Aurelia Butler

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for freeYour guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the worldThe Trump administration has imposed sanctions on a Chinese refinery for buying Iranian crude oil, as Washington increasingly pushes Beijing to rein in oil purchases from the country to increase the pressure on Tehran.The Treasury department targeted Shandong Shengxing Chemical for allegedly buying more than $1bn in Iranian crude oil from sources that included a front company for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in violation of US sanctions.The measure marks the second time in a month that President Donald Trump has put sanctions on a “teapot” refinery — a term for independent Chinese refineries that are the main buyers of Iranian crude.“Any refinery, company, or broker that chooses to purchase Iranian oil or facilitate Iran’s oil trade places itself at serious risk,” said Treasury secretary Scott Bessent. “The United States is committed to disrupting all actors providing support to Iran’s oil supply chain, which the regime uses to support its terrorist proxies and partners,” he added.The Treasury department also imposed sanctions on several companies and vessels for helping Iran transport oil to China on ships that are part of a “shadow fleet” of vessels that seek to avoid detection.The package marked the sixth round of sanctions that Trump has placed on Iran as part of his “maximum pressure campaign”.They come as Washington and Beijing are in the middle of a trade war that Trump launched in January and escalated in recent weeks. The US has imposed a 145 per cent tariff on imports from China, which has retaliated with a 125 per cent tariff on American goods.The Trump administration has also stepped up pressure on China over its purchases of Iranian crude. The Biden administration was criticised by Republicans for failing to exert more pressure on Beijing to stop importing oil from Iran in violation of US sanctions. Dennis Wilder, who was a White House Asia adviser to president George W Bush, said former president Joe Biden “turned a blind eye to China’s purchase of up to 90 per cent of Iran’s oil exports”.“This was, in large part, out of concern that a fully enforced embargo on Iran would lead to a sharp rise in oil prices that would affect US consumers,” Wilder said. “Chinese oil purchases have helped build a close relationship between Tehran and Beijing in which China benefits by gaining greater commercial access in the region.”The new sanctions come as the Trump administration is holding talks with Tehran on curtailing the Islamic republic’s nuclear programme, prompting hopes of a breakthrough in one of the Middle East’s most intractable problems. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, held indirect talks with Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi in Oman on Saturday. The pair are due to hold a second round of talks this coming Saturday.“We firmly oppose the US abuse of unilateral sanctions and ‘long-arm jurisdiction,’ which undermines international trade order and rules, disrupts normal economic and trade exchanges, and infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies and individuals,” said Liu Pengyu, the Chinese embassy spokesperson in Washington.   More

Stay informed with free updatesSimply sign up to the More

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for freeYour guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the worldThe US is engaging in efforts to negotiate a landmark global tax deal despite President Donald Trump’s criticism of the agreement, according to the OECD. Secretary-general Mathias Cormann told the Financial Times the US was taking part in active discussions, including technical concerns on implementation. “We are continuing the conversation,” he said on the sidelines of the Delphi Economic Forum in Greece. The comments show the deal to close tax loopholes for Big Tech groups and multinationals could get US backing. More than 135 countries signed up to the biggest corporate tax reform in more than a century more than four years ago, but since then half the agreement has not been enacted.Delegates from those countries said they held ‘‘constructive’’ talks on the agreement in Cape Town, South Africa, last week. That stands in stark contrast to the hostile tone Trump struck in a memorandum signed on his first day in office in January, which said the “global tax deal has no force or effect in the US”. The president’s memo had led many observers to conclude that the US had in effect pulled out of the OECD deal, but Cormann said he was ‘‘not sure’’ Trump’s comments equated to a withdrawal. He added: “[Trump] issued a memorandum on the 20th of January and that says what it says. But we remain engaged in discussions with the United States.” “The OECD was notified that the terms of the global tax deal agreed to by the prior administration are not acceptable,” said a Treasury spokesperson. “The Treasury continues to seek a path forward that protects American interests and US tax sovereignty.”The first pillar of the reform — making Big Tech groups and multinationals pay more tax in the places they do business — had not been agreed, Cormann said, but he stressed conversations were ongoing. He warned failure to deliver a multilateral solution could result in a proliferation of unilateral digital services taxes around the world, a scenario he said would be damaging for global trade and growth. Pillar one requires US backing to come into force, because countries need to change their