Connect with us

Published

on

Government officials will this week fly to China in an effort to convince the owner of British Steel to finalise plans for a state funding package amid hundreds of job cuts at the company.

Sky News has learnt that civil servants from the Department for Business and Trade are travelling to meet executives from Jingye Group amid protracted talks about a £300m grant to the Scunthorpe-based company.

Sources said the talks were expected to focus on the value of an energy subsidy package, which could take the overall value of government support for British Steel to approximately £1bn.

It comes just days after Kemi Badenoch, the new business and trade secretary, told Sky News’ economics and data editor, Ed Conway, that “nothing is ever a given” when asked whether Britain needed a steel industry.

A government spokesperson said: “The government recognises the vital role that steel plays within the UK economy, supporting local jobs and economic growth and is committed to securing a decarbonised, sustainable and competitive future for the UK steel sector.

“Government officials are engaging with Jingye regularly as part of the ongoing discussions with the company and our routine work with businesses across the steel sector.

“The Business and Trade Secretary considers the success of the steel sector a priority and continues to work closely with industry to achieve this.”

More on China

Sky News revealed last month that Jingye was drawing up plans to cut around 800 jobs at British Steel, with the BBC reporting on Tuesday night that 300 redundancies would be announced this week arising from the closure of coking ovens at the Scunthorpe plant.

Mrs Badenoch’s predecessor, Grant Shapps, told Jingye last month that proposals to make hundreds of workers redundant were “unhelpful” amid negotiations over a £300m taxpayer support package.

British Steel confirmed recently that it was “reluctantly having to consider cost-cutting” but did not specify the number of jobs that were at risk.

Nusrat Ghani, the business minister, had told MPs that talks between the government and British Steel were ongoing, even though the conditions attached to the taxpayer aid include a six-month moratorium on redundancies and a guarantee to preserve an unspecified proportion of the company’s workforce for the next decade.

Jingye said in January that steelmaking in Britain was “uncompetitive” in an international context.

“Unfortunately, like many other businesses we are reluctantly having to consider cost cutting in light of the global recession and increased costs,” the company said.

Sky News revealed last month that British Steel and larger rival Tata Steel would be required to guarantee thousands of jobs until 2033 in return for £600m of government support to help decarbonise the industry.

Any taxpayer funding is to be linked to the replacement of blast furnaces at the company’s sites with greener electric arc furnaces, while Jingye would be obliged to invest at least £1bn in the business by 2030.

A decision to grant the state aid would not be without controversy, given British Steel’s Chinese ownership and doubts about its adherence to financial commitments made when it bought the business out of insolvency proceedings in 2020.

In a letter to Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, in December, Mr Shapps and Michael Gove, the levelling-up secretary, warned that British Steel’s demise could cost the government up to £1bn in decommissioning and other liabilities.

They cautioned Mr Hunt that British Steel “does not have a viable business without government support”.

“Closing one blast furnace would be a stepping-stone to closure of the second blast furnace, resulting in a highly unstable business model dependent on Chinese steel imports,” Mr Shapps and Mr Gove wrote.

“Given the magnitude of the liabilities due to fall on HMG in the event of blast furnace closure, and following the PM’s steer, we would like officials to test whether net Government support in the region of £300m for British Steel could prevent closure, protect jobs and create a cleaner viable long-term future for steel production in the United Kingdom.”

British Steel employs about 4,000 people, with thousands more jobs in its supply chain dependent upon the company.

Tata Steel employs substantially more people in the UK, including more than 4,000 at its Port Talbot steelworks in Wales.

According to the ministers’ letter, British Steel had already informed the government that it could close one of the Scunthorpe blast furnaces as soon as next month, with the loss of 1,700 jobs.

This would be “followed by the second blast furnace closing later in 2023, creating cumulative direct job losses of around 3,000”, Mr Shapps and Mr Gove wrote.

In May 2019, the Official Receiver was appointed to take control of the company after negotiations over an emergency £30m government loan fell apart.

British Steel had been formed in 2016 when India’s Tata Steel sold the business for £1 to Greybull Capital, an investment firm.

As part of the deal that secured ownership of British Steel for Jingye, the Chinese group said it would invest £1.2bn in modernising the business during the following decade.

Jingye’s purchase of the company, which completed in the spring of 2020, was hailed by Boris Johnson, the then prime minister, as assuring the future of steel production in Britain’s industrial heartlands.

Continue Reading

Business

Could Trump’s tariffs tip the world into recession?

Published

on

By

Could Trump's tariffs tip the world into recession?

Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs last week spooked the markets. 

Stock markets tumbled on Monday, with most US markets down and stocks in Hong Kong falling 13.2%, their worst day since 1997 during the Asian financial crisis.

There was slight growth in Asian and UK markets on Tuesday, but recovery is still a way off after a steep decline in reaction to Mr Trump’s tariffs on goods imported to the US, which he announced last week.

Tariffs latest: Follow live updates

US economists at Goldman Sachs raised their assessment of the odds that America will tip into recession to 45%, up from 35% the week before.

And if most tariffs aren’t reduced or negotiated away, “we expect to change our forecast to a recession”, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius said in an analyst note.

Other economists are raising similar alarms, with JPMorgan putting the odds of a US and global recession at 60% and projecting inflation will reach 4.4% by the end of this year, up from 2.8% currently.

How do you know if a recession has begun?

The most commonly used definition of a recession is at least two consecutive quarters of economic contraction – or “negative growth” – in gross domestic product (GDP).

To break that down, GDP is the total value of goods and services produced over a specific time period. When it goes up, the economy is considered to be doing well.

When it goes down – negative growth or economic contraction – it’s not doing well. And when it doesn’t do well for six months, it counts as a recession.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump: ‘No pause to tariffs’

In the US, the National Bureau of Economic Research is the body which officially declares a recession – taking in a variety of economic data, not just GDP, defining it as “a significant decline in economic activity that is spread across the economy and lasts more than a few months”.

Currently, there are no signs the US or global economy is in recession, and it remains unknown if tariffs will have a large enough impact to knock America’s into reverse.

But it is this uncertainty that has the potential to cause the most damage.

“People are all at sea,” Sky News Business Live presenter Darren McCaffrey told the Sky News Daily podcast.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

“No one can quite work out whether President Trump wants a genuine rewiring of globalisation, what the consequences of that will be for the US and globally, and that these tariffs will remain permanent, or whether this is part of a negotiating tactic.

“That’s what no one can work out. That uncertainty is difficult, and it is going to cause damage.”

Stockbroker Russ Mould added that the markets are hoping the Trump administration is planning to use tariffs as a way of extracting better trade deals from existing trade partners. If this happens, it would help restore global trade to what’s been the standard in recent decades.

A screen shows trading of the Dow Jones Industrial Average after the closing bell. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Pic: Reuters

What could a global recession mean?

If the US and the rest of the world falls into recession – even if the UK doesn’t – it will “fundamentally mean we will all be poorer in the future,” McCaffrey said.

He added that Britain especially has not had a prolonged period of serious economic growth for a long time – held back by the financial crisis in 2008, the shock of Brexit, COVID, the Ukraine war and now US tariffs.

However, it is not all doom and gloom.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Day 79: Trump’s tariff turmoil

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

“The markets will always find a way,” McCaffrey says.

“The US is the world’s largest economy, but it is only 13% of global trade. Countries like China, Vietnam, Cambodia and others with high tariffs will find new markets. And one of the places that benefit from that in the short-medium term could be the UK.

“It will also force big wealthy blocs – the biggest of which is the EU – to look for new markets. Canada is also suggesting they would like a trade deal with the UK.

“This will cause damage to the US economy more than anywhere else, because other countries will want to be more reliant on more stable partners. As always with economics, there are winners and losers and ultimately the market will find a place for lots of these goods.”

How could the UK best prepare for potential recession?

Instead of retaliatory tariffs, the UK is looking to secure a post-Brexit trade deal with the US, Russ Mould explained, calling that “the UK’s primary goal”.

But if the UK is stuck with tariffs in the long-term, Mr Mould said it would be wise to consider deals with other countries.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM makes first post-tariff moves

He said: “Statistics show that 87% of global trade does not involve US, so maybe you can look elsewhere for trade deals with countries who also feel they have been badly treated by tariffs. I would guess India would be at the top of that list.

