faithiecannoise/iStock via Getty Images
Australia’s annual consumer price inflation slowed more sharply than anticipated in April, cooling to 4.2% from March’s 4.6% print and beating market expectations for a milder drop to 4.4%.
According to data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the headline
Though ROI is relatively low for finance organizations, many have cracked the code for higher returns.
A recent Bain & Company survey reveals that less than half (48%) of senior financial executives have seen improvements in speed and cycle time since investing in artificial intelligence (AI) within their treasury organizations, and around a third (34%) have seen headcount efficiencies and cost reductions.
Over the past 12 months, most enterprises have discussed AI use cases in corporate treasuries for accounts receivable, treasury, and accounts payable, and have experimented extensively with AI. “They have approached it more from the concept ‘Here’s an intelligence, let’s see how we can incorporate it into our business,’” said Rami Chahine, Chief Product and Technology Officer, at treasury-automation vendor Serrala.
“This is making the office of CFO more of an AI lab than anything,” he continued. “We are not seeing real adoption of active use cases deployed within our customer base. We see a lot of our enterprise customers bringing technology or spending, in some cases, a lot of money on technology, but haven’t really turned on agentic AI to truly realize their return-on-investment in terms of speed of delivery and the speed of work.”
According to the Bain study authors, that is a common situation within finance departments. Of the survey respondents, roughly 12% of finance organizations have deployed machine learning into financial planning and analysis (FP&A) forecasting in production.
“Yet in many cases, the underlying process hasn’t changed,” wrote the authors. “Finance teams run AI-generated forecasts alongside existing bottom-up planning cycles: two processes running in parallel, neither fully trusted.”
As a result, these finance organizations do not realize the expected benefits of faster cycle times, fewer people-hours, or greater accuracy.
According to the authors, it isn’t a technology problem. “It’s what happens when AI is layered on top of existing ways of working rather than providing the impetus to change them. If this workflow debt isn’t addressed, AI and automation can multiply complexity instead of productivity,” they wrote.
Other issues that act as headwinds to AI investment include concerns about trust, data sovereignty, and the ability of firms to audit AI’s data usage.
AIs are built to learn, but CFOs are concerned that only their instance of the AI is using their proprietary data to answer only their questions, rather than teaching other AI instances to answer someone else’s questions, said Chahine.
“Everyone believes in the capability,” he said. “Everyone understands the power of agentic AI and its ability to take over some of these manual tasks in the process of financial automation and treasury. But the biggest concern that will make a true impact on adoption is whether we can trust it.”
Despite these issues, CFOs remain bullish about AI investment in their organizations.
More than half (56%) of the surveyed CFOs are increasing AI investment by more than 15% this year. That figure rises to 83% when the window is extended to two years, with 42% of respondents expecting to increase AI spending to above 30% over the same period.
German Trade Minister Katherina Reiche is travelling to China from Tuesday to Friday as Berlin’s trade deficit with Beijing continues to deepen.
The trip comes two days after several of the EU’s largest economies – France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, as well as Lithuania – issued a non-paper urging the EU to crack down on Chinese overcapacity and unfair trade practices.
Berlin, however, did not endorse their call.
Germany remains the main chokepoint in the EU’s strategy towards China. While Euronews previously reported that the publication late last year of Germany’s trade deficit with Beijing marked a turning point for the EU executive, which is trying to sharpen its trade defence tools, Germany continues to favour cooperation with the Chinese.
In March, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called for a trade agreement with Beijing. Brussels pushed back against the idea.
“There are a number of concerns and real challenges that the European Union has consistently expressed to China that we need to see them meaningfully address before we can even talk about any future agreements or anything like that,” the Commission’s deputy chief spokesperson, Olof Gill, said at the time.
Even with a record €87 billion trade deficit with China, Berlin hopes Beijing will keep its market open to German industry, despite the obstacles faced by EU businesses in China and the Asian giant’s strategy of reducing its dependence on foreign products.
The main objective of Reiche’s visit this week is to discuss potential economic cooperation. According to the German government, the strategy is to explore future opportunities for collaboration while maintaining dialogue with the Chinese leadership.
Despite a steadily growing trade deficit, China remained Germany’s most important trading partner in 2025. According to the Federal Statistical Office, bilateral trade volume reached €250 billion. Around 5,200 German companies operate in China, making the country one of the most important foreign markets for Germany’s automotive, mechanical engineering and electrical industries.
During the trip, Reiche is expected to hold political talks, attend a business forum and visit local companies. She will be accompanied by a business delegation representing around 40 companies. Discussions are also set to focus on the development of energy technologies.
“We hope the visit will help to transfer the insights gained on the ground into the political discussion in Berlin and to further develop bilateral exchange,” said Oliver Oehms, Executive Director of the German Chamber of Commerce in China.
In a survey published in May by the chamber, 51% of German companies operating in China supported policies favouring partnerships with Chinese companies, while 42% backed the “strategic” use of knowledge gained through such partnerships.
But these sectors are also increasingly under pressure, as Chinese competitors benefit from extensive state subsidies.
According to a report published in May by the EU think tank Centre for European Reform, the growing concentration of global car, machinery and chemicals production in China could weaken innovation in traditional manufacturing hubs and increase Beijing’s leverage over Berlin through the threat of supply disruptions, similar to its blockade of rare earth exports in 2025.
The report added that demand generated by Germany’s fiscal stimulus after easing its debt brake could end up boosting Chinese imports rather than supporting Berlin’s domestic industry.
German exports to China fell by 9.7% year-on-year, while imports of Chinese goods such as electronics, electric vehicles and components rose significantly by 8.8%.
“China has already eaten much of German industry’s lunch and is preparing to start on dinner,” the report said.
Brent crude edged 2.5% higher on Tuesday and seems to have steadied around $100 per barrel at the time of writing, as US-Iran negotiations stall.
On the other hand, WTI dropped over 4% and is trading around $92.6 per barrel.
Overall, oil prices were declining since last Wednesday as the framework for a peace deal, or at least a longer and more encompassing ceasefire, between the US and Iran was seemingly on the verge of being agreed.
However, Iran accused the US of breaching the current ceasefire after Washington carried out what it described as defensive strikes in the southern part of the country.
Iran’s foreign ministry stated that the US attacks in the Hormozgan province, where Iranian media reported hearing explosions early Tuesday, amounted to a “serious violation” of the fragile ceasefire that has been in effect for almost seven weeks.
Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said negotiations aimed at ending the conflict could require “a few days” to reach an agreement.
On Monday, US President Donald Trump also reiterated nuclear demands in a social media post, as tensions continue to surround the fundamental aspects of a possible agreement.
Investors appear to have mixed reactions to the developments with some markets seeming to price in a decrease in the probability that a deal is imminent.
In Europe, the Euro Stoxx 50 has fallen more than 0.7% while the broader pan-European Stoxx 600 is trading around 1% lower as we approach the close of Tuesday’s session.
The UK’s FTSE 100, Germany’s DAX 30, France’s CAC 40, Italy’s FTSE MIB, the Netherlands’ AEX and Switzerland’s CH20 have all dropped between 0.1% and 0.7%.
Over in Asia, Japan’s Nikkei 225 and Taiwan’s TAIEX closed flat, but South Korea’s KOSPI jumped 2.5% primarily driven by a continuous demand for AI-related equities.
However, US markets appear completely decoupled from other indices and the broader situation. Not only have WTI prices continued to fall on Tuesday but the S&P 500 also opened 0.6% higher.
Both the US and Iran had signalled headway toward a memorandum of understanding that could end the conflict and resume maritime traffic through the blocked Strait of Hormuz, while allowing negotiators a 60-day window to tackle more complicated matters such as Iran’s nuclear activities and supplies.
In his latest remarks, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the Strait of Hormuz must remain accessible “one way or the other” as traffic through the chokepoint has dropped sharply, with only a few dozen ships currently using the route each day, compared with the usual 125 to 140 vessels.
Iran has continued to permit limited shipping, prioritising vessels connected to allied or friendly nations and arranging passage through state-to-state agreements.
Continuous reports of attacks in the Strait of Hormuz underscore how far from the normalisation of energy flows and other supplies the global economy still is.
On Tuesday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that a tanker experienced an external blast near the waterline on its port side.
According to the agency, the vessel was located about 60 nautical miles from Muscat, the capital of Oman.
UKMTO said the tanker and all crew members were unharmed, although a quantity of bunker fuel spilled into the sea.
This is the most recent reported incident near the Strait of Hormuz at the time of writing.
Africa’s Payments landscape is undergoing a significant transformation, fueled by advanced technologies and a surge in Cross-Border Trade. With AI and modular financial solutions taking root, African markets are quickly adopting faster, more secure, and seamless Payment experiences. But this shift isn’t just about digitisation—it’s about building a more resilient and inclusive financial ecosystem that empowers both businesses and individuals.
Africa’s Payments ecosystem isn’t a single, uniform market—it’s a complex tapestry of 54 countries, each with unique currencies, regulatory standards, and varying financial infrastructures. For corporates and financial institutions, this diversity presents challenges, but it also creates fertile ground for innovation.
The very intricacies that complicate Cross-Border Payments also encourage creative, technology-driven solutions that are tailored to local needs. This dynamic landscape invites forward-thinking approaches, making Africa a proving ground for Payment innovations with the potential to transform how value moves across the continent and beyond.
Africa’s diverse regulatory landscape demands adaptability in Cross-Border Payments. With each nation enforcing unique licensing, settlement, and risk rules, achieving a unified platform remains a significant challenge. Adding to the complexity is the growing insistence on local data storage to meet data sovereignty requirements, making compliance and technology integration even more intricate.
Instead of allowing regulatory hurdles to impede progress, industry leaders are using these complexities to build more adaptable and resilient systems. They’re advancing modular, “plug-and-play” platforms with strong governance, clear data separation, and flexible hybrid cloud infrastructure. This approach turns obstacles into opportunities for real innovation and growth.
This drive toward modularity has accelerated the adoption of Banking as a Service (BaaS), recasting Payments from a cost center into a strategic growth lever. Where corporates once saw Cross-Border Payment infrastructure as a burdensome expense, BaaS now allows secure, compliant Payment capabilities to be embedded directly into business platforms.
With a single integration, companies can navigate regulatory complexity, unlocking new revenue streams and harnessing Payment data to refine operations, understand customers, and deliver tailored services. Payments have become more than transactions—they’re a source of insight and innovation, fueling growth and competitive advantage.
Artificial Intelligence is transforming Transaction Banking in Africa, acting as a catalyst that enhances human expertise to improve efficiency and transparency. Rather than relying on the traditional first-in, first-out approach, AI now enables financial institutions to sort and route queries by urgency and complexity, streamlining exceptions and prioritising immediate needs. This reduces manual intervention and turnaround times, freeing teams to focus on deeper client relationships and higher-value tasks that improve service quality and satisfaction.
But AI’s impact goes far beyond boosting efficiency—it is transforming security and fraud detection across Africa’s digital Payments. As digital adoption rises, so does financial crime. AI uses real-time, behavior-based analytics to monitor transactions and learn each client’s typical patterns. This allows quick detection of anomalies and proactive fraud prevention, improving accuracy and reducing unnecessary disruptions while safeguarding customer trust.
As financial institutions adopt advanced AI systems, strong governance becomes critical. Without careful oversight, AI models built on limited or skewed data can unintentionally reinforce biases—delaying Payments or impacting service for certain groups. To maintain trust and fairness, banks must ensure they have strong accountability, transparent training of AI models and proactive monitoring so algorithms serve all customers equitably and uphold the highest industry standards.
Intra-African trade is experiencing unprecedented growth. As more businesses look beyond national borders, the demand for fast, accessible, and reliable Payment systems has never been greater. This surge in regional commerce is prompting the development of innovative Payment infrastructures that make Cross-Border transactions more seamless and inclusive.
Moving beyond the confines of Domestic Mobile Money networks, Telecom companies are developing Payment rails to enable real-time Payments that cross African borders with ease. This shift is especially transformative for small and medium-sized enterprises, opening fresh opportunities for growth and Cross-Border collaboration. By promoting interoperability and removing costly intermediaries, these regional networks make Payments faster, more affordable, and increasingly accessible.
As these Telecom-driven platforms continue to expand, they are enabling Africa’s Multi-Rail Payments ecosystem. Their ability to foster resilience, scalability, and efficiency is setting the stage for a future where regional Trade is not just possible, but practical for businesses of all sizes. This wave of innovation is redefining the landscape, ensuring that regional Payment Rails support and propel Africa’s economic growth for years to come.
Africa’s Cross-Border Trade is being reshaped by ongoing US dollar shortages and shifting macroeconomic forces. For import-dependent markets, these scarcities delay settlements, increase transaction costs, and tie up vital working capital. This environment demands new solutions and is pushing businesses to seek more efficient, reliable ways to move value across borders.
Concurrently, the region is experiencing rising Trade flows with Asia, and African businesses are rapidly adopting alternative Payment infrastructures. Platforms like the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) and greater use of the Chinese Renminbi offer new settlement options and critical flexibility. This shift reduces reliance on established networks such as Swift, giving companies more robust and diversified Payment infrastructure. As a result, importers and exporters can count on greater predictability, faster settlements, and lower intermediary costs—ultimately accelerating and scaling Cross-Border Trade across Africa.
