Author

admin

Browsing
In Stocks

UK’s FCA fines Barclays £42 million for ‘significant’ financial crime lapses

3 Mins Read

UK financial regulators have imposed a hefty £42 million ($56 million) fine on Barclays Plc for significant failures in identifying and managing financial crime risks related to two of its clients.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) detailed the lapses in a statement on Wednesday, highlighting how the banking giant facilitated the movement of funds linked to criminal activity.

The majority of the fine is directly linked to Barclays’ inadequate management of money laundering risks associated with a client named Stunt & Co.

According to the FCA’s statement, over the course of a year, Stunt & Co. received a substantial £46.8 million from Fowler Oldfield, a company that was later found to be at the heart of one of the United Kingdom’s largest-ever money-laundering trials.

The regulator’s findings were damning. The FCA stated that “Barclays failed to properly consider the money laundering risks associated with the firm even after receiving information from law enforcement about suspected money laundering through Fowler Oldfield, and after learning that the police had raided both firms.”

The watchdog concluded that “by providing ongoing banking services to Stunt & Co, Barclays facilitated the movement of funds linked to financial crime,” a severe breach of its regulatory obligations.

Lapses in due diligence: the WealthTek account

In a separate instance, Barclays was found to have failed in its due diligence when opening a money account for another client, WealthTek.

The FCA noted that Barclays failed to properly gather sufficient information about WealthTek before onboarding the company. Crucially, WealthTek was not permitted by the FCA to hold client money at the time Barclays provided it with the account.

The regulator pointed out that a basic but critical step was missed. “One simple check it could have done was to look at the Financial Services Register before opening the account,” the FCA said.

Without the right information about WealthTek and how the account would be used, there was an increased risk of misappropriation of client money or money laundering.

Barclays’ response

In an effort to mitigate the harm caused, Barclays has agreed to make a voluntary payment of £6.3 million to the clients of WealthTek who have experienced a shortfall in the money they have been able to reclaim from the now-defunct firm.

This proactive step, according to the FCA’s statement, helped Barclays secure a reduction in the ultimate fine it faced from the regulator.

In response to the fine, a spokesperson for Barclays stated that the bank “remains deeply committed to the fight against financial crime and fraud,” adding that the issues were all centered around historical money laundering activity.

The representative affirmed that the lender “fully cooperated with both investigations and has further strengthened its financial crime and other control capabilities.”

The post UK’s FCA fines Barclays £42 million for ‘significant’ financial crime lapses appeared first on Invezz

Keep Reading
In World news

Seabed Mining Heats Up as Lockheed Martin Courts Interest in Pacific Licenses

5 Mins Read

Defense manufacturer Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT) is in early talks with undersea mining companies to open access to two dormant seabed exploration licenses it has held since the 1980s

The move signals a renewed US push to tap the ocean floor for critical minerals.

The licenses, which cover swaths of the eastern Pacific seabed in international waters, were awarded to Lockheed by US regulators decades ago during a previous wave of interest in deep-sea mining.

Though the projects never progressed to extraction, they are now gaining fresh attention as nations and corporations seek alternative sources of key minerals used in electric vehicles, defense technologies, and clean energy systems.

“We are in early stages of conversations with several companies about giving them access to our licences and allowing them to process those materials,” Frank St. John, Lockheed’s chief operating officer, told the Financial Times.

While St. John declined to quantify the potential value of the deposits, he added that interested parties have “done the homework and determined there is value there.”

Lockheed’s seabed licenses could represent a strategic foothold in a mineral-rich region, containing polymetallic nodules that can hold commercially viable concentrations of key metals.

The timing also coincides with recent executive action from the White House.

USPresident Donald Trump, who returned to office in January, signed an executive order in April asserting US rights to issue mining licenses in international waters and encouraging the stockpiling of seabed metals as strategic resources.

The order bypasses ongoing negotiations at the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the UN agency tasked with regulating deep-sea mining, and instead relies on the 1980 US Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act as the legal foundation.

It emphasizes the need to “establish the US as a global leader in seabed mineral exploration and development both within and beyond national jurisdiction.” While the US has not ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea — the treaty from which the ISA derives its authority — it has signed a 1994 agreement recognizing the treaty’s seabed provisions and operates its own permitting system through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Lockheed said it welcomes the renewed policy attention. “We believe the US has the opportunity to develop a gold standard for commercial recovery of nodules in an environmentally responsible manner.”

Court upholds TMC disclosures on deep-dea mining risks

Lockheed is not alone in navigating the legal uncertainties surrounding seabed mining.

The Metals Company (TMC) (NASDAQ:TMC), a deep-sea mining startup, recently survived a shareholder lawsuit alleging it had misled investors about the environmental impacts and financial backing of its operations.

US District Judge Eric Komitee dismissed the claims, ruling that the company’s comparisons to conventional mining methods were not misleading, even if deep-sea mining still carries environmental risks.

“It is eminently possible that (1) deep-sea mining causes meaningful environmental harm, and yet (2) such harm is significantly less than the harm caused by existing methods,” the judge wrote.

TMC had disclosed in filings that deep-sea mining could result in damage and that the regulatory path remained uncertain. Its legal win may encourage others — like Lockheed — to proceed more openly with their seabed plans, albeit cautiously.

Deep-sea mining industry cautiously awakens

The growing pursuit of potentially extracting resources from the world’s oceans comes at a critical juncture for the seabed-mining industry. For decades, a de facto moratorium on mining in international waters has been in place due to regulatory uncertainty and environmental concerns.

The ISA has issued more than 30 exploratory permits, but has yet to finalize commercial extraction rules. That delay has prompted frustration from some parties, while drawing calls from others for a pause or outright ban.

Currently, the ISA is holding key assemblies in Jamaica to hash out the long-awaited mining code to regulate commercial activity on the ocean floor with provisions for environmental safeguards, royalties, and tax obligations.

But a growing number of countries — 37 at last count — have pushed for a precautionary pause, citing risks to deep-sea ecosystems that remain largely uncharted. Scientists warn that mining these habitats could cause irreversible damage.

In 2023, Lockheed appeared to step back from the sector by selling two UK-sponsored exploration licenses in the Pacific, a move interpreted by analysts as signaling reduced confidence in deep-sea mining.

However, its retained US licenses suggest it never fully exited the space.

The Trump administration’s executive order marks the most assertive US step yet to undermine the ISA’s multilateral approach, raising fears among diplomats that the agency may lose legitimacy.

China, which has also invested heavily in seabed mining, responded sharply to the move.

“The US authorization violates international law and harms the overall interests of the international community,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said earlier this year.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
In Business

Some Walmart garment orders from Bangladesh on hold due to U.S. tariff threat

3 Mins Read

LONDON/NEW YORK, July 11 (Reuters) – Suppliers to Walmart WMT.N have delayed or put on hold some orders from garment manufacturers in Bangladesh, according to three factory owners and correspondence from a supplier seen by Reuters, as U.S. President Donald Trump’s threat of a 35% tariff on the textile hub disrupts business.

Bangladesh is the third-largest exporter of apparel to the United States, and it relies on the garment sector for 80% of its export earnings and 10% of its GDP. The factory owners all said they expected orders to fall if the August 1 tariffs go into effect, as they are unable to absorb that 35% rate.

Iqbal Hossain, managing director of garment manufacturer Patriot Eco Apparel Ltd, told Reuters an order for nearly 1 million swim shorts for Walmart was put on hold on Thursday due to the tariff threat.

“As we discussed please hold all below Spring season orders we are discussing here due to heavy Tariff % imposed for USA imports,” Faruk Saikat, assistant merchandising manager at Classic Fashion, wrote in an email to Hossain and others seen by Reuters. Classic Fashion is a supplier and buying agent that places orders for retailers.

“As per our management instruction we are holding Bangladesh production for time being and IN case Tariff issues settled then we will continue as we planned here.”

The hold was not decided by Walmart, Saikat told Reuters, but by Classic Fashion itself.

Walmart did not respond to a request for comment.

Bangladesh is currently in talks with the United States in Washington to try to negotiate a lower tariff. Trump in recent days has revived threats of higher levies on numerous nations.

“If the 35% tariff remains for Bangladesh, that will be very tough to sustain, honestly speaking, and there will not be as many orders as we have now,” said Mohiuddin Rubel, managing director at jeans manufacturer Denim Expert Ltd in Dhaka.

Rubel, whose company produces jeans for H&M HMb.ST and other retailers, said he expects clients will ask him to absorb part of the tariff, but added this would not be possible financially. Manufacturers have already absorbed part of the blanket 10% tariff imposed by the U.S. on April 2.

“Only probably the big, big companies can a little bit sustain (tariffs) but not the small and medium companies,” he said.

Retailers have front-loaded orders since Trump returned to the White House, anticipating higher tariffs. Jeans maker Levi’s LEVI.N, which imports from Bangladesh, said on Thursday it has 60% of the inventory it needs for the rest of 2025.

U.S. clothing imports from Bangladesh totaled $3.38 billion in the first five months of 2025, up 21% from the year-earlier period, according to U.S. International Trade Commission data.

Another Dhaka-based garment factory owner said an importer with whom he was negotiating a spring 2026 order of trousers for Walmart asked him on Thursday to wait a week before the order would be confirmed due to the tariff risk.

Hossain said he may look for more orders from European clients to make up for lost orders if the U.S. 35% tariff gets implemented, even if he has to cut prices to stimulate demand.

(Reuters reporting by Helen Reid in London and Siddharth Cavale in New York; Editing by David Gaffen and Matthew Lewis)

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Keep Reading
In Politics

Huckabee demands Israel ‘aggressively investigate’ murder of Palestinian-American killed in ‘terrorist act’

2 Mins Read

The U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, on Tuesday called on Israeli authorities to ‘aggressively investigate’ the killing of Sayfollah Musallet, a 20-year-old Palestinian-American who was reportedly beaten to death by a gang of extremist settlers in the West Bank village of Sinjil on Friday.

‘We have asked Israel to aggressively investigate the murder of Saif Mussallet, an American citizen who was visiting family in Sinjil when he was beaten to death in the West Bank,’ Huckabee wrote on X. ‘There must be accountability for this criminal and terrorist act. Saif was only 20 years old.’

According to the family, Musallet was visiting the West Bank from Tampa, Florida, to reconnect with relatives and visit family-owned farmland. 

‘This is an unimaginable nightmare and injustice that no family should ever have to face,’ the family said in a statement. ‘We demand the U.S. State Department lead an immediate investigation and hold the Israeli settlers who killed Saif accountable for their crimes.’

Israeli military officials said the confrontation began when Palestinians threw rocks at settlers, lightly injuring two. IDF forces were deployed to the area and used non-lethal crowd control methods, the army said.

So far, no Israeli suspects have been arrested in connection with the killings. Two Israeli minors detained on Friday night for suspected involvement in public disturbances were later released to house arrest. A reserve soldier questioned by the military police over the shooting during the incident was also released.

The Palestinian Health Ministry said Musallet was fatally beaten during an attack by settlers in the area. Another man, 23-year-old Mohammed al-Shalabi, was shot in the chest and also killed during the same incident. 

Sources in the Israeli police told Haaretz newspaper that the lack of an autopsy and the fact that the bodies were not transferred to Israeli authorities may complicate the investigation.

A military court also released Abdullah Hamida, a Palestinian resident arrested during the settler raid, criticizing police conduct. During the hearing, the police representative admitted he was unaware that any Palestinians had been killed, and incorrectly claimed the only wounded were settlers.

The State Department acknowledged awareness of the incident but declined further comment, Reuters reports, citing ‘respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
In Stocks

Tesla’s $69,770 Model Y enters India: a premium EV bet to drive global sales?

4 Mins Read

Tesla Inc., the electric vehicle pioneer helmed by Elon Musk, has finally made its long-awaited entry into India with the launch of its Model Y SUV, priced at a steep ₹6 million ($69,770).

The company inaugurated its first showroom in Mumbai on Tuesday, formally stepping into the world’s third-largest automobile market, although its initial approach remains cautious and premium-focused.

The rear-wheel-drive Model Y has been listed on Tesla’s India website for ₹6 million, with the long-range version costing ₹6.8 million.

These prices mark the highest globally for the same vehicle. Tesla’s high pricing in India is primarily due to the country’s steep import duties on fully assembled cars, which can go as high as 70%.

In comparison, the Model Y starts at $44,990 in the United States, 263,500 yuan (approximately $36,700) in China, and €45,970 (about $53,700) in Germany.

Tesla enters niche EV segment to compete with BMW, Mercedes-Benz

Tesla’s Indian operations will begin with imported units, and customer deliveries are expected to start from the third quarter of 2025.

The company is targeting India’s small but growing premium EV segment, which currently accounts for only about 4% of total electric vehicle sales.

With the launch, Tesla positions itself to compete with global luxury names like BMW and Mercedes-Benz rather than homegrown EV manufacturers such as Tata Motors and Mahindra & Mahindra.

Tesla has already shipped six Model Y SUVs from its Shanghai Gigafactory to Mumbai for display and demonstration purposes.

According to auto portal Carwale, these vehicles will serve as initial showcases while Tesla gauges consumer interest.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported that Tesla has imported about $1 million worth of goods into India, including vehicles, chargers, and accessories, sourced mainly from China and the United States.

Bookings for the Model Y are open on the company’s Indian website, which lists the on-road price in Mumbai at ₹6.1 million.

A deposit of ₹22,220 is required to reserve the vehicle.

Tesla is also offering its Full Self-Driving (FSD) package for an additional ₹600,000, with promises of gradual software enhancements via over-the-air updates.

The current version of FSD requires driver supervision and is not yet fully autonomous.

Brand establishment before scaling

Despite lobbying for reduced duties for several years, Tesla chose to test the Indian market through imported units rather than wait for a complete manufacturing ecosystem to fall in place.

While the current approach is volume-light, it gives Tesla visibility in a growing market.

Industry analysts believe Tesla’s entry into India is more about establishing its presence than chasing immediate scale.

“It’s not meaningful from a volume standpoint yet,” Bloomberg quoted Jay Kale, an analyst at Elara Securities based in Mumbai, as saying.

“But it plants the brand. Over time, as charging infrastructure improves and the lineup expands, Tesla could scale.”

As India continues to develop its EV charging infrastructure and incentivizes domestic production, Tesla may consider a factory at a later stage.

For now, the company appears focused on evaluating brand acceptance, infrastructure readiness, and regulatory clarity.

Testing Indian waters amid global pressures

Tesla’s India entry also comes at a time when the company is navigating significant headwinds in its top markets — the US and China.

In the first quarter of 2025, Tesla reported revenue of $19.34 billion, missing analyst expectations of $21.11 billion.

The company’s gross margin fell to 16.3%, compared to 17.4% a year earlier.

In China, Tesla’s once-dominant EV market share has slipped due to fierce competition from local players.

In the first five months of 2025, Tesla accounted for just 7.6% of China’s EV sales, down from 10% in 2024 and a peak of 15% in 2020.

Domestic brands such as BYD and Xiaomi have steadily gained ground with feature-rich and more affordable alternatives.

Global competition from BYD is also eating into Tesla’s overall market share. With its dominance under threat, India represents a potentially important, albeit long-term, growth frontier.

Government tweaks EV policy to attract Tesla

India’s government responded to Tesla’s concerns last year by unveiling a new EV policy aimed at attracting global manufacturers.

The scheme allows approved companies to import up to 8,000 completely built electric vehicles per year at a reduced Customs duty of 15%—down from 70%—if they commit to investing at least ₹4,150 crore (roughly $500 million) in setting up local manufacturing.

To be eligible, companies must have global revenues of ₹10,000 crore or more and fixed assets worth at least ₹3,000 crore.

Although Tesla has yet to officially commit to building a plant in India, this policy has been widely viewed as a direct effort to lure the company.

The post Tesla’s $69,770 Model Y enters India: a premium EV bet to drive global sales? appeared first on Invezz

Keep Reading
In World news

Gold Price Update: Q2 2025 in Review

9 Mins Read

After soaring to all-time highs during the first quarter of 2025, how could gold follow up during Q2?

By setting new price records, of course.

Tariff threats, financial uncertainty and geopolitical tensions all fueled the yellow metal’s price rise during the second quarter of the year, which saw gold reach the US$3,500 per ounce mark for the first time.

While central banks continued to make gold purchases during the period, so too did retail investors, who shied away from US treasuries in favor of a more tangible safe-haven asset class.

What happened to the gold price in Q2?

Gold had an impressive run during the first quarter of the year, steadily rising from US$2,658.04 on January 2 to US$3,138.24 on April 2, leaving investors to wonder how much more gas was available for Q2.

Gold price, April 1 to July 10, 2025.

Chart via Trading Economics.

The price of gold started the second quarter on a downswing, falling below the US$3,000 mark by April 8, but quickly found momentum and soared to its quarterly high of US$3,434.40 on April 21.

It broke through the US$3,500 threshold briefly during the day’s trading session.

However, the gains were temporary, and gold once again fell; by May 1, it had dropped to US$3,237.30.

The metal saw a slight rebound to US$3,400.70 before the May meeting of the US Federal Reserve, but it came under pressure after that and had fallen to US$3,185 by May 14.

The end of May saw more tailwinds for the gold price, pushing it first to US$3,358 by May 23, then to US$3,381.70 by June 2. By the middle of the month, it was back to trading above US$3,400. Since that time, the precious metal has remained mainly above the US$3,300 level, closing the quarter at US$3,303.30 on June 30.

Tariff uncertainty helps boost gold price

The biggest story from the first quarter has carried over into the second quarter: tariffs.

Since the start of his second term in the Oval Office, US President Donald Trump has applied the threat of tariffs like a cudgel in trade talks with other countries. His long-held belief is that other nations, even longtime allies, are benefiting from trade with the US, while the US itself is facing detrimental effects.

During the first quarter of the year, the Trump administration levied tariff threats against Canada and Mexico. While most of his promised import fees were dialed back at the eleventh hour, a 25 percent tax was still applied to imports of Canadian steel and aluminum, as well as non-CUSMA-compliant automobiles and parts.

On April 2, Trump announced a broader set of tariffs on nearly every country in the world, regardless of trade status with the US. Dubbed “Liberation Day” by Trump, the executive order applied a baseline 10 percent fee to all imports from most countries to the US, plus significant reciprocal measures against countries with the largest trade deficits.

The new measures, set to be implemented on April 9, created panic among investors, causing a global market meltdown. Fear also spread to US debt holders, such as Japan and Canada, which began to sell US treasuries, pushing up the 10 year bond yield. Spooked investors rapidly flocked to gold, pushing the price to record highs above US$3,400.

