And it was further emphasised when, today, BAE announced it is spending $5.55bn (£4.35bn) on the aerospace division of the US packaging giant Ball Corporation.
The deal, described by BAE as a “unique opportunity to strengthen BAE Systems’ world class multi-domain portfolio”, is the biggest acquisition this year by a British company.
The Ball Corporation is a specialist supplier of satellite systems, geospatial intelligence, tactical solutions and antenna arrays.
The acquisition of its aerospace arm takes BAE more deeply into both the space sector and into what, in defence industry jargon, is described as ‘C4ISR’ – command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.
Ball, the world’s biggest maker of aluminium drink cans, put the business up for sale earlier this year as it seeks to focus on packaging and to reduce its $9.7bn debt pile – which is partly a legacy of its £4.5bn takeover of Rexam, the former FTSE-100 packaging group, in June 2016.
More on Defence
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:42
In November Sir Simon Lister discussed BAE’s Royal Navy contract to build five ships in Govan, Glasgow
Rivals beaten by BAE
BAE faced stiff competition to buy the business.
Advertisement
Private equity companies Blackstone and Veritas Capital were both in the running, as were other defence contractors, including the $61bn US giant General Dynamics and Textron, whose products include Cessna aircraft.
Charles Woodburn, the BAE chief executive, said the business – which BAE had not expected to become available – would be an “excellent addition” to BAE’s portfolio and an “excellent strategic fit”.
He added: “This is a significant and exciting day for BAE Systems.”
Mr Woodburn said Ball Aerospace was expected to grow its sales by 10% a year during the next five years and that it was also expected to add to BAE’s profits during the first year following the deal.
Ball Aerospace has already doubled its sales during the last five years and BAE expects those sales – which were $1.98bn in 2022 – to hit some $4bn by the end of the decade.
Mr Woodburn added: “We are making this acquisition from a position of strength. Ball Aerospace hits the mark in terms of a number of our strategic priorities… [including] defence, intelligence and scientific missions.”
Why BAE bought Ball Aerospace
Mr Woodburn outlined several reasons for buying Colorado-based Ball Aerospace.
The first is that the space sector is a market of growing importance to BAE’s customers. It will also deepen BAE’s relationship with the likes of NASA – one of Ball Aerospace’s key customers.
The second is the growing importance to BAE’s customers of environmental monitoring and surveillance as they seek to respond to climate change.
Ball Aerospace, which employs more than 5,200 people, is a key supplier of advanced remote sensing and other scientific systems and analytic tools and expertise.
It also enjoys a strong relationship with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the US government body that provides daily weather forecasts, storm warnings and climate monitoring.
Tom Arseneault, who heads BAE’s US arm BAE Systems Inc, said the war had led to a surprisingly rapid drawdown of munitions that was forcing governments to spend more in areas such as that serviced by Ball’s tactical solutions business, which supplies stealth cameras and antennas used on land and sea, and in air and space.
He said the company was optimistic about the regulatory process – a key point given that the US government, under first Barack Obama and then Donald Trump, has become increasingly sensitive in recent years about allowing the acquisition of strategic businesses by overseas buyers.
The deal means the US will now account for just under half of BAE’s global sales.
Image: The Prince of Wales talks to BAE Systems apprentice Charlotte and Typhoon delivery director Martin Topping during a visit to RAF Coningsby, Lincolnshire
Debt fears cause shares to fall
Shares of BAE fell by just over 5% on the news amid concerns that BAE’s debt will increase following the takeover.
Some analysts also expressed concerns that Ball Aerospace’s profit margins are slightly below those enjoyed by BAE’s electronic systems arm.
BAE’s margin is between 15-17% while Ball’s margins are between 10-12%.
But Mr Arseneault dismissed that, arguing that synergies between the two businesses would in time bring Ball Aerospace’s margins higher.
He added: “As part of a company with like supply chains, similar customers and… the ability of the teams to leverage each other’s connections and buying power will… underpin margin improvement.”
That pledge probably stacks up given BAE’s recent history.
As Mr Woodburn noted, BAE has a track record during the last few years of improving margins in its electronic systems business, while more broadly it also has a solid track record in integrating acquisitions in this field.
