Connect with us

Business

Trump Is Eyeing Greenland. His Commerce Nominee Has Financial Ties There.

Published

on

Trump Is Eyeing Greenland. His Commerce Nominee Has Financial Ties There.

As President Trump argues the acquisition of Greenland is key to the economic security of the United States, he is flanked by wealthy investors who have eyed the island as a potentially lucrative venue for mining metals and minerals.

Among them is his commerce secretary nominee, Howard Lutnick, who has a financial stake in the island’s mining promise through an investment his financial firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, holds in a company called Critical Metals Corp., securities filings show. Critical Metals plans to start the mining process as soon as 2026, according to company executives.

Mr. Lutnick, whose Senate confirmation hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, plans to resign as chief executive Cantor Fitzgerald, a privately held firm, if confirmed. His interests in the firm would be sold off within 90 days of his confirmation, according to his government ethics agreement, and during that period he would not participate in any matter that has a “direct and predictable effect” on the firm unless he received a waiver that allowed him to do so.

As head of the Commerce Department, which promotes the interests of U.S. businesses abroad, Mr. Lutnick would oversee all tariff and trade policy, Mr. Trump has said. That could include Greenland, if the president’s efforts to expand the country’s role on the island are successful.

It remains to be seen whether Mr. Lutnick would recuse himself entirely from policy issues related to Greenland. Neither he nor the White House responded to requests for comment.

Advertisement

American influence on Greenland, an autonomous Danish territory, could benefit miners there, potentially enriching investors in Critical Metals and, in turn, Mr. Lutnick’s former business partners at Cantor Fitzgerald, which he ran for more than 30 years.

Critical Metals has been pushing for U.S. government financing for its project since last fall, but was told to shelve its request until the new administration arrived in Washington, according to Tony Sage, its chief executive. Mr. Sage said he regarded Mr. Lutnick and his firm as a possible conduit for discussion of future investment by the U.S. government.

“They could” be beneficial, Mr. Sage said, adding, “Having an investor, already, does help.”

Mr. Lutnick is one of several supporters of Mr. Trump who have ties to investments in Greenland and could be in position to shape the president’s thinking on the subject.

That circle includes the Silicon Valley investor Marc Andreessen, the tech entrepreneur Sam Altman and the Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Either as individuals or through their companies, all three have donated either to Mr. Trump’s re-election efforts or his inaugural committee. Through their venture capital firms, all three are also investors in KoBold Metals, a privately held company based in Berkeley, Calif., that has explored for minerals and metals in Greenland.

Advertisement

A spokeswoman for Mr. Andreessen’s venture capital firm declined to comment. Mr. Altman and a spokesman for Mr. Bezos did not respond to requests for comment.

A spokesman for KoBold Metals declined to say whether the firm, which surveyed Disko Island off the west coast of Greenland for mining opportunities in 2022, was likely to do business there in the future.

Greenland’s glaciers, freezing weather and paucity of roads and other infrastructure have long made it a difficult environment for investment. Some mining executives and investors believe that an enhanced arrangement with the United States could benefit U.S. national security and create economic opportunities for both sides.

“I think it could be a win-win for the U.S. and for Greenland, regardless of how it ends up, whether it’s just a closer working relationship or whether we provide defense or something to Greenland,” said Peter Leidel, whose private-equity firm, Yorktown Partners, holds a controlling stake in a mining project there.

The idea of purchasing Greenland has been a hobby horse for Mr. Trump for many years. During his first term, he framed it as an opportunity to expand the United States’ global footprint, and in 2019 he even privately floated the possibility of trading Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, for Greenland, according to Peter Baker and Susan Glasser’s book “The Divider.” But his hopes fizzled amid objections from Denmark, the U.S. ally that oversees Greenland, and some of Mr. Trump’s advisers dismissed the idea as divisive and outlandish, according to the book.

Advertisement

Under former President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the United States continued pushing for enhanced involvement in Greenland, albeit more quietly. State Department officials traveled to the island last year to discuss its natural resources, and the U.S. Export-Import Bank expressed interest in financing a graphite mining project operated by a British company. Mining executives said they also hoped that Mr. Biden’s push for clean energy might benefit their rare-earth mining efforts, given that rare earths are essential components in electric vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels.

Undercutting China’s dominance in rare earths mining was also part of Biden administration’s calculus, mining executives recalled. “They made very clear that they would like this material to go to the U.S.,” said Greg Barnes, who spoke to U.S. officials before selling his stake in the Tanbreez rare-earths mine in southern Greenland to Critical Metals, the New York-based company in which Cantor Fitzgerald is invested, last summer. That concern over Chinese involvement is almost certain to loom even larger under Mr. Trump, who has long cast China as a malign influence in U.S. and global affairs.

Greenland got little or no airtime during Mr. Trump’s 2024 campaign. But on Dec. 22, as he announced Ken Howery as his choice for U.S. ambassador to Denmark on his social media site, Mr. Trump called “ownership and control” of the island “an absolute necessity.” In other posts and comments that followed, he described Greenland as crucial to U.S. national security.

Denmark has so far resisted the idea of a sale. But its efforts to find advocates in Washington have so far foundered. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., undertook a brief good will tour around Greenland this month. And the elder Mr. Trump has refused to rule out the idea of taking Greenland by force.

In interviews, mining executives and investors in Greenland said they weren’t banking on any particular outcome to Mr. Trump’s push for the island. But most of them said the level of interest the trans-Atlantic debate had stirred, and the resources it could draw to Greenland’s mining opportunities, was a net positive.

Advertisement

“The Trump presidency, I think, enhances our little investment,” said Mr. Leidel, the Yorktown Partners investor, who donated $315,000 to Mr. Trump’s re-election efforts, according to federal records. He said that his donation was motivated by a desire for the United States “to do well,” and not by any expectations around mining in Greenland.

Kitty Bennett contributed research.

Business

Trump orders federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI after clash with Pentagon

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

“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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

Published

on

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

In mapping out Elon Musk’s wealth, our investigation found that Mr. Musk is behind more than 90 companies in Texas. Kirsten Grind, a New York Times Investigations reporter, explains what her team found.

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Published

on

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%.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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%.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending