is seeking fines of roughly $200bn.

Meta has already been ordered to pay $942m in fines in a separate New Mexico lawsuit – $375m in civil penalties in a March jury verdict and $567m ordered by a judge earlier this month.

Meta has acknowledged that the lawsuits it faces, including those related to youth social media addiction, could lead to “substantial monetary damages or fines” in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing in January.

A long time coming

Meta, along with other social media giants, has faced a growing slate of cases across the United States, including from cities, states, school districts and even individuals.

The coalition of states is asking Meta to make changes to its platforms, including introducing new age restrictions and cutting the infinite scroll.

The case’s impetus came from a US Senate committee hearing in 2021, when whistleblower Frances Haugen, a former data scientist at Facebook, claimed that the company knowingly pushed products that could impact the health of young users as the Mark Zuckerberg-led company pursued higher profits.

Meta has repeatedly tried to end the coalition lawsuit, including in 2024 and as recently as June, when it sought summary judgement – a decision that a court might make without going to trial – which would have ended the lawsuit.

The case is impacting the company’s stock. On Wall Street, the social media giant is down more than 3 percent in midday trading.

FCC faces scrutiny as Disney claims licence renewal order is tied to political motives against ABC’s coverage.

Disney has filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) amid efforts to stop an early licence review for eight ABC-owned and -operated stations around the United States.

In the lawsuit filed in a federal court in Washington, DC, the media giant alleged the early renewal is an effort by the administration of US President Donald Trump to intimidate the company after infuriating the president.

In April, the FCC ordered the network’s stations, which include its affiliates in New York and Los Angeles, to file their licence renewals ahead of schedule despite the fact that for six of its stations, the current term isn’t even halfway finished. The station with the closest deadline is WTVD in Durham, North Carolina, but that is not until December 2028. The network says the move is part of a political “retaliatory campaign”.

“Again and again, the Administration has attacked ABC’s speech – the stories its journalists report and the viewpoints its network programs air. Over time, those attacks have escalated into express demands that ABC be stripped of its broadcast licenses because of its speech,” the 46-page complaint said.

The suit presented a wave of Truth Social posts that the president posted in 2025 threatening the network, among them one saying that the network “should lose their Licences for their unfair coverage of Republicans and/or Conservatives”.

The FCC said the April licence renewal call was a result of diversity, equity and inclusion practices at ABC’s parent company, Disney, and an investigation into the ABC network’s talk show programme The View.

In March, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr threatened broadcasters, saying stations airing “fake news” could lose their licences amid Trump’s frustration with coverage of the US-Israel war on Iran.

Not long after, Trump demanded that ABC fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel over comments he made before the White House correspondents dinner shooting in which he called first lady Melania Trump an “expectant widow”. Trump responded to them after the shooting, characterising them “a call to violence”.

Free speech advocates have praised ABC for the lawsuit.

“It’s about time for someone to take Brendan Carr and his FCC to court over their endless campaign of intimidation and retaliation against journalism that displeases Carr’s thin-skinned boss,” Seth Stern, director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told Al Jazeera.

“No matter what pretexts he asserts, Carr’s modus operandi is clear: to serve as Trump’s censorship tsar and abuse his office to repeatedly and exclusively target Trump’s perceived adversaries in the media, whether through sham proceedings or threatening letters and X posts.”

The network called for a “speedy hearing” in the complaint as well as a temporary restraining order.

News of the lawsuit sent Disney’s stock surging in morning trading by 1.1 percent.

London, United Kingdom – For several weeks, until her daughter is paid, Donna O’Hara is unable to buy food. On those days, she goes to a food bank instead, or borrows money to get by.

The 54-year-old, who has four children, started relying on food banks, nonprofit initiatives that collect and provide free emergency food to those in need, after her son and his girlfriend moved out following the birth of their baby in February. They had been contributing to the household bills, and losing that income tipped things over the edge.

“Mentally, it’s just stressful and it’s embarrassing having to go to the food bank, utterly embarrassing,” she says. “I hate asking people for help. I hate borrowing money.”

The stress compounds an already precarious situation.

O’Hara has multiple myeloma, a blood cancer, and has been hospitalised three times since October on life-saving antibiotics after infections forced her to pause chemotherapy. Her cancer is in remission, but doctors have told her it is likely to return before she can resume treatment. Her husband died of lung cancer last year.

Two of her children are on Universal Credit, the UK’s main working-age welfare monthly payment, including support for housing, children and low income or unemployment.

After paying child maintenance, her son is left with 340 pounds ($460) a month to live on after the payment. He cannot work because he is waiting for gallbladder surgery.

“Who can live on 340 pounds a month?” O’Hara said. “And because I’m always helping him out, that cuts into my money.”

Her own housing benefit payment is 1,800 pounds ($2,440) a month, against rent of 2,500 pounds ($3,390) for a private property with the downstairs toilet she and her late husband both needed because of their cancer treatment. She has fallen behind, and expects to be evicted.

“The day the bailiffs come round, I must be packed and ready to go into the housing they put me in,” she said. “Who knows where I’m going to end up?”

‘Damaging structural factors’

The UK has been in an acute cost of living crisis since inflation surged from late 2021, driven initially by pandemic disruption and then by the spike in energy prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

But for households like O’Hara’s, the strain runs deeper, with its roots in more than a decade of austerity, weak wage growth and stagnant productivity, compounded by the economic impact of Brexit.

That longer history is central to Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s political pitch. To tackle the UK’s cost of living crisis, the new premier has set out a 10-year plan built around expanding social and affordable housing, reforming Universal Credit and investing in local economies.

He is currently touring the nation to engage with people’s financial concerns.

Universal Credit is meant to act as a safety net, but for many, including O’Hara, it no longer stretches far enough to cover it.

Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation puts scale behind stories like O’Hara’s.

“We estimate 7.4 million low-income families were unable to afford at least one essential item in the last six months,” said Sam Tims, the charity’s lead analyst, pointing to cutbacks on heating, toiletries and food. “This is at a record high.”

Tims traced the roots directly to policy choices.

“The combination of all these damaging structural factors has left our economy weaker, our wages lower, our rents higher and our income safety net in need of repair,” he said, noting that the basic rate of Universal Credit support is lower now than a decade ago.

He welcomes the removal of the two-child benefit limit in April, estimated to have lifted about half a million children out of poverty, but argues it needs to be paired with a “protected minimum floor” in Universal Credit and higher local housing allowance rates to make private rents affordable again.

Adam Lang, director of policy at Carnegie UK, says the think tank’s polling shows just more than a quarter of households could not afford an unexpected 850-pound ($1,150) expense, and one in 20 cannot afford to feed everyone at home.

“What is striking is that we’ve conducted the same survey for the last three years and we see no real improvement on most of these measures,” he said.

Lang cautiously supports Burnham’s approach, but warned against expecting a single set of measures to fix things.

“It is heartening to hear the UK government talk of a 10-year plan,” he said. “On the other hand, it is clear that life is too hard for too many and change is required.”

He argued that governments need to track wellbeing alongside growth and employment, so policymakers can see “not just how the economy is performing, but how people are doing”.

Evelyn Henderson-Child, senior researcher at the Centre for Local Economies (CLES), said that even when growth does happen, it does not reliably reach those navigating the crisis.

“GDP [Gross domestic product] can kind of swish on upwards while the foundational conditions of life, community resilience and people’s financial stability are eroded,” she said, pointing out that growth-focused policy tends to prioritise high-productivity sectors while overlooking the ones that actually sustain society and offer significant amounts of employment, such as food, retail, transport, housing and care.

The answer lies less in growth itself and more in who benefits from it, she believes.

“Traditional policy tends to rely on patching up inequality, if it does at all, after wealth is generated and concentrated at the top,” she said. “It’s about pre-distribution, rewiring the economic system from the get-go so that economic and social benefits are spread more evenly.”

But the debate over growth statistics and structural reform is of little consequence for O’Hara.

“Some people say ‘work on a budget’. Try working on a budget when you have to count your pennies just to get a loaf of bread,” she said. “It’s not my fault I got cancer and can’t go to work. Life shouldn’t be like that.”

GDP rises 0.3 percent in the second quarter as consumption and capital spending sag.

Japan’s economy has slowed in the second quarter of the year amid moribund consumption and capital spending, according to official figures.

Gross domestic product (GDP) grew 0.3 percent in the April-June period from the first quarter, data released by Japan’s Cabinet Office on Monday showed. It was the third consecutive expansion but was down from 0.5 percent growth in the previous quarter and missed the 0.5 percent growth analysts had forecast.

On an annualised basis, the world’s fourth-largest economy expanded 1.1 percent.

A survey of 37 economists conducted by the Japan Center for Economic Research, a think tank, had forecast an annualised expansion of 1.67 percent.

Private consumption was flat in real terms while capital expenditures fell 1.2 percent, or 4.6 percent on an annualised basis, offsetting strong exports, according to the data.

Broken down by component, net exports contributed 0.5 percentage points to GDP growth while domestic demand accounted for negative 0.2 percent.

Norihiro Yamaguchi, lead economist for Japan at Oxford Economics, said he expected growth to be sluggish in the second half of 2026 as companies pass rising energy costs on to consumers.

“Although AI-related goods exports will continue to stay robust in the near term, sluggish non-AI-related global economic activities will limit overall export gains,” Yamaguchi said in a note to clients.

Japan imports almost all of its crude oil needs, leaving it exposed to elevated energy costs stemming from the fallout of the United States-Israel war on Iran.

Cost pressures on Japan’s consumers have been exacerbated by the weakness of the Japanese yen, which last month hit a 40-year low against the US dollar.

The weaker-than-expected growth figures could complicate the Bank of Japan’s (BOJ’s) upcoming decision on interest rates in September amid its push to normalise monetary policy after decades of ultra-low and negative borrowing costs.

The BOJ in June raised its benchmark interest rate to 1 percent, its highest in more than three decades.

The central bank began to move away from an ultra-loose policy in 2024 when it announced its first rate hike since the 2008 global financial crisis.

Japan’s stock market rose on Monday with the benchmark Nikkei 225 up 0.3 percent as of 05:15 GMT.

South Korea and Hong Kong’s markets also made gains with the KOSPI up 2.4 percent and the Hang Seng Index 1.6 percent higher.

The biggest danger facing mankind is a machine that can “outsmart the whole species”, argues Max Tegmark, professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and founder of the Future of Life Institute.

Tegmark tells host Steve Clemons that governments and tech companies are in a “race to replace” human labour, instead of solving human problems. “It’s aimed at getting more money and power to a very small number of individuals,” he says.

But a slew of suicides and murders committed by people chatting with AI chatbots has led to pushback against the Silicon Valley “don’t regulate us” lobby.

The pay gap between executives and their employees has widened from 2024 to 2025, with chief executives making 312 times what their median worker earned, according to the AFL-CIO, the largest coalition of labour unions in the United States.

That’s up from the previous rate of 285 times the median worker salary for executives working in the companies listed on the S&P 500 index.

The figures were released on Thursday as part of the AFL-CIO’s annual Paywatch report, which tracks the growing gulf in wages.

The labour federation warned that the divide in pay risks having broader effects for the global marketplace. If CEOs are focused on increasing their paycheques, the AFL-CIO warned that they may be less concerned about the stability of their companies — or of the economy overall.

“Excessive CEO compensation contributes to growing economic inequality,” the AFL-CIO wrote. “It creates the risk that CEOs will make short-term decisions to maximize their pay, even if it hurts the company’s long-term health.”

In determining the executive-to-worker pay ratio, the AFL-CIO explained it had to exclude one outlier: the world’s richest man, Elon Musk.

In 2025, Musk made $158bn as CEO of the electric vehicle company Tesla — 2.5 million times more than the company’s average employee. His salary even dwarfed the company’s revenue for the year, which was $94bn.

That same year, the carmaker reported a 3 percent decline in revenue. Sales dropped by roughly 9 percent, as some consumers boycotted the company over Musk’s participation in President Donald Trump’s second administration.

Tesla also faced 11 vehicle recalls last year, accounting for 745,000 of its cars.

For the first half of 2025, Musk served as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an office Trump established to oversee cuts to the federal workforce and spending.

He also oversees multiple business interests beyond Tesla, including the social media platform X and the rocket company SpaceX.

In June, the initial public offering (IPO) for SpaceX’s stock briefly ballooned Musk’s net worth, and he was listed for a short time as the world’s first trillionaire.

Including Musk, on average, the pay for a chief executive in an S&P 500 company jumped 1,700 percent last year to reach $3.1bn.

Excluding Musk, the increase was slightly more modest. Whereas in 2024 the average CEO pay was roughly $19m, in 2025 the figure increased by 21 percent to $22.8m.

That sum is nearly double the average compensation package for chief executives a decade ago.

Uneven distribution across industries

Different industries, however, saw varying ratios in executive-to-worker income.

The biggest pay disparity was in the manufacturing sector, with the average CEO making $696m and the average worker in the industry making slightly more than $93,000.

That amounted to a more-than-11,000 percent difference in their salaries. Tesla marks the biggest disparity in the sector, helping to drive the pay ratio higher.

The industry with the second-highest pay ratio was the arts, entertainment and recreation sector, where executives make an average of $24.6m, compared to an average of around $25,000 for median workers. The difference was a ratio of 1,057 to one.

One of the most stark examples of a pay divide was the coffee chain Starbucks, where the average worker made $17,279 — only $1,629 higher than the federal poverty line in 2025.

With CEO Brian Niccol earning north of $30m last year, experts estimate the pay ratio in the company is 1,794 to one.

The AFL-CIO’s report also showed that Amazon, Dollar Tree, FedEx, McDonald’s and Walmart workers are the largest recipients of social assistance programmes.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy made 51 times more than the company’s average employee, while McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski made 1,082 times more than the average worker at the Chicago, Illinois-based fast-food giant.

Trump posts surge in earnings

Thursday’s report also examined Trump’s income during the first year of his second term in office.

Trump’s campaigns for public office have largely hinged on his record as a businessman, and he has pitched himself to voters as uniquely qualified to address the country’s economic needs.

But critics have accused him of profiting from the presidency, whether through trademarks or policies favourable to his business interests, including cryptocurrency.

The AFL-CIO report found that Trump’s income surged 254 percent last year, over what he made in 2024, before his return to the White House.

The $2.2bn worth of income he earned in 2025 stemmed largely from World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s cryptocurrency venture, and the sale of meme coins.

Those earnings are roughly 43,154 times what the median US worker made last year, according to the AFL-CIO. Approximately 37 percent of US adults cannot cover a $400 emergency expense.

This comes as US consumer sentiment slipped 8 percent, with consumers growing more wary of business conditions and the strength of their personal finances, according to a report from the University of Michigan released on Friday.

The labour market is also experiencing a downturn, with the US economy shedding 23,000 jobs in July, according to a monthly report from the US Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

The Conference Board, a nonprofit think tank focused on the economy, also found last month that confidence in the state of the US economy is trending downward for the third consecutive month.

The consortium, named ​1892 Holdings, is led by former QPR chairman Amit Bhatia and also includes the Mittal Family Trusts, EE Capital and the K5 Sports ‌fund, where Bezos ​is the lead investor.

A ‌‌consortium which includes Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has reached a ⁠⁠definitive agreement ⁠⁠to buy a minority stake in Liverpool FC, the Premier League club’s owners, Fenway Sports Group has announced.

The consortium, named 1892 Holdings, is led by former Queens Park Rangers chairman Amit Bhatia and also includes the Mittal Family Trusts, EE Capital and the K5 Sports ‌‌fund, where Bezos is the lead investor.

“As we considered this opportunity, it became clear that Amit and the consortium shared our long-term philosophy and appreciation for what makes Liverpool special,” FSG president Mike Gordon said in a statement on Friday.

“Their experience and perspective will complement the strong foundation already in place and we ⁠⁠look forward to working together.”

A source ⁠⁠familiar with the matter told the Reuters news agency that the stake is about one-third. FSG, the US multinational sports company which bought Liverpool in 2010, will maintain the majority ⁠⁠share and operational control of the club.

Bhatia will become ⁠⁠the club’s new vice chairman and join the expanded board, along with Elaine Saverin from EE Capital and Bryan Baum from K5 Sports. Bezos will not have ⁠⁠a seat on the board, according to Reuters.

“To be welcomed as a partner in ⁠⁠a club of this stature is a ⁠⁠huge privilege,” Bhatia said.

“We are making this investment because we believe deeply in Liverpool and its leadership and we look forward to supporting the club’s continued success ‌‌for years to come.”

Liverpool, who have been English champions a joint-record 20 times, finished fifth in the Premier League last season. ‌‌

They ‌‌will start the new campaign at Newcastle United on August 23 with new manager Andoni Iraola.

Brazil has not yet decided whether it will proceed with retaliatory measures, but has committed to defending its position.

Brazil has opened consultations into potential retaliatory measures against the United States following the imposition of 25 percent tariffs on a range of Brazilian exports.

The new US tariffs are “unjustified and arbitrary”, and Brazil will “continue to defend its position in all appropriate forums”, the Brazilian government said in a statement on Thursday.

The step is the beginning of the reciprocity process that could eventually see Brazil introduce retaliatory measures, including tariffs, on imports from the US.

This early stage involves further diplomatic consultations with US trade authorities.

In July, the US imposed a surcharge of 25 percent on some Brazilian imports, including sugar, clothing, paper and steel, alleging unfair trade practices. The US also hit Brazil – and a host of other countries – with an additional 12.5 percent tariff linked to allegations of lax enforcement of forced labour bans.

While no decision has yet been made, Brazil’s retaliatory options include imposing taxes or fees, eliminating exemptions or reducing import tariffs, or even restricting imports of American goods or services.

A source told the Reuters news agency that further measures could go beyond tariffs, for example by suspending pharmaceutical and agricultural patents.

The US runs a trade surplus with Brazil, meaning it sells the country goods and services worth more than it imports from it. In 2026 so far, the US has exported $26.5bn worth to Brazil and imported $17bn, according to the US Census Bureau.

Multiple rounds of tariffs

Under President Donald Trump, the US has repeatedly sought to impose sweeping tariffs on imports into the US, lamenting the US’s trade deficit with countries around the world.

In April 2025, the White House announced the introduction of a minimum 10 percent tariff on nearly every country, in what Trump and his team dubbed the “Liberation Day” tariffs.

Those were struck down by US courts this year, but the latest round of tariffs is widely seen as a replacement for the failed Liberation Day tariffs, designed to survive challenges in the US court system.

On hearing that new Prime Minister Andy Burnham will be embarking on a monthlong “cost of living” tour across the United Kingdom, one user of the social media chat platform Reddit commented: “Housing is too expensive, energy is too expensive, food is too expensive etc. There you go, Andy, I’ve saved you some fuel (very expensive).”

Like much of the world, the UK is grappling with the rising cost of living. The Bank of England expects inflation to climb further in the second half of the year as the fallout from the United States-Israel war on Iran pushes up energy prices and household bills.

How high is inflation in the UK? Who is hardest hit? And how does it compare with other countries?

How high is inflation in the UK?

The annual rate of inflation in June was 2.8 percent, down from 3 percent in May. That means prices are still rising, but they are going up a bit more slowly than they were earlier in the year. In practical terms, if something cost 100 pounds (about $135) in June last year, that same item now costs 102.80 pounds ($138.65).

Before the US and Israel attacked Iran on February 28, the Bank of England had forecast that inflation as measured by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) would fall from 3.4 percent in 2025 to 2.3 percent in 2026. Instead, inflation was again 3.4 percent in March this year, largely driven by higher fuel and heating costs.

Petrol and diesel up more than 20 percent

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a route for about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies, has pushed up the cost of petrol, transport, food and other goods.

Petrol prices in the UK have hit a three-and-a-half- year high. According to data from the RAC Foundation, the price of petrol and diesel rose by 22 percent and 27 percent, respectively, between February 25 and August 11.

The average price of a litre (about a quarter of a gallon) of petrol increased from 1.32 pounds ($1.78) to 1.61 pounds ($2.17) while diesel rose from 1.42 pounds ($1.92) to 1.81 pounds ($2.44) per litre.

Who is being hardest hit?

Not every household feels inflation in the same way. For the average UK household, about 677 pounds ($914) is spent each week on goods and services with some of the biggest costs being housing, fuel and power, transport, food and recreation.

The impact is much greater for households on lower incomes. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) found that the poorest 20 percent of households spent an average of 407 pounds ($549) a week compared with 1,084 pounds ($1,462) for the richest 20 percent of households. Proportionally, the poorer households will feel the rise in prices more keenly.

That’s because the difference is particularly important when prices are rising. Someone spending a larger portion of their income on rent, energy, food and transport has far less of a cushion to absorb any increase in those costs.

According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, a charity that conducts and funds research aimed at fighting poverty in the UK, the cost of living crisis is widespread with 7.4 million low-income families unable to afford essential items this year – the highest since 2021 when its cost-of-living tracker began.

Is the UK worse off than other Western countries?

The UK’s 2.8 percent inflation rate in June puts it in the middle of the other Group of Seven  advanced-industrial democracies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the US.

The US has the highest inflation rate at 3.5 percent, followed by Italy (3 percent), Canada (2.8 percent), the UK (2.8 percent), Germany (2.3 percent), France (1.8 percent) and Japan (1.7 percent).

Countries have different exposures to inflation through energy prices, wage pressures and government policies. For the UK, inflation is primarily being driven by the energy triggered by conflict in the Middle East; services inflation, which in June was 3.6 percent, driven by higher costs at restaurants and hotels; and slowing wage growth.

Wages barely keeping up

For Britons, the weekly food shop is still more expensive than it was a year ago, but the latest figures show that food price inflation has slowed. This doesn’t mean prices are falling, of course – just not rising so quickly.

According to the ONS, food and nonalcoholic drink prices were 1.7 percent higher in June than a year earlier, down from 2.2 percent higher in May.

There could be more pressure ahead as the Bank of England says food prices are likely to be affected by higher energy costs affecting the production and transport costs of food. It predicts that food inflation will rise to nearly 3.5 percent by December while supermarkets have said they expect food inflation of 4 to 5 percent by the end of the year.

Weekly regular real earnings, which measure workers’ standard pay adjusted for inflation, have also dipped in recent months, from about 0.4 percent at the start of the year to 0.1 percent after the Iran war began, again making it harder for people to afford price rises.

Paramount CEO David Ellison may pull his operations out of California if the state does not end its attempt to block the company’s merger with Warner Bros Discovery and agree to settlement talks as soon as October.

The rumours were first reported by the publication Variety on Tuesday. They signal Ellison may be willing to leverage economic pressure on California’s ailing film industry in order to push through the merger.

Al Jazeera was not able to independently confirm the validity of the report.

In July, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that he was leading a coalition of 12 state attorneys general in an antitrust lawsuit to block the consolidation.

Should Paramount and Warner Bros Discovery combine, Bonta warned that the resulting company would control 27 percent of theatrically released films in the United States and a third of the country’s basic-cable output.

“Consolidation here not only leads to higher prices,” Bonta said. “It also leads to fewer opportunities for important stories to come to life, and fewer ways for audiences to encounter stories, ideas, and perspectives beyond their own experiences.”

But Variety reported that Ellison told Paramount’s senior executives that he would begin the process of moving the company out of California on October 1 if Bonta does not agree to settlement talks.

There could be downstream effects as well. The report also alleged that Ellison would pull Warner Bros Discovery out of California, too, if the $110bn merger goes through.

Variety indicated that Paramount is considering relocating to the US states of Tennessee, Texas or Georgia — none of which are involved in the ongoing antitrust lawsuit.

A growing enterprise

The dispute over Warner Bros Discovery’s fate stretches back to late 2025, when the company’s sale was first announced.

Critics quickly observed that the sale had the potential to shift the balance of power in Hollywood, with Warner Bros Discovery wielding influential properties including the news channel CNN, the production company New Line Cinema and the television-streaming service HBO.

The streaming giant Netflix initially emerged as a frontrunner to take over Warner Bros Discovery, but by February, Paramount succeeded in inking an agreement.

It was the second major merger Paramount had lined up in less than a year. In 2025, it had also succeeded in consolidating with the media production company Skydance, in a deal that generated scrutiny about the editorial independence of its subsidiaries.

Paramount’s decisions that year to cancel The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and enter into a $16m settlement with US President Donald Trump were widely perceived as efforts to curry government favour for the merger.

Paramount is considered a titan in US filmmaking and media production, as one of the oldest studios in the country. Its portfolio includes CBS News and Paramount Pictures.

A pair of lawsuits

The impending merger with Warner Bros Discovery has led to a fresh round of scrutiny for Ellison and the Paramount leadership.

Last week, Ellison addressed some of those concerns in an opinion column in The New York Times.

In it, he questioned whether the states’ antitrust lawsuit was “really about market share”, speculating that it was instead about control over major news outlets like CNN. He also sought to portray himself as politically independent.

“I have regularly voted for candidates of both parties; I hold some views that would be called conservative and others that would be called liberal, just like most Americans,” Ellison wrote.

“When it comes to our news operations, I do not aspire to lead these companies to bend their newsrooms to my views.”

But the states have argued that combining Warner Bros Discovery and Paramount would create a monopoly, stifling competition.

If the merger succeeds, the states say that only four distributors would control 86 percent of the country’s films.

The merger could also mean job losses. As of the end of 2025, the headcount at Paramount stood at 17,600, while Warner Bros Discovery had 35,500 employees.

A day after the 12 states filed their lawsuit, the Writers Guild of America (WGA) followed suit.

In its July 14 complaint, the guild argued that the merger would mean fewer jobs and more pressure on writers to accept less favourable working terms, owing to reduced competition in the media market.

“Writers will be paid less and have fewer employment opportunities,” the WGA complaint said.

In Los Angeles County alone, the merger could result in a loss of nearly 2,500 jobs, according to an analysis by the Los Angeles County Department of Economic Opportunity, published in June.

As many as 6,000 employees around the world could also see their positions cut.

By comparison, when the Paramount and Skydance merger was completed in 2025, the company laid off roughly 2,000 people.

Costly standoff

On July 24, Paramount Skydance agreed to pause the merger until a ruling in the states’ case is ultimately made or until June 1, 2027 — a move the WGA celebrated.

“It remains our view that this merger is unlawful, and we will continue the fight to block it,” WGA said at the time.

The WGA did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Slowing the merger could be costly for Paramount Skydance. Under the terms of the merger, the company would have to pay a so-called ticking fee of $7m per day, or $650m per quarter, if the deal does not close by September 30.

But the standoff with Ellison could also be costly for California, which is experiencing a downturn in the number of productions filmed in the state. New York, another state involved in the lawsuit, could see a backlash, as it houses studios for CBS News and Paramount’s executive offices.

Representatives for the state of California and Paramount Skydance did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Paramount Skydance’s stock is trending upward on the heels of Tuesday’s report. The stock was up 0.4 percent in midday trading, while Warner Bros Discovery was up 1.1 percent.

Serbia and Ukraine have agreed to deepen economic cooperation, with both sides pledging to finalise a long-stalled free trade agreement by the end of the year as Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic hosted his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in Belgrade.

The commitment came on the final day of a two-day visit that concluded on Saturday, Zelenskyy’s first to Serbia since taking office in 2019. The two leaders have met several times previously, most recently in Kyiv on July 15.

Speaking at a joint news conference, Vucic said Serbia would support Ukraine’s bid to join the European Union and maintain its support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity, including territories seized by Russia since 2014.

Belgrade has, however, refused to impose sanctions on Russia, its longtime ally.

Ukraine, for its part, has not recognised Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of independence. Serbia considers Kosovo part of its territory.

“You have never heard a single bad word about our country, neither from Volodymyr Zelenskyy nor anyone else [in Ukraine], and I am extremely grateful to our Ukrainian friends for that,” Vucic said.

“Our cooperation is expanding and will become much bigger,” he told reporters, adding that Serbia would help rebuild Ukrainian cities damaged by Russia’s invasion.

Long-delayed free trade agreement

The proposed free trade agreement has been under discussion for more than two decades, with both countries now aiming to complete a deal by the end of the year.

The agreement is crucial to Serbia’s bid to join the World Trade Organization and is a prerequisite for its EU membership. Ukraine has blocked a deal since 2005 over quotas and tariffs affecting its agricultural sector.

Both leaders pointed to progress on the agreement as a sign of strengthening economic ties, alongside Serbian commitments to provide humanitarian aid and infrastructure and energy support to Ukraine this winter.

Zelenskyy said the two leaders had discussed joint infrastructure projects as well as cooperation on energy and food security before the winter, saying that “virtually not a single thermal power plant remains intact” in Ukraine because of Russian strikes.

He said Russian attacks had also damaged railway stations, hospitals, universities and civilian businesses, and thanked Serbia for preparing a new humanitarian aid package focused particularly on the medical and energy sectors.

“We are developing all formats of cooperation which can give our people … more resilience,” Zelenskyy said.

In a post on X on Saturday, Zelenskyy said he also discussed economic and logistics projects with Serbian Prime Minister Duro Macut, including the Danube Corridor and closer links between Ukraine, the Western Balkans and the EU.

Zelenskyy thanked Serbia for pledging 2 million euros ($2.3m) to support Ukraine’s energy sector.

The two countries also signed a memorandum on animal health and food safety, according to the Kyiv Post. The agreement was signed by Serbia’s Agriculture Minister Dragan Glamocic and Ukraine’s ambassador to Serbia, Oleksandr Lytvynenko.

Serbia balances EU ambitions and Russia ties

Vucic expressed doubts that either Serbia or Ukraine would secure rapid EU membership.

“I wish Ukraine every success, but this is not just a merit-based process,” he said, noting that the bloc has not admitted a new member since Croatia joined in 2013.

He also warned that he did not expect the war in Ukraine to end soon.

“I’m very afraid that we’re in for a very difficult winter – especially for Ukrainians,” Vucic said, according to the Kyiv Post.

Belgrade had condemned Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and has supported Ukraine’s territorial integrity, but it has resisted joining Western sanctions against Moscow. Serbia also remains dependent on Russia for most of its gas.

At the same time, Serbia has sought to reduce some of its military dependence on Russia, including through an agreement to replace its ageing Soviet-era MiG-29 fighter jets with French Rafale aircraft.

The Kremlin has repeatedly accused Serbia of selling ammunition that ultimately reached Ukraine through intermediaries. Belgrade has denied supplying ammunition to Ukraine, but has said it sells ammunition to buyers around the world.

Vucic and Zelenskyy said military cooperation was not discussed during the visit.

The US president has clashed with Federal Reserve members over his bid to rapidly slash interest rates despite inflation.

The White House has revived its efforts to remove Lisa Cook, the first Black woman to serve as a governor at the Federal Reserve, the United States’ central bank.

On Friday, media reports emerged that the administration of President Donald Trump had sent Cook a letter threatening her position at the Federal Reserve.

“You are hereby provided notice that the President is considering removing you from your position,” the letter read.

Signed by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, the letter gave Cook a deadline of three weeks to respond to unproven allegations that she had committed mortgage fraud.

It also warned that the crime she was accused of was punishable by up to 30 years in prison. Her conduct, the letter added, constituted negligence that calls into question her trustworthiness as a Federal Reserve governor.

Trump first unveiled the claims against Cook in August 2025, in a push to fire her from her role.

No other president since the central bank’s founding in 1913 has sought to oust a Federal Reserve governor.

The central bank has historically been insulated from political pressure, and under the law, Federal Reserve governors can only be removed by the president “for cause”. A full term runs 14 years.

Such laws aim is to shield the central bank from making economic decisions based on political pressures.

But Trump has undertaken an aggressive campaign to slash interest rates, which are elevated as a means of combatting inflation.

He has also sought to rid the federal government of appointees aligned with his Democratic predecessors. Cook was nominated in 2022 under President Democrat Joe Biden, Trump’s two-time election rival.

Trump’s claims against Cook centre on the idea that she listed two homes as her primary residence: one in Georgia and the other in Michigan. That could have made her eligible for favourable mortgage rates.

But there is no conclusive evidence so far that Cook sought to deceive lenders, making a successful fraud prosecution unlikely.

In June, a US Supreme Court ruling also blocked Trump’s attempt to fire her, though it did clear the way for the president to fire the heads of other independent agencies.

The letter sent to Cook this week was dated August 5. That same day, Cook spoke at an economic luncheon in Alaska, saying inflation is “too high” and indicating that she is “prepared to act” by raising interest rates, a position shared by others at the Federal Reserve.

Trump has long sparred with the Federal Reserve over interest rates, repeatedly threatening to fire former Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell for refusing to bow to his demands.

Kevin Warsh, a Trump appointee, took over Powell’s position as chair in May. He has yet to deliver Trump’s wished-for rate cuts, amid stubborn inflation.

“We should have the lowest interest rate in the world,” Trump said after last week’s decision by the Federal Reserve to hold interest rates steady for the fifth consecutive time.

In a statement, Cook’s legal team said “there is no valid cause” for removing her from her position.

“As we did before, we will challenge this latest pretext and preserve her position and the historic role of the Fed,” lawyer Abbe D Lowell said.