Japan’s core consumer inflation in its capital slowed more than expected in June, driven by government relief on utility bills, but remained firmly above the central bank’s 2 per cent target, underscoring persistent price pressures in the world’s fourth-largest economy. Data released on Friday showed the Tokyo core consumer price index (CPI), which excludes volatile fresh food costs, rose 3.1 per cent in June compared with a year earlier. That was softer than May’s 3.6 per cent gain and below the median market forecast of 3.3 per cent, as per Reuters.&nbsp;The slowdown was largely attributed to the resumption of energy subsidies and temporary cuts to water charges in the city, aimed at helping households cope with soaring summer utility demand.<h2>Price pressures remain broad-based</h2>Despite the headline cooling, underlying price pressures in Japan’s export-reliant economy remain pronounced. A separate index that strips out both fresh food and fuel, a key measure closely watched by the Bank of Japan (BOJ) as an indicator of domestic demand-driven inflation also rose 3.1 per cent in June, after a 3.3 per cent increase in May.&nbsp;Marcel Thieliant, head of Asia-Pacific at Capital Economics, noted the underlying inflation trend remains well above the BOJ’s projections. “The slowdown in headline inflation in Tokyo in June partly reflects the resumption of energy subsidies,” he said. “With underlying inflation still running well ahead of the Bank of Japan’s forecasts, we still expect the Bank to hike rates in October.”<h2>Rising food costs hit households</h2>The data highlights the widening impact of inflation on Japanese households. The cost of food, excluding volatile items like vegetables, jumped 7.2 per cent in June from a year earlier, accelerating from May’s 6.9 per cent gain. Government figures showed particularly sharp increases for everyday staples: households in Tokyo paid 89 per cent more for rice than a year ago, 48 per cent more for a bar of chocolate, and 50 per cent more for a bag of coffee beans.&nbsp;Service-sector inflation, another area closely tracked by the BOJ, remained elevated at 2.1 per cent in June after hitting 2.2 per cent in the previous month, adding to evidence that price increases are spreading beyond imported raw materials to more domestically anchored sectors.<h2>Monetary policy under scrutiny</h2>The June inflation data will be a crucial factor in the Bank of Japan’s next policy meeting on July 30–31 when its board is set to issue fresh quarterly growth and price forecasts. Japan’s central bank, which ended its decade-long ultra-loose monetary policy last year, raised short-term interest rates to 0.5 per cent in January, the first increase since the era of negative rates began. Officials argued that inflation was on the verge of sustainably reaching the 2 per cent target.&nbsp;However, the economic backdrop has grown more complicated. The BOJ was forced to downgrade its growth forecasts in May, partly due to the impact of steep US tariffs that have threatened to hurt Japan’s export sector. While the BOJ has signalled readiness to continue raising rates if inflation risks intensify, the path ahead remains uncertain. Consumer inflation has exceeded the 2 per cent target for more than three years, as companies continue to pass on elevated raw material costs.Some central bank policymakers are already sounding a more hawkish note. Board member Naoki Tamura warned this week that the BOJ might need to act “decisively” if upside inflation risks strengthen. a sign that the pressure to normalise monetary policy further is unlikely to go away soon.&nbsp;&nbsp;For now, markets are watching carefully for signals from the central bank’s leadership, as Japan navigates the challenge of controlling inflation without stalling its still-fragile post-pandemic recovery.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

The Bank of Japan faces scrutiny ahead of its policy meeting, with potential interest rate hikes anticipated if inflation risks intensify. Economic complexities challenge efforts to manage inflation while supporting recovery.

Japan’s core consumer inflation in its capital slowed more than expected in June, driven by government relief on utility bills, but remained firmly above the central bank’s 2 per cent target, underscoring persistent price pressures in the world’s fourth-largest economy. Data released on Friday showed the Tokyo core consumer price index (CPI), which excludes volatile fresh food costs, rose 3.1 per cent in June compared with a year earlier. That was softer than May’s 3.6 per cent gain and below the median market forecast of 3.3 per cent, as per Reuters. The slowdown was largely attributed to the resumption of energy subsidies and temporary cuts to water charges in the city, aimed at helping households cope with soaring summer utility demand. Price pressures remain broad-based Despite the headline cooling, underlying price pressures in Japan’s export-reliant economy remain pronounced. A separate index that strips out both fresh food and fuel, a key measure closely watched by the Bank of Japan (BOJ) as an indicator of domestic demand-driven inflation also rose 3.1 per cent in June, after a 3.3 per cent increase in May. Marcel Thieliant, head of Asia-Pacific at Capital Economics, noted the underlying inflation trend remains well above the BOJ’s projections. “The slowdown in headline inflation in Tokyo in June partly reflects the resumption of energy subsidies,” he said. “With underlying inflation still running well ahead of the Bank of Japan’s forecasts, we still expect the Bank to hike rates in October.” Rising food costs hit households The data highlights the widening impact of inflation on Japanese households. The cost of food, excluding volatile items like vegetables, jumped 7.2 per cent in June from a year earlier, accelerating from May’s 6.9 per cent gain. Government figures showed particularly sharp increases for everyday staples: households in Tokyo paid 89 per cent more for rice than a year ago, 48 per cent more for a bar of chocolate, and 50 per cent more for a bag of coffee beans. Service-sector inflation, another area closely tracked by the BOJ, remained elevated at 2.1 per cent in June after hitting 2.2 per cent in the previous month, adding to evidence that price increases are spreading beyond imported raw materials to more domestically anchored sectors. Monetary policy under scrutiny The June inflation data will be a crucial factor in the Bank of Japan’s next policy meeting on July 30–31 when its board is set to issue fresh quarterly growth and price forecasts. Japan’s central bank, which ended its decade-long ultra-loose monetary policy last year, raised short-term interest rates to 0.5 per cent in January, the first increase since the era of negative rates began. Officials argued that inflation was on the verge of sustainably reaching the 2 per cent target. However, the economic backdrop has grown more complicated. The BOJ was forced to downgrade its growth forecasts in May, partly due to the impact of steep US tariffs that have threatened to hurt Japan’s export sector. While the BOJ has signalled readiness to continue raising rates if inflation risks intensify, the path ahead remains uncertain. Consumer inflation has exceeded the 2 per cent target for more than three years, as companies continue to pass on elevated raw material costs. Some central bank policymakers are already sounding a more hawkish note. Board member Naoki Tamura warned this week that the BOJ might need to act “decisively” if upside inflation risks strengthen. a sign that the pressure to normalise monetary policy further is unlikely to go away soon. For now, markets are watching carefully for signals from the central bank’s leadership, as Japan navigates the challenge of controlling inflation without stalling its still-fragile post-pandemic recovery. (With inputs from the agencies)

Japan's core consumer inflation in Tokyo slowed to 3.1% in June, down from May's 3.6%, influenced by government utility bill relief. This figure remains above the central bank's 2% target, reflecting ongoing price pressures.

Japan’s core inflation slows in Tokyo but stays above BOJ’s 2% target

The Trump Organisation’s much-touted “Made in the USA” promise for its new smartphone is facing fresh scrutiny after references to American production quietly vanished from its website. The shift in marketing language has prompted questions over whether Donald Trump’s brand can truly deliver a fully US-built phone—something experts warn is far from realistic with today’s global supply chains.<h2>Website wording quietly changes</h2>According to the BBC, the Trump T1 phone launched on 16 June with a clear “Made in the USA” tagline on its website. But by mid-week, that phrase was gone. Instead, the site now promotes an “American-Proud Design” and says the phone is “brought to life right here in the USA” with “American hands behind every device.”A banner that once read “our MADE IN THE USA T1 Phone” was changed to simply “the new T1 phone,” as first reported by The Verge.&nbsp;Despite these edits, Trump Mobile insists nothing has changed about its plans. A spokesperson told the BBC: “Speculation to the contrary is simply inaccurate,” maintaining that the phones would still be produced in America. The company also encouraged customers to sign up immediately for its service using their existing devices while waiting for the T1’s release later this year.<h2>Experts doubt feasibility of US-only smartphone</h2>Industry experts remain sceptical about the promise of a fully American-made smartphone. As per the BBC, Professor Tinglong Dai of Johns Hopkins University said the Trump team didn’t even appear to have a working prototype, calling the idea of fully domestic production “extremely unlikely” and requiring “a miracle.” Leo Gebbie, a technology analyst at CCS Insight, told the BBC that the United States “simply does not have the high-tech supply chain” to make smartphones entirely domestically, especially on an accelerated timeline. He suggested the most realistic scenario would involve assembling imported parts in the US to justify a “Made in USA” label.&nbsp;As reported by CNBC, even Apple—under years of political pressure—has struggled to move significant iPhone production to the US. Much of Apple’s assembly remains in China, Vietnam and India, despite Donald Trump’s past calls to shift manufacturing home.<h2>Trump’s record on manufacturing pressure</h2>The controversy also reflects Trump’s long history of pushing for “America First” manufacturing. In May, he wrote on Truth Social that he had “long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple” that iPhones sold in the US should be built domestically and not in India or elsewhere.&nbsp;During his presidency, Trump threatened to impose 25 per cent tariffs on Apple if it did not relocate production to the United States, as per Reuters. However, such threats had limited effect. Dan Ives, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, described the expectation as a “fairy tale that is not feasible” given Apple’s massive, globalised supply chain.<h2>Trump Mobile says vision remains</h2>Despite dropping the explicit “Made in the USA” tagline, the Trump Mobile team says its long-term goal remains the same. Eric Trump, who joined Donald Trump Jr in launching the mobile plan earlier this month, told a podcast that “eventually, all the phones can be built in the United States of America.” As per the BBC, the Trump Mobile website now focuses on promoting its service plans and encouraging Americans to switch immediately, while promising to launch the T1 phone later this year.&nbsp;For now, the subtle shift in wording has drawn new attention to the gap between the marketing promise of an all-American smartphone and the complicated, global reality of how such devices are actually made.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Initially launched with a clear American production tagline, the site now highlights American-Proud Design. Experts question the feasibility of fully US made smartphones due to global supply chain complexities. 

The Trump Organisation’s much-touted “Made in the USA” promise for its new smartphone is facing fresh scrutiny after references to American production quietly vanished from its website. The shift in marketing language has prompted questions over whether Donald Trump’s brand can truly deliver a fully US-built phone—something experts warn is far from realistic with today’s global supply chains. Website wording quietly changes According to the BBC, the Trump T1 phone launched on 16 June with a clear “Made in the USA” tagline on its website. But by mid-week, that phrase was gone. Instead, the site now promotes an “American-Proud Design” and says the phone is “brought to life right here in the USA” with “American hands behind every device.” A banner that once read “our MADE IN THE USA T1 Phone” was changed to simply “the new T1 phone,” as first reported by The Verge. Despite these edits, Trump Mobile insists nothing has changed about its plans. A spokesperson told the BBC: “Speculation to the contrary is simply inaccurate,” maintaining that the phones would still be produced in America. The company also encouraged customers to sign up immediately for its service using their existing devices while waiting for the T1’s release later this year. Experts doubt feasibility of US-only smartphone Industry experts remain sceptical about the promise of a fully American-made smartphone. As per the BBC, Professor Tinglong Dai of Johns Hopkins University said the Trump team didn’t even appear to have a working prototype, calling the idea of fully domestic production “extremely unlikely” and requiring “a miracle.” Leo Gebbie, a technology analyst at CCS Insight, told the BBC that the United States “simply does not have the high-tech supply chain” to make smartphones entirely domestically, especially on an accelerated timeline. He suggested the most realistic scenario would involve assembling imported parts in the US to justify a “Made in USA” label. As reported by CNBC, even Apple—under years of political pressure—has struggled to move significant iPhone production to the US. Much of Apple’s assembly remains in China, Vietnam and India, despite Donald Trump’s past calls to shift manufacturing home. Trump’s record on manufacturing pressure The controversy also reflects Trump’s long history of pushing for “America First” manufacturing. In May, he wrote on Truth Social that he had “long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple” that iPhones sold in the US should be built domestically and not in India or elsewhere. During his presidency, Trump threatened to impose 25 per cent tariffs on Apple if it did not relocate production to the United States, as per Reuters. However, such threats had limited effect. Dan Ives, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, described the expectation as a “fairy tale that is not feasible” given Apple’s massive, globalised supply chain. Trump Mobile says vision remains Despite dropping the explicit “Made in the USA” tagline, the Trump Mobile team says its long-term goal remains the same. Eric Trump, who joined Donald Trump Jr in launching the mobile plan earlier this month, told a podcast that “eventually, all the phones can be built in the United States of America.” As per the BBC, the Trump Mobile website now focuses on promoting its service plans and encouraging Americans to switch immediately, while promising to launch the T1 phone later this year. For now, the subtle shift in wording has drawn new attention to the gap between the marketing promise of an all-American smartphone and the complicated, global reality of how such devices are actually made. (With inputs from the agencies)

The Trump Organisation's "Made in the USA" promise for its T1 smartphone has come under scrutiny after related references were removed from its website.

‘Made in USA’ missing from Trump phone website: What happened?

Oil prices are heading for their worst weekly decline since March 2023, with traders stripping out any risk premium built up over fears of a wider Israel–Iran conflict in West Asia. Despite last week’s dramatic escalation, markets see no significant supply disruption as a ceasefire holds, pushing benchmark crude prices back to pre-conflict levels.<h2>War premium fades as ceasefire holds</h2>As per Reuters, Brent crude futures rose 35 cents, or 0.52 per cent, to US$68.08 a barrel in early trade on Friday, while US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) gained 40 cents, or 0.61 per cent, to US$65.64. Yet both benchmarks remain on track for a weekly fall of about 12 per cent—their steepest drop in more than two years. Prices had jumped to five-month highs earlier this week after US strikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend, fuelling fears of an all-out war that could threaten West Asian oil exports.&nbsp;&nbsp;But those gains quickly evaporated after US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire deal on Tuesday, easing fears of a supply shock. As per Reuters, traders swiftly priced out the geopolitical risk that had driven the rally.<h2>Analysts see oversupply despite conflict</h2>According to Reuters, analysts note that while tensions remain, there is no visible impact on physical oil supply so far. Macquarie analysts wrote in a note on Thursday: “Absent the threat of significant supply disruption, we still view oil as fundamentally oversupplied, with our 2025 balances indicating a roughly 2.1 million barrels per day surplus.”&nbsp;Macquarie has slightly raised its WTI price forecast by US$2 to account for a modest ongoing geopolitical risk premium. But the broader outlook remains bearish, with global supplies seen as ample and OPEC+ still holding spare production capacity.<h2>US inventory draw offers limited support</h2>Even as the war premium vanished, oil prices found some support midweek from signs of tightening US stockpiles. As per Reuters, US government data showed crude oil and fuel inventories declined in the most recent reporting week, reflecting higher refinery utilisation and demand. Phil Flynn, senior analyst at the Price Futures Group, told Reuters the market was “starting to digest the fact that crude oil inventories are very tight all of a sudden.” Despite that, the bullish impulse proved limited, with the broader market narrative dominated by relief that West Asian energy infrastructure remained unharmed.&nbsp;Beyond the ceasefire in West Asia, traders are also watching US monetary policy for clues about demand. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, President Trump may announce his choice for the next Federal Reserve chair earlier than usual—a move that has fuelled market bets on possible interest rate cuts. Lower US rates could typically stimulate economic activity and energy demand, offering a potential tailwind for oil prices.&nbsp;&nbsp;But for now, the dominant factor this week has been the unwinding of war-driven price gains, as traders conclude the Israel–Iran ceasefire has largely defused the immediate threat of major supply disruptions.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Brent crude rose slightly to $68.08, while WTI reached $65.64, but both are on track for a 12% drop. Analysts indicate an oversupply persists despite geopolitical tensions, and US inventory draws provided limited support. 

Oil prices are heading for their worst weekly decline since March 2023, with traders stripping out any risk premium built up over fears of a wider Israel–Iran conflict in West Asia. Despite last week’s dramatic escalation, markets see no significant supply disruption as a ceasefire holds, pushing benchmark crude prices back to pre-conflict levels. War premium fades as ceasefire holds As per Reuters, Brent crude futures rose 35 cents, or 0.52 per cent, to US$68.08 a barrel in early trade on Friday, while US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) gained 40 cents, or 0.61 per cent, to US$65.64. Yet both benchmarks remain on track for a weekly fall of about 12 per cent—their steepest drop in more than two years. Prices had jumped to five-month highs earlier this week after US strikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend, fuelling fears of an all-out war that could threaten West Asian oil exports. But those gains quickly evaporated after US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire deal on Tuesday, easing fears of a supply shock. As per Reuters, traders swiftly priced out the geopolitical risk that had driven the rally. Analysts see oversupply despite conflict According to Reuters, analysts note that while tensions remain, there is no visible impact on physical oil supply so far. Macquarie analysts wrote in a note on Thursday: “Absent the threat of significant supply disruption, we still view oil as fundamentally oversupplied, with our 2025 balances indicating a roughly 2.1 million barrels per day surplus.” Macquarie has slightly raised its WTI price forecast by US$2 to account for a modest ongoing geopolitical risk premium. But the broader outlook remains bearish, with global supplies seen as ample and OPEC+ still holding spare production capacity. US inventory draw offers limited support Even as the war premium vanished, oil prices found some support midweek from signs of tightening US stockpiles. As per Reuters, US government data showed crude oil and fuel inventories declined in the most recent reporting week, reflecting higher refinery utilisation and demand. Phil Flynn, senior analyst at the Price Futures Group, told Reuters the market was “starting to digest the fact that crude oil inventories are very tight all of a sudden.” Despite that, the bullish impulse proved limited, with the broader market narrative dominated by relief that West Asian energy infrastructure remained unharmed. Beyond the ceasefire in West Asia, traders are also watching US monetary policy for clues about demand. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, President Trump may announce his choice for the next Federal Reserve chair earlier than usual—a move that has fuelled market bets on possible interest rate cuts. Lower US rates could typically stimulate economic activity and energy demand, offering a potential tailwind for oil prices. But for now, the dominant factor this week has been the unwinding of war-driven price gains, as traders conclude the Israel–Iran ceasefire has largely defused the immediate threat of major supply disruptions. (With inputs from the agencies)

Oil prices face their steepest weekly decline since March 2023, dropping due to reduced risk premiums as a ceasefire holds between Israel and Iran.

Oil prices face steepest weekly fall in two years as West Asia war premium fades

India is overhauling its income tax return (ITR) rules for Assessment Year 2025–26, signalling its most serious effort in years to crack down on tax evasion while promising simpler compliance for honest taxpayers. The new framework combines a mix of relief measures such as extended deadlines and simpler forms for small investors, with stricter disclosure requirements and severe penalties for those attempting to game the system.<h2>What are the changes?</h2>One of the most prominent changes is the extension of the filing deadline for non-auditable taxpayers, which includes most salaried employees and pensioners. The new due date is 15 September 2025, replacing the usual 31 July deadline. However, this extended window comes with an important condition: taxpayers must pay their entire tax liability, including self-assessment tax, by 31 July to avoid penal interest. As per The Economic Times, the government designed this dual timeline to offer extra time for filing without sacrificing timely revenue collection. India’s tax authorities are also stepping up enforcement. Taxpayers who underreport or misreport their income can now face penalties of up to 200 per cent of the evaded tax, along with interest charges. According to The Economic Times, the tax department plans to enforce these penalties more rigorously this year, aided by better data validation and cross-verification tools.&nbsp;Looking ahead, the government is preparing an even more ambitious overhaul of the entire tax system. As per Reuters, the proposed Income-Tax Bill, 2025, will replace the Income Tax Act of 1961 from 1 April 2026. The new law is intended to simplify legal language, reduce litigation and even decriminalise certain offences such as non-filing of returns, making them non-cognisable.<h2>New tax regime</h2>The government is also doubling down on its push for the “new tax regime” by making it the default option for most taxpayers. Under this regime, the basic tax-free income threshold rises to ₹12 lakh, with an additional standard deduction of ₹75,000 for salaried employees, effectively exempting income up to ₹12.75 lakh from tax. This move reportedly aims to simplify the tax structure, offering lower rates in exchange for forgoing most traditional exemptions and deductions.&nbsp;However, taxpayers who prefer the old, deduction-heavy system are still allowed to opt out of the new regime by submitting Form 10-IEA. The government hopes that by making the simpler system the default, more people will switch to it, reducing complexity and compliance errors over time.<h2>Types of ITR forms and criteria</h2>The forms themselves have also been redesigned for this year. The ITR-1 (Sahaj) and ITR-4 (Sugam) forms now make filing easier for small taxpayers, particularly those with Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) of up to ₹1.25 lakh. These investors can now report such gains directly in ITR-1, sparing them from having to use more complex forms.&nbsp;Please find below the detailed breakdown of the ITR forms and their key features.&nbsp;

<figure class="table"><table><tbody><tr><td>ITR Form</td><td>Who Should Use It</td><td>Key Features</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-1 (Sahaj)</td><td>Resident individuals with income up to ₹50 lakh</td><td>Salary/pension, one house property, certain LTCG, other sources</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-2</td><td>Individuals/HUFs over ₹50 lakh</td><td>Multiple properties, capital gains; no business income</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-3</td><td>Individuals/HUFs with business or professional income</td><td>Includes salary, property, capital gains, other sources</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-4 (Sugam)</td><td>Small businesses, presumptive income scheme</td><td>Up to ₹50 lakh, simplified filing</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-5</td><td>Firms, LLPs, AOPs, BOIs</td><td>For partnerships and associations</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-6</td><td>Companies (non-charitable)</td><td>For companies not claiming Section 11 exemption</td></tr><tr><td>ITR-7</td><td>Trusts, political parties, certain institutions</td><td>Mandatory under Sections 139(4A–4D)</td></tr></tbody></table></figure>Source: Income Tax Department

At the same time, the government has introduced tighter disclosure requirements for those claiming deductions under the old regime. According to the Times of India, taxpayers must now provide details such as insurer names and policy numbers for Section 80C deductions, account or loan numbers for housing loan interest, landlord details for HRA exemptions, and registration details for political donations. This granular approach is intended to curb fake or inflated claims and ensure faster, more accurate refunds. For those with complex incomes, such as property sales or large equity transactions, the ITR-2 and ITR-3 forms require even more detailed reporting. Taxpayers must split LTCG earned before and after 23 July 2024, and buyback proceeds must be disclosed both as “nil consideration” in the capital gains schedule and under “Income from Other Sources.” The government has also raised the threshold for mandatory reporting of assets and liabilities from ₹50 lakh to ₹1 crore, further tightening scrutiny on high-net-worth individuals, as detailed by India Briefing.&nbsp;India’s new ITR rules send a clear signal: while compliance is being made easier for honest taxpayers, evasion will become riskier and far more expensive. For millions of taxpayers, the message is simple, pay on time, choose your regime carefully, keep records ready, and disclose fully to avoid the cost of non-compliance.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Key changes include extending the filing deadline for non-auditable taxpayers to 15 September 2025, with mandatory tax payment by 31 July to avoid penalties. Stricter penalties for income misreporting, up to 200% of evaded taxes will be enforced. 

