National Handloom Day 2026: From Alia Bhatt to Samantha Ruth Prabhu; Actresses who celebrated India's textile heritage as brides

The Royals enter the Doctor Who universe: King Charles and Queen Camilla beam into Commonwealth Games in TARDIS

Unitree Robotics targets $9 billion valuation in landmark IPO backed by DeepSeek and Tencent

India names 27 sites in Arunachal Pradesh

Bharat Bhhagya Viddhaata OTT: When will Kangana Ranaut's film stream online?

How many soldiers operate one S-400 battery?

Shakib Al Hasan ready to return to Bangladesh—under one condition

‘Fake news’: MEA rejects report claiming India sought defence pact with Israel after Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey deal

Rockstar to unveil GTA 6 extended look ahead of November launch

Russia forms Ukrainian Volunteer Spetsnaz Brigade to fight Ukraine

Drug-resistant fungus that hides in hair and enters bloodstream reported in 23 US states

Technology transfer deal boosts India's defence manufacturing ambitions

Border row erupts in Europe after Ceuta crossings, Spain imposes border controls on Italy

Morale plummets on USS Abraham Lincoln: Are US sailors reaching a breaking point? | GRAVITAS

'Security can't be bought with Pakistan, Turkey deal': Iran tells Saudi Arabia

Baba Vanga's 2026 prophecy: 2 predictions 'already came true', 3 terrifying ones remain. Details inside

Colombia’s new president Abelardo de la Espriella vows to ‘defeat narco-terrorists’, signals hardline shift

New Friday OTT releases (August 7, 2026): Operation Safed Sagar, Vadhandhi, Main Vaapis Aaunga- 6 movies and TV shows on Netflix, Prime Video and more

Squadron Leader Bhawana Kanth scripts history as Indian Air Force gets its first woman ‘Top Gun’ pilot

RSS says Gen Z protests reflect genuine distress

Trump says Iranian school bombing photos could be AI-generated - 'I don’t think...'

IAF officer held for sharing sensitive information in 'honey trap' case, booked under Official Secrets Act

Stray Kids under scrutiny? Fans react to Grammy submission silence after BTS boycott

Why the Su-30MKI doesn't need external fuel tanks to fly vast distances

Jugal Hansraj reunites with Shekhar Kapur after 40 years for Masoom: The Next Generation

New speed limits, automatic challans: Big traffic change coming to Delhi-Meerut Expressway. All you need to know

India officially names 27 places in Arunachal to counter China's renaming claims

Trump calls White House ballroom ruling a 'national disgrace' as court says Congress approval needed

US sanctions Iran’s crypto network after Strait of Hormuz attacks, offers $15m bounty for intel on IRGC finance

Why the Su-30MKI is one of the heaviest fighters ever built

Uttarakhand young innovator builds India's own flying vehicle, conducts first test flight: WATCH

Chilling video shows students take cover as teen opens fire at Thai school

Reese Witherspoon's father hospitalised after poolside incident in Nashville: Report

<p>Australia’s central bank, the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), on May 20 lowered its main cash rate by 25 basis points to a two-year low of 3.85 per cent.</p><p>The decision, which marks the second rate cut this year, was driven by the uncertainty in the global economic outlook and cooling inflation, though the RBA maintained a cautious stance on the need for further easing.</p><p>The move was widely anticipated by markets, given a slowdown in domestic inflation and heightened global uncertainty following recent US tariff announcements. Headline consumer price inflation held at 2.4 per cent in the first quarter of 2025, and a key trimmed mean measure of core inflation slowed to 2.9 per cent, bringing it back into the RBA’s 2 per cent to 3 per cent target band for the first time since late 2021.</p><p>“Inflation is in the target band, and upside risks appear to have diminished as international developments are expected to weigh on the economy,” the RBA board stated.</p><p>They assessed that this rate cut would make monetary policy “somewhat less restrictive”, but emphasised continued caution about the outlook, especially given the elevated uncertainty surrounding both aggregate demand and supply.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Trade tensions cast a shadow</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>A significant factor influencing the RBA’s decision is the rapidly evolving global trade landscape. Since the RBA’s last meeting in April, US President Donald Trump’s tariffs have continued to roil financial markets and disrupt business plans.</p><p>While a recent agreement between Washington and Beijing has temporarily slashed some duties for 90 days, considerable uncertainty remains about the final scope of tariffs and the policy responses of other nations.</p><p>Australia, a major exporter of resources to China, is particularly vulnerable to disruptions in global trade. Tariffs on the world’s second-biggest economy could hinder its growth and, consequently, its demand for commodities like iron ore.</p><p>The RBA’s quarterly Statement on Monetary Policy indicated that inflation would be lower and unemployment higher due to the cascading effects of global trade tensions. It specifically warned that the drag from Trump’s tariffs would lower global growth and prove disinflationary for Australia in net terms.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Mixed domestic picture</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Domestically, the data flow has been mixed. While the anticipated rebound in consumer spending has been disappointingly low, the labour market has remained strong, with the jobless rate hovering around a low 4.1 per cent for over a year. Wage growth picked up in the first quarter, though this was primarily attributed to government pay rises rather than a damaging wage-price spiral.</p><p>Despite the rate cut, the RBA remains attentive to domestic economic activity and inflation uncertainties. The RBA’s staff forecasts now project underlying inflation to ease slightly more quickly to be around the mid-point of its 2-3 per cent target range throughout much of the forecast period, while the labour market is seen loosening a tad. These forecasts assume a cumulative 85 basis points of easing by mid-2026.</p><p>The RBA has adopted a delicate balance in its monetary policy, seeking to hold onto labour market gains while curbing inflation. With core inflation returning to target and unemployment remaining low, this approach appears to be yielding results.</p><p>However, the Board acknowledged the uncertainties, including the lags in the effect of monetary policy and how firms’ pricing decisions and wages will respond to the demand environment and weak productivity outcomes amidst a tight labour market. The RBA concluded that while the risks to inflation have become more balanced, it will remain data-dependent and vigilant in guiding its future decisions, focusing on its mandate to deliver price stability and full employment.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>(<i>With inputs from agencies</i>)</p>

RBA lowered its main cash rate by 25 basis points to a two-year low of 3.85 per cent, though it maintained a cautious stance on the need for further easing.

Australia’s central bank, the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), on May 20 lowered its main cash rate by 25 basis points to a two-year low of 3.85 per cent. The decision, which marks the second rate cut this year, was driven by the uncertainty in the global economic outlook and cooling inflation, though the RBA maintained a cautious stance on the need for further easing. The move was widely anticipated by markets, given a slowdown in domestic inflation and heightened global uncertainty following recent US tariff announcements. Headline consumer price inflation held at 2.4 per cent in the first quarter of 2025, and a key trimmed mean measure of core inflation slowed to 2.9 per cent, bringing it back into the RBA’s 2 per cent to 3 per cent target band for the first time since late 2021. “Inflation is in the target band, and upside risks appear to have diminished as international developments are expected to weigh on the economy,” the RBA board stated. They assessed that this rate cut would make monetary policy “somewhat less restrictive”, but emphasised continued caution about the outlook, especially given the elevated uncertainty surrounding both aggregate demand and supply. Trade tensions cast a shadow A significant factor influencing the RBA’s decision is the rapidly evolving global trade landscape. Since the RBA’s last meeting in April, US President Donald Trump’s tariffs have continued to roil financial markets and disrupt business plans. While a recent agreement between Washington and Beijing has temporarily slashed some duties for 90 days, considerable uncertainty remains about the final scope of tariffs and the policy responses of other nations. Australia, a major exporter of resources to China, is particularly vulnerable to disruptions in global trade. Tariffs on the world’s second-biggest economy could hinder its growth and, consequently, its demand for commodities like iron ore. The RBA’s quarterly Statement on Monetary Policy indicated that inflation would be lower and unemployment higher due to the cascading effects of global trade tensions. It specifically warned that the drag from Trump’s tariffs would lower global growth and prove disinflationary for Australia in net terms. Mixed domestic picture Domestically, the data flow has been mixed. While the anticipated rebound in consumer spending has been disappointingly low, the labour market has remained strong, with the jobless rate hovering around a low 4.1 per cent for over a year. Wage growth picked up in the first quarter, though this was primarily attributed to government pay rises rather than a damaging wage-price spiral. Despite the rate cut, the RBA remains attentive to domestic economic activity and inflation uncertainties. The RBA’s staff forecasts now project underlying inflation to ease slightly more quickly to be around the mid-point of its 2-3 per cent target range throughout much of the forecast period, while the labour market is seen loosening a tad. These forecasts assume a cumulative 85 basis points of easing by mid-2026. The RBA has adopted a delicate balance in its monetary policy, seeking to hold onto labour market gains while curbing inflation. With core inflation returning to target and unemployment remaining low, this approach appears to be yielding results. However, the Board acknowledged the uncertainties, including the lags in the effect of monetary policy and how firms’ pricing decisions and wages will respond to the demand environment and weak productivity outcomes amidst a tight labour market. The RBA concluded that while the risks to inflation have become more balanced, it will remain data-dependent and vigilant in guiding its future decisions, focusing on its mandate to deliver price stability and full employment. (With inputs from agencies)

<p>RBA lowered its main cash rate by 25 basis points to a two-year low of 3.85 per cent, though it maintained a cautious stance on the need for further easing.</p>

Australian central bank cuts rate to two-year low amid global headwinds

<p>China’s battery behemoth CATL just pulled off the biggest IPO of the year, but the buzz around its $4.6 billion Hong Kong debut wasn’t just about market performance, it was about who <i>wasn’t</i>&nbsp;allowed to invest.<br>&nbsp;</p><p>In a striking sign of deepening US-China financial tensions, onshore American investors were reportedly barred from buying shares of CATL, the world’s largest EV battery maker and a key supplier to Tesla, Volkswagen, and Toyota.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The move underscored a growing “financial decoupling” between the world’s two largest economies. Economist Stephen Roach, former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, told The New York Times that “we are headed toward full financial decoupling with China” and added that “Congress is driving the process of disengagement.”</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Why is CATL’s IPO a big deal?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL) dominates the global electric vehicle battery market, controlling more than one-third of global EV battery sales, according to the BBC. The company is a cornerstone of China’s green tech ambitions and is rapidly expanding overseas, with manufacturing plants in Germany and Hungary, and an upcoming factory in Spain in partnership with Stellantis.<br>&nbsp;</p><p>Although already listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, CATL raised HK$35.7 billion ($4.55 billion) in its Hong Kong debut — the largest public offering of 2025 so far, according to data provider Dealogic, as reported by The New York Times.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Neil Beveridge, head of Asia research at Bernstein, told the BBC that “the performance of the stock was very good in what is going to be a key IPO for Hong Kong given the size of the listing.”</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Why were US investors barred?</strong><br>&nbsp;</p><p>The exclusion of onshore US investors from CATL’s Hong Kong listing was a direct result of escalating geopolitical tensions. In January, the US Department of Defense designated CATL as a company allegedly working with China’s military, a move that was reported by both the BBC and The New York Times.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Then in April, the chair of the House Select Committee on China wrote to the CEOs of JPMorgan and Bank of America, urging them to withdraw from the IPO, according to the BBC. In addition, The New York Times reported that US lawmakers lobbied Wall Street banks to distance themselves from the deal, citing national security concerns.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Facing mounting scrutiny, CATL restructured its IPO as a Regulation S offering, effectively barring onshore US investors and avoiding certain regulatory filings in the United States. In regulatory documents, the company admitted that it faces “risks associated with changes in trade policies or tariff regulations,” as reported by The New York Times.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>CATL also strongly denied any ties to military operations, stating it “has never engaged in any military-related businesses or activities” and had reached out to the Department of Defense to challenge what it called a false designation.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>The bigger picture: Financial decoupling</strong></p><p><br>CATL’s listing marks a dramatic reversal from the earlier trend of Chinese tech firms pursuing Wall Street debuts. When Alibaba went public on the New York Stock Exchange in 2014, it raised $21.8 billion and was celebrated by American investors and bankers.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>But according to The New York Times, the current climate is very different, with Chinese companies increasingly steering clear of US markets due to both political pressures and policy constraints.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Experts believe this may just be the beginning. Victor Shih, a specialist in Chinese finance at the University of California, San Diego, told The New York Times that CATL’s IPO structure represents “a major milestone” and predicted that “this will apply to many Chinese hardware and even some software producers,” effectively shutting out American investors from future high-growth opportunities. He estimated that around 10 per cent of US investors might have participated in the CATL IPO had they not been restricted.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Can tariffs hurt CATL?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Not as much as one might expect. CATL generates nearly 70 per cent of its revenue from the Chinese market, which has helped buffer the company against the effects of US-imposed tariffs, according to the BBC.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Despite trade headwinds, CATL continues to be a global innovation leader. In April, it unveiled a new battery capable of fast-charging up to 323 miles (520 kilometers) in just five minutes, as reported by the BBC.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The company also provides lithium iron phosphate batteries to Tesla’s Shanghai Gigafactory, further cementing its global presence.</p>

CATL $4.6 billion Hong Kong debut wasn’t just about market performance, it was about who wasn’t allowed to invest.

China’s battery behemoth CATL just pulled off the biggest IPO of the year, but the buzz around its $4.6 billion Hong Kong debut wasn’t just about market performance, it was about who wasn’t allowed to invest. In a striking sign of deepening US-China financial tensions, onshore American investors were reportedly barred from buying shares of CATL, the world’s largest EV battery maker and a key supplier to Tesla, Volkswagen, and Toyota. The move underscored a growing “financial decoupling” between the world’s two largest economies. Economist Stephen Roach, former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, told The New York Times that “we are headed toward full financial decoupling with China” and added that “Congress is driving the process of disengagement.” Why is CATL’s IPO a big deal? Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL) dominates the global electric vehicle battery market, controlling more than one-third of global EV battery sales, according to the BBC. The company is a cornerstone of China’s green tech ambitions and is rapidly expanding overseas, with manufacturing plants in Germany and Hungary, and an upcoming factory in Spain in partnership with Stellantis. Although already listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, CATL raised HK$35.7 billion ($4.55 billion) in its Hong Kong debut — the largest public offering of 2025 so far, according to data provider Dealogic, as reported by The New York Times. Neil Beveridge, head of Asia research at Bernstein, told the BBC that “the performance of the stock was very good in what is going to be a key IPO for Hong Kong given the size of the listing.” Why were US investors barred? The exclusion of onshore US investors from CATL’s Hong Kong listing was a direct result of escalating geopolitical tensions. In January, the US Department of Defense designated CATL as a company allegedly working with China’s military, a move that was reported by both the BBC and The New York Times. Then in April, the chair of the House Select Committee on China wrote to the CEOs of JPMorgan and Bank of America, urging them to withdraw from the IPO, according to the BBC. In addition, The New York Times reported that US lawmakers lobbied Wall Street banks to distance themselves from the deal, citing national security concerns. Facing mounting scrutiny, CATL restructured its IPO as a Regulation S offering, effectively barring onshore US investors and avoiding certain regulatory filings in the United States. In regulatory documents, the company admitted that it faces “risks associated with changes in trade policies or tariff regulations,” as reported by The New York Times. CATL also strongly denied any ties to military operations, stating it “has never engaged in any military-related businesses or activities” and had reached out to the Department of Defense to challenge what it called a false designation. The bigger picture: Financial decoupling CATL’s listing marks a dramatic reversal from the earlier trend of Chinese tech firms pursuing Wall Street debuts. When Alibaba went public on the New York Stock Exchange in 2014, it raised $21.8 billion and was celebrated by American investors and bankers. But according to The New York Times, the current climate is very different, with Chinese companies increasingly steering clear of US markets due to both political pressures and policy constraints. Experts believe this may just be the beginning. Victor Shih, a specialist in Chinese finance at the University of California, San Diego, told The New York Times that CATL’s IPO structure represents “a major milestone” and predicted that “this will apply to many Chinese hardware and even some software producers,” effectively shutting out American investors from future high-growth opportunities. He estimated that around 10 per cent of US investors might have participated in the CATL IPO had they not been restricted. Can tariffs hurt CATL? Not as much as one might expect. CATL generates nearly 70 per cent of its revenue from the Chinese market, which has helped buffer the company against the effects of US-imposed tariffs, according to the BBC. Despite trade headwinds, CATL continues to be a global innovation leader. In April, it unveiled a new battery capable of fast-charging up to 323 miles (520 kilometers) in just five minutes, as reported by the BBC. The company also provides lithium iron phosphate batteries to Tesla’s Shanghai Gigafactory, further cementing its global presence.

<p>Amid global trade tension, China’s battery behemoth Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL) just pulled off the biggest IPO of the year.</p>

How the US-China trade war shaped CATL’s blockbuster Hong Kong debut

<p>Foxconn, the key assembler of Apple’s iPhones, has pledged a significant investment of $1.5 billion into its Indian operations, signalling an ongoing shift in Apple’s global supply chain strategy.</p><p>The move reflects the company’s efforts to ramp up production outside of China, as it looks to mitigate risks posed by ongoing trade tensions, tariffs, and geopolitical uncertainty. This latest funding, made via Foxconn’s Singapore-based subsidiary, comes as the company expands its manufacturing capacity in southern India, positioning the country as a crucial hub for Apple’s iPhone production.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>iPhone production diversification</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Foxconn’s investment is the latest step in Apple’s broader push to diversify its manufacturing, which has been concentrated in China for years. As global political tensions, particularly the US-China trade war, have escalated, Apple has sought to reduce its heavy reliance on Chinese factories and shift more production to other countries.</p><p>India has emerged as a critical destination for this production shift, with Foxconn’s factories in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Telangana now playing a central role in assembling iPhones for both domestic and export markets.</p><p>In the 12 months leading up to March 2025, Apple’s production of iPhones in India surged to $22 billion, a nearly 60 per cent increase compared to the previous year. A significant portion of this production is handled by Foxconn’s factory in India, which is rapidly expanding.</p><p>Tata Group, which recently acquired Wistron’s Indian operations and took over Pegatron’s local business, has also played a key role in Apple’s manufacturing strategy in India. These efforts align with Apple’s broader goal to produce a substantial portion of the iPhones sold in the United States from India by the end of next year.</p><p>Minister for Electronics and Information Technology Ashwini Vaishnaw recently celebrated a major milestone in India’s role in Apple’s supply chain. He announced that Apple had exported iPhones worth over $17.4 billion during the fiscal year ending in March 2025, underscoring the significant growth in India’s smartphone manufacturing sector. This is a part of a larger trend in India’s growing role in global electronics manufacturing, as total smartphone exports from the country crossed $23.4 billion, a 54 per cent increase over the previous year.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>A strategic shift</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Apple’s push to move a significant portion of its production out of China was driven by several factors, including disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, which exposed the risks of over-reliance on a single manufacturing location. Apple’s factories in China faced severe production delays during the pandemic, highlighting the vulnerability of having a large portion of its supply chain concentrated in one country.</p><p>This disruption prompted Apple to accelerate its efforts to diversify its supply chain, turning to India, Southeast Asia, and other regions as alternative manufacturing hubs.</p><p>However, despite this pivot, Apple is unlikely to fully exit China in the near future. Experts believe that while India and Southeast Asia will become increasingly central to Apple’s production strategy, China will remain a key player in the firm's supply chain due to its well-established infrastructure and workforce.</p><p>The geopolitical climate, particularly the tense relationship between the US and China, has further driven Apple’s efforts to reduce its exposure to potential tariffs. Apple and other global companies are diversifying their production locations to mitigate the risks associated with unpredictable trade policies. As part of this strategy, Apple has also increased its investments in the US.</p><p>The company has pledged to invest $500 billion domestically over the next four years and create more American jobs, although Apple currently does not produce smartphones in the US.</p><p>Despite these investments, US President Donald Trump has criticised Apple’s growing manufacturing footprint in India. Trump has publicly urged Apple CEO Tim Cook to stop building factories in India and instead focus on increasing US-based production.</p><p>Trump’s comments reflect broader concerns about the outsourcing of American manufacturing jobs and the potential impact of such shifts on the US economy. However, Apple has maintained that its strategy to diversify production is necessary to safeguard its long-term growth and ensure its supply chain is resilient to geopolitical and economic disruptions.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Local economic impact</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Foxconn’s $1.5 billion investment in India is a significant vote of confidence in the country’s manufacturing capabilities and its growing role in global supply chains. Karnataka’s Minister M. B. Patil recently announced in a post on X that Foxconn’s Devanahalli ITIR (Information Technology Investment Region) near Bengaluru is on track to begin exporting iPhones to the US as early as June. This development marks a major milestone for Karnataka, positioning it as a key player in the global electronics manufacturing sector.</p><p>Patil highlighted the positive impact of this investment on the local economy, noting that the expansion of Foxconn’s operations in the state is not only strengthening its position on the international production map but also driving foreign investment and creating jobs.</p><p>(<i>With inputs from agencies</i>)</p>

The move reflects the company’s efforts to ramp up production outside of China, as it looks to mitigate risks posed by ongoing trade tensions, tariffs, and geopolitical uncertainty.

Foxconn, the key assembler of Apple’s iPhones, has pledged a significant investment of $1.5 billion into its Indian operations, signalling an ongoing shift in Apple’s global supply chain strategy. The move reflects the company’s efforts to ramp up production outside of China, as it looks to mitigate risks posed by ongoing trade tensions, tariffs, and geopolitical uncertainty. This latest funding, made via Foxconn’s Singapore-based subsidiary, comes as the company expands its manufacturing capacity in southern India, positioning the country as a crucial hub for Apple’s iPhone production. iPhone production diversification Foxconn’s investment is the latest step in Apple’s broader push to diversify its manufacturing, which has been concentrated in China for years. As global political tensions, particularly the US-China trade war, have escalated, Apple has sought to reduce its heavy reliance on Chinese factories and shift more production to other countries. India has emerged as a critical destination for this production shift, with Foxconn’s factories in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Telangana now playing a central role in assembling iPhones for both domestic and export markets. In the 12 months leading up to March 2025, Apple’s production of iPhones in India surged to $22 billion, a nearly 60 per cent increase compared to the previous year. A significant portion of this production is handled by Foxconn’s factory in India, which is rapidly expanding. Tata Group, which recently acquired Wistron’s Indian operations and took over Pegatron’s local business, has also played a key role in Apple’s manufacturing strategy in India. These efforts align with Apple’s broader goal to produce a substantial portion of the iPhones sold in the United States from India by the end of next year. Minister for Electronics and Information Technology Ashwini Vaishnaw recently celebrated a major milestone in India’s role in Apple’s supply chain. He announced that Apple had exported iPhones worth over $17.4 billion during the fiscal year ending in March 2025, underscoring the significant growth in India’s smartphone manufacturing sector. This is a part of a larger trend in India’s growing role in global electronics manufacturing, as total smartphone exports from the country crossed $23.4 billion, a 54 per cent increase over the previous year. A strategic shift Apple’s push to move a significant portion of its production out of China was driven by several factors, including disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, which exposed the risks of over-reliance on a single manufacturing location. Apple’s factories in China faced severe production delays during the pandemic, highlighting the vulnerability of having a large portion of its supply chain concentrated in one country. This disruption prompted Apple to accelerate its efforts to diversify its supply chain, turning to India, Southeast Asia, and other regions as alternative manufacturing hubs. However, despite this pivot, Apple is unlikely to fully exit China in the near future. Experts believe that while India and Southeast Asia will become increasingly central to Apple’s production strategy, China will remain a key player in the firm's supply chain due to its well-established infrastructure and workforce. The geopolitical climate, particularly the tense relationship between the US and China, has further driven Apple’s efforts to reduce its exposure to potential tariffs. Apple and other global companies are diversifying their production locations to mitigate the risks associated with unpredictable trade policies. As part of this strategy, Apple has also increased its investments in the US. The company has pledged to invest $500 billion domestically over the next four years and create more American jobs, although Apple currently does not produce smartphones in the US. Despite these investments, US President Donald Trump has criticised Apple’s growing manufacturing footprint in India. Trump has publicly urged Apple CEO Tim Cook to stop building factories in India and instead focus on increasing US-based production. Trump’s comments reflect broader concerns about the outsourcing of American manufacturing jobs and the potential impact of such shifts on the US economy. However, Apple has maintained that its strategy to diversify production is necessary to safeguard its long-term growth and ensure its supply chain is resilient to geopolitical and economic disruptions. Local economic impact Foxconn’s $1.5 billion investment in India is a significant vote of confidence in the country’s manufacturing capabilities and its growing role in global supply chains. Karnataka’s Minister M. B. Patil recently announced in a post on X that Foxconn’s Devanahalli ITIR (Information Technology Investment Region) near Bengaluru is on track to begin exporting iPhones to the US as early as June. This development marks a major milestone for Karnataka, positioning it as a key player in the global electronics manufacturing sector. Patil highlighted the positive impact of this investment on the local economy, noting that the expansion of Foxconn’s operations in the state is not only strengthening its position on the international production map but also driving foreign investment and creating jobs. (With inputs from agencies)

<p>The move reflects the company’s efforts to ramp up production outside of China, as it looks to mitigate risks posed by ongoing trade tensions, tariffs, and geopolitical uncertainty.</p>

Foxconn commits $1.5 billion to expand iPhone production in India

<p>India's markets regulator has warned two Mauritius-based funds with ties to Adani group. According to documents reviewed by <i>Reuters</i>, the funds in question could face penalties and cancellation of licences for not sharing shareholder details despite multiple requests.</p><p>The Adani group and its offshore investors have been under the regulatory radar since a report in 2023 alleged improper use of tax havens and other malpractices. The group has repeatedly denied any wrongdoings.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What does SEBI say?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Indian regulations require at least 25 per cent of the shares be held by public shareholders. This was put to test as the Group was accused of breaching these rules with its offshore funds.</p><p>The two Mauritius-based funds were asked to provide 'granular disclosures' of all their shareholders since they had 'concentrated positions' in the Adani Group. This is based on a document reviewed by Reuters dated March 28.</p><p>'To date, this has not been provided by these FPIs (Foreign portfolio investors) to SEBI...they have also not provided any reasons,' Reuters said quoting the document.</p><p>The two funds have reportedly applied to SEBI, requesting a monetary fine instead of disclosing documents. This is according to Reuters. At least two other offshore investors in Adani stocks are yet to supply information on Adani holdings.</p><p>The US authorities had earlier indicted group chairman Gautam Adani and some other executives, alleging they paid bribes to secure Indian contracts and misled investors. Adani denied any wrongdoing, saying the allegations are baseless. later, the act based on which the case was filed, was dismissed when Trump came to power.</p><p>Adani group is yet to respond to <i>WION’s </i>request for comments on this.</p>

Two Mauritius-based funds were asked to provide 'granular disclosures' of all their shareholders since they had 'concentrated positions' in the Adani Group.

India's markets regulator has warned two Mauritius-based funds with ties to Adani group. According to documents reviewed by Reuters, the funds in question could face penalties and cancellation of licences for not sharing shareholder details despite multiple requests. The Adani group and its offshore investors have been under the regulatory radar since a report in 2023 alleged improper use of tax havens and other malpractices. The group has repeatedly denied any wrongdoings. What does SEBI say? Indian regulations require at least 25 per cent of the shares be held by public shareholders. This was put to test as the Group was accused of breaching these rules with its offshore funds. The two Mauritius-based funds were asked to provide 'granular disclosures' of all their shareholders since they had 'concentrated positions' in the Adani Group. This is based on a document reviewed by Reuters dated March 28. 'To date, this has not been provided by these FPIs (Foreign portfolio investors) to SEBI...they have also not provided any reasons,' Reuters said quoting the document. The two funds have reportedly applied to SEBI, requesting a monetary fine instead of disclosing documents. This is according to Reuters. At least two other offshore investors in Adani stocks are yet to supply information on Adani holdings. The US authorities had earlier indicted group chairman Gautam Adani and some other executives, alleging they paid bribes to secure Indian contracts and misled investors. Adani denied any wrongdoing, saying the allegations are baseless. later, the act based on which the case was filed, was dismissed when Trump came to power. Adani group is yet to respond to WION’s request for comments on this.

<p>Two Mauritius-based funds were asked to provide 'granular disclosures' of all their shareholders since they had 'concentrated positions' in the Adani Group.</p>

SEBI warns 2 offshore funds holding Adani shares with penalties

<p>China's central bank, the People's Bank of China (PBOC), lowered its key lending rates for the first time since October as part of a broader effort to stabilise the country’s economy amid ongoing trade tensions with the United States.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>On May 20, the PBOC cut the one-year loan prime rate (LPR) by 10 basis points to 3.0 per cent from 3.1 per cent and the five-year LPR by a similar margin to 3.5 per cent from 3.6 per cent. These cuts aim to stimulate consumption, encourage borrowing, and ultimately help offset economic challenges such as weak domestic demand and deflationary pressures.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Economic impact</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The decision to reduce the LPR follows a series of monetary easing measures that the PBOC has been implementing in response to slowing economic growth. The LPR serves as a benchmark for the interest rates charged on loans, including mortgages, and influences both corporate and household borrowing. The one-year LPR, in particular, is vital for short-term loans, while the five-year rate directly impacts mortgage lending, making this decision significant for the housing market.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The rate cuts were widely anticipated by analysts, with many forecasting a 10-basis-point reduction. This move comes after a period of escalating trade tensions between the US and China, which had put substantial strain on both economies.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>However, the recent easing of tensions, following a temporary tariff reduction agreement between the two countries, has provided some breathing room for China to implement its monetary policy. The US and China agreed to roll back tariffs for 90 days, which has raised hopes of a more lasting resolution to the trade war.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>While the rate cuts are seen as a step in the right direction, economists warn that modest interest rate reductions alone may not be enough to generate substantial economic growth.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Strategic policy adjustments</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In addition to the rate cuts, Chinese authorities have also implemented measures to ease liquidity conditions by lowering the reserve requirement ratio for banks. This move aims to free up more funds for lending and investment, further supporting economic activity.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>These steps come in the wake of weakening economic indicators, including a sharp decline in new loans, which plummeted by 61 per cent year-over-year in April, signalling diminished confidence in borrowing due to tariff concerns.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Morgan Stanley economists told CNBC that stimulus measures are likely to be "lighter and delayed" due to the reduced likelihood of further escalations in the trade war. However, the firm also cautioned that despite the tariff reduction, the US trade-weighted tariff rate on China remains high, which could continue to dampen external demand for Chinese exports and exacerbate domestic overcapacity issues.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The decision to cut rates comes as part of a broader economic strategy that includes both monetary and fiscal easing, aimed at navigating the challenges posed by deflation and sluggish domestic consumption. Wholesale prices in China fell sharply in April, marking the steepest drop in six months, and consumer prices have been in decline for three consecutive months, underscoring persistent deflationary pressure.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Despite the favourable impact of the trade de-escalation on the yuan, which has strengthened by over 2.8 per cent against the US dollar since reaching a record low last month, the overall economic outlook remains uncertain.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>As China pushes forward with its stimulus measures, the government's goal of achieving a growth target of around 5 per cent for the year seems increasingly dependent on the success of these policies.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The combination of lower interest rates, fiscal stimulus, and trade negotiations presents a delicate balancing act for Beijing, which must navigate deflation, sluggish demand, and trade risks to achieve its growth objectives for 2025.</p><p><br>&nbsp;</p>

These cuts aim to stimulate consumption, encourage borrowing, and ultimately help offset economic challenges such as weak domestic demand and deflationary pressures.

China's central bank, the People's Bank of China (PBOC), lowered its key lending rates for the first time since October as part of a broader effort to stabilise the country’s economy amid ongoing trade tensions with the United States. On May 20, the PBOC cut the one-year loan prime rate (LPR) by 10 basis points to 3.0 per cent from 3.1 per cent and the five-year LPR by a similar margin to 3.5 per cent from 3.6 per cent. These cuts aim to stimulate consumption, encourage borrowing, and ultimately help offset economic challenges such as weak domestic demand and deflationary pressures. Economic impact The decision to reduce the LPR follows a series of monetary easing measures that the PBOC has been implementing in response to slowing economic growth. The LPR serves as a benchmark for the interest rates charged on loans, including mortgages, and influences both corporate and household borrowing. The one-year LPR, in particular, is vital for short-term loans, while the five-year rate directly impacts mortgage lending, making this decision significant for the housing market. The rate cuts were widely anticipated by analysts, with many forecasting a 10-basis-point reduction. This move comes after a period of escalating trade tensions between the US and China, which had put substantial strain on both economies. However, the recent easing of tensions, following a temporary tariff reduction agreement between the two countries, has provided some breathing room for China to implement its monetary policy. The US and China agreed to roll back tariffs for 90 days, which has raised hopes of a more lasting resolution to the trade war. While the rate cuts are seen as a step in the right direction, economists warn that modest interest rate reductions alone may not be enough to generate substantial economic growth. Strategic policy adjustments In addition to the rate cuts, Chinese authorities have also implemented measures to ease liquidity conditions by lowering the reserve requirement ratio for banks. This move aims to free up more funds for lending and investment, further supporting economic activity. These steps come in the wake of weakening economic indicators, including a sharp decline in new loans, which plummeted by 61 per cent year-over-year in April, signalling diminished confidence in borrowing due to tariff concerns. Morgan Stanley economists told CNBC that stimulus measures are likely to be "lighter and delayed" due to the reduced likelihood of further escalations in the trade war. However, the firm also cautioned that despite the tariff reduction, the US trade-weighted tariff rate on China remains high, which could continue to dampen external demand for Chinese exports and exacerbate domestic overcapacity issues. The decision to cut rates comes as part of a broader economic strategy that includes both monetary and fiscal easing, aimed at navigating the challenges posed by deflation and sluggish domestic consumption. Wholesale prices in China fell sharply in April, marking the steepest drop in six months, and consumer prices have been in decline for three consecutive months, underscoring persistent deflationary pressure. Despite the favourable impact of the trade de-escalation on the yuan, which has strengthened by over 2.8 per cent against the US dollar since reaching a record low last month, the overall economic outlook remains uncertain. As China pushes forward with its stimulus measures, the government's goal of achieving a growth target of around 5 per cent for the year seems increasingly dependent on the success of these policies. The combination of lower interest rates, fiscal stimulus, and trade negotiations presents a delicate balancing act for Beijing, which must navigate deflation, sluggish demand, and trade risks to achieve its growth objectives for 2025.

<p>On May 20, the Central bank of China cut the one-year loan prime rate (LPR) by 10 basis points to 3.0 per cent from 3.1 per cent and the five-year LPR by a similar margin to 3.5 per cent from 3.6 per cent.&nbsp;</p>

China cuts key lending rates to boost economic recovery amid trade war concerns

<p>Five years after the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union, both parties have signed a comprehensive agreement aimed at revitalising their relationship. This deal addresses key sectors such as trade, defence, energy, and fisheries, marking a significant step in UK-EU relations.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The agreement comes at a time when global trade dynamics are shifting, notably with the United States imposing new tariffs under President Donald Trump’s administration.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Key components of the 'reset' deal</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>1. Trade and food exports</strong><br>&nbsp;</p><p>A central element of the agreement is the easing of trade frictions, particularly concerning food and agricultural products. The UK and EU have agreed on a veterinary deal that reduces red tape and checks on animal and plant products.&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;</p><p>This move is expected to benefit UK food exporters, who have faced significant challenges since Brexit. According to the BBC, UK food exports to the EU have fallen by 34 per cent compared to 2019, largely due to increased paperwork and regulatory barriers. The new agreement aims to reverse this trend by simplifying export procedures.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>2. Fisheries access</strong></p><p><br>In a notable concession, the UK has granted EU fishing vessels continued access to British waters for an additional 12 years, extending the existing arrangements until 2038. This extension is part of the broader trade-off to facilitate smoother trade relations and reduce barriers for UK exporters.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>While this move has been welcomed by EU member states, it has drawn criticism from UK fishing communities who view it as a compromise on national sovereignty. The BBC reports that the fishing rights extension was a key component in reaching the overall agreement.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>3. Defence and security cooperation</strong></p><p><br>The agreement also encompasses enhanced cooperation in defence and security. Both parties have committed to regular strategic dialogues and joint initiatives to address shared security challenges.&nbsp;</p><p><br>This renewed collaboration signifies a mutual recognition of the importance of collective security in an increasingly complex global landscape.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>4. Energy collaboration</strong></p><p><br>Energy cooperation forms another pillar of the deal. The UK and EU have agreed to work closely on energy matters, including the integration of energy markets and joint efforts to achieve climate goals.&nbsp;</p><p><br>This collaboration is expected to lead to more efficient energy distribution and support the transition to renewable energy sources.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Economic implications</strong></p><p><br>The UK government projects that the agreement could yield economic benefits of up to £9 billion annually by 2040, with a modest boost of 0.3 per cent to the UK’s GDP. However, analysts caution that while the deal represents progress, it only partially mitigates the economic impact of Brexit.</p><p><br>The Financial Times notes that the agreement recoups only a fraction of the economic losses incurred since the UK’s departure from the EU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Political reactions</strong></p><p><br>Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has hailed the deal as a pragmatic step forward, emphasising the need to move beyond past political disputes. “It’s time to look forward,” he stated at the summit, highlighting the importance of practical solutions to improve the lives of British citizens.&nbsp;</p><p><br>European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed this sentiment, describing the summit as a “historic moment” and a “new chapter” in UK-EU relations.&nbsp;</p><p><br>However, the agreement has faced criticism from some UK political figures. Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch labelled the deal a “surrender,” expressing concerns over concessions made, particularly in the fisheries sector.</p><p><br>The UK-EU reset deal marks a significant development in post-Brexit relations, addressing critical sectors and aiming to foster a more collaborative partnership.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>While the agreement does not resolve all outstanding issues, it represents a concerted effort to rebuild trust and cooperation between the UK and the EU in an evolving global context.</p><p><br>&nbsp;</p>

Business & Economy: This deal addresses key sectors such as trade, defence, energy, and fisheries, marking a significant step in UK-EU relations. 

Five years after the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union, both parties have signed a comprehensive agreement aimed at revitalising their relationship. This deal addresses key sectors such as trade, defence, energy, and fisheries, marking a significant step in UK-EU relations. The agreement comes at a time when global trade dynamics are shifting, notably with the United States imposing new tariffs under President Donald Trump’s administration. Key components of the 'reset' deal 1. Trade and food exports A central element of the agreement is the easing of trade frictions, particularly concerning food and agricultural products. The UK and EU have agreed on a veterinary deal that reduces red tape and checks on animal and plant products. This move is expected to benefit UK food exporters, who have faced significant challenges since Brexit. According to the BBC, UK food exports to the EU have fallen by 34 per cent compared to 2019, largely due to increased paperwork and regulatory barriers. The new agreement aims to reverse this trend by simplifying export procedures. 2. Fisheries access In a notable concession, the UK has granted EU fishing vessels continued access to British waters for an additional 12 years, extending the existing arrangements until 2038. This extension is part of the broader trade-off to facilitate smoother trade relations and reduce barriers for UK exporters. While this move has been welcomed by EU member states, it has drawn criticism from UK fishing communities who view it as a compromise on national sovereignty. The BBC reports that the fishing rights extension was a key component in reaching the overall agreement. 3. Defence and security cooperation The agreement also encompasses enhanced cooperation in defence and security. Both parties have committed to regular strategic dialogues and joint initiatives to address shared security challenges. This renewed collaboration signifies a mutual recognition of the importance of collective security in an increasingly complex global landscape. 4. Energy collaboration Energy cooperation forms another pillar of the deal. The UK and EU have agreed to work closely on energy matters, including the integration of energy markets and joint efforts to achieve climate goals. This collaboration is expected to lead to more efficient energy distribution and support the transition to renewable energy sources. Economic implications The UK government projects that the agreement could yield economic benefits of up to £9 billion annually by 2040, with a modest boost of 0.3 per cent to the UK’s GDP. However, analysts caution that while the deal represents progress, it only partially mitigates the economic impact of Brexit. The Financial Times notes that the agreement recoups only a fraction of the economic losses incurred since the UK’s departure from the EU. Political reactions Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has hailed the deal as a pragmatic step forward, emphasising the need to move beyond past political disputes. “It’s time to look forward,” he stated at the summit, highlighting the importance of practical solutions to improve the lives of British citizens. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed this sentiment, describing the summit as a “historic moment” and a “new chapter” in UK-EU relations. However, the agreement has faced criticism from some UK political figures. Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch labelled the deal a “surrender,” expressing concerns over concessions made, particularly in the fisheries sector. The UK-EU reset deal marks a significant development in post-Brexit relations, addressing critical sectors and aiming to foster a more collaborative partnership. While the agreement does not resolve all outstanding issues, it represents a concerted effort to rebuild trust and cooperation between the UK and the EU in an evolving global context.

<p>UK and US sign agreement to revitalise their relationship five years after Britain's EU exit. This comes amid shifting global trade dynamics and US tariffs under Donald Trump.</p>

UK and EU forge landmark post-Brexit deal amid global trade tensions

<p>The United Kingdom is moving ahead with legislation to regulate the fast-growing Buy-Now, Pay-Later (BNPL) sector, targeting lenders like Klarna, Clearpay, PayPal, and Zilch.&nbsp;</p><p><br>According to Bloomberg, the Treasury will present the new rules to Parliament on Monday, aiming to align BNPL offerings with traditional credit products.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>This legislative shift follows growing concerns over unchecked consumer debt and limited protections for borrowers, with the government now pushing for stronger oversight after years of consultation.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What’s changing?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Under the proposed rules, affordability checks will become mandatory, requiring lenders to assess whether a customer can realistically afford a BNPL loan before approving it. Borrower rights will also be strengthened, giving consumers quicker access to refunds and the right to file complaints with the Financial Ombudsman Service—something previously unavailable under BNPL schemes.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The new framework also seeks to improve transparency and accountability, ending the era of interest-free loans that often carried hidden risks. “These new rules will protect shoppers from debt traps,” said Emma Reynolds, Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in a statement cited by Bloomberg.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Why now?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The BNPL model has surged in popularity, especially among younger consumers looking for flexible payment options. However, critics argue that the lack of regulation has encouraged impulsive borrowing and pushed many into cycles of unaffordable debt.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The government’s move signals a more cautious approach to consumer credit in an increasingly digital retail landscape.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>BNPL’s economic footprint in the UK</strong></p><p><br>The BNPL sector has grown into a major part of the UK’s consumer credit ecosystem. According to data from Statista and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the total value of BNPL transactions in the UK reached approximately 14 billion pounds in 2023.&nbsp;</p><p><br>A report by Fitch Ratings noted that BNPL usage now accounts for roughly 6 to 7 percent of all UK online retail sales. Meanwhile, as per the Financial Times, more than 10 million people in the UK have used BNPL services—a number that continues to rise amid ongoing cost-of-living pressures.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What happens next?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The legislation will be formally introduced in Parliament and is expected to take effect next year. That timeline gives BNPL providers a window to implement necessary compliance measures and for consumers to better understand the terms and risks of these services.</p>

This legislative shift follows growing concerns over unchecked consumer debt and limited protections for borrowers, with the government now pushing for stronger oversight after years of consultation.

The United Kingdom is moving ahead with legislation to regulate the fast-growing Buy-Now, Pay-Later (BNPL) sector, targeting lenders like Klarna, Clearpay, PayPal, and Zilch. According to Bloomberg, the Treasury will present the new rules to Parliament on Monday, aiming to align BNPL offerings with traditional credit products. This legislative shift follows growing concerns over unchecked consumer debt and limited protections for borrowers, with the government now pushing for stronger oversight after years of consultation. What’s changing? Under the proposed rules, affordability checks will become mandatory, requiring lenders to assess whether a customer can realistically afford a BNPL loan before approving it. Borrower rights will also be strengthened, giving consumers quicker access to refunds and the right to file complaints with the Financial Ombudsman Service—something previously unavailable under BNPL schemes. The new framework also seeks to improve transparency and accountability, ending the era of interest-free loans that often carried hidden risks. “These new rules will protect shoppers from debt traps,” said Emma Reynolds, Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in a statement cited by Bloomberg. Why now? The BNPL model has surged in popularity, especially among younger consumers looking for flexible payment options. However, critics argue that the lack of regulation has encouraged impulsive borrowing and pushed many into cycles of unaffordable debt. The government’s move signals a more cautious approach to consumer credit in an increasingly digital retail landscape. BNPL’s economic footprint in the UK The BNPL sector has grown into a major part of the UK’s consumer credit ecosystem. According to data from Statista and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the total value of BNPL transactions in the UK reached approximately 14 billion pounds in 2023. A report by Fitch Ratings noted that BNPL usage now accounts for roughly 6 to 7 percent of all UK online retail sales. Meanwhile, as per the Financial Times, more than 10 million people in the UK have used BNPL services—a number that continues to rise amid ongoing cost-of-living pressures. What happens next? The legislation will be formally introduced in Parliament and is expected to take effect next year. That timeline gives BNPL providers a window to implement necessary compliance measures and for consumers to better understand the terms and risks of these services.

<p>According to Bloomberg, the UK is moving ahead with legislation to regulate the fast-growing Buy-Now, Pay-Later (BNPL) sector, aiming to align BNPL offerings with traditional credit products.</p>

UK cracks down on Buy-Now, Pay-Later firms: What shoppers need to know

<p>Pakistan’s path to economic recovery just got rockier. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), in its latest report, has laid out stricter conditions for any future lending to the crisis-hit nation — conditions that go beyond traditional fiscal metrics and delve into politically sensitive reforms. And if that wasn’t enough, rising tensions with India are casting a long shadow over Islamabad’s ability to stabilise its fragile economy.</p><p><br>According to <i>Bloomberg</i>, the IMF has demanded sweeping structural reforms as a prerequisite for unlocking more funding. These include securing parliamentary approval for the upcoming federal budget by June, implementing agricultural income tax across all provinces, and rolling out a phased withdrawal of industrial incentives by year-end.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Additionally, Pakistan must adjust electricity and gas tariffs in a timely manner, and legislate to restructure debt in the energy sector, aiming to reduce the financial burden on state-owned power firms.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The IMF’s insistence on reforms reflects deeper concerns. Pakistan narrowly averted default in 2023, but with more than $100 billion in external financing needed through 2029, the margin for error is razor-thin. Complicating matters are geopolitical risks, especially those stemming from Pakistan’s worsening relationship with its eastern neighbour.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>India-Pakistan tensions</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The latest escalation began with the terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir on April 22, which claimed 26 lives. India blamed Pakistan-backed militants for orchestrating the assault and retaliated swiftly with Operation Sindoor, targeting terror camps across the Line of Control. But this was only the beginning. What followed was an aggressive economic retaliation campaign — one that’s proving to be just as damaging as military action.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>On May 2, India banned all imports from Pakistan, including those routed via third countries like the UAE. While trade between the two has been minimal since 2019 — accounting for just 0.06 per cent of India’s overall trade — the move sends a strong political message. It also hits Pakistan where it hurts.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Islamabad relies heavily on Indian raw materials, especially in the pharmaceutical sector, where more than 90 per cent of ingredients are imported. With supply chains severed, Pakistan’s medicine, chemical, and processed food industries are already feeling the squeeze.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>India’s response extended beyond trade. It closed its airspace to Pakistani carriers, forcing Pakistan International Airlines to reroute flights through longer, costlier paths via Iran and Central Asia. International carriers like Lufthansa and British Airways have also suspended flights over Pakistan due to security risks, cutting into the country’s overflight revenue estimated between $30–50 million annually.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Maritime trade hasn’t been spared either. With ports closed to Pakistani-flagged vessels, exporters are forced to rely on more expensive third-party routes. This not only delays shipments but also jeopardizes Pakistan’s export earnings from textiles, rice, and sports goods, worsening its current account deficit.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>And perhaps the most severe blow came when India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty — a World Bank-brokered agreement that has governed river water sharing since 1960. Given that 90 per cent of Pakistan’s agriculture depends on these rivers, any interruption could cripple farming in provinces like Punjab and Sindh. Already, protests have erupted over water shortages and the threat of massive crop failures looms large.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>India hasn’t just flexed its economic muscle domestically — it has taken the fight global. New Delhi formally objected to the IMF’s recent $1 billion disbursement to Pakistan, arguing that the funds could be misused in ways that undermine regional security. Bloomberg reports that India lobbied the IMF and World Bank to reconsider aid and credit lines to Islamabad, especially in light of continued terror threats emanating from its soil.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The IMF responded cautiously, warning that persistent hostilities between the two nuclear-armed neighbours could derail reform efforts in Pakistan. It also cited reputational risks if the fund is perceived as turning a blind eye to geopolitical tensions or the potential misuse of disbursed funds.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Amid the brewing economic cold war, India and Pakistan’s economic trajectories are sharply diverging. According to the IMF, India’s GDP growth is expected to moderate from 8.2 per cent in 2023 to 7 per cent in 2024 and 6.5 per cent in 2025 — still robust by global standards. Pakistan, on the other hand, faces an uphill climb. The IMF has revised its 2025 growth forecast for Pakistan down to 3 per cent from 3.2 per cent, reflecting the economic strain from domestic instability, international isolation, and surging import costs.</p><p><br>&nbsp;</p><p><br>&nbsp;</p>

IMF's conditions go beyond traditional fiscal metrics and delve into politically sensitive reforms. This comes amid rising tensions with India are casting a long shadow over Islamabad’s ability to stabilise its fragile economy.

Pakistan’s path to economic recovery just got rockier. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), in its latest report, has laid out stricter conditions for any future lending to the crisis-hit nation — conditions that go beyond traditional fiscal metrics and delve into politically sensitive reforms. And if that wasn’t enough, rising tensions with India are casting a long shadow over Islamabad’s ability to stabilise its fragile economy. According to Bloomberg, the IMF has demanded sweeping structural reforms as a prerequisite for unlocking more funding. These include securing parliamentary approval for the upcoming federal budget by June, implementing agricultural income tax across all provinces, and rolling out a phased withdrawal of industrial incentives by year-end. Additionally, Pakistan must adjust electricity and gas tariffs in a timely manner, and legislate to restructure debt in the energy sector, aiming to reduce the financial burden on state-owned power firms. The IMF’s insistence on reforms reflects deeper concerns. Pakistan narrowly averted default in 2023, but with more than $100 billion in external financing needed through 2029, the margin for error is razor-thin. Complicating matters are geopolitical risks, especially those stemming from Pakistan’s worsening relationship with its eastern neighbour. India-Pakistan tensions The latest escalation began with the terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir on April 22, which claimed 26 lives. India blamed Pakistan-backed militants for orchestrating the assault and retaliated swiftly with Operation Sindoor, targeting terror camps across the Line of Control. But this was only the beginning. What followed was an aggressive economic retaliation campaign — one that’s proving to be just as damaging as military action. On May 2, India banned all imports from Pakistan, including those routed via third countries like the UAE. While trade between the two has been minimal since 2019 — accounting for just 0.06 per cent of India’s overall trade — the move sends a strong political message. It also hits Pakistan where it hurts. Islamabad relies heavily on Indian raw materials, especially in the pharmaceutical sector, where more than 90 per cent of ingredients are imported. With supply chains severed, Pakistan’s medicine, chemical, and processed food industries are already feeling the squeeze. India’s response extended beyond trade. It closed its airspace to Pakistani carriers, forcing Pakistan International Airlines to reroute flights through longer, costlier paths via Iran and Central Asia. International carriers like Lufthansa and British Airways have also suspended flights over Pakistan due to security risks, cutting into the country’s overflight revenue estimated between $30–50 million annually. Maritime trade hasn’t been spared either. With ports closed to Pakistani-flagged vessels, exporters are forced to rely on more expensive third-party routes. This not only delays shipments but also jeopardizes Pakistan’s export earnings from textiles, rice, and sports goods, worsening its current account deficit. And perhaps the most severe blow came when India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty — a World Bank-brokered agreement that has governed river water sharing since 1960. Given that 90 per cent of Pakistan’s agriculture depends on these rivers, any interruption could cripple farming in provinces like Punjab and Sindh. Already, protests have erupted over water shortages and the threat of massive crop failures looms large. India hasn’t just flexed its economic muscle domestically — it has taken the fight global. New Delhi formally objected to the IMF’s recent $1 billion disbursement to Pakistan, arguing that the funds could be misused in ways that undermine regional security. Bloomberg reports that India lobbied the IMF and World Bank to reconsider aid and credit lines to Islamabad, especially in light of continued terror threats emanating from its soil. The IMF responded cautiously, warning that persistent hostilities between the two nuclear-armed neighbours could derail reform efforts in Pakistan. It also cited reputational risks if the fund is perceived as turning a blind eye to geopolitical tensions or the potential misuse of disbursed funds. Amid the brewing economic cold war, India and Pakistan’s economic trajectories are sharply diverging. According to the IMF, India’s GDP growth is expected to moderate from 8.2 per cent in 2023 to 7 per cent in 2024 and 6.5 per cent in 2025 — still robust by global standards. Pakistan, on the other hand, faces an uphill climb. The IMF has revised its 2025 growth forecast for Pakistan down to 3 per cent from 3.2 per cent, reflecting the economic strain from domestic instability, international isolation, and surging import costs.

<p>The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has laid out stricter conditions for any future lending to the crisis-hit nation, Pakistan.&nbsp;</p>

IMF tightens conditions for Pakistan to get fresh loans amid mounting tensions with India

<p>India has officially launched biometric e-passports in select cities, marking a significant advancement in travel document security and efficiency. This initiative, part of the Passport Seva Programme 2.0, aims to enhance international travel safety and streamline immigration processes for Indian citizens.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What Is an E-Passport?</strong></p><p>An e-passport is a traditional passport booklet embedded with a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chip and antenna. This chip securely stores the holder’s personal and biometric information, including their photograph, fingerprints, passport number, and date of birth.&nbsp;</p><p>The data is encrypted and protected by international security standards such as Basic Access Control (BAC) and Extended Access Control (EAC), making it difficult to forge or tamper with.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Where Are E-Passports Being Issued?</strong></p><p>As of now, e-passports are being issued in the following 13 cities:&nbsp;</p><p>• Nagpur</p><p>• Bhubaneswar</p><p>• Jammu</p><p>• Goa</p><p>• Shimla</p><p>• Raipur</p><p>• Amritsar</p><p>• Jaipur</p><p>• Chennai</p><p>• Hyderabad</p><p>• Surat</p><p>• Ranchi</p><p>• Delhi&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p><br>The Ministry of External Affairs plans to expand the issuance of e-passports to all Passport Seva Kendras across India by mid-2025.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Key Benefits for Travellers</strong></p><p>Enhanced Security: The encrypted chip makes it significantly harder to forge or duplicate passports, thereby reducing identity fraud.&nbsp;</p><p>Faster Immigration Processing: E-passports facilitate quicker verification at immigration checkpoints, especially in countries equipped with automated e-gates that recognize ICAO-compliant documents.&nbsp;</p><p>Global Recognition: India joins over 120 countries that have adopted e-passport technology, aligning with international travel standards.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>How to Apply for an E-Passport</strong></p><p>The application process for an e-passport remains the same as that for a traditional passport:&nbsp;</p><p>1.&nbsp;Online Application: Register and apply through the&nbsp;<a href="https://portal2.passportindia.gov.in/">Passport Seva Portal</a>.&nbsp;</p><p>2.&nbsp;Appointment Booking: Schedule an appointment at your nearest Passport Seva Kendra.&nbsp;</p><p>3.&nbsp;Biometric Data Submission: Visit the selected center to submit your biometric data and complete the necessary formalities.</p><p>If your Regional Passport Office is equipped to issue e-passports, you will automatically receive one upon application or renewal.&nbsp;</p><p><br><strong>What Happens to Existing Passports?</strong></p><p>Existing traditional passports will remain valid until their expiry date. There is no immediate requirement to switch to an e-passport. The transition to e-passports will be gradual, ensuring a smooth changeover for all citizens.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>The introduction of e-passports represents a significant step forward in enhancing security and efficiency of international travel. As the rollout continues, travellers can look forward to a more streamlined and secure travel experience.&nbsp;</p>

The Ministry of External Affairs plans to expand the issuance of e-passports to all Passport Seva Kendras across India by mid-2025.  

India has officially launched biometric e-passports in select cities, marking a significant advancement in travel document security and efficiency. This initiative, part of the Passport Seva Programme 2.0, aims to enhance international travel safety and streamline immigration processes for Indian citizens. What Is an E-Passport? An e-passport is a traditional passport booklet embedded with a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chip and antenna. This chip securely stores the holder’s personal and biometric information, including their photograph, fingerprints, passport number, and date of birth. The data is encrypted and protected by international security standards such as Basic Access Control (BAC) and Extended Access Control (EAC), making it difficult to forge or tamper with. Where Are E-Passports Being Issued? As of now, e-passports are being issued in the following 13 cities: • Nagpur • Bhubaneswar • Jammu • Goa • Shimla • Raipur • Amritsar • Jaipur • Chennai • Hyderabad • Surat • Ranchi • Delhi The Ministry of External Affairs plans to expand the issuance of e-passports to all Passport Seva Kendras across India by mid-2025. Key Benefits for Travellers Enhanced Security: The encrypted chip makes it significantly harder to forge or duplicate passports, thereby reducing identity fraud. Faster Immigration Processing: E-passports facilitate quicker verification at immigration checkpoints, especially in countries equipped with automated e-gates that recognize ICAO-compliant documents. Global Recognition: India joins over 120 countries that have adopted e-passport technology, aligning with international travel standards. How to Apply for an E-Passport The application process for an e-passport remains the same as that for a traditional passport: 1. Online Application: Register and apply through the Passport Seva Portal. 2. Appointment Booking: Schedule an appointment at your nearest Passport Seva Kendra. 3. Biometric Data Submission: Visit the selected center to submit your biometric data and complete the necessary formalities. If your Regional Passport Office is equipped to issue e-passports, you will automatically receive one upon application or renewal. What Happens to Existing Passports? Existing traditional passports will remain valid until their expiry date. There is no immediate requirement to switch to an e-passport. The transition to e-passports will be gradual, ensuring a smooth changeover for all citizens. The introduction of e-passports represents a significant step forward in enhancing security and efficiency of international travel. As the rollout continues, travellers can look forward to a more streamlined and secure travel experience.

<p>India has officially launched biometric e-passports in selected cities. This initiative, part of the Passport Seva Programme 2.0, aims to enhance international travel safety and streamline immigration processes for Indian citizens.&nbsp;</p>

E-Passport era begins in India: Key cities, benefits & how to apply

<p>Apple’s push to integrate artificial intelligence into iPhones in China is reportedly facing resistance from the Trump administration and US lawmakers. The tech giant’s partnership with Chinese firm Alibaba has triggered national security concerns, reigniting fears over data privacy, censorship, and China’s military edge.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What’s the deal about?</strong></p><p><br>Apple is quietly pursuing a partnership with Alibaba to bring the Chinese company’s AI capabilities to iPhones sold in China. According to <i>The New York Times</i>, Alibaba Chairman Joe Tsai publicly confirmed the deal in February, although Apple has not made any formal announcement.</p><p><br>With Chinese brands like Huawei and Xiaomi rapidly introducing AI-driven features, Apple views this collaboration as essential for staying competitive in a market that reportedly contributes nearly 20 per cent of its global revenue.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>However, as per <i>The New York Times</i>, this move has drawn sharp scrutiny in Washington. White House officials and the House Select Committee on China have questioned Apple executives about what user data might be shared with Alibaba, and whether the company is entering into binding agreements with Chinese regulators.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Why is the US concerned?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>AI is no longer seen as just a commercial tool — it’s a strategic asset. According to <i>The New York Times</i>, US officials believe AI will play a pivotal role in future military conflicts. They are concerned the Apple-Alibaba deal could help China advance its own AI models, particularly through access to real-world user data.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Lawmakers are also alarmed that working with Alibaba could expose Apple to China’s censorship laws, allowing Beijing to expand the influence of AI chatbots embedded with content controls.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The issue reached a boiling point during a closed-door meeting in March 2025, when Apple executives reportedly failed to adequately answer lawmakers’ questions about the specifics of the deal, <i>The New York Times</i>&nbsp;reported.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Trump tariffs and trade tensions</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Apple’s AI plans unfolded alongside rising trade tensions between the US and China. In April 2025, President Donald Trump announced a steep 145 per cent tariff on Chinese imports, aiming to slow China’s tech advancement and protect domestic industries. China responded with a 125 per cent retaliatory tariff on US goods, escalating fears of another full-scale trade war.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Amid global economic unease, officials from both countries met in Geneva on May 12 and agreed to a 90-day tariff pause. As part of the truce, the US lowered tariffs to 30 per cent, while China reduced its duties to 10 per cent, according to <i>Reuters</i>. While this temporary deal eased short-term pressure, it did little to resolve deeper structural tensions — especially those tied to emerging technologies like AI.</p><p><br>According to <i>The New York Times</i>, Apple is feeling the squeeze. With its supply chain deeply tied to China, the company is facing higher costs, political heat, and increasing difficulty in navigating two divergent regulatory systems. If Apple is forced to walk away from the Alibaba deal, it may lose vital ground to domestic Chinese rivals rapidly scaling their own AI capabilities.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Apple deal fallout risk and industry impact</strong></p><p><br>Analyst Richard Kramer of Arete Research told <i>The New York Times</i>&nbsp;that if the Alibaba partnership collapses, Apple could face commercial fallout beyond AI. Alibaba is also a key e-commerce partner, crucial for marketing and selling iPhones across China’s hyper-competitive smartphone market.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Pulling out of the deal could leave Apple both technologically and commercially vulnerable in one of its most important regions.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>There’s also a broader implication: US firms enabling Chinese AI companies to access large user bases may inadvertently help China refine its own AI systems. <i>The New York Times</i>&nbsp;notes that these systems could later support China’s military, surveillance, or strategic capabilities.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Companies like Baidu, ByteDance, and Alibaba stand to benefit from such indirect AI development, further fueling Washington’s concerns about unchecked tech transfer and the global race for AI dominance.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Apple’s AI ambitions in China have placed it squarely in the middle of an intensifying tech cold war. What’s at stake is not just the company’s future in China, but also US national security and the international balance of power in the age of artificial intelligence.</p><p><br>&nbsp;</p>

Business & Economy: Apple partnership with Chinese firm Alibaba has triggered national security concerns, reigniting fears over data privacy, censorship, and China military edge.

Apple’s push to integrate artificial intelligence into iPhones in China is reportedly facing resistance from the Trump administration and US lawmakers. The tech giant’s partnership with Chinese firm Alibaba has triggered national security concerns, reigniting fears over data privacy, censorship, and China’s military edge. What’s the deal about? Apple is quietly pursuing a partnership with Alibaba to bring the Chinese company’s AI capabilities to iPhones sold in China. According to The New York Times, Alibaba Chairman Joe Tsai publicly confirmed the deal in February, although Apple has not made any formal announcement. With Chinese brands like Huawei and Xiaomi rapidly introducing AI-driven features, Apple views this collaboration as essential for staying competitive in a market that reportedly contributes nearly 20 per cent of its global revenue. However, as per The New York Times, this move has drawn sharp scrutiny in Washington. White House officials and the House Select Committee on China have questioned Apple executives about what user data might be shared with Alibaba, and whether the company is entering into binding agreements with Chinese regulators. Why is the US concerned? AI is no longer seen as just a commercial tool — it’s a strategic asset. According to The New York Times, US officials believe AI will play a pivotal role in future military conflicts. They are concerned the Apple-Alibaba deal could help China advance its own AI models, particularly through access to real-world user data. Lawmakers are also alarmed that working with Alibaba could expose Apple to China’s censorship laws, allowing Beijing to expand the influence of AI chatbots embedded with content controls. The issue reached a boiling point during a closed-door meeting in March 2025, when Apple executives reportedly failed to adequately answer lawmakers’ questions about the specifics of the deal, The New York Times reported. Trump tariffs and trade tensions Apple’s AI plans unfolded alongside rising trade tensions between the US and China. In April 2025, President Donald Trump announced a steep 145 per cent tariff on Chinese imports, aiming to slow China’s tech advancement and protect domestic industries. China responded with a 125 per cent retaliatory tariff on US goods, escalating fears of another full-scale trade war. Amid global economic unease, officials from both countries met in Geneva on May 12 and agreed to a 90-day tariff pause. As part of the truce, the US lowered tariffs to 30 per cent, while China reduced its duties to 10 per cent, according to Reuters. While this temporary deal eased short-term pressure, it did little to resolve deeper structural tensions — especially those tied to emerging technologies like AI. According to The New York Times, Apple is feeling the squeeze. With its supply chain deeply tied to China, the company is facing higher costs, political heat, and increasing difficulty in navigating two divergent regulatory systems. If Apple is forced to walk away from the Alibaba deal, it may lose vital ground to domestic Chinese rivals rapidly scaling their own AI capabilities. Apple deal fallout risk and industry impact Analyst Richard Kramer of Arete Research told The New York Times that if the Alibaba partnership collapses, Apple could face commercial fallout beyond AI. Alibaba is also a key e-commerce partner, crucial for marketing and selling iPhones across China’s hyper-competitive smartphone market. Pulling out of the deal could leave Apple both technologically and commercially vulnerable in one of its most important regions. There’s also a broader implication: US firms enabling Chinese AI companies to access large user bases may inadvertently help China refine its own AI systems. The New York Times notes that these systems could later support China’s military, surveillance, or strategic capabilities. Companies like Baidu, ByteDance, and Alibaba stand to benefit from such indirect AI development, further fueling Washington’s concerns about unchecked tech transfer and the global race for AI dominance. Apple’s AI ambitions in China have placed it squarely in the middle of an intensifying tech cold war. What’s at stake is not just the company’s future in China, but also US national security and the international balance of power in the age of artificial intelligence.

<p>Amid US-China trade tension, Apple’s push to integrate artificial intelligence into iPhones in Beijing is reportedly facing resistance from the Trump administration and US lawmakers.&nbsp;</p>

Apple-Alibaba AI deal sparks US backlash: How China ties could derail iPhone AI rollout

<p>India has imposed sweeping new restrictions on imports from Bangladesh, targeting goods worth $770 million, which accounts for 42 per cent of total bilateral imports, according to the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI).</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry, through a directive by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) issued on Saturday, announced immediate port restrictions on several categories of Bangladeshi imports. The decision now bars most affected goods from entering India via land routes, restricting them to select sea ports.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What does the ban cover?</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Among the key sectors hit by this move are garments, processed foods, and plastic items. Of these, garments alone constitute $618 million worth of annual imports. These can now only be brought in through two designated sea ports, cutting off traditional land trade routes that had previously served as the backbone of cross-border commerce.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>According to the GTRI, this change “severely impacts Bangladesh’s most lucrative export channel to India,” especially since the majority of their ready-made garment (RMG) consignments moved via land.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Why India took this step?&nbsp;</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The move is being widely interpreted as retaliatory. Trade experts believe the restrictions reflect India’s response to a series of recent economic and diplomatic developments initiated by Dhaka.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>According to the GTRI, “The restrictions look like India’s response to Dhaka restricting imports from India on a large number of items and its diplomatic pivot towards China.” Over the past year, Bangladesh has gradually imposed several curbs on Indian exports. In April 2025, it banned Indian yarn imports through five key land ports.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>It has also tightened regulations on rice shipments and enforced import bans on a range of Indian goods including paper, tobacco, fish, and powdered milk.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In addition, Dhaka has introduced a new transit fee of 1.8 taka per tonne per kilometre on Indian goods moving through Bangladeshi territory, adding to the operational burden faced by Indian exporters.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Such measures have led to operational delays and mounting frustration among Indian businesses, prompting calls for a calibrated policy response from New Delhi.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Rising Bangladesh-China ties add tension</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>India’s decision also comes amid worsening diplomatic ties and growing China-Bangladesh alignment. The recent change in political leadership in Dhaka—from Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s pro-India government to an interim administration under Muhammad Yunus—has drastically altered regional dynamics.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In March 2025, Yunus visited China and secured USD 2.1 billion in investments across infrastructure and economic cooperation. His controversial remarks in Beijing, calling India’s northeastern states “a landlocked region with no access to the ocean,” have drawn sharp criticism in New Delhi.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Indian officials reportedly viewed these comments as undermining India’s sovereignty and regional connectivity goals, especially in light of ongoing projects like India’s Act East Policy and BIMSTEC corridor plans.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>India-Bangladesh trade ties</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Despite the current friction, India and Bangladesh share a deeply interwoven trade relationship. In FY24, bilateral trade stood at $15.9 billion, with India exporting goods worth $12.5 billion and importing around $3.4 billion, according to data from the Indian Ministry of Commerce and Industry.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>However, India’s textile industry has long expressed concern over what they term “unfair advantages” granted to Bangladeshi exporters.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>These include duty-free imports of Chinese fabrics and generous Bangladeshi government export subsidies, which reportedly provide a 10 to 15 per cent price advantage to Dhaka’s garment producers in the Indian market, according to the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI).</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>With these new curbs, India appears to be sending a strong message, not only protecting domestic industries but also signalling disapproval of Dhaka’s shifting geopolitical stance.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

Business & Economy: The decision now bars most affected goods from entering India via land routes, restricting them to select sea ports.

India has imposed sweeping new restrictions on imports from Bangladesh, targeting goods worth $770 million, which accounts for 42 per cent of total bilateral imports, according to the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI). The Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry, through a directive by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) issued on Saturday, announced immediate port restrictions on several categories of Bangladeshi imports. The decision now bars most affected goods from entering India via land routes, restricting them to select sea ports. What does the ban cover? Among the key sectors hit by this move are garments, processed foods, and plastic items. Of these, garments alone constitute $618 million worth of annual imports. These can now only be brought in through two designated sea ports, cutting off traditional land trade routes that had previously served as the backbone of cross-border commerce. According to the GTRI, this change “severely impacts Bangladesh’s most lucrative export channel to India,” especially since the majority of their ready-made garment (RMG) consignments moved via land. Why India took this step? The move is being widely interpreted as retaliatory. Trade experts believe the restrictions reflect India’s response to a series of recent economic and diplomatic developments initiated by Dhaka. According to the GTRI, “The restrictions look like India’s response to Dhaka restricting imports from India on a large number of items and its diplomatic pivot towards China.” Over the past year, Bangladesh has gradually imposed several curbs on Indian exports. In April 2025, it banned Indian yarn imports through five key land ports. It has also tightened regulations on rice shipments and enforced import bans on a range of Indian goods including paper, tobacco, fish, and powdered milk. In addition, Dhaka has introduced a new transit fee of 1.8 taka per tonne per kilometre on Indian goods moving through Bangladeshi territory, adding to the operational burden faced by Indian exporters. Such measures have led to operational delays and mounting frustration among Indian businesses, prompting calls for a calibrated policy response from New Delhi. Rising Bangladesh-China ties add tension India’s decision also comes amid worsening diplomatic ties and growing China-Bangladesh alignment. The recent change in political leadership in Dhaka—from Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s pro-India government to an interim administration under Muhammad Yunus—has drastically altered regional dynamics. In March 2025, Yunus visited China and secured USD 2.1 billion in investments across infrastructure and economic cooperation. His controversial remarks in Beijing, calling India’s northeastern states “a landlocked region with no access to the ocean,” have drawn sharp criticism in New Delhi. Indian officials reportedly viewed these comments as undermining India’s sovereignty and regional connectivity goals, especially in light of ongoing projects like India’s Act East Policy and BIMSTEC corridor plans. India-Bangladesh trade ties Despite the current friction, India and Bangladesh share a deeply interwoven trade relationship. In FY24, bilateral trade stood at $15.9 billion, with India exporting goods worth $12.5 billion and importing around $3.4 billion, according to data from the Indian Ministry of Commerce and Industry. However, India’s textile industry has long expressed concern over what they term “unfair advantages” granted to Bangladeshi exporters. These include duty-free imports of Chinese fabrics and generous Bangladeshi government export subsidies, which reportedly provide a 10 to 15 per cent price advantage to Dhaka’s garment producers in the Indian market, according to the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI). With these new curbs, India appears to be sending a strong message, not only protecting domestic industries but also signalling disapproval of Dhaka’s shifting geopolitical stance.

<p>India has imposed sweeping new restrictions on imports from Bangladesh, the Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry, through a DGFT issued on Saturday, announced immediate port restrictions on several categories of Bangladeshi imports.&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;</p>

India tightens trade with Bangladesh: $770 million imports now restricted

<p>US President Donald Trump has taken aim at Walmart, urging the retail giant to absorb the cost of tariffs instead of passing them on to consumers. In a sharp rebuke posted on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump accused the company of hiding behind his trade policies while raking in massive profits.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>“Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,” Trump wrote. “Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and China,&nbsp;they should, as is said, ‘EAT THE TARIFFS’, and not charge valued customers ANYTHING.”</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>His comments follow Walmart’s announcement earlier this week that it would begin raising prices due to increased import duties. The company, a key player in American retail, cited high tariffs on Chinese goods as the primary driver of the looming price hike.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Walmart retail price hike ultimatum&nbsp;</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>According to Reuters, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon stated on Thursday that the company could not absorb all the tariff costs because of narrow retail margins. However, he assured that Walmart was committed to shielding customers from rising costs as much as possible — especially on essentials like food.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>“We will do our best to keep our prices as low as possible,” McMillon told Reuters. “But we won’t be able to absorb all the pressure imposed by the tariffs.”</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Following Trump’s remarks, Walmart reiterated its stance in a statement to Reuters: “We have always worked to keep our prices as low as possible and we won’t stop,” said company spokesperson Molly Blakeman. “We’ll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can given the reality of small retail margins.”</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The retailer, which saw over 3 per cent sales growth to $112 billion in the most recent quarter, has not issued a profit projection for the current quarter, citing the ongoing uncertainty around tariffs.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Trump tariff saga&nbsp;</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>President Trump’s latest confrontation with Walmart is part of a broader and aggressive trade strategy that has seen the US impose tariffs on a range of foreign goods and trading partners.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The latest salvo came on April 2, 2025, when Trump unveiled a new wave of sweeping import duties during his “Liberation Day” announcement, including a staggering 145 per cent tariff on Chinese goods.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In retaliation, Beijing responded with reciprocal tariffs of 125 per cent on American goods. The tit-for-tat escalations disrupted global supply chains, drove up costs for consumers, and rattled financial markets.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Although a temporary 90-day tariff pause was agreed , a 10 per cent base tariff on Chinese goods remained in place. The Geneva trade talks held earlier this week were also viewed as a potential turning point.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>According to a joint statement, both sides have agreed to reduce tariffs: the US has brought down its duties from 145 per cent to 30 per cent, while China has cut its retaliatory tariffs from 125 per cent to 10 per cent.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Tariffs have also been raised on goods from Mexico, Vietnam, and South Korea, particularly in industries seen as vital to US national interests.</p><p>Simultaneously, the US-UK trade deal has entered its final negotiation phase, with both nations agreeing to remove certain non-tariff barriers and consider lowering duties on automotive parts and pharmaceuticals. The deal is expected to be signed later this year, aiming to bolster transatlantic trade post-Brexit.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Despite these diplomatic developments, Trump has remained firm on maintaining pressure on countries he views as taking advantage of the American market. Retailers like Walmart, which source about one-third of their products from overseas, primarily China and Mexico are reportedly caught in the middle, forced to balance profit margins against political rhetoric.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>With more than 4,000 stores across the US and 90 per cent of the population living within 10 miles of one, Walmart’s decision to increase prices may have broader implications for American consumers and for Trump’s own inflation-fighting narrative ahead of the 2024 elections.</p>

Business & Economy: Trump comments came after Walmart announced price increases due to high tariffs on Chinese imports, identifying them as the main factor for the price hike.

US President Donald Trump has taken aim at Walmart, urging the retail giant to absorb the cost of tariffs instead of passing them on to consumers. In a sharp rebuke posted on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump accused the company of hiding behind his trade policies while raking in massive profits. “Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,” Trump wrote. “Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and China, they should, as is said, ‘EAT THE TARIFFS’, and not charge valued customers ANYTHING.” His comments follow Walmart’s announcement earlier this week that it would begin raising prices due to increased import duties. The company, a key player in American retail, cited high tariffs on Chinese goods as the primary driver of the looming price hike. Walmart retail price hike ultimatum According to Reuters, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon stated on Thursday that the company could not absorb all the tariff costs because of narrow retail margins. However, he assured that Walmart was committed to shielding customers from rising costs as much as possible — especially on essentials like food. “We will do our best to keep our prices as low as possible,” McMillon told Reuters. “But we won’t be able to absorb all the pressure imposed by the tariffs.” Following Trump’s remarks, Walmart reiterated its stance in a statement to Reuters: “We have always worked to keep our prices as low as possible and we won’t stop,” said company spokesperson Molly Blakeman. “We’ll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can given the reality of small retail margins.” The retailer, which saw over 3 per cent sales growth to $112 billion in the most recent quarter, has not issued a profit projection for the current quarter, citing the ongoing uncertainty around tariffs. Trump tariff saga President Trump’s latest confrontation with Walmart is part of a broader and aggressive trade strategy that has seen the US impose tariffs on a range of foreign goods and trading partners. The latest salvo came on April 2, 2025, when Trump unveiled a new wave of sweeping import duties during his “Liberation Day” announcement, including a staggering 145 per cent tariff on Chinese goods. In retaliation, Beijing responded with reciprocal tariffs of 125 per cent on American goods. The tit-for-tat escalations disrupted global supply chains, drove up costs for consumers, and rattled financial markets. Although a temporary 90-day tariff pause was agreed , a 10 per cent base tariff on Chinese goods remained in place. The Geneva trade talks held earlier this week were also viewed as a potential turning point. According to a joint statement, both sides have agreed to reduce tariffs: the US has brought down its duties from 145 per cent to 30 per cent, while China has cut its retaliatory tariffs from 125 per cent to 10 per cent. Tariffs have also been raised on goods from Mexico, Vietnam, and South Korea, particularly in industries seen as vital to US national interests. Simultaneously, the US-UK trade deal has entered its final negotiation phase, with both nations agreeing to remove certain non-tariff barriers and consider lowering duties on automotive parts and pharmaceuticals. The deal is expected to be signed later this year, aiming to bolster transatlantic trade post-Brexit. Despite these diplomatic developments, Trump has remained firm on maintaining pressure on countries he views as taking advantage of the American market. Retailers like Walmart, which source about one-third of their products from overseas, primarily China and Mexico are reportedly caught in the middle, forced to balance profit margins against political rhetoric. With more than 4,000 stores across the US and 90 per cent of the population living within 10 miles of one, Walmart’s decision to increase prices may have broader implications for American consumers and for Trump’s own inflation-fighting narrative ahead of the 2024 elections.

<p>President Trump criticised Walmart on social media, urging the company to absorb tariff costs rather than transferring them to consumers, highlighting their profits.</p>

Trump tells Walmart to ‘eat the tariffs’ amid retail price hike alarm

<p>Turkey-based Celebi, which provides airport ground handling services in India, has filed a legal challenge against the Indian government’s abrupt decision to revoke its security clearance. According to Reuters, the revocation, announced on May 16, 2025, comes amid rising tensions between India and Turkey, following Ankara’s vocal criticism of India’s military operation against Pakistan.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Celebi Airport Services India, in its filing to the Delhi High Court seen by Reuters, argued that the cancellation was based on “vague” national security concerns and lacked specific reasoning or procedural fairness. The company stated the move threatens the livelihoods of 3,791 employees and could severely damage investor confidence in India. “Mere rhetoric of national security without elaborating upon in what manner an entity is a threat to national security is unsustainable in law,” the filing said, further noting that Celebi had previously passed all required background checks and security vetting before commencing operations.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In revoking Celebi’s clearance, India’s junior aviation minister Murlidhar Mohol stated on X (formerly Twitter) that the government had received requests from across the country to sever ties with the Turkish firm, citing national interests. “Recognising the seriousness of the issue and the call to protect national interests, we have taken cognizance of these requests,” he said.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In its legal submission, Celebi argued that while its shareholders are Turkish, the controlling stake is held by companies not incorporated in Turkey. The Delhi High Court is expected to hear the matter on May 19.</p><p><br><strong>Backdrop: Operation Sindoor and diplomatic fallout</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>India’s move comes in the wake of heightened diplomatic tensions triggered by the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam terror attack in Kashmir, which claimed 26 civilian lives. In retaliation, India launched “Operation Sindoor” on May 7, targeting nine terror training camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Turkey and Azerbaijan were among the few nations to publicly condemn India’s military response. Ankara described the airstrikes as “provocative,” urging restraint and dialogue, while Baku issued a statement criticising the operation and expressing solidarity with Pakistan. These statements were met with fierce backlash within India, prompting both public outrage and political calls for an economic and diplomatic boycott of the two nations.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>India’s economic pushback</strong></p><p><br>In response to Turkey and Azerbaijan’s stance, India initiated a series of economic and cultural measures aimed at curbing bilateral engagement. According to The Times of India, traders in Rajasthan halted imports of Turkish apples, while marble importers in Udaipur suspended shipments from Turkey, once a dominant player in India’s marble trade, supplying nearly 70 per cent of its imports.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>At the institutional level, universities such as Jamia Millia Islamia cancelled Memorandums of Understanding with Turkish government-linked educational institutions, marking a symbolic decoupling in the academic sphere. This was in tandem with Celebi’s expulsion from Indian airports, which disrupted its operations in Delhi, Kerala, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Goa.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Tourism takes a hit</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>One of the most direct economic impacts for Turkey and Azerbaijan is unfolding in the tourism sector. Major travel platforms such as MakeMyTrip and EaseMyTrip reportedly recorded a 60 per cent decline in bookings to Turkey and Azerbaijan, with cancellations spiking by 250 per cent amid the diplomatic fallout.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In 2024, Indian tourists spent approximately ₹42.9 billion in Turkey and ₹26 billion in Azerbaijan, according to estimates cited by NDTV. This spending was concentrated in Istanbul, Cappadocia, Baku, and Gabala—regions heavily dependent on foreign visitors.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The ongoing boycott has put immense pressure on tour operators, hotels, and airlines in both countries, with industry insiders warning of sharp revenue dips in the summer and festive quarters.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>What Celebi’s exit means for Turkey’s economy</strong>?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Celebi’s ejection from India’s aviation market could have a ripple effect on Turkey’s services exports and diplomatic credibility in South Asia. The company, which had invested significantly in ground handling infrastructure across five Indian airports, now faces reputational damage and potential financial losses from idle equipment, workforce layoffs, and terminated contracts.<br>&nbsp;</p><p>India’s broader trade with Turkey is also under strain. According to Financial Express, imports from Turkey during April–February of FY 2024–25 stood at $2.84 billion, down from $3.78 billion in the previous year. Turkish sectors like marble, machinery, and fresh produce have seen shrinking orders from Indian buyers.<br>&nbsp;</p><p>Meanwhile, Azerbaijan—whose tourism industry benefited from a surge in Indian travellers in 2024, with between 243,000 to 250,000 visitors generating $308 million to $311 million in revenue reported by Financial Express. It is now at risk of losing its fastest-growing inbound market. Travel agents say a prolonged boycott could derail the country’s tourism-dependent recovery post-COVID.</p><p><br>The Celebi lawsuit may be the first legal flashpoint in a broader geopolitical showdown, but it is unlikely to be the last. India’s message is clear: nations that align against its national interests, particularly on matters of sovereignty and security, will face economic consequences.</p><p>As the Delhi High Court hears Celebi’s challenge, the outcome will not only shape the firm’s future in India but it could also redefine how India leverages economic tools to defend its geopolitical red lines.</p><p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p><p><br>&nbsp;</p>

According to Reuters, the revocation, announced on May 16, 2025, comes amid rising tensions between India and Turkey, following Ankara’s vocal criticism of India’s military operation against Pakistan.

Turkey-based Celebi, which provides airport ground handling services in India, has filed a legal challenge against the Indian government’s abrupt decision to revoke its security clearance. According to Reuters, the revocation, announced on May 16, 2025, comes amid rising tensions between India and Turkey, following Ankara’s vocal criticism of India’s military operation against Pakistan. Celebi Airport Services India, in its filing to the Delhi High Court seen by Reuters, argued that the cancellation was based on “vague” national security concerns and lacked specific reasoning or procedural fairness. The company stated the move threatens the livelihoods of 3,791 employees and could severely damage investor confidence in India. “Mere rhetoric of national security without elaborating upon in what manner an entity is a threat to national security is unsustainable in law,” the filing said, further noting that Celebi had previously passed all required background checks and security vetting before commencing operations. In revoking Celebi’s clearance, India’s junior aviation minister Murlidhar Mohol stated on X (formerly Twitter) that the government had received requests from across the country to sever ties with the Turkish firm, citing national interests. “Recognising the seriousness of the issue and the call to protect national interests, we have taken cognizance of these requests,” he said. In its legal submission, Celebi argued that while its shareholders are Turkish, the controlling stake is held by companies not incorporated in Turkey. The Delhi High Court is expected to hear the matter on May 19. Backdrop: Operation Sindoor and diplomatic fallout India’s move comes in the wake of heightened diplomatic tensions triggered by the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam terror attack in Kashmir, which claimed 26 civilian lives. In retaliation, India launched “Operation Sindoor” on May 7, targeting nine terror training camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Turkey and Azerbaijan were among the few nations to publicly condemn India’s military response. Ankara described the airstrikes as “provocative,” urging restraint and dialogue, while Baku issued a statement criticising the operation and expressing solidarity with Pakistan. These statements were met with fierce backlash within India, prompting both public outrage and political calls for an economic and diplomatic boycott of the two nations. India’s economic pushback In response to Turkey and Azerbaijan’s stance, India initiated a series of economic and cultural measures aimed at curbing bilateral engagement. According to The Times of India, traders in Rajasthan halted imports of Turkish apples, while marble importers in Udaipur suspended shipments from Turkey, once a dominant player in India’s marble trade, supplying nearly 70 per cent of its imports. At the institutional level, universities such as Jamia Millia Islamia cancelled Memorandums of Understanding with Turkish government-linked educational institutions, marking a symbolic decoupling in the academic sphere. This was in tandem with Celebi’s expulsion from Indian airports, which disrupted its operations in Delhi, Kerala, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Goa. Tourism takes a hit One of the most direct economic impacts for Turkey and Azerbaijan is unfolding in the tourism sector. Major travel platforms such as MakeMyTrip and EaseMyTrip reportedly recorded a 60 per cent decline in bookings to Turkey and Azerbaijan, with cancellations spiking by 250 per cent amid the diplomatic fallout. In 2024, Indian tourists spent approximately ₹42.9 billion in Turkey and ₹26 billion in Azerbaijan, according to estimates cited by NDTV. This spending was concentrated in Istanbul, Cappadocia, Baku, and Gabala—regions heavily dependent on foreign visitors. The ongoing boycott has put immense pressure on tour operators, hotels, and airlines in both countries, with industry insiders warning of sharp revenue dips in the summer and festive quarters. What Celebi’s exit means for Turkey’s economy? Celebi’s ejection from India’s aviation market could have a ripple effect on Turkey’s services exports and diplomatic credibility in South Asia. The company, which had invested significantly in ground handling infrastructure across five Indian airports, now faces reputational damage and potential financial losses from idle equipment, workforce layoffs, and terminated contracts. India’s broader trade with Turkey is also under strain. According to Financial Express, imports from Turkey during April–February of FY 2024–25 stood at $2.84 billion, down from $3.78 billion in the previous year. Turkish sectors like marble, machinery, and fresh produce have seen shrinking orders from Indian buyers. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan—whose tourism industry benefited from a surge in Indian travellers in 2024, with between 243,000 to 250,000 visitors generating $308 million to $311 million in revenue reported by Financial Express. It is now at risk of losing its fastest-growing inbound market. Travel agents say a prolonged boycott could derail the country’s tourism-dependent recovery post-COVID. The Celebi lawsuit may be the first legal flashpoint in a broader geopolitical showdown, but it is unlikely to be the last. India’s message is clear: nations that align against its national interests, particularly on matters of sovereignty and security, will face economic consequences. As the Delhi High Court hears Celebi’s challenge, the outcome will not only shape the firm’s future in India but it could also redefine how India leverages economic tools to defend its geopolitical red lines.

<p>Turkey-based Celebi has filed a legal challenge against the Indian government’s abrupt decision to revoke its security clearance.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

Turkey's Celebi sues India over ‘vague’ clearance pullback amid Pakistan tension

<p dir="ltr"><span>Moody&rsquo;s Ratings stripped the United States of its last top-tier credit rating on Friday, downgrading its long-term issuer rating from Aaa to Aa1. The move reflects mounting concern about America&rsquo;s ballooning debt and structural fiscal deficits, which the agency warned are on an unsustainable trajectory.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The downgrade places Moody&rsquo;s in line with its two major counterparts&mdash;S&amp;P and Fitch Ratings&mdash;which previously downgraded the US sovereign rating in 2011 and 2023, respectively. With the move, all three top credit rating agencies now assess US government debt below the highest grade.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Although Moody&rsquo;s affirmed that the US retains significant credit strengths&mdash;including its resilient economy, deep capital markets, and the global dominance of the US dollar&mdash;it said these no longer fully offset the weakening of America&rsquo;s fiscal health. The agency simultaneously changed the outlook on the rating to &ldquo;stable&rdquo;, suggesting no further immediate downgrade is expected.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>In its statement, Moody&rsquo;s cited the failure of successive US administrations and Congress to agree on meaningful fiscal reforms, describing the trend of persistent annual deficits as a key driver of the downgrade.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>&ldquo;We do not believe that material multi-year reductions in mandatory spending and deficits will result from current fiscal proposals under consideration,&rdquo; the agency said.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The rating agency projects that the federal budget deficit will grow from 6.4 per cent of GDP in 2024 to nearly 9 per cent by 2035, driven by rising interest payments, increased entitlement spending, and relatively weak revenue generation.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Without reforms, the federal debt burden is expected to rise to 134 per cent of GDP by 2035&mdash;up from 98 per cent today&mdash;marking a sharp increase that would bring it close to post-World War II highs.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Moody&rsquo;s flagged the possibility that extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a central goal of the Republican-controlled Congress and President Donald Trump, would add about $4 trillion to the federal primary deficit (excluding interest payments) over the next decade. That alone, Moody&rsquo;s said, would materially worsen debt affordability and strain fiscal space further.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The agency noted that mandatory spending&mdash;including social security, medicare, and interest payments&mdash;is projected to account for nearly 78 per cent of total federal spending by 2035, up from 73 per cent today. Interest payments, in particular, are set to consume 30 per cent of all government revenue by 2035, compared to 18 per cent in 2024 and just 9 per cent in 2021.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>What will be the impact?</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Though largely expected, the downgrade had an immediate, if modest, impact on financial markets. Yields on 10-year Treasury bonds rose to around 4.49 per cent in after-hours trading, while ETFs tracking longer-term treasury debt fell roughly 1 per cent. The broader equity market also responded, with the S&amp;P 500 ETF declining 0.4 per cent in post-market trading.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Market analysts said the downgrade could push up borrowing costs at the margin, as investors demand higher yields for holding US government debt. Others suggested the symbolic nature of the downgrade might have a limited effect due to the entrenched role of the US dollar and treasuries in global finance.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Still, the move highlights rising concerns about the sustainability of US debt and the political dysfunction that undermines efforts to address it. The announcement came shortly after the GOP-led House Budget Committee failed to advance a major tax-and-spending bill&mdash;one that aimed to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts. The failure was due to opposition from hardline Republicans demanding steeper spending cuts.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Moody&rsquo;s downgrade also comes amid a wider debate over whether the US is losing its traditional fiscal discipline. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently warned Congress that the country&rsquo;s debt trajectory was &ldquo;unsustainable,&rdquo; adding that a crisis could involve &ldquo;a sudden stop in the economy as credit would disappear.&rdquo;</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>Concerns persist</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Moody&rsquo;s emphasised that US institutions, including the Federal Reserve and the constitutional separation of powers, remain strong and are key stabilising factors. However, the agency noted that recent political dysfunction has hampered the policymaking process and created uncertainty over the government&rsquo;s ability to enact long-term fiscal reforms.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>&ldquo;Successive US administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs,&rdquo; Moody&rsquo;s wrote. It warned that without bipartisan action on spending and revenue, the situation would continue to deteriorate.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Analysts also warned that continued reliance on foreign capital to fund US debt&mdash;combined with declining demand for treasuries and heightened geopolitical tensions&mdash;could eventually erode investor confidence.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Although Moody&rsquo;s still sees the US dollar as the dominant reserve currency for the foreseeable future, any shock that triggers a rapid investor pullback could deepen fiscal risks and accelerate the debt crisis.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>Looking ahead</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Moody&rsquo;s stated that the US still has time and institutional capacity to reverse its fiscal trajectory, particularly if bipartisan reforms can be enacted to increase revenue or curb spending growth. A credible long-term fiscal plan could eventually lead to an upgrade in the rating, the agency said.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>On the other hand, a faster-than-expected deterioration in debt metrics&mdash;or a significant erosion in policy credibility and investor confidence&mdash;could prompt further rating actions in the future. While the current rating outlook is stable, Moody&rsquo;s made clear that risks remain tilted toward fiscal deterioration unless political leaders make difficult decisions soon.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>In the absence of such action, the downgrade stands as a stark warning: the world&rsquo;s largest economy can no longer count on its historical fiscal reputation alone to preserve its top credit standing.</span></p>

Business & Economy: Moody's projects the budget deficit will grow to nearly 9 per cent by 2035, driven by interest payments, entitlement spending, weak revenue generation

Moody’s Ratings stripped the United States of its last top-tier credit rating on Friday, downgrading its long-term issuer rating from Aaa to Aa1. The move reflects mounting concern about America’s ballooning debt and structural fiscal deficits, which the agency warned are on an unsustainable trajectory. The downgrade places Moody’s in line with its two major counterparts—S&P and Fitch Ratings—which previously downgraded the US sovereign rating in 2011 and 2023, respectively. With the move, all three top credit rating agencies now assess US government debt below the highest grade. Although Moody’s affirmed that the US retains significant credit strengths—including its resilient economy, deep capital markets, and the global dominance of the US dollar—it said these no longer fully offset the weakening of America’s fiscal health. The agency simultaneously changed the outlook on the rating to “stable”, suggesting no further immediate downgrade is expected. In its statement, Moody’s cited the failure of successive US administrations and Congress to agree on meaningful fiscal reforms, describing the trend of persistent annual deficits as a key driver of the downgrade. “We do not believe that material multi-year reductions in mandatory spending and deficits will result from current fiscal proposals under consideration,” the agency said. The rating agency projects that the federal budget deficit will grow from 6.4 per cent of GDP in 2024 to nearly 9 per cent by 2035, driven by rising interest payments, increased entitlement spending, and relatively weak revenue generation. Without reforms, the federal debt burden is expected to rise to 134 per cent of GDP by 2035—up from 98 per cent today—marking a sharp increase that would bring it close to post-World War II highs. Moody’s flagged the possibility that extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a central goal of the Republican-controlled Congress and President Donald Trump, would add about $4 trillion to the federal primary deficit (excluding interest payments) over the next decade. That alone, Moody’s said, would materially worsen debt affordability and strain fiscal space further. The agency noted that mandatory spending—including social security, medicare, and interest payments—is projected to account for nearly 78 per cent of total federal spending by 2035, up from 73 per cent today. Interest payments, in particular, are set to consume 30 per cent of all government revenue by 2035, compared to 18 per cent in 2024 and just 9 per cent in 2021. What will be the impact? Though largely expected, the downgrade had an immediate, if modest, impact on financial markets. Yields on 10-year Treasury bonds rose to around 4.49 per cent in after-hours trading, while ETFs tracking longer-term treasury debt fell roughly 1 per cent. The broader equity market also responded, with the S&P 500 ETF declining 0.4 per cent in post-market trading. Market analysts said the downgrade could push up borrowing costs at the margin, as investors demand higher yields for holding US government debt. Others suggested the symbolic nature of the downgrade might have a limited effect due to the entrenched role of the US dollar and treasuries in global finance. Still, the move highlights rising concerns about the sustainability of US debt and the political dysfunction that undermines efforts to address it. The announcement came shortly after the GOP-led House Budget Committee failed to advance a major tax-and-spending bill—one that aimed to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts. The failure was due to opposition from hardline Republicans demanding steeper spending cuts. Moody’s downgrade also comes amid a wider debate over whether the US is losing its traditional fiscal discipline. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently warned Congress that the country’s debt trajectory was “unsustainable,” adding that a crisis could involve “a sudden stop in the economy as credit would disappear.” Concerns persist Moody’s emphasised that US institutions, including the Federal Reserve and the constitutional separation of powers, remain strong and are key stabilising factors. However, the agency noted that recent political dysfunction has hampered the policymaking process and created uncertainty over the government’s ability to enact long-term fiscal reforms. “Successive US administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs,” Moody’s wrote. It warned that without bipartisan action on spending and revenue, the situation would continue to deteriorate. Analysts also warned that continued reliance on foreign capital to fund US debt—combined with declining demand for treasuries and heightened geopolitical tensions—could eventually erode investor confidence. Although Moody’s still sees the US dollar as the dominant reserve currency for the foreseeable future, any shock that triggers a rapid investor pullback could deepen fiscal risks and accelerate the debt crisis. Looking ahead Moody’s stated that the US still has time and institutional capacity to reverse its fiscal trajectory, particularly if bipartisan reforms can be enacted to increase revenue or curb spending growth. A credible long-term fiscal plan could eventually lead to an upgrade in the rating, the agency said. On the other hand, a faster-than-expected deterioration in debt metrics—or a significant erosion in policy credibility and investor confidence—could prompt further rating actions in the future. While the current rating outlook is stable, Moody’s made clear that risks remain tilted toward fiscal deterioration unless political leaders make difficult decisions soon. In the absence of such action, the downgrade stands as a stark warning: the world’s largest economy can no longer count on its historical fiscal reputation alone to preserve its top credit standing.

Moody’s downgrades US credit rating over mounting debt, fiscal gridlock

<p dir="ltr"><span>China&rsquo;s recorded holdings of US Treasuries have dropped below those of the United Kingdom for the first time in over two decades, signalling a shift in global capital dynamics and deepening concerns over geopolitical and economic tensions surrounding US fiscal policy.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>According to the US Treasury Department&rsquo;s latest data, China&rsquo;s holdings fell to $765.4 billion in March, down $18.9 billion from the previous month. Meanwhile, UK investors increased their holdings by nearly $29 billion to $779.3 billion, overtaking China as the second-largest foreign holder of US debt behind Japan. This marks the first time since 2000 that the UK has surpassed China in US Treasury ownership.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The change coincides with a volatile period in financial markets, triggered in part by President Donald Trump&rsquo;s wave of aggressive tariffs against key US trading partners, including China. The escalation&mdash;dubbed &ldquo;Liberation Day&rdquo; by Trump&mdash;sparked a widespread sell-off in treasuries, pushed bond yields higher, and rattled investors globally.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>Foreign demand still strong</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Despite the geopolitical headwinds and concerns over US debt sustainability, overall foreign appetite for US Treasuries remained robust in March. Total foreign holdings rose by $233.1 billion, reaching a record $9.05 trillion, according to the Treasury&rsquo;s International Capital (TIC) report. Net inflows into US long- and short-term securities reached $254.3 billion, largely driven by private foreign investors.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Japan retained its position as the largest foreign holder, increasing its treasury stockpile to $1.1308 trillion. Canada and Belgium also increased their holdings, with Belgium&mdash;often considered a proxy for Chinese custodial accounts&mdash;adding $7.4 billion to reach $402.1 billion. The Cayman Islands, a major centre for hedge fund activity, saw holdings rise $37.5 billion to $455.3 billion.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Still, the rise in foreign holdings masks deeper structural shifts. China&rsquo;s steady, long-term reduction in direct treasury ownership&mdash;from a peak of over $1.3 trillion in 2011&mdash;is widely seen as part of Beijing&rsquo;s strategy to diversify its foreign reserves and reduce dependence on US assets.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Analysts believe a significant portion of Chinese holdings may now be hidden in custodial accounts in Belgium and Luxembourg.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>Bond sell-off raises alarm</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The market chaos in April highlighted a growing unease with US economic management. Yields on the 10-year treasury surged to 4.59 per cent, the highest since February, while the 30-year bond briefly breached 5 per cent, levels not seen since 2023.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>These moves came amid investor concerns that Trump's protectionist policies and erratic fiscal messaging could drive inflation, boost deficits, and erode the appeal of US debt.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The turmoil came days before Moody&rsquo;s downgraded the US credit rating from AAA to Aa1, citing rising deficits and chronic political gridlock. That move followed similar downgrades by Fitch and S&amp;P in previous years.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>While China&rsquo;s recent sales were not sudden, analysts warn that any acceleration in its unwinding of US assets could further destabilise markets. Others argue that Beijing may also be constrained in how far it can go.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Analysts caution that the full picture of China&rsquo;s holdings may remain opaque for months, given the lag in TIC data and China&rsquo;s use of third-party custodians. Meanwhile, hedge funds, European pension funds, and Japanese life insurers have all been named as possible contributors to the recent sell-off.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Trump&rsquo;s tariffs have heightened fears of a prolonged trade conflict, with Chinese officials vowing to &ldquo;fight to the end&rdquo;. As markets brace for further disruptions, the shift in treasury ownership&mdash;while symbolic&mdash;serves as a broader reflection of the fraying economic relationship between the world&rsquo;s two largest economies.</span></p>

Business & Economy: The change coincides with a volatile period in financial markets, triggered in part by Trump’s wave of tariffs against key US trading partners

China’s recorded holdings of US Treasuries have dropped below those of the United Kingdom for the first time in over two decades, signalling a shift in global capital dynamics and deepening concerns over geopolitical and economic tensions surrounding US fiscal policy. According to the US Treasury Department’s latest data, China’s holdings fell to $765.4 billion in March, down $18.9 billion from the previous month. Meanwhile, UK investors increased their holdings by nearly $29 billion to $779.3 billion, overtaking China as the second-largest foreign holder of US debt behind Japan. This marks the first time since 2000 that the UK has surpassed China in US Treasury ownership. The change coincides with a volatile period in financial markets, triggered in part by President Donald Trump’s wave of aggressive tariffs against key US trading partners, including China. The escalation—dubbed “Liberation Day” by Trump—sparked a widespread sell-off in treasuries, pushed bond yields higher, and rattled investors globally. Foreign demand still strong Despite the geopolitical headwinds and concerns over US debt sustainability, overall foreign appetite for US Treasuries remained robust in March. Total foreign holdings rose by $233.1 billion, reaching a record $9.05 trillion, according to the Treasury’s International Capital (TIC) report. Net inflows into US long- and short-term securities reached $254.3 billion, largely driven by private foreign investors. Japan retained its position as the largest foreign holder, increasing its treasury stockpile to $1.1308 trillion. Canada and Belgium also increased their holdings, with Belgium—often considered a proxy for Chinese custodial accounts—adding $7.4 billion to reach $402.1 billion. The Cayman Islands, a major centre for hedge fund activity, saw holdings rise $37.5 billion to $455.3 billion. Still, the rise in foreign holdings masks deeper structural shifts. China’s steady, long-term reduction in direct treasury ownership—from a peak of over $1.3 trillion in 2011—is widely seen as part of Beijing’s strategy to diversify its foreign reserves and reduce dependence on US assets. Analysts believe a significant portion of Chinese holdings may now be hidden in custodial accounts in Belgium and Luxembourg. Bond sell-off raises alarm The market chaos in April highlighted a growing unease with US economic management. Yields on the 10-year treasury surged to 4.59 per cent, the highest since February, while the 30-year bond briefly breached 5 per cent, levels not seen since 2023. These moves came amid investor concerns that Trump's protectionist policies and erratic fiscal messaging could drive inflation, boost deficits, and erode the appeal of US debt. The turmoil came days before Moody’s downgraded the US credit rating from AAA to Aa1, citing rising deficits and chronic political gridlock. That move followed similar downgrades by Fitch and S&P in previous years. While China’s recent sales were not sudden, analysts warn that any acceleration in its unwinding of US assets could further destabilise markets. Others argue that Beijing may also be constrained in how far it can go. Analysts caution that the full picture of China’s holdings may remain opaque for months, given the lag in TIC data and China’s use of third-party custodians. Meanwhile, hedge funds, European pension funds, and Japanese life insurers have all been named as possible contributors to the recent sell-off. Trump’s tariffs have heightened fears of a prolonged trade conflict, with Chinese officials vowing to “fight to the end”. As markets brace for further disruptions, the shift in treasury ownership—while symbolic—serves as a broader reflection of the fraying economic relationship between the world’s two largest economies.

UK overtakes China in US Treasury holdings for first time since 2000

<p dir="ltr"><span>Russia&rsquo;s economy is showing signs of weakening, as official statistics reveal a sharp decline in growth in the first quarter of 2025. According to preliminary data released by the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) on May 16, the country&rsquo;s gross domestic product (GDP) rose by just 1.4 per cent year-on-year. This marks a steep fall from the 4.5 per cent growth reported in the previous quarter and 5.4 per cent in the same period last year.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The slowdown came in below forecasts from both the Russian Economic Development Ministry, which predicted 1.7 per cent, and analysts at Bloomberg, who expected 1.8 per cent. Notably, Rosstat's quarter-on-quarter data showed the economy contracted by 0.4 per cent&mdash;its first quarterly decline since 2022&mdash;signalling growing economic vulnerability.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Experts have attributed the downturn to a combination of factors, including the central bank&rsquo;s high interest rate policy, persistent inflation, supply chain disruptions, and falling revenues from energy exports. From January to April, oil and gas revenues dropped by 10 per cent&mdash;a significant blow to a country that relies heavily on its energy sector.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>Economy in trouble?</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Despite the troubling first quarter, Rosstat recently revised its GDP growth estimate for 2024 upward to 4.3 per cent, citing stronger-than-expected performance in the fourth quarter. However, doubts are growing about the reliability of Russia&rsquo;s economic statistics.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>A report by the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE) warned that the Russian economy&rsquo;s resilience is only superficial. It noted deepening structural weaknesses, unsustainable fiscal practices, and an overreliance on military-driven stimulus.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Reuters reported that Torbjorn Becker of SITE pointed to discrepancies in Russia&rsquo;s inflation and monetary policy data as evidence that real GDP growth may be overstated. &ldquo;Russia claims inflation is 9&ndash;10 per cent. Why then is the central bank&rsquo;s key rate set at 21 per cent?&rdquo; he asked, arguing that understated inflation leads to inflated real GDP figures.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The SITE report, presented to European Union finance ministers, further claimed that Russia&rsquo;s budget deficit is likely larger than officially reported due to off-the-books war financing via the banking system. Official figures cite deficits of 2.3 per cent of GDP in 2022, 1.9 per cent in 2023, and 1.7 per cent in 2024&mdash;yet SITE estimates suggest the real fiscal shortfall could be twice as large, raising concerns about looming banking sector risks.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr">War and sanctions compounding economic pressure</h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>The long-term impact of sanctions continues to weigh heavily on the Russian economy. The Russian Finance Ministry reportedly acknowledged &ldquo;hundreds of billions of dollars&rdquo; in direct losses to the financial sector, while energy export earnings fell by an estimated $78.5 billion between December 2022 and June 2024, according to the Kyiv School of Economics.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Russia&rsquo;s pivot to a war economy has led to a surge in military spending, but this has come at the cost of consumer sector stability. Civilian businesses are struggling under the burden of soaring interest rates and inflation.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>In 2024, inflation reached 9.5 per cent, and bankruptcies rose 26 per cent year-on-year in the first three quarters, totalling 6,392 corporate insolvencies, according to Interfax.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Even as Moscow touts growth figures, Western analysts and institutions like the IMF are sceptical. The IMF estimates that while Russia&rsquo;s economy grew by 3.8 per cent in 2024, growth will slow to 1.4 per cent in 2025 and just 1.2 per cent in 2026.</span></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><span>Peace talks, but no ceasefire yet</span></h2>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Adding to the uncertainty are recent developments in the ongoing war in Ukraine. On May 16, Russia and Ukraine held their first direct peace talks since early 2022, agreeing to a large prisoner swap involving 1,000 prisoners each. However, significant gaps remain, especially over the issue of a ceasefire.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Ukrainian officials, backed by Western allies, have insisted on a temporary ceasefire as a first step toward broader peace. Russia has so far resisted this proposal. The two sides exchanged ceasefire proposals and discussed a potential meeting between their presidents, though no agreements were finalised.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Analysts warn that any reduction in military spending following a peace deal could deliver a short-term shock to Russia&rsquo;s already strained economy. Conversely, failure to reach an agreement could trigger a new round of sanctions from the West, compounding existing pressures.</span></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>

Business & Economy: According to data released by Rosstat, Russia’s GDP rose by just 1.4 per cent year-on-year, a steep fall from the 4.5 per cent in the last quarter

Russia’s economy is showing signs of weakening, as official statistics reveal a sharp decline in growth in the first quarter of 2025. According to preliminary data released by the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) on May 16, the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) rose by just 1.4 per cent year-on-year. This marks a steep fall from the 4.5 per cent growth reported in the previous quarter and 5.4 per cent in the same period last year. The slowdown came in below forecasts from both the Russian Economic Development Ministry, which predicted 1.7 per cent, and analysts at Bloomberg, who expected 1.8 per cent. Notably, Rosstat's quarter-on-quarter data showed the economy contracted by 0.4 per cent—its first quarterly decline since 2022—signalling growing economic vulnerability. Experts have attributed the downturn to a combination of factors, including the central bank’s high interest rate policy, persistent inflation, supply chain disruptions, and falling revenues from energy exports. From January to April, oil and gas revenues dropped by 10 per cent—a significant blow to a country that relies heavily on its energy sector. Economy in trouble? Despite the troubling first quarter, Rosstat recently revised its GDP growth estimate for 2024 upward to 4.3 per cent, citing stronger-than-expected performance in the fourth quarter. However, doubts are growing about the reliability of Russia’s economic statistics. A report by the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE) warned that the Russian economy’s resilience is only superficial. It noted deepening structural weaknesses, unsustainable fiscal practices, and an overreliance on military-driven stimulus. Reuters reported that Torbjorn Becker of SITE pointed to discrepancies in Russia’s inflation and monetary policy data as evidence that real GDP growth may be overstated. “Russia claims inflation is 9–10 per cent. Why then is the central bank’s key rate set at 21 per cent?” he asked, arguing that understated inflation leads to inflated real GDP figures. The SITE report, presented to European Union finance ministers, further claimed that Russia’s budget deficit is likely larger than officially reported due to off-the-books war financing via the banking system. Official figures cite deficits of 2.3 per cent of GDP in 2022, 1.9 per cent in 2023, and 1.7 per cent in 2024—yet SITE estimates suggest the real fiscal shortfall could be twice as large, raising concerns about looming banking sector risks. War and sanctions compounding economic pressure The long-term impact of sanctions continues to weigh heavily on the Russian economy. The Russian Finance Ministry reportedly acknowledged “hundreds of billions of dollars” in direct losses to the financial sector, while energy export earnings fell by an estimated $78.5 billion between December 2022 and June 2024, according to the Kyiv School of Economics. Russia’s pivot to a war economy has led to a surge in military spending, but this has come at the cost of consumer sector stability. Civilian businesses are struggling under the burden of soaring interest rates and inflation. In 2024, inflation reached 9.5 per cent, and bankruptcies rose 26 per cent year-on-year in the first three quarters, totalling 6,392 corporate insolvencies, according to Interfax. Even as Moscow touts growth figures, Western analysts and institutions like the IMF are sceptical. The IMF estimates that while Russia’s economy grew by 3.8 per cent in 2024, growth will slow to 1.4 per cent in 2025 and just 1.2 per cent in 2026. Peace talks, but no ceasefire yet Adding to the uncertainty are recent developments in the ongoing war in Ukraine. On May 16, Russia and Ukraine held their first direct peace talks since early 2022, agreeing to a large prisoner swap involving 1,000 prisoners each. However, significant gaps remain, especially over the issue of a ceasefire. Ukrainian officials, backed by Western allies, have insisted on a temporary ceasefire as a first step toward broader peace. Russia has so far resisted this proposal. The two sides exchanged ceasefire proposals and discussed a potential meeting between their presidents, though no agreements were finalised. Analysts warn that any reduction in military spending following a peace deal could deliver a short-term shock to Russia’s already strained economy. Conversely, failure to reach an agreement could trigger a new round of sanctions from the West, compounding existing pressures.

Are deeper structural risks weighing Russian economy down?

<p><span>Starbucks Corp. is exploring strategic options for its China business, including a possible stake sale, Bloomberg reported.</span></p>
<p><span>The coffee giant, which is facing mounting pressure from local competitors such as Luckin Coffee and Cotti Coffee, has reached out to private equity firms, technology companies, and other potential investors to gauge interest in its operations in the country.</span></p>
<p><span>The move comes as Starbucks grapples with increased competition and macroeconomic challenges in its second-largest market. Despite having more than 7,750 stores in China, the company's revenue in the region has faltered, generating nearly $740 million in the first quarter of 2025. This is well below the $1.2 billion net revenue posted by Luckin Coffee, which has rapidly expanded its footprint in the Chinese coffee market.</span></p>
<p><span>The Bloomberg report suggests the company is considering a transaction that could value its China assets in the billions of dollars. Potential investors are expected to submit initial feedback soon, although it remains unclear whether Starbucks will move forward with a deal.</span></p>
<p><span>During a recent earnings call, Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol reaffirmed the company's long-term commitment to China. Niccol also mentioned that the company has made changes to its product offerings and pricing to improve performance.</span></p>
<p><span>Starbucks' move to explore a potential stake sale follows a similar path taken by other global chains such as McDonald's and Yum! Brands, which both sold stakes in their China operations to private equity firms to better cater to local tastes and tap into growth opportunities.</span></p>
<h2><span><strong>More challenges on the plate</strong></span></h2>
<p><span>In a separate development, Starbucks faces labour unrest in the United States as employees at around 100 unionised locations have walked off the job since Sunday. The strikes are in response to a new dress code policy, which requires baristas to wear solid black tops, replacing the previous policy that allowed employees to wear shirts in any colour. The new policy also introduces stricter guidelines on the bottoms workers can wear.</span></p>
<p><span>Workers United, the union representing baristas at over 570 US Starbucks locations, claims the dress code changes are an attempt by the company to undermine union negotiations. The union filed a complaint with the US National Labor Relations Board, alleging that the changes are unlawful and demonstrate that the company is not negotiating fairly.</span></p>
<p><span>While Starbucks insists that less than 1 per cent of its US workers are participating in the strikes and that most stores have remained open, the labour group maintains that the protests highlight growing dissatisfaction among workers. Starbucks responded by saying that it continues to bargain in good faith and urged the union to return to the negotiating table, emphasising that differences in store policies will be addressed lawfully and fairly.</span></p>
<p><span>As the company faces pressure both from internal labour disputes and external market challenges, the decisions it makes over the next few months will have significant implications for its operations both in the US and abroad.</span></p>

Business & Economy: The coffee giant, which is facing mounting pressure from local competitors has reached out to PE firms, technology firms, and others to gauge interest

Starbucks Corp. is exploring strategic options for its China business, including a possible stake sale, Bloomberg reported. The coffee giant, which is facing mounting pressure from local competitors such as Luckin Coffee and Cotti Coffee, has reached out to private equity firms, technology companies, and other potential investors to gauge interest in its operations in the country. The move comes as Starbucks grapples with increased competition and macroeconomic challenges in its second-largest market. Despite having more than 7,750 stores in China, the company's revenue in the region has faltered, generating nearly $740 million in the first quarter of 2025. This is well below the $1.2 billion net revenue posted by Luckin Coffee, which has rapidly expanded its footprint in the Chinese coffee market. The Bloomberg report suggests the company is considering a transaction that could value its China assets in the billions of dollars. Potential investors are expected to submit initial feedback soon, although it remains unclear whether Starbucks will move forward with a deal. During a recent earnings call, Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol reaffirmed the company's long-term commitment to China. Niccol also mentioned that the company has made changes to its product offerings and pricing to improve performance. Starbucks' move to explore a potential stake sale follows a similar path taken by other global chains such as McDonald's and Yum! Brands, which both sold stakes in their China operations to private equity firms to better cater to local tastes and tap into growth opportunities. More challenges on the plate In a separate development, Starbucks faces labour unrest in the United States as employees at around 100 unionised locations have walked off the job since Sunday. The strikes are in response to a new dress code policy, which requires baristas to wear solid black tops, replacing the previous policy that allowed employees to wear shirts in any colour. The new policy also introduces stricter guidelines on the bottoms workers can wear. Workers United, the union representing baristas at over 570 US Starbucks locations, claims the dress code changes are an attempt by the company to undermine union negotiations. The union filed a complaint with the US National Labor Relations Board, alleging that the changes are unlawful and demonstrate that the company is not negotiating fairly. While Starbucks insists that less than 1 per cent of its US workers are participating in the strikes and that most stores have remained open, the labour group maintains that the protests highlight growing dissatisfaction among workers. Starbucks responded by saying that it continues to bargain in good faith and urged the union to return to the negotiating table, emphasising that differences in store policies will be addressed lawfully and fairly. As the company faces pressure both from internal labour disputes and external market challenges, the decisions it makes over the next few months will have significant implications for its operations both in the US and abroad.

Starbucks explores stake sale for its China business

<p>Japan&rsquo;s economy contracted unexpectedly in the first quarter of 2025, signalling a fragile recovery. The contraction, which marks the first since 2024, has been attributed to a drop in exports, flat consumer spending, and the looming impact of trade tensions with the US, including tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump.</p>
<p>According to preliminary data from the Cabinet Office, Japan&rsquo;s real GDP contracted an annualised 0.7 per cent in the January-March period, far worse than the median forecast of a 0.3 per cent drop.</p>
<p>This decline follows a robust 2.4 per cent expansion in the previous quarter, highlighting the vulnerability of the export-heavy economy. With private consumption, which accounts for more than half of the economy, stagnating and net exports contributing negatively to growth, Japan&rsquo;s economic outlook appears increasingly uncertain.</p>
<h2>US tariffs deepen challenges</h2>
<p>The contraction in Japan&rsquo;s economy comes as the country faces mounting challenges from trade tensions with the US, particularly following Trump&rsquo;s sweeping tariff measures. In March, the US imposed a 25 per cent duty on steel and aluminium imports, followed by tariffs on automobiles and other Japanese goods in April. These measures are expected to weigh heavily on Japan&rsquo;s export-driven industries, notably the automotive sector, which is a cornerstone of its economic growth.</p>
<p>Japanese automakers, such as Toyota and Honda, have already signalled that the tariffs are affecting their profitability. Honda recently revised its profit forecast for the fiscal year, and Toyota followed suit. The tariffs could cost Japan&rsquo;s automotive sector an estimated &yen;2 trillion ($13.7 billion) in operating profits for the current financial year, prompting concerns about the broader impact on Japan&rsquo;s economy.</p>
<p>Despite these challenges, Japan has signalled that it is prepared to hold out for a better trade deal with the United States. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has made it a priority to negotiate with the US over tariff exemptions. However, the outcome of these talks remains uncertain as the negotiators have yet to reach a breakthrough, and the pressure is mounting on Japan&rsquo;s leadership to secure a favourable deal.</p>
<p>As Japan&rsquo;s economy faces significant headwinds, much of the focus is now on the negotiations with the US over trade tariffs. Japan&rsquo;s economy minister, Ryosei Akazawa, and finance minister, Katsunobu Kato, have already held several rounds of talks with US officials, but significant hurdles remain.</p>
<p>Japan&rsquo;s starting position is the elimination of all new tariffs, including those on automotive and steel imports, which have been particularly damaging to its largest industries. The question now is whether Japan can win exemptions from these tariffs through continued negotiations or whether it will be forced to accept a deal that could further hamper its economic recovery.</p>
<p>While the US and China have recently negotiated a temporary truce, Japan has not yet made substantial progress in its talks with Washington, leaving the country&rsquo;s economic future hanging in the balance.</p>
<h2>India&rsquo;s rising economic power</h2>
<p>While Japan grapples with economic contraction, India is on a different trajectory. With a large and youthful population, a growing manufacturing base, and increasing digital transformation, India has almost closed the economic gap with Japan.</p>
<p>This shift will soon propel India into the position of the world&rsquo;s fourth-largest economy, as Japan&rsquo;s economic challenges deepen. Experts suggest that, with Japan&rsquo;s economy slowing and India continuing its growth trajectory, India may soon surpass Japan in terms of total GDP.</p>
<p>Although the United Nations has reduced India&rsquo;s 2025 growth forecast to 6.3 per cent, experts still predict that India&rsquo;s economic ascent will continue, potentially shifting the global rankings in the coming years.</p>
<h2>The future of Japan&rsquo;s economy</h2>
<p>Japan&rsquo;s economic vulnerability, coupled with its slowing domestic demand, has raised questions about its ability to withstand the impacts of external trade pressures, particularly in light of India&rsquo;s growing economic influence. While Japan&rsquo;s policymakers face pressure to stimulate growth through fiscal measures or interest rate cuts, they are constrained by political considerations and weak demand.</p>
<p>For Japan, the road ahead is fraught with uncertainty. The ongoing trade challenges, combined with stagnant domestic consumption and global trade disruptions, threaten to undermine the nation&rsquo;s ability to maintain its position as a global economic power. Meanwhile, India&rsquo;s continued rise suggests that Japan may soon face new competition for its spot in the top tier of the world&rsquo;s largest economies.</p>
<p>As Japan grapples with these challenges, the global economic landscape is set to undergo a transformation. The balance of power may soon shift, with countries like India emerging as stronger players in the global economy, while Japan&rsquo;s future hangs in the balance amid ongoing trade tensions and internal stagnation.</p>

Business & Economy: Japan’s real GDP contracted an annualised 0.7 per cent in the January-March period highlighting the vulnerability of the export-heavy economy.

Japan’s economy contracted unexpectedly in the first quarter of 2025, signalling a fragile recovery. The contraction, which marks the first since 2024, has been attributed to a drop in exports, flat consumer spending, and the looming impact of trade tensions with the US, including tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump. According to preliminary data from the Cabinet Office, Japan’s real GDP contracted an annualised 0.7 per cent in the January-March period, far worse than the median forecast of a 0.3 per cent drop. This decline follows a robust 2.4 per cent expansion in the previous quarter, highlighting the vulnerability of the export-heavy economy. With private consumption, which accounts for more than half of the economy, stagnating and net exports contributing negatively to growth, Japan’s economic outlook appears increasingly uncertain. US tariffs deepen challenges The contraction in Japan’s economy comes as the country faces mounting challenges from trade tensions with the US, particularly following Trump’s sweeping tariff measures. In March, the US imposed a 25 per cent duty on steel and aluminium imports, followed by tariffs on automobiles and other Japanese goods in April. These measures are expected to weigh heavily on Japan’s export-driven industries, notably the automotive sector, which is a cornerstone of its economic growth. Japanese automakers, such as Toyota and Honda, have already signalled that the tariffs are affecting their profitability. Honda recently revised its profit forecast for the fiscal year, and Toyota followed suit. The tariffs could cost Japan’s automotive sector an estimated ¥2 trillion ($13.7 billion) in operating profits for the current financial year, prompting concerns about the broader impact on Japan’s economy. Despite these challenges, Japan has signalled that it is prepared to hold out for a better trade deal with the United States. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has made it a priority to negotiate with the US over tariff exemptions. However, the outcome of these talks remains uncertain as the negotiators have yet to reach a breakthrough, and the pressure is mounting on Japan’s leadership to secure a favourable deal. As Japan’s economy faces significant headwinds, much of the focus is now on the negotiations with the US over trade tariffs. Japan’s economy minister, Ryosei Akazawa, and finance minister, Katsunobu Kato, have already held several rounds of talks with US officials, but significant hurdles remain. Japan’s starting position is the elimination of all new tariffs, including those on automotive and steel imports, which have been particularly damaging to its largest industries. The question now is whether Japan can win exemptions from these tariffs through continued negotiations or whether it will be forced to accept a deal that could further hamper its economic recovery. While the US and China have recently negotiated a temporary truce, Japan has not yet made substantial progress in its talks with Washington, leaving the country’s economic future hanging in the balance. India’s rising economic power While Japan grapples with economic contraction, India is on a different trajectory. With a large and youthful population, a growing manufacturing base, and increasing digital transformation, India has almost closed the economic gap with Japan. This shift will soon propel India into the position of the world’s fourth-largest economy, as Japan’s economic challenges deepen. Experts suggest that, with Japan’s economy slowing and India continuing its growth trajectory, India may soon surpass Japan in terms of total GDP. Although the United Nations has reduced India’s 2025 growth forecast to 6.3 per cent, experts still predict that India’s economic ascent will continue, potentially shifting the global rankings in the coming years. The future of Japan’s economy Japan’s economic vulnerability, coupled with its slowing domestic demand, has raised questions about its ability to withstand the impacts of external trade pressures, particularly in light of India’s growing economic influence. While Japan’s policymakers face pressure to stimulate growth through fiscal measures or interest rate cuts, they are constrained by political considerations and weak demand. For Japan, the road ahead is fraught with uncertainty. The ongoing trade challenges, combined with stagnant domestic consumption and global trade disruptions, threaten to undermine the nation’s ability to maintain its position as a global economic power. Meanwhile, India’s continued rise suggests that Japan may soon face new competition for its spot in the top tier of the world’s largest economies. As Japan grapples with these challenges, the global economic landscape is set to undergo a transformation. The balance of power may soon shift, with countries like India emerging as stronger players in the global economy, while Japan’s future hangs in the balance amid ongoing trade tensions and internal stagnation.

Japan’s economy contracts amid US tariff strains, India poised to overtake

US President Donald Trump urged Apple CEO Tim Cook to stop expanding manufacturing in India, expressing concern during their recent conversation in Qatar. Watch this report for more details!

Trump wants Apple to stop moving iPhone production to India

<div class="x_elementToProof" data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody">In a decisive move to stabilise its economy and shore up domestic demand, China's first reserve requirement ratio (RRR) cut of 2025 came into effect as re0ported by Reuters. The People&rsquo;s Bank of China (PBOC) slashed the RRR by 0.5 percentage points for eligible financial institutions, a step that will inject roughly 1 trillion yuan (about 139 billion US dollars) of long-term liquidity into the banking system.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The RRR cut, which took effect on May 15, is expected to reduce borrowing costs, ease liquidity pressures in the financial sector, and boost lending to businesses and consumers. The central bank also reduced the RRR to zero for auto financing and financial leasing companies, a move aimed at stimulating spending on vehicles and equipment upgrades.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">This is part of a broader package of monetary easing measures announced earlier this month, including a 10-basis point reduction in the 7-day reverse repo rate to 1.40 per cent and increased support through targeted relending facilities.&nbsp;</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The stimulus measures also include expanded equity investment capacity for insurance companies by 60 billion yuan, mortgage rate reductions for certain homebuyers, and new relending tools to support tech bond purchases and elderly care investments.</div>
<h2 class="x_elementToProof"><b>Why Now?</b><b></b></h2>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The RRR cut appears strategically timed, comes just days after high-stakes trade talks between Chinese officials and a US delegation led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and chief trade negotiator Jamieson Greer took place in Switzerland.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">Analysts say the liquidity injection is more than just monetary policy, it&rsquo;s a tactical move designed to buffer the domestic economy from the adverse effects of prolonged tariff tensions with the US. China has been under growing pressure as its export-driven industries face rising costs and declining overseas demand.</div>
<h2 class="x_elementToProof"><b>Trump&rsquo;s Tariff War: A Trade Deal Still Hanging</b><b></b></h2>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The fresh policy moves come against the backdrop of former US President Donald Trump&rsquo;s aggressive tariff regime, which has sent shockwaves through the global economy. According to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the US under Trump imposed tariffs on over 360 billion US dollars&rsquo; worth of Chinese goods between 2018 and 2020 &mdash; with some levies reaching up to 25 per cent.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The latest salvo came on April 2, 2025, when Trump unveiled a new wave of sweeping import duties during his &ldquo;Liberation Day&rdquo; announcement &mdash; including a staggering 145 per cent tariff on Chinese goods.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">In retaliation, Beijing responded with reciprocal tariffs of 125 per cent on American goods. The tit-for-tat escalations disrupted global supply chains, drove up costs for consumers, and rattled financial markets.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">Although a temporary 90-day tariff pause was agreed , a 10 per cent base tariff on Chinese goods remained in place. The Geneva trade talks held earlier this week were also viewed as a potential turning point. According to a joint statement, both sides have agreed to reduce tariffs: the US has brought down its duties from 145 per cent to 30 per cent, while China has cut its retaliatory tariffs from 125 per cent to 10 per cent.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">As the US-China trade saga enters a new chapter, China&rsquo;s monetary policy pivot underscores a shifting global narrative. No longer content to merely defend its position, Beijing is now proactively reshaping its internal economic resilience.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">While trade diplomacy plays out on the world stage, the PBOC&rsquo;s RRR cut and accompanying stimulus measures signal that China is preparing for a long-haul game &mdash; one that blends tactical monetary easing with strategic economic recalibration.</div>

Business & Economy: This strategic move is expected to infuse approximately trillion yuan, equivalent to about billion US dollars, into the banking system, fostering long-term stability.

In a decisive move to stabilise its economy and shore up domestic demand, China's first reserve requirement ratio (RRR) cut of 2025 came into effect as re0ported by Reuters. The People’s Bank of China (PBOC) slashed the RRR by 0.5 percentage points for eligible financial institutions, a step that will inject roughly 1 trillion yuan (about 139 billion US dollars) of long-term liquidity into the banking system. The RRR cut, which took effect on May 15, is expected to reduce borrowing costs, ease liquidity pressures in the financial sector, and boost lending to businesses and consumers. The central bank also reduced the RRR to zero for auto financing and financial leasing companies, a move aimed at stimulating spending on vehicles and equipment upgrades. This is part of a broader package of monetary easing measures announced earlier this month, including a 10-basis point reduction in the 7-day reverse repo rate to 1.40 per cent and increased support through targeted relending facilities. The stimulus measures also include expanded equity investment capacity for insurance companies by 60 billion yuan, mortgage rate reductions for certain homebuyers, and new relending tools to support tech bond purchases and elderly care investments. Why Now? The RRR cut appears strategically timed, comes just days after high-stakes trade talks between Chinese officials and a US delegation led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and chief trade negotiator Jamieson Greer took place in Switzerland. Analysts say the liquidity injection is more than just monetary policy, it’s a tactical move designed to buffer the domestic economy from the adverse effects of prolonged tariff tensions with the US. China has been under growing pressure as its export-driven industries face rising costs and declining overseas demand. Trump’s Tariff War: A Trade Deal Still Hanging The fresh policy moves come against the backdrop of former US President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff regime, which has sent shockwaves through the global economy. According to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the US under Trump imposed tariffs on over 360 billion US dollars’ worth of Chinese goods between 2018 and 2020 — with some levies reaching up to 25 per cent. The latest salvo came on April 2, 2025, when Trump unveiled a new wave of sweeping import duties during his “Liberation Day” announcement — including a staggering 145 per cent tariff on Chinese goods. In retaliation, Beijing responded with reciprocal tariffs of 125 per cent on American goods. The tit-for-tat escalations disrupted global supply chains, drove up costs for consumers, and rattled financial markets. Although a temporary 90-day tariff pause was agreed , a 10 per cent base tariff on Chinese goods remained in place. The Geneva trade talks held earlier this week were also viewed as a potential turning point. According to a joint statement, both sides have agreed to reduce tariffs: the US has brought down its duties from 145 per cent to 30 per cent, while China has cut its retaliatory tariffs from 125 per cent to 10 per cent. As the US-China trade saga enters a new chapter, China’s monetary policy pivot underscores a shifting global narrative. No longer content to merely defend its position, Beijing is now proactively reshaping its internal economic resilience. While trade diplomacy plays out on the world stage, the PBOC’s RRR cut and accompanying stimulus measures signal that China is preparing for a long-haul game — one that blends tactical monetary easing with strategic economic recalibration.

China’s first RRR cut for financial institutions in 2025 takes effect amid trump tariff fiasco

<div>As the United States and China intensify their economic rivalry, Europe finds itself increasingly caught in the middle&mdash;vulnerable to becoming a dumping ground for Chinese goods shut out of the American market. Despite the European Union&rsquo;s (EU) efforts to balance relations with both superpowers, China&rsquo;s rapidly growing trade surplus with the EU is triggering alarm across the continent and exposing cracks in Europe&rsquo;s open-market model.</div>
<div>As the United States and China escalate their economic rivalry and with no long-term certain solution in sight, Europe finds itself caught in the crossfire, increasingly vulnerable to becoming a fallback market for Chinese goods squeezed out of the US economy. Despite the European Union&rsquo;s (EU) efforts to maintain balanced relations with both economic giants, China&rsquo;s growing trade surplus with the EU is raising alarm across the continent.</div>
<div>In the first four months of 2025 alone, China&rsquo;s trade surplus with the EU surged to a record $90 billion, underlining the shift in global trade patterns as the US imposed reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries. With American levies on Chinese goods still up to 30 percentage points higher than they were at the start of this year, much of China&rsquo;s excess production is being increasingly redirected toward Europe&mdash;some through Southeast Asia and Latin America.</div>
<div>According to a report by Bloomberg, Maxime Darmet, senior economist at Allianz Trade, said, &ldquo;European and non-US markets are going to see an increase in Chinese shipments.&rdquo;</div>
<div>&ldquo;China will want to keep global market share at a high level, so will try to increase share in other markets,&rdquo; Darmet added.</div>
<h2><span>The new trade battlefield</span></h2>
<div>The shifting trade tides are testing the EU&rsquo;s core principles of economic openness. As Washington embraced a more protectionist stance, Brussels had to recalibrate its trade strategy. The EU has responded with targeted measures&mdash;such as tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs)&mdash;but has so far resisted a full-scale trade war.</div>
<div>At the heart of the trade imbalance lies China&rsquo;s aggressive industrial policy. State subsidies, particularly in the electric vehicle sector, have helped Chinese companies like BYD undercut competitors around the world. In 2024, BYD sold 4.27 million new vehicles globally, a 41 per cent jump from the previous year. Of those, 1.76 million were fully electric, putting BYD just behind Tesla in global EV sales. China&rsquo;s plug-in hybrid sales also soared 72.83 per cent to 2.49 million units.</div>
<div>The European Commission&rsquo;s move to impose duties on these heavily subsidised imports in late 2024 sparked outrage in Beijing. In retaliation, China launched an anti-dumping investigation into European dairy products, including cheese and milk&mdash;an echo of past tit-for-tat trade tensions and a sign that hostilities are broadening beyond vehicles and technology.</div>
<div>Despite these disputes, China remains the EU&rsquo;s largest trading partner, and the EU is China's second-largest. More than half of EU imports from China consist of mechanical appliances and electrical equipment, while vehicles and aircraft account for less than 6 per cent. On the export side, mechanical appliances and electrical equipment also lead, followed by vehicles and pharmaceuticals.</div>
<h2><span>Germany and France at the forefront of the storm</span></h2>
<div>Germany has been particularly impacted by the changing trade dynamics. The bilateral trade relationship with China, once marked by a German surplus, has flipped dramatically. In 2020, China had a trade deficit of over $18 billion with Germany. By 2024, that had reversed to a $12 billion surplus, and if current trends hold, China&rsquo;s surplus with Germany could exceed $25 billion in 2025.</div>
<div>One major factor has been the rapid rise in Chinese car exports, including both EVs and conventional models, while German exports to China, especially cars, have declined. Despite EU tariffs curbing EV imports, Chinese automakers have ramped up deliveries of hybrids and combustion-engine vehicles, maintaining their momentum in the European market.</div>
<div>France, too, is in the spotlight as it prepares for high-level talks with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng. The meeting comes after a temporary 90-day truce between Washington and Beijing, which lowered some tariffs but left many trade barriers firmly in place. European markets welcomed the pause, but economists remain wary, warning that the underlying tensions are far from resolved.</div>
<div>Meanwhile, the EU&rsquo;s trade chief Maros Sefcovic acknowledged the growing concerns last week, stating that the bloc is &ldquo;monitoring possible risks of trade diversion&rdquo;. Initial assessments are expected in mid-May, with the topic likely to dominate the agenda at Thursday&rsquo;s meeting of EU trade ministers in Brussels.</div>
<h2><span>Currency and competitiveness</span></h2>
<div>Further complicating matters is the recent weakening of the Chinese yuan, which in April 2025 hit its lowest level against the euro in more than a decade. This currency slump makes Chinese exports even more attractive to European buyers, increasing competitive pressure on domestic producers already battling deflation and sluggish demand.</div>
<div>As imports from China swell, EU exports to China are faltering. Between January 2023 and December 2024, EU exports to China dropped 12.5 per cent, while imports from China decreased by just 4.9 per cent. This decline in European exports contrasts sharply with a 3 per cent increase in exports to other non-EU countries during the same period.</div>
<div>Monthly trade data reinforces the trend: EU exports to China fell from &euro;19.2 billion ($21.5 billion) in January 2023 to &euro;16.8 billion ($18.8 billion) in December 2024, with the trade deficit peaking at &euro;29 billion ($32.5 million) in August 2024. Though imports from China also declined slightly, the overall deficit remains steep, underscoring Europe&rsquo;s dependence on Chinese goods amid weakening demand for European products in China.</div>
<h2><span>More protectionism likely?</span></h2>
<div>The evolving trade conflict has already altered the strategy of European capitals. Policymakers are increasingly under pressure to safeguard their industries&mdash;not only from Chinese competition but also from the collateral damage of US policies aimed squarely at Beijing.</div>
<div>With the global trade system becoming more fragmented, economists predict that Europe will continue to introduce more non-tariff barriers and subsidies for critical industries. The European Commission is expected to intensify efforts to prevent unfair competition, especially in sectors like automotive, green technology, and advanced manufacturing.</div>
<div>Whether Europe can maintain its identity as a bastion of free trade while protecting its industrial base in this era of geopolitical rivalry remains one of the defining challenges of the post-pandemic global economy.</div>

Business & Economy: In the first four months of 2025, China’s trade surplus with the EU surged to a record $90 billion, underlining the shift in global trade patterns

As the United States and China intensify their economic rivalry, Europe finds itself increasingly caught in the middle—vulnerable to becoming a dumping ground for Chinese goods shut out of the American market. Despite the European Union’s (EU) efforts to balance relations with both superpowers, China’s rapidly growing trade surplus with the EU is triggering alarm across the continent and exposing cracks in Europe’s open-market model. As the United States and China escalate their economic rivalry and with no long-term certain solution in sight, Europe finds itself caught in the crossfire, increasingly vulnerable to becoming a fallback market for Chinese goods squeezed out of the US economy. Despite the European Union’s (EU) efforts to maintain balanced relations with both economic giants, China’s growing trade surplus with the EU is raising alarm across the continent. In the first four months of 2025 alone, China’s trade surplus with the EU surged to a record $90 billion, underlining the shift in global trade patterns as the US imposed reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries. With American levies on Chinese goods still up to 30 percentage points higher than they were at the start of this year, much of China’s excess production is being increasingly redirected toward Europe—some through Southeast Asia and Latin America. According to a report by Bloomberg, Maxime Darmet, senior economist at Allianz Trade, said, “European and non-US markets are going to see an increase in Chinese shipments.” “China will want to keep global market share at a high level, so will try to increase share in other markets,” Darmet added. The new trade battlefield The shifting trade tides are testing the EU’s core principles of economic openness. As Washington embraced a more protectionist stance, Brussels had to recalibrate its trade strategy. The EU has responded with targeted measures—such as tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs)—but has so far resisted a full-scale trade war. At the heart of the trade imbalance lies China’s aggressive industrial policy. State subsidies, particularly in the electric vehicle sector, have helped Chinese companies like BYD undercut competitors around the world. In 2024, BYD sold 4.27 million new vehicles globally, a 41 per cent jump from the previous year. Of those, 1.76 million were fully electric, putting BYD just behind Tesla in global EV sales. China’s plug-in hybrid sales also soared 72.83 per cent to 2.49 million units. The European Commission’s move to impose duties on these heavily subsidised imports in late 2024 sparked outrage in Beijing. In retaliation, China launched an anti-dumping investigation into European dairy products, including cheese and milk—an echo of past tit-for-tat trade tensions and a sign that hostilities are broadening beyond vehicles and technology. Despite these disputes, China remains the EU’s largest trading partner, and the EU is China's second-largest. More than half of EU imports from China consist of mechanical appliances and electrical equipment, while vehicles and aircraft account for less than 6 per cent. On the export side, mechanical appliances and electrical equipment also lead, followed by vehicles and pharmaceuticals. Germany and France at the forefront of the storm Germany has been particularly impacted by the changing trade dynamics. The bilateral trade relationship with China, once marked by a German surplus, has flipped dramatically. In 2020, China had a trade deficit of over $18 billion with Germany. By 2024, that had reversed to a $12 billion surplus, and if current trends hold, China’s surplus with Germany could exceed $25 billion in 2025. One major factor has been the rapid rise in Chinese car exports, including both EVs and conventional models, while German exports to China, especially cars, have declined. Despite EU tariffs curbing EV imports, Chinese automakers have ramped up deliveries of hybrids and combustion-engine vehicles, maintaining their momentum in the European market. France, too, is in the spotlight as it prepares for high-level talks with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng. The meeting comes after a temporary 90-day truce between Washington and Beijing, which lowered some tariffs but left many trade barriers firmly in place. European markets welcomed the pause, but economists remain wary, warning that the underlying tensions are far from resolved. Meanwhile, the EU’s trade chief Maros Sefcovic acknowledged the growing concerns last week, stating that the bloc is “monitoring possible risks of trade diversion”. Initial assessments are expected in mid-May, with the topic likely to dominate the agenda at Thursday’s meeting of EU trade ministers in Brussels. Currency and competitiveness Further complicating matters is the recent weakening of the Chinese yuan, which in April 2025 hit its lowest level against the euro in more than a decade. This currency slump makes Chinese exports even more attractive to European buyers, increasing competitive pressure on domestic producers already battling deflation and sluggish demand. As imports from China swell, EU exports to China are faltering. Between January 2023 and December 2024, EU exports to China dropped 12.5 per cent, while imports from China decreased by just 4.9 per cent. This decline in European exports contrasts sharply with a 3 per cent increase in exports to other non-EU countries during the same period. Monthly trade data reinforces the trend: EU exports to China fell from €19.2 billion ($21.5 billion) in January 2023 to €16.8 billion ($18.8 billion) in December 2024, with the trade deficit peaking at €29 billion ($32.5 million) in August 2024. Though imports from China also declined slightly, the overall deficit remains steep, underscoring Europe’s dependence on Chinese goods amid weakening demand for European products in China. More protectionism likely? The evolving trade conflict has already altered the strategy of European capitals. Policymakers are increasingly under pressure to safeguard their industries—not only from Chinese competition but also from the collateral damage of US policies aimed squarely at Beijing. With the global trade system becoming more fragmented, economists predict that Europe will continue to introduce more non-tariff barriers and subsidies for critical industries. The European Commission is expected to intensify efforts to prevent unfair competition, especially in sectors like automotive, green technology, and advanced manufacturing. Whether Europe can maintain its identity as a bastion of free trade while protecting its industrial base in this era of geopolitical rivalry remains one of the defining challenges of the post-pandemic global economy.

US-China trade rift may turn Europe into a dumping ground for Chinese goods

<div class="x_elementToProof" data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody">Trade ministers from 21 Asia-Pacific nations kicked off a crucial summit on Thursday, only to be greeted by a sobering economic outlook. The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum warned that regional exports will see near-stagnant growth in 2025, a direct consequence of the sweeping tariffs reimposed under former US President Donald Trump&rsquo;s trade policy revival.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">According to APEC&rsquo;s latest regional trends analysis, exports among member economies are projected to rise by just 0.4 per cent this year, a steep decline from the 5.7 per cent growth recorded in 2024. Regional GDP is also forecast to grow at a sluggish 2.6 per cent, revised down from the previous estimate of 3.3 per cent, as reported by Reuters.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">&ldquo;Trade growth is set to decline sharply across APEC due to lower external demand, particularly in manufacturing and consumer goods, while rising uncertainty over goods-related measures weighs on services trade,&rdquo; APEC said in an official statement, as quoted by Reuters.</div>
<h2 class="x_elementToProof"><b>The Trump tariff effect</b><b></b></h2>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The downturn in trade coincides with the revival of tariff policies by the Trump administration, which has targeted more than half of APEC&rsquo;s member nations. Since the forum&rsquo;s inception in 1989, regional average tariff rates had dropped from 17 per cent to 5.3 per cent by 2021, contributing to a more than nine-fold increase in merchandise trade. However, Trump&rsquo;s recent tariff reinstatements threaten to reverse decades of economic integration.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">&ldquo;We&rsquo;re moving as quickly as we possibly can with folks who want to be ambitious,&rdquo; US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CNBC before departing for Jeju, declining further comment on his bilateral meeting schedule, Reuters reported.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The tariff measures have already triggered visible shifts in trade flows and investor sentiment. Economists warn that if the US continues its protectionist stance, sectors such as manufacturing, electronics, and consumer goods could face long-term disruptions.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">Meanwhile, China&rsquo;s Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang also attended the gathering. Although Reuters reports that no formal meeting with Greer has been confirmed, both sides had agreed to reduce steep tariffs during their initial face-to-face talks in Geneva on 10&ndash;11 May.</div>
<h2 class="x_elementToProof"><b>WTO reform &amp; bilateral deals</b><b></b></h2>
<div class="x_elementToProof">The Jeju summit is also being viewed as a staging ground for broader discussions on World Trade Organization (WTO) reforms, a hot-button issue after Washington recently moved to pause US funding to the institution. The Trump administration has long accused the WTO of enabling China&rsquo;s rise through what it terms &ldquo;unfair export advantages.&rdquo;</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">Trade representatives are holding bilateral discussions on the sidelines of the summit, which forms part of the lead-up to the APEC leaders&rsquo; summit later this year in Gyeongju, South Korea.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof"></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof">APEC, which accounts for 60 per cent of global GDP and half of global trade, remains a key pillar of global economic stability. But with tariff battles heating up and multilateralism on the defensive, the forum faces one of its most pivotal chapters yet.</div>

Business & Economy: APEC's latest report highlights exports among member economies are projected to rise by just 0.4 per cent this year, a steep decline from the 5.7 per cent growth recorded in 2024.

Trade ministers from 21 Asia-Pacific nations kicked off a crucial summit on Thursday, only to be greeted by a sobering economic outlook. The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum warned that regional exports will see near-stagnant growth in 2025, a direct consequence of the sweeping tariffs reimposed under former US President Donald Trump’s trade policy revival. According to APEC’s latest regional trends analysis, exports among member economies are projected to rise by just 0.4 per cent this year, a steep decline from the 5.7 per cent growth recorded in 2024. Regional GDP is also forecast to grow at a sluggish 2.6 per cent, revised down from the previous estimate of 3.3 per cent, as reported by Reuters. “Trade growth is set to decline sharply across APEC due to lower external demand, particularly in manufacturing and consumer goods, while rising uncertainty over goods-related measures weighs on services trade,” APEC said in an official statement, as quoted by Reuters. The Trump tariff effect The downturn in trade coincides with the revival of tariff policies by the Trump administration, which has targeted more than half of APEC’s member nations. Since the forum’s inception in 1989, regional average tariff rates had dropped from 17 per cent to 5.3 per cent by 2021, contributing to a more than nine-fold increase in merchandise trade. However, Trump’s recent tariff reinstatements threaten to reverse decades of economic integration. “We’re moving as quickly as we possibly can with folks who want to be ambitious,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CNBC before departing for Jeju, declining further comment on his bilateral meeting schedule, Reuters reported. The tariff measures have already triggered visible shifts in trade flows and investor sentiment. Economists warn that if the US continues its protectionist stance, sectors such as manufacturing, electronics, and consumer goods could face long-term disruptions. Meanwhile, China’s Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang also attended the gathering. Although Reuters reports that no formal meeting with Greer has been confirmed, both sides had agreed to reduce steep tariffs during their initial face-to-face talks in Geneva on 10–11 May. WTO reform & bilateral deals The Jeju summit is also being viewed as a staging ground for broader discussions on World Trade Organization (WTO) reforms, a hot-button issue after Washington recently moved to pause US funding to the institution. The Trump administration has long accused the WTO of enabling China’s rise through what it terms “unfair export advantages.” Trade representatives are holding bilateral discussions on the sidelines of the summit, which forms part of the lead-up to the APEC leaders’ summit later this year in Gyeongju, South Korea. APEC, which accounts for 60 per cent of global GDP and half of global trade, remains a key pillar of global economic stability. But with tariff battles heating up and multilateralism on the defensive, the forum faces one of its most pivotal chapters yet.

APEC sounds alarm on sluggish trade growth amid escalating US tariff pressure

<div>US President Donald Trump has announced a series of landmark economic and defence deals with Qatar, with total agreements worth approximately $243.5 billion and setting the foundation for a broader $1.2 trillion economic commitment.</div>
<div>The deals were signed during Trump&rsquo;s visit to Qatar&rsquo;s capital city, Doha&mdash;the second leg of his ongoing West Asia trip&mdash;and span aviation, energy, defence, quantum technology, and infrastructure, and are expected to generate over 1 million US jobs in the coming years.</div>
<div>The centrepiece of the agreements is a $96 billion deal between Boeing, GE Aerospace, and Qatar Airways for the purchase of up to 210 widebody aircraft, marking Boeing&rsquo;s largest-ever order for both the 787 Dreamliner and the 777X.</div>
<div>The White House hailed the deal as a catalyst for &ldquo;a new Golden Age&rdquo; of American manufacturing and innovation, underlining Trump's signature "America First" economic diplomacy.</div>
<h2><b>Boeing&rsquo;s record deal with Qatar Airways</b></h2>
<div>The aviation sector was at the forefront of Trump&rsquo;s announcement, with Boeing and GE Aerospace finalising a $96 billion agreement with Qatar Airways to supply up to 210 aircraft&mdash;an unprecedented deal in both scale and significance.</div>
<div>Qatar Airways CEO Badr Mohammed al-Meer called the deal &ldquo;historic&rdquo;, stating that the investment supports the airline&rsquo;s mission to build the &ldquo;cleanest, youngest, and most efficient fleet in global aviation.&rdquo; The aircraft will be powered exclusively by GE Aerospace engines, adding to the strategic impact for US manufacturing.</div>
<div>According to the White House, the agreement is projected to support 154,000 US jobs annually, amounting to over 1 million American jobs across the production and delivery lifecycle.</div>
<div>While the US administration touted Qatar's orders as a record for Boeing jets, the firm's ability to deliver has come into question. Boeing is currently struggling to keep up with deliveries of the previous order.</div>
<div>The firm fell into a deep crisis following a near-catastrophic accident in January 2024, that incident exposed hair-raising sloppiness at its factories and a key supplier.</div>
<div>Boeing's CEO Kelly Ortberg came out of retirement last year to help turn around the plane maker. But since taking over, Otberg has faced a debilitating strike by workers.</div>
<div>He has repaired the company's battered balance sheet with a fresh round of financing, but can Boeing overcome those issues at hand and deliver the record order from Qatar Air?</div>
<div>Boeing said the aircraft ordered by Qatar will be built into the next decade.</div>
<div>This deal is a major boost for Boeing amid the turbulence it has recently faced. Trump's involvement in sealing the agreement was widely seen as a symbolic endorsement of the company&rsquo;s return to dominance in the global aerospace sector.&nbsp;</div>
<h2><b>Defence, energy, and innovation drive deeper ties</b></h2>
<div>In addition to aviation, the visit saw major defence procurement agreements. A statement released by the White House stated that Raytheon, a subsidiary of RTX, secured a $1 billion deal to provide Qatar with its Fixed Site &ndash; Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aerial System Integrated Defeat System (FS-LIDS), a cutting-edge counter-drone technology. This deal marks Qatar as the first international customer for the advanced system.</div>
<div>General Atomics also finalised a nearly $2 billion agreement to supply the MQ-9B remotely piloted aircraft system to the Qatari Armed Forces. These deals, signed at the government-to-government level, are aimed at enhancing regional deterrence and strengthening the US-Qatar partnership.</div>
<div>Qatar also committed to investing $1 billion into quantum technologies through a joint venture with Quantinuum and Al Rabban Capital. The initiative is expected to advance state-of-the-art computing and workforce development in both nations.</div>
<div>Meanwhile, McDermott and QatarEnergy are advancing $8.5 billion worth of energy infrastructure projects. Parsons Corp. secured 30 high-value projects in Qatar valued at up to $97 billion, further deepening the commercial relationship between the two nations.</div>
<div>Qatar has also pledged continued support for the US defence industrial base, including a statement of intent to invest $38 billion in security partnerships, infrastructure at Al Udeid Air Base, and additional capabilities in maritime and air defence.</div>
<h2><b>Diplomatic dimensions&nbsp;</b></h2>
<div>Trump&rsquo;s trip to Qatar was not without controversy. Domestically, critics raised alarms over reports that the US Department of Defense may accept a $400 million luxury Boeing jet from Qatar&mdash;dubbed a &ldquo;palace in the sky&rdquo;&mdash;for presidential use. Detractors, mainly Democrats, cited the US Constitution&rsquo;s Emoluments Clause, which bars federal officials from accepting gifts from foreign governments without congressional approval.</div>
<div>Trump defended the gesture online, calling the aircraft a &ldquo;gift, free of charge&rdquo; and asserting the transaction was &ldquo;public and transparent&rdquo;. Nonetheless, the issue has reignited debates over presidential ethics and foreign influence.</div>
<div>At a state dinner hosted by Qatar&rsquo;s Emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, Trump appealed to Qatar to use its diplomatic leverage with Iran to advance nuclear negotiations. Citing Iran&rsquo;s enrichment of uranium up to 60 per cent&mdash;just below weapons-grade&mdash;Trump stressed the urgency of containing Tehran&rsquo;s nuclear ambitions and halting its support for proxy groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.</div>
<div>Al Thani responded in a televised interview, affirming Qatar&rsquo;s support for a nuclear-free Middle East while acknowledging Iran&rsquo;s right to pursue civilian nuclear power, provided it does not pose a regional threat.</div>
<h2><b>Broader economic strategy</b></h2>
<div>The Qatar visit is part of Trump&rsquo;s broader West Asia economic diplomacy tour, which began in Saudi Arabia. There, he announced $600 billion in investment commitments.&nbsp;</div>
<div>&ldquo;President Trump is securing billions in investments to revitalise American manufacturing,&rdquo; the White House said, pointing to the Qatar deals as evidence of his successful deal-making strategy.</div>
<div>Qatar&rsquo;s US investments reflect long-term bilateral cooperation, spanning sectors such as tourism, energy, information technology, healthcare, and financial services. The Gulf state invested $3.3 billion in the US in 2023 alone, with projects in advanced manufacturing and hospitality.</div>
<div>Trade between the two countries totalled $5.64 billion in 2024, with the US enjoying a $2 billion surplus. The US has had a positive trade balance with Qatar since 2003, and Qatar remains a top foreign military sales partner with active cases valued at over $26 billion.</div>
<div>The agreements are aligned with Qatar&rsquo;s Vision 2030, which aims to diversify the nation&rsquo;s economy and embrace advanced technologies. The deals also align with Trump&rsquo;s commitment to &lsquo;Made in America&rsquo;, bolstering the US industrial base and supporting high-paying jobs at home.</div>
<div>As Trump continues his West Asia tour, the impact of these historic deals will likely reverberate across sectors, from aerospace to defence and emerging tech&mdash;solidifying America&rsquo;s economic and strategic footprint in the Gulf for years to come.</div>
<div></div>

Business & Economy: The deals were signed during Trump’s visit to Qatar’s capital city, Doha, and are expected to generate over 1 million US jobs in the coming years.

US President Donald Trump has announced a series of landmark economic and defence deals with Qatar, with total agreements worth approximately $243.5 billion and setting the foundation for a broader $1.2 trillion economic commitment. The deals were signed during Trump’s visit to Qatar’s capital city, Doha—the second leg of his ongoing West Asia trip—and span aviation, energy, defence, quantum technology, and infrastructure, and are expected to generate over 1 million US jobs in the coming years. The centrepiece of the agreements is a $96 billion deal between Boeing, GE Aerospace, and Qatar Airways for the purchase of up to 210 widebody aircraft, marking Boeing’s largest-ever order for both the 787 Dreamliner and the 777X. The White House hailed the deal as a catalyst for “a new Golden Age” of American manufacturing and innovation, underlining Trump's signature "America First" economic diplomacy. Boeing’s record deal with Qatar Airways The aviation sector was at the forefront of Trump’s announcement, with Boeing and GE Aerospace finalising a $96 billion agreement with Qatar Airways to supply up to 210 aircraft—an unprecedented deal in both scale and significance. Qatar Airways CEO Badr Mohammed al-Meer called the deal “historic”, stating that the investment supports the airline’s mission to build the “cleanest, youngest, and most efficient fleet in global aviation.” The aircraft will be powered exclusively by GE Aerospace engines, adding to the strategic impact for US manufacturing. According to the White House, the agreement is projected to support 154,000 US jobs annually, amounting to over 1 million American jobs across the production and delivery lifecycle. While the US administration touted Qatar's orders as a record for Boeing jets, the firm's ability to deliver has come into question. Boeing is currently struggling to keep up with deliveries of the previous order. The firm fell into a deep crisis following a near-catastrophic accident in January 2024, that incident exposed hair-raising sloppiness at its factories and a key supplier. Boeing's CEO Kelly Ortberg came out of retirement last year to help turn around the plane maker. But since taking over, Otberg has faced a debilitating strike by workers. He has repaired the company's battered balance sheet with a fresh round of financing, but can Boeing overcome those issues at hand and deliver the record order from Qatar Air? Boeing said the aircraft ordered by Qatar will be built into the next decade. This deal is a major boost for Boeing amid the turbulence it has recently faced. Trump's involvement in sealing the agreement was widely seen as a symbolic endorsement of the company’s return to dominance in the global aerospace sector. Defence, energy, and innovation drive deeper ties In addition to aviation, the visit saw major defence procurement agreements. A statement released by the White House stated that Raytheon, a subsidiary of RTX, secured a $1 billion deal to provide Qatar with its Fixed Site – Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aerial System Integrated Defeat System (FS-LIDS), a cutting-edge counter-drone technology. This deal marks Qatar as the first international customer for the advanced system. General Atomics also finalised a nearly $2 billion agreement to supply the MQ-9B remotely piloted aircraft system to the Qatari Armed Forces. These deals, signed at the government-to-government level, are aimed at enhancing regional deterrence and strengthening the US-Qatar partnership. Qatar also committed to investing $1 billion into quantum technologies through a joint venture with Quantinuum and Al Rabban Capital. The initiative is expected to advance state-of-the-art computing and workforce development in both nations. Meanwhile, McDermott and QatarEnergy are advancing $8.5 billion worth of energy infrastructure projects. Parsons Corp. secured 30 high-value projects in Qatar valued at up to $97 billion, further deepening the commercial relationship between the two nations. Qatar has also pledged continued support for the US defence industrial base, including a statement of intent to invest $38 billion in security partnerships, infrastructure at Al Udeid Air Base, and additional capabilities in maritime and air defence. Diplomatic dimensions Trump’s trip to Qatar was not without controversy. Domestically, critics raised alarms over reports that the US Department of Defense may accept a $400 million luxury Boeing jet from Qatar—dubbed a “palace in the sky”—for presidential use. Detractors, mainly Democrats, cited the US Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which bars federal officials from accepting gifts from foreign governments without congressional approval. Trump defended the gesture online, calling the aircraft a “gift, free of charge” and asserting the transaction was “public and transparent”. Nonetheless, the issue has reignited debates over presidential ethics and foreign influence. At a state dinner hosted by Qatar’s Emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, Trump appealed to Qatar to use its diplomatic leverage with Iran to advance nuclear negotiations. Citing Iran’s enrichment of uranium up to 60 per cent—just below weapons-grade—Trump stressed the urgency of containing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and halting its support for proxy groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Al Thani responded in a televised interview, affirming Qatar’s support for a nuclear-free Middle East while acknowledging Iran’s right to pursue civilian nuclear power, provided it does not pose a regional threat. Broader economic strategy The Qatar visit is part of Trump’s broader West Asia economic diplomacy tour, which began in Saudi Arabia. There, he announced $600 billion in investment commitments. “President Trump is securing billions in investments to revitalise American manufacturing,” the White House said, pointing to the Qatar deals as evidence of his successful deal-making strategy. Qatar’s US investments reflect long-term bilateral cooperation, spanning sectors such as tourism, energy, information technology, healthcare, and financial services. The Gulf state invested $3.3 billion in the US in 2023 alone, with projects in advanced manufacturing and hospitality. Trade between the two countries totalled $5.64 billion in 2024, with the US enjoying a $2 billion surplus. The US has had a positive trade balance with Qatar since 2003, and Qatar remains a top foreign military sales partner with active cases valued at over $26 billion. The agreements are aligned with Qatar’s Vision 2030, which aims to diversify the nation’s economy and embrace advanced technologies. The deals also align with Trump’s commitment to ‘Made in America’, bolstering the US industrial base and supporting high-paying jobs at home. As Trump continues his West Asia tour, the impact of these historic deals will likely reverberate across sectors, from aerospace to defence and emerging tech—solidifying America’s economic and strategic footprint in the Gulf for years to come.

Trump’s Qatar visit: US inks deals worth more than $240 billion with Qatar, Boeing lands record deal

<div data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody">In a dramatic shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics, US President Donald Trump has announced the lifting of economic sanctions on Syria following his unexpected meeting with the country&rsquo;s new interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former militant leader with links to al-Qaeda.</div>
<div data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody"></div>
<div data-olk-copy-source="MessageBody">The decision marks a major turning point in the US-Syria relationship, which could have far-reaching consequences across the region.</div>
<h2><b>What happened in Syria?</b></h2>
<div>After over a decade of civil war and the near-total collapse of governance, President Bashar al-Assad&rsquo;s regime was toppled in December by Islamist militia Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The group, once affiliated with al-Qaeda, staged a surprise advance into Damascus, forcing Assad and his family to flee to Russia.</div>
<div></div>
<div>HTS, now rebranded as a political movement, formed an interim government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, who has attempted to present a moderate image and initiate the rebuilding of Syria. Street debates about democracy, governance, and civil liberties have emerged after decades of state repression.</div>
<div>However, Sharaa&rsquo;s administration is viewed with scepticism by many Syrians and global powers, due to the group&rsquo;s violent past. According to Human Rights Watch, HTS (previously the Nusra Front) was reportedly responsible for massacres of minority communities, including Alawites and Druze, during the conflict.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Sharaa now insists he is committed to safeguarding Syria&rsquo;s religious and ethnic diversity. &ldquo;There must be a legal framework that protects and ensures the rights of all,&rdquo; he told CNN.</div>
<h2><b>Why did Trump lift Syria sanctions?</b></h2>
<div>As per the Bloomberg report, Trump&rsquo;s decision came after weeks of lobbying from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, two of Sharaa&rsquo;s key regional backers. Meeting with Sharaa in Riyadh, Trump described him as a &ldquo;tough guy&rdquo; with &ldquo;potential&rdquo; and framed the move as giving Syria &ldquo;a chance at greatness.&rdquo;</div>
<div>Speaking at a major US-Saudi investment forum, Trump called the existing sanctions &ldquo;crippling&rdquo; and outdated. According to the White House summary, Trump urged Sharaa to normalise&nbsp;ties with Israel and &ldquo;expel all foreign terrorists&rdquo; from Syria.</div>
<div>Trump also criticised previous US administrations, claiming they were more interested in punishing leaders than negotiating change. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re not here to look into souls,&rdquo; he remarked. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re here to make deals.&rdquo;</div>
<h2><b>What were the US sanctions on Syria?</b></h2>
<div>US sanctions on Syria date back to 1979, when the country was designated a state sponsor of terrorism. The restrictions intensified after Syria&rsquo;s interference in Lebanon and support for Hezbollah.</div>
<div></div>
<div>In 2004, under President George W. Bush, the US further tightened sanctions, ending most exports to Syria. After Syria&rsquo;s brutal crackdown on Arab Spring protests in 2011, more sanctions followed under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, targeting Syrian government officials, businesses, and sectors linked to Assad&rsquo;s military campaign and human rights abuses.</div>
<div></div>
<div>According to the US Department of the Treasury, these sanctions froze assets, blocked US investments, and barred financial transactions, effectively cutting Syria off from the international banking system.</div>
<h2><b>How did sanctions affect the Syrian economy?</b></h2>
<div>Syria&rsquo;s economy was already bleeding from years of war. The World Bank downgraded it to low-income status in 2018. The country&rsquo;s GDP collapsed by over 50 per cent between 2010 and 2020, according to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).</div>
<div></div>
<div>By 2023, over 90 per cent of Syrians lived in poverty, reports the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Access to fuel, medicine, electricity, and food was critically low. Public institutions barely functioned, and foreign investment dried up. Meanwhile, Syria&rsquo;s once-thriving agriculture sector&mdash;famed for olives and pistachios&mdash;was decimated.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Sanctions also indirectly boosted Syria&rsquo;s illicit economy. With trade routes blocked, the country turned into a regional hub for Captagon, a powerful, amphetamine-type drug, according to Europol and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).</div>
<div></div>
<div>By cutting Syria off from global financial institutions, sanctions hampered reconstruction and even aid operations. Humanitarian agencies complained of delays and operational costs rising due to restrictions on banking transactions, despite technical exemptions.</div>
<h2><b>What&rsquo;s next for US-Syria relations?</b></h2>
<div>Trump&rsquo;s face-to-face with Sharaa was the first US-Syria leader-level meeting in 25 years. It signals a dramatic shift in US policy, especially given Sharaa&rsquo;s militant past.</div>
<div></div>
<div>But it&rsquo;s also fraught with risks. HTS remains on the US Foreign Terrorist Organization list, and Sharaa&rsquo;s past includes links to al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. As recently as 2016, the US offered $10 million for his capture.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Critics fear Trump&rsquo;s engagement could legitimise extremist actors. But supporters argue this is a pragmatic step to stabilise the region, curb Iranian influence, and enable regional powers to shoulder Syria&rsquo;s reconstruction.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Whether lifting sanctions will bring lasting peace or empower a controversial leader remains uncertain. For now, Syrians are celebrating what many call their &ldquo;Liberation Day&rdquo; &mdash; hoping that relief from sanctions will translate into jobs, infrastructure, and dignity.</div>
<div></div>
<div>As the world watches, the road to Syria&rsquo;s recovery remains long, fragile, and deeply contested.</div>

Business & Economy: The move followed a landmark meeting with Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa during Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia.

In a dramatic shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics, US President Donald Trump has announced the lifting of economic sanctions on Syria following his unexpected meeting with the country’s new interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former militant leader with links to al-Qaeda. The decision marks a major turning point in the US-Syria relationship, which could have far-reaching consequences across the region. What happened in Syria? After over a decade of civil war and the near-total collapse of governance, President Bashar al-Assad’s regime was toppled in December by Islamist militia Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The group, once affiliated with al-Qaeda, staged a surprise advance into Damascus, forcing Assad and his family to flee to Russia. HTS, now rebranded as a political movement, formed an interim government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, who has attempted to present a moderate image and initiate the rebuilding of Syria. Street debates about democracy, governance, and civil liberties have emerged after decades of state repression. However, Sharaa’s administration is viewed with scepticism by many Syrians and global powers, due to the group’s violent past. According to Human Rights Watch, HTS (previously the Nusra Front) was reportedly responsible for massacres of minority communities, including Alawites and Druze, during the conflict. Sharaa now insists he is committed to safeguarding Syria’s religious and ethnic diversity. “There must be a legal framework that protects and ensures the rights of all,” he told CNN. Why did Trump lift Syria sanctions? As per the Bloomberg report, Trump’s decision came after weeks of lobbying from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, two of Sharaa’s key regional backers. Meeting with Sharaa in Riyadh, Trump described him as a “tough guy” with “potential” and framed the move as giving Syria “a chance at greatness.” Speaking at a major US-Saudi investment forum, Trump called the existing sanctions “crippling” and outdated. According to the White House summary, Trump urged Sharaa to normalise ties with Israel and “expel all foreign terrorists” from Syria. Trump also criticised previous US administrations, claiming they were more interested in punishing leaders than negotiating change. “We’re not here to look into souls,” he remarked. “We’re here to make deals.” What were the US sanctions on Syria? US sanctions on Syria date back to 1979, when the country was designated a state sponsor of terrorism. The restrictions intensified after Syria’s interference in Lebanon and support for Hezbollah. In 2004, under President George W. Bush, the US further tightened sanctions, ending most exports to Syria. After Syria’s brutal crackdown on Arab Spring protests in 2011, more sanctions followed under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, targeting Syrian government officials, businesses, and sectors linked to Assad’s military campaign and human rights abuses. According to the US Department of the Treasury, these sanctions froze assets, blocked US investments, and barred financial transactions, effectively cutting Syria off from the international banking system. How did sanctions affect the Syrian economy? Syria’s economy was already bleeding from years of war. The World Bank downgraded it to low-income status in 2018. The country’s GDP collapsed by over 50 per cent between 2010 and 2020, according to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). By 2023, over 90 per cent of Syrians lived in poverty, reports the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Access to fuel, medicine, electricity, and food was critically low. Public institutions barely functioned, and foreign investment dried up. Meanwhile, Syria’s once-thriving agriculture sector—famed for olives and pistachios—was decimated. Sanctions also indirectly boosted Syria’s illicit economy. With trade routes blocked, the country turned into a regional hub for Captagon, a powerful, amphetamine-type drug, according to Europol and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). By cutting Syria off from global financial institutions, sanctions hampered reconstruction and even aid operations. Humanitarian agencies complained of delays and operational costs rising due to restrictions on banking transactions, despite technical exemptions. What’s next for US-Syria relations? Trump’s face-to-face with Sharaa was the first US-Syria leader-level meeting in 25 years. It signals a dramatic shift in US policy, especially given Sharaa’s militant past. But it’s also fraught with risks. HTS remains on the US Foreign Terrorist Organization list, and Sharaa’s past includes links to al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. As recently as 2016, the US offered $10 million for his capture. Critics fear Trump’s engagement could legitimise extremist actors. But supporters argue this is a pragmatic step to stabilise the region, curb Iranian influence, and enable regional powers to shoulder Syria’s reconstruction. Whether lifting sanctions will bring lasting peace or empower a controversial leader remains uncertain. For now, Syrians are celebrating what many call their “Liberation Day” — hoping that relief from sanctions will translate into jobs, infrastructure, and dignity. As the world watches, the road to Syria’s recovery remains long, fragile, and deeply contested.

Trump lifts sanctions on Syria: What happened and what it means for the war-torn nation

The United States has officially scrapped the controversial AI diffusion rule that had previously limited the export of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips. Watch to know more!

Trump administration reverses Biden's AI export controls

<p><span>Indian authorities have uncovered a sophisticated luxury car smuggling racket involving the undervaluation of high-end vehicles to evade customs duties, leading to losses exceeding ₹25 crore ($2.9 million).</span></p>
<p><span>The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) revealed that over 30 luxury vehicles were imported into India by misdeclaring their value using falsified documents.</span></p>
<p><span>According to the finance ministry, the imported vehicles included premium models such as the Rolls-Royce, Hummer EV, Cadillac Escalade, Lexus, Toyota Land Cruiser, and Lincoln Navigator.</span></p>
<p><span>These cars were initially shipped from the United States and Japan to intermediary locations like Dubai and Sri Lanka, where they underwent conversions from left-hand drive to right-hand drive&mdash;a requirement for Indian roads.</span></p>
<p><span>Once modified, the cars were imported into India at significantly undervalued prices, sometimes by as much as 50%, enabling importers to evade substantial customs duties. Investigators found that fabricated invoices and other documents were used to support the false declarations at Indian ports.</span></p>
<h2><span><strong>Nationwide operation and investigation</strong></span></h2>
<p><span>The DRI has already arrested a Hyderabad-based importer, identified as one of the key players in the scam. He is accused of importing at least eight such vehicles, resulting in an estimated ₹7 crore ($820,616) in customs duty evasion. He has been remanded to judicial custody by the Chief Judicial Magistrate&rsquo;s Court in Ahmedabad.</span></p>
<p><span>The smuggling ring is believed to involve importers operating across major Indian cities, including Mumbai, Pune, Ahmedabad, Bangalore, and Delhi. Several other importers and individuals who were the end-users of these luxury vehicles are currently under the DRI&rsquo;s scanner.</span></p>
<p><span>It is speculated that the operation exploited regulatory loopholes in India&rsquo;s high-duty import structure by using third-country routing and sophisticated documentation fraud. Authorities are intensifying scrutiny of similar vehicle imports to detect any further evasion.</span></p>
<p><span>The crackdown comes as the Indian government continues efforts to strengthen customs enforcement and close gaps in import regulations. The DRI is expected to pursue further legal action against those involved and recover the evaded duties.</span></p>
<p><span>This case highlights the increasing sophistication of customs fraud in high-value segments and the critical role of inter-agency intelligence in disrupting such operations.</span></p>
<p><span>(<em>With inputs from agencies</em>)</span></p>

Business & Economy: The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) revealed that over 30 luxury vehicles were imported into India by misdeclaring their value.

Indian authorities have uncovered a sophisticated luxury car smuggling racket involving the undervaluation of high-end vehicles to evade customs duties, leading to losses exceeding ₹25 crore ($2.9 million). The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) revealed that over 30 luxury vehicles were imported into India by misdeclaring their value using falsified documents. According to the finance ministry, the imported vehicles included premium models such as the Rolls-Royce, Hummer EV, Cadillac Escalade, Lexus, Toyota Land Cruiser, and Lincoln Navigator. These cars were initially shipped from the United States and Japan to intermediary locations like Dubai and Sri Lanka, where they underwent conversions from left-hand drive to right-hand drive—a requirement for Indian roads. Once modified, the cars were imported into India at significantly undervalued prices, sometimes by as much as 50%, enabling importers to evade substantial customs duties. Investigators found that fabricated invoices and other documents were used to support the false declarations at Indian ports. Nationwide operation and investigation The DRI has already arrested a Hyderabad-based importer, identified as one of the key players in the scam. He is accused of importing at least eight such vehicles, resulting in an estimated ₹7 crore ($820,616) in customs duty evasion. He has been remanded to judicial custody by the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court in Ahmedabad. The smuggling ring is believed to involve importers operating across major Indian cities, including Mumbai, Pune, Ahmedabad, Bangalore, and Delhi. Several other importers and individuals who were the end-users of these luxury vehicles are currently under the DRI’s scanner. It is speculated that the operation exploited regulatory loopholes in India’s high-duty import structure by using third-country routing and sophisticated documentation fraud. Authorities are intensifying scrutiny of similar vehicle imports to detect any further evasion. The crackdown comes as the Indian government continues efforts to strengthen customs enforcement and close gaps in import regulations. The DRI is expected to pursue further legal action against those involved and recover the evaded duties. This case highlights the increasing sophistication of customs fraud in high-value segments and the critical role of inter-agency intelligence in disrupting such operations. (With inputs from agencies)

Indian officials busts luxury car import scam; Rs 25 crore tax evasion uncovered