Following the blockbuster merger between US defence giants United Technologies and Raytheon in 2019, US regulators forced the enlarged company to offload a number of businesses, two of which were subsequently snapped up by BAE.
These were successfully integrated into BAE’s electronic systems business despite the disruption posed when the pandemic erupted shortly afterwards.
The bigger picture is that, while many people associate BAE with military hardware such as jet fighters, tanks, submarines and torpedoes – all of which remain important parts of what it does – the company has been evolving over recent years.
Products and services in electronic systems, cyber security and intelligence are an increasingly crucial part of what it offers customers.
The war in Ukraine has highlighted, in particular, the importance of satellite technology.
The way warfare is conducted is changing – and this deal underlines how this important British business is responding.
Donald Trump’s trade war escalation has sparked a global sell-off, with US stock markets seeing the biggest declines in a hit to values estimated above $2trn.
Tech and retail shares were among those worst hit when Wall Street opened for business, following on from a flight from risk across both Asia and Europe earlier in the day.
Analysis by the investment platform AJ Bell put the value of the peak losses among major indices at $2.2trn (£1.7trn).
The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite was down 5.8%, the S&P 500 by 4.3% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by just under 4% at the height of the declines. It left all three on course for their worst one-day losses since at least September 2022 though the sell-off later eased back slightly.
Analysts said the focus in the US was largely on the impact that the expanded tariff regime will have on the domestic economy but also effects on global sales given widespread anger abroad among the more than 180 nations and territories hit by reciprocal tariffs on Mr Trump‘s self-styled “liberation day”.
They are set to take effect next week, with tariffs on all car, steel and aluminium imports already in effect.
Price rises are a certainty in the world’s largest economy as the president’s additional tariffs kick in, with those charges expected to be passed on down supply chains to the end user.
The White House believes its tariffs regime will force employers to build factories and hire workers in the US to escape the charges.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:07
The latest numbers on tariffs
Economists warn the additional costs will add upward pressure to US inflation and potentially choke demand and hiring, ricking a slide towards recession.
Apple was among the biggest losers in cash terms in Thursday’s trading as its shares fell by almost 9%, leaving it on track for its worst daily performance since the start of the COVID pandemic.
Concerns among shareholders were said to include the prospects for US price hikes when its products are shipped to the US from Asia.
Other losers included Tesla, down by almost 6% and Nvidia down by more than 6%.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:54
PM: It’s ‘a new era’ for trade and economy
Many retail stocks including those for Target and Footlocker lost more than 10% of their respective market values.
The European Union is expected to retaliate in a bid to put pressure on the US to back down.
The prospect of a tit-for-tat trade war saw the CAC 40 in France and German DAX fall by more than 3.4% and 3% respectively.
The FTSE 100, which is internationally focused, was 1.6% lower by the close – a three-month low.
Financial stocks were worst hit with Asia-focused Standard Chartered bank enduring the worst fall in percentage terms of 13%, followed closely by its larger rival HSBC.
Among the stocks seeing big declines were those for big energy as oil Brent crude costs fell back by 6% to $70 due to expectations a trade war will hurt demand.
The more domestically relevant FTSE 250 was 2.2% lower.
A weakening dollar saw the pound briefly hit a six-month high against the US currency at $1.32.
There was a rush for safe haven gold earlier in the day as a new record high was struck though it was later trading down.
Sean Sun, portfolio manager at Thornburg Investment Management, said of the state of play: “Markets may actually be underreacting, especially if these rates turn out to be final, given the potential knock-on effects to global consumption and trade.”
He warned there was a big risk of escalation ahead through countermeasures against the US.
Sandra Ebner, senior economist at Union Investment, said: “We assume that the tariffs will not remain in place in the announced range, but will instead be a starting point for further negotiations.
“Trump has set a maximum demand from which the level of tariffs should decrease”.
She added: “Since the measures would not affect all regions and sectors equally, there will be winners and losers as in 2018 – although the losers are more likely to be in the EU than in North America.
“To protect companies in Europe from the effects of tariffs, the EU should not respond with high counter-tariffs. In any case, their impact in the US is not likely to be significant. It would be more efficient to provide targeted support to EU companies in the form of investment and stimulus.”
British companies and business groups have expressed alarm over President Donald Trump’s 10% tariff on UK goods entering the US – but cautioned against retaliatory measures.
It comes as Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds launched a consultation with firms on taxes the UK could implement in response to the new levies.
A 400-page list of 8,000 US goods that could be targeted by UK tariffs has been published, including items like whiskey and jeans.
On so-called “Liberation Day”, Mr Trump announced UK goods entering the US will be subject to a 10% tax while cars will be slapped with a 25% levy.
The government’s handling of tariff negotiations with the US to date has been praised by representative and industry bodies as being “cool” and “calm” – and they urged ministers to continue that approach by not retaliating.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:07
The latest numbers on tariffs
Business lobby group the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) said: “Retaliation will only add to supply chain disruption, slow down investment, and stoke volatility in prices”.
Industry body the British Retail Consortium (BRC) also cautioned: “Retaliatory tariffs should only be a last resort”.
‘Deeply troubling’
While a major category of exports, in the form of services – like finance and information technology (IT) – has been exempted from the tariffs, the impact on UK business is expected to be significant.
Mr Trump’s announcement was described as “deeply troubling for businesses” by the CBI’s chief executive Rain Newton-Smith.
The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) also said the tariffs were “a major blow” to small and medium companies (SMEs), as 59% of small UK exporters sell to the US. It called for emergency government aid to help those affected.
“Tariffs will cause untold damage to small businesses trying to trade their way into profit while the domestic economy remains flat,” the FSB’s policy chair Tina McKenzie said. “The fallout will stifle growth” and “hurt opportunities”, she added.
Companies will need to adapt and overcome, the British Export Association said, but added: “Unfortunately adaptation will come at a cost that not all businesses will be able to bear.”
Watch dealer and component seller Darren Townend told Sky News the 10% hit would be “painful” as “people will buy less”.
“I am a fan of Trump, but this is nuts,” he said. “I expect some bad months ahead.”
Industry body Make UK said the 25% tariffs on cars, steel and aluminium would in particular be devastating for UK manufacturing.
Cars hard hit
Carmakers are among the biggest losers from the world trade order reshuffle.
Auto industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said the taxes were “deeply disappointing and potentially damaging measure”.
“These tariff costs cannot be absorbed by manufacturers”, SMMT chief executive Mike Hawes said. “UK producers may have to review output in the face of constrained demand”.
The new taxes on cars took effect on Thursday morning, while the measures impacting car parts are due to come in on 3 May.
Economists immediately started scratching their heads when Donald Trump raised his tariffs placard in the Rose Garden on Wednesday.
On that list he detailed the rate the US believes it is being charged by each country, along with its response: A reciprocal tariff at half that rate.
So, take China for example. Donald Trump said his team had run the numbers and the world’s second-largest economy was implementing an effective tariff of 67% on US imports. The US is responding with 34%.
How did he come up with that 67%? This is where things get a bit murky. The US claims it studied its trading relationship with individual countries, examining non-tariff barriers as well as tariff barriers. That includes, for example, regulations that make it difficult for US exporters.
However, the actual methodology appears to be far cruder. Instead of responding to individual countries’ trade barriers, Trump is attacking those enjoying large trade surpluses with the US.
A formula released by the US trade representative laid this bare. It took the US’s trade deficit in goods with each country and divided that by imports from that country. That figure was then divided by two.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
So, in the case of China, which has a trade surplus of $295bn on total US exports of $438bn, that gives a ratio of 68%. The US divided that by two, giving a reciprocal tariff of 34%.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:58
PM will ‘fight’ for deal with US
This is a blunt measure which targets big importers to the US, irrespective of the trade barriers they have erected. This is all part of Donald Trump’s efforts to shrink the country’s deficit – although it’s US consumers who will end up paying the price.
But what about the small number of countries where the US has a trade surplus? Shouldn’t they actually be benefiting from all of this?
That includes the UK, with whom the US has a surplus (by its own calculations) of $12bn. By its own reciprocal tariff formula, the UK should be benefitting from a “negative tariff” of 9%.
Instead, it has been hit by a 10% baseline tariff. Number 10 may be breathing a sigh of relief – the US could, after all, have gone after us for our 20% VAT rate on imports, which it takes issue with – but, by Trump’s own measure, we haven’t got off as lightly as we should have.