As per the latest announcement from the US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, the tariff cuts cover an array of products ranging from US corn to cosmetics and from Chinese household appliances to toys.

“Under the US-China Board of Trade, both countries have each recommended USD 30 billion of trade in non-sensitive goods for more favorable tariff treatment,” Greer said in a media briefing on Sunday.

“For the United States, that was unlocking improved market access for about 30% of US exports to China,” he said further.

The reciprocal tariff reduction, along with the extension of a trade truce, was among the key takeaways from the second summit this year between Xi and Trump, with the Chinese president paying his reciprocal visit to Washington last week.

One of two lists from ⁠the White House showed that China planned to trim duties on various US agricultural goods, including corn, wheat, sorghum, meat, dairy, vegetable oils, and meals.

The list, however, did not include soybeans.

The post Xi-Trump Summit: China, US agree tariff cuts on USD 60 billion of goods appeared first on International Finance.

The White House is reportedly hesitant to announce the move before November’s midterm elections, with affordability and inflation emerging as key issues in the voters’ minds.

Both President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers are facing pressure from American consumers and businesses, with the Republican’s relentless tariff obsession resulting in higher costs.

Although the administration has not decided to impose tariffs on refined copper products such as cathode, as well as copper concentrate produced at mine sites, the commodities’ prices have surged to record highs.

As per the reports, traders and industrial buyers have been rushing to build inventories in the United States to get ahead of any new duties, creating one of the world’s largest stockpiles ⁠of the metal.

Copper has entered Trump’s crosshairs, as the latter eyes a broader push into rebuilding American manufacturing and reducing reliance on foreign supplies of critical materials.

Copper is used in construction, transportation, electronics, and many other industries. S&P Global expects growth in the AI and defense sectors to boost global copper demand 50% by 2040.

Regarding Uncle Sam, the United States imports roughly half of its copper needs each year and only has two operational copper smelters, which are owned by Freeport-McMoRan and Rio Tinto, respectively.

While the Trump administration believes that the proposed tariffs could make imported copper pricier and improve the economics of American mining and smelting and refining projects, broader tariffs could also raise costs for manufacturers that rely on the metal, including producers of electrical equipment, automobiles, construction products, and other industrial goods.

The administrative dilemma around the tariff has also prevented the copper from flowing to markets outside the United States, further tightening the commodity’s global supply.

“As long as (tariff) policy ⁠remains unresolved, that possibility reduces the incentive to return metal to international markets,” said Jacob White, a minerals analyst at Sprott Asset Management, which invests in copper producers, while interacting with Reuters.

Trump, in 2025, imposed ⁠levies on pipes, wiring, and other semi-finished products, much to the chagrin of companies that mine copper itself.

Thereafter, he reportedly tasked Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to update him by June 2026 on copper markets and recommend whether to impose a 15% tariff starting on January 1, 2027, that would rise to 30% in 2028.

The United States’ refined copper imports have jumped 16-fold since 2015, even as production slipped 20%, according to the nation’s Geological Survey data. The world’s largest economy has nearly 30 years’ worth of supply within its borders.

Trump, since 2025, has pushed his administration to bolster domestic copper projects, including the Resolution Copper project in Arizona from BHP and Rio and the Twin Metals project in Minnesota from Antofagasta.

Trump also banned the export of electronic waste, which contains copper.

The post White House stalls copper tariff discussions as economy dominates midterm narrative appeared first on International Finance.

Thune, a Republican, on Saturday (August 8), filed the bill, called the “Clarity Act,” following which a key procedural vote will be set up when the Senate returns from its August recess in mid-September, stated the US Senate Press Gallery website.

Amid opposition from the Democrats, Senate Republicans believe they may be able to put together the ⁠60 votes needed for the bill to pass. However, the bill still needs the support of at least eight Democrats and all of the Senate’s voting Republicans for it to pass.

The legislation, if passed, would give the crypto industry its first comprehensive federal rulebook, defining when digital tokens will become securities or commodities and which regulators will oversee them.

The post Clarity Act: US Senate advances landmark crypto bill despite bipartisan opposition appeared first on International Finance.

