Financial Markets

Tehran, Iran – Iran says it will continue efforts to get out of a blacklist of a prominent global watchdog on money laundering and “terrorism” financing despite “20 years of obstruction” from domestic opponents.

The statement by the Financial Intelligence Unit of Iran’s Ministry of Economic Affairs on Sunday came two days after the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force (FATF) renewed its years-long blacklisting of Iran, according to a report by the official IRNA news agency.

The FATF also ramped up measures aimed at isolating Iran from global financial markets with a particular focus on virtual asset service providers (VASPs) and cryptocurrencies.

It recommended member states and financial institutions around the world to:

• Refuse to establish representative offices of Iranian financial institutions and VASPs or consider the noncompliance risks involved.
• Prohibit financial institutions and VASPs from establishing offices in Iran.
• On a risk basis, limit business relationships or financial transactions, including virtual asset transactions, with Iran or people inside the country.
• Prohibit financial institutions and VASPs from establishing new correspondent banking relationships and require them to undertake a risk-based review of existing ties.

Even the flow of funds involving humanitarian assistance, food and health supplies as well as diplomatic operating costs and personal remittances are recommended to be handled “on a risk basis considering the “terrorist” financing or proliferation financing risks emanating from Iran”.

What does the FATF move mean?

Iran has been blacklisted by the FATF for years and is currently on the list in the company of just two other countries: North Korea and Myanmar.

Since October 2019, Iran has had “heightened measures” like supervisory examination and external audit requirements recommended against it and has been subject to “effective countermeasures” since February 2020.

This contributed to making access to international transactions increasingly difficult or impossible for Iranian banks and nationals and made the country more dependent on costlier shadowy third-party intermediaries for transactions.

The new countermeasures emphasise existing frameworks but also specifically cite virtual assets, signalling an increased focus.

The fact that the FATF also urges countries and global institutions to remain wary of risks of having any dealings with Iran may mean even more limited transaction opportunities for Iranian entities and nationals.

Small banks maintaining old correspondent relations with Iranian counterparts may also reconsider after being recommended to re-evaluate existing links.

The isolation has hobbled state-run or private income streams and contributed to the continuous depreciation of the Iranian rial over the years.

Links with Iran’s nuclear dilemmas

The FATF, formerly known by its French name, was established by the Group of Seven (G7) countries in 1989 to combat money laundering but later had its mandate expanded to countering financing of “terrorism” and weapons of mass destruction.

It has been formally raising concerns about Iran since the late 2000s, which is also when it started calling for countermeasures as international tensions grew over Iran’s nuclear programme and the country was sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council.

But a year after Iran signed a landmark 2015 nuclear deal with world powers that lifted the sanctions, the FATF also acknowledged a “high-level political commitment” from Iran and agreed to an action plan for the country to address its compliance requirements.

The centrist government of President Hassan Rouhani, who had clinched the deals, pressed ahead with ratifying several laws needed to fulfil the action plan despite opposition from hardliners who were firmly against the increased financial transparency and international supervision.

But United States President Donald Trump unilaterally reneged on the nuclear deal in 2018, imposing a “maximum pressure” campaign that has remained in effect until today. The move empowered the argument from the hardliners in Tehran, who succeeded in blocking the ratification of the rest of the FATF-linked legislation, leaving the issue dormant for years.

Washington has retained the sanctions over the years with some of the latest – including the blacklisting in January of two United Kingdom-based cryptocurrency exchanges – allegedly connected to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The UN Security Council sanctions were also reinstated against Iran in September when Western powers triggered the “snapback” mechanism of the nuclear accord. They include an arms embargo, asset freezes and travel bans as well as nuclear, missile and banking sanctions that are binding for all UN member states.

Support for ‘axis of resistance’

The Iranian hardliners railing against any progress on FATF-related legislation have presented two main concerns.

They assert that fully adhering to the watchdog’s guidelines would curb Tehran’s ability to back its “axis of resistance” of aligned armed groups in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine. The axis lost its base in Syria with the fall of President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024.

Hardliners have also suggested that Iran’s ability to circumvent US sanctions may be significantly compromised by disclosing all the information required by the FATF.

Iran has been selling most of its oil to China at hefty discounts, using a shadow fleet of ships that turn their transponders off to avoid detection in international waters. The country has also for years been forced to rely on a capillary network of currency exchanges and intermediaries, some of them based in neighbouring countries, such as Türkiye and the United Arab Emirates.

To assuage some of the domestic concerns, two FATF-related laws ratified by Iran in 2025 were passed with special “conditions” and reservations infused in the text.

One of the main conditions was that the ratified regulations must not “prejudice the legitimate right of peoples or groups under colonial domination and/or foreign occupation to fight against aggression and occupation and to exercise their right to self-determination” and “shall not be construed in any manner as recognition of the Zionist occupying regime”, a reference to Israel.

Iran also said it would not accept any referral to the International Court of Justice and asserted that its own Supreme National Security Council would determine which groups qualify as “terrorist” outfits.

Those conditions were rejected by the FATF, leading to the increased countermeasures.

The watchdog also said it expects Iran to identify and freeze “terrorist assets” in line with relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Some of Iran’s nuclear and military authorities are among individuals sanctioned by those resolutions.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s 10-year outlook projects worsening long-term United States federal deficits and rising debt, driven largely by increased spending, notably on Social Security, Medicare, and debt service payments.

Compared with the CBO’s analysis this time last year, the fiscal outlook, which was released on Wednesday, has deteriorated modestly.

The CBO said that the deficit for fiscal 2026 – President Donald Trump’s first full fiscal year in office – will be about 5.8 percent of GDP, about where it was in fiscal 2025, when the deficit was $1.775 trillion.

But the US deficit-to-GDP ratio will average 6.1 percent over the next decade, reaching 6.7 percent in fiscal 2036 – far above US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s goal to shrink it to about 3 percent of economic output.

Major developments over the last year are factored into the latest report, including Republicans’ tax and spending measure known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” higher tariffs, and the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration, which includes deporting millions of immigrants from the US mainland.

As a result of these changes, the projected 2026 deficit is about $100bn higher, and total deficits from 2026 to 2035 are $1.4 trillion larger, while debt held by the public is projected to rise from 101 percent of GDP to 120 percent — exceeding historical highs.

Notably, the CBO says higher tariffs partially offset some of those increases by raising federal revenue by $3 trillion, but that also comes with higher inflation from 2026 to 2029.

Rising debt and debt service are important because repaying investors for borrowed money crowds out government spending on basic needs such as roads, infrastructure and education, which enable investments in future economic growth.

CBO projections also indicate that inflation does not hit the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target rate until 2030.

A major difference is that the CBO forecasts rely on significantly lower economic growth projections than the Trump administration, pegging 2026 real GDP growth at 2.2 percent on a fourth-quarter comparison basis, fading to an average of about 1.8 percent for the rest of the decade.

Trump administration officials in recent weeks have projected robust growth in the 3-4 percent range for 2026, with recent predictions that first-quarter growth could top 6 percent amid rising investments in factories and artificial intelligence data centres.

CBO’s forecasts assume that tax and spending laws and tariff policies in early December remain in place for a decade. The government’s fiscal year starts on October 1.

While revived investment tax incentives and bigger individual tax refunds provide a boost in 2026, the CBO said that this is attenuated by the drag from larger fiscal deficits and reduced immigration that slows the growth of the labour force.

Jonathan Burks, executive vice president of economic and health policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center said “large deficits are unprecedented for a growing, peacetime economy”, though “the good news is there is still time for policymakers to correct course.”

‘Urgent warning’

Lawmakers have recently addressed rising federal debt and deficits primarily through targeted spending caps and debt limit suspensions, as well as deploying “extraordinary measures” when the US is close to hitting its statutory spending limit, though these measures have often been accompanied by new, large-scale spending or tax policies that maintain high deficit levels.

And Trump, at the start of his second term, deployed a new “Department of Government Efficiency”, which set a goal to balance the budget by cutting $2 trillion in waste, fraud and abuse; however, budget analysts estimate that DOGE cut anywhere between $1.4bn to $7bn, largely through workforce firings.

Michael Peterson, CEO of the Peterson Foundation, said the CBO’s latest budget projection “is an urgent warning to our leaders about America’s costly fiscal path.”

“This election year, voters understand the connection between rising debt and their personal economic condition. And the financial markets are watching. Stabilising our debt is an essential part of improving affordability, and must be a core component of the 2026 campaign conversation.”

The world’s most popular cryptocurrency has lost about one-third of its value since the start of the year.

Bitcoin has fallen sharply, racking up more losses after a tumultuous week for the world’s most popular cryptocurrency.

The digital currency was down nearly 14 percent on Friday morning, hovering at about $62,900 as of 01:00 GMT.

The slide continues a run of steep losses that kicked off last weekend, when the digital currency fell below $80,000.

After the latest tumble, Bitcoin, which is famed for its dramatic price swings, is down about one-third in value since the start of the year.

Bitcoin soared after United States President Donald Trump’s re-election raised expectations that Washington would adopt a crypto-friendly regulatory regime after years of crackdowns, with the digital currency hitting $100,000 for the first time in December 2024.

But the digital asset has largely been on a downward spiral since October, when it hit an all-time peak of more than $127,000, amid geopolitical and regulatory uncertainty.

A Trump-backed bill to regulate the trade of digital assets has stalled in the US Senate amid divisions between banks and cryptocurrency firms.

The Trump family’s cryptocurrency firm, World Liberty Financial, has also come under scrutiny in the US Congress after The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported that representatives of an Abu Dhabi official had signed a deal to invest $500m for a major stake in the venture.

Bitcoin’s latest tumble comes amid a heavy sell-off in global stocks and commodities.

Wall Street’s benchmark S&P 500 dropped 1.2 percent on Wednesday, while the tech-focused Nasdaq Composite fell about 1.6 percent.

Shares of tech giant Amazon plunged more than 11 percent in after-hours trading after its plans to invest $200bn in artificial intelligence-related infrastructure stoked fears of a tech bubble.

In the Asia Pacific, South Korea’s KOSPI plunged about 5 percent in early morning trading, while Australia’s ASX 200 and Japan’s Nikkei 225 were down more than 1 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively.

Precious metals, which have been on a volatile ride after racking up huge gains in 2025, also continued their recent streak of losses.

Gold was down more than 4 percent on Thursday, trading at about $4,720 an ounce.

Silver, which has seen even more dramatic price swings, fell as much as 18.5 percent, trading at about $69.

