Business
California still bullish on EV trucks, despite industry opposition and setbacks in Washington
It seemed like the death knell. The state of California failed to get required federal permission from the Biden administration — the Biden administration — to enforce new regulations that would phase out sales of diesel big-rig trucks to fleet operators at the state’s seaports, forcing them to buy zero-emission vehicles instead.
The regulations, known as Advanced Clean Fleets, faced pitched opposition from the trucking industry. But California plans to carry on anyway, hoping the carrot of subsidy money and the stick of other state regulations will accomplish its goals.
Infrastructure improvements will help. Liane Randolph, chair of the California Air Resources Board, was among officials on hand at the Port of Long Beach recently for a ribbon-cutting ceremony for a new electric truck charging depot — 25 chargers and 44 dispensers to serve up to 200 trucks a day.
“We are committed in California to continuing this process,” she said.
The $10-million-plus depot, funded through a mix of private investment and state, local and federal tax credits, subsidies and grants, will be run by a San Francisco startup called Forum Mobility, one of several heavy-duty truck charging companies seeking a foothold in a new business category called TaaS, or trucking as a service.
Forum charges truck fleet operators monthly “subscriptions” to use its charging depots. It also buys or leases electric trucks, in turn leasing them to truck fleet owners as part of a subscription package.
The success (or not) of companies such as Forum could determine whether California achieves its ambitious quest to slash local pollution and global greenhouse gas emissions by converting the state’s massive population of diesel trucks to zero-emission versions.
By January, the Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency had not acted on California’s 15-month-old request for a waiver to federal rules that would allow Advanced Clean Trucks rules to move forward. CARB withdrew its waiver request in January for fear the Trump administration would turn it down. Biden’s EPA never explained what was taking so long to reach a decision.
The rule would have applied to drayage trucks — semitrucks that haul shipping containers into and out of seaports. The goods are carried to nearby distribution centers, most of which are then transported by long-distance trucks and trains.
Because drayage trucks concentrate fume-pumping diesel engines in a tight location, the air quality in residential areas adjacent to ports suffers. To combat this pollution and global warming, the state is pushing for electric vehicle transport.
The rules would have applied to any truck operator who owned or leased between one and 50 trucks, if annual revenue topped $50 million, or to any truck fleet larger than 50 vehicles.
Forum Mobility electric trucks from Volvo, charging up.
(Kevin Krause / Forum Mobility)
Forum and other electric truck service providers aren’t panicking. While the state cannot now force fleet operators to buy electric trucks, it can still require truck manufacturers to sell them through its Advanced Clean Trucks regulations.
It’s similar to California’s Advanced Clean Cars program, which doesn’t require consumers to buy electric vehicles, but penalizes manufacturers if they don’t phase out sales of gasoline and diesel cars and light trucks by 2035. Truck manufacturers have until 2036 to fully convert to zero-emission sales of new trucks.
Most major U.S. big-rig truck and engine manufacturers signed a deal with the state in 2023, agreeing to go along with the plan and not file lawsuits against it, in return for more regulatory certainty — at least at the state level — and flexibility in meeting the state’s strict diesel pollution rule. That deal could protect the program from any action against it from the Trump administration. Signers include Ford, GM, Navistar, Volvo, Paccar, Cummins and others.
But with no state rules forcing zero-emission trucks on truck buyers, the budding electric truck industry will have to rely more on salesmanship — operating costs are cheaper for electric trucks — and more on government subsidy money to pay for the currently enormous costs of electric trucks.
“We’ll move forward with more carrots than sticks,” said Adam Browning, policy chief at Forum Mobility.
Truckloads of carrots will be required, and they’ll have to come from state and local governments, because federal support for electric trucks appears doubtful in the Trump administration.
By far the biggest barrier to diesel-to-electric conversion is the cost of electric trucks. Few electric big-rig assembly lines yet exist and an electric big-rig cab can cost up to three times as much as a diesel version — around $450,000.
Scaling up production — in a big way — could result in great cost reductions. State officials thought a diesel ban combined with state subsidies would sufficiently boost demand. Now it’ll have to rely mostly on subsidies.
