Economy

The government has announced investments of about 2.3 billion reais ($444.2m) to bolster its artificial intelligence ecosystem.

Brazil will invest about 2.3bn reais ($444.2m) to bolster its artificial intelligence ecosystem, splitting projects between United States and Chinese tech firms in a strategic move that underscores its efforts to balance ties with both superpowers.

Just more than half the total, 1.3bn reais ($251m), will fund a supercomputing infrastructure project in Rio de Janeiro developed in partnership with China’s Huawei Technologies and iFlytek, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva‘s government said on Thursday.

The infrastructure will be used primarily to develop large language models for general and sector-specific applications, it said.

Separately, about 1 billion reais ($193.1m) will be allocated through a tender for a supercomputer that Brazil expects to rank among the world’s 10 most powerful AI processing machines.

The machine will be installed in the northeastern state of Rio Grande do Norte, chosen for its energy potential. Lula attended an announcement ceremony in the state on Thursday.

The Reuters news agency quoted unnamed government officials as saying they expect US chipmaker Nvidia to win the tender. Science and Technology Minister Luciana Santos told the Folha de S Paulo newspaper last week that she anticipated the company would be the supplier.

“The strategy is not to depend on a single company, technology or country,” Lula’s administration said in a statement, adding that the investments are aimed at strengthening national sovereignty over data.

China, a leading player in AI, has expanded its role as Brazil’s largest trading partner. The US, meanwhile, remains the biggest source of foreign direct investment in Latin America’s largest economy despite losing market share in trade and recently imposing additional tariffs on Brazilian goods.

The investments will be funded by the National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development (FNDCT) through phased disbursements. The government expects the supercomputer to begin operating by the end of next year, while the cooperation agreement with the Chinese companies is scheduled to start in July 2027.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New York City, United States – Mayor Zohran Mamdani is challenging a new law that would give New York City’s teaching aides a one-time $10,000 bonus, arguing it goes against the city’s collective bargaining laws.

On Wednesday, the bill, which was passed by New York City’s City Council, automatically became law because the mayor had opted not to veto it. Instead, Mamdani filed a lawsuit to block it because the City Council had enough votes to override his veto.

The bill, called the Respect Check Act, was backed by the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), a labour union representing teachers across New York City’s public school system and was championed by City Council Speaker Julie Menin, who has often clashed with the mayor.

Teaching assistants are among the lowest-paid workers in the city’s school system, according to a statement released by Menin’s office on Wednesday. Their pay is as low as $32,000. According to MIT’s living wage calculator, the living wage in New York City is $79,469 for Manhattan, $67,558 for Brooklyn, $73,258 for Queens, $67,974 in Staten Island, and $60,341 for the Bronx.

When the bill passed in July, Mamdani argued that the law directly violated a state law called the Taylor Law, a nearly 60-year-old law that gives public sector workers the right to organise. The UFT, which endorsed Mamdani in July 2025 ahead of the city’s election, pushed back on the mayor’s claims. The group argued the City Council did not undermine collective bargaining.

“The City Council would not have introduced – let alone passed – this bill if it were illegal, and we would not have supported a bill that threatened our collective bargaining rights,” Michael Mulgrew, president of the UFT, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“This moment is an opportunity for Mayor Mamdani to create a new, fairer system and build the kind of city he said he wanted to lead. This administration must keep its promises, and we won’t stop until it does.”

The City Council crafted the law to avoid violating New York’s Taylor Law, a UFT representative told Al Jazeera.

Under a 2023 state appeals court ruling, additional payments to public employees are mandated to be independent of a worker’s regular salary and cannot be tied to collective bargaining, they argue.

“The Court of Appeals has found that the Taylor Law does not prevent a municipality from unilaterally providing an economic benefit,” Beth Norton, general counsel for the UFT, said in testimony in front of the City Council in 2025, provided to Al Jazeera.

Pushing back

New York City Hall sees it differently.

“Council labels these ‘stabilisation’ payments; they effectively function as stipends or salary bonuses and, regardless of terminology, are an additional form of compensation and, as such, a mandatory subject of bargaining,” the 18-page filing obtained by Al Jazeera said.

“I think the mayor is right that this sets a bad precedent,” Adin Lenchner, founder of the New York-based political consultancy Carroll Street Campaigns, told Al Jazeera.

“Him and his team are either posturing, negotiating, or using this as a moment to negotiate toward some other kind of deal. I think everyone would agree that, substantively and philosophically, this is aligned with the mayor’s public policy approach and his vision for the city,” Lenchner added.

“So, if I had to guess, this is, on the one hand, about not wanting to establish a bad precedent and, on the other hand, a step toward a longer-term negotiation.”

Citizens Budget Commission (CBC), a nonpartisan think tank, urged the mayor in July to veto the bill, arguing that City Council should not make this decision. It says the now-law would add $325m in city spending.

“The City should continue to determine employee compensation at the bargaining table, not the legislative chamber,” vice president for research at CBC, Ana Champeny, said in a press release in mid-July.

Mamdani echoed that sentiment when he was asked about the law earlier this month.

“Conversations around compensation are better left at the bargaining table,” Mamdani said in a news conference on August 6.

However, the mayor voiced support on the campaign trail for legislation that would provide support payments to these paraprofessionals. That legislation supported recurring payments, not a one-time payment.

“The version he supported last fall made the payment recurring; what passed last month only guarantees it for one year. That’s the line between then and now, so not much of a flip-flop,” Lenchner added.

“We will not allow the political process to replace the collective bargaining table. The City is filing a lawsuit to protect the right of every union to negotiate on behalf of its members, to fight for the workplace they deserve and ensure that workers – not politicians – determine their own futures,” Matt Rauschenbach, a spokesperson for the mayor, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“We will work towards a quick resolution that respects workers, protects the City’s finances, and ensures that the Council does not interfere with collective bargaining in the future.”

Rauschenbach declined to provide further comment.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mixed big-box earnings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Significant financial impact

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Can the lawsuit impact its core product?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How will this impact future lawsuits?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crude oil and natural gas supplies have been disrupted worldwide by the United States-Israel war on Iran, but one energy sector appears to be cashing in – coal.

This week, South Africa’s thermal coal producer Thungela Resources said it had doubled its half-year profits as the war has forced more countries to buy the fuel.

Although abundant and relatively cheap to produce, coal is considered one of the dirtiest fossil fuels.

Mining it causes water pollution, and burning it releases enormous amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, which contributes to global warming.

In recent months, several countries, especially in Asia, have reversed or delayed promises to scale back on coal production.

Global coal consumption was already rising in 2025 with the Eurasia region and the US using the fuel to power artificial intelligence data centres, according to the World Bank.

Here’s what we know:

Why is more coal being used?

The US-Israel war on Iran has triggered a global energy crisis. Soon after strikes on Tehran began on February 28, Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies were shipped during peacetime.

Negotiations to reopen the strait are ongoing.

Its closure has reduced oil and gas supplies and caused oil prices to soar, prompting many countries to fall back on the most readily available alternative to keep the power on – coal.

While coal prices have also risen, the fuel is still much cheaper than oil – and is more readily available.

No region has been more impacted than Asia, which largely depends on the Gulf for its energy needs. About 82 percent of oil and gas shipments through the Strait of Hormuz went to Asia in 2022, according to the US Energy Information Administration. China, India, Japan and South Korea were the top destinations.

Besides being unable to ship exports through the strait, Gulf countries caught up in the conflict have also been badly impacted by Iranian strikes. Qatar, for example, was forced to declare force majeure on its delivery contracts in March when Iranian drones hit its Ras Laffan oil facility – the world’s largest LNG complex – forcing it offline. Iran’s attacks had knocked out 17 percent of Qatar’s LNG exports by March, state officials said.

Similarly, the United Arab Emirates’s Das Island LNG terminal, Fujairah oil terminal, Ruwais Refinery Complex and other energy sites have been attacked during the conflict. Facilities in Saudi Arabia and Oman have also been hit.

Where has coal use increased?

According to an analysis by the energy data company Ember, coal output will rise globally by 1.8 percent by the end of 2026 compared with 2025 in a “worst-case” scenario.

This represents a notable uptick considering that countries are meant to be transitioning away from coal, experts said.

Since the war began, several Asian countries have announced plans to increase coal-fired electricity generation.

Japan has lifted restrictions on older, high-emission coal plants to cope with the energy shocks while South Korea has delayed the shutdown of coal-powered plants it promised to wind down by 2040.

In Bangladesh, the government at first imposed power cuts, closed universities and rationed fuel sales for vehicles before announcing it had ramped up coal-powered electricity generation.

Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam have also increased coal-powered electricity generation to preserve dwindling gas reserves.

In Pakistan, data from the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority showed that by July, electricity generated from imported coal had risen by 90 percent compared with the same period the previous year.

China and India already consume 70 percent of the world’s coal and are also major producers. In India, where electricity demand is increasing partly due to more intense heatwaves, the government plans to launch several new coal-mining projects that will see global supplies increase by 2.5 billion tonnes a year, according to the Global Energy Monitor.

Germany also said it won’t jeopardise electricity generation because of earlier climate promises it made while Italy has pushed back its coal phase-out plans from late 2025 to 2038.

Who is making a profit from coal?

Indonesia is the top coal exporter by a wide margin, followed by Australia and Russia.

In March, Jakarta reversed previous plans to curb coal production and reduce oversupply in a bid to benefit from the rising prices. Prices were set at $131.85 per tonne in July, compared with $102.20 in the previous year.

South Africa’s Thungela, meanwhile, reported doubled profits from January to June, compared with the same period of 2025, driven largely by higher production from its Ensham mines in Queensland as well as higher demand and higher prices at both Ensham and its South Africa operations.

Production at Ensham rose by 38 percent in the first half of the year – during the peak of the conflict – to 2.2 tonnes, compared with 1.6 tonnes in the previous period.

The company reported 4.80 South African rand ($0.30) in headline earnings per share – or HEPS, a primary metric of profitability used in South Africa. That’s up from 1.92 rand ($0.12) in June last year.

In a statement, Thungela said prices will likely remain high as European and Asian markets prepare for winter.

What does this mean for the drive for clean energy?

In 2021, more than 40 countries, including Indonesia and Vietnam, promised to scale back coal use at the COP26 global climate summit. India and China did not sign up, however. Last year, South Korea joined the Powering Past Coal Alliance, which helps coal-dependent economies transition away from the fuel.

However, the Middle East crisis has upset those plans largely because many countries do not have sufficient renewable energy-generating capacity to fall back on, said Nick Hedley, an energy transition analyst at South Africa-based Zero Carbon Analytics.

“For the likes of Bangladesh, it’s easy to lift coal use when global gas supplies are disrupted because the country invested heavily in coal infrastructure in recent decades, and much of that capacity has been sitting idle,” he said.

“Coal becomes cheaper than imported gas when gas prices surge. Importantly, coal still cannot compete with renewables on cost,” Hedley added.

It’s not all doom, however. Analysts noted that upticks in some places are being offset by long-term declines in coal use in places like Europe.

China’s domestic coal production also fell this year as the government tightened oversight following a deadly explosion in May at the Liushenyu coal mine, where 82 people died. Beijing has also made large investments in renewables.

In addition, the breakdown of global fossil energy supply chains could make clean alternatives more competitive and force more countries to invest in them, Hedley pointed out.

“The lesson here is that Asian countries need to speed up their shift to clean energy and electrification to safeguard themselves against future global crises,” he concluded.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

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

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

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

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

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

More to follow…

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Limited claims’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A long time coming

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Free speech advocates have praised ABC for the lawsuit.

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

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

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

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

Amid trade embargoes, asset freezes and attacks on ships as part of a naval blockade, Washington has announced a plan to enact a new wave of restrictions on Iran, targeting its economy.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last Thursday that the United States was planning to inflict more economic damage on Tehran as early as this week. The US would apply measures that have “never been seen in the history of economic isolation on a country”, Bessent said.

A day later on Friday, President Donald Trump echoed Bessent and said that Iran would be hit hard economically.

As the memorandum of understanding (MoU) expired on Monday, Trump called on Tehran to hold up the “white flag of surrender” but insisted that he was in no rush to end the war.

Since February 2025, following the start of Trump’s second term in office, Washington has sanctioned “more than 1,000 Iran-related persons, vessels, and aircraft”, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) said in May.

Remaining defiant, Iran’s authorities have said they could shift to offensive operations, and are simultaneously prepared to counter a potential ground invasion.

According to Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, professor of economics of the Middle East at Philipps-Universitat Marburg in Germany, the naval blockade creates a new situation in which traditional sanctions packages are combined with the use of military force to generate a physical shortage of goods in the Iranian economy.

“This is an additional burden that raises new questions for policymakers in Tehran: Should they choose a deal whose terms are dictated by the Trump administration, or should they continue the armed conflict to break the blockade of the ports? It currently seems that Iran is leaning toward the second option,” he told Al Jazeera.

Farzanegan said that for the US to achieve its goals, namely changing the behaviour of the Iranian government, it should also “open a diplomatic exit and offer it as an option”.

If armed conflict does fully resume, he said “the costs will not be confined to the target of sanctions; the global economy will also pay a price” through continued disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz and attacks across the region.

Iran emphasises MoU commitments

Meanwhile, talks have stalled in finding a way out of the war, although Iran’s negotiations have been ongoing with Oman and other mediators over a potential temporary arrangement in the Strait of Hormuz, where one-fifth of the global oil and natural gas used to flow before the war.

Iran’s parliament speaker and top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, told state media on Tuesday that the Strait of Hormuz would remain closed until the US meets the conditions of the now-expired MoU.

“Let me state clearly: Until the commitments made by the United States in the memorandum of understanding, including the lifting of the blockade, the release of frozen assets, the lifting of oil sanctions, the end of threats and military operations on all fronts, and other conditions to which America agreed in the memorandum, are implemented, the strait will not be opened,” Ghalibaf said.

With tensions soaring before the war, Iran’s government delegated some authorities to border provinces to import essential goods and build up inventories.

To survive the blockade over recent months, Iran has also focused more on rerouting imports of food, consumer goods and industrial inputs through land borders with Pakistan, Turkiye and others, as well as through the Caspian Sea with Russia and Central Asia.

During the brief ceasefire period established under the MoU, the blockade was lifted for several weeks in late June and early July, enabling the rapid export of oil stored on board supertankers and giving the military time to regroup.

But Iran’s oil exports have stopped once again since the breakdown of the deal, and US and Israeli authorities have discussed disrupting Iran’s inland imports to ramp up the pressure.

The mounting pressure has only exacerbated Iran’s structural economic issues, rooted in decades of domestic corruption and mismanagement, as well as sanctions and international isolation.

For the country’s roughly 90 million people, the consequences include persistent inflation, insecure and poorly paid work, declining purchasing power and growing uncertainty about the future.

Against this backdrop, President Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration this week named stabilising markets, protecting livelihoods and strengthening national resilience as its priorities for the next two years.

However, Mahdi Ghodsi, a senior economist at the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, said Iran’s prolonged stagnation over most of the past 15 years suggested that government policy had not been aligned with those objectives.

He told Al Jazeera that to guarantee sustainable economic growth, the Islamic Republic would have to reduce confrontation with the US, the West and Israel while pursuing meaningful domestic reforms that would involve moving away from coercive social controls to restore some public trust.

“Without both external de-escalation and domestic political reform, the government may be able to slow the deterioration in living standards and market conditions, but it is unlikely to deliver durable stability, stronger livelihoods or genuine national resilience,” Ghodsi said.

Energy in the crosshairs

US media outlets have reported that Washington’s forthcoming measures against Iran could include sanctioning additional independent Chinese refineries – known as “teapots” – that buy or process Iranian crude.

OFAC has already imposed secondary sanctions on smaller China- and Hong Kong-based entities processing Iranian oil money, but it could go a major step further by following through on its threat of designating larger Chinese banks if they touch Iran-linked funds.

That move risks prompting a response from China, at a time when Washington is concerned about curtailed exports of critical minerals.

Economist Ghodsi said energy remained the most powerful source of US leverage over Iran, particularly after US and Israeli attacks damaged the country’s infrastructure.

“If the blockade persists into autumn and winter, the country risks severe supply shortages. Iran was already struggling with electricity, gas and water imbalances before this shock; further constraints would mean deeper rationing and temporary shutdowns in industry to preserve household supply,” he said.

The government has also reduced some subsidised petrol quotas for personal vehicles and has been considering raising fuel costs – after an earlier increase last December. Necessary but costly fuel imports amounting to several billion dollars per year have stopped as a result of the war and blockade.

Ghodsi said that is why the US would likely target Iran’s external energy trade, involving maritime transport, shipping services, insurance, payments and the foreign buyers and intermediaries that keep those flows operating.

“In practice, that means tighter enforcement against entities in China and elsewhere that facilitate sanctioned energy transactions, together with closer scrutiny of trans-shipment and payment routes through neighbouring countries and other trade partners,” he said.

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

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

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

The stress compounds an already precarious situation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Damaging structural factors’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tims traced the roots directly to policy choices.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gaza City — Rabab Deifallah sits inside her tent, clutching a small, battered lighter. She presses it once, then again, trying to produce a spark strong enough to ignite a pile of wood inside a stove.

The mother of five has carefully looked after the lighter. Her son has repaired it several times since it became difficult to buy a new one after Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began in October 2023.

Firewood has become essential for 46-year-old Rabab. She uses it to bake bread, heat water for her children, prepare food and make tea amid shortages of cooking gas and soaring fuel prices.

“Our whole daily life depends on fire,” Rabab told Al Jazeera. “But getting a fire started begins with a lighter and this small object has become one of the hardest things to find in Gaza.”

Before the war, lighters were so cheap and readily available that she remembers buying three for one shekel ($0.33). Today, a new lighter can cost between $27-33 and Rabab last spent $12 to repair her old lighter.

“Should I spend that amount on a lighter, or should I buy a bag of flour?” she asked.

Palestinians in Gaza would rather spend their limited money on food, so a single lighter is often passed around families in several tents.

Some days, Rabab cannot find a lighter at all, so her family has been forced to spend days eating cold food or waiting until a neighbour has a fire burning to borrow a spark.

She often sends a piece of cardboard to a neighbour to get a light off their fire and bring it home. Other times, if a neighbour is baking bread, she may ask to use their oven to prepare food for her family.

The lighter is now something she guards carefully, as it is, for her, the starting point for fire, food, bread and hot water.

A second struggle

Nearby, Hasnaa Mansour, 43, faces the same problem but from a different angle.

Displaced from Jabalia refugee camp, Hasnaa sits beside a clay oven she had treasured since her family’s financial situation deteriorated during the war.

Her husband previously worked as a tailor and the family lived relatively comfortably, but due to a lack of business, Hasnaa now bakes and sells food to help support their six children.

Hasnaa has repeatedly repaired her lighter because buying a new one is beyond her means.

But a shortage of cooking gas has made the problem even worse.

“With gas, all you need is a small spark to light it. But with the oven, I need a real fire,” she said.

“I’ve been sitting here since the morning and by 10 o’clock I still couldn’t light the oven. I sent my young daughter with a piece of cardboard to look for someone who had a fire burning, but she couldn’t find anyone.”

Restrictions and shortages

The lighter shortage comes amid Israel’s continued siege on Gaza.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) says restrictions on the movement of goods and closures of crossings have contributed to shortages and rising prices of essential supplies. OCHA also says items classified by Israeli authorities as “dual-use” face additional difficulties in obtaining approval to enter Gaza.

The Gaza Chamber of Commerce and Industry said in June that restrictions on crossings and the mechanisms for bringing commercial shipments into Gaza continued to limit the flow of goods.

It said that more than 30,000 trucks entered Gaza during the first five months of 2026, an average of no more than 191 trucks a day – still far below the territory’s daily pre-war needs.

In an earlier publication, the chamber of commerce documented the emergence of lighter-repair work during the war, saying lighters were among items prevented from entering Gaza.

That is why lighters are now so valuable and families spend relatively large amounts to fix them rather than buy a new one.

Sharing a single lighter

For Shadi Abu Shamlah, a displaced father living with his family at Al-Karmel School west of Gaza City, the shortage means sharing a lighter among tents.

“The whole school here… you wouldn’t find more than four lighters,” he said.

The few available lighters move from one tent to another as families try to cook, heat water or prepare hot drinks.

“The lighter today is the backbone of life. If you have a lighter in your tent, you’re okay. If you don’t have one, you’re stuck,” he said.

“The simplest things need fire. You want a cup of tea, you want to cook, you want to make milk for a child… you need fire.”

Abu Shamlah says his family sometimes goes to bed without dinner because they cannot light a fire.

Repairing lighters has also become difficult. He says a lighter flint can cost 25 to 30 shekels ($8–$10), while people have resorted to using gas from larger cylinders to refill lighters, sometimes causing burns.

Tamer Al-Shawish, who worked as a driver before the war, turned to fixing lighters to help provide for his family.

On a small stall near Al Karmel school camp, the 24-year-old father of two says his new profession was previously unheard of.

“The war has forced us into jobs and work we never knew before. I started repairing lighters so I could provide for my family’s needs,” he told Al Jazeera.

A new profession

“Before the war, no one needed to repair a lighter. They were cheap and available. When the gas ran out, we would throw it away and buy another one.”

“People come to repair the lighter because it is cheaper than buying a new one, especially with the high prices and shortages of basic goods,” Tamer said.

He salvages parts from damaged lighters to repair others.

“Even an old lighter has value now. We take parts from damaged lighters and use them to repair other lighters, so they last longer.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Uneven distribution across industries

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump posts surge in earnings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A salvage operation is under way to stabilise the stricken tanker behind a major oil spill off Oman, the risk management company coordinating the effort has said.

The announcement by Ambrey on Thursday came a day after Oman’s environmental authority confirmed that oil from the Caroline Bezengi had reached beaches along the sultanate’s central coast.

The tanker, a suspected member of Russia’s shadow fleet used to transport sanctioned Russian oil, has been leaking crude into waters near the Hallaniyat archipelago since June, when the ship’s crew reported an unidentified explosion.

Ambrey said it was working with Omani authorities and that its services had been engaged as part of a “significant international response” that included salvage vessels, aircraft and specialist personnel.

Apart from Oman and an unnamed “leading international oil spill response company”, Ambrey did not elaborate on which other countries or firms were involved in the effort to salvage the vessel, which has flown the flags of states including Cameroon, Palau and Liberia.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) – the United Nations maritime agency – said on Thursday that it was “closely monitoring” the situation and would “continue to support ongoing efforts”, without providing further details.

The International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds, a pair of intergovernmental organisations established to provide compensation for oil pollution, said it would not be involved in the cleanup operation after determining that the incident likely resulted from an act of war.

Ambrey, based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, said it expected salvage vessels to reach the Caroline Bezengi soon and that specialist personnel had already boarded the vessel to begin stabilising its cargo.

Ed Wollaston, director of global response at Ambrey, said the “extremely challenging situation” had been complicated by adverse weather from the annual Khareef monsoon.

“However, we have deployed the leading experts in each aspect of the response and have mobilised the appropriate supporting equipment, aircraft and vessels,” Wollaston said in a statement.

“We are working around the clock to mitigate the environmental impact of the situation.”

The oil spill has expanded dramatically in size over the past week, according to analyses of satellite imagery, raising fears for coastlines and ecosystems in the region, including a marine reserve established last year off the Hallaniyat archipelago.