OpenAI’s newest and most powerful AI system, called GPT-5.6, has been released only to a small group of hand-picked companies. And it is not entirely OpenAI’s choice. The Donald Trump administration asked OpenAI to limit the rollout to a small set of United States government-approved partners before any wider release, citing security concerns, marking the first time the US pre-emptively asking an American AI company to restrict a model launch.

The decision came from the very top of the administration. The White House’s Office of the National Cyber Director and Office of Science and Technology Policy made the request as the administration works to build a framework for testing and evaluating the security of new models.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was also closely involved, reportedly wanting to ensure that all relevant sections of the government had tested and cleared the model before it went live.

Why is the government so concerned?
GPT-5.6 is not a routine upgrade. To understand why Washington has intervened so forcefully, it helps to understand what the model can actually do.

Under OpenAI’s own internal safety framework, all three versions of GPT-5.6 are classified as ‘High’ capability in both cybersecurity, and biological and chemical risk. In plain terms, the model is considered powerful enough that, in the wrong hands, it could potentially be used to launch sophisticated cyberattacks, probe critical infrastructure, or assist in the development of dangerous biological or chemical agents.

The biology numbers alone are striking. GPT-5.6 scored 53.5% on the Virology Capabilities Test, 60% on Molecular Biology, 68.4% on Human Pathogen Capabilities, and 68.3% on a benchmark called World-Class Bio, approximately nine percentage points above its predecessor, GPT-5.5.

These are not abstract academic scores. They represent a measurable increase in the model’s ability to reason about biological systems in ways that security experts consider ‘sensitive’.

On the cybersecurity side, GPT-5.6 Sol shifts the performance frontier for long-horizon security tasks, including vulnerability research and exploitation. On ExploitBench, a standard industry test, it performs on a par with Anthropic’s most advanced model while using roughly a third of the output tokens.

OpenAI’s own pre-release testing also found what are described as universal jailbreaks – systemic attack vectors capable of bypassing safeguards across the model family – before any public access was granted. That finding alone would give any government cause for concern.

An independent pre-deployment evaluation by METR found that Sol’s detected reward-hacking rate, a form of AI behaviour where the model games its own tests rather than genuinely solving them, was the highest of any public model METR has tested.

Put together, these findings paint a picture of a system that is extraordinarily capable but also, by its creators’ own admission, not yet fully understood.

What exactly is GPT-5.6?
OpenAI released three versions of the model named Sol, Terra, and Luna. Sol is the most powerful of the three. Terra offers a balance of efficiency and power, while Luna is designed for speed and affordability.

According to OpenAI, Terra is intended to offer performance comparable to its predecessor GPT-5.5 while costing half as much, making it potentially the most commercially attractive option for businesses once the restrictions are lifted.

Sol, however, is where the real leap forward lies. It introduces a ‘max’ reasoning effort mode and an ‘ultra’ mode that uses coordinated sub-agents to solve highly complex tasks.

Sub-agent orchestration, in everyday language, means the AI can break a complex task into parts and assign each part to a specialised mini-version of itself working in parallel, a significant advance in how much autonomous work the system can handle without human involvement.

In benchmark testing, Sol set a new state-of-the-art score on Terminal-Bench 2.1, which tests command-line workflows requiring planning, iteration, and tool coordination, achieving 88.8%, rising to 91.9% in its ultra configuration, ahead of competing frontier models.

The current limited preview is available to approximately 20 companies, whose participation has been approved by the United States government.

OpenAI’s uncomfortable position
OpenAI has complied with the restrictions but has made its displeasure clear. CEO Sam Altman told staff in a memo that the Trump government is approving access ‘customer by customer’,” and he hopes to release GPT-5.6 more broadly a couple of weeks later.

The company’s public statement was pointed.

“We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. It keeps the best tools from users, developers, enterprises, cyber defenders, and global partners who need them,” OpenAI said.

OpenAI was careful, however, not to frame the situation as a conflict with the White House. The company said it believes the Trump administration still has the best interests of US AI competitiveness in mind, and positioned the restricted launch as a short-term concession during an in-between period, one where the government has announced a plan to evaluate new model releases, but has yet to detail exactly how that process will work.

The company’s preferred framing is that it is helping build the scaffolding, not being caught in it. OpenAI described the restricted rollout as a short-term step, and said it represents the strongest path to broader availability in the coming weeks, as the company works with the administration to develop a cybersecurity executive order framework, and a repeatable process for future model releases.

Now, a report from British daily Financial Times (FT) claims that OpenAI has discussed giving the Trump administration a 5% stake. The Altman-led firm also wants other American AI companies to hand over similar stakes to the government.

In fact, Trump, in June 2026, said that he was exploring options to give the public a stake in leading AI companies in response to concerns that individual Americans will not share in the sector’s expected profits.

If Altman’s proposal gets serious consideration at the White House, the result will be the creation of an investment vehicle similar to the “Alaska Permanent Fund,” a state-owned corporation seeded with oil revenues that pays annual dividends to residents and helps support Alaska’s budget.

While OpenAI earlier proposed the creation of a “public wealth fund” to invest in AI companies and distribute proceeds to citizens, Anthropic has been actively exploring a “digital dividend,” defined as payments to Americans funded by taxes on the AI sector.

Altman has ⁠reportedly discussed the stake sale with Trump, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, apart from engaging with Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders in recent weeks.

A pattern taking shape across the industry
This is not an isolated incident, and OpenAI is not the only company navigating this new terrain.

The Trump administration previously placed an export control order on Anthropic, leading the AI company to pull its latest advanced models, Mythos and Fable, from public access after concerns arose in Washington and on Wall Street over their advanced cybersecurity capabilities. Anthropic’s Mythos model has since been made available only to a curated group of trusted organisations through a programme called Project Glasswing.

After Anthropic released its most powerful public model, “Fable 5,” the administration ordered the company to remove access for any foreign national, prompting Anthropic to take the model down entirely, raising questions about how much power the government should have over AI model releases.

The legal basis underpinning all of this is relatively recent. A Trump executive order signed on 2nd June 2, 2026 requires federal benchmarking of new AI models, and is the formal mechanism through which the government can gate these rollouts.

The order technically asks companies to voluntarily submit advanced models for government review up to 30 days before release, but critics say the voluntary label is increasingly difficult to distinguish from a mandatory one.

Dean Ball, a former White House AI adviser, argues that the executive order has effectively created a de facto involuntary licencsing regime for frontier AI, and that without clearly defined safety standards, endless launch delays could hand China an advantage in the global AI race while also jeopardising the billions of dollars flowing into AI infrastructure.

What comes next
The immediate commercial stakes are significant. Enterprises that had been anticipating GPT-5.6 for deployment in cybersecurity defence, drug discovery, or large-scale software engineering will need to wait.

During the preview period, OpenAI said it will work with enterprise customers on longer-term approaches, including the possibility of adding privacy-preserving detection, customer-operated safety controls, and calibrated access.

For the broader AI industry, the implications are harder to quantify but potentially more consequential. If Washington’s current approach becomes the template, with government review before commercial release, access approved company by company, and restrictions enforced through executive order rather than legislation, the relationship between frontier AI labs and the state will look fundamentally different within a year.

OpenAI has framed the restricted launch as a temporary inconvenience on the road to a broader rollout. Whether Washington sees it the same way remains to be seen. What is clear is that the era in which AI companies could release transformative systems entirely on their own terms, on their own timetables, may already be over.

The post White House’s tech ‘lock and key’ strategy shifts to OpenAI appeared first on International Finance.

While China will make the purchases through 2028, with the 2026 target applying to the remainder of the year on a proportionate basis, the deal came along with Beijing’s commitment to buy at least 87 million metric tonnes of American soya beans, which was made at the bilateral between Trump and Xi in South Korea in October 2025.

The White House further stated the Xi Jinping administration’s commitment to restore market access for American meat products by renewing the expired listings for more than 400 production facilities. Additionally, China will resume imports of poultry from states determined by the US Department of Agriculture to be free of avian influenza.

“Trump and Xi also agreed to establish two new bodies – the US-China Board of Trade and the US-China Board of Investment – to manage trade and investment between the sides,” the White House said.

