Economy

The lawsuit alleges the Trump administration’s move to cut federal funding to public broadcasting is a violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment.

National Public Radio (NPR) and three of its local stations have filed a lawsuit against United States President Donald Trump, arguing that an executive order aimed at cutting federal funding for the organisation is illegal.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court on Tuesday in Washington, DC by NPR and three local stations in Colorado — Colorado Public Radio, Aspen Public Radio and KUTE Inc – argues that Trump’s executive order to slash public subsidies to PBS and NPR violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Trump issued the executive order earlier this month, instructing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and other federal agencies “to cease Federal funding for NPR and PBS” and requiring that they work to root out indirect sources of public financing for the news organisations. Trump issued the order after alleging there is “bias” in the broadcasters’ reporting.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting spends roughly $500m on public TV and radio annually. PBS and NPR get part of their funding from federal grants: 17 percent and two percent, respectively.

“The Order’s objectives could not be clearer: the Order aims to punish NPR for the content of news and other programming the President dislikes and chill the free exercise of First Amendment rights by NPR and individual public radio stations across the country,” the lawsuit alleges.

“The Order is textbook retaliation and viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, and it interferes with NPR’s and the Local Member Stations’ freedom of expressive association and editorial discretion,” it said.

The White House’s executive order argued that editorial choices – including that NPR allegedly “refused to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story”, and that it ran a “Valentine’s Day feature around ‘queer animals’” – were some of the reasons it wanted to cut federal funding.

“This is retaliatory, viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment,” NPR CEO Katherine Maher said in a statement.

“NPR has a First Amendment right to be free from government attempts to control private speech as well as from retaliation aimed at punishing and chilling protected speech. By basing its directives on the substance of NPR’s programming, the Executive Order seeks to force NPR to adapt its journalistic standards and editorial choices to the preferences of the government if it is to continue to receive federal funding.”

The absence of PBS from Tuesday’s filing indicates the two systems will challenge this separately; PBS has not yet gone to court, but is likely to do so soon.

The US president’s attempts to dismantle government-run news sources like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty have also sparked court clashes.

The administration has battled with the press on several fronts. The Federal Communications Commission is investigating ABC, CBS and NBC News. And after The Associated Press refrained from calling the Gulf of Mexico “the Gulf of America”, as Trump directed, the administration restricted the news outlet’s access to certain government events.

US President Donald Trump has backed away — for now — from imposing steep levies on the European Union, two days after he threatened the bloc with 50 percent tariffs.

On Sunday, Trump agreed to extend his deadline for trade talks until July 9, from the June 1 deadline he set on Friday, after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the bloc needed more time to “reach a good deal”.

Von der Leyen reportedly told Trump during a phone call that the EU needed more time to come to an agreement and asked him to delay the trade duties until July, the deadline he had originally set when he announced his “reciprocal” tariffs on almost all countries around the world in April.

Trump said that he had granted the request, and that von der Leyen told him, “We will rapidly get together to see if we can work something out.” Von der Leyen said in a social media post that the EU was ready to move quickly in trade talks.

During a trip to Vietnam on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron said that he hoped Washington and Brussels could achieve a deal with the lowest tariffs possible. “The discussions are advancing,” he told reporters.

The US president’s latest salvo comes amid Washington’s stop-and-start global trade war that kicked off in April. Trump’s moves have unnerved markets, businesses and consumers and raised fears of a global economic downturn.

But while his approach has yielded a trade deal with the United Kingdom, and negotiations are believed to be progressing with a range of other nations — from India to Vietnam to Japan — key sticking points complicate the prospects of an agreement with the EU.

Here’s what the tiff is about, and why the US and EU are struggling to reach a trade deal:

What’s the backdrop?

Trump’s recent broadside against the EU was prompted by the White House’s belief that negotiations with the bloc are not progressing fast enough. “Our discussions with them are going nowhere!” Trump posted on Truth Social.

“Therefore, I am recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union, starting on June 1, 2025. There is no Tariff if the product is built or manufactured in the United States,” he wrote last Friday.

By Sunday, however, Trump had changed course. He welcomed von der Leyen’s assertion that the bloc was willing to negotiate but that it needed more time. He added that it was his “privilege” to delay the increased tariffs.

Trump said, “[von der Leyen] said she wants to get down to serious negotiation. We had a very nice call … she said we will rapidly get together and see if we can work something out,” he told reporters.

Trump is thought to be opposed to the idea of mutually cutting tariffs to zero – an EU proposal. The US president has insisted on preserving a baseline 10 percent tax on most imports from America’s trading partners.

On May 8, the UK agreed to a trade deal that kept Trump’s 10 percent reciprocal tariff rate in place.

EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic said the European Commission – the EU’s executive arm – remains committed to securing a deal that works for both sides. But he warned that EU-US trade “must be guided by mutual respect, not threats.”

In 2024, EU exports to the US totalled about 532 billion euros ($603bn). Pharmaceuticals, cars and auto parts, chemicals and aircraft were among the largest exports, according to EU data.

What is the EU offering?

Last week, the US rejected a proposal sent by the European Commission. The EU had offered to remove tariffs on industrial goods, boost access for some US agricultural products and co-develop AI data centres, Bloomberg reported.

It also proposed enhancing economic cooperation in areas like shipbuilding and port infrastructure, as well as by establishing an EU-US energy partnership covering gas, nuclear power and oil.

In exchange, Brussels wants the Trump administration to have more flexibility on lowering the 10 percent baseline tariff — including by potentially lowering it in phases over time.

While the EU has said it wants to find a negotiated solution, it has also been preparing to retaliate if necessary.

Member states have approved a 50 percent tariff on a batch of US products worth 21 billion euros ($23.8bn), including maize, wheat and clothing, which will kick in on July 14 without a deal.

The bloc is also preparing tariffs on other imported products totalling 95 billion euros ($107.8bn), targeting industrial goods like Boeing aircraft and cars, as well as bourbon.

What does the US want?

Trump has long accused the European Union of “ripping off” the US, and is determined that Brussels will adopt measures to lower its 198.2-billion-euro ($225bn) goods trade surplus with the US.

Washington has repeatedly raised concerns over Europe’s value-added tax, as well as its regulations on IT and food exports. Trump contends that these controls act as de facto trade barriers to the EU.

For his part, Sefcovic recently told the Financial Times that he wants to slash the US-EU trade deficit by buying more US gas, weapons and agricultural products.

In addition, the bloc is reportedly open to reducing its dependence on Chinese exports and on erecting tariffs against subsidised Chinese exports, which Trump is keen on.

Sefcovic and his US counterpart, Jamieson Greer, are scheduled to meet in Paris next month to discuss ways of de-escalating the ongoing US-EU trade dispute.

How badly would Trump’s tariffs affect both economies?

In 2024, the EU exported 531.6 billion euros ($603bn) in goods to the US and imported products worth 333 billion euros ($377.8bn), resulting in a trade surplus of almost 200 billion euros ($227bn).

On the flip side, the US runs a surplus of more than 109 billion euros ($124bn) in services as of 2023, with notable IT exports, led by large American tech companies, charges for intellectual property and financial services.

Trump’s tariffs would, in turn, hit both economies hard. According to a 2019 study by the International Monetary Fund, a full-scale US-EU trade war could cost 0.3-to-0.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on both sides.

The layoffs come days after US President Donald Trump threatened 50 percent tariffs on EU goods.

Swedish automaker Volvo is set to cut 3,000 white-collar jobs amid restructuring efforts as prices begin to rise due to tariff-driven uncertainty.

The company announced the news on Monday. The layoffs come as the Swedish automaker tries to resurrect its rock-bottom share price and drum up better demand for its cars by restructuring part of its business and cutting costs.

CEO Hakan Samuelsson, who was recently brought back to the role after heading the company for a decade until 2022, unveiled a programme in April to slash costs by $1.9bn (18 billion Swedish crowns), including a substantial cut to Volvo’s white-collar staff, who make up 40 percent of its workforce.

“It’s white collar in almost all areas, including R&D  [research and development], communication, human resources,” Samuelsson told the Reuters news agency.

The layoffs represent around 15 percent of the company’s office staff, Volvo Cars said in a statement, and would incur a one-time restructuring cost of $160m (1.5 billion crowns).

Volvo Cars’ new CFO Fredrik Hansson told Reuters that while all of its departments and locations would be impacted, most of the redundancies will happen in Gothenburg.

“It’s tailored to make us structurally more efficient, and then how that plays out might vary a bit depending on the area. But no stone is left unturned,” Hansson said.

With most of its production based in Europe and China, Volvo Cars is more exposed to new United States tariffs than many of its European rivals, and has said it could become impossible to export its most affordable cars to the US.

The company said in a press release that it would finalise a new structural setup by the third quarter of this year.

Volvo withdrew its financial guidance as it announced its cost cuts last month, pointing to unpredictable markets amid weaker consumer confidence and trade tariffs causing turmoil in the global auto industry.

The layoff announcement comes only days after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose a 50 percent tariff on imports from the European Union from June 1. On Monday, however, he backed away from that date, restoring a July 9 deadline to allow for talks between Washington and Brussels.

As a result, Volvo’s CEO said the move would make it harder for it to sell one of its electric vehicles (EVs) — the EX30 EV that is made in Belgium — in the US market.

Farmers demonstrate against changes to legislation that would ease restrictions on pesticide and water use in farming.

French farmers have disrupted highway traffic around Paris and rallied in front of parliament to protest against amendments filed by opposition lawmakers to a bill that would loosen environmental regulations on farming.

Members of France’s leading farming union, the FNSEA, parked about 10 tractors outside the National Assembly on Monday to put pressure on MPs, who began debating the legislation in the afternoon.

The legislation, tabled by far-right MP Laurent Duplomb, proposes simplifying approvals for breeding facilities, loosening restrictions around water use to promote irrigation reservoirs and reauthorising a banned neonicotinoid pesticide used in sugar beet cultivation that environmentalists say is harmful to bees.

The proposed law is part of a wider trend in numerous European Union states to unwind environmental legislation as farmers grapple with rising costs and households struggle with the cost-of-living crisis.

More than 150 farmers from the Ile-de-France, Grand Est and Provence-Alpes-Cote d’Azur regions gathered peacefully in front of the National Assembly, drinking coffee and eating croissants, after blocking the main roads around the capital.

“This bill to lift the constraints on the farming profession is very important to us,” FNSEA Secretary-General Herve Lapie told the AFP news agency.

“What we are asking for is simply to be able to work in a European environment: a single market, a single set of rules. We’ve been fighting for this for 20 years. For once, there’s a bill along these lines. … We don’t have the patience to wait any longer.”

The FNSEA and its allies say the neonicotinoid pesticide acetamiprid, which has been prohibited in France since 2018 due to environmental and health concerns, should be authorised in France like it is across the EU because it is less toxic to wildlife than other neonicotinoids and stops crops from being ravaged by pests.

Environmental campaigners and some unions representing small-scale and organic farmers say the bill benefits the large-scale agriculture industry at the expense of independent operators.

President Emmanuel Macron’s opponents on the political left have proposed multiple amendments that the protesting farmers said threatened the bill.

“We’re asking the lawmakers, our lawmakers, to be serious and vote for it as it stands,” Julien Thierry, a grain farmer from the Yvelines department outside Paris, told The Associated Press news agency, criticising politicians from the Greens and left-wing France Unbowed (LFI).

Ecologists party MP Delphine Batho said the text of the bill is “Trump-inspired” while LFI MP Aurelie Trouve wrote in an article for the French daily Le Monde that it signified “a political capitulation, one that marks an ecological junction”.

FNSEA chief Arnaud Rousseau said protests would continue until Wednesday with farmers from the Centre-Val de Loire and Hauts-de-France regions expected to join their colleagues.

Protests are also expected in Brussels next week, targeting the EU’s environmental regulations and green policies.

Farmers across France and Europe won concessions last year after railing against cheap foreign competition and what they say are unnecessary regulations.

ECB President Christine Lagarde argues the US economic policy shifts have created inroads for the euro to the standard currency for future global trade.

The euro could become a viable alternative to the US dollar as the global standard currency for international trade, according to European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde.

In a speech in Berlin, Germany, Lagarde said on Monday that the erratic economic policy of the United States has spooked global investors into limiting their exposure to the dollar in recent months. Many have opted to invest in gold, without seeing a viable alternative.

“The ongoing changes create the opening for a ‘global euro moment’,” she said.

Lagarde said investors seek “geopolitical assurance in another form: they invest in the assets of regions that are reliable security partners and can honour alliances with hard power”.

“The global economy thrived on a foundation of openness and multilateralism underpinned by US leadership … but today it is fracturing.”

The dollar’s role has been on the decline for years and now makes up 58 percent of international reserves, the lowest in decades, but still well above the euro’s 20 percent share.

Any enhanced role for the euro must coincide with greater military strength that can back up partnerships, Lagarde said.

Europe should also make the euro the currency of choice for businesses invoicing international trade, she said. This could be supported by forging new trade agreements, enhanced cross-border payments and liquidity agreements with the ECB.

Looming challenges

The euro’s global role has been stagnant for decades now since the European Union’s financial institutions remain unfinished and governments have shown little appetite to embark on more integration.

For this, Europe needs a deeper, more liquid capital market, must bolster its legal foundations, and needs to underpin its commitment to open trade with security capabilities, Lagarde argued.

Reforming the domestic economy may be more pressing, however, she said. The euro area capital market is still fragmented, inefficient and lacks a truly liquid, widely available safe asset that investors could flock to.

“Economic logic tells us that public goods need to be jointly financed. And this joint financing could provide the basis for Europe to gradually increase its supply of safe assets,” Lagarde said.

Joint borrowing has been taboo for some key eurozone members, particularly Germany, which fears that its taxpayers could end up having to pay for the fiscal irresponsibility of others.

If Europe succeeded, the benefits would be large, Lagarde said. The investment inflow would allow domestic players to borrow at lower cost, insulate the bloc from exchange rate movements and protect it against international sanctions.

US president continues to fuel global economic uncertainty with erratic trade policy.

United States President Donald Trump has backed away from launching a trade war with the European Union, two days after threatening to impose punishing tariffs.

Trump said on Sunday that he has agreed to extend trade negotiations with the EU to July 9 following a call with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. As part of that agreement, the US will also hold back from imposing a 50 percent tariff on imports from the bloc, which Trump announced on Friday would be imposed on June 1.

The announcement is the latest U-turn on US trade policy in a long series in recent months, and will only add to the uncertainty that Trump’s erratic and unpredictable policy is casting over the global economy.

Trump said, “[von der Leyen] said she wants to get down to serious negotiation. We had a very nice call.”

“She said we will rapidly get together and see if we can work something out,” he told reporters.

The European Commission chief noted that she had shared a “good call” with Trump and that the EU was ready to move swiftly.

Backtracked

Trump set a 90-day window for trade negotiations with the EU in April, making them due to end on July 9.

He had backtracked on Friday, saying he was not interested in reaching an agreement at all and escalated the transatlantic trade dispute.

“I’m not looking for a deal,” the president said. “We’ve set the deal – it’s at 50 percent.”

However, by Sunday, he welcomed von der Leyen’s assertion that the bloc is willing to negotiate but needs more time.

“Europe is ready to advance talks swiftly and decisively,” she recapped on X. “To reach a good deal, we would need the time until July 9.”

The bloc’s top trade negotiator, Maros Sefcovic, had on Friday urged the US to show “mutual respect, not threats”.

Trump roiled financial markets with his Liberation Day announcement in April, which threatened sweeping tariffs on multiple countries.

However, amid nosediving markets, threats of retaliation, and turmoil across the globe, the US president has in many cases softened his stance in favour of negotiations.

Washington has made deals with the United Kingdom and opened talks with China. Those moves have buoyed markets somewhat, but uncertainty persists as the US stance continues to shift.

A series of new executive orders seeks to fast-track approvals to grow the US’s nuclear energy sector, a lengthy process.

United States President Donald Trump has signed a series of new executive orders aimed at boosting nuclear energy production in the country, while rolling back regulations.

Friday’s orders, signed by Trump at an Oval Office event, called on the nation’s independent Nuclear Regulatory Commission to cut down on regulations and fast-track new licences for reactors and power plants.

One order requires the body to make decisions on new nuclear reactors within 18 months. That would severely pare down a process that can take more than a decade. Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump described the nuclear industry as “hot”.

“It’s a brilliant industry. You have to do it right,” he said, flanked by CEOs of nuclear companies, as well as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

Burgum told reporters that the president’s actions would “turn the clock back on over 50 years of overregulation” in the nuclear industry.

Trump’s orders also called for assessing staffing levels at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and directed the US Departments of Energy and Defense to work together to build nuclear plants on federal land.

Building more nuclear reactors, an official told reporters in advance of the signing, is aimed in part at addressing the increased energy needs created by artificial intelligence (AI) technology.

It was not immediately clear how much authority Trump and the executive branch could assert over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which Congress created as an independent agency in 1974.

Trump’s orders also called for growth in the domestic production and enrichment of uranium, the primary fuel used in nuclear power.

‘National energy emergency’

Trump has focused heavily on energy industry deregulation since taking office for a second term in January, but much of the emphasis has been directed at fossil fuels.

On January 20, the day he returned to the White House, Trump declared a “national energy emergency”.

As part of that order, he called on the heads of federal agencies to identify any emergency powers they could use to “facilitate the identification, leasing, siting, production, transportation, refining, and generation of domestic energy resources” on federal and non-federal land.

He further called high energy prices an “active threat” to US citizens and national security.

Nuclear energy has long been a thorny issue in the US, splitting those who seek alternatives to fossil fuels.

On one hand, the industry offers a means of producing energy with low levels of greenhouse gas emissions. But on the other hand, the production of nuclear energy creates waste that can remain radioactive for long periods of time, and requires special storage to ensure public safety.

Nuclear power also carries the risk of rare, but potentially cataclysmic, accidents.

For many, incidents like the Three Mile Island accident represent the possible dangers. In 1979, the nuclear generator on Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania suffered a mechanical failure, releasing radioactive gases into the air and spurring a backlash against nuclear power.

Even with Trump’s regulatory rollback, many experts in the field believe it would take years for the US to scale up its nuclear infrastructure.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has taken its first concrete action to deliver sanctions relief for Syria, following a surprise policy pivot earlier this month.

On Friday, the US Department of the Treasury announced sweeping relief to an array of individuals and entities, which it said will “enable new investment and private sector activity consistent with [Trump’s] America First strategy”.

The US State Department, meanwhile, concurrently issued a waiver to a 2019 law, the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, that would “enable our foreign partners, allies, and the region to further unlock Syria’s potential”.

Trump surprised the international community when, on May 13, he pledged to remove sanctions placed on Syria during the leadership of its now-ousted leader, President Bashar al-Assad.

Friday’s announcements mark an initial step towards that goal, as Syria recovers from abuses under al-Assad’s government and 13 years of civil war.

“As President Trump promised, the Treasury Department and the State Department are implementing authorizations to encourage new investment into Syria,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.

“Syria must also continue to work towards becoming a stable country that is at peace, and today’s actions will hopefully put the country on a path to a bright, prosperous, and stable future”.

Sanctions relief is critical for Syria to move forward. The United States is issuing a Caesar Act sanctions waiver to increase investments and cash flows that will facilitate basic services and reconstruction in Syria. We support the Syrian people’s efforts to build a more…

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) May 23, 2025

Trump first unveiled his plans for sanctions relief during a tour of the Middle East in mid-May. He said lifting US sanctions would give Syria “a chance at greatness”, since the restrictions left the war-torn country economically isolated.

