Connect with us

News

Trump Signals New Tariffs on Chips, Calling Exclusions Temporary

Published

on

Trump Signals New Tariffs on Chips, Calling Exclusions Temporary

President Trump signaled on Sunday that he would pursue new tariffs on the powerful computer chips inside smartphones and other technologies, just two days after his administration excluded a variety of electronics from the steep import taxes recently applied on goods arriving from China.

The push came as Mr. Trump’s top economic advisers scrambled to explain their shifting strategy, after having insisted for weeks that they would shield no company or industry from any of the fees they have levied in a bid to reset U.S. trade relationships.

The reprieve for technology companies arrived in the form of a Customs and Border Protection rule issued late Friday that spared high-tech imports from Mr. Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs, including those on China. While the president paused a set of punishing levies on nearly 60 countries last week, his administration has forged ahead with a new 145 percent tax on Chinese exports, announcing it after Beijing retaliated against the United States.

The exclusions in the C.B.P. rule covered a wide slate of products, such as computers, smartphones, modems and flash drives, and it represented a major victory for Apple, and other U.S. technology giants, which rely on Chinese factories to help manufacture important components and popular devices. Apple executives had even been in contact with Trump administration officials about the Chinese tariffs in recent days, according to two people with knowledge of the company’s efforts. The company declined to comment.

But on Sunday, Mr. Trump and his top aides cast the exemptions in a different light, framing them as only a temporary break while the government prepares more targeted import taxes on key technologies. The administration is expected to take the first step toward enacting the new tariffs as soon as next week, opening an investigation to determine the effects of semiconductor imports on national security.

Advertisement

The approach appears to mirror the process that yielded Mr. Trump’s tariffs on other specific products and sectors, including the high fees he imposed on foreign cars and auto parts this year. On social media, the president signaled Sunday that the scope of his next inquiry would be broad, “taking a look at Semiconductors and the WHOLE ELECTRONICS SUPPLY CHAIN in the upcoming National Security Tariff Investigations.”

“NOBODY is getting ‘off the hook’ for the unfair Trade Balances, and Non Monetary Tariff Barriers, that other Countries have used against us, especially not China which, by far, treats us the worst!” Mr. Trump added.

Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said earlier Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” that Mr. Trump could announce new tariffs “in the next month or two” that would target not only semiconductors but also pharmaceutical imports, another priority for the administration.

Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, told CNN’s “State of the Union” that it was “always the case” that some of these high-tech imports would be subject to their own tariffs, separate from those broadly imposed on countries in response to their trade practices.

“Semiconductors are a key important part of a lot of defense equipment,” Mr. Hassett added, saying, “I don’t think anything really should be a surprise.”

Advertisement

And Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, described the move on CBS’s “Face the Nation” as more of a mechanical change, saying of semiconductors that it is “not that they won’t be subject to tariffs” but that they are being done under a “different regime.”

The Trump administration had already excluded various types of semiconductors from the reciprocal tariffs as of April 2. But the chaotic changes in tariffs and exclusions in recent days bewildered businesses that depend on trade with China. Some investors and chief executives publicly praised the decision to walk back tariffs on electronics, which represent roughly a quarter of U.S. imports from China.

“A willingness to adjust a strategy based on new facts and data is a sign of the strength of a leader,” Bill Ackman, the chief executive of the hedge fund Pershing Square, wrote on social media. “It is not an indication of weakness.”

Still, there appears to be no quick end to the trade conflict with China in sight. And the potential for new tariffs on chips threatened to cast another pall over the tech industry, even as major lobbying groups representing Intel, Nvidia and other companies have encouraged the Trump administration to strike trade deals that ultimately lower trade barriers globally.

Asked about the possibility of upcoming tariffs on chips on Saturday, Mr. Trump said, “I’ll give you that answer on Monday.”

Advertisement

“We’ll be very specific,” he added. “But we’re taking in a lot of money. As a country we’re taking in a lot of money.”

Dan Ives, an analyst for Wedbush Securities, said in a note to investors on Sunday that “the mass confusion created by this constant news flow out of the White House is dizzying for the industry and investors and creating massive uncertainty and chaos for companies trying to plan their supply chain, inventory and demand.”

Ultimately, new taxes on chip imports could make it more expensive for U.S. companies to produce smartphones and other devices, cutting into their profits or forcing them to raise prices on American consumers. For Apple, in particular, the tit for tat between the United States and China caused the tech giant to lose more than $770 billion in market capitalization in just the opening days of Mr. Trump’s trade war.

Since then, the two nations have continued to retaliate against each other, causing financial markets around the world to whipsaw in the face of a persistent and costly standoff. U.S. consumers even appeared to rush out to purchase new iPhones last week, anticipating that a protracted trade conflict could push up prices.

Advertisement

News

Europe and Asia battle for LNG as Iran war chokes supply

Published

on

Europe and Asia battle for LNG as Iran war chokes supply

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Asian and European buyers are battling to source liquefied natural gas after the war in the Middle East choked off shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, blocking a fifth of global supplies.

In an indication of the intensifying contest for LNG since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran, a handful of gas carriers have abruptly changed course while sailing to Europe and swung towards Asia instead, according to ship monitoring data analysed by the FT.

Countries across Asia are highly dependent on oil and gas sent through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway where shipping has slowed to a near standstill.

Advertisement

Most of the LNG produced in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates is ordinarily shipped through the strait to Asia, and Asian LNG prices surged almost immediately after war broke out, creating an incentive to divert US gas to the region.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are among the countries that need to source LNG to make up for supplies they will not receive from the Gulf, said Massimo Di Odoardo, head of gas and LNG analysis at consultancy Wood Mackenzie.