Africa’s financial future is emerging as an ecosystem that is intelligent, instant, and seamlessly connected. Thriving in this landscape will require more than just advanced technology. It demands a clear understanding of local realities and global shifts. The leaders will be those who turn Africa’s complexity into intuitive, secure, and streamlined client experiences—setting new standards for growth, resilience, and trust in the continent’s rapidly evolving Payments Sector.
Published on
The Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), Italy’s antitrust authority, announced on Tuesday that it opened a formal probe into easyJet Airline Company Limited over alleged unfair commercial practices.
The case centres on how the carrier structures and presents baggage fees on its website and mobile app, with the regulator alleging that passengers were routinely given a distorted picture of what they were actually paying.
According to the AGCM, easyJet’s platform set bundled checked baggage and sports equipment for round trips as the automatic default, presenting only an overall average price for the service, even when customers had no intention of purchasing it for both legs of their journey.
The regulator contends that anyone wishing to add luggage for one leg only was forced to interrupt the booking process to override this setting, a step most consumers would be unlikely to notice or navigate.
The investigation will assess whether easyJet’s booking system created unclear pricing conditions and limited consumers’ ability to make fully informed choices.
At the time of writing, easyJet has not publicly commented on the case.
This is not the first time easyJet has appeared before Italian authorities.
In May 2021, the AGCM imposed a €2.8 million fine on the airline alongside Ryanair and Volotea, after all three failed to offer cash reimbursements for flights cancelled when Italy lifted its COVID-19 travel restrictions, issuing vouchers instead.
EasyJet appealed, but the Lazio Regional Administrative Court in Rome rejected the challenge in February 2025.
The AGCM has shown no hesitation in pursuing the sector more broadly.
In December 2025, it fined Ryanair €255 million for abusing its dominant position in air travel to and from Italy.
The Italian authority concluded the carrier had deployed an “elaborate strategy” to obstruct travel agencies from purchasing its flights, including through facial-recognition checks, payment blocks and mass account deletions, a ruling Ryanair immediately vowed to appeal.
filo
FinVolution Group (FINV) has announced a new share repurchase program, effective from May 30, 2026, that allows the company to buy back up to $150 million in shares, including American Depositary Shares (ADSs), from May 30, 2026, to May 29, 2028.
The U.S. dollar edged lower, as investors tracked shifting developments around a potential Iran deal and the resulting moves in oil prices, which influenced inflation expectations and safe-haven demand.
The dollar index (DXY), which measures the greenback against a
An acquisition is the easiest way for the titan to get a leg up with digital nomads and international customers.
At first glance, it seems an absurd idea: JPMorgan Chase & Co., with its roughly $850 billion market cap, acquiring European unicorn Revolut, a private neobank valued at $75 billion.
Seemingly absurd, yes, but also worth considering, because it underscores the challenge that upstart fintechs pose to traditional banks. JPMorgan has already tested the practicality of building a digital-first banking experience internally. It launched Finn in 2017 as a standalone mobile banking brand aimed at younger users, then shut it down in 2019 after it failed to gain traction.
But the Finn experiment was not a clean rebuttal; it looked more like a legacy institution’s attempt to market around a shifting banking relationship than a fundamental rethink. A Revolut acquisition would give JPMorgan an established entry point into a dynamic new field.
I’m old enough to remember when BlackBerry’s CEO scoffed at Steve Jobs, saying, “You don’t need an app for the web.” We know how that played out. It’s easy to dismiss what doesn’t seem to fit your current moment, and just as easy to miss the next shift when you have the means to act.
JPMorgan doesn’t need Revolut. But the point isn’t survival; it’s trajectory. If banking is moving toward super apps as primary accounts, the question is whether JPMorgan can realistically build that future internally, or whether buying it may be the faster path.
Here are four reasons it could actually make sense:
Ask a senior engineer at Revolut whether JPMorgan could replicate its platform quickly, and you’re likely to get a laugh. Ask JPMorgan’s technology leadership, and you’re likely to hear the opposite.
Both can be true.
By the time JPMorgan was experimenting with the future, Revolut was writing it. The fintech hit 100,000 customers within a year of its funding and scaled to 50 million by the end of 2024. It’s redefining what consumers expect from banking in Europe, and its sights are now set on the U.S. as well. In March, it applied to the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for a U.S. national bank charter.
JPMorgan has the resources to succeed in the era of super-apps. But building a globally integrated, mobile-first platform is as much about organizational culture as it is about technology. Revolut was built for speed, iteration, and cross-border functionality from day one. JPMorgan was built for scale, stability, and regulatory complexity.
As Finn illustrates, those traits are not easily interchangeable.
JPMorgan could buy smaller firms in payments, investing, foreign exchange, or onboarding to assemble its own version of a super app. But stitching together components is not the same as acquiring a scaled, integrated platform with tens of millions of users, unified technology, and talent that lives and breathes a culture built around speed and innovation.
Realistically, an acquisition would require a significant premium over Revolut’s most recent private valuation. But that cuts both ways; JPMorgan would be paying for a scaled operating system, not a collection of disconnected parts.
The difference between the two banks shows up in their approach to competing in Europe. JPMorgan is already expanding its digital retail presence and building out its footprint beyond the U.S. But the approach is incremental.
Revolut is anything but incremental. The company has grown to more than 70 million customers, adding roughly 1 million every 17 days. It provides immediate scale in markets where JPMorgan is still building.
Banks like Banco Santander have spent decades building global retail networks, market by market. For JPMorgan, acquiring Revolut would dramatically shorten that timeline, turning a multi-year expansion into near-instant relevance.
Traditional banking still assumes a static customer: one address, one jurisdiction, one primary market. While that remains true for many customers, it doesn’t justify treating digital nomads and international customers as undeserving, which is exactly what many U.S. banks do.
A growing segment — freelancers, remote workers, and globally mobile professionals — lives across borders. They earn in one currency, spend in another, and expect their financial lives to follow them. Revolut was built specifically for this customer.
JPMorgan, for all its scale, still largely adheres to a domestic model. Acquiring Revolut would instantly position it at the center of a shift already underway: one that legacy banking structures are not designed to support.
Of course, a deal this large would face serious scrutiny in the U.S. and the U.K. Regulators would question systemic risk, governance, the impact on competition, and whether one of the world’s largest banks should absorb one of fintech’s fastest-growing global challengers.
But “difficult” and “impossible” are not synonyms, especially in modern finance, where every few years brings a deal that once seemed unthinkable. If JPMorgan believed the strategic gap was large enough, regulatory friction would become part of the negotiation, not the automatic death of the deal.
It would also send a signal to regulators and policymakers — intentionally or not — that U.S. banking structures may need to loosen if domestic institutions are to compete more effectively on the global stage. Even floating a deal like a JPMorgan/Revolut tie-up would force a conversation the industry needs to have.
No, JPMorgan doesn’t need Revolut. But at some point, it may have to decide whether to write the future of banking or keep refining the version it already dominates.
Cathie Wood’s ARK Investment Management executed a highly active rebalancing strategy for the week ending May 22, 2026. The latest trading data reveals a distinct shift away from certain legacy chipmakers and streaming tech, rotating capital heavily into digital asset infrastructure, next-gen aviation, AI hardware, and
Inna Dodor/iStock via Getty Images
Ahead of Memorial Day, we want to express appreciation to the brave men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom. Seeking Alpha wishes all our subscribers a beautiful holiday weekend and let us remember those who courageously gave
Published on
Oura, the Finnish company that created the ring-shaped health tracker worn by millions worldwide, has confidentially submitted draft paperwork to the US Securities and Exchange Commission for a proposed IPO, according to several reports.
While the number of shares and the expected price range remain undisclosed, the company had a recent funding round in the fall of 2025 that valued the business at around $11 billion (€9.5bn), more than double the $5 billion (€4.3bn) valuation it earned in a previous round in 2024.
According to CEO Tom Hale, more than 5.5 million Oura rings had been sold up to the end of last year’s third quarter.
At the time, Hale also projected that the company would reach $2 billion (€1.7bn) in annual revenue in 2026 compared with $500 million (€430mn) just two years ago.
The move towards an IPO puts a European wearable brand on Wall Street’s radar at a time when investor appetite for consumer health technology appears to be returning.
Oura has become a standout name in the fast-growing smart ring category, competing against smartwatch giants such as Apple, Garmin and Samsung, while carving out a niche with a distinct piece of hardware that some consumers find less obtrusive.
Over the past two years, the company has expanded aggressively into software, subscriptions and AI-powered health analysis. Its wearable platform now focuses on long-term health signals including sleep, readiness, heart rate, stress and recovery.
More recently, Oura has pushed further into women’s health and AI-based personal coaching, including tools designed to interpret physiological data and provide tailored wellness recommendations.
Analysts see that transition from device maker to subscripton-based health platform as central to its IPO pitch as the firm is currently on pace to surpass 5 million paid members.
The IPO filing marks a significant moment for one of Europe’s most prominent health tech success stories.
Founded in Finland and developed around research into sleep, recovery and biometric monitoring, Oura has grown from a Nordic hardware start-up into a global player in the wearable market.
However, for Europe’s start-up ecosystem, Oura’s planned listing carries broader significance.
While its roots and design philosophy are deeply tied to Finland, the company recently transitioned to a US-based parent company, named Oura Inc. and headquartered in San Francisco, to access American venture capital while keeping its European operations.
Its decision to prepare for a US listing rather than a European one reflects a wider pattern among high-growth European tech firms seeking deeper capital markets and greater visibility among global investors.
The planned flotation arrives during renewed debate over whether Europe is losing some of its most successful technology companies to US exchanges.
Oura joins a growing list of European-founded businesses choosing Wall Street as their route to public markets, drawn by scale, liquidity and stronger investor familiarity with consumer technology.
The company’s IPO will also be seen as a test of investor sentiment towards wearable technology after a mixed few years for the sector.
Unlike smartwatches, smart rings remain a relatively young category, though interest has accelerated rapidly.
Oura is widely viewed as the segment’s category leader and its public debut could offer a clearer benchmark for how markets value next-generation health hardware combined with software subscriptions and AI services.
remotevfx
Digital asset ETFs experienced heavy selling pressure last week as Bitcoin (BTC-USD) briefly dipped near $75K amid rising macro uncertainty and bond market stress.
From May 18 to May 22, spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $1.26B in net outflows, according to
Political turmoil rattles emerging markets as election risks mount
Source link
Notable healthcare headlines for the week: UnitedHealth, Boston Scientific, and Eli Lilly in focus
Source link
Joe Hendrickson/iStock Editorial via Getty Images
Pabst Brewing Company confirmed this week that it is placing Schlitz Premium “on hiatus,” citing unsustainable economics. The brand’s volume had fallen so far that even the minimum production quantities required by the Anheuser-Busch (BUD) plant in Texas, which had
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa signed on Friday a revamped trade deal with Mexico as part of the EU’s efforts to expand its influence in Latin America, shortly after the Mercosur pact entered into force.
The deal was signed at an EU–Mexico summit in Mexico, with von der Leyen and Costa joined by the country’s President Claudia Sheinbaum, amid rising geopolitical tensions and shifting global alliances following the return of US president to the White House.
The economic partnership between the two medium-sized powers reflects efforts on both sides to reduce their dependence on the US — the EU’s and Mexico’s largest trading partner—and on China, for which Mexico has become a hub for electric vehicle production.
“The EU and Mexico are committed to a close strategic partnership,” von der Leyen said, adding: “Today’s modernised Agreements set out our shared vision of the future and will deliver many benefits for both sides.”
The EU–Mexico trade deal strengthens the EU’s diversification strategy by updating a 20-year-old agreement that had already eliminated tariff barriers on bilateral trade.
Under the new deal, the EU will access new markets for products, such as agri-food (pork, dairy, cereals, fruit and pasta), pharmaceuticals and machinery.
Mexico is the EU’s second-largest trading partner in Latin America and the EU is Mexico’s second-largest export market. Trade between both sides reached €86.8 billion in goods in 2025, alongside €29.7 billion in services in 2024.
The figures remain far smaller than Mexico’s trade with its neighbour, the US, which exceeded $900 billion in goods and services in 2024. But the deal comes as Mexico faces mounting pressure from a more protectionist White House.
For its part, the EU has been grappling with repeated tariff threats from Trump despite a trade deal clinched in 2025.
“At a time of growing global uncertainty, the EU and Mexico are choosing openness, partnership and ambition,” EU trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič, who was also in Mexico City, said. He pointed out that more than 43,000 European companies export to Mexico, while over 11,000 EU companies operate in the country.
On agriculture, the pact will open up new markets for Mexican products such as coffee, fruit, chocolate and agave syrup.
A total of 568 European and 26 Mexican geographical indications will also be protected, alongside the opening of public procurement markets, according to the Commission.
With this new deal, the EU also wants to signal its strengthened presence in Latin America, where China has expanded its influence.
“97% of the GDP of Latin America and the Caribbean will be covered by sophisticated preferential agreements with the European Union,” a senior EU official said, adding: “There is no other region in the world that has such a dense and connected network of agreements.”
The EU has already built new trade ties with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay through the Mercosur trade agreement, which provisionally entered into force on 1 May and liberalises trade flows between the EU and those countries.
However, its signing has faced strong opposition from EU farmers, who fear unfair competition from Latin American imports, and ratification was suspended after MEPs challenged the agreement before the EU Court of Justice.
Brussels argues the Mexico agreement should avoid the backlash faced by Mercosur because sensitive agricultural imports remain capped through tariff quotas.
Published on
EU Industry Commissioner Stéphane Séjourné called for EU businesses to diversify their suppliers on Friday as trade tensions with China ramp up.
The comments come as Beijing has made repeated threats towards the EU in recent weeks, while Brussels seeks to strengthen its legislation against its Asian rival.
Last year, China restricted exports of rare earths and chips, strategic for the EU’s green technologies, defence and automotive industries.
“Do not make 100% of your supplies in one country,” Séjourné told EU businesses after a meeting with the EU’s 27 trade ministers in Brussels. He added: “The global geopolitical situation shows that your ability to provide yourself abroad must also depend on other types of countries and also on European production.”
The European Commission has so far issued guidance to EU companies and Séjourné signalled that if they did not move, the EU executive would “perhaps have to move to the next step.”
Internally, the Commission is already working on a proposal to force car producers to source chips from multiple suppliers, Euronews has revealed.
Last year, a spat between the Dutch government and the Chinese chip company Nexperia, based in the Netherlands, caused shortages of chips for EU industries after Beijing blocked exports in retaliation.
EU Trade Chief Maroš Šefčovič told Euronews at the time that China was “weaponising” critical supplies for EU industry.
Brussels and Beijing have been at loggerheads since the EU presented several proposals restricting China’s access to the EU single market.
The so-called “Industrial Accelerator Act” aims to favour EU companies in public procurement and impose strict conditions on Chinese investments in the bloc. Meanwhile, a Cybersecurity Act could exclude Chinese telecoms companies from the EU market.
Beijing has directly threatened the EU with retaliation if it moves forward with those proposals. China repeated the threats after media reports about potential EU measures against cheap Chinese imports flooding the EU market.
An orientation debate is set to take place in Brussels between EU commissioners on 29 May to decide on the EU’s strategy as its trade deficit with China becomes more critical month after month.
From Spain to Cabo Verde, the EIB is building a blueprint for global maritime decarbonization.
When the European Investment Bank (EIB) signed off on an €80 million loan to Bilbao’s Port Authority in late 2024, most observers logged it as routine. It was anything but.
The facility bundled three priorities that now define the bank’s maritime strategy: capacity expansion, grid electrification, and renewable energy generation on port land. Over the past 18 months, operating through its core European window and EIB Global, the bank has deployed or committed well over €400 million in maritime financing, for the most active period of EIB maritime engagement in a generation.
The Bilbao loan and a subsequent package for Málaga form the European spine of the push. Bilbao’s €80 million facility finances breakwater expansion, the landside electricity grid, and renewable generation, positioning the port on the Atlantic Corridor of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) as a lower-carbon alternative to road freight. Málaga’s €50 million loan, signed in spring 2025, follows the same template on the Mediterranean Corridor: a new multi-purpose terminal, full shore-power electrification for docked vessels, and upgraded border and passenger facilities.
Both foreground onshore power supply (OPS)—enabling ships to cut auxiliary engines at berth—in anticipation of FuelEU Maritime, the EU regulation that mandates OPS at designated EU ports as of 2030.
The Cabo Verde Blue Economy Sustainable Ports Facility remains the EIB’s most ambitious external maritime bet in recent memory, however.
Assembled in layers over the past two years, the program combines €114 million in EIB loans with a €34 million EU investment grant for a total €148 million concessional package under the Global Gateway, the EU’s strategy to invest in sustainable infrastructure. The undertaking spans three of the four maritime hubs across the Cape Verde archipelago: Mindelo’s Porto Grande (new breakwater, expanded container and fisheries infrastructure), Palmeira on Sal (larger-vessel reception, improved fish-landing facilities), and Santo Antão’s Porto Novo (inter-island connectivity upgrades).
Solar energy systems across multiple ports aim to cut diesel dependency. The centerpiece of the project is the rehabilitation of CABNAVE, Cape Verde’s sole naval repair yard. The EIB intends to develop it into a regional maritime center of excellence: a goal with geopolitical resonance, given China’s longstanding interest in the facility.SUBHED
The series of deals comes fully into focus as an accompaniment to the regulatory revolution unfolding in parallel in the EU. FuelEU Maritime, in force since the beginning of last year, mandates progressive greenhouse-gas intensity cuts for ships above 5,000 gross tonnes calling at EU ports: 2% against a 2020 baseline now, rising to 6% by 2030 and 80% by 2050. Simultaneously, the EU Emissions Trading System covers shipping; companies must surrender allowances for 40% of verified emissions from 2024, 70% from 2025, and 100% from 2026.
This double pressure—a fuel-intensity standard alongside a carbon price—is the commercial incentive structure the EIB’s port electrification investments are designed to capitalize on. The bank is de-risking regulatory transitions for port authorities that might otherwise be delayed while awaiting final implementing rules. Additionally, bundling electrification, renewables, and capacity expansion into single loan instruments is more sophisticated than the EIB’s earlier methods of generating port loans, which were piecemeal and perceived as non-strategic.
But the EIB is not the only major backer of the energy transition, nor could it be.
Last year, the European Investment Fund approved infrastructure fund investments explicitly targeting shipping-sector decarbonization, signaling a move beyond pure debt into equity and quasi-equity instruments that aim to crowd in pension funds and insurers at a scale individual EIB loans cannot reach. The European Commission has estimated that the full maritime energy transition will require around €100 billion by 2035; the EIF’s fund route is considered the most plausible mechanism for mobilizing capital at that magnitude.
Yet gaps remain. The portfolio is still weighted heavily toward port-side infrastructure rather than the fleet itself; direct EIB financing for vessel retrofits and alternative-fuel newbuilds has yet to materialize at scale. OPS deployment across all TEN-T ports by 2030 is a larger task than two Spanish loans can address. And the geopolitical role the bank has assumed in Cape Verde raises questions about mandate and institutional capacity that extend beyond the mid-Atlantic.
The EIB’s maritime schemes of the past 18 months are not isolated transactions; they are the outline of a strategy. Whether the bank receives the resources and political backing to match the scale of the transition it’s trying to finance is an open question.
Deepfake fraud is becoming a persistent, multiyear corporate risk as synthetic voices circulate undetected.
Deepfake-enabled fraud, which began as novel technical exploits, is now a persistent operational risk with a multi-year shelf life within the corporate ecosystem. According to deepfake-detection provider Resemble.AI, deepfakes typically remain in circulation for three-and-a-half years.
Resemble.AI’s 2025 Deepfake Threat Report, published in March, references an incident in which a voice clone of a German energy company CEO remained in circulation for nearly six years, although it resulted in only a €243,000 loss in 2019.
Determining losses from such attacks is difficult; for the 41 documented incidents last year cited by the research, only $74.9 million in verified losses were reported, with a median per-incident loss of $243,000. However, the authors noted that 71% of victims did not report financial losses, suggesting a higher volume of hidden liabilities.
“What makes them so effective is that they enable both real-time impersonation and the creation of synthetic identities stitched together from real and fake data,” said Dominic Forrest, CTO of biometric security vendor Iproov. “These are extremely difficult to detect, and once trusted, they can be used to bypass controls and commit fraud.”
Detecting deepfakes is a growing concern; the authors of the Resemble.AI report estimate that deepfake-based fraud attacks on corporations reached 8.5 billion potential incidents, ranging from audio impersonations of executives to doctored or fake images. The most common targets, Forrest noted, are on account openings, payment authorization, credential reset, and high-value transactions.
Telling a deepfake from the genuine article has become an AI-on-AI battle, experts warn.
The generative AI models producing deepfakes improve continuously via scaling and data, while deepfake detectors rely on signals like artifacts and inconsistencies, which disappear as models improve, said Siwei Lyu, professor of Computer Science and Engineering and director of the Institute for AI and Data Science at the State University of New York at Buffalo.
“In practice, detectors lag by about six to 18 months on specific modalities,” he said. “But more importantly, they are chasing a moving target whose failure modes are actively being optimized away.”
Forrest suggests that firms move their identity verification from single checks to a multi-layered approach: “You need to confirm that a real person is physically present, not a deepfake, while also analyzing the digital environment for signs of compromise. No signal should be trusted in isolation.”
This article first appeared in the May edition of Global Finance Magazine.
Chemours falls as EPA's rollback of refrigerant rule raises oversupply concerns
Source link