Connect with us

Published

on

Donald Trump has signed two proclamations imposing 25% tariffs on all steel and aluminium imports to the US.

A proclamation is a form of presidential directive to government officials, but they do not carry the force of law, as an executive order would.

However the White House has said the tariffs will take effect from 4 March.

“This is a big deal,” Mr Trump said in the Oval Office as he announced the tariffs. “The beginning of making America rich again.”

He added: “We were being pummelled by both friend and foe alike.”

Read more
Analysis: Trump’s steel and aluminium tariffs target a deeper issue
Trump issues Gaza ceasefire ultimatum to Hamas
Analysis: The country that could benefit most from Trump tariffs

President Donald Trump speaks with reporters as he signs executive orders in the Oval Office at the White House. Pic: PA
Image:
‘We were being pummelled by both friend and foe alike,’ said the US president

The proclamations mean the president has now removed the exceptions and exemptions from his 2018 tariffs on steel to allow for all imports of the metal to be taxed at 25%.

More from US

The new tariff on aluminium is also much higher than the 10% duty he imposed on the material in his first term.

The tariffs are part of an aggressive push by Mr Trump to reset global trade, as he claims that price hikes on the people and companies buying foreign-made products will ultimately strengthen domestic manufacturing.

Outside economic analyses suggest the tariffs would increase costs for the factories that use steel and aluminium, possibly leaving US manufacturers worse off.

Canada, the largest source of steel imports to the US, criticised the move.

Candace Laing, CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said Mr Trump was destabilising the global economy.

“Today’s news makes it clear that perpetual uncertainty is here to stay,” she said.

Hard to see how tariffs won’t be inflationary



Ed Conway

Economics and data editor

@EdConwaySky

At least part of the idea behind tariffs is to bring some production back to the US, but imposing them will have consequences.

What kinds of consequences? Well, at its simplest, tariffs push up prices. This is, when you think about it, blindingly obvious.

A tariff is a tax on a good entering the country.

So if aluminium and steel are going up in price then that means, all else equal, that the cost of making everything from aircraft wings to steel rivets also goes up.

That in turn means consumers end up paying the price – and if a company can’t make ends meet in the face of these tariffs, it means job losses – possibly within the very industrial sectors the president wants to protect.

So says the economic theory. But in practice, economics isn’t everything.

There are countless examples throughout history of countries defying economic logic in search of other goals.

Perhaps they want to improve their national self-reliance in a given product; perhaps they want to ensure certain jobs in cherished areas or industries are protected.

But nothing comes for free, and even if Donald Trump’s tariffs succeed in persuading domestic producers to smelt more aluminium or steel, such things don’t happen overnight.

In the short run, it’s hard to see how these tariffs wouldn’t be significantly inflationary.

Trump’s war of tariffs

Mr Trump’s proclamations come days after the US imposed a 10% tariff on all goods imported from China.

In return, China imposed 10% tariffs on American crude oil, agricultural machinery, large-displacement cars and pickup trucks.

There will also be 15% tariffs on coal and liquefied natural gas from the US.

US plans to impose 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada were paused after agreements were reached on border security.

Mexico’s president said she was sending 10,000 National Guard troops to the US border immediately in return for a tariff delay.

Mr Trump said the Mexican soldiers would be “specifically designated” to stop the flow of fentanyl into the US, as well as illegal migrants.

Meanwhile, Canada’s prime minister Justin Trudeau said almost 10,000 frontline personnel “are and will be working on protecting the border”.

He added that his country was appointing a “fentanyl czar”, drug cartels would be listed as terrorists, and there would be “24/7 eyes on the border”.

Continue Reading

Business

Direct cost of Jaguar Land Rover cyber attack which impacted UK economic growth revealed

Published

on

By

Direct cost of Jaguar Land Rover cyber attack which impacted UK economic growth revealed

The cyber attack on Jaguar Land Rover (JLR), which halted production for nearly six weeks at its sites, cost the company roughly £200m, it has been revealed.

Latest accounts released on Friday showed “cyber-related costs” were £196m, which does not include the fall in sales.

Profits took a nose dive, falling from nearly £400m (£398m) a year ago to a loss of £485m in the three months to the end of September.

Money blog: Apple launches £220 iPhone ‘sock’ today – fans are divided

Revenues dropped nearly 25% and the effects may continue as the manufacturing halt could slow sales in the final three months of the year, executives said.

The impact of the shutdown also hit factories across the car-making supply chain.

Slowing the UK economy

The production pause was a large contributor to a contraction in UK economic growth in September, official figures showed.

Had car output not fallen 28.6%, the UK economy would have grown by 0.1% during the month. Instead, it fell by 0.1%.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How cyber attack ‘effectively hacked GDP’

Read more from Sky News:
Telegraph future in limbo again as RedBird abandons £500m deal

Reacting to JLR’s impact on the GDP contraction, its chief financial officer, Richard Molyneux, said it was “interesting to hear” and it “goes to reinforce” that JLR is really important in the UK economy.

The company, he said, is the “biggest exporter of goods in the entire country” and the effect on GDP “is a reflection of the success JLR has had in past years”.

Recovery

The company said operations were “pretty much back running as normal” and plants were “at or approaching capacity”.

Production of all luxury vehicles resumed.

Investigations are underway into the attack, with law enforcement in “many jurisdictions” involved, the company said.

When asked about the cause of the hack and the hackers, JLR said it was not in a position to answer questions due to the live investigation.

A run of attacks

The manufacturer was just one of a number of major companies to be seriously impacted by cyber criminals in recent months.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Are we in a cyber attack ‘epidemic’?

High street retailer Marks and Spencer estimated the cost of its IT outage was roughly £136m. The sum only covers the cost of immediate incident systems response and recovery, as well as specialist legal and professional services support.

The Co-Op and Harrods also suffered service disruption caused by cyber attacks.

Four people were arrested by police investigating the incidents.

Continue Reading

Business

Telegraph future in limbo again as RedBird abandons £500m deal

Published

on

By

Telegraph future in limbo again as RedBird abandons £500m deal

The future ownership of the Daily Telegraph has been plunged back into crisis after RedBird Capital Partners abandoned its proposed £500m takeover.

Sky News has learnt that a consortium led by RedBird and including the UAE-based investor IMI has formally withdrawn its offer to buy the right-leaning newspaper titles.

In a statement issued to Sky News, a RedBird Capital Partners spokesman confirmed: “RedBird has today withdrawn its bid for the Telegraph Media Group.

“We remain fully confident that the Telegraph and its world-class team have a bright future ahead of them and we will work hard to help secure a solution which is in the best interests of employees and readers.”

Money blog: Apple launches £220 iPhone ‘sock’

The move comes nearly two-and-a-half years after the Telegraph’s future was plunged into doubt when its lenders seized control from the Barclay family, its long-standing proprietors.

RedBird IMI then extended financing which gave it a call option to own the newspapers, but its original proposal was thwarted by objections to foreign state ownership of British national newspapers.

A new deal was then stitched together which included funding from Daily Mail owner Lord Rothermere and Sir Leonard Blavatnik, the billionaire owner of sports streaming platform DAZN.

Under that deal, Abu Dhabi-based IMI would have taken a 15% stake in Telegraph Media Group.

Read more from Sky News:
Lloyds clinches £120m deal for digital wallet provider Curve
Starmer and Reeves in U-turn over income tax
‘Staggering’ 20-year fall in domestic UK flights

In recent weeks, RedBird principal Gerry Cardinale had reiterated his desire to own the titles despite apparently having been angered by reporting by Telegraph journalists which explored links between RedBird and Chinese state influences.

Unrest from the Telegraph newsroom is said to have been one of the main factors in RedBird’s decision to withdraw its offer.

The collapse of the deal means a further auction of the titles is now likely to take place in the new year.

Continue Reading

Business

Budget 2025: Starmer and Reeves ditch plans to raise income tax

Published

on

By

Starmer and Reeves ditch plans to raise income tax in budget

Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have scrapped plans to break their manifesto pledge and raise income tax rates in a massive U-turn less than two weeks from the budget.

The decision, first reported in the Financial Times, comes after a bruising few days which has brought about a change of heart in Downing Street.

Read more: How No 10 plunged itself into crisis

I understand Downing Street has backed down amid fears about the backlash from disgruntled MPs and voters.

The Treasury and Number 10 declined to comment.

The decision is a massive about-turn. In a news conference last week, the chancellor appeared to pave the way for manifesto-breaking tax rises in the budget on 26 November.

She spoke of difficult choices and insisted she could neither increase borrowing nor cut spending in order to stabilise the economy, telling the public “everyone has to play their part”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Aren’t you making a mockery of voters?’

The decision to backtrack was communicated to the Office for Budget Responsibility on Wednesday in a submission of “major measures”, according to the Financial Times.

The chancellor will now have to fill an estimated £30bn black hole with a series of narrower tax-raising measures and is also expected to freeze income tax thresholds for another two years beyond 2028, which should raise about £8bn.

Tory shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith said: “We’ve had the longest ever run-up to a budget, damaging the economy with uncertainty, and yet – with just days to go – it is clear there is chaos in No 10 and No 11.”

How did we get here?

For weeks, the government has been working up options to break the manifesto pledge not to raise income tax, national insurance or VAT on working people.

I was told only this week the option being worked up was to do a combination of tax rises and action on the two-child benefit cap in order for the prime minister to be able to argue that in breaking his manifesto pledges, he is trying his hardest to protect the poorest in society and those “working people” he has spoken of so endlessly.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Ed Conway on the chancellor’s options

But days ago, officials and ministers were working on a proposal to lift the basic rate of income tax – perhaps by 2p – and then simultaneously cut national insurance contributions for those on the basic rate of income tax (those who earn up to £50,000 a year).

That way the chancellor can raise several billion in tax from those with the “broadest shoulders” – higher-rate taxpayers and pensioners or landlords, while also trying to protect “working people” earning salaries under £50,000 a year.

The chancellor was also going to take action on the two-child benefit cap in response to growing demand from the party to take action on child poverty. It is unclear whether those plans will now be shelved given the U-turn on income tax.

A rough week for the PM

The change of plan comes after the prime minister found himself engulfed in a leadership crisis after his allies warned rivals that he would fight any attempted post-budget coup.

It triggered a briefing war between Wes Streeting and anonymous Starmer allies attacking the health secretary as the chief traitor.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Wes Streeting: Faithful or traitor? Beth Rigby’s take

Read more: Is Starmer ‘in office but not in power’?

The prime minister has since apologised to Mr Streeting, who I am told does not want to press for sackings in No 10 in the wake of the briefings against him.

But the saga has further damaged Sir Keir and increased concerns among MPs about his suitability to lead Labour into the next general election.

Insiders clearly concluded that the ill mood in the party, coupled with the recent hits to the PM’s political capital, makes manifesto-breaking tax rises simply too risky right now.

But it also adds to a sense of chaos, given the chancellor publicly pitch-rolled tax rises in last week’s news conference.

Continue Reading

Trending