Taiwan relied on Qatar for more than 30 per cent of its gas consumption in 2025, according to Citigroup, while for South Korea and Japan the figures were 15 per cent and 5 per cent respectively. Asia typically uses more gas than Europe in the hotter summer months because of more air-conditioning use, creating urgency for Asian utilities to secure cargoes.

The vast majority of LNG is sold under long-term contracts rather than on the spot market, but some buyers are able to change the final destination of their purchases and some sellers are willing to break contracts if prices rise high enough.

Advertisement

By Thursday, surging European gas prices and rocketing shipping rates had swung the balance back against diversion of US LNG to Asia, according to data company Spark Commodities.

The decision on where to send gas carriers can depend on the relative levels of the European gas price, Asia’s JKM benchmark for LNG and shipping rates.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

For European buyers, the battle with Asia for LNG supplies is eerily familiar to the situation four years ago after Russia slashed pipeline natural gas flows to the continent following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Competition for spare cargoes then pushed prices to record levels.

On Monday, European gas prices reached as high as €69.50 per megawatt hour, more than double their level before the Iran conflict began. Even so, prices are still far from the €342 per megawatt hour reached in 2022.

JKM gas prices also more than doubled since the start of the war to $24.80 per 1mn British thermal units by Monday, equivalent to €73.10/MWh.

Advertisement

European buyers have learnt from their experience in 2022. “Europe has more weapons at its disposal in this extreme price scenario to try and fight,” said Alex Kerr, a partner at law firm Baker Botts.

Buyers had started putting clauses in contracts to say that suppliers would face much higher penalties if they diverted cargoes for commercial gain, Kerr said.

There is also much more LNG on the market now that is not committed to set destinations, largely because of new projects starting in the US.

While producers such as Qatar impose strict rules on where its LNG can be sent, almost all US exports are allowed to sail wherever buyers want. Several analysts said there had also been an increase in the willingness of some producers to break contracts for financial advantage.

This makes diversions more likely, while the reluctance of some European buyers to sign long-term supply contracts before the outbreak of war this month could prove costly.

Advertisement

Expectations of a global supply glut convinced some European buyers that it would be cheaper to wait until later in the year to sign supply deals.

Wood Mackenzie’s Di Odoardo said the buyers had also held off on LNG purchases because new EU legislation on methane emissions made it unclear whether they could incur penalties in the future.

The risk of prices rising as Europe and Asia fight for available cargoes is increasing every day the Strait of Hormuz stays almost closed.

Gas is more difficult to store and to carry in tankers than oil, making its markets more vulnerable to shortages and price shocks.

“The longer the Strait remains shut, the greater the risk that the shipping disruption turns into a genuine gas shortage, as tankers cannot load and facilities have limited storage,” said consultancy Oxford Economics in a research note.

Advertisement

Additional reporting by Harry Dempsey in Tokyo. Data visualisation by Jana Tauschinski

Continue Reading

News

Is Iran another Iraq? : Sources & Methods

Published

on

Is Iran another Iraq? : Sources & Methods
Poor planning, overly ambitious goals, not thinking through the aftermath. These are the parallels that Richard Haass sees between the 2003 U.S. invastion of Iraq and its current air campaign against Iran.Haass was in charge of planning for the invasion as a top official in the State Department. He was a voice of dissent within the administration. Now he’s president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of the Home & Away newsletter. He talks to Host Mary Louise Kelly about the Trump administration’s foreign policy and national security apparatus and where he sees it falling short on Iran.Email the show at sourcesandmethods@npr.orgNPR+ supporters hear every episode without sponsor messages and unlock access to our complete archive. Sign up at plus.npr.org.
Continue Reading

News

Concert promoter Live Nation settles US monopoly case over ticket sales

Published

on

Concert promoter Live Nation settles US monopoly case over ticket sales

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Live Nation has agreed to a preliminary settlement with the US government to end a monopoly case brought by the Department of Justice, in a deal that would stop short of breaking up the company.

The DoJ and some US states have reached a deal with Live Nation, which is the parent company of Ticketmaster, less than a week after trial began in New York, according to a senior justice department official. But 27 other state attorneys-general have refused to join the agreement, arguing it benefits Live Nation. 

The DoJ in 2024 sued Live Nation, accusing it of operating a monopoly that “suffocates its competition” in the live entertainment industry. The government alleged that the company illegally dominated the market for ticketing and concert promotion, using “exclusionary conduct” to wield an outsized influence over the majority of live concert venues across the US.

Advertisement

The lawsuit came amid growing discontent among fans, rivals, artists and US lawmakers, who have accused Live Nation of abusing its market power by charging exorbitant fees and retaliating against venues that choose to work with rivals.

It followed a fiasco during the ticket sale of Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour in 2022, when Ticketmaster’s website was overwhelmed by massive demand.

The terms of the deal, which will have to be confirmed by a federal court, include Live Nation offering a product that will allow other ticketing companies to use its technology. It would also let go of 13 amphitheatres it owns or controls — a number that may rise if other states join the agreement. 

The deal “opens up markets for other competitors, which will allow for competition that previously didn’t exist in primary ticketing and in the live entertainment space”, said a senior DoJ official. 

“That competition is going to have a direct impact on prices coming down,” he added. “It’ll also give consumers more options and not feel like they just have to go through Live Nation or Ticketmaster.”

Advertisement

But New York state attorney-general Letitia James, who has led a bipartisan group of states suing Live Nation, on Monday said in a statement that the agreement “fails to address the monopoly at the center of this case, and would benefit Live Nation at the expense of consumers. We cannot agree to it.”

“[W]e will continue our lawsuit to protect consumers and restore fair competition to the live entertainment industry,” she added.

Live Nation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending