tax

The extradition agreement comes as Mexico continues to cooperate with the Trump administration despite its tariff threats.

Mexico has expelled 26 alleged high-ranking cartel members to the United States, in its latest deal with the administration of President Donald Trump.

The transfer was confirmed by a joint statement from the Mexican attorney general’s office and its security ministry on Tuesday.

The statement said that the US Justice Department had sought the extradition and that it had given guarantees that the death penalty would not be levied against any of those prosecuted.

The transfer comes as the Trump administration continues to exert pressure on Mexico to take more action against criminal gangs involved in drug smuggling and human trafficking.

Part of that pressure campaign has come in the form of tariffs, with certain Mexican exports to the US now taxed at a higher rate.

Trump has described the import tax as necessary to hold Mexico “accountable” for the “extraordinary threat posed by illegal aliens and drugs”.

In response, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has struck a careful balance when dealing with Trump, cooperating on some security issues, while drawing clear lines when it comes to her country’s sovereignty. That has included vehemently opposing any US military intervention on Mexican soil.

Still, US media reported last week that Trump has secretly signed an order directing the military to take action against drug-smuggling cartels and other criminal groups from Latin America, which could presage the deployment of US forces both domestically and abroad.

The move on Tuesday was the second time in recent months that Mexico has expelled alleged criminal gang members wanted by the US.

In February, Mexico extradited 29 alleged cartel figures, including Rafael Caro Quintero, who is accused of killing a US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent in 1985.

That deal came as Trump threatened to impose blanket 25-percent tariffs on Mexican imports, but the scope of that tariff threat was later pared down.

Currently, the US imposes a 25-percent tariff on Mexican-made cars and products not covered under a pre-existing free trade accord, the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Mexico also faces a 50-percent tax on its steel, aluminium and copper products.

But at the end of July, Trump agreed to extend a tariff exemption for goods that fall under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement for 90 days.

The Associated Press news agency reported that Abigael González Valencia, the leader of “Los Cuinis”, a drug-trafficking group closely aligned with the notorious Cartel Jalisco New Generation (CJNG), was among those expelled to the US in the latest deal.

The Trump administration took the unorthodox move of designating the CJNG and seven other Latin American crime groups as “foreign terrorist organisations” upon taking office.

Valencia is the brother-in-law of CJNG leader Nemesio Ruben “El Mencho” Oseguera Cervantes, who is considered one of the most wanted people in Mexico and the US.

Valencia was arrested in February 2015 in Mexico and had since been fighting extradition to the US.

Another individual, Roberto Salazar, stands accused of participating in the 2008 killing of a Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy, a source told the news agency.

One of the most iconic EU cities is under pressure to increase its tourist tax following outrage from locals – who argue their home is being turned into a theme park

Fed-up locals in one of Europe’s most famous cities are calling for tough measures following a surge in tourism. Last year, a staggering 48.7 million visitors flocked to Paris – lured in by iconic sights like the Eiffel Tower, the Louvre, and of course those mouthwatering pastries.

Around 11 million of these selfie-stick-waving tourists headed over to Montmartre, a historic district home to the ethereal Sacré-Cœur Basilica. Instantly recognisable by its narrow cobbled streets and vibrant nightlife – Montmatre was catapulted to fame thanks to its famous cabaret venue, The Moulin Rouge, and was once a haven for artists like Picasso, Van Gogh, and Renoir.

However, with narrow streets so crowded with large tour groups, residents say their home has turned into Disneyland, and are calling for drastic change. It comes after Spanish islands fear Brits won’t return as tourists are dealt another blow.

READ MORE: Huge blow as beautiful country with 3m visitors unveils £17 tourist charge

Anne Renaudie has lived in the area for almost three decades, and manages the Vivre à Montmartre association. Speaking to Reuters, she argued the historic quarter has turned into a theme park after being cast into the tourist spotlight thanks to the 2011 hit film Amelie.

“People come for three hours, have fun, buy a beret or a crepe, and leave – as if they were in an amusement park,” she said. As a result, many of the essential food shops catering to locals have been replaced with tourist-targeted snack stands and souvenir shops.

“We’re down to two or three butchers [and] two cheese shops. They’re disappearing one after the other,” Anne added. “Now, it’s a lot of ice cream, crepes, and taco places.”

Along with other members of the association, Anne is urging the town hall to impose similar clampdowns to other European hotspots including Barcelona and Venice. This includes limiting tour groups to just 25 people, banning loudspeakers and increasing the tourist tax.

Sky-high tourist taxes have become common practice across the continent in recent years, with swathes of destinations struggling to keep up with soaring demand. Take Italy’s Venice, for example, which has extended its day-tripper tourist tax to 2025 and doubled the price for certain visitors.

Those wanting to roam the endless network of canals on a gondola, or eat their body weight in pizza, will now have to pay €5 for the Venice Access Fee if they’re visiting for the day from April 18 to July 27. For last-minute visitors, this doubles to €10.

Cruise passengers heading to insufferably busy Greek islands such as Santorini and Mykonos will also be charged €20 for disembarking at the harbour, while tourists in Portugal are subject to a €1-€4 charge per night depending on the accommodation and area they’re staying in. For some, the unexpected costs come prior to flying – like one woman who was charged £75 for her luggage.

Do you have a story to share? Email us at [email protected] for a chance to be featured

Trump’s sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminium and autos have hit the manufacturing sector hard and reduced hiring.

The Canadian economy lost tens of thousands of jobs in July, sending the share of people employed to an eight-month low as the labour market gave back the gains seen in the prior month.

The economy shed 40,800 jobs in July, compared with a net addition of 83,000 jobs in June, taking the employment rate, or the percentage of people employed out of the total working-age population, to 60.7 percent, Statistics Canada said on Friday.

The unemployment rate, however, remained steady at a multiyear high of 6.9 percent.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast the economy would add 13,500 jobs and the unemployment rate would tick up to 7 percent.

“Canada’s labour market snapped back to reality in July,” Michael Davenport, senior economist at Oxford Economics, wrote in a note.

United States President Donald Trump’s sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminium and cars have hit the manufacturing sector hard and reduced the hiring intentions of companies, the Bank of Canada has previously said.

The number of people employed in manufacturing shrank by close to 10,000 in July on a yearly basis as sectors linked to steel, aluminium and carmaking curtailed hiring and experienced layoffs.

Marty Warren, the United Steelworkers’ national director for Canada, told Reuters that about 1,000 members have been laid off.

Oxford Economics’s Davenport predicts more layoffs in the coming months, forecasting about 140,000 lost jobs and an unemployment rate rising to the mid-7 percent range later this year.

Employment in some areas has held up well despite tariffs, the data showed.

Overall, there has been little net employment growth since the beginning of the year, StatsCan said. The layoff rate was virtually unchanged at 1.1 percent in July compared with 12 months earlier.

The bulk of the job losses in July occurred among workers aged between 15 and 24 – that group’s unemployment rate edged up to 14.6 percent, the highest since September 2010, excluding the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021.

Policy rate

The youth unemployment rate is usually higher than the country’s average.

The employment rate for this group, which accounts for about 15 percent of the total working-age population, sank to 53.6 percent, the lowest level since November 1998 if the pandemic years are excluded.

The Bank of Canada kept its key policy rate unchanged last week, partly due to a strong labour market, but indicated it might reduce lending rates if inflation stays under control and economic growth weakens.

“We are now a bit more confident in our view that the Bank of Canada will resume cutting next month, although a surprisingly strong CPI [Consumer Price Index] print next week could prompt another pause,” said Alexandra Brown, North America economist at Capital Economics.

Money market bets show the odds of a rate cut at the next monetary policy meeting on September 17 at 38 percent, up 11 percentage points from Thursday.

The information, culture and recreation sector lost 29,000 jobs last month, marking the biggest decline, followed by 22,000 lost jobs in construction and 19,000 in business, building and other support services.

The average hourly wage of permanent employees – a gauge closely tracked by the Bank of Canada to ascertain inflationary trends – grew by 3.5 percent in July to 37.66 Canadian dollars ($27.4) per hour, against a 3.2 percent increase in the prior month.

India is signaling it may seek to rebalance its global partnerships after Trump’s salvo of tariffs on Indian goods.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio “Lula” da Silva have spoken by phone, their offices said, discussing a broad range of topics that included tariffs imposed by the United States on goods from both countries.

Lula confirmed a state visit to India in early 2026 during the call on Thursday, which occurred a day after the Brazilian leader told the news agency Reuters that he would initiate a conversation among the BRICS group of countries on tackling US President Donald Trump’s levies, which are the highest on Brazil and India.

The group of major emerging economies also includes China, Russia and South Africa.

“The leaders discussed the international economic scenario and the imposition of unilateral tariffs. Brazil and India are, to date, the two countries most affected,” Lula’s office said in a statement.

Trump announced an additional 25 percent tariff on Indian goods on Wednesday, raising the total duty to 50 percent. The additional tariff, effective August 28, is meant to penalise India for continuing to buy Russian oil, Trump has said.

Trump has also slapped a 50 percent tariff on goods from Brazil, with lower levels for sectors such as aircraft, energy and orange juice, tying the move to what he called a “witch hunt” against former President Jair Bolsonaro, a right-wing ally on trial for an alleged coup plot to overturn his 2022 election loss.

On their call, Lula and Modi reiterated their goal of boosting bilateral trade to more than $20bn annually by 2030, according to the Brazilian president’s office, up from roughly $12bn last year.

Brasilia said they also agreed to expand the reach of the preferential trade agreement between India and the South American trade bloc Mercosur, and discussed the virtual payment platforms of their countries.

Modi’s office, in its statement, did not explicitly mention Trump or US tariffs, but said “the two leaders exchanged views on various regional and global issues of mutual interest.”

India is already signalling it may seek to rebalance its global partnerships after Trump’s salvo of tariffs on Indian goods.

Modi is preparing for his first visit to China in more than seven years, suggesting a potential diplomatic realignment amid growing tensions with Washington. The Indian leader visited Lula in Brasilia last month.

Tougher United States trade penalties on goods originating in one country being re-shipped from another are not expected to immediately follow new US tariffs, three people in Southeast Asia with knowledge of the matter said, easing a major cause of concern.

Southeast Asian countries, including Vietnam and Thailand, have been explicitly targeted by White House officials for their alleged role in facilitating the so-called transshipment to the US of Chinese goods, which would face higher tariffs if shipped directly from China.

The administration of US President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on goods from dozens of countries from Thursday, and in an executive order, said products determined to have been illegally rerouted to conceal their country of origin would face additional duties of 40 percent. But it did not clarify what constitutes transshipment.

US imports from Southeast Asia’s biggest economies, which rely heavily on exports, are now subject to tariff rates of about 19 percent, many of which have been significantly reduced from previously threatened rates.

Existing US customs guidance states that goods from countries with no free trade agreements with Washington, such as Southeast Asian nations, can be labelled as made in the country where they undergo a “substantial transformation” of components, even if those parts entirely come from another country, such as China.

And with no new US guidance on rules of origin or specification of what transshipment means, some officials in Southeast Asia have told exporters that existing rules apply.

That effectively limits cases of transshipment to illegal activities, like the use of forged export certificates or documents obtained illicitly.

“Currently, all exported goods [from Thailand] are subject to a 19 percent rate because there are no rules on transshipment yet,” Arada Fuangtong, head of the Thai Ministry of Commerce’s Department of Foreign Trade, told Reuters on Thursday.

Her message was echoed by US officials in Vietnam, who told businessmen the tariff of 20 percent would apply to Vietnamese goods, even if they are entirely made with Chinese components and only assembled in Vietnam, according to one person familiar with those talks.

Trade consultants have said rules are vague, and they have advised clients, even before the new wave of US tariffs, to have at least 40 percent of local content for their exports to the US. That is “to be on the safe side”, one of them said.

The US embassy in Vietnam did not immediately reply to a request for comment. The Office of the US Trade Representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside US working hours.

“Goods defined by US customs as transshipped are subject to 40 percent duties, but pending any new definition, that’s limited to old definitions,” said a Vietnam-based consultant.

Both people declined to be named in order to speak more freely.

China dependence

According to the US customs guidance, repackaging does not usually cause a “substantial transformation”, but assembly may, depending on the complexity of the operations.

It is unclear if this narrow interpretation of transshipment could be enforced for other countries.

Economic ministries in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Singapore did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the issue.

Manufacturers in Southeast Asia, which rely heavily on Chinese components, have been in the dark for months about what Washington would consider transshipment.

Questions remain about whether that would include goods with a large, but yet undefined, share of components or raw materials from China, even when they are legitimately transformed in Southeast Asian nations.

A strict definition of transshipment may come later, multiple investment consultants warned.

An executive order signed by Trump last week said the US will “publish every six months a list of countries and specific facilities used in circumvention schemes”.

That will “inform public procurement, national security reviews, and commercial due diligence”, it said.

“The message from Washington is deterrence,” said Marco Forster, director for Southeast Asia at investment consultancy Dezan Shira and Associates.

“If your supply chain cuts corners, it won’t be treated as a technical error. It’ll be treated as fraud.”

Even as the United States slaps India with a 50 percent tariff, the highest among all countries so far and one that will push their relationship to its lowest moment in years, one thing is clear: US President Donald Trump is more interested in onshoring than friend-shoring, experts say.

On Wednesday, the US announced an additional 25 percent tariff on India over its import of Russian oil, taking the total to 50 percent. The move caught most experts by surprise as New Delhi was one of the first to start trade negotiations with Washington, DC, and Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have repeatedly admired each other in public statements and called each other friends. Brazil is the only other country facing tariffs as high as India’s.

“The breakdown of the trade negotiations was a surprise,” said Vina Nadjibulla, vice president of strategy and research at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.

“This is a very difficult moment, arguably the worst in many, many years in their relationship and puts India in a very small group of countries that find themselves without a deal and with the highest tariff rates. They now need some pragmatic path forward and need to find a way to rebuild trust,” Nadjibulla said.

While the 50 percent tariffs, set to kick in in three weeks, have come as a shock, there has been a series of events in the past few weeks that hinted at disagreements between the two countries.

Just last week, Trump threatened that he would penalise New Delhi for buying Russian oil and arms, venting his frustration over an impasse in trade talks and referred to both countries as “dead economies”.

Negotiations deadlock

Last year, bilateral trade between India and the US stood at approximately $212bn, with a trade gap of about $46bn in India’s favour. Modi has said in the past that he plans to more than double trade between the two countries to $500bn in the next five years.

As part of the tariff negotiations, New Delhi had offered to remove levies from US industrial goods and said it would increase defence and energy purchases, the Reuters news agency reported. It also offered to scale back taxes on cars, despite a strong auto lobby at home pressuring it not to.

But it refused to remove duties from farm and dairy products, two politically sensitive sectors that employ hundreds of millions of predominantly poor Indians, and a stance similar to some other countries like Canada.

There are also geopolitical layers to what was supposed to be a trade conversation, pointed out Farwa Aamer, director of South Asia Initiatives at the Asia Society Policy Institute in New York.

A very public one was the difference in perception on how the latest clash between India and archenemy Pakistan in May was brought to an end. Trump has repeatedly said that he mediated a ceasefire. India has repeatedly said that Trump had no role in bringing about a truce and has said that Modi and Trump never spoke during the conflict.

Pakistan, on the other hand, has said it will nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize and has so far walked away with deals with the US to explore its reserves of critical minerals and oil as its efforts to reset ties with the US play out after years of ambivalence under former US President Joe Biden, said Aamer.

All of this has caused unease for New Delhi, which is now trying to navigate a tough road. “This will test India’s foreign policy,” said Aamer, “and the question is if we will see it grow with the US even as it maintains its ties with Russia,” its longstanding defence and trade partner.

New Delhi has called Wednesday’s tariff “unfair, unjustified and unreasonable” and said its imports of Russian oil are based on its objective of securing the energy needs of its nation of 1.4 billion people.

But beyond that, “India doesn’t want to look weak”, said Aamer. “India has this global standing, and Modi has this global standing, so it has to hold its own. It will maintain its stance that its national security is driving its foreign policy.”

Robert Rogowsky, a professor of international trade at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, said he expected “very creative diplomacy” in the “near term” as India and the US try to reset ties despite tensions.

“Strong-arming individuals like Modi will inevitably lead to shifts and counter-shifts,” he told Al Jazeera.

Adding instability

For now, India can focus on strengthening its bilateral trade agreements, said Aamer, such as the one it signed with the United Kingdom last month and another with the European Union, which is currently in the works.

India is also trying to stabilise relations with China –  just as Australia, Canada and Japan have done in recent months since Trump took office and hit allies with tariffs. Modi is planning to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit at the end of the month. It would be his first visit to China since the two countries had a face-off in 2020 in the Galwan River valley.

But the trade blow from the US also comes at a time when India has been trying to position itself as a manufacturing hub and as an option for businesses that were looking to add locations outside China.

In April, Apple, for instance, said all iPhones meant to be sold in the US would be assembled in India by next year. While electronics are exempt for now from the tariffs, a country with a 50 percent tariff tag on it is hardly attractive for business, and this just “adds to the instability and uncertainty that businesses were already feeling” because of all the Trump tariffs, Nadjibulla said.

“Trump has made it clear that he’s interested in onshoring rather than friend-shoring.”

LINCOLN, Neb. — Rep. Mike Flood has gotten an earful during a public meeting in Lincoln aimed at discussing his support for the massive tax breaks and spending cuts bill that passed Congress and was signed into law by President Trump.

Flood, a second-term Republican who represents the GOP-leaning district that includes the University of Nebraska, on Monday braved the ire of a college town audience dominated by hundreds of people intent on expressing their displeasure chiefly with cuts to Medicaid benefits and tax reductions tilted toward the wealthy.

He described the law as less than perfect but stood firm on its Medicaid and tax provisions, fueling a 90-minute barrage of jeers and chants in a scenario House Republican leaders have specifically advised GOP members to avoid.

“More than anything I truly believe this bill protects Medicaid for the future,” Flood said, setting off a shower of boos from the audience of roughly 700 in the University of Nebraska’s Kimball Recital Hall. “We protected Medicaid.”

How voters receive the law, passed with no Democratic support in the narrowly GOP-controlled House and Senate, could go a long way to determine whether Republicans keep power in next year’s midterm elections.

Flood was resolute on his position but engaged with the audience at times. During his repeated discussions of Medicaid, he asked if people in the audience thought able-bodied Americans should be required to work. When many shouted their opposition, he replied, “I don’t think a majority of Nebraskans agree with that.”

Dozens formed a line to the microphone to speak to Flood, most asking pointed questions about the law, but many others questioning moves by the Trump administration on immigration enforcement, education spending and layoffs within the federal bureaucracy.

Some came prepared to confront him.

“You said in Seward you were not a fascist,” one man stood in line to say. “Your complicity suggests otherwise.”

Flood shot back, “Fascists don’t hold town halls with open question-and-answer sessions.”

Asked if he would block the release of files related to the sex trafficking case involving the late Jeffrey Epstein, Flood said he supports their release as a co-sponsor of a nonbinding resolution calling for their publication. Flood also said he supports requiring a deposition from Epstein’s convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, who argues she was wrongfully prosecuted.

Flood’s audience was gathering more than an hour before the doors opened. And as people lined up in the warm August air, he sauntered by, introducing himself, shaking hands and thanking people, including retired Lincoln teacher and school administrator Mary Ells, for attending.

“I believe Congressman Flood listened in a socially appropriate way,” Ells said after expressing concerns to Flood about her grandchildren’s future. “I do not believe he listens in a responsive, action-oriented way for citizens in Nebraska that do not agree with the national playbook written elsewhere but being implemented here.”

Inside the hall, much of that decorum vanished.

During Flood’s discussion of his support of the law’s tax provisions, which he argued would benefit the middle class, the audience exploded in a deafening chant of “Tax the rich.”

Other refrains included “Vote him out!” and “Free Palestine!”

Hecklers often drowned out Flood, creating a rolling cacophony with only occasional pauses.

Republican lawmakers’ town halls have been few and far between since the bill passed early last month, in part because their leaders have advised them against it. Trump and others say the law will give the economy a jolt, but Democrats feel they’ve connected with criticism of many of its provisions, especially its cuts to Medicaid and tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy.

Flood later downplayed the confrontation as “spirited” but “part of the process” during an impromptu press conference.

“It doesn’t mean you can make everybody happy,” he said. “But, you know, if you feel strongly about what you’re doing in Congress, stand in the town square, tell them why you voted that way, listen to their questions, treat them with respect and invite them to continue to communicate.”

Unlike dozens of other Republicans in competitive districts, Flood hardly has to worry, as Republicans brace for a challenge to their razor-thin majority in the House next year. Elected in 2022, Flood was reelected to the seat last year by winning 60% of the vote in a district that includes Lincoln in Democratic-leaning Lancaster County but also vast Republican-heavy rural tracts in 11 counties that ring the Omaha metropolitan area.

Beaumont writes for the Associated Press.

LONDONERS have seen a 75 per cent rise in the “Sadiq Khan stealth tax” during the mayor’s time in office, we can reveal.

The levy — officially known as the mayoral precept — is added to council tax bills in all 32 city boroughs and has risen steadily since the Labour politician’s 2016 election.

For a Band D home, it has jumped from £280.02 in 2017 to £490.38 today.

In comparison, Liverpool asks £24, Cambridge £36 and Greater Manchester £128.95.

West Midlands Mayor Richard Parker charges nothing.

Much of this year’s London fee — £319.13 — goes to the Met Police to pay for cops.

Another £71.72 is for the London Fire Brigade and £77.09 for transport services.

The Greater London Authority, which includes Mr Khan’s office, takes the remaining £22.44.

The Sun told last week that he is on course to rake in £14million, most of it from motorists failing to pay the £12.50 daily ultra low emission zone (Ulez) charge.

City Hall Conservative Group leader Susan Hall said: “Sadiq Khan has taxed the life out of our city. Where has it all gone? Crime is out of control, traffic is at a standstill, nightlife is dead, house building’s virtually stopped and the green belt is at risk.

“To paraphrase the president of the USA, he’s a terrible mayor.”

A spokesman for the mayor said a record £1.16billion had been invested in policing this year, providing 935 neighbourhood cops.

He added: “Keeping Londoners safe is Sadiq’s top priority.”

1

The White House has launched an aggressive public relations campaign promoting a narrative of economic strength during the first six months of United States President Donald Trump, with claims of his policies fueling “America’s golden age”.

But an Al Jazeera analysis of economic data shows the reality is more mixed.

Trump’s claims of his policies boosting the US economy suffered a blow on Friday when the latest jobs report revealed that the country had added a mere 73,000 jobs last month, well below the 115,000 forecasters had expected. The only additions were in the healthcare sector, which added 55,000 jobs, and the social services sector added 18,000.

US employers also cut 62,075 jobs in July — up 29 percent from cuts in the month before, and 140 percent higher than this time last year, according to the firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas, which tracks monthly job cuts. Government, tech, and retail sectors are the industries that saw the biggest declines so far this year.

It comes as this month’s jobs and labour turnover report showed an economic slowdown. There were 7.4 million open jobs in the US, down from 7.7 million a month before.

The Department of Labour on Friday released downward revisions to both the May and June jobs reports, significantly changing the picture the White House had previously painted.

“For the FOURTH month in a row, jobs numbers have beat market expectations with nearly 150,000 good jobs created in June,” the White House said in a July 3 release following the initial June report.

The Labor Department had reported an addition of 147,000 jobs in June. On Friday, it sharply revised down that number to just 14,000. May’s report also saw a big downgrade from 144,000 to only 19,000 jobs gained. Trump has since fired the head of the agency that produces the monthly jobs data, alleging that the data had been manipulated to make him look bad.

Even before the revisions, June’s report was the first to reflect early signs of economic strain tied to the administration’s tariff threats, as it revealed that job growth was concentrated in areas such as state and local government and healthcare. Sectors more exposed to trade policy – including construction, wholesale trade, and manufacturing – were flat. Meanwhile, leisure and hospitality showed weak growth, even in peak summer, reflecting falling travel demand both at home and abroad.

The administration also claimed that native-born workers accounted for all job gains since January. That assertion is misleading as it implies that no naturalised citizens or legally present foreign workers gained employment.

However, it is true that employment among foreign-born workers has declined – by over half a million jobs – claims that native-born workers are replacing foreign-born labour, are not supported by the jobs data.

Jobs lost in sectors with high foreign-born employment, including tech, have been abundant, driven by tariffs and automation, particularly AI. In fact, recent layoffs in tech have been explicitly attributed to AI advancements, not labour displacement by other groups.

Companies including Recruit Holdings — the parent company of Indeed and Glassdoor, Axel Springer, IBM, Duolingo and others have already made headcount reductions directly attributed to AI advancements.

Wage growth

The pace of rise of wage growth, an indicator of economic success, has slowed in recent months. That is partly due to the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates steady in hopes of keeping inflation stable.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, wages have been outpacing inflation since 2023, after a period of declining real wages following the COVID pandemic.

Wage growth ticked up by 0.3 percent in July from a month prior. Compared with this time last year, wage growth is 3.9 percent, according to Friday’s Labor Department jobs report.

Earlier this year, the White House painted a picture that wage growth differed between the era of former President Joe Biden and now under Trump because of policy.

“Blue-collar workers have seen real wages grow almost two percent in the first five months of President Trump’s second term — a stark contrast from the negative wage growth seen during the first five months of the Biden Administration,” the White House said in a release.

However, Biden and Trump inherited two very different economies when they took office. Biden has to deal with a massive global economic downturn driven by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trump, on the other hand, during his second term, inherited “unquestionably the strongest economy” in more than two decades, per the Economic Policy Institute, particularly because of the US economy’s rebound compared with peer nations.

Inflation

Inflation peaked in mid-2022 during Biden’s term at 9 percent, before falling steadily because of the Federal Reserve’s efforts to manage a soft landing.

A July 21 White House statement claimed, “Since President Trump took office, core inflation has tracked at just 2.1 percent.” On Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessett said “inflation is cooling” in a post on X.

However, the Consumer Price Index report, which tracks core inflation – a measure that excludes the price of volatile items such as food and energy – was 2.9 percent in the most recent report and overall inflation was at 2.7 percent in June.

Prices

The most recent Consumer Price Index report, published July 15, shows that on a monthly basis, prices on all goods went up in June by 0.3 ,percent which is 2.7 percent higher from this time last year.

Grocery prices in particular are up 2.4 percent from this time last year and 0.3 percent from the prior month. The cost of fruits and vegetables went up 0.9 percent, the price of coffee increased by 2.2 percent and the cost of beef went up 2 percent.

New pending tariffs on Brazil, as Al Jazeera previously reported, could further drive up the cost of beef in the months to come.

Trump has pointed to falling egg prices in particular as evidence of economic success, after Democrats attacked his administration over their price in March. He has even gone so far as to claim that prices are down by 400 percent. That figure is mathematically impossible – a 100 percent decrease would mean eggs are free.

During the first few months of Trump’s term egg prices surged, and then dropped due to an outbreak of, and then recovery from, a severe avian flue outbreak, which had been hindering supply – not because of any specific policy intervention.

In January, when Trump took office egg prices were $4.95 per dozen as supply was constrained by the virus. By March, the average egg price was $6.23.  But outbreak and high prices drove away consumers, allowing farmers with healthier flocks to catch up on the supply side. As a result, prices fell to an average of $3.38. That would be a 32 percent drop since the beginning of his term and a 46 percent drop from their peak price – far from the 400 percent Trump claimed.

Trump also recently said petrol prices are at $1.98 per gallon ($0.52 per litre) in some states. He doubled down on that again on Wednesday. That is untrue. There is not a single state that has those petrol prices.

According to Gasbuddy, a platform that helps consumers find the lowest prices on petrol, Mississippi at $2.70 a gallon ($0.71 per litre) has the cheapest gas, and the cheapest petrol station in that state is currently selling gas at $2.37 ($0.62 per litre).

AAA, which tracks the average petrol price, has it at $3.15 per gallon ($0.83 per litre) nationwide, this is up from the end of January when it was $3.11 ($0.82 per litre).

While petrol prices have gone down since Trump took office, they are nowhere close to the rate he has continually suggested. In July 2024, for instance, the average price for a gallon of petrol nationwide was $3.50 ($0.93 per litre).

GDP

On Wednesday, the White House said that “President Trump has reduced America’s reliance on foreign products, boosted investment in the US”, citing the positive GDP data that had come out that morning.

That is misleading. While the US economy grew at a 3 percent annualised rate in the second quarter, surpassing expectations, that was a combination of a rebound after a weak first quarter, a drop in imports – which boosted GDP, and a modest rise in consumer spending.

The data beneath the headline showed that private sector investment fell sharply by 15.6 percent and inventories of goods and services declined by 3.2 percent, indicating a slowdown.

Manufacturing

The administration recently highlighted gains in industrial production, pointing to a boost in domestic manufacturing. Overall, there was a 0.3 percent increase in US industrial production in June. That was after stagnating for two months.

There have been isolated gains, such as increases in aerospace and petroleum-related sectors—1.6 percent and 2.9 percent, respectively.

But production of durable goods — items that are not necessarily for immediate consumption— remained flat, and auto manufacturing fell by 2.6 percent last month as tariffs dampened demand. Mining output also decreased by 0.3 percent.

According to the Department of Commerce’s gross domestic product report, manufacturing growth among non-durable goods has slowed. While there was a 1.3 percent increase, that’s a decline from 2.3 percent in the previous quarter.

This could change in the future, as several companies across a range of sectors have pledged to increase US production, including carmaker Hyundai and pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca, which just pledged a $50bn investment over the next five years.

Trade deals and tariffs

In April, the White House replaced country-specific tariffs with a 10-percent blanket tariff while maintaining additional levies on steel, cars, and some other items. It then promised to deliver “90 trade deals in 90 days.” That benchmark was not met. By the deadline, only one loosely fleshed out deal — with the United Kingdom — had been announced. As of 113 days later, the US has announced comparable deals with just a handful more countries and the European Union. The EU deal still needs parliamentary approval.

Contrary to the administration’s claims, tariffs do not pressure foreign exporters — they are paid by US importers and ultimately are likely to be passed on to US consumers. Companies, including big box retailer Walmart and toymaker Mattel, have announced price hikes as a direct result. Ford, for example, raised prices on three Mexico-assembled models due to tariff pressures.

To protect their own economies, many countries have pivoted their trade policies away from the US. Brazil and Mexico recently announced a new trade pact.

The White House and its allies continue to defend tariffs by highlighting the increased revenue they bring to the federal government, which is true. Since Trump took office, the US has brought in more than $100bn in revenue, compared with $77bn in the entire fiscal year 2024. The price of imports for consumers has only risen about 3 percent, but many expect that will change as the import taxes are passed on to consumers.

The White House did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Oral arguments over United States President Donald Trump’s power to impose tariffs have kicked off before a US appeals court after a lower court ruled he had exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping new levies on imported goods.

The appeals court judges on Thursday sharply questioned whether what Trump calls his “reciprocal” tariffs, announced in April, were justified by the president’s claim of emergency powers.

A panel of all the court’s active judges – eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by Republican presidents – is hearing arguments in two cases brought by five small US businesses and 12 Democratic-led US states.

The judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, pressed government lawyer Brett Shumate to explain how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, gave Trump the power to impose tariffs.

Trump is the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs.

The judges frequently interrupted Shumate, peppering him with a flurry of challenges to his arguments.

“IEEPA doesn’t even say tariffs, doesn’t even mention them,” one of the judges said.

Shumate said the law allows for “extraordinary” authority in an emergency, including the ability to stop imports completely. He said IEEPA authorises tariffs because it allows a president to “regulate” imports in a crisis.

The states and businesses challenging the tariffs argued they are not permissible under IEEPA and the US Constitution grants Congress, and not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes.

Neal Katyal, a lawyer for the businesses, said the government’s argument that the word “regulate” includes the power to tax would be a vast expansion of presidential power.

Tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue source for the federal government as customs duties in June quadrupled to about $27bn, a record, and through June have topped $100bn for the current fiscal year, which ends on September 30. That income could be crucial to offset lost revenue from extended tax cuts in a Trump-supported bill that passed and became law this month.

“Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again,” Trump wrote in a social media post on Thursday. “To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America’s big case today.”

But economists said the duties threaten to raise prices for US consumers and reduce corporate profits. Trump’s on-again, off-again tariff threats have roiled financial markets and disrupted US companies’ ability to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices.

Dan Rayfield, the attorney general of Oregon, one of the states challenging the levies, said the tariffs are a “regressive tax” that is making household items more expensive.

Since Trump began imposing his wave of tariffs, companies ranging from carmaker Stellantis to American Airlines, temporarily suspended financial guidance for investors, which has since started again but has been revised down. Companies across multiple industries, including Procter and Gamble, the world’s largest consumer goods brand, announced this week that it would need to raise prices on a quarter of its goods.

The president has made tariffs a central instrument of his foreign policy, wielding them aggressively in his second term as leverage in trade negotiations and to push back against what he has called unfair practices.

Pressure outside trade

Trump has said the April tariffs, which he placed on most countries, are a response to persistent US trade imbalances and declining US manufacturing power. However, in recent weeks, he’s used them to increase pressure on nontrade issues.

He hit Brazil with 50 percent tariffs over the prosecution of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a key Trump ally who is on trial for an alleged coup attempt after he lost the 2022 presidential election.

Trump also threatened Canada over its move to recognise a Palestinian state, saying a trade deal will now be “very hard”.

He said tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop fentanyl from crossing US  borders. The countries have denied that claim.

On May 28, a three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade sided with the Democratic states and small businesses that are challenging Trump.

It said IEEPA, a law intended to address “unusual and extraordinary” threats during national emergencies, did not authorise tariffs related to longstanding trade deficits. The appeals court has allowed the tariffs to remain in place while it considers the administration’s appeal. The timing of the court’s decision is uncertain, and the losing side will likely appeal quickly to the US Supreme Court.

The case will have no impact on tariffs levied under more traditional legal authorities, such as duties on steel and aluminium. The president recently announced trade deals that set tariff rates on goods from the European Union and Japan after smaller trade agreements with Britain, Indonesia and Vietnam.

Trump’s Department of Justice has argued that limiting the president’s tariff authority could undermine ongoing trade negotiations while other Trump officials have said negotiations have continued with little change after the initial setback in court. Trump has set a deadline of Friday for higher tariffs on countries that don’t negotiate new trade deals.

There are at least seven other lawsuits challenging Trump’s invocation of IEEPA, including cases brought by other small businesses and California.

The International Monetary Fund has raised its global growth forecasts for 2025 and 2026 slightly, citing stronger-than-expected purchases in advance of an August 1 jump in tariffs imposed by the United States and a drop in the effective US tariff rate to 17.3 percent from 24.4 percent.

In its forecast on Tuesday, it warned, however, that the global economy faced major risks including a potential rebound in tariff rates, geopolitical tensions and larger fiscal deficits that could drive up interest rates and tighten global financial conditions.

“The world economy is still hurting, and it’s going to continue hurting with tariffs at that level, even though it’s not as bad as it could have been,” said Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, IMF chief economist.

In an update to its World Economic Outlook from April, the IMF raised its global growth forecast by 0.2 percentage point to 3 percent for 2025 and by 0.1 percentage point to 3.1 percent for 2026. However, that is still below the 3.3 percent growth it had projected for both years in January and the pre-pandemic historical average of 3.7 percent.

It said global headline inflation was expected to fall to 4.2 percent in 2025 and 3.6 percent in 2026, but noted that inflation would likely remain above target in the US as tariffs passed through to consumers in the second half of the year.

The US effective tariff rate – measured by import duty revenue as a proportion of goods imports – has dropped since April, but remains far higher than its estimated level of 2.5 percent in early January. The corresponding tariff rate for the rest of the world is 3.5 percent, compared with 4.1 percent in April, the IMF said.

US President Donald Trump has upended global trade by imposing a universal tariff of 10 percent on nearly all countries since April and threatening even higher duties to kick in on Friday. Far higher tit-for-tat tariffs imposed by the US and China were put on hold until August 12, with talks in Stockholm this week potentially leading to a further extension.

The US has also announced steep duties ranging from 25 percent to 50 percent on automobiles, steel and other metals, with higher duties soon to be announced on pharmaceuticals, lumber, and semiconductor chips.

Such future tariff increases are not reflected in the IMF numbers, and could raise effective tariff rates further, creating bottlenecks and amplifying the effect of higher tariffs, the IMF said.

Shifting tariffs

Gourinchas said the IMF was evaluating new 15-percent tariff deals reached by the US with the European Union and Japan over the past week, which came too late to factor into the July forecast, but said the tariff rates were similar to the 17.3 percent rate underlying the IMF’s forecast.