India is overhauling its income tax return (ITR) rules for Assessment Year 2025–26, signalling its most serious effort in years to crack down on tax evasion while promising simpler compliance for honest taxpayers. The new framework combines a mix of relief measures such as extended deadlines and simpler forms for small investors, with stricter disclosure requirements and severe penalties for those attempting to game the system. What are the changes? One of the most prominent changes is the extension of the filing deadline for non-auditable taxpayers, which includes most salaried employees and pensioners. The new due date is 15 September 2025, replacing the usual 31 July deadline. However, this extended window comes with an important condition: taxpayers must pay their entire tax liability, including self-assessment tax, by 31 July to avoid penal interest. As per The Economic Times, the government designed this dual timeline to offer extra time for filing without sacrificing timely revenue collection. India’s tax authorities are also stepping up enforcement. Taxpayers who underreport or misreport their income can now face penalties of up to 200 per cent of the evaded tax, along with interest charges. According to The Economic Times, the tax department plans to enforce these penalties more rigorously this year, aided by better data validation and cross-verification tools. Looking ahead, the government is preparing an even more ambitious overhaul of the entire tax system. As per Reuters, the proposed Income-Tax Bill, 2025, will replace the Income Tax Act of 1961 from 1 April 2026. The new law is intended to simplify legal language, reduce litigation and even decriminalise certain offences such as non-filing of returns, making them non-cognisable. New tax regime The government is also doubling down on its push for the “new tax regime” by making it the default option for most taxpayers. Under this regime, the basic tax-free income threshold rises to ₹12 lakh, with an additional standard deduction of ₹75,000 for salaried employees, effectively exempting income up to ₹12.75 lakh from tax. This move reportedly aims to simplify the tax structure, offering lower rates in exchange for forgoing most traditional exemptions and deductions. However, taxpayers who prefer the old, deduction-heavy system are still allowed to opt out of the new regime by submitting Form 10-IEA. The government hopes that by making the simpler system the default, more people will switch to it, reducing complexity and compliance errors over time. Types of ITR forms and criteria The forms themselves have also been redesigned for this year. The ITR-1 (Sahaj) and ITR-4 (Sugam) forms now make filing easier for small taxpayers, particularly those with Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) of up to ₹1.25 lakh. These investors can now report such gains directly in ITR-1, sparing them from having to use more complex forms. Please find below the detailed breakdown of the ITR forms and their key features.

India is reforming income tax return rules for Assessment Year 2025–26 to combat tax evasion while easing compliance for honest taxpayers.

India’s new ITR rules: What taxpayers need to know about higher penalties, new forms, and extended deadlines

China today announced it had “confirmed details” of a trade deal with the United States, signalling a potential pause in months of spiralling tariffs, export controls and diplomatic recriminations.&nbsp;Beijing’s Commerce Ministry said on 27 June that both sides had agreed to lift certain “restrictive measures” while China would “review and approve” controlled export items. “It is hoped that the United States and China will meet each other halfway,” the ministry added, calling for “healthy, stable and sustainable development” of trade ties. This statement followed US President Donald Trump’s reveal at the White House on 26 June, where he declared the deal “done”—though neither side released full details, and the White House described negotiations as “ongoing but constructive.” Markets rose on hopes the worst escalation could be avoided.&nbsp;Below is a detailed timeline of the 2025 trade conflict, showing how the world’s two largest economies veered toward a damaging trade war before scrambling for a deal.<h2>February–March 2025: Trump revives tariff threats</h2>6 February 2025: At a rally speech, President Trump vowed “across-the-board” 60 per cent tariffs on all Chinese imports if talks failed. As per Reuters, he accused Beijing of “decades of cheating” and promised to restore US manufacturing.&nbsp;14 February 2025: The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) launched a formal review of Section 301 tariffs, aiming to hike rates on key consumer goods like electronics and toys by mid-year, as per Bloomberg.&nbsp;20 February 2025: China’s Ministry of Commerce warned of “strong countermeasures,” signalling it could target US agricultural exports or impose licensing restrictions on critical minerals.&nbsp;2 March 2025: Trump reiterated the tariff plan at CPAC, saying “China will pay” and promising final action by summer, as per Time Magazine.<h2>April 2025: Tech war and tariff escalation</h2>2 April 2025: Trump formally imposed a blanket 10 per cent tariff on all Chinese imports, scrapping the de minimis exemption for small parcels, arguing e-commerce routes were used to funnel fentanyl into the US, as per Reuters.&nbsp;4 April 2025: The US expanded export controls on Chinese AI chip firms, closing licensing “loopholes” for Nvidia’s advanced accelerators&nbsp;&nbsp;4 April 2025: China retaliated with 34 per cent duties and imposed export restrictions on rare earth minerals essential for electronics, EVs, and defence. As per Reuters, these moves threatened to choke US tech and defence supply chains.&nbsp;9 April 2025: Trump dramatically escalated tariffs to 145 per cent on Chinese imports, branding it “Liberation Day” in a proclamation meant to signal economic independence.&nbsp;10 April 2025: China filed a formal WTO complaint, accusing Washington of “economic coercion” and “unilateral bullying," as per Reuters.&nbsp;19 April 2025: Bloomberg reported the US prepared even tighter controls on lithography tools and chipmaking software.&nbsp;23 April 2025: China announced expanded export licensing rules on gallium and germanium products, slowing global supply chains, as per Reuters.<h2>May 2025: A fragile Geneva truce, then new clashes</h2>12 May 2025: At WTO-brokered talks in Geneva, both sides agreed to lower tariffs temporarily (US to 30 per cent, China to 10 per cent) in a fragile 90-day truce.But tensions soon resurfaced:&nbsp;29 May 2025: The US imposed new export curbs on AI chips, semiconductor design software, and specialty chemicals, citing national security risks.&nbsp;&nbsp;30 May 2025: Trump accused China of breaching the Geneva truce and threatened further escalation.<h2>June 2025: Threats, negotiations, and a partial deal</h2>2 June 2025: Beijing dismissed Trump’s claims as “groundless” and vowed “forceful countermeasures,” with Reuters reporting fears of a new tariff wave.&nbsp;3 June 2025: US Treasury Secretary met China’s Vice Premier in Singapore to “restart communication channels,” but talks ended with both sides restating hardline positions, as per Reuters.&nbsp;9–10 June 2025: High-level US and Chinese negotiators held marathon talks in London aiming to finalise the Geneva framework. According to Reuters, officials described the sessions as “putting meat on the bones” of the May truce, trying to lock in details on tariff reductions, tech restrictions, and rare earth shipments.&nbsp;10 June 2025: The US Commerce Department blacklisted two more Chinese AI firms for alleged military links. China condemned the move as “illegal sanctions," as per Bloomberg.&nbsp;11 June 2025: Following the London talks, Trump said that the US had secured concessions on rare earth exports and other sticking points. As quoted by CNBC, he told the audience: “We made a great deal with China. We’re very happy with it. And hopefully they are too.”&nbsp;17 June 2025: Chinese state media reported “progress” in backchannel discussions. The US refused to confirm any deal, underscoring deep mistrust.&nbsp;20 June 2025: Reuters reported Trump advisors were weighing delaying the 60 per cent tariff implementation by one month to allow “final deal talks.”<h2>26–27 June 2025: Two announcements, no full details</h2>26 June 2025: Trump declared at the White House that the deal was “done,” saying the US had secured partial tariff rollbacks, Chinese pledges to buy American farm goods, and promises to ease certain tech curbs. However, no full text was released, and the White House described negotiations as “ongoing but constructive", as per Reuters.&nbsp;27 June 2025: China’s Ministry of Commerce announced it had “confirmed details” of the deal, saying Washington would lift “restrictive measures” while Beijing would “review and approve” export-controlled items. The statement called for “healthy, stable and sustainable development” in China-US economic relations, as per Reuters.<h2>What lies ahead?</h2>Despite these announcements, analysts warn the underlying tensions are far from resolved. Issues such as technology transfer restrictions, intellectual property enforcement, and China’s industrial policy remain persistent sticking points.&nbsp;According to Bloomberg, US manufacturers are accelerating supply chain diversification away from China, while Beijing is pushing its self-reliance strategy. For now, the “confirmed details” of this deal may pause the immediate tariff threats, but the fundamental drivers of the trade war remain in place, promising further rounds of confrontation even if this fragile truce holds.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

This followed US President Trump declaration of the deal being, although full details were not disclosed, with negotiations described as ongoing. 

China today announced it had “confirmed details” of a trade deal with the United States, signalling a potential pause in months of spiralling tariffs, export controls and diplomatic recriminations. Beijing’s Commerce Ministry said on 27 June that both sides had agreed to lift certain “restrictive measures” while China would “review and approve” controlled export items. “It is hoped that the United States and China will meet each other halfway,” the ministry added, calling for “healthy, stable and sustainable development” of trade ties. This statement followed US President Donald Trump’s reveal at the White House on 26 June, where he declared the deal “done”—though neither side released full details, and the White House described negotiations as “ongoing but constructive.” Markets rose on hopes the worst escalation could be avoided. Below is a detailed timeline of the 2025 trade conflict, showing how the world’s two largest economies veered toward a damaging trade war before scrambling for a deal. February–March 2025: Trump revives tariff threats 6 February 2025: At a rally speech, President Trump vowed “across-the-board” 60 per cent tariffs on all Chinese imports if talks failed. As per Reuters, he accused Beijing of “decades of cheating” and promised to restore US manufacturing. 14 February 2025: The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) launched a formal review of Section 301 tariffs, aiming to hike rates on key consumer goods like electronics and toys by mid-year, as per Bloomberg. 20 February 2025: China’s Ministry of Commerce warned of “strong countermeasures,” signalling it could target US agricultural exports or impose licensing restrictions on critical minerals. 2 March 2025: Trump reiterated the tariff plan at CPAC, saying “China will pay” and promising final action by summer, as per Time Magazine. April 2025: Tech war and tariff escalation 2 April 2025: Trump formally imposed a blanket 10 per cent tariff on all Chinese imports, scrapping the de minimis exemption for small parcels, arguing e-commerce routes were used to funnel fentanyl into the US, as per Reuters. 4 April 2025: The US expanded export controls on Chinese AI chip firms, closing licensing “loopholes” for Nvidia’s advanced accelerators 4 April 2025: China retaliated with 34 per cent duties and imposed export restrictions on rare earth minerals essential for electronics, EVs, and defence. As per Reuters, these moves threatened to choke US tech and defence supply chains. 9 April 2025: Trump dramatically escalated tariffs to 145 per cent on Chinese imports, branding it “Liberation Day” in a proclamation meant to signal economic independence. 10 April 2025: China filed a formal WTO complaint, accusing Washington of “economic coercion” and “unilateral bullying," as per Reuters. 19 April 2025: Bloomberg reported the US prepared even tighter controls on lithography tools and chipmaking software. 23 April 2025: China announced expanded export licensing rules on gallium and germanium products, slowing global supply chains, as per Reuters. May 2025: A fragile Geneva truce, then new clashes 12 May 2025: At WTO-brokered talks in Geneva, both sides agreed to lower tariffs temporarily (US to 30 per cent, China to 10 per cent) in a fragile 90-day truce. But tensions soon resurfaced: 29 May 2025: The US imposed new export curbs on AI chips, semiconductor design software, and specialty chemicals, citing national security risks. 30 May 2025: Trump accused China of breaching the Geneva truce and threatened further escalation. June 2025: Threats, negotiations, and a partial deal 2 June 2025: Beijing dismissed Trump’s claims as “groundless” and vowed “forceful countermeasures,” with Reuters reporting fears of a new tariff wave. 3 June 2025: US Treasury Secretary met China’s Vice Premier in Singapore to “restart communication channels,” but talks ended with both sides restating hardline positions, as per Reuters. 9–10 June 2025: High-level US and Chinese negotiators held marathon talks in London aiming to finalise the Geneva framework. According to Reuters, officials described the sessions as “putting meat on the bones” of the May truce, trying to lock in details on tariff reductions, tech restrictions, and rare earth shipments. 10 June 2025: The US Commerce Department blacklisted two more Chinese AI firms for alleged military links. China condemned the move as “illegal sanctions," as per Bloomberg. 11 June 2025: Following the London talks, Trump said that the US had secured concessions on rare earth exports and other sticking points. As quoted by CNBC, he told the audience: “We made a great deal with China. We’re very happy with it. And hopefully they are too.” 17 June 2025: Chinese state media reported “progress” in backchannel discussions. The US refused to confirm any deal, underscoring deep mistrust. 20 June 2025: Reuters reported Trump advisors were weighing delaying the 60 per cent tariff implementation by one month to allow “final deal talks.” 26–27 June 2025: Two announcements, no full details 26 June 2025: Trump declared at the White House that the deal was “done,” saying the US had secured partial tariff rollbacks, Chinese pledges to buy American farm goods, and promises to ease certain tech curbs. However, no full text was released, and the White House described negotiations as “ongoing but constructive", as per Reuters. 27 June 2025: China’s Ministry of Commerce announced it had “confirmed details” of the deal, saying Washington would lift “restrictive measures” while Beijing would “review and approve” export-controlled items. The statement called for “healthy, stable and sustainable development” in China-US economic relations, as per Reuters. What lies ahead? Despite these announcements, analysts warn the underlying tensions are far from resolved. Issues such as technology transfer restrictions, intellectual property enforcement, and China’s industrial policy remain persistent sticking points. According to Bloomberg, US manufacturers are accelerating supply chain diversification away from China, while Beijing is pushing its self-reliance strategy. For now, the “confirmed details” of this deal may pause the immediate tariff threats, but the fundamental drivers of the trade war remain in place, promising further rounds of confrontation even if this fragile truce holds. (With inputs from the agencies)

China announced confirmation of a trade deal with the US, suggesting a potential pause in escalating tariffs and controls.

China ‘confirms details’ of trade deal with United States: A timeline of 2025 tensions and talks

US President Donald Trump has fuelled fresh speculation about an imminent “very big” trade deal with India, weeks after top negotiators from both countries wrapped up closed-door talks aimed at slashing tariffs and expanding market access.&nbsp;Speaking at the ‘Big Beautiful Event’ at the White House on Thursday, Trump told supporters: “We just signed with China yesterday. We are having some great deals. We have one coming up, maybe with India. Very big one,” as quoted by Reuters. Trump said the United States would not sign trade deals with every nation indiscriminately. “We’re not going to make deals with everybody. Some we are just going to send them a letter, say thank you very much. You are to pay 25, 35, 45 per cent. That’s the easy way to do it,” he said, emphasising that his team preferred forging substantial bilateral pacts over blanket tariff threats, as reported by Reuters.&nbsp;<h2>High-stakes negotiations target $500 billion trade milestone</h2>The comments follow intensive four-day negotiations held earlier this month between US and Indian trade teams in New Delhi. Talks focused on expanding market access for industrial and agricultural products, tariff reductions, and tackling non-tariff barriers.According to people familiar with the negotiations, the goal is to transform annual bilateral trade from its current level of around $190 billion to $500 billion by 2030, a figure Indian and US officials have cited repeatedly as a shared ambition.&nbsp;Union Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal said after the latest round of talks: “PM Modi and US President Trump met in February 2025… Both our leaders have decided to enter into a bilateral trade agreement which will be mutually beneficial for both the economies, businesses on both sides and the people of both countries. We are negotiating to make a nice, fair, equitable, and balanced agreement to promote business,” as quoted by Reuters.Earlier this month, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick also signalled optimism that a deal could soon be finalised, saying both sides had found “common ground” to meet their strategic and economic interests, as per Reuters.&nbsp;<h2>India–US trade: A crucial and growing partnership</h2>The United States is India’s single largest trading partner. According to India’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry, bilateral goods and services trade between the two countries reached $191 billion in 2023–24, with Indian exports to the US valued at over $118 billion and imports from the US at around $73 billion.The US accounted for roughly 18 per cent of India’s total exports in 2023–24, making it India’s top export destination. Key Indian exports include pharmaceuticals, textiles, engineering goods, gems and jewellery, and software services.&nbsp;Conversely, the US is a major supplier of crude oil, LNG, advanced machinery, aircraft, defence equipment and agricultural products to India. US energy exports to India alone exceeded $10 billion in 2023, as per the US Energy Information Administration.Trade in services also forms a vital component of the economic relationship, with India’s IT sector providing services worth over $40 billion annually to US clients, according to Nasscom data.&nbsp;Investment ties are similarly robust. US foreign direct investment in India stood at $67 billion as of end-2023, while Indian companies have invested over $40 billion in the US, generating thousands of American jobs.<h2>Talks come amid tariff threats</h2>Trump’s comments also underline the high-stakes backdrop for the negotiations. The US President has threatened to impose tariffs of up to 45 per cent on countries unwilling to strike new trade deals with Washington.&nbsp;While the Biden-era Phase One agreement with India had kept tariff escalation largely at bay, Trump’s second-term approach has seen renewed threats of sweeping duties unless partners sign what he calls “fair and reciprocal” deals.Indian officials see a deal with the US as critical to securing market stability and boosting exports amid a challenging global environment marked by trade fragmentation and geopolitical tensions.&nbsp;For the United States, expanding trade ties with India is seen as a key element of its Indo-Pacific strategy, offering a counterweight to China’s economic influence in the region.<h2>A path forward?</h2>Negotiators from both sides remain tight-lipped about precise timelines or the final shape of any agreement. But Trump’s remarks suggest both governments want to signal progress ahead of their next planned high-level meeting.&nbsp;With India–US trade already on a record-setting trajectory, any new pact will have to address thorny issues ranging from tariff harmonisation to digital trade rules and standards. But if achieved, officials on both sides believe it could cement one of the 21st century’s most consequential economic partnerships.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

At a White House event, he hinted at a very big agreement on the horizon while emphasizing selective trade partnerships.

US President Donald Trump has fuelled fresh speculation about an imminent “very big” trade deal with India, weeks after top negotiators from both countries wrapped up closed-door talks aimed at slashing tariffs and expanding market access. Speaking at the ‘Big Beautiful Event’ at the White House on Thursday, Trump told supporters: “We just signed with China yesterday. We are having some great deals. We have one coming up, maybe with India. Very big one,” as quoted by Reuters. Trump said the United States would not sign trade deals with every nation indiscriminately. “We’re not going to make deals with everybody. Some we are just going to send them a letter, say thank you very much. You are to pay 25, 35, 45 per cent. That’s the easy way to do it,” he said, emphasising that his team preferred forging substantial bilateral pacts over blanket tariff threats, as reported by Reuters. High-stakes negotiations target $500 billion trade milestone The comments follow intensive four-day negotiations held earlier this month between US and Indian trade teams in New Delhi. Talks focused on expanding market access for industrial and agricultural products, tariff reductions, and tackling non-tariff barriers. According to people familiar with the negotiations, the goal is to transform annual bilateral trade from its current level of around $190 billion to $500 billion by 2030, a figure Indian and US officials have cited repeatedly as a shared ambition. Union Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal said after the latest round of talks: “PM Modi and US President Trump met in February 2025… Both our leaders have decided to enter into a bilateral trade agreement which will be mutually beneficial for both the economies, businesses on both sides and the people of both countries. We are negotiating to make a nice, fair, equitable, and balanced agreement to promote business,” as quoted by Reuters. Earlier this month, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick also signalled optimism that a deal could soon be finalised, saying both sides had found “common ground” to meet their strategic and economic interests, as per Reuters. India–US trade: A crucial and growing partnership The United States is India’s single largest trading partner. According to India’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry, bilateral goods and services trade between the two countries reached $191 billion in 2023–24, with Indian exports to the US valued at over $118 billion and imports from the US at around $73 billion. The US accounted for roughly 18 per cent of India’s total exports in 2023–24, making it India’s top export destination. Key Indian exports include pharmaceuticals, textiles, engineering goods, gems and jewellery, and software services. Conversely, the US is a major supplier of crude oil, LNG, advanced machinery, aircraft, defence equipment and agricultural products to India. US energy exports to India alone exceeded $10 billion in 2023, as per the US Energy Information Administration. Trade in services also forms a vital component of the economic relationship, with India’s IT sector providing services worth over $40 billion annually to US clients, according to Nasscom data. Investment ties are similarly robust. US foreign direct investment in India stood at $67 billion as of end-2023, while Indian companies have invested over $40 billion in the US, generating thousands of American jobs. Talks come amid tariff threats Trump’s comments also underline the high-stakes backdrop for the negotiations. The US President has threatened to impose tariffs of up to 45 per cent on countries unwilling to strike new trade deals with Washington. While the Biden-era Phase One agreement with India had kept tariff escalation largely at bay, Trump’s second-term approach has seen renewed threats of sweeping duties unless partners sign what he calls “fair and reciprocal” deals. Indian officials see a deal with the US as critical to securing market stability and boosting exports amid a challenging global environment marked by trade fragmentation and geopolitical tensions. For the United States, expanding trade ties with India is seen as a key element of its Indo-Pacific strategy, offering a counterweight to China’s economic influence in the region. A path forward? Negotiators from both sides remain tight-lipped about precise timelines or the final shape of any agreement. But Trump’s remarks suggest both governments want to signal progress ahead of their next planned high-level meeting. With India–US trade already on a record-setting trajectory, any new pact will have to address thorny issues ranging from tariff harmonisation to digital trade rules and standards. But if achieved, officials on both sides believe it could cement one of the 21st century’s most consequential economic partnerships. (With inputs from the agencies)

US President Donald Trump has raised expectations for a significant trade deal with India following recent negotiations aimed at reducing tariffs and improving market access.

US–India trade deal: What’s inside Trump’s “very big” hint?

The world’s leading financial crime watchdog has sounded the alarm over gaps in cryptocurrency regulation, urging governments to take far stronger action against illicit finance in the booming sector.&nbsp;The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), based in Paris, warned on Thursday that shortcomings in policing virtual assets risk creating global financial vulnerabilities, with criminals exploiting loopholes across borders. “Virtual assets are inherently borderless, and regulatory failures in one jurisdiction can have global consequences,” the FATF said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters. The call-to-action underscores mounting concern among global regulators that rapid growth in crypto markets is outpacing efforts to keep them in check.<h2>Patchy compliance despite progress</h2>According to the FATF’s latest assessment, progress on tightening crypto rules remains uneven. As of April 2025, only 40 out of 138 jurisdictions assessed were considered “largely compliant” with its standards, up from 32 the previous year.&nbsp;While that improvement reflects some momentum, it also highlights the vast number of countries lagging behind. FATF officials warn that these regulatory gaps create safe havens for criminals, making it harder to trace illicit financial flows that move seamlessly across national borders.<h2>Surge in illicit crypto activity</h2>The watchdog cited alarming figures pointing to the scale of the problem. Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimates that illicit crypto wallet addresses may have received as much as $51 billion in 2024 alone. Countries, the FATF says, continue to face major difficulties in identifying the real people behind virtual asset transactions, a key challenge in disrupting networks of money launderers, sanctions evaders and terror financiers.&nbsp;FATF also flagged particular concern over the rising role of stablecoins, cryptocurrencies pegged to fiat currencies like the US dollar which it said have become a preferred tool for various illicit actors. “Most illicit crypto activity now involves stablecoins,” the FATF warned, adding that the technology is being misused by groups including terrorist financiers, drug traffickers and state-backed cyber criminals.<h2>Spotlight on North Korea</h2>The report comes amid heightened scrutiny of North Korea’s role in global cybercrime. In February 2025, the FBI blamed North Korean hackers for the theft of around $1.5 billion worth of virtual assets from the crypto exchange ByBit, the largest known crypto heist in history.&nbsp;Pyongyang has repeatedly denied involvement in such attacks, but security agencies in the US and allied countries say North Korea’s regime relies heavily on crypto thefts and ransomware operations to fund its weapons programmes.<h2>Global authorities ramp up warnings</h2>The FATF’s statement is the latest in a series of warnings from international regulators about crypto’s potential to undermine financial stability and security. In April 2025, the European Union’s securities watchdog cautioned that the rapidly expanding crypto sector could pose systemic risks, particularly as its links with traditional financial markets deepen. As governments scramble to finalise regulatory frameworks, FATF urged them to prioritise closing loopholes, increasing oversight, and improving coordination. Without such steps, it warned, the risk of crypto markets being weaponised by criminals and even hostile states will only grow.&nbsp;The message is clear: despite technological innovation and growing mainstream adoption, the crypto industry remains in urgent need of stricter global policing to prevent it from becoming a haven for financial crime.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)

Despite some progress, only 40 of 138 jurisdictions are largely compliant with FATF standards. Regulatory gaps allow criminals to exploit loopholes, particularly with stablecoins, which are increasingly used for illegal activities. 

The world’s leading financial crime watchdog has sounded the alarm over gaps in cryptocurrency regulation, urging governments to take far stronger action against illicit finance in the booming sector. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), based in Paris, warned on Thursday that shortcomings in policing virtual assets risk creating global financial vulnerabilities, with criminals exploiting loopholes across borders. “Virtual assets are inherently borderless, and regulatory failures in one jurisdiction can have global consequences,” the FATF said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters. The call-to-action underscores mounting concern among global regulators that rapid growth in crypto markets is outpacing efforts to keep them in check. Patchy compliance despite progress According to the FATF’s latest assessment, progress on tightening crypto rules remains uneven. As of April 2025, only 40 out of 138 jurisdictions assessed were considered “largely compliant” with its standards, up from 32 the previous year. While that improvement reflects some momentum, it also highlights the vast number of countries lagging behind. FATF officials warn that these regulatory gaps create safe havens for criminals, making it harder to trace illicit financial flows that move seamlessly across national borders. Surge in illicit crypto activity The watchdog cited alarming figures pointing to the scale of the problem. Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimates that illicit crypto wallet addresses may have received as much as $51 billion in 2024 alone. Countries, the FATF says, continue to face major difficulties in identifying the real people behind virtual asset transactions, a key challenge in disrupting networks of money launderers, sanctions evaders and terror financiers. FATF also flagged particular concern over the rising role of stablecoins, cryptocurrencies pegged to fiat currencies like the US dollar which it said have become a preferred tool for various illicit actors. “Most illicit crypto activity now involves stablecoins,” the FATF warned, adding that the technology is being misused by groups including terrorist financiers, drug traffickers and state-backed cyber criminals. Spotlight on North Korea The report comes amid heightened scrutiny of North Korea’s role in global cybercrime. In February 2025, the FBI blamed North Korean hackers for the theft of around $1.5 billion worth of virtual assets from the crypto exchange ByBit, the largest known crypto heist in history. Pyongyang has repeatedly denied involvement in such attacks, but security agencies in the US and allied countries say North Korea’s regime relies heavily on crypto thefts and ransomware operations to fund its weapons programmes. Global authorities ramp up warnings The FATF’s statement is the latest in a series of warnings from international regulators about crypto’s potential to undermine financial stability and security. In April 2025, the European Union’s securities watchdog cautioned that the rapidly expanding crypto sector could pose systemic risks, particularly as its links with traditional financial markets deepen. As governments scramble to finalise regulatory frameworks, FATF urged them to prioritise closing loopholes, increasing oversight, and improving coordination. Without such steps, it warned, the risk of crypto markets being weaponised by criminals and even hostile states will only grow. The message is clear: despite technological innovation and growing mainstream adoption, the crypto industry remains in urgent need of stricter global policing to prevent it from becoming a haven for financial crime. (With inputs from the agencies)

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has raised concerns about inadequate cryptocurrency regulation, urging governments to strengthen measures against illicit finance.

Global watchdog urges crackdown on crypto crime as risks grow

European Union leaders gathered in Brussels on Thursday to discuss fresh trade proposals from the United States, with just two weeks left before a tariff truce expires and the spectre of 50 per cent US import duties returns to threaten transatlantic commerce.&nbsp;As per Reuters, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the “outline” of the new US offer to heads of state and government at the summit, though officials did not reveal specific details. One EU diplomat described the proposal as a “two-pager, principle agreement” and said Washington was keen to avoid negotiating sector-by-sector commitments, as quoted by Reuters.&nbsp; “We only have two weeks left – so we should go for something like that, like Brazil and Britain,” the diplomat added, alluding to simpler trade frameworks struck by other countries with the US. But divisions across the EU remain stark, with France pushing for a tougher line while Italy leans towards compromise.<h2>Internal EU divisions complicate talks</h2>The split within Europe’s largest economies has become increasingly visible. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz earlier this week urged the bloc to move quickly and prioritise a “faster” and “simpler” trade deal with Washington. In contrast, French officials argued that Brussels should hold out for stronger terms, particularly on opening up US services markets, as per Reuters. The stakes are high. President Donald Trump has threatened to raise tariffs on EU goods to 50 per cent if a new agreement cannot be reached before the July 9 deadline, reigniting fears of a transatlantic trade war at a time when European economies are already battling high inflation and sluggish growth.&nbsp;According to Reuters, the European Commission is trying to find common ground among the 27 member states but achieving a unified position before the deadline remains a significant diplomatic challenge.<h2>Tariffs overshadow broader summit agenda</h2>The Brussels summit had originally been intended to cover a wider range of pressing issues, from Europe’s security posture to its fraught relationship with Russia but trade tensions with Washington quickly dominated proceedings.&nbsp;The meeting followed a tense NATO summit earlier in the week, where alliance members agreed to raise defence spending significantly. However, that commitment exposed rifts within Europe, with some states privately admitting they cannot afford the new targets. Spain has reportedly demanded an explicit opt-out, highlighting the strains on national budgets amid competing priorities.<h2>Ukraine pressures Europe for stronger stance</h2>Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine cast a long shadow over the summit’s agenda. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy addressed EU leaders directly, calling for a fresh round of sanctions on Russia that would target its oil exports and banking sector. He also demanded a clear, unequivocal message of support for Ukraine’s future EU membership.&nbsp;“What’s needed now is a clear political message – that Ukraine is firmly on the European path, and that Europe stands by its promises,” Zelenskiy told the gathering, as quoted by Reuters. “Any delay by Europe at this point could create a global precedent – a reason to doubt Europe’s words and commitments.” Yet even on this front, divisions persist. Hungary remains firmly opposed to offering Ukraine a clear accession path or adopting new sanctions on Russian energy trade.<h2>Uncertain path ahead</h2>As the Brussels talks adjourned without a final decision on the US trade proposal, time is rapidly running out for Europe to strike a deal that would avert punishing new tariffs. European officials say they will continue negotiations in the coming days, but the challenge of reconciling internal divisions while bargaining with the Trump administration’s hardline stance remains daunting.&nbsp;With transatlantic relations at risk of fresh trade turmoil, and Ukraine’s war effort demanding ever more support, EU leaders face a difficult balancing act as they seek to project unity and resolve on the global stage.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented a basic outline of the US offer, which seeks a more straightforward agreement rather than detailed sector by sector negotiations. 

European Union leaders gathered in Brussels on Thursday to discuss fresh trade proposals from the United States, with just two weeks left before a tariff truce expires and the spectre of 50 per cent US import duties returns to threaten transatlantic commerce. As per Reuters, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the “outline” of the new US offer to heads of state and government at the summit, though officials did not reveal specific details. One EU diplomat described the proposal as a “two-pager, principle agreement” and said Washington was keen to avoid negotiating sector-by-sector commitments, as quoted by Reuters. “We only have two weeks left – so we should go for something like that, like Brazil and Britain,” the diplomat added, alluding to simpler trade frameworks struck by other countries with the US. But divisions across the EU remain stark, with France pushing for a tougher line while Italy leans towards compromise. Internal EU divisions complicate talks The split within Europe’s largest economies has become increasingly visible. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz earlier this week urged the bloc to move quickly and prioritise a “faster” and “simpler” trade deal with Washington. In contrast, French officials argued that Brussels should hold out for stronger terms, particularly on opening up US services markets, as per Reuters. The stakes are high. President Donald Trump has threatened to raise tariffs on EU goods to 50 per cent if a new agreement cannot be reached before the July 9 deadline, reigniting fears of a transatlantic trade war at a time when European economies are already battling high inflation and sluggish growth. According to Reuters, the European Commission is trying to find common ground among the 27 member states but achieving a unified position before the deadline remains a significant diplomatic challenge. Tariffs overshadow broader summit agenda The Brussels summit had originally been intended to cover a wider range of pressing issues, from Europe’s security posture to its fraught relationship with Russia but trade tensions with Washington quickly dominated proceedings. The meeting followed a tense NATO summit earlier in the week, where alliance members agreed to raise defence spending significantly. However, that commitment exposed rifts within Europe, with some states privately admitting they cannot afford the new targets. Spain has reportedly demanded an explicit opt-out, highlighting the strains on national budgets amid competing priorities. Ukraine pressures Europe for stronger stance Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine cast a long shadow over the summit’s agenda. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy addressed EU leaders directly, calling for a fresh round of sanctions on Russia that would target its oil exports and banking sector. He also demanded a clear, unequivocal message of support for Ukraine’s future EU membership. “What’s needed now is a clear political message – that Ukraine is firmly on the European path, and that Europe stands by its promises,” Zelenskiy told the gathering, as quoted by Reuters. “Any delay by Europe at this point could create a global precedent – a reason to doubt Europe’s words and commitments.” Yet even on this front, divisions persist. Hungary remains firmly opposed to offering Ukraine a clear accession path or adopting new sanctions on Russian energy trade. Uncertain path ahead As the Brussels talks adjourned without a final decision on the US trade proposal, time is rapidly running out for Europe to strike a deal that would avert punishing new tariffs. European officials say they will continue negotiations in the coming days, but the challenge of reconciling internal divisions while bargaining with the Trump administration’s hardline stance remains daunting. With transatlantic relations at risk of fresh trade turmoil, and Ukraine’s war effort demanding ever more support, EU leaders face a difficult balancing act as they seek to project unity and resolve on the global stage. (With inputs from the agencies)

EU leaders met in Brussels to discuss US trade proposals as a tariff truce approaches its end, risking 50% US import duties.

EU leaders weigh US trade offer as tariff deadline looms

A fragile US-China trade truce appears to be back on track, with President Donald Trump declaring a new deal “done” after months of bitter tariff escalation and critical export curbs. The breakthrough, which includes China’s agreement to resume rare earth mineral shipments to the United States, offers a tentative respite for global markets rattled by the world’s biggest economic rivalry.&nbsp;Speaking at Washington’s Kennedy Center, Trump announced the agreement, saying: “We made a great deal with China. We’re very happy with it. We have everything we need, and we’re going to do very well with it. And hopefully they are too,” as quoted by Reuters. The deal, finalised after two days of intense negotiations in London, still requires formal approval from Chinese President Xi Jinping. Yet it marks the clearest sign yet of a possible easing of a trade war that has snarled supply chains, stoked inflation fears, and weighed on growth prospects worldwide.<h2>Rare earths at the heart of the deal</h2>One of the most significant elements of the agreement is Beijing’s commitment to remove export restrictions on rare earth minerals and magnetic components essential for manufacturing electric vehicles, smartphones, defence systems, and semiconductors.&nbsp;China’s curbs on these critical minerals—imposed in February under new export controls citing national security concerns—had threatened to choke US defence and tech supply chains. The United States accused China of weaponising its dominant position, as the country holds roughly 36 per cent of global rare earth reserves and nearly 70 per cent of refining capacity. As per Reuters, the White House says the understanding is designed to implement a Geneva framework agreed in May, which committed China to removing non-tariff countermeasures imposed on the US since April 2. However, negotiations had faltered over these mineral export curbs, prompting Washington to retaliate with its own controls on semiconductor design software and other high-end technologies.&nbsp;US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg that China had agreed to “deliver rare earths to us” and in return, the US would “take down our countermeasures.” While Lutnick described the final rare earths deal as “balanced,” he did not detail specific mineral types or shipment volumes.<h2>Tariff freeze at 55 per cent</h2>Another headline element of the new agreement is the fixing of US tariffs on Chinese imports at 55 per cent, a composite rate built from layers of duties imposed over Trump’s second term. According to a senior White House official, this figure includes 25 per cent legacy tariffs from Trump’s first term, 20 per cent in response to alleged fentanyl trade routes through China, and a 10 per cent blanket tariff announced in February 2025. In return, China is expected to maintain a 10 per cent reciprocal tariff on US goods. Trump confirmed the deal on his social media platform Truth Social, stating: “Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China. Likewise, we will provide to China what was agreed to, including Chinese students using our colleges and universities.”&nbsp;This exchange on student visas reflects a concession on another sticking point in bilateral ties, with Trump previously threatening tighter controls on Chinese nationals studying sensitive subjects in US institutions.<h2>Timeline of a bruising trade war</h2>The latest deal follows a turbulent year of tit-for-tat trade measures that reignited tensions between Washington and Beijing.&nbsp;In February 2025, Trump issued an executive order imposing a blanket 10 per cent tariff on all Chinese imports and scrapping the de minimis exemption for small parcels, arguing that e-commerce routes were being used to funnel fentanyl into the US. Beijing retaliated with tariffs on American coal, LNG, crude oil and vehicle parts, while also introducing new export controls on rare earths. By March, the conflict had escalated further, with the US hiking tariffs to 20 per cent, then to 54 per cent under Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” order. China matched these moves, slapping tariffs as high as 125 per cent on some US products and filing a formal complaint at the World Trade Organization.&nbsp;A fragile ceasefire emerged in May after talks in Geneva produced a 90-day moratorium on new trade measures. But tensions soon resurfaced when the US accused China of failing to deliver on commitments to resume rare earth shipments. A turning point came in early June with a 90-minute phone call between Trump and Xi, which paved the way for high-level negotiations in London from June 9–10. Officials say these marathon sessions “put meat on the bones” of the Geneva framework, culminating in Trump’s declaration on June 11 that the deal was “done.”<h2>A fragile peace?</h2>Despite the White House’s upbeat messaging, analysts caution that the agreement remains short on detail and vulnerable to collapse. “It’s a done deal, according to President Trump, but we haven’t seen any details, which is why I think the market is not reacting to it yet,” Oliver Pursche, a senior adviser at Wealthspire Advisors, told Reuters. The World Bank has already cut its 2025 global growth forecast to 2.3 per cent, citing tariff escalation and policy uncertainty. Even with this new framework in place, there is deep scepticism over whether both sides can avoid another round of brinkmanship.&nbsp;For now, the deal offers a sliver of hope that the world’s two largest economies can avoid another damaging escalation. But with implementation mechanisms still pending, and a long history of breakdowns in trust, the road to a lasting trade peace remains highly uncertain.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

The deal encompasses China promise to restart shipments of rare earth minerals to the US, essential for numerous sectors. Trump highlighted the advantages of the agreement, but it still requires official authorization from President Xi Jinping. 

A fragile US-China trade truce appears to be back on track, with President Donald Trump declaring a new deal “done” after months of bitter tariff escalation and critical export curbs. The breakthrough, which includes China’s agreement to resume rare earth mineral shipments to the United States, offers a tentative respite for global markets rattled by the world’s biggest economic rivalry. Speaking at Washington’s Kennedy Center, Trump announced the agreement, saying: “We made a great deal with China. We’re very happy with it. We have everything we need, and we’re going to do very well with it. And hopefully they are too,” as quoted by Reuters. The deal, finalised after two days of intense negotiations in London, still requires formal approval from Chinese President Xi Jinping. Yet it marks the clearest sign yet of a possible easing of a trade war that has snarled supply chains, stoked inflation fears, and weighed on growth prospects worldwide. Rare earths at the heart of the deal One of the most significant elements of the agreement is Beijing’s commitment to remove export restrictions on rare earth minerals and magnetic components essential for manufacturing electric vehicles, smartphones, defence systems, and semiconductors. China’s curbs on these critical minerals—imposed in February under new export controls citing national security concerns—had threatened to choke US defence and tech supply chains. The United States accused China of weaponising its dominant position, as the country holds roughly 36 per cent of global rare earth reserves and nearly 70 per cent of refining capacity. As per Reuters, the White House says the understanding is designed to implement a Geneva framework agreed in May, which committed China to removing non-tariff countermeasures imposed on the US since April 2. However, negotiations had faltered over these mineral export curbs, prompting Washington to retaliate with its own controls on semiconductor design software and other high-end technologies. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg that China had agreed to “deliver rare earths to us” and in return, the US would “take down our countermeasures.” While Lutnick described the final rare earths deal as “balanced,” he did not detail specific mineral types or shipment volumes. Tariff freeze at 55 per cent Another headline element of the new agreement is the fixing of US tariffs on Chinese imports at 55 per cent, a composite rate built from layers of duties imposed over Trump’s second term. According to a senior White House official, this figure includes 25 per cent legacy tariffs from Trump’s first term, 20 per cent in response to alleged fentanyl trade routes through China, and a 10 per cent blanket tariff announced in February 2025. In return, China is expected to maintain a 10 per cent reciprocal tariff on US goods. Trump confirmed the deal on his social media platform Truth Social, stating: “Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China. Likewise, we will provide to China what was agreed to, including Chinese students using our colleges and universities.” This exchange on student visas reflects a concession on another sticking point in bilateral ties, with Trump previously threatening tighter controls on Chinese nationals studying sensitive subjects in US institutions. Timeline of a bruising trade war The latest deal follows a turbulent year of tit-for-tat trade measures that reignited tensions between Washington and Beijing. In February 2025, Trump issued an executive order imposing a blanket 10 per cent tariff on all Chinese imports and scrapping the de minimis exemption for small parcels, arguing that e-commerce routes were being used to funnel fentanyl into the US. Beijing retaliated with tariffs on American coal, LNG, crude oil and vehicle parts, while also introducing new export controls on rare earths. By March, the conflict had escalated further, with the US hiking tariffs to 20 per cent, then to 54 per cent under Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” order. China matched these moves, slapping tariffs as high as 125 per cent on some US products and filing a formal complaint at the World Trade Organization. A fragile ceasefire emerged in May after talks in Geneva produced a 90-day moratorium on new trade measures. But tensions soon resurfaced when the US accused China of failing to deliver on commitments to resume rare earth shipments. A turning point came in early June with a 90-minute phone call between Trump and Xi, which paved the way for high-level negotiations in London from June 9–10. Officials say these marathon sessions “put meat on the bones” of the Geneva framework, culminating in Trump’s declaration on June 11 that the deal was “done.” A fragile peace? Despite the White House’s upbeat messaging, analysts caution that the agreement remains short on detail and vulnerable to collapse. “It’s a done deal, according to President Trump, but we haven’t seen any details, which is why I think the market is not reacting to it yet,” Oliver Pursche, a senior adviser at Wealthspire Advisors, told Reuters. The World Bank has already cut its 2025 global growth forecast to 2.3 per cent, citing tariff escalation and policy uncertainty. Even with this new framework in place, there is deep scepticism over whether both sides can avoid another round of brinkmanship. For now, the deal offers a sliver of hope that the world’s two largest economies can avoid another damaging escalation. But with implementation mechanisms still pending, and a long history of breakdowns in trust, the road to a lasting trade peace remains highly uncertain. (With inputs from the agencies)

A trade agreement between the US and China seems to be reinstated, with President Trump revealing a deal following months of rising tariffs and export limitations.

US-China trade truce: Trump says deal is ‘done’ as rare earth exports set to resume

India’s benchmark indices extended their winning streak for the third consecutive session on June 26, buoyed by easing geopolitical concerns and strong buying in banking, metal, and oil &amp; gas stocks. The BSE Sensex soared 1,000.36 points, or 1.21 per cent, to close at 83,755.87, while the NSE Nifty 50 index jumped 304.25 points to settle at 25,549. Both indices touched their highest levels in nearly nine months.&nbsp;The rally, driven by heavyweight performers such as HDFC Bank, Reliance Industries, Tata Steel, and Bharti Airtel, pushed the market capitalisation of BSE-listed companies up by ₹3.33 lakh crore ($38.84 billion) on June 26 alone. Over the past three sessions, investor wealth has grown by ₹9.70 lakh crore ($113 billion), with the total market cap reaching ₹457.33 lakh crore (approximately $5.34 trillion).&nbsp;<h2>Financials and metals lead the charge</h2>&nbsp;Market sentiment was upbeat across key sectors. Nifty Bank ended at a record high of 57,207, rising 586 points, supported by strong moves in private bank shares like HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank. Financials and metal shares outperformed, with the Nifty Metal index gaining 2.3 per cent, led by stocks like Tata Steel, Jindal Steel, Vedanta, and Hindustan Copper. Oil marketing companies such as IOC, BPCL, and HPCL also saw robust gains of around 3 per cent each. Broadly, financial services, metals, oil &amp; gas, energy, and utilities indices posted 1–2 per cent gains. On the flip side, IT, realty, and media stocks ended in the red.&nbsp;Among the top performers were Bharti Airtel and HDFC Bank, both crossing ₹2,000 per share for the first time. A total of four Nifty stocks—Bharti Airtel, HDFC Bank, HDFC Life, and Grasim—hit record highs during the session.&nbsp;Broader markets also participated in the rally, though to a lesser extent. The BSE Midcap index climbed 0.56 per cent, while the Smallcap index edged up 0.12 per cent. However, market breadth was neutral, with 2,097 stocks advancing, 1,900 declining, and 156 remaining unchanged on the BSE.&nbsp;<h2>Rupee strengthens, FIIs trim holdings</h2>&nbsp;The Indian rupee strengthened to a two-week high, closing at 85.7050 per dollar (provisional), rising 0.4 per cent on the back of dollar weakness amid concerns over the future independence of the US Federal Reserve. Despite the market rally, foreign institutional investors (FIIs) continued to pare holdings due to narrowing yield spreads between US and Indian 10-year bonds. Meanwhile, domestic institutional investors (DIIs) emerged as net buyers, buoyed by improving liquidity and a recovery in consumption trends.&nbsp;<h2>Asian markets mixed; Japan outperforms</h2>&nbsp;Elsewhere in Asia, markets ended mixed. Japanese indices hit near five-month highs, powered by tech stocks, while South Korea's market declined on profit booking. China’s Shanghai Composite closed 0.22 per cent lower as investors weighed lingering economic and geopolitical risks. Gold ticked higher in Asian trade amid dollar weakness, and oil prices rose on signs of strong US crude demand.&nbsp;With geopolitical concerns abating and domestic fundamentals stabilising, Indian equities appear to be regaining strong upward momentum, even as global cues remain cautiously optimistic.

The rally, driven by heavyweight performers such as HDFC Bank, Reliance Industries, Tata Steel, and Bharti Airtel, pushed the market capitalisation of BSE-listed companies up by ₹$38.84 billion on June 26 alone.

India’s benchmark indices extended their winning streak for the third consecutive session on June 26, buoyed by easing geopolitical concerns and strong buying in banking, metal, and oil & gas stocks. The BSE Sensex soared 1,000.36 points, or 1.21 per cent, to close at 83,755.87, while the NSE Nifty 50 index jumped 304.25 points to settle at 25,549. Both indices touched their highest levels in nearly nine months. The rally, driven by heavyweight performers such as HDFC Bank, Reliance Industries, Tata Steel, and Bharti Airtel, pushed the market capitalisation of BSE-listed companies up by ₹3.33 lakh crore ($38.84 billion) on June 26 alone. Over the past three sessions, investor wealth has grown by ₹9.70 lakh crore ($113 billion), with the total market cap reaching ₹457.33 lakh crore (approximately $5.34 trillion). Financials and metals lead the charge Market sentiment was upbeat across key sectors. Nifty Bank ended at a record high of 57,207, rising 586 points, supported by strong moves in private bank shares like HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank. Financials and metal shares outperformed, with the Nifty Metal index gaining 2.3 per cent, led by stocks like Tata Steel, Jindal Steel, Vedanta, and Hindustan Copper. Oil marketing companies such as IOC, BPCL, and HPCL also saw robust gains of around 3 per cent each. Broadly, financial services, metals, oil & gas, energy, and utilities indices posted 1–2 per cent gains. On the flip side, IT, realty, and media stocks ended in the red. Among the top performers were Bharti Airtel and HDFC Bank, both crossing ₹2,000 per share for the first time. A total of four Nifty stocks—Bharti Airtel, HDFC Bank, HDFC Life, and Grasim—hit record highs during the session. Broader markets also participated in the rally, though to a lesser extent. The BSE Midcap index climbed 0.56 per cent, while the Smallcap index edged up 0.12 per cent. However, market breadth was neutral, with 2,097 stocks advancing, 1,900 declining, and 156 remaining unchanged on the BSE. Rupee strengthens, FIIs trim holdings The Indian rupee strengthened to a two-week high, closing at 85.7050 per dollar (provisional), rising 0.4 per cent on the back of dollar weakness amid concerns over the future independence of the US Federal Reserve. Despite the market rally, foreign institutional investors (FIIs) continued to pare holdings due to narrowing yield spreads between US and Indian 10-year bonds. Meanwhile, domestic institutional investors (DIIs) emerged as net buyers, buoyed by improving liquidity and a recovery in consumption trends. Asian markets mixed; Japan outperforms Elsewhere in Asia, markets ended mixed. Japanese indices hit near five-month highs, powered by tech stocks, while South Korea's market declined on profit booking. China’s Shanghai Composite closed 0.22 per cent lower as investors weighed lingering economic and geopolitical risks. Gold ticked higher in Asian trade amid dollar weakness, and oil prices rose on signs of strong US crude demand. With geopolitical concerns abating and domestic fundamentals stabilising, Indian equities appear to be regaining strong upward momentum, even as global cues remain cautiously optimistic.

The rally, driven by heavyweight performers such as HDFC Bank, Reliance Industries, Tata Steel, and Bharti Airtel, pushed the market capitalisation of BSE-listed companies up by ₹$38.84 billion on June 26 alone.

Markets soar for third straight day: Sensex surges 1,000 points, Nifty crosses 25,500

The United States is redrawing its military priorities. President Donald Trump has unveiled a nearly $893 billion defence and national security budget request for 2026, one that reflects a clear pivot towards next-generation warfare. The budget, flat in dollar terms from last year, offers a glimpse into Trump’s evolving vision: a leaner, tech-driven military force, heavy on drones and long-range missiles, but lighter on traditional fighter jets and warships.&nbsp;But the announcement does not exist in isolation. It comes at a time when the world is witnessing not one, but two active war zones, Russia’s grinding invasion of Ukraine and a dangerous escalation between Israel and Iran. And across the Atlantic, NATO is preparing for a historic increase in defence spending. So, what’s really driving Trump’s latest move?<h2>More missiles, fewer F-35s: Inside the 2026 budget shift</h2>According to documents reviewed by Reuters, Trump has proposed purchasing only 47 F-35 stealth jets, down from 68 approved in President Biden’s final defence budget. The cut has already sparked pushback on Capitol Hill, with the House Appropriations Committee recommending 69 fighter jets as part of its draft legislation. Instead of expanding airpower through fighter jets, the budget prioritises long-range strike capabilities. As per Reuters, the US Air Force plans to increase investment in the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile - Extended Range (JASSM-ER) and Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), systems designed to strike targets at a distance, particularly relevant to rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific.&nbsp;Meanwhile, orders for the Precision Strike Missile, a successor to the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) used in Ukraine, are being scaled back, signalling a focus on fewer, more advanced platforms.In another major shift, the budget boosts funding for small tactical drones, a response to battlefield innovations seen in Ukraine, where cheap, unmanned aircraft have proven to be highly effective tools of modern warfare.<h2>Cuts and controversy: What’s being sacrificed?</h2>To offset these investments, the 2026 plan trims other corners of the Pentagon’s arsenal. As per Reuters, the US Navy will reduce its civilian workforce by more than 7,200 jobs, while only three new warships are scheduled for procurement under this budget. Large naval projects like the Virginia-class submarine, jointly built by General Dynamics and Huntington Ingalls Industries, will instead be funded through a separate appropriation.&nbsp;One of Trump’s most ambitious defence projects, the “Golden Dome” missile defence shield is mostly absent from this request. Instead, funding for the programme has been routed through a separate $25 billion allocation within a larger $150 billion Republican-led defence package dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, which has already passed the House.<h2>How US defence spending in 2024–25</h2>Before Trump’s 2026 pitch, the US already led global military spending. As per Reuters, US defence outlays reached $997 billion in fiscal 2024, rising 5.7 per cent from 2023 and comprising 37 per cent of worldwide military expenditure. For fiscal 2025, Congress approved about $895 billion under the National Defense Authorization Act. This total included a $849.8 billion base budget and additional war-related, emergency funding, in line with the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which capped growth at just 0.9 per cent over the previous year .&nbsp;The $849.8 billion base defence budget for fiscal 2025 was divided into several major areas. According to the Department of Defense’s FY 2025 budget overview, around 39 per cent (approximately $330 billion) was dedicated to military personnel and benefits, including pay, housing and healthcare. A similar proportion was allocated to operations and maintenance, covering day-to-day military activities, logistics, training, facility upkeep and ongoing overseas commitments . The combined $300 billion allocated to procurement and research, development, test &amp; evaluation (RDT&amp;E) funded new weapons, advanced technologies, and the next generation of platforms which are vital for modernising the force. This structure reflects a strong focus on sustaining readiness while investing heavily in future capabilities.Altogether, defence spending comprised just over 50 per cent of the US discretionary budget, which totals around $1.8 trillion, making it the single largest area of government expenditure, as noted by Reuters.<h2>NATO’s 5 per cent pledge: A new arms race?</h2>Across the Atlantic, NATO allies are preparing for a dramatic increase in defence spending. At a summit in The Hague earlier this week, member states agreed to a new goal: defence spending equivalent to 5 per cent of national GDP by 2035, up from the current 2 per cent target set in 2014.The new benchmark includes 3.5 per cent for core military capability and 1.5 per cent for infrastructure, cyber defence, and supply chain resilience.&nbsp;But not all NATO members are willing to commit. Spain’s refusal to accept the 5 per cent goal drew a sharp rebuke from Trump, who called Madrid’s decision “terrible” and hinted at trade retaliation. As quoted by Politico, Trump stated that European nations should meet the 5 per cent target but insisted that the US should not be held to the same requirement, given it already spends around 3.4 per cent of GDP on defence. According to Washington Post, only a handful of countries, including Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Norway, are on track to meet the 5 per cent goal.<h2>Two wars, one nervous West</h2>The timing of Trump’s budget is deliberate. It arrives amid two major global crises.In Ukraine, Russia’s full-scale invasion has entered its third year. The US has been a key supplier of munitions and intelligence, but Trump has repeatedly called for Europe to “step up” and share more of the financial burden. As per Reuters, he remains critical of “blank cheque” approaches to Kyiv.In the West Asia, tensions between Israel and Iran have escalated rapidly. Israel has carried out targeted strikes on suspected Iranian nuclear infrastructure. In response, Tehran launched waves of drones and missiles, triggering fears of a broader regional war.&nbsp;These crises appear to have informed the Pentagon’s strategy. The focus on drones, missiles and unmanned platforms reflects an evolving battlefield where precision and distance are more valuable than conventional firepower.<h2>The bigger picture: From conventional to asymmetric warfare</h2>Trump’s 2026 defence budget reflects more than just financial priorities, it signals a shift in American military doctrine. The US is reportedly recalibrating away from high-maintenance legacy systems like the F-35 and large naval platforms, and moving towards rapid, asymmetric capabilities designed for unpredictable and tech-driven theatres of war.&nbsp;Meanwhile, NATO’s 5 per cent pledge suggests that Europe, too, is bracing for a long-term security challenge. But questions remain over implementation and whether political appetite will keep pace with rising military costs. As the US Congress prepares for heated debates over the budget, and as NATO allies scramble to realign spending, one thing is clear: the global defence landscape is undergoing a fundamental transformation. In a world shaped by drones, missile shields and cyber weapons, Trump’s budget may be setting the tone for the wars of tomorrow. &nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

As wars rage in Ukraine and West Asia, and NATO eyes a 5% defence GDP goal, the US pivots toward asymmetric warfare and tech-driven military dominance.

The United States is redrawing its military priorities. President Donald Trump has unveiled a nearly $893 billion defence and national security budget request for 2026, one that reflects a clear pivot towards next-generation warfare. The budget, flat in dollar terms from last year, offers a glimpse into Trump’s evolving vision: a leaner, tech-driven military force, heavy on drones and long-range missiles, but lighter on traditional fighter jets and warships. But the announcement does not exist in isolation. It comes at a time when the world is witnessing not one, but two active war zones, Russia’s grinding invasion of Ukraine and a dangerous escalation between Israel and Iran. And across the Atlantic, NATO is preparing for a historic increase in defence spending. So, what’s really driving Trump’s latest move? More missiles, fewer F-35s: Inside the 2026 budget shift According to documents reviewed by Reuters, Trump has proposed purchasing only 47 F-35 stealth jets, down from 68 approved in President Biden’s final defence budget. The cut has already sparked pushback on Capitol Hill, with the House Appropriations Committee recommending 69 fighter jets as part of its draft legislation. Instead of expanding airpower through fighter jets, the budget prioritises long-range strike capabilities. As per Reuters, the US Air Force plans to increase investment in the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile - Extended Range (JASSM-ER) and Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), systems designed to strike targets at a distance, particularly relevant to rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific. Meanwhile, orders for the Precision Strike Missile, a successor to the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) used in Ukraine, are being scaled back, signalling a focus on fewer, more advanced platforms. In another major shift, the budget boosts funding for small tactical drones, a response to battlefield innovations seen in Ukraine, where cheap, unmanned aircraft have proven to be highly effective tools of modern warfare. Cuts and controversy: What’s being sacrificed? To offset these investments, the 2026 plan trims other corners of the Pentagon’s arsenal. As per Reuters, the US Navy will reduce its civilian workforce by more than 7,200 jobs, while only three new warships are scheduled for procurement under this budget. Large naval projects like the Virginia-class submarine, jointly built by General Dynamics and Huntington Ingalls Industries, will instead be funded through a separate appropriation. One of Trump’s most ambitious defence projects, the “Golden Dome” missile defence shield is mostly absent from this request. Instead, funding for the programme has been routed through a separate $25 billion allocation within a larger $150 billion Republican-led defence package dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, which has already passed the House. How US defence spending in 2024–25 Before Trump’s 2026 pitch, the US already led global military spending. As per Reuters, US defence outlays reached $997 billion in fiscal 2024, rising 5.7 per cent from 2023 and comprising 37 per cent of worldwide military expenditure. For fiscal 2025, Congress approved about $895 billion under the National Defense Authorization Act. This total included a $849.8 billion base budget and additional war-related, emergency funding, in line with the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which capped growth at just 0.9 per cent over the previous year . The $849.8 billion base defence budget for fiscal 2025 was divided into several major areas. According to the Department of Defense’s FY 2025 budget overview, around 39 per cent (approximately $330 billion) was dedicated to military personnel and benefits, including pay, housing and healthcare. A similar proportion was allocated to operations and maintenance, covering day-to-day military activities, logistics, training, facility upkeep and ongoing overseas commitments . The combined $300 billion allocated to procurement and research, development, test & evaluation (RDT&E) funded new weapons, advanced technologies, and the next generation of platforms which are vital for modernising the force. This structure reflects a strong focus on sustaining readiness while investing heavily in future capabilities. Altogether, defence spending comprised just over 50 per cent of the US discretionary budget, which totals around $1.8 trillion, making it the single largest area of government expenditure, as noted by Reuters. NATO’s 5 per cent pledge: A new arms race? Across the Atlantic, NATO allies are preparing for a dramatic increase in defence spending. At a summit in The Hague earlier this week, member states agreed to a new goal: defence spending equivalent to 5 per cent of national GDP by 2035, up from the current 2 per cent target set in 2014. The new benchmark includes 3.5 per cent for core military capability and 1.5 per cent for infrastructure, cyber defence, and supply chain resilience. But not all NATO members are willing to commit. Spain’s refusal to accept the 5 per cent goal drew a sharp rebuke from Trump, who called Madrid’s decision “terrible” and hinted at trade retaliation. As quoted by Politico, Trump stated that European nations should meet the 5 per cent target but insisted that the US should not be held to the same requirement, given it already spends around 3.4 per cent of GDP on defence. According to Washington Post, only a handful of countries, including Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Norway, are on track to meet the 5 per cent goal. Two wars, one nervous West The timing of Trump’s budget is deliberate. It arrives amid two major global crises. In Ukraine, Russia’s full-scale invasion has entered its third year. The US has been a key supplier of munitions and intelligence, but Trump has repeatedly called for Europe to “step up” and share more of the financial burden. As per Reuters, he remains critical of “blank cheque” approaches to Kyiv. In the West Asia, tensions between Israel and Iran have escalated rapidly. Israel has carried out targeted strikes on suspected Iranian nuclear infrastructure. In response, Tehran launched waves of drones and missiles, triggering fears of a broader regional war. These crises appear to have informed the Pentagon’s strategy. The focus on drones, missiles and unmanned platforms reflects an evolving battlefield where precision and distance are more valuable than conventional firepower. The bigger picture: From conventional to asymmetric warfare Trump’s 2026 defence budget reflects more than just financial priorities, it signals a shift in American military doctrine. The US is reportedly recalibrating away from high-maintenance legacy systems like the F-35 and large naval platforms, and moving towards rapid, asymmetric capabilities designed for unpredictable and tech-driven theatres of war. Meanwhile, NATO’s 5 per cent pledge suggests that Europe, too, is bracing for a long-term security challenge. But questions remain over implementation and whether political appetite will keep pace with rising military costs. As the US Congress prepares for heated debates over the budget, and as NATO allies scramble to realign spending, one thing is clear: the global defence landscape is undergoing a fundamental transformation. In a world shaped by drones, missile shields and cyber weapons, Trump’s budget may be setting the tone for the wars of tomorrow. (With inputs from the agencies)

Trump’s $893B defence budget slashes F-35 orders to fund drones, missiles and next-gen warfare tools.

Why Trump’s $893 Billion Military Budget Cuts F-35s and Boosts Drones, Missiles?

Rice, a staple in Japan and an integral part of the country’s culture, tradition and politics, has turned into a pain point for the nation. A rice crisis has gripped the nation for nearly a year with soaring prices and empty supermarket shelves, but it is showing tentative signs of easing. New data from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries revealed that average rice prices fell below the psychologically significant 4,000-yen mark for the first time since early March, offering hope to consumers long frustrated by the soaring cost of a dietary staple.&nbsp; According to the ministry, a five-kilogram bag of rice sold for an average of 3,920 yen ($27.03) during the week ending June 15, a 256-yen drop from the previous week. This marks the first time in over three months that prices have entered the 3,000-yen range, a goal Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba had pledged to achieve by the end of June.&nbsp; “This drop is a result of the government’s clear intervention and strategic release of rice reserves,” said Farm Minister Shinjiro Koizumi. Blended rice, which includes rice from government stockpiles, now accounts for half of the market share, up 6 percentage points, helping stabilise supply. Retailers have also started offering imported rice from countries like the US and South Korea. Supermarket chain Aeon began selling California-sourced rice in early June, while South Korean firm The O Global signed a deal to export 200 tonnes of rice, the largest ever by a South Korean private company, to Japan.&nbsp; Still, the recovery remains uneven. Smaller stores around Tokyo continue to report shortages, while some chains and regional outlets have resumed regular stock levels. The National Supermarket Association confirmed to CNBC that although the shortage appears to be easing, “there is no stock of reasonably priced rice,” suggesting the crisis isn’t over yet.&nbsp;<h2> Behind the shortage: Panic buying, poor harvest, and tourist demand</h2>&nbsp; The roots of Japan’s rice crisis are multifaceted. Prices began rising sharply in late 2024, primarily driven by a poor harvest in 2023 attributed to unseasonably hot weather and pest infestations. The situation worsened as demand surged, in part due to increased tourism and a rise in rice consumption spurred by rising prices of bread and noodles amid the global wheat crisis following the Russia-Ukraine war.&nbsp; Public anxiety spiked further in mid-2024 after a widely circulated warning about a potential “megaquake” led to nationwide panic buying. The top-tier “Koshihikari” brand began selling rice for nearly 5,000 yen ($35) per 5 kg, and the average household faced prices nearly double those seen the year before. At one point, rice stockpiles at commercial wholesalers dipped 400,000 tonnes below 2023 levels, hitting a record low of 1.53 million tonnes.&nbsp; Making matters worse was the government’s delayed release of emergency reserves and structural inefficiencies in Japan’s rice supply chain. The powerful Japan Agricultural Cooperatives (JA), which dominate rice sales, were caught off guard by the crisis.&nbsp;&nbsp; Meanwhile, the government has faced criticism for failing to track stock levels accurately due to a growing share of rice being sold outside traditional JA channels. The lack of a centralised tracking mechanism and logistical challenges like insufficient milling capacity to convert brown reserve rice into polished white rice only added to consumer frustration.&nbsp;<h2> Still high, still uneven</h2>&nbsp; Although prices have begun to decline, the fall has been modest. Core consumer prices in May rose by 3.7 per cent from a year earlier, with rice prices spiking by a staggering 101.7 per cent, the largest jump in over 50 years. Analysts note that branded rice prices have only just started to dip, suggesting that issues beyond simple supply-demand imbalances may be at play.&nbsp; Many consumers are also sceptical about the quality of rice being released. Government reserves often consist of older stocks, with terms like “ko-ko-komai” or “old-old-old rice” used to describe some batches. Freshly harvested “shinmai” rice is prized in Japan for its taste and texture, and older rice is seen as less palatable.&nbsp; To prevent hoarding and profiteering, authorities on June 23 implemented a ban on reselling rice bought at retail stores. Offenders now face up to one year in prison or a fine of up to 1 million yen. Despite these moves, Prime Minister Ishiba has admitted in parliament that the government still lacks full clarity on the current rice inventory, acknowledging that “structural problems” in Japan’s rice policy must be addressed. Bank of Japan Governor Kazuo Ueda echoed a cautious optimism, stating, “We expect such pressures to dissipate,” noting that while inflation remains elevated, it is being driven in part by temporary shocks like rice and import costs.&nbsp;(With inputs from agencies)

New data from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries revealed that average rice prices fell below the psychologically significant 4,000-yen mark for the first time since early March, offering hope to consumers long frustrated by the soaring cost of rice.

Rice, a staple in Japan and an integral part of the country’s culture, tradition and politics, has turned into a pain point for the nation. A rice crisis has gripped the nation for nearly a year with soaring prices and empty supermarket shelves, but it is showing tentative signs of easing. New data from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries revealed that average rice prices fell below the psychologically significant 4,000-yen mark for the first time since early March, offering hope to consumers long frustrated by the soaring cost of a dietary staple. According to the ministry, a five-kilogram bag of rice sold for an average of 3,920 yen ($27.03) during the week ending June 15, a 256-yen drop from the previous week. This marks the first time in over three months that prices have entered the 3,000-yen range, a goal Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba had pledged to achieve by the end of June. “This drop is a result of the government’s clear intervention and strategic release of rice reserves,” said Farm Minister Shinjiro Koizumi. Blended rice, which includes rice from government stockpiles, now accounts for half of the market share, up 6 percentage points, helping stabilise supply. Retailers have also started offering imported rice from countries like the US and South Korea. Supermarket chain Aeon began selling California-sourced rice in early June, while South Korean firm The O Global signed a deal to export 200 tonnes of rice, the largest ever by a South Korean private company, to Japan. Still, the recovery remains uneven. Smaller stores around Tokyo continue to report shortages, while some chains and regional outlets have resumed regular stock levels. The National Supermarket Association confirmed to CNBC that although the shortage appears to be easing, “there is no stock of reasonably priced rice,” suggesting the crisis isn’t over yet. Behind the shortage: Panic buying, poor harvest, and tourist demand The roots of Japan’s rice crisis are multifaceted. Prices began rising sharply in late 2024, primarily driven by a poor harvest in 2023 attributed to unseasonably hot weather and pest infestations. The situation worsened as demand surged, in part due to increased tourism and a rise in rice consumption spurred by rising prices of bread and noodles amid the global wheat crisis following the Russia-Ukraine war. Public anxiety spiked further in mid-2024 after a widely circulated warning about a potential “megaquake” led to nationwide panic buying. The top-tier “Koshihikari” brand began selling rice for nearly 5,000 yen ($35) per 5 kg, and the average household faced prices nearly double those seen the year before. At one point, rice stockpiles at commercial wholesalers dipped 400,000 tonnes below 2023 levels, hitting a record low of 1.53 million tonnes. Making matters worse was the government’s delayed release of emergency reserves and structural inefficiencies in Japan’s rice supply chain. The powerful Japan Agricultural Cooperatives (JA), which dominate rice sales, were caught off guard by the crisis. Meanwhile, the government has faced criticism for failing to track stock levels accurately due to a growing share of rice being sold outside traditional JA channels. The lack of a centralised tracking mechanism and logistical challenges like insufficient milling capacity to convert brown reserve rice into polished white rice only added to consumer frustration. Still high, still uneven Although prices have begun to decline, the fall has been modest. Core consumer prices in May rose by 3.7 per cent from a year earlier, with rice prices spiking by a staggering 101.7 per cent, the largest jump in over 50 years. Analysts note that branded rice prices have only just started to dip, suggesting that issues beyond simple supply-demand imbalances may be at play. Many consumers are also sceptical about the quality of rice being released. Government reserves often consist of older stocks, with terms like “ko-ko-komai” or “old-old-old rice” used to describe some batches. Freshly harvested “shinmai” rice is prized in Japan for its taste and texture, and older rice is seen as less palatable. To prevent hoarding and profiteering, authorities on June 23 implemented a ban on reselling rice bought at retail stores. Offenders now face up to one year in prison or a fine of up to 1 million yen. Despite these moves, Prime Minister Ishiba has admitted in parliament that the government still lacks full clarity on the current rice inventory, acknowledging that “structural problems” in Japan’s rice policy must be addressed. Bank of Japan Governor Kazuo Ueda echoed a cautious optimism, stating, “We expect such pressures to dissipate,” noting that while inflation remains elevated, it is being driven in part by temporary shocks like rice and import costs. (With inputs from agencies)

New data from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries revealed that average rice prices fell below the psychologically significant 4,000-yen mark for the first time since early March, offering hope to consumers long frustrated by the soaring cost of rice.

Japan’s rice crisis eases as prices dip and stocks return to shelves

Pakistan and the United States are preparing to finalise a crucial agreement on reciprocal tariffs by next week, according to a statement released by Pakistan’s Ministry of Finance on Wednesday. The move comes ahead of the expiry of a 90-day suspension of new US tariffs that could hit Pakistani exports with duties of up to 29 per cent.&nbsp;The agreement follows a virtual meeting between Pakistan’s Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb and US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. According to the finance ministry, both sides agreed on “meaningful engagement” to strengthen bilateral trade and investment, and to build a broader economic partnership.<h2>US targets Pakistan’s $3 billion trade surplus</h2>The negotiations were triggered after the US announced tariffs last month on countries running significant trade surpluses with Washington. Pakistan, which posted a $3 billion trade surplus with the US, now faces a potential 29 per cent tariff on its outbound shipments.&nbsp;As per APP, the US initially delayed the tariffs by 90 days to give space for diplomatic negotiations. Islamabad responded by dispatching a high-level trade delegation to Washington in May. During the visit, Pakistan proposed a zero-tariff bilateral trade agreement and offered to boost imports of US goods such as cotton and edible oils, which are in domestic short supply.<h2>New framework for strategic economic cooperation</h2>Beyond tariffs, both sides are also discussing a long-term plan to deepen trade and investment ties. According to Pakistan’s finance ministry, the discussions will lead to a “strategic and investment-based partnership,” with technical-level talks expected to wrap up next week.&nbsp;The talks come at a time when Pakistan is looking to attract greater foreign investment amid economic reforms. Earlier this week, the two countries co-hosted a webinar promoting investment in Pakistan’s mineral sector, including the $7 billion Reko Diq copper-gold project, as reported by Reuters.US investors and government officials reportedly discussed public-private partnerships and regulatory changes to boost Pakistan’s mining sector.<h2>Trade diplomacy follows regional thaw</h2>The broader context is also shifting. US President Donald Trump, who recently brokered a ceasefire between Pakistan and India, has argued that trade diplomacy has helped avoid a deeper conflict between the two neighbours. Trump has positioned trade as a key instrument of foreign policy during his second term.&nbsp;For Pakistan, preserving access to the US market is essential. The US remains one of Pakistan’s largest trading partners, particularly for textiles, garments, and leather goods.With the clock ticking on the 90-day suspension, the stakes are high. A failure to secure a deal could expose Pakistan’s exports to costly US tariffs at a time when the country is already grappling with a depreciating rupee and industrial stagnation.&nbsp;&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

Facing up to 29% US tariffs on exports, Pakistan pushes for zero-duty trade pact and deeper economic ties amid rising pressure on its fragile economy.

Pakistan and the United States are preparing to finalise a crucial agreement on reciprocal tariffs by next week, according to a statement released by Pakistan’s Ministry of Finance on Wednesday. The move comes ahead of the expiry of a 90-day suspension of new US tariffs that could hit Pakistani exports with duties of up to 29 per cent. The agreement follows a virtual meeting between Pakistan’s Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb and US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. According to the finance ministry, both sides agreed on “meaningful engagement” to strengthen bilateral trade and investment, and to build a broader economic partnership. US targets Pakistan’s $3 billion trade surplus The negotiations were triggered after the US announced tariffs last month on countries running significant trade surpluses with Washington. Pakistan, which posted a $3 billion trade surplus with the US, now faces a potential 29 per cent tariff on its outbound shipments. As per APP, the US initially delayed the tariffs by 90 days to give space for diplomatic negotiations. Islamabad responded by dispatching a high-level trade delegation to Washington in May. During the visit, Pakistan proposed a zero-tariff bilateral trade agreement and offered to boost imports of US goods such as cotton and edible oils, which are in domestic short supply. New framework for strategic economic cooperation Beyond tariffs, both sides are also discussing a long-term plan to deepen trade and investment ties. According to Pakistan’s finance ministry, the discussions will lead to a “strategic and investment-based partnership,” with technical-level talks expected to wrap up next week. The talks come at a time when Pakistan is looking to attract greater foreign investment amid economic reforms. Earlier this week, the two countries co-hosted a webinar promoting investment in Pakistan’s mineral sector, including the $7 billion Reko Diq copper-gold project, as reported by Reuters. US investors and government officials reportedly discussed public-private partnerships and regulatory changes to boost Pakistan’s mining sector. Trade diplomacy follows regional thaw The broader context is also shifting. US President Donald Trump, who recently brokered a ceasefire between Pakistan and India, has argued that trade diplomacy has helped avoid a deeper conflict between the two neighbours. Trump has positioned trade as a key instrument of foreign policy during his second term. For Pakistan, preserving access to the US market is essential. The US remains one of Pakistan’s largest trading partners, particularly for textiles, garments, and leather goods. With the clock ticking on the 90-day suspension, the stakes are high. A failure to secure a deal could expose Pakistan’s exports to costly US tariffs at a time when the country is already grappling with a depreciating rupee and industrial stagnation. (With inputs from the agencies)

Pakistan, US race to finalise reciprocal tariff deal before looming deadline threatens key exports.

Pakistan races to finalise tariff deal with US as 90-day suspension deadline nears expiry

In a landmark step towards internationalising its commodity markets and reducing reliance on the US dollar, China has rolled out its first offshore gold vault in Hong Kong. According to Bloomberg, the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) launched the facility alongside two new yuan-denominated gold contracts, marking the exchange’s first physical expansion outside mainland China since its founding in 2002.&nbsp;The vault, operated by Bank of China’s Hong Kong unit, will allow settlement of trades in either cash or physical gold delivery. As per the Shanghai Gold Exchange’s statement quoted by Bloomberg, storage fees at the new vault will be waived until the end of this year to incentivise participation. Trading on the new contracts began Thursday.<h2>Why the move matters?</h2>The timing and location of the expansion are significant. As the world’s largest producer and consumer of gold, China has long sought greater influence in pricing the metal. The new offshore contracts, settled in yuan, are also part of Beijing’s broader goal of promoting the renminbi in international trade and reducing dependence on the greenback.&nbsp;Bloomberg reports that the move also strengthens Hong Kong’s role as a global financial centre. The city has long served as a gateway between China and international capital markets and is now being positioned as a logistics and trading hub for commodities not just finance.<h2>London still rules the global gold trade</h2>Despite the expansion, China still lags far behind the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), which remains the global centre for gold trading. According to the World Gold Council, trading volumes on the LBMA still vastly exceed those of the SGE.&nbsp;Here’s how trading volumes compare in the first five months of 2025:

<figure class="table"><table><tbody><tr><td>Month</td><td>LBMA (London) Volume</td><td>SGE (Shanghai) Volume</td></tr><tr><td>January</td><td>~$155 billion</td><td>~$10 billion</td></tr><tr><td>February</td><td>~$158 billion</td><td>~$11 billion</td></tr><tr><td>March</td><td>~$145 billion</td><td>~$9 billion</td></tr><tr><td>April</td><td>~$180 billion</td><td>~$12 billion</td></tr><tr><td>May</td><td>~$150 billion</td><td>~$10 billion</td></tr></tbody></table></figure>Source: World Gold Council (2025). Volume includes over-the-counter trades.

&nbsp;While the Shanghai Gold Exchange is the single largest platform for physical bullion trading, the over-the-counter nature of London’s market ensures it remains the benchmark for institutional and wholesale activity.<h2>A quiet bid to de-dollarise</h2>As quoted by Bloomberg, China’s central bank has been a major gold buyer over the past three years, using the metal as a hedge against dollar volatility. Analysts believe the yuan-denominated offshore contracts are another step in Beijing’s ambition to reduce the dollar’s dominance in global commodity pricing.&nbsp;The Shanghai Futures Exchange, the country’s largest commodity bourse, is also preparing to open up to foreign investors. The trend points towards deeper yuan integration in energy and metals markets, building on China’s vast role in global supply chains.<h2>Will London’s dominance hold?</h2>London still accounts for the lion’s share of global gold trading, but competition is growing. Singapore is also making a play for bullion trade, while Hong Kong is sharpening its position in warehousing and logistics. However, as per analysts quoted by Bloomberg, trust, transparency, and global pricing infrastructure still favour Western markets.&nbsp;For now, the new Hong Kong vault gives Beijing a stronger foothold in global gold markets, but it is still playing catch-up in a centuries-old market. &nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

While London remains the global gold benchmark, China rising bullion purchases and yuan-based contracts signal ambition to challenge dollar dominance.

In a landmark step towards internationalising its commodity markets and reducing reliance on the US dollar, China has rolled out its first offshore gold vault in Hong Kong. According to Bloomberg, the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) launched the facility alongside two new yuan-denominated gold contracts, marking the exchange’s first physical expansion outside mainland China since its founding in 2002. The vault, operated by Bank of China’s Hong Kong unit, will allow settlement of trades in either cash or physical gold delivery. As per the Shanghai Gold Exchange’s statement quoted by Bloomberg, storage fees at the new vault will be waived until the end of this year to incentivise participation. Trading on the new contracts began Thursday. Why the move matters? The timing and location of the expansion are significant. As the world’s largest producer and consumer of gold, China has long sought greater influence in pricing the metal. The new offshore contracts, settled in yuan, are also part of Beijing’s broader goal of promoting the renminbi in international trade and reducing dependence on the greenback. Bloomberg reports that the move also strengthens Hong Kong’s role as a global financial centre. The city has long served as a gateway between China and international capital markets and is now being positioned as a logistics and trading hub for commodities not just finance. London still rules the global gold trade Despite the expansion, China still lags far behind the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), which remains the global centre for gold trading. According to the World Gold Council, trading volumes on the LBMA still vastly exceed those of the SGE. Here’s how trading volumes compare in the first five months of 2025:

China strengthens gold market presence with new Hong Kong vault as part of long-term push to de-dollarise trade.

China opens first offshore gold vault in Hong Kong, but can it rival London’s dominance?

Japan has reiterated its firm opposition to the&nbsp;25 per cent US tariffs on automobile imports, just as a high-level trade delegation prepares to enter critical negotiations in Washington. Ryosei Akazawa, Japan’s chief trade negotiator, said on Thursday that such steep duties are “unacceptable”, especially given the scale of Japan’s contribution to the American automotive market.&nbsp;Speaking to reporters ahead of his trip to the US, Akazawa said Japanese carmakers produce 3.3 million vehicles in the US annually, far more than the 1.37 million they export to America. The industry has collectively invested over $60 billion in the US and is responsible for 2.3 million jobs, according to figures shared with Reuters. In fact, 300,000 vehicles built in the US by Japanese companies are exported to other markets, contributing to America’s own trade surplus.&nbsp;“We have repeatedly explained to the US that Japan’s automobile industry has made an enormous contribution to the US economy,” Akazawa said. “We consider the 25 per cent tariff to be unacceptable," as quoted by Bloomberg.&nbsp;<h2>Tariffs threaten Japan’s fragile recovery</h2>The tariff shock comes at a delicate moment. Japan was beginning to show early signs of economic revival, wage growth was picking up and consumer demand was starting to strengthen after years of stagnation. But that fragile recovery now appears at risk. As per a Bloomberg poll, 64 per cent of economists believe the tariffs could push Japan into a recession.&nbsp;The automobile industry is the backbone of Japan’s economy. It employs 5.6 million people, or 8.3 per cent of the country’s workforce, according to the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. Vehicles and auto parts account for one-third of Japan’s exports to the United States, Tokyo’s largest trading partner and a key contributor to its trade surplus.&nbsp;Among Japanese carmakers, Subaru appears the most exposed. Over 70 per cent of its global sales depend on the US market, and the company now estimates a $2.5 billion hit from the tariffs this fiscal year, as per Bloomberg Intelligence. While some manufacturers may explore shifting production to the US, such decisions risk hollowing out Japan’s domestic manufacturing base and affecting thousands of parts suppliers.<h2>US remains key market for Japanese automakers</h2>A Bloomberg chart on 2024 car sales reinforces just how vital the US market is for Japanese automakers. Of Toyota’s 10 million global vehicle sales, 23 per cent were in the US. For Honda and Nissan, the figures stood at 37 per cent and 28 per cent, respectively. Subaru stands out, with an overwhelming 71 per cent of its sales concentrated in the US alone.

<figure class="table"><table><tbody><tr><td>Carmaker</td><td>Global Sales (2024)</td><td>Share of US Market</td></tr><tr><td>Toyota</td><td>10M</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Honda</td><td>3.8M</td><td>37%</td></tr><tr><td>Nissan</td><td>3.4M</td><td>28%</td></tr><tr><td>Subaru</td><td>0.94M</td><td>71%</td></tr><tr><td>Mazda</td><td>1.3M</td><td>33%</td></tr><tr><td>Mitsubishi</td><td>0.85M</td><td>13%</td></tr><tr><td>Suzuki</td><td>3.3M</td><td>0% (focuses on India &amp; Japan)</td></tr></tbody></table></figure>(Source: Bloomberg)

<h2>Japan’s supply chain at breaking point</h2>Smaller suppliers are already under pressure from the global EV transition are feeling the effects first. At Daido Steel Co., a 12,000-employee firm making magnets for hybrid engines, executives are worried about indirect fallout. The company doesn’t export directly to the US, but it supplies major automakers like Honda and Toyota, making it vulnerable to downstream production cuts.&nbsp;Another example is Hasegawa Yuuki Co., a small manufacturer with just 50 employees. The company has already lost 5 per cent of its orders after Honda moved some of its production to Alabama in response to the tariffs. President Noriyuki Hasegawa said the firm is now exploring non-automotive sectors to stay afloat, including furniture fittings and home storage equipment.&nbsp;Ogami Co., another plastic components supplier based in Gunma, has put capital investment plans on hold and warned that salary hikes for 2025 are now “difficult”. With thin profit margins and limited flexibility to expand overseas, many SMEs like Ogami may not survive prolonged trade disruptions.This is particularly concerning because two-thirds of Japan’s workforce is employed by small and mid-sized enterprises (SMEs), many of which are tied to the auto supply chain. The ripple effect of tariffs could therefore trigger a broader employment crisis and drag down wage growth.<h2>Tokyo’s last push</h2>Japan’s government is now in damage control mode. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who faces an election next month, has instructed negotiators to seek “tariff concessions” from Washington. Akazawa’s upcoming talks in North America, his seventh round with US officials are seen as Tokyo’s last chance to soften the impact.&nbsp;Japan’s best-case outcome, according to analysts cited by Bloomberg, is a reduction of auto tariffs to 10 per cent. Even that would be painful, but manageable. Analysts estimate that a 10 per cent tariff could be absorbed through gradual price hikes of 2–3 per cent per year, alongside new car model rollouts to maintain buyer interest.&nbsp;But a full 25 per cent levy would push several automakers into crisis mode. “At that level, one or two of Japan’s major carmakers may require state support,” said Tatsuo Yoshida, a senior auto analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. He compared the potential fallout to General Motors during the global financial crisis—a scenario Tokyo would want to avoid at all costs.<h2>Will protectionism outlast Trump?</h2>Japanese businesses are watching developments closely. For many, the fear isn’t just about this tariff round—it’s about whether Trump’s protectionist wave will continue if he secures another four-year term.“Surviving the pandemic was hard enough. But this time, we may not make it,” said Hiroaki Ogami, the head of Ogami Co., in an interview with Bloomberg. “We can’t just wait this out.” &nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

With 3.3 million cars built in America and $60 billion invested, Japan urges Washington to reconsider 25% tariff that threatens jobs, exports, and fragile growth.

Japan has reiterated its firm opposition to the 25 per cent US tariffs on automobile imports, just as a high-level trade delegation prepares to enter critical negotiations in Washington. Ryosei Akazawa, Japan’s chief trade negotiator, said on Thursday that such steep duties are “unacceptable”, especially given the scale of Japan’s contribution to the American automotive market. Speaking to reporters ahead of his trip to the US, Akazawa said Japanese carmakers produce 3.3 million vehicles in the US annually, far more than the 1.37 million they export to America. The industry has collectively invested over $60 billion in the US and is responsible for 2.3 million jobs, according to figures shared with Reuters. In fact, 300,000 vehicles built in the US by Japanese companies are exported to other markets, contributing to America’s own trade surplus. “We have repeatedly explained to the US that Japan’s automobile industry has made an enormous contribution to the US economy,” Akazawa said. “We consider the 25 per cent tariff to be unacceptable," as quoted by Bloomberg. Tariffs threaten Japan’s fragile recovery The tariff shock comes at a delicate moment. Japan was beginning to show early signs of economic revival, wage growth was picking up and consumer demand was starting to strengthen after years of stagnation. But that fragile recovery now appears at risk. As per a Bloomberg poll, 64 per cent of economists believe the tariffs could push Japan into a recession. The automobile industry is the backbone of Japan’s economy. It employs 5.6 million people, or 8.3 per cent of the country’s workforce, according to the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. Vehicles and auto parts account for one-third of Japan’s exports to the United States, Tokyo’s largest trading partner and a key contributor to its trade surplus. Among Japanese carmakers, Subaru appears the most exposed. Over 70 per cent of its global sales depend on the US market, and the company now estimates a $2.5 billion hit from the tariffs this fiscal year, as per Bloomberg Intelligence. While some manufacturers may explore shifting production to the US, such decisions risk hollowing out Japan’s domestic manufacturing base and affecting thousands of parts suppliers. US remains key market for Japanese automakers A Bloomberg chart on 2024 car sales reinforces just how vital the US market is for Japanese automakers. Of Toyota’s 10 million global vehicle sales, 23 per cent were in the US. For Honda and Nissan, the figures stood at 37 per cent and 28 per cent, respectively. Subaru stands out, with an overwhelming 71 per cent of its sales concentrated in the US alone.

Japan slams US auto tariffs as “unacceptable” ahead of key trade talks, warning of recession risk and damage to economic recovery.

Japan rejects US 25% auto tariffs, says carmakers already boost American economy

Britain is on track to experience its worst decade for living standards growth in more than 6 decades, according to the Resolution Foundation’s Living Standards Outlook 2025, released on June 26. Despite a sharp income recovery in 2024-25, the report warns that median household incomes will stagnate through the rest of the 2020s, particularly hitting lower-income families, renters, and children. Drawing on economic forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and the Bank of England, the report projects that typical non-pensioner household incomes will grow by just 1 per cent in real terms between 2024-25 and 2029-30, a cash gain of only around £300. This would amount to zero growth across the full decade, following a turbulent first half marked by the Covid-19 pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis.The weakest outlook is for those at the bottom of the income distribution. The poorest 10 per cent of non-pensioner households are projected to be 8 per cent worse off in 2029-30 compared to 2019-20, a loss of around £1,000. Meanwhile, incomes for the bottom half overall are expected to fall by 2 per cent over the decade, whereas the top half could see a slight rise of 1 per cent.Pensioners and outright homeowners are among the few groups likely to see positive growth. Pensioner incomes are projected to rise by 5 per cent between 2024-25 and 2029-30, largely due to the continuation of the triple lock on the state pension. By contrast, private renters are expected to see incomes fall by 2 per cent and mortgagors by 1 per cent over the same period. Children, in particular, are expected to suffer, with their typical household income projected to be 2 per cent lower in 2029-30 than in 2019-20.<h2>Policy choices and economic risks ahead</h2>The report warns that current government policies, including the continuation of the two-child benefit limit, frozen income tax thresholds, and rising council tax, are set to suppress income growth. Under existing policies, child poverty is expected to rise from 31 per cent in 2023-24 to 34 per cent by the end of the decade, representing a record 4.8 million children in poverty.However, the Resolution Foundation highlights that alternative policy decisions could significantly alter the trajectory. For instance, scrapping the two-child limit could reverse the expected rise in child poverty and deliver modest income growth for the poorest families, even if funded by tax increases.More optimistic economic scenarios, including stronger pay growth and higher employment, could also improve outcomes. In such a case, median incomes could rise by up to 3 per cent between 2024-25 and 2029-30, still historically weak, but better than the central forecast.<h2>Public concern reflects hard realities</h2>The bleak projections come amid widespread public anxiety. According to recent surveys cited in the report, 86 per cent of Britons view the cost of living as the UK’s most pressing issue, with a record 26 per cent saying they are struggling to live on their income, up from 16 per cent in 2018.Despite strong earnings growth in recent years, rising inflation, high housing costs, and policy headwinds have eroded real income gains. Without substantial changes, the 2020s could mark a generational low point for British household living standards.“The government’s goal of raising living standards is welcome but unambitious,” said Adam Corlett, lead author of the report. “Delivering noticeable income growth for a broad range of voters will require targeted measures for the poorest as well as sustained economic growth.”

The weakest outlook is for those at the bottom of the income distribution. The poorest 10 per cent of non-pensioner households are projected to be 8 per cent worse off in 2029-30 compared to 2019-20.

Britain is on track to experience its worst decade for living standards growth in more than 6 decades, according to the Resolution Foundation’s Living Standards Outlook 2025, released on June 26. Despite a sharp income recovery in 2024-25, the report warns that median household incomes will stagnate through the rest of the 2020s, particularly hitting lower-income families, renters, and children. Drawing on economic forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and the Bank of England, the report projects that typical non-pensioner household incomes will grow by just 1 per cent in real terms between 2024-25 and 2029-30, a cash gain of only around £300. This would amount to zero growth across the full decade, following a turbulent first half marked by the Covid-19 pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis. The weakest outlook is for those at the bottom of the income distribution. The poorest 10 per cent of non-pensioner households are projected to be 8 per cent worse off in 2029-30 compared to 2019-20, a loss of around £1,000. Meanwhile, incomes for the bottom half overall are expected to fall by 2 per cent over the decade, whereas the top half could see a slight rise of 1 per cent. Pensioners and outright homeowners are among the few groups likely to see positive growth. Pensioner incomes are projected to rise by 5 per cent between 2024-25 and 2029-30, largely due to the continuation of the triple lock on the state pension. By contrast, private renters are expected to see incomes fall by 2 per cent and mortgagors by 1 per cent over the same period. Children, in particular, are expected to suffer, with their typical household income projected to be 2 per cent lower in 2029-30 than in 2019-20. Policy choices and economic risks ahead The report warns that current government policies, including the continuation of the two-child benefit limit, frozen income tax thresholds, and rising council tax, are set to suppress income growth. Under existing policies, child poverty is expected to rise from 31 per cent in 2023-24 to 34 per cent by the end of the decade, representing a record 4.8 million children in poverty. However, the Resolution Foundation highlights that alternative policy decisions could significantly alter the trajectory. For instance, scrapping the two-child limit could reverse the expected rise in child poverty and deliver modest income growth for the poorest families, even if funded by tax increases. More optimistic economic scenarios, including stronger pay growth and higher employment, could also improve outcomes. In such a case, median incomes could rise by up to 3 per cent between 2024-25 and 2029-30, still historically weak, but better than the central forecast. Public concern reflects hard realities The bleak projections come amid widespread public anxiety. According to recent surveys cited in the report, 86 per cent of Britons view the cost of living as the UK’s most pressing issue, with a record 26 per cent saying they are struggling to live on their income, up from 16 per cent in 2018. Despite strong earnings growth in recent years, rising inflation, high housing costs, and policy headwinds have eroded real income gains. Without substantial changes, the 2020s could mark a generational low point for British household living standards. “The government’s goal of raising living standards is welcome but unambitious,” said Adam Corlett, lead author of the report. “Delivering noticeable income growth for a broad range of voters will require targeted measures for the poorest as well as sustained economic growth.”

The weakest outlook is for those at the bottom of the income distribution. The poorest 10 per cent of non-pensioner households are projected to be 8 per cent worse off in 2029-30 compared to 2019-20.

UK’s bleak living standards forecast: Stagnating growth, rising poverty

The UK government on Thursday introduced a new&nbsp;trade strategy designed to strengthen British exports while tightening safeguards against the threat of cheap foreign imports. The move comes amid rising global uncertainty and renewed protectionism triggered by the US tariff wave under President Donald Trump.<h2>What is Britain's new trade plan?&nbsp;</h2>Unveiled at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) conference in London, the strategy outlines a dual approach: expanding export support for UK firms while reinforcing trade defences to ensure domestic industries remain competitive.&nbsp;Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the initiative is aimed at “ensuring British businesses are protected from harm”, as quoted by Reuters. According to the strategy, the UK will increase government-backed financing for exporters and provide assistance in navigating complex trade regulations—especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).<h2>Concerns over redirected exports amid US tariffs</h2>The timing of the announcement follows rising concerns that goods originally intended for the US, particularly steel and electric vehicles, may be diverted to the UK, after President Trump’s new tariffs made American markets costlier for foreign producers. Reuters reports that British manufacturers fear a potential influx of underpriced imports, particularly from China, as global supply chains reroute. Sectors such as automotive and steel have called for urgent measures to prevent market distortion.&nbsp;Unlike the European Union, the UK has not imposed high tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles, and its existing steel import safeguards are due to expire in 2026.<h2>Trade defence under review</h2>Officials have signalled an upcoming review of trade remedy tools managed by the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA). While the UK’s current mechanisms allow for countermeasures against dumping or subsidies, industry groups say enforcement has been slow and limited in scope.&nbsp;According to Financial Times, British steelmakers are urging the government to extend or replace current safeguards and consider treating certain sectors, such as domestic steel production, as strategic.<h2>Focus on services, India trade deal</h2>The strategy also highlights a renewed focus on expanding UK services exports, which already account for over £500 billion annually, as per Financial Times. Officials pointed to the recently concluded UK–India free trade agreement as a key success. The deal is expected to increase bilateral trade by over £25 billion per year by 2040.&nbsp;The government also referenced improvements in post-Brexit trading terms with the European Union and a new tariff agreement with the US as signs of diplomatic progress.<h2>Closing the tax-free loophole on low-value imports</h2>The UK Treasury is reviewing the “de minimis” rule, which currently allows goods worth under £135 to enter the UK without import taxes. Retailers argue that this loophole is being exploited by foreign e-commerce firms, including Shein and Temu, to undercut local sellers.&nbsp;As per The Guardian, Andrew Opie of the British Retail Consortium called for “swift action” to prevent misuse of the rule, originally intended for consumers but now increasingly leveraged for commercial advantage.<h2>What’s next?</h2>The government’s trade policy update reflects a shift toward greater responsiveness in a changing global environment. With protectionist measures spreading across major economies and geopolitical risks reshaping supply chains, UK officials say the new plan aims to strike a balance, supporting exporters while defending vulnerable sectors.&nbsp;The coming months will be key as the UK reviews steel safeguards, monitors redirected trade flows, and implements changes to low-value import&nbsp;rules.&nbsp;&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

Amid Trump-led US tariff surge, Britain tightens trade defences and eyes redirected Chinese exports while expanding support for SMEs and services.

The UK government on Thursday introduced a new trade strategy designed to strengthen British exports while tightening safeguards against the threat of cheap foreign imports. The move comes amid rising global uncertainty and renewed protectionism triggered by the US tariff wave under President Donald Trump. What is Britain's new trade plan? Unveiled at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) conference in London, the strategy outlines a dual approach: expanding export support for UK firms while reinforcing trade defences to ensure domestic industries remain competitive. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the initiative is aimed at “ensuring British businesses are protected from harm”, as quoted by Reuters. According to the strategy, the UK will increase government-backed financing for exporters and provide assistance in navigating complex trade regulations—especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Concerns over redirected exports amid US tariffs The timing of the announcement follows rising concerns that goods originally intended for the US, particularly steel and electric vehicles, may be diverted to the UK, after President Trump’s new tariffs made American markets costlier for foreign producers. Reuters reports that British manufacturers fear a potential influx of underpriced imports, particularly from China, as global supply chains reroute. Sectors such as automotive and steel have called for urgent measures to prevent market distortion. Unlike the European Union, the UK has not imposed high tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles, and its existing steel import safeguards are due to expire in 2026. Trade defence under review Officials have signalled an upcoming review of trade remedy tools managed by the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA). While the UK’s current mechanisms allow for countermeasures against dumping or subsidies, industry groups say enforcement has been slow and limited in scope. According to Financial Times, British steelmakers are urging the government to extend or replace current safeguards and consider treating certain sectors, such as domestic steel production, as strategic. Focus on services, India trade deal The strategy also highlights a renewed focus on expanding UK services exports, which already account for over £500 billion annually, as per Financial Times. Officials pointed to the recently concluded UK–India free trade agreement as a key success. The deal is expected to increase bilateral trade by over £25 billion per year by 2040. The government also referenced improvements in post-Brexit trading terms with the European Union and a new tariff agreement with the US as signs of diplomatic progress. Closing the tax-free loophole on low-value imports The UK Treasury is reviewing the “de minimis” rule, which currently allows goods worth under £135 to enter the UK without import taxes. Retailers argue that this loophole is being exploited by foreign e-commerce firms, including Shein and Temu, to undercut local sellers. As per The Guardian, Andrew Opie of the British Retail Consortium called for “swift action” to prevent misuse of the rule, originally intended for consumers but now increasingly leveraged for commercial advantage. What’s next? The government’s trade policy update reflects a shift toward greater responsiveness in a changing global environment. With protectionist measures spreading across major economies and geopolitical risks reshaping supply chains, UK officials say the new plan aims to strike a balance, supporting exporters while defending vulnerable sectors. The coming months will be key as the UK reviews steel safeguards, monitors redirected trade flows, and implements changes to low-value import rules. (With inputs from the agencies)

UK unveils new trade strategy to boost exports and shield domestic industries from cheap foreign imports.

UK unveils trade plan to support exporters, guard against cheap imports

Meta Platforms secured a legal win on June 25 in a copyright case involving the use of books to train its generative AI model, Llama. Thirteen authors, including comedian Sarah Silverman and novelist Ta-Nehisi Coates, had alleged that Meta infringed on their copyrights by using pirated versions of their works without consent or compensation. However, US District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the plaintiffs failed to present a compelling legal argument that Meta’s actions violated US copyright law.The case, one of the first major legal battles testing the limits of fair use in the AI era, revolved around whether training AI models on copyrighted content without permission constitutes infringement. In his ruling, Judge Chhabria emphasised that the fair use doctrine protected Meta’s use of the books in this instance, noting that the plaintiffs could not prove that the company’s practices caused meaningful harm to the market for their works.“On this record, Meta has defeated the plaintiffs’ half-hearted argument that its copying causes or threatens significant market harm,” Chhabria wrote. He acknowledged that using copyrighted materials without permission is “generally illegal” but criticised the authors’ legal strategy as poorly developed. “This ruling does not stand for the proposition that Meta’s use of copyrighted materials to train its language models is lawful,” Chhabria clarified. “It stands only for the proposition that these plaintiffs made the wrong arguments and failed to develop a record in support of the right one.”<h2>Fair use doctrine shields Meta for now</h2>Meta’s core legal defence relied on the fair use doctrine, a provision of US copyright law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without the rights holder’s permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, or transformative uses. Meta argued that its AI training process was transformative, as it did not reproduce the original works but instead used them to teach the AI to generate new, original text.“No one can use Llama to read Sarah Silverman’s description of her childhood or Junot Diaz’s story of a Dominican boy growing up in New Jersey,” Meta’s attorneys wrote in filings. The company also claimed that the authors’ works could not be substituted by AI-generated content and that there was no evidence of market harm. “After nearly two years of litigation, there still is no evidence that anyone has ever used Llama as a substitute for reading Plaintiffs’ books, or that they even could,” the lawyers stated.While Chhabria acknowledged that Meta’s use may have economic implications, he noted that no significant harm was demonstrated in court. He did, however, criticise Meta’s assertion that banning the use of copyrighted works in AI training would “badly disserve” the public interest or stifle innovation. “This is nonsense,” Chhabria wrote, calling Meta’s claim exaggerated and speculative.<h2>Ruling limited in scope, new lawsuits likely</h2>Though Meta prevailed in this case, the ruling is not a sweeping endorsement of AI companies’ use of copyrighted materials. Judge Chhabria stressed that the decision applied only to the 13 plaintiffs and did not provide blanket legal protection for Meta’s practices.“In the grand scheme of things, the consequences of this ruling are limited,” he wrote. “This is not a class action, so the ruling only affects the rights of these thirteen authors, not the countless others whose works Meta used to train its models.” Chhabria also left open the possibility of future legal challenges, suggesting that a more thoroughly developed case could reach a different outcome.The ruling came just days after another case involving AI firm Anthropic, in which Judge William Alsup found that the company’s use of copyrighted books to train its Claude chatbot was also “transformative” and qualified for fair use. However, that case will still go to trial over allegations that Anthropic illegally downloaded pirated books from online sources.Chhabria criticised Alsup’s decision for focusing too heavily on the transformative nature of AI without adequately weighing potential harm to content creators. He expressed concern about the broader implications of generative AI on creative markets, saying such tools could undermine the incentive to produce original work. “By training generative AI models with copyrighted works, companies are creating something that often will dramatically undermine the market for those works,” Chhabria noted.<h2>More legal challenges loom for AI companies</h2>The recent ruling does not close the book on legal scrutiny of AI training practices. The plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that Meta used pirated versions of books from “shadow libraries”, with internal Meta documents showing the decision was escalated to CEO Mark Zuckerberg due to its potential legal risk. A separate claim related to Meta’s alleged illegal distribution of copyrighted works via torrenting is still pending.Meta has joined a growing list of tech companies, including OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic, that face lawsuits from authors, news organisations, and other rights holders over the unauthorised use of copyrighted materials in AI training. As generative AI continues to disrupt content creation industries, more complex legal battles over the limits of fair use are expected to emerge.

Though Meta prevailed in this case, Judge Chhabria stressed that the decision applied only to the 13 plaintiffs and did not provide blanket legal protection for Meta’s practices.

Meta Platforms secured a legal win on June 25 in a copyright case involving the use of books to train its generative AI model, Llama. Thirteen authors, including comedian Sarah Silverman and novelist Ta-Nehisi Coates, had alleged that Meta infringed on their copyrights by using pirated versions of their works without consent or compensation. However, US District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the plaintiffs failed to present a compelling legal argument that Meta’s actions violated US copyright law. The case, one of the first major legal battles testing the limits of fair use in the AI era, revolved around whether training AI models on copyrighted content without permission constitutes infringement. In his ruling, Judge Chhabria emphasised that the fair use doctrine protected Meta’s use of the books in this instance, noting that the plaintiffs could not prove that the company’s practices caused meaningful harm to the market for their works. “On this record, Meta has defeated the plaintiffs’ half-hearted argument that its copying causes or threatens significant market harm,” Chhabria wrote. He acknowledged that using copyrighted materials without permission is “generally illegal” but criticised the authors’ legal strategy as poorly developed. “This ruling does not stand for the proposition that Meta’s use of copyrighted materials to train its language models is lawful,” Chhabria clarified. “It stands only for the proposition that these plaintiffs made the wrong arguments and failed to develop a record in support of the right one.” Fair use doctrine shields Meta for now Meta’s core legal defence relied on the fair use doctrine, a provision of US copyright law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without the rights holder’s permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, or transformative uses. Meta argued that its AI training process was transformative, as it did not reproduce the original works but instead used them to teach the AI to generate new, original text. “No one can use Llama to read Sarah Silverman’s description of her childhood or Junot Diaz’s story of a Dominican boy growing up in New Jersey,” Meta’s attorneys wrote in filings. The company also claimed that the authors’ works could not be substituted by AI-generated content and that there was no evidence of market harm. “After nearly two years of litigation, there still is no evidence that anyone has ever used Llama as a substitute for reading Plaintiffs’ books, or that they even could,” the lawyers stated. While Chhabria acknowledged that Meta’s use may have economic implications, he noted that no significant harm was demonstrated in court. He did, however, criticise Meta’s assertion that banning the use of copyrighted works in AI training would “badly disserve” the public interest or stifle innovation. “This is nonsense,” Chhabria wrote, calling Meta’s claim exaggerated and speculative. Ruling limited in scope, new lawsuits likely Though Meta prevailed in this case, the ruling is not a sweeping endorsement of AI companies’ use of copyrighted materials. Judge Chhabria stressed that the decision applied only to the 13 plaintiffs and did not provide blanket legal protection for Meta’s practices. “In the grand scheme of things, the consequences of this ruling are limited,” he wrote. “This is not a class action, so the ruling only affects the rights of these thirteen authors, not the countless others whose works Meta used to train its models.” Chhabria also left open the possibility of future legal challenges, suggesting that a more thoroughly developed case could reach a different outcome. The ruling came just days after another case involving AI firm Anthropic, in which Judge William Alsup found that the company’s use of copyrighted books to train its Claude chatbot was also “transformative” and qualified for fair use. However, that case will still go to trial over allegations that Anthropic illegally downloaded pirated books from online sources. Chhabria criticised Alsup’s decision for focusing too heavily on the transformative nature of AI without adequately weighing potential harm to content creators. He expressed concern about the broader implications of generative AI on creative markets, saying such tools could undermine the incentive to produce original work. “By training generative AI models with copyrighted works, companies are creating something that often will dramatically undermine the market for those works,” Chhabria noted. More legal challenges loom for AI companies The recent ruling does not close the book on legal scrutiny of AI training practices. The plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that Meta used pirated versions of books from “shadow libraries”, with internal Meta documents showing the decision was escalated to CEO Mark Zuckerberg due to its potential legal risk. A separate claim related to Meta’s alleged illegal distribution of copyrighted works via torrenting is still pending. Meta has joined a growing list of tech companies, including OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic, that face lawsuits from authors, news organisations, and other rights holders over the unauthorised use of copyrighted materials in AI training. As generative AI continues to disrupt content creation industries, more complex legal battles over the limits of fair use are expected to emerge.

Though Meta prevailed in this case, Judge Chhabria stressed that the decision applied only to the 13 plaintiffs and did not provide blanket legal protection for Meta’s practices.

Meta wins copyright lawsuit over AI training, but judge signals door still open for future claims

Nvidia surged to a record high on Wednesday, becoming the world’s most valuable company once again, as investor optimism over the next phase of artificial intelligence (AI) adoption drove a fresh rally in the US tech sector. The chipmaker’s stock jumped over 4 per cent to close at $154.10, pushing its market capitalisation to $3.76 trillion, surpassing Microsoft’s $3.65 trillion valuation.&nbsp;&nbsp;This marks another milestone for the California-based semiconductor giant, which is at the centre of the global AI boom.<h2>Analyst backs ‘Golden Wave’ of Gen AI</h2>The latest surge in Nvidia’s stock followed a bullish research note by Loop Capital, which raised its price target on the company from $175 to $250, citing stronger-than-expected demand for generative AI. “Our work suggests we are entering the next ‘Golden Wave’ of Gen AI adoption and Nvidia is at the front-end of another material leg of stronger-than-anticipated demand,” said Ananda Baruah, analyst at Loop Capital, as quoted by Reuters.&nbsp;Nvidia is widely seen as the global leader in AI chips used to train and run large language models (LLMs), and has become a bellwether for investor sentiment in the rapidly evolving AI ecosystem.<h2>Market rotation back to AI trade</h2>Nvidia’s rally comes as the broader US stock market returns to the AI-driven trade that dominated headlines last year. The S&amp;P 500 technology index climbed 0.9 per cent to a new all-time high on Wednesday and is now up nearly 6 per cent in 2025. The company has seen a 60 per cent rebound from its April lows, when US markets were rattled by President Donald Trump’s global tariff announcements. Since then, investor confidence has returned on expectations that the White House will negotiate trade deals to soften the blow of new tariffs.&nbsp;Despite its eye-popping valuation, Nvidia is currently trading at around 30 times forward earnings, according to LSEG data. That’s actually below its five-year average of 40—reflecting the fact that analysts have consistently raised their earnings forecasts even faster than the stock has appreciated.<h2>Tech titans continue value race</h2>Nvidia’s re-ascent to the top of the market cap leaderboard reflects an ongoing tug-of-war among the “Big Three” tech giants, Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple. The three have rotated positions as the world’s most valuable publicly listed companies over the past year.&nbsp;Microsoft had briefly reclaimed the lead in early June, following strong enterprise cloud performance. Meanwhile, Apple’s stock edged up 0.4 per cent on Wednesday, putting its valuation at approximately $3.0 trillion. With investors betting big on next-generation AI models, chipmakers like Nvidia remain central to the market narrative, bridging innovation in hardware, cloud computing, and software platforms.<h2>What's next?&nbsp;</h2>As global adoption of AI tools accelerates, from consumer applications to enterprise automation, Nvidia appears poised to remain the foundational infrastructure provider. Analysts now see the company not just as a chipmaker, but as a strategic enabler of the AI economy, drawing comparisons to what Microsoft was for software in the 1990s.&nbsp;With generative AI poised to reshape global productivity and geopolitics, Nvidia’s performance may continue to serve as a barometer for where the AI-driven economy is headed next.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Driven by soaring Gen AI demand and bullish forecasts, Nvidia hits record valuation of $3.76 trillion, edging past Microsoft in the Big Tech value race.

Nvidia surged to a record high on Wednesday, becoming the world’s most valuable company once again, as investor optimism over the next phase of artificial intelligence (AI) adoption drove a fresh rally in the US tech sector. The chipmaker’s stock jumped over 4 per cent to close at $154.10, pushing its market capitalisation to $3.76 trillion, surpassing Microsoft’s $3.65 trillion valuation. This marks another milestone for the California-based semiconductor giant, which is at the centre of the global AI boom. Analyst backs ‘Golden Wave’ of Gen AI The latest surge in Nvidia’s stock followed a bullish research note by Loop Capital, which raised its price target on the company from $175 to $250, citing stronger-than-expected demand for generative AI. “Our work suggests we are entering the next ‘Golden Wave’ of Gen AI adoption and Nvidia is at the front-end of another material leg of stronger-than-anticipated demand,” said Ananda Baruah, analyst at Loop Capital, as quoted by Reuters. Nvidia is widely seen as the global leader in AI chips used to train and run large language models (LLMs), and has become a bellwether for investor sentiment in the rapidly evolving AI ecosystem. Market rotation back to AI trade Nvidia’s rally comes as the broader US stock market returns to the AI-driven trade that dominated headlines last year. The S&P 500 technology index climbed 0.9 per cent to a new all-time high on Wednesday and is now up nearly 6 per cent in 2025. The company has seen a 60 per cent rebound from its April lows, when US markets were rattled by President Donald Trump’s global tariff announcements. Since then, investor confidence has returned on expectations that the White House will negotiate trade deals to soften the blow of new tariffs. Despite its eye-popping valuation, Nvidia is currently trading at around 30 times forward earnings, according to LSEG data. That’s actually below its five-year average of 40—reflecting the fact that analysts have consistently raised their earnings forecasts even faster than the stock has appreciated. Tech titans continue value race Nvidia’s re-ascent to the top of the market cap leaderboard reflects an ongoing tug-of-war among the “Big Three” tech giants, Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple. The three have rotated positions as the world’s most valuable publicly listed companies over the past year. Microsoft had briefly reclaimed the lead in early June, following strong enterprise cloud performance. Meanwhile, Apple’s stock edged up 0.4 per cent on Wednesday, putting its valuation at approximately $3.0 trillion. With investors betting big on next-generation AI models, chipmakers like Nvidia remain central to the market narrative, bridging innovation in hardware, cloud computing, and software platforms. What's next? As global adoption of AI tools accelerates, from consumer applications to enterprise automation, Nvidia appears poised to remain the foundational infrastructure provider. Analysts now see the company not just as a chipmaker, but as a strategic enabler of the AI economy, drawing comparisons to what Microsoft was for software in the 1990s. With generative AI poised to reshape global productivity and geopolitics, Nvidia’s performance may continue to serve as a barometer for where the AI-driven economy is headed next. (With inputs from the agencies)

As Wall Street rotates back to the AI trade, Nvidia’s rally signals renewed investor confidence in Gen AI's next growth wave and tech sector dominance.

Nvidia hits all-time high as analyst predicts AI-driven ‘Golden Wave’

World Liberty Financial (WLF), the Donald Trump-linked decentralised finance (DeFi) platform, is preparing to release an independent audit of its stablecoin USD1 and will soon launch a new mobile app aimed at retail crypto investors. WFL co-founder Zak Folkman shared the update during the Permissionless Conference in Brooklyn on June 25. Folkman confirmed that the company had completed its first accounting attestation and would publish the report within days. The audit will detail the reserves backing USD1, which include US dollar deposits, treasuries, and cash equivalents. BitGo is acting as the custodian, and WLF will begin publishing monthly reserve updates to enhance transparency.USD1 has reached a market cap of $2.2 billion since its March launch and operates on Ethereum, BNB Chain, and TRON. “We’re going to have very transparent auditing from a financial level,” Folkman said, emphasising WLF’s commitment to investor confidence. In addition, WLF is developing a user-friendly mobile app designed to simplify crypto use for mainstream investors. The app is expected to go live in the coming weeks.Perhaps most notably, Folkman hinted that the platform’s governance token, known as WLFI, could soon become available for trading. “If you pay attention over the next couple of weeks, I think everyone’s going to be very, very happy,” he said.<h2>Trump ties raise ethics concerns</h2>WLFI and USD1 have generated hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for Donald Trump’s family business, intensifying scrutiny from lawmakers and watchdog groups. Critics have raised ethical concerns about potential conflicts of interest, especially as Trump advocates for looser crypto regulations during his presidential campaign.The Trump family reportedly reduced its stake in WLF from 60 per cent to 40 per cent earlier this month, netting over $130 million from the sale and bringing in $190 million in total. WLFI tokens, which provide governance rights, were initially sold to raise capital but were not listed on exchanges. Despite criticism, adoption of USD1 continues to grow. Airdrops and large-scale investments, such as a $2 billion transaction by UAE-based MGX and a $4 million giveaway reaching 85,000 wallets, have helped solidify its presence in the stablecoin market.<h2>Stablecoin landscape under scrutiny</h2>The rise of USD1 comes amid increasing global regulatory scrutiny of stablecoins. On June 24, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) issued its strongest warning yet, urging nations to regulate stablecoins and accelerate central bank digital currency development. BIS officials warned that stablecoins lack transparency, pose risks to monetary sovereignty, and could trigger “fire sales” if reserve assets collapse.&nbsp;The group advocated for “tokenised unified ledgers” to integrate central bank reserves and government bonds into programmable, secure platforms. As the BIS calls for bold action, WLF’s moves highlight how political figures are increasingly intertwining with high-growth crypto ventures, pushing the boundaries of both financial innovation and regulatory oversight.

The stablecoin audit will detail the reserves backing USD1, which include US dollar deposits, treasuries, and cash equivalents. BitGo is acting as the custodian, and WLF will begin publishing monthly reserve updates to enhance transparency.

World Liberty Financial (WLF), the Donald Trump-linked decentralised finance (DeFi) platform, is preparing to release an independent audit of its stablecoin USD1 and will soon launch a new mobile app aimed at retail crypto investors. WFL co-founder Zak Folkman shared the update during the Permissionless Conference in Brooklyn on June 25. Folkman confirmed that the company had completed its first accounting attestation and would publish the report within days. The audit will detail the reserves backing USD1, which include US dollar deposits, treasuries, and cash equivalents. BitGo is acting as the custodian, and WLF will begin publishing monthly reserve updates to enhance transparency. USD1 has reached a market cap of $2.2 billion since its March launch and operates on Ethereum, BNB Chain, and TRON. “We’re going to have very transparent auditing from a financial level,” Folkman said, emphasising WLF’s commitment to investor confidence. In addition, WLF is developing a user-friendly mobile app designed to simplify crypto use for mainstream investors. The app is expected to go live in the coming weeks. Perhaps most notably, Folkman hinted that the platform’s governance token, known as WLFI, could soon become available for trading. “If you pay attention over the next couple of weeks, I think everyone’s going to be very, very happy,” he said. Trump ties raise ethics concerns WLFI and USD1 have generated hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for Donald Trump’s family business, intensifying scrutiny from lawmakers and watchdog groups. Critics have raised ethical concerns about potential conflicts of interest, especially as Trump advocates for looser crypto regulations during his presidential campaign. The Trump family reportedly reduced its stake in WLF from 60 per cent to 40 per cent earlier this month, netting over $130 million from the sale and bringing in $190 million in total. WLFI tokens, which provide governance rights, were initially sold to raise capital but were not listed on exchanges. Despite criticism, adoption of USD1 continues to grow. Airdrops and large-scale investments, such as a $2 billion transaction by UAE-based MGX and a $4 million giveaway reaching 85,000 wallets, have helped solidify its presence in the stablecoin market. Stablecoin landscape under scrutiny The rise of USD1 comes amid increasing global regulatory scrutiny of stablecoins. On June 24, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) issued its strongest warning yet, urging nations to regulate stablecoins and accelerate central bank digital currency development. BIS officials warned that stablecoins lack transparency, pose risks to monetary sovereignty, and could trigger “fire sales” if reserve assets collapse. The group advocated for “tokenised unified ledgers” to integrate central bank reserves and government bonds into programmable, secure platforms. As the BIS calls for bold action, WLF’s moves highlight how political figures are increasingly intertwining with high-growth crypto ventures, pushing the boundaries of both financial innovation and regulatory oversight.

The stablecoin audit will detail the reserves backing USD1, which include US dollar deposits, treasuries, and cash equivalents. BitGo is acting as the custodian, and WLF will begin publishing monthly reserve updates to enhance transparency.

Trump-linked crypto firm plans stablecoin audit and new investor app

China’s increasing use of collateral to secure loans to emerging economies is eroding these countries’ ability to control their public finances, according to a new international study. By tying loans to revenues from commodities like oil and copper, and locking funds in offshore escrow accounts, Beijing has created what researchers call a “ring-fencing” mechanism, one that restricts debtor governments’ fiscal freedom for years.&nbsp;The study, published on Thursday by researchers from AidData, the Kiel Institute, and Georgetown University, reviewed over 900 publicly guaranteed loans extended by Chinese state-owned entities between 2000 and 2021. Of these, nearly half worth US $418 billion, were found to be collateralised, largely targeting low-income and resource-rich nations.<h2>How does collateralised lending work?</h2>Unlike typical sovereign loans, China’s collateralised lending structure uses commodity export revenues, such as oil, gas, or minerals, as guarantees. In many cases, borrower countries are required to deposit the proceeds from these exports into escrow accounts located in China, controlled directly by the lenders.&nbsp;“Some of these revenues remain offshore beyond the control of the borrowing government for many years,” the report noted, adding that the lack of access or transparency “compromises debtor governments’ ability to monitor and steer their fiscal affairs,” as quoted by Reuters.The practice is prevalent in China’s lending to countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East, particularly in those facing economic distress or weak governance.<h2>The numbers behind the debt trap</h2>Between 2000 and 2021, China’s lending to the developing world surged dramatically, both in volume and in complexity. The bar graph below, sourced from AidData, shows how collateralised lending (orange bars) surged after the 2008 financial crisis and peaked again in 2014–2016, accounting for the majority of total lending in those years.<figure class="table"><table><tbody><tr><td>Year</td><td>Collateralised Loans (US$ bn)</td><td>Uncollateralised Loans (US$ bn)</td></tr><tr><td>2000</td><td>~1</td><td>~1</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>~12</td><td>~9</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>~70</td><td>~30</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>~55</td><td>~25</td></tr><tr><td>2016</td><td>~50</td><td>~30</td></tr><tr><td>2020</td><td>~10</td><td>~15</td></tr></tbody></table></figure>Source: AidData / HCC; Graphic: Karin Strohecker via Reuters(All figures in constant 2021 US dollars) Notably, the average collateralised loan locks up over 20 per cent of a country’s annual external debt repayments, restricting budgetary resources and access to alternative credit, as per the study.<h2>Fiscal control versus Chinese leverage</h2>According to Brad Parks, Executive Director of AidData, the report highlights a “previously undocumented pattern of revenue ring-fencing,” in which Chinese lenders gain first claim on national income streams, often at the expense of domestic public spending or creditor negotiations.&nbsp;In countries that later required debt restructuring, such as Zambia and Sri Lanka, China’s collateralised terms further complicated multilateral relief efforts, as Chinese banks refused to write down secured portions of the debt, as noted in the IMF-World Bank joint paper in 2023.<h2>IMF, World Bank raise the red flag</h2>Global financial institutions have expressed growing alarm. A 2023 paper by the IMF and World Bank warned that China’s practice increases the risk of over-borrowing, crowds out other unsecured creditors, and makes debt distress more likely, especially during commodity price shocks or political instability.&nbsp;“The collateral mechanism may appear commercially rational from a lender’s perspective, but it severely constrains sovereign fiscal space,” said one IMF official, as quoted by Reuters.<h2>A broader pattern of financial dominance</h2>This lending strategy is part of China’s broader transformation into a global creditor. According to the Financial Times, Beijing extended over US $1.34 trillion in overseas credit during 2000–2021, with a growing share dedicated to critical mineral extraction, infrastructure-for-resources deals, and bailout-style rescue loans to countries facing economic collapse.&nbsp;In fact, China provided US $240 billion in rescue financing to 22 countries between 2008 and 2021, positioning itself as a parallel lender of last resort to the IMF, albeit on very different terms.For emerging economies desperate for infrastructure and liquidity, China’s cash may offer a lifeline, but at a cost. The use of commodity-backed, collateralised loans gives Beijing preferential repayment rights and direct control over a borrower’s key revenue streams, often outside the purview of national parliaments or the public.&nbsp;With nearly half of China’s overseas loans now collateralised, and the debt burdens of many developing nations mounting, the study paints a troubling picture: a global financial system in which fiscal sovereignty is being steadily traded for short-term liquidity on China’s terms.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

By tying loans to oil, copper and other exports, China is locking key revenues offshore and tightening financial grip on low income, resource rich economies.

China’s increasing use of collateral to secure loans to emerging economies is eroding these countries’ ability to control their public finances, according to a new international study. By tying loans to revenues from commodities like oil and copper, and locking funds in offshore escrow accounts, Beijing has created what researchers call a “ring-fencing” mechanism, one that restricts debtor governments’ fiscal freedom for years. The study, published on Thursday by researchers from AidData, the Kiel Institute, and Georgetown University, reviewed over 900 publicly guaranteed loans extended by Chinese state-owned entities between 2000 and 2021. Of these, nearly half worth US $418 billion, were found to be collateralised, largely targeting low-income and resource-rich nations. How does collateralised lending work? Unlike typical sovereign loans, China’s collateralised lending structure uses commodity export revenues, such as oil, gas, or minerals, as guarantees. In many cases, borrower countries are required to deposit the proceeds from these exports into escrow accounts located in China, controlled directly by the lenders. “Some of these revenues remain offshore beyond the control of the borrowing government for many years,” the report noted, adding that the lack of access or transparency “compromises debtor governments’ ability to monitor and steer their fiscal affairs,” as quoted by Reuters. The practice is prevalent in China’s lending to countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East, particularly in those facing economic distress or weak governance. The numbers behind the debt trap Between 2000 and 2021, China’s lending to the developing world surged dramatically, both in volume and in complexity. The bar graph below, sourced from AidData, shows how collateralised lending (orange bars) surged after the 2008 financial crisis and peaked again in 2014–2016, accounting for the majority of total lending in those years. Year Collateralised Loans (US$ bn) Uncollateralised Loans (US$ bn) 2000 ~1 ~1 2005 ~12 ~9 2010 ~70 ~30 2014 ~55 ~25 2016 ~50 ~30 2020 ~10 ~15 Source: AidData / HCC; Graphic: Karin Strohecker via Reuters (All figures in constant 2021 US dollars) Notably, the average collateralised loan locks up over 20 per cent of a country’s annual external debt repayments, restricting budgetary resources and access to alternative credit, as per the study. Fiscal control versus Chinese leverage According to Brad Parks, Executive Director of AidData, the report highlights a “previously undocumented pattern of revenue ring-fencing,” in which Chinese lenders gain first claim on national income streams, often at the expense of domestic public spending or creditor negotiations. In countries that later required debt restructuring, such as Zambia and Sri Lanka, China’s collateralised terms further complicated multilateral relief efforts, as Chinese banks refused to write down secured portions of the debt, as noted in the IMF-World Bank joint paper in 2023. IMF, World Bank raise the red flag Global financial institutions have expressed growing alarm. A 2023 paper by the IMF and World Bank warned that China’s practice increases the risk of over-borrowing, crowds out other unsecured creditors, and makes debt distress more likely, especially during commodity price shocks or political instability. “The collateral mechanism may appear commercially rational from a lender’s perspective, but it severely constrains sovereign fiscal space,” said one IMF official, as quoted by Reuters. A broader pattern of financial dominance This lending strategy is part of China’s broader transformation into a global creditor. According to the Financial Times, Beijing extended over US $1.34 trillion in overseas credit during 2000–2021, with a growing share dedicated to critical mineral extraction, infrastructure-for-resources deals, and bailout-style rescue loans to countries facing economic collapse. In fact, China provided US $240 billion in rescue financing to 22 countries between 2008 and 2021, positioning itself as a parallel lender of last resort to the IMF, albeit on very different terms. For emerging economies desperate for infrastructure and liquidity, China’s cash may offer a lifeline, but at a cost. The use of commodity-backed, collateralised loans gives Beijing preferential repayment rights and direct control over a borrower’s key revenue streams, often outside the purview of national parliaments or the public. With nearly half of China’s overseas loans now collateralised, and the debt burdens of many developing nations mounting, the study paints a troubling picture: a global financial system in which fiscal sovereignty is being steadily traded for short-term liquidity on China’s terms. (With inputs from the agencies)

China’s collateralised loans are eroding fiscal control in developing nations, warns major international study.

China’s collateralised lending traps emerging economies in debt control crisis, says study

The US Department of Commerce has issued new letters to top energy exporters Enterprise Products and Energy Transfer, easing, but not eliminating, the recently imposed restrictions on ethane exports to China. The letters, first reported by Reuters, authorise the companies to load ethane onto tankers and transport it toward China, but restrict unloading the cargo at Chinese ports without explicit government approval. The move marks a slight relaxation of the strict curbs introduced in late May and early June, which halted ethane shipments altogether and left multiple tankers stranded off the US coast.&nbsp;Enterprise and Energy Transfer, two of the largest US ethane exporters, had several ships stuck in limbo as inventories of the petroleum byproduct began to rise domestically. The letter from the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), a division of the Commerce Department, said, “This letter authorises Enterprise Products to load vessels with ethane, transport and anchor in foreign ports, even if... to a party located in China.”&nbsp; It added, “However, Enterprise Products may not complete such export... to a party that is located in China," without further authorisation.<h2>Strategic pressure, tactical pause</h2>The initial restrictions were part of the Trump administration’s broader strategy to counter China’s tightening grip on critical materials, particularly rare earth elements essential to US technology and defence industries. Days before imposing the ethane export restrictions, the administration also curbed US exports of chip design software, jet engines, and nuclear power components.With the petrochemical sector in China heavily reliant on US ethane, accounting for nearly half of all US exports of the gas, industry experts warned that the embargo could create major disruptions on both sides. Ethane is a key input for plastics and other petrochemical products, and China’s rapidly growing sector has made long-term bets on continued US supply.<h2>Risk still looms for shippers</h2>Despite the apparent policy softening, energy exporters remain cautious. While they are now allowed to load and dispatch vessels, they risk penalties as high as twice the value of a shipment if a vessel unloads ethane in China without prior authorisation.Experts say companies are unlikely to take the risk without clear indications that offloading will be permitted upon arrival. Although the 30-day transit time from Houston to China gives some room for potential policy shifts, particularly as negotiations between Washington and Beijing evolve.The ethane export curb came amid high-stakes trade talks, in which the US sought access to rare earth materials exports from China. In recent days, China has shown signs of compromise, granting export licences and pledging faster processing of applications. Observers believe the US may be using this partial relaxation on ethane as a bargaining chip to extract further concessions.

The companies in United States are now authorised to load ethane onto tankers and transport it toward China, but restrict unloading the cargo at Chinese ports without explicit government approval.

The US Department of Commerce has issued new letters to top energy exporters Enterprise Products and Energy Transfer, easing, but not eliminating, the recently imposed restrictions on ethane exports to China. The letters, first reported by Reuters, authorise the companies to load ethane onto tankers and transport it toward China, but restrict unloading the cargo at Chinese ports without explicit government approval. The move marks a slight relaxation of the strict curbs introduced in late May and early June, which halted ethane shipments altogether and left multiple tankers stranded off the US coast. Enterprise and Energy Transfer, two of the largest US ethane exporters, had several ships stuck in limbo as inventories of the petroleum byproduct began to rise domestically. The letter from the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), a division of the Commerce Department, said, “This letter authorises Enterprise Products to load vessels with ethane, transport and anchor in foreign ports, even if... to a party located in China.” It added, “However, Enterprise Products may not complete such export... to a party that is located in China," without further authorisation. Strategic pressure, tactical pause The initial restrictions were part of the Trump administration’s broader strategy to counter China’s tightening grip on critical materials, particularly rare earth elements essential to US technology and defence industries. Days before imposing the ethane export restrictions, the administration also curbed US exports of chip design software, jet engines, and nuclear power components. With the petrochemical sector in China heavily reliant on US ethane, accounting for nearly half of all US exports of the gas, industry experts warned that the embargo could create major disruptions on both sides. Ethane is a key input for plastics and other petrochemical products, and China’s rapidly growing sector has made long-term bets on continued US supply. Risk still looms for shippers Despite the apparent policy softening, energy exporters remain cautious. While they are now allowed to load and dispatch vessels, they risk penalties as high as twice the value of a shipment if a vessel unloads ethane in China without prior authorisation. Experts say companies are unlikely to take the risk without clear indications that offloading will be permitted upon arrival. Although the 30-day transit time from Houston to China gives some room for potential policy shifts, particularly as negotiations between Washington and Beijing evolve. The ethane export curb came amid high-stakes trade talks, in which the US sought access to rare earth materials exports from China. In recent days, China has shown signs of compromise, granting export licences and pledging faster processing of applications. Observers believe the US may be using this partial relaxation on ethane as a bargaining chip to extract further concessions.

The companies in United States are now authorised to load ethane onto tankers and transport it toward China, but restrict unloading the cargo at Chinese ports without explicit government approval.

US loosens ethane export ban to China; conditions applied

The strong partnership between Microsoft and OpenAI is under stress, as disagreements over a critical clause tied to artificial general intelligence (AGI) threaten to upend one of the most consequential relationships in the world of AI, The Information reported on June 25. At the heart of the dispute lies a provision in their multi-billion-dollar agreement that allows OpenAI to restrict Microsoft’s access to its technologies upon declaring the achievement of AGI. The clause, agreed upon in 2019 when AGI seemed like a distant possibility, is now being reconsidered as OpenAI executives, including CEO Sam Altman, believe the company is on the verge of reaching that milestone.&nbsp;Microsoft, which has invested over $10 billion into OpenAI and integrated its models into Azure and key software products, is demanding that the AGI clause be removed. OpenAI, however, has so far refused. Under the current agreement, OpenAI’s board can declare AGI in “good faith”, at which point Microsoft’s privileged access could be cut off. Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella has publicly expressed scepticism over such a declaration, calling self-claimed AGI benchmarks “nonsensical”. The disagreement not only reflects diverging views on AGI itself but also highlights rising commercial tension between the two companies as OpenAI transitions toward a for-profit structure.<h2>Access, equity, and control</h2>The AGI clause is complicating OpenAI’s attempts to convert its for-profit arm into a public-benefit corporation, a move that requires Microsoft’s approval. Talks have dragged on for months, with both parties staking out hard positions. Microsoft is reportedly open to taking a 35 per cent equity stake in the new structure but insists on longer-term access to OpenAI’s intellectual property, even beyond any AGI declaration.The issue is further complicated by exclusivity clauses that currently prevent OpenAI from offering its tools to other cloud providers. Microsoft controls key aspects of OpenAI’s IP and hosts its models exclusively on Azure. If AGI, or what OpenAI calls “sufficient AGI”, is declared and Microsoft signs off, OpenAI would be allowed to license its models more broadly.For now, the talks continue, with both sides publicly projecting unity. “We have a long-term, productive partnership that has delivered amazing AI tools for everyone. Talks are ongoing, and we are optimistic we will continue to build together for years to come,” OpenAI and Microsoft said in a joint statement emailed to Reuters.

At the heart of the dispute lies a provision in their multi-billion-dollar agreement that allows OpenAI to restrict Microsoft’s access to its technologies upon declaring the achievement of AGI.

The strong partnership between Microsoft and OpenAI is under stress, as disagreements over a critical clause tied to artificial general intelligence (AGI) threaten to upend one of the most consequential relationships in the world of AI, The Information reported on June 25. At the heart of the dispute lies a provision in their multi-billion-dollar agreement that allows OpenAI to restrict Microsoft’s access to its technologies upon declaring the achievement of AGI. The clause, agreed upon in 2019 when AGI seemed like a distant possibility, is now being reconsidered as OpenAI executives, including CEO Sam Altman, believe the company is on the verge of reaching that milestone. Microsoft, which has invested over $10 billion into OpenAI and integrated its models into Azure and key software products, is demanding that the AGI clause be removed. OpenAI, however, has so far refused. Under the current agreement, OpenAI’s board can declare AGI in “good faith”, at which point Microsoft’s privileged access could be cut off. Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella has publicly expressed scepticism over such a declaration, calling self-claimed AGI benchmarks “nonsensical”. The disagreement not only reflects diverging views on AGI itself but also highlights rising commercial tension between the two companies as OpenAI transitions toward a for-profit structure. Access, equity, and control The AGI clause is complicating OpenAI’s attempts to convert its for-profit arm into a public-benefit corporation, a move that requires Microsoft’s approval. Talks have dragged on for months, with both parties staking out hard positions. Microsoft is reportedly open to taking a 35 per cent equity stake in the new structure but insists on longer-term access to OpenAI’s intellectual property, even beyond any AGI declaration. The issue is further complicated by exclusivity clauses that currently prevent OpenAI from offering its tools to other cloud providers. Microsoft controls key aspects of OpenAI’s IP and hosts its models exclusively on Azure. If AGI, or what OpenAI calls “sufficient AGI”, is declared and Microsoft signs off, OpenAI would be allowed to license its models more broadly. For now, the talks continue, with both sides publicly projecting unity. “We have a long-term, productive partnership that has delivered amazing AI tools for everyone. Talks are ongoing, and we are optimistic we will continue to build together for years to come,” OpenAI and Microsoft said in a joint statement emailed to Reuters.

At the heart of the dispute lies a provision in their multi-billion-dollar agreement that allows OpenAI to restrict Microsoft’s access to its technologies upon declaring the achievement of AGI.

Microsoft and OpenAI clash over future control of advanced AI models

The US dollar slumped to its lowest level in over three years against the euro on Thursday, as financial markets reacted nervously to growing concerns over the future independence of the US Federal Reserve. The decline followed reports that President Donald Trump is considering replacing Fed Chair Jerome Powell ahead of the November elections, a move that analysts say could damage the credibility of US monetary policy.<h2>Dollar loses ground amid political interference fears</h2>The greenback slipped across major currencies, with the euro climbing 0.2 per cent to $1.1687, its strongest since October 2021, as per Reuters. Sterling also gained 0.2 per cent to $1.3690, the highest level since January 2022. The dollar index, which tracks the currency against six peers, dropped to 97.491, its lowest reading since early 2022.&nbsp;Market unease intensified after a Wall Street Journal report claimed that Trump was toying with the idea of announcing Powell’s replacement by September or October. Such a move, if seen as politically motivated, could undermine the Federal Reserve’s independence and complicate the central bank’s cautious approach to interest rate management.&nbsp;“Markets are likely to bristle at any early move to name Powell’s successor, particularly if the decision appears politically motivated,” said Kieran Williams, head of Asia FX at InTouch Capital Markets, as quoted by Reuters. “It could recalibrate rate expectations and trigger a reassessment of dollar positioning.”<h2>Rate cut bets increase as Fed–White House tensions escalate</h2>The possibility of political interference has fed into expectations of a more dovish stance from the Fed. Markets are now pricing in a 25 per cent chance of a rate cut at the central bank’s July meeting, up from just 12 per cent a week earlier, according to Reuters. Overall, traders are factoring in 64 basis points of rate cuts by the end of 2025, up from 46 basis points priced in last Friday.&nbsp;Trump’s criticism of Powell escalated on Wednesday, when he called the Fed Chair “terrible” for not slashing rates more aggressively. Meanwhile, Powell, testifying before the Senate defended the Fed’s cautious stance, highlighting risks to inflation from the President’s evolving tariff policies. The dollar weakened 0.2 per cent against the yen to 144.89 and fell to its lowest against the Swiss franc since 2011 at 0.8033. The franc also hit a record high against the yen, trading near 180.55, as per Reuters.<h2>Tariffs and recession fears weigh on dollar</h2>Trump’s shifting tariff policy is also driving renewed concern. With the President’s July 9 deadline for trade deals approaching, banks and investors are bracing for further disruptions. JPMorgan, in a note published on Wednesday, warned that higher tariffs could slow US economic growth and lift inflation, projecting a 40 per cent chance of a recession.&nbsp;“The risk of additional negative shocks is elevated,” JPMorgan analysts wrote, as quoted by Reuters. “We expect US tariff rates to move higher… and our baseline scenario incorporates the end of a phase of US exceptionalism.”&nbsp;The “end of US exceptionalism," a term referring to America’s post-2008 dominance in global growth and monetary stability has become a central narrative in the dollar’s decline. With investor confidence shaken by domestic political uncertainty and tariff-induced inflationary risks, the greenback’s appeal as the world’s safe haven currency is visibly eroding.<h2>Euro emerges stronger as Europe invests in stability</h2>The euro has emerged as one of the biggest beneficiaries of the dollar’s slide. Investor optimism is growing around Europe’s economic resilience, as governments ramp up investment in defence, infrastructure, and strategic autonomy.&nbsp;The resulting capital flows into European markets are further strengthening the euro’s appeal as a reserve asset, challenging the dollar’s long-held dominance. With the Fed’s next meeting looming, and US politics in flux, global investors are left weighing whether the era of American monetary stability is entering uncharted territory.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies) &nbsp;

Markets jitter as Trump mulls replacing Fed Chair Powell; dollar weakens amid rising recession fears and fading US policy credibility.

The US dollar slumped to its lowest level in over three years against the euro on Thursday, as financial markets reacted nervously to growing concerns over the future independence of the US Federal Reserve. The decline followed reports that President Donald Trump is considering replacing Fed Chair Jerome Powell ahead of the November elections, a move that analysts say could damage the credibility of US monetary policy. Dollar loses ground amid political interference fears The greenback slipped across major currencies, with the euro climbing 0.2 per cent to $1.1687, its strongest since October 2021, as per Reuters. Sterling also gained 0.2 per cent to $1.3690, the highest level since January 2022. The dollar index, which tracks the currency against six peers, dropped to 97.491, its lowest reading since early 2022. Market unease intensified after a Wall Street Journal report claimed that Trump was toying with the idea of announcing Powell’s replacement by September or October. Such a move, if seen as politically motivated, could undermine the Federal Reserve’s independence and complicate the central bank’s cautious approach to interest rate management. “Markets are likely to bristle at any early move to name Powell’s successor, particularly if the decision appears politically motivated,” said Kieran Williams, head of Asia FX at InTouch Capital Markets, as quoted by Reuters. “It could recalibrate rate expectations and trigger a reassessment of dollar positioning.” Rate cut bets increase as Fed–White House tensions escalate The possibility of political interference has fed into expectations of a more dovish stance from the Fed. Markets are now pricing in a 25 per cent chance of a rate cut at the central bank’s July meeting, up from just 12 per cent a week earlier, according to Reuters. Overall, traders are factoring in 64 basis points of rate cuts by the end of 2025, up from 46 basis points priced in last Friday. Trump’s criticism of Powell escalated on Wednesday, when he called the Fed Chair “terrible” for not slashing rates more aggressively. Meanwhile, Powell, testifying before the Senate defended the Fed’s cautious stance, highlighting risks to inflation from the President’s evolving tariff policies. The dollar weakened 0.2 per cent against the yen to 144.89 and fell to its lowest against the Swiss franc since 2011 at 0.8033. The franc also hit a record high against the yen, trading near 180.55, as per Reuters. Tariffs and recession fears weigh on dollar Trump’s shifting tariff policy is also driving renewed concern. With the President’s July 9 deadline for trade deals approaching, banks and investors are bracing for further disruptions. JPMorgan, in a note published on Wednesday, warned that higher tariffs could slow US economic growth and lift inflation, projecting a 40 per cent chance of a recession. “The risk of additional negative shocks is elevated,” JPMorgan analysts wrote, as quoted by Reuters. “We expect US tariff rates to move higher… and our baseline scenario incorporates the end of a phase of US exceptionalism.” The “end of US exceptionalism," a term referring to America’s post-2008 dominance in global growth and monetary stability has become a central narrative in the dollar’s decline. With investor confidence shaken by domestic political uncertainty and tariff-induced inflationary risks, the greenback’s appeal as the world’s safe haven currency is visibly eroding. Euro emerges stronger as Europe invests in stability The euro has emerged as one of the biggest beneficiaries of the dollar’s slide. Investor optimism is growing around Europe’s economic resilience, as governments ramp up investment in defence, infrastructure, and strategic autonomy. The resulting capital flows into European markets are further strengthening the euro’s appeal as a reserve asset, challenging the dollar’s long-held dominance. With the Fed’s next meeting looming, and US politics in flux, global investors are left weighing whether the era of American monetary stability is entering uncharted territory. (With inputs from the agencies)

US dollar sinks to multi-year lows as fears grow over Fed independence and Trump’s push to oust Powell.

Dollar hits 3-year low as Trump eyes Fed shake-up

Oil prices ticked up on Thursday after data showed a sharper-than-expected drop in US crude and gasoline inventories, underscoring strong fuel demand across the world’s largest economy. However, investor caution continues to cloud the market amid geopolitical uncertainty in West Asia and ambiguity surrounding future OPEC+ production policy, as per Reuters.<h2>US demand supports recovery</h2>Brent crude futures rose 12 cents to $67.80 per barrel in early Asian trade, while US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) gained 20 cents to reach $65.12. Both benchmarks had jumped nearly one per cent on Wednesday following signs of resilient demand from US consumers, as quoted by Reuters.Government data released by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) showed a significant drop of 5.8 million barrels in US crude inventories for the week ending June 20, well above analyst forecasts of a mere 797,000-barrel draw, according to Reuters.&nbsp;Gasoline inventories also fell sharply by 2.1 million barrels against expectations of a 381,000-barrel build. This coincided with a surge in fuel consumption, with gasoline supplied often used as a proxy for demand hitting its highest level since December 2021, as per EIA data cited by Reuters.“Some buyers are favouring solid demand indicated by falling inventories in US weekly statistics,” said Yuki Takashima, economist at Nomura Securities, as quoted by Reuters. He added that despite this bullish trend, “investors remain nervous, seeking clarity on the status of the Iran-Israel ceasefire”.<h2>Geopolitical jitters and OPEC+ decisions</h2>While tensions between Iran and Israel have eased following a US-brokered ceasefire, investors are watching closely for long-term diplomatic commitments. US President Donald Trump, in remarks on Wednesday, praised the cessation of hostilities but made it clear that Washington’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign on Tehran, including oil sanctions remains in place, as per Reuters.&nbsp;However, Trump signalled a potential softening of enforcement, stating the US might allow limited leeway in oil transactions to help Iran “rebuild” its economy, provided talks on curbing its nuclear programme make progress, according to Reuters reporting.&nbsp;Market attention is also pivoting to production policy from the OPEC+ alliance. On Saturday, Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin suggested that the group, comprising the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies like Russia could advance its planned production hikes by almost a year, as quoted by Reuters.Such a move could inject fresh supply into the market, potentially capping oil price gains just as seasonal summer demand strengthens.<h2>What's next?&nbsp;</h2>Analysts are split on where oil prices go next. Takashima of Nomura forecasts that WTI could stabilise back in the $60–$65 per barrel range, levels seen before the West Asia flare-up, as per Reuters.&nbsp;While physical demand remains strong, traders are closely monitoring upcoming US-Iran talks, any shifts in OPEC+ output strategy, and broader macroeconomic signals from top consumers like China and India.With West Asia still fragile and major producers walking a tightrope between market share and price stability, oil markets remain delicately balanced.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)&nbsp;

Despite a bullish demand signal from the US, oil markets face volatility as traders weigh fragile West Asia peace and potential OPEC+ supply shifts.

Oil prices ticked up on Thursday after data showed a sharper-than-expected drop in US crude and gasoline inventories, underscoring strong fuel demand across the world’s largest economy. However, investor caution continues to cloud the market amid geopolitical uncertainty in West Asia and ambiguity surrounding future OPEC+ production policy, as per Reuters. US demand supports recovery Brent crude futures rose 12 cents to $67.80 per barrel in early Asian trade, while US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) gained 20 cents to reach $65.12. Both benchmarks had jumped nearly one per cent on Wednesday following signs of resilient demand from US consumers, as quoted by Reuters. Government data released by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) showed a significant drop of 5.8 million barrels in US crude inventories for the week ending June 20, well above analyst forecasts of a mere 797,000-barrel draw, according to Reuters. Gasoline inventories also fell sharply by 2.1 million barrels against expectations of a 381,000-barrel build. This coincided with a surge in fuel consumption, with gasoline supplied often used as a proxy for demand hitting its highest level since December 2021, as per EIA data cited by Reuters. “Some buyers are favouring solid demand indicated by falling inventories in US weekly statistics,” said Yuki Takashima, economist at Nomura Securities, as quoted by Reuters. He added that despite this bullish trend, “investors remain nervous, seeking clarity on the status of the Iran-Israel ceasefire”. Geopolitical jitters and OPEC+ decisions While tensions between Iran and Israel have eased following a US-brokered ceasefire, investors are watching closely for long-term diplomatic commitments. US President Donald Trump, in remarks on Wednesday, praised the cessation of hostilities but made it clear that Washington’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign on Tehran, including oil sanctions remains in place, as per Reuters. However, Trump signalled a potential softening of enforcement, stating the US might allow limited leeway in oil transactions to help Iran “rebuild” its economy, provided talks on curbing its nuclear programme make progress, according to Reuters reporting. Market attention is also pivoting to production policy from the OPEC+ alliance. On Saturday, Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin suggested that the group, comprising the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies like Russia could advance its planned production hikes by almost a year, as quoted by Reuters. Such a move could inject fresh supply into the market, potentially capping oil price gains just as seasonal summer demand strengthens. What's next? Analysts are split on where oil prices go next. Takashima of Nomura forecasts that WTI could stabilise back in the $60–$65 per barrel range, levels seen before the West Asia flare-up, as per Reuters. While physical demand remains strong, traders are closely monitoring upcoming US-Iran talks, any shifts in OPEC+ output strategy, and broader macroeconomic signals from top consumers like China and India. With West Asia still fragile and major producers walking a tightrope between market share and price stability, oil markets remain delicately balanced. (With inputs from the agencies)

Oil prices rise on strong US demand and inventory draw, but West Asia tensions and OPEC+ policy keep markets on edge.

Oil prices rise as US crude draw points to firm demand; West Asia risks still linger

An Essel Group company, Konti Infrapower and Multiventures, has moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) against Kotak Asset Management Company (AMC) over the asset management company’s failure to honour certain contractual obligations. Claiming dues to the tune of Rs 12.99 crore, the Essel Group entity has stated that Kotak AMC, as a corporate debtor, is yet to meet its financial obligations under an agreement dated April 6, 2019.“As the Corporate Debtor failed and neglected to honour its contractual obligations as given under Agreement dated 6th April 2019, the Applicant vide demand notice dated 19 February 2025, inter-alia called once again upon the Corporate Debtor to release the due amounts as a pro-tem measure. Till date, the Financial Creditor has not received payment from the Corporate Debtor,” reads the plea by Konti Infrapower and Multiventures.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h2>What is the plea about?</h2>&nbsp;The matter is related to the Rs 20-crore non-convertible debentures (NCDs) subscribed by Kotak AMC of Essel Group entities on the pledge of listed equity shares of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited (ZEEL), which in turn was the underlying security for the NCDs.The NCDs were sold by Kotak AMC to certain other investors in February 2019, and the advancement of Rs 12.99 crore was in relation to this part only. &nbsp;According to Konti Infrapower and Multiventures’ plea, certain obligations arose due to the NCD issue, for which, a sum of Rs 12.99 crore was advanced to Kotak AMC. Under the agreement, the Kotak group company was required to repay the amount to Konti Infrapower after the completion of the market regulator SEBI’s routine annual inspection. SEBI was due to issue its report after completing the routine annual inspection of Kotak AMC from April 2019 to March 2020. Further, the amounts advanced were to be refunded after unit holders of Kotak AMC were paid the amounts under the underlying NCDs. &nbsp;Konti Infrapower and Multiventures said it wrote two letters to Kotak AMC on July 6, 2022, for the release of the amounts as per the agreement, to which Kotak AMC replied on July 28, 2022, that the inspection of SEBI was not complete.&nbsp; &nbsp;According to the Essel Group company, SEBI’s inspection of Kotak AMC, which is the trigger point for the refund of its money, has been completed, and a report dated 28 March, 2023, has been prepared. Also, Kotak AMC liquidated its NCDs and repaid the unitholders. &nbsp;The next hearing in the matter is due on July 10. At the time of publishing this report, an email sent to Kotak AMC remained unanswered.

An Essel Group company has moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) against Kotak Asset Management Company, claiming dues of Rs 12.99 crore, citing the corporate debtor's failure to honour its contractual obligations in an agreement dated April 6, 2019.

An Essel Group company, Konti Infrapower and Multiventures, has moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) against Kotak Asset Management Company (AMC) over the asset management company’s failure to honour certain contractual obligations. Claiming dues to the tune of Rs 12.99 crore, the Essel Group entity has stated that Kotak AMC, as a corporate debtor, is yet to meet its financial obligations under an agreement dated April 6, 2019. “As the Corporate Debtor failed and neglected to honour its contractual obligations as given under Agreement dated 6th April 2019, the Applicant vide demand notice dated 19 February 2025, inter-alia called once again upon the Corporate Debtor to release the due amounts as a pro-tem measure. Till date, the Financial Creditor has not received payment from the Corporate Debtor,” reads the plea by Konti Infrapower and Multiventures. What is the plea about? The matter is related to the Rs 20-crore non-convertible debentures (NCDs) subscribed by Kotak AMC of Essel Group entities on the pledge of listed equity shares of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited (ZEEL), which in turn was the underlying security for the NCDs. The NCDs were sold by Kotak AMC to certain other investors in February 2019, and the advancement of Rs 12.99 crore was in relation to this part only. According to Konti Infrapower and Multiventures’ plea, certain obligations arose due to the NCD issue, for which, a sum of Rs 12.99 crore was advanced to Kotak AMC. Under the agreement, the Kotak group company was required to repay the amount to Konti Infrapower after the completion of the market regulator SEBI’s routine annual inspection. SEBI was due to issue its report after completing the routine annual inspection of Kotak AMC from April 2019 to March 2020. Further, the amounts advanced were to be refunded after unit holders of Kotak AMC were paid the amounts under the underlying NCDs. Konti Infrapower and Multiventures said it wrote two letters to Kotak AMC on July 6, 2022, for the release of the amounts as per the agreement, to which Kotak AMC replied on July 28, 2022, that the inspection of SEBI was not complete. According to the Essel Group company, SEBI’s inspection of Kotak AMC, which is the trigger point for the refund of its money, has been completed, and a report dated 28 March, 2023, has been prepared. Also, Kotak AMC liquidated its NCDs and repaid the unitholders. The next hearing in the matter is due on July 10. At the time of publishing this report, an email sent to Kotak AMC remained unanswered.

An Essel Group company has moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) against Kotak Asset Management Company, claiming dues of Rs 12.99 crore, citing the corporate debtor's failure to honour its contractual obligations in an agreement dated April 6, 2019.

Essel Group slams dishonest debtor Kotak AMC, drags it to NCLT for dishonouring contractual obligations