Environmental NGO Greenpeace said on Thursday that, based on satellite imagery, the spill had grown from 45 square kilometres (17sq miles) in late July to about 1,300sq kilometres (502sq miles) as of Wednesday.

Omani authorities as recently as Monday estimated the size of the spill at approximately 400sq kilometres (154sq miles).

Hanen Keskes, Greenpeace’s head of campaigns for the MENA region, said the circumstances of the spill made it “especially challenging” to respond to.

“Given the scale of this – a damaged tanker in a remote location, during monsoon season, with no clear owner or verified insurer to compel a rapid response – this is a case where international assistance should be mobilised urgently,” Keskes told Al Jazeera.

“Capabilities like specialised salvage equipment and expertise can exceed what any one country has on hand, and every day of delay allows more oil to disperse.”

Najmedin Meshkati, an expert in oil spills and a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Southern California, said that authorities should have moved faster to contain the spill.

“That two-month interval was the response window, and it closed. In spill response, source control on day three is worth many multiples of source control on day 60,” Meshkati told Al Jazeera.

Meshkati acknowledged, however, that Omani authorities had been dealt a difficult situation.

“It was handed an orphaned wreck with no responsive owner, no verifiable insurer, no functioning flag state, and a compensation regime containing a war exclusion that may void it entirely,” Meshkati said.

“No mid-sized maritime administration on earth is resourced for that. But that is precisely the argument for escalating harder and earlier.”

Damilola S Olawuyi, a professor of energy and environmental law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, said the spill highlighted the need for stronger international mechanisms to hold polluters accountable.

“The obligation of the entity responsible for pollution to pay for the cost of cleanup and remediation, ie, the polluter pays principle, has for long been a bedrock of international law,” Olawuyi told Al Jazeera.

“However, in an era of increasing geopolitical realignments, identifying the responsible polluter has become complex, therefore complicating effective risk reduction, response and remediation measures,” he said.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Multiple rounds of tariffs

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

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

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

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

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

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

How high is inflation in the UK?

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

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

Petrol and diesel up more than 20 percent

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

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

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

Who is being hardest hit?

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

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

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

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

Is the UK worse off than other Western countries?

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

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

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

Wages barely keeping up

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

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

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

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

New Delhi, India – The vapour heat treatment (VHT) facility in Rehmanpur village of Lucknow, the capital of the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh – used to sterilise fruit and vegetables – was preparing for the busiest time of the year when Japanese quarantine inspectors turned up in March.

Export documents had been cleared, shipping schedules finalised, and growers in the western states of Maharashtra and Gujarat reserved their best Alphonso and Kesar mangoes for export to Japan, one of Asia’s premium markets.

Everything appeared set for the season to begin when production ground to a halt. Japanese inspectors reviewing the fumigation, disinfection and certification procedures raised concerns about the whole process, prompting Japan to suspend imports of the fruits.

However, on March 31, the plant protection authorities in Yokohama sent a formal letter, saying all Indian mango shipments bearing inspection certificates issued on or after March 25 would be barred until inspectors could confirm that operational standards had improved.

It was the first major disruption in India-Japan mango trade in nearly two decades. In 1986, imports of the fruit were barred over fruit fly concerns. Restrictions were lifted in 2006 after the country built VHT infrastructure, strengthened pest surveillance and agreed to annual inspections.

Japan ‘gave us credibility’

The 2026 halt now affects six approved varieties of mango – Alphonso, Kesar, Langra, Banganapalli, Chausa and Mallika – covering the peak export window of April through to June.

Japan imported roughly $1.54m worth of fresh and processed mango products from India between 2025 and 2026. It might appear to be a modest sum, but the Japanese market holds huge significance for the rest of the global trade. Japan pays premium prices for mangoes and the country’s approval signals quality to the rest of the world.

The suspension came at an already challenging time for mango farmers in India. Sustained heatwaves through the Konkan belt had destroyed much of Maharashtra’s Alphonso crop. Geopolitical disruptions in West Asia had pushed freight costs higher, and exporters who had spent years establishing relations with the Japanese suddenly faced cancelled contracts and inventories rotting in storage.

Vikram Shah, a Mumbai-based exporter who shipped about 2.5 tonnes of mangoes to Japan in 2025, highlighted the importance of its market.

“Japan was never our biggest market in terms of quantity, but it was the one that gave us credibility,” Shah told Al Jazeera. “We spent six years building trust with buyers there. I travelled to Osaka twice, sat with importers, visited their cold storage facilities and learned exactly what they expected from us. Relationships like that take years to build and can disappear in a single season.”

Rajesh Patil, an Alphonso grower in Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, said his family had cultivated mangoes on a three-acre (1.2-hectare) orchard along the Konkan coast for two generations. The Japanese market, he said, consistently delivered far higher returns than domestic auctions, leading him to invest heavily in meeting Japan’s stringent import standards.

“We upgraded the orchard because Japan rewarded quality,” Patil said. “I spent nearly ₹80,000 [$840] on grading and handling equipment, attended pest-management training sessions, and changed the way we harvest and pack fruit,” he told Al Jazeera.

“The Japanese market paid almost twice what I could earn locally. When you make those investments, you expect the system supporting exports to be as reliable as the fruit you grow.”

China objects to rice

On April 17, China revoked the import licences of three Indian rice exporters after the General Administration of Customs rejected their consignments, claiming traces of genetically modified organisms (GMO).

The exporters disputed the finding, pointing out that their shipments received GMO-free certification before their departure and that the Indian government also said all domestic paddy and rice fields are free of genetic modification.

Rice makes up more than 20 percent of India’s agricultural exports, with a record-breaking $12.5bn of it shipped in the last financial year (2025-26). The three suspended exporters now face an uncertain path back into China, rattling their community.

Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA), under India’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry, notified the companies and, on June 8, published a list of laboratories approved for GMO tests on China-bound shipments.

SK Singh, an agricultural scientist in New Delhi, told Al Jazeera the dispute exposed weaknesses in India’s testing system.

“Our labs built expertise in pesticide residue and aflatoxin testing because that’s what most markets wanted,” he said. “China’s demand for GMO verification calls for a different scale of capacity.”

The exporters’ certificates came from accredited labs even if the certification network remains uneven, he added.

Only a handful of facilities, concentrated in New Delhi and Hyderabad in the southeastern state of Telangana, run the required protein analysis, forcing exporters in northern Punjab and Haryana states to ship samples hundreds of kilometres away.

Fragmented supply chain

There were other warning signs before the crisis hit mangoes and rice.

Hong Kong suspended several Indian spice products over pesticide residues, and testing found quality deviations in nearly 12 percent of the samples. The European Union also raised the inspection frequency on Indian cumin to 30 percent in January 2025, following 312 spice alerts on its rapid alert system in 2024.

Ananya Bose, a food safety scientist in Kochi in the southern state of Kerala, traced the problem to a fragmented supply chain.

“A farmer sells to an aggregator, who sells to a trader, who supplies a processor. Somewhere in that chain, the record of what was sprayed disappears,” she said. “The trail is detailed until the first sale, then it effectively ends.”

Bose has pushed for mandatory digital pesticide records, since regulators abroad expect traceability from field to shipment, a standard many states still treat as optional.

These setbacks may read as isolated incidents, but they expose a gap between India’s agricultural strength and the traceability, food safety and certification standards that Japan, the EU, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada now demand. Those standards are tightened by consumer pressure for transparency, climate-driven pest concerns, food-security strategy and the COVID pandemic.

At the same time, competitors have moved faster, with Thailand building a nationwide traceability programme, Vietnam investing in farmers’ training, and Brazil and Chile pouring money into cold-chain systems.

India’s progress has lagged with just 207 registered pack houses, 72 percent of them concentrated in Maharashtra. Moreover, scarce cold storage facilities and logistical costs eat up roughly 15 percent of export value, almost double that of advanced nations. Small farmers owning less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of land make up more than 86 percent of India’s cultivators, making standardisation difficult at scale.

“India built its strategy around producing more, while premium markets reward proving quality along the way,” agricultural economist Anil Gupta told Al Jazeera.

Gupta pointed to some real gains: recognised laboratories grew from 22 to 89 over the past decade, and approved export certificates climbed from roughly 61,000 to more than 170,000.

“The progress is measurable, but so is the scale of the challenge,” he said. “These improvements mark a beginning, well short of the finish line.”

Ujjwal Kumar Ghosh, a senior official in the government’s Department of Commerce, has called for tighter controls on antibiotic residues, pesticides and aflatoxins in spices, tea, fruits and vegetables. He said funds have been set aside to upgrade laboratories, though without a timeline.

“The government is strengthening the system from testing to inspection and traceability. We are tightening controls on antibiotic and pesticide residues and aflatoxins, expanding laboratory capacity, introducing risk-based inspections and using digital systems and rapid screening to identify problems faster. The objective is to help exporters meet stricter global food-safety standards while protecting India’s access to international markets,” said Ghosh.

India still holds just 2.4 percent of global agri-exports despite ranking as the world’s second-largest agricultural producer, with processed exports stuck near 17 percent, against 25 percent in the US and 50 percent in China.

And growers are facing the fallout.

Gujarat’s Kesar mango farmers lost their strongest Japanese buyer. A basmati rice farmer in Haryana’s Karnal said local prices had already dropped 8 percent. And a turmeric processor in Kerala’s Erode said residue testing cost him 15,000 rupees ($157) last quarter, almost 10 percent of his profit.

Agriculture still employs about 42 percent of India’s workforce while producing less than a fifth of the national output.

“This is about far more than a few rejected shipments,” Gupta said. “The countries that succeed will consistently meet the standards global buyers demand.”

Indian farmers have long proven they can grow for the world. The task now is building systems that convince the world to keep buying.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A growing enterprise

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

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

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

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

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

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

A pair of lawsuits

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Costly standoff

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Half of America’s most advanced missiles are gone. The Pentagon wants $67bn to restock, on top of $37.5bn already spent fighting Iran. So where is all that money actually going? Al Jazeera’s Yasmeen ElTahan explains.

It’s almost time for Dodger baseball. I am standing outside a hotel in downtown Los Angeles.

I could walk six blocks to Union Station and ride the free Dodger Stadium Express. I could jump into an Uber and pay about $18 for the two-mile ride.

Instead, to make that short hop to the ballpark, I am about to board a very nice bus that costs $85.

Is it worth it?

First, some background: The Japanese travel agency JTB last year signed a sponsorship agreement that makes the company the “official Japanese tourism partner” of the Dodgers. JTB sells tour packages to Japanese fans eager to make the pilgrimage to see Shohei Ohtani play.

“Some people go to Disneyland and Universal Studios,” said Masakazu Nakafuji, general manager of JTB’s New York office. “Mainly, people want to see the Dodgers for three straight days at Dodger Stadium.”

The tour packages include game tickets, hotel rooms and transportation. However, not every fan from Japan buys the entire tour package, so the company launched a shuttle service: If you get tickets and hotels on your own, we’ll sell you a VIP ride, with a bilingual guide.

“So far, our shuttle customers are 90% Japanese,” Nakafuji said. “We are going to try to expand in the English-language market.”

On the shuttle bus I rode last week, I met Tsutomu and Sayuri Ichikawa, a couple from Tokyo wearing his and hers Roki Sasaki jerseys. The Ichikawas visited in May, on a JTB tour in which they saw three Dodgers games. The couple came back to see six more Dodgers games on their own, so the shuttle offered them a familiar way to get to Dodger Stadium.

Tsutomu, left, and Sayuri Ichikawa were among those on a JTB shuttle bus for a July 30 Dodgers game against the Seattle Mariners.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

I also met a woman named Colleen and her 8-year-old son, dressed in an Ohtani jersey. Colleen, who declined to give her last name, was visiting from Chicago. She said she had searched for shuttle buses online and considered them a better option than “having to take an Uber or take public transportation at night with a child” on a first visit to Dodger Stadium.

And I met Lina Endo of Seattle, here for three games against her beloved Mariners. She attended the first two games with friends and chose to take the shuttle for the third game, since she would be alone.

“I wanted to check out the early entry too, so it makes sense from a cost perspective,” Endo said.

Ah, yes, the cost. Is the $85 worth it?

As if the Dodgers do not already charge enough for tickets, the team offers an “early entry” add-on option for most games: For anywhere from $40 to $70, depending on the game, you can get in three hours before game time, an hour before most fans. That lets you watch the Dodgers take batting practice on the field, although Ohtani rarely does, and get to the head of the line for giveaway items, stadium attractions and team stores.

The JTB tours and shuttle buses include early entry. For one fan, $45 for Dodger Stadium parking plus $40 for early entry equals $85 for a JTB shuttle.

For a family of four, though, $45 for parking plus $160 for early entry is still less than $340 for four tickets for the shuttle bus. In fairness, JTB is not focusing its shuttle service on locals.

“They are driving, right?” Nakafuji said.

The shuttle bus driver points in the direction he’s trying to go in the Dodger Stadium parking lot before a game last month.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

They might be taking the Dodger Stadium Express from Union Station, or an Uber or Lyft. If there is a sales pitch to local fans, this is it: Just how long do you want to take getting out of Dodger Stadium? The wait for the Dodger Stadium Express or a rideshare pickup, and the slog out of the stadium and along Sunset Boulevard, can be excruciating.

“It’s a headache,” Nakafuji said.

The JTB shuttles leave exactly 30 minutes after the end of the ninth inning. If you want to stay for extra innings, a fireworks show, or a drone show, you risk finding your own way back.

Sounds harsh. But, on the night I rode the shuttle bus, it took just 15 minutes to escape the parking lot and return to the hotel. If time is money, maybe the $85 is worth it.

Of course, in 15 minutes, you can walk downhill from Dodger Stadium to the Metro Chinatown station, and another five minutes to Union Station.

Still, beyond the sales of takoyaki (octopus fritters) at a Dodger Stadium concession stand and Ohtani-endorsed skin serum in the team store, here’s another economic indicator in the Shohei Ohtani Economy: a two-mile bus ride for $85.