“It’s their time to shine. We’re taking them all off,” he said from Riyadh.

Shortly after, Trump met and shook hands with Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa, who had only recently been removed from the US’s “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” list.

Appeal for relief

Calls for sanctions relief had grown following the fall of al-Assad’s government last December. As head of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group, al-Sharaa spearheaded the offensive that led to al-Assad fleeing the country, bringing the civil war to an end.

The war, which first broke out in 2011, had left Syria’s economy in tatters.

As many as 656,493 people were killed during the conflict, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, and a 2020 report from the United Nations estimated that the country suffered total economic losses of about $442.2bn in the first eight years of the war alone.

Sanctions have further dampened Syria’s economic outlook, making it difficult for countries with ties to the US to conduct business there.

Since taking power in December, Syria’s interim government has argued the ongoing sanctions, largely imposed during al-Assad’s rule, would slow development and cause further instability.

Trump’s announcement earlier this month buoyed hope for many Syrians of a new path forward, although the extent of the relief had remained unclear.

Earlier this week, the European Union also announced it had lifted sanctions against Syria.

Friday’s sanctions relief in the US applies to the “the Government of Syria … as in existence on or after May 13, 2025”, according to the Treasury Department.

The reprieve also applies to several previously sanctioned transportation, banking, tourism and fossil fuel entities.

Transactions related to Russia, Iran and North Korea remain under US sanctions.

One of the biggest hurdles, however, is the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, a law that was passed in 2019, during Trump’s first term.

It included broad sanctions that targeted al-Assad’s government and its allies and supporters for atrocities committed against civilians.

The act was named after a former Syrian military photographer and whistleblower who smuggled out of the country a cache of images showing torture and mass killing at detention centres run by al-Assad’s security forces.

But since the law was passed by Congress, it will likely take an act of Congress to completely lift its restrictions.

The president, however, can issue temporary waivers to the law, which is what the Trump administration did on Friday.

In a statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the waiver will last for 180 days, in order to “increase investments and cash flows that will facilitate basic services and reconstruction in Syria”.

“We support the Syrian people’s efforts to build a more hopeful future,” Rubio said.

Investors interpreted Trump’s comments to mean Nippon Steel had received his approval for its takeover of US Steel.

United States President Donald Trump has expressed support for Nippon Steel’s $14.9bn bid for US Steel, saying their “planned partnership” would create jobs and help the US economy.

Shares of US Steel soared 21 percent on Friday after Trump’s comments as investors interpreted the president’s post on Truth Social to mean Nippon Steel had received his approval for its long-planned takeover, the last major hurdle for the deal.

“This will be a planned partnership between United States Steel and Nippon Steel, which will create at least 70,000 jobs, and add $14 Billion Dollars to the US Economy,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Friday.

This week, the Reuters news agency reported that Nippon Steel has said if the merger is approved, it would invest $14bn into US Steel’s operations, including up to $4bn in a new steel mill.

Trump added that the bulk of that investment would occur in the next 14 months and said he would hold a rally at US Steel in Pittsburgh next Friday.

Nippon Steel said it applauded Trump’s decision to approve the “partnership”. The White House did not immediately reply to questions about the announcement.

US Steel share price kept rising after hours and reached $54, just shy of Nippon Steel’s $55-per-share offer price made in late 2023. While no details were released, investors expressed confidence that terms will be similar to those agreed in 2023. Investors said that eventually US Steel will no longer be publicly traded and they will receive a cash payout for their shares.

Politically controversial

The deal has been one of the most highly anticipated on Wall Street after it morphed into the political arena with fears that foreign ownership would mean job losses in Pennsylvania, where US Steel is based. It factored into last year’s election that saw Trump return to the White House.

Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick, who also called the deal a “partnership”, on Friday said it was a “huge victory for America and the US Steel Corporation”, that will protect more than 11,000 Pennsylvania jobs and support the creation of at least 14,000 more.

The last pieces of the deal came together surprisingly fast. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS), which reviews deals for national security risks, told the White House this week that the security risks can be addressed, Reuters reported, moving the final decision to Trump’s desk.

Following an earlier CFIUS-led review, former President Joe Biden blocked the deal in January on national security grounds.

The companies sued, arguing they did not receive a fair review process. The Biden White House rejected that view.

The companies argued Biden opposed the deal when he was running for re-election to win support from the United Steelworkers union in the battleground state of Pennsylvania. The Biden administration had defended the review as essential to protecting security, infrastructure and supply chains.

Trump also initially opposed the deal, arguing the company must be owned and operated in the US.

The United Steelworkers were against the deal as recently as Thursday when they urged Trump to block the deal despite the $14bn investment pledge from Trump.

For investors, including prominent hedge funds, the news spells relief after more than a year of waiting for a resolution. “There were huge high-fives all around today,” one recent investor said, adding, “We understood Donald Trump’s psyche and we played it to our advantage here.”

Investors said Trump appears to have won ground after the pledge for new investments was increased.

“This deal ensures that steelmaking will live on in Pittsburgh for generations,” another investor said.

The DOJ is expected to have a written agreement with Boeing in place by the end of next week.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has struck a deal in principle with Boeing to allow it to avoid prosecution in a fraud case stemming from two fatal 737 MAX plane crashes that killed 346 people, a harsh blow to the families of the victims.

Boeing will pay more than $1.1bn, including the fine and compensation to families, and more than $455m to strengthen the company’s compliance, safety, and quality programmes, the DOJ said on Friday.

The aircraft maker also agreed to pay an additional $444.5m into a crash victims’ fund that would be divided evenly per crash victim on top of an additional $243.6m fine.

“Boeing must continue to improve the effectiveness of its anti-fraud compliance and ethics program and retain an independent compliance consultant,” the DOJ said on Friday. “We are confident that this resolution is the most just outcome with practical benefits.”

The agreement allows Boeing to avoid being branded a convicted felon and is a blow to families who lost relatives in the crashes and had pressed prosecutors to take the US planemaker to trial. A lawyer for family members and two US senators had urged the DOJ not to abandon its prosecution, but the government quickly rejected the requests.

The DOJ expects to file the written agreement with Boeing by the end of next week. Boeing will no longer face oversight by an independent monitor under the agreement.

Boeing did not immediately comment.

No more guilty plea

Boeing had reached a tentative non-prosecution agreement with the government on May 16, as first reported by the news agency Reuters.

The agreement would forestall a June 23 trial date the planemaker faces on a charge it misled US regulators about a crucial flight control system on the 737 MAX, its best-selling jet.

Boeing in July had agreed to plead guilty to a criminal fraud conspiracy charge after the two fatal 737 MAX crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia spanning 2018 and 2019, pay a fine of up to $487.2m and face three years of independent oversight.