“The question is how quickly can trade deals be struck, given the fact the UK has been casting the net around for the last five years without a huge amount of progress.”

Read more:
Everything you need to know about Trump’s tariffs

What China could do next as Trump’s tariff war ramps-up
A major economic shock is happening thanks to Trump

Mr Mould added that the recipe for economic growth in any market is the growth of the labour force coupled with productivity growth.

“In terms of productivity, [leaders] are probably looking at targeted tax breaks for investment and to stimulate research and development. Other positive things for long-term benefits include examining infrastructure and transport access,” Mr Mould said.

“In terms of encouraging labour participation, you are into the deep waters of whether it is education or tax breaks for child care. All of those are very long-term solutions to a potential near-term challenge.”

Listen to the full Sky News Daily episode here

Continue Reading

Business

Philip Green’s human rights not breached when he was named in parliament over injunction, court rules

Published

on

By

Philip Green's human rights not breached when he was named in parliament over injunction, court rules

Retail tycoon Sir Philip Green’s human rights were not breached when he was named in parliament as the holder of an injunction against the Telegraph newspaper, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled.

The former Topshop boss previously obtained a court injunction preventing the Telegraph from publishing allegations of misconduct made against him by five ex-employees who had agreed to keep the details of their complaints confidential under non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

Sir Philip “categorically” denied any unlawful sexual behaviour.

However, he was named as the businessman behind the injunction in parliament in October 2018 by Labour peer Lord Hain who used parliamentary privilege.

Parliamentary privilege grants certain legal immunities for members of both the House of Commons and House of Lords and is in place to ensure MPs and peers can go about their work without fear of being sued or prosecuted for contempt of court.

Sir Philip brought a complaint to the ECHR, with lawyers for the Monaco-based businessman challenging the absence of controls on the power of parliamentary privilege to reveal information covered by an injunction.

On Tuesday, the ECHR ruled against Sir Philip.

In a unanimous decision, eight judges in Strasbourg found the right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had not been violated.

A majority of the judges also found that his complaints brought under Article 6, the right to a fair hearing, and Article 13, the right to an effective remedy, were “inadmissible”.

NDAs are legal contracts often used by companies to preserve confidentiality. If the contract is breached, the party breaking the agreement could be liable for damages in the form of hefty financial compensation.

Read more from Sky News:
Trump’s tariffs: what you need to know
Warnings of retail closures over NI hike

Following the ECHR ruling on Tuesday, Lord Hain said: “I’m really pleased that the Strasbourg Court [has] defended parliamentary privilege.”

Sir Philip became one of the UK’s best-known retail tycoons when he bought department store group BHS in 2000 and Topshop owner Arcadia Group in 2002.

But his reputation was damaged by the collapse of BHS after he sold the chain for one pound in 2015 to a businessman who had previously been declared bankrupt.

Arcadia Group subsequently went into administration in 2020.

Sky News has approached Sir Philip’s representatives for comment on Tuesday’s ruling.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump’s tariffs could herald one of the most painful episodes in modern times – here’s why | Ed Conway

Published

on

By

Trump's tariffs could herald one of the most painful episodes in modern times - here's why | Ed Conway

Of course this is dramatic. Of course markets are slumping.

Because if you take Donald Trump at his word (something investors are now finally beginning to do), he is attempting single-handedly to reverse and uproot decades worth of economic history in the space of a few months.

Because if this really is “the end of globalisation”, as a few politicians, including Keir Starmer, are now calling it, it constitutes one of the most wrenching, painful episodes in modern times.

Money: Petrol prices could tumble within 10 days

To see what I mean, the best place to begin is by pondering the hidden life of the device you’re reading this on. I’m assuming it’s a smartphone, specifically the latest iPhone, but most of the following applies for other smartphones and, indeed, many laptops or desktop computers.

The display was made in South Korea or Japan. The camera module was made by Sony in Japan (who have a particular expertise in this type of specialised silicon that few other companies have been able to match). The batteries (for the latest iPhone at least) are made in India, though these days, the vast majority of the world’s cells are made in China.

On it goes – the memory chips from South Korea, which has a near monopoly on solid state storage silicon. The logic chips – the ones that help the device “think”- made in Taiwan, albeit with intellectual property (IP) from all over the world, including America and even Britain. Some of the chips do indeed come from the US – in particular the modem, though the company behind them (Qualcomm) sometimes manufactures in Taiwan. But there are some from Europe too – most notably the spatial sensor chips that come from Bosch in Germany.

More on Stock Market

Globalisation is in your hands

If you are looking for an example of “globalisation”, you couldn’t do much better than the smartphone. But even this potted geography lesson understates it because those fabrication plants in Taiwan and South Korea, turning out those silicon chips that help the phone think and remember stuff, are totally dependent on machines made by a company called ASML, based in the Netherlands. Those Dutch machines, in turn, contain components from hundreds of other companies around the world, including in Germany and the US. On it goes.

Nor is this degree of interconnectedness solely to be found in high-tech equipment. The other day, I was up in Scunthorpe at the blast furnaces of British Steel. It turns out the iron they smelt there doesn’t just go into the rails that striate this country. They also make the steel that go into the tracks of Caterpillar trucks.

Trump tariffs latest: UK stock market suffers
Politics latest: Trump tariffs ‘bad news’ for global economy, cabinet minister

That’s right: the iconic tracked diggers – for many people the most American of all things – are all mounted on steel “track shoes” made in the North East of England (the plant is a little further north of Scunthorpe, in Skinningrove).

The further you look around the world of manufactured products, the more you realise that nearly everything you touch on a daily basis has, in the months before it arrived in your life, been on a long trip from factory to factory, taking it all around the world. That device you’re reading this on may say “made in China” on the back, but that’s an enormous over-simplification. It was made more or less everywhere.

This is the way the world works today – like it or not. In a sense it’s the ultimate extension of what Adam Smith discussed back in the earliest days of economics, when he described a “pin factory” where the work of making a simple pin was divided up between different people, with each worker specialising in a particular task rather than trying to make the whole pin themselves.

The swings and roundabouts of globalisation

Today, we have a sort of international division of labour. Today, nearly everyone goes to China to get their batteries. They go to South Korea to get their memory chips. The upshot is these factories have become ever more efficient at making their products. And – here’s where it matters for the rest of us – the price of making and buying this stuff goes down.

Today, the reason one can buy what would once have been classified as a supercomputer for a few hundred pounds is because of this division of labour. Globalisation made everything, from computers to Caterpillar trucks to T-Shirts, that bit cheaper than they would have been had we attempted to manufacture them all in a single country.

Trader Christopher Lagana. Pic: AP
Image:
Trader Christopher Lagana. Pic: AP

But the ugly side of this economic shift is that those regions that used to do the manufacturing – be it the “rust belt” of America or the Midlands and North East of England – have seen much of their traditional work disappear. And while economists have insisted that cheaper products make everyone better off in net terms, the reality is that these parts of our countries haven’t got better off. They have been hollowed out. And in time, resentment about globalisation has built up – for good reason.

Trump’s aspiration

This is the world we inhabit today. Unpicking it will be phenomenally difficult and phenomenally expensive. Trying to relocate all those functions – factories and labour markets with expertise that has built up over decades – would be incredibly difficult and would take a long time. But that seems, as far as anyone can tell, to be the aspiration of Donald Trump. That appears to be the objective of his tariff policy.

Up until now, most investors had assumed that the president wasn’t entirely serious about this – that he merely intended to scare a few Asian companies into opening factories in key swing states. And who knows – that may well turn out to be the case. But he certainly seems more serious this time around – and less fazed by the negative market reaction.

In the meantime, we are left with those tariffs.

Costs will go up

Think back to that iPhone. Think back to those Caterpillar tracks. All those components now face swinging tariffs when they arrive in the US. That will push up the cost of buying pretty much anything in the US and will accordingly push down the demand for those goods. And since America is the world’s consumer of last resort – the biggest importer of goods anywhere – that has an enormous bearing on demand around the world.

So, yes, of course, this is dramatic. Of course, markets are slumping. No one knows what the US president will do next. But either way, what happened last week in the Rose Garden will reverberate for a long time to come.

Continue Reading

Trending