international tax treaties including with the US, to bring it into effect.The second pillar, the global minimum tax, came into effect from last year and has been enacted in more than 40 countries out of the 141 signatories. It does not require US backing, as nations can introduce it unilaterally. However, despite it having been enacted in some capitals, countries at the OECD are refining the details, with the organisation regularly updating guidance on the rules.Cormann said the US had raised “specific technical concerns” on the implementation of the second pillar, which introduces a global minimum 15 per cent corporate tax rate. It had raised questions including about a rule on undertaxed profits, and how research and development tax credits factor into effective tax rate calculations. EU countries on Wednesday agreed to re-engage on negotiations with the US on the second pillar, officials said.Sandy Bhogal, partner and co-chair of tax at law firm Gibson Dunn, said he could not see the first pillar targeting Big Tech groups and multinationals happening. ‘‘I cannot see how it can be made to appease the US without fundamental reform,’’ he said.“The Trump administration is unhappy about the undertaxed profits rule aspect of pillar two, and so that would have to change as well. I think we are a long way away from US adoption of either.”Cormann added international tax co-operation remained essential to prevent both double taxation and no taxation. “Multinationals operate across borders — and so do tax issues. Without co-operation, everyone loses. “If we can’t find a satisfactory multilateral solution, then the risk grows that countries will take matters into their own hands.”Cormann also warned sweeping new tariffs risked triggering slower global growth and higher inflation, adding to the economic challenges facing policymakers.The recent tariff announcements — if implemented as outlined — would contribute to a “further contraction in global growth and higher inflation”, he said, though he stopped short of forecasting a global recession.While the OECD is not expected to release updated forecasts until June, Cormann confirmed the organisation was reassessing its projections in light of developments since early April. The March forecast had cut global growth by 0.2 percentage points for this year and 0.3 percentage points for 2025.Cormann also raised concerns about rising global fragmentation. “A trade war is in nobody’s interest,” he said. “Lower global growth leads to lower incomes and higher prices — including in the US.” He described the current moment as a critical juncture for Europe and multilateralism more broadly. “We are committed to working with all democratically elected governments. Multilateralism is hard — but it’s never been more essential.”Additional reporting by Claire Jones in Washington and Paola Tamma in Brussels More

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.Bankers and consultants have long touted the opportunities of emerging Asia’s rapidly expanding middle classes to their clients. As incomes have risen, foreign direct investment has duly flooded in, fuelling further growth. But in recent years, the momentum behind the Asian consumer has been slowing. The dual economic shocks of the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which pushed up food and energy prices, hit households’ disposable incomes. Distressed borrowing and a dearth of well-paying jobs hindered the recovery. The White House’s aggressive protectionist agenda will be yet another setback for the region’s export-orientated industrial economies.Since 2004, developing Asia has added close to 200mn households to its middle class, according to research by Oxford Economics (defined as those with disposable income between $20,000 to $70,000 per year). A significant chunk of that rise has been driven by China and India, the world’s most populous nations. But in both countries, consumers are now struggling. In China, households are still haunted by a real estate crash in 2021, triggered by loose credit and overzealous developers. In India, middle earners have taken on hefty unsecured loans, partly to bridge a rise in the post-pandemic cost of living. Many are now struggling to repay their debt, as the Financial Times reported this week. China and India are also grappling with high youth unemployment.But the strains on Asia’s new middle classes are broad-based. In Indonesia the number of people considered to be middle class by its government has declined by a fifth over the past six years. Economists reckon the nation’s over-reliance on the commodities sector, which has tended to produce poorly paid work, is partly to blame. In Thailand, the authorities are desperately trying to reduce the burden of household debt which, at around 90 per cent of GDP, is among the highest in the region.US President Donald Trump’s tariffs plans will also damp revenues and wages across the region. With developing Asia’s comparative advantage lying in low-cost, youthful labour, many countries’ best hope is to negotiate a climbdown from the White House’s now on-hold “reciprocal” tariffs. They will also need to pen new trade deals with other countries to make up for the loss of access to the US. However America’s protectionist plans pan out, the long-term lesson from the series of one-two punches faced by the region over recent years is that governments must do more to boost their nations’ economic resilience.First, many of Asia’s fast-growing exporters lack adequate social safety nets. This means private debt tends to play a big role in plugging shortfalls. In China, consumers remain cautious, in part because they know there is limited state support should there be another economic shock. That leaves the country’s producers dependent on external demand. Stronger welfare and consumer protection systems would help households bounce back faster and avoid vicious debt cycles emerging. Better education and support for women to enter the formal workforce would also boost households’ earning potential. Second, many nations have not done enough to diversify their economies to support better-paying jobs. In Indonesia, for example, local content requirements and import restrictions have impeded FDI and the creation of formal jobs beyond the mining industry. Streamlining red tape and investing in better infrastructure would attract further investment and help domestic businesses to scale. Emerging Asia successfully rode the wave of globalisation that has swept across the world since the 1990s. But as recent global shocks have underscored, the relentless rise of the region’s middle class is not guaranteed. Policymakers will need to play a greater role in ensuring their economies are less hostage to fortune. More

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for freeYour guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the worldCalifornia governor Gavin Newsom said that the state plans to sue to halt Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs, arguing that the duties will cost jobs and push up prices.The lawsuit, which represents one of the first significant legal challenges to Trump’s trade policy, will be filed in federal court in California on Wednesday by Newsom and state attorney-general Rob Bonta.“President Trump’s unlawful tariffs are wreaking chaos on California families, businesses and our economy, driving up prices and threatening jobs,” Newsom said.“We’re standing up for American families who can’t afford to let the chaos continue,” he added.Newsom, who was elected governor of California in 2018, is regarded as a potential future Democratic presidential candidate. According to Newsom’s office, California is the fifth-largest economy in the world. The state is also home to the Port of Los Angeles, the busiest in the US and one that is particularly exposed to a slowdown in trade with China.Earlier this month, Trump imposed steep “reciprocal” tariffs on US trading partners, before announcing a 90-day reprieve after the move sent Wall Street stocks plunging and Treasury yields soaring.However, a universal levy of 10 per cent remains in place, in addition to certain sector-specific duties such as that on cars. More

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.Donald Trump’s administration is clamping down on Nvidia’s ability to sell artificial intelligence chips to China, sending the Silicon Valley giant’s shares sliding in pre-market trading and hitting Wall Street tech stocks.Nvidia revealed new US controls on American chipmakers’ sales to China in a late-night regulatory filing on Tuesday, in which it said it expected to take a $5.5bn earnings hit as a result.The curbs were subsequently confirmed by the commerce department, marking another escalation in Donald Trump’s trade war with Beijing.The chipmaker said its H20 chip, which is already tailored to comply with Joe Biden-era export controls that prevent the sale of its most powerful chips in China, would now require a special licence to be sold to Chinese customers. It is still unclear how many such licences will be granted, but Nvidia said it would take a $5.5bn charge in the quarter to April 27 related to H20 chips for “inventory, purchase commitments, and related reserves”.Analysts estimate Nvidia will generate about $17bn in sales to Chinese customers in the current financial year.Nvidia’s shares fell 6 per cent in pre-market trading on Wednesday, while futures tracking the tech-focused Nasdaq 100 index were down 1.4 per cent.Shares in Dutch chipmaking equipment company ASML sank 5 per cent after orders of its machines fell short of expectations. Shares in US semiconductor group AMD also fell more than 6 per cent in pre-market trading. Stocks in Hong Kong also fell, led by leading AI chip buyers Alibaba, down 4 per cent, and Baidu and Tencent, which both fell about 2 per cent. The new US chip controls mark the latest salvo in a spiralling trade war between the world’s two largest economies. Earlier this month, the Trump administration imposed additional tariffs of 145 per cent on China, with a reprieve for some consumer electronics. Beijing matched the additional duties in retaliation.The shortage of domestic chip suppliers in China able to build products to rival those of Nvidia had meant its tech companies were flocking to buy H20s, even in the face of Beijing’s steep import duties.But that could change under the new US controls. Since the H20 chip is less powerful than those Nvidia can sell outside China, customers in the rest of the world may also be unwilling to buy up stock that cannot be sold there.Bernstein analysts on Tuesday said the H20 accounted for about $12bn of Nvidia’s $17bn revenues in China over the past year. They added that there was still a lack of clarity on whether licences might be granted, or whether it amounted to a full “wipeout” of the product line.Nvidia said it was notified of the new controls on April 9 and was told on Monday that the licence requirement for H20 and any similar chips “will be in effect for the indefinite future”.On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt urged China to cut a new trade deal with the US, saying, “the ball is in China’s court”.The US commerce department later confirmed it was issuing new export licensing requirements for the H20, as well as AMD’s MI308 and equivalent chips. It said it was “acting on the president’s directive to safeguard our national and economic security”.The US move underscores Nvidia’s exposure to geopolitical tensions between Washington and Beijing. The chip designer has been at the heart of the AI boom, and briefly last year became the world’s most valuable company.On Monday, the Trump administration launched a national security probe that could lead to new tariffs on semiconductors, as it holds off from immediately applying steeper levies on chips. Nvidia’s chips are manufactured in Taiwan, so they could be subject to import duties when sold to US-based customers.The company said on Monday it would spend up to half a trillion dollars on US AI infrastructure over the next four years through partnerships with companies including Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company and Foxconn. The Financial Times had first reported on its investment plans.Nvidia introduced its China-focused H20 processors last year after the Biden administration imposed export controls on its chips. They are less powerful than its top range of graphics processing units, or GPUs, coveted by Microsoft, OpenAI, Meta and Amazon. Despite its reduced performance, the H20 has still seen solid demand in China. But Beijing has taken steps to encourage local tech companies to use homegrown chips from companies such as Huawei, and could freeze out Nvidia’s products with new energy efficiency rules.Video: Nvidia’s rise in the age of AI | FT Film More

Japan’s top trade negotiator has travelled to Washington for talks over Donald Trump’s tariffs, in one of the first tests of the White House’s willingness to strike deals on the levies with US trading partners.Tokyo is the first capital to be granted face-to-face talks with the Trump administration after the US president announced onerous “reciprocal” tariffs on dozens of nations earlier this month, before suspending them for 90 days.On Wednesday, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he would personally attend the meeting, alongside Treasury secretary Scott Bessent and commerce secretary Howard Lutnick.“Japan is coming in today to negotiate Tariffs, the cost of military support, and ‘TRADE FAIRNESS’,” he wrote, adding: “Hopefully something can be worked out which is good (GREAT!) for Japan and the USA!”Diplomats said Japan’s status as a “guinea pig” in the talks might give it an advantage over other countries, though uncertainty remained over what the Trump administration hopes to achieve. Japan’s trade surplus with the US is among the 10 biggest in the world.“All the uncertainty of the last weeks, the weaponisation of tariffs and the language of trade war — in all of this we haven’t properly seen what it is that Trump wants this to lead to,” said a person close to preparations for the talks.“Japan may not enjoy this position, but its big contribution may be to be in the front line when that is clarified,” they added.Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.The two-day visit by Ryosei Akazawa comes after Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba declared a “national crisis” over the potential hit to trade from Trump’s tariffs.The US president’s imposition of a 24 per cent “reciprocal” duty on Tokyo has rankled because of Japan’s status as a staunch military ally and the largest foreign investor in the US for the past five years.Despite Trump’s subsequent pause, Japan still faces a 25 per cent tariff on car exports to the US, as well as the baseline 10 per cent levy imposed on most of America’s trading partners.Takeshi Niinami, chair of the Japan Association of Corporate Executives, said the choice of Bessent as the lead US negotiator signalled that Washington would probably push Japan to address weakness in the yen. The US also wants to stabilise the US Treasuries market, in which the Japanese state holds about $1.1tn as foreign currency reserves.People familiar with the situation said the US had signalled several priorities for the talks, including discussing ways for Japan to import more of its liquefied natural gas.They said Washington also wanted to boost Japanese market access to US produce such as rice and wheat, and address safety standards for cars that the US believes make it difficult to sell in Japan.The US Treasury did not respond to a question about the Trump team’s priorities for the talks.Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.Officials in Tokyo said Japan was prepared to discuss a range of issues, including buying more weapons from the US, infrastructure investment in the country, and collaboration on shipbuilding.In 2019, Japan’s then-prime minister Shinzo Abe — who became known as the “Trump whisperer” for his close rapport with the president — sealed a trade deal with the US.Abe only managed to secure the easing of some restrictions on some US agricultural products and strike an agreement on digital commerce. However, Trump described the deal as “phenomenal”, and the Japanese leader was able to present it domestically as evidence of close ties between the countries.“We have many cards this time but last time [during the previous Trump administration] was totally different in terms of the scene of negotiations,” said Niinami.Several experts said Japan would put the US car tariffs high on its priority list. “Japan will likely focus on trying to get the auto tariffs paused,” said Matt Goodman, a US-Japan economic relations expert at the Council on Foreign Relations. “But the auto tariffs will probably be the hardest thing to get Trump to back down on.”Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.Tobias Harris, founder of political risk advisory Japan Foresight, said the lack of clarity about the US side’s goals for the talks put Japan and Ishiba in a difficult position compared with the situation under Abe.“I don’t think there is quick stuff out there. If the US want real concessions on agriculture that is not something that can be settled quickly in the best of times, and this does not feel like the best of times,” said Harris.“And I don’t get the sense there is a desire in Tokyo to just roll over and do a bad deal for Japan,” he added. “It’s a really tough line for Ishiba to walk. If they do what the US wants there will be a price domestically.”Jeff Kingston, a US foreign policy expert at Temple University in Japan, said the stakes in the talks were further raised by anxiety in Japan over the US commitment to regional stability in Asia, where it is the primary security player.Recent actions of the Trump administration, said Kingston and other analysts, have particularly unsettled Japan, which depends on the US for its defence.In particular, Trump’s stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has raised concerns that the US could be more reluctant to engage militarily in a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan.At the same time, the Japanese economy’s reliance on exports makes it highly vulnerable to global recessions and any fraying of the international rules-based order.“The Japanese have to talk tough for domestic consumption, but when it really comes down to it they will do whatever needs to be done to keep Trump on side,” said Kingston. “The difficulty is that Trump uses uncertainty as a weapon in negotiation, and Japan is not in a position to gamble.” More

This article is an on-site version of our Moral Money newsletter. Premium subscribers can sign up here to get the newsletter delivered three times a week. Standard subscribers can upgrade to Premium here, or explore all FT newsletters.Visit our Moral Money hub for all the latest ESG news, opinion and analysis from around the FT Welcome back. Donald Trump’s suspension of his “liberation day” tariffs prompted sighs of relief in much of the world. But it’s worth remembering that, as things stand, they are still due to come into force in a matter of weeks.For our first story today, I discussed with a senior UN trade official what this would mean for development in some of the world’s poorest countries. Also today, we pick through the details of a major change of course from the world’s biggest climate-focused banking coalition.We’ll be off on Friday, returning to your inbox on Monday. See you then.economic development Trump tariffs prompt rare rebuke from UN trade bodyIf US President Donald Trump were trying to craft a trade policy that would impede the development of low-income nations all over the world, the “reciprocal” tariffs he announced on April 2 would have been an excellent start. Last week, Trump suspended the full implementation of those elevated tariffs for 90 days, meaning that they are set to come into force in July. For millions of people in developing nations, that would be a serious blow — as an unusual intervention this week from the UN Trade and Development body (Unctad) has highlighted. Perhaps the greatest perversity of the formula behind Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs is that it reserves special punishment for nations that have made a start on developing their economies through export-led growth, but are not yet rich enough to import much from the US. Lesotho, which got the highest Trump tariff of any nation before the more recent escalation of the trade war with China, is a case in point. The landlocked southern African country was hit with a tariff rate of 50 per cent. That’s because it exported $237mn of goods to the US last year, but only imported $2.8mn in the other direction. Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.This trade imbalance is unsurprising when you consider that Lesotho’s per capita GDP is a little over $900, making it one of the 20 poorest countries in the world. Trump’s tariffs threaten to worsen that poverty. Lesotho’s US exports are worth more than 10 per cent of its GDP. Worse, they are mainly in the highly competitive, low-margin clothing sector. A tariff at the planned level could leave its exporters unable to compete. This destructive dynamic has prompted Unctad to wade in, breaking with its normal practice of avoiding specific criticisms of individual countries’ policies.On Monday, the body published a report warning about the damaging impact that the tariffs would have on low-income countries. It argued that “vulnerable and small economies, whose activities have a negligible effect on trade deficits, should be exempt from new tariff hikes”. The US’s net imports from Lesotho, for example, amount to 0.019 per cent of the global US trade deficit. “This will represent a source of instability for these countries, and will make it even more difficult for them to eventually buy products from the US,” Luz Maria de la Mora, Unctad’s director of international trade and commodities, told me yesterday. She said all 44 economies listed by the UN as “least developed countries” should be exempted from the “reciprocal” tariffs should they come into force, as well as the 10 per cent baseline tariff that has already been applied.Four