Boeing no longer will plead guilty, prosecutors told family members of crash victims during a meeting last week.

The company’s posture changed after a judge rejected a previous plea agreement in December, prosecutors told the family members.

Judge Reed O’Connor in Texas said in 2023 that “Boeing’s crime may properly be considered the deadliest corporate crime in US history.”

Boeing has faced enhanced scrutiny from the Federal Aviation Administration since January 2024, when a new MAX 9 missing four key bolts suffered a mid-air emergency losing a door plug. The FAA has capped production at 38 planes per month.

DOJ officials last year found Boeing had violated a 2021 agreement, reached during the first Trump administration’s final days, that had shielded the planemaker from prosecution for the crashes.

That conclusion followed the January 2024 in-flight emergency during an Alaska Airlines’ flight. As a result, DOJ officials decided to reopen the 2018-19 fatal crashes case and negotiate a plea agreement with Boeing.

Abu Dhabi’s IMI will take a minority stake in the company of no more than 15 percent.

A consortium led by US investment firm RedBird Capital Partners has agreed to buy the publisher of the United Kingdom’s 170-year-old Daily Telegraph newspaper for about $674m (500 million pounds).

Redbird said it has reached an agreement in principle to become controlling owner of the Telegraph Media Group, ending a lengthy takeover saga for the conservative-leaning newspaper on Friday.

Gerry Cardinale, founder and managing partner of RedBird, said the sale “marks the start of a new era for The Telegraph as we look to grow the brand in the UK and internationally, invest in its technology and expand its subscriber base”.

The Telegraph group, previously owned by the UK’s Barclay family, was put up for sale two years ago to help pay off the family’s debts. It publishes the Daily and Sunday Telegraph newspapers and weekly newsmagazine The Spectator, which all are closely allied to the UK’s Conservative Party.

In 2023, there was an offer to buy the publications from RedBird IMI, a consortium backed by RedBird Capital Partners and Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, a member of Abu Dhabi’s royal family and the vice president of the United Arab Emirates.

But the consortium pulled out last year following strong opposition from the UK government, which launched legislation to block foreign state ownership of the British press.

Under the deal, Abu Dhabi’s IMI will take a minority stake of not more than 15 percent in the Telegraph as a member of the consortium. The sale must be approved by British regulators.

RedBird has investments in football team AC Milan, the parent company of Liverpool football club and film production company Skydance.

Telegraph Media Group chief executive Anna Jones said that “RedBird Capital Partners have exciting growth plans that build on our success — and will unlock our full potential across the breadth of our business.”

The Spectator was sold in September to British hedge fund investor Paul Marshall.

It was the second time in one day that the FTC pulled out of litigation begun during the Biden administration.

The Republican-controlled Federal Trade Commission is abandoning a Biden-era effort to block Microsoft’s purchase of Call of Duty video game maker Activision Blizzard.

In an order issued Thursday, the FTC said it had determined that “the public interest is best served by dismissing the administrative litigation in this case.”

It was the second time in one day that the FTC pulled out of litigation begun during the administration of former President Joe Biden, a Democrat. Earlier Thursday, the FTC said it was dismissing a lawsuit against PepsiCo that was filed by the Democratic-controlled FTC in January.

Microsoft announced a $69bn acquisition of Activision in January 2022. It was one of the most expensive tech acquisitions in history and was designed to boost sales of Microsoft’s Xbox gaming console, which has lagged in sales behind Sony’s PlayStation and Nintendo.

In December 2022, the FTC – then led by Democratic Chairwoman Lina Khan – sued to temporarily block the acquisition, saying it would let Microsoft suppress competitors who want access to Xbox and its subscription content.

In July 2023, the United States District Court in Northern California denied the FTC’s request to pause the acquisition, but the FTC appealed. Earlier this month, a federal appeals court also denied the FTC’s request.

In the meantime, Microsoft completed its purchase of Activision in October 2023 after it won approval from the United Kingdom’s competition watchdog, which had also considered blocking the merger.

Brad Smith, Microsoft’s vice chairman and president, said Thursday in a statement on X that the decision is a victory for video game players and for “common sense in Washington DC”.

“We are grateful to the FTC for today’s announcement,” Smith said.

Political actions

Khan stepped down from the FTC when President Donald Trump took office in January, and Trump fired Democratic Commissioners Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya in March. Bedoya and Slaughter have sued the Trump administration, saying their removal was illegal.

Right now, the FTC is made up of three Republican commissioners, and it’s unclear when the two Democrats on the commission will be replaced. A message seeking comment was left with the FTC.

In the PepsiCo case, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson said the Biden-era FTC rushed to authorise a case just three days before Trump’s inauguration. He said on Thursday that the case, which alleged that PepsiCo was violating the law by giving unfair price advantages to Walmart, was a “dubious political stunt”.

But the FTC hasn’t stood in the way of some Biden-era policies. Earlier this month, a rule the FTC announced in December requiring ticket sellers, hotels, vacation rental platforms and others to disclose their fees upfront went into effect.

US President Donald Trump has threatened a 50-percent tariff on all imports from the European Union and 25-percent on Apple products unless iPhones are made in the United States.

The president announced his intentions over social media on Friday.

“Our discussions with them are going nowhere!” Trump posted on Truth Social. “Therefore, I am recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union, starting on June 1, 2025. There is no Tariff if the product is built or manufactured in the United States.”

The Republican president’s proposal would see higher import taxes on goods from the EU, a longstanding US ally, than from China, a geopolitical rival that had its tariffs cut to 30 percent this month so Washington and Beijing could hold negotiations.

Trump has been upset by the lack of progress in trade talks with the EU, which has proposed mutually cutting tariffs to zero even as the president has publicly insisted on preserving a baseline 10-percent tax on most imports.

Trump aides have said the goal of his tariffs was to isolate China and strike new agreements with allies, but the president’s tariff threats undermine the logic of those claims. Not only could the EU face higher tariffs than China, but the bloc of member states might have been better off by establishing a broad front with China and other countries against Trump’s trade policy, said German economist Marcel Fratscher.

“The strategy of the EU Commission and Germany in the trade conflict with Trump is a total failure,” Fratscher, the head of the German Institute for Economic Research, said on X. “This was a failure you could see coming — Trump sees Europe’s wavering, hesitation and concessions as the weaknesses that they are.”

Apple’s ultimatum

Trump’s post had been preceded by a threat of import taxes against Apple for its plans to continue making its iPhone in Asia. Apple now joins Amazon, Walmart and other major US  companies in the White House’s crosshairs as they try to respond to the uncertainty and inflationary pressures unleashed by his tariffs.

“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the US.”