The summit between Trump and Xi, which lasted between May 14 and 15, didn’t result in substantial understandings. However, as per the reports, both the heads of state sought greater alignment on economic issues and trade while avoiding sensitive issues like Taiwan and the Iran war. As per the White House, “The two sides had discussed ways to enhance economic cooperation, and they agreed on the need to keep the Strait of Hormuz open and that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.”

Talking about the economic cooperation between the countries, Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, told Al Jazeera that Washington’s statements on the summit should be treated with caution until they are confirmed by the Chinese side.

“On agriculture purchases, I’m sceptical of any announcements that have been made by one side and not confirmed by the other. This is sometimes an issue in many relationships, but it’s acute under Trump 2.0, especially with China. An additional USD 17 billion in agricultural purchases annually would only provide a minor, albeit welcome, boost to the US economy. But the US is a USD 30 trillion economy. Even if these buys materialise, the net effect is going to be tiny,” the senior analyst remarked.

The ongoing salvos between Washington and Beijing have resulted in US-Chinese trade going down sharply from its peak. The figures, in 2025, stood at some USD 415 billion, down from more than USD 690 billion in 2022.

Another talking point in the White House’s fact sheet has been American access to rare earths. While the Trump administration said that Beijing would address Uncle Sam’s rare earth shortages, particularly the ones like yttrium, scandium, neodymium and indium, the Chinese side didn’t talk about it.

It is to be noted that Beijing controls the supply chain for these rare earths that serve as the backbone of the manufacturing of smartphones and electric vehicles, along with the American and Western weapon industries. The Xi Jinping administration, in the past, had used the export control of these minerals to gain leverage over the West during moments of economic and geopolitical upheavals.

Last but not the least, the United States has also specified Chinese plans to buy 200 Boeing aeroplanes, despite the world’s second-largest economy having the distinction of developing its own civilian jetliner called the Comac C919 (often touted as a direct rival to Airbus’s and Boeing’s narrow-body families).

The post Trump-Xi summit: China to buy USD 17 billion agricultural goods from US appeared first on International Finance.

The Republican also enacted legislation establishing a regulatory framework for dollar-pegged cryptocurrencies, commonly known as stablecoins, a milestone that could help normalise their use for everyday transactions and money transfers. The bill, called the GENIUS Act, was passed by the House of Representatives in July with a vote of 308 to 122, earning support from nearly half of the Democratic members and a majority of Republicans. It had previously cleared the Senate.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the new technology would buttress the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency, expand access to the dollar economy, and boost demand for American Treasuries, which back stablecoins. Stablecoins are designed to maintain a constant value, usually a 1:1 US dollar peg, and their use has exploded, notably among crypto traders moving funds between tokens. The industry hopes they will enter mainstream use for sending and receiving payments instantly.

The new law also requires stablecoins to be backed by liquid assets, such as US dollars and short-term Treasury bills, and for issuers to disclose publicly the composition of their reserves monthly. Yet a stark contradiction lies at the heart of these plans, and we will use the Bitcoin example to explain this. Even as Trump champions an all-American “Crypto Vision,” he has unleashed steep import tariffs that jack up the cost of the very hardware US Bitcoin miners depend on, most of which is made in China.

This policy double-edged sword has left US miners, including the Trump family’s own mining company, caught between patriotic rhetoric and harsh economic reality. Industry experts warn that unless this contradiction is resolved, Trump’s dream of US dominance in Bitcoin mining may be undercut by the practical challenges his trade war has created.

Trump’s push for a Bitcoin mining empire

Trump’s recent policy moves mark a stunning 180-degree turn in the crypto world. After once calling Bitcoin a scam, he now openly courts the crypto industry. In his first months back in office, Trump fulfilled key crypto pledges by establishing a US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, stockpiling seized Bitcoins as national reserves, and replacing regulators seen as hostile to crypto with crypto-friendly figures.

For example, Trump ousted the prior Securities and Exchange Commission leadership, known for its aggressive stance on crypto, and installed former commissioner Paul Atkins, a pro-Bitcoin advocate, as SEC Chair. He also named tech investor David Sacks as “crypto and AI czar” to coordinate digital asset strategy and scheduled the White House’s first-ever crypto policy summit. All these steps signal that Trump’s administration is throwing its weight behind Bitcoin mining and blockchain businesses.

“Our country must be the leader in the field,” Trump has said of cryptocurrency. A centrepiece of Trump’s vision is for the US to dominate Bitcoin mining, the energy-intensive process that secures the Bitcoin network and mints new coins.

In July 2024, Donald Trump clearly addressed an enthusiastic crowd at the Bitcoin 2024 conference. He reiterated that America would become the undisputed Bitcoin mining capital of the planet. He explicitly called for an all-American Bitcoin: one mined on US soil with US-made equipment. To back miners, Trump has even floated using energy policy as a lever, hinting at measures to provide abundant, cheap power for mining farms.

All told, the administration’s message is clear. It wants Bitcoin’s future to be written in red, white, and blue, with American firms reaping the rewards of the crypto boom.

Global hardware arms race

Grasping the challenge requires first understanding how Bitcoin mining works. Bitcoin mining is a global hardware arms race. Miners worldwide run specialised computers (called ASICs) that race nonstop to solve cryptographic puzzles; the first to succeed earns the right to add a block of transactions to the blockchain and collect newly minted Bitcoins as a reward. The faster and more efficient your machines, the better your odds of winning this race and profiting.

Mining companies must constantly upgrade to cutting-edge hardware and newer rigs with more computational power and better energy efficiency or risk falling behind rivals. “To ensure their fleet is sufficiently powerful to beat out competitors, miners must constantly replace old and weather-beaten hardware with the latest, most advanced machines,” explains one industry report.

In short, access to top-notch mining rigs is crucial for any hope of profitability. Lagging in hardware is a quick road to being edged out of the market.

Here lies a fundamental tension for Trump’s “made in the USA” mining dream. The world’s best mining machines are not made in America. In fact, the global mining rig market is overwhelmingly dominated by Chinese manufacturers. Two companies from China, Bitmain Technologies and MicroBT, are kingpins of mining hardware, together accounting for an estimated 97% of all Bitcoin mining machine sales. A third Chinese-origin firm, Canaan, makes up much of the remainder.

These firms produce the popular Antminer and WhatsMiner series ASICs that power a huge share of Bitcoin’s network. According to the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, this Chinese duopoly controls virtually the entire market for Bitcoin rigs. Bitmain and MicroBT’s near-monopoly didn’t happen by accident. They had an early start in developing specialised mining chips and achieved massive economies of scale, fending off countless would-be Western challengers.

“The road is lined with the corpses of people who tried,” jokes Chris Bendiksen, a Bitcoin research lead at CoinShares, about past failed US mining rig ventures. The result is a lopsided reality. While the United States now hosts a large share of Bitcoin mining operations (over 30% of global mining power is in North America), more than 90% of the physical machines powering the network are built in China.

This imbalance in geographic supply and demand means American miners remain heavily reliant on imported gear, and it’s not only an economic factor but also a strategic one. “Hundreds of thousands” of Chinese-made mining rigs are plugged into the US electrical grid, notes Sanjay Gupta, chief strategy officer of US-based manufacturer Auradine. It’s something that he and others consider a security risk if tensions with China worsen. In essence, China dominates Bitcoin’s hardware supply chain, and any American bid for mining supremacy must contend with that fact.

Tariffs backfire on US miners

Trump’s trademark policy tool—tariffs on imports—has now been extended to this supply chain, with far-reaching consequences. On April 2, 2025, the president shocked the crypto mining sector by announcing punitive new tariffs on dozens of countries, including those crucial to mining equipment production.

China was the primary target in Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariff package. Shipments of high-tech goods from China were set to face a whopping 55% import duty. But the measures went further. Trump also slapped tariffs in the range of 24–36% on imports from countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand. These were the locations where Chinese companies often assemble mining rigs or route shipments to evade direct China–US duties.

In short, the administration moved to seal off any backdoor for Chinese-made miners, ensuring that whether a machine comes directly from Beijing or through a third country, it would incur steep US tariffs.

For US Bitcoin mining firms, which collectively import hundreds of thousands of ASIC rigs, these levies landed like a sledgehammer. Suddenly, the cost of new hardware could spiral by 25%, 50%, or even higher for Chinese-origin machines. “The tariffs included a levy on shipments from China, later revised to 55%, and tariffs between 24 and 36% on Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia,” WIRED reported, noting that many American miners “faced the prospect of spiralling hardware costs” as a result.

Even American Bitcoin, the new mining venture started by Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Jr., was not spared, as it too planned to source cutting-edge machines from the dominant Chinese suppliers. The irony was palpable. The president’s family business, launched to champion US mining, was now pinched by his trade policy.

Existing orders that US mining companies had placed with Bitmain or MicroBT suddenly became much more expensive, as any unfulfilled deliveries would be hit with the new import taxes. Long-term supply contracts offered no escape clause for tariffs, meaning miners were stuck either swallowing the additional costs or deferring equipment shipments altogether.

US miners, large and small, have decried the tariffs as a serious setback. One industry lobbying group, the Digital Energy Council, has reportedly pressed the Commerce Department to exempt cryptocurrency mining rigs from the tariff lists, warning that the policy could handicap American miners against foreign competitors.

“The tariffs are clearly destructive,” argues Chris Bendiksen of CoinShares, who says they directly undermine Trump’s goal of expanding the US mining sector. The situation indeed seems counterproductive. How can the US lead in Bitcoin mining if its miners struggle to afford the latest equipment?

In effect, Trump’s nationalist tariff policy is colliding with his nationalist crypto ambitions. The cost pressure comes at an already challenging time for miners, as we’ll see, intensifying a broader shakeout in the industry.

On the other hand, Trump officials insist this short-term pain is for a longer-term gain. The White House argues that two things can be accomplished at once. The tariffs can push manufacturing to American soil and use leverage to drive down other costs for mining firms.

“Two things can be accomplished at once,” a White House spokesperson told WIRED, describing the aim to onshore hardware production while using US energy policy to reduce miners’ cost burden.

In theory, by making imported rigs pricier, the tariffs create a protective bubble for United States-based equipment manufacturers to grow. Indeed, as the tariffs took effect, those few companies building Bitcoin rigs in America suddenly found an opening. Chief among them is a Silicon Valley start-up called Auradine.

Energy costs, margins, and competition

Even without tariffs, Bitcoin mining is a brutally competitive, low-margin business, and that has only intensified in 2025. Start with Bitcoin’s own design. The network undergoes a “halving” roughly every four years, cutting the block reward (the new Bitcoins miners earn) by 50%. The most recent halving in April 2024 slashed miners’ Bitcoin rewards from 6.25 BTC per block to 3.125 BTC, squeezing revenue per unit of computing power.

At the same time, network competition has grown fiercer as more miners join, and the Bitcoin algorithm adjusts to increase mining difficulty. This arms race, combined with occasional slumps in transaction fees, has steadily whittled down profit margins for mining operators.

Even though Bitcoin’s price has been rising in 2025, providing some relief, analysts note that many other factors are eroding mining profitability. “Fierce competition, a slump in transaction fees, and diminishing Bitcoin rewards… have whittled down margins for mining companies,” WIRED reports, summarising the challenge.

Above all, energy costs are the dominant factor. Electricity can account for 50–60% of a mining firm’s operating expenses. US miners have historically sought out regions with cheap power, ranging from hydro-rich Washington State to wind-powered West Texas. But the surge of new power-hungry industries is changing the equation.

Artificial intelligence data centres have emerged as a major new competitor for electricity and infrastructure. These AI operations are often backed by deep-pocketed tech companies and venture capital, and they’re willing to pay a premium for power and real estate. “Miners have always been scrappy buyers and vultures of the power grid. The AI companies are outbidding them, as they are just willing to pay more,” said Christopher Bendiksen.

In practical terms, that means some power contracts that might have gone to a Bitcoin mine are now going to a data centre instead, or utilities are raising rates knowing AI firms will pay. The US Department of Energy projects that by 2028, AI computing could consume as much electricity as 22% of US households—a stunning statistic that illustrates how much tighter the energy market could get for miners.

For miners, expensive electricity can quickly turn a profitable operation into a money-loser. Fred Thiel of Marathon has noted that a 5- or 10-percentage-point change in electricity rates has far more impact on a mine’s bottom line than a similar change in hardware costs.

Can the US lead Bitcoin mining?