“The bond market understands that Washington is so broken and the debt situation is so bad,’ he explained. ‘It varies in degrees compared to other countries, but everybody’s in the same boat. That’s why gold all of a sudden … gold is the safe haven now, even more than treasuries. And I don’t think a lot of people every thought they’d see that again.’

Ultimately, the stock market turmoil and the shift in bond market sentiment brought about a quick reversal from Trump, who paused his tariff plans for 90 days. Although the gold price showed signs of easing as market participants calmed, the metal remained high through the end of the quarter as uncertainty remained near the surface.

The pause was set to expire on July 9, but the White House announced a last-minute extension delaying the implementation of the tariffs on all but 14 countries, including Japan, South Korea and South Africa.

However, there are still underlying concerns.

The US-China trade war, which raged through much of the first half of the year, was put on hold on May 12 after tariffs between the two largest economies reached their peak, adding headwinds to the gold price. Up to that point, the US had levied a 145 percent import tax on Chinese goods while China had applied a 125 percent tax on US imports.

Although tensions have stabilized since the pause, on July 7, China warned the US against reigniting conflicts. China also said it would retaliate against any country that makes deals with the US to China’s detriment.

Geopolitical tensions erupt in the Middle East

Financial uncertainty was a key driver of the gold price through the second quarter as investors sought to diversify their portfolios amid a chaotic investment landscape, but it wasn’t the only factor.

Geopolitical tensions also played a significant role, particularly in the Middle East.

With the Israel-Gaza conflict now past 18 months, the larger fear was that it would spill into a broader regional war.

Those fears were stoked in late May, when there was speculation that Israel was preparing to attack nuclear facilities in Iran. The news helped pull gold out of monthly lows as more investors sought the safety of the metal.

Ultimately, the speculation was true — on June 12, Israel launched attacks against key nuclear sites in Iran, causing Iran to launch counterattacks against targets in Israel and providing further tailwinds for the gold price.

What’s driving demand for gold?

Other support for the gold price came from continued purchases from central banks.

According to World Gold Council data, central banks bought 244 metric tons of gold in Q1. The amount was 24 percent higher than the five year quarterly average, but 9 percent lower than the average from the last three years.

The largest first quarter gold buyers were the National Bank of Poland, which added 49 metric tons of the metal to its holdings, increasing its total to 497 metric tons. This was followed by the People’s Bank of China, which purchased 13 metric tons, bringing its reported gold reserves to 2,292 metric tons

In another report, the World Gold Council indicates that despite high prices, central banks continued to buy gold in May, albeit at a slightly reduced pace, with a net 20 metric tons entering their reserves.

But it’s not just central banks that are picking up gold.

“In the past, there has been relatively little involvement, even to now, from western retail investors in this move. This has been overwhelmingly led by central banks and large funds,” Temple said.

However, he noted a shift in buying on the back of wider interest, pointing to gold’s popularity at Costco Wholesale (NASDAQ:COST), although he noted, ‘So far, this hasn’t moved the needle significantly.’

Temple added, “Traditionally the big needle mover when you’ve got these larger swings in markets and market sentiment has come from investors who are buying exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and buying the larger gold stocks, and then ultimately working their way down the food chain and buying the better exploration stories. We finally started in recent months to see some of that where it’s deserved. There have been some really nice moves.’

This idea is echoed in the World Gold Council’s June ETF report, which indicates that ETF flows ended the first half of 2025 with the highest semiannual inflows since the first half of 2020.

The North American movement led the way, with more than US$4.8 billion entering the market in June, bringing the total for the first half of the year to US$21 billion. This was followed by US$2 billion in inflows in Europe, with its first half total reaching US$6 billion. Asian markets added US$610 million with a first-half record of US$11 billion.

Gold price forecast for 2025

The expectation is that the factors that drove the gold price in H1 are unlikely to go away soon.

Trump continues to kick the tariff question down the road. And although a ceasefire has been called between Israel and Iran, tensions in the region are still high. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is ongoing, with Russia escalating attacks at the start of July, to the point of invoking Trump’s ire.

“We were thinking that by the time you got into June, July, August, not only would you have some seasonal weakness, but you’d also have a situation where financial markets might have calmed down and taken a less pessimistic outlook to the economy, simply because the initial shock of Trump policies was in there and had been digested. What we’re seeing is a prolongation of that shock period.’

Financial uncertainty and conflicts were a theme echoed by Kandoshko.

She pointed to the July 9 — now August 1 — deadline for tariffs as a potential inflection point.

“This could spark another rally in gold prices if trade tensions escalate. I have a feeling that the existing tariffs will gradually push prices up, which might lead the Fed to hold off on cutting rates. In the grand scheme of things, higher inflation is likely to boost gold demand, especially from central banks,” Kandoshko said.

She also believes a weak US dollar will likely be a boon for gold, making it more attractive to overseas buyers.

Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
In Politics

Hawley urges DHS Secretary Noem to declassify all Trump Butler rally assassination attempt documents

4 Mins Read

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., is urging Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem to declassify all documents related to the assassination attempt on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, 2024.

Hawley’s request comes a year after 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks fired off several shots at Trump from a rooftop near the presidential rally grounds. The gunman had a clear shot and grazed the president’s ear.

Even after a year, though, questions still remain about how Crooks was able to get a clear shot.

In his letter to Noem, Hawley mentions the one-year anniversary of the first assassination attempt on Trump.

‘This occasion marks a deeply troubling chapter in our nation’s history and serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency in preserving public trust during moments of national crisis,’ he wrote. ‘To that end, I urge you to take the necessary steps to declassify all documents within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) related to the events of July 13, 2024.

‘As you know, assassination attempts against current and former presidents are rare but profoundly consequential events in American life,’ Hawley continued. ‘And the American people rightly expect full transparency from their government.’

The senator pointed to investigation stonewalling tactics from the Biden administration’s Secret Service and DHS, which he said ultimately denied basic facts to the American people.

‘The public learned far more from whistleblowers than they did from public officials, and I released a report documenting these disclosures, many of which have been corroborated to date,’ Hawley wrote. ‘In October of last year, in a unanimous vote, the Homeland Security Committee passed my legislation requiring the Secret Service release to the public all pertinent documents.

‘Now, I am requesting that you immediately declassify and release all documents relating to the first assassination attempt on President Trump within the full extent of your authority, subject only to the narrowest possible redactions necessary to protect ongoing operations or individual safety,’ he said. ‘The public deserves a full and accurate account of this event, the circumstances that allowed it to happen, and the steps the government has taken since to strengthen protective measures.’

Hawley requested a complete inventory of all classified or non-public materials related to the first assassination attempt on Trump, including reports, internal communications, threat assessments, after-action reviews and coordinated records with other agencies.

He also requested a formal explanation for the continued classification of materials Noem believes must remain restricted, as well as a proposed plan and timeline for the immediate declassification and public release of all remaining documents, all by July 30, 2025.

Fox News Digital has reached out to DHS for comment on the matter.

Hawley released a report in September, detailing the failures of the Secret Service in connection with the attempted assassination of Trump in July, which included whistleblower allegations that are ‘highly damaging to the credibility’ of the agency.

The report uncovered a ‘compounding pattern of negligence, sloppiness, and gross incompetence that goes back years, all of which culminated in an assassination attempt that came inches from succeeding.’

Hawley accused the Secret Service, FBI and DHS of all trying ‘to evade real accountability.’

‘These agencies and their leaders have slow-walked congressional investigations, misled the American people, and shirked responsibility,’ the report states. 

After the first of two assassination attempts against Trump in just over two months, Hawley visited the Butler rally site to interview whistleblowers and opened up a whistleblower tip line, encouraging those with relevant information to share with officials. 

Documents subpoenaed by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs also show major failures among the six U.S. Secret Service (USSS) agents who were suspended without pay in response to the assassination attempt.

The documents were based on interviews with the agents and their colleagues and revealed that several agents admitted the existence of major security concerns at the Butler rally, but none of them elevated the concerns or helped produce a plan to properly cover the roof that provided Crooks a clear shot of Trump.

The documents show that some agents in charge never even conducted walk-throughs of the site. For example, the lead advance agent, documents show, never did a final security walk-through of the rally site because she was in the hospital for heat exhaustion, the special agent in charge said when questioned.

Some of the agents were suspended without pay for various terms, though none of the agents were fired.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
In Stocks

China’s exports surge amid waning frontloading demand

3 Mins Read

In June, China’s exports saw a renewed surge, and imports also recovered. 

The surge was largely due to companies expediting shipments to leverage a temporary tariff agreement between Beijing and Washington, anticipating an upcoming August deadline, according to a Reuters report.

Businesses globally are anticipating the outcome of negotiations between the world’s two largest economies. 

The key question is whether a lasting agreement will be reached, or if the global supply chains face disruption once more due to the potential re-imposition of duties exceeding 100%.

Trade tensions intensify as China’s exports surge

China’s outbound shipments saw a 5.8% year-on-year increase in June, according to customs data released on Monday.

This figure surpassed economists’ predictions of a 5.0% rise in a Reuters poll and also exceeded May’s growth of 4.8%.

Imports rebounded 1.1%, following a 3.4% decline in May. Economists had predicted a 1.3% rise.

“There are some signs that frontloading demand is beginning to wane gradually,” Chim Lee, senior analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit was quoted in the Reuters report. 

Global supply chain concerns

Lee added:

While frontloading ahead of the August tariff pause deadline is likely to continue, freight rates for China-bound shipments to the U.S. have started to decline.

He added export controls between the US and China have eased substantially, bringing trade conditions broadly back to mid-April levels.

In June, trade relations between the US and China seemingly stabilised. 

This followed an agreement to revive a delicate truce established during May talks in Geneva.

Prior to these talks, the agreement had been jeopardized by a series of export controls that disrupted global supply chains in critical industries.

China’s customs data indicates a significant increase in rare earth exports, rising 32% in June compared to the previous month. 

This surge suggests that agreements reached last month to facilitate the flow of these metals may be proving effective.

Difficulties for Chinese manufacturers

Analysts caution that Beijing could face indirect harm from the expanding US global trade offensive.

Trump’s new tariffs on other trade partners may impact China, particularly through pressure on third countries extensively used for transhipments of Chinese goods.

Trump recently introduced a 40% tariff on US-bound transhipments via Vietnam. This action could potentially hinder Chinese manufacturers who are attempting to reroute shipments to evade increased duties.

The US President has proposed a 10% tariff on imports from BRICS nations, a move that significantly impacts China as a founding member of the bloc. 

This potential economic measure exacerbates existing trade tensions and introduces new uncertainties for Beijing’s export-oriented economy. 

The imposition of such a tariff could lead to increased costs for Chinese goods entering the US market, potentially dampening demand and disrupting established supply chains.

The White House and China have until August 12 to finalise a lasting agreement.

Compounding these challenges, tensions with the European Union have also intensified. 

The EU has accused China of flooding the global market with excess capacity and enabling Russia’s war economy, an accusation made ahead of a key summit later this month.

China’s trade surplus increased to $114.7 billion in June, up from $103.22 billion in May.

The post China’s exports surge amid waning frontloading demand appeared first on Invezz

Keep Reading
In World news

Rare Earths Firm MP Materials to Get US$400 Million Defense Department Investment

3 Mins Read

The US Department of Defense (DoD) will become the largest shareholder in MP Materials (NYSE:MP) after agreeing to purchase US$400 million worth of preferred stock in the company.

MP Materials is known for owning and operating the only US rare earths mine.

The rare earths producer said the proceeds from the investment will fund the expansion of its processing capabilities at the Mountain Pass mine in California and support the construction of a second magnet manufacturing facility in the US.

The materials mined and processed by MP Materials are critical to the production of permanent magnets used in military systems, including the F-35 fighter jet, drones, and submarines.

The US has depended heavily on foreign imports for these materials — primarily from China, which accounted for about 70 percent of rare earth imports in 2023, according to the US Geological Survey.

In a press release issued on Thursday (July 10), MP Materials described the agreement as a ‘transformational public-private partnership.’ The company also said the deal will ‘dramatically accelerate the build-out of an end-to-end US rare earth magnet supply chain and reduce foreign dependency.’

The investment gives the Pentagon newly created preferred stock convertible into common shares, along with a 10-year warrant to buy additional stock at US$30.03 per share. If fully converted and exercised, the DoD would own 15 percent of MP Materials, based on current share counts as of Wednesday (July 9). That would exceed the 8.61 percent stake held by CEO James Litinsky and the 8.27 percent stake held by BlackRock Fund Advisors.

Litinsky emphasized that the deal does not equate to government control of the company. “This is not a nationalization,” he told CNBC. “We remain a thriving public company. We now have a great new partner in our economically largest shareholder, DoD, but we still control our company. We control our destiny. We’re shareholder driven.”

MP’s new magnet facility, called 10X, will increase the company’s magnet manufacturing capacity to 10,000 metric tons annually once it begins commissioning in 2028. The exact location of the facility has not yet been disclosed.

The Pentagon has committed to purchasing 100 percent of the magnets produced at the 10X facility for 10 years.

Additionally, the DoD will guarantee a minimum price of US$110 per kilogram for MP’s neodymium-praseodymium oxide, a key material for magnet production.

If market prices fall below that level, the Pentagon will pay the difference quarterly. In return, once the new facility is operational, the government will receive 30 percent of any upside above US$110 per kilogram.

To further support the buildout, MP Materials expects to receive a US$150 million loan from the Pentagon within 30 days to expand its heavy rare earth separation capabilities at Mountain Pass, the only active rare earth mine in the US.

It is also commissioning a magnetics facility in Texas, known as Independence, to bolster its downstream processing capabilities.

As the only domestic miner with vertically integrated capabilities and a clear path to rare earth magnet production at scale, MP Materials now sits at the center of the Biden-to-Trump era effort to bring critical minerals supply chains back to American soil.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
In Business

Trump’s tariffs on Brazil could make your coffee even more expensive

5 Mins Read

President Donald Trump’s proposed 50% tariff on Brazilian imports is bad news for coffee drinkers.

Brazil, the largest U.S. supplier of green coffee beans, accounts for about a third of the country’s total supply, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Coffee beans need to grow in a warm, tropical climate, making Hawaii and Puerto Rico the only suitable places in the United States to farm the crop. But, as the world’s top consumer of coffee, the U.S. requires a massive supply to stay caffeinated. Mintel estimates that the U.S. coffee market reached $19.75 billion last year.

The increase in trade duties could leave consumers with even higher costs after several years of soaring coffee prices. Inflation-weary consumers have seen prices for lattes and cold brew climb as droughts and frost hit the global coffee supply, particularly in Brazil. Earlier this year, coffee bean futures hit all-time highs. They rose 1% on Thursday, although still well below the record set in February.

To be sure, there’s still time for Brazil to strike a deal with the White House before the tariffs go into effect on Aug. 1. Plus, food and beverage makers are hoping that the Trump administration will grant exemptions for key commodities. U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said in an interview in late June that the White House is considering exemptions for produce that can’t be grown in the U.S. — including coffee.

But if that doesn’t happen, coffee companies like Folgers owner J.M. Smucker, Keurig Dr Pepper, Starbucks and Dutch Bros will face much higher costs for the commodity. Giuseppe Lavazza, chair of Italian roaster Lavazza, said on Bloomberg TV on Thursday morning that the latest tariff could mean “a lot of inflation” for the coffee industry.

Roasters will try to mitigate the impact of the higher tariff, but it won’t be easy.

“Every company is always trying to eke out the next efficiency, to dial into their operations or find the way to minimize inflationary pressures, but a 50% tariff on a commodity that fundamentally is not available in the U.S. — you can’t really do much with that,” Tom Madrecki, vice president of supply chain and logistics for the Consumer Brands Association, a trade group that represents the consumer packaged goods industry.

One mitigation tactic could be to import beans from countries other than Brazil, but companies will likely still be paying more for the commodity.

“A characteristic of tariffs, especially when you have tariffs on multiple countries at once, is that not just the inbound cost rises. It allows the pricing floor to also rise,” Madrecki said. “If you have cheaper coffee in a country different than Brazil, you’re not inclined to sell it at a 30% lower cost. You’re going to try to bump your coffee up a bit more, too.”

At-home coffee brands, like JM Smucker’s Dunkin’ and Kraft Heinz’s Maxwell House, have already been hiking their prices this year in response to spiking commodity costs. More price increases could be on the way for consumers, although retailers may push back.

Keurig Dr Pepper would consider additional price hikes in the latter half of the year to mitigate the impact of tariffs, CEO Tim Cofer said in late April, after Trump introduced his initial round of so-called reciprocal duties.

And Smuckers warned investors on its quarterly conference call in early June that tariffs on coffee were weighing on its profits. Coffee accounts for roughly a third of the company’s revenue.

“Green coffee is an unavailable natural resource that cannot be grown in the continental United States due to its reliance on a tropical climate,” Smuckers CEO Mark Smucker said. “We currently purchase approximately 500 million pounds of green coffee annually, with the majority coming from Brazil and Vietnam, the two largest coffee-producing countries.”

Vietnam, which announced a tentative trade deal with the White House earlier this month, supplies about 8% of the U.S.’s green coffee beans. Under the agreement, the U.S. will impose a 20% duty on Vietnamese imports.

Consumers who prefer a caramel macchiato from Starbucks for their caffeine hit will likely see a more muted impact on their wallets.

After several quarters of sluggish U.S. sales, Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol said in late 2024 that the company wouldn’t raise prices in 2025, in the hopes of winning back customers who had complained about how expensive its drinks had gotten. While it waits for its turnaround to take hold, Starbucks might choose to swallow the higher coffee costs.

The coffee giant also benefits from its diversity — both in suppliers and the breadth of its menu, which now includes the popular Refreshers line. Starbucks imports its coffee from 30 different countries, and roughly 10% of its cost of goods sold in North America comes from coffee.

The new trade duty could mean a 0.5% increase in Starbucks’ North American cost of goods sold, assuming about 22% of its beans come from Brazil, TD Cowen analyst Andrew Charles wrote in a note to clients on Thursday. Starbucks’ packaged drinks, which are distributed by Nestle, could see their cost of goods sold increase 3.5%. Altogether, that represents a 5-cent drag on annual earnings per share, according to Charles.

For rival Dutch Bros, higher coffee costs also wouldn’t hurt its bottom line much. Coffee accounts for less than a tenth of the drive-thru coffee chain’s cost of goods sold. Assuming that Dutch Bros sources more than half of its coffee from Brazil, its cost of goods sold would rise just 1.3%, according to Charles’ estimates.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Keep Reading