industry

This article contains spoilers from the first season of “The Paper.”

The journey to spin off the U.S. version of “The Office” has, until now, been long and slow. (That’s what she said.)

While the unconventional workplace comedy about a humdrum band of paper company employees, adapted from a beloved British series of the same name, famously got off to a sluggish start on NBC with a low-rated six-episode first season, it became a rare case study of how a risky gamble can become a pop culture phenomenon and one of the most popular sitcoms in TV history. Talks of expanding “The Office” universe began as early as Season 3, when another office branch was introduced. “Parks and Recreation” was initially conceived as a spinoff but morphed into a standalone series. Another centered on socially awkward Dwight Schrute (Rainn Wilson) would get dropped. The series eventually ended its nine-season run in 2013 with no offshoot. But it still managed to have an afterlife without one, as fans obsessively continued to watch it in syndication or on streaming platforms.

Once “The Office” began making headlines in 2020 for the being the most streamed show in America, Greg Daniels, who captained the U.S. adaptation and was initially concerned about tarnishing its legacy with offshoots, was coming around to the idea that it was safely insulated enough to withstand any attempt to find a way to build out its kooky world.

Finally, more than a decade after “The Office” went off the air, Peacock is hoping the spinoff series “The Paper” can recycle some of that show’s success while finding its own path.

In “The Paper,” Domhnall Gleeson, left, stars as editor in chief Ned Sampson, and Tim Key plays executive Ken Davies.

(Aaron Epstein / Peacock)

This series shifts its focus to the staff at the Toledo Truth Teller, a struggling local newspaper in Ohio, which is being filmed by the same documentary crew that followed bumbling boss Michael Scott (Steve Carell) and his Scranton, Pa.-based Dunder Mifflin employees. (It’s a believable documentary subject when you consider the U.S. has lost more than one-third of its newspapers since 2005.) Daniels created the series with Michael Koman (“Nathan For You,” “How to With John Wilson”).

All 10 episodes of the first season were released Thursday on Peacock, and the show has been picked up for a second season. Daniels and Koman visited The Times earlier this month — and spoke in follow-up video calls — to discuss the comedy potential of a beleaguered industry, why Oscar is the obvious choice to be the crossover character in the spinoff and whether they plan to reference the president’s comments about the press. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.

The series was originally going to launch with four episodes, then switch to a weekly drop. But it was recently announced that the full season is dropping at once. What happened? And do you have strong feelings about release models?

Daniels: Every company is different. I do know that they’re [NBCUniversal] being incredibly supportive and there’s a giant team gaming out every move. I trust that they have the best of intentions and have a lot of good strategy. My inclination was always to sneak on the air without any fanfare whatsoever, and then maybe advertise after — that is very naive, apparently. One possible nice thing about it being handled this way is our superfans will be able to watch at their own convenience, and maybe before they’ve seen too many promos. I’ve always felt like the show was cut to be the introduction to the show itself. And the more you know jokes you see from later in the seasons, the more you’re coming at it with an unintended awareness of what’s to come. It may play better, just clean for all the superfans. Actually, I thought at first, the pace-out model would be good because that was how “The Office” was on NBC. But they did point out to me that probably the majority of “The Office” fans have watched it on streaming, where they could binge the whole thing.

Koman: It’s not really my area, but that’s how I like to watch things. I’m always happy when it’s up to me — I can make my own schedule, and I tend to watch things quickly.

The crisis facing local journalism doesn’t feel like an obvious backdrop for comedy — and if you’re in it, it’s more of a can’t-help-but-laugh–to-keep-from-crying vibe. How did you arrive at a newsroom as your backdrop and what was the pitch?

Daniels: You wouldn’t think that selling stationary was a particularly hilarious or glamorous place to set a show. I think that there are some intentional differences with this show, and in the sense that we didn’t want to repeat aspects of “The Office.” For me, I was incredibly protective of the original show and the cast. I just waited a long time to do something like this. The original “Office” cast was very supportive by the time it came about. Since it’s a documentary, if you’re going to really commit to that device, you have to think all the time about [how] there’s really camerapeople in the room; they’re trying to cover something; they wouldn’t be there to just cover what they thought was a funny workplace. They’re there to cover an actual story. And the hollowing out of local newspapers is an interesting story that you could imagine a documentary crew from PBS being like, “Oh, this is a good story.” Of course, since it’s a comedy show, the stuff that’s happening in the background is really the point of the show — all the funny interactions with people as they try to do stuff. Another way that we wanted it to be different was the whole interaction between Michael Scott and his staff — he was not a very inspirational boss, and Ned Sampson, played by Domhnall Gleeson, comes in and he does manage to inspire the people working there. And the question is more: Is he biting off way more than he can chew and his staff can chew? Or should they be right and believing in him?

Koman: I just think reality always makes the best backdrop. And it’s good if your characters are facing a challenge and you have something to root for.

1

2

1. Clockwise from top left: Rainn Wilson as Dwight Schrute, Jenna Fischer as Pam Beesly, John Krasinksi as Jim Halpert, BJ Novak as Ryan Howard and Steve Carell as Michael Scott in “The Office.” 2. Carell, Krasinksi and Wilson in a scene from the NBC comedy. (Justin Lubin / NBC Universal)

How did you land on Toledo?

Daniels: That was really about the alliteration of the Toledo Truth Teller. There’s something about the Cleveland Plain Dealer that I think is a super interesting thing. The name of it, I thought, has always been very intriguing. It kind of reminds you of the independence of these big Midwestern newspapers, which is different from now. It really feels like the big newspapers are L.A., New York, Washington, Dallas. I know the Cleveland Plain Dealer is still quite healthy, which is great. But there is something about the Midwest that feels nostalgic.

Koman: If I think of the heyday of print journalism, Ohio is just a place that comes to mind. They had so many really important newspapers and great journalists that came out of there, so it just seemed like … if somebody was going to try to revive something, that’s a state, and Toledo itself, is a place where you can see it happening.

Daniels: Toledo also has a certain “Office-y,” Scranton thing to it. There was a time where we were looking at where the other locations that Dunder Mifflin has offices. And the list is very funny. It’s like Yonkers and Nashua, New Hampshire. It’s all these words that are just kind of fun to roll off your tongue.

Greg, you had been resistant to the idea of expanding “The Office” universe. “Parks and Recreation” was originally meant to be a spinoff, but it eventually evolved away from that. Why now? What changed?

Daniels: There’s two questions. One is, why now? And part of that is that “Upload” [Daniels’ Prime Video series] is wrapping up. When we first started discussing it, I didn’t know what was going to happen with “Upload.” I had sold it and I was committed to being the showrunner and it kept getting picked up, so I kept having to put off thinking about any kind of [“The Office”] spinoff. But [the final season of] “Upload” is dropping Aug. 25. The other part of your your question — over the years, since the finale, the show had this enormous blow-up on Netflix. It just felt like this show is pretty bulletproof at this point. Even if we did a s— job with a spinoff, it’s not going to go back in time and mess up “The Office,” which was my concern. “The Office” was such a beautiful and rare confluence of the cast and the time and the format and the writers and everything — it seemed very arrogant to think you could pull that off again. But then after a while, it’s like, “Well, you got to try.” You can’t be intimidated out of ever doing anything.

Greg Daniels says the staff of a struggling newspaper is as relatable as their Dunder Mifflin predecessors: “That quality of morale being low is very ‘Office’-like. The tone is intended to be similar without having the characters be similar.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

How did you arrive at former Dunder Mifflin accountant Oscar Martinez (Oscar Núñez) being the connecting character between the two shows?

Daniels: When you look at the finale of “The Office,” everybody was going off in their own direction that had a lot of, in my view, meaningful wrap-up of their story. Jim and Pam were moving to Boston with Darrell; Toby was in England. But Oscar didn’t really have a big arc. He was pretty much Oscar the whole way through, and it didn’t feel like it was going to undo anything with “The Office” to keep Oscar involved.

Koman: It made sense, just on a business level, that if one company was acquired by another, that some people would move over into that company. He was the one person who, I think, would have stayed.

Daniels: He was maybe the most self-possessed. He had the most dignity, I think, of most of the characters. The idea that the crew has found him again just seemed appropriate. He did run for elective office at the end of “The Office,” so I feel like he is susceptible to being inspired and do something for his community, so he seems like a person who could buy into what Ned is selling.

Koman: Also, he has kind of a cosmopolitan personality. The city is like a third larger than Scranton.

Greg, you gave us one of the great will–they/won’t–they relationships in TV history with Jim and Pam. There are a couple of office romances brewing on “The Paper.” The season ends with Ned and Mare (Chelsea Frei) kissing. Is there a specific challenge with crafting a slow burn in the streaming era? How did you want to approach things this time around?

Daniels: You need to have stakes in stories. If you’re going to be very realistic and relatable, the stakes in people’s stories are mostly romantic because most people don’t battle aliens to save the world or whatever. So, the highest stakes a normal person usually has is who they’re going to marry or who they’re seeing, or what drama they’re in in their personal lives. There’s a column the New York Times does about people who are getting married, how-they-met kind of thing, which I love, and you realize that there’s hundreds and hundreds of stories of how people meet. It’s not all Sam and Diane or Pam and Jim. My aim would be to not have the audience be like, “Who’s the next Pam and Jim? Is that Pam and Jim?” That’s their relationship. Those two actors were brilliant. You can’t replicate it, but it doesn’t mean that other characters aren’t going to be romantically interested in each other.

Pam Beesly (Jenna Fischer) and Jim Halpert (John Kraskinski), the friends-to-lovers duo affectionately known as JAM, in a scene from “The Office.” (Paul Drinkwater/NBC)

“The Paper” features characters like interim managing editor Esmeralda (Sabrina Impacciatore), compositor turned reporter Mare (Chelsea Frei) and new boss Ned (Domhnall Gleeson). Mare and Ned have a will-they/won’t-they dynamic in the sitcom. (Aaron Epstein/Peacock)

We had a sense, at least through Kelly Kapoor and her pop culture references, that “The Office” took place in our shared reality, but it didn’t directly comment on real world matters. But considering the show’s setting and Ned’s idealism about the profession, with President Trump’s ongoing remarks about the press, can you see a day where those remarks or ideas are more directly referenced in some form? Or do you want to stay clear of that?

Daniels: I think there’s so many voices that [are] constantly talking about that, just from a comedy standpoint; I’m very tired of it. There’s also so many opinions that are so strong. My inclination is to do the fundamentals — it’s a character comedy. These are characters. They’re in a world of journalism [and it] has a lot of bumping between human beings and ethics, and to tell those stories is valuable. No matter what side you’re on, you can look at it and, hopefully, if there’s truth in what’s being presented, you can take something valuable away.

Koman: It’s important to think of this as a local paper. Their struggle is to credibly tell local stories, which is what I think the city needs, more than anything — a voice to just tell people what’s going on. Beyond that, I think the way that a culture will seep into a show like this — you should always have a sense of reality and that this is taking place in the present. I think of their minds as being focused on: How can we be a good news source for Toledo?

Michael Koman, who previously worked on docu-comedies “Nathan For You” and “How To With John Wilson,” on capturing the state of journalism realistically in “The Paper”: “What makes newspapers different than other businesses or other jobs is that people do arrive with a sense of enthusiasm for what they’re going to do. It seemed important that many of these people could have started their jobs like this, but now we’re meeting them at a point where that’s been tamped down enormously.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

The impulse when you hear about a spin-off or a reboot is to compare and to see who fits into what archetypes. Tell me about the types of characters you wanted to fill out in this newsroom.