All of this raises a pivotal question. Will Trump’s policies ultimately help or hurt US leadership in Bitcoin mining? The president’s vision of an all-American Bitcoin, mined on US soil with United States-made hardware, strengthening American economic and energy interests, is a bold nationalist gambit. It appeals to those who worry about US dependence on foreign technology and want to ensure the next generation of financial infrastructure is America-dominated.

In the long run, Trump’s tariffs may indeed spur some domestic manufacturing, as evidenced by Chinese firms localising production and startups like Auradine gaining traction. If the US can facilitate its own resilient supply chain for mining equipment and combine it with abundant low-cost energy, the country could solidify its status as a Bitcoin mining hub in the 2020s and beyond.

However, the current evidence suggests that Trump’s approach is struggling to deliver immediate results for miners. Thus far, the tariffs have introduced more instability than opportunity. US mining companies are pausing expansion plans and delaying hardware purchases while they wait to see how deeply costs will rise.

The initial 90-day suspension of the new levies has many in a holding pattern. But if and when full tariffs kick in, some firms may find it untenable to upgrade their fleets and could capitulate. The broader trend of miners diversifying away from Bitcoin or shifting overseas directly undercuts Trump’s goal of US dominance.

Ultimately, Trump’s dual objectives of onshoring the Bitcoin hardware supply chain and supporting a thriving US mining industry may require a more nuanced balancing act than tariffs alone can provide.

The post Trump’s Bitcoin dream collides with tariff reality appeared first on International Finance.

The London-based research group also stated that it based its latest calculation on its survey of over 1,000 ACP recipients as well as data from Recon Analytics, the FCC and the Benton Institute, along with the commentary from companies in the ACP programme and data obtained during the COVID pandemic.

The Affordable Connectivity Programme, which has kept millions of low-income American families with a low-cost high-speed internet connection since the beginning of the COVID pandemic, is now facing the prospect of being shut down, as the funds required to run the programme are about to end in April 2024.

New Street Research’s survey found that 27% of ACP beneficiaries would drop internet services if their bill increases by USD 30 (the amount of the ACP subsidy). However, the research body’s analysts estimated that around 1.2 million households may end up performing the move, given the fact that survey responses often do not directly correlate with actual consumer behaviours.

The firm also estimated that around 1.6 million households will cut their telecom spending by USD 15 per month if the ACP ends. The ACP gets support under the United States government’s Emergency Broadband Benefit (EBB) programme, instituted during the COVID pandemic, and distributes subsidies of up to USD 30 per month to low-income households for telecom services. As of March 2024, the programme has some 23 million American households as beneficiaries.

Companies in the programme were required to warn customers by March 19 about the uncertain future the scheme faces.

The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) also noted that May would be the last month where partial ACP funds would be made available. As per the government agency, ACP benefits will be between USD 7 and USD 16 per household in May, instead of USD 30.

Top lawmakers and the White House have reached a preliminary deal to avoid a US government shutdown and continue to fund key government agencies. According to an Axios report, that agreement would represent a milestone for House Speaker Mike Johnson, given the fact that his predecessor wasn’t able to pass a budget.

However, analysts are sceptical whether the legislators can reach a similar agreement over extending the ACP programme.

“The odds of passage have not improved,” summarised Blair Levin, a policy adviser to New Street Research and a former high-level FCC official, in a note to investors. The expert also noted that 197 House members are now listed as sponsors of a bill designed to keep the ACP programme intact.

However, most of those co-sponsors are Democrats and “the bottleneck for passage is the speaker, who we don’t think will allow a vote.”

The post ACP discontinuation could cost American telecom USD 4 billion: Research appeared first on International Finance.

As per a Reuters report, the new rules will require the chargers to be built in the States “immediately,” with 55% of the production cost will be coming from US-made components by 2024.

Earlier, manufacturers voiced concern over a slowed rollout from “imposing a domestic components quota too soon in the program rule.” Now, the new rules will allow more time for companies to abide by the ‘Made in America’ deadlines.

All the chargers built must comply with the U.S. standard for charging connectors, called “Combined Charging System” (CCS), which is described as allowing drivers to “use standardized payment options; a single method of identification that works across all chargers; and work 97% of the time.”

