industry

In defeating a measure to rescind the 310 area code overlay, telecommunications companies showed they won’t shrink from battle as the state moves to put tighter controls on area code changes, industry leaders said Friday.

The state Assembly early Friday approved a bill, AB 406, that sets additional hurdles in place before area code splits and overlays can be imposed.

But the bill, which had been approved late Thursday by the Senate, was passed only after a provision rescinding the 310 overlay on the Westside and South Bay was removed.

That change was credited to a fierce lobbying effort by telecom companies, and could serve as a preview of what’s to come as lawmakers and utilities regulators consider ways to slow the proliferation of overlays and splits statewide, including a split proposed for the San Fernando Valley.

“I was unable to get for 310 what I had my heart set on, which was the recision of the 310 overlay and 11-digit dialing,” said Assemblyman Wally Knox (D-Los Angeles), who wrote AB 406 (which became the vehicle for the legislation formerly known as AB 818).

Knox said a sustained lobbying effort by telephone industry representatives resulted in the removal of the 310 overlay and 11-digit dialing portion from the bill.

Representatives from Pacific Bell, GTE, AT&T;, MediaOne Telecommunications of California, the California Cable Television Assn. and the Cellular Carriers Assn. of California were among the 30 lobbyists arguing that the provision would diminish competition among carriers and consumer choice.

“The intensive lobbying effort should have been anticipated by everyone because the stakes were so high for the industry,” said Dennis H. Mangers, senior vice president of the California Cable Television Assn., a group whose members are seeking a foothold in the telephone business.

Even so, the arm-twisting in Sacramento stands in contrast to the role played by phone companies at public forums on the issue.

At a recent Van Nuys town hall meeting on splits and overlays, for example, no phone company representative spoke publicly–although at least one was in attendance, observing the proceedings.

Telephone company officials said Friday that they have sent representatives to numerous public hearings on the matter, but remained silent to give residents the chance to express their concerns.

*

Industry lobbyists said regulatory meetings and legislative sessions are the proper forums for them to state their positions.

In Sacramento, telecom lobbyists argued that rescinding the overlay in West Los Angeles and the South Bay would be unfair because phone companies had already spent millions to compete for local customers in the region, Mangers said. He also said numbers already had been assigned in the new 424 area code overlay.

“We reminded them that it was they who encouraged communications companies to do business in California,” Mangers said. “If they passed the bill containing that provision, they would be cutting off their own policy.”

Cable company MediaOne, for example, spent $600 million to upgrade its facilities to provide digital telephone service, high-speed Internet access and cable television to Los Angeles customers, particularly those in the 310 region, officials said.

“We have definitely been lobbying in Sacramento,” said Theresa L. Cabral, MediaOne’s senior corporate counsel. “Our concern is that we have made that investment and we can’t use it.”

Pac Bell protested the bill because rolling back the 310 area code overlay would hurt customers who need numbers, said Steve Getzug, a spokesman for the company.

Pac Bell and GTE, the two largest phone companies in Los Angeles, are pushing specifically for overlays when area code relief is needed.

With an overlay, new phone lines within a specific area code are given a new area code–even if it is in the same home or building. Additionally, all users in an overlay area must dial the area code–even to a number with the same area code.

*

Phone company officials say the overlay is less disruptive than actually creating a new area code through a geographic split, but critics say such splits and overlays would not be needed if regulators did a better job of allocating and conserving phone numbers.

Knox, who has emerged as the leading consumer advocate on the issue, said Friday that he will now take his fight to the PUC, which is scheduled to take up proposals for a 310 overlay and an 818 split on Wednesday.

“It is important for folks to know that the fight is not over,” he said. “The momentum we have built in the Legislature we will now take to the PUC.”

Gov. Gray Davis has not taken a position on AB 406, aides said. But if he does sign the bill, PUC officials will analyze it to determine its role in implementing new area codes and overlays, said Kyle DeVine, a PUC spokeswoman.

“Until we get direction from the commissioners,” she said, “we can’t say what we are going to do.”

The bill, which passed the Senate on a 35-0 vote, was approved in the Assembly on a vote of 79 to 1, with Assemblyman Tom McClintock (R-Northridge), dissenting. He could not be reached for comment Friday.

Bangkok, Thailand – Stewed, seasoned with sugar and cloves, deep-fried or dished up in a zingy chilli mince – the diets of most Thais are incomplete without pork.

But a $3bn market – supplied nearly entirely by domestic pig farmers – may be about to face competition like never before from the giant hog farms of the world’s third-largest producer, the United States.

While the fine print of the Thai government’s preliminary trade deal with the US is yet to be revealed, some details have emerged.

Washington has a 10,000-item-long wish list of goods it wants to enter Thailand duty-free to reduce its $45.5bn trade deficit with the Southeast Asian country, an imbalance President Donald Trump says unfairly disadvantages US producers.

The list includes pork, corn, soya beans and some fruits.

Shortly after Trump met Thailand’s caretaker prime minister, Anutin Charnvirakul, on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Malaysia last month, the White House revealed some of the many strings attached to its trade deal, which set the tariff rate for the kingdom’s exports to the US at 19 percent.

They include Thailand agreeing to “address and prevent barriers to US food and agricultural products in the Thai market”, according to the White House, and a commitment to “expediting access” for US meat and poultry products.

That has panicked Thailand’s pig farmers, who say the industry may not survive a flood of cheaper, subsidised US pork, which is fattened up on ractopamine, a livestock additive banned in many countries, including the kingdom.

If US pork is allowed into Thailand without duties, nothing less than the kingdom’s food security is at stake, according to Worawut Siripun, deputy secretary-general of the Swine Raisers Association of Thailand.

“Producers will not be able to survive and will stop raising pigs. But the risks are not only for farms facing falling pig prices,” Worawut, who has about 10,000 pigs, told Al Jazeera.

“Those who grow feed crops are also affected, as well as animal feed traders, animal feed producers, and veterinary drug sellers. Everyone in the production cycle is impacted.”

Trump had made trade talks with Thailand contingent on Bangkok signing an extended ceasefire agreement with Cambodia.

But in the weeks since meeting Anutin, Thailand has suspended truce talks over alleged Cambodian breaches of the terms of the agreement.

While there are conflicting signals over whether tensions with Cambodia have put Thailand’s trade negotiations with its biggest export destination on the back burner, farmers and livestock companies are bracing for intensified competition.

Thailand’s pork industry has weathered challenges ranging from outbreaks of swine flu to illegal imports from China and Vietnam.

But it faces high costs, largely as a result of government price controls on corn and soya used to feed pigs and other livestock – a measure intended to protect the country’s crop farmers, a key voting bloc.

And like most of Thailand’s agricultural producers, the country’s pig farmers deal with slim margins.

“Both imported and locally produced feed materials in Thailand are more expensive compared to the US, where feed is cheaper,” Worawut said.

Corn and other feed farmers are also bracing for tough times.

Thailand announced earlier this month that it would lift its annual corn import limit, from approximately 50,000 tonnes to 1 million tonnes, and scrap a 20 percent tariff to appease Washington.

Prime Minister Anutin is likely to dissolve parliament in the coming weeks and set a date for new elections.

He is angling to return to office in defiance of critics who say he has already given away too much to Washington before a comprehensive trade deal has been signed.

Trump officials have already announced a deal to gain preferential access to Thailand’s rare earths, the sale of billions of dollars of US-made aircraft and a promise by Bangkok not to tax US digital services companies.

Anutin’s bargaining position has been weakened by tough economic conditions.

On Monday, the Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council trimmed its economic growth forecast for 2026 to 1.2 percent, down from an expected 2 percent expansion this year – by far the weakest performance among Southeast Asia’s leading economies.

With a third round of trade talks with the US under a cloud following the suspension of the Thailand-Cambodia peace deal, the main political opposition party has called on the government to pause the negotiations and consult with local stakeholders.

“This is a crucial moment,” said Weerayut Karnchuchat, deputy leader of the opposition People’s Party, Thailand’s largest in parliament.

“The minister of commerce has said negotiations will conclude by the end of 2025. That leaves around two months. The government should hold eight weeks of stakeholder hearings … especially groups directly affected, such as corn farmers.”

Thailand should take stock and assess if regional peers with full US trade deals – including Cambodia, Vietnam and Malaysia – are happy with the outcomes and “whether Thailand is offering too much”, he added.

For many midsized businesses, the return of Trump and his trade war has made for a difficult year, with demand depressed across countless supply chains exposed to the US.

Orders are retreating inside Thailand for everything from lightbulbs to electrical wires needed to run factories that export to the US.

Tipok Lertwattanaweerakul, a durian farmer and middleman, said he has seen his profit margins slashed.

Saudi Arabian buyers who sold durian to customers in the US had been Lertwattanaweerakul’s main source of business, but with the Arab country hit with a 10 percent tariff, “they are no longer purchasing from me at all,” he told Al Jazeera.

California First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom recently convened a meeting that might rank among the top sweat-inducing nightmare scenarios for Silicon Valley’s tech bros — a group of the Golden State’s smartest, most powerful women brainstorming ways to regulate artificial intelligence.

Regulation is the last thing this particular California-dominated industry wants, and it’s spent a lot of cash at both the state and federal capitols to avoid it — including funding President Trump’s new ballroom. Regulation by a bunch of ladies, many mothers, with profit a distant second to our kids when it comes to concerns?

I’ll let you figure out how popular that is likely be with the Elon Musks, Peter Thiels and Mark Zuckerbergs of the world.

But as Siebel Newsom said, “If a platform reaches a child, it carries a responsibility to protect that child. Period. Our children’s safety can never be second to the bottom line.”

Agreed.

Siebel Newsom’s push for California to do more to regulate AI comes at the same time that Trump is threatening to stop states from overseeing the technology — and is ramping up a national effort that will open America’s coffers to AI moguls for decades to come.

Right now, the U.S. is facing its own nightmare scenario: the most powerful and world-changing technology we have seen in our lifetimes being developed and unleashed under almost no rules or restraints other than those chosen by the men who seek personal benefit from the outcome.

To put it simply, the plan right now seems to be that these tech barons will change the world as they see fit to make money for themselves, and we as taxpayers will pay them to do it.

“When decisions are mainly driven by power and profit instead of care and responsibility, we completely lose our way, and given the current alignment between tech titans and the federal administration, I believe we have lost our way,” Siebel Newsom said.

To recap what the way has been so far, Trump recently tried to sneak a 10-year ban on the ability of states to oversee the industry into his ridiculously named “Big Beautiful Bill,” but it was pulled out by a bipartisan group in the Senate — an early indicator of how inflammatory this issue is.

Faced with that unexpected blockade, Trump has threatened to sign a mysterious executive order crippling states’ ability to regulate AI and attempting to withhold funds from those that try.

Simultaneously, the most craven and cowardly among Republican congresspeople have suggested adding a 10-year ban to the upcoming defense policy bill that will almost certainly pass. Of course, Congress has also declined to move forward on any meaningful federal regulations itself, while technology CEOs including Trump frenemy Musk, Apple’s Tim Cook, Meta’s Zuckerberg and many others chum it up at fancy events inside the White House.

Which may be why this week, Trump announced the “Genesis Mission,” an executive order that seemingly will take the unimaginable vastness of government research efforts across disciplines and dump them into some kind of AI model that will “revolutionize the way scientific research is conducted.”

While I am sure that nothing could possibly go wrong in that scenario, that’s not actually the part that is immediately alarming. This is: The project will be overseen by Trump science and technology policy advisor Michael Kratsios, who holds no science or engineering degrees but was formerly a top executive for Thiel and former head of another AI company that works on warfare-related projects with the Pentagon.

Kratsios is considered one of the main reasons Trump has embraced the tech bros with such adoration in his second term. Genesis will almost certainly mean huge government contracts for these private-sector “partners,” fueling the AI boom (or bubble) with taxpayer dollars.

Siebel Newsom’s message in the face of all this is that we are not helpless — and California, as the home of many of these companies and the world’s fourth-largest economy in its own right, should have a say in how this technology advances, and make sure it does so in a way that benefits and protects us all.

“California is uniquely positioned to lead the effort in showing innovation and responsibility and how they can go hand in hand,” she said. “I’ve always believed that stronger guardrails are actually good for business over the long term. Safer tech means better outcomes for consumers and greater consumer trust and loyalty.”

But the pressure to cave under the might of these companies is intense, as Siebel Newsom’s husband knows.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has spent the last few years trying to thread the needle on state legislation that offers some sort of oversight while allowing for the innovation that rightly keeps California and the United States competitive on the global front. The tech industry has spent millions in lobbying, legal fights and pressure campaigns to water down even the most benign of efforts, even threatening to leave the state if rules are enacted.

Last year, the industry unsuccessfully tried to stop Senate Bill 53, landmark legislation signed by Newsom. It’s a basic transparency measure on “frontier” AI models that requires companies to have safety and security protocols and report known “catastrophic” risks, such as when these models show tendencies toward behavior that could kill more than 50 people — which they have, believe it or not.

But the industry was able to stop other efforts. Newsom vetoed both Senate Bill 7, which would have required employers to notify workers when using AI in hiring and promotions; and Assembly Bill 1064, which would have barred companion chatbot operators from making these AI systems available to minors if they couldn’t prove they wouldn’t do things like encourage kids to self-harm, which again, these chatbots have done.

Still, California (along with New York and a few other states) has pushed forward, and speaking at Siebel Newsom’s event, the governor said that last session, “we took a number of at-bats at this and we made tremendous progress.”

He promised more.

“We have agency. We can shape the future,” he said. “We have a unique responsibility as it relates to these tools of technology, because, well, this is the center of that universe.”

If Newsom does keep pushing forward, it will be in no small part because of Siebel Newsom, and women like her, who keep the counter-pressure on.

In fact, it was another powerful mom, First Lady Melania Trump, who forced the federal government into a tiny bit of action this year when she championed the “Take It Down Act”, which requires tech companies to quickly remove nonconsensual explicit images. I sincerely doubt her husband would have signed that particular bill without her urging.

So, if we are lucky, the efforts of women like Siebel Newsom may turn out to be the bit of powerful sanity needed to put a check on the world-domination fantasies of the broligarchy.

Because tech bros are not yet all-powerful, despite their best efforts, and certainly not yet immune to the power of moms.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 (UPI) — A new federal definition of hemp tucked into Congress’ recently passed spending bill has reopened the debate over legal cannabis and set up a year-long fight that could determine the future of hemp-derived CBD and THCA products — and thousands of small businesses behind them.

The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, also known as the 2018 Farm Bill, allowed hemp production and removed the plant from the Drug Enforcement Administration’s schedule of Controlled Substances.

But now, Congress has sharply moved to restrict the hemp industry after slipping new language into the latest continuing resolution that ended the 43-day government shutdown Nov. 13.

This change could redefine what counts as legal hemp and effectively outlaw many of the products that have fueled the sector’s rapid growth over the last seven years.

Jonathan Miller, the U.S. Hemp Roundtable’s general counsel, said this provision was introduced more than a year ago as part of the House appropriations bill. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., then brought it to the Senate six months ago.

The controversial provision was then included in the House’s fiscal year 2026 Agriculture Appropriations draft. Lawmakers, including Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., and Rep. Andy Barr, R-Ky., publicly opposed the provision’s language, while Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C. was a staunch leader pushing the provision through.

“Members of Congress were forced to choose between saving the hemp industry or reopening government, and there was just too much at stake. As a result, we lost this battle. The good news is it doesn’t go to effect for a year, so we’ve got over 350 days now to try to get it reversed and to replace it with a regulatory framework,” Miller said.

The U.S. Hemp Roundtable emphasized that once the legislation moved to the Senate, McConnell included a 365-day delay before the restrictions take effect. The grace period which runs to Nov. 13, 2026, is planned to give hemp businesses time to push Congress toward adopting a regulatory framework rather than an all-out ban.

Since 2018, manufacturers and retailers have taken advantage of what some describe as a “loophole” in federal hemp regulations to produce products containing hemp-derived CBD.

Under federal law, hemp is cannabis containing less than 0.3% THC by dry weight, the psychoactive compound that produces a “high.” Because this threshold is calculated on dry weight, companies have formulated products that technically comply but may deliver stronger effects.

This loophole helped expand the hemp industry, particularly cannabidiol, or CBD, a non‑psychoactive compound touted for therapeutic benefits.

A new congressional provision would redefine hemp to include all forms of THC — including THCA — within the 0.3% limit, and prohibit hemp‑derived CBD products manufactured for consumption in beverages, edibles, or vapes.

Lawmakers argue these products exploit the current definition while producing intoxicating effects.

Many tied to hemp production have responded with fears of a widespread economic blow to an industry worth $28.4 billion and employs a large number of Americans.

“There are 300,000 jobs affiliated with the industry. Those would go away. There’s $1.5 billion of state and local tax revenue that would go away. Many farmers would would lose their farms. Many small [companies] would lose their businesses,” Miller said.

“Many consumers, including veterans and seniors, who rely on these products for their health and wellness would lose access to them.”

“It’s a $28 billion market, which means there is a ton of demand for these products. If they’re made illegal, people will find a way to access them illegally, and which means there will be no safety protections and no regulatory regime,” he added.

The U.S. Hemp Roundtable, one of the industry’s largest national coalitions, said the measure could ban “more than 95% of all hemp extract products.” While the law would continue the sales of products containing less than 0.4 mg. of total THC per container, the group says items that meet that threshold are “very rare.”

“If it goes through as is, the industry is over as we know it. Ninety-five percent of our products would be considered schedule one narcotics, akin to heroin, and the remaining 5% it would be impossible to produce because of the restrictions on extraction,” Miller said.

Conversely, supporters of including this provision in the continuing resolution that reopened the government believe closing the loophole was overdue, arguing that the hemp-derived intoxicating products are largely unregulated.

For example, the American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp praised Congress for moving to clarify federal intent. In a press release, it said the bill “carefully distinguishes between intoxicating and non-intoxicating products” and would, for the first time, provide federal recognition and protection for non-intoxicating hemp-derived items.

The policy shift will potentially cause conflict between federal and state governments. Several states have created their own regulatory frameworks for hemp-derived products, including testing, age limits and potency caps. These could be disrupted by the new federal standards.

“It’s difficult to say how state implementation of the new federal hemp policy will look across states. It will certainly differ based on the state policy environment and state priorities and goals,” Gillian Schauer said, executive director of the Cannabis Regulators Association.

The association is a nonpartisan, nonprofit that helps regulate cannabis, marijuana and hemp across more than 45 states, the District of Columbia, three U.S. territories and a number of international governments.

“Ultimately, regulators are primarily implementers — they will implement what comes down from their state legislatures. Most of these policy implementation decisions will be made legislatively. With legislative sessions right around the corner in most states, those decisions may be made before we have any further federal guidance,” Schauer said.

Kentucky is one of the top producing hemp states, along with California, Colorado and Oregon. The two Kentucky senators are on opposite ends of viewpoint on the provision being added.

After the continuing resolution passed, McConnell released a statement saying, ​​”I am proud to have championed this language that keeps these products out of the hands of children, secures the future of regulated hemp businesses and keeps our promise to American farmers and law enforcement by clarifying the intention in the 2018 Farm Bill.”

“The language included in [the] bill preserves the legitimate hemp industry, while addressing the rise of intoxicating and synthetic THC products. Industrial hemp and CBD will remain legal for industrial applications — such as seed, stock, fiber, grain oil — or used in drug trials, federally authorized research or research at an institution of higher education,” he added.

Countering that, Sen. Rand Paul said he opposed this provision. On the Senate floor before it passed, he said “The bill, as it now stands, overrides the regulatory frameworks of several states, cancels the collective decisions of hemp consumers and destroys the livelihoods of hemp farmers.”

He added: “Farmers’ costs have increased as the price of fertilizer and machinery have jumped, while prices for their crops, like soybean, corn and wheat, have declined. For many farmers, hemp has proved to be a lifeline, a new cash crop.”

In effect, the same language McConnell praised drew criticism from Paul, who argued it would wipe out existing markets and override state authority.

“The numbers put forward in this bill will eliminate 100% of the hemp products in our country. That amounts to an effective ban, because the limit is so low that the products intended to manage pain or anxiety will lose their effect,” Paul said.

“This bill will effectively preempt and nullify all state laws concerning hemp. Most of the things your states have regulated and made legal will be made illegal by this bill,”

As part of the second international forum “Russia-Africa Expo-2025,” a roundtable discussion titled “The Potential of Africa’s Mining Industry: New Opportunities for Cooperation with Russia and China” was held at the conference hall of the Financial and Business Association of Euro-Asian Cooperation (FBAEAC). The event served as an important platform for strengthening the trilateral Russia-China-Africa partnership in industrial and technological development.

The roundtable was organized by the FBA EAC, with co-organizers including the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s Council for Financial, Industrial, and Investment Policy, the Peace Foundation, the State Duma Committee on International Affairs, the Russian-African Club of Lomonosov Moscow State University, Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), and the company “Kapital-Info.”

The event brought together over 70 participants—diplomats, as well as representatives from business, academia, and international organizations. Among them were delegations from more than 15 African countries, as well as from Russia, China, and Iran.

The Chinese delegation played a significant role in the event. Participants included Sun Yongjun, First Secretary of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China, and Liu Yan, Second Secretary, along with representatives from the “Chongqing Pump Plant” (joining online): Su Ao, Ji Xiaodong, Yang Jiaquan, Yang Yiguang, and Wang Renjie. The participation of the Chinese side confirmed the practical focus of the trilateral cooperation and the readiness for joint implementation of projects in the mining industry.

The African side was represented by a wide range of participants: Jean Rick Biyaya Kadievu (Minister Plenipotentiary of the Embassy of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in Russia), Sid’Ahmed Cheikh Ould Aichetou (Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania); Eric Rubayita (Counsellor of the Embassy of Rwanda); Diarra Hadja Niamé Mariam Fofana (President of the Program of Consultations and Actions for Women Leaders of Mali); Gerry Mane (Chairman of the National Regulatory Authority for Communications and IT, Guinea-Bissau); Pierre Bangourou (Africa International Trade Connection, Côte d’Ivoire); Yumssi Tichuè (Général Import Export SARL, Cameroon); Amadou Demba Sy (Demba Mining & Frères, Cameroon); Domou Nouble Bruno Alkis (GIES, Cameroon).

The presentations by the African speakers emphasized the continent’s readiness to attract investments, adopt new technologies, and build sustainable production chains. Particular attention was paid to logistics, personnel training, and environmental issues.

The roundtable was also attended by a representative of Iran—Mehdi Rezazadeh, founder and general director of ZedPay Financial System & Services P.J.S.C. His participation further underscored the cross-regional nature of the discussion and the interest in expanding financial and technological cooperation within the context of industry projects.

Li Shaobin, President of the FBA EAC, addressed the participants with a welcome speech, noting that the development of cooperation with Africa in the mining industry opens new horizons for the entire Eurasian business space.

Ivan Borisovich Arkhipov, Deputy Chairman of the Russian-Chinese Friendship Society, also delivered a welcoming address, emphasizing the importance of strengthening humanitarian and economic ties.

Sergey Korotkov, Advisor to the President of the FBA EAC, presented a message from Vitaly Vovk, Deputy Director of the Industrial Policy Department of the Eurasian Economic Commission (EAEC). In his address, Vovk noted that the constructive discussion provides a new impetus for the development of sectoral cooperation and expressed the EAEC’s readiness to assist in developing specific mechanisms for collaboration.

A presentation by Roman Isakov, a recognized expert in the mining industry, attracted particular attention from the roundtable participants. Roman Isaevich delivered a report on “Technologies and Standards of Russian Mining Companies.”

Anatoly Tkachuk, Board Member of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) and Head of the Center for International Projects and Programs at the International Congress of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (ICIE), spoke about the RSPP and ICIE mechanisms for developing joint projects in the mining sector.

Furthermore, the Russian side was represented by Daria Michurina (RSPP), Yury Malakhov (Association of Machinery Manufacturers of Kuzbass), Alexander Kotlyarsky (PROMTEK LLC, First Vice President of FBA EAC), Anton Vasilyev (SPARTA LLC, Member of FBA EAC), Alexandra Matveeva (IBEC), Viktor Lazutin (RF CCI), and Igor Khmelkov (NOBIS Company), among others.

The roundtable was moderated by Louis Gouend, founder and president of the African Business Club, chairman of the organizing committee for “Russia-Africa Expo-2025,” and president of the Cameroonian Diaspora in Russia, together with Anna Geroldovna Bezdudnaya, doctor of economics, professor, head of the Department of Management and Innovations at SPbSUE, executive director of the R&D Center for Arctic Environmental-Economic Research, and editor-in-chief of the “FBA EAC Herald” journal.

During the discussion, participants examined a wide range of issues: the formation of joint working groups and industrial clusters, the creation of joint ventures, specialist training, financial support mechanisms, the implementation of environmental standards, and the expansion of logistics chains.

Following the event, participants highlighted the need to coordinate efforts among business communities, research centers, and government structures to implement specific investment and educational projects in the mining industry.

Key conclusions and recommendations developed during the discussion included:

(i) The need to promptly establish expert working groups to prepare pilot project initiatives.

(ii) Intensifying the exchange of technologies and equipment with the direct involvement of industrial manufacturers and engineering companies.

(iii) Developing joint educational programs and academic exchanges for training qualified personnel.

(iv) Strengthening institutional project support through guarantee mechanisms and financial instruments.

(v) Implementing unified environmental standards and sustainable development practices.

Within the framework of the changing global economic architecture, Russian enterprises are highly prioritizing investments in Africa, demonstrating readiness to invest, particularly in energy, industrial technology, and infrastructure, and compete with global players.

Undoubtedly, Africa is fast becoming one of the most significant centers of power, attracting external players. One lingering question is how promptly the recommended measures designed would address historical investment gaps and ensure that agreements reached at the ‘Russia-Africa Expo-2025’ would lead to tangible outcomes.

Days after Shein opened its first location in Paris, France, is threatening to ban the Chinese fast-fashion giant. The threat follows months of hand-wringing over Shein’s growing footprint in France, topped off by the discovery of child-like sex dolls and weapons from third-party sellers on its website and on its third-party online marketplace. With the growing backlash, will the controversial company survive in Europe’s fashion capital?

The carmaker first announced the plan for battery production in 2021.

Toyota Motor Corporation has begun production at its $13.9bn North Carolina battery plant as it ramps up hybrid production and confirms plans to invest $10bn over five years in United States manufacturing.

The Tokyo, Japan-based carmaker announced the developments on Wednesday.

It first introduced the plan in December 2021 to produce batteries for its hybrid and electric vehicles (EVs). Batteries from the plant are set to power hybrid versions of the Camry, Corolla Cross, RAV4, and a yet-to-be-announced, all-electric, three-row-battery vehicle. The plant is producing hybrid batteries for factories in Kentucky and a Mazda and Toyota joint venture in Alabama.

“Over the next five years, we are planning an additional investment of $10bn in the US to further grow our manufacturing capabilities, bringing our total investment in this country to over $60bn,” said Ted Ogawa, president of Toyota Motor North America.

Toyota’s 11th US factory, on a 1,850-acre (749-hectare) site, will be able to produce 30 gigawatt-hours of energy annually at full capacity and house 14 battery production lines for plug-in hybrids and full EVs. It will eventually employ 5,000 workers.

Last month in Japan, US President Donald Trump said Toyota planned a $10bn investment in the United States.

“Go out and buy a Toyota,” said Trump, who has been critical of Japanese and other auto imports and has imposed hefty tariffs on imported vehicles.

Toyota has been one of the slowest carmakers to move to full EVs, but has rapidly moved to convert its best-selling vehicles to hybrids.

“We know there is no single path to progress”, Ogawa said on Wednesday.

“That’s why we remain committed to our multi-pathway approach, offering fuel-efficient gas engines, hybrids, plug-in hybrids, battery electronics and fuel cell electronics.”

Other car companies like Volkswagen have said they will add more hybrids as the Trump administration has rescinded EV tax credits and eliminated penalties that incentivised EV sales.

US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said at the event that the administration plans to soon propose to ease fuel economy standards, saying prior rules were too aggressive.

Duffy in January signed an order to direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to rescind fuel economy standards issued under former US President Joe Biden, a Democrat, for the 2022-2031 model years that had aimed to drastically reduce fuel use for cars and trucks.

Toyota’s stock is up by about 0.4 percent in midday trading in New York.

Nov. 7 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Friday wants the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the meatpacking industry for possible price fixing and collusion.

Trump posted about the situation on Truth Social while flying to South Florida for the weekend and after he met in the White House with three Republican senators from beef-producing states, who are opposed to importing beef from Argentina.

“I have asked the DOJ to immediately begin an investigation into the meatpacking companies, who are driving up the price of beef through illicit collusion, price fixing, and price manipulation,” Trump posted.

“We will always protect our American Ranchers, and they are being blamed for what is being done by a majority of foreign-owned meatpackers, who artificially inflate prices and jeopardize the security of our Nation’s food supply.

“Action must be taken immediately to protect consumers, combat Illegal monopolies, and ensure these corporations are not criminally profiting at the expense of the American people. I am asking the DOJ to act expeditiously.”

A short time later, he posted: “Cattle prices have dropped substantially, the price of boxed beef has gone up — therefore, you know that something is ‘fishy.’ We will get to the bottom of it very quickly. If there is criminality, those people responsible will pay a steep price!”

After the messages, Attorney General Pam Bondi posted on X: “Our investigation is underway! My Antitrust Division led by @AAGSlater has taken the lead in partnership with our friend @SecRollins at @USDA.”

Brooke Rollins is the agriculture secretary and Abigail “Gail” Slater leads the DOJ’s Antitrust Division.

The top four meatpackers control more than about 85% of the U.S. market — American companies Tyson and Cargill with JBS and National subsidiaries of Brazilian companies.

“This consolidation allows them to suppress prices paid to ranchers while keeping consumer prices high,” Farm Action said. “Importing more beef into this rigged system will not lower costs for families or restore fair markets for producers.

Three of the companies have been sued.

In October, Cargill and Tyson agreed to pay $87.5 million to settle a case alleging price fixing for beef while also denying any wrongdoing.

Earlier this year, JBS agreed to pay $83.5 million for its portion of a separate suit over alleged cattle price fixing.

Trump was taking aim on meatpacking instead of cattle raising, which has been affected by drought, smaller herds, labor shortages and lingering COVID-19 effects, Axios reported.

Trump has said overall grocery prices are going down but concedes beef costs are rising.

A CNN fact check pointed out in September that they were 1.4% higher than in January, when Trump returned to office, according to the Consumer Price Index.

There was a 0.6% increase in average grocery prices from July 2025 to August 2025, the biggest month-to-month jump in three years

Beef is up 13% in one year — the highest over most food items — according to the CPI.

Trump has attempted to increase the nation’s beef supply with increased imports.

The cattle industry and legislators, including Republicans, have opposed this move.

“President Trump’s plan to buy beef from Argentina is a betrayal of the American rancher,” Farm Action said.

“Those of us who raise cattle have finally started to see what profit looks like after facing years of high input costs and market manipulation by the meatpacking monopoly.

“After crashing the soybean market and gifting Argentina our largest export buyer, he’s now poised to do the same to the cattle market. Importing Argentinian beef would send U.S. cattle prices plummeting -and with the meatpacking industry as consolidated as it is, consumers may not see lower beef prices either. Washington should be focused on fixing our broken cattle market, not rewarding foreign competitors.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota, opposes the imports.

“This isn’t the way to do it,” Thune told Semafor in October. “It’s created a lot of uncertainty in that market. So I’m hoping that the White House has gotten the message.”

Trump met with some Republican senators from beef-producing states: Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi, Tim Sheehy of Montana and Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

Hyde-Smith is a Republican from Mississippi whose family raises cattle. She is opposed to the imports.

In October, he announced plans to quadruple the tariff quota for imported Argentine beef from 20,000 to 80,000 metric tons. Any imports above this new quota with no tariff would still be subject to a higher 26.4% tariff.

In October, Trump authorized $20 billion loan to Argentina’s government and another $20 billion in financing from private lenders and sovereign wealth funds. It has been described as a bailout to Argentine President Javier Milei.