The world’s most popular cryptocurrency has fallen nearly 20 percent in value since the start of 2026.

Bitcoin has dropped below $71,000, adding to a week of losses that have wiped out all of its gains since United States President Donald Trump’s re-election in 2024.

The world’s most popular cryptocurrency fell more than 7 percent on Thursday, continuing a steep downward slide that began in mid-January.

Bitcoin, which is famed for its wild price swings, was trading at about $70,900 as of 04:30 GMT.

The latest slide takes the value of the digital asset down by nearly 20 percent since the start of the year.

Bitcoin hit $100,000 for the first time in December 2024 and breached that level again in February and May 2025. But the asset has largely been on a downward trajectory since October, when it hit an all-time high of more than $127,000.

Bitcoin and other digital currencies racked up explosive gains after President Trump’s re-election raised expectations of Washington adopting a light touch to regulating digital assets after years of regulatory crackdowns.

Trump had pledged to turn the US into the world’s cryptocurrency capital during his re-election campaign, and launched his own crypto firm, World Liberty Financial, along with his sons, before winning the vote.

Shortly after taking office, Trump announced the establishment of a strategic crypto reserve that would include Bitcoin and four other cryptocurrencies.

But a Trump-backed bill to regulate the trading of cryptocurrency has stalled in the US Senate amid disagreement between banks and cryptocurrency firms, casting doubt over the industry.

US Democratic Party lawmaker Ro Khanna said on Wednesday that he would investigate World Liberty Financial after The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported that representatives of an Abu Dhabi official signed a $500m deal to buy a 49 percent stake in Trump’s fledgling cryptocurrency venture.

Equities and commodities markets also saw losses on Thursday, with silver dropping as much as 16 percent and benchmark stock indexes in Hong Kong and Japan down about 1.3 percent and 0.7 percent, respectively.

Walmart has reached a $1 trillion market valuation, a first for the big-box retailer.

The company’s shares hit a high on Tuesday morning trade as the stock continues to soar on the news of a new CEO and looming trade negotiations with India, where the Arkansas-based company maintains a large presence both in supply chain and domestic markets within India. The stock was up 2.1 percent from the market open in midday trading.

Walmart, which has 11,000 stores in 19 countries, joins a slate of nine corporate giants in the so-called trillion dollar club, including Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet, and Microsoft, among others. Amazon is the only other retailer that has broken the barrier and is now valued at $2.6 trillion.

Trade deal bump

On Monday, United States President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with India that would slash tariffs to 18 percent from 50 percent and that impacts Walmart, which has strategically shifted supply chain operations to India and away from China.

On Tuesday, in an interview with CNBC, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said that the White House is still ironing out the details of the deal, but that still hasn’t slowed Walmart’s stock from popping on the looming deal.

“We have an announcement of an India deal, but still no timeline about when it comes into effect and whether the secondary tariffs, the 25 percent linked to India’s purchase of Russian oil, when those would be removed, so I think there’s still a lot of questions,” economist Rachel Ziemba, founder of Ziemba Insights, told Al Jazeera.

While there are limited details on the specifics of the deal, markets are responding to tariffs likely to come down.

“Markets are, of course, forward-looking. I think this sort of reinforces a view in the marketplace that incremental tariffs will be less this year,” Ziemba said.

The big box retailer jumped from 2 percent of its global exports coming from India in 2018 to 25 percent in 2023, according to a Reuters review of import data in 2023. Walmart hopes to source $10bn in goods from India by next year.

At the time, the company also decreased its percentage of goods from China to 60 percent from 80 percent.

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

The Federation of Indian Export Organisations (FIEO), a lobby for exporters, said the cut in US tariffs will significantly boost Indian exports, including textiles and apparel, putting them on par with Asian peers, such as Vietnam and Bangladesh.

According to data from ImportYeti, a platform that tracks import contracts for major companies, Walmart’s biggest import areas are in home fabrics, apparel and toys.

“Those are the products facing the highest tariffs, while consumer electronics and other categories have largely been shielded. If the India–US deal becomes a reality, it would put tariffs on Indian goods entering the US at roughly the same level as those from Southeast Asia, making that supply-chain realignment more attractive. You also highlight the importance of the Indian market,” Ziemba added.

While the trade deal is in focus, Walmart has also invested significantly in India domestically, as well, and holds an 80 percent stake in India’s e-commerce giant Flipkart.

C-suite changes

The surge also comes concurrently with a shake-up in the C-suite. On Monday, John Furner took over as Walmart’s chief executive, succeeding longtime CEO Doug McMillion who announced his retirement late last year.

Furner, who started at the company in a job stocking shelves, has climbed up the ladder. Most recently, he served as the CEO of Walmart US, where he focused on key initiatives driving growth, including curbside pick-up. Prior to that, he served as the CEO of Sam’s Club, Walmart’s wholesale chain.

Furner’s appointment comes as the company grows as an e-commerce giant and intends to double down in AI tech, healthcare services, e-commerce, and hybrid options with its brick-and-mortar footprint.

“As AI rapidly reshapes retail, we are centralizing our platforms to accelerate shared capabilities, freeing up our operating segments to be more focused on and closer to our customers and members,” Walmart said in a statement last month.

“Walmart is masterful at brick-and-mortar retail and remains highly competitive with Amazon. I love that because it shows consumerism is still alive and well. Five years ago, the narrative was the fall of the mall and the decline of retail. This confirms the opposite. Walmart also has a clear strategy for retaining consumers and managing the customer experience,” Brett Rose, CEO and founder of United National Consumer Suppliers (UNCS), a distributor that focuses on excess inventories, which it provides to more budget-friendly retailers, told Al Jazeera.

The tech-centric focus comes as e-commerce has grown for the company, which reported a 28 percent jump in e-commerce sales compared with the previous quarter. Walmart is slated to release its next earnings report on February 19.

“What you need to look at is that Walmart has successfully become a marketplace, not as big as Amazon, but big enough to give it a run for its money,” said Rose.

United States President Donald Trump has announced the launch of a strategic minerals stockpile.

The stockpile, called Project Vault, was announced on Monday. It will combine $2bn of private capital with a $10bn loan from the US Export-Import Bank.

It is the latest move by the White House to invest in rare-earth minerals needed in the production of key goods, including semiconductor chips, smartphones and electric car batteries.

The aim is to “ensure that American businesses and workers are never harmed by any shortage”, Trump said at the White House.

The move to develop a strategic stockpile is the latest in a slew of efforts by the Trump administration to take control of the means of production for critical rare-earth materials to limit reliance on other countries, particularly China, which has held up its exports to gain leverage in negotiations with Trump.

Here’s a look at some of the investments the US government has made in this space.

What are the investments?

In 2025, the Trump administration acquired equity stakes in seven companies by converting federal grants into ownership positions. Among the investments is a 10 percent stake in USA Rare Earth, which plans to build rare-earth element and magnet production facilities in the US.

The project is supported by $1.6bn in funding allocated under the CHIPS Act, legislation passed during the administration of former Democratic President Joe Biden, aimed at reducing dependence on China for semiconductor manufacturing.

USA Rare Earth announced the investment last week and expects commercial production to begin in 2028.

The US government also acquired a roughly 10 percent stake, valued at about $1.9bn, in Korea Zinc to help fund a $7.4bn smelter in Tennessee through a joint venture controlled by the US government and unnamed US-based strategic investors, who would then control about 10 percent of the South Korean firm.

The venture will operate a mining complex anchored by two mines and the only operational zinc smelter in the US. Construction is set to begin this year, with commercial operations expected to start in 2029.

In October, the government announced a $35.6m investment to acquire a 10 percent stake in Canadian-based Trilogy Metals to support the Upper Kobuk Mineral Projects (UKMP) in Alaska. The investment backs the development of critical minerals, including copper, zinc, gold, and silver, in Alaska’s mineral-rich northwest Ambler mining district.

Also in October, the US announced a 5 percent stake in Lithium Americas as part of a joint venture with General Motors (GM) to fund operations at the Thacker Pass lithium mine in Nevada. The project will supply lithium for electric vehicles and has attracted significant interest from the Detroit-based automaker.

In August, the White House acquired an almost 10 percent stake in Intel. The government’s investment in the semiconductor chip giant was an effort to help fund the construction and expansion of the company’s domestic manufacturing capabilities.

In July, the White House announced a 15 percent investment in MP Materials, which operates the only currently active rare-earth mine in the US, located in California. The largest federal stakeholder in the investment is the Department of War, then called the Department of Defense, which committed $400m.

The US is also reportedly exploring an 8 percent share in Critical Minerals for a stake in the Tranbreez rare-earths deposit in Greenland, underscoring Trump’s unsolicited attempts to acquire the Danish self-governed territory, the Reuters news agency reported.

Amid news of Trump’s stockpile plan, sector stocks are mixed. MP Materials and Intel are up 0.6 percent and 5 percent, respectively. Others finished out the day trending downwards. Lithium Americas is down 2.2 percent. Trilogy metals is down almost 2 percent, USA Rare Earth is down by 1.3 percent, and Korean Zinc finished down 12.6 percent.

Is this unusual?

The government buying equity stakes in large companies is unusual in US history, but not unprecedented.

During the 2008 financial crisis, the US government temporarily acquired equity stakes in several major companies through the Troubled Asset Relief Programme (TARP). In 2009, TARP provided federal assistance to General Motors, ultimately leaving the government with a more than 60 percent ownership share. This intervention began in the final months of the administration of former President George W Bush. The government fully sold its stake in GM in 2013.

Through TARP, the government also acquired a 9.9 percent stake in Chrysler, which it exited in 2011.

The programme extended beyond car makers to the financial sector. The US government took a more than 73 percent stake in GMAC (General Motors Acceptance Corporation, now Ally Financial), exiting its ownership in 2014. It also acquired nearly 74 percent of the financial services insurance giant AIG, selling its remaining stake in 2012, and took a 34 percent stake in Citigroup, which it fully exited by 2010.

“This isn’t like 2008, when there was an urgent need to shore up critical companies. There’s a much more measured approach here. They [the US government] want these investments to generate returns, and they need to be seen as good investments in order to attract other forms of capital,” Nick Giles, senior equity research analyst at B Riley Securities, an investment banking and capital markets firm, told Al Jazeera.

During the Great Depression, the government bought stakes in several large banks. Before that, at the turn of the 20th century, it bought an equity stake in the Panama Railroad Company, which was responsible for building the railway that would be used during the construction of the Panama Canal. That equity stake was attached to a specific project rather than a more open-ended challenge, such as foreign dependence on critical minerals.

“There may not be a defined end date, but they’re clearly looking to make a return, and it sends an important signal that more is coming. I don’t think they [the government] are going to let this fail,” Giles added.

Political divide on the approach

Interest in providing funds to critical mineral projects was shared by Trump’s predecessor, Biden, who brought in the CHIPS Act for that purpose. Biden was focused on providing grants for projects rather than buying equity stakes.

Trump’s approach to buy stakes is actually more aligned with progressive Democrats than with members of his own party. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has long been a proponent of the US government buying equity stakes in companies.

In August, after the White House bought an equity stake in Intel, Sanders applauded the move.

“Taxpayers should not be providing billions of dollars in corporate welfare to large, profitable corporations like Intel without getting anything in return,” Sanders said at the time.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, a Republican known for his libertarian stances, called ownership a “terrible idea” and referred to it as a “step towards socialism” on CNBC. North Carolina’s Thom Tillis likened the Intel investment to something that countries like China or Russia would do.

For Babak Hafezi, professor of international business at the American University, the investments are a step to remove any reliance on China.

“Without domestic control and resiliency in both extraction and production, we are dependent on China, which extracts nearly 60 percent of global rare-earth minerals and produces 90 percent of it. This creates a major global chokepoint, and China can use this chokepoint as a means to dictate American Foreign policy via supply chain limitations,” he said.

“Thus, establishing free and open markets for US consumption is critical to remove any dependency.”

Wednesday’s cuts are the second mass layoffs in three months at the e-commerce giant.

Amazon is slashing 16,000 jobs in a second wave of layoffs at the e-commerce giant in three months, as the company restructures and leans on artificial intelligence.

Wednesday’s cuts follow the 14,000 redundancies that the Seattle, Washington–based company made in October. The layoffs are expected to affect employees working in Prime Video, Amazon Web Services, and the company’s human resources department, according to the Reuters news agency, which first reported the cuts.

Amazon confirmed to Al Jazeera that all the cuts to the company will affect corporate-level employees.

In a memo to the employees, shared with Al Jazeera, Amazon said workers in the United States impacted by the cuts will have a 90-day window to find a new role in the company.

“Teammates who are unable to find a new role at Amazon or who choose not to look for one, we’ll provide transition support including severance pay, outplacement services, health insurance benefits [as applicable], and more,” Beth Galetti, senior vice president of People Experience and Technology at Amazon, said in the note provided to Al Jazeera.

The announced reductions come amid a broader restructuring effort at the company. Earlier this week, Amazon announced it would close its brick-and-mortar Amazon Go and Amazon Fresh grocery stores, accounting for more than 70 locations across the US.

Some of those physical stores will be converted into Whole Foods Market locations. Amazon acquired the Austin, Texas–based grocery chain in 2017, and it has since grown by 40 percent.

The cuts come alongside increased investment in AI. In June, CEO Andy Jassy touted investment in generative AI and floated the possibility of redundancies.

“We expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce as we get efficiency gains from using AI extensively across the company,” Jassy said in a blog post at the time.

According to the AFL-CIO CEO PayWatch tracker, Jassy made 43 times more than the median employee at the company.

Amazon’s stock tumbled in midday trading and was down 0.7 percent. Overall, however, the stock is up 7 percent year to date.

Wave of cuts

Amazon is the latest company in a wave of redundancies hitting the tech sector at the start of the year. Earlier this week, Pinterest announced it would cut 780 jobs as the social media company reallocated resources amid increased investment in AI. Last week, Autodesk said it would cut about 1,000 jobs, also tied to AI.

Layoffs.fyi, a website that tracks redundancies in the tech sector, shows that more than 123,000 tech workers lost their jobs in 2025 as companies, including Salesforce and Duolingo, doubled down on AI investments.

But it is not just the tech sector facing redundancies. On Tuesday, UPS also announced job cuts. The shipping giant said it would eliminate 30,000 jobs and close 24 facilities as it reduces deliveries with Amazon.

UPS stock was down more than 1.2 percent in midday trading.

United States President Donald Trump’s $5bn lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase resurfaces his accusations of debanking – the act of removing a person or organisation’s access to financial services.

The complaint, filed in a Florida court on Thursday, alleges that the bank singled him out for political reasons and closed several of his accounts following the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, which was perpetrated by his supporters.

“JPMC does not close accounts for political or religious reasons. We do close accounts because they create legal or regulatory risk for the company. We regret having to do so, but often rules and regulatory expectations lead us to do so,” the bank said in a statement.

While the lawsuit was filed in his personal capacity, the concept of debanking has long been in the crosshairs of the Trump White House.

Late last year, the White House launched a high-profile effort targeting the nation’s largest financial institutions, accusing them of closing accounts based on political bias. Within days, Trump signed an executive order restricting banks from denying accounts on those grounds.

Trump has long framed “debanking” as a systemic effort targeting conservatives. But evidence for this claim is limited.

A Reuters news agency review of more than 8,000 complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found only 35 related to political or religious reasons, let alone targeting Christians or conservatives specifically.

The push by banks centres on the use of “reputational risk” as a standard that allows them to weigh the social or political fallout of doing business with a client.

Critics say this practice makes banks arbiters of morality – freezing, withholding, or closing accounts based not on financial considerations but on social and geopolitical concerns. This approach has pulled financial institutions into the middle of cultural and geopolitical debates.

While often cast as a partisan issue, data show that Trump’s core base, evangelical Christians, are not the ones typically targeted by debanking efforts.

A report from the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), a research organisation that looks at the experience of the US Muslim community, found that 27 percent of Muslim Americans and 14 percent of Jewish Americans have faced trouble banking, compared with negligible rates among Christian denominations, especially with Trump’s core base, evangelicals, at 8 percent.

Overall, 93 percent of Muslim Americans reported experiencing trouble with banking access. In one situation involving Citibank, the New York Chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) accused the financial institution of not opening the account of a Muslim woman because of her husband, whom she wanted to nominate as a beneficiary and who is a Palestinian Muslim. CAIR did not release the name of the woman at the centre of the complaint.

“It [debanking] is a huge barrier for actually Muslims fulfilling philanthropic goals,” Erum Ikramullah, a senior research project manager at the ISPU, told Al Jazeera.

“It’s a huge barrier for the actual Muslim-based, Muslim-led organisations who are managing relief both domestically and overseas.”

Between October 2023 and May 2024, at least 30 US nonprofits providing humanitarian aid to Gaza have had accounts closed.

“Muslim Americans and Armenian Americans have faced de-banking on account of their last names,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Democrat from Massachusetts who founded the CFPB in 2013, said in a Senate Banking Committee hearing last year.

But Trump continues to allege that groups like Christians and conservatives are the ones discriminated against.

Among them include the National Committee for Religious Freedom, led by former Republican Senator and Kansas Governor Sam Brownback. Brownback alleges that Chase closed his account on religious grounds, a claim the bank denies.

Regardless, the push to take on the problem of debanking is a rare spot of bipartisanship in Washington, with Trump and Warren both agreeing that banks should change their ways.

Industry turmoil

A US banking regulator said last month that the nine largest US banks put restrictions on industries that it deems risky, but this has been a long-term issue for several industries.

Operation Choke Point, under the administration of former Democratic President Barack Obama, targeted exploitative industries like payday lenders and arms dealers. The initiative pushed banks to consider entire categories of businesses – and the individuals who worked in them – as reputationally risky, even when that view lagged cultural sentiment.

In response, Frank Keating, the then-CEO of the American Banking Association, slammed the move in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, saying that the “Justice Department [is] telling bankers to behave like policemen and judges”.

Ultimately, that scrutiny affected people working in several industries over the last decade, most particularly in adult entertainment, cannabis, and cryptocurrency.

Within months of the new guidance from the Obama administration, hundreds of adult performers lost access to banking services from Chase Bank. The ability to keep a bank account persisted for adult performers. In 2022, adult performer Alana Evans penned an op-ed for The Daily Beast describing how Wells Fargo closed her account.

The Free Speech Coalition, an adult industry trade group, found that 63 percent of adult workers have lost access to a bank account because of their work in the legal industry, and nearly 50 percent have been rejected for a loan because of the nature of the profession.

“I think that when I talk to a lot of people about this issue, or when I’ve talked to even legislators about this, they really can’t believe it, because it’s never been anything that they’ve encountered personally. The idea that a bank could shut off your account because they disagreed with the type of work you do is sort of inconceivable to most people,” Mike Stabile, the director of public policy for the Free Speech Coalition, told Al Jazeera.

The cannabis business has faced similar problems. Over the last decade, both laws and public sentiment around marijuana use have drastically changed. Now, more people use marijuana daily than drink alcohol, and recreational use is legal in 24 states as well as Washington, DC.

Yet, legitimate businesses that cater to this growing market share and those who work for them have been subject to debanking.

Kyle Sherman, the CEO and founder of Flowhub, a cannabis payment processing company, testified in front of the Senate Banking Committee last year that his employees are routinely discriminated against in consumer banking. He alleged that one of his employees was denied a mortgage because of what he does for a living, as well as others who have had their personal accounts closed.

While state laws have shifted on marijuana’s stance, federal laws have not kept up, making it harder for banks to navigate the reputational risk.

Trump recently eased pressure on the marijuana industry by reclassifying the substance as Schedule III, which means it is less harmful, but it does not change the legality of sale and interstate commerce on the federal level.

“In some of the states that have recently gone legal with recreational and medical cannabis, the individual entrepreneurs [there] were previously considered outlaws. It is hard for a banker to get over the perception that yesterday, you were an illegal activity, and today, you’re a legal activity,” said Terry Mendez, the CEO of Safe Harbor Financial, a financial services company for the cannabis industry.

There has been a bigger about-face with regard to the cryptocurrency industry. At first, crypto was seen as a safe haven for illicit transactions because the underlying technology allowed for anonymous transfers, making it difficult for banks to determine which transactions were legitimate and legal and which ones were not.

As the industry began to move into the mainstream, the challenges were amplified. Exchanges and startups faced debanking or sudden account closures, and even major platforms like Coinbase struggled to maintain reliable banking partners.

“Historically, banks were kind of more naturally averse to crypto companies, going back to like 2018, to 2020, 2021. Crypto companies would often, when registering for accounts with banks, say that they were software development companies to try and avoid the mention of crypto because of fear of not being able to open a bank account, which, of course, then means it’s harder to make a payroll. It’s hard to take in funds from investors; you can’t pay vendors,” Sid Powell, the CEO of the asset management firm Maple Finance, told Al Jazeera.

That was not helped by the collapse of FTX, the notorious cryptocurrency exchange, pushing banks to pull back from working with the crypto industry.

Sentiment is shifting now. Under Trump, who has embraced crypto, financial regulators last year withdrew guidance that suggested that banks should be careful when working with the crypto industry. Powell says the executive order could help crypto avoid debanking in the future.

“It [the executive order] kind of signals to the FDIC and the OCC that they should act in a more balanced way when it comes to crypto companies and crypto startups, instead of taking a more hostile approach, or the approach of kind of lumping everyone in with the worst of the industry, which tended to happen post-FTX,” Powell added.

Powell was referring to the The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, an independent agency created by Congress to maintain stability in the nation’s financial system, and The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, an independent bureau of the US Department of the Treasury, which charters, regulates, and supervises all national banks, federal savings associations, and federal branches and agencies of foreign banks.

Trump’s personal gripes

Trump has also accused banks of not doing business with him, the primary driver of his interest in the debanking issue.

Banks can generally refuse to create accounts for potential customers who could be deemed as high risk.

“The president’s companies have filed [for] bankruptcy repeatedly. There have been years of reporting about financial institutions’ concerns with suspicious financial activity, and the president was found civilly liable for inflating the value of his assets that served as collateral for loans from financial institutions,” Graham Steele, an academic fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University, told Al Jazeera.

Reuters reported last year that banks gauged Trump as a financial risk due to his plethora of legal challenges after his first term, including the suit brought by E Jean Caroll, which found Trump liable for sexual abuse. He has declared bankruptcy six times.

He also defaulted on loans totalling hundreds of millions of dollars several times, including a loan to Deutsche Bank. In 2024, a New York court ruled that the president fraudulently inflated his financial worth by more than $2bn.

“Notwithstanding the fact that the president is an inherently political figure, a financial institution could reasonably rely on any of these concerns, grounded in financial and legal risks, not ‘political’ beliefs, as a basis for declining to do business with a customer,” Steele said.

That did not stop the president from pointing fingers at banking giants, including Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan.

“I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives, because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank, and that includes a place called Bank of America,” Trump told the executive during a Q&A session at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last year.

The Trump family also sued Capital One last March. The lawsuit alleged that it debanked The Trump Organisation after Trump incited an insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, after spreading misinformation alleging that he won the 2020 presidential election even though he had lost by a significant margin.

Trump debanks ‘liberal’ causes

Trump’s rhetoric on debanking is among his latest attempts to punish entities for political bias, while actively pushing actions that punish those who have viewpoints that oppose his own.

Trump has argued that debanking disproportionately targets conservatives and conservative-leaning businesses like firearms manufacturers. His pressure has moved the needle at Citibank. In June, it lifted its ban on banking services to gun sellers and manufacturers, a policy it put in place in 2018 after the shooting in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 people dead.

In March, his administration announced it would shut down a set of climate grants under the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund – known as the “green bank” – a $20bn programme created through the bipartisan Inflation Reduction Act signed by his predecessor, President Joe Biden, in 2022 to channel financing for climate projects into underinvested regions.

Environment and Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Lee Zeldin justified the decision by citing “misconduct, conflicts of interest, and potential fraud”, allegations he offered without evidence, and forced Citibank, which was holding the fund’s money for nonprofit distribution, to return the funds to the EPA.

The decision faced legal hurdles. But earlier this month, a US court of appeals allowed the Trump administration to continue axing the programme. The 2-1 ruling was decided by two judges appointed by Trump.

Last year, the White House also pressured companies seeking federal contracts to abandon diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes, which it has long portrayed, without evidence, as undermining merit-based hiring.

Citigroup, historically one of the most vocal supporters of DEI in the financial services sector, scrapped its programme. Citibank holds multiple federal contracts with agencies including the Department of Defense and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Bank of America and Wells Fargo followed suit in February, scaling back their initiatives as well, as did many other companies.

As part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdowns, the White House has also pressured banks to cut financial services to immigrants. The administration is doing so by trying to cancel the social security numbers of migrants who have legal status in the US, which would essentially cut them off from access to basic financial services, including bank accounts and credit cards, The New York Times reported.

At the time, Leland Dudek, then the Social Security Administration’s acting commissioner and a Trump administration appointee, said the move to cut access would end their “financial lives”.

“There’s a real telling disconnect. They are saying, on the one hand, we wanna put a thumb on the scale and ensure that conservative groups are included in the financial system, while actively working to push out liberal coded groups by either freezing them out of the bank accounts when they get government grants, or trying to investigate and potentially bring criminal charges against the payment platform that serves liberal groups,” Steele said.

Steele questioned if taking on political bias would actually help communities that do not align with the Trump administration’s stated values and conservative viewpoints.

“I think one of the other concerns here is that a lot of this depends on how the executive order is going to be enforced,” Steele said.

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s tax and spending pledges in advance of snap elections next month have sent jitters through global markets.

Japanese government bonds and the yen have been on a rollercoaster since Takaichi unveiled plans to pause the country’s consumption tax if her Liberal Democratic Party wins the February 8 vote.

The market turmoil reflects concerns about the long-term sustainability of Japan’s debt levels, which are the highest among advanced economies.

The volatility has extended beyond Japan, highlighting broader fiscal sustainability worries in an era in which the United States and other major economies are running huge deficits.