of the five countries hardest hit by the “reciprocal” tariffs are least developed countries, including Cambodia (49 per cent), Laos (48 per cent) and Madagascar (47 per cent). De la Mora called on major economies to push for relief for low-income nations as part of their engagement with the US on the new tariffs. “These countries don’t need to be hurt,” she said.Net-zero banking allianceUnpacking the NZBA’s bonfire of the rulesBeing a member of the Net-Zero Banking Alliance just got a heck of a lot easier.The body announced yesterday that a majority of its 128 member banks have voted to eliminate a host of rules, approving a new framework that, as we wrote last month, looked to many like a lowering of ambition. The NZBA’s organisers are hoping that the far looser requirements will stem further defections — following a rush of exits by most US and Japanese members — and encourage new members from developing nations to sign up. They might be right on that, but others are less pleased. The weakened rules have already led Dutch bank Triodos to quit the NZBA, saying the new approach did not “align with our own climate ambition”. Here’s what you need to know about the change: What’s missing?The new version of the NZBA commitment statement, to be signed by all members, is a much shorter document than the one it replaces.The previous version featured a string of mandatory commitments including a pledge to align all financing with a scenario in which global carbon dioxide emissions reach net zero by 2050, with global warming limited to 1.5C. Members were also required to publish annual updates on their progress in reducing their “financed emissions”, for review by UN officials. The new version, in contrast, is peppered with phrases stating that members “may”, or “are welcome” to take various measures. The document does say that each member bank “aims to align financing and business strategies with the Paris Agreement” (my italics), but this is much softer than the clear commitment in the prior document.The only sentence that sounds like a firm commitment is this one:We have independently chosen to support the transition to a low-carbon economy by setting and publishing individual science-based, near-term targets (or to do so within 18 months of joining), progress against targets, and transition plans.And even this, a footnote makes clear, is to be approached on “a comply or explain basis”.Meanwhile, the NZBA’s revised governance document has lost the whole section on its “accountability mechanism”, which detailed how the body would kick out banks that didn’t meet the membership requirements.Phase 2According to Shargiil Bashir, the sustainability head at First Abu Dhabi Bank who is currently serving as head of the NZBA’s steering group, this marks a second stage of the body’s work.“Before the NZBA was set up [in 2021], no bank had set targets aligned with the Paris Agreement,” Bashir told me, adding that more than 100 banks had now done so. “Now, the next phase is about how do we go from targets to implementation?”He argued that authorities in many major economies had now introduced regulations around climate-related financial disclosures, reducing the need for mandatory requirements from the NZBA. And despite the removal of the formal accountability mechanism, he stressed that all members would still be expected to publish climate targets and transition plans, and could be removed by the steering group for persistently failing to meet the commitment statement pledge.The body would now have a new focus on “capacity building” and knowledge sharing, Bashir said, including on driving progress among members from developing countries. “We know that some of the geographies’ pathway to net zero looks different,” Bashir added.A different animalSome sort of change of course at the NZBA had become inevitable. As the likelihood of limiting global warming to 1.5C has shrunk, the financial tensions for banks committing themselves to pursuing that target were becoming increasingly difficult. A rush of exits by US institutions, triggered in part by Trump’s re-election, threatened to become a global exodus. And the existing membership requirements had clearly weighed on sign-ups from developing countries, which have so far accounted for a disproportionately small proportion of NZBA members.The NZBA should now be seen mainly as a forum for discussion and cooperation, rather than a body that sets and enforces standards around ambitious climate action. That creates an opportunity for other bodies to play an expanded role — including the Science Based Targets initiative, which last month gave its stamp of approval to targets set by the Netherlands’ ING, the first such accreditation it has given to a major international bank.The NZBA’s policy shift may yet give a boost to its global reach — but banks seeking a rigorous benchmark for best-in-class climate ambition will need to look elsewhere.Smart readsAt the table The OECD secretary-general said the US government was engaging in efforts to negotiate a global tax deal.Staying the course Why has oil major TotalEnergies stuck to its green energy investment plans, while rivals BP and Shell have pulled back?Risk off Accounting group PwC has pulled back from more than a dozen countries as it seeks to reduce the risk of scandals.Recommended newsletters for youFull Disclosure — Keeping you up to date with the biggest international legal news, from the courts to law enforcement and the business of law. Sign up hereEnergy Source — Essential energy news, analysis and insider intelligence. Sign up here More