Navratri 2026: 9 days, 9 forms of Goddess Durga and 9 colours- Check the complete list

Trump accuses Houthis of driving up oil prices before US midterms, warns of consequences

Russian woman and Bihar boy's love story goes viral after she reaches India to marry him

US Midterms 2026: In Alaska, cost-of-living anxiety meets strangest ballot in high-stakes Senate race

Arijit Singh 9-city India stadium tour to start from January: Check venue and ticket prices

F1 set to return to Africa for first time since 1993 

'Don't ever mess with nature!': Trump’s tiger attack post triggers social media backlash as victim's family issues heartbreaking tribute

CMs Vijay-Naidu meet in Vijayawada, discuss water sharing, river-linking

Air India Flight from Frankfurt diverted to Jaipur after hijack alert, probe on

1,500 drones illuminate Mumbai sky as Cordelia Cruises unveils second ship, Cordelia Sky

Delhi Police arrest Cockroach Janta Party's Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka, Ajinkya Shinde in Jantar Mantar case, to be produced before court

Pakistan to chair UN-backed global Borrowers’ Platform as its own debt burden mounts, triggers sarcastic reactions on social media

‘Rise up, young patriots!’: American singer Mary Millben says US donors funding CJP, backs Modi govt

Nobel Peace Prize winner Navi Pillay calls on US to 'get back to' being defender of human rights

France accuses Musk of ‘online harassment’ of European leaders, warns of poll interference

'Turn approver, resign, we'll forgive you': Rahul Gandhi claims receiving messages from CEC Gyanesh Kumar

MI5 chief warns Russia is UK’s ‘aggressor number one’ as Iran and AI threats grow

Trump reconsidering calling off Nidal Hasan's execution livestream. Here's why

‘My president, I mean my husband’: Trump's new press secretary Katie Zacharia's first briefing goes off the rails in 14 minutes

‘How many people did she illegally bring from Somalia?’ Trump targets Ilhan Omar, questions her net worth

Marco Rubio to visit India next week, focus on energy cooperation and strategic ties

US politicians mistakenly use Indian, Russian warship images for Navy's birthday posts

'Ouch!!! That must hurt': Kangana Ranaut hails Kamal Haasan's sharp reply to Elon Musk over Starlink row

Girl 'dead' for 8 hours wakes up at her own funeral, dad insists she wasn't breathing

Sidhu Moose Wala’s younger brother wins hearts by recreating late singer’s signature move at Toronto Hologram Show

UK school ditches technology, shifts from screen to pen and paper for learning

Durga Puja 2026: Kolkata roads get a splash of colours

New OTT releases this week (October 12-18, 2026): Sacrifice, Koffee with Karan S9, Roadies Rebirth- 6 titles coming on Netflix, JioHotstar and more

Inside Aneet Padda's 24th birthday bash with rumoured boyfriend Ahaan Panday and Alia Bhatt

New Cold War: Why is China buying more gold? Explained

Netanyahu wants to join Saudi's war on Houthis, but Crown Prince denies: Report

Anupam Kher joins Ranbir Kapoor's Ramayana as Jatayu, new poster unveiled

Measles kills again: 6 dead in Pennsylvania as America faces its worst outbreak in decades | Gravitas

Cornell University suspends fraternity parties over 2024 gang rape allegations

Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has secured its largest defence contract since World War II. The deal includes the supply of 11 Mogami-class frigates worth $6billion (A$10 billion) over the next decade. Australian Defence Ministry chose Mitsubishi over Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS), emphasising the new era of Asia Pacific Defence collaboration.&nbsp;“This is clearly the biggest defence-industry agreement that has ever been struck between Japan and Australia,” said Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles.<h2>Why does Australia need these ships?</h2>For Australia, the decision shows a pragmatic approach to counter the Chinese threat in the Pacific. Australia wants to project itself as a naval powerhouse, with increasing patrols near Taiwan and assertive moves in the South China Sea. The 2023 Australian Defence Strategy Review (DSR) findings portrayed the Australian navy as substantially weak and poorly equipped to project power in the contested Indo-Pacific. It resulted in the growing urgency of Australia to modernise its naval fleet of major warships from 11 to 26, with an increased US$11.1 billion Defence budget. According to an Australian Defence Official, the new fleet will be used in patrolling vital trade routes, reinforcing maritime surveillance, and supporting allied operations frameworks like AUKUS and QUAD.“The acquisition of these stealth frigates will make our navy a bigger navy, and a more lethal navy,” said Marles.&nbsp;<h2>Why Japan's Mogami-class frigates?</h2>Three of these frigates will be built in Japan, and the rest will be built in Australia in a newly constructed facility under sovereign oversight. These ships feature &nbsp;32 vertical-launch missile cells, with a range of 10000 nautical miles, enhanced stealth capacity with improved design, and reduced crew requirements as low as 90. Japan had a faster delivery timeline and a better suitability to Pacific conditions. The decision to choose Mitsubishi over Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems also shows a growing push for regional cooperation. Japan had been a pacifist since World War 2, but now this is the largest international defence export since World War II. It is a diplomatic economic win that shows its growing role in the region as a strategic partner.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Japan's Mitsubishi has acquired the biggest defence deal since World War II from Australia. Australia's Defence Minister says that these acquisitions will make their navy bigger and better, enhancing deterrence in the Indo-Pacific.

Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has secured its largest defence contract since World War II. The deal includes the supply of 11 Mogami-class frigates worth $6billion (A$10 billion) over the next decade. Australian Defence Ministry chose Mitsubishi over Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS), emphasising the new era of Asia Pacific Defence collaboration. “This is clearly the biggest defence-industry agreement that has ever been struck between Japan and Australia,” said Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles. Why does Australia need these ships? For Australia, the decision shows a pragmatic approach to counter the Chinese threat in the Pacific. Australia wants to project itself as a naval powerhouse, with increasing patrols near Taiwan and assertive moves in the South China Sea. The 2023 Australian Defence Strategy Review (DSR) findings portrayed the Australian navy as substantially weak and poorly equipped to project power in the contested Indo-Pacific. It resulted in the growing urgency of Australia to modernise its naval fleet of major warships from 11 to 26, with an increased US$11.1 billion Defence budget. According to an Australian Defence Official, the new fleet will be used in patrolling vital trade routes, reinforcing maritime surveillance, and supporting allied operations frameworks like AUKUS and QUAD. “The acquisition of these stealth frigates will make our navy a bigger navy, and a more lethal navy,” said Marles. Why Japan's Mogami-class frigates? Three of these frigates will be built in Japan, and the rest will be built in Australia in a newly constructed facility under sovereign oversight. These ships feature 32 vertical-launch missile cells, with a range of 10000 nautical miles, enhanced stealth capacity with improved design, and reduced crew requirements as low as 90. Japan had a faster delivery timeline and a better suitability to Pacific conditions. The decision to choose Mitsubishi over Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems also shows a growing push for regional cooperation. Japan had been a pacifist since World War 2, but now this is the largest international defence export since World War II. It is a diplomatic economic win that shows its growing role in the region as a strategic partner.

Japan's Mitsubishi has acquired the biggest defence deal since World War II from Australia. Australia's Defence Minister says that these acquisitions will make their navy bigger and better, enhancing deterrence in the Indo-Pacific.

$6bn worth defence deal between Japan and Australia: Japan's biggest defence contract since WW2

India has issued a strong rebuttal to US President Donald Trump’s latest threats to impose higher tariffs on Indian imports, specifically targeting the country’s continued purchase of oil from Russia. Trump, in a post on his social media platform Truth Social, accused India of “profiting” from reselling Russian oil, despite the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. He warned that unless India ceases its oil imports from Russia, the US would “substantially raise the tariff” on goods from India. Trump’s accusations claim that India “doesn’t care how many people in Ukraine are being killed” and that it is taking advantage of Russia’s discounted oil by selling it on the global market for “big profits”. The US president’s comments come as part of a broader push to impose sanctions on Russia and its allies, including countries like India that continue to do business with the Kremlin despite the war in Ukraine.<h2>India’s rebuttal: Unjustified and unreasonable</h2>In response, India’s Ministry of External Affairs issued a sharp statement, dismissing Trump’s claims as “unjustified and unreasonable”. A spokesperson emphasised that India’s decision to import Russian oil was driven by economic necessity, as Western sanctions on Russia forced Moscow to offer discounted crude, which India has utilised to stabilise global energy markets. The spokesperson also pointed out that the US had initially encouraged India to buy Russian oil in the early stages of the Ukraine conflict.India’s government made it clear that it would continue to safeguard its national interests, regardless of US pressure. The spokesperson also highlighted the inconsistency in US policy, noting that the US itself continued to engage in trade with Russia, with trade worth $3.5 billion between the two countries last year. “Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security,” the statement added.<h2>Trade tensions deepen amid geopolitical rift</h2>The tensions over Russian oil are part of a broader set of challenges in the US-India relationship. While India has historically maintained a non-aligned stance, balancing ties with both Russia and the West, the US has raised concerns about India’s growing economic ties with Moscow. However, India has remained resolute in its position, emphasising that its energy and defence policies will not be dictated by outside pressure.The Indian government also rejected Trump’s previous claim of brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May, calling it false. The ongoing geopolitical tension, coupled with Trump’s recent tariffs and inflammatory rhetoric, has made it increasingly difficult for both nations to maintain a cooperative relationship, particularly as India seeks to strengthen its strategic autonomy.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

US President Donald Trump, in a post on Truth Social, accused India of “profiting” from reselling Russian oil, despite the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. He warned that unless India ceases its oil imports from Russia, the US would “substantially raise the tariff” on goods from India.

India has issued a strong rebuttal to US President Donald Trump’s latest threats to impose higher tariffs on Indian imports, specifically targeting the country’s continued purchase of oil from Russia. Trump, in a post on his social media platform Truth Social, accused India of “profiting” from reselling Russian oil, despite the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. He warned that unless India ceases its oil imports from Russia, the US would “substantially raise the tariff” on goods from India. Trump’s accusations claim that India “doesn’t care how many people in Ukraine are being killed” and that it is taking advantage of Russia’s discounted oil by selling it on the global market for “big profits”. The US president’s comments come as part of a broader push to impose sanctions on Russia and its allies, including countries like India that continue to do business with the Kremlin despite the war in Ukraine. India’s rebuttal: Unjustified and unreasonable In response, India’s Ministry of External Affairs issued a sharp statement, dismissing Trump’s claims as “unjustified and unreasonable”. A spokesperson emphasised that India’s decision to import Russian oil was driven by economic necessity, as Western sanctions on Russia forced Moscow to offer discounted crude, which India has utilised to stabilise global energy markets. The spokesperson also pointed out that the US had initially encouraged India to buy Russian oil in the early stages of the Ukraine conflict. India’s government made it clear that it would continue to safeguard its national interests, regardless of US pressure. The spokesperson also highlighted the inconsistency in US policy, noting that the US itself continued to engage in trade with Russia, with trade worth $3.5 billion between the two countries last year. “Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security,” the statement added. Trade tensions deepen amid geopolitical rift The tensions over Russian oil are part of a broader set of challenges in the US-India relationship. While India has historically maintained a non-aligned stance, balancing ties with both Russia and the West, the US has raised concerns about India’s growing economic ties with Moscow. However, India has remained resolute in its position, emphasising that its energy and defence policies will not be dictated by outside pressure. The Indian government also rejected Trump’s previous claim of brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May, calling it false. The ongoing geopolitical tension, coupled with Trump’s recent tariffs and inflammatory rhetoric, has made it increasingly difficult for both nations to maintain a cooperative relationship, particularly as India seeks to strengthen its strategic autonomy. (With inputs from agencies)

US President Donald Trump, in a post on Truth Social, accused India of “profiting” from reselling Russian oil, despite the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. He warned that unless India ceases its oil imports from Russia, the US would “substantially raise the tariff” on goods from India.

India defies Trump’s threats over Russian oil purchases

HCLTech CEO C Vijayakumar has retained his position as the highest-paid chief executive in the Indian IT industry for a second consecutive year, with a total compensation of $10.85 million (approximately Rs 94.6 crore) in FY25. The 57-year-old outpaced all his peers at top Indian IT rivals such as Infosys, Wipro, TCS, and Tech Mahindra. He has been CEO of HCL Technologies since October 2016 and has a background in electrical engineering from Tamil Nadu. Vijayakumar’s pay package includes base salary, performance-linked incentives, stock awards, and other benefits and marks a steady rise from the last fiscal. In FY24, he earned $10.06 million (around Rs 84.17 crore), a staggering 190 per cent jump from the previous year.&nbsp;The sharp increase in FY24 had already drawn attention, as it far outpaced the average 7 per cent salary hike given to HCLTech employees that year.In FY25, HCLTech board approved a 71 per cent hike in his compensation for the coming year, putting his FY26 package at $18.6 million, or about Rs 154 crore.&nbsp;<h2>‘Under his leadership, HCLTech’s market cap grew 3.8 times’</h2>&nbsp;The board credited the company’s market performance as one of the key reasons behind the continued increase in his pay package even though industry observers raised questions about the widening pay gap at the top.“Under C Vijayakumar’s leadership, HCLTech’s market capitalisation has increased from Rs 1,15,000 crore on March 31, 2016, to Rs 4,32,000 crore on March 31, 2025, reflecting a growth of 3.8 times since FY16. Over the same period, the market capitalisation of the other four leading Indian listed IT services firms among the top five has grown by approximately 2.5 times,” the company said in its annual report.&nbsp;<h2>How do his peers at rival IT firms fare?</h2>&nbsp;Infosys CEO Salil Parekh earned Rs 80.62 crore in FY25 and Wipro’s Srinivas Pallia Rs 53.64 crore. Tech Mahindra’s Mohit Joshi was paid Rs 52.1 crore, and TCS’ K Krithivasan earned Rs 26.5 crore in FY25.&nbsp;The figures show that Vijayakumar’s compensation not only leads the industry but also far exceeds that of his peers.His FY25 remuneration comprised a base salary of $1.96 million, a variable bonus of $1.73 million and long-term incentives valued at $6.96 million, in addition to benefits and perquisites worth $0.2 million, HCLTech’s filings said.In FY23, Wipro’s Thierry Delaporte topped the list with a package of Rs 82 crore followed by Parekh and Vijayakumar.The shift highlights HCLTech’s growing willingness to reward its top leadership, especially as the company looks to compete more aggressively in digital, cloud, and AI deals.&nbsp;Vijayakumar was also recognised by Fortune India as India’s Best CEO in the IT Services—Super Large category and ranked first in the Best CEO category in the Institutional Investor Research 14th Annual Asia Executive Team survey.

HCLTech's C Vijayakumar took home Rs 94.6 crore in FY25 to become highest paid Indian IT CEO for a second year. The IT firm's board cited the company's market performance as one of the key reasons for the fatter pay package.

HCLTech CEO C Vijayakumar has retained his position as the highest-paid chief executive in the Indian IT industry for a second consecutive year, with a total compensation of $10.85 million (approximately Rs 94.6 crore) in FY25. The 57-year-old outpaced all his peers at top Indian IT rivals such as Infosys, Wipro, TCS, and Tech Mahindra. He has been CEO of HCL Technologies since October 2016 and has a background in electrical engineering from Tamil Nadu. Vijayakumar’s pay package includes base salary, performance-linked incentives, stock awards, and other benefits and marks a steady rise from the last fiscal. In FY24, he earned $10.06 million (around Rs 84.17 crore), a staggering 190 per cent jump from the previous year. The sharp increase in FY24 had already drawn attention, as it far outpaced the average 7 per cent salary hike given to HCLTech employees that year. In FY25, HCLTech board approved a 71 per cent hike in his compensation for the coming year, putting his FY26 package at $18.6 million, or about Rs 154 crore. ‘Under his leadership, HCLTech’s market cap grew 3.8 times’ The board credited the company’s market performance as one of the key reasons behind the continued increase in his pay package even though industry observers raised questions about the widening pay gap at the top. “Under C Vijayakumar’s leadership, HCLTech’s market capitalisation has increased from Rs 1,15,000 crore on March 31, 2016, to Rs 4,32,000 crore on March 31, 2025, reflecting a growth of 3.8 times since FY16. Over the same period, the market capitalisation of the other four leading Indian listed IT services firms among the top five has grown by approximately 2.5 times,” the company said in its annual report. How do his peers at rival IT firms fare? Infosys CEO Salil Parekh earned Rs 80.62 crore in FY25 and Wipro’s Srinivas Pallia Rs 53.64 crore. Tech Mahindra’s Mohit Joshi was paid Rs 52.1 crore, and TCS’ K Krithivasan earned Rs 26.5 crore in FY25. The figures show that Vijayakumar’s compensation not only leads the industry but also far exceeds that of his peers. His FY25 remuneration comprised a base salary of $1.96 million, a variable bonus of $1.73 million and long-term incentives valued at $6.96 million, in addition to benefits and perquisites worth $0.2 million, HCLTech’s filings said. In FY23, Wipro’s Thierry Delaporte topped the list with a package of Rs 82 crore followed by Parekh and Vijayakumar. The shift highlights HCLTech’s growing willingness to reward its top leadership, especially as the company looks to compete more aggressively in digital, cloud, and AI deals. Vijayakumar was also recognised by Fortune India as India’s Best CEO in the IT Services—Super Large category and ranked first in the Best CEO category in the Institutional Investor Research 14th Annual Asia Executive Team survey.

HCLTech's C Vijayakumar took home Rs 94.6 crore in FY25 to become highest paid Indian IT CEO for a second year. The IT firm's board cited the company's market performance as one of the key reasons for the fatter pay package.

HCLTech’s C Vijayakumar tops the list of highest paid Indian IT CEOs for 2nd year

The Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) began its three-day meeting on August 4 against the backdrop of faltering credit growth, weakening global trade, and new headwinds from US tariffs. The decision, which will be announced on August 6, could have far-reaching implications for borrowers, banks, and financial markets. The key policy rate, or the repo rate, currently stands at 5.5 per cent after a cumulative 100 basis points (bps) cut across the last three policy meetings. While the MPC’s stance has shifted to ‘neutral,’ speculation is rife that a fresh rate cut may be on the table.<h2>Rate pause or cut? RBI faces tough trade-off</h2>With the US imposing 25 per cent tariffs on Indian exports, concerns have grown over a potential hit to trade and GDP. Analysts believe the RBI could respond proactively. Japanese broking Nomura sees a 35 per cent chance of a surprise rate cut in August, though it continues to expect 25 bps cuts in both October and December. Similarly, the State Bank of India (SBI) has called for a front-loaded 25 bps cut in this meeting to stimulate credit demand ahead of the festive season.However, some, including Barclays and CareEdge Ratings, suggest the RBI may prefer a “dovish pause” to assess the impact of previous cuts. Barclays expects the final 25 bps cut to come in October, while CareEdge says the RBI may wait for further clarity on global risks and transmission of earlier rate reductions.<h2>Inflation eases, but growth concerns mount</h2>India's retail inflation has significantly eased, with June CPI at just 2.1 per cent, which is its lowest level since January 2019. July inflation could drop further to 1.5 per cent, well below the RBI’s target range of 2-6 per cent. Barclays now forecasts FY26 inflation at 3.5 per cent, down from the RBI’s 3.7 per cent estimate, creating more room for monetary easing.At the same time, indicators point to economic softness. Bank credit growth to industry slowed to just 5.5 per cent in June, and overall credit-deposit ratios have declined. Net interest margins for banks have shrunk, and deposit growth continues to outpace credit growth. Public sector banks are leading in lending, but the private sector remains cautious amid tepid demand and tight margins.<h2>Cautious optimism</h2>Homebuyers, borrowers, and banks are keenly watching for any change. A rate cut would bring cheer to home loan seekers while also helping revive private investment. Still, with global volatility, a hawkish US Fed, and rupee pressure in play, RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra and the MPC may tread cautiously. Regardless of the outcome, the central bank’s forward guidance will be key in signalling its growth versus inflation priorities for the rest of FY26.

