companies

PA Media

How does your water company rank for environmental performance?

Getty Images

Oct. 7 (UPI) — The European Union has announced it will match President Donald Trump‘s tariffs on steel, causing the United Kingdom’s steel industry to quake.

The new tariffs would cause a crisis in the U.K. steel industry, as 80% of British exports are to the EU, according to a lobbying group representing the sector. Unions said the tariffs could kill the industry, The Guardian reported.

The European Commission’s plan would sharply cut the amount of steel that can be imported to the EU without tariffs to 18.3 million tons a year, an almost 50% drop, and would almost double the tariff rate to 50%.

The EU’s goal is to cut down on global overcapacity, which brings cheap steel from China and hurts steel jobs in Europe, the New York Times reported. It is also a reaction to Trump’s tariffs on EU steel, which could increase the likelihood that global producers will send their steel to Europe, flooding the market.

“Global overcapacity is damaging our industry,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement.

“We have global overcapacity, unfair competition, state aid, and undercutting in prices, and we are reacting to that,” Stéphane Séjourné, the European Commission’s executive vice president for prosperity and industrial strategy, said at a news conference at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. “Eighteen thousand jobs were lost in the steel sector in 2024. That’s too many, and we had to put a stop to that.

“The European steel industry was on the verge of collapse — we are protecting it so that it can invest, decarbonize, and become competitive again,” Séjourné said.

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer told reporters during a flight to India that officials were in discussions with the EU about the tariffs, according to The Guardian.

“In relation to the question of tariffs or other measures, as you’d expect, we are in discussions with the EU about this, as we’re in discussions with the U.S. about it,” Starmer said. “So I’ll be able to tell you more in due course, but we are in discussions as you’d expect.”

The U.K. government took control of Chinese-owned plants in Scunthorpe, England, earlier this year, while Liberty Steel plants in Rotherham and Stocksbridge, England, fell into government control last month.

U.K. industry minister Chris McDonald said it was “vital” to “protect trade flows between the U.K. and EU” and that he would meet with industry leaders on Thursday. He said he was “pushing the European Commission for urgent clarification of the impact of this move on the U.K.”

Charlotte Brumpton-Childs, U.K. national officer with the GMB trade union, called the tariffs a “hammer blow” that “could end steelmaking in the U.K. if safeguards aren’t secured,” according to The Guardian.

California lawmakers want Gov. Gavin Newsom to approve bills they passed that aim to make artificial intelligence chatbots safer. But as the governor weighs whether to sign the legislation into law, he faces a familiar hurdle: objections from tech companies that say new restrictions would hinder innovation.

Californian companies are world leaders in AI and have spent hundreds of billions of dollars to stay ahead in the race to create the most powerful chatbots. The rapid pace has alarmed parents and lawmakers worried that chatbots are harming the mental health of children by exposing them to self-harm content and other risks.

Parents who allege chatbots encouraged their teens to harm themselves before they died by suicide have sued tech companies such as OpenAI, Character Technologies and Google. They’ve also pushed for more guardrails.

Calls for more AI regulation have reverberated throughout the nation’s capital and various states. Even as the Trump administration’s “AI Action Plan” proposes to cut red tape to encourage AI development, lawmakers and regulators from both parties are tackling child safety concerns surrounding chatbots that answer questions or act as digital companions.

California lawmakers this month passed two AI chatbot safety bills that the tech industry lobbied against. Newsom has until mid-October to approve or reject them.

The high-stakes decision puts the governor in a tricky spot. Politicians and tech companies alike want to assure the public they’re protecting young people. At the same time, tech companies are trying to expand the use of chatbots in classrooms and have opposed new restrictions they say go too far.

Meanwhile, if Newsom runs for president in 2028, he might need more financial support from wealthy tech entrepreneurs. On Sept. 22, Newsom promoted the state’s partnerships with tech companies on AI efforts and touted how the tech industry has fueled California’s economy, calling the state the “epicenter of American innovation.”

He has vetoed AI safety legislation in the past, including a bill last year that divided Silicon Valley’s tech industry because the governor thought it gave the public a “false sense of security.” But he also signaled that he’s trying to strike a balance between addressing safety concerns and ensuring California tech companies continue to dominate in AI.

“We have a sense of responsibility and accountability to lead, so we support risk-taking, but not recklessness,” Newsom said at a discussion with former President Clinton at a Clinton Global Initiative event on Wednesday.

Two bills sent to the governor — Assembly Bill 1064 and Senate Bill 243 — aim to make AI chatbots safer but face stiff opposition from the tech industry. It’s unclear if the governor will sign both bills. His office declined to comment.

AB 1064 bars a person, business and other entity from making companion chatbots available to a California resident under the age of 18 unless the chatbot isn’t “foreseeably capable” of harmful conduct such as encouraging a child to engage in self-harm, violence or disordered eating.

SB 243 requires operators of companion chatbots to notify certain users that the virtual assistants aren’t human.

Under the bill, chatbot operators would have to have procedures to prevent the production of suicide or self-harm content and put in guardrails, such as referring users to a suicide hotline or crisis text line.

They would be required to notify minor users at least every three hours to take a break, and that the chatbot is not human. Operators would also be required to implement “reasonable measures” to prevent companion chatbots from generating sexually explicit content.

Tech lobbying group TechNet, whose members include OpenAI, Meta, Google and others, said in a statement that it “agrees with the intent of the bills” but remains opposed to them.

AB 1064 “imposes vague and unworkable restrictions that create sweeping legal risks, while cutting students off from valuable AI learning tools,” said Robert Boykin, TechNet’s executive director for California and the Southwest, in a statement. “SB 243 establishes clearer rules without blocking access, but we continue to have concerns with its approach.”

A spokesperson for Meta said the company has “concerns about the unintended consequences that measures like AB 1064 would have.” The tech company launched a new Super PAC to combat state AI regulation that the company thinks is too burdensome, and is pushing for more parental control over how kids use AI, Axios reported on Tuesday.

Opponents led by the Computer & Communications Industry Assn. lobbied aggressively against AB 1064, stating it would threaten innovation and disadvantage California companies that would face more lawsuits and have to decide if they wanted to continue operating in the state.

Advocacy groups, including Common Sense Media, a nonprofit that sponsored AB 1064 and recommends that minors shouldn’t use AI companions, are urging Newsom to sign the bill into law. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta also supports the bill.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation said SB 243 is too broad and would run into free-speech issues.

Several groups, including Common Sense Media and Tech Oversight California, removed their support for SB 243 after changes were made to the bill, which they said weakened protections. Some of the changes limited who receives certain notifications and included exemptions for certain chatbots in video games and virtual assistants used in smart speakers.

Lawmakers who introduced chatbot safety legislation want the governor to sign both bills, arguing that they can both “work in harmony.”

Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista), who introduced SB 243, said that even with the changes he still thinks the new rules will make AI safer.

“We’ve got a technology that has great potential for good, is incredibly powerful, but is evolving incredibly rapidly, and we can’t miss a window to provide commonsense guardrails here to protect folks,” he said. “I’m happy with where the bill is at.”

Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda), who co-wrote AB 1064, said her bill balances the benefits of AI while safeguarding against the dangers.

“We want to make sure that when kids are engaging with any chatbot that it is not creating an unhealthy emotional attachment, guiding them towards suicide, disordered eating, any of the things that we know are harmful for children,” she said.

During the legislative session, lawmakers heard from grieving parents who lost their children. AB 1064 highlights two high-profile lawsuits: one against San Francisco ChatGPT maker OpenAI and another against Character Technologies, the developer of chatbot platform Character.AI.

Character.AI is a platform where people can create and interact with digital characters that mimic real and fictional people. Last year, Florida mom Megan Garcia alleged in a federal lawsuit that Character.AI’s chatbots harmed the mental health of her son Sewell Setzer III and accused the company of failing to notify her or offer help when he expressed suicidal thoughts to virtual characters.

More families sued the company this year. A Character.AI spokesperson said they care very deeply about user safety and “encourage lawmakers to appropriately craft laws that promote user safety while also allowing sufficient space for innovation and free expression.”

In August, the California parents of Adam Raine sued OpenAI, alleging that ChatGPT provided the teen information about suicide methods, including the one the teen used to kill himself.

OpenAI said it’s strengthening safeguards and plans to release parental controls. Its chief executive, Sam Altman, wrote in a September blog post that the company believes minors need “significant protections” and the company prioritizes “safety ahead of privacy and freedom for teens.” The company declined to comment on the California AI chatbot bills.

To California lawmakers, the clock is ticking.

“We’re doing our best,” Bauer-Kahan said. “The fact that we’ve already seen kids lose their lives to AI tells me we’re not moving fast enough.”

Nvidia (NVDA 3.52%) has built an artificial intelligence (AI) empire thanks to the dominance of its AI chips and its expansion into a wide variety of other related offerings. But the company isn’t isolating itself, and instead, has looked to work with others — even much smaller players — in this AI boom. One company in particular has become a key Nvidia ally, and that’s CoreWeave (CRWV 0.39%).

CoreWeave launched an initial public offering in March, and the stock has since surged about 195%, buoyed by the company’s soaring sales — and its relationship with Nvidia. The AI chip giant held a 7% stake in CoreWeave as of the end of the second quarter, and CoreWeave makes up 91% of Nvidia’s investment portfolio. And CoreWeave’s business relies heavily on Nvidia as the company’s specialty is the following: It rents out Nvidia’s high-powered graphics processing units (GPUs) to customers through its cloud platform.

Now, Nvidia’s latest move — a $6.3 billion deal with CoreWeave — signals something big for shareholders of both companies. Let’s take a closer look.

Image source: Getty Images.

A 1,300% gain

First, though, a quick summary of the businesses of Nvidia and CoreWeave. As mentioned, Nvidia is the AI chip leader, with its GPUs and related products delivering record revenue and earnings over the past few years. Nvidia’s chips offer the highest performance on the market, so tech giants, prioritizing AI success, have rushed to get in on these essential tools. All of this has helped Nvidia stock climb 1,300% over the past five years — and pushed market value past $4 trillion to make Nvidia the world’s biggest company.

CoreWeave, as mentioned, offers customers access to Nvidia compute through its cloud platform. Customers may rent GPUs by the hour or for the long term, and this offers them great flexibility. CoreWeave holds about 250,000 GPUs across 32 data centers and has been the first to make Nvidia’s latest innovations generally available. All of this has translated into outsized revenue growth, with sales tripling in the latest quarter. CoreWeave clearly depends on Nvidia’s success as demand for Nvidia GPUs power its revenue higher — if demand were to decline, not only would Nvidia suffer, but so would CoreWeave.

And this brings me to the latest deal between the two companies. Nvidia signed a $6.3 billion order with CoreWeave, ensuring that the chip leader will buy any cloud capacity that CoreWeave is unable to sell to customers. The deal, extending a 2023 agreement, covers the period through April 13, 2032.

Eliminating a risk

This order signals something different — but significant — for both companies and their shareholders. For CoreWeave, this removes the big risk of the company being stuck with excess capacity. Though the future of AI spending looks bright, any dip in spending, even over a short period, could be costly for the company. So, Nvidia’s agreement to potentially step in means that if any drop in demand happens, it won’t hurt CoreWeave’s sales. As a result, shareholders may breathe a sigh of relief, and cautious investors who have worried about this risk may consider getting in on CoreWeave.

As for Nvidia, this move suggests the company truly is confident about the demand for AI capacity over the next several years. It’s unlikely the tech giant would agree to such a deal if it saw a major slowdown on the horizon. This reinforces Nvidia’s prediction a few weeks ago that AI infrastructure spending may reach $4 trillion by the end of the decade. Nvidia has said in the past that its customers offer it visibility about their upcoming needs — so the chip designer has a good idea of how the demand situation will evolve.

All of this means this latest deal between Nvidia and CoreWeave is fantastic news for shareholders of both companies — for CoreWeave, the agreement lowers risk, and for Nvidia, the agreement confirms that demand for AI is going strong.

Considering this, both of these companies make great AI stocks to buy and hold onto as this AI growth story develops.

For this article, I asked myself: Where would I start investing if I had less than $100 to invest?

Image source: Getty Images.

An AI ETF that’s concentrated and full of leading and profitable companies

This answer to my question popped into my head: I’d want a concentrated exchange-traded fund (ETF) focused on leading and profitable companies heavily involved in artificial intelligence (AI), but with enough differences among themselves.

Why an ETF? Because I’d not want to put all my (investing) eggs in one basket.

Why AI? Because it’s poised to be the biggest secular trend in many decades or even generations.

Why concentrated? Because I believe if investors are going to buy a very diversified ETF, they might as well buy the entire market, so to speak, and buy an S&P 500 index ETF. Indeed, buying an S&P 500 index fund is a good idea for many investors, and recommended by investing legend Warren Buffett. That said, over the long run, I think an AI ETF full of only leading and profitable companies will beat the S&P 500 index.

Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS): Overview

And bingo! There is such an ETF — the Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS 1.92%). It has seven holdings — the so-called “Magnificent Seven” stocks: Alphabet (GOOG 4.38%) (GOOGL 4.53%), Amazon (AMZN 1.42%), Apple (AAPL 1.06%), Meta Platforms (META 1.18%), Microsoft (MSFT 1.01%), Nvidia (NVDA -0.10%), and Tesla (TSLA 3.54%). This ETF closed at $62.93 per share on Friday, Sept. 12.

These megacap stocks (stocks with market caps over $200 billion) were given the Magnificent Seven name a couple of years ago by a Wall Street analyst due to their strong growth and large influence on the overall market. The name comes from the title of a 1960 Western film.

Two other main traits I like about this ETF:

• Its expense ratio is reasonable at 0.29%.
• It provides equal-weight exposure to the seven stocks. At each quarterly rebalancing, the stocks will be reset to an equal weighting of about 14.28% (100% divided by 7).

Since its inception in April 2023 (almost 2.5 years), the Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF has returned 160% — 2.4 times the S&P 500’s 65.9% return.

Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS): All stock holdings

Stocks are listed in order of current weight in portfolio. Keep in mind the ETF is rebalanced quarterly to make stocks equally weighted.

Data sources: Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF, finviz.com, and YCharts. EPS = earnings per share. Data as of Sept. 12, 2025.

All these companies are profitable leaders in their core markets, and heavily involved in AI. Nvidia produces AI tech that enables others to use AI, while the other companies mainly use AI to improve their existing products and develop new ones.

Alphabet’s Google is the world leader in internet search. Its cloud computing business is No. 3 in the world, behind Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Microsoft Azure. The company also has other businesses, notably its driverless vehicle subsidiary, Waymo. (You can read here why I believe Nvidia is the best driverless vehicle stock.)

Nvidia is often described as the world’s leading maker of AI chips — and that it is. But it’s much more. It’s the world leader in supplying technology infrastructure for enabling AI. It’s also the global leader in graphics processing units (GPUs) for computer gaming.

Apple’s iPhone holds the No. 2 spot in the global smartphone market, behind Samsung. However, it dominates the U.S. market. The company’s services business is attractive, as it consists of recurring revenue and has been steadily growing.

Amazon operates the world’s No. 1 e-commerce business and the world’s No. 1 cloud computing business. It also has many other businesses, notably its Fresh and Amazon Prime Now (Whole Foods) grocery delivery operations.

Meta Platforms operates the world’s leading social media site, Facebook, as well as Instagram, Threads, and messaging app WhatsApp.

Microsoft’s Word has long been the world’s leading word processing software. Word is part of Microsoft Office, a suite of popular software for personal computers (PCs). Its Azure is the world’s second-largest cloud computing business.

Tesla remains the No. 1 electric vehicle (EV) maker, by far, in the U.S. despite struggling recently. In the first half of 2025, China’s BYD surpassed Tesla as the world’s leader in all-electric vehicles by number of units sold. CEO Elon Musk touts that the company’s robotaxi and Optimus humanoid robot businesses will eventually be larger than its EV sales business.

In short, the Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF is poised to continue to benefit from the growth of artificial intelligence. Technically, it doesn’t have a long-term history. But if it had existed many years ago, it’s easy to tell that its long-term performance would be very strong because the long-term performances of all its holdings have been anywhere from great to spectacular.

Sept. 15 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said Monday that American public companies shouldn’t have to report quarterly earnings, and should instead change to a six-month schedule.

Trump said on Truth Social: “Subject to SEC Approval, Companies and Corporations should no longer be forced to ‘Report’ on a quarterly basis (Quarterly Reporting!), but rather to Report on a ‘Six (6) Month Basis.’ This will save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies. Did you ever hear the statement that, ‘China has a 50 to 100 year view on management of a company, whereas we run our companies on a quarterly basis???’ Not good!!!”

Trump mentioned this potential change during his first term in office, too.

This would change the way U.S. companies do business, and it would more closely align with how public companies report in other countries.

The change requires approval from the Securities and Exchange Commission, which has required quarterly reporting since 1970.

Wall Street closely follows quarterly results to determine the financial performance of companies. Many public companies host earnings calls after they post their results, which is a chance for investors to ask questions about the company’s decisions.

SEOUL, Sept. 2 (UPI) — South Korea’s state-backed companies and private enterprises promised significant investments in the United States to coincide with President Lee Jae Myung’s summit with his American counterpart Donald Trump at the White House on Aug. 25.

From Washington’s perspective, more investments from South Korea contribute to the U.S. economy, and Seoul’s ruling Democratic Party described President Lee’s U.S. trip that led to those investments as a success.

But suspicions arise about whether such measures would also help South Korea. The main opposition People Power Party, for example, accused the Lee administration of overpromising.

“The Lee Jae Myung administration pledged another $150 billion in direct U.S. investment in addition to the existing $350 billion commitment, thus offering a massive ‘gift package’ totaling $500 billion,” the party’s chief spokesman, Park Sung-hoon, said in a statement.

“However, on critical issues directly tied to our national interest, not a single concrete achievement or clear outcome was secured,” he added.

Park pointed to Washington’s continued 25% tariff on made-in-Korea automobiles, despite a July understanding to reduce it to 15% in return for Korea’s $350 billion investment pledge.

Other Observers echoed concerns, as well.

“Just let me know what President Lee gained in return for promising much. At the very least, he should have secured a definite timeline for the 15% tariff reduction,” economic commentator Kim Kyeong-joon, formerly vice chairman at Deloitte Consulting Korea, told UPI.

“Our foreign exchange reserves are just above $400 billion. I don’t think it’s plausible to invest more than our total reserves in a single foreign country. And if we do so, we risk losing the ability to invest within our own borders, which would be disastrous for our economy,” he said.

Lee Phil-sang, an adviser at Aju Research Institute of Corporate Management and former Seoul National University economics professor, concurred.

“My real concern is that President Lee may have made undisclosed concessions. I hope that hasn’t happened,” he said in a phone interview.

“The worst part of the summit is that we made lots of promises, while the U.S. offered little in return. I fear Washington will demand more in upcoming working-level talks following the Lee-Trump meeting,” he added.

By contrast, Leaders Index CEO Park Ju-gun downplayed the criticism. His company is a Seoul-based business tracker.

“Many Korean companies did not sign binding contracts. Most agreements were [memoranda of understanding], which might never materialize. And I don’t think that the overall investment in the U.S. would reach $500 billion. Many concerns are overblown,” Park said.

New investment promises from South Korean firms

Hyundai Motor Group announced that it would invest $26 billion in the U.S. between 2025 and 2028, expanding its push into automotive, steel and robotics. It marks a $5 billion increase from its original $21 billion commitment unveiled earlier this year.

With the funds, Hyundai Motor plans to boost vehicle production, build a new steel mill in Louisiana and construct a robotics facility with an annual capacity of 30,000 units.

Korean Air said the flagship carrier would channel $36.2 billion to buy 103 aircraft from Boeing, including 95 passenger planes and eight freighters, by the end of the 2030s.

Once finalized, the deal would raise the Seoul-based company’s total Boeing orders to 175 aircraft, up from the 72 already on its books.

Hanwha Group vowed to funnel $5 billion into Hanwha Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia to install additional docks and quays to crank up the capacity of the shipyard, which Hanwha acquired late last year from Norway’s Aker ASA.

Nuclear cooperation was another area where the South Korean side, led by state-run Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Corporation, or KHNP, inked several agreements to support various U.S. projects.

Together with POSCO International, KHNP agreed to cooperate with Fermi America to take part in the construction of an 11-gigawatt power complex. It will explore potential investment by joining with Centrus Energy.

KHNP also teamed up with Korea’s Doosan Enerbility to collaborate with X-energy of Maryland and Amazon Web Services of Seattle with the aim of accelerating the deployment of small modular reactors and fuel in the United States.

Not all accords centered on U.S. investment. Korea Zinc, the world’s largest zinc smelter, signed a memorandum of understanding with Lockheed Martin to procure and supply of germanium, whish is used primarily in fiber optics, infrared optics and electronics.

They are plan work together in the critical minerals supply chain.

Bill Ackman is one of the most closely followed investment managers on Wall Street. His Pershing Square Capital Management hedge fund holds just a handful of high-conviction positions, and he typically holds those positions for the long run.

Ackman is often forthcoming with the biggest moves in his portfolio. He’ll usually disclose new trades through his social media accounts or monthly updates to his hedge fund investors. But Pershing Square’s quarterly 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) can provide a full accounting of the hedge fund’s portfolio of publicly traded U.S. stocks.

Ackman made a couple of big moves last quarter, and now holds roughly 58% of the portfolio in just three companies.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. Uber (20.6%)

Ackman made a massive investment in Uber Technologies (UBER -2.28%) at the start of 2025, accumulating 30.3 million shares for Pershing Square. That immediately made the stock the hedge fund’s largest position, and it’s only grown bigger since. Uber shares are up 57% so far in 2025 as of this writing.

Uber continues to see strong adoption for both its mobility and delivery service. Total users climbed to 180 million last quarter, up 15% year over year, and it saw a 2% increase in trips per user. Delivery gross bookings climbed 20% year over year and produced strong EBITDA margin expansion. As a result, the company saw adjusted EBITDA growth of 35% year over year.

But the threat of autonomous vehicles is weighing on Uber stock. Ackman believes self-driving cars will benefit Uber in the long run, as it operates the network required for connecting vehicles with riders. That kind of network effect is hard to replicate, giving Uber a competitive advantage and a significant stake in the autonomous vehicle industry. To that end, the company has already partnered with 20 different companies, including AV leader Alphabet‘s (GOOG 0.56%) (GOOGL 0.63%) Waymo.

Shares of Uber currently trade for about 1.2 times its gross bookings over the past year. But with expectations for growth in the high teens, that puts it down closer to a 1 multiple. That’s historically been a good price to pay for the stock. In more traditional valuation metrics, its stock price is 3.9 times forward revenue expectations. Its enterprise value of $206 billion as of this writing is less than 24 times 2025 adjusted EBITDA expectations. Even after its strong performance in 2025, Uber shares still look about fairly valued.

2. Brookfield Corp (19.7%)

Ackman built a position in diversified asset manager Brookfield Corporation (BN -0.08%) over the last five quarters, adding to it each quarter since Pershing Square’s initial purchase in the second quarter of 2024. As a result, the stock is now the hedge fund’s second-largest position.

Brookfield saw its distributable earnings excluding carried interest and gains from selling investments climb 13% on a per-share basis last quarter. The company expects to produce distributable earnings growth of 21% per year from 2024 through 2029.

A huge growth driver for Brookfield is its Wealth Solutions segment, which grew total insurance assets to $135 billion as of the end of June. Its annualized earnings are now $1.7 billion.

The business is growing quickly. Just two years ago, insurance assets totaled $45 billion. Management expects the growth to continue with assets topping $300 billion by 2029. At that point, the segment will be the conglomerate’s largest contributor to distributable earnings.

Management is using its free cash flow to buy back shares and invest in new assets. This could further increase distributable earnings per share above its guidance for 21% organic growth over the next few years. Shares currently trade for less than 20 times management’s expectations for 2025 distributable earnings, offering compelling value for investors.

3. Alphabet (17.9%)

Ackman first bought shares of Alphabet in early 2023, shortly after the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT. While many saw the growth of generative AI as a major threat to Alphabet’s Google, Ackman thought the market overreacted, offering a bargain price for the stock. While he trimmed the position a bit in 2024, he’s added back to it over the first two quarters of 2025, preferring the Class A shares (which come with voting rights).

Alphabet has produced strong financial results in 2025. Its core advertising business climbed 10% year over year last quarter, with particularly strong results from Google Search (up 12%). That speaks to the company’s efforts to incorporate generative AI into its search business with features like AI Overviews and Google Lens. The former has increased engagement and user satisfaction, according to management, while the latter lends itself to high-value product searches.

Alphabet has seen tremendous results in its Google Cloud business, which supplies compute power to AI developers. Sales increased 32% year over year, with operating margin expanding to 22% for the business. Overall, Google Cloud accounted for 43% of the total increase in Alphabet’s operating earnings last quarter, despite its relatively small size compared to the Search business.

That said, the company faces potential regulatory challenges to its business. The Department of Justice has ruled that it operates an illegal monopoly. The company is awaiting a ruling on required remedies, which could include divesting its Chrome browser or a ban on contracts positioning Google as the default search engine in other browsers.

As a result, Alphabet shares trade for less than 21 times forward earnings expectations. That’s the lowest multiple among the “Magnificent Seven” stocks and a great price for one of the leading AI companies in the world.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California energy regulators Friday put the brakes on plans requiring oil companies to pay a penalty if their profits climb too high, a temporary win for the fossil fuel industry two years after the governor declared the state had “finally beat big oil.”

The postponement by the California Energy Commission until 2030 comes after two oil refineries accounting for roughly 18% of the state’s refining capacity announced their plans to close in the coming months. The commission has the power to implement a penalty but has not done so since it was given that authority in 2023.

The penalty was considered a landmark piece of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s government and the state’s ambitious goals to curb climate change. The state faces challenges in its efforts to take on the oil industry while ensuring a stable and affordable fuel supply. His administration is also proposing to temporarily streamline approvals of new oil wells in existing oil fields in an effort to maintain a stable fuel supply.

Siva Gunda, the commission’s vice chair, said the state is not “walking back” its efforts to wean itself off fossil fuels but must prioritize protecting consumers at the gas pump.

“I personally truly believe that this pause will be beneficial to ensure that this mid-transition is smooth,” he said.

The commission still plans to set rules that would require oil refineries to keep a minimum level of fuel on hand to avoid shortages when refineries go offline for maintenance.

Jamie Court, the president of Consumer Watchdog who supported the law, said the energy commission’s vote is “basically a giveaway to the industry.”

“I’m really disheartened and disgusted by Newsom,” he said. “I feel like this is just a total about-face. And in the end it’s going to result in greater price spikes.”

But the Western States Petroleum Association recommended that the state postpone a penalty for 20 years.

“While today’s action by the CEC stopped short of a full statutory repeal or a 20-year pause, it represents a needed step to provide some certainty for California’s fuels market,” CEO Catherine Reheis-Boyd said in a statement. “The vote demonstrates the CEC’s understanding that imposing this failed policy would have likely exacerbated investment concerns contributing to California’s recent refinery closures.”

In 2022, Newsom called the Legislature into a special session to pass a law aimed at holding oil companies accountable for making too much money after a summer of record-high gas prices in California. The governor signed a law the following year authorizing the energy commission to penalize oil companies for excessive profits.

The law also required oil companies to report more data on their operations to the state. It created an independent division at the commission to oversee the oil and gas industry and provide guidance to the state on its energy transition.

Newsom’s office thanked the energy commission for voting to postpone implementing a penalty, saying it was a “prudent step” toward stabilizing the oil market.

“When Governor Newsom signed this legislation two years ago, he promised that we would utilize the new transparency tools to look under the hood of our oil and gas market that had been a black box for decades,” spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said in a statement. “We did exactly that.”

Julia Stein, deputy director of a climate institute at UCLA School of Law, said state officials are still intent on advancing their efforts to transition away from fossil fuels.

“But I think there is also a sense at the state level that we’re entering a different phase of the transition where some of these problems are going to be presented more acutely,” she said. “And folks are kind of now trying to understand how they’re going to approach that in real time.”

California has the highest gas prices in the nation, largely due to taxes and environmental regulations. Regular unleaded gas prices were $4.59 a gallon Friday, compared to a national average of $3.20, according to AAA.

The commission has not determined what would count as an excessive profit under the policy.

Setting a penalty could be risky for the state because it could unintentionally discourage production and drive prices up, said Severin Borenstein, an economist and public policy professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

“It’s pretty clear they are shifting towards more focus on affordability and recognition that the high prices in California may not be associated with the actual refinery operations,” he said of state officials.

Austin writes for the Associated Press.

The Motley Fool just updated its report on the 10 largest consumer staple companies. You probably know every name on the list, which includes retail giants like Walmart (NYSE: WMT), product makers like Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG), and tobacco companies like Philip Morris International (NYSE: PM). Also on that list is a Dividend King food and beverage company that has a historically high yield. Here’s why it could be the best opportunity for investors today.

What does PepsiCo do?

To get right to the crux of the topic, PepsiCo (PEP 1.12%) is the company in question. It sits at No. 7 on the list of the largest consumer staple companies, with a market cap of around $200 billion. It is one of three beverage makers on the list, the other two being Coca-Cola (KO 0.94%) at No. 4 and Anheuser-Busch InBev (NYSE: BUD) at No. 10.

Image source: Getty Images.

Unlike those other two, however, PepsiCo’s business extends well beyond beverages. It also has leading positions in the salty snack (Frito-Lay) and packaged food (Quaker Oats) segments of the sector. It is one of the most diversified companies on the top-10 list. Only Unilever (NYSE: UL), which makes household products and food, has a similar degree of diversification.

PepsiCo, meanwhile, stands toe to toe with every company on the list with regard to name recognition. For more direct peers, those that manage brands and are not retailers, it can compete equally on distribution, marketing, and product development. And, like all the other names on the list, PepsiCo is large enough to act as an industry consolidator, buying smaller companies to round out its brand portfolio and keep up with consumers’ buying habits.

The proof of the business’s strength and resilience is best highlighted by the fact that PepsiCo is a Dividend King. It has increased its dividend annually for 53 consecutive years, which is not something a company can achieve if it doesn’t have a strong business model that gets executed well in both good times and bad. For reference, other Dividend Kings on the list include Walmart, Coca-Cola, and Procter & Gamble.

WMT data by YCharts.

This is not a good time for PepsiCo 

Among the sub-grouping of large consumer staples companies that are also Dividend Kings, PepsiCo has been the laggard in recent years. To put a number on that, PepsiCo’s 2.1% organic sales growth in the second quarter was less than half the 5% growth of Coca-Cola, its closest peer. No wonder PepsiCo’s stock is down more than 20% from its 2023 highs, the worst result from the Dividend Kings grouping. That also puts PepsiCo into its own personal bear market.

However, the market’s negative view of PepsiCo could be an opportunity for long-term dividend investors. For starters, history suggests that PepsiCo will muddle through this rough patch, as it has done many times before. Second, the company is already making moves to improve performance, including buying a Mexican-American food maker and a probiotic beverage company. Third, falling share price has pushed its dividend yield up to 3.8%, which is toward the high end of the stock’s historical yield range.

That last point suggests that PepsiCo stock is cheap right now. This view is backed up by the fact that the company’s price-to-sales and price-to-book-value ratios are both well below their five-year averages. The company’s price-to-earnings ratio is sitting around the longer-term average. This is an opportunity if you think in decades and not days.

The time to jump is now

The interesting thing here is that PepsiCo is actually the best-performing stock on the top 10 list over the past three months. It seems investors are beginning to recognize the potential. But given how far the stock has fallen, it is still flying under the radar a bit. If you like owning Dividend Kings with reliable businesses, PepsiCo can still be an attractive long-term investment to add to your portfolio… if you act quickly.

The Trump administration on Wednesday laid out a plan that aims to make it easier for companies to quickly develop and deploy artificial intelligence technology.

The initiative shows how Silicon Valley tech executives who backed Trump during the election are shaping federal policy that will impact their businesses as they compete globally to dominate the AI race.

“Artificial intelligence is a revolutionary technology with the potential to transform the global economy and alter the balance of power in the world,” said David Sacks, the White House’s AI and crypto advisor, in a statement. “To remain the leading economic and military power, the United States must win the AI race.”

Sacks is a co-founder and partner at Craft Ventures, a venture capital firm in San Francisco.

Tech companies have forged stronger ties with the Trump administration by donating money, showing up at high profile events such as his inauguration and showcasing their U.S. investments.

Shortly after Trump took office, OpenAI, Oracle and Softbank announced that they planned to invest a total of $500 billion in AI infrastructure over the next four years. Billionaire Elon Musk, who runs Tesla and SpaceX, donated more than $280 million to the 2024 election and was tasked with slashing government spending. Apple, which has faced criticism from Trump for building its iPhones overseas, said it would invest $500 billion in the United States.

The AI plan underscores how Trump is taking a different approach to AI regulation than his predecessor, former President Biden, who focused on AI’s benefits but also potential risks such as fueling disinformation and displacing jobs. Trump had revoked Biden’s executive order in January that placed guardrails around AI development.

Tech companies started investing in artificial intelligence long before the rise in popularity of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, a chatbot that can generate text and images. But the emergence of more rivals has sparked a fierce competition among companies that are trying to release new AI tools that could reshape industries from healthcare to education.

The rapid pace of technological development has raised concerns about whether the government is doing enough to regulate tech companies and safeguard the public from AI’s potential dangers. Some fact-checkers have noted that AI chatbots can spew out incorrect information. Parents are worried chatbots their children use could pose a threat to their mental health.

But regulation has a tough time keeping pace with how fast technology moves. The government also has to balance concerns that too many rules can hinder how quickly companies can release new AI-powered products. As major tech giants from Google and Meta face OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, they’re also going head to head with rivals in other countries including Chinese AI company DeepSeek.

The plan outlines removing “bureaucratic red tape” and “onerous federal regulation” that would make it tougher for companies to quickly build and develop AI technology. It also mentions revamping permits for data centers, infrastructure needed to power AI systems.

Data centers house computing equipment such as servers used to process the trove of information needed to train and maintain AI systems. But the amount of water and electricity data centers consume concerns some environmentalists.

Ahead of the plan’s release, more than 80 civil rights, labor and environmental groups signed a “people’s AI action plan.”

“We can’t let Big Tech and Big Oil lobbyists write the rules for AI and our economy at the expense of our freedom and equality, workers and families’ well-being, even the air we breathe and the water we drink — all of which are affected by the unrestrained and unaccountable roll-out of AI,” the competing plan said.

The White House’s plan also tries to address one of the biggest concerns about the rapid deployment of AI: the potential that technology could replace humans in some jobs. The building of infrastructure to power AI systems, for example, will create high-paying jobs for Americans, the plan said.

“AI will improve the lives of Americans by complementing their work — not replacing it,” the plan said.

It also said that AI systems must be free from bias. The plan recommends that the National Institute of Standards and Technology eliminate references to “misinformation, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and climate change” in its AI risk management framework.

The plan emphasized the importance of national security. It mentioned that the U.S. should export its “full AI technology stack” that includes hardware and software to its allies and partners but deny advanced AI to its foreign adversaries.

Some tech executives on Wednesday quickly praised the AI plan.

Box Chief Executive Aaron Levie said that the plan is “quite strong.”

“It has a clear a mission to win the AI race and accelerate the development and use of AI by removing roadblocks or aiding adoption. Importantly, it focuses on the positive benefits of AI, which we’re all seeing every day,” he wrote on X.

Fred Humphries, Microsoft’s corporate vice president of U.S. Government Affairs, also praised the plan.

“President Trump’s plan will accelerate infrastructure readiness so AI can be built and used here, and help students and workers with skills needed to win in an AI-powered global economy,” he said on X.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur says some of the world’s largest companies are complicit in and profiting from Israel’s actions in the occupied Palestinian territory.

Francesca Albanese’s landmark report identified Microsoft, Amazon and Google as just some of the major United States tech firms helping Israel sustain its genocide in Gaza.

But UN reports like this have no legal power. And Israel has rejected Albanese’s findings as “groundless”, saying it would “join the dustbin of history”.

So, will big companies, despite their financial interests, start to question their ties with Israel?

And will consumers around the world bring commercial pressure on those implicated firms?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Omar Barghouti – Cofounder of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement

Vaniya Agrawal – Former software engineer at Microsoft, who resigned earlier this year

Michael Lynk – Human rights lawyer and a former UN special rapporteur for human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory

“For some, genocide is profitable.” UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese has issued a blistering report accusing major companies of profiting from Israel’s genocide in Gaza and its occupation of Palestinian land.

The United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) has released a new report mapping the corporations aiding Israel in the displacement of Palestinians and its genocidal war on Gaza, in breach of international law.

Francesca Albanese’s latest report, which is scheduled to be presented at a news conference in Geneva on Thursday, names 48 corporate actors, including United States tech giants Microsoft, Alphabet Inc. – Google’s parent company – and Amazon. A database of more than 1000 corporate entities was also put together as part of the investigation.

“[Israel’s] forever-occupation has become the ideal testing ground for arms manufacturers and Big Tech – providing significant supply and demand, little oversight, and zero accountability – while investors and private and public institutions profit freely,” the report said.

“Companies are no longer merely implicated in occupation – they may be embedded in an economy of genocide,” it said, in a reference to Israel’s ongoing assault on the Gaza Strip. In an expert opinion last year, Albanese said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe Israel was committing genocide in the besieged Palestinian enclave.

The report stated that its findings illustrate “why Israel’s genocide continues”.

“Because it is lucrative for many,” it said.

What arms and tech companies were identified in the report?

Israel’s procurement of F-35 fighter jets is part of the world’s largest arms procurement programme, relying on at least 1,600 companies across eight nations. It is led by US-based Lockheed Martin, but F-35 components are constructed globally.

Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A is listed as a main contributor in the military sector, while Japan’s FANUC Corporation provides robotic machinery for weapons production lines.

The tech sector, meanwhile, has enabled the collection, storage and governmental use of biometric data on Palestinians, “supporting Israel’s discriminatory permit regime”, the report said. Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon grant Israel “virtually government-wide access to their cloud and AI technologies”, enhancing its data processing and surveillance capacities.

The US tech company IBM has also been responsible for training military and intelligence personnel, as well as managing the central database of Israel’s Population, Immigration and Borders Authority (PIBA) that stores the biometric data of Palestinians, the report said.

It found US software platform Palantir Technologies expanded its support to the Israeli military since the start of the war on Gaza in October 2023. The report said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe the company provided automatic predictive policing technology used for automated decision-making in the battlefield, to process data and generate lists of targets including through artificial intelligence systems like “Lavender”, “Gospel” and “Where’s Daddy?”

What other companies are identified in the report?

The report also lists several companies developing civilian technologies that serve as “dual-use tools” for Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory.

These include Caterpillar, Leonardo-owned Rada Electronic Industries, South Korea’s HD Hyundai and Sweden’s Volvo Group, which provide heavy machinery for home demolitions and the development of illegal settlements in the West Bank.

Rental platforms Booking and Airbnb also aid illegal settlements by listing properties and hotel rooms in Israeli-occupied territory.

The report named the US’s Drummond Company and Switzerland’s Glencore as the primary suppliers of coal for electricity to Israel, originating primarily from Colombia.

In the agriculture sector, Chinese Bright Dairy & Food is a majority owner of Tnuva, Israel’s largest food conglomerate, which benefits from land seized from Palestinians in Israel’s illegal outposts. Netafim, a company providing drip irrigation technology that is 80-percent owned by Mexico’s Orbia Advance Corporation, provides infrastructure to exploit water resources in the occupied West Bank.

Treasury bonds have also played a critical role in funding the ongoing war on Gaza, according to the report, with some of the world’s largest banks, including France’s BNP Paribas and the UK’s Barclays, listed as having stepped in to allow Israel to contain the interest rate premium despite a credit downgrade.

Who are the main investors behind these companies?

The report identified US multinational investment companies BlackRock and Vanguard as the main investors behind several listed companies.

BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, is listed as the second largest institutional investor in Palantir (8.6 percent), Microsoft (7.8 percent), Amazon (6.6 percent), Alphabet (6.6 percent) and IBM (8.6 per cent), and the third largest in Lockheed Martin (7.2 percent) and Caterpillar (7.5 percent).

Vanguard, the world’s second-largest asset manager, is the largest institutional investor in Caterpillar (9.8 percent), Chevron (8.9 percent) and Palantir (9.1 percent), and the second largest in Lockheed Martin (9.2 percent) and Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems (2 percent).

Are companies profiting from dealing with Israel?

The report states that “colonial endeavours and their associated genocides have historically been driven and enabled by the corporate sector.” Israel’s expansion on Palestinian land is one example of “colonial racial capitalism”, where corporate entities profit from an illegal occupation.

Since Israel launched its war on Gaza in October 2023, “entities that previously enabled and profited from Palestinian elimination and erasure within the economy of occupation, instead of disengaging are now involved in the economy of genocide,” the report said.

For foreign arms companies, the war has been a lucrative venture. Israel’s military spending from 2023 to 2024 surged 65 percent, amounting to $46.5bn – one of the highest per capita worldwide.

Several entities listed on the exchange market – particularly in the arms, tech and infrastructure sectors – have seen their profits rise since October 2023. The Tel Aviv Stock Exchange also rose an unprecedented 179 percent, adding $157.9bn in market value.

Global insurance companies, including Allianz and AXA, invested large sums in shares and bonds linked to Israel’s occupation, the report said, partly as capital reserves but primarily to generate returns.

Booking and Airbnb also continue to profit from rentals in Israeli-occupied land. Airbnb briefly delisted properties on illegal settlements in 2018 but later reverted to donating profits from such listings to humanitarian causes, a practice the report referred to as “humanitarian-washing”.

Are private companies liable under international law?

According to Albanese’s report, yes. Corporate entities are under an obligation to avoid violating human rights through direct action or in their business partnerships.

States have the primary responsibility to ensure that corporate entities respect human rights and must prevent, investigate and punish abuses by private actors. However, corporations must respect human rights even if the state where they operate does not.

A company must therefore assess whether activities or relationships throughout its supply chain risk causing human rights violations or contributing to them, according to the report.

The failure to act in line with international law may result in criminal liability. Individual executives can be held criminally liable, including before international courts.

The report called on companies to divest from all activities linked to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory, which is illegal under international law.

In July 2024, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion ruling that Israel’s continued presence in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem should come to an end “as rapidly as possible”. In light of this advisory opinion, the UN General Assembly demanded that Israel bring to an end its unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory by September 2025.

Albanese’s report said the ICJ’s ruling “effectively qualifies the occupation as an act of aggression … Consequently, any dealings that support or sustain the occupation and its associated apparatus may amount to complicity in an international crime under the Rome Statute.

“States must not provide aid or assistance or enter into economic or trade dealings, and must take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that would assist in maintaining the illegal situation created by Israel in the oPt.”

Amid their public feud over the looming tax bill, US President Donald Trump has suggested that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) review subsidies tied to once ally Elon Musk, including those received by Tesla and SpaceX, in order to save money.

“Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa. No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!,” the president said in an early morning post on Trump’s social media platform Truth Social.

Trump’s remarks on Tuesday came after Musk renewed his criticism of the sweeping tax-cut and spending bill — which the White House hopes to sign into law by July 4th — pledging to unseat lawmakers who supported it after campaigning on limiting government spending.

Shortly after, Senate Republicans hauled Trump’s big tax breaks and spending cuts bill to passage Tuesday on the narrowest of margins, pushing past opposition from Democrats and their own GOP ranks after a turbulent overnight session.

The outcome capped an unusually tense weekend of work at the Capitol, the president’s signature legislative priority teetering on the edge of approval or collapse. In the end, that tally was 50-50, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote.

Musk and Trump spar over bill

Feuding with Trump could create hurdles for Tesla and the rest of Musk’s business empire.

The US Transportation Department regulates vehicle design and would play a key role in deciding whether Tesla can mass-produce robotaxis without pedals and steering wheels, while Musk’s rocket company SpaceX has about $22bn in federal contracts.

Trump previously threatened to cut Musk’s government contracts when their relationship erupted into an all-out social media brawl in early June over the bill, which non-partisan analysts have said would add about $3 trillion to the US debt.

But after weeks of relative silence, Musk rejoined the debate on Saturday as the Senate took up the package, calling it “utterly insane and destructive” in a post on X.

On Monday, he said lawmakers who campaigned on cutting spending but backed the bill “should hang their heads in shame!” “And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,” Musk added.

The criticism marked a dramatic shift after the billionaire spent nearly $300m on Trump’s re-election campaign and led the administration’s controversial DOGE initiative.

Musk has argued that the legislation would greatly increase the national debt and erase the savings he says he achieved through DOGE.

Conflicts of interest

Musk was long slammed for his conflicts of interest while leading DOGE — accused of going after government agencies that had open investigations against him and his associated companies.

A report from the left-leaning think tank Public Citizen found that 70 percent of the agencies in May found that Musk aimed to make significant cuts to agencies, including the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which had been investigating Tesla.

The Food and Drug Administration, which had been investigating his brain implant chip, Neuralink, and cuts to the Department of Defense, which has been called for by both progressive Democrats as well, comes as SpaceX receives more than $22bn in federal contracts from the agency, according to the report.

The market response

There are conflicts with Musk within the bill he’s actively rallying against. The bill, which Trump eliminated the EV tax credit, Musk originally said would not hurt Tesla. The EV tax credit, however, has helped other carmakers make more affordable electric vehicles for more consumers, and Musk has recently changed his tune.

In a note last month, JP Morgan said cutting the EV tax credit could cost Tesla $1.2bn annually. Now the market is reacting as these plans might come to fruition in a matter of days, and amid the president’s Truth Social post, spooking investors.

Tesla stock tumbled roughly 6 percent as of 11:00am ET (15:00 GMT) and about 13 percent over the last five days.

“[This] BFF situation has now turned into a soap opera that remains an overhang on Tesla’s stock with investors fearing that the Trump Administration will be more hawkish and show scrutiny around Musk related US government spending related to Tesla/SpaceX and most importantly the autonomous future with the regulatory environment key to the future of Robotaxis and Cybercabs,” Dan Ives, senior analyst at Wedbush Securities said in a note provided to Al Jazeera earlier this morning.

Musk’s other companies include SpaceX, X Corp, and Neuralink are privately held companies.

More broadly the markets erased some of the gains in the last few days. The tech-heavy Nasdaq is down by about a full percentage point and the S&P 500 down 0.3 percent.  Dow Jones Industrial Average, on the other hand, is trending upwards, roughly 0.6 percent higher than the market open.

Norway’s largest pension fund, KLP, has said that it will no longer do business with two companies that sell equipment to the Israeli military because the equipment is possibly being used in the war in Gaza.

The two companies are the Oshkosh Corporation, a United States company mostly focused on trucks and military vehicles, and ThyssenKrupp, a German industrial firm that makes a broad selection of products, ranging from elevators and industrial machinery to warships.

“In June 2024, KLP learned of reports from the UN that several named companies were supplying weapons or equipment to the [Israeli army] and that these weapons are being used in Gaza,” Kiran Aziz, the head of responsible investments at KLP Kapitalforvaltning, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“Our conclusion is that the companies Oshkosh and ThyssenKrupp are contravening our responsible investment guidelines,” the statement said.

“We have therefore decided to exclude them from our investment universe.”

According to the pension fund, it had investments worth $1.8m in Oshkosh and almost $1m in ThyssenKrupp until June 2025.

KLP, founded in 1949 and the country’s largest pension fund, oversees a fund worth about $114bn. It is a public pension fund owned by municipalities and businesses in the public sector, and has a pension scheme that covers about 900,000 people, mostly municipal workers, according to its website.

Vehicles and warships

KLP said that it had been in touch with both companies before it made its decision and that Oshkosh “confirmed that it has sold, and continues to sell, equipment that is used by the [Israeli army] in Gaza”, mostly vehicles and parts for vehicles.

ThyssenKrupp told KLP that “it has a long-term relationship with [the Israeli army]” and that it had delivered four warships of the type Sa’ar 6 to the Israeli Navy in the period November 2020 to May 2021.

The German company also said it had plans to deliver a submarine to the Israeli Navy later this year.

When asked by KLP what checks and balances were made when it came to the use of the equipment the companies delivered, KLP said both Oshkosh and ThyssenKrupp “failed to document the necessary due diligence in relation to their potential complicity in violations of humanitarian law”.

“Companies have an independent duty to exercise due diligence in order to avoid complicity in violations of fundamental human rights and humanitarian law,” said Aziz.

Previous divestments

This is not the first time that the pension fund has divested from companies linked to possible human rights abuses.

In 2021, KLP divested from 16 companies, including telecom giant Motorola, that it concluded were linked to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The pension fund said there was an “unacceptable risk that the excluded companies are contributing to the abuse of human rights in situations of war and conflict through their links with the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank”.

That same year, KLP also said it was divesting from the Indian port and logistics group Adani Ports because of its links to the Myanmar military government.

Last summer, KLP also divested from US firm Caterpillar. In an opinion piece for Al Jazeera, the KLP’s Aziz wrote that Caterpillar’s bulldozers undergo adjustments in Israel by the military and local companies, and are subsequently used in the occupied Palestinian territory.

“The constant use of these weaponised bulldozers in the occupied Palestinian territory has led to a series of human rights warnings from United Nations agencies, and nongovernmental organisations over the last two decades about the company’s involvement in the demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure,” she wrote.

“It is therefore impossible to assert that the company has implemented adequate measures to avoid becoming involved in future norm violations.”

The latest move builds on a series of similar decisions among several large investment funds in Europe that have cut ties with Israeli companies for their involvement in either the war in Gaza or because of links to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

In May, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the largest in the world, said it would divest from Israel’s Paz Retail and Energy because of the company’s involvement in supplying infrastructure and fuel to illegal Israeli settlements.

This came after an earlier decision in December last year to sell all shares it had in another Israeli company, Bezeq, for its services provided to the illegal settlements.

Other pension funds as well as wealth funds have also, in recent years, distanced themselves from companies accused of enabling or cooperating with Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank or its war on Gaza.

In February 2024, Denmark’s largest pension fund divested from several Israeli banks and companies as the fund feared its investments could be used to fund the settlements in the West Bank.

Six months later, the United Kingdom’s largest pension fund, the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS), said it would sell off all its investments linked to Israel because of its war on Gaza. The fund, which totals about $79bn, said it would sell its $101m worth of investments after pressure from its members.

June 29 (UPI) — Group of Seven nations agreed to exempt U.S. companies from a 15% minimum corporate tax rate, the countries said in a joint statement.

The nonbinding deal was announced Saturday but still requires approval from the 38-member Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development that established the 2021 agreement on taxing companies. G-7 nations are part of the OECED.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had proposed a “side-by-side solution” for American-headquartered companies that would be exempt from the Income Inclusion Rule and Undertaxed Profits Rule “in recognition of the existing U.S. minimum tax rules to which they are subject.”

The massive spending bill now being considered in Congress originally included a “revenge tax” that would have imposed a levy of up to 20% on investments from countries that taxed U.S. companies.

“I have asked the Senate and House to remove the Section 899 protective measure from consideration in the One, Big, Beautiful Bill,” Bessent wrote in a multi-post thread on X on Thursday.

The House has approved the massive legislation and the Senate is considering it.

“It is an honorable compromise as it spares us from the automatic retaliations of Section 899 of the Big, Beautiful Bill,” Italian Finance Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti told local media.

“We are not claiming victory, but we obtained some concessions as the U.S. pledged to engage in OECD negotiations on fair taxation,” an unnamed French official told Politico Europe. The official called the “revenge tax” a potentially “huge burden for French companies.”

Trump has criticized this provision because he said it would limit sovereignty and send U.S. tax revenues to other countries.

“The Trump administration remains vigilant against all discriminatory and extraterritorial foreign taxes applied against Americans,” Bessent wrote Thursday.

Trump has imposed a July 9 deadline for U.S. trading partners to lower taxes on foreign goods, threatening high duties on the worst offenders, including 50% on goods from the 27 European Union members. In April, a baseline tariff was imposed on most U.S. trading partners, with higher rates on certain companies and products.

In 2021, nearly 140 countries agreed to tax multinational companies at the 15% minimum, regardless of where they were headquartered.

In late April, the European Union, Britain, Japan and Canada agreed to exempt the United States from the 15% minimum tax on companies.

“Delivery of a side-by-side system will facilitate further progress to stabilize the international tax system, including a constructive dialogue on the taxation of the digital economy and on preserving the tax sovereignty of all countries,” the joint statement read.

The agreement, according to the statement, would ensure that any substantial risks identified “with respect to the level playing field, or risks of base erosion and profit shifting, are addressed to preserve the common policy objectives of the side-by-side system.”

The G-7 includes Britain, France, Germany, Italy in Europe, as well as Canada, Japan and U.S. Before 2014, the group was known as the G-8 until Russia was expelled after annexing the Crimea region of Ukraine.

The chairs of the House and Senate committees responsible for tax policy cheered the agreement.

“We applaud President Trump and his team for protecting the interests of American workers and businesses after years of congressional Republicans sounding the alarm on the Biden Administration’s unilateral global tax surrender under Pillar 2,” Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and Missouri Rep. Jason Smith, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, said in a press release.

The agreement also, however, has its critics.

“The U.S. is trying to exempt itself by arm-twisting others, which would make the tax deal entirely useless,” Markus Meinzer, director of policy at the Tax Justice Network, told Politico Europe. “A ship with a U.S.-sized hole in its hull won’t float.”

Move follows campaign accusing Maersk of links to Israel’s military and occupation of Palestinian lands.

Maersk will cut ties with companies linked to illegal Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank, the Danish shipping giant has said.

The decision follows months-long pressure by activists on Maersk on issues related to Palestine.

Its shipments have come under scrutiny as part of an international campaign led by the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), a grassroots organisation. The group has focused mainly on Maersk’s shipments of US foreign military sales, but PYM has also researched the transport of cargo from companies tied to settlements.

A statement on the Maersk website, dated June, 2025, said, “Following a recent review of transports related to the West Bank, we further strengthened our screening procedures in relation to Israeli settlements, including aligning our screening process with the OHCHR database of enterprises involved in activities in the settlements.”

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) database includes businesses involved in various activities related to the settlements, such as providing services, equipment, or financial operations that support the illegal settlements.

When asked for further details on its decision, Maersk pointed Al Jazeera to the statement on its website. It is unclear which or how many businesses Maersk had links to.

Israel has built more than 100 settlements across the occupied West Bank that are home to some 500,000 settlers. These settlements, illegal under international law, range from small outposts to larger communities with modern infrastructure.

“This sends a clear message to the global shipping industry: compliance with international law and basic human rights is not optional. Doing business with Israel’s illegal settlements is no longer viable, and the world is watching to see who follows next,” said PYM’s Aisha Nizar.

But she called for further action, arguing that Maersk still transports goods for the Israeli military, including components of its F-35 fighter planes.

“Maersk continues to profit from the genocide of our people – regularly shipping F-35 components used to bomb and massacre Palestinians,” Nizar said. “We will continue to build pressure and mobilise people power until Maersk cuts all ties to genocide and ends the transport of weapons and weapons components to Israel.”

Last year, Spain banned Maersk ships transporting military goods to Israel from using its ports.

Earlier this month, PYM revealed how Maersk was using the port of Rotterdam as an essential link in what it called a “supply chain of death”.

Despite a Dutch court ruling that prohibited the Netherlands from exporting F-35 parts to Israel, Rotterdam still played a role in Israel’s F-35 programme, the report showed.

In response to those findings, Maersk told Al Jazeera that it upholds a strict policy of not shipping weapons or ammunition to active conflict zones and that it conducts due diligence, particularly in regions affected by active conflicts, including Israel and Gaza, and adapts this due diligence to the changing context.

It confirmed, however, that its US subsidiary, Maersk Line Limited, was one of “many companies supporting the global F-35 supply chain” with transport services.

Video game performers and producers have reached a tentative contract agreement, reaching terms that could end a long strike over artificial intelligence.

The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the game companies came to a resolution on Monday, more than two years after their previous agreement covering interactive media expired.

The deal is subject to review and approval by the SAG-AFTRA National Board and ratification by the membership in the coming weeks, the union said. Specific terms of the deal were not immediately available.

Terms of a strike suspension agreement are expected to be finalized with employers soon, the union said. Until then, though, SAG-AFTRA members will remain on strike.

SAG-AFTRA members must vote on whether to ratify the new contract, which covers roughly 2,600 performers doing voice-acting, performance- and motion-capture work in the video game industry.

Since fall 2022, video game performers have been fighting for a new contract containing AI protections, wage increases to keep up with inflation, more rest periods and medical attention for hazardous jobs.

Game actors went on strike in late July after contract talks broke down over AI. Throughout the walkout, performers demanded a deal that would require video game producers to obtain informed consent before replicating their voices, likenesses or movements with AI.

During the first few months of the strike, SAG-AFTRA reached numerous side deals with individual game companies that agreed to follow the union’s AI rules in exchange for a strike pardon. By Nov. 18, the labor organization announced that it had made AI pacts with the developers of 130 different video games.

“The sheer volume of companies that have signed SAG-AFTRA agreements demonstrates how reasonable those protections are,” Sarah Elmaleh, chair of the union’s video game negotiating committee, said in a statement in September.

While some companies earned the union’s approval, others felt its wrath.

Halfway through October, SAG-AFTRA added the popular computer game “League of Legends” to its list of struck titles in an effort to punish audio company Formosa Interactive for allegedly violating terms of the walkout. SAG-AFTRA also filed an unfair labor practice charge against Formosa, which provides voice-over services to “League of Legends,” according to the union.

Formosa denied SAG-AFTRA’s allegations.

The biggest sticking point for actors under the umbrella of AI involved on-camera performers, whose job is often to disappear into the characters they are bringing to life. They expressed concerns that the companies’ AI proposal would leave them defenseless against the technology.

The game companies argued that their AI proposal already contained robust protections that would require employers to seek prior consent and pay actors fairly when cloning their performances.

“All performers need AI protections,” said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director and chief negotiator of SAG-AFTRA, in an interview with The Times months ago.

“Everyone’s at risk, and it’s not OK to carve out a set of performers and leave them out of AI protections.”

This work stoppage marked SAG-AFTRA’s second video game strike in less than a decade and second overall strike in roughly a year.

While the walkout persisted, video game performers weren’t allowed to provide any services — such as acting, singing, stunts, motion capture, background and stand-in work — to struck games. Union actors were also barred from promoting any struck projects via social media, interviews, conventions, festivals, award shows, podcast appearances and other platforms.

AI was also a major sticking point during the film and TV actors’ strike of 2023. That walkout culminated in a contract mandating that producers obtain consent from and compensate performers when using their digital replica.