ReportWire

Tag: international trade

  • Consumer confidence slides in December to lowest level since US tariffs rolled out

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Consumers confidence in the economy was shaken in December as Americans grow anxious about high prices and the impact of President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs.

    The Conference Board said Tuesday that its consumer confidence index fell 3.8 points to 89.1 in December from November’s upwardly revised reading of 92.9. That is close to the 85.7 reading from April, when Trump rolled out his import taxes on U.S. trading partners.

    A measure of Americans’ short-term expectations for their income, business conditions and the job market remained stable at 70.7, but still well below 80, the marker that can signal a recession ahead. It was the 11th consecutive month that reading has come in under 80.

    Consumers’ assessments of their current economic situation tumbled 9.5 points to 116.8.

    Write-in responses to the survey showed that prices and inflation remained consumers’ biggest concern, along with tariffs, despite repeated claims by President Trump that inflation is a hoax.

    Perceptions of the job market also declined this month.

    The conference board’s survey reported that 26.7% of consumers said jobs were “plentiful,” down from 28.2% in November. Also, 20.8% of consumers said jobs were “hard to get,” up from 20.1% last month.

    Last week, the government reported that the U.S. economy gained a healthy 64,000 jobs in November but lost 105,000 in October. Notably, the unemployment rate rose to 4.6% last month, the highest since 2021.

    The country’s labor market has been stuck in a “low hire, low fire” state, economists say, as businesses stand pat due to uncertainty over Trump’s tariffs and the lingering effects of elevated interest rates. Since March, job creation has fallen to an average 35,000 a month, compared to 71,000 in the year ended in March. Fed Chair Jerome Powell said recently that he suspects those numbers will be revised even lower.

    Despite the broad pessimism, the proportion of those surveyed who think a recession in the next year is is unlikely grew.

    The December survey showed that respondents’ views of their family’s current financial situation sank into negative territory for the first time in close to four years. On the flip side, expectations about their future financial situation were the most positive since January.

    Also Tuesday, the government reported that the economy expanded at a 4.3% annual rate in the third quarter, though economists expect a much more sluggish fourth quarter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A look at the experts racing to decode Trump’s tariff rules

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — After a half-century immersed in the world of trade, customs broker Amy Magnus thought she’d seen it all, navigating mountains of regulations and all sorts of logistical hurdles to import everything from lumber and bananas to circus animals and Egyptian mummies.

    Then came 2025.

    Tariffs were imposed in ways she’d never seen. New rules left her wondering what they really meant. Federal workers, always a reliable backstop, grew more elusive.

    “2025 has changed the trade system,” says Magnus. “It wasn’t perfect before, but it was a functioning system. Now, it is a lot more chaotic and troubling.”

    Once hidden cogs in the international trade machine, customs brokers are getting a rare spotlight as President Donald Trump reinvents America’s commercial ties with the world. If this breathless year of tariffs amounts to a trade war, customs brokers are its front lines.

    Few Americans have been exposed as exhaustively to every fluctuation of trade policy as the customs broker. They were there in the opening days of Trump’s second term, when tariffs were announced on Canada and Mexico, and two days later, when those same levies were paused. They were there through every rule on imports of steel and seafood, on cars and copper, on polysilicon and pharmaceuticals, and on and on. For every tariff, for every carve-out, for every order, brokers have been left to translate policy into reality, line by line and code by code, in a year when it seemed every passing week brought change.

    “We were used to decades of a certain way of processing, and from January to now, that universe has been turned kind of upside-down on us,” says Al Raffa, a customs broker in Elizabeth, New Jersey, who helps shepherd containerloads of cargo into the U.S. packed to the brim with everything from rounds of brie to boxes of chocolate.

    Each arrival of products imported to the country requires filings with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and often, other agencies. Importers often turn to brokers to handle the regulatory legwork and, with a spate of new trade rules unleashed by the Trump administration, they’ve seen their demand grow alongside their workloads.

    Many shipments that entered duty free now are tariffed. Other imports that had minimal levies that might cost a company a few hundred dollars have had their bills balloon to thousands. For Raffa and his crew, the ever-expanding list of tariffs means a given product could be subjected to taxes under multiple separate tariff lines.

    “That one line item of cheese that previously was just one tariff, now it could be two, three, in some cases five tariff numbers,” says 53-year-old Raffa, who has had jobs in trade since he was a teenager and who has a button emblazoned with “Make Trade Boring Again.”

    Government regulations have always been a reality for brokers, and the very reason for their existence. When thick tomes of trade rules changed in the past, though, they typically were issued long ahead of their effective dates, with periods for comment and review, each word of policy crafted in an attempt to project clarity and definition.

    With Trump, word of a major change in trade rules might come in a Truth Social post or an oversized chart clutched by the president in a Rose Garden appearance.

    “You’d be remiss not to be looking at the White House website on a daily basis, multiple times a day, just to see what executive order is going to be announced,” Raffa says.

    Each announcement sends brokerage firms into a scramble to attempt to dissect the rules, update their systems to reflect them and alert their customers who may have shipments en route and for whom any shift in tariffs could mean a major hit to their bottom line.

    JD Gonzalez, a third-generation customs broker in Laredo, Texas, and president of the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America, says the volume and speed of changes have been challenging enough. But the wording of White House orders has often left more unanswered questions than brokers are accustomed to.

    “The order is kind of vague sometimes, the guidance that’s being provided is sometimes murky, and we’re trying to make the determination,” 62-year-old Gonzalez says.

    Gonzalez rattles off 10-digit tariff codes for alcohol and doors and recites the complicated web of rules that determine the duties on a chair with a frame made of steel produced in the U.S. but processed in Mexico. As brokers’ work has grown tougher, he says some of their firms have begun charging customers more for their services because each item they’re responsible for tracking on a bill of lading takes longer.

    “You double the time,” he says.

    Brokers can’t help but see the imprints of their work everywhere they go. Gonzalez looks at a T-shirt tag and thinks of what a broker did to get it into the country. Magnus sees Belgian chocolate or Chinese silk and is awed, despite all the things that could have kept something from landing on a store shelf, that it still arrived. Raffa walks through the supermarket, picks up a can of artichoke hearts, and considers every possible regulation that might apply to secure its import into the country.

    It has been heartening for brokers, who existed in the gray arcana of hidden bureaucracy unseen by most Americans, to now earn a bit more recognition.

    “It was maybe taken for granted how that wonderful piece of gourmet cheese got on the shelf, or that Gucci bag,” says Raffa. “Up until this year, people were clueless what I did.”

    Magnus, who is in her 70s and based on Marco Island, Florida, spent 18 years at U.S. Customs before starting at a brokerage in 1992. She came to find comfort in the precision of rules governing every import she cleared the way for, from crude oil to diamonds.

    “We don’t like to have any doubt, we don’t like to leave anything up to interpretation,” she says. “When we ourselves are struggling, trying to interpret and understand the meaning of some of these things, it is a very unsettling place to be.”

    It’s not just the White House orders that have complicated her work.

    The Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting blitz under billionaire Elon Musk led to layoffs and retirements of trusted government workers that brokers turn to for guidance. A shutdown slowed operations at ports. And fear of being out of step with the administration has some federal employees cautious about decoding trade orders, making answers on interpretation of tariff rules sometimes tough to come by.

    Magnus was befuddled by moves that seemed at odds with everything she knew of trade policy. Canada as adversary? Switzerland subjected to 39% tariffs? It defied how she had come to see the choreography of cargo and what it says about the world.

    “It’s like an incredible ballet to be able to trade with all these countries all over the world,” she says. “In my own mind, I always felt that as long as we were trading and we were friendly with each other, we were reducing the chance of war and killing each other.”

    Work has been so hectic this year that Magnus hasn’t managed to take a vacation. Weekends have so frequently been upended by Friday afternoon edicts announcing a tariff is going into effect or being taken away that it has become an inside joke with colleagues.

    “It’s Friday afternoon,” she says. “Is everybody watching?”

    A couple hours after Magnus repeats this, the next White House order is posted, undoing a slew of tariffs on agricultural products and sending brokers into another scurry.

    ___

    Matt Sedensky can be reached at msedensky@ap.org and https://x.com/sedensky

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A Look at the Experts Racing to Decode Trump’s Tariff Rules

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK (AP) — After a half-century immersed in the world of trade, customs broker Amy Magnus thought she’d seen it all, navigating mountains of regulations and all sorts of logistical hurdles to import everything from lumber and bananas to circus animals and Egyptian mummies.

    Tariffs were imposed in ways she’d never seen. New rules left her wondering what they really meant. Federal workers, always a reliable backstop, grew more elusive.

    “2025 has changed the trade system,” says Magnus. “It wasn’t perfect before, but it was a functioning system. Now, it is a lot more chaotic and troubling.”

    Once hidden cogs in the international trade machine, customs brokers are getting a rare spotlight as President Donald Trump reinvents America’s commercial ties with the world. If this breathless year of tariffs amounts to a trade war, customs brokers are its front lines.

    Few Americans have been exposed as exhaustively to every fluctuation of trade policy as the customs broker. They were there in the opening days of Trump’s second term, when tariffs were announced on Canada and Mexico, and two days later, when those same levies were paused. They were there through every rule on imports of steel and seafood, on cars and copper, on polysilicon and pharmaceuticals, and on and on. For every tariff, for every carve-out, for every order, brokers have been left to translate policy into reality, line by line and code by code, in a year when it seemed every passing week brought change.

    “We were used to decades of a certain way of processing, and from January to now, that universe has been turned kind of upside-down on us,” says Al Raffa, a customs broker in Elizabeth, New Jersey, who helps shepherd containerloads of cargo into the U.S. packed to the brim with everything from rounds of brie to boxes of chocolate.

    Each arrival of products imported to the country requires filings with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and often, other agencies. Importers often turn to brokers to handle the regulatory legwork and, with a spate of new trade rules unleashed by the Trump administration, they’ve seen their demand grow alongside their workloads.

    Many shipments that entered duty free now are tariffed. Other imports that had minimal levies that might cost a company a few hundred dollars have had their bills balloon to thousands. For Raffa and his crew, the ever-expanding list of tariffs means a given product could be subjected to taxes under multiple separate tariff lines.

    “That one line item of cheese that previously was just one tariff, now it could be two, three, in some cases five tariff numbers,” says 53-year-old Raffa, who has had jobs in trade since he was a teenager and who has a button emblazoned with “Make Trade Boring Again.”

    Government regulations have always been a reality for brokers, and the very reason for their existence. When thick tomes of trade rules changed in the past, though, they typically were issued long ahead of their effective dates, with periods for comment and review, each word of policy crafted in an attempt to project clarity and definition.

    With Trump, word of a major change in trade rules might come in a Truth Social post or an oversized chart clutched by the president in a Rose Garden appearance.

    “You’d be remiss not to be looking at the White House website on a daily basis, multiple times a day, just to see what executive order is going to be announced,” Raffa says.

    Each announcement sends brokerage firms into a scramble to attempt to dissect the rules, update their systems to reflect them and alert their customers who may have shipments en route and for whom any shift in tariffs could mean a major hit to their bottom line.

    JD Gonzalez, a third-generation customs broker in Laredo, Texas, and president of the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America, says the volume and speed of changes have been challenging enough. But the wording of White House orders has often left more unanswered questions than brokers are accustomed to.

    “The order is kind of vague sometimes, the guidance that’s being provided is sometimes murky, and we’re trying to make the determination,” 62-year-old Gonzalez says.

    Gonzalez rattles off 10-digit tariff codes for alcohol and doors and recites the complicated web of rules that determine the duties on a chair with a frame made of steel produced in the U.S. but processed in Mexico. As brokers’ work has grown tougher, he says some of their firms have begun charging customers more for their services because each item they’re responsible for tracking on a bill of lading takes longer.

    “You double the time,” he says.

    Brokers can’t help but see the imprints of their work everywhere they go. Gonzalez looks at a T-shirt tag and thinks of what a broker did to get it into the country. Magnus sees Belgian chocolate or Chinese silk and is awed, despite all the things that could have kept something from landing on a store shelf, that it still arrived. Raffa walks through the supermarket, picks up a can of artichoke hearts, and considers every possible regulation that might apply to secure its import into the country.

    It has been heartening for brokers, who existed in the gray arcana of hidden bureaucracy unseen by most Americans, to now earn a bit more recognition.

    “It was maybe taken for granted how that wonderful piece of gourmet cheese got on the shelf, or that Gucci bag,” says Raffa. “Up until this year, people were clueless what I did.”

    Magnus, who is in her 70s and based on Marco Island, Florida, spent 18 years at U.S. Customs before starting at a brokerage in 1992. She came to find comfort in the precision of rules governing every import she cleared the way for, from crude oil to diamonds.

    “We don’t like to have any doubt, we don’t like to leave anything up to interpretation,” she says. “When we ourselves are struggling, trying to interpret and understand the meaning of some of these things, it is a very unsettling place to be.”

    It’s not just the White House orders that have complicated her work.

    The Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting blitz under billionaire Elon Musk led to layoffs and retirements of trusted government workers that brokers turn to for guidance. A shutdown slowed operations at ports. And fear of being out of step with the administration has some federal employees cautious about decoding trade orders, making answers on interpretation of tariff rules sometimes tough to come by.

    Magnus was befuddled by moves that seemed at odds with everything she knew of trade policy. Canada as adversary? Switzerland subjected to 39% tariffs? It defied how she had come to see the choreography of cargo and what it says about the world.

    “It’s like an incredible ballet to be able to trade with all these countries all over the world,” she says. “In my own mind, I always felt that as long as we were trading and we were friendly with each other, we were reducing the chance of war and killing each other.”

    Work has been so hectic this year that Magnus hasn’t managed to take a vacation. Weekends have so frequently been upended by Friday afternoon edicts announcing a tariff is going into effect or being taken away that it has become an inside joke with colleagues.

    “It’s Friday afternoon,” she says. “Is everybody watching?”

    A couple hours after Magnus repeats this, the next White House order is posted, undoing a slew of tariffs on agricultural products and sending brokers into another scurry.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • China to impose up to 42.7% provisional tariffs on EU dairy products

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG — China will impose up to 42.7% of provisional tariffs on dairy products including milk and cheese imported from the European Union, its Commerce Ministry said Monday.

    The elevated duties, which take effect Tuesday, were based on preliminary results from an investigation opened by China’s Commerce Ministry in August 2024 as tensions between Beijing and Brussels flared. Beijing reviewed subsidies provided by EU countries for their dairy and other farm products.

    Beijing’s probe was launched as part of tit-for-tat measures as the EU investigated Chinese subsidies on electric vehicles, and later imposed tariffs as high as 45.3% on China-made EVs.

    China had initiated other probes into European brandy and pork imports as counter measures for the EU’s tariffs on Chinese EVs. It had also urged the EU to scrap its EV tariffs.

    The temporary duties on EU dairy imports will range from 21.9% to 42.7%, according to the Commerce Ministry, and will cover a basket of dairy products, including fresh and processed cheese, blue cheese, milk, and cream with a fat content exceeding 10% by weight.

    The ministry said preliminary findings from its investigation determined that subsidies provided by the EU and EU member states for their dairy products had damaged China’s dairy industry.

    Beijing’s probe into EU dairy products covered subsidies given under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy and subsidies offered to farmers by EU countries including Italy, Ireland and Finland, the Commerce Ministry said in August 2024.

    China’s relationship with the EU is fractious, with the Chinese trade surplus with the EU recently coming into the spotlight. The EU runs a significant trade deficit with China, at more than 300 billion euros ($352 billion) last year.

    Last week, Beijing announced it was imposing up to 19.8% tariffs on EU pork imports — significantly lower than preliminary tariffs of up to 62.4%.

    It accused the EU of dumping pork and pig by-products in the country, selling them at cheap prices which in turn harmed its domestic pork industry.

    In July, Beijing also announced up to 34.9% tariffs on brandy imported from the EU — including cognac from France — although several major brandy brands had received exemptions.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China to Impose up to 42.7% Provisional Tariffs on EU Dairy Products

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG (AP) — China will impose up to 42.7% of provisional tariffs on dairy products including milk and cheese imported from the European Union, its Commerce Ministry said Monday.

    The elevated duties, which take effect Tuesday, were based on preliminary results from an investigation opened by China’s Commerce Ministry in August 2024 as tensions between Beijing and Brussels flared. Beijing reviewed subsidies provided by EU countries for their dairy and other farm products.

    Beijing’s probe was launched as part of tit-for-tat measures as the EU investigated Chinese subsidies on electric vehicles, and later imposed tariffs as high as 45.3% on China-made EVs.

    China had initiated other probes into European brandy and pork imports as counter measures for the EU’s tariffs on Chinese EVs. It had also urged the EU to scrap its EV tariffs.

    The temporary duties on EU dairy imports will range from 21.9% to 42.7%, according to the Commerce Ministry, and will cover a basket of dairy products, including fresh and processed cheese, blue cheese, milk, and cream with a fat content exceeding 10% by weight.

    The ministry said preliminary findings from its investigation determined that subsidies provided by the EU and EU member states for their dairy products had damaged China’s dairy industry.

    Beijing’s probe into EU dairy products covered subsidies given under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy and subsidies offered to farmers by EU countries including Italy, Ireland and Finland, the Commerce Ministry said in August 2024.

    China’s relationship with the EU is fractious, with the Chinese trade surplus with the EU recently coming into the spotlight. The EU runs a significant trade deficit with China, at more than 300 billion euros ($352 billion) last year.

    Last week, Beijing announced it was imposing up to 19.8% tariffs on EU pork imports — significantly lower than preliminary tariffs of up to 62.4%.

    It accused the EU of dumping pork and pig by-products in the country, selling them at cheap prices which in turn harmed its domestic pork industry.

    In July, Beijing also announced up to 34.9% tariffs on brandy imported from the EU — including cognac from France — although several major brandy brands had received exemptions.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • India and New Zealand finalize a free trade agreement, eyeing growth as global uncertainties persist

    [ad_1]

    NEW DELHI — India and New Zealand announced Monday they have reached a free trade deal, seeking to deepen economic ties and shore up growth at a time of mounting global trade uncertainties.

    The move comes as New Delhi accelerates efforts to diversify export destinations as part of a broader strategy to offset the impact of steep U.S. import tariffs.

    A formal signing of the agreement between India and New Zealand is expected in the first quarter of next year after legal scrubbing of the negotiated text, India’s chief negotiator Petal Dhillon told reporters.

    The India-New Zealand trade agreement, negotiated over nine months, aims to lower tariffs, ease regulatory barriers and expand cooperation across goods, services and investments.

    It underscores India’s push to lock in trade partnerships beyond traditional markets as global commerce faces strains from unpredictable tariffs and geopolitical tensions, slowing growth and raising protectionism.

    As part of the deal, India would get zero-duty-export access for all its goods to New Zealand while Wellington would get duty concessions and market access for about 70% of New Delhi’s tariff lines, covering 95% of its exports in a phased manner, Indian officials said.

    India’s major sectors that will gain from tax free exports include textiles, apparel, engineering goods, leather and footwear, and marine products, while New Zealand’s major gains will be in horticulture, wood exports, coal, and sheep wool and meat, among others.

    New Zealand has committed investments worth $20 billion in India over a period of 15 years as part of the agreement, India’s Trade Ministry said.

    New Delhi has excluded from the deal dairy imports such as milk, cream, whey, yoghurt, and cheese, along with animal and vegetable products, including goat meat, onions and almonds, citing “domestic sensitivities.”

    Bilateral trade between India and New Zealand remains modest compared with New Delhi’s bigger partners, but officials said the deal has strong growth potential. Two-way trade that includes merchandise goods and services stood at $2.4 billion in 2024, which the two sides hope to double in about five years, Trade Secretary Rajesh Agarwal said.

    “Given the limited scale of bilateral trade, the agreement is less a trade breakthrough than a framework for deeper cooperation,” trade analyst Ajay Srivastava said.

    New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said in a post on X Monday that he spoke to his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi on conclusion of the talks. He said New Zealand’s exports to India are forecast to increase by $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion annually over the coming two decades as a result of the agreement.

    “Boosting trade means more Kiwi jobs, higher wages and more opportunities for hard working New Zealanders,” he said.

    New Zealand Trade Minister Todd McClay said the agreement gives the country access to markets that India has not provided to any other country.

    “New Zealand is the first country to secure any access for apples and honey into India in an FTA. We have secured the best access for kiwi fruit into India of any country in the world,” he said.

    Indian Trade Minister Piyush Goyal said the agreement demonstrates India was “rapidly expanding” its trade relations with countries that complement the Indian economy rather than competing with it.

    India is betting that a wider network of trade agreements will help cushion external shocks and anchor its export ambitions. In recent months, New Delhi has accelerated a push to finalize several free trade agreements. The country is in advanced talks with the European Union and Chile, among others, and hopes to finalize terms of reference soon to negotiate a pact with Canada.

    The stepped-up negotiations come as Indian exporters face pressure from higher U.S. import tariffs, which went into effect in August. The tariffs include an additional 25% levy on India for its unabated purchases of discounted Russian oil, bringing the combined tariffs imposed by the United States on its ally to 50%.

    India has been the second biggest importer of Russian crude after China, drawing criticism from Washington that it was helping finance Moscow’s war machine against Ukraine.

    While India and the U.S. have been negotiating a bilateral trade agreement, the tariffs have weighed on sectors such as textiles, auto components, metals and labor-intensive manufacturing.

    India signed comprehensive economic cooperation and trade agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Australia in recent years, lifting bilateral trade with both countries. In May, Britain and India announced a hard-wrought FTA that will slash tariffs on products including Scotch whisky and English gin shipped to India, and Indian food and spices sent to the U.K.

    Last week, India signed a comprehensive economic partnership agreement with Oman.

    —-

    AP video journalist Mayuko Ono in Tokyo contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • French Government Calls for Christmas Truce in Farmer Protests

    [ad_1]

    PARIS, Dec 19 (Reuters) – The French government on ‌Friday ​called for a Christmas truce ‌with protesting farmers, warning against further blockades during the ​holiday season, a move the country’s main union said depended on the prime minister’s response ‍to their demands.

    Farmers have been ​blocking roads, dumping manure and holding demonstrations in France for over a ​week to ⁠protest against the government’s management of cattle lumpy skin disease and a trade deal with the South American bloc Mercosur.

    Farmers gathered with tractors early on Friday in front of President Emmanuel Macron’s residence in the seaside resort of Le ‌Touquet in northern France, placing a coffin labelled “RIP Agri” and “NO Mercosur”.

    Meanwhile, in the ​southern ‌town of Avignon,  farmers ‍threw potatoes ⁠at public buildings.

    Protesters argue that the government’s policy of culling an entire herd when lumpy skin disease is detected is excessive and cruel. They also claim the EU-Mercosur deal whose signing has been postponed to January would allow massive imports of products not meeting French standards.

    Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu is holding meetings with the main farm unions. ​The head of the FNSEA, the country’s largest, said Lecornu committed to sending a letter by evening with answers to a range of agricultural issues.

    “This letter will be decisive,” FNSEA Chairman Arnaud Rousseau told reporters, adding that the union would then make a decision on whether to suspend the protests. 

    Government spokesperson Maud Bregeon said on RTL radio that the government would no longer tolerate further blockades and would do “everything necessary” to avoid them.

    Young Farmers union President Pierrick Horel said it would observe ​a Christmas truce.    

    However, it was still unclear if unions Coordination rurale and the Confederation Paysanne, which have led the blockades, would call off protests.

    Agriculture Minister Annie Genevard was due to travel to a farm near ​Paris later in the day.

    (Reporting by Sybille de La Hamaide and Gus Trompiz; Editing by Kirsten Donovan)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • France’s Macron Says He Hopes EU Will Pass Mercosur Clauses During Delay

    [ad_1]

    PARIS, Dec ‌19 (Reuters) – ​French President ‌Emmanuel Macron said on ​Friday it was ‍too early to ​say ​whether ⁠a one-month delay to decide on an EU trade deal with South America’s ‌Mercosur bloc will be ​enough to ‌meet the ‍conditions set ⁠by France, but that he hoped so.

    Macron, who has pushed for stronger guarantees ​to protect farmers, said he hoped the EU and Mercosur nations will approve in January measures to ensure South American imports meet the same requirements ​than European ones.

    That would make the pact a “new” Mercosur-EU deal, ​he said.

    (Reporting by Michel Rose)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • EU Must Reform or Risk Irrelevance, Blair and Dimon Say

    [ad_1]

    LONDON, Dec 18 (Reuters) – The European Union must reform or ‌risk ​becoming irrelevant as the rivalry between China ‌and the U.S. sparks a new era without precedent, posing challenges on security, energy, technology ​and trade, a report led by Tony Blair and Jamie Dimon says.

    Based on conversations with government, business and civil leaders, the report sets ‍out how a convergence of structural shifts ​is reshaping nations, markets and institutions, threatening those countries and groupings that once relied on the U.S. for security while growing ​trade ties with ⁠China.

    Blair, British prime minister from 1997 to 2007, and Dimon, the head of JPMorgan Chase, said Europe needed to integrate further to prioritise defence and economic growth.

    “If it cannot stand on its own against Russia, it will be even less able to manage systemic competition with the U.S. or China,” their report said. “Reform is not optional; it is required to remain ‌relevant.”

    EU HAS SAID IT MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OWN SECURITY

    The blunt summary comes as the EU hosts a summit ​to discuss ‌funding for Ukraine and how ‍it can respond to ⁠the “changed landscape for rules-based economic relations”, and as U.S. President Donald Trump heaps pressure on the bloc, including with a new National Security Strategy.

    The head of the EU Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has said that Europe must reform and be responsible for its own security. Supporters of the bloc would note that while Europe’s share of global GDP is declining, the U.S. is on the same path.

    The report also set out the challenge posed to middle powers such as India and the Gulf states from the new dynamic, as part ​of a broad overview of how geopolitics, artificial intelligence and political populism were upending the world order.

    NEW WORLD ORDER IS LIKE A 3D CHESS BOARD

    Alexander George, an author of the “World Rewired: Navigating a Multi-Speed, Multipolar Order” report, said people had previously been able to look to moments in history for guidance.

    “We’re really living in a new world which has never actually existed before,” he said. “It’s like this 3D chess board.”

    The report said the U.S. retained enduring power but faced its greatest threats at home where political volatility makes it harder to tackle high debt, while China’s trajectory will hinge on whether it can maintain growth despite demographic and debt constraints.

    On middle powers it said the steep U.S. tariffs on India in retaliation for its purchase of Russian oil showed the ​limitations to a multi-alignment approach, while the UAE’s move to strengthen U.S. technology ties showed that countries were having to choose between the U.S. and China on tech.

    The report was produced by Dimon’s JPMorgan Chase, which has launched a $1.5 trillion, decade-long plan to support industries deemed vital to U.S. economic security and resilience, and the Tony ​Blair Institute for Global Change.

    Blair is the chair of JPMorgan’s international council which advises the firm on strategy and geopolitics.

    (Reporting by Kate HoltonEditing by Alexandra Hudson)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Farmers and politics threaten to put EU’s free-trade deal with South America on ice

    [ad_1]

    BRUSSELS — France is throwing up a last-minute obstacle to a massive trans-Atlantic trade deal between the 27-country European Union and the five South American nations of the Mercosur bloc that’s taken a quarter-century to negotiate.

    Angry European farmers fearing new competition from the EU-Mercosur pact are marching on Brussels, and European negotiators who thought they would finally wrap up the deal this year are facing a tough week.

    The deal between the EU and the five Mercosur countries — Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia — would progressively remove duties on almost all goods traded between the two blocs over the next 15 years. Provided it is ratified by both blocs, the accord would cover a market of 780 million people and a quarter of the globe’s gross domestic product.

    Negotiators agreed on the EU-Mercosur deal a year ago, but it now must be approved by all 27 EU countries, as well as the European Parliament.

    Both the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa are scheduled to sign the deal in Brazil on Dec. 20 — if aggrieved farmers marching on Brussels and vocal opposition from key EU nations don’t derail their plans.

    In the run-up to what many expected to be the final stretch, French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu said on Sunday that the current EU-Mercosur deal was “unacceptable,” and that conditions for a vote of EU heads of state and government on Thursday “have not been met.” He requested a delay, which would push the vote to 2026 or beyond.

    While commending recent measures taken by the European Commission to both protect farmers and increase inspections of agricultural imports for food safety violations like pesticides banned in the EU, Lecornu said that France has not been fully placated.

    “It is clear in this context that the conditions are not in place for any vote by the EU Council on authorizing the signing of the agreement,” he said.

    Poland, Austria, the Netherlands and France are concerned that Mercosur exporters could undercut EU products made with stronger labor and sanitary regulations like pesticide restrictions, said Alicia Gracia-Herrero, a senior fellow at the Brussels-based Bruegel Institute. France has failed to get Mercosur to agree to “mirror” those regulations.

    She said that the deal reflects limits on the EU’s geopolitical strength, political unity and capability.

    “If we cannot get this done even with (U.S. President Donald) Trump’s pressure, what can you expect from the EU?” she said. “I hope France cannot fully torpedo this because the EU cannot afford a further delay in Mercosur if it wants to be credible with other ongoing trade deals, such as Indonesia and, even more so, India.”

    In the wake of Trump’s tariff blitzkrieg earlier this year, when Washington imposed levies of 15% on most imports from the EU, the bloc has sought bilateral trade deals to help weather with aggressive trade tactics from both the U.S. and China, its historical top trading partners.

    European Commission spokesperson Olof Gill said that Brussels would push to have the Mercosur deal signed by the end of the year because it puts the EU’s geopolitical credibility on the line.

    “We’re talking about bringing together two of the world’s biggest trading blocs. And in so doing, in a time of rising geopolitical uncertainty, we create a platform based on trust, based on rules, where we can work with Mercosur on the big challenges at global level of our time. We’re talking climate, economic security, reform of the global rules-based order, and so on,” he said.

    From Spanish ham and Italian wine to Dutch dairy and Greek olives, agriculture is central to the European Union’s budget, economy, culture and politics. The EU exported 235.4 billion euros ($272 billion) worth of agricultural goods in 2024.

    Many farmers loathe the Mercosur deal, but its proponents in Brussels say it would save businesses some $4.26 billion in duties each year, streamline sales, and remove tariffs on products like French wine, Argentinian soybeans, Brazilian rare earth minerals, and German pharmaceuticals.

    Its critics in France, the Netherlands and other countries with big dairy and beef industries say the pact would subject local farmers to unfair competition and cause environmental damage.

    Such opposition has prompted Brussels to propose new protections for the EU’s agricultural sector.

    Last year, the European Commission vowed to slash red tape for farmers and more equitably distribute annual agricultural subsidies of 50 billion euros ($58 billion) across bloc.

    In October, the commission set up new mechanisms allowing farmers to trigger investigations if the prices of imports from Mercosur are at least 10% lower than the prices of the same or competing EU products. Serious violators could get their preferential tariffs temporarily withdrawn.

    In December, the commission proposed to ratchet up border inspections to check if imported agricultural goods were produced with pesticides banned in the EU.

    But those moves have not soothed French fears nor the anxieties of farmers.

    Agricultural unions are once again planning demonstrations in Brussels as leaders and diplomats meet for the European Council on Thursday.

    Disgruntled farmers used tractors to paralyze many European capitals as part of a campaign lionized by the far right in the run-up to their successful showing in EU-wide elections in 2024. ——— Associated Press writer Sylvie Corbet contributed from Paris.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China, Saudi Arabia Agree to Strengthen Coordination on Regional, Global Matters

    [ad_1]

    BEIJING, Dec 15 (Reuters) – China and Saudi ‌Arabia ​agreed to have closer ‌communication and coordination on regional and international issues, ​with Beijing lauding Riyadh’s role in Middle East diplomacy, statements following ‍a meeting between the nations’ ​foreign ministers on Sunday showed.

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi ​is on ⁠a three-nation tour in the Middle East that began in the United Arab Emirates and is expected to end in Jordan. He met with Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan ‌Al-Saud in Riyadh on Sunday.

    A joint statement published by China’s ​official news ‌agency Xinhua did not ‍elaborate ⁠on what issues the countries will strengthen coordination on, but mentioned China’s support for Saudi Arabia and Iran developing and enhancing their relations.

    “(China) appreciates Saudi Arabia’s leading role and efforts to achieve regional and international security and stability,” the statement released on Monday said.

    The statement ​also reiterated both countries’ support for a “comprehensive and just settlement” of the Palestinian issue and the formation of an independent state for Palestinians.

    At a high-level meeting, Wang told his Saudi counterpart that China has always regarded Saudi Arabia as a “priority for Middle East diplomacy” and an important partner in global diplomacy, a Chinese foreign ministry statement on Monday said.

    He also encouraged more cooperation in energy and investments, as ​well as in the fields of new energy and green transformation.

    The countries have agreed to mutually exempt visas for diplomatic and special passport holders from both sides, according ​to the joint statement.

    (Reporting by Liz Lee and Shanghai newsroom; Editing by Paul Simao)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Bipartisan Group of US Lawmakers Calls for Export Controls on Synthetic DNA Sequences

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO, Dec ‌12 (Reuters) – ​A bipartisan group of ‌U.S. lawmakers this week introduced bills that ​would require U.S. firms to obtain a license before exporting ‍sequences of synthetic DNA.

    DNA ​research is foundational to the biotech industry, where ​researchers ⁠use powerful computers and, increasingly, artificial intelligence software to come up with new DNA sequences not found in nature that could be used to treat diseases. Those digital DNA ‌sequences are then sent to labs where they can ​be synthesized ‌into physical molecules ‍and ⁠used in research.

    This week, three U.S. senators and two U.S. representatives introduced bills in both houses of Congress that would require U.S. firms to obtain an export license before sending those digital synthetic DNA sequences to countries such as China ​and Russia.

    “It’s essential that we protect cutting-edge American proprietary research from our chief foreign adversaries,” Senator Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, said in a statement. He was among the lawmakers who introduced the bills. 

    “Our bill will ensure that Communist China doesn’t have access to the intellectual property that drives American biotech innovation,” Cotton said.

    The other lawmakers helping to introduce the bill ​were: Senator Maggie Hassan, a New Hampshire Democrat; Senator Ted Budd, a North Carolina Republican; Representative Warren Davidson, an Ohio Republican; and Representative Chrissy Houlahan, ​a Pennsylvania Democrat.

    (Reporting by Stephen Nellis in San FranciscoEditing by Matthew Lewis)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Irish Minister Defends ‘Limited’ Trade Curbs on Israeli Settlements

    [ad_1]

    By John O’Donnell and Padraic Halpin

    DUBLIN, Dec 12 (Reuters) – Ireland’s planned curbs on trade with Israeli settlements ‌will ​be limited strictly to goods, a minister told Reuters, offering ‌the first clear signal on the scope of the contested legislation and rejecting accusations that the country is antisemitic.

    Ireland has been preparing ​a law to curb trade with settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, facing pressure at home to widen the scope of the ban from goods to services, while Israel and the United States want ‍the bill scrapped.

    Ireland has been one of the European ​Union’s most outspoken critics of Israel’s assault in Gaza, which authorities in the Palestinian enclave say has killed more than 67,000 people.

    ‘EXTREMELY LIMITED MEASURE’, SAYS MINISTER

    But Thomas Byrne, Ireland’s Minister of State for ​European Affairs and Defence, ⁠told Reuters that the bill is limited to the import of goods and that it would not become law this year.

    “It’s an extremely limited measure, which would prohibit imports of goods from illegally-occupied territories,” he said in an interview. “Similar measures have already been brought in in a number of European countries.”

    Byrne’s comments give insight into Dublin’s thinking as Ireland seeks to deflect pressure, including from U.S. companies based in the country, to soften its criticism of Israel. Ireland’s bill is expected to help shape how other European nations launch similar ‌curbs on trade with Israeli settlements.

    The Irish government has signalled the bill is imminent but has yet to publicly announce its scope.

    Byrne declined to say when it would be ​sent ‌to parliament, as the government weighs the ‍bill’s implications. “It’s certainly not going to ⁠be implemented this year,” he said.

    Earlier this year, sources told Reuters that the government intended to blunt the law, curbing its scope to just a limited trade of goods, such as dried fruit, and not services.

    That more ambitious move could have entangled companies in technology and other industries in Ireland doing business in Israel. Business lobby groups had sought to kill the idea.

    Limiting the bill to goods only would catch just a handful of products imported from Israeli-occupied territories such as fruit that are worth just 200,000 euros ($234,660) a year.

    LAWMAKER BLACK SAYS SHE STILL WANTS SERVICES BAN

    Most of the international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal under international law.

    Israel disputes this, citing historical and biblical ties to the area. It says the settlements provide strategic depth and security.

    On Gaza, Israel says it acted in ​self-defence following the deadly October 7, 2023, Hamas attack that killed 1,200 people and resulted in 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Israel has repeatedly said it is committed to international law and tries to minimize harm to the civilian population of Gaza.

    Frances Black, the lawmaker who proposed the Irish bill, told Reuters she would push to include a ban on services. “It will take a lot of work in the new year to get services included but that’s exactly what I’m prepared to do.”

    Byrne also defended Ireland’s government, after Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar recently posted a video online where he accused the Irish government of having an “antisemitic nature”.

    Saar said the Irish government’s response had been slow to a local proposal to rename a park bearing the name of Chaim Herzog, the former president of Israel who was raised in Dublin.

    Irish ministers had roundly criticised the idea and Dublin City Council has since delayed a decision on whether to remove the name.

    U.S. senator Lindsey Graham had also labelled Ireland a “cesspool of antisemitism”.

    EU LAWMAKER REJECTS ANTISEMITISM CHARGE AS ‘NONSENSE’

    “I reject outright that the country is in any way antisemitic,” said Byrne. “We’re deeply conscious of the ​contribution that Jewish people have made in Ireland.”

    Ireland’s relations with Israel have been fraught. Last December, Israel shut its embassy in Dublin amid a row over Ireland’s criticism of its war in Gaza, including Ireland’s recognition of a Palestinian state last year.

    Barry Andrews, an Irish member of the European parliament, urged Dublin to go ahead with its occupied territories bill. “Claims that Ireland is antisemitic are nonsense,” he said. Ireland has nothing to fear. We are no longer the only ones doing this.”

    On Wednesday, ​Ireland’s central bank governor Gabriel Makhlouf was forced to abandon a public speech in Dublin by pro-Palestinian protesters objecting to the central bank’s earlier role in the sale of Israeli bonds.

    (Additional reporting by Conor Humphries, Editing by William Maclean)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Poland Says Hungary’s Government Is Closer to Moscow Than Brussels

    [ad_1]

    Dec 11 (Reuters) – Polish Justice Minister Waldemar Zurek accused Hungary’s ‌Prime ​Minister Viktor Orban on Thursday ‌of being closer to Russia than Europe, renewing an argument between the two ​European Union members that Budapest has called an unjustified provocation.

    Zurek expressed frustration with Budapest in an interview with ‍Reuters when asked about two former ​Polish officials charged with misuse of funds who are being shielded by fellow-EU member Hungary.

    He referred ​to the ⁠case, as well as Orban’s talks with President Vladimir Putin and Hungary blocking funds for Poland for supporting Ukraine’s fight against Russian invasion.

    “It looks to me today as if Hungary’s leadership is closer to the leadership in Moscow than the EU leadership, and I say this with great sadness ‌and also with great concern,” Zurek said.

    “Orban, unfortunately, wants to blow up the EU from within ​and ‌his pro-Russian policies are completely ‍unacceptable to the ⁠majority of citizens in the EU.”

    Orban has accused Poland of making unjust and provocative remarks about its ties with Moscow, which he argues are in Hungary’s national interest. He says European Union sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine are self-defeating.

    Former Polish Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro, who faces 26 charges including leading an organised criminal group, is in Hungary and may seek asylum there, following the example of his former deputy ​Marcin Romanowski, who faces similar charges.

    Both men say they will not return to Poland because they would not get a fair trial under Tusk’s government, which rejects the charges, emphasising that its justice system is independent.

    Orban met Ziobro in Budapest in October and accused Warsaw of a “political witch hunt”.

    A Polish court will decide in the coming weeks whether to issue a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for Ziobro.

    “When you have EAW, it’s an agreement between all EU countries that we respect and have confidence in our own national justice systems… Today we have a situation where Hungary says ‘we are granting asylum to Mr. Romanowski’, which ​in my opinion is violating this EU agreement,” Zurek said.

    “It seems that the subsequent issue will be to examine the actions of the Hungarian state. And perhaps Poland will be forced to expose this abnormal situation on the European forum, where Hungary is breaking the ​rules of the EAW by granting asylum.”

    (Reporting by Anna Koper, Anna Włodarczak-Semczuk, Justyna Pawlak and Kuba Stezycki; editing by Philippa Fletcher)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Congress would target China with new restrictions in massive defense bill

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration may have softened its language on China to maintain a fragile truce in their trade war, but Congress is charging ahead with more restrictions in a defense authorization bill that would deny Beijing investments in highly sensitive sectors and reduce U.S. reliance on Chinese biotechnology companies.

    Included in the 3,000-page bill approved Wednesday by the House is a provision to scrutinize American investments in China that could help develop technologies to boost Chinese military power. The bill, which next heads to the Senate, also would prohibit government money to be used for equipment and services from blacklisted Chinese biotechnology companies.

    In addition, the National Defense Authorization Act would boost U.S. support for the self-governing island of Taiwan that Beijing claims as its own and says it will take by force if necessary.

    “Taken together, these measures reflect a serious, strategic approach to countering the Chinese Communist Party,” said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, the top Democrat on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. He said the approach “stands in stark contrast to the White House’s recent actions.”

    Congress moves for harsher line toward China

    The compromise bill authorizing $900 billion for military programs was released two days after the White House unveiled its national security strategy. The Trump administration dropped Biden-era language that cast China as a strategic threat and said the U.S. “will rebalance America’s economic relationship with China,” an indication that President Donald Trump is more interested in a mutually advantageous economic relationship with Beijing than in long-term competition.

    The White House this week also allowed Nvidia to sell an advanced type of computer chip to China, with those more hawkish toward Beijing concerned that would help boost the country’s artificial intelligence.

    The China-related provisions in the traditionally bipartisan defense bill “make clear that, whatever the White House tone, Capitol Hill is locking in a hard-edged, long-term competition with Beijing,” said Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think tank.

    If passed, these provisions would “build a floor under U.S. competitiveness policy — on capital, biotech, and critical tech — that will be very hard for future presidents to unwind quietly,” he said.

    The Chinese embassy in Washington on Wednesday denounced the bill.

    “The bill has kept playing up the ‘China threat’ narrative, trumpeting for military support to Taiwan, abusing state power to go after Chinese economic development, limiting trade, economic and people-to-people exchanges between China and the U.S., undermining China’s sovereignty, security and development interests and disrupting efforts of the two sides in stabilizing bilateral relations,” said Liu Pengyu, the embassy spokesperson.

    “China strongly deplores and firmly opposes this,” Liu said.

    US investments in China

    U.S. policymakers and lawmakers have been working for several years toward bipartisan legislation to curb investments in China when it comes to cutting-edge technologies such as quantum computing, aerospace, semiconductors and artificial intelligence. Those efforts flopped last year when Tesla CEO Elon Musk opposed a spending bill.

    Musk has extensive business interests in China, including a Tesla gigafactory in the eastern city of Shanghai.

    The provision made it into the must-pass defense policy bill, welcomed by Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party.

    “For too long, the hard-earned money of American retirees and investors has been used to build up China’s military and economy,” he said. “This legislation will help bring that to an end.”

    Biosecurity protections

    Congress last year failed to pass the BIOSECURE Act, which cited national security in preventing federal money from benefiting a number of Chinese biotechnology companies. Critics said then that it was unfair to single out specific companies, warning that the measure would delay clinical trials and hinder development of new drugs, raise costs for medications and hurt innovation.

    The provision in the NDAA no longer names companies but leaves it to the Office of Management and Budget to compile a list of “biotechnology companies of concern.” The bill also would expand Pentagon investments in biotechnology.

    Moolenaar lauded the effort for taking “defensive action to secure American pharmaceutical supply chains and genetic information from malign Chinese companies.”

    Support for Taiwan

    The defense bill also would authorize an increase in funding, to $1 billion from $300 million this year, for Taiwan-related security cooperation and direct the Pentagon to establish a joint drone and anti-drone program.

    Another provision supports Taiwan’s bid to join the International Monetary Fund, which would provide the self-governing island with financial protection from China.

    It comes amid mixed signals from Trump, who appears careful not to upset Beijing as he seeks to strike trade deals with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The Chinese leader has urged Trump to handle the Taiwan issue “with prudence,” as Beijing considers its claim over Taiwan a core interest.

    In the new national security strategy, the White House says the U.S. does not support any unilateral change to the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and stresses that the U.S. should seek to deter and prevent a large-scale military conflict.

    “But the American military cannot, and should not have to, do this alone,” the document says, urging Japan and South Korea to increase defense spending.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FACT FOCUS: Trump blames Biden for the agricultural trade deficit. It’s not that simple

    [ad_1]

    As President Donald Trump announced a $12 billion farm aid package this week to help U.S. farmers hurt by tariffs, he placed responsibility for the U.S. agricultural trade deficit on former President Joe Biden.

    But in casting blame elsewhere, he is ignoring other factors, including his own role. Currently, farmers — especially those that produce soybeans and sorghum — have had a hard time selling their crops while getting hit by increasing costs after Trump raised tariffs on China earlier this year as part of a broader trade war that has contributed to the deficit.

    Experts say that it is a massive oversimplification to blame any one administration or policy.

    Here’s a closer look at the facts.

    CLAIM: There was an agricultural trade surplus during Trump’s first term that former Biden turned into an agricultural trade deficit.

    THE FACTS: This is both misleading and missing context. It is true that there was an agricultural trade surplus when Trump entered the White House in 2017, which has since become a significant deficit. However, according to experts, this can be attributed to actions taken by both administrations, as well as factors outside their control such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “I don’t want to let U.S. trade policy off the hook here, but it’s one element of a broader, more complicated kind of story,” said Cullen Hendrix, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

    Still, Trump held Biden solely responsible for the agricultural trade deficit at a White House roundtable Monday where he announced the farm aid package.

    “In my first term, we had an agricultural trade surplus by a lot,” the president said, misrepresenting the numbers. “We had a big surplus. We knew we were exporting American agricultural products all over the world, making a net profit and, in many cases, a very substantial profit. He came in and ruined it. Biden turned that surplus into a gaping agricultural deficit that continues to this day.”

    What the numbers show

    The yearly agricultural trade balance, which reflects the amount of those goods the U.S. has exported versus the amount it has imported, had been positive for nearly 60 years until 2019 during Trump’s first term.

    According to data from the Department of Agriculture, it stood at a surplus of approximately $16.3 billion at the end of 2016 and fell the next year, Trump’s first as president, to one of about $13.66 billion. The balance further decreased over the next two years, ultimately turning into a deficit of about $481 million. It returned to a surplus in 2020 at about $3.39 billion, which further increased in 2021 — the year Biden entered the White House. In 2022, it transitioned back to a deficit that grew to approximately $36.45 billion by the end of 2024. As of August, the latest data available, there was an agricultural trade deficit of about $36.3 billion.

    The yearslong trade war between the U.S. and China is partly to blame for the agricultural deficit, experts say. Trump fired the first shot in January 2018, with 30% tariffs on imported solar panels, which led to additional tariffs and import curbs from both sides that continued to a certain extent under Biden.

    The countries signed a Phase One trade deal in January 2020 through which China committed to buying an additional $200 billion of U.S. goods and services over the next two years. However, the Peterson Institute later found China had bought essentially none of the goods promised.

    What is the current situation?

    Trump has instituted even more tariffs on Chinese imports since returning to the White House. In response, China has retaliated with tariffs and import curbs on U.S. goods, including key farm products.

