Connect with us

Business

Ahead of Possible Tariffs, No Rush to Get Goods In From Canada and Mexico

Published

on

Ahead of Possible Tariffs, No Rush to Get Goods In From Canada and Mexico

Companies in the United States do not appear to be making a concerted effort to rush in shipments from Mexico and Canada ahead of the high tariffs that President Trump has threatened to impose on Saturday.

Mr. Trump said after taking office that the United States would apply tariffs of 25 percent on imports from Canada and Mexico, contending that they were allowing “mass numbers of people to come in and fentanyl to come in.”

The tariffs would raise the cost of imports significantly, especially since tariffs are not applied to most goods under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade deal that Mr. Trump signed in 2020. Canada and Mexico together account for 30 percent of U.S. trade. Many industries could be saddled with extra costs, including the vast auto operations that straddle the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada.

Mr. Trump could withdraw his threat or reduce the tariff if he decides Canada and Mexico are doing more to address his complaints, Howard Lutnick, the president’s nominee to lead the Commerce Department, suggested on Wednesday.

With the tariff deadline near, some data shows higher freight volumes on road and rail, but the increases are not especially large, and transportation experts say rail and trucking companies have the capacity to cope. The situation, they said, is quite different from 2021 and 2022, when a deluge of imports overwhelmed supply chains, causing shipping costs to skyrocket and helping fuel a rapid acceleration of inflation.

Advertisement

“The industry’s probably never been in a better spot to deal with significant changes in the marketplace,” said Scott Shannon, vice president of North America cross-border at C.H. Robinson, a freight forwarder.

Larry Gross, president of Gross Transportation Consulting, said the transportation of shipping containers by rail was up 10 percent in the first four weeks of the year across North America compared with the same period in 2024. But while efforts to bring in goods before tariffs very likely contributed to the increase, he said, other factors also played a role. A big one was a desire to get shipments in before a possible strike at the East and Gulf Coast ports that could have started in mid-January but was averted.

“Every system has its limitations,” Mr. Gross said, “But the network is far better positioned today than it was at the beginning of the post-pandemic surge.” He said regulatory data that show how many trains are not running because they lack crews or locomotives were not showing any warning signs.

And Jason Miller, a professor of supply chain management at Michigan State University, noted that storing inventory has significant costs — financing and paying for warehouse space — that may deter companies from accelerating their imports.

The U.S. also imports huge amounts of goods from China. Mr. Trump said he was going to impose 10 percent tariffs on Chinese goods on Saturday.

Advertisement

Imports from China arrive primarily through the ports. And while the volume of containers coming through U.S. ports has been strong in recent months, the ports — and trucks and railways that move cargo inland — have not had problems handling recent volumes.

Some businesses are concerned that applying tariffs to goods that currently lack them may slow customs processing at the Mexican and Canadian borders and cause delays. But Adam Lewis, a co-founder and the president of Clearit, an online customs broker, said he did not expect applying new tariffs to be difficult for the brokers.

While updating the brokers’ software may take a short while, he said, any new tasks relating to tariffs could be done manually without much trouble. “It’s pretty much business as usual,” Mr. Lewis said.

But there may be delays if U.S. Customs and Border Protection increases its scrutiny to ensure that businesses are complying. The agency did not comment.

Advertisement

Business

Disney’s ABC challenges FCC, escalating fight over free speech

Published

on

Disney’s ABC challenges FCC, escalating fight over free speech

Walt Disney Co.’s ABC is forcefully resisting Federal Communications Commission efforts to soften the network’s programming, accusing the federal agency of an overreach that violates 1st Amendment freedoms.

Last week, the FCC took the unusual step of calling in the licenses of eight Disney-owned television stations for early review. The move — widely interpreted as an effort to chill the network’s speech — came a day after President Trump demanded that ABC fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel over a joke about First Lady Melania Trump.

The FCC separately has taken aim at ABC’s daytime discussion show, “The View,” which delves deeply into politics.

The FCC has questioned whether the show, which prominently features Trump critics Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar, could continue toclaim an exemption to rules that require broadcasters to provide equal time for opponents of political candidates.

In its response this week to the FCC, Disney’s Houston television station raised the stakes in “The View” dispute, calling the commission’s actions “unprecedented” and “beyond the Commission’s authority.” The ABC station’s petition for a declaratory ruling said “The View,” has long qualified as a “bona fide” news interview program with freedom to conduct interviews of legally qualified political candidates.

Advertisement

“The Commission’s actions threaten to upend decades of settled law and practice and chill critical protected speech, both with respect to The View and more broadly,” the Houston station KTRK-TV said in the filing.

The network’s firm stance sets up a clash with the Trump administration, including the president’s hand-picked FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, who has made no secret of his disdain for Kimmel and other ABC programming. Earlier this year, Carr announced that decades-old exemptions from the so-called “equal time rule,” for some programs, including “The View,” were no longer valid.

In a statement, the FCC said it would “review Disney’s assertion that ‘The View’ is a ‘bona fide news program’ and thus exempt from the political equal time rules,” according to a spokesperson.

“Decades ago, Congress passed a law that generally prohibits broadcast television programs from putting a thumb on the scale in favor of one political candidate over another,” the spokesperson said. “The equal time law encourages more speech and empowers voters to decide the outcome of elections.”

ABC’s strenuous arguments mark a turning point for the Disney-owned outlet.

Advertisement

In December 2024, a month after Trump was elected to a second term, the network quickly settled a lawsuit over statements made by news anchor George Stephanopoulos that Trump found offensive. ABC agreed to pay Trump $15 million to end his legal fight — sparking an outcry among free speech advocates, who accused the network of caving on a case it may have won.

But, over the past year, the network has weathered several storms, including a threat by Carr in September to punish ABC if it didn’t muzzle Kimmel for comments he made in the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s death. ABC briefly benched Kimmel to allow tensions to cool but, during the week his show was off the air, protesters loudly bashed Disney, demanding the legendary company stand up for free speech.

Thousands of consumers canceled their Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions in protest.

Protesters swarmed Hollywood Boulevard, protesting ABC’s move to bench Jimmy Kimmel in September over comments he made about the shooting of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Some conservatives, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and commentator Ben Shapiro also criticized Carr’s handling of 1st Amendment issues.

“The days of the FCC as a paper tiger are numbered,” the FCC’s lone Democrat, Anna M. Gomez, said Friday in a statement. “What the public will remember is who complied in advance and who fought back. I’m glad Disney is choosing courage over capitulation.”

The high-profile dispute presents an early challenge for Disney Chief Executive Josh D’Amaro, who succeeded longtime chief Bob Iger in March.

ABC has asked for the full commission — a three member panel of Carr, Gomez and Commissioner Olivia Trusty, a Republican — to rule on the equal time exemption for “The View.” ABC said that, in 2002, it received a ruling from the FCC that granted the exemption, and the show’s format has not changed. “The View” is produced by ABC News.

Advertisement

“Some may dislike certain — or even most — of the viewpoints expressed on The View or similar shows,” the station said in its filing. “Such dislike, however, cannot justify using regulatory processes to restrict those views.”

ABC described a logistical nightmare of providing equal time for political opponents by pointing to California’s crowded primary field of gubernatorial candidates. “Affording equal time would mean accommodating over 60 legally qualified candidates, regardless of their perceived newsworthiness,” the station wrote.

The network said it makes show bookings based on newsworthiness, not partisan politics. It also noted it has invited politicians from both sides of the aisle to appear on “The View,” but some, including Vice President J.D. Vance, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of State Marco Rubio and entrepreneur Elon Musk, have declined the invitation.

The station also noted that, while the FCC has questioned the exemption for “The View,” the agency hasn’t shown interest in regulating programs on other networks, “including the many voices — conservative and liberal — on broadcast radio.” The FCC also oversees radio station licenses.

“The danger is that the government will simply decide which perspectives to regulate and which to leave undisturbed,” ABC said.

Advertisement

On April 28, Carr called for a review of Disney’s broadcast licenses, including for the Houston station and KABC-TV in Los Angeles, two years before any of them were set to expire. The FCC said the review was part of the agency’s year-old inquiry into Disney’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies and whether they violated federal anti-discrimination rules.

In its Thursday petition, ABC said it had fully complied with the FCC’s request for documents related to its diversity and hiring.

The company has produced more than 11,000 pages of documents to comply with the request, Disney said.

The same week that Disney sent documents to the FCC, Kimmel made a joke on his show about Melania Trump, comparing her glow to that of “an expectant widow.” On April 25, a gunman tried to breach security at the Washington Hilton, where the first couple were on stage for the White House Correspondents’ Assn. Dinner. Shots were fired outside the ballroom.

Three days later, the FCC announced it was requiring early license renewal applications for the Disney-owned stations.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

U.S. Targets Iran’s Missile and Drone Program With Sanctions

Published

on

U.S. Targets Iran’s Missile and Drone Program With Sanctions

The United States on Friday announced a flurry of new sanctions intended to increase pressure on Iran’s economy, targeting people and companies in China and Hong Kong that have been helping the Iranian military gain access to supplies and war equipment.

The sanctions came ahead of a major summit between President Trump and China’s leader, Xi Jinping, in Beijing next week. China’s support for Iran has become a flashpoint with the Trump administration, which has been trying to compel independent Chinese refineries to stop purchasing Iranian oil.

China is Iran’s biggest buyer of oil, and the Trump administration has said that it is sponsoring terrorism by propping up the Iranian economy.

The new sanctions are aimed at Iran’s military industrial supply chain, and are intended to make it harder for Iran to secure access to the material it needs to build drones and missiles. In addition to China, the sanctions also target people and companies based in Belarus and the United Arab Emirates.

“Under President Trump’s decisive leadership, we will continue to act to keep America safe and target foreign individuals and companies providing Iran’s military with weapons for use against U.S. forces,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.

Advertisement

The Trump administration has been looking for ways to squeeze Iran’s economy and pressure the Iranian government to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a conduit for the flow of global oil. Oil tankers have had sporadic access to the critical waterway since the war started earlier this year, and the United States and Iran have been fighting over who should control it.

U.S. warships that have been trying to transit the strait have been attacked by Iranian forces. The United States on Friday fired on and disabled two Iranian-flagged oil tankers as they tried to reach an Iranian port.

The Treasury Department has also imposed sanctions on the Chinese “teapot” refineries this month. The independent refineries are major purchasers of Iranian oil. But China invoked a domestic policy ordering its companies to disregard the sanctions.

Mr. Bessent said earlier this week that he expected Mr. Trump to urge Mr. Xi to use the country’s leverage over Iran to pressure it to allow oil cargo to travel.

“Let’s see if China — let’s see them step up with some diplomacy and get the Iranians to open the strait,” Mr. Bessent told Fox News on Monday.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

General Motors to pay $12.5 million to settle claims that it illegally sold California driver data

Published

on

General Motors to pay .5 million to settle claims that it illegally sold California driver data

General Motors has agreed to pay $12.5 million dollars to settle claims that the automaker illegally sold location and driving data of hundreds of thousands of Californians, state officials said Friday.

The settlement is an example of how automakers are facing more scrutiny over allegations that they share driver data with the insurance industry, influencing how much people pay for coverage. California, though, has a law that bars insurers from using driving data to set rates.

“If we get word that a company is illegally collecting, storing or selling consumer data, we won’t hesitate to look under the hood and hold them accountable to the law,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in a news conference.

The settlement is the largest California Consumer Privacy Act penalty in the state’s history, Bonta said.

The act gives California consumers the right to request that businesses disclose what data they collect. They can also opt out of the sharing or sale of their personal information and request that businesses delete their data.

Advertisement

Investigators found that from 2020 to 2024, GM sold driver data, including names, contact information, location data and driving behavior data, to data brokers Verisk Analytics Inc. and LexisNexis Risk Solutions. The data came from a driver’s use of OnStar, which is owned by GM and provides roadside assistance, navigation and other services.

GM said the agreement addresses a product called OnStar Smart Driver that the company discontinued in 2024. The product was meant to help improve people’s driving but faced privacy concerns from consumers. In 2024, GM also ended its partnership with the two data brokers and said it would enhance privacy controls.

“Vehicle connectivity is central to a modern and safe driving experience, which is why we’re committed to being clear and transparent with our customers about our practices and the choices and control they have over their information,” a GM spokesperson said in a statement.

Various district attorneys throughout the state, including in Los Angeles and San Francisco, were involved in the investigation and settlement.

Technology has been playing a bigger role in the auto industry, but the data collected from drivers can reveal personal information about people’s daily habits, including where they drop off their kids and doctor visits.

Advertisement

The California Privacy Protection Agency in 2023 started investigating the privacy practices of connected cars. As the state was looking into the automakers, the New York Times reported in 2024 that GM was sharing consumer driving behavior with insurance companies. Nationwide, GM reportedly made roughly $20 million from selling data to Verisk and LexisNexis.

The state’s privacy protection agency has taken action against other automakers before. Ford Motor Company was fined $375,703 in March and Honda was fined $632,500 in 2025 for privacy violations.

Under the GM settlement, which still needs court approval, the automaker would delete any driving data the company kept within 180 days and request that the two data brokers do the same. They would also stop selling driving data to consumer reporting agencies for five years and develop a privacy program that includes assessing and mitigating the risks of data collected from OnStar.

California’s settlement with GM came after the Federal Trade Commission in 2025 also took action against the automaker and OnStar for its privacy practices, barring them from disclosing location and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies for five years.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending