More stories

  • in

    Trump’s Tariffs Prompt Wave of Lawsuits

    The cases are the latest test of the president’s expansive claims of executive power.Somewhere along a roughly 7,500-mile journey that begins in Shenzhen, China, there are 19 shipments bound for Rick Woldenberg, the chief executive of Learning Resources, an educational toy company in Vernon Hills, Ill.Eventually, the containers of puzzle cards, child binoculars and other products will reach a port in the United States, and Mr. Woldenberg will face a difficult and expensive decision. He can pay the sky-high tariffs that President Trump has imposed on most foreign goods, or forgo at least some of the much-needed inventory, perhaps imperiling his bottom line.Mr. Woldenberg expects to do a bit of both. But he has also opted for a more aggressive course of action, joining a growing roster of opponents now legally challenging Mr. Trump’s ability to issue some of the tariffs in the first place.Nearly four weeks into a costly global trade war with no end in sight, Mr. Trump is facing a barrage of lawsuits from state officials, small businesses and even once-allied political groups, all contending that the president cannot sidestep Congress and tax virtually any import at levels to his liking.The lawsuits carry great significance, not just because the tariffs have roiled financial markets and threatened to plunge the United States into a recession. The legal challenges also stand to test Mr. Trump’s claims of expansive presidential power, while illustrating the difficult calculation that his opponents face in deciding whether to fight back and risk retribution.None of the lawsuits filed this month are supported by major business lobbying groups, even though many organizations — including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable — have been sharply critical of the president’s tariffs and lobbied to lessen their impact. The chamber privately debated bringing a lawsuit, but ultimately decided it was “not the best course of action at this time,” said Neil Bradley, the executive vice president of the group.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump to Impose Tariffs Against Countries That Buy Venezuelan Oil

    President Trump issued an executive order on Monday to crack down on countries that buy Venezuelan oil by imposing tariffs on the goods those nations send into the United States, claiming that Venezuela has “purposefully and deceitfully” sent criminals and murderers into America.In the order, the president said the government of Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan leader, and the Tren de Aragua gang, a transnational criminal organization, posed a threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.On or after April 2, a tariff of 25 percent may be imposed on all goods imported into the United States from any country that imports Venezuelan oil, either directly or indirectly through third parties, the order said.The order said the secretaries of state, Treasury, commerce and homeland security, as well as the trade representative, would determine at their discretion what tariffs to impose. The tariffs would expire one year after the last date the Venezuelan oil was imported, or earlier if Trump officials so chose, it said.This unconventional use of tariffs could further disrupt the global oil trade as buyers of Venezuelan oil seek alternatives. The United States and China have been the top buyers of Venezuelan oil in recent months, according to Rystad Energy, a research and consulting firm. India and Spain also buy a small amount of crude from the South American country.But in the case of China, Venezuela’s oil makes up such a small portion of the country’s imports that the threat of higher tariffs will probably cause China to look elsewhere for oil, said Jorge León, a Rystad Energy analyst.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    White House Ignites Firestorm With Rules Governing A.I.’s Global Spread

    The tech industry is fighting new regulations, expected soon, that aim to keep the cutting-edge technology in the United States and allied countries.The next big fight over offshoring is playing out in Washington, and this time it involves artificial intelligence.The Biden administration, in its final weeks in office, is rushing to issue new regulations to try to ensure that the United States and its close allies have control over how artificial intelligence develops in the years to come.The rules have touched off an intense fight between tech companies and the government, as well as among administration officials.The regulations, which could be issued as early as Friday, would dictate where American-made chips that are critical for A.I. could be shipped. Those rules would then help determine where the data centers that create A.I. would be built, with a preference for the United States and its allies.The rules would allow most European countries, Japan and other close U.S. allies to make unfettered purchases of A.I. chips, while blocking two dozen adversaries, like China and Russia, from buying them. More than 100 other countries would face different quotas on the amount of A.I. chips they could receive from U.S. companies.The regulations would also make it easier for A.I. chips to be sent to trusted American companies that run data centers, like Google and Microsoft, than to their foreign competitors. The rules would establish security procedures that data centers would have to follow to keep A.I. systems safe from cybertheft.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Debate Over U.S. Sanctions on Russia For Ukraine War Intensifies

    The president-elect has said he will use sanctions sparingly while vowing to end the war in Ukraine, renewing questions over their efficacy.Thousands of far-reaching sanctions have been imposed by dozens of countries on Russian banks, businesses and people since Moscow ordered tanks to roll across the border into Ukraine in the winter of 2022.Now, more than 1,000 days later, as President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to take office, questions about the sanctions’ effectiveness — and future — are expected to come under renewed scrutiny.Mr. Trump has stated, “I want to use sanctions as little as possible.” And he has made clear that there will be a shift in American policy toward Ukraine, having promised to end the war in a single day.Experts believe that sanctions and continued military aid are almost certain to be bargaining chips in any negotiations.So how valuable are the sanction chips that Mr. Trump will hold?The answer is hotly debated.Predictions in the early months of the war that economic restrictions would soon undermine President Vladimir V. Putin’s regime or reduce the ruble to “rubble” did not pan out. Mr. Putin remains entrenched in the Kremlin, and his forces are inflicting punishing damage on Ukraine and gaining on the battlefield.Yet the idea that economic sanctions could bring a quick end to the war was always more a product of hope than a realistic assessment, said Sergei Guriev, a Russian economist who fled the country in 2013 and is now the dean of the London Business School.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    For Syria’s Economy, the Way Forward Starts With Sanctions Relief

    Years of strife ruined the energy sector, battered the currency and strangled growth. The West must ease financial controls to help the economy, experts say.Although the collapse of President Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria was shockingly quick, rebuilding the devastated economy he left behind will be painfully slow.After nearly 14 years of brutal civil war and political repression, most of Syria’s oil and gas wells, roads, electricity grids, farmland and infrastructure are in ruins. Ninety percent of the population is living in poverty. The value of the Syrian pound has plummeted, and the central bank’s reserves of foreign currency — needed to buy essentials like food, fuel and spare parts — are nearly depleted.Before the war, oil accounted for two-thirds of Syria’s exports and agriculture made up roughly a quarter of economic activity. More recently, Syria’s most profitable export was captagon, an illegal, addictive amphetamine controlled by a cartel of politically connected elites.“The whole economic system in Syria is not functioning,” said Samir Aita, a Syrian economist and the president of the Circle of Arab Economists.Ahmed al-Shara, the leader of the rebel coalition that has taken power in Syria, has a daunting task ahead to unify the rebel factions, reconstitute the government, re-establish the rule of law, provide security and manage essential services like the distribution of water and other scarce resources.Even so, there is widespread agreement that the single most important step in rebuilding Syria’s economy can be taken only by the United States: Lift the punishing layers of sanctions that have effectively cut off Syria from international commerce and investment.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    How U.S. Firms Battled a Government Crackdown to Keep Tech Sales to China

    An intense struggle has unfolded in Washington between companies and officials over where to draw the line on selling technology to China.At a meeting in Washington this spring, tech company representatives and government officials once again found themselves at odds over where to draw the line when it came to selling coveted technology to China.The Biden administration was considering cutting off the sales of equipment used to manufacture semiconductors to three Chinese companies that the government had linked to Huawei, a technology giant that is sanctioned by the United States and is central to China’s efforts to develop advanced chips.Applied Materials, KLA Corporation and Lam Research, which make semiconductor equipment, argued that the three Chinese companies were a major source of revenue. The U.S. firms said that they had already earned $6 billion by selling equipment to those Chinese companies, and that they planned to sell billions more, two government officials said.U.S. officials, who view the flow of U.S. technology to Huawei as a national security threat, were stunned by the argument. In regulations issued this month, they ultimately rejected the American companies’ plea.Over the past year, an intense struggle has played out in Washington between companies that sell machinery to make semiconductors and Biden officials who are bent on slowing China’s technological progress. Officials argue that China’s ability to make chips that create artificial intelligence, guide autonomous drones and launch cyberattacks is a national security threat, and they have clamped down on U.S. technology exports, including in new rules last week.But many in the semiconductor industry have fought to limit the rules and preserve a critical source of revenue, more than a dozen current and former U.S. officials said. Most requested anonymity to discuss sensitive internal government interactions or exchanges with the industry.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Is Trump More Flexible on China Than His Hawkish Cabinet Picks Suggest?

    President-elect Donald J. Trump is assembling a team of aides bent on confrontation with China. But he also has advisers who do business there, including Elon Musk.They are the new class of cold warriors, guns pointed at China.President-elect Donald J. Trump has chosen cabinet secretaries and a national security adviser who stress the need to confront China across the entire security and economic spectrum: military posture, trade, technology, espionage, human rights and Taiwan.Those choices could open a new era of conflict with a nuclear-armed nation that has the world’s largest standing army and second-largest economy, and where many top officials see the United States as a superpower in decline.Mr. Trump’s hawkish advisers so far include Marco Rubio, a Florida senator named as secretary of state; Michael Waltz, a Florida congressman tapped for national security adviser; and Pete Hegseth, a former Fox News television personality designated to be defense secretary. Cabinet secretaries must be confirmed by the Senate, although Mr. Trump has floated the idea of getting around that by using recess appointments.Those men are more explicitly hostile to China than their counterparts in the Biden administration, though President Biden has taken an aggressive tack with China and continued some of the policies from Mr. Trump’s first term. A consensus has solidified among Democrats and Republicans in Washington that China must be constrained because it is the nation most capable of upending American global dominance.Yet there are signs that Mr. Trump might consider a more moderate approach on trade, perhaps to avoid upsetting a roaring stock market nurtured by Mr. Biden.Mr. Trump with President Xi Jinping of China in Beijing in November 2017. Mr. Trump hosted Mr. Xi at Mar-a-Lago earlier that year, but their budding relationship eventually fell apart over a trade war that Mr. Trump started.Doug Mills/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    G7 Finalizes $50 Billion Ukraine Loan Backed by Russian Assets

    The economic lifeline is expected to be disbursed by the end of the year.The Group of 7 nations finalized a plan to give Ukraine a $50 billion loan using Russia’s frozen central bank assets, Biden administration officials said on Wednesday.The loan represents an extraordinary maneuver by Western nations to essentially force Russia to pay for the damage it is inflicting on Ukraine through a war that shows no sign of ending.“These loans will support the people of Ukraine as they defend and rebuild their country,” President Biden said in a statement. “And our efforts make it clear: Tyrants will be responsible for the damages they cause.”The announcement comes after months of debate and negotiation among policymakers in the United States and Europe over how they could use $300 billion of frozen Russian central bank assets to support Ukraine.The United States and the European Union enacted sanctions to freeze Russia’s central bank assets, most of which are held in Europe, after its invasion of Ukraine in early 2022. As the war dragged on, officials in the United States pushed for the funds to be seized and given directly to Ukraine to aid in its economic recovery.European officials had concerns about the lawfulness of such a move, however, and both sides eventually agreed over the summer that they would use the interest that the assets were earning to back a $50 billion loan.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More