President Donald Trump singled out Brazil for import taxes of 50% on Wednesday for its treatment of its former president, Jair Bolsonaro, showing that personal grudges rather than simple economics are a driving force in the U.S. leader’s use of tariffs.

Trump avoided his standard form letter with Brazil, specifically tying his tariffs to the trial of Bolsonaro, who is charged with trying to overturn his 2022 election loss. Trump has described Bolsonaro as a friend and hosted the former Brazilian president at his Mar-a-Lago resort when both were in power in 2020.

“This Trial should not be taking place,” Trump wrote in the letter posted on Truth Social. “It is a Witch Hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY!”

There is a sense of kinship as Trump was indicted in 2023 for his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The U.S. president addressed his tariff letter to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who bested Bolsonaro in 2022.

Bolsonaro testified before the country’s Supreme Court in June over the alleged plot to remain in power after his 2022 election loss. Judges will hear from 26 other defendants in coming months. A decision could come as early as September, legal analysts say. Bolsonaro has already been ruled ineligible until 2030 by the country’s electoral authorities.

Brazil’s vice president, Geraldo Alckmin, said he sees “no reason” for the U.S. to hike tariffs on the South American nation.

“I think he has been misinformed,” he said. “President Lula was jailed for almost two years. No one questioned the judiciary. No one questioned what the country had done. This is a matter for our judiciary branch.”

For Trump, the tariffs are personal

Trump also objected to Brazil’s Supreme Court fining of social media companies, saying the temporary blocking last year amounted to “SECRET and UNLAWFUL Censorship Orders.” Trump said he is launching an investigation as a result under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which applies to companies with trade practices that are deemed unfair to U.S. companies.

Among the companies the Supreme Court fined was X, which was not mentioned specifically in Trump’s letter. X is owned by Elon Musk, Trump’s multibillionaire backer in the 2024 election whose time leading Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency recently ended and led to a public feud over the U.S. president’s deficit-increasing budget plan. Trump also owns a social media company, Truth Social.

The Brazil letter was a reminder that politics and personal relations with Trump matter just as much as any economic fundamentals. And while Trump has said the high tariff rates he’s setting are based on trade imbalances, it was unclear by his Wednesday actions how the countries being targeted would help to reindustrialize America.

The tariffs starting Aug. 1 would be a dramatic increase from the 10% rate that Trump levied on Brazil as part of his April 2 “Liberation Day” announcement. In addition to oil, Brazil sells orange juice, coffee, iron and steel to the U.S., among other products. The U.S. ran a $6.8 billion trade surplus with Brazil last year, according to the Census Bureau.

Trump initially announced his broad tariffs by declaring an economic emergency, arguing under a 1977 law that the U.S. was at risk because of persistent trade imbalances. But that rationale becomes problematic in this particular case, as Trump is linking his tariffs to the Bolsonaro trial and the U.S. exports more to Brazil than it imports.

Trump also targeted smaller trade partners

Trump also sent letters Wednesday to the leaders of seven other nations. None of them — the Philippines, Brunei, Moldova, Algeria, Libya, Iraq and Sri Lanka — is a major industrial rival to the United States.

Most economic analyses say the tariffs will worsen inflationary pressures and subtract from economic growth, but Trump has used the taxes as a way to assert the diplomatic and financial power of the U.S. on both rivals and allies. His administration is promising that the taxes on imports will lower trade imbalances, offset some of the cost of the tax cuts he signed into law on Friday and cause factory jobs to return to the United States.

Trump, during a White House meeting with African leaders, talked up trade as a diplomatic tool. Trade, he said, “seems to be a foundation” for him to settle disputes between India and Pakistan, as well as Kosovo and Serbia.

“You guys are going to fight, we’re not going to trade,” Trump said. “And we seem to be quite successful in doing that.”

On Monday, Trump placed a 35% tariff on Serbia, one of the countries he was using as an example of how fostering trade can lead to peace.

Trump said the tariff rates in his letters were based on “common sense” and trade imbalances, even though the Brazil letter indicated otherwise. Trump suggested he had not thought of penalizing the countries whose leaders were meeting with him in the Oval Office — Liberia, Senegal, Gabon, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau — as “these are friends of mine now.”

Countries are not complaining about the rates outlined in his letters, he said, even though those tariffs have been generally close to the ones announced April 2 that rattled financial markets. The S&P 500 stock index rose Wednesday.

“We really haven’t had too many complaints because I’m keeping them at a very low number, very conservative as you would say,” Trump said.

Tariff uncertainty returns with Trump’s letters

Officials for the European Union, a major trade partner and source of Trump’s ire on trade, said Tuesday that they are not expecting to receive a letter from Trump listing tariff rates. The Republican president started the process of announcing tariff rates on Monday by hitting two major U.S. trading partners, Japan and South Korea, with import taxes of 25%.

According to Trump’s Wednesday letters, imports from Libya, Iraq, Algeria and Sri Lanka would be taxed at 30%, those from Moldova and Brunei at 25% and those from the Philippines at 20%. The tariffs would start Aug. 1.

The Census Bureau reported that last year that the U.S. ran a trade imbalance on goods of $1.4 billion with Algeria, $5.9 billion with Iraq, $900 million with Libya, $4.9 billion with the Philippines, $2.6 billion with Sri Lanka, $111 million with Brunei and $85 million with Moldova. The imbalance represents the difference between what the U.S. exported to those countries and what it imported.

Taken together, the trade imbalances with those seven countries are essentially a rounding error in a U.S. economy with a gross domestic product of $30 trillion.

The letters were posted on Truth Social after the expiration of a 90-day negotiating period with a baseline levy of 10%. Trump is giving countries more time to negotiate with his Aug. 1 deadline, but he has insisted there will be no extensions for the countries that receive letters.

The tariff letters are worded aggressively in Trump’s style of writing. He frames the tariffs as an invitation to “participate in the extraordinary Economy of the United States,” adding that the trade imbalances are a “major threat” to America’s economy and national security.

The president threatened additional tariffs on any country that attempts to retaliate. He said he chose to send the letters because it was too complicated for U.S. officials to negotiate with their counterparts in the countries with new tariffs. It can take years to broker trade accords.

___

Associated Press writers Mauricio Savarese in Rio de Janeiro, David McHugh in Frankfurt, Germany and Eileen Ng in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, contributed to this report.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Eva Marie Uzcategui/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Alan G. Hassenfeld, a renowned philanthropist and former CEO of iconic toy company Hasbro Inc., the maker of G.I. Joe and Play-Doh, has died. He was 76, according to the toy company.

Hasbro, the nation’s second largest toy company behind Mattel based on annual sales, declined to offer more details. Hassenfeld’s family foundation, Hassenfeld Family Initiatives, wasn’t immediately available to comment.

Hassenfeld was born in Providence, Rhode Island and graduated from Deerfield Academy in Massachusetts. He received an undergraduate arts degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1970. Upon graduation, he joined the Pawtucket, Rhode Island-based family business in 1970. Hasbro was founded in 1923, by Hassenfeld’s grandfather, Henry. Known initially as Hassenfeld Brothers, it sold textile remnants but expanded into school supplies and later toy manufacturing under the Hasbro name in the 1940s, according to Hasbro’s website. It went public in 1968.

Hassenfeld rose quickly in the family business serving as special assistant to the president and worked his way up the ranks. He became one of the key architects of Hasbro’s international operations and spent extensive time traveling overseas. He was named executive vice president in 1980 and became president in September 1984.

Hassenfeld labored for years in the shadow of his older brother Stephen. His brother’s death of pneumonia in June 1989 at age 47, however, moved Hassenfeld into the position of chairman and chief executive officer.

Hassenfeld stepped down as CEO in 2003 and in August 2005, he retired from his chairman position and became emeritus chairman. He stepped away from that role last year. Hassenfeld was the last family member to sit on the board, according to Hasbro.

“All of us who have ever had any connection to Hasbro today are mourning the profound loss of Alan Hassenfeld, our beloved former Chairman & CEO, mentor, and dear friend, ” Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks in an e-mailed statement to The Associated Press. “Alan’s enormous heart was, and will remain, the guiding force behind Hasbro — compassionate, imaginative, and dedicated to bringing a smile to the face of every child around the world. His tireless advocacy for philanthropy, children’s welfare, and the toy industry created a legacy that will inspire us always.”

Hassenfeld was involved in many charitable and social causes both nationally and locally in Rhode Island. His concerns ranged from childhood hunger to issues involving refugee settlement in the state. As chairman of the Hassenfeld Family Initiatives, he oversaw the foundation’s mission of globalizing safety and human rights within the area of children’s products; empowering women in developing countries; and enhancing the economy, education and business opportunities in Rhode Island.

Hassenfeld was also founding benefactor of Hasbro Children’s Hospital in Providence, and his family’s contributions helped to establish the Hassenfeld Child Health Innovation Institute at Brown University.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)

Turns out Donald Trump gauges his esteem for presidential predecessors by how well their portraits fit into his White House redecorating scheme. Or sometimes how well the frames around those portraits do.

“I’m a frame person,” Trump said Tuesday during a meeting with his Cabinet. “Sometimes I like frames more than I like the pictures.”

Trump wrapped up a 90-plus-minute session by explaining how he personally worked to redecorate the Cabinet Room, seeming to take real joy in choosing which portraits were hung. The president also said he helped choose the room’s drapes and polled those present about whether he should repaint the room in gold leaf. (Cabinet members think he should.)

“I actually spent time in the vaults. The vaults are where we have a lot of great pictures and artwork. And I picked it all myself,” Trump said. “I’m very proud of it.”

The president said that meant “a lot of time, effort” and “very little money.” He even recounted having gone to Secretary of State Marco Rubio ‘s office and directing that a grandfather clock there be moved to the White House.

“As president, you have the power — if I go into the State Department, or Department of Commerce or Treasury — if I see anything that I like, I’m allowed to take it,” Trump said, drawing laughs. He offered the anecdote despite there not being any record of Trump having paid a public visit to the State Department during Rubio’s tenure.

Trump also pointed out each portrait and shared what he thought of each ex-president depicted. He started by indicating “the great Andrew Jackson ” and went from there — renewing his frequent praise for William McKinley and getting in a dig about how Bill Clinton once offered donors overnight stays in the Lincoln bedroom in exchange for campaign contributions.

Here’s what Trump said about some past presidents:

James K. Polk (1845-49):

“That’s a gentleman named — and we call him — President Polk. He was sort of a real-estate guy. He was — people don’t realize — he was a one-termer. But he was a very good president. But, and I’m not sure I should be doing this, he actually gave us the state of California.”

Then Trump revealed that his choice of Polk’s picture might have had more do with the portrait’s frame being almost the same size as the frame surrounding Jackson’s portrait, which he suggested was especially aesthetically pleasing: “Polk is actually a very good president who’s got the same frame that I needed, OK.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-61):

“A very underrated president. Built the Interstate (Highway) System. And he was the toughest president, I guess, until we came along. But I don’t mind giving up that crown, because, I don’t want to be too tough on it. But we want to be humane. But he was the toughest president on immigration. He was very strong at the borders. Very, very strong. And, sometimes you can be too strong. He was strong at the borders and, during a certain period of time, there was so strong that almost every farmer in California went bankrupt. And we have to remember that. We have to work together. We have to remember that. But he was a very good president, and a very good general and a very good president and I thought he deserved a position somewhere on this floor.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-45):

“He was not a Republican, to put it mildly. But he was, you know, a four-termer. He was Franklin Delano Roosevelt. And, if you notice, we have a lot of ramps outside. You have a ramp. People say, ‘It’s an unusual place for a ramp.’ It was because of him. He was wheelchair bound. But he was an amazing man.”

Abraham Lincoln (1861-65):

“Over there is ‘Honest’ Abe Lincoln. And that picture was in his, ugh, in his bedroom. And we thought this would be a very important place because this is where wars are ended. I’m not going to say wars are declared. I’m going to say wars are ended. OK? We’ll be positive. And, that’s the picture of Abe Lincoln from his bedroom, sat in the bedroom for many, many years. That was his favorite picture of himself. And the Lincoln Bedroom’s very famous. You remember when Bill Clinton had it and he rented it out to people. We don’t do that.”

John Adams (1797-1801):

“They were the first occupants of the White House. 1800. And John Quincy Adams, Mrs. Adams, they were the first occupants. So we have them looking at each other and, in between their stares is Abraham Lincoln trying to make peace.”

(Trump is correct that John Adams, the nation’s second president, and his wife Abigail, were the first first couple to move into the White House in 1800. But he was mistaken about John Quincy Adams, who was John and Abigail’s son and the sixth president. He served from 1825 to 1829).

William McKinley (1897-1901):

“McKinley was a great president who never got credit. In fact, they changed the name of Mount McKinley and I changed it back because he should have been — the people of Ohio, he was the governor of Ohio — the people of Ohio were very happy when I did that. I heard they were very insulted. They took the name of Mount McKinley off. That was done by Obama a little while ago and I had to change it back. I changed it back. He actually was a great president. He was a president. He was the tariff, the most, I guess since me — I think I’m gonna outdo him — but he was a tariff president. He believed that other countries should pay for the privilege of coming into our country and taking our jobs and taking our treasure. That’s the way he explained it. They took our jobs and they took our treasure. And for that he should pay. And he made them pay. And he built a tremendous fortune.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File

A “click-to-cancel” rule, which would have required businesses to make it easy for consumers to cancel unwanted subscriptions and memberships, has been blocked by a federal appeals court just days before it was set to go into effect.

The Federal Trade Commission’s proposed changes, adopted in October, required businesses to obtain a customer’s consent before charging for memberships, auto-renewals and programs linked to free trial offers.

The FTC said at the time that businesses must also disclose when free trials or other promotional offers will end and let customers cancel recurring subscriptions as easily as they started them.

The administration of President Joe Biden included the FTC’s proposal as part of its “Time is Money” initiative, a governmentwide initiative that was announced last year with the aim of cracking down on consumer-related hassles.

The FTC rule was set to go into effect on Monday, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said this week that the FTC made a procedural error by failing to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis, which is required for rules whose annual impact on the U.S. economy is more than $100 million.

The FTC claimed that it did not have to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis because it initially determined that the rule’s impact on the national economy would be less than $100 million. An administrative law judge decided that the economic impact would be more than the $100 million threshold.

The court decided to vacate the rule.

“While we certainly do not endorse the use of unfair and deceptive practices in negative option marketing, the procedural deficiencies of the Commission’s rulemaking process are fatal here,” the court wrote.

The FTC declined to comment on Wednesday.

The agency is currently moving forward with its preparations for a trial involving Amazon’s Prime program. The trial stems from a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit that accused Amazon of enrolling consumers in its Prime program without their consent and making it difficult for them to cancel their subscriptions.

The trial is expected to take place next year.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© AP Photo/Jenny Kane, File

Mattel has introduced its first Barbie representing a person with Type 1 diabetes, as part of wider efforts from the toy maker to increase inclusivity among its dolls.

In an announcement Tuesday, Mattel said it had partnered with Breakthrough T1D — a Type 1 diabetes research and advocacy organization formerly known as Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, or JDRF — to ensure that the design of the doll “truly captures the community.” That includes accessories that “accurately reflect the medical equipment” people with Type 1 diabetes may need, the California-based company noted.

“Visibility matters for everyone facing Type 1 diabetes,” Emily Mazreku, director of marketing strategy at Breakthrough T1D, said in an accompanying announcement. And as a mother who lives with Type 1 diabetes, she added, “it means everything to have Barbie helping the world see T1D and the incredible people who live with it.”

The new Barbie wears continuous glucose monitor (CGM), a device that tracks blood sugar levels, on her arm — while holding a phone displaying an accompanying app. She also has an insulin pump attached to her waist. And the doll carries a blue purse that can be used to carry other essential supplies or snacks on the go.

The Barbie’s outfit is blue, too — with polka dots on a matching top and skirt set. Mattel says that this color and design are nods to symbols for diabetes awareness.

This new doll “enables more children to see themselves reflected in Barbie,” Mattel wrote Tuesday, and is part of the company’s wider Fashionistas line committed to inclusivity. The line features Barbies with various skin tones, hair colors and textures, disabilities, body types and more. Previously-introduced Fashionistas include a Ken doll with a prosthetic leg and a Barbie with hearing aids. Mattel also introduced its first doll with Down syndrome in 2023.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 38.4 million Americans of all ages — amounting to about 11.6% of the U.S. population — were estimated to have diabetes as of 2021, the latest year with data available. About 2 million had Type 1 diabetes, including about 304,000 children and teens younger than 20.

Barbie’s new doll with Type 1 diabetes was also introduced at Breakthrough T1D’s 2025 Children’s Congress held in Washington, D.C. this week, where the organization is advocating for continued federal research funding. This year, Breakthrough T1D has been particularly focused on the Special Diabetes Program, which is currently set to expire in September.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Mattel, Inc. via AP

Just weeks ago, President Donald Trump said he wanted to begin “phasing out” the Federal Emergency Management Agency after this hurricane season to “wean off of FEMA” and “bring it down to the state level.”

But after months of promises to overhaul or eliminate the federal agency charged with responding to disasters, Trump and his administration are touting a fast and robust federal response to the devastating Texas floods. In doing so, they are aligning more closely with a traditional model of disaster response — and less with the dramatic reform the president has proposed.

The president approved Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s request for a major disaster declaration just one day after it was submitted, activating FEMA resources and unlocking assistance for survivors and local governments. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem told Trump in a presidential Cabinet meeting Tuesday morning that FEMA was deploying funding and resources quickly. “We’re cutting through the paperwork of the old FEMA, streamlining it, much like your vision of how FEMA should operate,” Noem said.

Noem said the rapid delivery of funds to Texas resembled the “state block grants” model Trump has promoted. It’s an idea that would replace FEMA’s current system of reimbursing states for response and recovery expenses at a cost-share of at least 75%.

But ex-FEMA officials say it’s unclear how the response differs from FEMA’s typical role in disasters, which is to support states through coordination and funding. Instead, they say, the vigorous federal response underscores how difficult it would be for states to take on FEMA’s responsibilities if it were dismantled.

“This is a defining event that can help them realize that a Federal Emergency Management Agency is essential,” said Michael Coen, FEMA chief of staff in the Obama and Biden administrations. “Imagine if an event like this happened a year from now, after FEMA is eliminated. What would the president or secretary (Noem) offer to the governor of Texas if there is no FEMA?”

The Department of Homeland Security and FEMA did not immediately respond to questions about Noem’s remarks, including whether FEMA was doing something different in how it moved money to Texas, or why it resembled a block-grant system.

FEMA will have multiple roles in Texas

While Noem and Trump have emphasized that Texas is leading the response and recovery to the floods, that has always been FEMA’s role, said Justin Knighten, the agency’s director of external affairs during the Biden administration.

“The state is in the lead. FEMA is invited into the state to support,” Knighten said. He said that while Texas’ division of emergency management is one of the most experienced in the country, even the most capable states face catastrophes that overwhelm them: “When there’s capacity challenges and resource need, that’s where FEMA steps in.”

One of FEMA’s primary roles will be to coordinate resources from other federal agencies. If the state needs the Army Corps of Engineers to help with debris removal, Health and Human Services for mortuary support and crisis counseling, or EPA for water quality testing, FEMA arranges that at the state’s request and then reimburses those agencies. “FEMA becomes a one-point entry for all federal support,” Coen said.

The agency also coordinates first-responder support — like search-and-rescue teams deployed from across the country — and reimburses those costs. It administers the National Flood Insurance Program, which gives homeowners and renters access to flood coverage not typically included in general policies.

Those with insufficient insurance or none at all will rely heavily on FEMA’s Individual Assistance program, which supports survivors with needs like temporary housing and home repairs. On Wednesday, the agency is opening disaster recovery centers where households can get help applying for assistance, according to Texas Emergency Management Chief Nim Kidd. The Public Assistance program will reimburse state and local governments for most or all of the costs of infrastructure repairs.

States would have trouble replacing FEMA

While Trump and Noem often say they want states to take on more responsibility in disaster response, experts say the tragedy in Texas underscores how even the most capable states need support.

“It’s true that Texas is very capable, but I think it’s something that people forget that FEMA pays for a lot of state and local emergency capacity,” said Maddie Sloan, director of the disaster recovery and fair housing project at the policy nonprofit Texas Appleseed. The Texas Division of Emergency Management’s budget of over $2 billion is mostly funded through federal grants.

“If a state like Texas asks for federal assistance within two days, the smaller states that are less capable don’t stand a chance,” said Jeremy Edwards, FEMA’s deputy director of public affairs during the Biden administration.

States would have to set up their own recovery programs and to coordinate with each federal agency if they were given block grants in lieu of FEMA involvement. “Without FEMA, a governor or a state has to be calling around and have a Rolodex of the whole federal government to call and try and figure out what support they can get,” Coen said.

There are plenty of reforms that could improve how FEMA reimburses states and helps survivors, experts said, but eliminating it risks big gaps in recovery. “We have spent a lot of time encouraging FEMA to be better, but if FEMA goes away, there is no help for individual families,” Sloan said.

Uncertain future for federal disaster response

Trump has deflected questions about what the Texas response means for FEMA’s future. A 12-member review council established by the president and charged with proposing FEMA reforms will meet for the second time Wednesday. Abbott and Kidd are both on the council.

At the first meeting, Abbott called FEMA “slow and clunky” and said reforms should “streamline the effort.” He has praised Trump’s quick disaster declaration in Texas.

While no large reforms to the agency have been enacted yet, smaller policy changes could impact Texas’ recovery.

This spring, the administration did away with FEMA’s practice of door-to-door canvassing to help households enroll for assistance, calling it “wasteful and ineffective.” Many of the impacted areas in Kerr County and beyond still lack power and accessible roads, which will make it difficult for households to apply immediately for help.

Abbott’s request for hazard mitigation funding, a common add-on to public and individual assistance that helps communities rebuild with resilience, is also still pending. Trump has not approved any hazard-mitigation assistance requests since February.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File

Switzerland’s medical products authority has granted the first approval for a malaria medicine designed for small infants, touted as an advance against a disease that takes hundreds of thousands of lives — nearly all in Africa — each year.

Swissmedic gave a green light Tuesday for the medicine from Basel-based pharmaceutical company Novartis for treatment of babies with body weights between 2 and 5 kilograms (nearly 4½ to 11 pounds), which could pave the way for hard-hit African nations to follow suit in coming months.

The agency said that the decision is significant in part because it’s only the third time it has approved a treatment under a fast-track authorization process, in coordination with the World Health Organization, to help developing countries access needed treatment.

The newly approved medication, Coartem Baby, is a combination of two antimalarials. It is a lower dose version of a tablet previously approved for other age groups, including older children.

Dr. Quique Bassat, a malaria expert not affiliated with the Swiss review, said the burden of malaria in very young children is “relatively low” compared to older kids.

But access to such medicines is important to all, he said.

“There is no doubt that any child of whichever age — and particularly very, very young ones or very light-weighted ones — require a treatment,” said Bassat, the director- general of the Barcelona Institute for Global Health, known as ISGlobal.

Up to now, antimalarial drugs designed for older children have been administered to small infants in careful ways to avoid overdose or toxicity, in what Bassat called a “suboptimal solution” that the newly designed medicine could help rectify.

“This is a drug which we know is safe, we know works well, and therefore it will just be available as a new version for a specific age group,” he said.

Ruairidh Villar, a Novartis spokesperson, said that eight African countries took part in the assessment and are expected to approve the medicine within 90 days. The company said that it’s planning on a rollout on a “largely not-for-profit basis” in countries where malaria is endemic.

Dr. Bhargavi Rao, co-director of the Malaria Centre at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, noted that malaria cases continue to rise — especially in crisis-hit countries — despite new vaccines and programs targeting the mosquitoes that spread the parasite.

She said access strategies for the new medicine must include a look at where needs are greatest, and urged clarity on pricing.

“We need transparency around what Novartis’ ‘largely not for profit’ statement means including publicly available pricing, which countries will benefit and how long for,” she wrote in an email.

Still, she said it was “significant to finally have a suitable and safe treatment for very young children — more than 20 years since WHO first pre-qualified Coartem for older age groups.

She noted the announcement comes as resistance to antimalarials has been growing and many traditional donor countries have been sharply cutting outlays for global health — including for malaria programming and research.

The mosquito-borne illness is the deadliest disease in Africa, whose 1.5 billion people accounted for 95% of an estimated 597,000 malaria deaths worldwide in 2023, according to WHO. More than three-quarters of those deaths were among children.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Adekunle Ajayi—AP

When President Donald Trump last rolled out tariffs this high, financial markets quaked, consumer confidence crashed and his popularity plunged.

Only three months later, he’s betting this time is different.

In his new round of tariffs being announced this week, Trump is essentially tethering the entire world economy to his instinctual belief that import taxes will deliver factory jobs and stronger growth in the U.S., rather than the inflation and slowdown predicted by many economists.

On Tuesday, he told his Cabinet that past presidents who hadn’t aggressively deployed tariffs were “stupid.” Ever the salesman, Trump added that it was “too time-consuming” to try to negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world, so it was just easier to send them letters, as he’s doing this week, that list the tariff rates on their goods.

The letters marked a change from his self-proclaimed April 2 “Liberation Day” event at the White House, where he had posterboards with the rates displayed, a choice that led to a brief market meltdown and the 90-day negotiating period with baseline 10% tariffs that will end Wednesday. Trump, instead, chose to send form letters with random capitalizations and punctuation and other formatting issues.

“It’s a better way,” Trump said of his letters. “It’s a more powerful way. And we send them a letter. You read the letter. I think it was well crafted. And, mostly it’s just a little number in there: You’ll pay 25%, 35%. We have some of at 60, 70.”

When Trump said those words, he had yet to issue a letter with a tariff rate higher than 40%, which he levied Monday on Laos and Myanmar. He plans to put 25% tariffs on Japan and South Korea, two major trading partners and allies deemed crucial for curbing China’s economic influence. Leaders of the 14 countries tariffed so far hope to negotiate over the next three weeks before the higher rates are charged on imports.

“I would say that every case I’m treating them better than they treated us over the years,” Trump said.

The president said Tuesday evening on Truth Social that he would be releasing letters to “a minimum of 7 Countries” on Wednesday morning, with additional letters coming out in the afternoon.

Three possible outcomes

His approach is at odds with how major trade agreements have been produced over the last half-century, detailed sessions that could sometimes take years to solve complex differences between nations.

There are three possible outcomes to this political and economic wager, each of which could drastically reshape international affairs and Trump’s legacy.

Trump could prove most economic experts wrong and the tariffs could deliver growth as promised. Or he could retreat again on tariffs before their Aug. 1 start in a repeat of the “Trump Always Chickens Out” phenomenon, also known as TACO. Or he could damage the economy in ways that could boomerang against the communities that helped return him to the White House last year, as well as hurt countries that are put at a financial disadvantage by the tariffs.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said Trump’s letters had “extended his tariff purgatory for another month,” essentially freezing in place the U.S. economy as CEOs, foreign leaders and consumers are unclear of Trump’s actual strategy on foreign trade.

“The TACO negotiating tactic pioneered by Trump is making his threats less and less credible and reducing our trading partners’ willingness to even meet us halfway,” Wyden said. “There’s no sign that he’s any closer to striking durable trade deals that would actually help American workers and businesses.”

So far, the stock and bond markets are relatively calm, with the S&P 500 stock index essentially flat Tuesday after a Monday decline. Trump is coming off a legislative win with his multitrillion-dollar income tax cuts. And he’s confidently levying tariffs at levels that previously rocked global markets, buoyed by the fact that inflation has eased so far instead of accelerating as many economists and Democratic rivals had warned.

“By floating tariffs as high as 40% to even 100%, the administration has ‘normalized’ the 25% tariff hikes — yet this is still one of the most aggressive and disruptive tariff moves in modern history,” said Wendong Zhang, an economist at Cornell University. “This gradual unveiling, paradoxically, risks normalizing what would otherwise be considered exceptionally large tariff hikes.”

Others simply see Trump as a source of nonstop chaos, with the letters and their somewhat random tariff rates showing the absence of a genuine policy process inside his administration.

“It’s really just a validation that this policy is all over the place, that they’re running this by the seat of their pants, that there is no real strategy,” said Desmond Lachman, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank.

Questions about how much money tariffs will generate

With Trump’s 90-day tariff negotiation period ending, he as of Monday had sent letters to 14 countries that place taxes on imported goods ranging from 25% to 40%. He said Tuesday he would sign an order to place 50% tariffs on copper and added that at some point pharmaceutical drugs could face tariffs of as much as 200%. All of that is on top of his existing 50% tariffs on steel and aluminum, 25% tariffs on autos and his separate import taxes on Canada, Mexico and China.

“The obvious inference is that markets for now are somewhat skeptical that Trump will go through with it, or alternatively they think compromises will be reached,” said Ben May, a director of global economic research at the consultancy Oxford Economics. “That’s probably the key element.”

May said the tariffs are likely to reduce the growth in U.S. household incomes, but not cause those incomes to shrink outright.

Trump has said his tariffs would close U.S. trade imbalances, though it’s unclear why he would target nations such as Tunisia that do relatively little trade with America. Administration officials say trillions of dollars in tariff revenues over the next decade would help offset the revenue losses from the continuation and expansion of his 2017 tax cuts that were signed into law Friday.

The federal government has collected $98.2 billion in tariff revenues so far this year, more than double what it collected last year, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.

At Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the tariff revenues could be “well over $300 billion by the end of the year.” Bessent added that “we don’t agree” with the Congressional Budget Office estimate that tariffs would bring in $2.8 trillion over 10 years, “which we think is probably low.”

The governments of Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia and South Africa have each said they hope for further negotiations on tariffs with Trump, though it’s unclear how that’s possible as Trump has said it would be too “complicated” to hold all those meetings.

Instead on Tuesday, Trump posted on social media that the tariffs would be charged as scheduled starting Aug. 1.

“There has been no change to this date, and there will be no change,” Trump said on Truth Social. “No extensions will be granted.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Samuel Corum/Getty Images

Texas inspectors signed off on Camp Mystic’s emergency planning just two days before catastrophic flooding killed more than two dozen people at the all-girls Christian summer camp, most of them children.

The Department of State Health Services released records Tuesday showing the camp complied with a host of state regulations regarding “procedures to be implemented in case of a disaster.” Among them: instructing campers what to do if they need to evacuate and assigning specific duties to each staff member and counselor.

Five years of inspection reports released to The Associated Press do not offer any details of those plans at Mystic, raising new questions about the camp’s preparedness ahead of the torrential July 4 rainfall in flood-prone Texas Hill Country.

The National Weather Service had issued a flood watch for the area July 3 at 1:18 p.m. That danger prompted at least one of the roughly 18 camps along the Guadalupe River to move dozens of campers to higher ground.

The uncertainty about what happened at Mystic comes as local officials have repeatedly dodged questions about who was monitoring the weather and what measures were taken ahead of the flooding.

Tragedy falls on the historic camp

Camp Mystic, established in 1926, did not evacuate and was especially hit hard when the river rose from 14 feet (4.2 meters) to 29.5 feet (9 meters) within 60 minutes in the early morning hours. Flooding on that stretch of the Guadalupe starts at about 10 feet (3 meters).

A wall of water overwhelmed people in cabins, tents and trailers along the river’s edge. Some survivors were found clinging to trees.

At least 27 campers and counselors died during the floods, and officials said Tuesday that five campers and one counselor have still not been found. Among the dead was Richard “Dick” Eastland, the camp’s beloved director described by campers as a father figure.

Charlotte Lauten, 19, spent nine summers at Camp Mystic, mostly recently in 2023. She said she didn’t recall ever receiving instructions as a camper on what do in the case of a weather emergency.

“I do know that the counselors go through orientation training for a week before camp starts,” she said. “They do brief them on all those types of things.”

One thing that likely hindered the girls’ ability to escape was how dark it would have been, Lauten said. Campers don’t have access to their phones while at camp, she said, adding they wouldn’t have cell service anyway because of the remote location.

“This is the middle of nowhere and they didn’t have power,” she said. “It would have been pitch black, like could not see 5 feet in front of you type of darkness. I’ve never seen stars like there because there’s just no light.”

Inspections found no issues

The state inspected Camp Mystic on July 2, the same day the Texas Division of Emergency Management activated emergency response resources ahead of the anticipated flooding.

The inspection found no deficiencies or violations at the camp in a long list of health and safety criteria. The camp had 557 campers and more than 100 staffers at the time between its Guadalupe and Cypress Lake locations.

The disaster plans are required to be posted in all camp buildings but aren’t filed with the state, said Lara Anton, a spokesperson for the Texas Department of State Health Services.

“We do not have them,” Anton said in an email. “You’d have to get it from the camp.”

Camp Mystic did not respond to requests for comment on its emergency plan. In a statement on its website, the camp said it has been “in communication with local and state authorities who are tirelessly deploying extensive resources to search for our missing girls.”

Camps are responsible for developing their own emergency plan. Inspectors evaluate the plans to ensure they meet several state requirements, including procedures for evacuation.

“The inspector checked that they had plans posted for those elements in every building,” Anton said, “and that they had trained staff and volunteers on what to do.”

Camp Mystic is licensed by the state and a member of the Camping Association for Mutual Progress, which says its goal is to “raise health and safety standards” for summer camps. Leaders of that association didn’t return messages.

The American Camp Association said Tuesday that Camp Mystic is not accredited with that organization, whose standards focus on safety and risk management. Spokesperson Lauren McMillin declined to say whether the camp previously had been accredited with the association, which describes itself as “the only nationwide accrediting organization for all year-round and summer camps.”

Authorities review rain and river gauges

One rain gauge about a mile (1.6 kilometers) from Camp Mystic recorded 9.5 inches (24 centimeters) of precipitation July 4, according to Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority data. Another of the agency’s gauges — further south and to the west — recorded 12.2 inches (31 centimeters) of precipitation. The authority told the AP that a review of its equipment found both were functioning during the flood event.

However, at least four United States Geological Survey gauges along the Guadalupe River experienced some level of failure July 4.