    The White House said in October, after Trump met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in South Korea, that Beijing had promised to buy at least 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by the end of the calendar year, plus 25 million metric tons a year in each of the next three years. China has purchased more than 2.8 million metric tons of soybeans since Trump announced the agreement, according to AP reporting. That’s only about one quarter of what administration officials said China had promised, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said China is on track to meet its goal by the end of February, which is two months later than the White House originally promised.

    “China’s been refusing large U.S. purchases in favor of other trade partners,” said Hendrix. “This is a lamentable, but kind of predictable, consequence of the United States engaging in this trade war and weaponizing trade policy. Our trade partners are going to seek to diversify both for self-insurance — we’re talking about food, we’re talking about survival here — and to punish the U.S. for kind of changing the rules of the game so unilaterally.”

    But there are myriad other factors that have contributed to the current deficit, experts say. For example, high purchasing power enabled by a strong U.S. dollar and a desire by U.S. consumers to buy high-value goods that aren’t produced domestically. A stronger dollar also decreases demand for U.S. exports, as this makes it more difficult for other countries to buy those products.

    In addition, Brazil and Argentina have begun exporting soy, corn and beef, competing directly with U.S. exports and lowering prices for such goods. Major world events of which the U.S. government has little or indirect control, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, climate variability and the Russia-Ukraine war, have also contributed.

    “The tariffs can exacerbate the situation, but generally the fact that you may have a deficit or a surplus is really more dependent on global prices,” said Joseph Glauber, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who served as the Department of Agriculture’s chief economist from 2008 to 2014 under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

    Asked whether Trump blames solely Biden for the agricultural trade deficit, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said that “farmers suffered for years under Joe Biden,” but that Trump is committed to “helping our agriculture industry by negotiating new trade deals to open new export markets for our farmers and boosting the farm safety net for the first time in a decade.”

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Turning Screws on Russia Should Not Impact Legitimate Maritime Sector, Say Cyprus and Malta

    [ad_1]

    NICOSIA, Dec 10 (Reuters) – Discussions on the need to ‌tighten ​sanctions on Russia, including the ‌possibility of a blanket ban on providing maritime services, should ​not be at the expense of legitimate businesses in the industry, key EU shipping nations Cyprus ‍and Malta said.

    The Group of Seven ​countries and the European Union are in talks to replace a price cap ​on Russian ⁠oil exports with a full maritime services ban in an attempt to reduce the oil revenue that helps finance Russia’s war in Ukraine, Reuters exclusively reported on Dec. 5.

    Cyprus and Malta, who along with Greece have the largest fleets in the EU, said tightening ‌sanctions should not target bona fide maritime businesses.

    “Any shift away from the price cap ​must ‌avoid pushing maritime services ‍to non-EU jurisdictions, ⁠where the EU would lose oversight and, with it, the leverage needed to uphold European standards,” the Maltese government said in a statement.

    “There needs to be a holistic approach,” Cypriot Foreign Minister Constantinos Kombos said. He said that while additional pressure on Russia was needed, the focus should also be on sanctions dodging.

    “That has many actors involved and undermines our collective effort,” he ​said.

    Russia exports over a third of its oil in Western tankers, mostly to India and China, with the use of Western shipping services. The ban would end that trade, which is mostly done through the fleets of EU maritime nations including Cyprus, Malta and Greece.

    The services ban could be part of the EU’s next package of sanctions against Russia, slated for early 2026, three sources told Reuters last week. The 27 nation EU would like to approve the ban together with a broader G7 agreement before proposing the ban in the ​package, two sources said.

    Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braze, who is visiting Cyprus, echoed Kombos’ comments. She said the discussion needed to be ‘calibrated’, and that it had also been discussed with the United States. “We have discussed how to increase sanctions ​efficiency,” she said.

    (Reporting by Michele Kambas, Jonathan Saul and Chris Scicluna; Editing by Chris Reese and Nick Zieminski)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Congress Would Target China With New Restrictions in Massive Defense Bill

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration may have softened its language on China to maintain a fragile truce in their trade war, but Congress is charging ahead with more restrictions in a defense authorization bill that would deny Beijing investments in highly sensitive sectors and reduce U.S. reliance on Chinese biotechnology companies.

    Included in the 3,000-page bill approved Wednesday by the House is a provision to scrutinize American investments in China that could help develop technologies to boost Chinese military power. The bill, which next heads to the Senate, also would prohibit government money to be used for equipment and services from blacklisted Chinese biotechnology companies.

    In addition, the National Defense Authorization Act would boost U.S. support for the self-governing island of Taiwan that Beijing claims as its own and says it will take by force if necessary.

    “Taken together, these measures reflect a serious, strategic approach to countering the Chinese Communist Party,” said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, the top Democrat on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. He said the approach “stands in stark contrast to the White House’s recent actions.”


    Congress moves for harsher line toward China

    The compromise bill authorizing $900 billion for military programs was released two days after the White House unveiled its national security strategy. The Trump administration dropped Biden-era language that cast China as a strategic threat and said the U.S. “will rebalance America’s economic relationship with China,” an indication that President Donald Trump is more interested in a mutually advantageous economic relationship with Beijing than in long-term competition.

    The China-related provisions in the traditionally bipartisan defense bill “make clear that, whatever the White House tone, Capitol Hill is locking in a hard-edged, long-term competition with Beijing,” said Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think tank.

    If passed, these provisions would “build a floor under U.S. competitiveness policy — on capital, biotech, and critical tech — that will be very hard for future presidents to unwind quietly,” he said.

    The Chinese embassy in Washington on Wednesday denounced the bill.

    “The bill has kept playing up the ‘China threat’ narrative, trumpeting for military support to Taiwan, abusing state power to go after Chinese economic development, limiting trade, economic and people-to-people exchanges between China and the U.S., undermining China’s sovereignty, security and development interests and disrupting efforts of the two sides in stabilizing bilateral relations,” said Liu Pengyu, the embassy spokesperson.

    “China strongly deplores and firmly opposes this,” Liu said.

    U.S. policymakers and lawmakers have been working for several years toward bipartisan legislation to curb investments in China when it comes to cutting-edge technologies such as quantum computing, aerospace, semiconductors and artificial intelligence. Those efforts flopped last year when Tesla CEO Elon Musk opposed a spending bill.

    The provision made it into the must-pass defense policy bill, welcomed by Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party.

    “For too long, the hard-earned money of American retirees and investors has been used to build up China’s military and economy,” he said. “This legislation will help bring that to an end.”

    Congress last year failed to pass the BIOSECURE Act, which cited national security in preventing federal money from benefiting a number of Chinese biotechnology companies. Critics said then that it was unfair to single out specific companies, warning that the measure would delay clinical trials and hinder development of new drugs, raise costs for medications and hurt innovation.

    The provision in the NDAA no longer names companies but leaves it to the Office of Management and Budget to compile a list of “biotechnology companies of concern.” The bill also would expand Pentagon investments in biotechnology.

    Moolenaar lauded the effort for taking “defensive action to secure American pharmaceutical supply chains and genetic information from malign Chinese companies.”

    The defense bill also would authorize an increase in funding, to $1 billion from $300 million this year, for Taiwan-related security cooperation and direct the Pentagon to establish a joint drone and anti-drone program.

    It comes amid mixed signals from Trump, who appears careful not to upset Beijing as he seeks to strike trade deals with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The Chinese leader has urged Trump to handle the Taiwan issue “with prudence,” as Beijing considers its claim over Taiwan a core interest.

    In the new national security strategy, the White House says the U.S. does not support any unilateral change to the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and stresses that the U.S. should seek to deter and prevent a large-scale military conflict.

    “But the American military cannot, and should not have to, do this alone,” the document says, urging Japan and South Korea to increase defense spending.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • FACT FOCUS: Trump says tariffs can eventually replace federal income taxes. Experts disagree

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump has long praised tariffs as key to increasing wealth in the United States, idealizing Gilded Age policies that preceded the implementation of a modern federal income tax.

    Among the potential benefits, Trump claims, is the ability to replace revenue from federal income taxes with money the U.S. is taking in from tariffs — a concept he has touted since his 2024 presidential campaign, most recently at a Cabinet meeting Tuesday.

    But tariff revenue doesn’t even come close to where it would need to be if federal income taxes were eliminated, and experts say such a plan isn’t at all feasible.