As the new rules come out, Tesla will have to modify their charging stations to “add a permanently attached Combined Charging System connector or adapter that charges a CCS-compliant vehicle.”

As the Joe Biden administration finalized standards for a USD 7.5 billion ‘National Electric Vehicle Charging Network’, Tesla has now agreed to open to the public at least 7,500 chargers on its proprietary network, a shift in the earlier stance, where the Electric Vehicle manufacturer’s charging network used to be unavailable for the other brands.

“The new standards will ensure everyone can use the network – no matter what car you drive or which state you charge in,” the White House said.

“The open chargers will be distributed across the United States. They will include at least 3,500 new and existing 250 kW Superchargers along highway corridors to expand freedom of travel for all EVs, and Level 2 Destination Charging at locations like hotels and restaurants in urban and rural locations. All EV drivers will be able to access these stations using the Tesla app or website,” as per the White House statement.

Tesla now has plans to double its full nationwide network of Superchargers, according to the announcement.

The Joe Biden administration’s EV aspirations include having 50% of new electric car sales by 2030, apart from the rollout of a 500,000-public-charger network. According to the White House, there are more than 3 million EVs registered in the US till February 2023 and more than 130,000 public chargers are active within the country.

“Effective immediately, final assembly and all manufacturing processes for any iron or steel charger enclosures or housing occur in the United States. By July 2024, at least 55% of the cost of all components will need to be manufactured domestically as well,” the White House said.

Along with Tesla, the White House highlighted work being done by companies like General Motors, EVgo, Pilot, Hertz and bp in the EV charging space.

“These companies and others are announcing new commitments to expand their networks by thousands of public charging ports in the next two years, using private funds to complement federal dollars and putting the nation’s EV charging goals even closer within reach,” the statement remarked.

The post Joe Biden government’s EV charger rule forces Tesla to change key policy appeared first on International Finance.

The article pointed out that “after months of gloom, Americans are finally starting to feel better about the economy and more resigned to inflation. Americans are making small changes — buying meat in bulk, for example, or shifting more of their shopping to discount chains — suggesting that many families are learning to deal with higher prices.”

The report emphasised gas prices dropping from a record high of USD 5 and used similar talking points as the White House, stating that the “25 percent cut in expenses has been meaningful for many Americans.”

“Overall inflation, meanwhile, has eased slightly — prices remained flat in July, though they’re still up 8.5 percent from a year ago — as a result of aggressive interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve,” the Washington Post piece stated.

Omaha native Nils Haaland said, “Soaring prices for fuel and food this summer forced him and his wife to stop dining out, postpone summer travel and buy less meat. Although prices are still relatively high, he says he feels less worried that inflation will continue to spiral out of control.”

It was reported that although Americans still rank inflation as their top issue in the run-up to the midterm elections, this percentage has decreased.

The Fed’s latest “beige book” report revealed that many households have switched to less expensive goods and are allocating more of their spending toward necessities like food. That has undoubtedly been the case at Walmart, where management claim to have noticed an increase in the number of middle- and high-income customers.

The post Americans finally learn to deal with Inflation appeared first on International Finance.

To prevent the impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine from fracturing the international coalition, Biden and his counterparts will meet supplies and combat the inflation of gold from Russia.

The principal new economic restriction against Russia that emerged from the summit appears to be the prohibition on gold imports, which may result in a fine of tens of billions of dollars.

Officials from the administration chose not to reply when asked if additional sanctions will be applied.

It would be more difficult for Russia to compete in international markets if imports of gold were prohibited as they are Moscow’s second-largest export after energy.

The US Treasury will release a decision to forbid the entry of new gold into the country, further isolating Russia from the rest of the world’s economies by barring its participation in the gold market, according to a senior administration official.

According to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the ban stated that it will directly hit Russian oligarchs and strike at the heart of Vladimir Putin’s war machine.

Boris Johnson further added that Putin is unnecessarily spending his resources on this pointless war.

According to the White House, gold accounted for almost USD 19 billion, or approximately 5% of global gold exports, in 2020.

Image Credits: Narendra Modi @ Twitter

The post G7 bans Russian gold following Ukraine war appeared first on International Finance.