Daniels: We tried to avoid that. What’s the point of doing something where everybody can go, “Oh, that’s the new Dwight”? They’re working in journalism and they have a very romantic, idealistic boss. He’s extremely interested in getting to the bottom of stories and being super rigorous and ethical, but he’s come in and replaced the temporary managing editor, Esmeralda, played by Sabrina Impacciatore, who has a very different view. She doesn’t really drill down that hard. She’s more about getting eyeballs.

Koman: What makes newspapers different than other businesses or other jobs is that people do arrive with a sense of enthusiasm for what they’re going to do. It seemed important that many of these people could have started their jobs like this, but now we’re meeting them at a point where that’s been tamped down enormously. Morale is low. In terms of who this group of people was, you could feel like that’s been dampened enormously and somebody new can come in who, either out of naivety or just optimism, thinks that he can revive it.

Daniels: That quality of morale being low is very “Office”-like. The tone is intended to be similar without having the characters be similar.

The title sequence is a montage of the various ways people make use of newspapers — rather than reading it. How would you describe your relationship to print journalism?

Daniels: When I first moved out here, I had a subscription to the L.A. Times, and the volume of papers was so gigantic, and it would come with these white ties to hold it all together. I built furniture in my apartment out of stacks of L.A. Times because they were so big. So it’d be like two weeks of them, I could make a stool and make a table with a full week’s worth stacked up.

Koman: Yes, I would say that digital media is all well and good until you need to pack glasses, then you hunt for a newspaper.

Daniels: One of my earliest memories is my parents trying to read the newspaper on their bed, and I wanted their attention, so I would roll onto the newspapers and look up at them, which would really irritate them. They were a big newspaper household.

Much like the news media, your industry is confronting budget constraints and technological disruption that is forcing changes to business models and programming strategies. What are your concerns about your industry right now?

Daniels: One of the big themes is the return to advertising. The streamers have all added ad tiers and that naturally is going to change the programming a bit. I don’t think, necessarily, [that] it’s bad. When you look at the heyday of Netflix, a lot of their biggest stuff had been developed under the old advertising model. I sometimes think about the French movie business, where it seems like they don’t care if something makes money or not. It’s just, if you’re in the club, you get to make movies over and over again. I’ve always felt like that there’s something more democratic about: You actually have to get people to watch your thing somehow.

Koman: The strangest thing about this industry is that it might change a lot, [but] the thing you’re making is a timeless product. You’re telling a story. There’s the part of it that is like, “Well, this will eventually be finished and will be presented somewhere” — and you have no control over how that’s going to change. But what you’re actually trying to make would have to hold up under any conditions.

HIKING gambling taxes at the Budget would “backfire” and push punters to the unsafe black market, the sector has said.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been warned not to press ahead with proposals to introduce a single remote betting tax amid the damage to horse racing.

Enormous damage would be caused if the 15 per cent tax paid by bookmakers is brought into line with online gaming which is taxed at 21 per cent.

Horse racing will go on strike next Wednesday when four race meetings are put on hold in protest at the proposed changes.

The horse racing industry would be dealt a £66 million a year hit and threaten thousands of jobs.

Ministers have been warned that any such move will have be catastrophic for racing’s fragile finances with punters also being driven to illicit markets.

A spokesperson for the Betting and Gaming Council said: “Hiking gambling taxes would backfire spectacularly.

“Far from boosting the Treasury, it will push punters towards the unsafe black market, which pays no tax, backs no sport and has zero standards.”

They add that it would shrink the legal market and damage sport.

The industry says it already pays £4 billion in taxes, supports 109,000 jobs and pumps £6.8 billion into the economy.

Ex-PM Gordon Brown has called for an increase on gambling taxes to help take children out of poverty.

The Treasury has previously said: “We are consulting on bringing the treatment of online betting in line with other forms of online gambling to cut down bureaucracy – it is not about increasing or decreasing rates, and we welcome views from all stakeholders including businesses, trade bodies, the third sector and individuals.”

1

Aug. 29 (UPI) — Britain barred Israeli government and military officials from taking part in its flagship international defense and security event in September as London stepped up pressure on Israel over its military offensive to capture and occupy Gaza City.

Israel is normally one of the main exhibitors at the biannual Defense and Security Equipment International conference, but the Ministry of Defense said Thursday that Israeli government officials had not been invited to the event, which runs Sept. 9 through Sept. 12 at the Excel exhibition and convention center in London’s Docklands.

“The Israeli government’s decision to further escalate its military operation in Gaza is wrong. As a result, we can confirm that no Israeli government delegation will be invited to attend DSEI UK 2025,” a Ministry of Defense spokesman told Politico.

“There must be a diplomatic solution to end this war now, with an immediate cease-fire, the return of the hostages and a surge in humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza.”

The ban does not extend to private Israeli arms manufacturers, but their presence at DSEI — which is run by a private British company but with major backing from the government and armed forces — was expected to trigger large public demonstrations outside the venue.

Israel criticized the move as discriminatory and, accusing Britain of politicizing the global defense sector, said it would abandon plans for the large pavilion it usually sponsors at the conference, but stressed it fully supported domestic firms opting to exhibit at DSEI.

“These restrictions amount to a deliberate and regrettable act of discrimination against Israel’s representatives,” the Israel Ministry of Defense wrote in a social media post.”

“At a time when Israel is engaged on multiple fronts against Islamist extremists and terrorist organisations — forces that also threaten the West and international shipping lanes — this decision by Britain plays into the hands of extremists, grants legitimacy to terrorism, and introduces political considerations wholly inappropriate for a professional defense industry exhibition,” said the ministry.

The ban follows a standoff at the Paris Air Show in June, when the organizers draped black sheeting over the stands of some Israeli defense firms exhibiting at the event at the request of the French government after the Israeli defense ministry failed to observe a ban on arms designed for offensive purposes.

Britain has been gradually stepping up diplomatic and legal pressure on Israel in recent months over the conduct of its military operation in Gaza, including imposing restrictions on some arms sales.

In July, Britain announced it would recognize a Palestinian state in September if Israel did not agree to a cease-fire by then.

In June, it joined Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Norway in sanctioning far-right Israeli government ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich over “repeated incitements of violence against Palestinians.”

Britain suspended arms export licenses in September for around 10% of British-made weapons and military equipment destined for Israel after Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government determined there was a “clear risk” of Israel using the arms in ways that would breach international law.

The ban on 30 out of 350 categories of equipment and goods included military aircraft, helicopter and drone components, as well as ground targeting equipment.

However, the block did not extend to parts for F-35 joint-strike fighter flown by Israeli forces in combat missions over Gaza that Britain supplies into a pool as part of a multi-country support program for the American-made F-35 — except where they went directly to Israel.

Senior ministers in Starmer’s cabinet insisted at the time that Britain remained a “staunch ally” of Israel, defended the timing, which came just days after Hamas executed six Israeli hostages, and insisted it would not undermine Israel’s security.

INDEPENDENT travel agency, InteleTravel, is answering questions about their business practices after The Sun’s investigation shined a light on the true cost of joining their organisation to sell travel.

With glamorous celebrities like Strictly’s Vicky Pattison and TOWIE’s Jess Wright promoting the scheme on their huge social platforms, it was revealed they could be earning over £200,000 as fans sign up to the scheme.

5

5

However, our report showed that almost 90 per cent of people don’t make a single penny working as an Independent Travel Agent (ITA) – with many ending up out of pocket.

Those selling travel through the Vicky’s Vacay team will almost certainly have signed up with recruitment firm, PlaNet Marketing, who are a separate company to InteleTravel.

Even though they are different companies, The Sun could find no way of joining InteleTravel without signing up to PlaNet Marketing and paying an initial fee of £140 and then £30 per month thereafter.

Industry experts TTG, have reported that since The Sun called for clarity on how many Brits are affected negatively by joining the scheme, InteleTravel is now reviewing its partnership with the US-headquartered company that recruits agents on its behalf.

In our report, we looked at how likely it is for everyday women and fans of these glamourous celebrities to earn money selling holidays to their friends and family for a small commission.

Social media messaging flaunting a jet-set lifestyle and ability to ‘be your own boss’ is rife on platforms like Instagram.

And it’s not just the celebrities who are at it.

Many ITAs who say they make ‘big money’ from selling travel are, in fact, doing so with an elaborate recreruitment downline.

This means anyone they sign up to their ‘team’ must pay them a commission, as well as the commission to InteleTravel – an ABTA-approved travel agency – on anything they go on to sell.

InteleTravel came under criticism as recruiters for the network, appear to approach people, most-often women and mums, on social media.

Subtle messaging, which some women who spoke to The Sun allege they are trained for, is used to lure new agents in by telling them a glamorous lifestyle can be achieved while on their family holiday.

It’s heavily implied that a huge salary can be achieved while being a full-time mum or working in another job.

A recruiter told our reporter that she earned £27,000 alongside her full time job in a different sector.

Tricia Handley-Hughes, InteleTravel’s UK and Ireland managing director, insisted the agency’s partnership with PlanNet Marketing had “not run its course” but added: “discussions need to take place”.

5

5

Senior industry agents also reacted to the story, calling it “deeply concerning”.

In a article published by trade publication, Travel Weekly, they raised concerns about InteleTravel’s recruitment methods and about the impact of the story on the professional reputation of other agents in the sector.

Advantage Travel Partnership chief executive Julia Lo Bue-Said said: “It’s important to remember the vast majority of travel agents across the UK are highly professional and trustworthy”.

“Being a travel agent is not a hobby. It should never be treated as a casual side hustle to make some extra money”.

While marketing consultant Steve Dunne, chief executive of Digital Drums, said such stories “could push back the reputation of the travel agents a generation”.

A number of InteleTravel agents have reacted to our report in defence of InteleTravel.

They were keen to tell their followers that agents can ‘just sell holidays’ and do not have to sign up to be part of the business responsible for the recruitment of other agents.

James Pirie-Warsop said: “I’ve been with Intele for about two or three years and I’m glad I did [join them]. Yes, there’s a multi-level marketing side, but you don’t have to do it”.

Whilst no-one is forced to recruit a ‘dream team of travel agents’ like Vicky and Jess, official data from the Direct Selling Association reveals that 63 per cent of agents in the sector do go on to build a ‘team’.

InteleTravel’s own figures may differ from the UK wide average, but when asked directlt by The Sun, they declined to comment on the amount their agents earn.

Read our full InteleTravel report here.

Have you been approached to join InteleTravel or asked if you’d like to make money selling travel with a team of like-minded agents? Get in touch with us at

5

United States President Donald Trump has threatened to impose tariffs of up to 300 percent on semiconductor imports, with exemptions for foreign companies that commit to manufacturing in the US.

Trump has cast the proposed tariff as a way to drive investment to the US, but experts say it could also disrupt global supply chains and even penalise companies already making chips in the US.

What are the details of Trump’s plan?

Few details have been released since Trump announced plans for a 100 percent tariff at a White House event on August 7.

The US president said exemptions would be given to companies that build research or manufacturing facilities in the US, but tariffs could be applied retroactively if they failed to follow through on their planned investments.

“If, for some reason, you say you’re building, and you don’t build, then we go back, and we add it up, it accumulates, and we charge you at a later date, you have to pay, and that’s a guarantee,” Trump told reporters.

On Friday, Trump told reporters on board Air Force One that more details would be announced soon and that the tariff could be much higher than previously suggested.

“I’ll be setting tariffs next week and the week after, on steel and on, I would say chips – chips and semiconductors, we’ll be setting sometime next week, week after,” Trump said en route to Alaska to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“I’m going to have a rate that is going to be 200 percent, 300 percent,” he added.

Why does Trump want to impose tariffs on chip imports?

Trump wants to impose a tariff on chips for several reasons, but the main one is to re-shore investment and manufacturing to the US, said G Dan Hutcheson, the vice chair of Canada’s TechInsights.

“The primary goal is to reverse the cost disadvantage of manufacturing in the US and turn it into an advantage. It’s mainly focused on companies that are not investing in the US,” Hutcheson told Al Jazeera.

“Exclusions are negotiable for entities that align with his goal of bringing manufacturing back to the US.”

More broadly, the tariff is also intended to address the US dependence on imported semiconductors and buttress Washington’s position in its ongoing rivalry with China, another chip-making powerhouse.

Both issues are bipartisan concerns in the US.

The Trump administration earlier this year launched a Section 301 investigation into alleged unfair trade practices in China’s semiconductor industry, and a Section 232 investigation into the national security implications of US reliance on chip imports and finished products that use foreign chips.

Who will be impacted by the tariff?

Foreign tech giants that have already invested in the US, including the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and South Korea’s Samsung, would likely not be affected by the tariff.

It is less clear how the measure could affect other companies, including chip makers in China, where companies face barriers to US investment from both US and Chinese regulators.

Yongwook Ryu, an assistant professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore, said the tariff could be used as leverage by the US as it negotiates the rate of its so-called “reciprocal tariffs” on China.

The US has imposed blanket tariffs of 10-40 percent on most trade partners since August 7, but negotiators are still hammering out a comprehensive trade deal with Beijing.

“My view is that while the reciprocal tariffs are generally aimed more at addressing the US trade deficit problem and re-shoring manufacturing back to the US, product-specific or sectoral tariffs [like semiconductors] are aimed at serving the strategic goal of strengthening US technological hegemony and containing China,” Ryu told Al Jazeera.

What is the value of US chip imports each year?

The US imported about $40bn in chips in 2024, according to a report by the American Enterprise Institute, citing United Nations trade data.

Imports mainly came from Taiwan, Malaysia, Israel, South Korea, Ireland, Vietnam, Costa Rica, Mexico and China, but experts say this data does not capture the full picture of chip flows in and out of the US.

Chips can cross borders multiple times as they are manufactured, packaged, or added to finished goods.

Chris Miller, the author of Chip War: The Fight for the World’s Most Critical Technology, estimates that another $50bn worth of chips entered the US in 2024 via products like smartphones, auto parts and home appliances from countries like China and Vietnam.

Miller also estimates that a “substantial portion” of US chip imports are manufactured in the US before being sent overseas for packaging – a labour-intensive process – and then re-imported.

“Many of the chips imported from key trading partners like Mexico, Malaysia and Costa Rica are likely actually manufactured by US firms like Texas Instruments and Intel, which have manufacturing in the US but often have their test and assembly facilities abroad,” Miller told Al Jazeera.

Why is the tariff a concern for the global chip industry?

Trump’s tariff plans have injected further uncertainty into an industry already grappling with his administration’s sweeping efforts to reorder global trade.

“It’s unclear whether the US government has the capacity to effectively enforce this and… there’s not really any guidance in terms of what these tariffs are actually going to look like,” Nick Marro, the lead analyst for global trade at the Economist Intelligence Unit, told Al Jazeera.

The White House has yet to provide details on whether the tariff will apply to chips originally made in the US and chips contained in finished products.

If the latter were included in the tariff plans, the fallout would extend to industries like electronics, home appliances, automobiles and auto parts. 

Miller said that it would be consumers in the US and elsewhere who would be among those most affected by the tariff. 

“Initially, it appears that most costs would be paid by companies via lower profit margins, though in the long run, consumers will pay the majority of the cost,” he said.

Democrats, bless their hearts, keep trying to figure out the magic formula to stop President Trump. But here’s a cold splash of reality: If Trump’s popularity ever collapses, it will probably be because of something completely beyond their control.

In 2020, it wasn’t some brilliant strategy that defeated Trump. It was COVID. A global pandemic. An act of God (or Wuhan).

This raises an uncomfortable thought: the next disruption — the one that might shake up the political snow globe again — will probably be much bigger than COVID. That looming disturbance is artificial intelligence.

In a recent Substack essay, Pete Buttigieg suggested that “the number one leadership challenge for world leaders, including the President of the United States, will be to manage the changes that AI is bringing about.” He goes on to note that “our president — and his opposition — have yet to make clear what their AI policies even are.”

He’s not wrong about the bipartisan lack of preparation. And for this reason, the political consequences are likely to be brutal for whichever party is in charge when the tipping point arrives and AI upends the lives of millions of Americans.

Trump still has three and a half years left on the clock — just enough time for AI to yank the rug out from under him. That’s a golden opportunity for Democrats, if they’re smart enough to capitalize on it.

But Democrats should hold off on gleefully penciling in 2028 as the year AI hands them the keys to the White House in perpetuity. Why? Because huge shocks to the system tend to empower either a) bold problem solvers or b) populist demagogues.

Lest we forget, the last seismic tech shift — the rise of the Information Age — gave us globalization, economic dislocation (for working-class Americans) and (eventually) Donald Trump.

This next disruption could be even more traumatic. AI isn’t just coming for truck drivers. It’s coming for legal assistants, graphic designers, junior software developers, even (ahem) writers. College graduates who spent decades believing their degree was a shield against obsolescence are about to get a taste of what coal miners, steelworkers, typists and travel agents have already endured.

When that happens, disenchanted moderates will radicalize, and income inequality will detonate. The people who build and control AI will obviously get filthy rich. So will superstar surgeons and elite litigators — people whose rarefied expertise and skills can’t be replicated remotely. But their legions of associates, researchers and paralegals will vanish like Blockbuster Video.

Now, for generations, lost jobs and industries were replaced by new ones — thanks to what economists call “creative destruction.” The buggy maker gave way to the auto industry and the auto mechanic, and society moved forward. But this time, the old rules may not apply — at least, not by virtue of some organic “invisible hand.”

If this shift is as severe and pervasive as many believe it will be (a huge caveat, to be sure), it won’t be solved by fiddling around with marginal tax rates or by mildly expanding unemployment benefits. It will require a vast reimagining of what the government does — the kind of thing that would make free-market purists break out in hives.

But here’s where it gets tricky for Democrats: They can’t simply hand displaced workers a check and call it a solution.

This is the core problem with universal basic income, often touted as the answer to AI-driven job losses. The modest $1,000-a-month figure that’s been floated is a joke. But even if the amount were higher, it would still have to be paired with meaningful work.

Something Democrats must learn: People don’t just want money. They crave dignity, purpose, belonging and a reason to get up in the morning.

That means thinking big and finding meaningful opportunities for the displaced to serve and provide value. Imagine one teacher for every five students in America’s public school and college classrooms. Imagine school buses with three adults instead of one overworked driver.

Imagine a national corps of well-paid nurses and physical therapists making regular visits to isolated seniors and providing full-time home healthcare.

Picture teams of young, tech-savvy Americans helping retirees navigate their iPads, iPhones, TVs and other devices — closing the digital divide for an entire generation.

Now, pair that with a bold expansion of union apprenticeships to train the next wave of electricians, plumbers and carpenters — alongside free college or vocational training in exchange for a year or two of national service.

It wouldn’t happen overnight. Managing this transition would require robust unemployment benefits — say, 90% of prior salary for a fixed period — not as welfare, but as an investment in people and a dividend on the value they’ve helped create by virtue of tax dollars (that built the internet) and data (that fuel automation). Because again, addressing the dilemma of job displacement is about more than money.

Which brings us to some important questions we had better answer.

What does it mean to be a citizen in a society when AI makes half of the labor market feel redundant? How do you retain your identity and sense of self-worth when the work you have dedicated your life to can be more efficiently done by artificial intelligence?

And how do we redeploy human beings — tens of millions of them — into roles that make life better for others and give them back the self-respect that comes from service?

AI might be the great test of our political age, and the party that passes this test will be remembered as our savior.

The party that fails this test will be remembered — if at all — as the one fiddling while Rome was automated.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

After a wave of rushed buying, driven by looming tariffs, US car sales have started to slow, weighing on carmakers.

New car sales fell by 300,000 in June from 15.6 million to 15.3 million, according to data released by Cox Automotive last month.

“Now we’ve got sales slowing because [the pre-tariff buying] surge pretty much pulled ahead a lot of people that might have been in the market this year, who wanted to buy before tariffs hit,” Mark Schirmer, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive, told Al Jazeera.

This will only get harder for carmakers, dealerships and shoppers down the road.

“Price rises together with demand destruction,” Sina Golara, assistant professor of supply chain management at Georgia State’s Robinson College of Business, told Al Jazeera. “If consumers don’t have the resilience to pay for those higher prices, they’ll take a step back.”

United States President Donald Trump’s erratic approach to tariffs, putting some in place and then taking them away, has made it difficult for businesses to plan. In April, car companies, including Stellantis, Ford and Volvo, suspended financial guidance as a result of the uncertainty.

Last month Volvo also said that tariffs will cost it $1.2bn in the second quarter. Ford then announced it expects a reduced annual profits to $3bn after taking an $800m hit from tariffs in the second quarter. GM announced that it expects a $5bn hit, and Toyota said it expects $9.5bn in tariff-driven blows to profits for the year.

In May, Ford also announced it would have to raise prices on some of its cars made in Mexico, including the Mustang Mach-E electric SUV, Maverick pick-up truck and Bronco Sport, in some cases by as much as $2,000, the Reuters news agency reported. Those cars began to reach lots last month.

As a result, consumers are overwhelmingly opting for used cars that are not subject to tariffs, including foreign-made ones, as they are already on US roads.

Used car sales are up 2.3 percent from this time last year, according to Used Car Index report, an auto industry insight platform by Edmunds.

In part, this is because of the limited supply of used cars. Edmunds’s report says that buyers, and sellers looking to upgrade but need the money from sale of a current car, are hesitant about undertaking expenses amid economic uncertainty.

The bigger impact of both those trends is of inventory piling up. On average, dealerships have 82 days worth of cars on the lot, a roughly 14 percent increase between May and June.

An expensive escalation

Cox forecasts prices could rise anywhere between 4 to 8 percent over the next six months as a result of the tariffs. The group expects new car sales of 13 million to 13.3 million this year.

“Tariffs will be inflationary on both the new and used vehicle market,” Schirmer said, adding, the main challenge right now is the unsold inventory that’s piling up.

Analysts believe that prices will continue to rise amid Trump’s tariffs, especially as companies try to move supply chains to the US, as demanded by Trump, an effort that is years in the making.

“The tariff ‘relief’ is like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound with US car companies now dealing with the repercussions moving forward as this Twilight Zone situation will change the paradigm for the US auto industry for years to come,” Dan Ives, analyst at Wedbush Securities, said in a note provided to Al Jazeera.

In the meantime, the cost to import a car is expected to increase by $1,000 this year to $5,700, according to Cox Automotive.

“The US imports a little less than half of the new vehicles sold, but dependence on imports varies substantially by segment. The most dependent segments are at the two ends of the price spectrum – the most affordable vehicles and luxury vehicles. Most of the vehicles priced under $30,000 would face added costs that would make them unaffordable,” Cox Automotive chief economist Jonathan Smoke said in a June conference call shared with Al Jazeera.

EVs hit hard

Trump’s new tax legislation – signed into law last month and which cut the EV tax credit of up to $7,500 – has already led to a significant pullback specifically for the electric vehicle marketplace as demand for the products begins to fall.

“Our forecast had been for approximately 10 percent of new vehicle sales this year to be EV. We slightly lowered that to 9 percent,” Schirmer added.

Volvo reported a 26 percent decline in sales for electric vehicles (12 percent overall). Ford EV sales tumbled by 31 percent. Rivian saw sales decline by 23 percent. Tesla saw a decline of 13.5 percent globally as CEO Elon Musk’s political involvement hindered the brand’s reputation. The cuts to the EV tax credit is expected to cost Tesla $1.2bn every year, JP Morgan forecast.

“Several dealers have also stated that these [EV tax credits] are the main drivers [for consumers]. So without those incentives, there would definitely be a significant hit through EV sales,” Golara added.

General Motors has been the exception to the rule. The Michigan-based auto giant doubled its EV sales in recent months.

Despite the dip in sales, Golora believes that the setback in the EV market is temporary.

“It’s [the EV market] still compelling in the long run because many manufacturers have already reached a decision that this is where the industry is going,” Golara said.

“Investment [in EV production] doesn’t look like a lost one. The payback period will be longer.”

Manufacturing strains

While US manufacturing ticked up overall in June, when it comes to motor vehicle and parts production, it is a different story. Production tumbled by 2.6 percent for the month as demand began to slow.

US auto manufacturing employment is also down. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment in auto manufacturing in the United States has tumbled by 35.7 percent since this time last year and down 2.4 percent from this time last month.

Al Jazeera reached out to the United Auto Workers for comment about the effect on car manufacturing jobs, but the organisation did not respond.

“Demand was not growing as fast as needed, and many manufacturers were caught by surprise. That’s a problem, and it is kind of a longer-term, structural issue,” Golara said.

The world’s top-selling carmaker joins a growing list of companies reporting profit hits because of tariffs

Toyota expects a $9.5bn hit from United States President Donald Trump’s tariffs on cars imported to the US, the largest of any company to date, underscoring growing margin pressures.

The world’s top-selling carmaker announced the forecast impact alongside its updated annual guidance on Thursday.

Toyota also cut its forecast for full-year operating profit by 16 percent, reflecting challenges for global manufacturers grappling with rising costs from US levies on cars, parts, steel and aluminium.

“It’s honestly very difficult for us to predict what will happen regarding the market environment,” Takanori Azuma, Toyota’s head of finance, told a briefing, vowing to keep making cars for US customers, regardless of tariff impact.

Azuma said the 1.4-trillion yen ($9.50bn) estimate also includes fallout that suppliers are facing, particularly those in the US importing parts from Japan, though he declined to say how much of the total was attributable to that.

Toyota’s North American business swung to an operating loss of 63.6 billion yen ($431.3m) in the first quarter, from a profit of 100.7 billion yen ($682.9m) a year earlier, as it took a hit of 450 billion yen ($3bn) from the tariffs.

Its broad production operations, which include US, Canadian, Mexican and Japanese plants, expose it to tariffs not only on direct exports but also on vehicles and parts shipped across borders within North America.

Last week, the automaker said it turned out some 1.1 million Toyota and Lexus brand vehicles in North America in the first six months of 2025, including more than 700,000 in the US.

Forecasts tumble

Toyota cut its operating profit forecast for the financial year to the end of March 2026 to 3.2 trillion yen ($21.7bn) down from a previous outlook of 3.8 trillion yen ($25.7bn).

It had previously estimated a tariff hit of 180 billion yen ($1.2bn) for April and May, but that was solely for the impact from tariffs on Toyota’s vehicles. It had not issued a full-year projection until now.

Rivals have reported smaller tariff hits so far: Jeep maker Stellantis said tariffs were expected to add $1.7bn in expenses for the year. General Motors (GM) has projected one of $4bn to $5bn for the year, while Ford expects a $3bn gross hit to pretax adjusted profit.

On Wednesday, Ford reported that second-quarter results took an $800m hit from tariffs.

Trade deals

The first-quarter results highlight the pressure US import tariffs are putting on Japanese automakers, even as a trade pact between Tokyo and Washington offers potential relief.

Under the deal agreed last month, Japanese auto exports into the US would face a 15 percent tariff, down from levies totalling 27.5 percent previously. But a timeframe for the change has yet to be unveiled.

Last week, Toyota reported record global output and sales for the year’s first half, driven by strong demand in North America, Japan and China, including that for petrol-electric hybrid vehicles.

The carmaker also announced on Thursday a plan to build a new vehicle factory in Japan, where car sales have been falling due to a shrinking population and declining ownership.

Toyota said it planned to start operations early next decade at the new plant, but has yet to decide production models.

On Wall Street, Toyota’s stock is on the decline amid its downward revised forecast. As of 11:30am in New York City (15:30 GMT), it is down by 1.6 percent. Competitors’ stocks are mixed. Ford is down 0.5 percent, Stellantis is up 2.4 percent and GM is up by about 0.7 percent.

‘It’s important work’

Back at the waste yard, business has died down for the day.

Bamfo and her youngest children, Nkunim, 10, and Josephine, 6, are emptying the last few bottles. She will be in bed by 8pm, rising at midnight for her Bible studies before starting work again at dawn.

Bamfo never thought she would become a waste picker.

She was 19 when she finally gained her school certificate, and by selling oranges, she scraped together enough money for a secretarial course. But she couldn’t afford a typewriter.

While the other girls tapped away at their machines, she drew the keyboard on her exercise book and practiced on that, pressing her fingers into the paper.

Soon, the money ran out. Instead of the office job she dreamed of, she found work breaking stones on a building site.

“At that moment, I see myself – I’m a big loser, and there’s nothing,” says Bamfo, leaning forward on her office chair to keep a watch for any final delivery tricycles. “I see the world is against me.”

Then one morning she woke to find the building site had disappeared overnight, replaced by a dump: Truckloads of water sachets, drinks bottles and nylon wigs.

Her five children lay sleeping. Her husband, as usual, had not come home. To buy cassava to make banku – dumpling stew – she needed money urgently.

A friend had told her that factories in the city would buy plastic waste for a few cedis a kilogramme. It was one of the lowliest jobs there were, involving not only backbreaking labour but stigma and shame.

“If you are a woman doing this waste picking, people think you have no family to care for you,” she says. “They think you are bad. They think you are a witch.”

She came home one day to find her husband had abandoned her. But not before he had called her father to tell him his daughter had become a “vulture”.

Estrangement from her father only compounded the shame. To escape her neighbours’ taunts, Bamfo moved with her children to the other side of the city.

There, she took over her small yard, buying waste from pickers and selling it on to factories and recycling plants. Bit by bit, she built a wooden house. Eventually, she plucked up the courage to phone her father.

“I said, ‘Come and see the work I do. See that it is not something to feel bad about.’”

When he saw the yard and the tricycle teams that had become Bamfo’s business, Nkosoo Waste Management (“nkosoo” is Twi for “progress”), he couldn’t help but be impressed.

“You are not a woman, you are a man,” she recalls him telling her once, half admiring and half accusing. “The heart that you have – even your brother doesn’t have that heart.”

Now she hopes to pass on some of her resilience. King, her supervisor at the yard, slept on a nearby dumpsite as a small child and says Bamfo and her waste business saved him. “I cannot say a bad thing about her. She is my mother.”

As night settles on Accra, the polluting plastic tide has crept a little higher. But Bamfo has, she says, found dignity in the fight to keep it at bay.

“It is important work we do,” she says. “Sometimes I feel very sad and bad about not getting the education I wanted. But we clean the city. I think of that.”

This story was produced in partnership with SourceMaterial

Legal marijuana businesses in Los Angeles will pay thousands more dollars in renewal fees, the City Council decided Tuesday, bringing fresh financial woes to an already constricting market.

City officials said the fee increases are necessary to make up for declining tax revenue from the marijuana industry, at a time when the city is in dire financial straits.

“This is a difficult but necessary action for the continued functions of [the cannabis department] and to avoid further strain on our General Fund,” City Councilmember Imelda Padilla in a statement.

But some struggling business owners said the increased fees could threaten their survival.

Luis Rivera previously ran three different marijuana delivery businesses in the city, two of which have gone under. He’s now considering shuttering the remaining one, Bonafide Delivery in Sun Valley, due to the fee increases and low profit margins.

“There’s nowhere to pull the money from,” Rivera said. “The fees will be disastrous.”

The new fees, which the council approved unanimously, are expected to bring in about $6 million this year to the city’s Department of Cannabis Regulation, which is required to recoup all its expenses through fees or other charges.

After four straight years where gross receipt taxes from marijuana sales exceeded $100 million, the amount dropped to about $90 million in 2024, according to cannabis department data.

High state and local taxes and the high cost of doing business because of a lack of access to traditional banking and financing, as well as competition with the illegal cannabis market, have contributed to the falling revenue, said Bryan Bergman, an attorney who works with cannabis businesses.

The illegal dispensaries often undercut the prices of legal stores, in part because they do not pay taxes or fees, and have also been hotbeds of crime, according to law enforcement.

“The fee increases are coming at a really bad time for industry folks. And it’s a very significant increase,” Bergman said.

Cannabis products for sale at Bonafide in Sun Valley.

(David Butow/For the Times)

The cannabis department’s budget is $8.6 million for this fiscal year, and it is expected to pay additional $19 million to other parts of city government, such as the city attorney’s office, for their marijuana-related work.

While increasing fees for marijuana businesses, the new ordinance decreases fines for major violations of city rules and regulations. For example, delivering marijuana goods outside of allowable hours will now result in a $23,000 fine, down from $42,000.

The new ordinance also creates a new category of “severe” violation, such as diverting cannabis to unlawful establishments, which would result in a $34,000 fine. Cannabis Department officials said the goal was to avoid excessively heavy fines.

Los Angeles has the nation’s largest municipal commercial cannabis department, overseeing nearly 1,100 licenses for brick-and-mortar dispensaries, delivery businesses and growing operations.

Department officials argued that its fees, which had not gone up since 2020, did not match the cost of operations. Since the department first authorized fees in 2020, its staff has grown from 37 to 63 members. Through collective bargaining agreements, their salaries have also increased 19% since 2020.

The most widespread hit for marijuana businesses will come from renewal fees, which must be paid annually.

A license renewal will jump from $8,486 to $12,617. A temporary approval renewal will go from $4,233 to $6,294, and a record renewal will increase from $1,829 to $2,719.

The new ordinance also contains other fee changes, including an increase in the business diagram modification review fee and a drop in the ownership structure modification review fee.

A Cannabis Department spokesperson said that participants in its social equity program, which provides support to cannabis operators from communities most harmed by the war on drugs, will have some of their increased fees covered by money from a state grant.

The grant will cover about $3.1 million in new fees, said Jason Killeen, the cannabis department’s assistant executive director, during a city council committee meeting Tuesday. More than half of the money will cover the difference between the old renewal fee and the new one for the 317 social equity license holders. The rest of the grant money will go toward new applicants for social equity licenses.

The increased fees come as the city struggles with a budget crisis likely to continue for several years. This year’s budget closes a nearly $1-billion gap through layoffs and other cuts.

The City Council approved an increase in ticket prices for the L.A. Zoo and has taken steps to raise trash fees for roughly 740,000 customers. The city may also raise parking meter fees and extend the meters’ hours of operation.

The Cannabis Department has acknowledged that the new fees will be a hardship for businesses.

“Please understand that this fee study was necessitated by law and is central to DCR’s ability to continue serving this community effectively and equitably,” Executive Director Michelle Garakian wrote in a July news bulletin. “It’s easy to feel like no one at the City cares. But I assure you, DCR does. DCR has to navigate limited resources, competing needs, and make challenging decisions.”

MASERU, Lesotho — The southern African nation of Lesotho has had its U.S. export tariff reduced from a threatened 50% to 15%, but its crucial textile industry still faces massive factory closures, officials said Friday.

Despite a reduction announced by President Trump, the country’s textile sector says it remains at a competitive disadvantage and faces ongoing factory closures and job losses.

In April, the Trump administration announced a 50% tariff on imports from Lesotho, the highest among all countries.

The tariffs were paused across the board, but the anticipated increase wreaked havoc across the country’s textile industry, which is its biggest private-sector employer with more than 30,000 workers.

About 12,000 of them work for garment factories exporting to the U.S. market, supplying American retailers such as Levi’s and Wrangler.

The Associated Press reported this week that clothing manufacturer Tzicc has seen business dry up ahead of the expected tariff increase, sending home most of its 1,300 workers who have made and exported sportswear to American stores, including JCPenney, Walmart and Costco.

David Chen, chairperson of the Lesotho Textile Exporters, has warned that the U.S. government’s move to reduce the tariffs offers little relief for the struggling industry as their competitors have lesser tariffs.

“Other countries which we are competing against are already being charged 10%, which makes it difficult for us to compete on an equal footing,” said Chen, singling out the East African country of Kenya as its strongest competitor with a more favorable 10% tariff.

“As a result, many factories will have to shut down,” Chen said. “They had already been forced to lay off workers when the tariffs were first announced in April.”

According to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, in 2024, U.S.-Lesotho bilateral trade stood at $240.1 million. Apart from clothing, Lesotho’s exports also include diamonds and other goods.

Lesotho is classified as a lower-middle-income country by the World Bank, and nearly half of its 2.3 million population live below the poverty line, while a quarter are unemployed.

Lesotho’s minister of Trade, Industry and Business Development, Mokhethi Shelile, said that while several meetings with U.S. trade representatives led to a reduced tariff, more needed to be done to lower it further.

“We remain committed to pushing for a further reduction to the minimum tariff level of 10%, which is essential for our textile sector to compete effectively in the U.S. market,” he said. “I have already communicated with the U.S. Embassy regarding continued negotiations.”

Lesotho’s neighbor and trading partner, South Africa, is also reeling after Trump announced a reciprocal 30% tariff for the country, which is expected to significantly affect its agriculture and manufacturing sectors, among others.

Phakela writes for the Associated Press.

Published on
01/08/2025 – 15:53 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

US President Donald Trump doesn’t appear willing to ease the pressure on German carmakers. The US executive order on reciprocal tariffs published just before 1 August stopped short of applying the 15% tariffs agreed by Trump and Commission president Ursula von der Leyen to US imports of EU vehicles.

Since 2 April, EU cars have been hit with 25% US tariffs under the section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act, which allows the US president to restrict imports of goods threatening US national security.

The deal concluded last Sunday with President Ursula von der Leyen was meant to apply the 15% tariffs to EU cars, and to exempt certain strategic products such as aircraft from tariffs, but neither proviso appears in the executive order.

The executive order imposes a blanket 15% tariff on EU goods to apply from 8 August. Goods already in transit before that date will enjoy the previous tariff rate of 10% until 5 October, the US order says. Any attempt to circumvent these tariffs will be penalized with a 40% duty on the goods concerned, the order adds.

Despite the apparent omissions from the order, EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič welcomed “the first results of the EU–US deal”.

“This reinforces stability for businesses as well as trust in the transatlantic economy,” he said on X, adding: “EU exporters now benefit from a more competitive position.”

Šefčovič also said, however, that “the work continues”, referring to ongoing negotiations on a joint statement intended to formalise the political trade agreement reached on July 27.

Diverging narratives

The Commission and the US administration are struggling to agree on a joint text, and up to now have pushed diverging narratives on the deal.

Uncertainty remains over the fate of steel and aluminium, currently hit by 50% US tariffs, which, according to the Commission, are expected to soon be subject to lower tariff-rate quotas. Negotiations are also ongoing over a series of exemptions, as pressure mounts from the EU wine and spirits industry.

In a factsheet published on Monday, the US also claimed that the EU committed not to apply telecommunications network usage fees in an upcoming Digital Network Act, which is currently being disputed between EU telecom companies and US tech giants in Brussels.

On Thursday the Commission noted that a white paper on digital networks published in February 2024 assessed that imposing a network fee was “not a viable solution”. “Such an exemption would not apply to US company only,” a Commission spokesperson said.

The federal government has paid California dairy farms more than $230 million to subsidize losses in milk production resulting from bird flu, records show, an amount that the dairy industry expects to climb higher as more claims for damages are processed.

The H5N1 bird flu has swept through more than 75% of California’s 1,000 dairy farms since August 2024, sickening cattle and leading to steep dropoffs in milk production.

Farmers were able to get relief under a U.S. Department of Agriculture program known as the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program, or ELAP. The program usually provides assistance for farmers impacted by wildfires, drought and flooding but was opened up for dairy farmers last year as bird flu began ravaging their cows.

U.S. Department of Agriculture records show that 644 payments were made to 359 California dairy farms between November 2024 and June 2025 totaling $231 million. The average per farm payment was about $645,000, and ranged from $2,058 to the Pereira Dairy Farm, in Visalia, to $4.4 million to Channel Islands Dairy Farm, in Corcoran.

Those payments are expected to go much higher, however, as more claims are submitted and processed. Many of the payments issued in May and June were for outbreaks in 2024, suggesting there are more to come.

The relief payments were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by Farm Forward, a nonprofit group that advocates against factory farming. The group asserts that the subsidies help prop up industrial-scale dairy operations that perpetuate the spread of bird flu.

“These are mega industrial operations that are fueling an outbreak,” said Andrew deCoriolis, Farm Forward’s executive director. “Bird flu spreads in exactly the kinds of environments that we’re paying to preserve.”

Anja Raudabaugh, the chief executive of the industry’s largest state trade group, Western United Dairies, said the payments have “ensured our dairy communities and their workers stay employed and healthy. Until we get approval of a dairy cow vaccine, weathering this storm has only been possible with the assistance of the milk loss payments.”

Jonathan Cockroft, managing partner of Channel Islands Dairy Farms, said while the payments helped with the roughly 30% drop in milk production his farm experienced, his losses exceed the $4 million he received.

He said the virus caused cows to abort their pregnancies, and often prevented them from getting pregnant again. A dairy cow that doesn’t give birth doesn’t produce milk. In other cases, he said the udders were so scarred by the disease that the cows were unable to produce milk at levels prior to infection.

“There’s a whole other version I’m not sure the public understands, which is the huge impact on reproduction,” he said.

He also noted many animals died — especially when the outbreak first hit last fall, and the newness of it combined with the blazing heat of the Central Valley felled 10% to 15% of many California herds.

Joey Airoso, a dairy farmer in Tipton, received a $1.45-million subsidy for an outbreak at his farm last October.

He said the outbreak has cost him more than $2 million “just on milk income and that does not include the over $250,000 of extra care costs” required to treat cows with medicines, extra staffing and veterinary consultations.

And it doesn’t cover the cost of the cows that died — which can’t produce milk or be sold for meat. The average dairy cow costs about $3,500, Cockroft said.

Jay Van Rein, a spokesperson for California’s Department of Food and Agriculture, said the loss payments are “the most realistic way for producers to recover and to avoid huge disruptions in the food supply of these products.”

USDA officials didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, but a former top USDA official who left the agency in January said it was important to provide dairy farmers relief once the agency identified H5N1 bird flu in a handful of Texas herds in March 2024. By then the disease had been spreading for weeks, if not months, making containment to one state impossible.

“This was a once-in-a-lifetime event, and we knew that we were going to need to support producers, and we knew that the quicker we could get some assistance out to them to help them test, the better off we were going to be, and the faster we’d be able to bring the infection under control,” he said.

Farm Forward’s DeCoriolis and others, however, say these programs perpetuate an agricultural industry designed around containing hundreds, if not thousands, of genetically similar animals into confined lots — veritable playgrounds for a novel virus. He also noted the federal relief programs don’t come with any strings attached, such as incentives for disease mitigation and/or biosecurity.

Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan’s Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization in Canada, said handing out subsidies to farms without trying to understand or investigate the practices they are using to quash the disease is a mistake.

“What are they doing on the farms to prevent reinfection?” she said.

The USDA payments were based on a per cow milk production losses over a four-week period. According to Farm Forward’s data, several farms received more than one subsidy. While roughly half received just one payment, 100 farms received two payments, 58 received three, 19 received four and two received six separate payments.

At one farm in Tulare County, four USDA payments were submitted once a month between November 2024 and February 2025. At another, payments stretched from December 2024 to May 2025.

Rasmussen said the multiple payments most likely stemmed depending on specific circumstances at the dairies involved.

Cockroft of the Channel Islands Dairy said he and other farmers have seen waves of reinfection and milk tests that remain positive for months on end. He said he knew of a farm that was in quarantine for nine months.

When herds are quarantined, animals are not allowed to be transferred on or off site. In California, a farm is under quarantine for 60 days after initial virus detection. It can’t move out of quarantine until tests show its milk is virus-free — for three weeks in a row.

Van Rein, the state agriculture spokesperson, said the average time under quarantine is 103 days. He said that of the 1,000 herds in California, 940 are not under quarantine; 715 of those had previously been infected and released from quarantine.

A quarantined farm can still sell milk, however, even if the milk tests positive. Pasteurization has been shown to kill the virus.

The relief payments are another sign of how the U.S. government supports the agricultural industry, which is considered by some to be vital to the national interest.

“We’ve decided politically that this is an industry that we want to support, that was hit by something that obviously wasn’t their fault, and we’re going to help them, because it was a disastrous thing that hit the industry,” said Daniel Sumner, an agricultural economist at UC Davis. “If we thought about these payments as we’re using our tax money to help somebody who’s in need, because their family is poor, that’s not the case.”

GM’s profit tumble in second quarter comes a day after Jeep maker Stellantis says it expected a $2.7bn loss in the first six months of the year.

Auto giant General Motors has reported a 35 percent drop in second-quarter profits, including a $1.1bn hit from United States-imposed tariffs but confirmed its full-year forecast.

GM’s results released on Tuesday still topped analyst estimates, but the US carmaker cautioned that profits in the second half of 2025 would be lower than in the first.

The company pointed to sales growth in North America, where new and revamped trucks and sport utility vehicles sold briskly with solid pricing. GM was among the carmakers that benefitted from a surge in demand this spring from consumers who wanted to beat the US tariffs and their higher prices.

Profits overall fell 35.4 percent to $1.9bn year-on-year while revenues dipped 1.8 percent to $47.1bn.

The US imposed 25 percent tariffs on imported finished cars in early April, a move that affected major GM manufacturing operations in Mexico, Canada and South Korea. Car companies have also faced tariffs on imported steel, aluminium and auto parts.

The tariff hit in the second quarter reflected that there were “minimal mitigation offsets”, GM said in a slide presentation.

The Detroit, Michigan-based company’s outlook for a weaker second half of 2025 reflects “seasonally lower” volumes, increased spending on vehicle launches and the presence of two quarters with a tariff hit compared with just one in the first half of the year.

GM expected annual operating income of $10bn to $12.5bn after notching $6.5bn in the first half of the year.

Chief Financial Officer Paul Jacobson described the hit to profitability in the first quarter as “the peak of the tariff impact for us”, telling CNBC in an interview that mitigation efforts should enable a partial recovery in profit margins later in the year.

Shifting manufacturing

GM expected to mitigate “at least” 30 percent of the tariff hit through “manufacturing adjustments, targeted cost initiatives and consistent pricing”, according to a slide.

Jacobson said it would take 18 to 24 months to implement capital projects to adjust GM’s manufacturing footprint.

In June, GM announced spending of $4bn over two years to expand production at plants in Michigan, Kansas and Tennessee, making use of unused capacity in its home market as President Donald Trump’s tariffs penalise imports of finished vehicles.

The June announcement included steps to produce the Chevrolet Equinox and Chevrolet Blazer in the US. The two vehicles are currently assembled in Mexico.

GM has so far not shifted manufacturing from South Korea, home to production for the Chevrolet Trax, a popular compact SUV that is priced affordably.

Jacobson told CNBC the Trax has stayed profitable even with the hit from the tariff on imported autos.

“We haven’t made any long-term decisions about Korea yet, mainly because there is a lot of uncertainty about that,” Jacobson said.

Trump has set an August 1 deadline to reach broad trade deals with numerous countries, including South Korea, which faces a 25 percent tariff if there is no deal.

“We’re optimistic that the US and Korea can find common ground,” Jacobson said. “We know the auto industry is important to both sides in those conversations.”

GM’s stock tumbled on the lacklustre earnings report. It is down 6.6 percent for the day as of 11:30am in New York (15:30 GMT).

GM’s newly reported hit comes a day after carmaker Stellantis announced it expected a $2.7bn loss in the first six months of the year because of Trump’s imposed tariffs. Stellantis, the owner of brands including Fiat and Jeep, will disclose its final results for the first half of the year on July 29.

Stellantis stock is down 0.3 percent since the market opened on Tuesday and had increased more than 2.4 percent over the past five days.

Skip Brittenham, a prominent Hollywood attorney whose clients included Harrison Ford, Henry Winkler and Eddie Murphy, has died at age 83.

Brittenham died Thursday, said Ziffren Brittenham LLP, the firm he founded in 1978.

“Everyone in our industry knew of Skip’s legal prowess,” the firm said in a statement. “But some may not have known of his quiet generosity, his ability to find humor and opportunity in the darkest moments, and his unwavering belief that media and the entertainment industry must serve people, not the other way around.”

The firm did not disclose the cause of death.

Brittenham was known in the entertainment industry as a powerful dealmaker. Beyond his starry client list, Brittenham helped to forge Pixar’s initial deal with Disney, was behind the splitting of DreamWorks and ushered Disney’s acquisition of Miramax.

“What amuses me most about Skip is he often represents everyone in the deal,” Ford, who was a client before he rose to fame with “Star Wars,” told The Times in 2005. “And, he does a really good job for everybody … I’ve always walked away from every negotiation and thought, ‘Jesus, how did he get that?’”

Ken Ziffren, one of two lawyers with whom Brittenham founded the firm, told The Times in 2005 that early in their partnership, the two discovered they were wooing the same prospective client, comedian Richard Pryor.

“Skip did not back down,” Ziffren said. “He got Pryor.”

Born Harry M. Brittenham, the eldest son of an Air Force fighter pilot, he spent much of his childhood moving from one base to another. Although he attended Air Force Academy, Brittenham got hit in the eye with a squash racket in 1963. His 20-20 vision — a requirement for pilot training — was gone.

He spent four years negotiating contracts for the Air Force before enrolling in law school at UCLA.

Outside of his professional life, Brittenham was a passionate fly-fisher with decades of experience. He competed in and won several worldwide fishing competitions and practiced the sport across six continents.

The love of nature Brittenham tended to as he pursued fly-fishing led him to serve as a longtime board member of Conservation International, a leading environmental organization that honored him with its Heroes of Conservation Award.

Brittenham was also an avid fan of science fiction, and he authored a sci-fi graphic novel titled “Anomaly” in 2012. Speaking with The Times ahead of the book’s release, Brittenham said he wanted to dabble in his creative side and tap into his childhood love for Marvel and DC Comics to show people he was more than just a negotiator.

“I don’t like to just try things out,” he said. “I like to jump all the way in and figure out how to do something unique and different.”

Although Brittenham is remembered as a tenacious lawyer, he also had a reputation as a family man, often leaving the office by 5 p.m. to be with his wife and children.

Brittenham was married to actor and screenwriter Heather Thomas, and he had three daughters: Kristina, Shauna and India. He is also survived by his brother Bud, two devoted sons-in-law Jesse Sisgold and Avi Reiter, and four grandchildren.

ADVERTISEMENT

What the US government dubbed as the “Crypto Week” yielded in the House passing the first federal legislation to regulate stablecoins. As it has been previously approved by the Senate, it comes into effect the moment the president signs it.

Two additional crypto-related bills also passed in the House and will now proceed to the Senate.

This is a major win for the crypto industry, which poured millions into last year’s election, supporting candidates, including Donald Trump, who became a major advocate for cryptocurrency investments.

The House had three crypto-related bills to pass this “Crypto Week”. However, the bills were stalled for more than a day due to disagreements among House Republicans over how to combine the legislation.

Ultimately, GOP leaders put the three bills up for separate votes. One of the three bills, legislation to regulate a type of cryptocurrency called stablecoins, had already passed the Senate with broad bipartisan support and will now head to Trump’s desk.

The other two bills — a broader measure to create a new market structure for cryptocurrency and a bill to prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a new digital currency — will be considered by the Senate later.

How stablecoin is being regulated in the US

The stablecoin bill, called the “Genius Act”, sets initial guardrails and consumer protections for the cryptocurrency, with reserve requirements, audits, and compliance.

Stablecoins are digital tokens tied to a stable asset, often the US dollar, to reduce price volatility.

“Around the world, payment systems are undergoing a revolution,” said House Financial Services Chair French Hill of Arkansas as lawmakers debated the stablecoin legislation Thursday morning. Hill said the bill will “ensure American competitiveness and strong guardrails for our consumers.”

The stablecoin measure is seen by lawmakers and the industry as a step toward adding legitimacy and consumer trust to a rapidly growing sector. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in June that the legislation could help that currency “grow into a $3.7 trillion (€3.2tr) market by the end of the decade.”

The bill outlines requirements for stablecoin issuers, including compliance with US anti-money laundering and sanctions laws, and mandates that issuers hold reserves backing the cryptocurrency.

Without such a framework, Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee warned in a statement, “consumers face risks like unstable reserves or unclear operations from stablecoin issuers.”

After the votes, House Republicans strongly urged the Senate to take up the second bill, which would create a new market structure for cryptocurrency.

That legislation aims to provide clarity for how digital assets are regulated. The bill defines what forms of cryptocurrency should be treated as commodities regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and which are securities policed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. In general, tokens associated with “mature” blockchains, like Bitcoin, will be considered commodities.

The third bill, passed in the House on a narrower 219-210 margin, prohibits the US from offering what is known as a “central bank digital currency,” which is a government-issued form of digital cash.

Why the US needs crypto regulation

The crypto industry has long complained that unclear laws have made it difficult to operate in the US and that the Biden administration attempted to regulate it through enforcement actions rather than transparent rulemaking.

Passing this bill has been a top priority for the industry, which has quickly become a major player in Washington, thanks to substantial campaign donations and lobbying efforts.

Patrick McHenry, the former chair of the House Financial Services Committee and now vice chair of the crypto firm Ondo Finance, said the legislation will have a “massive generational impact,” similar to the securities laws Congress passed in the 1930s that helped make Wall Street the centre of the financial world.

“These bills will make the United States the centre of the world for digital assets,” he said.

While the bill has significant bipartisan support, it has also faced pushback from Democrats who argue that the legislation should address Trump’s personal financial interests in the cryptocurrency space.

A provision in the stablecoin bill bans members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins. But that prohibition does not extend to the president and his family.

According to Forbes, the president’s crypto holdings are worth more than any single real estate asset in his portfolio, an estimated $1 billion (€860 million).

The Republican president’s family holds a significant stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto project that launched its own stablecoin, USD1.

Trump reported earning $57.35 million (€49.2 million) from token sales at World Liberty Financial in 2024, according to a public financial disclosure released in June.

Some Democrats also criticised the bill for creating what they see as an overly weak regulatory framework that could pose long-term financial risks. They have also raised concerns that the legislation opens the door for major corporations to issue their own private cryptocurrencies.

“If this bill passes, it will allow Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg to issue their own money. The bill still permits Big Tech companies and other conglomerates to issue their own private currencies,” said Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.

Advocates hope House bills will bring decentralised currency into US mainstream as Trump pushes ‘crypto week’.

The United States House of Representatives has passed three bills related to cryptocurrency, sending one directly to US President Donald Trump and the other two to the US Senate.

The votes by the Republican-controlled chamber come amid a wider push by the Trump administration to make the US the “crypto capital of the world”, in what the president has dubbed “crypto week”.

Trump and his family’s emphasis on the largely unregulated crypto industry has also raised concerns it could be used to mask corruption and foreign influence.

The bill that will go directly to Trump is called the GENIUS Act. It sets initial guardrails and consumer protections for a cryptocurrency known as stablecoins, which are tied to “stable” assets like the US dollar to reduce their volatility.

House Financial Services Chair French Hill said during debate on Thursday that the bill will “ensure American competitiveness and strong guardrails for our consumers”.

“Around the world, payment systems are undergoing a revolution,” he said.

The legislation passed in the Senate and by a 308-122 vote in the House. It garnered bipartisan support in both chambers.

A second bill would create a new market structure for cryptocurrency. It passed by a slimmer margin of 294-134 and will need to go to the Senate, where lawmakers could craft a new version.

That legislation aims to provide clarity for how digital assets are regulated, mostly by defining what forms of cryptocurrency should be treated as commodities regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and which are securities policed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Commodities are typically considered goods that can be traded or sold, while securities, like stocks and bonds, typically refer to partial ownership of an asset.

A third bill, passed by a narrower 219-210 margin, would prohibit the US from offering what’s known as a “central bank digital currency”, essentially a government-issued form of digital cash. It will also head to the Senate.

Trump’s crypto interests

Cryptocurrencies, which are unmoored from any central government authority, have exploded in popularity since first emerging in 2009.

But experts have said US operations have been curtailed by unclear laws governing the industry. Advocates have said the bills passed on Thursday could help to hearken in more mainstream adoption.

Still, Democrats critical of the GENIUS bill accused Republicans of fast-tracking the passage, while failing to address Trump and future presidents’ interests in cryptocurrency.

For example, a provision in the bill bans members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins. That prohibition does not extend to the president and his family.

Trump’s family holds a significant stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto project that launched its own stablecoin, USD1. Trump reported earning $57.35m from token sales at World Liberty Financial in 2024, according to a public financial disclosure released in June.

A meme coin linked to him has also generated an estimated $320m in fees, though the earnings are split among multiple investors.

“No one should be surprised that these same Republicans’ next order of business is to validate, legitimise, and endorse the Trump family’s corruption and efforts to sell the White House to the highest bidder,” Representative Maxine Waters, the top Democrat on the House Financial Services panel, said amid the flurry of votes on Thursday.

Since taking office, Trump has also proposed creating a cryptocurrency “national reserve” and has suspended Department of Justice investigations related to cryptocurrency.

Some Democrats also criticised the GENIUS bill for creating what they called an overly weak regulatory framework that could pose longterm financial risks.

They also say the legislation opens the door for major corporations to issue their own private cryptocurrencies.

Already, miners have successfully protested a proposal by the Trump administration to close more than 30 field offices run by the Mining Safety and Health Administration, a branch of the Labor Department that enforces safety standards.

Another government bureau, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), faced staffing cuts of nearly 90 percent under Trump. Miners pushed back, arguing that NIOSH’s research is necessary for their protection.

“For generations, the United Mine Workers of America has fought to protect the health and safety of coal miners and all working people,” union president Cecil Roberts said in a statement announcing a lawsuit against the cuts in May.

“The dismantling of NIOSH and the elimination of its critical programs — like black lung screenings — puts miners’ lives at risk and turns back decades of progress.”

Some of NIOSH’s workers were reinstated. Others were not. The upheaval left some investigations in states like Wyoming in limbo.

Marshal Cummings, a United Steelworkers union representative in southwest Wyoming, was among those seeking NIOSH’s help. He had grown concerned about the potential for trona miners like himself to be exposed to high levels of silica dust, a known carcinogen.

“We know what silica does to people,” Cummings told Al Jazeera. “We know that it causes people to get their lungs cut up by jagged edges of a silica particle, and then they slowly die. They lose that same quality of life that people who work on the surface have.”

Cummings believes there is too little research to fully understand the toll silica exposure is taking on trona miners.

Already, trona miners work in extreme conditions. Their mines cut deep into the earth. One of Wyoming’s biggest trona pits plunges to a depth of 1,600 feet or 488 metres: deep enough to swallow three full-sized copies of the Great Pyramid of Giza, stacked on top of each other.

Cummings was also dismayed to learn that a new rule slated to take effect in April had been pushed back until at least mid-August.

The rule would have lowered the acceptable levels of silica dust in mines. Heavy exposure has been tied to respiratory diseases. Black lung — a potentially fatal condition caused by dust scarring the lungs — has been on the rise in Wyoming, as it is throughout the US.

To Cummings, blame rests squarely on the shoulders of mining executives whom he sees as more interested in their wallets than their employees’ health. He believes the silica rule’s delay is part of their political manoeuvring.

“The pause is not just the pause,” Cummings said. “It’s giving people who care more about a favourable quarterly report than they do their employees an opportunity to get this rule completely thrown out. And that’s unacceptable.”

Travis Deti, the executive director of the Wyoming Mining Association, represents some of the industry leaders who opposed the new rule. They felt the silica rule was “a little bit of overreach”, he explained.

“I know that a lot of our folks have a little heartburn over it, that it might go a little too far,” Deti said.

He pointed out that coal mining, for instance, is different in Wyoming than it is in the Appalachia region. While Appalachian miners have to tunnel to harvest the fossil fuel, Wyoming has surface mines that require less digging.

“My guys feel they mitigate their silica issues appropriately,” Deti said.

The opening scene unfolds onto a bird’s-eye view of a sedan making its way down a stretch of unmarked highway, as Woody Harrelson’s unmistakable drawl is heard off-camera. “You ever wonder if this industry of ours is just chasing its own tail?” he asks.

Matthew McConaughey, in his equally distinctive cadence, shoots back, “No, I don’t wonder. Restrictions, regulations, nickel and diming productions, political lectures,” before the camera pans in for a close-up of the actors.

The sequence pays homage to the gritty, atmospheric crime drama “True Detective.” Indeed, it was directed by Nic Pizzolatto, the show’s creator.

Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey have played major roles in the effort to increase Texas film incentives.

(Lester Cohen / WireImage)

In January, this four-minute video, “True to Texas,” was released as part of an unusual campaign by a coalition of A-list actors — Dennis Quaid, Renée Zellweger and Billy Bob Thornton make appearances — independent creatives and Lone Star Republicans to appeal to the Texas State Legislature.

The goal: to help bring increased film incentives to a state not known for its wholesale embrace of Hollywood or government subsidies — particularly for something like the arts.

Despite considerable push back among conservative lawmakers, the effort paid off. Last month Gov. Greg Abbott allowed the passage of an unprecedented bill boosting tax incentives for film production in the state to $300 million every two years — guaranteeing that funding for 10 years. The law goes into effect Sept. 1.

The aggressive bid to nab a slice of Hollywood furthers the ongoing rivalry between California and Texas. Several major Golden State-based companies including Tesla and Hewlett-Packard have relocated to the Lone Star State, lured by lower taxes and its business-friendly environment. It also comes as California is struggling to keep movie and TV production, having recently doubled its own tax incentive ceiling to compete with film subsidies in three dozen other states and abroad.

The new bill puts Texas in a position to become a major player among the growing list of global and regional filming hubs in an industry that has become increasingly unmoored from its historic Hollywood hometown.

“Texas now has a program that is going to be competitive,” said Fred Poston, the executive director of the Texas Media Production Alliance. “When you really take a close look at it, you realize this is a big deal. We have this new level of funding to start building more industry around it.”

The Texas bill is not only bigger and better, but found itself an unlikely champion in Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick wants to make his state the world’s film capital.

(Eric Gay / Associated Press)

“We are not trying to make Texas the next Hollywood — we don’t like Hollywood. We want to export Texas values,” said Patrick in a campaign update. A staunch conservative who has relentlessly opposed legalized marijuana, gambling and abortion, Patrick has vowed “to make Texas the Film Capital of the World.”

The bill, which supports the Texas Moving Image Industry Incentive Fund (TMIIF) program, offers tiered grants up to 25% for projects spending $1.5 million in the state. Faith-based films and those that shoot in historic sites or employ a percentage of crew who are Texas-based military veterans can push grants up to 31%.

The governor’s office, through the film commission, has broad discretion over which projects receive funds and awards can be denied at any stage in the review process for material that portrays Texas negatively or contains “inappropriate” content.

Conservative backlash

Still, even with the bill’s Texas-style protectionist wrangling, its passage was far from assured.

Weeks before the Senate vote, there was hand-wringing among conservative lawmakers and others who opposed the bill on economic, moral and even biblical grounds. Critics took swipes at profanity-laced scripts and what they saw as inaccurate portrayals of the state’s oilmen on TV. Some viewed the grants as akin to taxpayer theft. Many shuddered at the thought that the bill would usher in the unholy influence of a debauched Hollywood on Texas.

“The Bible warns us of the consequences of the government wrongfully taking money from some and handing it out to others,” said the Texans for Fiscal Responsibility in one of several papers it published decrying the bill.

Republican State Rep. Brian Harrison called the bill “an abomination. And shame on everybody who voted for it.”

Harrison launched his own “Don’t Hollywood My Texas” crusade.

One of his followers, the Freedom Bard, a self-proclaimed “patriotic” lyricist, recorded an earworm of a protest anthem denouncing the bill with such lyrics as: “Keep your failed policies and your liberal BS.”

“This is big government liberal redistributive socialism,” Harrison told The Times, “The governor and lieutenant governor of the supposedly Republican-controlled state of Texas chose to keep property taxes billions of dollars higher so that you can subsidize a rich liberal Hollywood movie industry — how embarrassing.”

He plans to introduce legislation at a special hearing later this month to repeal the law.

The ‘Third Coast’

Despite the hostility toward Hollywood, Texas was once known as the film industry’s “Third Coast.”

Many of the westerns of the 1920s and ‘30s were filmed in the state.

Texas’ sweeping backdrops and larger-than-life characters have inspired some of the most celebrated movies and television shows, including the 1956 epic “Giant,” the 1974 slasher classic “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” the 1990 sleeper hit “Slacker” and the acclaimed small-town TV series “Friday Night Lights.”

The 1956 classic “Giant,” starring James Dean, was primarily shot in Texas.

(Warner Bros. / TCM)

The state’s cultural soil has nurtured a fertile creative community with filmmakers like Robert Rodriguez (“El Mariachi”), Wes Anderson (“Bottle Rocket”) and Richard Linklater (“Boyhood”).

By the early 2000s, however, neighboring states began chipping away.

“Texas had been highly competitive, we had all of these ingredients,” said Rebecca Campbell, CEO of the Austin Film Society. “Then all of a sudden, Texas stories were getting shot in New Mexico and Louisiana.”

In 2007, the state established its first program for film incentives, earmarking $20 million. Although the program expanded in later years, it became chronically underfunded, prompting the producers of “Fear the Walking Dead” in 2021 to relocate to Georgia after filming four seasons around Austin.

Linklater had to rework his 2024 romantic crime thriller “Hit Man” starring Glen Powell, originally set in Houston, when filming relocated to New Orleans because of a lack of available incentive funds.

Director Richard Linklater on the set of “Hit Man,” with Adria Arjona and Glen Powell.

(Brian Roedel / Netflix)

“We’re completely surrounded by states that have very active film incentive programs,” Linklater told the podcast “Friends on Film.” “They really support this industry, and you have to do that to compete.”

But a perceptible cultural and economic shift in the Texas landscape began to slowly take shape during the pandemic, when a wave of actors and filmmakers relocated to the state.

Filmmaker Nate Strayer, formerly of Los Angeles, moved to Austin in 2021 and later founded production company Stray Vista Studios.

“We started to realize that we could have an industry here where our stories aren’t being pulled away to other states,” said Strayer, whose company produced the “True to Texas” video.

Noah Hawley has made Austin, Texas, his base of operations.

(Justin Cook / For The Times)

Until the pandemic shut down Hollywood, “Fargo” series creator Noah Hawley flew every other week from his home in Texas to Los Angeles for meetings with his production company when he wasn’t shooting. When the pandemic ended, Hawley found he no longer needed to be based in Hollywood.

Last year he moved his company, 26 Keys, to Austin.

“My wife and I wanted to be a bigger part of our community in Texas,” he said. “What Austin provides for me is more of a local, handmade place.”

The ‘Sheridan effect’

The other wave to hit Texas’ film industry was Taylor Sheridan.

Taylor Sheridan films an episode of “Landman.”

(Emerson Miller / Paramount+)

The “Yellowstone” creator, who grew up in Fort Worth, began filming many of his hit television shows — including “1883” and “Landman” — across the state.

The productions brought in hundreds of millions of dollars to local businesses and a stream of tourists in what many began calling “the Sheridan Effect.”

Production of “1883” alone led to 13,325 booked hotel nights in Fort Worth, according to the city’s film commission.

Beyond the economic boom, Sheridan showed that Texas could tell its own stories and help seed larger ambitions.

In February 2023, Lt. Gov. Patrick had dinner with Sheridan.

Shortly afterward, Patrick described Sheridan as the “best screenwriter of our time and one of the best storytellers ever to make movies” and said, “My goal is for Taylor to move all of his TV and movie production to Texas.”

Soon, Sheridan had a multiplier effect.

The Wonder Project, the faith-based, family-oriented production company behind Amazon‘s “House of David,” was established by filmmaker Jon Erwin (“Jesus Revolution”) and former YouTube executive Kelly Merryman Hoogstraten in 2023 with more than $75 million from such investors as Jason Blum, Lionsgate and Leonard Leo, the wealthy conservative lawyer and Federalist Society co-chairman.

Two years ago, Hill Country Studios, a $267-million film and television studio, broke ground in San Marcos. The plans include 12 soundstages spanning 310,000 square feet, two back lots, a virtual production stage and 15 acres of outdoor production space.

Zachary Levi, the star of “Shazam!” and “Chuck,” is raising $40 million to develop his Wyldwood Studios in Bastrop east of Austin. Plans call for two 20,000-square-foot soundstages, along with a hotel, restaurants and homes.

Zachary Levi is planning to create a new kind of studio system in Texas.

(Chris Pizzello / Invision / AP)

“I really felt this … calling on my life to go and build what is essentially a new version in the lineage of United Artists,” he said. “That allows the artist to really take the power back, take their destiny back.”

But for all the activity, there was no getting around the math. If Texas did not pour resources into a substantial rebate program, it would continue to lose out.

The challenge was to convince the conservative Legislature that an incentive program was not simply a Hollywood handout.

Thus began a campaign in spring 2023 with Texas voices advocating for a strong film industry.

That May, “Good for Texas,” the video precursor to “True to Texas,” showcased Lone Star-born actors such as McConaughey, Quaid, Owen Wilson, Powell and others in support of increased incentives.

Filmmaker Chase Musslewhite, a sixth-generation Houstonian who was one of the video’s producers, said she was motivated to get involved when she lost funding for her first feature after her financier opted to shoot in Louisiana.

She joined forces with Grant Wood, a Midland native, who had studied film and ran a Dallas start-up, to launch the Media for Texas advocacy group.

“We wanted to help get the film community aligned and put forth one bill with one idea to make it as easy as possible for the Legislature to push for it,” Musslewhite said.

The Texas Film Commission painted a rosy picture, saying that for every dollar invested in the incentives, Texas received $4 of new money into the economy.

A pivotal moment arrived in late summer 2024. Media for Texas co-hosted a private screening of the film “Reagan,” starring Dennis Quaid, with Patrick at Austin’s Bullock Texas State History Museum. A number of state legislators attended.

Patrick took to the podium and announced his aim to “make Texas the media capital of the world,” Musslewhite recalled.

That was the push people needed, Musslewhite said.

Last October, Patrick convened a special hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, where a new bill for a robust film incentive was front and center.

Patrick marshaled McConaughey, Harrelson, Quaid and Sheridan to support him. Joining the effort was billionaire Ross Perot Jr.

Dennis Quaid, second from left, standing next to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, looking up, at the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo in March, is one of the many prominent Texas-born Hollywood actors and filmmakers to rally around film incentives.

(Cassie Stricker / Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo)

During the hearing, a denim-clad Quaid voiced his support. “I, for one, feel that the world is beginning to turn right side up again and common sense prevails, and I’d like to see that reflected in our films and entertainment.”

When Sheridan spoke, he expressed regret that his 2016 film “Hell or High Water,” a story of two bank-robbing brothers trying to save their Texas family ranch, had to shoot in New Mexico because of its subsidies.

“No one will be here without the incentives,” the filmmaker said.

During the last stretch before the vote, McConaughey, in a cowboy hat, made a final overture to legislators in March.

“If we pass this bill, we are immediately at the bargaining table for shooting more films and TV and commercials in our state,” he said. “That is money that’s going to local Texas restaurants, hotels, coffee shops, dry cleaners, street rentals, home rentals ― even Woody’s barber,” in a nod to Harrelson, who was also in attendance.

The high-profile campaign worked. Two months later, the bill passed in the Senate with a 23-8 vote, and by June it had become law.

A slippery slope?

Nonetheless, concerns remain about the program.

For one, the bill, which emphasizes a positive portrayal of the state, does not specifically address whether a film or show that has themes such as abortion, gun control or LGBTQ+ characters will receive funding.

In 2010, then-Gov. Rick Perry’s administration yanked funding for the Robert Rodriguez film “Machete” over concerns that the movie portrayed Texas negatively.

Funding for Robert Rodriguez’s film “Machete” was denied over concerns it portrayed Texas negatively.

(Ryan Green / Netflix)

George Huang, professor of screenwriting at UCLA School of Theater, Film, and Television, cautioned this could be “a very slippery slope.”

“I understand that with incentives you don’t want to appear to fund controversial subjects,” he said. “But where do you draw the line on censorship? Who in the governor’s office is the arbiter of good taste?”

Many inside the Texas film community stress that these are still early days and believe the film office will ultimately take a case-by-case approach.

“I think that those fears are misplaced, because the opportunity for what Texas can provide to the country and to the world outweighs the risk,” Musslewhite said.

For now,the Texas film community is elated.

“Texans kind of warmed up to the idea that if an industry were to grow in Texas, it doesn’t have to look exactly like it looks in some of these other places,” Strayer said. “I think they came to realize that you can kind of write your own rules.”

And what’s more Texan than writing your own rules?

The announcement last month that Occidental Studios would be put up for sale marked a historic turning point in a studio once used by Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks to make silent films.

It also underscored how dramatically the market has shifted for the owners of soundstages across Los Angeles that have been buffeted by a confluence of forces — the pandemic, strikes in 2023 and the continued flight of production to other states and countries.

As film activity has fallen to historic levels in the L.A. region — film shoot days dropped 22% in the first quarter of 2025 — the places that host film and TV crews, along with prop houses and other businesses that service the industry, have been especially hard hit.

Between 2016 and 2022, Los Angeles’ soundstages were nearly filled to capacity, boasting average occupancy rates of 90%, according to data from the nonprofit organization FilmLA, which tracks on-location shoot days in the Greater L.A. area.

That rate plummeted to 69% in 2023, as dual writers’ and actors’ strikes brought the industry to a halt.

Once the strikes were over, production never came back to what it was. In fact, last year the average occupancy rate dropped even further to 63%, according to a FilmLA report released in April.

So far this year, there is “no reason to think the occupancy numbers look better,” said Philip Sokoloski, spokesperson for FilmLA.

“It’s a trailing indicator of the loss of production,” he said. “The suddenness of the crash is what caught everybody by surprise.”

Studio owners, who have watched their soundstages go from overbooked to frequently empty, are celebrating the new state tax credits meant to boost their industry and create action on their lots.

The California Legislature’s decision to more than double the amount allocated each year to the state’s film and television tax credit program to $750 million could be a tipping point toward better times, studio owners said, but the climb out of the doldrums is still steep.

“This is definitely a defining moment and to see whether or not L.A. is going to get itself back up to the occupancy levels that it had prior to COVID,” said Shep Wainwright, managing partner of East End Studios. “Everyone’s pretty bullish about it, but it’s obviously been such a slog for the past few years.”

Sean Griffin of Sunset Studios called the tax credit boost signed into law last week “a massive stride in the right direction” while Zach Sokoloff of independent studio operator Hackman Capital Partners called the decision “an enormous win for the state.”

Sokoloff hopes to see its Southern California facilities, which include Radford Studio Center and Culver Studios, perk up the way their New York properties did when the state increased its film and TV subsidy to $800 million in May.

“We had stages that had been sitting empty, and almost 24 hours after the passage of the tax credit bill in New, York, our phones were ringing,” he said. “We had renewed interest in soundstage occupancy there.”

Community member William Meyerchak, left, Los Angeles City Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, center, and Zach Sokoloff, senior vice president of Hackman Capital Partners, right, celebrate after the passing of the $1-billion TVC project, which will expand and redevelop the old CBS Television City site at Beverly Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue, on Jan. 7, 2025.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Los Angeles Center Studios, where such shows as “Mad Men” and “Westworld” filmed, also has felt the effects of the production slump.

The 26-year-old facility in downtown L.A. has six 18,000-foot soundstages and three smaller stages, along with a number of practical locations on the lot for shooting. Before the pandemic, its stages were 100% full for more than 10 years, said Sam Nicassio, president of Los Angeles Center Studios.

He declined to state the studio’s current occupancy rate, though he said it was above the average for about 300 soundstages throughout the area, which his company tracked at 58%.

“It’s been a struggle,” he said. “The slowdown in overall production activity, coupled with coming out of the strikes and all of us expecting to have a jump-start again and we didn’t, was very difficult. There’s a lot of soundstages for not a lot of users right now.”

Not long ago, private equity firms saw L.A. studio stages as good business opportunities.

A billboard for a Netflix streaming show “The Diplomat,” on a building across the street from where WGA members walk a picket line around Bronson Sunset Studios, in May 2023.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

WGA members walk a picket line around Bronson Sunset Studios lot, where Netflix leases space for production and offices, in May 2023.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

A number of firms participated heavily in the construction of new facilities, which seemed like smart bets due to advancements in production technology, the desire of studios and streamers to cut down on unpredictable risk from on-location shoots and — especially after the pandemic — health and safety systems like air filtration and more space to prevent workers from getting sick.

“Stages are critical to being able to do, especially TV, on time and on budget,” said George Huang, a professor of screenwriting at the UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television. “They are the backbone of making movies in Hollywood.”

But after the pandemic, strikes and a cutback in spending at the studios, production slowed. Then in January, the Southern California wildfires hit, further affecting production and causing many in the industry to lose their homes — and reconsider whether they wanted to stay in the Golden State.

Working with influencers

As Hollywood production slowed, soundstage operators looked for new ways to make up revenue, including shoots for the fashion industry, music videos, DJ rehearsals, video game production and even private events like birthdays or weddings.

Hackman Capital Partners, which owns and operates Television City in Los Angeles, recently announced a partnership with Interwoven Studios to open a boutique production facility catering to social media influencers, online media brands and other creators who work in nontraditional formats such as YouTube.

Among the well-known creators who have worked lately at Television City — home to such classic shows as “All in the Family” and most recently “American Idol” — are Logan Paul and Jake Shane, actress-singer Keke Palmer, livestreamers FaZe Clan and hip-hop artist Big Sean.

“As the segment of the content-creation universe grows on the smaller end of production, we’re going to be a partner to them,” Sokoloff said. “Necessity is the mother of invention.”

Sunset Studios, which operates 59 stages in the Los Angeles area, has long made a point of working with short-form creators through its smaller Quixote division, said Griffin, who is head of studio sales. “We’ve always been involved with influencers, music videos and commercials.”

Such tenants working on smaller stages sometimes move up to TV and movie-sized stages when they land a big television commercial or music video, such as Selena Gomez’s “Younger and Hotter Than Me” music video recently shot at Sunset Las Palmas Studios.

Paul McCartney leased a studio at Sunset Glenoaks Studios to rehearse for his 2024 tour and and made a music video there.

In general, though, stages are still underused, he said.

“Once the strikes ended, we got a about a good healthy quarter” of production, he said. Then business “really quieted down, and we haven’t seen the show counts rebound very much.”

The vacancies have created a tenant-friendly market as studio owners compete for their business on rental prices, Griffin said.

“This is a very tough market,” he said. “Everyone is competing very, very hard.”

One reason for optimism about the new tax credits is that they apply to 30-minute shows for the first time, he said.

“L.A. is a television town,” Griffin added. “Opening up the tax credit to 30-minute comedies is going to be really helpful.”

And there are signs of life for longer scripted shows that take multiple stages and shoot for longer than other productions, Griffin said.

Developer David Simon is betting heavily on a turnaround. He is building a new movie studio from the ground up in Hollywood. His $450-million Echelon Studios complex is set to open late next year on Santa Monica Boulevard.

“We think content creation is here to stay in various forms,” he said, and that big soundstages will continue to be used even as the technology to make content changes.

Simon said he is close to signing leases with fashion brands that are creating content with celebrities and collaborating with influencers.

“We’re not nearly where we were prepandemic,” he acknowledged, but “California is the entertainment capital of the world, and the producers and directors and actors that want to stay in state will help bring back and retain our fair share of production.”

For now , at least, soundstage operators are still “treading water,” said Peter Marshall, managing principal at Epic Insurance Brokers & Consultants, who works in media insurance and counts some L.A.-based soundstages as clients.

“Most operators are pretty concerned,” he said.

Yet, the fact that there are still new soundstages opening and others are in development suggests a “high level of confidence” that production will eventually return to L.A., Sokoloski of FilmLA said.

“I am optimistic that we will keep more production here than we have in the last few years,” Nicassio said. The new tax credit program “puts us on a competitive level now with other states and countries.”

Others in the industry say that more is needed and have advocated for a federal tax credit that would help make California a morecompetitive location. Gov. Gavin Newsom has pushed for the idea, urging President Trump to work with him on the issue.

“When you have a governor and big private equity firms both focusing on promoting one thing, that might, who knows, get the federal government involved,” Marshall said. “That would be the game changer.”