The key policy rate, or the repo rate, currently stands at 5.5 per cent after a cumulative 100 basis points (bps) cut across the last three policy meetings. While the MPC’s stance has shifted to ‘neutral,’ speculation is rife that a fresh rate cut may be on the table.

The Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) began its three-day meeting on August 4 against the backdrop of faltering credit growth, weakening global trade, and new headwinds from US tariffs. The decision, which will be announced on August 6, could have far-reaching implications for borrowers, banks, and financial markets. The key policy rate, or the repo rate, currently stands at 5.5 per cent after a cumulative 100 basis points (bps) cut across the last three policy meetings. While the MPC’s stance has shifted to ‘neutral,’ speculation is rife that a fresh rate cut may be on the table. Rate pause or cut? RBI faces tough trade-off With the US imposing 25 per cent tariffs on Indian exports, concerns have grown over a potential hit to trade and GDP. Analysts believe the RBI could respond proactively. Japanese broking Nomura sees a 35 per cent chance of a surprise rate cut in August, though it continues to expect 25 bps cuts in both October and December. Similarly, the State Bank of India (SBI) has called for a front-loaded 25 bps cut in this meeting to stimulate credit demand ahead of the festive season. However, some, including Barclays and CareEdge Ratings, suggest the RBI may prefer a “dovish pause” to assess the impact of previous cuts. Barclays expects the final 25 bps cut to come in October, while CareEdge says the RBI may wait for further clarity on global risks and transmission of earlier rate reductions. Inflation eases, but growth concerns mount India's retail inflation has significantly eased, with June CPI at just 2.1 per cent, which is its lowest level since January 2019. July inflation could drop further to 1.5 per cent, well below the RBI’s target range of 2-6 per cent. Barclays now forecasts FY26 inflation at 3.5 per cent, down from the RBI’s 3.7 per cent estimate, creating more room for monetary easing. At the same time, indicators point to economic softness. Bank credit growth to industry slowed to just 5.5 per cent in June, and overall credit-deposit ratios have declined. Net interest margins for banks have shrunk, and deposit growth continues to outpace credit growth. Public sector banks are leading in lending, but the private sector remains cautious amid tepid demand and tight margins. Cautious optimism Homebuyers, borrowers, and banks are keenly watching for any change. A rate cut would bring cheer to home loan seekers while also helping revive private investment. Still, with global volatility, a hawkish US Fed, and rupee pressure in play, RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra and the MPC may tread cautiously. Regardless of the outcome, the central bank’s forward guidance will be key in signalling its growth versus inflation priorities for the rest of FY26.

The key policy rate, or the repo rate, currently stands at 5.5 per cent after a cumulative 100 basis points (bps) cut across the last three policy meetings. While the MPC’s stance has shifted to ‘neutral,’ speculation is rife that a fresh rate cut may be on the table.

RBI MPC meeting: Will US tariffs and low inflation trigger a rate cut?

China’s largest electric vehicle (EV) maker, BYD, has reported its first monthly delivery decline of 2025, signaling a potential slowdown for the company amid an escalating price war in the EV market. The company shipped 341,030 vehicles in July, down from 377,628 in June. This marks a nearly flat year-over-year performance, which is a stark contrast to its steady growth earlier in the year. BYD's drop in deliveries follows its decision to slash prices on several hybrid and battery-only models by approximately 30 per cent in May. The move, aimed at increasing affordability, has triggered a broader price-cutting trend across the industry. However, policymakers in Beijing have expressed concern about the price war’s impact on market stability, prompting calls to halt the excessive competition.<h2>Li Auto and Nio report declines, Xpeng and Xiaomi shine</h2>The price war has also affected other major Chinese EV makers. Li Auto saw a significant drop in deliveries, reporting only 30,731 units in July, down 39.7 per cent year-over-year. Nio’s deliveries also fell to 21,017 units, down from 24,925 in June, reflecting a slight 2.7 per cent year-on-year decline. However, other companies have posted strong growth.&nbsp;Xpeng, continuing its momentum, delivered a record 36,717 units in July, marking its ninth consecutive month with over 30,000 units sold. Xiaomi also posted notable growth, delivering over 30,000 vehicles in July, up from 25,000 in June. Both companies are seeing increased consumer demand, driven by new model launches and strong market positioning. Leapmotor, backed by Stellantis, also hit a milestone by delivering 50,129 vehicles, its highest monthly sales to date. The Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance, supported by Huawei, delivered 47,752 units, with the bulk of sales coming from Aito’s Wenjie series, which accounted for 40,753 cars.<h2>BYD faces pressure as competition intensifies</h2>BYD’s recent decline in deliveries is coupled with a dip in its stock price, falling nearly 1 per cent in China following the report. The company’s shares have dropped 15 per cent in 2025, contrasting with a 28.6 per cent rise in its US-listed shares. This underlines the pressure BYD is facing domestically, where fierce competition and falling prices are squeezing margins. Despite the challenges, BYD’s international presence remains a strong growth driver, and discussions with India’s Adani Group for a potential battery production joint venture signal that the company is looking beyond the domestic market for future expansion.

BYD’s recent decline in deliveries is coupled with a dip in its stock price, falling nearly 1 per cent in China following the report. The company’s shares have dropped 15 per cent in 2025, contrasting with a 28.6 per cent rise in its US-listed shares.

China’s largest electric vehicle (EV) maker, BYD, has reported its first monthly delivery decline of 2025, signaling a potential slowdown for the company amid an escalating price war in the EV market. The company shipped 341,030 vehicles in July, down from 377,628 in June. This marks a nearly flat year-over-year performance, which is a stark contrast to its steady growth earlier in the year. BYD's drop in deliveries follows its decision to slash prices on several hybrid and battery-only models by approximately 30 per cent in May. The move, aimed at increasing affordability, has triggered a broader price-cutting trend across the industry. However, policymakers in Beijing have expressed concern about the price war’s impact on market stability, prompting calls to halt the excessive competition. Li Auto and Nio report declines, Xpeng and Xiaomi shine The price war has also affected other major Chinese EV makers. Li Auto saw a significant drop in deliveries, reporting only 30,731 units in July, down 39.7 per cent year-over-year. Nio’s deliveries also fell to 21,017 units, down from 24,925 in June, reflecting a slight 2.7 per cent year-on-year decline. However, other companies have posted strong growth. Xpeng, continuing its momentum, delivered a record 36,717 units in July, marking its ninth consecutive month with over 30,000 units sold. Xiaomi also posted notable growth, delivering over 30,000 vehicles in July, up from 25,000 in June. Both companies are seeing increased consumer demand, driven by new model launches and strong market positioning. Leapmotor, backed by Stellantis, also hit a milestone by delivering 50,129 vehicles, its highest monthly sales to date. The Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance, supported by Huawei, delivered 47,752 units, with the bulk of sales coming from Aito’s Wenjie series, which accounted for 40,753 cars. BYD faces pressure as competition intensifies BYD’s recent decline in deliveries is coupled with a dip in its stock price, falling nearly 1 per cent in China following the report. The company’s shares have dropped 15 per cent in 2025, contrasting with a 28.6 per cent rise in its US-listed shares. This underlines the pressure BYD is facing domestically, where fierce competition and falling prices are squeezing margins. Despite the challenges, BYD’s international presence remains a strong growth driver, and discussions with India’s Adani Group for a potential battery production joint venture signal that the company is looking beyond the domestic market for future expansion.

BYD’s recent decline in deliveries is coupled with a dip in its stock price, falling nearly 1 per cent in China following the report. The company’s shares have dropped 15 per cent in 2025, contrasting with a 28.6 per cent rise in its US-listed shares.

BYD’s delivery growth stalls amid intense EV price war

South Korea’s globally popular K-beauty industry is facing a major setback in the United States as a new 15 per cent import tariff, imposed by US President Donald Trump, threatens to disrupt trade flows and raise prices for consumers. Known for its innovative products, natural ingredients, and affordability, K-beauty has built a devoted following in the US, where it generated $1.7 billion in sales in 2024, a 54 per cent increase from the year before, according to the US International Trade Commission.But the growth may soon slow. The US has ended South Korea’s tariff-free status for cosmetics, part of a broader policy shift aimed at reducing reliance on foreign manufacturing and encouraging American-made goods. South Korean beauty products are now subject to a 15 per cent import tax, sparking uncertainty across the industry.<h2>Retailers brace for higher costs and slower sales</h2>K-beauty retailers in the US have already begun adjusting their strategies in anticipation of rising costs. Santé Brand, a California-based online seller, saw a 30 per cent spike in orders in April as consumers rushed to stock up before the tariffs took effect. “When the tariff announcements hit, customers got strategic with how they were going to weather the storm,” Santé founder Cheyenne Ware told the BBC. “Consumers are preparing against the uncertainty.”Other retailers, such as Senti Senti, say suppliers have started sending alerts urging them to place large orders while prices remain unchanged. Some sellers have increased inventory to stay ahead of expected cost hikes. But industry insiders warn that price increases are inevitable, especially for smaller sellers on platforms like Amazon who operate with thin profit margins.<h2>Fans remain loyal—for now</h2>Despite the looming price hikes, K-beauty loyalists say they’re not ready to switch to Western alternatives. Experts say that sentiment is common among loyal consumers, but casual buyers might be turned off by the higher price.Some experts also say that large K-beauty brands with healthy profit margins may be able to absorb some of the costs, softening the impact for customers. But smaller firms based in South Korea will likely struggle to remain competitive, especially if tariffs are extended or increased.<h2>Trade policy collides with pop culture</h2>President Trump has justified the tariff strategy as part of a broader plan to bring manufacturing back to the US and level the playing field in global trade. In recent days, Japan and the European Union have agreed to similar 15 per cent tariffs on beauty exports to the US, meaning the policy will affect other global giants alongside South Korea. Still, industry analysts say South Korea is uniquely vulnerable because of how deeply its cosmetics brands are intertwined with global pop culture and consumer trends.From BB creams to 10-step skincare routines featuring ingredients like snail mucin, heartleaf, and rice water, Korean skincare has reshaped beauty habits worldwide. And while US officials hope tariffs will encourage domestic production, many American consumers say they simply haven’t found homegrown equivalents that measure up. For now, K-beauty remains a staple on American vanities. But if tariffs stay in place, it may soon become a luxury item rather than an everyday essential.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

The US has ended South Korea’s tariff-free status for cosmetics. South Korean beauty products are now subject to a 15 per cent import tax, sparking uncertainty across the industry which generated $1.7 billion in sales in 2024, a 54 per cent increase from the year before.

South Korea’s globally popular K-beauty industry is facing a major setback in the United States as a new 15 per cent import tariff, imposed by US President Donald Trump, threatens to disrupt trade flows and raise prices for consumers. Known for its innovative products, natural ingredients, and affordability, K-beauty has built a devoted following in the US, where it generated $1.7 billion in sales in 2024, a 54 per cent increase from the year before, according to the US International Trade Commission. But the growth may soon slow. The US has ended South Korea’s tariff-free status for cosmetics, part of a broader policy shift aimed at reducing reliance on foreign manufacturing and encouraging American-made goods. South Korean beauty products are now subject to a 15 per cent import tax, sparking uncertainty across the industry. Retailers brace for higher costs and slower sales K-beauty retailers in the US have already begun adjusting their strategies in anticipation of rising costs. Santé Brand, a California-based online seller, saw a 30 per cent spike in orders in April as consumers rushed to stock up before the tariffs took effect. “When the tariff announcements hit, customers got strategic with how they were going to weather the storm,” Santé founder Cheyenne Ware told the BBC. “Consumers are preparing against the uncertainty.” Other retailers, such as Senti Senti, say suppliers have started sending alerts urging them to place large orders while prices remain unchanged. Some sellers have increased inventory to stay ahead of expected cost hikes. But industry insiders warn that price increases are inevitable, especially for smaller sellers on platforms like Amazon who operate with thin profit margins. Fans remain loyal—for now Despite the looming price hikes, K-beauty loyalists say they’re not ready to switch to Western alternatives. Experts say that sentiment is common among loyal consumers, but casual buyers might be turned off by the higher price. Some experts also say that large K-beauty brands with healthy profit margins may be able to absorb some of the costs, softening the impact for customers. But smaller firms based in South Korea will likely struggle to remain competitive, especially if tariffs are extended or increased. Trade policy collides with pop culture President Trump has justified the tariff strategy as part of a broader plan to bring manufacturing back to the US and level the playing field in global trade. In recent days, Japan and the European Union have agreed to similar 15 per cent tariffs on beauty exports to the US, meaning the policy will affect other global giants alongside South Korea. Still, industry analysts say South Korea is uniquely vulnerable because of how deeply its cosmetics brands are intertwined with global pop culture and consumer trends. From BB creams to 10-step skincare routines featuring ingredients like snail mucin, heartleaf, and rice water, Korean skincare has reshaped beauty habits worldwide. And while US officials hope tariffs will encourage domestic production, many American consumers say they simply haven’t found homegrown equivalents that measure up. For now, K-beauty remains a staple on American vanities. But if tariffs stay in place, it may soon become a luxury item rather than an everyday essential. (With inputs from agencies)

The US has ended South Korea’s tariff-free status for cosmetics. South Korean beauty products are now subject to a 15 per cent import tax, sparking uncertainty across the industry which generated $1.7 billion in sales in 2024, a 54 per cent increase from the year before.

Trump tariffs threaten South Korea’s K-Beauty boom in the US

In a strategic shift with sweeping implications for global defence manufacturing, China has escalated restrictions on the export of critical minerals, disrupting supply chains across the Western world and exposing the deep reliance of US and allied militaries on Chinese raw materials. The materials in question, including rare earth elements, gallium, germanium, and antimony, are essential to the production of advanced weapons systems, from infrared missile sensors to radar arrays and fighter jet engines. China not only mines a majority of the world’s rare earths, but it also controls as much as 90 per cent of global refining capacity, turning it into a chokepoint for the global defence industry.<h2>Chokehold on supply disrupts production</h2>Earlier this year, Beijing imposed tighter export controls on several categories of rare earths and other critical minerals. While some concessions were made after the US agreed to limited trade compromises in June, China has maintained strict limits on shipments intended for military applications. The impact has been immediate. One US-based drone parts supplier, ePropelled, was forced to delay shipments by up to two months after its Chinese suppliers demanded photos, schematics, and end-user details before releasing magnets made from rare earths. The company refused, prompting the suspension of deliveries.Across the defence sector, prices for materials such as samarium, used in high-temperature magnets for jet engines, have skyrocketed, in one reported case increasing by 60 times. Suppliers now warn of rising costs and looming production halts unless access to critical minerals is restored or alternative sources are secured. Leonardo DRS, a major US defence firm, has already hit critical levels on its stockpile of germanium, vital for infrared targeting sensors, with CEO Bill Lynn warning that material flow must improve in the second half of 2025 to avoid supply disruptions.<h2>Strategic weakness exposed</h2>The growing crisis has highlighted a key vulnerability: more than 80,000 parts used in US Department of Defense weapons systems rely on minerals currently under Chinese export control, according to defence analytics firm Govini. Nearly all those supply chains involve at least one Chinese vendor. Some companies have responded by racing to build stockpiles, but many, especially smaller drone manufacturers and startups, lack the resources or foresight to accumulate months’ worth of reserves. Even those that do stockpile face problems sourcing materials like antimony or dysprosium, which have few viable alternatives outside China.The Pentagon has attempted to address the crisis with targeted investments. In July, it committed $400 million for a 15 per cent stake in MP Materials, the only US-based rare earth mining and processing company. In earlier grants, it also funded expansion of germanium and antimony production by Canadian and American firms. But officials acknowledge that reshaping the supply chain will take years.<h2>A domestic push, but time is short</h2>Amid intensifying pressure, US companies are moving aggressively to build up domestic rare earth capacity. USA Rare Earth, a Texas-based firm launched in 2019, has seen a surge of investor interest since China’s latest round of export curbs. The firm raised $170 million for its magnet production line and is seeking another $300 million to expand operations. Still, the gap is large. China continues to control 60 per cent of global rare earth mining and 90 per cent of refining. In 2024, China produced 750 out of the 760 tonnes of gallium used worldwide. The US produced none.While MP Materials is ramping up magnet production, much of its raw material still goes to China for processing, a bottleneck the Pentagon is now paying to eliminate. USA Rare Earth’s mine in Texas contains reserves of 15 out of 17 rare earth elements, and its refining technology is designed to be more sustainable than past US operations, which were hindered by environmental concerns.Washington is also trying to diversify through partnerships. Ukraine has emerged as a potential supplier, but developing its mining infrastructure amid ongoing war could take decades. In the meantime, defence companies are invoking emergency powers under the Defense Production Act and seeking long-term deals with rare earth producers in allied countries. DARPA and other agencies are working on predictive models to identify future bottlenecks, while firms like Phoenix Tailings in Massachusetts aim to ramp up domestic metal recycling and processing. Still, the clock is ticking. US law now requires defence contractors to eliminate Chinese-sourced rare earth magnets by 2027. Without new, stable sources, some firms will hit a cliff edge in less than two years.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

China not only mines a majority of the world’s rare earths, but it also controls as much as 90 per cent of global refining capacity, turning it into a chokepoint for the global defence industry.

In a strategic shift with sweeping implications for global defence manufacturing, China has escalated restrictions on the export of critical minerals, disrupting supply chains across the Western world and exposing the deep reliance of US and allied militaries on Chinese raw materials. The materials in question, including rare earth elements, gallium, germanium, and antimony, are essential to the production of advanced weapons systems, from infrared missile sensors to radar arrays and fighter jet engines. China not only mines a majority of the world’s rare earths, but it also controls as much as 90 per cent of global refining capacity, turning it into a chokepoint for the global defence industry. Chokehold on supply disrupts production Earlier this year, Beijing imposed tighter export controls on several categories of rare earths and other critical minerals. While some concessions were made after the US agreed to limited trade compromises in June, China has maintained strict limits on shipments intended for military applications. The impact has been immediate. One US-based drone parts supplier, ePropelled, was forced to delay shipments by up to two months after its Chinese suppliers demanded photos, schematics, and end-user details before releasing magnets made from rare earths. The company refused, prompting the suspension of deliveries. Across the defence sector, prices for materials such as samarium, used in high-temperature magnets for jet engines, have skyrocketed, in one reported case increasing by 60 times. Suppliers now warn of rising costs and looming production halts unless access to critical minerals is restored or alternative sources are secured. Leonardo DRS, a major US defence firm, has already hit critical levels on its stockpile of germanium, vital for infrared targeting sensors, with CEO Bill Lynn warning that material flow must improve in the second half of 2025 to avoid supply disruptions. Strategic weakness exposed The growing crisis has highlighted a key vulnerability: more than 80,000 parts used in US Department of Defense weapons systems rely on minerals currently under Chinese export control, according to defence analytics firm Govini. Nearly all those supply chains involve at least one Chinese vendor. Some companies have responded by racing to build stockpiles, but many, especially smaller drone manufacturers and startups, lack the resources or foresight to accumulate months’ worth of reserves. Even those that do stockpile face problems sourcing materials like antimony or dysprosium, which have few viable alternatives outside China. The Pentagon has attempted to address the crisis with targeted investments. In July, it committed $400 million for a 15 per cent stake in MP Materials, the only US-based rare earth mining and processing company. In earlier grants, it also funded expansion of germanium and antimony production by Canadian and American firms. But officials acknowledge that reshaping the supply chain will take years. A domestic push, but time is short Amid intensifying pressure, US companies are moving aggressively to build up domestic rare earth capacity. USA Rare Earth, a Texas-based firm launched in 2019, has seen a surge of investor interest since China’s latest round of export curbs. The firm raised $170 million for its magnet production line and is seeking another $300 million to expand operations. Still, the gap is large. China continues to control 60 per cent of global rare earth mining and 90 per cent of refining. In 2024, China produced 750 out of the 760 tonnes of gallium used worldwide. The US produced none. While MP Materials is ramping up magnet production, much of its raw material still goes to China for processing, a bottleneck the Pentagon is now paying to eliminate. USA Rare Earth’s mine in Texas contains reserves of 15 out of 17 rare earth elements, and its refining technology is designed to be more sustainable than past US operations, which were hindered by environmental concerns. Washington is also trying to diversify through partnerships. Ukraine has emerged as a potential supplier, but developing its mining infrastructure amid ongoing war could take decades. In the meantime, defence companies are invoking emergency powers under the Defense Production Act and seeking long-term deals with rare earth producers in allied countries. DARPA and other agencies are working on predictive models to identify future bottlenecks, while firms like Phoenix Tailings in Massachusetts aim to ramp up domestic metal recycling and processing. Still, the clock is ticking. US law now requires defence contractors to eliminate Chinese-sourced rare earth magnets by 2027. Without new, stable sources, some firms will hit a cliff edge in less than two years. (With inputs from agencies)

China not only mines a majority of the world’s rare earths, but it also controls as much as 90 per cent of global refining capacity, turning it into a chokepoint for the global defence industry.

China tightens grip on critical minerals, disrupting Western defence supply chains

More than 3,200 Boeing Defense workers in Missouri and Illinois walked off the job on August 4 after overwhelmingly rejecting the company’s latest four-year contract offer. The strike, led by District 837 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), targets Boeing’s military aircraft facilities in the St. Louis area, which produce the F-15 Eagle, F/A-18 Hornet, T-7 trainer, and the MQ-25 aerial refuelling drone. The work stoppage is Boeing’s first major strike in its defence division since 1996 and comes at a particularly sensitive time for the company. Boeing’s defence business is traditionally considered more stable than its commercial wing, which has faced a string of safety and production crises in recent years.“Members have spoken loud and clear,” District 837 head Tom Boelling said in a statement. “They deserve a contract that reflects their skill, dedication, and the critical role they play in our nation’s defence.” The rejected offer included a 20 per cent general wage increase over four years, periodic raises, increased vacation and sick leave, and a $5,000 ratification bonus. Boeing said the package amounted to an average wage growth of 40 per cent, but union members remained unsatisfied, citing concerns over pensions, scheduling, and long-term job security.<h2>Boeing downplays impact as Union ramps up pressure</h2>Boeing Defense said it had contingency plans in place to maintain operations during the strike, including using non-union labour where necessary. Dan Gillian, vice president and general manager of Boeing’s St. Louis operations, expressed disappointment over the rejection. “We’re disappointed our employees rejected an offer that featured 40 per cent average wage growth,” he said in a statement.Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg attempted to minimise the disruption during a recent earnings call. “I wouldn’t worry too much about the implications of the strike. We’ll manage our way through that,” he said, referencing last year’s seven-week strike by 33,000 commercial aircraft workers in Washington state, which cost the company billions. Still, the strike casts a shadow over Boeing’s defence operations just as it ramps up production of the new F-47A fighter jet, a key project for the US Air Force. The St. Louis facilities are expected to be central to that expansion.<h2>Tensions mount amid broader company struggles</h2>The defence worker strike adds to Boeing’s mounting challenges. The company is still recovering from the fallout of two deadly 737 Max crashes in 2018 and 2019, a major mid-air panel blowout in early 2024, and persistently low commercial aircraft deliveries. In 2023, Boeing delivered just 348 aircraft, its lowest total since the pandemic.IAM represents roughly 600,000 workers across the US, and District 837 has made it clear this strike is about more than wages. “This is about respect and dignity, not empty promises,” the union wrote on X. With labour unrest growing and trust between the company and its workforce fraying, Boeing’s leadership now faces renewed pressure to stabilise both its defence and commercial arms.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

The Boeing strike, led by District 837 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), targets Boeing’s military aircraft facilities in the St. Louis area, which produce the F-15 Eagle, F/A-18 Hornet, T-7 trainer, and the MQ-25 aerial refuelling drone.

More than 3,200 Boeing Defense workers in Missouri and Illinois walked off the job on August 4 after overwhelmingly rejecting the company’s latest four-year contract offer. The strike, led by District 837 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), targets Boeing’s military aircraft facilities in the St. Louis area, which produce the F-15 Eagle, F/A-18 Hornet, T-7 trainer, and the MQ-25 aerial refuelling drone. The work stoppage is Boeing’s first major strike in its defence division since 1996 and comes at a particularly sensitive time for the company. Boeing’s defence business is traditionally considered more stable than its commercial wing, which has faced a string of safety and production crises in recent years. “Members have spoken loud and clear,” District 837 head Tom Boelling said in a statement. “They deserve a contract that reflects their skill, dedication, and the critical role they play in our nation’s defence.” The rejected offer included a 20 per cent general wage increase over four years, periodic raises, increased vacation and sick leave, and a $5,000 ratification bonus. Boeing said the package amounted to an average wage growth of 40 per cent, but union members remained unsatisfied, citing concerns over pensions, scheduling, and long-term job security. Boeing downplays impact as Union ramps up pressure Boeing Defense said it had contingency plans in place to maintain operations during the strike, including using non-union labour where necessary. Dan Gillian, vice president and general manager of Boeing’s St. Louis operations, expressed disappointment over the rejection. “We’re disappointed our employees rejected an offer that featured 40 per cent average wage growth,” he said in a statement. Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg attempted to minimise the disruption during a recent earnings call. “I wouldn’t worry too much about the implications of the strike. We’ll manage our way through that,” he said, referencing last year’s seven-week strike by 33,000 commercial aircraft workers in Washington state, which cost the company billions. Still, the strike casts a shadow over Boeing’s defence operations just as it ramps up production of the new F-47A fighter jet, a key project for the US Air Force. The St. Louis facilities are expected to be central to that expansion. Tensions mount amid broader company struggles The defence worker strike adds to Boeing’s mounting challenges. The company is still recovering from the fallout of two deadly 737 Max crashes in 2018 and 2019, a major mid-air panel blowout in early 2024, and persistently low commercial aircraft deliveries. In 2023, Boeing delivered just 348 aircraft, its lowest total since the pandemic. IAM represents roughly 600,000 workers across the US, and District 837 has made it clear this strike is about more than wages. “This is about respect and dignity, not empty promises,” the union wrote on X. With labour unrest growing and trust between the company and its workforce fraying, Boeing’s leadership now faces renewed pressure to stabilise both its defence and commercial arms. (With inputs from agencies)

The Boeing strike, led by District 837 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), targets Boeing’s military aircraft facilities in the St. Louis area, which produce the F-15 Eagle, F/A-18 Hornet, T-7 trainer, and the MQ-25 aerial refuelling drone.

Boeing hit by another challenge: First defence strike since 1996

China’s copper smelting sector, already the largest in the world, is showing signs of strain as ore shortages and mounting government pressure on industrial overcapacity begin to bite. After months of record production, output is projected to dip slightly in August and decline further in September, according to Shanghai Metals Market (SMM). SMM forecasts China’s refined copper production will reach 1.168 million tonnes in August, down 0.5 per cent from July’s record high. While modest, the dip signals a possible turning point for an industry that has defied global feedstock shortages and squeezed profitability to maintain output growth.China, which accounts for over half of global refined copper production, has rapidly expanded smelting capacity in recent years, even as global copper ore supply growth slowed to a crawl. This imbalance has driven down processing fees and pushed some overseas competitors to suspend operations.<h2>Tight ore markets and Beijing’s watchful eye</h2>Despite soaring production, Chinese smelters are grappling with the lowest copper concentrate inventories this year, just over 560,000 tonnes at key ports, according to SMM. This tightness is forcing some facilities to reduce operations or schedule maintenance. Five major smelters with a combined capacity of 900,000 tonnes are expected to halt or slow output in September. The pressure comes as Beijing intensifies efforts to address overcapacity across industries.&nbsp;While the copper sector, seen as vital for green energy and technology, has previously escaped restrictions, policymakers are now signalling a tougher stance on industrial excess that drives deflation and inefficient investment. Spot treatment and refining charges (TC/RCs), the fees paid to smelters for converting concentrate into refined copper, have shown slight recovery in recent weeks, an indication that supply and demand may be finding a new balance.<h2>Booming output reshapes global market</h2>Still, China’s refined copper production is on track to rise between 7.5 per cent and 12 per cent in 2025, potentially topping last year’s record of 13.64 million tonnes, according to multiple analysts. That continued surge, fuelled by state-backed investments and strong byproduct revenues, is outpacing global ore supply and placing further strain on foreign rivals.Consultancy Benchmark Mineral Intelligence (BMI) expects China’s share of global refined copper output to hit 57 per cent this year. As output rises, refined copper imports are projected to fall by 8 per cent in 2025, marking a shift in China’s trade strategy and underscoring its growing self-reliance in critical materials.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

China, which accounts for over half of global refined copper production, has rapidly expanded smelting capacity in recent years, even as global copper ore supply growth slowed to a crawl. This imbalance has driven down processing fees and pushed some overseas competitors to suspend operations.

China’s copper smelting sector, already the largest in the world, is showing signs of strain as ore shortages and mounting government pressure on industrial overcapacity begin to bite. After months of record production, output is projected to dip slightly in August and decline further in September, according to Shanghai Metals Market (SMM). SMM forecasts China’s refined copper production will reach 1.168 million tonnes in August, down 0.5 per cent from July’s record high. While modest, the dip signals a possible turning point for an industry that has defied global feedstock shortages and squeezed profitability to maintain output growth. China, which accounts for over half of global refined copper production, has rapidly expanded smelting capacity in recent years, even as global copper ore supply growth slowed to a crawl. This imbalance has driven down processing fees and pushed some overseas competitors to suspend operations. Tight ore markets and Beijing’s watchful eye Despite soaring production, Chinese smelters are grappling with the lowest copper concentrate inventories this year, just over 560,000 tonnes at key ports, according to SMM. This tightness is forcing some facilities to reduce operations or schedule maintenance. Five major smelters with a combined capacity of 900,000 tonnes are expected to halt or slow output in September. The pressure comes as Beijing intensifies efforts to address overcapacity across industries. While the copper sector, seen as vital for green energy and technology, has previously escaped restrictions, policymakers are now signalling a tougher stance on industrial excess that drives deflation and inefficient investment. Spot treatment and refining charges (TC/RCs), the fees paid to smelters for converting concentrate into refined copper, have shown slight recovery in recent weeks, an indication that supply and demand may be finding a new balance. Booming output reshapes global market Still, China’s refined copper production is on track to rise between 7.5 per cent and 12 per cent in 2025, potentially topping last year’s record of 13.64 million tonnes, according to multiple analysts. That continued surge, fuelled by state-backed investments and strong byproduct revenues, is outpacing global ore supply and placing further strain on foreign rivals. Consultancy Benchmark Mineral Intelligence (BMI) expects China’s share of global refined copper output to hit 57 per cent this year. As output rises, refined copper imports are projected to fall by 8 per cent in 2025, marking a shift in China’s trade strategy and underscoring its growing self-reliance in critical materials. (With inputs from agencies)

China, which accounts for over half of global refined copper production, has rapidly expanded smelting capacity in recent years, even as global copper ore supply growth slowed to a crawl. This imbalance has driven down processing fees and pushed some overseas competitors to suspend operations

China’s copper output nears limit amid ore shortage and overcapacity crackdown

In a strategic move to bolster trade ties, China has approved 183 new Brazilian coffee exporters to ship products to its market, the Chinese Embassy in Brazil announced over the weekend. The decision comes just days ahead of the United States imposing a 50 per cent tariff on several Brazilian goods, including coffee, a significant blow to Brazil’s largest agricultural export. The Chinese permits, effective from July 30 and valid for five years, mark a potential shift in the global coffee trade. Brazil, the world’s largest coffee producer, is currently facing rising trade tensions with the US, which buys about 16 per cent of its coffee exports.&nbsp;In June alone, Brazil exported over 440,000 60-kg bags of coffee to the US, compared to just 56,000 to China, according to data from Brazilian coffee exporters' group Cecafe. With the new Chinese approvals in place, Brazilian exporters may now look to China as a key alternative market, particularly as they scramble to redirect the roughly 8 million bags traditionally sold to US buyers annually.<h2>Lula responds to trade war with diversification</h2>Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s administration has actively worked to diversify Brazil’s trade relationships, particularly in Asia. “We want to negotiate on equal terms,” Lula said Sunday at a Workers’ Party event in Brasília. “We will support our companies, defend our workers, and say, ‘Look, when you’re ready to negotiate, our proposals are on the table.’” Lula’s comments come amid heightened tensions with former US President Donald Trump, who recently threatened punitive tariffs unless Brazil's Supreme Court halted legal proceedings against former President Jair Bolsonaro.&nbsp;While Washington has delayed the tariff hike to August 6 and exempted some goods, coffee remains on the tariff list. Brazil’s Finance Minister Fernando Haddad said he intends to speak with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent regarding sanctions and trade friction, while welcoming Trump's comment that Lula is “free to call him.” However, Lula reiterated Brazil's stance: dialogue only under conditions of respect and equality.<h2>A strategic opening for China</h2>With the US backing away from Brazilian coffee imports, China is seizing the opportunity to deepen economic ties. As the US erects trade barriers, Brazil is aligning itself more closely with global partners who show a willingness to engage on Brazil’s terms.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

The Chinese permits, effective from July 30 and valid for five years, mark a potential shift in the global coffee trade. Brazil, the world’s largest coffee producer, is currently facing rising trade tensions with the US, which buys about 16 per cent of its coffee exports.

In a strategic move to bolster trade ties, China has approved 183 new Brazilian coffee exporters to ship products to its market, the Chinese Embassy in Brazil announced over the weekend. The decision comes just days ahead of the United States imposing a 50 per cent tariff on several Brazilian goods, including coffee, a significant blow to Brazil’s largest agricultural export. The Chinese permits, effective from July 30 and valid for five years, mark a potential shift in the global coffee trade. Brazil, the world’s largest coffee producer, is currently facing rising trade tensions with the US, which buys about 16 per cent of its coffee exports. In June alone, Brazil exported over 440,000 60-kg bags of coffee to the US, compared to just 56,000 to China, according to data from Brazilian coffee exporters' group Cecafe. With the new Chinese approvals in place, Brazilian exporters may now look to China as a key alternative market, particularly as they scramble to redirect the roughly 8 million bags traditionally sold to US buyers annually. Lula responds to trade war with diversification Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s administration has actively worked to diversify Brazil’s trade relationships, particularly in Asia. “We want to negotiate on equal terms,” Lula said Sunday at a Workers’ Party event in Brasília. “We will support our companies, defend our workers, and say, ‘Look, when you’re ready to negotiate, our proposals are on the table.’” Lula’s comments come amid heightened tensions with former US President Donald Trump, who recently threatened punitive tariffs unless Brazil's Supreme Court halted legal proceedings against former President Jair Bolsonaro. While Washington has delayed the tariff hike to August 6 and exempted some goods, coffee remains on the tariff list. Brazil’s Finance Minister Fernando Haddad said he intends to speak with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent regarding sanctions and trade friction, while welcoming Trump's comment that Lula is “free to call him.” However, Lula reiterated Brazil's stance: dialogue only under conditions of respect and equality. A strategic opening for China With the US backing away from Brazilian coffee imports, China is seizing the opportunity to deepen economic ties. As the US erects trade barriers, Brazil is aligning itself more closely with global partners who show a willingness to engage on Brazil’s terms. (With inputs from agencies)

The Chinese permits, effective from July 30 and valid for five years, mark a potential shift in the global coffee trade. Brazil, the world’s largest coffee producer, is currently facing rising trade tensions with the US, which buys about 16 per cent of its coffee exports.

China opens door to Brazilian coffee as US tariffs loom

China’s independent oil companies are making a significant push into Iraq’s oil sector, with plans to double their output in the country to 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2030. This surge in activity comes as Iraq, the second-largest oil producer in OPEC, looks to attract new investments and meet ambitious production goals. These smaller Chinese firms, led by veterans of China’s major state-owned energy giants, are capitalising on lucrative contract terms and lower operational costs.China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), which currently dominates Iraq’s oil output, controls over half of the country’s production at major fields such as Haifaya, Rumaila, and West Qurna 1. However, the latest influx of smaller, privately run Chinese firms into Iraq is shifting the landscape. Companies such as Geo-Jade Petroleum, United Energy Group, Zhongman Petroleum, and Anton Oilfield Services have won significant exploration licenses and are now betting on Iraq’s improved investment climate and growing political stability.<h2>A changing landscape for Iraq’s oil industry</h2>The transition to profit-sharing contracts, implemented by Iraq’s oil ministry a year ago, has proven to be a key factor in attracting smaller Chinese firms. These new agreements offer greater financial flexibility compared to the previous fixed-fee contracts, which were more common during the era of major Western oil players like ExxonMobil and Shell. Smaller Chinese firms are also proving to be more nimble and cost-effective in their operations, with a reputation for rapid project execution, strict adherence to timelines, and a higher risk tolerance.Chinese companies are reducing drilling costs, with prices now half what they were a decade ago. Executives say that these firms can develop an oilfield in as little as two to three years, much faster than their Western counterparts, who typically require five to ten years. “Chinese independents have much lower management costs compared to Western firms and are also more competitive versus Chinese state-run players,” Dai Xiaoping, CEO of Geo-Jade Petroleum, told Reuters.One of the notable projects being led by Geo-Jade is the South Basra project, which involves revitalising the Tuba field in southern Iraq and expanding its production capacity to 100,000 bpd by mid-2027. This project will also include a refinery and petrochemical complex, with investments totalling billions of dollars.<h2>Challenges ahead for Chinese firms</h2>While China’s smaller oil firms are helping to drive down industry costs, there are concerns regarding transparency and the use of Chinese labour in Iraq. Former Basra Oil operations manager Muwafaq Abbas raised concerns about the technical standards and reliance on Chinese staff, which has often left local Iraqi workers in lower-paying positions. Despite these challenges, Iraq remains keen to bolster its oil output, with a goal of increasing production to over 6 million bpd by 2029.Though Chinese companies are making significant strides in Iraq, some Western firms are returning to the market. TotalEnergies, for example, announced a $27 billion project in 2023, and BP is expected to invest up to $25 billion in the redevelopment of fields in the Kurdish region.

Chinese companies are reducing drilling costs, with prices now half what they were a decade ago. Executives say that these firms can develop an oilfield in as little as two to three years, much faster than their Western counterparts, who typically require five to ten years.