How much the state will pay out is unclear, hinging partly on demand and partly on how much state revenue is available. CARB said it has paid $1.5 billion to subsidize purchase of commercial electric trucks, nearly $200 million last year alone.
Buyers can qualify for subsidies worth from 40% to 90% of the cost of an electric big-rig cab.
The state believes the cost is worth it in the long run, with reduced pollution improving public health and lowering medical costs, and greenhouse gas reduction helping to address hazards partly attributable to global warming. If left purely to the marketplace, any shift to zero-emission vehicles would take much longer than the state believes is necessary.
There are many sources of subsidy money in California for trucks and truck charging, including two carbon cap-and-trade programs, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Money is also available from CARB, from state air quality districts, from cities and from container fees levied by port operators.
With enough demand, truck manufacturers will scale up and add production lines, sending costs down. If the cost ever becomes competitive with diesel trucks, truck fleet owners, especially those with short- to medium-haul routes, may well find electric trucks more appealing.
Rudy Diaz is an early adopter. He owns Hight Logistics, a medium-size fleet operator for trucks that transfer freight in and out of the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. His drayage trucks are natural candidates for electric early adoption. With a typical range around 200 miles, heavy truck batteries don’t yet have the range to meet the demands of long-haul transport. But it’s plenty for most drayage jobs.
Rudy Diaz, chief executive at Hight Logistics, with an electric truck at Hight headquarters in Long Beach.
(William Liang / For The Times)
Diaz grew up in Watts and worked in freight logistics before launching Hight from his house with a small fleet of diesel cabs. Hight now operates a warehouse and truck yard near the Long Beach airport, with 70 trucks — 50 diesel, 20 electric. He’s hoping to grow the electric share.
He’s been a customer of Forum Mobility since December 2021.
“Forum reached out to me saying they were a startup company and wanted to start a program with turnkey solutions” — truck leasing, maintenance and charging, including chargers installed at the Hight truck yard.
“At the time I had no idea what a battery-electric truck was or even how you’d charge one,” he said.
But he’s an outdoors lover, a bicyclist, trim and fit, with a personal dedication to improving air quality.
“I genuinely do care about the environment,” he said. “If the environment is not considered, our survival is in question.”
Subsidies from state, local and federal sources flow through to Forum and Hight, allowing Diaz’s electric trucks — from Volvo, Daimler and BYD — to make a profit. But no question, he said, the electric truck market will have to stand on its own at some point to attract sufficient private capital and grow big enough to displace diesel technology.
Hight carries everything from clothes to car parts to consumer electronics, but the electric trucks are allowing it to branch out. The EV component was key to Hight’s getting a freight contract with Lime Micromobility, the electric scooter company.
“Decarbonization of the economy underpins everything we do,” said Lime co-founder Adam Savage. “We want to go carbon free as fast and aggressively as we can, whether producing our own vehicles our moving freight.”
One of Hight’s drivers, Marco Garrido of Anaheim, recently shifted from diesel to electric, and became an instant convert.
“I love it, I love it,” he said. The trucks are quiet, no exhaust, no cumbersome gear shifting, and the new models are fitted with the latest safety equipment, including backup sensors. It adds up, he said, to less stress.
Although it’s highly questionable whether federal money makes its way to the nascent electric truck market over the next four years, a nonprofit financial group called Climate United last August locked in nearly $7 billion in funding from the EPA to help for clean energy projects, part of which will be spent to boost truck maker production and pave the way for private lenders now stuck in neutral.
One way to do that: create a market in used electric trucks. Not only are electric trucks expensive, no one knows how much they’ll be worth once their leases run out.
“Traditional lessors are not set up to take risk on what that amount will be,” said Jacqueline Torres, head of finance at Forum.
That can scare private finance away, said Brooke Durham, the organization’s communications director. With the EPA money, it will buy trucks and lease them to Forum and other trucking-as-service companies, taking on the risk of creating a used truck market. As used truck prices become clearer, private lenders and investors will have hard data on which to base their financial decisions.
“This will be catalytic to have private capital step in,” said Forum Mobility Chief Executive Matt LeDucq.
The company is hoping that’ll help spark big new orders.
“Something needs to break the chicken or the egg loose,” said Forum’s Browning. “Once a 500-truck order comes in, the flywheel really gets going.”
California’s clean transportation goals depend on that happening.
Business
Trump orders federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI after clash with Pentagon
President Trump on Friday directed federal agencies to stop using technology from San Francisco artificial intelligence company Anthropic, escalating a high-profile clash between the AI startup and the Pentagon over safety.
In a Friday post on the social media site Truth Social, Trump described the company as “radical left” and “woke.”
“We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!” Trump said.
The president’s harsh words mark a major escalation in the ongoing battle between some in the Trump administration and several technology companies over the use of artificial intelligence in defense tech.
Anthropic has been sparring with the Pentagon, which had threatened to end its $200-million contract with the company on Friday if it didn’t loosen restrictions on its AI model so it could be used for more military purposes. Anthropic had been asking for more guarantees that its tech wouldn’t be used for surveillance of Americans or autonomous weapons.
The tussle could hobble Anthropic’s business with the government. The Trump administration said the company was added to a sweeping national security blacklist, ordering federal agencies to immediately discontinue use of its products and barring any government contractors from maintaining ties with it.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who met with Anthropic’s Chief Executive Dario Amodei this week, criticized the tech company after Trump’s Truth Social post.
“Anthropic delivered a master class in arrogance and betrayal as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the United States Government or the Pentagon,” he wrote Friday on social media site X.
Anthropic didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Anthropic announced a two-year agreement with the Department of Defense in July to “prototype frontier AI capabilities that advance U.S. national security.”
The company has an AI chatbot called Claude, but it also built a custom AI system for U.S. national security customers.
On Thursday, Amodei signaled the company wouldn’t cave to the Department of Defense’s demands to loosen safety restrictions on its AI models.
The government has emphasized in negotiations that it wants to use Anthropic’s technology only for legal purposes, and the safeguards Anthropic wants are already covered by the law.
Still, Amodei was worried about Washington’s commitment.
“We have never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner,” he said in a blog post. “However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values.”
Tech workers have backed Anthropic’s stance.
Unions and worker groups representing 700,000 employees at Amazon, Google and Microsoft said this week in a joint statement that they’re urging their employers to reject these demands as well if they have additional contracts with the Pentagon.
“Our employers are already complicit in providing their technologies to power mass atrocities and war crimes; capitulating to the Pentagon’s intimidation will only further implicate our labor in violence and repression,” the statement said.
Anthropic’s standoff with the U.S. government could benefit its competitors, such as Elon Musk’s xAI or OpenAI.
Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT and one of Anthropic’s biggest competitors, told CNBC in an interview that he trusts Anthropic.
“I think they really do care about safety, and I’ve been happy that they’ve been supporting our war fighters,” he said. “I’m not sure where this is going to go.”
Anthropic has distinguished itself from its rivals by touting its concern about AI safety.
The company, valued at roughly $380 billion, is legally required to balance making money with advancing the company’s public benefit of “responsible development and maintenance of advanced AI for the long-term benefit of humanity.”
Developers, businesses, government agencies and other organizations use Anthropic’s tools. Its chatbot can generate code, write text and perform other tasks. Anthropic also offers an AI assistant for consumers and makes money from paid subscriptions as well as contracts. Unlike OpenAI, which is testing ads in ChatGPT, Anthropic has pledged not to show ads in its chatbot Claude.
The company has roughly 2,000 employees and has revenue equivalent to about $14 billion a year.
Business
Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk
new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey
February 27, 2026
Business
Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office
Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.
If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.
All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.
But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.
That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.
The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.
— Katie Martin, Financial Times
Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.
Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.
Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.
But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.
Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.
That hasn’t been the case for months.
”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”
Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.
Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.
It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.
Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”
Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”
Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.
Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.
“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”
I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.
To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.
Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.
The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.
It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.
That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.
Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts3 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology7 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology7 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics7 days agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT