data

Reporting from Washington — To any nefarious hackers looking for information that could be used to sway elections or steal Americans’ identities, the file compiled by a GOP data firm called Deep Root Analytics offered all manner of possibilities.

There in one place was detailed personal information about almost every voter in the U.S. It was a collection of some 9.5 billion data points that helped the firm assess not only how those Americans would probably vote, but their projected political preferences. In some cases, the data collectors had scoured people’s histories on Reddit, the social media platform, to match vote history with social media use, and well-informed predictions were made about where each voter would stand on issues as personal as abortion and stem cell research.

It’s the kind of sensitive information that, if a bank or a big-box retailer or almost any other corporation had failed to protect it, would have triggered major trouble with regulators. But there it sat on the Internet, without so much as a password to guard it, for 12 days.

Luckily for the Republican Party and Deep Root, an Arlington, Va.-based firm that handles data management and analysis for the party, it was a cybersecurity consultant who came across the treasure-trove of political data this month, not a foreign agent. There is no indication that the database had been tapped by any other unauthorized parties while it was unprotected.

But the exposure of the data, which some are describing as the largest leak of voter information in history, is a jolting reminder of how deeply the political parties are probing into the lives of voters and how vulnerable the information they are compiling is to theft.

The Deep Root incident is the latest in a series of such problems with political data, the most infamous being the case of the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee. As cybersecurity experts sound an increasingly loud alarm about the potential consequences, the lapses keep happening — often with nobody held accountable for them.

“This is a catalog of human lives, with intrinsic details,” said Mike Baukes, chief executive of UpGuard, the Mountain View, Calif., firm that came across the file during a routine scan of cloud systems.

“Every voter in America is potentially in there. The scale of it is just staggering, and the fact that it was left wide open is wholly irresponsible.…This is happening all the time. We are continually finding these things. It is just staggering.”

Privacy experts were skeptical that political operatives will change their ways following the latest incident.

“The state of security for massive data sets is so incredibly poor despite a daily drumbeat of data breached,” said Timothy Sparapani, a former director of public policy for Facebook who is now a data privacy consultant at the firm SPQR Strategies, based in Washington. “It is shocking. It is embarrassing. People ought to lose their jobs.”

Sparapani said if the culprit had been a private firm, it would be subjected to punitive actions by attorneys general, consumer lawsuits and big fines from regulators. But political operations face no such repercussions.

“As a voter, you are left with almost no recourse because our laws have not caught up to the massive computing power which is readily available to gather enormous data sets and make them searchable at the click of a button,” he said. “The breadth and depth of data collection by these companies is not well understood. If it were, I think the average voter would be frightened.”

UpGuard was able to access the file merely by guessing a Web address. It alerted Deep Root as well as federal authorities.

Deep Root apologized in a statement, but also suggested the incident had been overblown.

The data file “is our proprietary analysis to help inform local-television ad buying,” the statement said. It noted that much of the voter information the analysis is built on is “readily provided by state government offices.” The firm said it has put security procedures in place to prevent future leaks.

Other digital strategists warned, however, that the failure to protect such detailed information not only raised major privacy and security concerns, but also may have tipped off political adversaries to the inner workings of the Republican Party’s closely guarded digital strategy.

The GOP contracted with Deep Root during the presidential campaign. The firm’s co-founder, Alex Lundry, led the data efforts of GOP nominee Mitt Romney in 2012 and then worked for the unsuccessful presidential campaign of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush last year.

GOP officials said the data belonging to the party that was exposed was limited to very basic information about voters, such as their party registration. They said none of the GOP’s sensitive strategic data was exposed. The party has suspended work with the firm pending an investigation by Deep Root into security procedures.

The failure by Deep Root to protect its massive database was particularly troubling to some advocates at a time when Congress is investigating how Russia exploited data vulnerabilities to meddle in last year’s presidential election.

“This is data used for opinion manipulation,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the nonprofit research group Electronic Privacy Information Center, based in Washington. “It needs to be regulated. And there needs to be consequence for breaches. We have a major problem in this country with data security, and it’s getting worse.” The foundation wants Congress to hold hearings on political data security.

But holding political parties and contractors accountable for their data practices has proven tricky. David Berger, an attorney with the Bay Area-based firm Girard Gibbs who has represented consumers affected by data breaches at Anthem and Home Depot, said part of the problem is voters are not demanding changes loudly enough.

When a retail company fails to protect the privacy of its customers, Berger said, the company suffers and lawmakers hear about it from the victims.

“When people see Deep Root, they are not going to necessarily associate that with the [Republican Party] or anything else,” he said. “If your average American knew the amounts of data and profiling that is already put together by these companies about every single one of us, people would be very concerned. But there’s no face here, and they try to keep quiet.”

Halper reported from Washington and Dave from Los Angeles.

[email protected]

Follow me: @evanhalper

ALSO

The black vote is key in Georgia’s House race — but can Democrats energize it?

Supreme Court to decide on partisan gerrymandering: Can it be used to create favorable voting districts?

As Tom Steyer pushes for Trump’s impeachment, the billionaire environmentalist is still weighing a run for office

The New Reactor Economy

In the twenty-first century, nuclear energy has re-emerged not only as a source of electricity but also as an instrument of geopolitical endurance. Among all global reactor exporters, Russia’s Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporationremains exceptionally resilient. Despite sanctions and fractured supply chains, Rosatom today is involved in the construction of thirty to forty reactor units worldwide, including in Egypt’s El-Dabaa, Bangladesh’s Rooppur, and Turkey’s Akkuyu.

Yet beneath the story of uranium and concrete lies a subtler revolution: the rise of digital-twin technology. A digital twin is a virtual, data-driven replica of a reactor that mirrors every process in real time using sensors, analytics, and artificial intelligence (AI). It enables engineers to simulate performance, anticipate faults, and fine-tune safety systems remotely.

In doing so, Rosatom is no longer merely exporting atomic hardware; it is exporting data architectures and predictive-analytics ecosystems that tether partner nations to Russian digital infrastructures for decades. The company has consolidated these capabilities under its Unified Digital Platform, linking design, construction, and operation through cloud-based modelling and AI-driven monitoring (Rosatom Newsletter, 2025).

This digitalization marks a turning point in nuclear diplomacy: power now flows through algorithms and data, not only through megawatts and materials.

From Hardware Exports to Data Dependencies

Since 2020, Rosatom’s subsidiaries, notably Atomenergomash and Rusatom Service, have begun integrating digital lifecycle systems across their international reactor portfolio. The company’s engineering arm, ASE, has developed what it calls Multi-D IMS, a digital configuration-management platform that creates detailed virtual models of nuclear facilities during design and construction. These models enable real-time collaboration, fault prediction, and workflow optimization across sites, forming the foundation of Rosatom’s emerging digital-twin ecosystem.

Rosatom’s own communications describe these tools as part of a broader Unified Digital Platform, which connects design, manufacturing, and operation through cloud-based modelling and AI-driven analytics. While official statements do not identify specific plants using these systems, Rosatom notes that its “digital infrastructure and twin technologies” are being offered to international partners within its reactor export programs.

This architecture creates a durable maintenance corridor between Moscow and client operators.  Even after physical construction ends, the flow of digital data and software updates ensures that Russian engineers remain integral to plant performance.  In practice, the information layer itself becomes a channel of long-term engagement and influence.

Comparable Western vendors, EDF, Westinghouse, and GE Hitachi, are also pursuing digital-twin technologies. Yet Rosatom’s approach is uniquely state-integrated, aligning with Russia’s national strategy of digital sovereignty and self-sufficient AI infrastructure. The result is a hybrid of engineering innovation and strategic design: a system that embeds Russian digital standards within the nuclear industries of its partners.

For many developing economies, the offer is pragmatic: a single vendor providing financing, turnkey construction, and continuous digital assistance.  But this convenience introduces a subtler dependence, one not of uranium supply or credit, but of algorithmic reliance and data governance.

Kudankulam: India’s Quiet Test Bed

Nowhere is this shift more visible than in southern India. The Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP), jointly operated by India’s Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) and Rosatom, is the first operational complex of VVER-1000 reactors in the Global South.

Originally a hardware partnership signed in 1988, Kudankulam is evolving into a digital interface. In 2020, Rosatom’s fuel subsidiary TVEL supplied India with next-generation TVS-2M fuel assemblies, extending reactor cycles from twelve to eighteen months, a shift managed through digital modelling and predictive maintenance.

Rosatom’s 2024 annual report outlines plans to connect Kudankulam’s operational analytics to its Unified Digital Nuclear Industry Platform, integrating India into the same digital ecosystem that supports Turkey’s and Egypt’s projects.

For India, this offers substantial advantages, higher capacity factors, enhanced safety diagnostics, and exposure to emerging global standards in nuclear AI. Yet it also entwines India’s civilian nuclear operations with Russian data protocols and remote diagnostic tools. Kudankulam thus becomes not only a reactor but also a node in Rosatom’s global digital web, where megawatts are managed by code as much as by turbines.

This duality defines the future of strategic cooperation: efficiency through integration, balanced against data-driven interdependence.

Algorithmic Sovereignty and Strategic Autonomy

Digital integration introduces a new vocabulary of power. Terms once reserved for information technology, data sovereignty, algorithmic control, and cybersecurity now shape energy diplomacy. For countries like India, which prize autonomy, these are practical concerns.

In 2019, a cyber incident at Kudankulam briefly demonstrated how vulnerable nuclear infrastructure can be when administrative networks intersect with global data flows. Although operational systems were unaffected, the episode exposed the need for stronger digital-governance frameworks in critical energy sectors.

Another question concerns ownership of reactor data. Predictive-maintenance algorithms rely on vast datasets, coolant temperatures, pressure levels, and sensor diagnostics gathered continuously during operation. If these datasets are processed on Rosatom’s proprietary cloud, who controls their reuse or replication? India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act (2023) mandates localization for sensitive data, yet nuclear information exists in a legal grey zone, governed more by bilateral contracts than explicit national legislation.

For Russia, digitalization ensures resilience under sanctions. Cloud-based engineering assistance allows specialists in Moscow to monitor reactors abroad even when travel or logistics are constrained. For partners, it delivers cost-efficient expertise, yet it also embeds an asymmetry; operational sovereignty becomes mediated by foreign algorithms.

Rosatom’s approach reflects Moscow’s broader strategy of technological statecraft, using digital ecosystems to sustain global reach despite economic isolation. The outcome is a new form of dependence: not energy insecurity but informational dependency.

Atoms → Algorithms: The Next Frontier of Energy Diplomacy

Rosatom’s digital transformation parallels wider trends in global technology politics. China’s Digital Silk Road, the U.S.-EU “trusted-tech” frameworks, and Russia’s own push for a “Digital Atom Belt” all reveal how infrastructure and information are converging.

India occupies a delicate middle ground. Collaboration with Rosatom at Kudankulam grants access to advanced analytics, but New Delhi also explores partnerships with Western firms on small modular reactors and new fuel cycles. Balancing these engagements will require clear rules on digital interoperability, data governance, and cyber assurance.

India already has the institutions to do so. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) verifies reactor-control software domestically, while CERT-IN supervises cyber-critical infrastructure. Extending such oversight to digital-twin and predictive-maintenance platforms can preserve sovereignty while encouraging innovation.

For Russia, meanwhile, digital twins are both export products and diplomatic instruments. By embedding AI-based support systems in every reactor project, Rosatom ensures long-term relevance. Even if hardware exports slow, its role as a digital-lifecycle provider guarantees enduring engagement. In that sense, Rosatom’s most influential reactor export may no longer be physical; it is virtual.

Conclusion: The Politics of Invisible Power

The shift from atoms to algorithms defines the next frontier of nuclear diplomacy. During the Cold War, power was measured in reactors built or megawatts produced. Today, it is determined by who controls the data that sustains those reactors.

For partner nations, digital twins promise transparency, efficiency, and safety. For exporting powers, they offer a quiet form of leverage that persists beyond physical construction. As India pursues self-reliance through Make in India and Atmanirbhar Bharat, it must treat data infrastructure with the same strategic weight as fuel supply chains.

The aim should not be isolation from partners like Russia but reciprocal digital governance, shared access protocols, transparent algorithmic audits, and domestic data custody. Rosatom’s digital twin diplomacy exemplifies a future where technological cooperation and strategic caution must coexist.

The next great non-proliferation challenge may not concern uranium enrichment but data enrichment: who holds it, who protects it, and who decides how it is used?

Since April 2023, more than 12 million people have been displaced, nearly 9 million inside Sudan and over 3 million across borders. The United Nations now identifies Sudan as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with 25 million people facing acute food insecurity and famine conditions already recorded in multiple areas.

These are not statistics; they are markers of systemic collapse. Mass graves, torched health facilities, and emptied towns tell the story. UN officials and independent human rights bodies have documented that the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and allied militias committed genocide in Darfur, a finding echoed by the recent fall of El Fasher to RSF forces and the disturbing images that followed, underscoring the scale of brutality: civilians hunted in displacement camps, aid workers killed, humanitarian corridors severed. Each captured city tightens the noose on civilians and erodes any remaining space for lifesaving assistance.

The $4.2 billion required under the 2025 Sudan Humanitarian Response Plan remains largely unfunded. Agencies, including the WFP, UNICEF, UNHCR, and IOM, warn of an imminent operational collapse. Inaction is not neutral — it accelerates mass hunger, disease, and death. Sudan’s implosion will intensify displacement, fuel illicit economies, exacerbate extremist recruitment, and heighten volatility in food and fuel supplies. The outcome is predictable: expanded violence, deteriorating governance, and prolonged economic decline across West and Central Africa.

This crisis does not end at Sudan’s borders. It reverberates across a Sahel already destabilised by insurgency, climate shocks, and hollowed-out state institutions. Since 2020, a succession of coups in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger has entrenched military rule and normalised authoritarian recourse. Weak governance and porous borders transform humanitarian emergencies into regional security threats.

The international response must shift from caution to conviction:

• Close the funding gap immediately. Multiyear, flexible financing is essential. Underfunding today guarantees higher security and social costs tomorrow.

• Enforce accountability. Genocide determinations and credible atrocity reports demand criminal investigations, targeted sanctions, and civilian protection mechanisms. Impunity is a policy choice — and one that invites repetition.

• Reform and empower Africa’s institutions. The African Union must evolve from a consultative platform into a body capable of deterrence. Continent-wide resilience requires real incentives and penalties for unconstitutional rule, as well as rapid protection capacity. AU, ECOWAS, and the UN should align political mediation, enforcement tools, and governance support to reduce the appeal of coups masquerading as solutions.

The AU’s intervention is both urgent and crucial for the continent’s stability. Africa cannot afford perpetual crises while its people are uprooted and its natural wealth siphoned off. Sudan is a warning. The Sahel is the echo. Failure to act decisively will cement a trajectory of conflict, authoritarian drift, and economic paralysis. Accountability, protection, and reform are not aspirations; they are minimum requirements for continental stability.

Oct. 23 (UPI) — New data released by Harvard University’s undergraduate school showed a decline for the class of 2029 in both Hispanic and Black students, with a spike in its Asian student population.

Massachusetts-based Harvard College stated its 2029 class makeup showed Black students comprised 11.5%, with Hispanics at 11% and Asian-American students at 41%, according to newly released data.

However, the university did not release demographics and data on its White student population.

The data release followed the U.S. Supreme Court‘s recent ruling that struck down affirmative action practices in America’s higher learning institutions.

Prior to the high court’s decision, the Harvard student population had been made up of about 18% of Black students.

But Harvard’s total number of Hispanic students went up following the Supreme Court’s ruling.

According to data, roughly 21% of Harvards 2029 graduating class were eligible for federal Pell Grants. It added 45% were tuition free and 26% on an entirely free program.

Earlier this year, President Donald Trump instructed the Department of Education to inform U.S. educational institutions on the receiving end of federal funds to officially end affirmative action policies in a number of school-related practices.

Meanwhile, a Yale professor and expert on affirmative action history called the decline an example how the high court’s “disastrous decision from 2023 continues to cause Black enrollment rates to decline at many of the nation’s premier universities.”

“I fear that Harvard’s plummeting trend lines over the last two years offers an unattractive preview of the future in American higher education,” Justin Driver, a professor at Yale Law School, told The New York Times.

Hello and happy Thursday. It’s Anita Chabria again. Today, I’m coming to you from a coffee shop where I just used Apple Pay to buy a dirty chai.

Why does that matter? Because in the last five minutes, I’ve dropped all kinds of data into the universe. What I drink, how much I’ll pay for it, how long I sat here using this Wi-Fi and dozens of other details that companies are willing to pay for but that I don’t even think about — much less benefit from.

Every day, we all walk around dropping data like garbage — when in reality it’s gold. Especially in the age of budding artificial intelligence, when the smallest bit of insight is being crammed into these new robo-gods in the hope of making them seem ever smarter and more human.

It all raises the question, if it’s our data, shouldn’t we be paid for it?

André Vellozo thinks so, and is working to make that a reality. He’s a Brazilian hippie based in Silicon Valley, an outsider in an increasingly conservative and insular community with an idea that’s more about equality than power.

“Everything you do generates value and data,” Vellozo said. “Now you can collect.”

Here’s what he envisions — and why it’s as much politics as business.

A bus stop advertises Artisan AI, an artificial intelligence software company, along the Embarcadero in downtown San Francisco.

(Florence Middleton / For The Times)

Pennies add up

Think of Vellozo’s idea a bit like streaming royalties, giving you a small paycheck every time information you create is used, be it details of a coffee purchase or your hospital stay. Obviously, an artist could never keep track of every single time their show or song is played — they rely on managers and brokers.

Vellozo’s company, DrumWave, would act as that broker for individuals’ data. In his scenario, every person from birth would have a digital wallet where every bit of data they drop is accounted for. This is stuff you are already creating, whether you’re aware of it or not — and which companies are too often collecting, whether you are aware of it or not.

How many “accept all” buttons have you clicked in your life without reading the details of what you are agreeing to, including allowing others to sell your data for their own profit?

When companies want to use that data — which they do to understand economics in the macro and micro, or to study health outcomes, or to feed those large language models such as ChatGPT — DrumWave packages it and licenses it for use without identifying details, but with each consumer’s consent.

Data goes out, payment comes it — over and over for the life of the account.

It’s not as far-fetched as it might seem. Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed a similar idea in 2019, arguing, “California’s consumers should also be able to share in the wealth that is created from their data.”

Nothing ever came of it, in no small part due to the lobbying and money thrown at government by big tech. I asked the governor’s office if there was still any interest around the idea and got nothing back from them. But California already has a law that could give folks control of their data, though it isn’t often used the way Vellozo envisions.

Downsides

There are, of course, many obstacles and potential pitfalls. Data privacy is one that comes up often — do we really want to be selling the details of our most recent colonoscopy, anonymous or not?

And of course, there’s also the potential for exploitation. What data would the poor or desperate be willing to sell, and how cheaply?

Annemarie Butler is an associate professor of philosophy at Iowa State University who specializes in the ethics of AI. She wonders if people would really understand what their data was being used for or by whom, and if they would be able to pull it back in any way once it’s out there.

She also said that there may be no meaningful way to opt out.

“Our own data are not always restricted to that one person,” she warns. “DNA is probably the clearest example of this: When one shares a DNA sample, she shares vital (and immutable) information about any of her blood relatives. And yet only she provides the consent.”

Of course, privacy is something of an illusion right now.

And, Vellozo points out, it’s not just that we are currently giving data away for free under the current system — we are all actually paying to create that data in the first place. We pay for the electricity that charges our phones. We pay the monthly service charge on our devices. We are actively putting in our time and labor to create the information.

Vellozo’s company is currently running a pilot of digital wallets with rideshare drivers in California.

He points out that these drivers spend a lot of money and energy creating information that will likely be used to train their AI replacements — their gas, the cost of the car, insurance, maintenance and time. Then all that information — who they pick up, when, how long the ride is and a million other details — is just collected and used to create profit for others.

In another milestone, Brazil — a country that has embraced a national model of digital payments much to the chagrin of many technology and banking companies, and President Trump for that matter — is on board with the idea of a digital wallet for all citizens. Vellozo was back home this week to work on that effort.

A check on AI

So why does all this matter in a politics newsletter?

Beyond money, data ownership offers another benefit: Regulation. Although California has arguably done more to regulate AI than almost any other state, the controls on the technology remain woefully slim. The federal government, after a fancy dinner redolent in flattery at the White House, has made it clear it has no interest in protecting people from this powerful technology, or the men who would wield it.

Vellozo sees the ownership of data as an important step in curbing the power of corporations to pursue ever-mightier AI models without oversight.

The coming changes induced by artificial intelligence are going to be profound for the average person. Already, we are seeing a world in which physical money, or at least the movement of it, is increasingly a relic. Financial companies are becoming tech companies, and money is digital (yes, economists, I know this is technically too simple).

Combine that with the changes in our ability to earn money through work, and the power imbalance already faced by the poor and working class becomes, well, really bad. Remember the railroad barons? This is going to make it seem like they were running ice cream trucks.

We need to rethink what a successful economy looks like. Because AI is going to give a few people not just a lot of money, but a lot of power — by scavenging the knowledge and work of the rest of us. It will take all of us to build successful AI, but the rewards will go to a handful.

So the idea of owning our data is not really about Vellozo’s company or if it accomplishes its goal.

It’s about creating a future in which individual power isn’t a thing of the past.

And where the coming changes benefit society, not just the corporate titans who would like us all to remain too confused to object.

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: Just like humans, AI can get ‘brain rot’ from low-quality text and the effects appear to linger, pre-print study says
The what happened: Trump empowers election deniers, still fixated on 2020 grievances
The L.A. Times special: Malibu residents flee as international buyers snap up burned-out lots

P.S. We’re continuing to look at the blatant (and frankly frightening) propaganda that Homeland Security is posting on its official social media. Case in point, this recruitment ad with … medieval knights? Not only is this image chock-full of Christian nationalism dog whistles, it’s aimed at the young men Immigration and Customs Enforcement is hoping to recruit with its edgelord/video game fanatasies that would turn legimate law enforcement efforts into a religious crusade against immigrants.

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Second order this year focuses on UK users; earlier attempt included US user data, but was withdrawn under US pressure.

The British government has ordered Apple to hand over personal data uploaded by its customers to the cloud for the second time this year in an ongoing privacy row that has raised concerns among civil liberties campaigners.

The Home Office issued a demand in early September for the tech behemoth to create a so-called back door that would allow the authorities access to private data uploaded by United Kingdom Apple customers after a previous attempt that included customers in the United States failed, according to a report published on Wednesday by The Financial Times.

A previous technical capability notice (TCN) issued early this year led to a major backlash from the US, which frowns upon foreign entities seeking to regulate Silicon Valley. The administration of US President Donald Trump eventually forced the UK to back down.

US intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard said in August that the administration had wanted to “ensure Americans’ private data remains private and our constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected”.

Civil liberties campaigners in the UK reacted with alarm to the latest order for access to encrypted data. “If this new order isn’t stopped, the UK Government will likely issue similar orders to other companies, too,” said London-based group Privacy International.

It said the UK government, which would be deploying the measure to protect national security, risked “everyone’s security, while claiming to ‘protect’ people”.

If this new order isn’t stopped, the UK Government will likely issue similar orders to other companies, too.

— Privacy International (@privacyint) October 1, 2025

The Home Office was cited by the FT as saying: “We do not comment on operational matters, including, for example, confirming or denying the existence of any such notices.”

Privacy through encryption is a major selling point for tech platforms, which have long seen providing access to law enforcement as a red line.

On Wednesday, Apple said it had “never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services and we never will”. The company had appealed against the earlier TCN at the UK’s Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the body confirmed in April.

However, it withdrew full end-to-end encryption, known as Advanced Data Protection, for UK users in February. The feature allows iPhone and Mac users to ensure that only they – and not even Apple – can unlock data stored on its cloud.

“Apple is still unable to offer Advanced Data Protection in the United Kingdom to new users, and current UK users will eventually need to disable this security feature,” the California-based company said on Wednesday.

The company said it was committed to offering users the highest level of security, and it was hopeful it would be able to do so in Britain in the future.

The controversy over official attempts to snoop on Apple users comes amid a growing furore over government plans to issue digital identity cards to curb undocumented immigration and ward off threats from the right-wing Reform UK party.

The move raised hackles among civil liberties groups and citizens in the UK, where the concept of national identity cards has traditionally been unpopular.

For the first time since artificial intelligence (AI) captured Wall Street’s imagination, investors are beginning to broaden their scope beyond the “Magnificent Seven.” Two names that have attracted growing attention this year are Oracle and CoreWeave.

Unlike the tech titans that dominate headlines, Oracle and CoreWeave are carving out their niche at the infrastructure layer of the AI ecosystem. The opportunity they’ve identified is straightforward but also mission-critical: providing cloud-based access to GPUs. These chips — designed primarily by Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices — remain supply constrained as they are largely absorbed by the world’s largest companies.

This supply imbalance has created an opportunity to enable AI model development by offering GPUs as a service — a business model that allows companies to rent chip capacity through cloud infrastructure. For businesses that cannot secure GPUs directly, infrastructure services are both time-saving and cost-efficient.

In the background, however, a small, albeit capable, company has been competing with Oracle and CoreWeave in the GPU-as-a-service landscape. Let’s explore how Nebius Group (NBIS 5.54%) is disrupting incumbents and why now is an interesting time to take a look at the stock for your portfolio.

17.4 billion reasons to pay close attention to Nebius

Last week, Nebius announced a five-year, $17.4 billion infrastructure agreement with Microsoft. For reference, up until this point, Nebius’ management had been guiding for $1.1 billion in run rate annual recurring revenue (ARR) by December. I point this out to underscore just how transformative this contract is in terms of scale and duration.

The Microsoft deal not only places Nebius firmly alongside peers like Oracle and CoreWeave in the AI infrastructure conversation, but it also serves as validation that its technology is robust enough to meet the standards of a hyperscaler.

For Microsoft, the partnership is equally strategic. With GPUs in chronically short supply and long lead times to expand data center capacity, this agreement allows Microsoft to secure adequate compute resources without stretching internal infrastructure or assuming the upfront capital expenditure (capex) budget and execution risks that come with it.

Image source: Getty Images.

Why this deal matters for investors

AI investment is not a cyclical trend — it’s a structural shift. Enterprises are deploying applications into production at unprecedented speed, workloads are scaling rapidly, and new use cases in areas like robotics and autonomous systems are emerging.

For companies that supply the compute underpinning this increasingly complex ecosystem, these dynamics create durable secular tailwinds. By securing Microsoft as a flagship customer, Nebius has established itself within this foundational layer of the AI infrastructure economy.

Is Nebius stock a buy right now?

Since announcing its partnership with Microsoft, Nebius shares have surged roughly 39% as of this writing (Sept. 16). With that kind of momentum, it’s natural to wonder whether the stock has become expensive. To answer that, it helps to put its valuation in context.

Prior to the Microsoft deal, Nebius was guiding for $1.1 billion in ARR by year-end. If I assume Microsoft’s $17.4 billion commitment is evenly spread across five years (2026 to 2031), that adds about $3.5 billion annually — bringing Nebius’ pro forma ARR closer to $4.6 billion.

Against its current market cap of $21.3 billion, Nebius stock trades at an implied forward price-to-sales (P/S) ratio of 4.6. On the surface, that looks meaningfully discounted to peers like Oracle and CoreWeave.

ORCL PS Ratio data by YCharts

That said, there are important caveats to consider. My analysis assumes no customer attrition over the next several years — this is unrealistic due to competitive pressures. While Nebius may continue winning large-scale contracts, it’s also reasonable to expect some customer churn.

Moreover, comparing Nebius’ future ARR to Oracle’s and CoreWeave’s current revenue base is not an apples-to-apples match. Oracle, for example, has reportedly inked a $300 billion cloud deal with OpenAI. Meanwhile, CoreWeave also has multiyear, multibillion-dollar commitments tied to OpenAI. The catch is that OpenAI itself doesn’t have the cash on its balance sheet to fully fund these agreements — leaving questions about their viability.

In short, Nebius appears attractively valued relative to its peers — but the landscape is evolving quickly and riddled with moving parts. The more important takeaway is that Nebius is now winning significant business alongside its brand-name peers.

In my eyes, this validation in combination with ongoing structural demand tailwinds makes Nebius a compelling buy and hold opportunity as the AI infrastructure narrative continues to unfold.

Los Angeles County is moving to add more checks on how federal immigration officials can access data collected by the Sheriff’s Department that can be used to track where people drive on any given day.

County supervisors voted Tuesday to approve a motion, introduced by Supervisor Hilda Solis, to beef up oversight of data gathered by law enforcement devices known as automated license plate readers.

