Trigg Minerals (TMG:AU) has announced ANTIMONY EXEMPT FROM US TARIFF POLICY
Download the PDF here.
This post appeared first on investingnews.com
The first quarter of 2025 proved challenging for the cryptocurrency market.
Bitcoin, the bellwether of the sector world, suffered its worst first quarter performance in seven years, characterized by significant volatility and a prevailing downward trend. The top cryptocurrency’s lackluster movement was similar to price activity seen from other major coins, such as Ethereum, which also recorded substantial losses.
However, Q1 began with optimism following the results of the US presidential election.
President Donald Trump’s anticipated crypto-friendly policies initially boosted sentiment, and Bitcoin rose to its current all-time high of US$108,786 on January 20, the day he was inaugurated.
Crypto positivity was also reflected in options trading, where open interest outpaced the Bitcoin spot price.
Total Bitcoin options open interest vs. the Bitcoin price, January 2 to March 31, 2025.
Chart via Coinglass.
However, low volume provided insufficient support for high prices, foreshadowing the volatility to come.
Q1 data from Coinglass shows that Bitcoin fell 11.82 percent and Ethereum dropped 45.41 percent for the period, with February seeing the largest losses at 17.39 percent for Bitcoin and 31.95 percent for Ethereum.
Bitcoin’s price at the end of the Q1 was around US$80,000, while Ethereum — which has struggled to retake US$2,000 after dipping below that threshold mid-March — closed at around US$1,800.
Proposed economic policies, an impending trade war and poor economic data have acted as major catalysts, resulting in a turn from risky assets like crypto and tech stocks toward traditional safe havens like bonds and gold.
Institutional momentum, Stablecoin growth signal crypto’s next chapter
Despite market fluctuations, some areas of the crypto sector experienced notable growth and development in Q1.
Speaking at Benzinga’s Fintech & FODA Event in December 2024, Venable partner Chris O’Brien said that Sam Bankman-Fried’s conviction marked the end of an initial highly speculative phase for cryptocurrencies.
While cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology will persist, their future hinges on moving beyond mere speculation and focusing on practical applications that address real-world problems.
A defining feature, identified early in the quarter by Bitwise’s Matthew Hougan, is the continued and increasing involvement of institutional players in the crypto market. This trend manifested in strategic investments from companies like Strategy (NASDAQ:MSTR) and BlackRock, both of which accumulated substantial portions of Bitcoin’s supply in Q1.
Major banks like BNY Mellon, which have incorporated cryptocurrency services to allow transactions between certain clients using Circle’s USDC, also began expanding their crypto services.
Earlier this year, Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) CEO Brian Moynihan told CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin that the US banking industry is eager to integrate crypto into traditional banking if — or, more likely, when — regulation allows for it.
Alongside institutional interest, stablecoins saw significant growth in Q1. The total market cap for stablecoins surged past US$200 billion, outpacing Bitcoin’s price trajectory for the period.
Total stablecoin market cap vs. the Bitcoin price, Q1 2025.
Chart via Coinglass.
A key crossover occurred in February after the US announced tariffs targeting Canada and Mexico. The move resulted in a downturn in both cryptocurrencies and traditional markets.
Amid these developments, lawmakers turned their focus to passing stablecoin legislation, specifically Senator Bill Hagerty’s (R-Tenn.) GENIUS Act, which is currently awaiting a full House vote. Kristin Smith, CEO of the Blockchain Association, said during Blockworks’ 2025 Digital Asset Summit in New York that lawmakers are on pace to pass legislation establishing rules for stablecoins and cryptocurrency market structure by August.
Divestitures into altcoins continued from Q4 2024, although momentum slowed comparatively, a shift exacerbated by speculative meme coin trading and the controversies surrounding projects like TRUMP, MELANIA and LIBRA.
Bitcoin retook its dominant position, but notable interest in SOL and XRP remained, as multiple firms sought to offer spot ETFs; their approval is all but guaranteed by former US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler’s exit. Applications have also been filed to offer ETFs tracking SUI, AVA and DOGE.
Ethereum’s Q1 presented a complex picture, marked by both progress and setbacks.
The network increased its gas limit to enhance throughput and enable complex DeFi applications; however, competition from other blockchains — particularly Solana — caused it to underperform. Additionally, the upcoming Pectra upgrade ran into testing issues on the Holesky and Sepolia testnets, causing delays.
Declining network activity contributed to price suppression, but the tripling in total value for BlackRock’s BUIDL fund in the weeks leading up to the end of Q2 signaled continued confidence in Ethereum’s long-term potential and a broader trend toward tokenization, mirrored in the growth of the real-world asset (RWA) market.
The market cap of RWAs grew by approximately US$5 billion in Q1 to reach almost US$20 billion as tokenization was applied to diverse assets and expanded across various blockchains.
Trump admin takes positive crypto steps
Q1 brought various developments in cryptocurrency regulation and policy in the US.
After taking office, Trump signed an executive order establishing the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets to establish criteria for a national stockpile of digital assets and develop a dollar-backed stablecoin; meanwhile, working groups in both chambers of Congress have focused on developing regulatory frameworks for digital assets.
While key aspects of regulation are still under negotiation, lawmakers and regulators signaled a more collaborative approach to cryptocurrencies under the Trump administration in Q1. The SEC dropped several longstanding cases against crypto exchange facilitators, formed a crypto-focused taskforce led by Commissioner Hester Peirce and repealed SAB 121, allowing banks to hold crypto for their customers without assets to balance liabilities.
Industry leaders also convened at the White House on March 7 for the inaugural Digital Asset Summit, a federal initiative aimed at gathering feedback on proposed regulations for the cryptocurrency sector.
Ahead of the summit, Trump signed an executive order to establish a Bitcoin reserve of around 200,000 Bitcoin (BTC). The US government currently holds 213,246 BTC. Bills that would allow the US government to acquire and hold Bitcoin in reserve have been introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.The executive order also established a separate reserve for altcoins, although some industry analysts have questioned this strategy.
Transform Ventures CEO and Bitcoin Supercycle author Michael Terpin argued against holding anything other than Bitcoin, the only truly decentralized and consistently performing digital asset.
He likened adding other cryptos to adding stocks to traditional reserves.
State-level initiatives to establish Bitcoin reserves in Arizona, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah also advanced alongside similar measures to allow pension fund investments in digital assets in North Carolina and other states.
Volatility, manipulation, hacks create crypto headwinds
The first quarter of the year was marked by market volatility and corrections, with both Bitcoin and altcoins experiencing significant price swings that were not only driven by typical market data, but were also heavily influenced by current events, evolving policies and even speculative social media trends.
Another challenge for the crypto market was opposition to proposed legislation in the US; insider trading and market manipulation concerns also arose, particularly around meme coin launches.
Suspiciously timed trades occurred before Trump’s strategic crypto reserve executive order: a large deposit was made to Hyperliquid, followed by highly leveraged trades on Bitcoin and Ethereum, resulting in profits exceeding US$6.8 million. This led many, including a prominent crypto analyst, to believe it was a case of insider trading.
Analysis by Material Indicators on March 20 also identifies a manipulatory device known as spoofing by one or more whales, which it cites as a reason for Bitcoin’s failure to sustain a rally past US$87,500 in March.
Despite efforts to improve regulation and security, the crypto industry continues to grapple with hacking incidents as well. A major hack of the Bybit exchange on February 23 led to losses of US$195 million, although the firm managed to fully replenish its reserves within 72 hours thanks to a mix of loans and large deposits from other industry players.
Glassnode Insights analysts said the correction following the hack and subsequent US$5.7 billion withdrawal from user wallets pushed Bitcoin’s monthly performance down by 13.6 percent. Altcoins and meme coins suffered even steeper losses, resetting market momentum to April 2024 levels.
2025 Bitcoin price predictions
Moderate Bitcoin growth and price appreciation are expected in mid- to late 2025, tied to stablecoin and DeFi growth.
Bitcoin price performance post-halving.
Chart via IntoTheBlock.
Price targets for Bitcoin this year vary. Network economist Timothy Peterson has predicted that Bitcoin could peak around US$126,000 in the latter half of 2025. A meta-analysis of Polymarket estimates posted by X user Ashwin on March 26 identifies a bull target price of US$138,617 and a bear price of US$59,040.
The potential for a supply shock due to diminishing Bitcoin reserves on exchanges could fuel a rally. Factors like a weakening US dollar and an end quantitative tightening from the US Federal Reserve are seen as positive catalysts. Historical data shows April is often a turning point for the market.
Stablecoins and RWAs are expected to continue their role in the convergence of DeFi with traditional finance. Furthermore, initiatives like the Digital Chamber’s US Blockchain Roadmap, which proposes BitBonds (Bitcoin-backed US Treasuries), could revitalize debt markets and attract global capital.
Key industry figures like Galaxy Digital’s Mike Novogratz and 10T Holdings’ Dan Tapiero, anticipate new crypto companies listing on major exchanges like the NYSE and Nasdaq in the second quarter. This sentiment is supported by reports of initial public offering filings from companies like eToro, Circle, Gemini, Bullish and BitGo.
However, this positive outlook is set against a turbulent economic backdrop, including a possible slowdown in US growth and uncertainty around inflation and trade policies, which could influence sentiment and capital flows.
Speaking virtually at the Digital Asset Summit in New York on March 18, Cathie Wood, CEO of ARK Invest, expressed concerns about a potential recession, citing a significant slowdown in the velocity of money.
“I think what’s happening, though, is that if we do have a recession, declining GDP, that this is going to give the president and the Fed many more degrees of freedom to do what they want in terms of tax cuts and monetary policy,” she said.
However, Wood also said she believes that ‘long-term innovation wins,’ despite the recent market correction, describing crypto assets as a pillar of ARK’s investment approach.
Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
This post appeared first on investingnews.com
Left-wing movie director Oliver Stone slammed Democrats for weaponizing federal law enforcement and ‘lying’ in their attempts to charge the president with Russian collusion during the 2016 election.
Stone, meanwhile, applauded President Donald Trump for taking steps to find out what really happened, adding that he is ‘absolutely’ right that the federal government has been weaponized to attack political opponents.
Trump recently signed a new executive order directing the FBI to immediately declassify files concerning Crossfire Hurricane, the initial investigation launched in 2016 that sought information on whether members of the Trump campaign were colluding with the Russians to undermine the election. The president has also taken steps to go after the law firms involved in the scandal, including by suspending the security clearances for their attorneys and barring them from entering any federal buildings.
‘Russiagate – we paid for it,’ Stone said. ‘I applaud [what Trump is doing], and I hate what they did with Russiagate, I really do. I think it’s – again, the lying, the lying, the lying, and selling that to the American people.’
When asked if he felt Trump was right about there being weaponization of the federal government against conservatives, Stone responded: ‘There was.’
Stone, who has produced several documentaries supporting Russian narratives about Ukraine, added that the underlying premise behind Russiagate – that Russia is a nefarious actor – is wrong and ‘un-American.’
‘They are potentially our best partners, as are the Chinese. I mean, we have this mentality that they’re the enemy,’ Stone said. ‘That’s all been inculcated by propaganda. If you go out there to China, and you go out to Russia, you don’t hear that kind of vituperative dialogue.’
However, while Stone said he agreed with Trump’s approach to taking on those involved with Russiagate, he did lament the president’s attacks on pro-Palestinian protesters over alleged antisemitism.
‘I don’t like this new thing about censorship coming from Trump,’ said Stone. ‘Against the anti – what he calls ‘antisemitic news’ – I mean, I don’t agree. I don’t know where he’s coming from, and it’s not what he promised.’
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
The Trump administration is slashing millions of dollars in DEI grants from a library and museum system as part of its overall Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) push to rid the government of waste, fraud and abuse.
The administration is cutting $15 million from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) in the form of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) grants in a move the agency says is aligned with both DOGE and President Donald Trump’s executive orders aimed at eliminating DEI from the federal government.
The grants include $6.7 million to the California State Library to enhance equitable library programs and $4 million to the Washington State Library for diverse staff development and incarcerated support.
A $1.5M DEI grant to the Connecticut State Library system to ‘integrate social justice, diversity, equity, and inclusion’ into their daily operations is also being cut along with $700,000 for a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit to study ‘post-pandemic DEI practices’ in American children’s museums that would formulate ‘enhanced equity-focused strategies.’
Additionally, a DEI grant of $265,000 going to Queens College in New York to conduct a research project on why ‘BIPOC’ teens read Japanese comic books will be cut along with $250,000 to fund the ‘Gay Ohio History Initiative’ to erect 10 ‘LGBTQ+ historical markers’ will be cut.
‘In keeping with the vision of the President’s executive orders, we are taking action to end taxpayer funding for discriminatory DEI initiatives in our nation’s museums and libraries,’ Acting IMLS Director Keith Sonderling told Fox News Digital in a statement.
‘Our cultural institutions should bring Americans together—not promote divisive ideologies. Moving forward, we must champion programs that uphold our founding ideals and reaffirm that the American Dream is within reach for all, through hard work and determination, not identity politics.’
The grant cuts come after IMLS reportedly cut 80% of its staff in a move aimed at slashing the bloated federal government while saving taxpayers additional millions.
A recent study by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences found that federal funds represent only 0.3% of the total operating revenue for public libraries. The vast majority of funding comes from state and local sources.
The Institute of Museum and Library Services was one of seven government agencies targeted in Trump’s ‘Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy’ executive order last month.
Trump’s DOGE efforts have saved the American taxpayer $140 billion, according to its website, which represents almost $900 saved per taxpayer.
The Trump administration says it has slashed hundreds of millions of dollars in DEI contracts, including at least $100 million at the Department of Education.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Elon Musk’s high-profile role in the Trump administration is dominating headlines. His DOGE recommendations are roiling the Washington establishment. His young staffers with backpacks are looking at waste in multiple government agencies, and he himself is frequently advising the president. While Musk’s prominent role is certainly unusual, history reveals some parallels to presidential advisers who have had an enormous influence in previous administrations. History also shows that having a high-profile non-traditional role also paints a big target on your back.
One of the first uber-powerful outside advisers was in the Woodrow Wilson administration. House was a wealthy Texan who had been advising Democratic politicians in his home state when he connected with then-New Jersey Governor Wilson.
When Wilson won the presidency, House had little interest in a Cabinet slot. According to Wilson’s personal physician Cary Grayson, House ‘wanted no office himself and his one desire, it seemed, was to be helpful to the President in the selection of men for appointments.’
House became Wilson’s main foreign policy adviser. He lived in the White House, which gave him access day and night to Wilson, and controlled the flow of information to Wilson. House recalled that Wilson ‘seldom reads the newspapers and gains his knowledge of public affairs largely from the matter brought to his attention….’ With House culling what was brought to Wilson’s attention, it’s unsurprising that Wilson once called House ‘my second personality,’ adding ‘his thoughts and mine are one.’
House’s influence grew with America’s entry into World War I in 1917. House came up with the idea for and populated The Inquiry, a proto think tank that examined the potential scenarios in the war’s aftermath. Wilson’s famous 14 Points speech, laying out his framework for a post-war world, was based on a draft written by Inquiry member Walter Lippman and then refined by House and Wilson. As House recalled his efforts on that speech, he and Wilson ‘finished remaking the map of the world…at half past twelve o’clock.’
Although the war initially increased House’s power, it also set the stage for his downfall. There was resentment within the White House and the State Department about House’s outsized role. Wilson’s second wife Edith did not much like him, either. Wilson also felt that House conceded too much to the European powers in the Versailles negotiations. House further pushed his luck by urging Wilson to negotiate with Senate Republicans to secure passage of the Versailles Treaty, good advice that Wilson did not want to hear.
On June 28, 1919, House and Wilson met for the last time as Wilson was about to return to the U.S. to begin his ultimately unsuccessful effort to ratify the treaty. He said, ‘Good-by, House,’ and the two men never spoke again.
Franklin Roosevelt also had a top administration priority run by a man with a military title in a non-traditional appointment. Ex- was working for the wealthy investor and Democratic fixer Bernard Baruch when he became a member of Roosevelt’s ‘Brain Trust.’ He then headed Roosevelt’s new National Recovery Administration, where, according to the New York Times, he was given ‘almost unlimited powers.’
Johnson’s job as head of the NRA was to get companies to adhere to Roosevelt’s New Deal policies. Here the similarities to DOGE are apparent, except NRA was initially an executive branch creation targeting the private sector, while DOGE aims to rein in government. Congress created the NRA, and Roosevelt signed it into law, on June 16, after Johnson had started. Within one month, Johnson got 2 million companies to sign on to the NRA codes, allowing them to display the ‘Blue Eagle’ of compliance.
Johnson used heavy-handed tactics to get companies to comply. Ford founder Henry Ford learned this firsthand when he refused to sign on. In response, Johnson criticized Ford publicly and went to Michigan to confront Ford, even threatening to sic the Department of Justice on Ford. Ford pushed back, issuing a company statement saying that Johnson was ‘assuming the airs of a dictator.’
Ford’s resistance notwithstanding, Johnson was lionized by the press, and he was named TIME’s ‘Man of the Year’ in 1933. The power and accolades, however, seemed to go to Johnson’s head. His former employer Baruch warned FDR that Johnson was ‘a born dictator.’ Cabinet members like Labor Secretary Frances Perkins and Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau complained about him as well, but Roosevelt defended Johnson, saying that ‘every administration needed a Peck’s Bad Boy.’ Roosevelt even spurned an offer from Johnson to resign, prompting Johnson to tell the press, ‘My feet are nailed to the floor for the present… I am not going to resign.’
Despite Roosevelt’s initial support, the pressure eventually became too great. Roosevelt forced Johnson to resign in September of 1934. In his resignation speech, Johnson called the NRA ‘as great a social advance as has occurred on this earth since a gaunt and dusty Jew in Palestine declared, as a new principle in human relationship, ‘The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.’’ Johnson’s love for the administration that ousted him did not last, though, as he became a Roosevelt critic, particularly of Roosevelt’s effort to remake, or ‘pack’ the Supreme Court that had invalidated Johnson’s NRA in 1935.
In Roosevelt’s third term, he changed priorities from what he called ‘Dr. New Deal’ to ‘Dr. Win the War.’ In this, one of his top needs was to shift America’s industrial base to producing war material. To do so, Roosevelt needed someone not from government but from the private sector that he had spent much of his first two terms trying to bring to heel. FDR looked to Baruch for advice. Baruch responded: ‘First, Knudsen. Second, Knudsen. Third, Knudsen.’ Baruch was referring to , president of General Motors, at the time the largest company on earth. FDR called Knudsen, who forgo an enormous $300,000 salary – about $6.5 million today – to become a dollar-a-year man in Washington. FDR also made Knudsen a lieutenant general in the Army, an unusual move for someone coming directly from the civilian ranks.
Like House and Johnson before him – and Musk in our day – Knudsen had his critics. New Dealers were angry that Knudsen refused to shut down the production of cars for civilian use. Knudsen held his ground before FDR, explaining that shutting down production would necessitate closing the plants, which would get in the way of war production.
Criticism notwithstanding, Knudsen did his job well. In marshaling America’s industrial might to help the United States and its allies, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, win the war, Knudsen got some praise from an unusual source. At the 1943 meeting of the Big Three allies in Tehran, Josef Stalin proposed a toast ‘to American production, without which this war would have been lost.’ It might as well have been a toast to Knudsen himself.
Following the war, TIME founder saw in Dwight Eisenhower an opportunity to return Republicans to the White House. Luce backed Eisenhower in a variety of ways: with favorable TIME coverage, foreign policy advice, and the loan of several staffers to Eisenhower’s 1952 presidential campaign. When Eisenhower won, some of the Luce people joined the administration, and Luce’s wife Clare Boothe Luce served as ambassador to Italy.
During Eisenhower’s administration, Luce continued to provide both advice and favorable coverage, although the latter came at a cost. TIME staffers did not like serving as ‘Eisenhower’s mouthpiece.’ More broadly, TIME began to be seen as biased towards the Republicans, an example of reputational damage stemming from being too close to a sitting administration.
In the Nixon administration, another prominent CEO would take a hit for his closeness to a Republican president. In 1968, long before was a presidential candidate, the Texas billionaire and founder of EDS met Richard Nixon through PepsiCo Chairman Donald Kendall. Perot, who had become rich selling data processing to the federal government, told Nixon that computers could be an important tool in a presidential campaign. He provided 10 paid employees – and an EDS airplane – to the Nixon campaign to demonstrate how it could be done.
When Nixon won, Perot became a presence in the Nixon White House. He never took an official position, but he did join the Nixon Foundation, and was a source of ideas, staff, and money – or at least promises of money. He also highlighted the issue of American POWs held by the North Vietnamese, something that the Nixon administration appreciated. For its part, the Nixon administration helped Perot as well, siding with EDS in some government contract disputes and aiding EDS in its efforts to secure additional contracts.
While helpful in some ways, Perot was also a pest. Some of his ambitious plans, like buying the Washington Post or ABC to improve their Nixon coverage, did not come to fruition. Still, the idea of a billionaire buying a platform that could aid a president politically has at least some familiarity. In addition, Nixon White House aide Gordon Strachey characterized him as ‘Difficult to please Perot.’
The Nixon link would eventually cost Perot. The Nixon administration asked Perot to help the struggling but prominent Wall Street firm F. I. Dupont, Glore Forgan and Co. Perot initially put in $10 million, then poured in more, ultimately totaling $100 million. In the end. Dupont fell apart, and EDS stock plummeted from $162 a share to $10, significantly reducing Perot’s net worth. As Perot later recalled, ‘They said it was a $5 million problem. So we waded in like Boy Scouts and then found out the vault was out of control.’
When Perot later ran for president in 1992, he lost to Bill Clinton. As president, Clinton enlisted his former Rhodes Scholar friend and business consultant as staff director of his health care task force. Magaziner had eschewed offers of a Cabinet slot to help direct the administration’s biggest issue. Magaziner enlisted hundreds of volunteers, many from the private sector, to work on the task force, working 15-hour days in 30 different sub-task forces, and meeting with Clinton on a nearly daily basis.
Like Musk, Magaziner tried to attack a challenging problem in a new way. As his wife Suzanne said of him, ‘Ira is always trying to redefine the square. He’s not constrained by limits just because they’re there.’ He also took his share of hits. The Washington Post’s Steven Pearlstein said of Magaziner that ‘There is about him a supreme self-confidence that sometimes slips into arrogance.’
Ultimately, the health effort failed, and Republicans took control of the House and Senate in part because of the backlash against the Magaziner-led initiative. The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons sued the administration, arguing that non-governmental appointees could have meetings with governmental officials that were not open to the public. Federal Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that Magaziner was ‘misleading at best’ in the discovery process. Lamberth added that the government needed to be ‘accountable when its officials run amok,’ and fined Magaziner more than $285,000.
Magaziner offered to resign after the health care failure, but Clinton refused the resignation. Magaziner remained a White House adviser on internet-related issues through 1998, and his fine was eventually reversed on appeal in 1999.
Clearly, no one is or could be exactly like Elon Musk: a mega-billionaire who runs electric car, social media, and space exploration companies while running a powerful government commission identifying waste, fraud, and abuse. But there have certainly been other prominent private sector actors who have worked on presidential priorities in non-traditional ways, bringing in their own people in the process. And there have also others who have been accused of arrogance and conflicts of interest, pilloried in the press and subjected to financial and reputational hits. The biggest open question is what happens in this kind of relationship between the president and the adviser. Whether the Musk-Trump relationship survives this experience remains the biggest and most interesting question out there.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
White House Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett doubled down on the effectiveness of President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Sunday, saying dozens of countries are now seeking to open negotiations and U.S. manufacturing is booming.
Hassett made the claim during an appearance on ABC News’ ‘This Week’ with host George Stephanopoulos. He said that over 50 countries have already said they want to negotiate new trade agreements with Trump’s administration since the tariffs hit last week, though he acknowledged there may be short-term pain for consumers.
He pointed to the decrease in prices that has existed since China entered the World Trade Organization in 2000, arguing that the loss of jobs outweighs the low prices.
‘If cheap goods were the answer, if cheap goods were going to make Americans’ real wages better off, then real incomes would have gone up over that time. Instead, they went down because wages went down more than prices went down. So we got the cheap goods at the grocery store, but then we had fewer jobs,’ he said.
Hassett added that he has received ‘anecdotal word’ that some U.S. auto plants are adding second shifts to their work schedules in response to the tariffs.
Stephanopoulos then pressed Hassett to explain why Russia wasn’t targeted with any additional tariffs.
‘There’s obviously an ongoing negotiation with Russia and Ukraine, and I think the president made the decision not to conflate the two issues. It doesn’t mean that Russia in the fullness of time, is going to be treated wildly different than every other country,’ Hassett responded.
‘But Russia’s one of the only countries, one of few countries that is not subject to these new tariffs, aren’t they?’ Stephanopoulos pressed.
‘They’re in the middle of a negotiation, George, aren’t they?’ Hassett countered. ‘Would you literally advise that you go in and put a whole bunch of new things on the table in the middle of a negotiation that affects so many American and Ukrainian and Russian lives?’
‘Negotiators do that all the time,’ Stephanopoulos argued.
‘Russia is in the midst of negotiations over peace that affects really thousands and thousands of lives of people and that’s what President Trump’s focused on right now,’ Hassett said.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
President Donald Trump said Sunday that he is not willing to make a deal with China unless the trade deficit of over $1 trillion is resolved first.
While speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Trump said with some countries there is a trade deficit of over a billion dollars, but with China, it is over $1 trillion.
‘We have a $1 trillion trade deficit with China. Hundreds of billions of dollars a year we lose to China, and unless we solve that problem, I’m not going to make a deal,’ he said. ‘I’m willing to make a deal with China, but they have to solve this surplus. We have a tremendous deficit problem with China… I want that solved.’
Trump also said because of the tariffs, the U.S. has $7 trillion of committed investments when it comes to building automotive manufacturing plants, chip companies and other types of businesses, ‘at levels that we’ve never seen before.’
But in terms of trade deficits, Trump said he has spoken with a lot of leaders in Europe and Asia, who are ‘dying’ to make a deal, but as long as there are deficits, he is not going to do that.
‘A deficit is a loss,’ he said. ‘We’re going to have surpluses, or we’re, at worst, going to be breaking even. But China would be the worst in the group because the deficit is so big, and it’s not sustainable.
‘I was elected on this,’ Trump added.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
United Airlines plans to add daily flights to Vietnam and Thailand in October, further expanding the network for the U.S. carrier that already has the most Asia service.
In the expansion, United is using a tactic that’s unusual in its network: Its airplanes from Los Angeles and San Francisco that are headed for Hong Kong will then go on to the two new destinations. The Bangkok and Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, service is set to begin on Oct. 26.
On Oct. 25, United plans to add a second daily nonstop flight from San Francisco to Manila, Philippines, and on Dec. 11, it will launch nonstops from San Francisco to Adelaide, Australia, which will operate three days a week.
The carrier has aggressively been adding far-flung destinations not served by rivals to its routes, like Nuuk, Greenland, and Bilbao, Spain, which start later this year. Getting the mix right is especially important as carriers seek to grow their lucrative loyalty programs and need attractive destinations to keep customers spending.
Bangkok, in particular, “is in even more demand now given the popularity of ‘White Lotus,’” Patrick Quayle, United’s senior vice president of network and global alliances, said of the HBO show.
He said the carrier isn’t planning on cutting any international routes for its upcoming winter schedule.
This post appeared first on NBC NEWS
WASHINGTON — Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg told senators on Wednesday that he’s happy with the company’s progress improving manufacturing and safety practices following several accidents, including a near catastrophe last year.
Ortberg faced questioning from the Senate Commerce Committee about how the company will ensure that it doesn’t repeat past accidents or manufacturing defects, in his first hearing since he became CEO last August, tasked with turning the manufacturer around.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R.-Texas, the committee’s chairman, said he wants Boeing to succeed and invited company managers and factory workers to report to him their opinions on its turnaround plan. “Consider my door open,” he said.
Ortberg acknowledged the company still has more to do.
“Boeing has made serious missteps in recent years — and it is unacceptable. In response, we have made sweeping changes to the people, processes, and overall structure of our company,” Ortberg said in his testimony. “While there is still work ahead of us, these profound changes are underpinned by the deep commitment from all of us to the safety of our products and services.”
Boeing executives have worked for years to put the lasting impact of two fatal crashes of its best-selling Max plane behind it.
Ortberg said Boeing is in discussions with the Justice Department for a revised plea agreement stemming from a federal fraud charge in the development of Boeing’s best-selling 737 Maxes. The previous plea deal, reached last July, was later rejected by a federal judge, who last month set a trial date for June 23 if a new deal isn’t reached.
Boeing had agreed to plead guilty to conspiring to defraud the U.S. government, pay up to $487.2 million and install a corporate monitor at the company for three years.
“We’re in the process right now of going back with the DOJ and coming up with an alternate agreement,” Ortberg said during the hearing. “I want this resolved as fast as anybody. We’re still in discussions and hopefully we’ll have a new agreement here soon.”
Asked by Sen. Maria Cantwell, the ranking Democrat on the committee, whether he had an issue with having a corporate monitor, Ortberg replied: “I don’t personally have a problem, no.”
Ortberg and other Boeing executives have recently outlined improvements across the manufacturer’s production lines, such as reducing defects and risks from so-called traveled works, or doing tasks out of sequence, in recent months, as well as wins like a contract worth more than $20 billion to build the United States’ next generation fighter jet.
But lawmakers and regulators have maintained heightened scrutiny on the company, a top U.S. exporter.
“Boeing has been a great American manufacturer and all of us should want to see it thrive,” Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican and chairman of the committee, said in a statement in February announcing the hearing. “Given Boeing’s past missteps and problems, the flying public deserves to hear what changes are being made to rehabilitate the company’s tarnished reputation.”
The Federal Aviation Administration last year capped Boeing’s production of its 737 Max planes at 38 a month following the January 2024 door plug blowout. The agency plans to keep that limit in place, though Boeing is producing below that level.
Ortberg said at the hearing Wednesday that the company could work up to production rate of 38 Max planes a month or even higher sometime this year, but said Boeing wouldn’t push it if the production line isn’t stable.
Acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau said at a Senate hearing last week that the agency’s oversight of the company “extends to ongoing monitoring of Boeing’s manufacturing practices, maintenance procedures, and software updates.”
This post appeared first on NBC NEWS
Retailers and brands have turned to Vietnam to manufacture goods from sneakers to couches while moving some or all production out of China.
For years, China’s southern neighbor became a popular alternative for companies trying to avoid the crossfire of U.S. trade tensions with Beijing. Now, as President Donald Trump expands his tariff targets, they can no longer steer clear.
Trump said he will put a 46% duty on imports from Vietnam as part of a new wave of global levies announced Wednesday. That could soon raise costs for major corporations in the apparel, furniture and toy space, and some of them may pass those increases to consumers in the form of price hikes. The tariffs on Vietnam take effect on April 9.
China exported more goods to the U.S. than any other country for more than two decades, but Mexico surpassed China as the top source in 2023. China is now the second largest supplier to the U.S., accounting for $438.9 billion worth of goods in 2024, according to government data from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
For companies that have looked to diversify the countries they rely on for production and reduce risks from trade conflicts with China, Vietnam has also become a popular place to go. Imports from Vietnam grew to $136.6 billion in 2024, up about 19% from 2023, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
On the other hand, imports from China rose only 2.8% from 2023 to 2024, according to government data. Imports from China dropped about 18% last year when compared to 2022, when the U.S. brought in $536.3 billion in goods from the country.
The duties will hit companies at a time when many consumers have become value-conscious and selective about spending due to persistent inflation and concerns about the economy. While it is unclear now which companies will raise prices due to the tariffs, businesses may be reluctant to shoulder the higher costs as they forecast lackluster spending in the months ahead.
Some household names will feel the pinch from Vietnam tariffs. Nike manufacturers about half of its footwear in China and Vietnam, with about 25% coming from Vietnam. Trump will put a 34% tariff on top of existing 20% duties on imports from China, for an apparent rate of 54%, a White House official told CNBC.
The tariffs would be yet another headwind for the sneaker and athletic apparel giant, which already delivered a disappointing forecast for the current quarter. That guidance, which projects a double-digit percentage sales decline in the three-month period, included the estimated impact from tariffs on imports from China and Mexico.
Expanded tariffs could stall or slow Nike’s efforts to revive its brand and improve sales under its new CEO Elliott Hill, a company veteran who took the helm last fall.
Nike shares dropped more than 6% in extended trading Wednesday. Adidas and other major footwear players also rely heavily on Vietnam.
The two companies did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Nearly a third of footwear imports in the U.S. came from Vietnam in 2023, the most recent full-year data available, according to the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, an industry trade group.
Steve Madden, for example, said on an earnings call in early November that it would slash its imports to the U.S. from China by as much as 45% over the next year. The footwear maker made that announcement just days after Trump’s presidential victory, following his campaign trail promises to impose steep tariffs on countries like China.
Yet one of the nations Steve Madden has accelerated its move to is Vietnam, along with Cambodia, Mexico and Brazil, CEO Edward Rosenfeld said at the time on the earnings call.
Vietnam was the second largest country for suppliers of Ugg and Hoka parent company Deckers Brands as of this month. The company has 68 supply chain partners in Vietnam, which is surpassed only by its 125 suppliers in China. Deckers shares dropped nearly 9% in extended trading. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
VF Corporation, which is made up of footwear, apparel and accessories brands including The North Face, Timberland, Vans and Jansport, has a heavy reliance on China and Vietnam, too. About 38% of its suppliers are in China and 17% are in Vietnam, adding up to 55% of exposure across the two countries, according to a manufacturing disclosure from December.
The company’s shares dropped more than 8% in extended trading Wednesday. VF declined to comment, citing its quiet period before its upcoming earnings report.
The furniture industry has also ramped up its reliance on Vietnam.
In 2023, 26.5% of U.S. furniture imports came from the country, close behind the 29% coming from China, according to data from the Home Furnishings Association, a trade group that lobbies on behalf of home goods retailers. The group cited investment banking firm Mann, Armistead & Epperson — one of the furniture industry’s top sources for data.
Taken together, that means about 56% of U.S. furniture imports come from both regions combined.
On an earnings call in February, Wayfair CEO Niraj Shah said the shift to countries outside of China has been “a growing trend” since Trump enacted tariffs during his first administration.
He said places like Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam “have grown as places where folks have factories and where our goods are coming from.”
Wayfair’s stock plunged about 12% in extended trading. In a statement, Wayfair said it is “closely monitoring the evolving trade landscape.” The company added it is “well-positioned to continue offering customers the best possible combination of value, assortment, and experience.”
Toymakers have also leaned on Vietnam to make more merchandise that’s imported and sold to kids and adults across the U.S. Hasbro, SpinMaster, Mattel and Crayola are among the companies that work with GFT Group, one of the largest toy manufacturers in the Southeast Asia.
In addition to long-established manufacturing facilities in China, GFT currently has five production facilities in northern Vietnam that employ over 15,000 workers.
On a call in early March, Funko Chief Financial Officer Yves LePendeven said the company, which is known for its big-eyed plastic collectibles called Pops, was working hard to control what it could in the year ahead. That includes trying to offset tariffs by “renegotiating factory costs, accelerating our shift in production to other sourcing countries, and implementing pricing adjustments,” he said.
On the call, he said about a third of Funko’s global product purchases come from China. He didn’t name the countries that Funko was moving production to, but it is a customer of GFT Group.
Those toymakers did not immediately respond to CNBC’s requests for comment.
Curtis McGill is the co-founder of Hey Buddy Hey Pal, a toy company that specializes in Easter egg decorating kits. He said he expects the 46% tariffs to raise toy costs in the U.S., but added companies will likely be negotiating with suppliers in Vietnam to try to mitigate those hikes.
“A lot of manufacturers and the actual toy companies have been already having conversations with manufacturing plants having to to help in some regards, because the toy companies are getting pressure to try and maintain prices on this side from the retailers,” McGill said.
For companies, including apparel makers, the new tariff policies have raised questions about whether — and where — to potentially move their manufacturing. Last month, an investor asked American Eagle Outfitters about its exposure to Vietnam on its most recent earnings call.
Chief Financial Officer Michael Mathias said the jeans and apparel brand’s production is similar in Vietnam and China, with “high-teens to 20%” of production in each of those countries. He said the company aims to trim that back to single-digits by the back half of the year.
American Eagle shares dipped more than 5% on Wednesday. The company did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Yet both Mathias and American Eagle CEO Jay Schottenstein said on the company’s last earnings call that it will be crucial to stay flexible, while waiting to see how tariffs would play out and which countries would be targeted.
Schottenstein referred to eight years ago during the first Trump administration, when American Eagle also faced challenges and had to figure out a new plan.
Schottenstein said there’s another shift coming, but “nobody knows what the story is yet.”
“I wouldn’t be rushing,” he said. “You go rush, where am I rushing to? I don’t know where I’m rushing to.”
Peter Baum is the chief financial officer and chief operation officer of Baum Essex, a New York-based manufacturer with licenses to make products for brands like Nautica, Betsey Johnson and Steve Madden. During the first Trump administration in 2019, Baum moved factories from from China to the Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam and India.
He told CNBC on Wednesday that the reciprocal tariffs would do massive damage to his company.
“This is how you start a global depression. After 80 years and five generations Trump just put us out of business,” Baum said.
— CNBC’s Sarah Whitten, Jason Gewirtz and Eamon Javers contributed to this report.
This post appeared first on NBC NEWS