The statement by Trump is critical in that he suggests the company itself would bear the price of tariffs, contradicting his earlier claims as he rolled out a series of aggressive tariffs over the past several months that foreign countries would shoulder the cost of the import taxes. In general, importers pay the tariffs and the costs are often passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices.

In response to Trump’s tariffs on China, Apple CEO Tim Cook said earlier this month that most iPhones sold in the US during the current fiscal quarter would come from India, with iPads and other devices being imported from Vietnam. After Trump rolled out tariffs in April, analysts estimated that the cost for a $1,200 iPhone, if made in America, could jump anywhere from $1,500 to $3,500.

“The pressure from Trump administration on Apple to build iPhone production in the US … would result in an iPhone price point that is a non-starter for Cupertino and translate into iPhone prices of ~$3,500 which is not realistic as this would take 5-10 years to shift production to the US. We believe the concept of Apple producing iPhones in the US is a fairy tale that is not feasible,” Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives said in a note.

Trump had previously created an exemption on electronics imported from China to help companies such as Apple, something he could now remove. He also threatened separate 25-percent import taxes on computer chips and could have the tariffs schedule rewritten in ways that could expose Apple products to the taxes.

Until recently, the US president repeatedly bragged about the $500bn that Apple in February pledged to invest domestically as part of its development of artificial intelligence technologies. But he publicly turned against the company last week while speaking in Qatar.

“I had a little problem with Tim Cook yesterday,” Trump told the audience. “I said to him, ‘My friend, I treated you very good. You’re coming here with $500bn, but now I hear you’re building all over India. I don’t want you building in India.’”

A global response

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said the EU’s executive commission has his country’s full support in working to “preserve our access to the American market”.

“I think such tariffs help no one, but would just lead to economic development in both markets suffering,” Wadephul said in Berlin. “So we are still counting on negotiations, and support the European Commission in defending Europe and the European market while at the same time working on persuasion in America.”

Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said he expected a calm and robust response from the EU to the announcement of possible new US trade tariffs.

In response to the news, Volvo Cars CEO Hakan Samuelsson said the tariffs would result in higher prices for consumers. In an interview with the Reuters news agency, he said the tariff would limit the ability of Volvo Cars to sell its Belgium-made EX30 electric vehicle in the US.

Investors are shaken on the move. As of 10:30am in New York (14:30 GMT), the Dow was down 0.6 percent, the tech-heavy Nasdaq was down 1 percent and the S&P 500 was down 0.8 percent. Apple is down 2.3 percent from the market close yesterday.

SAP, Europe’s most valuable company’s stock, is down 1.8 percent from yesterday’s close. Novo Nordisk, the Danish pharmaceutical giant and the maker of the blockbuster drug Ozempic, which is Europe’s second-highest valued company, has seen its stock down 1 percent on the news.

Shares in LVMH and Hermes, France’s largest listed companies by market capitalisation, fell by about 3 and 4 percent, respectively.

United States debt has long been considered the safest of all safe havens.
But, Washington has just lost its pristine reputation as a borrower.
Moody’s has downgraded the nation from its top-notch AAA rating, becoming the last of the big three agencies to do so.
The ratings agency has cited the United States’s growing debt – now at $36 trillion, almost 120 percent of gross domestic product – and rising debt service costs.
Against this backdrop, President Donald Trump is pushing what he calls the “one big, beautiful bill”.
Critics warn his tax cut package could add trillions more to the already ballooning deficit.

The group said it would call for analysis on international supply chain resilience.

Finance ministers and central bank governors from the Group of Seven (G7) democracies have pledged to address “excessive imbalances” in the global economy and said they could increase sanctions on Russia.

The G7 announced the plan on Thursday as the officials, who met in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, said there was a need for a common understanding of how “non-market policies and practices” undermine international economic security.

The document did not name China, but references by the United States and other G7 economies to non-market policies and practices often are targeted at China’s state subsidies and export-driven economic model.

The final communique called for an analysis of market concentration and international supply chain resilience.

“We agree on the importance of a level playing field and taking a broadly coordinated approach to address the harm caused by those who do not abide by the same rules and lack transparency,” it said.

Lowering Russian oil price cap

European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis said the G7 ministers discussed proposals for further sanctions on Russia to try to end its war in Ukraine. They included lowering the G7-led $60-per-barrel price cap on Russian oil, given that Russian crude is now selling under that level, he said.

The G7 participants condemned what they called Russia’s “continued brutal war” against Ukraine and said that if efforts to achieve a ceasefire failed, they would explore all possible options, including “further ramping up sanctions”.

Russia’s sovereign assets in G7 jurisdictions would remain immobilised until Moscow ended the war and paid for the damage it has caused to Ukraine, the communique said. It did not mention a price cap.

Brent crude currently trades at around $64 per barrel.

A European official said the US is “not convinced” about lowering the Russian oil price cap.

Earlier this week, the US Treasury said Secretary Scott Bessent intended to press G7 allies to focus on rebalancing the global economy to protect workers and companies from China’s “unfair practices”.

The communique also recognised an increase in low-value international “de minimis” package shipments that can overwhelm customs and tax collection systems and be used for smuggling drugs and other illicit goods.

The duty-free de minimis exemption for packages valued below $800 has been exploited by Chinese e-commerce companies including Shein and Temu.

Economists echo Dimon’s concerns as US credit downgrade and tariff-driven uncertainty continue.

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon has warned that he can’t rule out the possibility that the United States will fall into what is called stagflation— an economic term that refers to a period when inflation and unemployment are high as economic growth is slow.

In an interview with Bloomberg Television on Thursday, Dimon said, “I don’t agree that we’re in a sweet spot” in response to a question about some US Federal Reserve officials saying that the US economy was in a sweet spot.

Dimon made his comments while at JPMorgan’s Global China Summit in Shanghai. His comments come against the backdrop of the US facing increasing geopolitical tensions, rising deficits and pressure on consumer prices from changing government policies on tariffs that have led retailers to announce a need to raise prices and left businesses in a wait-and-watch mode over all the economic uncertainties.

Economists like Stuart Mackintosh, executive director of the financial think tank Group of Thirty, echoed Dimon’s concerns to Al Jazeera.

“Stagflation is a real risk we cannot rule out. We’re in a circumstance where we have uncertainty on tariffs, uncertainty on many policies that increase the downward pressure on growth in America.”

Last week Moody’s Ratings downgraded the US economy’s credit rating. The firm lowered its gold-standard Aaa to an Aa1 credit rating for the US, citing its growing national debt.

Dimon’s Thursday comments were underscored by his remarks at the company’s investor day on Monday.

“Credit today is a bad risk,” Dimon said.

While at the summit, Dimon also offered comments on US President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill”, the tax and spending bill passed by the US House of Representatives that includes key parts of the Trump administration agenda including tax cuts, slashes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), increased funding for immigration enforcement, and new taxes on colleges and universities.

“I think they should do the tax bill. I do think it’ll stabilise things a little bit, but it’ll probably add to the deficit,” Dimon said in a record first obtained by the Reuters news agency.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that the tax bill would add $3.8 trillion to the national debt.

‘Inflation going up’

In the Bloomberg interview, Dimon added that the US Federal Reserve is doing the right thing to wait and see before it decides on monetary policy. The central bank opted to hold rates steady at its last policy meeting, which was largely in line with economists’ expectations.

Policymakers weighed a stable labour market at the time, even as they acknowledged that could be short-lived.

“This is unsustainable. We might get into a much worse economic picture almost immediately,” Mackintosh said.

More information on the state of the US labour market is expected in the next couple of weeks as both the US Department of Labor and the payroll and human resources firm ADP are slated to release their monthly report on the rate of job growth.

Dimon has also long warned that inflation and stagflation will continue to increase.

“I think the chance of inflation going up and stagflation is a little bit higher than other people think,” he noted.

On Wall Street, JPMorgan Chase’s stock has trended up following Dimon’s remarks. As of noon in New York (16:00 GMT), it was 0.2 percent higher than yesterday’s market close after opening lower this morning.

The Republican-controlled US House of Representatives has passed the “Big, Beautiful Bill”, the sweeping tax and spending bill by a single vote.

The legislation, which would enact much of President Donald Trump’s policy agenda, passed early Thursday morning after an overnight session.

The bill, which is now headed to the Senate, will cut taxes, but also saddle the country with trillions of dollars more in debt.

The bill would fulfil many of Trump’s populist campaign pledges, delivering new tax breaks on tips and car loans and boosting spending on the military and border enforcement. It will add about $3.8 trillion to the federal government’s $36.2 trillion in debt over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

“This is arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country!” Trump wrote on social media.

The package passed in a 215-214 vote after a marathon push that kept lawmakers debating the bill through two successive nights.

All of the chamber’s Democrats and two Republicans voted against it, while a third Republican voted “present”, neither for nor against the bill. Another Republican missed the vote because he was asleep.

With a narrow 220-212 majority, House Speaker Mike Johnson could not afford to lose more than a handful of votes from his side, and he made several last-minute changes to satisfy various Republican factions.

“The House has passed generational, truly nation-shaping legislation,” Johnson said.

The bill is now headed to the Republican-controlled Senate, where it will likely be changed further during weeks of debate.

The 1,100-page bill would extend corporate and individual tax cuts passed in 2017 during Trump’s first term in office, cancel many green-energy incentives passed by Democratic former President Joe Biden and tighten eligibility for health and food programmes for the poor.

It also would fund Trump’s crackdown on immigration, adding tens of thousands of border guards and creating the capacity to deport up to one million people each year. Regulations on firearm silencers would be loosened.

The bill passed despite growing concerns about the US debt, which has reached 124 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), prompting a downgrade of the country’s top-notch credit rating by Moody’s last week. The US government has recorded budget deficits every year of this century, as Republican and Democratic administrations alike have failed to bring spending into alignment with revenue.

Interest payments accounted for one out of every eight dollars spent by the US government last year, more than the amount spent on the military, according to the CBO. That share is due to grow to one out of every six dollars over the next 10 years as an ageing population pushes up the government’s health and pension costs, even if Trump’s budget bill is not taken into account.

A mixed response

“We’re not rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic tonight. We’re putting coal in the boiler and setting a course for the iceberg,” said Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, one of the two Republicans to vote against the bill.

The growing debt has paradoxically given urgency for Republicans to pass the bill, as it would raise the federal government’s debt ceiling by $4 trillion. That would avert the prospect of a default, which officials have warned could otherwise come sometime in the middle of this year.

Republicans have also argued that failure to pass the bill would mean an effective tax hike for many Americans, as Trump’s 2017 tax cuts are due to expire at the end of the year.

Hardliners on the party’s right flank had pushed for deeper spending cuts to lessen the budget impact, but they met resistance from centrists who worried that would fall too heavily on the 71 million low-income Americans enrolled in the Medicaid health programme. Johnson made changes to address conservatives’ concerns, pulling forward new work requirements for Medicaid recipients to take effect at the end of 2026, two years earlier than before. That would kick several million people off the programme, according to the CBO. The bill also would penalise states that expand Medicaid in the future.

Johnson also expanded a deduction for state and local tax payments from $30,000 to $40,000, which was a priority for a handful of centrist Republicans who represent high-tax states like New York and California. Democrats blasted the bill as disproportionately benefitting the wealthy while cutting benefits for working Americans. The CBO found it would reduce income for the poorest 10 percent of US households and boost income for the top 10 percent.

“This bill is a scam, a tax scam designed to steal from you, the American people, and give to Trump’s millionaire and billionaire friends,” Democratic Representative Jim McGovern said.

Investors, unnerved by the fiscal position of the US and Trump’s erratic tariff moves, are increasingly selling the dollar and other US assets that make up the bedrock of the global financial system. The three major indices the Dow, Nasdaq and S&P 500 are trending upwards slightly after its worst day in a month following a bond market sell-off yesterday.

JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive Jamie Dimon gave a mixed response to the bill’s passage.

“I think they should do the tax bill. I do think it’ll stabilise things a little bit, but it’ll probably add to the deficit,” Dimon said at JPMorgan’s Global China Summit in Shanghai.

Target has slashed its annual forecasts amid a pullback in discretionary spending due to tariff-driven uncertainty and a backlash against shifts in its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policy.

The United States big box retailer, which reported its first-quarter earnings on Wednesday, relies on China for 30 percent of its store label goods. While it is on track to reduce its dependency by another 5 percent by the end of the year, tariff-driven uncertainty has caused a slump.

In its forecast, the Minneapolis, Minnesota-based retailer expects a low single-digit decline in annual sales. Wall Street analysts expected a marginal increase of 0.27 percent in annual sales, according to the LSEG. Target previously forecasted net sales growth of about 1 percent.

This comes as Bank of America recently forecasted that consumers have eased up on spending as the most recent report from The Conference Board showed a slowdown in consumer confidence, which hit a 13-year low in April. The US economy also showed the first contraction in three years in the first quarter.

Target’s first-quarter comparable sales fell 3.8 percent compared with analysts’ estimates of a 1.08 percent decline. It expects annual adjusted earnings of $7 to $9 per share, compared with its prior forecast of $8.80 to $9.80. Analysts were expecting $8.40.

“Expectations were very low for Target’s first quarter. Even against that, Target’s results came in light,” Michael Baker, a DA Davidson analyst, told the news agency Reuters. Target’s stock has performed poorly, down nearly 28 percent this year, in contrast to Walmart’s 9 percent gain and Home Depot’s 2.3 percent decline.

Target’s stock is tumbling on the news of its disappointing earnings report. As of 11am in New York (15:00 GMT), it was down 2.91 percent from the market open although it is up more than 1 percent over the past five days.

DEI boycotts weigh on sales 

Target also said its first-quarter performance was impacted by changes made to its DEI policies in January.

Target ended many of its DEI policies, drawing condemnation as some of its critics noted that its commitment to inclusiveness had helped attract younger, more diverse consumers. The decision generated more attention as it coincided with US President Donald Trump’s executive order to eliminate DEI policies in federal agencies and schools.

The backlash led to economic boycotts, notably from Reverend Jamal-Harrison Bryant, a Georgia pastor who organised a 40-day “fast” of Target stores. He has since called for those efforts to continue in recognition of the fifth anniversary of George Floyd’s murder by police in Minneapolis, Target’s headquarters.

CEO Brian Cornell said the reversal of some DEI policies played a role in first-quarter performance but he couldn’t quantify the impact.

Worse than competitors 

“Target’s [results] do nothing to restore confidence in the company. On the contrary, they are emblematic of a business that has made too many mistakes and has lost its way on several fronts,” GlobalData Managing Director Neil Saunders told Reuters, pointing to issues including poor inventory management and a lack of exciting merchandise.

Target’s forecast contrasts with its bigger rival Walmart, which maintained its annual forecasts last week but said it would need to pass on higher prices due to tariffs. That has drawn the ire of Trump, who said Walmart should “eat the tariffs” on imported goods instead of passing on the costs.

Unlike Walmart, which generates the bulk of its revenues by selling groceries like bananas, milk, toilet paper and shampoo, a majority of what Target sells falls in the nonessential category – largely apparel, home furnishings and beauty products, which it sources from China.

TJX, the parent company of retailer TJ Maxx, also reported its earnings on Wednesday, and while tariffs loom, the company is set to maintain its forecasts. The Massachusetts-based big box retailer expects comparable sales to grow 2 percent to 3 percent during the current quarter.

Unlike Target and Walmart, TJ Maxx, relies on expansive sourcing from middlemen in the US, which limits the impact of any new tariffs on China.

Looming price hike 

On a media call, Target executives declined to provide details on potential price increases due to tariffs. Most tariff-related increases could be offset, they said, but acknowledged that raising prices could be a “last resort”.

Cornell said pricing decisions will largely depend on ongoing efforts to source more products from the US and reduce reliance on China.

“That is going to play a very important role,” he said.

Rick Gomez, the company’s chief commercial officer, said Target is working on negotiating with suppliers, expanding sourcing to other Asian countries beyond China, re-evaluating its product assortment, and adjusting the timing and quantity of orders.

“These efforts are expected to offset the vast majority of the incremental tariff exposure,” Gomez said.

In one case, a person suffered permanent brain damage because of a delayed transfer, The Guardian newspaper reported.

UnitedHealth has allegedly secretly paid nursing homes to reduce hospital transfers — the latest accusations in a series of woes facing the health insurance giant.

The alleged action, first reported by The Guardian newspaper on Wednesday, was part of a series of cost-cutting tactics that have saved the company millions, but at times, risked residents’ health, the publication showed, citing an investigation.

The story, which cites thousands of documents and firsthand accounts of more than 20 former employees of the healthcare company and nursing homes, says that the insurance giant sent its own medical teams to nursing homes to push the cost-cutting measures. As a result, patients who urgently needed medical care did not receive it, including one person who now lives with permanent brain damage after a delayed transfer.

The allegations add to the litany of negatives that have hurt UnitedHealth in the last several months, following a massive cyberattack at its Change Healthcare unit, reports of criminal and civil investigations into the company’s practices, including one for Medicare fraud and the abrupt departure of CEO Andrew Witty last week.

UnitedHealth said in response to the story, “The US Department of Justice investigated these allegations, interviewed witnesses, and obtained thousands of documents that demonstrated the significant factual inaccuracies in the allegations.”

The company also said that the DOJ “declined to pursue the matter”.

Wall Street responds 

Shares have stumbled all year, losing more than 39 percent compared with a 0.6 percent decrease for the Dow. As of noon ET (16:00 GMT), the stock is down more than 3.6 percent.

“The news is only seemingly getting worse for UnitedHealth,” said Sahak Manuelian, managing director, global equity trading at Wedbush Securities.

HSBC downgraded the stock to “reduce” from “hold,” and cut the price target to a street-low of $270.

The brokerage said higher medical costs, pressure on drug pricing and its pharmacy benefit management unit, OptumRx, and a potential Medicaid funding cut can upset the company’s recovery journey.

Disruption from the ‘highly sophisticated and targeted cyber attack’, first reported around Easter weekend, continues.

British retailer Marks & Spencer estimates that a cyberattack that stopped it from processing online orders and left store shelves empty will cost it about 300 million pounds ($403m).

The company said in a business update (PDF) on Wednesday that disruption from the “highly sophisticated and targeted cyber attack,” which was first reported around the Easter weekend, is expected to continue until July.

Online sales of food, home and beauty products have been “heavily impacted” because the company, popularly known as M&S, had to pause online shopping.

The attack on one of the biggest names on the United Kingdom high street forced M&S to resort to pen and paper to move billions of pounds of fresh food, drinks and clothing after it switched off its automated stock systems.

That led to bare food shelves and frustrated customers, denting profits.

A month on, M&S’s large online clothing service remains offline, and the attack has wiped more than a billion pounds off its stock market value.

Chairman Archie Norman said the timing of the attack was unfortunate as M&S, which has been implementing a comprehensive turnaround plan since 2022, had been starting to show its full potential.

“But in business life, just as you think you’re onto a good streak, events have a way of putting you on your backside,” he said.

M&S, which has 65,000 staff and 565 stores, said the hack would cost about 300 million pounds ($403m) in lost operating profit in its year to March 2026, although it hopes to halve that impact through insurance, cost control and other actions.

Chief executive Stuart Machin said the company is focused on recovery and restoring its systems and operations.

“This incident is a bump in the road, and we will come out of this in better shape,” Machin said. He did not provide any details on the attack or who might be behind it.

Earlier this month, the company said customer personal data, which could have included names, emails, addresses and dates of birth, was taken by hackers in the attack.

Two other British retailers, luxury London department store Harrods and supermarket chain Co-op, have also been targeted by cyberattacks at around the same time.