It’s already illegal in California for local law enforcement agencies to share information gleaned from license plate readers with federal agencies such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a warrant.

But after a summer of ramped-up deportations, the county supervisors decided to impose more transparency on who’s requesting license plate data from the Sheriff’s Department — and when the agency provides it.

The change will create a clear policy that the data cannot be “disclosed, transferred, or otherwise made available” to immigration officials except when “expressly required” by law or if they have a warrant.

“In a place like Los Angeles County, where residents depend on cars for nearly every aspect of daily life, people must feel safe traveling from place to place without fear that their movements are being tracked, stored, and shared in ways that violate their privacy,” the motion states.

Supervisor Kathryn Barger cast the sole no vote. Helen Chavez, a spokesperson for Barger, said the supervisor voted against the motion because it calls for the county to support a bill that would limit the amount of time law enforcement can keep most license plate data to 60 days. Law enforcement has opposed that bill, she said.

Across the country, law enforcement agencies use cameras to collect data on millions of vehicles, poring over the records for clues to help find stolen vehicles, crime suspects or missing persons.

A sheriff deputy’s patrol car is equipped with a license plate scanner. The plate numbers are instantaneously processed and if the registered vehicle owners are wanted for felonies or certain types of misdemeanors, if they are registered sex or arson offenders or if an Amber Alert has been issued, an alarm will sound to alert the officer.

(Los Angeles Times)

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department said in a statement it has roughly 366 fixed licensed plate readers from Motorola Vigilant and 476 from Flock Safety in contract cities and unincorporated areas. An additional 89 mobile systems from Motorola are mounted on vehicles that patrol these areas.

The department said its policy already prohibits it from sharing data from plate readers, known as ALPR, with any entity that “does not have a lawful purpose for receiving it.”

“LASD shares ALPR data with other law enforcement agencies only under an executed inter-agency agreement, which requires all parties to collect, access, use, and disclose the data in compliance with applicable law,” the statement read. “LASD has no current agreements for ALPR data sharing with any federal agency.”

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, said in a statement that the agency has multiple resources at its “fingertips to ensure federal law is enforced in Los Angeles, and throughout the entire country.”

“These sanctuary politicians’ efforts to stop the Sheriff’s Department from cooperating with ICE are reckless and will not deter ICE from enforcing the law,” McLaughlin said.

Southern California law enforcement departments — including LAPD and authorities in San Diego, Orange and Riverside counties — have been accused of routinely flouting state law by sharing license plate data with federal agents. A recent report from CalMatters cited records obtained by the anti-surveillance group Oakland Privacy that showed more than 100 instances in a single month when local police queried databases for federal agencies.

“When you collect this data, it’s really hard to control,” said Catherine Crump, director of UC Berkeley’s Technology & Public Policy Clinic. “It’s no different from once you share your data with Meta or Google, they’re going to repackage your data and sell it to advertisers and you don’t have any idea which of the advertising companies have your data.”

Even with the board cracking down on data sharing, advocates say it’s nearly impossible to ensure federal agents are barred from license plate data in L.A. County.

Dave Maass, the director of investigations for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said private companies that operate in California still collect and sell data that ICE can use.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection also has its own license plate readers around Southern California, he said.

Maass said even if a county bars its local sheriff’s department from sharing data with ICE, it’s difficult to guarantee the rule is followed by the rank-and-file. Immigration officers could informally pass on a plate number to a deputy with access to the system.

An L.A. County Sheriff’s Department patrol car equipped with a license plate reader can scan somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 plates a day.

(Los Angeles Times)

“Maybe they run the plate,” Maass says. “Unless there’s some public records release from the Los Angeles side of things, we just really don’t know who accessed the system.”

Under the motion passed Tuesday, the sheriff department would need to regularly report what agencies asked for license plate data to two county watchdogs groups — the Office of Inspector General and the Civilian Oversight Commission.

“Having somebody who is somewhat independent and whose role is more aggressively overseeing reviewing these searches is actually quite a big deal,” Maass said.

Sept. 10 (UPI) — The U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of the Inspector General announced Wednesday that it will conduct a review of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ collection and reporting activities for the Consumer Price Index and the Producer Price Index.

In a letter to the BLS’s acting director, William Wiatrowski, the OIG announced the intent to review the department.

“Our focus will be on the challenges and related mitigating strategies for (1) collecting PPI and CPI data, and (2) collecting and reporting, including revising, monthly employment data,” said the letter from Laura Nicolosi, assistant inspector general for audit.

The announcement arrives just weeks after President Donald Trump fired the BLS administrator Erika McEntarfer in August after a weak monthly jobs report. He has nominated conservative economist E.J. Antoni to replace her, but the nomination hasn’t yet been confirmed by the Senate.

The letter said that the BLS recently issued “a large downward revision of its estimate of new jobs in the monthly Employment Situation Report.”

The Labor Department in a preliminary report Tuesday revised jobs data sharply downward for the year ending March 2025 — a drop of 911,000 from initial estimates. The revisions were the largest in more than 20 years.

The BLS has long said that lower survey response rates and other trends have made it harder to measure the state of the U.S. economy, the New York Times reported. But experts inside and outside the agency say a lack of resources slows its efforts to mitigate those challenges.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s health secretary and a longtime vaccine skeptic, struck a defiant tone Thursday as he faced bipartisan criticism over changes he has made to reorganize federal health agencies and vaccine policies, telling senators that he is determined to “eliminate politics from science.”

In the testy appearance before the Senate Finance Committee, Kennedy repeatedly defended his record in heated exchanges with senators from both parties and questioned data that show the effectiveness of vaccines. In turn, senators accused him of taking actions that contradict his promise seven months earlier that he would do “nothing that makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines.”

“Secretary Kennedy, in your confirmation hearing you promised to uphold the highest standard for vaccines. Since then, I’ve grown deeply concerned,” Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, a top-ranking Senate Republican and a physician, said during the hearing.

Kennedy forcefully denied that he has limited access to vaccines and defended his record in restoring trust in federal healthcare agencies under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“They deserve the truth and that’s what we’re going to give them for the first time in the history of the agency,” Kennedy told senators.

From the outset, it was expected that Democrats would slam Kennedy’s record. Some of them called on him to resign and accused him of politicizing federal health policy decisions. But three other Republicans, including Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who was key in advancing Kennedy’s nomination, joined Democrats in criticizing Kennedy’s actions, mostly pertaining to vaccine policy changes.

Thursday’s session marked a peak of bipartisan frustration over a string of controversial decisions by Kennedy that have thrown his department into disarray. Kennedy dismissed an entire advisory panel responsible for vaccine recommendations and replaced its members with known vaccine skeptics. He withdrew $500 million in funding earmarked for developing vaccines against respiratory viruses. And, just last week, he ousted the newly appointed director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention following disagreements over vaccine policy.

In an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, Susan Monarez, the former CDC director, wrote that she was forced out after she declined to recommend people “who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric” to an influential vaccine advisory panel.

At the hearing, Kennedy said Monarez was lying. Instead, he said he fired her because he asked her if she was trustworthy, and she told him, “no.”

He added that he fired all the members of the vaccine panel because it was “plagued with persistent conflicts of interest.”

“We depoliticized it and put great scientists on it from a very diverse group, very, very pro-vaccine,” he claimed.

In questioning, however, members of his own party questioned his support for vaccines. At one point, Cassidy, a physician, read an email from a physician friend who said patients 65 and older need a prescription to get a COVID-19 shot.

“I would say effectively we are denying people vaccines,” Cassidy said.

“You’re wrong,” Kennedy responded.

In that same exchange, Cassidy asked Kennedy if he believed President Trump deserved a Nobel Prize for his administration’s work on Operation Warp Speed, the initiative that sped the development of the COVID-19 vaccine and treatments.

“Absolutely,” Kennedy said.

Cassidy said he was surprised at his answer because he believes Kennedy is trying to restrict access to the COVID-19 vaccine. He also expressed dismay at Kennedy’s decision to cancel $500 million in contracts to develop vaccines using mRNA technology, which Cassidy said was key to the operation.

Kennedy’s position on vaccines have reverberated beyond Capitol Hill.

Ahead of the hearing, more than 1,000 employees at the health agency and national health organizations called on Kennedy to resign. Seemingly in support of Kennedy’s direction, Florida announced plans to become the first state to end all vaccines mandated, including for schoolchildren. And three Democratic-led states — California, Washington and Oregon — have created an alliance to counter turmoil within the federal public health agency.

The states said the focus of their health alliance will be on ensuring the public has access to credible information about the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

Almost as if in a parallel universe, Kennedy told senators on Thursday that his goal was to achieve the same thing, after facing hours of criticism on his vaccine policies.

“I am not going to sign on to something if I can’t make it with scientific certainty,” he said. “It doesn’t mean I am antivax, it just means I am pro-science.”

WASHINGTON — Mattresses on the floor, next to bunk beds, in meeting rooms and gymnasiums. No access to a bathroom or drinking water. Hourlong lines to buy food at the commissary or to make a phone call.

These are some of the conditions described by lawyers and the people held at immigrant detention facilities around the country over the last few months. The number of detained immigrants surpassed a record 60,000 this month. A Los Angeles Times analysis of public data shows that more than a third of ICE detainees have spent time in an overcapacity dedicated detention center this year.

In the first half of the year, at least 19 out of 49 dedicated detention facilities exceeded their rated bed capacity and many more holding facilities and local jails exceeded their agreed-upon immigrant detainee capacity. During the height of arrest activity in June, facilities that were used to operating with plenty of available beds suddenly found themselves responsible for the meals, medical attention, safety and sleeping space for four times as many detainees as they had the previous year.

“There are so many things we’ve seen before — poor food quality, abuse by guards, not having clean clothes or underwear, not getting hygiene products,” said Silky Shah, executive director of Detention Watch Network, a coalition that aims to abolish immigrant detention. “But the scale at which it’s happening feels greater, because it’s happening everywhere and people are sleeping on floors.”

Shah said there’s no semblance of dignity now. “I’ve been doing this for many years; I don’t think I even had the imagination of it getting this bad,” she added.

Shah said conditions have deteriorated in part because of how quickly this administration scaled up arrests. It took the first Trump administration more than two years to reach its peak of about 55,0000 detainees in 2019.

Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the allegations about inhumane detention conditions false and a “hoax.” She said the agency has significantly expanded detention space in places such as Indiana and Nebraska and is working to rapidly remove detainees from those facilities to their countries of origin.

McLaughlin emphasized that the department provides comprehensive medical care, but did not respond to questions about other conditions.

Detainees do stretches outdoors as a helicopter flies overhead at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Krome detention center in Miami on July 4, 2025.

(Rebecca Blackwell / Associated Press)

At the Krome North Service Processing Center in Miami, the maximum number of detainees in a day in 2024 was 615, four more than the rated bed capacity of 611. In late June of this year, the detainee population reached 1,961, more than three times the capacity. The facility, which is near the Everglades, spent 161 days in the beginning of the year with more people to house than beds.

Miami attorney Katie Blankenship of the legal aid organization Sanctuary of the South represents people detained at Krome. Last month, she saw nine Black men piled into a visitation room, surrounded with glass windows, that holds a small table and four chairs. They had pushed the table against the wall and spread a cardboard box flat across the floor, where they were taking turns sleeping.

The men had no access to a bathroom or drinking water. They stood because there was no room to sit.

Blankenship said three of the men put their documents up to the window so she could better understand their cases. All had overstayed their visas and were detained as part of an immigration enforcement action, not criminal proceedings.

Another time, Blankenship said, she saw an elderly man cramped up in pain, unable to move, on the floor of a bigger room. Other men put chairs together and lifted him so he could rest more comfortably while guards looked on, she said.

Blankenship visits often enough that people held in the visitation and holding rooms recognize her as a lawyer whenever she walks by. They bang on the glass, yell out their identification numbers and plead for help, she said.

“These are images that won’t leave me,” Blankenship said. “It’s dystopian.”

Krome is unique in the dramatic fluctuation of its detainee population. On Feb. 18, the facility saw its biggest single-day increase. A total of 521 individuals were booked in, most transferred from hold rooms across the state, including Orlando and Tampa. Hold rooms are temporary spaces for detainees to await further processing for transfers, medical treatment or other movement into or out of a facility. They are to be used to hold individuals for no more than 12 hours.

On the day after its huge influx, Krome received a waiver exempting the facility from the requirement to log hold room activity. But it never resumed the logs. Homeland Security did not respond to a request for an explanation of the exception.

After reaching their first peak of 1,764 on March 16, the trend reversed.

Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) visited Krome on April 24. In the weeks before the visit, hundreds of detainees were transferred out. Most were moved to other facilities in Florida, some to Texas and Louisiana.

“When those lawmakers came around, they got rid of a whole bunch of detainees,” said Blankenship’s client Mopvens Louisdor.

The 30-year-old man from Haiti said conditions started to deteriorate around March as hundreds of extra people were packed into the facility.

Staffers are so overwhelmed that for detainees who can’t leave their cells for meals, he said, “by the time food gets to us, it’s cold.”

Also during this time, from April 29 through May 1, the facility underwent a compliance inspection conducted by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of Detention Oversight. Despite the dramatic reduction in the population, the inspection found several issues with crowding and meals. Some rooms exceeded the 25-person capacity for each and some hold times were nearly double the 12-hour limit. Inspectors observed detainees sleeping on the hold room floors without pillows or blankets. Staffers had not recorded offering a meal to the detainees in the hold rooms for more than six hours.

Hold rooms are not designed for long waits

ICE detention standards require just 7 square feet of unencumbered space for each detainee. Seating must provide 18 inches of space per detainee.

LOS ANGELES TIMES

Sanitary and medical attention were also areas of concern noted in the inspection. In most units, there were too many detainees for the number of toilets, showers and sinks. Some medical records showed that staffers failed to complete required mental and medical health screenings for new arrivals, and failed to complete tuberculosis screenings.

Detainees have tested positive for tuberculosis at facilities such as the Anchorage Correctional Complex in Alaska and the Adelanto ICE Processing Center in California. McLaughlin, the Homeland Security assistant secretary, said that detainees are screened for tuberculosis within 12 hours of arrival and that anyone who refuses a test is isolated as a precaution.

“It is a long-standing practice to provide comprehensive medical care from the moment an alien enters ICE custody,” she said. “This includes medical, dental, and mental health intake screening within 12 hours of arriving at each detention facility, a full health assessment within 14 days of entering ICE custody or arrival at a facility, and access to medical appointments and 24-hour emergency care.”

Facility administrators built a tented area outside the main building to process arriving detainees, but it wasn’t enough to alleviate the overcrowding, Louisdor said. Earlier this month, areas with space for around 65 detainees were holding more than 100, with cots spread across the floor between bunk beds.

Over-capacity facilities can feel extremely cramped

Bed capacity ratings are based on facility design. Guidelines require 50 square feet of space for each individual. When buildings designed to those specifications go over their rated capacity, there is not enough room to house additional detainees safely and comfortably.

American Correctional Association and Immigration and Customs Enforcement

LOS ANGELES TIMES

Louisdor said a young man who uses a wheelchair had resorted to relieving himself in a water bottle because staffers weren’t available to escort him to the restroom.

During the daily hour that detainees are allowed outside for recreation, 300 people stood shoulder to shoulder, he said, making it difficult to get enough exercise. When fights occasionally broke out, guards could do little to stop them, he said.

The line to buy food or hygiene products at the commissary was so long that sometimes detainees left empty-handed.

Louisdor said he has bipolar disorder, for which he takes medication. The day he had a court hearing, the staff mistakenly gave him double the dosage, leaving him unable to stand.

Since then, Louisdor said, conditions have slightly improved, though dormitories are still substantially overcrowded.

In California, detainees and lawyers similarly reported that medical care has deteriorated.

Tracy Crowley, a staff attorney at Immigrant Defenders Law Center, said clients with serious conditions such as hypertension, diabetes and cancer don’t receive their medication some days.

Cells that house up to eight people are packed with 11. With air conditioning blasting all night, detainees have told her the floor is cold and they have gotten sick. Another common complaint, she said, is that clothes and bedding are so dirty that some clients are getting rashes all over their bodies, making it difficult to sleep.

Luis at Chicano Park in San Diego on Aug. 23, 2025.

(Ariana Drehsler / For The Times)

One such client is Luis, a 40-year-old from Colombia who was arrested in May at the immigration court in San Diego after a hearing over his pending asylum petition. Luis asked to be identified by his middle name out of concern over his legal case.

When he first arrived at Otay Mesa Detention Center, Luis said, the facility was already filled to the maximum capacity. By the time he left June 30, it was overcrowded. Rooms that slept six suddenly had 10 people. Mattresses were placed in a mixed-use room and in the gym.

Luis developed a rash, but at the medical clinic he was given allergy medication and sleeping pills. The infection continued until finally he showed it over a video call to his mother, who had worked in public health, and she told him to request an anti-fungal cream.

Luis was held at Otay Mesa Detention Center after his May arrest. It was at capacity when he arrived but by the time he left in June, it was overcrowded, he said.

(Ariana Drehsler / For The Times)

Other detainees often complained to Luis that their medication doses were incomplete or missing, including two men in his dorm who took anti-psychotic medication.

“They would get stressed out, start to fight — everything irritated them,” he said. “That affected all of us.”

Crowley said the facility doesn’t have the infrastructure or staff to hold as many people as are there now. The legal system also can’t process them in a timely manner, she said, forcing people to wait months for a hearing.

The administration’s push to detain more people is only compounding existing issues, Crowley said.

“They’re self-imposing the limit, and most of the people involved in that decision-making are financially incentivized to house more and more people,” she said. “Where is the limit with this administration?”

Members of the California National Guard load a truck outside the ICE Processing Center in Adelanto, Calif., on July 11, 2025.

(Patrick T. Fallon / AFP/Getty Images)

Other facilities in California faced similar challenges. At the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, the number of detainees soared to 1,000 from 300 over a week in June, prompting an outcry over deteriorated conditions.

As of July 29, Adelanto held 1,640 detainees. The Desert View Annex, an adjacent facility also operated by the GEO Group, held 451.

Disability Rights California toured the facility and interviewed staffers and 18 people held there. The advocacy organization released a report last month detailing its findings, including substantial delays in meal distribution, a shortage of drinking water, and laundry washing delays, leading many detainees to remain in soiled clothing for long periods.

In a letter released last month, 85 Adelanto detainees wrote, “They always serve the food cold … sometimes we don’t have water for 2 to 7 hours and they said to us to drink from the sink.”

At the Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin, Ga., Rodney Taylor, a double amputee, was rendered nearly immobile.

Taylor, who was born in Liberia, uses electronic prosthetic legs that must be charged and can’t get wet. The outlets in his dormitory were inoperable, and because of the overcrowding and short-staffing, guards couldn’t take him to another area to plug them in, said his fiancee, Mildred Pierre.

“When they’re not charged they’re super heavy, like dead weight,” she said. It becomes difficult to balance without falling.

Pierre said the air conditioning in his unit didn’t work for two months, causing water to puddle on the floor. Taylor feared he would slip while walking and fall — which happened once in May — and damage the expensive prosthetics.

Last month, Taylor refused to participate in the daily detainee count, telling guards he wouldn’t leave his cell unless they agreed to leave the cell doors open to let the air circulate.

“They didn’t take him to charge his legs and now they wanted him to walk through water and go in a hot room,” Pierre recalled. “He said no — he stood his ground.”

Several guards surrounded him, yelling, Pierre said. They placed him in solitary confinement for three days as punishment, she said.

Aug. 19 (UPI) — Britain backed down on demand for “backdoor” access to Apple users’ data, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said.

Gabbard wrote in a post on X that the British government agreed to drop the request for access to Apple’s encrypted data after discussions between the new nations.

“Over the past few months, I’ve been working closely with our partners in the U.K., alongside [President Doanld Trump] and [Vice President JD Vance], to ensure Americans’ private data remains private and our Constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected,” Gabbad wrote. “As a result, the UK has agreed to drop its mandate for Apple to provide a ‘back door’ that would have enabled access to the protected encrypted data of American citizens and encroached on our civil liberties.”

In February, Apple pulled its Advanced Data Protection end-to-end iCloud encryption from British customers’ devices after the government requested access to the data. Following the events of the British government pressuring Apple to build a “backdoor” to allow government authorities to access user iCloud data.

It was not immediately clear whether Apple would restore access to British users following the agreement.

Apple cannot view the data of its customers who have activated its advanced data protection.

“We have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services, and we never will,” the company said.

Thousands of Afghans brought to safety in the UK have had their personal data exposed, after a Ministry of Defence (MoD) sub-contractor suffered a data breach.

The names, passport information and Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) details of up to 3,700 Afghans have potentially been compromised after Inflite The Jet Centre, which provides ground-handling services for flights at London Stansted airport, suffered a cyber-security incident.

It comes just a month after it was a revealed another major data breach in 2022 exposed the details of almost 19,000 people who had asked to come to the UK in order to flee the Taliban.

The government said the incident “has not posed any threat to individuals’ safety, nor compromised any government systems”.

There is currently no evidence to suggest that any data has been released publicly.

The Afghans affected are believed to have travelled to the UK between January and March 2024, under a resettlement scheme for those who worked with British troops.

An email sent out by the Afghan resettlement team on Friday afternoon warned their families that personal information may have been exposed.

“This may include passport details (including name, date of birth, and passport number) and Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) reference numbers,” it said.

Those affected also include British military personnel and former Conservative government ministers, the BBC understands.

A government spokesperson said: “We were recently notified that a third party sub-contractor to a supplier experienced a cyber security incident involving unauthorised access to a small number of its emails that contained basic personal information.

“We take data security extremely seriously and are going above and beyond our legal duties in informing all potentially affected individuals.”

Inflite The Jet Centre said in a statement it believes “the scope of the incident was limited to email accounts only” and has reported it to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).

The ICO confirmed to the BBC it has received a report from Inflite.

Professor Sara de Jong from the Sulha Alliance charity that supports Afghans who worked for the British Army called the breach “astonishing”.

“The last thing that Afghans – who saved British lives – need is more worries about their own and their families’ lives,” she said.

Prof de Jong also urged the MoD to commit to expediting all pending cases of Afghans waiting for relocation.

The incident follows a February 2022 incident in which the personal data of nearly 19,000 Afghans who had applied to move to the UK under the Arap scheme was mistakenly leaked by a British official, leading to thousands of Afghans being secretly relocated to the UK.

The leaked spreadsheet contained the names, contact details and some family information of the people potentially at risk of harm from the Taliban.

That incident was made public for the first time in July.

BBC’s Newsnight programme has meanwhile spoken to the son of a member of the Afghan “Triples” elite special forces who worked with the British Army and was part of the original MoD data breach.

The man and his family initially applied to the Arap scheme – which was set up to relocate and protect Afghans who worked with British forces or the UK government in Afghanistan – shortly after the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.

The family were in Pakistan waiting for a final decision on the application, which was endorsed by the Ministry of Defence last year.

He faced imminent deportation back to Afghanistan, Newsnight reported, after local authorities raided his Islamabad hotel.

His son, who managed to hide from the authorities and speak to the BBC, said his family would not survive if they returned to Afghanistan after their personal details were leaked.

“Please help my family and avoid their murder by the Taliban,” the son said, in a plea to the British government.

On Friday, after the interview, Newsnight learned the man had been deported back to Afghanistan.

In response to news of the deportation, the MoD said in a statement that it was “honouring commitments” to all eligible people who pass their relevant checks for relocation.

“As the public would rightly expect, anyone coming to the UK must pass strict security and entry checks before being able to relocate to the UK.

“In some cases people do not pass these checks,” it said.

Speaking on Newsnight, Sir Mark Lyall Grant, former UK national security adviser, called both breaches “deeply embarrassing” for the British government.

He added that while checks for relocation are necessary, it falls to the British government to “honour the commitment they made”.

“We do need to move faster to protect people who genuinely are at risk of being victimised and persecuted by the Taliban if they go back,” he said.

Speaking to Newsnight, former Conservative Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng said the data breaches were “very serious” and “really concerning” for people facing deportation back to Afghanistan.

Liberal Democrat Defence Spokesperson Helen Maguire accused the government of “staggering incompetence and clearly inadequate security standards,” as she called for an “immediate, fully independent investigation” into the security breaches.

SMARTY’s latest offer hands you a massive data boost for no extra cash.

Right now, you can bag 24GB of data for only £7 a month, the same price you’d normally pay for just 8GB.

1

Smarty SIM-only deal, 8GB 24GB data for £7/month

That’s triple the data without spending a penny extra.

It’s Smarty’s latest push to give shoppers more for their money, and frankly, it’s a pretty solid offer.

If you’re after enough data to stream Spotify, scroll socials, and cover your everyday browsing on the go, this plan has you well covered.

You’re on a low, flat monthly fee with no sneaky mid-contract price hikes lurking in the small print.

And because Smarty runs on rolling 1-month contracts, you can walk away whenever you like, no strings attached.

That kind of freedom is a big part of why Smarty has built such a loyal following among budget-conscious shoppers..

The service rides on Three’s network, which already offers solid coverage across most of the UK.

To be sure, you can double-check your signal with Smarty’s handy coverage checker before you sign up.

There are a few tempting offers on the table right now, but the standout is the 8GB SIM-only plan, currently boosted to a chunky 24GB for just £7 a month.

That’s not bad at all when you consider some providers will happily charge you twice as much for a fraction of the allowance.

Best SIM-only Smarty deals:

If 24GB isn’t enough, you’ll find other plans going up to unlimited data, still at budget rates.

Here are some of the best:

But for light-to-moderate users, the triple-data offer is hard to beat.

And with no contract tie-in, you can switch, upgrade, or leave whenever you fancy.

If you’re also hunting for other tech savings, there are a couple of standouts doing the rounds this week.

You can boost your online security and save 72% on NordVPN, and they’re throwing in a free Amazon gift card worth £50 just for signing up.

And for those who want a new handset without the big spend, there’s an ‘excellent condition’ refurbished iPhone 13 going for just £20 a month.

If these deals don’t quite fit the bill, have a look at our roundup of the best SIM-only deals from all the big networks.

Smarty SIM-only deal, 8GB 24GB data for £7/month

The firing of a top United States statistics official by President Donald Trump last week has drawn concerns from economists and policymakers regarding the credibility of data in the world’s biggest economy.

Trump’s dismissal of Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner Erika McEntarfer after the release of disappointing employment figures on Friday has raised fears over the integrity of Washington’s economic data, which are relied on by countless businesses and investors in the US and across the world.

The National Association for Business Economics warned that McEntarfer’s “baseless” ouster risked doing “lasting harm to the institutions that support American economic stability”.

“It could open the door to political meddling and certainly will undermine trust in federal statistics that businesses, policymakers and individuals use to make some of their most important decisions,” Erica Groshen, who led the Bureau of Labor Statistics under former President Barack Obama, told Al Jazeera.

If Trump’s dismissal of McEntarfer and other presidential appointees is allowed to stand, Groshen said, he could make a habit of firing any head of a statistical agency or other body that delivers “unwelcome news”.

“Then he is likely to replace them with appointees who prioritise serving his goals over serving the mission of their agencies, ethical standards or scientific integrity,” Groshen said.

Trump, who justified McEntarfer’s removal by claiming without evidence that the latest job figures were “rigged” to make him look bad, said on Sunday that he would announce a new Bureau of Labor Statistics head in three or four days.

‘Global ramifications’

A collapse in trust in official economic data about the US would have ramifications worldwide.

Despite the growing influence of emerging economies such as China and India, the US remains the world’s largest economy by some distance.

The US gross domestic product (GDP) at about $30.3 trillion accounts for more than one-quarter of the global economy. China’s estimated GDP is about two-thirds that amount.

US government data on trade, employment, consumer spending and GDP are considered important signals for the direction of the global economy and are closely followed by businesses and investors from London to Dubai and Tokyo.

Many countries, including democratic states, have faced accusations of fiddling with economic statistics for political reasons, often with serious reputational consequences.

In 2010, the European Commission published a withering report accusing Greece of deliberately falsifying data to conceal the poor state of its public finances.

In 2013, the International Monetary Fund officially censured Argentina for providing what it said was inaccurate data on inflation and economic growth.

‘Economic data manipulation’

Some research suggests that countries run by strong-arm leaders are especially prone to misrepresenting the state of their economies.

A 2024 study published in the European Journal of Political Economy found that economic openness and democracy decreased the likelihood of governments manipulating statistics although there were no observable positive effects from media freedom or the independence of the statistical office.

In a 2022 paper that used satellite imagery of nighttime light as a proxy for economic development, Luis Martinez, a professor at the University of Chicago, estimated that autocratic countries artificially inflated their annual GDP growth by about 35 percent.

“Economic data manipulation is pervasive in history, especially in autocracies and dictatorships to create narratives for the people – typically to embellish standards of living,” Tomasz Michalski, an associate professor of economics at the HEC Paris business school, told Al Jazeera.

“What is rarer, though, is to find such deliberate behaviour in countries that strive to be democracies or are more developed.”

After Trump’s firing of McEntarfer, a career economist who was appointed in 2024 with overwhelming bipartisan support, critics were quick to note parallels to tactics attributed to strongman leaders seeking to bolster public approval for their policies.

“It’s one more step on our rapid descent into banana republic status,” Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman said on Substack, a subscription-based newsletter platform.

Lawrence Summers, who served as US Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton, described the firing as the “stuff of democracies giving way to authoritarianism”.

Scott Sumner, a professor of economics at Bentley University in Waltham, Massachusetts, said Trump’s move made the US “look more like a banana republic” although it remained to be seen whether he would seek to directly manipulate the government’s economic figures.

“It’s actually hard to fool the public, and almost no one was fooled by the Argentina manipulation,” Sumner told Al Jazeera.

“It’s too soon to say whether Trump will try to do the same. Any attempt to do so would likely fail.”

‘The quality of US economic statistics’

The quality of US economic data has been a growing concern for some time due in part to the Trump administration’s freeze on hiring federal employees and staff cuts at numerous agencies.

In March, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick dissolved two expert committees that advised the government on its economic statistics, prompting concern among some economists.

In June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced that it had stopped collecting price-related data in three US cities – Buffalo, New York; Lincoln, Nebraska; and Provo, Utah – due to limitations in “current resources”.

But even before Trump’s return to the White House in January, declining response rates to surveys among the public in recent years had made the collection of data increasingly difficult, raising concerns about accuracy.

In a poll published by the Reuters news agency last month, 89 of 100 policy experts surveyed said they had at least some concerns about the quality of US economic statistics.

“Some data is just unreliable because people stopped responding to surveys or the responses became so biased given the nonhomogeneous response rates,” said Michalski, the HEC Paris associate professor.

“There are no easy remedies often for improving data collection given that many people are not using landlines, are unreachable or provide careless answers to investigators,” he said.

Even with sound methodology, data are always at risk of manipulation once politicians get involved, Michalski added.

“Even with correct numbers, it is possible to spin a story about inflation or GDP growth by changing the base years or selecting some specific periods to weave narratives,” he said.

“The incentives to manipulate and falsify are clearly there. There is little or no punishment.”

Groshen said that while she does not expect US economic data to stop being reliable in the immediate future, “we seem headed in that direction.”

“For now, the BLS will continue to operate as it has before,” she said.

“We will need to start worrying if and when the president’s people are embedded there.”

Trump administration officials question data amid condemnation of dismissal of Bureau of Labor Statistics head.

The White House has defended United States President Donald Trump’s firing of the top official responsible for compiling employment statistics after her dismissal raised concerns about the future credibility of crucial economic data.

Trump fired Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), on Friday, claiming without evidence that the latest jobs report had been “rigged” to make him look bad.

On Sunday, Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, denied that Trump was “shooting the messenger” and questioned the accuracy of the figures showing much weaker hiring than previously reported.

“The president wants his own people there so that when we see the numbers, they’re more transparent and more reliable,” Hassett told NBC News’s Meet the Press, calling the downward revision of jobs growth for May and June “unprecedented” and a “historically important outlier”.

“And if there are big changes and big revisions – we expect more big revisions for the jobs data in September, for example – then we want to know why. We want people to explain it to us.”

Speaking on Fox News later on Sunday, Hassett again poured doubt on the official figures, suggesting without evidence that employment statistics can sometimes contain “partisan patterns”.

“I think what we need is a fresh set of eyes at the BLS, somebody who can clean this thing up,” he told Fox News Sunday.

US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer also defended Trump’s dismissal of McEntarfer, saying the president had “real concerns” about the jobs data.

“You want to be able to have somewhat reliable numbers,” Greer told CBS News’ Face the Nation.

“There are always revisions, but sometimes you see these revisions go in really extreme ways. And it’s, you know, the president is the president. He can choose who works in the executive branch.”

The latest employment figures released on Friday showed that 258,000 fewer jobs were created in May and June than previously estimated, and that a fewer-than-expected 73,000 jobs were added in July, undermining Trump’s insistence that the economy has not been negatively affected by his sweeping tariffs.

Trump said on Sunday that he would announce a new BLS director, as well as a candidate to fill the position left open by the resignation of Federal Reserve governor Adriana Kugler, within the next few days.

Trump’s dismissal of McEntarfer, a career bureaucrat who was appointed with overwhelming bipartisan support in 2024, has prompted condemnation from economists and both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.

In a statement on Friday, The Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a group co-led by former BLS directors William Beach and Erica L Groshen, accused Trump of politicising the statistics agency and undermining confidence in official government data.

“US official statistics are the gold standard globally,” the group said.

“When leaders of other nations have politicised economic data, it has destroyed public trust in all official statistics and in government science.”

Aug. 3 (UPI) — Economists are lining up to defend Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner Erika McEntarfer, who was fired by President Donald Trump on Friday over his allegations that the agency manipulated a report showing low job growth for July.

“It has been the honor of my life to serve as Commissioner of BLS alongside the many dedicated civil servants tasked with measuring a vast and dynamic economy. It is vital and important work and I thank them for their service to this nation,” McEntarfer said on social media Friday.

Her firing came after the July report had shown that jobs growth was slower than expected as the unemployment rose, with the United States only adding 73,000 new jobs for the month — down from 147,000 new jobs added in June.

“Today’s jobs numbers were rigged in order to make Republicans and me look bad,” Trump had said Friday afternoon in a Truth Social post.

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers called Trump’s accusations a “preposterous charge” in an interview with ABC News’ “This Week” program Sunday.

“These numbers are put together by teams of literally hundreds of people following detailed procedures that are in manuals. There’s no conceivable way that the head of the BLS could have manipulated this number,” Summers said.

Summers said that the numbers in the job report were “in line” with data and information being reviewed in the private sector and criticized Trump for his “authoritarian” removal of McEntarfer.

“Firing statisticians goes with threatening the heads of newspapers. It goes with launching assaults on universities. It goes with launching assaults on law firms that defend clients that the elected boss finds uncongenial,” he said. “This is really scary stuff.”

Bill Beach, McEntarfer’s predecessor, appeared in an interview with CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday where he likewise called the move by Trump “totally groundless” and dangerous.

“The commissioner doesn’t see the numbers until Wednesday before they’re published. By the time the commissioner sees the numbers, they’re all prepared. They’re locked into the computer system,” Beach said.

Beach said that the only thing the commissioner can do before the jobs report is published is review the text accompanying the data, as he explained part of the process of how they’re compiled.

“What I think really upset the president on Friday were the revisions to May and June, big revisions. But that’s because, like every time we publish on Friday, there are revisions to the previous two months,” he said. “This is a survey. And a survey has sample returns.”

Beach said the jobs reports are compiled from surveys that are sent out to Americans and hundreds of thousands of businesses each month. But the BLS doesn’t receive all the returns in time, keeping the window for responses open an extra two months.

“What you saw on Friday was the effect of trying to do a better job, getting more information,” Beach said.

During his interview, Beach was asked if he would believe future report numbers compiled by the BLS after a successor for McEntarfer is found.

“I will, because I know the people who work there. They are some of the most loyal Americans you can imagine. They have worked in every kind of political circumstance. They are completely devoted to producing the very best gold standard data possible,” he said. “And that’s why BLS is the finest statistical agency in the entire world. Its numbers are trusted all over the world. So, I will trust those numbers.”

Still, White House officials aimed Sunday to double down on the president’s claim that the data was being manipulated, without evidence.

White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett was interviewed on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday and said that the BLS needs a “fresh set of eyes.”

“There have been a bunch of patterns that could make people wonder,” he said. “And I think the most important thing for people to know is that it’s the president’s highest priority that the data be trusted and that people get to the bottom of why these revisions are so unreliable.”

The far-right political activist Laura Loomer, who is not an official member of the Trump administration but has positioned herself as an informal chief adviser on personnel matters, called the BLS situation a “vetting crisis.”

“Great job by President Trump who just announced he is firing Biden holdover Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of Labor Statistics,” she said on social media. “Every single Biden holdover must be FIRED.”

The White House has launched an aggressive public relations campaign promoting a narrative of economic strength during the first six months of United States President Donald Trump, with claims of his policies fueling “America’s golden age”.

But an Al Jazeera analysis of economic data shows the reality is more mixed.

Trump’s claims of his policies boosting the US economy suffered a blow on Friday when the latest jobs report revealed that the country had added a mere 73,000 jobs last month, well below the 115,000 forecasters had expected. The only additions were in the healthcare sector, which added 55,000 jobs, and the social services sector added 18,000.

US employers also cut 62,075 jobs in July — up 29 percent from cuts in the month before, and 140 percent higher than this time last year, according to the firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas, which tracks monthly job cuts. Government, tech, and retail sectors are the industries that saw the biggest declines so far this year.

It comes as this month’s jobs and labour turnover report showed an economic slowdown. There were 7.4 million open jobs in the US, down from 7.7 million a month before.

The Department of Labour on Friday released downward revisions to both the May and June jobs reports, significantly changing the picture the White House had previously painted.

“For the FOURTH month in a row, jobs numbers have beat market expectations with nearly 150,000 good jobs created in June,” the White House said in a July 3 release following the initial June report.

The Labor Department had reported an addition of 147,000 jobs in June. On Friday, it sharply revised down that number to just 14,000. May’s report also saw a big downgrade from 144,000 to only 19,000 jobs gained. Trump has since fired the head of the agency that produces the monthly jobs data, alleging that the data had been manipulated to make him look bad.

Even before the revisions, June’s report was the first to reflect early signs of economic strain tied to the administration’s tariff threats, as it revealed that job growth was concentrated in areas such as state and local government and healthcare. Sectors more exposed to trade policy – including construction, wholesale trade, and manufacturing – were flat. Meanwhile, leisure and hospitality showed weak growth, even in peak summer, reflecting falling travel demand both at home and abroad.

The administration also claimed that native-born workers accounted for all job gains since January. That assertion is misleading as it implies that no naturalised citizens or legally present foreign workers gained employment.

However, it is true that employment among foreign-born workers has declined – by over half a million jobs – claims that native-born workers are replacing foreign-born labour, are not supported by the jobs data.

Jobs lost in sectors with high foreign-born employment, including tech, have been abundant, driven by tariffs and automation, particularly AI. In fact, recent layoffs in tech have been explicitly attributed to AI advancements, not labour displacement by other groups.

Companies including Recruit Holdings — the parent company of Indeed and Glassdoor, Axel Springer, IBM, Duolingo and others have already made headcount reductions directly attributed to AI advancements.

Wage growth

The pace of rise of wage growth, an indicator of economic success, has slowed in recent months. That is partly due to the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates steady in hopes of keeping inflation stable.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, wages have been outpacing inflation since 2023, after a period of declining real wages following the COVID pandemic.

Wage growth ticked up by 0.3 percent in July from a month prior. Compared with this time last year, wage growth is 3.9 percent, according to Friday’s Labor Department jobs report.

Earlier this year, the White House painted a picture that wage growth differed between the era of former President Joe Biden and now under Trump because of policy.

“Blue-collar workers have seen real wages grow almost two percent in the first five months of President Trump’s second term — a stark contrast from the negative wage growth seen during the first five months of the Biden Administration,” the White House said in a release.

However, Biden and Trump inherited two very different economies when they took office. Biden has to deal with a massive global economic downturn driven by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trump, on the other hand, during his second term, inherited “unquestionably the strongest economy” in more than two decades, per the Economic Policy Institute, particularly because of the US economy’s rebound compared with peer nations.

Inflation

Inflation peaked in mid-2022 during Biden’s term at 9 percent, before falling steadily because of the Federal Reserve’s efforts to manage a soft landing.

A July 21 White House statement claimed, “Since President Trump took office, core inflation has tracked at just 2.1 percent.” On Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessett said “inflation is cooling” in a post on X.

However, the Consumer Price Index report, which tracks core inflation – a measure that excludes the price of volatile items such as food and energy – was 2.9 percent in the most recent report and overall inflation was at 2.7 percent in June.

Prices

The most recent Consumer Price Index report, published July 15, shows that on a monthly basis, prices on all goods went up in June by 0.3 ,percent which is 2.7 percent higher from this time last year.

Grocery prices in particular are up 2.4 percent from this time last year and 0.3 percent from the prior month. The cost of fruits and vegetables went up 0.9 percent, the price of coffee increased by 2.2 percent and the cost of beef went up 2 percent.

New pending tariffs on Brazil, as Al Jazeera previously reported, could further drive up the cost of beef in the months to come.

Trump has pointed to falling egg prices in particular as evidence of economic success, after Democrats attacked his administration over their price in March. He has even gone so far as to claim that prices are down by 400 percent. That figure is mathematically impossible – a 100 percent decrease would mean eggs are free.

During the first few months of Trump’s term egg prices surged, and then dropped due to an outbreak of, and then recovery from, a severe avian flue outbreak, which had been hindering supply – not because of any specific policy intervention.

In January, when Trump took office egg prices were $4.95 per dozen as supply was constrained by the virus. By March, the average egg price was $6.23.  But outbreak and high prices drove away consumers, allowing farmers with healthier flocks to catch up on the supply side. As a result, prices fell to an average of $3.38. That would be a 32 percent drop since the beginning of his term and a 46 percent drop from their peak price – far from the 400 percent Trump claimed.

Trump also recently said petrol prices are at $1.98 per gallon ($0.52 per litre) in some states. He doubled down on that again on Wednesday. That is untrue. There is not a single state that has those petrol prices.

According to Gasbuddy, a platform that helps consumers find the lowest prices on petrol, Mississippi at $2.70 a gallon ($0.71 per litre) has the cheapest gas, and the cheapest petrol station in that state is currently selling gas at $2.37 ($0.62 per litre).

AAA, which tracks the average petrol price, has it at $3.15 per gallon ($0.83 per litre) nationwide, this is up from the end of January when it was $3.11 ($0.82 per litre).

While petrol prices have gone down since Trump took office, they are nowhere close to the rate he has continually suggested. In July 2024, for instance, the average price for a gallon of petrol nationwide was $3.50 ($0.93 per litre).

GDP

On Wednesday, the White House said that “President Trump has reduced America’s reliance on foreign products, boosted investment in the US”, citing the positive GDP data that had come out that morning.

That is misleading. While the US economy grew at a 3 percent annualised rate in the second quarter, surpassing expectations, that was a combination of a rebound after a weak first quarter, a drop in imports – which boosted GDP, and a modest rise in consumer spending.

The data beneath the headline showed that private sector investment fell sharply by 15.6 percent and inventories of goods and services declined by 3.2 percent, indicating a slowdown.

Manufacturing

The administration recently highlighted gains in industrial production, pointing to a boost in domestic manufacturing. Overall, there was a 0.3 percent increase in US industrial production in June. That was after stagnating for two months.

There have been isolated gains, such as increases in aerospace and petroleum-related sectors—1.6 percent and 2.9 percent, respectively.

But production of durable goods — items that are not necessarily for immediate consumption— remained flat, and auto manufacturing fell by 2.6 percent last month as tariffs dampened demand. Mining output also decreased by 0.3 percent.

According to the Department of Commerce’s gross domestic product report, manufacturing growth among non-durable goods has slowed. While there was a 1.3 percent increase, that’s a decline from 2.3 percent in the previous quarter.

This could change in the future, as several companies across a range of sectors have pledged to increase US production, including carmaker Hyundai and pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca, which just pledged a $50bn investment over the next five years.

Trade deals and tariffs

In April, the White House replaced country-specific tariffs with a 10-percent blanket tariff while maintaining additional levies on steel, cars, and some other items. It then promised to deliver “90 trade deals in 90 days.” That benchmark was not met. By the deadline, only one loosely fleshed out deal — with the United Kingdom — had been announced. As of 113 days later, the US has announced comparable deals with just a handful more countries and the European Union. The EU deal still needs parliamentary approval.

Contrary to the administration’s claims, tariffs do not pressure foreign exporters — they are paid by US importers and ultimately are likely to be passed on to US consumers. Companies, including big box retailer Walmart and toymaker Mattel, have announced price hikes as a direct result. Ford, for example, raised prices on three Mexico-assembled models due to tariff pressures.

To protect their own economies, many countries have pivoted their trade policies away from the US. Brazil and Mexico recently announced a new trade pact.

The White House and its allies continue to defend tariffs by highlighting the increased revenue they bring to the federal government, which is true. Since Trump took office, the US has brought in more than $100bn in revenue, compared with $77bn in the entire fiscal year 2024. The price of imports for consumers has only risen about 3 percent, but many expect that will change as the import taxes are passed on to consumers.

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

US President Trump alleged that the data had been manipulated to make him look bad.

United States President Donald Trump has removed the head of the agency that produces the monthly jobs figures after a report showed hiring slowed in July and was much weaker in May and June than previously reported.

Trump, in a post on his social media platform on Friday, alleged that the figures were manipulated for political reasons and said that Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, should be fired. He provided no evidence for the charge.

“I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,” Trump said on Truth Social. “She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.”

Trump later posted: “In my opinion, today’s Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad.”

After his initial post, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said on X that McEntarfer was no longer leading the bureau and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as the acting director.

“I support the President’s decision to replace Biden’s Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS,” Chavez-DeRemer said.

Friday’s jobs report showed that just 73,000 jobs were added last month and that 258,000 fewer jobs were created in May and June than previously estimated. The report suggested that the economy has sharply weakened during Trump’s tenure, a pattern consistent with a slowdown in economic growth during the first half of the year and an increase in inflation during June that appeared to reflect the price pressures created by the president’s tariffs.

“What does a bad leader do when they get bad news? Shoot the messenger,” Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said in a Friday speech.

Revisions to hiring data

Trump has sought to attack institutions that rely on objective data for assessing the economy, including the Federal Reserve and, now, the BLS. The actions are part of a broader mission to bring the totality of the executive branch – including independent agencies designed to objectively measure the nation’s wellbeing – under the White House’s control.

McEntarfer was nominated by Biden in 2023 and became the commissioner of the BLS in January 2024. Commissioners typically serve four-year terms, but since they are political appointees, they can be fired. The commissioner is the only political appointee of the agency, which has hundreds of career civil servants.

The Senate confirmed McEntarfer to her post 86-8, with now Vice President JD Vance among the yea votes.

Trump focused much of his ire on the revisions the agency made to previous hiring data. Job gains in May were revised down to just 19,000 from 125,000, and for June they were cut to 14,000 from 147,000. In July, only 73,000 positions were added. The unemployment rate ticked up to a still-low 4.2 percent from 4.1 percent.

“No one can be that wrong? We need accurate Jobs Numbers,” Trump wrote. “She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified. Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate, they can’t be manipulated for political purposes.”

The monthly employment report is one of the most closely-watched pieces of government economic data and can cause sharp swings in financial markets. The disappointing figure sent US market indexes about 1.5 percent lower on Friday.

While the jobs numbers are often the subject of political spin, economists and Wall Street investors – with millions of dollars at stake – have always accepted US government economic data as free from political manipulation.