There will be much to chew over at the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) spring meetings this week.

Central bankers and finance ministers will descend on Washington for its latest bi-annual gathering, a place where politicians and academics converge, all of them trying to make sense of what’s going on in the global economy.

Everything and nothing has changed since they last met in October – one man continues to dominate the agenda.

Six months ago, delegates were wondering if Donald Trump could win the election and what that might mean for tax and tariffs: How far would he push it? Would his policy match his rhetoric?

This time round, expect iterations of the same questions: Will the US president risk plunging the world’s largest economy into recession?

Yes, he put on a bombastic display on his so-called “Liberation Day”, but will he now row back? Have the markets effectively checked him?

Behind the scenes, finance ministers from around the world will be practising their powers of persuasion, each jostling for meetings with their US counterparts to negotiate a reduction in Trump’s tariffs.

That includes Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who is still holding out hope for a trade deal with the US – although she is not alone in that.

Read more:
PM and Trump step up trade talks
Ed Conway on the impact of US tariffs

Are we heading for a recession?

The IMF’s economists have already made up their minds about Trump’s potential for damage.

Last week, they warned about the growing risks to financial stability after a period of turbulence in the financial markets, induced by Trump’s decision to ratchet up US protectionism to its highest level in a century.

By the middle of this week the organisation will publish its World Economic Outlook, in which it will downgrade global growth but stop short of predicting a full-blown recession.

Others are less optimistic.

Kristalina Georgieva, the IMF’s managing director, said last week: “Our new growth projections will include notable markdowns, but not recession. We will also see markups to the inflation forecasts for some countries.”

She acknowledged the world was undergoing a “reboot of the global trading system,” comparing trade tensions to “a pot that was bubbling for a long time and is now boiling over”.

She went on: “To a large extent, what we see is the result of an erosion of trust – trust in the international system, and trust between countries.”

Don’t poke the bear

It was a carefully calibrated response. Georgieva did not lay the blame at the US’s door and stopped short of calling on the Trump administration to stop or water down its aggressive tariffs policy.

That might have been a choice. To the frustration of politicians past and present, the IMF does not usually shy away from making its opinions known.

Last year it warned Jeremy Hunt against cutting taxes, and back in 2022 it openly criticised the Liz Truss government’s plans, warning tax cuts would fuel inflation and inequality.

Taking such a candid approach with Trump invites risks. His administration is already weighing up whether to withdraw from global institutions, including the IMF and the World Bank.

The US is the largest shareholder in both, and its departure could be devastating for two organisations that have been pillars of the world economic order since the end of the Second World War.

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

Here in the UK, Andrew Bailey has already raised concerns about the prospect of global fragmentation.

It is “very important that we don’t have a fragmentation of the world economy,” the Bank of England’s governor said.

“A big part of that is that we have support and engagement in the multilateral institutions, institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, that support the operation of the world economy. That’s really important.”

The Trump administration might take a different view when its review of intergovernmental organisations is complete.

That is the main tension running through this year’s spring meetings.

How much the IMF will say and how much we will have to read between the lines, remains to be seen.

DHL Express is suspending some shipments to the US as Donald Trump’s new tariff regime takes effect.

From 21 April, shipments worth more than $800 (£603) to US consumers from “any origin” will be temporarily suspended.

New rules that came into effect at the start of April made such shipments subject to increased customs checks.

“This change has caused a surge in formal customs clearances, which we are handling around the clock,” said the parcel delivery service.

Shipments going from business to business worth more than $800 aren’t affected by the suspension, but DHL warned they may also face delays.

Shipments under $800 to either businesses or consumers are not impacted, but one British cycle manufacturer suggested its US customers may need to split orders over $800 into “smaller shipments” to avoid the red tape.

Read more:
The art of doing a deal with Trump
Is there method to Trump’s madness?

Trump targeting ‘deceptive’ practices

From May, shipments from China and Hong Kong that are worth less than $800 “will be subject to all applicable duties”, according to the White House.

“President Trump is targeting deceptive shipping practices by Chinese-based shippers, many of whom hide illicit substances, including synthetic opioids, in low-value packages,” it said in a statement.

Until now, deliveries worth less than $800 didn’t incur any duties, which allowed low-cost companies Chinese like Shein and Temu to make inroads in the US.

Both have warned their prices will now rise because of the rule changes, starting on 25 April.

Premier League match tickets at Chelsea have been selling for more than twice the price of a season ticket on an American exchange website with a familiar director and investor to supporters – club chairman Todd Boehly.

Amid growing fan fury, Sky News was able to access the Vivid Seats platform on different devices last week from London – and saw tickets for the visit of Liverpool on 4 May, priced by Chelsea at a maximum of £80, being sold for between £537 and £2,666.

Some tickets were listed as being sold by traders.

Chelsea’s official website appeared to show no availability for this premium fixture, with the Blues battling for Champions League qualification and Liverpool potentially celebrating being crowned Premier League winners.

The most expensive Stamford Bridge season ticket for this campaign was £1,015.

Vivid is listed by the Premier League among “unauthorised ticket websites” with a message: “We would urge fans to exercise extreme caution when dealing with these websites.”

The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust has written to the Premier League to ask that Vivid – given its ties with a club’s shareholder – “ceases facilitating the sale of tickets for significantly above face value”.

Mr Boehly – part of the consortium that replaced Roman Abramovich as owner in 2022 – has not addressed accusations of a “conflict of interest” or claims he is undermining efforts to combat ticket touting.

There are anti-touting warnings on signs in the streets approaching the stadium.

An official Chelsea Ticket Exchange allows season ticket holders to sell their tickets “at the pro-rata price of season tickets” to a club member “in a safe, secure environment”.

While Chelsea’s website says to only buy tickets in the UK from official sellers, it adds: “Many of the websites that advertise and sell tickets online are not within the jurisdiction of UK law.

“This means, while we report these sites when we see Chelsea tickets on them, there is little we can do to shut down the sites.”

On Vivid, we did see warnings telling visiting users not to buy seats in the home sections and a pop-up eventually appeared after browsing the availability, saying: “Tickets for the EPL matches are not currently available for purchase in your location.”

No attempt was made by us to buy tickets. But should we have been able to see the listings at all?

Sky News first asked for comment from Vivid last Monday and continued to see ticket listings with variable prices in pounds during the week. It took until Friday night for any form of response.

“Vivid Seats respectfully adheres to the laws that are in place in the United Kingdom and is not in violation of any regulations around EPL tickets,” the email read in part. “As such, Vivid Seats’ policy restricts the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”

When Sky News checked the website again on Saturday the listings for Premier League matches were no longer visible as they are from outside of Britain.

Asked if they were no longer visible after our inquiries, Vivid’s official replied: “The conclusions that you are drawing are factually incorrect.

“We understand that people will try to find ways to circumvent technology and as such, we have validation protocols in place in order to restrict the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”

Again, Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain.

But the same official did not respond to an email detailing how we were able to view the tickets listings from London on separate days, without using VPN software that can make your browser seem as if it’s accessing the internet from another country.

‘It’s the only way I was going to get here’

Ticket exchange websites can be the only way for some fans overseas to come to matches.

When Ipswich played at Stamford Bridge on 13 April, Baz Gillespie was able to watch after 20 years living in Cyprus by paying a vastly-inflated £300 for two tickets on a website other than Vivid.

“The only way I was going to get here was that way,” he said, remembering the days he could just queue up and pay a fiver for a ticket.

The same match was Martin van Dijk’s first-ever game at the Bridge, having come from the Netherlands after paying €150 (£128) on another exchange website after initially trying through Vivid.

“If there’s no other option, and you want to visit, it’s the only way, but I’d rather get it through like the normal way,” he said.

‘An absolute disgrace’

It is the “normal way” that so many supporters want to protect and are aghast at Mr Boehly’s links to Vivid, predating his purchase of a stake in Chelsea.

“It’s an absolute disgrace,” supporter Ben Grey said. “He shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website. It’s unethical from a basic perspective.

“The club are coming out with communication saying that they’re against ticket reselling and our semi-majority shareholder [has a website] reselling tickets to our games.”

Asked what the Premier League should do, he replied: “I’m a massive Chelsea fan, I don’t want Chelsea to be hit hard by anything.

“But the fact of the matter is they need to sort that out and if they’re allowing there to be an owner of a club who’s reselling tickets, it’s a disgrace.”

‘Not a very good look’

Another fan, Rich Still, called it “21st century greed”.

The issue is resonating with young children.

Rhys Edwards, watching with his father, said: “It doesn’t look too good on Chelsea and their owners to be fair.

“Saying that [the website] is not authorised by the league they’re playing in isn’t a very good look.”

Officials with Chelsea, the Premier League and Mr Boehly declined to comment.

The Vivid statement to Sky News stressed: “It is important to note that Vivid Seats does not set the base price for tickets sold on its marketplace or receive any revenue from that base price; only the seller sets and receives the base ticket price.”

‘It’s like the Wild West’

Vivid highlighted to Sky News its “long-standing partnership”, including being a backer of a 2023 summer tour of the United States.

Chelsea’s website featured a quote saying: “We are pleased to join with a company committed to becoming the ultimate partner for connecting fans to the live events, teams and artists they love.”

The government has launched a consultation to prevent people from being ripped off in Britain by the resale of tickets.

Read more:
Chelsea star’s £160,000 car seized
UK set to host 2035 Women’s World Cup

The limit could range from the cost of the original ticket to a 30% uplift to stop the public being “fleeced” by professional touts.

Labour MP for Ealing Central and Acton, Rupa Huq, has separately proposed a change to the law to improve pricing transparency on secondary ticketing sites.

“It’s an unregulated market,” she told Sky News. “It’s like the Wild West. It needs getting back into control.”