Foreign Investments

Latest story

113 Shares104 Views

Cleveland-Cliffs Signals a Possible New Bid for U.S. Steel

by

The company’s renewed interest comes after the Biden administration blocked Nippon Steel from acquiring the onetime American powerhouse.A possible new takeover bid for U.S. Steel emerged on Monday, teeing up more turmoil over the once-dominant company’s future after President Biden’s decision to block its acquisition by a Japanese company.Lourenco Goncalves, the chief executive of an American competitor, Cleveland-Cliffs, said his company had “an All-American solution to save the United States Steel Corporation,” stressing that acquiring U.S. Steel was a matter of “when,” not “if.” But he offered no details of the bidding plans.The renewed expression of interest from Cleveland-Cliffs comes less than two weeks after Mr. Biden blocked a $14 billion takeover of U.S. Steel by Nippon Steel, arguing that the sale posed a threat to national security. Cleveland-Cliffs tried to buy U.S. Steel in 2023, an offer that was rejected in favor of Nippon’s higher bid.CNBC reported on Monday morning that Cleveland-Cliffs would seek to take over U.S. Steel and sell off its subsidiary, Big River Steel, to Nucor, another American producer. But Mr. Goncalves, at a news conference later in the day, would not confirm any partnership with Nucor on a bid.U.S. Steel and Nucor did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Investors seemed pleased by the potential bid, sending shares of U.S. Steel up as much as 10 percent on Monday when CNBC reported the potential offer. Shares of U.S. Steel finished about 6 percent higher on Monday but are down 23 percent over the past year, including Monday’s spike.But the fate of Nippon’s proposed takeover remains in limbo. U.S. Steel and Nippon sued the United States government last week in the hopes of reviving their merger, accusing Mr. Biden and other senior administration officials of corrupting the review process for political gain and blocking the deal under false pretenses.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

More stories

  • 100 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Cements TSMC Grant Before Trump Takes Over

    by

    The White House is racing to finish grant agreements for chip manufacturers, but some of its biggest successes might be credited to the Trump administration.The Biden administration said on Friday that it had completed an agreement to award Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company up to $6.6 billion in grants, as federal officials race to put in place their plans to boost U.S. chip manufacturing before the end of President Biden’s term.The administration struck a preliminary agreement in the spring to provide TSMC with the funding, which will support three new factories in Phoenix. The government will give TSMC the money in tranches as the company meets milestones.In a statement, Mr. Biden said that the foreign direct investment in the facilities was the largest for a new factory project in U.S. history, and that the announcement on Friday was “among the most critical milestones yet” in the rollout of his chips program.The agreement “demonstrates how we are ensuring that the progress made to date will continue to unfold in the coming years, benefiting communities all across the country,” Mr. Biden said.The administration is expected to finish more grant awards in the coming weeks. But the projects might come too late for Mr. Biden to receive much credit. Chip factories take years to build, and many of these projects will not break ground — or produce chips — until well into President-elect Donald J. Trump’s term.Mr. Biden’s administration is working to cement its legacy with the grants as part of a $39 billion program to revitalize U.S. technology manufacturing and reduce reliance on foreign nations for critical semiconductors. The program is a pillar of the president’s economic policy, which has largely focused on bolstering American manufacturing.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

  • 138 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Countries Weigh How to Raise Trillions for Climate Crisis at COP29

    by

    Low-income countries need at least $1 trillion a year to manage climate change. Donald Trump’s victory just made that more difficult, but options exist.Money: It’s the most contentious subject at the international climate talks this week in Baku, Azerbaijan. How much? From where? What for?Getting big cash commitments would be hard enough without wars, a pandemic and inflation having drained the reserves of rich countries that are expected to help poorer ones cope with climate hazards.It just got even harder. The election of Donald J. Trump as president of the United States all but guarantees that the world’s richest country will not chip in. (Mr. Trump has said he would withdraw from the global climate accord altogether, as he did during his first term.)So now what?Several creative ideas are circulating to raise money for countries to invest in renewable energy and adapt to the dangers of climate change. They include levying taxes, tackling debt and pushing international development banks to do more, faster.The new proposals come with steep hurdles of their own, but the traditional way of raising money — passing around the hat and asking donor countries to make pledges — has failed to meet the need.The last time a climate finance goal was established, in 2009, rich countries promised to mobilize $100 billion a year by 2020. They were two years late in meeting that target, and about 70 percent of the money came as loans, infuriating already heavily indebted countries.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

  • 125 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Global Economic Leaders Confront a New Era of Industrial Policy

    by

    Policymakers brace for more protectionism and the demise of “neoliberalism” if Donald J. Trump is re-elected in the U.S.At the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank this week, Kristalina Georgieva, the head of the I.M.F., expressed a mix of relief and trepidation about the state of the world economy.Policymakers had tamed rapid inflation without causing a global recession. Yet another big economic problem loomed. Rising protectionism and thousands of new industrial policy measures enacted by countries around the world over the last year are threatening future growth prospects.“Trade, for the first time, is not the engine of growth,” Ms. Georgieva said at an event sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee.Economic policymakers who convened in Washington showed little indication that they might heed the warnings.Eighty years after the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were created to stabilize the global economy in the wake of World War II, the role of those organizations and the guiding principles behind their creation has largely fallen out of fashion. The I.M.F. and World Bank were designed to embrace a new system of economic order and international cooperation, one that would stitch the world economy together and allow rich nations to help poorer ones through trade and investment.But today, those who espouse such “neoliberal” notions of open markets are increasingly lonely voices.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

  • 100 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Raises New Concerns Over Chinese Lending Practices

    by

    A Treasury official will call for greater transparency over emergency currency “swap” loans to struggling countries by China’s central bank.The United States is raising new concerns about China’s practice of making emergency loans to debt-ridden countries, warning that a lack of transparency surrounding such financing can mask the fiscal predicaments facing fragile economies that have turned to China for help.A senior Treasury official, Brent Neiman, publicly aired concerns about the practice in a speech on Tuesday in which he urged the International Monetary Fund to push China for greater clarity about its lending terms. The Biden administration broached the issue directly with Chinese officials in Washington this year during a meeting of a recently created bilateral economic and financial working group.Chinese loans to countries already struggling to repay their debts are being made through China’s central bank using so-called swap agreements. These agreements allow countries to borrow Chinese renminbi and keep those funds in their central reserves while using the U.S. dollars that they hold to repay foreign debts.The financing is essentially a line of credit, in which a country swaps its own currency for renminbi and agrees to pay Beijing a high interest rate. The arrangement allows those countries to use their dollar reserves to finance trade or other government needs. They can also use the funds to pay debts owed to Chinese banks or to make purchases from China, creating even deeper ties to its economy.China has provided more than $200 billion in emergency financing in recent years. Chinese state media reported this year that the central bank had 31 currency swap agreements in force worth a combined $586 billion. Chinese currency loans tend to come with higher interest rates than those offered by the Federal Reserve or the I.M.F.Such currency loans do not always appear on the balance sheet of the borrowing nation, obscuring the extent of its liabilities. That lack of information can make it harder for other investors to know how deeply in debt a country is and has fueled criticism that the Chinese loans could leave the recipients worse off.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

  • 113 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Expected to Block U.S. Steel Takeover by Nippon

    by

    The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is expected to raise national security concerns about selling the iconic steel producer to Japan’s Nippon Steel.President Biden is preparing to soon block an attempt by Japan’s Nippon Steel to buy U.S. Steel on national security grounds, according to three people familiar with the matter, likely sinking a merger that became entangled in election-year politics in the United States.A decision to block the takeover would come after months of wrangling among lawmakers, business leaders and labor officials over whether a corporate acquisition by a company based in Japan — a key U.S. ally — could pose a threat to national security. A move by Mr. Biden to block the deal on those grounds could roil relations between the two nations at a moment when the United States has been trying to deepen ties with Japan amid China’s growing influence in East Asia.For months, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, has been scrutinizing the deal over potential risks. There has been mounting speculation that the Biden administration could intervene before the November election.A White House official told The New York Times that CFIUS “hasn’t transmitted a recommendation to the president, and that’s the next step in this process.”CFIUS is made up of members of the State, Defense, Justice, Commerce, Energy and Homeland Security Departments, and is led by the Treasury secretary, Janet L. Yellen.The committee sent a letter to U.S. Steel in recent weeks saying that it had found national security concerns with the transaction, one of the people familiar with the situation said.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

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Europe Has Fallen Behind the U.S. and China. Can It Catch Up?

    by

    A “competitiveness crisis” is raising alarms for officials and business leaders in the European Union, where investment, income and productivity are lagging.Europe’s share of the global economy is shrinking, and fears are deepening that the continent can no longer keep up with the United States and China.“We are too small,” said Enrico Letta, a former Italian prime minister who recently delivered a report on the future of the single market to the European Union.“We are not very ambitious,” Nicolai Tangen, head of Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, told The Financial Times. “Americans just work harder.”“European businesses need to regain self-confidence,” Europe’s association of chambers of commerce declared.The list of reasons for what has been called the “competitiveness crisis” goes on: The European Union has too many regulations, and its leadership in Brussels has too little power. Financial markets are too fragmented; public and private investments are too low; companies are too small to compete on a global scale.“Our organization, decision-making and financing are designed for ‘the world of yesterday’ — pre-Covid, pre-Ukraine, pre-conflagration in the Middle East, pre-return of great power rivalry,” said Mario Draghi, a former president of the European Central Bank who is heading a study of Europe’s competitiveness.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

  • 150 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    G7 Finance Ministers Aim to Use Russia’s Frozen Assets to Help Ukraine

    by

    Western economic officials projected a united front, and braced for retaliation, as they prepped tougher sanctions and tariffs.Top finance officials from the world’s advanced economies moved toward an agreement on Saturday over how to use Russia’s frozen central bank assets to aid Ukraine and warned against China’s dumping of cheap exports into their markets, aiming to marshal their economic might to tackle twin crises.The embrace of more ambitious sanctions and protectionism came as finance ministers from the Group of 7 nations gathered for three days of meetings in Stresa, Italy. The proposals under consideration could deepen the divide between the alliance of wealthy Western economies and Russia, China and their allies, worsening a global fragmentation that has worried economists.Efforts by the Group of 7 to influence the two powerful adversaries have had limited success in recent years, but rich countries are making a renewed push to test the limits of their combined economic power.In a joint statement, or communiqué, released on Saturday, policymakers said they would stay united on both fronts as geopolitical crises and trade tensions have emerged as the biggest threats to the global economy.“We are making progress in our discussions on potential avenues to bring forward the extraordinary profits stemming from immobilized Russian sovereign assets to the benefit of Ukraine,” the statement said.Regarding China, the finance ministers expressed concern about its “comprehensive use of nonmarket policies and practices that undermines our workers, industries, and economic resilience.” They agreed to monitor the negative effects of China’s overcapacity and “consider taking steps to ensure a level playing field.”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

  • 150 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    G7 Finance Ministers Close Ranks as Tensions with Russia and China Fester

    by

    Western economic officials projected a united front, and braced for retaliation, as they prepped tougher sanctions and tariffs.Top finance officials from the world’s advanced economies moved closer to an agreement on Saturday over how to use Russia’s frozen central bank assets to aid Ukraine and pledged to unite against China’s dumping of cheap exports into their markets, aiming to marshal their economic might to tackle twin crises weighing on the global economy.The embrace of more ambitious sanctions and protectionism came as finance ministers from the Group of 7 nations gathered for three days of meetings in Stresa, Italy. The proposals under consideration could deepen the divide between the alliance of wealthy Western economies and Russia, China and their allies, worsening a global fragmentation that has worried economists.Efforts by the Group of 7 to influence the two powerful adversaries have had limited success in recent years, but rich countries are making a renewed push to test the limits of their combined economic power.In a joint statement, or communiqué, that was set to be released on Saturday, policymakers said they would stay united on both fronts as geopolitical crises and trade tensions have emerged as the biggest threats to the global economy.“We are making progress in our discussions on potential avenues to bring forward the extraordinary profits stemming from immobilized Russian sovereign assets to the benefit of Ukraine,” the statement, which was reviewed by The New York Times, said.Regarding China, the finance ministers expressed concern about its “comprehensive use of nonmarket policies and practices that undermines our workers, industries, and economic resilience.” They agreed to monitor the negative effects of China’s overcapacity and “consider taking steps to ensure a level playing field.”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