President Donald Trump would have unique influence over the operations of U.S. Steel under the terms of what the White House calls an “investment” being made by Japan-based Nippon Steel in the iconic American steelmaker.

Administration officials over the past few days provided additional insight into the “golden share” arrangement that the federal government made as a condition for supporting the deal.

The Pittsburgh-based steel maker and Nippon Steel plan $11 billion in new investments by 2028 after indicating that they plan to move forward with the deal under the terms of a national security agreement that has the White House’s approval.

The White House has described the deal as a “partnership” and an “investment” by Nippon Steel in U.S. Steel, although Nippon Steel has never backed off its stated intention of buying and controlling U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary in a nearly $15 billion offer it originally made in late 2023.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick posted on social media on Saturday how the “golden share” to be held by the president would operate, revealing that the White House is willing to insert itself aggressively into a private company’s affairs even as it has simultaneously pledged to strip away government regulations so businesses can expand.

Under the government’s terms, it would be impossible without Trump’s consent to relocate U.S. Steel’s headquarters from Pittsburgh, change the name of the company, “transfer production or jobs outside the United States,” shutter factories, or reincorporate the business overseas, among other powers held by the president.

Lutnick also said it would require presidential approval to reduce or delay $14 billion in planned investments.

“The Golden Share held by the United States in U.S. Steel has powerful terms that directly benefit and protect America, Pennsylvania, the great steelworkers of U.S. Steel, and U.S. manufacturers that will have massively expanded access to domestically produced steel,” Lutnick posted on X.

That $14 billion figure is higher than what the companies disclosed on Friday when Trump created a pathway for the investment with an executive order based on the terms of the national security agreement being accepted.

Lawmakers from Pennsylvania say the higher figure includes the cost of an electric arc furnace — a more modern steel mill that melts down scrap — that Nippon Steel wants to build in the U.S., bringing the value of the deal to at least $28 billion.

The president has the authority to name one of the corporate board’s independent three directors and veto power over the other two choices, according to a person familiar with the terms of the agreement who insisted on anonymity to discuss them. The details of the board structure were first reported by The New York Times.

Details of the agreement emerged as Trump was traveling to Alberta in Canada for the Group of Seven summit.

Still, the full terms remain somewhat unclear. The companies have not made public the full terms of Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel or the national security agreement with the federal government.

On Sunday, the United Steelworkers, the labor union representing U.S. Steel employees, posted a letter raising questions about the deal forged by Trump, who during his run for the presidency had pledged to block Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel.

The union said it was “disappointed” that Trump “has reversed course” and raised basic questions about the ownership structure of U.S. Steel.

“Neither the government nor the companies have publicly identified what all the terms of the proposed transaction are,” the letter said. “Our labor agreement expires next year, on September 1, 2026, and the USW and its members are prepared to engage the new owners” of U.S. Steel “to obtain a fair contract.”

If Trump has as much control of U.S. Steel as he has claimed, that could put him in the delicate position of negotiating the salary and benefits of unionized steelworkers going into midterm elections.

As president, Joe Biden used his authority to block Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel on his way out of the White House after a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.

After he was elected, Trump expressed openness to working out an arrangement and ordered another review by the committee. That’s when the idea of the “golden share” emerged as a way to resolve national security concerns and protect American interests in domestic steel production.

As it sought to win over American officials, Nippon Steel made a series of commitments.

It gradually increased the amount of money it was pledging to invest in U.S. Steel, promised to maintain U.S. Steel’s headquarters in Pittsburgh, put U.S. Steel under a board with a majority of American citizens and keep plants operating.

It also said it would protect the interests of U.S. Steel in trade matters and it wouldn’t import steel slabs that would compete with U.S. Steel’s blast furnaces in Pennsylvania and Indiana.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Julia Demaree Nikhinson—AP

When U.S. President Donald Trump last came to Canada for a Group of Seven summit, the enduring image was of him seated with his arms folded defiantly as then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel stared daggers at him.

If there is a shared mission at this year’s G7 summit, which begins Monday in Canada’s Rocky Mountains, it is a desire to minimize any fireworks at a moment of combustible tensions.

The 2018 summit ended with Trump assailing his Canadian hosts on social media as he departed on Air Force One, saying he had instructed the U.S. officials who remained in Quebec to oppose the G7 joint statement endorsed by the leaders of Japan, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany and, of course, Canada.

“I have instructed our U.S. Reps not to endorse the Communique as we look at Tariffs on automobiles flooding the U.S. Market!” Trump posted on the site then known as Twitter.

This time, Trump already has hit several dozen nations with severe tariffs that risk a global economic slowdown. There is little progress on settling the wars in Ukraine and Gaza and now a new and escalating conflict between Israel and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Add to all of that the problems of climate change, immigration, drug trafficking, new technologies such as artificial intelligence and China’s continued manufacturing superiority and chokehold on key supply chains.

Asked if he planned to announce any trade agreements at the G7 as he left the White House on Sunday, Trump said: “We have our trade deals. All we have to do is send a letter, ‘This is what you’re going to have to pay.’ But I think we’ll have a few, few new trade deals.”

At stake might be the survival of the G7 itself at a time when the Trump administration has sent mixed signals about whether the president will attend the November Group of 20 summit in South Africa.

What Trump opposed at the 2018 summit in Quebec wasn’t just tariffs, but a focus on having alliances with a shared set of standards seeking to shape policies.

“The big dispute in Quebec were the references to the rules-based international order and that’s where that famous photo comes from,” said Peter Boehm, Canada’s counselor at the 2018 G7 summit in Quebec and a veteran of six G7 summits. “I think it gave everyone the idea that G7s were maybe not business as usual.”

The German, U.K., Japanese and Italian governments have each signaled a belief that a friendly relationship with Trump this year can reduce the likelihood of outbursts.

“Well, I have got a good relationship with President Trump, and that’s important,” U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Saturday as he flew to Canada.

There is no plan for a joint statement this year from the G7, a sign that the Trump administration sees no need to build a shared consensus with fellow democracies if it views such a statement as contrary to its goals of new tariffs, more fossil fuel production and a Europe that is less dependent on the U.S. military.

“The Trump administration almost certainly believes that no deal is better than a bad deal,” said Caitlin Welsh, a director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank who was part of Trump’s team for the G7 in Trump’s first term.

The White House has stayed decidedly mum about its goals for the G7, which originated as a 1973 finance ministers’ meeting to address the oil crisis and steadily evolved into a yearly summit that is meant to foster personal relationships among world leaders and address global problems.

The G7 even briefly expanded to the G8 with Russia as a member, only for Russia to be expelled in 2014 after annexing Crimea and taking a foothold in Ukraine that preceded its aggressive 2022 invasion of that nation.

Trump will have at least three scheduled bilateral meetings during the summit with other world leaders while in Canada, staring on Monday morning with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. The U.S. president is also expected to have bilateral meetings with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, according to an administration official.

The U.S. president has imposed 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum and autos, all of which have disproportionately hit Japan. Trump is also charging a 10% tax on imports from most countries, though he could raise rates on July 9, after the 90-day negotiating period set by him would expire.

The United Kingdom reached a trade framework with the U.S. that included quotas to protect against some tariffs, but the 10% baseline would remain as the Trump administration is banking on tariff revenues to help cover the cost of its income tax cuts.

Canada and Mexico face separate tariffs of as much as 25% that Trump put into place under the auspices of stopping fentanyl smuggling, through some products are still protected under the 2020 U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement signed during Trump’s first term.

The Trump administration has insisted that its broad tariffs will produce trade agreements that box out China, though it’s unclear how antagonizing trade partners would make them want to strengthen their reliance on the U.S. Carney, the Canadian leader, has been outspoken in saying his country can no longer look to the U.S. as an enduring friend.

That might leave Trump with the awkward task of wanting to keep his tariffs in place while also trying to convince other countries that they’re better off siding with the U.S. than China.

“Trump will try to coordinate the group against China’s economic coercion,” Josh Lipsky, chair of international economics at the Atlantic Council, wrote in an analysis. “But the rest of the leaders may turn back to Trump and say that this kind of coordination, which is at the heart of why the G7 works, would be easier if he weren’t imposing tariffs on his allies.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI—AFP via Getty Images

 President Donald Trump likes to say he’s bringing in trillions of dollars in investments from foreign countries, but a provision in his tax cuts bill could cause international companies to avoid expanding into the United States.

The House-passed version of the legislation would allow the federal government to impose taxes on foreign-parented companies and investors from countries judged as charging “unfair foreign taxes” on U.S. companies.

Known as Section 899, the measure could cause companies to avoid investing in the the U.S. out of concern they could face steep taxes. The fate of the measure rests with the Senate — setting off a debate about its prospects and impact.

A new analysis by the Global Business Alliance, a trade group representing international companies such as Toyota and Nestlé, estimates that the provision would cost the U.S. 360,000 jobs and $55 billion annually over 10 years in lost gross domestic product. The analysis estimates that the tax could cut a third off the economic growth anticipated from the overall tax cuts by Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation.

“While proponents say this punitive tax hike is intended as a retaliatory measure against foreign governments, this report confirms that the real victims are American workers in states like North Carolina, South Carolina, Indiana, Tennessee and Texas,” said Jonathan Samford, president and CEO of the Global Business Alliance.

Republican Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, has defended the provision as protecting U.S. interests by giving the president a tool that can be used against countries with tax codes that, in the federal government’s opinion, put American companies at a disadvantage.

“If these countries withdraw these taxes and decide to behave, we will have achieved our goal,” Smith said in a statement last week. “It’s just common sense. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to move quickly to pass this bill and protect Americans from economic bad actors around the world.”

House Republicans have been looking into the issue for a long time and the bill provides the flexibility so that a president doesn’t have to levy taxes. There were concerns among GOP lawmakers during Joe Biden’s presidency that an agreement among countries on corporate tax codes could cause foreign governments to charge U.S. companies more.

The tax gets at a fundamental tension within Trump’s policy agenda: a contradiction in the broad strokes of Trump simultaneously trying to tax imports and foreign profits at higher rates while also seeking investments from companies headquartered abroad.

In late May, Trump defended his approach by saying that his tariffs were causing more countries to invest in the U.S. to avoid imports getting taxed. While some countries and companies have made announcements, there is not evidence of the investments pushing up spending on new factories as measured in the government’s monthly report on construction spending.

The Republican president said his tendency to impose steep tariffs, then retreat to lower rates, had succeeded.

“We have $14 trillion now invested, committed to investing,” Trump said then. “You know we have the hottest country anywhere in the world. I went to Saudi Arabia, the king told me, he said, you got the hottest — we have the hottest country in the world right now.”

The Global Business Alliance was among the groups that signed a letter on Monday warning of the consequences of Section 899 to Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo of Idaho, both Republicans.

The Investment Company Institute, representing financial firms, said the provision “could limit foreign investment to the U.S. — a key driver of growth in American capital markets that ultimately benefits American families saving for their futures.”

The analysis performed by EY Quantitative Economics and Statistics notes there is a degree of uncertainty in how the taxes under Section 899 could be implemented and other countries would respond. But they could be charged against companies based in countries that tax digital services, as is the case in parts of Europe.

If the U.S. judged the taxes unfair, there would be a 30% tax rate on foreign companies’ profits and income. People working in the U.S. for the companies who are not citizens could also be taxed, among other provisions. Still, an exemption is in place so that the foreign holders of U.S. debt are not affected by the potential new taxes.

The possibility of the taxes and seemingly arbitrary nature by which they could be imposed is also a challenge, said Chye-Ching Huang, executive director of New York University’s Tax Law Center.

“Section 899 creates a game of political chicken with trade partners that risks harming businesses, consumers, and workers in the hopes of securing US multinationals the ability to shift more of their profits out of the US to tax havens,” Huang said in an email. “It’s a high-risk strategy that could expand the damage of the failed tariff war.”

There could also be political repercussions if key states in Trump’s political coalition from 2024 suffer layoffs or simply find job growth slowing. The Global Business Alliance finds job losses could amount to 44,200 in Florida, 27,700 in Pennsylvania, 24,500 in North Carolina and 23,500 in Michigan.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© AP Photo/Evan Vucci