What has Takaichi promised on the economy?

Takaichi said last week that she would suspend the country’s 8 percent consumption tax on food and non-alcoholic beverages for two years if her government is returned to power, following her dissolution of the House of Representatives.

Based on Japanese government data, Takaichi’s plan would result in an estimated revenue shortfall of 5 trillion yen ($31.71bn) each year.

Takaichi, a proponent of predecessor Shinzo Abe’s agenda of high public spending and ultra-loose monetary policy, said the shortfall could be made up by reviewing existing expenditures and tax breaks, but did not provide specific details.

Takaichi’s tax pledge comes after her Cabinet in November approved Japan’s largest stimulus since the COVID-19 pandemic.

The package, worth 21.3 trillion yen ($137bn), included one-time cash handouts of 20,000 yen per child for families, subsidies for utility bills amounting to about 7,000 yen per household over a three-month period, and food coupons worth 3,000 yen per person.

Why have Takaichi’s pledges unnerved markets?

Japan’s long-term government bond yields soared following Takaichi’s announcement.

Yields on 40-year bonds rose above 4 percent on Tuesday, the highest on record, as investors exited from Japanese government debt en masse.

Bond markets, through which governments borrow money from investors in exchange for paying out a fixed rate of interest, are closely watched as a gauge of the health of countries’ balance sheets.

While typically offering lower returns than stocks, government bonds are seen as low-risk investments as they have the backing of the state, making them attractive to investors seeking safe places to park their money.

As confidence in a government’s ability to repay its debts declines, bond yields rise as investors seek higher interest payments for holding riskier debt.

“When Prime Minister Takaichi announced a planned reduction in consumption taxes, this made existing bond-holders of Japan’s debt uneasy, requiring a higher compensation for the risk they bear,” Anastassia Fedyk, an assistant professor of finance at the Haas School of Business of the University of California, Berkeley, told Al Jazeera.

“As a result, bond prices dropped and yields rose. And yes, this is a general pattern that applies to other countries, too, though Japan has an especially high level of debt, making its position more vulnerable.”

Japan’s debt-to-GDP ratio already exceeds 230 percent, following decades of deficit spending by governments aiming to reverse the country’s long-term economic stagnation.

The East Asian country’s debt burden stands far above that of peers such as the US, UK and France, whose debt-to-GDP ratios are about 125 percent, 115 percent and 101 percent, respectively.

At the same time, the Bank of Japan (BOJ) has been scaling back bond purchases as part of its move away from decades of ultra-low interest rates, limiting its options for interventions to bring yields down.

“Bond investors reacted because her headline package looks like large, near-term fiscal loosening at exactly the moment the BOJ is trying to normalise policy,” Sayuri Shirai, a professor of economics at Keio University in Tokyo, told Al Jazeera.

How does all this affect the rest of the world?

The sell-off in Japanese bonds reverberated through markets overseas, with yields on 30-year US Treasuries rising to their highest level since September.

As Japanese bond yields rise, local investors are able to earn higher interest payments at home.

That can incentivise investors to offload other bonds, such as US Treasuries.

As of November, Japanese investors held $1.2 trillion in US Treasuries, more than any other foreign group of buyers.

In an interview with Fox News last week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent expressed concern about the impact of Japan’s bond market on US Treasury prices and said he anticipated that his Japanese counterparts would “begin saying the things that will calm the market down.”

Japan’s long-term bond yields fell on Monday amid the expectations that Japanese and US authorities would step in to prop up the yen.

On Friday, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal reported that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York had inquired about the cost of exchanging the Japanese currency for US dollars.

“Japan matters globally through flows. If Japanese government bond yields rise, Japanese investors can earn more at home, potentially reducing demand for foreign bonds; that can nudge global yields and risk pricing,” Shirai said.

“This is why global-market pieces have framed Japan’s bond move as a wider rates story.”

Higher bond yields in Japan, the US and elsewhere raise the cost of borrowing and servicing the national debt.

In a worst-case scenario, a sharp escalation in interest rates can lead to a country defaulting on its debts.

Masahiko Loo, a fixed income strategist at State Street Investment Management in Tokyo, said that the reaction of international investors to Takaichi’s plans reflects growing sensitivity to fiscal credibility in highly indebted economies.

“Yes, Japan may be the spark, but the warning applies equally to the US and others with large structural deficits,” Loo told Al Jazeera.

Is Japan on the verge of a financial crisis?

Probably not.

While Japan is more indebted than its peers, its fiscal position is more sustainable than it might appear due to factors specific to the country – at least in the short to medium term – according to economists.

The vast majority of Japan’s debt is held by local institutions and denominated in yen, reducing the likelihood of a panic induced by foreign investors, while interest rates are far lower than in other economies.

“The debt situation is more manageable than a lot of people think,” Thomas Mathews, head of markets for Asia Pacific at Capital Economics, told Al Jazeera.

“Net debt-to-GDP is on a downward trajectory, and Japan’s budget deficit isn’t all that big by global standards.”

Loo of State Street Investment Management said that the turmoil surrounding Japan had more to do with a “communication gap around fiscal sustainability and policy coordination” than the country’s solvency.

“That said, markets are likely to continue testing the feasibility of the agenda, as even fiscally sanguine countries have, at times, been disciplined by market forces,” Loo said.