“Right now, we are not seeing a major change compared to the effective tariff rate that the US is imposing on other countries,” he said, adding it was not yet clear if these agreements would last.

“We’ll have to see whether these deals are sticking, whether they’re unravelled, whether they’re followed by other changes in trade policy,” he said.

Staff simulations showed that global growth in 2025 would be roughly 0.2 percentage point lower if the maximum tariff rates announced in April and July were implemented, the IMF said.

The IMF said the global economy was proving resilient for now, but uncertainty remained high and current economic activity suggested “distortions from trade, rather than underlying robustness”.

Gourinchas said the 2025 outlook had been helped by what he called “a tremendous amount” of front-loading as businesses tried to get ahead of the tariffs, but he warned that the stockpiling boost would not last.

“That is going to fade away,” he said, adding, “That’s going to be a drag on economic activity in the second half of the year and into 2026. There is going to be pay back for that front loading, and that’s one of the risks we face.”

Tariffs were expected to remain high, he said, pointing to signs that US consumer prices were starting to edge higher.

“The underlying tariff is much higher than it was back in January, February. If that stays … that will weigh on growth going forward, contributing to a really lackluster global performance.”

One unusual factor has been a depreciation of the dollar, not seen during previous trade tensions, Gourinchas said, noting that the lower dollar was adding to the tariff shock for other countries, while also helping ease financial conditions.

US growth was expected to reach 1.9 percent in 2025, up 0.1 percentage point from April’s outlook, edging up to 2 percent in 2026. A new US tax cut and spending law was expected to increase the US fiscal deficit by 1.5 percentage points, with tariff revenues offsetting that by about half, the IMF said.

It lifted its forecast for the euro area by 0.2 percentage point to 1 percent in 2025, and left the 2026 forecast unchanged at 1.2 percent. The IMF said the upward revision reflected a historically large surge in Irish pharmaceutical exports to the US; without it, the revision would have been half as big.

China’s outlook got a bigger upgrade of 0.8 percentage point, reflecting stronger-than-expected activity in the first half of the year, and the significant reduction in US-China tariffs after Washington and Beijing declared a temporary truce.

The IMF increased its forecast for Chinese growth in 2026 by 0.2 percentage point to 4.2 percent.

Overall, growth is expected to reach 4.1 percent in emerging markets and developing economies in 2025, edging lower to 4 percent in 2026, it said.

The IMF revised its forecast for world trade up by 0.9 percentage point to 2.6 percent, but cut its forecast for 2026 by 0.6 percentage point to 1.9 percent.

As United States President Donald Trump blasts his way through tariff announcements, one thing is clear, experts say: Some level of duties is here to stay.

In the past few weeks, Trump has announced a string of deals – with the European Union, Japan, Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines – with tariffs ranging from 15 percent to 20 percent.

He has also threatened Brazil with a 50 percent tariff, unveiled duties of 30 percent and 35 percent for major trading partners Mexico and Canada, and indicated that deals with China and India are close.

How many of Trump’s tariff rates will shake out is anybody’s guess, but one thing is clear, according to Vina Nadjibulla, vice president of research and strategy at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada: “No one is getting zero tariffs. There’s no going back.”

Trump’s various announcements have spelled months of chaos for industry, leaving businesses in limbo and forcing them to pause investment and hiring decisions.

The World Bank has slashed its growth forecasts for nearly 70 percent of economies – including the US, China and Europe, and six emerging market regions – and cut its global growth estimate to 2.3 percent, down from 2.7 percent in January.

Oxford Economics has forecast a shallow recession in capital spending in the Group of Seven (G7) countries – Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the US – lasting from the second quarter to the third quarter of this year.

“What we’re seeing is the Donald Trump business style: There’s lots of commotion, lots of claim, lots of activity and lots of b*******,” Robert Rogowsky, professor of international trade at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told Al Jazeera.

“That’s his business model, and that’s how he operates. That’s why he’s driven so many of his businesses into bankruptcy. It’s not strategic or tactical. It’s instinctive.”

Rogowsky said he expects Trump to push back his tariff deadline again, after delaying it from April to July, and then to August 1.

“It’s going to be a series of TACO tariffs,” Rogowsky said, referring to the acronym for “Trump Always Chickens Out”, a phrase coined by Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong in early May to describe the US president’s backpedalling on tariffs in the face of stock market turmoil.

“He will bump them again,” Rogowsky said. “He’s just exerting the image of power.”

Trump’s back-and-forth policy moves have characterised his dealings with some of the US’s biggest trade partners, including China and the EU.

China’s tariff rate has gone from 20 percent to 54 percent, to 104 percent, to 145 percent, and then 30 percent, while the deadline for implementation has shifted repeatedly.

The proposed tariff rates for the EU have followed a similar pattern, going from 20 percent to 50 percent to 30 percent, and then 15 percent following the latest trade deal.

The EU’s current tariff rate only applies to 70 percent of goods, with a zero rate applying to a limited range of exports, including semiconductor equipment and some chemicals.

European steel exports will continue to be taxed at 50 percent, and Trump has indicated that new tariffs could be on the way for pharmaceutical products.

Despite the trade deals, many details of how Trump’s tariffs will work in practice remain unclear.

Whether Trump announces more changes down the track, analysts agree that the world has entered a new phase in which countries are seeking to become less reliant on the US.

“Now that the initial shock and anger [at Trump policies] has subsided, there is a quiet determination to build resilience and become less reliant on the US,” Nadjibulla said, adding that Trump was pushing countries to address longstanding issues that had been untouchable before.

Canada, for instance, is tackling inter-provincial trade barriers, a politically sensitive issue historically, even as it looks elsewhere to increase exports, said Tony Stillo, director of Canada Economics at Oxford Economics.

“It would be foolhardy not to provide to the US, seeing as it’s our largest market, but it also makes us more resilient to provide to other markets as well,” Stillo told Al Jazeera.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has reached out to the EU and Mexico and indicated his wish to improve his country’s strained relations with China and India.

This month, Canada expanded its exports of liquified natural gas beyond the US market, with its first shipment of cargoes to Asia.

To mitigate the fallout of Trump’s tariffs, Ottawa has been offering relief to Canadian businesses, including automakers, and has instituted a six-month pause on tariffs on some imports from the US to give firms time to re-adjust their supply chains.

There is also “some relief” in the fact that other countries “don’t seem to be imitating the Trump show [by levying their own tariffs]. They’re witnessing this attempt to strong-arm the rest of the world, but it doesn’t seem to be working,” Mary Lovely, the Anthony M Solomon senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), told Al Jazeera.

But the world is watching how the tariffs will affect the US economy, as “that will also be instructive to other countries”, Lovely said.

“If we see a slowdown, as we expect, it becomes a cautionary tale for others.”

Although the US stock market is near an all-time high, it is heavily weighted towards the “magnificent seven”, said Lovely, referring to the largest tech companies, and that reflects just one part of the economy.

Re-emergence of industrial policy

Trump’s tariffs come on top of other growing challenges for exporters the world over, including China’s subsidy-heavy industrial policy that allows its businesses to undercut its competitors.

“We’ve entered a period of global economic alignment with the reintroduction of industrial policies,” Nadjibulla said, explaining that more and more governments are likely to roll out support for their domestic industries.

“Each country will have to navigate these and find ways to de-risk and reduce overreliance on the US and China.”

Still, countries seeking to support their homegrown industries will have to do so while reckoning with the World Trade Organization and rules-based trade agreements such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, Nadjibulla said.

“It will take some tremendous leadership around the world to corral this wild mustang [Trump] before he breaks up the world order,” Rogowsky said.

“But it will break because I do think Donald Trump will drive us into a recession.”

July 28 (UPI) — A Florida woman is headed to prison after helping her family hide nearly $100 million from the federal government.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced Monday that Gilda Rosenberg of Golden Beach in Miami-Dade County has been sentenced to 30 months in prison for conspiring to defraud the United States by stashing tens of millions of dollars in undeclared foreign financial accounts, for filing false tax returns and evading taxes, among other offenses.

According to court documents, Rosenberg, who is a dual U.S. and Colombian citizen, worked in conjunction with two other members of her family in a plan to hide more than $90 million in income and assets by keeping the money in undeclared bank accounts in Andorra, Israel, Panama and Switzerland.

Rosenberg’s family had been keeping offshore accounts since the 1970s, and by the 1990s she had become an owner and authorized signer on some of those accounts. She also knew that neither she or her relatives had disclosed these accounts to the United States nor had paid any taxes on income earned from the accounts.

By the 2000s, the family had shifted their assets to various foreign banks in order to continue hiding it all from the IRS, and Rosenberg was documented as the as the beneficial owner of accounts at banks in Switzerland and Andorra. She also signed false account opening documents that claimed she was only a Colombian citizen and not American.

Rosenberg and her involved relatives also didn’t disclose their foreign financial accounts as legally required, while also omitting their offshore assets on their U.S. tax returns.

By 2017, all those involved schemed to continue evading paying the IRS by dividing their assets and signing documents that made it appear Rosenberg and a relative gifted their assets to another relative who had renounced his American citizenship.

The group then attempted to secretly transfer assets to Rosenberg in the United States and to conceal their continued tax evasion by, among other methods, creating fake loans and investment documents to make it appear that transfers to and from Rosenberg were loans and business investments.

It has since been determined that Rosenberg and two of her co-conspirators caused a tax loss to the United States of more than $1.9 million between 2009 and 2017, which she has since agreed to pay in restitution, not including interest. Additionally, as per her plea agreement, she was required to pay a penalty of over $5.8 million to the IRS to resolve a civil liability related to failing to disclose her foreign financial accounts.

CANTON, Ohio — Vice President JD Vance used a speech in his home state on Monday to promote the GOP’s sweeping tax-and-border bill as a small group of protesters outside a northeast Ohio steel plant brandished signs critical of the administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

Vance spoke to a crowd of steel workers in neon green, orange, yellow and red hard hats and safety glasses gathered inside a rolling mill at Metallus Inc. in Canton, about 60 miles from Cleveland. It was his second trip this month as chief promoter of the hodgepodge of conservative priorities that Republicans have dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Echoing themes expressed at an industrial machine shop in West Pittston, Pa., Vance said American workers should be able to keep more of their pay in their pockets and U.S. companies should be rewarded when they grow. He highlighted the law’s new tax deductions on overtime and its breaks on tipped income.

Vance decried Democrats — including U.S. Rep. Emilia Sykes, whose competitive House district he was visiting — for opposing the bill that keeps the current tax rates, which would have otherwise expired later this year.

The legislation cleared the GOP-controlled Congress by the narrowest of margins, with Vance breaking a tie vote in the Senate for the package that also sets aside hundreds of billions of dollars for Trump’s immigration agenda while slashing Medicaid and food stamps.

The vice president is also stepping up his public relations blitz on the bill as the White House tries to deflect attention from the growing controversy over Jeffrey Epstein.

The disgraced financier killed himself, authorities say, in a New York jail cell in 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. Trump and his top allies stoked conspiracy theories about Epstein’s death before Trump returned to the White House and are now reckoning with the consequences of a Justice Department announcement earlier this month that Epstein did indeed die by suicide and that no further documents about the case would be released.

Vance insisted that the administration of President Trump isn’t trying to cover up information from the investigation that’s in the public interest.

Vance said Trump asked Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to release all “credible information” but that the process “takes time.” The Justice Department has asked for grand jury transcripts to be made public, but a judge in Florida has rejected that bid while requests remain pending in New York.

Vance said Trump, who was an acquaintance of Epstein before they had a falling out, wants “full transparency” in the case and alleged that prior administrations went “easy on this guy.” A few heads could be seen nodding amid the crowd.

Questions about the case continued to dog Trump in Scotland, where he on Sunday announced a framework trade deal with the European Union.

Asked about the timing of the trade announcement and the Epstein case and whether it was correlated, Trump responded: “You got to be kidding with that.”

“No, had nothing to do with it,” Trump told the reporter. “Only you would think that.”

The White House sees the new law as a political boon, sending Vance to promote it in swing congressional districts that will determine whether Republicans retain their House majority next year.

In a navy jacket and white shirt unbuttoned at the collar, Vance leaned into folksy word choices and characterized the administration’s immigration crackdown as an effort to keep gangs trafficking deadly fentanyl out of the country.

Vance’s decision to visit Sykes’ district comes as the National Republican Congressional Committee has named her narrowly split district as a top target this cycle. His northeastern Pennsylvania stop was in the district represented by Republican Rep. Rob Bresnahan, a first-term lawmaker who knocked off a six-time Democratic incumbent last fall.

A spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee called his visit “another desperate attempt to lie to Ohioans about the devastating impact the Big, Ugly Law will have on working families,” in a statement.

In the statement, Katie Smith said Sykes “fought tooth and nail against this disastrous law.”

Polls before the bill’s passage showed that it largely remained unpopular, although the public approves of some individual provisions such as increasing the child tax credit and allowing workers to deduct more of their tips on taxes.

Smyth and Kim write for the Associated Press.

British tourists heading over to one of the most popular cities in Europe have been warned over sly tactics many restaurants use to make foreigners spend more money

UK holidaymakers have been urged to watch out for sneaky fees that could end up wreaking havoc on their finances. Last year, a whopping 48.7 million tourists flocked to the French city of Paris and its surrounding areas – marking a two per cent increase compared to 2023. Unable to resist the charm of strolling along the Seine, watching the Eiffel Tower sparkle, and eating their body weight in pastries and cheese – the iconic city is expecting an even stronger tourism rebound this year.

As romantic and enchanting as Paris may be, there’s no denying it’s an expensive city – one that can easily break the bank if you’re not careful. Of course, avoiding fancy restaurants and luxury hotels may help keep the price down.

READ MORE: Spanish hotspot’s brutal 2-word warning as Brits threatened with £648 fine

However, there’s also a secret tourist tax that’s recently been unearthed. It comes after one local pretended to be a visitor from the United States to see whether dining out is really a set price for all.

Local media outlet Le Parisien sent two journalists to a well-known eatery in the city to see whether they’d be charged the same for their identical order. It comes after the publication spotted a slew of complaints from international tourists online, arguing that waiters use sly tactics to get them to pay more.

Writer Mathiew Hennequin was disguised as an American tourist, donned in a baseball cap and an Eiffel Tower t-shirt, while Marc (who uses the alias Radin Malin, pretended to be a domestic tourist. The pair requested the same order: a lasagna, soda, and water.

The ‘American tourist’ was offered Coke in ‘Medium’ or ‘Large’ size, but after choosing ‘Medium’ was given a huge pint of Coke for €9.50. He was also charged €6 for a bottle of water. However, the French guinea pig received a can of Coke for just €6.50 and was provided with a free carafe of water, paying €9.50 less than the fake Yankee.