China’s independent oil companies are making a significant push into Iraq’s oil sector, with plans to double their output in the country to 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2030. This surge in activity comes as Iraq, the second-largest oil producer in OPEC, looks to attract new investments and meet ambitious production goals. These smaller Chinese firms, led by veterans of China’s major state-owned energy giants, are capitalising on lucrative contract terms and lower operational costs. China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), which currently dominates Iraq’s oil output, controls over half of the country’s production at major fields such as Haifaya, Rumaila, and West Qurna 1. However, the latest influx of smaller, privately run Chinese firms into Iraq is shifting the landscape. Companies such as Geo-Jade Petroleum, United Energy Group, Zhongman Petroleum, and Anton Oilfield Services have won significant exploration licenses and are now betting on Iraq’s improved investment climate and growing political stability. A changing landscape for Iraq’s oil industry The transition to profit-sharing contracts, implemented by Iraq’s oil ministry a year ago, has proven to be a key factor in attracting smaller Chinese firms. These new agreements offer greater financial flexibility compared to the previous fixed-fee contracts, which were more common during the era of major Western oil players like ExxonMobil and Shell. Smaller Chinese firms are also proving to be more nimble and cost-effective in their operations, with a reputation for rapid project execution, strict adherence to timelines, and a higher risk tolerance. Chinese companies are reducing drilling costs, with prices now half what they were a decade ago. Executives say that these firms can develop an oilfield in as little as two to three years, much faster than their Western counterparts, who typically require five to ten years. “Chinese independents have much lower management costs compared to Western firms and are also more competitive versus Chinese state-run players,” Dai Xiaoping, CEO of Geo-Jade Petroleum, told Reuters. One of the notable projects being led by Geo-Jade is the South Basra project, which involves revitalising the Tuba field in southern Iraq and expanding its production capacity to 100,000 bpd by mid-2027. This project will also include a refinery and petrochemical complex, with investments totalling billions of dollars. Challenges ahead for Chinese firms While China’s smaller oil firms are helping to drive down industry costs, there are concerns regarding transparency and the use of Chinese labour in Iraq. Former Basra Oil operations manager Muwafaq Abbas raised concerns about the technical standards and reliance on Chinese staff, which has often left local Iraqi workers in lower-paying positions. Despite these challenges, Iraq remains keen to bolster its oil output, with a goal of increasing production to over 6 million bpd by 2029. Though Chinese companies are making significant strides in Iraq, some Western firms are returning to the market. TotalEnergies, for example, announced a $27 billion project in 2023, and BP is expected to invest up to $25 billion in the redevelopment of fields in the Kurdish region.

Chinese companies are reducing drilling costs, with prices now half what they were a decade ago. Executives say that these firms can develop an oilfield in as little as two to three years, much faster than their Western counterparts, who typically require five to ten years.

Iraq’s oil industry sees surge in Chinese investment amid western retreat

US President Donald Trump's top aide Stephen Miller on Sunday (Aug 3) accused India of "financing" Russia's war in Ukraine by the nation's continued purchase of oil from Moscow. This comes as the United States continues to escalate pressure on New Delhi to stop buying Russian oil. Miller, the deputy chief of staff at the White House and one of Trump's most influential aides, during an interview, said that the US president has "very clearly" told India that it was "not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia".&nbsp;<h2>"People will be shocked..."</h2>Appearing on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures", Miller voiced what was some of the strongest criticism yet by the Trump administration about India, one of America's major partners in the Indo-Pacific. He said that what Trump "said very clearly is that it is not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia."He claimed that “People will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil... That's an astonishing fact.” However, tempering his criticism of India, Miller noted that Donald Trump's relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was "tremendous".His statement comes as the US continues to put pressure on India to cease oil imports from Russia. On Friday, a US tariff of 25 per cent on Indian products also went into effect. Trump has further threatened India and other nations that buy oil from Russia with a 100 per cent tariff unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine.<h2>India to keep buying oil from Russia</h2>Meanwhile, on Saturday (Aug 2), sources in the Indian government told Reuters that New Delhi will keep purchasing oil from Moscow despite US threats. Calling the imports "long-term oil contracts", one unnamed source said that it was "not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Another Indian government official who also chose to stay anonymous noted that India's purchase of Russian crude has helped avoid a global surge in oil prices.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff at the White House and one of Trump's most influential aides, during an interview, said that the US president has "very clearly" told India that it was "not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia". 

US President Donald Trump's top aide Stephen Miller on Sunday (Aug 3) accused India of "financing" Russia's war in Ukraine by the nation's continued purchase of oil from Moscow. This comes as the United States continues to escalate pressure on New Delhi to stop buying Russian oil. Miller, the deputy chief of staff at the White House and one of Trump's most influential aides, during an interview, said that the US president has "very clearly" told India that it was "not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia". "People will be shocked..." Appearing on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures", Miller voiced what was some of the strongest criticism yet by the Trump administration about India, one of America's major partners in the Indo-Pacific. He said that what Trump "said very clearly is that it is not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia." He claimed that “People will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil... That's an astonishing fact.” However, tempering his criticism of India, Miller noted that Donald Trump's relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was "tremendous". His statement comes as the US continues to put pressure on India to cease oil imports from Russia. On Friday, a US tariff of 25 per cent on Indian products also went into effect. Trump has further threatened India and other nations that buy oil from Russia with a 100 per cent tariff unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. India to keep buying oil from Russia Meanwhile, on Saturday (Aug 2), sources in the Indian government told Reuters that New Delhi will keep purchasing oil from Moscow despite US threats. Calling the imports "long-term oil contracts", one unnamed source said that it was "not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Another Indian government official who also chose to stay anonymous noted that India's purchase of Russian crude has helped avoid a global surge in oil prices.

Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff at the White House and one of Trump's most influential aides, during an interview, said that the US president has "very clearly" told India that it was "not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia".&nbsp;

'People will be shocked...': Trump top aide Stephen Miller accuses India of 'financing' Russia's war in Ukraine via oil purchases

OPEC and its allies are preparing to greenlight another major oil production increase for September, according to a Bloomberg report citing an OPEC+ delegate. The coalition, led by Saudi Arabia and Russia, is expected to ratify an output hike of 548,000 barrels per day in a video conference scheduled for Sunday. This would mark the final phase of reversing a 2.2 million barrel per day cut initiated by eight members of the group in 2023. It also includes additional allowances for the United Arab Emirates. The move reflects a dramatic pivot by the group from defending high oil prices to reclaiming market share, amid strong summer demand and geopolitical uncertainty.<h2>OPEC+ accelerates reversal of 2023 cuts</h2>As per Bloomberg, the production increase caps months of accelerated supply hikes by the alliance. In early April, OPEC+ shocked markets by announcing a rapid rollback of earlier output curbs, sending oil prices to a four-year low. That decision coincided with President Donald Trump’s surprise “Liberation Day” tariffs, which rattled global markets and put pressure on the group to stabilise prices.&nbsp;Since then, OPEC+ has followed through with a series of bumper monthly increases, ramping up production further in July. Analysts suggest the group’s strategy is now geared more toward increasing global supply, rather than propping up prices.<h2>Brent holds near $70 but surplus looms</h2>Despite the sharp policy shift, crude prices have slowly recovered over the summer. Brent futures hovered just below $70 per barrel on Friday, still down 6.7 per cent for the year, according to Bloomberg data. However, market experts warn of a looming surplus later in 2025, as the production increases outpace demand growth.&nbsp;Retail gasoline prices in the US have edged lower recently, offering some political relief for President Trump, who has long criticised OPEC+ for high prices and has repeatedly urged the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates. The current supply expansion aligns with Trump’s broader economic strategy, which seeks to ease inflationary pressures by reducing energy costs.<h2>Ukraine war and Russian oil in spotlight</h2>The decision also comes as the Trump administration considers new penalties on Russian oil exports. According to Bloomberg, Washington may impose secondary tariffs on buyers of Russian crude unless a ceasefire is reached in Ukraine. Any disruption to Russian oil flows could push prices higher, potentially clashing with Trump’s repeated calls for cheaper energy. Against this tense backdrop, Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak made a rare visit to Riyadh on Thursday. He met with Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman to discuss bilateral cooperation, as reported by Bloomberg.&nbsp;&nbsp;The two nations have jointly steered OPEC+ since its inception nearly a decade ago, and their coordination will be crucial as the group weighs further output adjustments. For now, global oil markets are bracing for a potential oversupply, even as geopolitical tensions simmer. The next decision facing OPEC+ may involve the 1.66 million barrels per day of output that remains offline until the end of 2026. Whether that volume returns earlier will depend on market dynamics and perhaps more importantly, the political calculations in Washington and Moscow.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

With oil prices near $70 and surplus risks rising, OPEC+ production surge tests global demand resilience amid US-Russia tensions and Trump inflation fight.

OPEC and its allies are preparing to greenlight another major oil production increase for September, according to a Bloomberg report citing an OPEC+ delegate. The coalition, led by Saudi Arabia and Russia, is expected to ratify an output hike of 548,000 barrels per day in a video conference scheduled for Sunday. This would mark the final phase of reversing a 2.2 million barrel per day cut initiated by eight members of the group in 2023. It also includes additional allowances for the United Arab Emirates. The move reflects a dramatic pivot by the group from defending high oil prices to reclaiming market share, amid strong summer demand and geopolitical uncertainty. OPEC+ accelerates reversal of 2023 cuts As per Bloomberg, the production increase caps months of accelerated supply hikes by the alliance. In early April, OPEC+ shocked markets by announcing a rapid rollback of earlier output curbs, sending oil prices to a four-year low. That decision coincided with President Donald Trump’s surprise “Liberation Day” tariffs, which rattled global markets and put pressure on the group to stabilise prices. Since then, OPEC+ has followed through with a series of bumper monthly increases, ramping up production further in July. Analysts suggest the group’s strategy is now geared more toward increasing global supply, rather than propping up prices. Brent holds near $70 but surplus looms Despite the sharp policy shift, crude prices have slowly recovered over the summer. Brent futures hovered just below $70 per barrel on Friday, still down 6.7 per cent for the year, according to Bloomberg data. However, market experts warn of a looming surplus later in 2025, as the production increases outpace demand growth. Retail gasoline prices in the US have edged lower recently, offering some political relief for President Trump, who has long criticised OPEC+ for high prices and has repeatedly urged the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates. The current supply expansion aligns with Trump’s broader economic strategy, which seeks to ease inflationary pressures by reducing energy costs. Ukraine war and Russian oil in spotlight The decision also comes as the Trump administration considers new penalties on Russian oil exports. According to Bloomberg, Washington may impose secondary tariffs on buyers of Russian crude unless a ceasefire is reached in Ukraine. Any disruption to Russian oil flows could push prices higher, potentially clashing with Trump’s repeated calls for cheaper energy. Against this tense backdrop, Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak made a rare visit to Riyadh on Thursday. He met with Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman to discuss bilateral cooperation, as reported by Bloomberg. The two nations have jointly steered OPEC+ since its inception nearly a decade ago, and their coordination will be crucial as the group weighs further output adjustments. For now, global oil markets are bracing for a potential oversupply, even as geopolitical tensions simmer. The next decision facing OPEC+ may involve the 1.66 million barrels per day of output that remains offline until the end of 2026. Whether that volume returns earlier will depend on market dynamics and perhaps more importantly, the political calculations in Washington and Moscow. (With inputs from the agencies)

OPEC+ is set to approve a 548,000 bpd output hike for September, finalising its pivot from price support to regaining market share.

OPEC+ agrees to major supply hike as Trump eyes lower oil prices

US pressure on Russian crude trade could inflate India’s oil imports by $11 billionIndia’s reliance on discounted Russian crude may soon come at a steep cost. According to analysts quoted by the Press Trust of India (PTI), India could see its annual oil import bill surge by $9–11 billion (₹75,000–91,000 crore) if compelled to scale back or halt Russian crude purchases amid growing US pressure. The warning follows US President Donald Trump’s recent announcement of a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods and threats of additional penalties for importing Russian oil and defence equipment. The tariff is now in force, while the nature of the penalty remains unspecified. However, the chilling effect is already visible in Indian refineries and global trade circles.<h2>Russian crude, once a bargain, now a geopolitical liability</h2>India, the world’s third-largest oil importer, had swiftly ramped up Russian oil purchases after Western sanctions isolated Moscow post its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. From under 0.2 per cent before the war, Russian crude now makes up 35–40 per cent of India’s total imports. The shift delivered massive cost savings, tamed domestic fuel prices, and helped private refiners like Reliance Industries and Nayara Energy clock record profits by refining cheap crude into diesel and exporting it, even to Europe.&nbsp;But with the European Union banning imports of fuels derived from Russian-origin crude starting January 2026, and Washington threatening penalties, Indian refiners now face what Kpler analyst Sumit Ritolia calls “a squeeze from both ends.” According to Kpler, EU rules will force Indian refiners to segregate their crude intake, while the US may introduce secondary sanctions that complicate shipping, insurance, and dollar-based financing, the backbone of India’s Russian oil trade.<h2>Refiners export and margin hit</h2>India’s total oil import bill stood at over $137 billion (₹11.4 lakh crore) last fiscals. Any disruption in Russian flows or loss of the $5-per-barrel discount could push costs sharply higher, as per PTI. The impact would be most acute for private refiners. Reliance, which sends over 185,000 barrels per day of refined fuels to Europe in 2025, risks losing market access if it fails to comply with origin-tracking mandates.&nbsp;&nbsp;While Reliance may reroute these products to Asia, Africa, or Latin America, analysts warn this would involve longer voyages, narrower margins, and higher risk. Nayara Energy, majority-owned by Russia’s Rosneft, faces EU sanctions already and is even more exposed.<h2>July imports drop as refiners reassess risk</h2>India’s Russian crude imports fell to 1.8 million barrels per day in July, down from 2.1 million bpd in June, as per Kpler data. While part of the decline was due to seasonal refinery maintenance, analysts noted that state-run refiners are particularly cautious, anticipating compliance challenges and regulatory uncertainty.&nbsp;Private refiners, who account for over 50 per cent of Russian crude intake, have also begun diversifying their procurement, with a fresh focus on non-Russian barrels from the Middle East, West Africa, Latin America, or even the United States, wherever commercially viable.But experts caution that this is far from a plug-and-play switch.<h2>Consumers may feel the heat</h2>Ritolia noted that replacing Russian crude fully is logistically complex, costly, and technically challenging, especially for complex Indian refineries calibrated to handle Urals-grade blends. Switching feedstock could reduce yields and profitability, ultimately affecting margins. Should Russia be forced out of India’s oil mix, the country’s energy security, fiscal balance, and inflation management would come under stress. If the government opts to absorb the price shock to protect consumers, the resulting fiscal burden could widen.&nbsp;Kpler estimates that India could face an additional $9–11 billion (₹75,000–91,000 crore) in annual import costs just from losing the Russian discount. And if global oil prices rise further due to supply rebalancing, the impact could be even worse. In that case, Indian consumers could face rising petrol and diesel prices, while the rupee may weaken and monetary policy could become harder to manage. As PTI reports, India’s bet on Russian crude helped stabilise its energy economy for two years. But with US and EU pressure mounting, that bargain may soon turn into a very expensive risk.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

With sanctions tightening, Indian refiners face export hurdles, higher costs, and shrinking margins if forced to pivot from discounted Russian oil.

US pressure on Russian crude trade could inflate India’s oil imports by $11 billion India’s reliance on discounted Russian crude may soon come at a steep cost. According to analysts quoted by the Press Trust of India (PTI), India could see its annual oil import bill surge by $9–11 billion (₹75,000–91,000 crore) if compelled to scale back or halt Russian crude purchases amid growing US pressure. The warning follows US President Donald Trump’s recent announcement of a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods and threats of additional penalties for importing Russian oil and defence equipment. The tariff is now in force, while the nature of the penalty remains unspecified. However, the chilling effect is already visible in Indian refineries and global trade circles. Russian crude, once a bargain, now a geopolitical liability India, the world’s third-largest oil importer, had swiftly ramped up Russian oil purchases after Western sanctions isolated Moscow post its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. From under 0.2 per cent before the war, Russian crude now makes up 35–40 per cent of India’s total imports. The shift delivered massive cost savings, tamed domestic fuel prices, and helped private refiners like Reliance Industries and Nayara Energy clock record profits by refining cheap crude into diesel and exporting it, even to Europe. But with the European Union banning imports of fuels derived from Russian-origin crude starting January 2026, and Washington threatening penalties, Indian refiners now face what Kpler analyst Sumit Ritolia calls “a squeeze from both ends.” According to Kpler, EU rules will force Indian refiners to segregate their crude intake, while the US may introduce secondary sanctions that complicate shipping, insurance, and dollar-based financing, the backbone of India’s Russian oil trade. Refiners export and margin hit India’s total oil import bill stood at over $137 billion (₹11.4 lakh crore) last fiscals. Any disruption in Russian flows or loss of the $5-per-barrel discount could push costs sharply higher, as per PTI. The impact would be most acute for private refiners. Reliance, which sends over 185,000 barrels per day of refined fuels to Europe in 2025, risks losing market access if it fails to comply with origin-tracking mandates. While Reliance may reroute these products to Asia, Africa, or Latin America, analysts warn this would involve longer voyages, narrower margins, and higher risk. Nayara Energy, majority-owned by Russia’s Rosneft, faces EU sanctions already and is even more exposed. July imports drop as refiners reassess risk India’s Russian crude imports fell to 1.8 million barrels per day in July, down from 2.1 million bpd in June, as per Kpler data. While part of the decline was due to seasonal refinery maintenance, analysts noted that state-run refiners are particularly cautious, anticipating compliance challenges and regulatory uncertainty. Private refiners, who account for over 50 per cent of Russian crude intake, have also begun diversifying their procurement, with a fresh focus on non-Russian barrels from the Middle East, West Africa, Latin America, or even the United States, wherever commercially viable. But experts caution that this is far from a plug-and-play switch. Consumers may feel the heat Ritolia noted that replacing Russian crude fully is logistically complex, costly, and technically challenging, especially for complex Indian refineries calibrated to handle Urals-grade blends. Switching feedstock could reduce yields and profitability, ultimately affecting margins. Should Russia be forced out of India’s oil mix, the country’s energy security, fiscal balance, and inflation management would come under stress. If the government opts to absorb the price shock to protect consumers, the resulting fiscal burden could widen. Kpler estimates that India could face an additional $9–11 billion (₹75,000–91,000 crore) in annual import costs just from losing the Russian discount. And if global oil prices rise further due to supply rebalancing, the impact could be even worse. In that case, Indian consumers could face rising petrol and diesel prices, while the rupee may weaken and monetary policy could become harder to manage. As PTI reports, India’s bet on Russian crude helped stabilise its energy economy for two years. But with US and EU pressure mounting, that bargain may soon turn into a very expensive risk. (With inputs from the agencies)

India risks a $9 billion to $11 billion spike in its oil import bill as US and EU pressure mounts over Russian crude reliance.

US pressure on Russian crude trade could inflate India’s oil imports by $11 billion

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway took a staggering $3.76 billion after-tax write-down on its Kraft Heinz stake in the second quarter, a signal that one of its largest investments has fallen significantly short of expectations. As reported by Reuters, the write-down slashed Berkshire’s overall net income by 59 per cent, while operating profits also declined, reflecting growing concerns over market valuations, global trade uncertainties, and lacklustre performance across key businesses.<h2>A tough quarter for Buffett</h2>Berkshire reported second-quarter operating income of $11.16 billion, down from $11.6 billion a year ago. Net income, which includes unrealised gains and losses on Berkshire’s vast stock portfolio tumbled to $12.37 billion from $30.35 billion in the same period last year. Revenue fell 1 per cent to $92.52 billion, weighed down by weak insurance premiums and foreign exchange losses of $877 million due to a weaker US dollar.&nbsp;The most notable hit came from Kraft Heinz, in which Berkshire holds a 27.4 per cent stake. The food giant recently announced it would explore strategic alternatives, including a possible breakup, after years of lagging consumer interest and shifting demand toward healthier and private-label options. Berkshire said it had carried its Kraft Heinz stake at above-market value, but changing market conditions, economic uncertainties, and longer-term intentions to remain an investor made the valuation gap “other-than-temporary”. As per Reuters, this marks the second major Kraft Heinz writedown by Berkshire, following a $3 billion markdown in 2019. Buffett had previously admitted to overpaying in the 2015 merger between Kraft Foods and H.J. Heinz, calling it one of his major investment missteps.<h2>Cash pile swells, stock buying stalls</h2>Despite the earnings drag, Berkshire’s cash hoard grew to $344.1 billion, just shy of its all-time high. According to Reuters, the company once again sold more stocks than it bought, for an 11th straight quarter suggesting that Buffett and his team view current market valuations as unattractive.Buffett has not repurchased Berkshire stock since May 2024, signalling further caution even as US and global equities test record highs. Analysts cited by Reuters say President Trump’s escalating tariff regime, particularly on consumer goods and critical imports has likely raised the bar for new investments.&nbsp;“Buffett definitely views the market as overvalued, and will sit back and wait for something to come to him,” said Kyle Sanders, an analyst at Edward Jones, as quoted by Reuters.<h2>Mixed signals from operating units</h2>Berkshire’s vast operating empire also offered a mixed performance. The group’s insurance underwriting profits fell 12 per cent, dragged down by weaker results in reinsurance and smaller carriers. However, Geico, its flagship auto insurer, saw a modest 2 per cent increase in pre-tax underwriting profit, though analysts warned that Trump’s 25 per cent tariffs on Chinese parts could raise future claims costs.&nbsp;The company’s rail and utilities segments fared better. Railroad operator BNSF posted a 19 per cent profit increase due to lower fuel expenses, despite flat volumes. Meanwhile, Berkshire Hathaway Energy saw earnings rise 7 per cent, even as the company flagged uncertainty over Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which could disrupt the economics of renewables, grid storage, and transmission investment.<h2>Post-Buffett era jitters weigh on stock</h2>Shares of Berkshire have dropped over 12 per cent since Buffett announced on May 3 that he would step down as CEO at year-end. Vice Chairman Greg Abel, 63, is set to take over, while Buffett remains chairman. But as per Reuters, the company is already feeling the weight of the so-called “Buffett premium” beginning to erode, with the stock underperforming the S&amp;P 500 by 22 percentage points in that time.&nbsp;“Berkshire and the economy are both at inflection points,” said Cathy Seifert, analyst at CFRA Research, speaking to Reuters. “The combination of mediocre results, a lack of buybacks, and succession uncertainty is not what the market wants to see.”<h2>Waiting for a better pitch</h2>For now, Buffett appears content to sit on the sidelines with his record cash stockpile, avoiding new bets in a market clouded by tariff uncertainty, inflation pressures, and geopolitical volatility. The 93-year-old billionaire, who built Berkshire into a $1 trillion empire, remains cautious and with the US economy flashing mixed signals, investors may need to wait longer for his next “elephant-sized” acquisition.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Buffett Berkshire posts a steep net income drop, writes down Kraft Heinz, and stockpiles $344B in cash as market uncertainty stalls big investments.

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway took a staggering $3.76 billion after-tax write-down on its Kraft Heinz stake in the second quarter, a signal that one of its largest investments has fallen significantly short of expectations. As reported by Reuters, the write-down slashed Berkshire’s overall net income by 59 per cent, while operating profits also declined, reflecting growing concerns over market valuations, global trade uncertainties, and lacklustre performance across key businesses. A tough quarter for Buffett Berkshire reported second-quarter operating income of $11.16 billion, down from $11.6 billion a year ago. Net income, which includes unrealised gains and losses on Berkshire’s vast stock portfolio tumbled to $12.37 billion from $30.35 billion in the same period last year. Revenue fell 1 per cent to $92.52 billion, weighed down by weak insurance premiums and foreign exchange losses of $877 million due to a weaker US dollar. The most notable hit came from Kraft Heinz, in which Berkshire holds a 27.4 per cent stake. The food giant recently announced it would explore strategic alternatives, including a possible breakup, after years of lagging consumer interest and shifting demand toward healthier and private-label options. Berkshire said it had carried its Kraft Heinz stake at above-market value, but changing market conditions, economic uncertainties, and longer-term intentions to remain an investor made the valuation gap “other-than-temporary”. As per Reuters, this marks the second major Kraft Heinz writedown by Berkshire, following a $3 billion markdown in 2019. Buffett had previously admitted to overpaying in the 2015 merger between Kraft Foods and H.J. Heinz, calling it one of his major investment missteps. Cash pile swells, stock buying stalls Despite the earnings drag, Berkshire’s cash hoard grew to $344.1 billion, just shy of its all-time high. According to Reuters, the company once again sold more stocks than it bought, for an 11th straight quarter suggesting that Buffett and his team view current market valuations as unattractive. Buffett has not repurchased Berkshire stock since May 2024, signalling further caution even as US and global equities test record highs. Analysts cited by Reuters say President Trump’s escalating tariff regime, particularly on consumer goods and critical imports has likely raised the bar for new investments. “Buffett definitely views the market as overvalued, and will sit back and wait for something to come to him,” said Kyle Sanders, an analyst at Edward Jones, as quoted by Reuters. Mixed signals from operating units Berkshire’s vast operating empire also offered a mixed performance. The group’s insurance underwriting profits fell 12 per cent, dragged down by weaker results in reinsurance and smaller carriers. However, Geico, its flagship auto insurer, saw a modest 2 per cent increase in pre-tax underwriting profit, though analysts warned that Trump’s 25 per cent tariffs on Chinese parts could raise future claims costs. The company’s rail and utilities segments fared better. Railroad operator BNSF posted a 19 per cent profit increase due to lower fuel expenses, despite flat volumes. Meanwhile, Berkshire Hathaway Energy saw earnings rise 7 per cent, even as the company flagged uncertainty over Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which could disrupt the economics of renewables, grid storage, and transmission investment. Post-Buffett era jitters weigh on stock Shares of Berkshire have dropped over 12 per cent since Buffett announced on May 3 that he would step down as CEO at year-end. Vice Chairman Greg Abel, 63, is set to take over, while Buffett remains chairman. But as per Reuters, the company is already feeling the weight of the so-called “Buffett premium” beginning to erode, with the stock underperforming the S&P 500 by 22 percentage points in that time. “Berkshire and the economy are both at inflection points,” said Cathy Seifert, analyst at CFRA Research, speaking to Reuters. “The combination of mediocre results, a lack of buybacks, and succession uncertainty is not what the market wants to see.” Waiting for a better pitch For now, Buffett appears content to sit on the sidelines with his record cash stockpile, avoiding new bets in a market clouded by tariff uncertainty, inflation pressures, and geopolitical volatility. The 93-year-old billionaire, who built Berkshire into a $1 trillion empire, remains cautious and with the US economy flashing mixed signals, investors may need to wait longer for his next “elephant-sized” acquisition. (With inputs from the agencies)

Berkshire Hathaway took a $3.76 billion hit on Kraft Heinz as Warren Buffett faces valuation woes, weaker earnings, and growing succession jitters.

Buffett’s Berkshire slumps on $3.8 bn Kraft Heinz loss, sits tight as tariffs loom

Amid fresh US tariffs and escalating global economic uncertainty, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has renewed his call for citizens to buy and promote Indian-made products, stressing the need for economic self-reliance. At a public rally in Uttar Pradesh on Saturday, Modi reiterated the importance of local manufacturing and consumption, urging Indians to set a simple benchmark for every purchase: prioritising products “made by the sweat of an Indian.”&nbsp;“The world economy is going through many apprehensions, there is an atmosphere of instability. Now, whatever we buy, there should be only one scale: we will buy those things which have been made by the sweat of an Indian,” Modi said, as quoted by Bloomberg. While the Prime Minister made no direct reference to the United States, his comments come in the wake of US President Donald Trump’s imposition of 25 per cent tariffs on Indian exports, a move that has rattled Indian trade and policy circles.<h2>‘Make in India’ message finds new urgency</h2>PM Modi’s renewed emphasis echoes his long-running “Make in India” campaign, but with heightened urgency. As per Bloomberg, Trump has accused India of imposing disproportionately high tariffs compared to other Asian countries and has hinted at further penalties, citing India’s energy and defence ties with Russia.&nbsp;The new tariffs are expected to impact a wide range of Indian export sectors, from textiles and pharmaceuticals to auto parts and engineering goods. With trade relations under strain, the Prime Minister’s messaging appears calibrated to cushion India’s domestic economy through self-reliant consumption.<h2>Farmers, MSMEs and youth in focus</h2>PM Modi also framed his call for buying local as a defence of India’s most vulnerable economic segments, farmers, small industries, and unemployed youth. “The interests of our farmers, our small industries and the employment of our youth are of paramount importance,” he said, as quoted by Bloomberg. “India has to remain vigilant about its economic interests, when other countries are focusing on their own interests,” he added.&nbsp;The message aligns with the government’s larger Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) push, introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic and now being adapted to weather external shocks such as global trade restrictions and supply chain disruptions.<h2>Rising protectionism reshaping trade policy</h2>The developments come against a backdrop of rising protectionism, with the US taking a tougher stance on imports across the board. India is not alone; other Asian economies are also facing increased scrutiny from Washington under President Trump’s renewed America-first trade doctrine.&nbsp;India has reacted cautiously but firmly. As per Bloomberg, the government has protested the tariffs and is exploring diplomatic channels to seek exemptions or negotiate terms for key industries. PM Modi’s strategic silence on Trump’s tariff move may be part of a broader diplomatic effort to avoid further escalation while reinforcing domestic economic resilience.&nbsp;By doubling down on the “Buy Indian” message, Modi is not just tapping into nationalism but also positioning India to weather the storm of global economic realignments. The shift reflects a broader effort to redirect consumer demand inward, mitigate external shocks, and promote long-term industrial competitiveness. While India navigates a more unpredictable global trade landscape, the Prime Minister’s latest push makes clear that local consumption will be key to insulating the economy from external pressures.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;&nbsp;

Amid US tariff tensions, PM Modi revives his Make in India pitch with a sharper focus on protecting farmers, MSMEs, and youth through local consumption.

Amid fresh US tariffs and escalating global economic uncertainty, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has renewed his call for citizens to buy and promote Indian-made products, stressing the need for economic self-reliance. At a public rally in Uttar Pradesh on Saturday, Modi reiterated the importance of local manufacturing and consumption, urging Indians to set a simple benchmark for every purchase: prioritising products “made by the sweat of an Indian.” “The world economy is going through many apprehensions, there is an atmosphere of instability. Now, whatever we buy, there should be only one scale: we will buy those things which have been made by the sweat of an Indian,” Modi said, as quoted by Bloomberg. While the Prime Minister made no direct reference to the United States, his comments come in the wake of US President Donald Trump’s imposition of 25 per cent tariffs on Indian exports, a move that has rattled Indian trade and policy circles. ‘Make in India’ message finds new urgency PM Modi’s renewed emphasis echoes his long-running “Make in India” campaign, but with heightened urgency. As per Bloomberg, Trump has accused India of imposing disproportionately high tariffs compared to other Asian countries and has hinted at further penalties, citing India’s energy and defence ties with Russia. The new tariffs are expected to impact a wide range of Indian export sectors, from textiles and pharmaceuticals to auto parts and engineering goods. With trade relations under strain, the Prime Minister’s messaging appears calibrated to cushion India’s domestic economy through self-reliant consumption. Farmers, MSMEs and youth in focus PM Modi also framed his call for buying local as a defence of India’s most vulnerable economic segments, farmers, small industries, and unemployed youth. “The interests of our farmers, our small industries and the employment of our youth are of paramount importance,” he said, as quoted by Bloomberg. “India has to remain vigilant about its economic interests, when other countries are focusing on their own interests,” he added. The message aligns with the government’s larger Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) push, introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic and now being adapted to weather external shocks such as global trade restrictions and supply chain disruptions. Rising protectionism reshaping trade policy The developments come against a backdrop of rising protectionism, with the US taking a tougher stance on imports across the board. India is not alone; other Asian economies are also facing increased scrutiny from Washington under President Trump’s renewed America-first trade doctrine. India has reacted cautiously but firmly. As per Bloomberg, the government has protested the tariffs and is exploring diplomatic channels to seek exemptions or negotiate terms for key industries. PM Modi’s strategic silence on Trump’s tariff move may be part of a broader diplomatic effort to avoid further escalation while reinforcing domestic economic resilience. By doubling down on the “Buy Indian” message, Modi is not just tapping into nationalism but also positioning India to weather the storm of global economic realignments. The shift reflects a broader effort to redirect consumer demand inward, mitigate external shocks, and promote long-term industrial competitiveness. While India navigates a more unpredictable global trade landscape, the Prime Minister’s latest push makes clear that local consumption will be key to insulating the economy from external pressures. (With inputs from the agencies)

PM Modi urges citizens to buy Indian-made goods to boost economic self-reliance as US tariffs and global instability cloud trade prospects.

PM Modi renews ‘Make in India' call amid Trump’s 25% tariff blowback

India is gearing up for a new highway travel initiative, and it’s set to roll out this Independence Day. The Union Road Transport and Highways Ministry, under Nitin Gadkari, is introducing a FASTag Annual Pass exclusively for private vehicles. The pass aims to simplify toll payments and provide unlimited ease on designated National Highways (NH) and National Expressways (NE), up to a limit.<h2>What is FASTag Annual Pass?</h2>Effective from August 15, 2025, the FASTag Annual Pass is a prepaid tolling system that allows cars, jeeps, and vans to make up to 200 free trips or travel for one year, whichever comes first. It is designed for private users and will work only at designated NH and NE toll plazas identified by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).&nbsp;As per the announcement, this move is part of a broader strategy to decongest toll booths and reduce friction in India’s growing road network. The FASTag system is already mandatory for all vehicles, and the new pass is expected to further incentivise digital toll payments.<h2>What about price, availability and validity?</h2>The cost of the FASTag Annual Pass has been fixed at ₹3,000 for the financial year 2025–26. It can be purchased via the Rajmargyatra mobile app or directly through the official NHAI website. After purchase, the pass will be activated within two hours—pending verification of the vehicle and its linked FASTag account.&nbsp;The pass remains valid for one year from the date of activation or 200 transactions, depending on which limit is hit earlier. Once the pass expires—either due to duration or number of trips—it automatically reverts to a standard FASTag, meaning tolls will start being deducted per trip again as usual.<h2>Is it transferable?&nbsp;</h2>Each Annual Pass is vehicle-specific. It cannot be transferred to another car or reused across vehicles. According to NHAI’s guidelines, any attempt to use the pass on a different vehicle will result in immediate deactivation of the pass.<h2>What counts as a trip?</h2>Under the rules, each crossing of a point-based toll plaza counts as one trip. A round journey, going and coming back, counts as two trips. For closed tolling systems, which are usually found on access-controlled expressways, a full journey from entry to exit will be counted as one trip.<h2>Gadkari’s push for smart highways</h2>The FASTag Annual Pass comes amid Union Minister Nitin Gadkari’s push for intelligent transport systems and digitalisation of India’s roadways. As per the Ministry, the new system is expected to benefit lakhs of commuters who frequently travel on national highways and face repetitive toll charges.&nbsp;By capping annual payments and offering digital pass management, the initiative is likely to encourage more people to switch to private road travel, especially across India’s expanding expressway network.With the FASTag Annual Pass, the government is taking another step towards seamless highway travel and digitised tolling. While it offers convenience and cost predictability to frequent travellers, users will need to follow strict guidelines to avoid deactivation.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)

Set to debut this Independence Day, the FASTag Annual Pass promises smoother, cost-effective highway travel, but with strict rules on use and vehicle verification.

India is gearing up for a new highway travel initiative, and it’s set to roll out this Independence Day. The Union Road Transport and Highways Ministry, under Nitin Gadkari, is introducing a FASTag Annual Pass exclusively for private vehicles. The pass aims to simplify toll payments and provide unlimited ease on designated National Highways (NH) and National Expressways (NE), up to a limit. What is FASTag Annual Pass? Effective from August 15, 2025, the FASTag Annual Pass is a prepaid tolling system that allows cars, jeeps, and vans to make up to 200 free trips or travel for one year, whichever comes first. It is designed for private users and will work only at designated NH and NE toll plazas identified by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI). As per the announcement, this move is part of a broader strategy to decongest toll booths and reduce friction in India’s growing road network. The FASTag system is already mandatory for all vehicles, and the new pass is expected to further incentivise digital toll payments. What about price, availability and validity? The cost of the FASTag Annual Pass has been fixed at ₹3,000 for the financial year 2025–26. It can be purchased via the Rajmargyatra mobile app or directly through the official NHAI website. After purchase, the pass will be activated within two hours—pending verification of the vehicle and its linked FASTag account. The pass remains valid for one year from the date of activation or 200 transactions, depending on which limit is hit earlier. Once the pass expires—either due to duration or number of trips—it automatically reverts to a standard FASTag, meaning tolls will start being deducted per trip again as usual. Is it transferable? Each Annual Pass is vehicle-specific. It cannot be transferred to another car or reused across vehicles. According to NHAI’s guidelines, any attempt to use the pass on a different vehicle will result in immediate deactivation of the pass. What counts as a trip? Under the rules, each crossing of a point-based toll plaza counts as one trip. A round journey, going and coming back, counts as two trips. For closed tolling systems, which are usually found on access-controlled expressways, a full journey from entry to exit will be counted as one trip. Gadkari’s push for smart highways The FASTag Annual Pass comes amid Union Minister Nitin Gadkari’s push for intelligent transport systems and digitalisation of India’s roadways. As per the Ministry, the new system is expected to benefit lakhs of commuters who frequently travel on national highways and face repetitive toll charges. By capping annual payments and offering digital pass management, the initiative is likely to encourage more people to switch to private road travel, especially across India’s expanding expressway network. With the FASTag Annual Pass, the government is taking another step towards seamless highway travel and digitised tolling. While it offers convenience and cost predictability to frequent travellers, users will need to follow strict guidelines to avoid deactivation. (With inputs from the agencies)

India to launch a FASTag Annual Pass for private vehicles on August 15, offering up to 200 toll-free trips on select highways for ₹3,000 a year.

India launches FASTag Annual Pass for private vehicles from August 15: Details here

Iran and Iraq appear to be on the brink of resolving a long-standing dispute over Iranian gas exports and Iraq’s unpaid dues, just as Baghdad battles surging power demand during peak summer months. Iran’s Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad on Saturday said that both nations are close to settling the issues that have disrupted energy flows and strained bilateral relations, as per Bloomberg.&nbsp;&nbsp;“We will soon witness the resolution of both issues,” Paknejad said, as quoted by Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB News after meeting with Iraq’s Electricity Minister Ziad Ali Fadhil in Tehran. The statement was cited in a Bloomberg report on the matter.<h2>Electricity shortages plague Iraq</h2>The gas shortfall from Iran has significantly impacted Iraq’s electricity generation, pushing parts of the country into deeper blackouts. Iraq’s Electricity Ministry recently confirmed that reduced Iranian gas deliveries had forced cuts in domestic power output, straining an already fragile grid as temperatures soar above 50°C in several provinces.&nbsp;As per Bloomberg, Minister Fadhil’s ministry stressed the urgency of restoring Iranian gas flows to meet Iraq’s peak summer energy needs. Iraq depends on Iran for roughly one-third of its power generation, either through direct gas supplies or imported electricity.<h2>Iran juggles domestic power and export commitments</h2>Despite possessing the world’s second-largest natural gas reserves, Iran continues to face a dilemma: balancing domestic energy demand with export obligations. The country’s internal grid has been under pressure, especially during heatwaves, forcing the government to resort to more polluting fuels.On Tuesday, Saeed Tavakoli, head of the National Iranian Gas Company, said Iran’s power plants had extensively turned to burning mazut, a heavy, sulphur-rich fuel oil, to keep the national grid stable.As quoted by Bloomberg, Tavakoli noted this substitution could free up additional gas for exports, including to Iraq.<h2>Long-term energy ties, short-term challenges</h2>In 2024, Iran and Iraq signed a five-year extension to their gas export agreement. The deal, reported by Shana, the Iranian Oil Ministry’s official news outlet, allows for seasonal flexibility, giving Tehran leeway to prioritise domestic energy needs during winter or peak demand periods.&nbsp;However, payment issues remain a sticking point. Iraq has reportedly fallen behind on dues for gas imports, largely due to US sanctions on Iran that complicate cross-border financial transactions. The two nations have used a mix of currency swaps and escrow accounts in third countries to navigate the restrictions.<h2>A political and energy balancing act</h2>A resolution to the current crisis would not only stabilise Iraq’s power sector but also reaffirm Iran’s role as a key regional energy supplier, despite ongoing infrastructure and sanctions-related challenges.As per Bloomberg, the talks between Tehran and Baghdad signal progress in a region where energy security remains deeply intertwined with diplomacy and domestic pressures. For now, both governments appear committed to a fix, though any sustainable solution will likely require longer-term investments in infrastructure and clearer payment mechanisms.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

As Iran and Iraq work to end a prolonged energy dispute, US sanctions and regional heatwaves highlight the fragile balance between diplomacy, domestic demand, and cross-border power reliance.

Iran and Iraq appear to be on the brink of resolving a long-standing dispute over Iranian gas exports and Iraq’s unpaid dues, just as Baghdad battles surging power demand during peak summer months. Iran’s Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad on Saturday said that both nations are close to settling the issues that have disrupted energy flows and strained bilateral relations, as per Bloomberg. “We will soon witness the resolution of both issues,” Paknejad said, as quoted by Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB News after meeting with Iraq’s Electricity Minister Ziad Ali Fadhil in Tehran. The statement was cited in a Bloomberg report on the matter. Electricity shortages plague Iraq The gas shortfall from Iran has significantly impacted Iraq’s electricity generation, pushing parts of the country into deeper blackouts. Iraq’s Electricity Ministry recently confirmed that reduced Iranian gas deliveries had forced cuts in domestic power output, straining an already fragile grid as temperatures soar above 50°C in several provinces. As per Bloomberg, Minister Fadhil’s ministry stressed the urgency of restoring Iranian gas flows to meet Iraq’s peak summer energy needs. Iraq depends on Iran for roughly one-third of its power generation, either through direct gas supplies or imported electricity. Iran juggles domestic power and export commitments Despite possessing the world’s second-largest natural gas reserves, Iran continues to face a dilemma: balancing domestic energy demand with export obligations. The country’s internal grid has been under pressure, especially during heatwaves, forcing the government to resort to more polluting fuels. On Tuesday, Saeed Tavakoli, head of the National Iranian Gas Company, said Iran’s power plants had extensively turned to burning mazut, a heavy, sulphur-rich fuel oil, to keep the national grid stable. As quoted by Bloomberg, Tavakoli noted this substitution could free up additional gas for exports, including to Iraq. Long-term energy ties, short-term challenges In 2024, Iran and Iraq signed a five-year extension to their gas export agreement. The deal, reported by Shana, the Iranian Oil Ministry’s official news outlet, allows for seasonal flexibility, giving Tehran leeway to prioritise domestic energy needs during winter or peak demand periods. However, payment issues remain a sticking point. Iraq has reportedly fallen behind on dues for gas imports, largely due to US sanctions on Iran that complicate cross-border financial transactions. The two nations have used a mix of currency swaps and escrow accounts in third countries to navigate the restrictions. A political and energy balancing act A resolution to the current crisis would not only stabilise Iraq’s power sector but also reaffirm Iran’s role as a key regional energy supplier, despite ongoing infrastructure and sanctions-related challenges. As per Bloomberg, the talks between Tehran and Baghdad signal progress in a region where energy security remains deeply intertwined with diplomacy and domestic pressures. For now, both governments appear committed to a fix, though any sustainable solution will likely require longer-term investments in infrastructure and clearer payment mechanisms. (With inputs from the agencies)

Iran and Iraq are close to resolving a gas export and payment dispute, aiming to restore critical energy flows amid Iraq’s worsening summer power crisis.

Iran signals breakthrough on gas supply, payments with Iraq

As the world hurtles toward an AI-driven future, the tech giants of Silicon Valley are embracing a bold new strategy: building things. After years of rapid innovation and iteration, industry leaders are now focusing on one crucial element to power the next wave of artificial intelligence (AI): physical infrastructure. From massive data centres to advanced manufacturing capabilities, these companies are sinking billions into the hardware necessary to support AI models, with some pushing their capital expenditures (capex) to unprecedented levels.<h2>A new era of infrastructure spending</h2>Tech companies like Meta, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, and Amazon are investing heavily in physical infrastructure, notably in colossal data centres that house the powerful chips essential for AI computations. This age of infrastructure is characterised by massive, sustained investments in tangible assets that support the growing demand for AI capabilities. According to recent reports, the largest tech companies, including Meta, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon, have collectively spent a record $102.5 billion on capex in their most recent earnings reports.This spending spree marks a dramatic shift in how Silicon Valley operates. In the past, these companies were primarily focused on software and code, with their largest expenses going toward talent, stock compensation, and research and development. Today, however, the biggest tech companies are investing in hardware at an unprecedented pace, acquiring and building the infrastructure required to keep up with the surging demand for AI.For context, Google alone has announced a planned $85 billion investment in AI and cloud infrastructure for 2025—an increase of $10 billion from its previous estimates. Amazon isn’t far behind, with plans to allocate $100 billion to AI infrastructure in 2025. Even Meta, traditionally less focused on physical assets, has ramped up its plans, now projecting to spend between $64 billion and $72 billion on AI infrastructure in the next year. The scale of these investments puts them in the same realm as major industrial spending from the early 20th century, when titans of business like JPMorgan and Andrew Carnegie dominated the steel and railroad sectors.<h2>The power of vertical integration</h2>This shift toward vertical integration is reminiscent of the early days of corporate monopolies. Tech companies are increasingly investing in the physical assets that power their businesses. Just as the steel barons once controlled production from mine to mill, today’s tech giants are building their own supply chains for AI development. This is crucial because AI, unlike traditional software, requires massive amounts of computational power, something that cannot be scaled with just software and intellectual property alone.AI supercomputers, which process vast amounts of data and run sophisticated models, rely on complex infrastructure that includes not only server farms but also energy resources, real estate, and cooling systems to prevent overheating. This infrastructure is so expansive that it often takes up entire industrial sites, with some data centres now being built on old steel mill locations due to their proximity to energy resources. The scale of the investment is staggering, and it reflects the growing recognition that the companies with the most expansive infrastructure will be the ones leading the AI revolution.In the not-too-distant past, companies like Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon were primarily software-driven, with most of their operational costs dedicated to talent, research, and coding. Now, however, these firms are controlling more of the physical infrastructure necessary to run their operations. This makes them less dependent on third-party suppliers and gives them greater leverage over the markets they serve. Even competitors like OpenAI, despite being one of the best-funded startups in the AI race, find themselves unable to keep up with the massive investments being made by these tech giants.<h2>The growing power of the few</h2>In an ironic twist, the increasing investment in infrastructure is reinforcing the dominance of a few large players in the tech industry. While these companies are amassing unprecedented amounts of capital, they are also creating deeper and wider moats around their businesses. The physical assets that power their AI capabilities, from data centres to chip factories, serve as barriers to entry that are difficult for smaller competitors to overcome. The competition is now less about software innovation and more about who can control the physical resources necessary to power AI.This concentration of power, much like the monopolistic practices of the Gilded Age, has raised questions about regulation. While the world’s tech giants may be poised to dominate the next phase of the AI revolution, the lack of regulatory oversight is creating an environment where the biggest players continue to outspend and out-innovate their competitors. Just as in the past, when corporate power went largely unchecked, today’s tech titans are in a position to shape the future of AI and infrastructure in ways that could leave smaller firms and startups struggling to catch up.In this new era of infrastructure, the tech giants are betting that control over physical assets will be the key to maintaining their dominance in the AI market. While the long-term returns on these investments are still uncertain, the scale of the capital expenditures signals a new phase in the evolution of Silicon Valley. As companies like Amazon, Google, and Meta build and control the infrastructure that powers AI, they are laying the groundwork for a future in which they hold the reins of the AI economy. The question now is whether this dominance will be sustainable or whether emerging players can find ways to challenge these giants and break their hold over the industry.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

The increasing investment in infrastructure is reinforcing the dominance of a few large players in the tech industry. While these companies are amassing unprecedented amounts of capital, they are also creating deeper and wider moats around their businesses.

As the world hurtles toward an AI-driven future, the tech giants of Silicon Valley are embracing a bold new strategy: building things. After years of rapid innovation and iteration, industry leaders are now focusing on one crucial element to power the next wave of artificial intelligence (AI): physical infrastructure. From massive data centres to advanced manufacturing capabilities, these companies are sinking billions into the hardware necessary to support AI models, with some pushing their capital expenditures (capex) to unprecedented levels. A new era of infrastructure spending Tech companies like Meta, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, and Amazon are investing heavily in physical infrastructure, notably in colossal data centres that house the powerful chips essential for AI computations. This age of infrastructure is characterised by massive, sustained investments in tangible assets that support the growing demand for AI capabilities. According to recent reports, the largest tech companies, including Meta, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon, have collectively spent a record $102.5 billion on capex in their most recent earnings reports. This spending spree marks a dramatic shift in how Silicon Valley operates. In the past, these companies were primarily focused on software and code, with their largest expenses going toward talent, stock compensation, and research and development. Today, however, the biggest tech companies are investing in hardware at an unprecedented pace, acquiring and building the infrastructure required to keep up with the surging demand for AI. For context, Google alone has announced a planned $85 billion investment in AI and cloud infrastructure for 2025—an increase of $10 billion from its previous estimates. Amazon isn’t far behind, with plans to allocate $100 billion to AI infrastructure in 2025. Even Meta, traditionally less focused on physical assets, has ramped up its plans, now projecting to spend between $64 billion and $72 billion on AI infrastructure in the next year. The scale of these investments puts them in the same realm as major industrial spending from the early 20th century, when titans of business like JPMorgan and Andrew Carnegie dominated the steel and railroad sectors. The power of vertical integration This shift toward vertical integration is reminiscent of the early days of corporate monopolies. Tech companies are increasingly investing in the physical assets that power their businesses. Just as the steel barons once controlled production from mine to mill, today’s tech giants are building their own supply chains for AI development. This is crucial because AI, unlike traditional software, requires massive amounts of computational power, something that cannot be scaled with just software and intellectual property alone. AI supercomputers, which process vast amounts of data and run sophisticated models, rely on complex infrastructure that includes not only server farms but also energy resources, real estate, and cooling systems to prevent overheating. This infrastructure is so expansive that it often takes up entire industrial sites, with some data centres now being built on old steel mill locations due to their proximity to energy resources. The scale of the investment is staggering, and it reflects the growing recognition that the companies with the most expansive infrastructure will be the ones leading the AI revolution. In the not-too-distant past, companies like Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon were primarily software-driven, with most of their operational costs dedicated to talent, research, and coding. Now, however, these firms are controlling more of the physical infrastructure necessary to run their operations. This makes them less dependent on third-party suppliers and gives them greater leverage over the markets they serve. Even competitors like OpenAI, despite being one of the best-funded startups in the AI race, find themselves unable to keep up with the massive investments being made by these tech giants. The growing power of the few In an ironic twist, the increasing investment in infrastructure is reinforcing the dominance of a few large players in the tech industry. While these companies are amassing unprecedented amounts of capital, they are also creating deeper and wider moats around their businesses. The physical assets that power their AI capabilities, from data centres to chip factories, serve as barriers to entry that are difficult for smaller competitors to overcome. The competition is now less about software innovation and more about who can control the physical resources necessary to power AI. This concentration of power, much like the monopolistic practices of the Gilded Age, has raised questions about regulation. While the world’s tech giants may be poised to dominate the next phase of the AI revolution, the lack of regulatory oversight is creating an environment where the biggest players continue to outspend and out-innovate their competitors. Just as in the past, when corporate power went largely unchecked, today’s tech titans are in a position to shape the future of AI and infrastructure in ways that could leave smaller firms and startups struggling to catch up. In this new era of infrastructure, the tech giants are betting that control over physical assets will be the key to maintaining their dominance in the AI market. While the long-term returns on these investments are still uncertain, the scale of the capital expenditures signals a new phase in the evolution of Silicon Valley. As companies like Amazon, Google, and Meta build and control the infrastructure that powers AI, they are laying the groundwork for a future in which they hold the reins of the AI economy. The question now is whether this dominance will be sustainable or whether emerging players can find ways to challenge these giants and break their hold over the industry. (With inputs from agencies)

The increasing investment in infrastructure is reinforcing the dominance of a few large players in the tech industry. While these companies are amassing unprecedented amounts of capital, they are also creating deeper and wider moats around their businesses.

Silicon Valley’s bold new bet: Massive investment in physical infrastructure to power AI

The US government’s recent decision to impose a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods has ignited tensions between the two nations, but India’s response so far has been measured. Despite the headline-grabbing nature of the tariff order, the Indian government remains focused on strategic adjustments rather than retaliatory measures. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal has assured that the government will safeguard the interests of India’s exporters, particularly small entrepreneurs and farmers. The Ministry of External Affairs reaffirmed that the broader US-India relationship remains resilient, with short-term trade disputes unlikely to derail the larger partnership.<h2>The tariff impact and India’s response</h2>The 25 per cent tariff, effective from August 1, affects several key Indian export sectors, including textiles, gems and jewellery, auto components, and seafood. However, products like pharmaceuticals, IT services, and high-end engineering goods remain relatively insulated, with the Indian government taking steps to mitigate the adverse impact on affected industries.India’s export strategy now hinges on diversifying into new markets and improving competitiveness in regions like the UK, the EU, and ASEAN. The country recently signed a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the UK, and negotiations with the EU are in their final stages, with a deal expected before the end of the year. These markets are seen as crucial in offsetting the impact of tariffs in the US. Additionally, India is exploring emerging markets such as Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Mexico, and Ethiopia to boost exports in key sectors.The Indian government is particularly focused on industries facing direct tariff challenges, such as textiles and engineering goods, Mint&nbsp;reported. Plans are underway to ramp up exports to new destinations, including Sao Tome, Greece, and Lithuania, for sectors like engineering, pharmaceuticals, and electronics. Such diversification will reduce India’s dependency on the US and shield its export sector from potential trade shocks.<h2>Long-term trade dynamics and strategic shifts</h2>While the 25 per cent tariff is a significant challenge for Indian exporters, the economic impact is expected to be limited in the long run. India’s annual exports to the US, amounting to approximately $87 billion, constitute only a small fraction of the country’s GDP. Analysts predict a modest impact on India’s overall growth, with an estimated dip of 0.2 per cent to 0.4 per cent in GDP. However, sectors that rely heavily on the US market, such as textiles and gems and jewellery, could see sharper declines in exports.The broader trade tensions reflect deeper strategic disagreements between India and the US. Trump’s administration has been critical of India’s economic policies, including its agricultural market and defence procurement practices. As India stands firm on its sovereignty, particularly regarding food security and defence, the country’s approach remains focused on diversifying its export base and protecting long-term growth interests.In the face of tariffs, India’s resilience and ongoing efforts to expand its footprint in new markets position it well for navigating this trade storm. Despite the disruption caused by the tariffs, India’s economic agility remains a key strength, and its export diversification strategy is already showing signs of potential success.&nbsp;(With input from agencies)

The US tariff affects several key Indian export sectors, including textiles, gems and jewellery, and auto components. However, products like pharma, IT services, and high-end engineering goods remain relatively insulated, with the Centre taking steps to mitigate the impact on the industries.

The US government’s recent decision to impose a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods has ignited tensions between the two nations, but India’s response so far has been measured. Despite the headline-grabbing nature of the tariff order, the Indian government remains focused on strategic adjustments rather than retaliatory measures. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal has assured that the government will safeguard the interests of India’s exporters, particularly small entrepreneurs and farmers. The Ministry of External Affairs reaffirmed that the broader US-India relationship remains resilient, with short-term trade disputes unlikely to derail the larger partnership. The tariff impact and India’s response The 25 per cent tariff, effective from August 1, affects several key Indian export sectors, including textiles, gems and jewellery, auto components, and seafood. However, products like pharmaceuticals, IT services, and high-end engineering goods remain relatively insulated, with the Indian government taking steps to mitigate the adverse impact on affected industries. India’s export strategy now hinges on diversifying into new markets and improving competitiveness in regions like the UK, the EU, and ASEAN. The country recently signed a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the UK, and negotiations with the EU are in their final stages, with a deal expected before the end of the year. These markets are seen as crucial in offsetting the impact of tariffs in the US. Additionally, India is exploring emerging markets such as Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Mexico, and Ethiopia to boost exports in key sectors. The Indian government is particularly focused on industries facing direct tariff challenges, such as textiles and engineering goods, Mint reported. Plans are underway to ramp up exports to new destinations, including Sao Tome, Greece, and Lithuania, for sectors like engineering, pharmaceuticals, and electronics. Such diversification will reduce India’s dependency on the US and shield its export sector from potential trade shocks. Long-term trade dynamics and strategic shifts While the 25 per cent tariff is a significant challenge for Indian exporters, the economic impact is expected to be limited in the long run. India’s annual exports to the US, amounting to approximately $87 billion, constitute only a small fraction of the country’s GDP. Analysts predict a modest impact on India’s overall growth, with an estimated dip of 0.2 per cent to 0.4 per cent in GDP. However, sectors that rely heavily on the US market, such as textiles and gems and jewellery, could see sharper declines in exports. The broader trade tensions reflect deeper strategic disagreements between India and the US. Trump’s administration has been critical of India’s economic policies, including its agricultural market and defence procurement practices. As India stands firm on its sovereignty, particularly regarding food security and defence, the country’s approach remains focused on diversifying its export base and protecting long-term growth interests. In the face of tariffs, India’s resilience and ongoing efforts to expand its footprint in new markets position it well for navigating this trade storm. Despite the disruption caused by the tariffs, India’s economic agility remains a key strength, and its export diversification strategy is already showing signs of potential success. (With input from agencies)

The US tariff affects several key Indian export sectors, including textiles, gems and jewellery, and auto components. However, products like pharma, IT services, and high-end engineering goods remain relatively insulated, with the Centre taking steps to mitigate the impact on the industries.

India’s strategic shift: Diversifying exports amid US tariff pressure

In a landmark ruling, a federal jury in Miami has found Tesla partially responsible for a fatal crash involving its Autopilot system, ordering the company to pay $329 million in damages. The lawsuit stemmed from a tragic 2019 incident in the Florida Keys, where a Tesla Model S, operating on autopilot, struck a pedestrian, Naibel Benavides Leon, 22, and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, severely injuring him. Tesla’s Autopilot, a driver-assistance feature designed to assist with steering, acceleration, and braking, was found to have failed in the crash. Plaintiffs argued that the software should have alerted the driver and activated the brakes to prevent the accident, which resulted in Benavides Leon's death and Angulo’s lifelong injuries. The jury ruled that Tesla was partly at fault, with the company ordered to pay $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages.<h2>Elon Musk and Tesla's legal strategy under scrutiny</h2>The verdict represents a significant setback for Elon Musk and Tesla, which has long championed self-driving technology as a cornerstone of its future. Tesla has vowed to appeal the decision, calling the verdict “wrong” and arguing that it would harm efforts to develop life-saving technology. Tesla contended that the driver, George McGee, was responsible for the accident due to his distracted driving—he had dropped his phone and was not paying attention to the road. According to Tesla, the driver had his foot on the accelerator, which overrode the Autopilot system.&nbsp;The company maintained that the Autopilot software functioned as designed and that the crash was a result of human error rather than a malfunction of its technology. However, plaintiffs’ attorneys, including Brett Schreiber, argued that Tesla misrepresented the capabilities of its Autopilot system. Schreiber accused the company of promoting Autopilot as a fully self-driving system despite its limitations, saying that it was designed primarily for highways but was widely used on roads it was not intended for. “Tesla’s lies turned our roads into test tracks for their fundamentally flawed technology,” Schreiber stated.<h2>Implications for Tesla's future and regulatory oversight</h2>The ruling has raised significant questions about the legal and safety implications of self-driving technology. Unlike previous cases, where Tesla settled out of court, this lawsuit went to trial, bringing the company’s practices under intense scrutiny. It is the first federal case to find Tesla liable for an accident involving its self-driving software.The case also brings renewed focus on Tesla’s transparency and marketing claims. Experts have criticised the company for overstating the capabilities of its technology, which, despite being labelled as “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving,” still requires the driver to remain alert and ready to take control. Critics argue that these names mislead consumers about the system's actual abilities.This case also comes at a critical time for Tesla as it prepares to launch its driverless taxi service. Musk has promised thousands of robotaxis on US roads by next year, a major part of the company’s plans for the future. However, this trial has cast a shadow over Tesla's claims about the safety and reliability of its self-driving technology.As Tesla continues to push forward with its self-driving ambitions, it is likely to face increasing pressure from regulators. The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has already raised concerns about Autopilot's safety, with a recent report citing a “critical safety gap” in the system. The case may also prompt lawmakers and safety regulators to reconsider how self-driving vehicles are monitored and held accountable for accidents.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

The verdict represents a significant setback for Elon Musk and Tesla, which has long championed self-driving technology as a cornerstone of its future. Tesla has vowed to appeal the decision, calling the verdict wrong and arguing that it would harm efforts to develop life-saving technology.

In a landmark ruling, a federal jury in Miami has found Tesla partially responsible for a fatal crash involving its Autopilot system, ordering the company to pay $329 million in damages. The lawsuit stemmed from a tragic 2019 incident in the Florida Keys, where a Tesla Model S, operating on autopilot, struck a pedestrian, Naibel Benavides Leon, 22, and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, severely injuring him. Tesla’s Autopilot, a driver-assistance feature designed to assist with steering, acceleration, and braking, was found to have failed in the crash. Plaintiffs argued that the software should have alerted the driver and activated the brakes to prevent the accident, which resulted in Benavides Leon's death and Angulo’s lifelong injuries. The jury ruled that Tesla was partly at fault, with the company ordered to pay $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages. Elon Musk and Tesla's legal strategy under scrutiny The verdict represents a significant setback for Elon Musk and Tesla, which has long championed self-driving technology as a cornerstone of its future. Tesla has vowed to appeal the decision, calling the verdict “wrong” and arguing that it would harm efforts to develop life-saving technology. Tesla contended that the driver, George McGee, was responsible for the accident due to his distracted driving—he had dropped his phone and was not paying attention to the road. According to Tesla, the driver had his foot on the accelerator, which overrode the Autopilot system. The company maintained that the Autopilot software functioned as designed and that the crash was a result of human error rather than a malfunction of its technology. However, plaintiffs’ attorneys, including Brett Schreiber, argued that Tesla misrepresented the capabilities of its Autopilot system. Schreiber accused the company of promoting Autopilot as a fully self-driving system despite its limitations, saying that it was designed primarily for highways but was widely used on roads it was not intended for. “Tesla’s lies turned our roads into test tracks for their fundamentally flawed technology,” Schreiber stated. Implications for Tesla's future and regulatory oversight The ruling has raised significant questions about the legal and safety implications of self-driving technology. Unlike previous cases, where Tesla settled out of court, this lawsuit went to trial, bringing the company’s practices under intense scrutiny. It is the first federal case to find Tesla liable for an accident involving its self-driving software. The case also brings renewed focus on Tesla’s transparency and marketing claims. Experts have criticised the company for overstating the capabilities of its technology, which, despite being labelled as “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving,” still requires the driver to remain alert and ready to take control. Critics argue that these names mislead consumers about the system's actual abilities. This case also comes at a critical time for Tesla as it prepares to launch its driverless taxi service. Musk has promised thousands of robotaxis on US roads by next year, a major part of the company’s plans for the future. However, this trial has cast a shadow over Tesla's claims about the safety and reliability of its self-driving technology. As Tesla continues to push forward with its self-driving ambitions, it is likely to face increasing pressure from regulators. The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has already raised concerns about Autopilot's safety, with a recent report citing a “critical safety gap” in the system. The case may also prompt lawmakers and safety regulators to reconsider how self-driving vehicles are monitored and held accountable for accidents. (With inputs from agencies)

The verdict represents a significant setback for Elon Musk and Tesla, which has long championed self-driving technology as a cornerstone of its future. Tesla has vowed to appeal the decision, calling the verdict wrong and arguing that it would harm efforts to develop life-saving technology.

Tesla found partly liable for fatal 2019 crash involving autopilot

The cracks in the US labour market are widening. Job creation has slowed to a crawl, unemployment is rising, and economists are warning that stagflation, the dreaded mix of slow growth and persistent inflation, may be creeping back into the American economy. According to the US Labor Department’s latest employment report, released Friday, only 73,000 nonfarm jobs were added in July, well below market expectations of 110,000. Making matters worse, job growth for May and June was slashed by a staggering 258,000 jobs, in what economists are calling a clear sign of deterioration.&nbsp;As per Reuters, this is the weakest three-month job growth streak since the pandemic era. The revisions bring May’s jobs gain down to just 19,000 and June’s to a mere 14,000.<h2>A market in pain&nbsp;</h2>Christopher Rupkey, chief economist at FWDBONDS, put it bluntly and said, “The labor market is not rolling over, but it is badly wounded and may yet bring about a reversal in the US economy’s fortunes." Speaking to Reuters, Rupkey added, “The door to a Fed rate cut in September just got opened a crack wider.”&nbsp;Indeed, with unemployment rising to 4.2 per cent in July, up from 4.1 per cent in June, pressure is mounting on the Federal Reserve to act. Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who left interest rates unchanged this week at 4.25%–4.50%, had warned markets not to expect a cut anytime soon. But this latest report may force a rethink. Markets are now pricing in a September rate cut, and further confirmation could come when the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases its benchmark payrolls revision next month.<h2>Tariffs, immigration, and Trump’s economic gamble</h2>The report offers a sobering snapshot of the human impact of President Donald Trump’s trade and immigration policies. On Thursday, Trump slapped 35 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods and imposed steep duties on dozens of other trade partners. These measures, aimed at protecting domestic industries, are now raising input costs and fuelling inflation, while making it harder for firms to hire and invest.&nbsp;At the same time, mass immigration raids and workforce crackdowns are thinning out the labour pool. In July, the number of foreign-born workers fell by 341,000, as per Reuters. That, along with an uptick in retirements, pushed labour force participation down for a third straight month to 62.2 per cent. “Without the participation rate decline, the unemployment rate would have added another tenth to a solid 4.3%,” said Michael Gapen, chief US economist at Morgan Stanley, as quoted by Reuters. “Immigration restrictions have and will continue to have a chilling effect on participation and will continue to add to downward pressure on the unemployment rate.”<h2>Behind the numbers</h2>The pain isn’t spread evenly. Healthcare and social assistance led job growth with 73,300 new positions, while retail and financial services added modest gains. But manufacturing, wholesale trade, and professional services all lost jobs. There are more part-time workers, more long-term unemployed, and a growing sense of uncertainty among businesses.&nbsp;The median duration of unemployment rose to 10.2 weeks. And as per the data, even government jobs are vanishing, federal employment dropped by 12,000 last month, and is down 84,000 since January. The recent Supreme Court ruling clearing the way for mass federal layoffs only adds to the anxiety. Trump has already fired Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, accusing her, without evidence, of falsifying jobs data, Reuters reported.<h2>A chilling climate for business</h2>Tariff uncertainty is making it harder for companies to plan. Economists warn that despite recent trade deals, the effective US tariff rate is now the highest since the 1930s, according to Reuters. Domestic demand, meanwhile, is slowing. The second quarter saw the weakest pace of consumption in 2.5 years. “One gets the sense that due to trade and immigration policy the domestic economy and labor market are paying a price,” said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM US. “Stagflation is the best description of the domestic economy as we enter the second half of the year.”<h2>What’s next?</h2>With Wall Street trading lower, the dollar falling, and Treasury yields dropping, the message from markets is clear: the US economy is entering dangerous territory. While Trump continues to push his aggressive economic agenda, and the Fed hesitates, millions of American workers may soon feel the cost, in pink slips and shrinking paychecks.&nbsp;The August jobs report, due September 5, may be the most important economic data point of the year. It could not only determine the Fed’s next move but shape the trajectory of the 2025 election-year economy.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Trump tariffs and immigration crackdowns are weighing heavily on the US labour market, with job creation slowing and participation falling, raising fresh questions about the economy’s direction ahead of the 2025 election.

The cracks in the US labour market are widening. Job creation has slowed to a crawl, unemployment is rising, and economists are warning that stagflation, the dreaded mix of slow growth and persistent inflation, may be creeping back into the American economy. According to the US Labor Department’s latest employment report, released Friday, only 73,000 nonfarm jobs were added in July, well below market expectations of 110,000. Making matters worse, job growth for May and June was slashed by a staggering 258,000 jobs, in what economists are calling a clear sign of deterioration. As per Reuters, this is the weakest three-month job growth streak since the pandemic era. The revisions bring May’s jobs gain down to just 19,000 and June’s to a mere 14,000. A market in pain Christopher Rupkey, chief economist at FWDBONDS, put it bluntly and said, “The labor market is not rolling over, but it is badly wounded and may yet bring about a reversal in the US economy’s fortunes." Speaking to Reuters, Rupkey added, “The door to a Fed rate cut in September just got opened a crack wider.” Indeed, with unemployment rising to 4.2 per cent in July, up from 4.1 per cent in June, pressure is mounting on the Federal Reserve to act. Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who left interest rates unchanged this week at 4.25%–4.50%, had warned markets not to expect a cut anytime soon. But this latest report may force a rethink. Markets are now pricing in a September rate cut, and further confirmation could come when the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases its benchmark payrolls revision next month. Tariffs, immigration, and Trump’s economic gamble The report offers a sobering snapshot of the human impact of President Donald Trump’s trade and immigration policies. On Thursday, Trump slapped 35 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods and imposed steep duties on dozens of other trade partners. These measures, aimed at protecting domestic industries, are now raising input costs and fuelling inflation, while making it harder for firms to hire and invest. At the same time, mass immigration raids and workforce crackdowns are thinning out the labour pool. In July, the number of foreign-born workers fell by 341,000, as per Reuters. That, along with an uptick in retirements, pushed labour force participation down for a third straight month to 62.2 per cent. “Without the participation rate decline, the unemployment rate would have added another tenth to a solid 4.3%,” said Michael Gapen, chief US economist at Morgan Stanley, as quoted by Reuters. “Immigration restrictions have and will continue to have a chilling effect on participation and will continue to add to downward pressure on the unemployment rate.” Behind the numbers The pain isn’t spread evenly. Healthcare and social assistance led job growth with 73,300 new positions, while retail and financial services added modest gains. But manufacturing, wholesale trade, and professional services all lost jobs. There are more part-time workers, more long-term unemployed, and a growing sense of uncertainty among businesses. The median duration of unemployment rose to 10.2 weeks. And as per the data, even government jobs are vanishing, federal employment dropped by 12,000 last month, and is down 84,000 since January. The recent Supreme Court ruling clearing the way for mass federal layoffs only adds to the anxiety. Trump has already fired Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, accusing her, without evidence, of falsifying jobs data, Reuters reported. A chilling climate for business Tariff uncertainty is making it harder for companies to plan. Economists warn that despite recent trade deals, the effective US tariff rate is now the highest since the 1930s, according to Reuters. Domestic demand, meanwhile, is slowing. The second quarter saw the weakest pace of consumption in 2.5 years. “One gets the sense that due to trade and immigration policy the domestic economy and labor market are paying a price,” said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM US. “Stagflation is the best description of the domestic economy as we enter the second half of the year.” What’s next? With Wall Street trading lower, the dollar falling, and Treasury yields dropping, the message from markets is clear: the US economy is entering dangerous territory. While Trump continues to push his aggressive economic agenda, and the Fed hesitates, millions of American workers may soon feel the cost, in pink slips and shrinking paychecks. The August jobs report, due September 5, may be the most important economic data point of the year. It could not only determine the Fed’s next move but shape the trajectory of the 2025 election-year economy. (With inputs from the agencies)

US job growth stalls and unemployment rises, fuelling stagflation fears and putting pressure on the Fed to consider a rate cut.

US job growth slows to a crawl, labour market weakens

Despite US President Donald Trump's newly imposed penalties on top of a 25 per cent tariff for its trade relations with Russia, Indian oil refiners, as per reports, continue to source oil from Russian suppliers, suggest reports. The Indian oil refiners' decision is reportedly based on the price, grade of crude, inventories, logistics, and other economic factors and has nothing to do with the prevailing political atmosphere. Previously, on Friday (Aug 1), speaking on similar lines, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal, while speaking about media reports that some Indian oil firms had paused Russian imports, said he was not aware of any such developments. He noted that India's broad approach to energy sourcing requirements depends on "what is available in the market and the prevailing global situation."<h2>Why is Russian oil in the headlines, and what does India have to do with it?</h2>On Thursday (Jul 31), Trump signed an executive order imposing new tariffs on dozens of its trade partners. This included a 25 per cent tariff rate and a penalty on India. The tariffs come amid growing criticism from Washington over India's continued imports of discounted Russian oil, despite Western sanctions related to the Ukraine war.However, as per an ANI report citing sources, despite US' pressure, India continues to source oil from Russian suppliers. As per the report, this is because Moscow is the world's second-largest crude oil producer with an output of around 9.5 mb/d (nearly 10 per cent of global demand). It is also the second-largest exporter, shipping about 4.5 mb/d of crude and 2.3 mb/d of refined products. In March 2022, amid fears of Russian oil getting pushed out of the market, Brent crude prices soared to US $137 per barrel."In this challenging environment, India, as the world’s third-largest energy consumer with 85% crude oil import dependence, strategically adapted its sourcing to secure affordable energy while fully adhering to international norms," said the news agency's unnamed sources. They added that Russian oil has never been sanctioned. Instead, the nation was subjected to a G7/EU price cap mechanism that is designed to limit revenue while making sure global supplies flowed uninterrupted. Calling India's purchases legitimate and in line with international norms, they added that "Had India not absorbed discounted Russian crude combined with OPEC+ production cuts of 5.86 mb/d, global oil prices could have surged well beyond the March 2022 peak of US$137/bbl, intensifying inflationary pressures worldwide".This, they said, means that India's energy decisions, while being guided by the nation's interests, also contributed positively to global energy stability and kept oil flowing, prices stable, and markets balanced, while fully respecting international frameworks.

Despite the US' pressure, India continues to source oil from Russian suppliers. As per the report, among other things, this is because Moscow is the world's second-largest crude oil producer and also the second-largest exporter.

Despite US President Donald Trump's newly imposed penalties on top of a 25 per cent tariff for its trade relations with Russia, Indian oil refiners, as per reports, continue to source oil from Russian suppliers, suggest reports. The Indian oil refiners' decision is reportedly based on the price, grade of crude, inventories, logistics, and other economic factors and has nothing to do with the prevailing political atmosphere. Previously, on Friday (Aug 1), speaking on similar lines, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal, while speaking about media reports that some Indian oil firms had paused Russian imports, said he was not aware of any such developments. He noted that India's broad approach to energy sourcing requirements depends on "what is available in the market and the prevailing global situation." Why is Russian oil in the headlines, and what does India have to do with it? On Thursday (Jul 31), Trump signed an executive order imposing new tariffs on dozens of its trade partners. This included a 25 per cent tariff rate and a penalty on India. The tariffs come amid growing criticism from Washington over India's continued imports of discounted Russian oil, despite Western sanctions related to the Ukraine war. However, as per an ANI report citing sources, despite US' pressure, India continues to source oil from Russian suppliers. As per the report, this is because Moscow is the world's second-largest crude oil producer with an output of around 9.5 mb/d (nearly 10 per cent of global demand). It is also the second-largest exporter, shipping about 4.5 mb/d of crude and 2.3 mb/d of refined products. In March 2022, amid fears of Russian oil getting pushed out of the market, Brent crude prices soared to US $137 per barrel. "In this challenging environment, India, as the world’s third-largest energy consumer with 85% crude oil import dependence, strategically adapted its sourcing to secure affordable energy while fully adhering to international norms," said the news agency's unnamed sources. They added that Russian oil has never been sanctioned. Instead, the nation was subjected to a G7/EU price cap mechanism that is designed to limit revenue while making sure global supplies flowed uninterrupted. Calling India's purchases legitimate and in line with international norms, they added that "Had India not absorbed discounted Russian crude combined with OPEC+ production cuts of 5.86 mb/d, global oil prices could have surged well beyond the March 2022 peak of US$137/bbl, intensifying inflationary pressures worldwide". This, they said, means that India's energy decisions, while being guided by the nation's interests, also contributed positively to global energy stability and kept oil flowing, prices stable, and markets balanced, while fully respecting international frameworks.

Despite the US' pressure, India continues to source oil from Russian suppliers. As per the report, among other things, this is because Moscow is the world's second-largest crude oil producer and also the second-largest exporter.

India defies Trump’s oil penalties, continues Russian imports: Report

Southeast Asian countries are breathing a sigh of relief after the US unveiled its revised tariff schedule, slashing the initially feared higher rates and offering a somewhat more manageable outcome. Though US President Donald Trump’s tariffs will still hit the region’s key exports hard, the adjustments are seen as less severe than expected, especially for nations like Singapore and Malaysia. The final tariff rates, which range from 10 per cent to 40 per cent depending on the country, were unveiled late on July 31, setting the stage for a new phase in the ongoing global trade tensions.For most of Southeast Asia, the revised tariffs are more tolerable than the original threat of punitive measures that could have harmed their economies. Singapore, which had previously feared a 25 per cent tariff on its goods, is set to face a baseline tariff of just 10 per cent. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong expressed that this outcome, while still impactful, is manageable for the city-state, which maintains a robust trade surplus with the US and stands to lose relatively little. The 10 per cent rate is far lower than the 19 per cent imposed on other regional heavyweights, including Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines. This adjustment, while significant, spares Singapore from the worst-case scenario of even higher tariffs.<h2>How do things stand now?</h2>While the 10 per cent tariff will affect Singapore’s export-driven economy, the damage is expected to be less severe than the rates imposed on neighbouring countries. The situation could have been far worse, with countries like Laos and Myanmar facing tariffs as high as 40 per cent. Both economies are much smaller than their regional peers, but these tariffs still pose a significant burden. Myanmar, which continued its controversial military junta rule amid Western sanctions, will face particularly heavy consequences despite a modest $734 million trade relationship with the US.The situation remains complex, and for many nations in the region, it’s still too early to gauge the full economic impact. Vietnam, for instance, had initially been targeted with a 46 per cent tariff but successfully negotiated this down to 20 per cent. However, Vietnam’s status as a primary beneficiary of trade from China means that its exporters may still be vulnerable to additional scrutiny as the US targets goods transshipped from China. The move to impose a 40 per cent tariff on such goods adds another layer of uncertainty, especially for countries with complex supply chains that include Chinese components. Despite this, Vietnam’s position as a key trading hub in the region makes it unlikely that its exports will be completely sidelined.For Thailand and Malaysia, the new tariff levels represent a much-needed boost to their manufacturing sectors, especially in industries like electronics, textiles, and garments. Thailand’s economy, which is heavily reliant on exports, stands to benefit from the 19 per cent tariff rate, down from the threatened 36 per cent. Thailand’s finance minister, Pichai Chunhavajira, welcomed the move, saying it would help restore the country’s competitiveness. Similarly, Malaysia’s government expressed satisfaction with its tariff reduction to 19 per cent, down from 25 per cent. Both nations are poised to maintain their standing in the global market, ensuring they are not placed at a disadvantage relative to each other.Cambodia, too, was granted some respite as its tariff was cut to 19 per cent from the much higher 49 per cent, a decision that saved its garment industry, its largest economic driver, from potentially disastrous consequences. The reduction has been hailed as a critical lifeline for Cambodia, with its trade negotiators, including Deputy Prime Minister Sun Chanthol, declaring the outcome to be a major win for the country’s manufacturing sector.<h2>The effect on Southeast Asia’s exports</h2>Yet, while many Southeast Asian countries can take comfort in the adjustments, not all have escaped unscathed. Laos and Myanmar’s high tariffs could dampen their export-driven economies further, and analysts fear these nations will be unable to cope with such significant trade barriers. Myanmar, in particular, could face considerable economic strain as it attempts to deal with the fallout of the sanctions and the global trade restrictions imposed by the US.Despite the relative success of Southeast Asian negotiations, US officials continue to leave the door open for further tariffs, particularly in sectors where national security is a concern. For instance, semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries in some countries are still under investigation by the US government for potential national security risks. While some analysts see this as a negotiating tactic, others worry about further disruptions to supply chains that already face significant strain from ongoing geopolitical tensions.For the region’s larger economies, like Singapore and Malaysia, the 10-20 per cent tariff range presents new challenges but also a kind of stability, providing some clarity after months of uncertainty. As many businesses adjust their strategies in response to the new tariffs, the challenge for Southeast Asia will be to navigate these shifting rules while still maintaining strong economic ties with the US.So, while Southeast Asia has avoided the worst-case scenario of even steeper tariffs, the economic challenges posed by Trump’s tariff strategy remain. The region's economies will likely feel the effects over the coming months and years, particularly as global supply chains continue to shift and countries adjust to the new rules. Though the region has secured more favourable tariff terms than expected, the longer-term impacts will depend on how effectively governments can adapt to a world where tariffs and trade relations remain in constant flux.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

While many Southeast Asian countries can take comfort in the adjustments, not all have escaped unscathed. Laos and Myanmar’s high tariffs could dampen their export-driven economies further, and analysts fear these nations will be unable to cope with such significant trade barriers.

Southeast Asian countries are breathing a sigh of relief after the US unveiled its revised tariff schedule, slashing the initially feared higher rates and offering a somewhat more manageable outcome. Though US President Donald Trump’s tariffs will still hit the region’s key exports hard, the adjustments are seen as less severe than expected, especially for nations like Singapore and Malaysia. The final tariff rates, which range from 10 per cent to 40 per cent depending on the country, were unveiled late on July 31, setting the stage for a new phase in the ongoing global trade tensions. For most of Southeast Asia, the revised tariffs are more tolerable than the original threat of punitive measures that could have harmed their economies. Singapore, which had previously feared a 25 per cent tariff on its goods, is set to face a baseline tariff of just 10 per cent. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong expressed that this outcome, while still impactful, is manageable for the city-state, which maintains a robust trade surplus with the US and stands to lose relatively little. The 10 per cent rate is far lower than the 19 per cent imposed on other regional heavyweights, including Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines. This adjustment, while significant, spares Singapore from the worst-case scenario of even higher tariffs. How do things stand now? While the 10 per cent tariff will affect Singapore’s export-driven economy, the damage is expected to be less severe than the rates imposed on neighbouring countries. The situation could have been far worse, with countries like Laos and Myanmar facing tariffs as high as 40 per cent. Both economies are much smaller than their regional peers, but these tariffs still pose a significant burden. Myanmar, which continued its controversial military junta rule amid Western sanctions, will face particularly heavy consequences despite a modest $734 million trade relationship with the US. The situation remains complex, and for many nations in the region, it’s still too early to gauge the full economic impact. Vietnam, for instance, had initially been targeted with a 46 per cent tariff but successfully negotiated this down to 20 per cent. However, Vietnam’s status as a primary beneficiary of trade from China means that its exporters may still be vulnerable to additional scrutiny as the US targets goods transshipped from China. The move to impose a 40 per cent tariff on such goods adds another layer of uncertainty, especially for countries with complex supply chains that include Chinese components. Despite this, Vietnam’s position as a key trading hub in the region makes it unlikely that its exports will be completely sidelined. For Thailand and Malaysia, the new tariff levels represent a much-needed boost to their manufacturing sectors, especially in industries like electronics, textiles, and garments. Thailand’s economy, which is heavily reliant on exports, stands to benefit from the 19 per cent tariff rate, down from the threatened 36 per cent. Thailand’s finance minister, Pichai Chunhavajira, welcomed the move, saying it would help restore the country’s competitiveness. Similarly, Malaysia’s government expressed satisfaction with its tariff reduction to 19 per cent, down from 25 per cent. Both nations are poised to maintain their standing in the global market, ensuring they are not placed at a disadvantage relative to each other. Cambodia, too, was granted some respite as its tariff was cut to 19 per cent from the much higher 49 per cent, a decision that saved its garment industry, its largest economic driver, from potentially disastrous consequences. The reduction has been hailed as a critical lifeline for Cambodia, with its trade negotiators, including Deputy Prime Minister Sun Chanthol, declaring the outcome to be a major win for the country’s manufacturing sector. The effect on Southeast Asia’s exports Yet, while many Southeast Asian countries can take comfort in the adjustments, not all have escaped unscathed. Laos and Myanmar’s high tariffs could dampen their export-driven economies further, and analysts fear these nations will be unable to cope with such significant trade barriers. Myanmar, in particular, could face considerable economic strain as it attempts to deal with the fallout of the sanctions and the global trade restrictions imposed by the US. Despite the relative success of Southeast Asian negotiations, US officials continue to leave the door open for further tariffs, particularly in sectors where national security is a concern. For instance, semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries in some countries are still under investigation by the US government for potential national security risks. While some analysts see this as a negotiating tactic, others worry about further disruptions to supply chains that already face significant strain from ongoing geopolitical tensions. For the region’s larger economies, like Singapore and Malaysia, the 10-20 per cent tariff range presents new challenges but also a kind of stability, providing some clarity after months of uncertainty. As many businesses adjust their strategies in response to the new tariffs, the challenge for Southeast Asia will be to navigate these shifting rules while still maintaining strong economic ties with the US. So, while Southeast Asia has avoided the worst-case scenario of even steeper tariffs, the economic challenges posed by Trump’s tariff strategy remain. The region's economies will likely feel the effects over the coming months and years, particularly as global supply chains continue to shift and countries adjust to the new rules. Though the region has secured more favourable tariff terms than expected, the longer-term impacts will depend on how effectively governments can adapt to a world where tariffs and trade relations remain in constant flux. (With inputs from agencies)

While many Southeast Asian countries can take comfort in the adjustments, not all have escaped unscathed. Laos and Myanmar’s high tariffs could dampen their export-driven economies further, and analysts fear these nations will be unable to cope with such significant trade barriers.

Southeast Asia dodges worst-case US tariff impact, but challenges remain

Thousands of export license applications by US companies, including those for sensitive technology shipments to China, are stuck in limbo due to turmoil at the US Department of Commerce. A report by Reuters&nbsp;says that dysfunction at the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), the agency tasked with approving these licenses, has caused significant delays, leaving companies and industries in uncertainty. The most high-profile case involves Nvidia’s efforts to ship artificial intelligence (AI) chips to China. Despite assurances from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and other officials in July that licenses for Nvidia’s H20 chip would be granted, reports suggest no licenses have been issued yet.&nbsp;Nvidia had hoped to begin deliveries soon after receiving confirmation in mid-July, with billions of dollars' worth of AI chip orders at stake. The delay in approval is the latest example of the agency’s increasingly unpredictable and slow license process. The agency’s paralysis has left many US companies waiting for approval on a wide range of goods, from semiconductor manufacturing equipment to advanced sensors. The situation has been compounded by internal leadership issues, an exodus of staff, and poor communication between the BIS and industry representatives, according to several sources familiar with the matter.<h2>Internal turmoil and leadership challenges at BIS</h2>The BIS, which plays a crucial role in enforcing export restrictions to safeguard national security, has become nearly paralysed due to internal turmoil. The report by Reuters suggests that Jeffrey Kessler, who became BIS undersecretary in March, has micromanaged the bureau and failed to engage in adequate communication with industry stakeholders. At a staff meeting shortly after his appointment, Kessler reportedly instructed BIS employees to limit communication with companies and to log all meetings in a spreadsheet. Additionally, reports say that obtaining approval from Kessler’s office for meetings with other government agencies has also become increasingly difficult.The lack of clear communication has raised concerns within both the US government and the private sector.&nbsp;The current backlog of license applications is the longest in more than three decades, according to one US official. In fiscal year 2023, the BIS processed 37,943 export license applications, taking an average of 38 days to process each request. However, the agency has struggled to keep up with the increasing volume of applications, especially those involving sensitive technologies.<h2>Frustration among exporters and delayed regulations</h2>Industry insiders have expressed growing frustration over the delays. Sean Stein, president of the US-China Business Council, noted that many sectors are seeing no movement on their license applications, including semiconductor manufacturing equipment valued at billions of dollars. As the delays persist, he warned that Chinese companies are turning to alternative suppliers, threatening to erode US market share.Some companies have also reported delays in getting approvals for exports to other regions, such as Latin America. Jim Anzalone, president of Compliance Assurance, a trade consultancy, stated that he has experienced delays in exporting sensors, radars, and sonar. While some exports to allied countries continue to be processed, the overall situation has raised alarms.&nbsp;The Commerce Department has also delayed the publication of several important regulatory changes. In May, the agency announced it would rescind a Biden administration rule restricting where AI chips can be exported but has yet to follow through with that change. Other regulatory updates, such as one expanding export restrictions to subsidiaries of banned companies, remain unpublished.Staff turnover has also exacerbated the crisis. Important vacancies, such as export control officers based in China, have yet to be filled, and key staff members have resigned, including Dan Clutch, the acting director of the BIS Office of Export Enforcement.

The current backlog of license applications is the longest in more than three decades, according to one US official. In fiscal year 2023, the BIS processed 37,943 export license applications. However, the agency has struggled to keep up with the increasing volume of applications.

Thousands of export license applications by US companies, including those for sensitive technology shipments to China, are stuck in limbo due to turmoil at the US Department of Commerce. A report by Reuters says that dysfunction at the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), the agency tasked with approving these licenses, has caused significant delays, leaving companies and industries in uncertainty. The most high-profile case involves Nvidia’s efforts to ship artificial intelligence (AI) chips to China. Despite assurances from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and other officials in July that licenses for Nvidia’s H20 chip would be granted, reports suggest no licenses have been issued yet. Nvidia had hoped to begin deliveries soon after receiving confirmation in mid-July, with billions of dollars' worth of AI chip orders at stake. The delay in approval is the latest example of the agency’s increasingly unpredictable and slow license process. The agency’s paralysis has left many US companies waiting for approval on a wide range of goods, from semiconductor manufacturing equipment to advanced sensors. The situation has been compounded by internal leadership issues, an exodus of staff, and poor communication between the BIS and industry representatives, according to several sources familiar with the matter. Internal turmoil and leadership challenges at BIS The BIS, which plays a crucial role in enforcing export restrictions to safeguard national security, has become nearly paralysed due to internal turmoil. The report by Reuters suggests that Jeffrey Kessler, who became BIS undersecretary in March, has micromanaged the bureau and failed to engage in adequate communication with industry stakeholders. At a staff meeting shortly after his appointment, Kessler reportedly instructed BIS employees to limit communication with companies and to log all meetings in a spreadsheet. Additionally, reports say that obtaining approval from Kessler’s office for meetings with other government agencies has also become increasingly difficult. The lack of clear communication has raised concerns within both the US government and the private sector. The current backlog of license applications is the longest in more than three decades, according to one US official. In fiscal year 2023, the BIS processed 37,943 export license applications, taking an average of 38 days to process each request. However, the agency has struggled to keep up with the increasing volume of applications, especially those involving sensitive technologies. Frustration among exporters and delayed regulations Industry insiders have expressed growing frustration over the delays. Sean Stein, president of the US-China Business Council, noted that many sectors are seeing no movement on their license applications, including semiconductor manufacturing equipment valued at billions of dollars. As the delays persist, he warned that Chinese companies are turning to alternative suppliers, threatening to erode US market share. Some companies have also reported delays in getting approvals for exports to other regions, such as Latin America. Jim Anzalone, president of Compliance Assurance, a trade consultancy, stated that he has experienced delays in exporting sensors, radars, and sonar. While some exports to allied countries continue to be processed, the overall situation has raised alarms. The Commerce Department has also delayed the publication of several important regulatory changes. In May, the agency announced it would rescind a Biden administration rule restricting where AI chips can be exported but has yet to follow through with that change. Other regulatory updates, such as one expanding export restrictions to subsidiaries of banned companies, remain unpublished. Staff turnover has also exacerbated the crisis. Important vacancies, such as export control officers based in China, have yet to be filled, and key staff members have resigned, including Dan Clutch, the acting director of the BIS Office of Export Enforcement.

The current backlog of license applications is the longest in more than three decades, according to one US official. In fiscal year 2023, the BIS processed 37,943 export license applications. However, the agency has struggled to keep up with the increasing volume of applications.

US Commerce Bureau faces backlog of export applications, including critical technology

Meta Platforms is accelerating its push to bring in outside investors to help finance its growing artificial intelligence infrastructure. In a regulatory filing disclosed on Thursday, the tech giant revealed plans to offload $2.04 billion worth of data centre assets, as part of a broader strategy to co-develop facilities powering its next-generation AI systems.&nbsp;The move reflects a notable shift in how Big Tech firms fund infrastructure, as the cost of building and operating data centres for generative AI continues to soar.<h2>Meta eyes co-development model amid rising AI costs</h2>As per Reuters, Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp has reclassified a major portion of its data centre infrastructure, including land and construction-in-progress, as “held-for-sale.” The company expects these assets to be contributed to a third-party venture within 12 months, aimed at co-developing AI data centres.&nbsp;Meta valued the reclassified assets at the lower of their carrying amounts or fair value less selling costs, and did not record a loss. The company disclosed in its filing that total held-for-sale assets stood at $3.26 billion as of June 30, according to Reuters.<h2>CFO confirms search for financial partners</h2>In an earnings call earlier this week, Meta Chief Financial Officer Susan Li confirmed the company is “exploring ways to work with financial partners to co-develop data centers,” as quoted by Reuters. While Meta still intends to fund most of its capital expenditure internally, Li said some infrastructure projects could attract “significant external financing”, offering greater flexibility should infrastructure needs evolve.&nbsp;Li clarified there were no finalised transactions yet, but the language in the regulatory filing suggests that plans are advancing, Reuters reported.<h2>Zuckerberg’s AI ambitions drive spending surge</h2>Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has consistently championed the company’s aggressive push into artificial intelligence, with plans to build massive “AI superclusters” to support artificial general intelligence (AGI) development. “Just one of these covers a significant part of the footprint of Manhattan,” Zuckerberg said this week, underscoring the sheer physical and financial scale of the company’s AI infrastructure projects, as quoted by Reuters.&nbsp;In line with this strategy, Meta on Wednesday raised the lower end of its full-year capital expenditure guidance by $2 billion, bringing the updated forecast to $66 billion to $72 billion. The increased spending comes as Meta reported stronger-than-expected ad sales, driven in part by AI-enhanced ad targeting and content delivery, as per Reuters.<h2>Silicon Valley’s funding model is evolving</h2>Meta’s asset sale strategy underscores a broader trend in the tech industry. As per Reuters, major companies like Meta are now rethinking the traditional model of self-funding infrastructure, particularly for AI development. The construction and operation of advanced data centres demands huge upfront investment in real estate, energy, semiconductors, and cooling systems.&nbsp;While Meta declined to comment on the specific asset sale plans when approached by Reuters, the company’s disclosures make clear its willingness to share the financial burden of its long-term AI ambitions. With investor enthusiasm for AI infrastructure still running high, Meta’s move could set a new precedent, changing how trillion-dollar tech firms scale their AI operations in the years to come.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Meta reclassifies $3.26 billion in assets for sale as it seeks external partners to co finance AI data centers, reflecting a shift in Silicon Valley AI investment strategy.

Meta Platforms is accelerating its push to bring in outside investors to help finance its growing artificial intelligence infrastructure. In a regulatory filing disclosed on Thursday, the tech giant revealed plans to offload $2.04 billion worth of data centre assets, as part of a broader strategy to co-develop facilities powering its next-generation AI systems. The move reflects a notable shift in how Big Tech firms fund infrastructure, as the cost of building and operating data centres for generative AI continues to soar. Meta eyes co-development model amid rising AI costs As per Reuters, Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp has reclassified a major portion of its data centre infrastructure, including land and construction-in-progress, as “held-for-sale.” The company expects these assets to be contributed to a third-party venture within 12 months, aimed at co-developing AI data centres. Meta valued the reclassified assets at the lower of their carrying amounts or fair value less selling costs, and did not record a loss. The company disclosed in its filing that total held-for-sale assets stood at $3.26 billion as of June 30, according to Reuters. CFO confirms search for financial partners In an earnings call earlier this week, Meta Chief Financial Officer Susan Li confirmed the company is “exploring ways to work with financial partners to co-develop data centers,” as quoted by Reuters. While Meta still intends to fund most of its capital expenditure internally, Li said some infrastructure projects could attract “significant external financing”, offering greater flexibility should infrastructure needs evolve. Li clarified there were no finalised transactions yet, but the language in the regulatory filing suggests that plans are advancing, Reuters reported. Zuckerberg’s AI ambitions drive spending surge Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has consistently championed the company’s aggressive push into artificial intelligence, with plans to build massive “AI superclusters” to support artificial general intelligence (AGI) development. “Just one of these covers a significant part of the footprint of Manhattan,” Zuckerberg said this week, underscoring the sheer physical and financial scale of the company’s AI infrastructure projects, as quoted by Reuters. In line with this strategy, Meta on Wednesday raised the lower end of its full-year capital expenditure guidance by $2 billion, bringing the updated forecast to $66 billion to $72 billion. The increased spending comes as Meta reported stronger-than-expected ad sales, driven in part by AI-enhanced ad targeting and content delivery, as per Reuters. Silicon Valley’s funding model is evolving Meta’s asset sale strategy underscores a broader trend in the tech industry. As per Reuters, major companies like Meta are now rethinking the traditional model of self-funding infrastructure, particularly for AI development. The construction and operation of advanced data centres demands huge upfront investment in real estate, energy, semiconductors, and cooling systems. While Meta declined to comment on the specific asset sale plans when approached by Reuters, the company’s disclosures make clear its willingness to share the financial burden of its long-term AI ambitions. With investor enthusiasm for AI infrastructure still running high, Meta’s move could set a new precedent, changing how trillion-dollar tech firms scale their AI operations in the years to come. (With inputs from the agencies)

Meta plans to sell over $2 billion in data center assets to co-develop AI infrastructure, signaling a new funding approach amid surging AI costs.

Meta to offload $2 billion in data centre assets to fund AI infrastructure costs