The gauges, located near Hunt and Kerrville, stopped collecting both river levels and the flow rate of water in the early morning hours of July 4.

One gauge, about 5 miles (8 kilometers) northeast of Camp Mystic, recorded a level of 29.5 feet (9 meters) at 4:35 a.m., according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data. It was the last recorded river level from the instrumentation until a USGS hydrologist installed a temporary gauge. At the time, the hydrologist measured the high water mark at 37.52 feet (11.44 meters).

At that location, a river level of 32 feet (9.75 meters) could lead to “disastrous life-threatening flooding,” which could cover the roads of the lowest camps and resorts, according to NOAA.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Julio Cortez—AP

The impact of the massive spending bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on Independence Day is expected to filter down to infants and toddlers — a segment of the population that is particularly vulnerable to cuts to the federal social safety net.

Many middle-class and wealthy families will see benefits from the new legislation, but programs that help low-income families keep babies healthy have been cut back. While state money funds public schools and preschool in some cases, programs supporting the youngest children are largely backed by the federal government.

The law extends tax cuts that Trump passed during his first term in office and pours billions more into border security as the president seeks to broaden his crackdown on immigration. To pay for these initiatives, the law cuts Medicaid and food stamps — programs relied upon by poor households with children — by more than $1 trillion.

The legislation Republicans called Trump’s “big beautiful bill” is set to deliver some gains for families with children. It increases tax credits, including one that now allows parents to deduct up to $2,200 per child from their tax bills. And it introduces investment accounts for newborns dubbed “Trump Accounts,” each seeded with $1,000 from the government.

Still, advocates say they do not make up for what children are likely to lose under the new law. And they fear what comes next, as the next Trump budget proposes more cuts to programs that help parents and babies.

Medicaid cuts could add to strains on families

Over 10 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health care. About 40% of births are covered by Medicaid. Newborns, too, qualify for it when their mothers have it.

The new law doesn’t take little kids or their parents off Medicaid. It institutes Medicaid work requirements for childless adults and adults with children over the age of 13. But pediatricians warn the cuts will be felt broadly, even by those who do not use Medicaid.

The Medicaid cuts are expected to put a financial strain on health care providers, forcing them to cut their least profitable services. That’s often pediatrics, where young patients are more likely to use Medicaid, said Lisa Costello, a West Virginia pediatrician who chairs the federal policy committee for the American Association of Pediatrics.

The ripple effects could exacerbate an existing shortage of pediatricians and hospital beds for children.

“Any cuts to that program are going to trickle down and impact children, whether that’s pediatric practices who depend on Medicaid to be able to stay open or children’s hospitals,” Costello said.

States also use Medicaid to pay for programs that go beyond conventional medical care, including therapies for young children with disabilities. Under the new law, states will foot a greater portion of the bill for Medicaid, meaning optional programs are at risk of getting cut.

Advocates worry that if an adult loses Medicaid coverage, it could ratchet up household stress and make it more difficult for parents to make ends meet, both of which can negatively impact youngsters. And parents who lose their health insurance are less likely to take their children to the doctor.

“When parents lose their health insurance, they often think that their children also are no longer eligible, even if that’s not the case,” said Cynthia Osborne, a professor of early education and the executive director of the Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center at Vanderbilt University.

The law increases tax credits for parents who qualify

The law increases the child tax credit to $2,200 per child, up from $2,000. But parents who don’t earn enough to pay income tax will still not see the benefit, and many will only see a partial benefit.

The measure also contains two provisions intended to help families pay for child care, which in many places costs more than a mortgage. First, it boosts the tax credit parents receive for spending money on child care. The bill also expands a program that gives companies tax credits for providing child care for their employees.

Both measures have faced criticism for generally benefiting larger companies and wealthier households.

“It’s a corporate business tax break,” said Bruce Lesley, president of the advocacy group First Focus on Children. “It makes their child care dependent upon working for an employer who has the credit.”

‘Trump Accounts’ will be opened with $1,000 for newborns

The law launches a program that creates investment accounts for newborn children. The “Trump Accounts” are to be seeded with $1,000 from the government, and children will be able to use the money when they become adults to start a new business, put the money toward a house or go to school.

Unlike other baby bond programs, which generally target disadvantaged groups, the federal program will be available to families of all incomes.

The program’s backers have pitched the accounts as a way to give young people a boost as they reach adulthood and teach them about the benefits of investing. Critics have argued that families in poverty have more immediate needs and that their children should receive a larger endowment if the goal is to help level the playing field.

A food assistance program faces cuts

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) faces the largest cut in its history under the law. It will, for the first time, require parents to work to qualify for the benefit if their children are 14 or older. But even households with younger children could feel the impact.

The law kicks some immigrants — including those with legal status — off food assistance. It makes it more difficult for individuals to qualify by changing how it considers their utility bills.

SNAP has historically been funded by the federal government, but under the new law, states will have to shoulder some of the financial burden. Cash-strapped governments could decide to implement new requirements that would make it more difficult for people to qualify, said Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Some states may decide to exit the program altogether.

“When young children lose access to that healthy nutrition, it impacts them for the rest of their lives,” Bergh said. “This bill fundamentally walks away from a long-standing nationwide commitment to making sure that low-income children in every state can receive the food assistance that they need.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Evan Vucci—AP

The State Department is warning U.S. diplomats of attempts to impersonate Secretary of State Marco Rubio and possibly other officials using technology driven by artificial intelligence, according to two senior officials and a cable sent last week to all embassies and consulates.

The warning came after the department discovered that an impostor posing as Rubio had attempted to reach out to at least three foreign ministers, a U.S. senator and a governor, according to the July 3 cable, which was first reported by The Washington Post.

The recipients of the scam messages, which were sent by text, Signal and voice mail, were not identified in the cable, a copy of which was shared with The Associated Press.

“The State Department is aware of this incident and is currently investigating the matter,” it said. “The department takes seriously its responsibility to safeguard its information and continuously takes steps to improve the department’s cybersecurity posture to prevent future incidents.”

It declined to comment further due to “security reasons” and the ongoing investigation.

One of the officials said the hoaxes had been unsuccessful and “not very sophisticated.” Nonetheless, the second official said the department deemed it “prudent” to advise all employees and foreign governments, particularly as efforts by foreign actors to compromise information security increase.

The officials were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

“There is no direct cyber threat to the department from this campaign, but information shared with a third party could be exposed if targeted individuals are compromised,” the cable said.

The FBI warned in a public service announcement this past spring of a “malicious text and voice messaging campaign” in which unidentified “malicious actors” have been impersonating senior U.S. government officials.

The scheme, according to the FBI, has relied on text messages and AI-generated voice messages that purport to come from a senior U.S. official and that aim to dupe other government officials as well as the victim’s associates and contacts.

It is the second high-level Trump administration official to face such AI-driven impersonation.

The government was investigating after elected officials, business executives and other prominent figures received messages from someone impersonating President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, Susie Wiles. Text messages and phone calls went out from someone who seemed to have gained access to the contacts in Wiles’ personal cellphone, The Wall Street Journal reported in May.

Some of those who received calls heard a voice that sounded like Wiles, which may have been generated by artificial intelligence, according to the newspaper. The messages and calls were not coming from Wiles’ number, the report said.

___

AP writer Eric Tucker contributed to this report.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File

For the first time in almost 20 years, travelers may no longer be required to take off their shoes during security screenings at U.S. airports.

The Transportation Security Administration is looking to abandon the additional security step that has for years bedeviled anyone passing through U.S airports, according to media reports.

If implemented, it would put an end to a security screening mandate put in place almost 20 years ago, several years after “shoe bomber” Richard Reid’s failed attempt to take down a flight from Paris to Miami in late 2001.

The travel newsletter Gate Access was first to report that the security screening change is coming. ABC News reported on an internal memo sent to TSA officers last week that states the new policy allows travelers to keep their shoes on during standard screenings at many U.S. airports, beginning Sunday. That would expand to all airports shortly.

The plan is for the change to occur at all U.S. airports soon, the memo said.

Travelers have previously been able to skirt the extra security requirement if they participate in the TSA PreCheck program, which costs around $80 for five years. The program allows airline passengers to get through the screening process without removing shoes, belts or light jackets.

Travelers who are 75 years old or older and those 12 or younger do not have to remove shoes at security checkpoints.

The TSA has not officially confirmed the reported security screening change yet.

“TSA and DHS are always exploring new and innovative ways to enhance passenger experience and our strong security posture,” a TSA spokesperson said in a statement Tuesday. “Any potential updates to our security process will be issued through official channels.”

The TSA began in 2001 when President George W. Bush signed legislation for its creation two months after the 9/11 attacks. The agency included federal airport screeners that replaced the private companies airlines had used to handle security.

Over the years the TSA has continued to look for ways to enhance its security measures, including testing facial recognition technology and implementing Real ID requirements.

One of the most prominent friction points for travelers is the TSA at screening checkpoints. Trump’s Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy asked the public in an April social media post what would make travel more seamless.

The following day, Duffy posted on X that, “It’s very clear that TSA is the #1 travel complaint. That falls under the Department of Homeland Security. I’ll discuss this with @Sec_Noem.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem will host a press conference Tuesday evening at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport to announce a new TSA policy “that will make screening easier for passengers, improve traveler satisfaction, and reduce wait times,” her agency said.

Trump fired TSA Administrator David Pekoske in January in the middle of a second five-year term, though he was appointed by Trump during his first term in the White House. Pekoske was reappointed by President Joe Biden.

No reason was given for Pekoske’s departure. The administrator position remains vacant, according to the TSA website.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© AP Photo/Erik S. Lesser, File

The IRS says pastors who endorse political candidates from the pulpit should not have to risk losing their tax-exempt status.

The move effectively calls for a carve out for religious organizations from the rarely used IRS rule called the Johnson Amendment, put in place in 1954 and named after then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson.

In a joint court filing intended to end an ongoing case against the IRS, the tax collection agency and the National Religious Broadcasters Association — a Evangelical media consortium — and other plaintiffs have asked a federal court in Texas to stop the government from enforcing the Johnson Amendment against the plaintiffs.

The Johnson Amendment is a 1954 amendment to the U.S. tax code that prohibits tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from endorsing or opposing political candidates.

The Christian media group and others filed suit against the IRS last August, stating that the amendment violates their First Amendment rights to the freedom of speech and free exercise of religion, among other legal protections. On Monday, the IRS and plaintiffs wrote that the Johnson Amendment should be interpreted “so that it does not reach communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith.”

The New York Times was first to report the news of the court filing.

The IRS has generally not enforced the Johnson Amendment against houses of worship for speech related to electoral politics.

President Donald Trump has said he wanted to get rid of the Johnson Amendment and signed an executive order in 2017 directing Treasury to disregard the rule.

“I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution,” Trump said at a National Prayer Breakfast in 2017, which is a high-profile event bringing together faith leaders, politicians and dignitaries.

Representatives from the IRS and the National Religious Broadcasters Association did not respond to an Associated Press request for comment.

Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers introduced legislation to remove the Johnson Amendment.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Patrick Semansky—AP

Federal officials on Monday took a first step toward reopening vast areas of public lands in two Western states to new coal sales as part of President Donald Trump’s push to expand U.S. fossil fuel production.

The Interior Department proposal comes after the Biden administration, citing climate change, tried to end sales of the fuel from the nation’s most productive coal fields — the Powder River Basin in northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana.

The Trump administration is instead considering selling leases for coal mining on more than 2,600 square miles (6,800 kilometers) of federal lands in that region, according to documents released by officials. That’s an area larger than Delaware.

The unfolding course reversal on using public lands to boost the struggling U.S. coal industry stems from an executive order signed by Trump on his first day in office. It’s part of Trump’s broad push to increase oil, gas and coal extraction from publicly owned lands and waters in the U.S., even as Republicans pull back support for renewable energy projects.

The tax bill that Trump signed last week lowered royalty payments from 12.5% to 7% for companies that mine coal on public lands. The bill also has a mandate to make available for leasing 6,250 square miles (16,200 square kilometers) — an area greater in size than Connecticut.

A spokesperson for the Interior Department’s Bureaeu of Land Management said Monday’s announcement about Powder River Basin leasing was preliminary and could change after a public comment period. The agency declined to say how much interest it expects from mining companies or how quickly new mines could open.

Ashley Burke with the National Mining Association said coal companies have “clear interest in additional leasing,” but declined to say how much acreage they might buy.

“When we see our grid stretched to its limits with energy demand soaring, we must acknowledge our energy reality, which means reversing prior ill-conceived and punitive policies,” she said of changes to leasing under Trump.

The Biden administration had calculated that an end to federal coal sales would reduce emissions by the equivalent of 293 million tons (266 million metric tonnes) of carbon dioxide annually. That’s comparable to emissions from about 63 million gasoline-power vehicles, according to a government analysis.

“Not only is new coal-leasing inconsistent with the imperative to arrest the advance of climate change, the coal plants that used to burn Powder River Basin coal are shuttering as more affordable, clean energy comes into the market,” said Jenny Harbine with the environmental law firm Earthjustice.

Scientists say greenhouse gas emissions from burning coal is a leading driver of human-caused climate change that’s making weather more extreme, wildfires more frequent and destructive and water supplies less reliable.

A federal judge blocked attempts made during Trump’s first term to alter the government’s management plan for the Powder River Basin, saying officials had not adequately analyzed potential health impacts from burning coal.

Fourteen active coal mines in the region accounted for about 40% of total U.S. coal production in 2022.

Some mines closed in recent years as utilities turned to less-polluting natural gas to generate electricity. Companies mined 512 million tons (464 million metric tonnes) of coal in the U.S. last year, the lowest volume since 1964.

But Burke, with the mining association, pointed to two recent positive indicators for the industry: more U.S. coal getting exported overseas and a surge in the amount of electricity generated by burning coal during the first four months of 2025 compared with the same period last year.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

Five years after the true crime documentary “Tiger King” captivated a country shut down by COVID-19, the final legal troubles for one of its main characters will be resolved Tuesday in a courtroom in South Carolina.

Bhagavan “Doc” Antle faces up to 10 years in prison for trafficking in exotic animals and money laundering after pleading guilty in November 2023.

Exactly what punishment prosecutors are asking for and any arguments for leniency from Antle’s attorneys were kept from the public before Tuesday morning’s hearing in federal court in Charleston.

Three others who pleaded guilty in his investigation received either probation or a four-month prison sentence.

Antle’s sentence is the final true-life chapter of the Tiger King saga. The Netflix series debuted in March 2020 near the peak of COVID-19 restrictions.

The show centered on dealers and conservationists of big cats, focusing on disputes between Joe Exotic, a collector and private zookeeper from Oklahoma, and Carole Baskin, who runs Big Cat Rescue in Florida.

Exotic, whose real name is Joseph Maldonado-Passage, is serving a 21-year federal prison sentence for trying to hire two different men to kill Baskin.

Antle, who owns a private zoo called Myrtle Beach Safari, appeared in the first season of the documentary and was the star of the third season.

Antle’s zoo was known for charging hundreds or thousands of dollars to let people pet and hold baby animals like lions, tigers and monkeys that were so young they were still being bottle-fed. Customers could have photos or videos made. Antle would sometimes ride into tours on an elephant.

Myrtle Beach Safari remains open by reservation only, according to its website. Antle has remained out on bail since his arrest in June 2022.

Antle’s federal charges were brought after the Tiger King series.

Prosecutors said he sold or bought cheetahs, lions, tigers and a chimpanzee without the proper paperwork. And they said in a separate scheme, Antle laundered more than $500,000 that an informant told him was being used to get people into the U.S. illegally to work.

Antle was used to having large amounts of money he could move around quickly, investigators said.

The FBI was listening to Antle’s phone calls with the informant as he explained a baby chimpanzee could easily cost $200,000. Private zookeepers can charge hundreds of dollars for photos with docile young primates or other animals, but the profit window is only open for a few years before the growing animals can no longer be safely handled.

“I had to get a monkey, but the people won’t take a check. They only take cash. So what do you do?” Antle said according to a transcript of the phone call in court papers.

Two of Antle’s employees have already been sentenced for their roles in his schemes.

Meredith Bybee was given a year of probation for selling a chimpanzee while Andrew “Omar” Sawyer, who prosecutors said helped Antle launder money, was given two years of probation.

Jason Clay, a Texas private zoo owner, pleaded guilty to illegally selling a primate and was sentenced to four months in prison, while charges were dropped against California ranch owner Charles Sammut.

Antle was also convicted in 2023 in a Virginia court of four counts of wildlife trafficking over sales of lions and was sentenced to two years of prison suspended “upon five years of good behavior.” An appeals court overturned two of the convictions, ruling that Virginia law bans the sale of endangered species but not their purchase.

Antle was found not guilty of five counts of animal cruelty at that same Virginia trial.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

World shares mostly rose Tuesday, with financial markets shrugging off U.S. tariff pressures on its trading partners.

In early European trading, Germany’s DAX rose 0.2% to 24,112.38. Britain’s FTSE 100 edged 0.2% higher to 8,822.09. France’s CAC 40 shed 0.1% to 7,716.19.

The futures for the S&P 500 added 0.1% . The futures for the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 0.1%.

In Asia, Japan’s Nikkei 225 added 0.3% to 39,688.81 while South Korea’s Kospi surged 1.8% to 3,114.95.

Hong Kong’s Hang Seng index climbed 1.1% to 24,140.13 while the Shanghai Composite gained 0.7% to 3,497.48. Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 edged 0.1% lower to 8,590.70.

Stocks on Wall Street closed broadly lower on Monday as the White House stepped up pressure on major trading partners to make deals before punishing tariffs imposed by the U.S. take effect.

The S&P 500 fell 0.8% for its biggest loss since mid-June. The benchmark index remains near its all-time high set last week.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average gave back 0.9% while the Nasdaq composite also finished 0.9% lower, not too far from its own record high.

The losses were widespread. Decliners outnumbered gainers by nearly 4 to 1 on the New York Stock Exchange.

It came after the Trump administration released letters informing Japan and South Korea that their goods will be taxed at 25% starting on Aug. 1, citing persistent trade imbalances with the two crucial U.S. allies in Asia. U.S. President Donald Trump also announced new tariff rates on Malaysia, Kazakhstan, South Africa, Laos and Myanmar.

Just before hefty U.S. tariffs on goods imported from nearly every country around the globe were to take effect in April, Trump postponed the levies for 90 days in hopes that foreign governments would be more willing to strike new trade deals. That 90-day negotiating period was set to expire before Wednesday.

In a post on his social media platform late Sunday, Trump also said any country that aligns itself with what he termed “the Anti-American policies of BRICS” would be levied an added 10% tariff. BRICS member nations include Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Iran. Saudi Arabia has also been invited to join.

“Financial markets have reacted to news of higher US tariffs in sanguine fashion,” Chris Turner, ING’s global head of markets, wrote in a commentary. “Presumably, the view is now that there are more deals to be done before the 1 August deadline.”

He said equity markets have recovered most of their initial losses, bond markets have barely budged and in FX, Asian currencies have bounced back.

In other dealings on Tuesday, benchmark U.S. crude oil lost 29 cents to $67.64 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, gave up 18 cents to $69.40.

The dollar was trading at 146.17 to the Japanese yen, up from 146.01 yen. The euro rose to $1.1752 from $1.1714.

___

AP Business Writer Alex Veiga contributed to this report.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Real estate investors are snapping up a bigger share of U.S. homes on the market as rising prices and stubbornly high borrowing costs freeze out many other would-be homebuyers.

Nearly 27% of all homes sold in the first three months of the year were bought by investors — the highest share in at least five years, according to a report by real estate data provider BatchData.

Between 2020 and 2023, the share of homes bought by investors averaged 18.5%.

All told, investors bought 265,000 homes in the January-March quarter, an increase of 1.2% from the same period a year earlier, the firm said.

Despite the modest annual increase, the rise in the share of investor home purchases is more a reflection of how much the housing market has slowed as traditional buyers face growing affordability constraints, according to BatchData.

The U.S. housing market has been in a sales slump since early 2022, when mortgage rates began to climb from pandemic-era lows. Home sales fell last year to their lowest level in nearly 30 years.

They’ve remained sluggish so far this year, as many prospective homebuyers have been discouraged by elevated mortgage rates and home prices that have kept climbing, though more slowly.

As home sales have slowed, properties are taking longer to sell. That’s led to a sharply higher inventory of homes on the market, benefitting investors and other home shoppers who can afford to bypass current mortgage rates by paying in cash or tapping home equity gains.

“As traditional buyers struggle with affordability, investors with cash and financing advantages are stepping in to maintain transaction volume,” according to the report.

BatchData analyzes U.S. home sales records to determine which properties were purchased by investors. These could include vacation homes or rentals, but not a homebuyer’s primary residence.

Investors bought 1.2 million homes in 2024, up from an average of 1.1 million homes a year going back to 2020, according to BatchData.

Even so, investor-owned homes account for roughly 20% of the nation’s 86 million single-family homes, the firm said.

Of those, mom-and-pop investors, or those who own between 1 and 5 homes, account for 85% of all investor-owned residential properties, while those with between 6 and 10 properties account for another 5%.

Institutional investors that own 1,000 or more homes account for only about 2.2% of all investor-owned homes, the firm said.

And that number could get smaller, amid signs that large institutional investors are scaling back home purchases.

Out of a group of eight of the biggest companies that own and lease single-family houses, including Invitation Homes and American Homes 4 Rent, six sold more homes in the second quarter than they bought, according to data from Parci Labs.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Peter Morgan—AP

A fierce protest in Mexico City railing against gentrification and mass tourism was fueled by government failures and active promotion to attract digital nomads, according to experts, who said tension had been mounting for years.

The criticism comes after Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum alleged that Friday’s protest was marked by xenophobia, reviving a debate over an influx of Americans in the city.

Many Mexicans say they’ve been priced out of their neighborhoods — in part because of a move made by Sheinbaum in 2022, when she was the Mexico City mayor and signed an agreement with Airbnb and UNESCO to boost tourism and attract digital nomads despite concern over the impact short-term rentals could have.

‘Gringo: Stop stealing our home’

On Friday, that came to a head. A largely peaceful protest of hundreds of demonstrators marched through tourism centers of the city with signs reading “Gringo: Stop stealing our home” and “Housing regulations now!”

Near the end of the march, a group of protesters turned violent, breaking the windows of storefronts and looting a number of businesses. In one case, a protester slammed a butter knife against the window of a restaurant where people were hiding, and another person painted “kill a gringo” on a nearby wall.

“The xenophobic displays seen at that protest have to be condemned. No one should be able to say ‘any nationality get out of our country’ even over a legitimate problem like gentrification,” Sheinbaum said Monday. “We’ve always been open, fraternal.”

The frustrations were built upon years of mass tourism and rising rent prices in large swathes of the city. The influx of foreigners began around 2020, when Americans flooded into the Mexico City to work remotely, dodge coronavirus restrictions and take advantage of cheaper living costs.

In the years since, choice neighborhoods like Roma and Condesa, lush central areas dotted with cafes and markets, have grown increasingly populated by foreign tourists and the remote workers known as digital nomads, and there are more temporary housing units rented through companies like Airbnb that cater to tourists.

As they have, rent and living prices have soared and English has been increasingly common on the streets of those areas. Some groups have described the phenomenon as a sort of “neo-colonialism.”

Mounting tensions

The Mexico City Anti-Gentrification Front, one of the organizations behind the protest, it was “completely against” any acts of physical violence and denied that the protests were xenophobic. Instead, the organization said the protest was a result of years of failures by the local government to address the root of the problems.

“Gentrification isn’t just foreigners’ fault, it’s the fault of the government and these companies that prioritize the money foreigners bring,” the organization said in a statement. Meanwhile “young people and the working class can’t afford to live here.”

In its list of demands, the organization called for greater rent controls, mandates that locals have a voice in larger development projects in their area, stricter laws making it harder for landlords to throw out residents and prioritizing Mexican renters over foreigners.

Mexico’s protest comes on the back of a wave of similar protests across Europe railing against mass tourism. Tensions in Mexico have also been compounded by wider inequalities and the Trump administration targeting Latino communities in the U.S. as it ramps up deportations.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security took a jab at protesters Sunday, writing in a post on the social media platform X: “If you are in the United States illegally and wish to join the next protest in Mexico City, use the CBP Home app to facilitate your departure.”

Government failures

Protesters’ cries against government failures were echoed by experts, who said that surging gentrification is a product of both shortage of affordable housing in the city and longtime government failures to regulate the housing market.

Antonio Azuela, lawyer and sociologist and others said that they do see the protest as a xenophobic backlash, and around 2020 the core of the problem was the influx of “digital nomads” in the city, but it grew out of hand because of lax housing laws.

“What has made this explode is lack of regulation in the market,” Azuela said.

Mexico City’s government over the course of decades has made a few efforts to control development and create affordable housing.

Legislators estimated there are about 2.7 million houses and apartments in the city, but it needs about 800,000 more. But such affordable housing developments that have popped up often are pushed off to the fringes of the city, said Luis Salinas, a researcher at National Autonomous University of Mexico who has studied gentrification in Mexico City for years.

Taking advantage of ‘insufficient’ laws

Controls, meanwhile, have been marked by lack of enforcement, which developers travel services companies like Airbnb take advantage of, he said.

Today, more than 26,000 properties in Mexico City are currently listed on Airbnb, according to the Inside Airbnb, an advocacy organization that tracks the company’s impact on residential communities through data. That’s compared to 36,000 properties in New York City and 19,000 in Barcelona, where protests have also broken out.

“The government has treated housing like it’s merchandise,” Salinas said. The actions the government is taking “are completely insufficient. The federal government needs to be intervening far more nowadays.”

Airbnb said it helped contribute more than a billion dollars in “economic impact” to Mexico City last year and that spending by guests has supported 46,000 jobs in the city. “What’s needed is regulation based not on prohibitions, but on respect for rights and transparency of obligations,” it said in a statement.

Last year, Mexico City’s government approved the most ambitious rent control law since the 1940s in an effort to control prices and also set caps on short-term rentals to 180 nights a year, but Salinas said that enforcement of short-term rental legislation has been put on pause until after the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

And even then, the country’s government will have to take far greater actions to get the situation under control, said Azuela.

“This isn’t going to end by just reigning in Airbnb,” he said. “They’re going to have to do a whole lot more.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Gerardo Vieyra—NurPhoto via Getty Images

Elon Musk has said that he’s formed a new political party, but it’s unclear what steps — if any — he’s taken to do so, or how the effort might affect upcoming elections.

Musk has not yet released any additional information. Spokespeople for Musk and his political action committee, America PAC, didn’t immediately comment Monday.

While there are many recent federal elections filings that reference the Tesla and SpaceX CEO or his companies, Musk himself has even gone on his social media platform batting down at least one filing as fake.

The possible new political party marks another development in the rift between Musk and President Donald Trump over the Republican’s sweeping tax cuts law, which the tech billionaire has called “insane.”

The fissures between Trump and his one-time top surrogate and Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutter-in-chief have exposed not only the fragile nature of relations between two of the country’s most visible personalities but also the potential political consequences of disagreeing with the priorities of either man. The squabble could be particularly costly for Musk, whose businesses rely on billions of dollars in government contracts, and whose publicly traded company Tesla has taken a market hit.

Here’s what we know — and what we don’t — about Musk’s new political party:

Musk says he’s formed the America Party

Musk said Saturday on X that he had formed the America Party “to give you back your freedom.” He’d teased the move for days, threatening to make his own party if “this insane spending bill passes” Congress. He spent part of Sunday taking feedback from X users about the party, which he indicated he’d use to get involved in the 2026 midterm elections.

Some new Musk-related parties seem fishy

The Federal Election Commission database has teemed with newly formed political entities that make reference either to Musk or one of his companies, but there are details that cast doubts on their authenticity.

As of Monday afternoon, there were multiple political parties listed in the Federal Election Commission database formed in the hours since Musk’s Saturday X post, with versions of “America Party” or “DOGE” or “X” in the name, or Musk listed among people affiliated with the entity.

But none appeared to be real, listing contacts for the organization as email addresses such as ” [email protected] ″ or untraceable Protonmail addresses. Several listed Vaibhav Taneja — the chief financial officer of Tesla — as a contact for the party, along with a Texas address for a building affiliated with X. Several pointed to a home in Maryland.

When a Musk supporter posted screengrabs of one of the formation documents to X, Musk took to X Sunday to say that the “filing is false and has been reported as such to the FEC.”

What could Musk do with a new party?

While indicating earlier this year that he might play less of a role in elected politics moving forward, Musk — the world’s richest man who spent at least $250 million supporting Trump in the 2024 election — could use a new party to try to do the opposite.

New political parties are often formed but typically struggle to pull any significant support away from the Republican and Democratic parties. But Musk could impact next year’s elections determining control of Congress if he is willing to spend significant amounts of money — through a new party or existing ones.

During the tax cuts debate, Musk pledged to work toward supporting primary challengers for members of Congress who backed the bill. He also said he would support Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican targeted by Trump for opposing the measure.

What has Trump said about Musk’s new party?

Trump on Sunday called Musk’s proposition “ridiculous,” going on to tout “tremendous success with the Republican Party.”

Trump later posted on social media that he was “saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK,” saying the only thing third parties are good for “is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS.”

What does it take to make a new political party?

There are official steps, like setting up a tax identification number, bank account and treasurer, who can be held liable if future paperwork isn’t filed properly.

According to the FEC, any new party that intends to operate in federal elections has to register with the commission “when they raise or spend money over certain thresholds in connection with a federal election.” Federal campaign finance laws and regulations govern how political parties can take in money. Parties have to file regular reports with the FEC.

But even a federally designated political party has to gain access to ballots state by state, making the entire process, according to University of Richmond School of Law professor Carl Tobias, “complicated and expensive.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Alex Brandon—AP

Jeffrey Epstein did not maintain a “client list,” the Justice Department acknowledged Monday as it said no more files related to the wealthy financier’s sex trafficking investigation would be made public despite promises from Attorney General Pam Bondi that had raised the expectations of conservative influencers and conspiracy theorists.

The acknowledgment that the well-connected Epstein did not have a list of clients to whom underage girls were trafficked represents a public walk-back of a theory that the Trump administration had helped promote, with Bondi suggesting in a Fox News interview earlier this year that such a document was “sitting on my desk” for review.

Even as it released video from inside a New York jail meant to definitively prove that Epstein killed himself, the department also said in a memo that it was refusing to disclose other evidence investigators had collected. Bondi for weeks had suggested more material was going to be revealed — “It’s a new administration and everything is going to come out to the public,” she said at one point — after a first document dump she had hyped angered President Donald Trump’s base by failing to deliver revelations.

That episode, in which far-right influencers were invited to the White House in February and provided with binders marked “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” and “Declassified” that contained documents that had largely already been in the public domain, has spurred conservative internet personalities to sharply criticize Bondi.

After the first release fell flat, Bondi said officials were poring over a “truckload” of previously withheld evidence she said had been handed over by the FBI. In a March TV interview, she claimed the Biden administration “sat on these documents, no one did anything with them,” adding: “Sadly these people don’t believe in transparency, but I think more unfortunately, I think a lot of them don’t believe in honesty.”

But after a months-long review of evidence in the government’s possession, the Justice Department determined that no “further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted,” the memo says. The department noted that much of the material was placed under seal by a court to protect victims and “only a fraction” of it “would have been aired publicly had Epstein gone to trial.”

“One of our highest priorities is combating child exploitation and bringing justice to victims,” the memo says. “Perpetuating unfounded theories about Epstein serves neither of those ends.”

The two-page memo bore the logos of the Justice Department and the FBI but was not signed by any individual official.

Conservatives who have sought proof of a government cover-up of Epstein’s activities and death expressed outrage Monday over the department’s position. Far-right influencer Jack Posobiec posted: “We were all told more was coming. That answers were out there and would be provided. Incredible how utterly mismanaged this Epstein mess has been. And it didn’t have to be.”

Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones wrote that “next the DOJ will say ‘Actually, Jeffrey Epstein never even existed,’” calling it “over the top sickening.” Elon Musk shared a series of photos of a clown applying makeup appearing to mock Bondi for saying the client list doesn’t exist after suggesting months ago that it was on her desk.

The client list hubbub began when Bondi was asked in a Fox News interview whether the department would release such a document.

She replied: “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and Justice Department spokesperson Chad Gilmartin said Monday that Bondi was referring to the overall Epstein case files.

Among the evidence that the Justice Department said Monday it has in its possession, and will not be releasing, are images of Epstein, “images and videos of victims who are either minors or appear to be minors,” and more than 10,000 “downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography.”

The memo does not explain when or where the videos were located, who and what they depict and whether they were newly found as investigators scoured their collection of evidence or were known for some time to have been in the government’s possession.

The Associated Press published a story last week about unanswered questions surrounding possible video evidence after Bondi cited the existence of “tens of thousands” of videos that she said showed Epstein “with children or child porn.”

Multiple people who participated in the criminal cases of Epstein and socialite former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell told AP that they had not seen and did not know of a trove of recordings along the lines of what Bondi had referenced. Indictments and detention memos also don’t allege the existence of video recordings and neither Epstein nor Maxwell were charged with possession of child sex abuse material even though that would have been easier for prosecutors to prove than the sex trafficking counts they faced.

The AP did find reference in a filing in a civil lawsuit to the discovery by the Epstein estate of videos and pictures that could constitute child sex abuse material, but lawyers involved in that case said a protective order prevents them from discovering the specifics of that evidence and the Justice Department did not respond to a detailed list of questions from AP about the videos Bondi was referencing.

Epstein was found dead in his jail cell in August 2019, weeks after his arrest on sex trafficking charges, in a suicide that foreclosed the possibility of a trial.

The department’s disclosure that Epstein took his own life is hardly a revelation even though conspiracy theorists have continued to challenge that conclusion.

In November 2019, for instance, then-Attorney General William Barr told the AP that he had reviewed security footage that revealed that no one entered the area where Epstein was housed on the night he died, and expressed confidence that Epstein’s death was a suicide.

More recently, FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino have insisted in television and podcast interviews that the evidence was clear that Epstein had killed himself.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Jacquelyn Martin—AP