In the same restaurant, the server offered the reporters ‘garlic bread’ without specifying that it was extra – but ended up charging the American €6 for the privilege. In another restaurant, the ‘American’ was told that service wasn’t included as part of the bill – which Franck Trouet of hotel and restaurant group GHR claims is ‘obviously false’.

The boss branded the findings a ‘disgrace’, adding: “You can’t even call these people waiters. You should know that in France, water and bread are free. One can refuse a bottle of water. The tip is to express thanks for the service if one is very satisfied: above all, it is not compulsory. This is not the United States.”

In both cases, the bill for the fake American tourist was 50 per cent more than that of the French customer. While this investigation didn’t use any reporters pretending to be British, it’s worth being careful when ordering food and drinks in the city to make sure you’re not being overcharged.

Do you have a story to share? Email us at [email protected] for a chance to be featured.

A group of business leaders submitted paperwork on Wednesday for a ballot measure that would repeal Los Angeles’ gross receipts tax, delivering some financial relief to local employers but also punching an $800-million hole in the city budget.

The proposed measure, called the “Los Angeles Cost of Living Relief Initiative,” would strip away a tax imposed on a vast array of businesses: entertainment companies, child care providers, law firms, accountants, healthcare businesses, nightclubs, delivery companies and many others, according to the group that submitted it.

Backers said that repealing a tax long reviled by the business community would help address the city’s economic woes, creating jobs, allowing businesses to stay in the city and making the economy “more affordable for all Angelenos.”

“This initiative is the result of the business community uniting to fight the anti-job climate at City Hall,” said Nella McOsker, president and CEO of the Central City Assn., a downtown-based business group.

McOsker, one of five business leaders who signed the ballot proposal, said city officials have “ignored the pleas of small- and medium-sized businesses for years.” As a result, scores of restaurants and other establishments, including the Mayan Theater, are closing, she said.

The filing of the ballot proposal immediately set off alarms at City Hall, where officials recently signed off on a plan to lay off hundreds of city workers in an attempt to balance this year’s budget. The city’s business tax generates more than $800 million annually for the general fund — the part of the budget that pays for police patrols, firefighters, paramedic response and other core services.

“Public safety is almost exclusively paid for by the general fund,” said City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo, in an email to The Times. “This measure is an assault on public safety. Proponents of this measure will be directly responsible for cutting police or fire staffing in half if it passes.”

McOsker, asked about L.A.’s financial woes, said the city had a $1-billion shortfall this year and still succeeded in balancing the budget. She is the daughter of City Councilmember Tim McOsker, who sits on the five-member budget committee.

The proposed measure is backed by executives and board members with various groups, including the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, the Greater San Fernando Valley Chamber of Commerce and VICA, the Valley Industry and Commerce Assn.

VICA president Stuart Waldman said the city’s economy has faltered amid a spate of increased taxes, higher city fees and new regulations. The most recent, he said, is the ordinance hiking the minimum wage for hotel employees and workers at Los Angeles International Airport to $30 per hour by 2028, which was approved by the City Council over objections from business leaders.

“We’re usually playing defense,” said Waldman, who also signed the ballot proposal. “We’ve decided the time has come to play offense.”

The business tax proposal is part of a larger ballot battle being waged this year between businesses and organized labor.

Last month, a group of airlines and hotel industry organizations turned in about 140,000 signatures for a proposed ballot measure aimed at overturning the newly approved hotel and LAX minimum wage. L.A. County election officials are currently verifying those signatures.

Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel employees, responded with its own package of countermeasures. One would require a citywide election on the construction or expansion of hotels, sports stadiums, concert halls and other venues. Another would hike the minimum wage for all workers in the city, raising it to the level of hotel and airport employees.

Two other measures from Unite Here take aim at companies that pay their CEOs more than a hundred times their median employee in L.A., either by forcing them to pay higher business taxes or by placing limitations on their use of city property.

The ongoing ballot battle is “escalating in ways that are reckless and disconnected from the real work of running a city,” said Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, who heads the council’s budget committee. Yaroslavsky, in a statement, said the fight is “unproductive and needs to stop.”

“We just closed a billion-dollar budget gap, and basic services are already severely strained,” she said. “You don’t fix that by removing one of our largest revenue sources with no plan to replace it. We have to fix what is broken and that requires working together to offer real solutions.”

Josué Marcus, spokesperson for the Los Angeles City Clerk, said proponents of the latest ballot measure would need to gather about 140,000 valid signatures for it to qualify. The next city election is in June 2026. McOsker, for her part, said she believes that state law sets a lower threshold — only 44,000 — for measures that result in the elimination of taxes.

Industry leaders have long decried L.A.’s business tax, which is levied not on profits but on the gross receipts that are brought in — even where an enterprise suffers financial losses.

Former Mayor Eric Garcetti argued for eliminating the tax more than a decade ago, saying it puts the city’s economy at a competitive disadvantage. Once in office, he only managed to scale it back, amid concerns that an outright repeal would trigger cuts to city services.

Organizers of the latest proposal said it would not rescind business taxes on the sale of cannabis or medical marijuana, which were separately approved by voters.

Greece has introduced a new cruise tax which will see people charged depending on the season and port on the European Union holiday hotspot, MSC Cruises has warned

British holidaymakers now face a €20 (£17.35) levy the moment they set foot in Greece following the introduction of fresh regulations in the popular European Union destination. A new cruise tax has been rolled out, meaning passengers will be hit with varying disembarkation charges depending on which Greek island port they visit and the time of year.

From July 21, 2025, island-hopping by cruise ship became considerably pricier for all travellers. Between June 1 and September 30, visitors will be stung with a €20 fee when stepping off at Mykonos and Santorini ports. All other Greek ports will impose a €5 (£4.34) charge during this peak period.

READ MORE: Brits claim Benidorm is ‘too posh’ as ‘German Magaluf’ is the new holiday hotspot

The levy reduces during the shoulder months of October and from April 1 to May 31, dropping to €12 (£10.41) for Mykonos and Santorini whilst other ports charge €3 (£2.60).

Throughout the winter period from November 1 to March 31, the fee falls to just €4 (£3.47) for the two popular islands and €1 (87p) for remaining ports. The charge applies to each passenger at every port where they step ashore.

MSC Cruises has already notified customers via email that the additional cost will be passed directly onto guests. The cruise operator explained in correspondence: “This tax, similar to those already in force for hotels and other types of accommodation facilities, is designed to support local infrastructure, promote sustainable tourism, and improve the visitor experience.”

“For your convenience, MSC Cruises will prepay this tax for you directly to the Greek authorities. We will simply add the tax to your onboard account the night before each call in a Greek port.”

READ MORE: Little known cheap holiday spot dubbed the ‘new Magaluf’ as £2 pints a hit with Brits

They explained: “MSC does not determine or control this expense, which is established and imposed by the Greek authorities and applied to all cruise companies operating in Greece.” The message also noted that passengers who remain aboard will have the fee automatically waived.

The new travel permit is to strengthen security and the borders of the Schengen zone, reports Birmingham Live. The €20 doesn’t apply only to Greece, but also other popular holiday destinations, such as Spain and France, will be affected.

This also follows news from EU’s Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs revealing that European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) were going to be introduced in the final quarter of 2026. As previously reported by the Mirror, ETIAS will not be mandatory until 2027.

Brits might want to do some research before they head off to a sunny-drenched destination, as they might be stung with a fee. The bigger the family, the more expensive it will become!