    Here’s a closer look at the facts.

    CLAIM: The U.S. is earning enough revenue from tariffs to eventually eliminate federal income taxes.

    THE FACTS: This is false. Individual income taxes brought in trillions more dollars than tariffs did in the last fiscal year, accounting for more than 50% of total U.S. revenue, according to Treasury Department data. Tariffs made up only 3.7% of the total. In the first month of the current fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, individual income taxes accounted for 54% of total revenue. Tariffs made up 7.75%.

    Trump’s proposal wouldn’t work regardless, according to experts, given the unreliability of tariff revenue as well as the harmful effects of tariffs on economic growth and their outsize impact on lower earners.

    “It’s not possible. It’s not feasible mathematically or economically,” said Brandon DeBot, senior attorney adviser and policy director at New York University’s Tax Law Center. “And analysts from a range of different perspectives agree with that conclusion. Even the very substantial tariffs imposed this year, which are at the highest levels in the postwar era, raise nowhere near the revenue that income tax does.”

    Steve Wamhoff, federal policy director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, called the idea “nonsensical.”

    But Trump has floated it twice in the last week — first during remarks on Thanksgiving at Mar-a-Lago and then again at Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting.

    “And I believe that at some point in the not too distant future, you won’t even have income tax to pay. Because the money we’re taking in is so great, it’s so enormous, that you’re not going to have income tax to pay,” he said at the meeting, which lasted more than two hours.

    The numbers don’t add up

    In the last fiscal year, Treasury Department data shows that revenue from individual income taxes was approximately $2.66 trillion out of about $5.23 trillion in total revenue. Corporation income taxes added approximately $452 billion. Customs duties earned nearly $195 billion. That’s a difference of around $2.8 trillion.

    The current fiscal year is shaping up in a similar fashion. Individual income taxes took in about $217 billion out of approximately $404 billion in total revenue the first month, with about $15 billion in additional funds from corporation taxes. Tariffs, meanwhile, earned around $31 billion.

    Trump has boasted of additional income from investments in the U.S. by other countries and international companies. But the precise terms of these investments have yet to be fully codified and released to the public, and some numbers are under dispute or involve potentially fuzzy math.

    The modern federal income tax was created with the ratification of 16th Amendment in 1913, ending the 43-year era when Trump says the country was wealthiest. He has not expressly detailed plans to end a national income tax since retaking the White House, and he can’t do so without an act of Congress and upending the federal budget.

    “President Trump is set to raise trillions in revenue for the federal government in the coming years with his tariffs — whose costs will ultimately be paid by the foreign exporters who rely on the American economy, the world’s biggest and best consumer market,” said White House spokesman Kush Desai. He also cited “trillions in historic investment commitments to make and hire in America” that have been fueled by tariffs.

    It is actually importers — American companies — that pay tariffs. Those companies typically pass their higher costs on to their customers in the form of higher prices. Still, tariffs can hurt foreign countries by making their products pricier and harder to sell abroad. Foreign companies might have to cut prices — and sacrifice profits — to offset the tariffs and try to maintain their market share in the United States.

    A burden on lower-income households

    Even if the numbers were made to add up, replacing revenue from federal income taxes with that of tariffs — a Republican talking point since the 1990s — poses many risks. Tariffs, especially at rates needed to make up for a loss in federal income taxes, could lead to retaliation from other countries and a lack of imports. In fact, revenue could start going down the more tariffs go up. There is also a lot of uncertainty about how much revenue tariffs will actually take in, given periodic changes to Trump’s policies.

    “We would be talking about living in a completely different world than the one we live in now,” said Wamhoff. “There was a time when the government’s finances were provided through tariffs. But I believe people were getting around with a horse and buggy back then and not cars. I mean, that was a completely different time.”

    Another reality is currently playing out. Trump’s tariffs are the subject of a Supreme Court case and could be struck down if the justices decide he does not have the authority to implement them. However, the president will still have plenty of options to keep taxing imports aggressively even if the courts rule against him. For example, he can reuse tariff powers he deployed in his first term and can reach for others, including one that dates back to the Great Depression. Many companies — including Costco — aren’t waiting for a decision from the Supreme Court. Instead, they’re filing suits against the Trump administration demanding refunds on the tariffs they’ve paid.

    Experts say there is also an issue of fairness, noting that tariffs would shift the tax burden to lower-income households given their propensity to increase costs on consumer goods. Plus, they lack the flexibility of income taxes, which can be set at any desired rate, and they wouldn’t allow for incentives such as charitable donations or child tax credits.

    “Inequality is very highly skewed toward the top,” said Michael Graetz, a professor of tax law at Yale University. “We’ve got more billionaires than we’ve ever had. We’ve got more millionaires than we’ve ever had. So it’s a strange time to be reducing the tax burden on the top and increasing it on the middle. It’s a proposal that is very effective for fundraising for Republicans and it always has been.”

    The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Canada’s prime minister and Alberta’s premier sign pipeline deal

    [ad_1]

    TORONTO — TORONTO (AP) — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and the premier of Canada’s oil rich province of Alberta agreed Thursday to work toward building a pipeline to the Pacific Coast to diversify the country’s oil exports beyond the United States, in a move that has caused turmoil in Carney’s inner circle.

    The memorandum of understanding includes an adjustment of an oil tanker ban off parts of the British Columbia coast if a pipeline comes to fruition.

    Carney’s support for it led to the resignation Thursday of one of his cabinet ministers, Steven Guilbeault, a former environment minister and career environmentalist who has been serving as the minister of culture.

    Guilbeault said in a statement he strongly opposes the agreement with Alberta, noting the pipeline could cross the Great Bear Rainforest and that it would increase the risk of a tanker spill on the coast. But he said he understands why Canada needs to remain united and said he will stay on as a Liberal Member of Parliament.

    Carney said he was glad Guilbeault is staying as a Liberal lawmaker.

    Carney has set a goal for Canada to double its non-U.S. exports in the next decade, saying American tariffs are causing a chill in investment.

    Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said the agreement will lead to more than 1 million barrels per day for mainly Asian markets so “our province and our country are no longer dependent on just one customer to buy our most valuable resource.”

    Carney reiterated that as the U.S. transforms all of its trading relationships, many of Canada’s strengths – based on those close ties to America – have become its vulnerabilities.

    “Over 95% of all our energy exports went to the States. This tight interdependence – once a strength – is now a weakness,” Carney said.

    Carney said a pipeline can reduce the price discount on current oil sales to U.S. markets.

    He called the framework agreement the start of a process.

    “We have created some of the necessary conditions for this to happen but there is a lot more work to do,” he said.

    Carney said if there is not a private sector proponent there won’t be a pipeline.

    The agreement calls on Ottawa and Alberta to engage with British Columbia, where there is fierce opposition to oil tankers off the coast, to advance that province’s economic interests.

    Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau approved one controversial pipeline from the Alberta oil sands to the British Columbia coast in 2016 but the federal government had to build and finish construction of it as it faced opposition from environmental and aboriginal groups.

    Trudeau at the same time rejected the Northern Gateway project to northwest British Columbia which would have passed through the Great Bear Rainforest. Northern Gateway would have transported 525,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta’s oil sands to the Pacific to deliver oil to Asia, mainly energy-hungry China.

    The northern Alberta region has one of the largest oil reserves in the world, with about 164 billion barrels of proven reserves.

    Carney’s announcement comes after British Columbia Premier David Eby said lifting the tanker ban would threaten projects already in development in the region and consensus among coastal First Nations.

    Eby said he knows the federal government could impose this pipeline if they wished.

    “What this is about is the fact that this project has no company that’s advancing it. It’s got no money. It’s got no coastal First Nations support,” he said.

    Eby said the agreement is a “distraction” to real projects.

    “We have zero interest in co-ownership or economic benefits of a project that has the potential to destroy our way of life and everything we have built on the coast,” Coastal First Nations President Marilyn Slett said.

    The agreement pairs the pipeline project a proposed carbon capture project and government officials say the two projects must be built in tandem.

    The agreement says Ottawa and Alberta will with work with companies to identify by April 1 new emissions-reduction projects to be rolled out starting in 2027.

    [ad_2]

    Source link