Israel-Iran attacks spur market fears
The Big Story
Global stocks fell Friday after Israel struck targets in Iran, killing Iranian military leaders and targeting the country's main nuclear enrichment facility.
© The Associated Press
The Dow Jones Industrial Average of big U.S. companies closed with a loss of 769 points Friday, falling 1.8 percent.
The S&P 500 index fell 1.1 percent, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite fell 1.3 percent.
Oil prices had been trending down during President Trump's trade moves as higher tariff levels took the steam out of future global trade flows and international orders and shipments were scaled back.
Higher energy prices could factor quickly into higher inflation in the economy. While tariffs can take months to factor into price increases as companies work through already purchased inventories, increased shipping costs can translate to prices more rapidly.
'The recent good performance on inflation will be at risk from this and from the full impact of tariffs as they filter into the data,' analysts for Deutsche Bank wrote in a Friday analysis.
Welcome to The Hill's Business & Economy newsletter, I'm Aris Folley — covering the intersection of Wall Street and Pennsylvania Avenue.
Did someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here.
Essential Reads
Key business and economic news with implications this week and beyond:
Shaquille O'Neal settling FTX class action lawsuit for $1.8M
NBA legend Shaquille O'Neal has agreed to pay $1.8 million to settle a class action lawsuit over his promotion of the now-defunct crypto exchange FTX.
Consumer sentiment rises for 1st time this year as inflation remains tame
Consumer sentiment increased in June for the first time in six months, the latest sign that Americans' views of the economy have improved as inflation has stayed tame and the Trump administration has reached a truce in its trade fight with China.
Trump's immigration clampdown could affect these 5 industries the most
As President Trump enforces his election promise to clamp down on immigration, he is coming good on his mandate: 'On day one, I will launch the largest deportation programme of criminals in the history of America.'
{{if !contains(profile.lists,'Evening Report')}
{/if}}{{if !contains(profile.lists,'Evening Report')}
{/if}}
The Ticker
Upcoming news themes and events we're watching:
In Other News
Branch out with more stories from the day:
Air India black box recovered after crash that killed 241 onboard and several others on the ground
AHMEDABAD, India (AP) — The flight data recorder from the crashed Air India flight was recovered Friday …
Good to Know
Business and economic news we've flagged from other outlets:
What Others are Reading
Top stories on The Hill right now:
Republicans lay groundwork for 'total tax cliff' at end of Trump's term
Congressional Republicans are laying the groundwork for a tax cliff at the end of President Trump's term in office. Read more
Newsom becomes a fighter, and Democrats beyond California are cheering
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is meeting the moment, Democrats say. Read more
What People Think
Opinions related to business and economic issues submitted to The Hill:
You're all caught up. See you next week!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No More Student Visas? No Problem.
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Just how mad is Beijing about President Donald Trump's decision to revoke student visas for Chinese nationals? Not as mad as it says, and not as mad as one might expect. Publicly, China's leadership will likely complain that Trump's action is yet another attempt to thwart the country's rise. But in reality, Beijing would probably just as soon keep its smartest kids at home. Late last month, the U.S. State Department announced that it would 'aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields,' and that it would 'enhance scrutiny' of the applications it received in the future. The new visa policy, a spokesperson said, is meant to prevent China from exploiting American universities and stealing intellectual property. A spokesperson for the foreign ministry quickly registered Beijing's objection to the new policy. But when Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke with Trump by phone last week, either he didn't raise the new visa policy or his foreign ministry didn't regard his comments on the matter worth including in its official summary of the call, which suggests that the issue is not a top priority in Beijing's negotiations with Washington. One reason for this underwhelming response may be that re-shoring its university students serves Beijing's current agenda. China first opened to the world in the 1980s; in the decades that followed, securing a Western education for its elite helped the country bring in the technology and skills it needed to escape poverty. China was 'sending people out, learning from other places, finding the best quality wherever it was, and bringing that quality back to China,' Robin Lewis, a consultant for U.S.-China education programs and a former associate dean at Columbia University, told me. Now that period has given way to one of nationalism and self-reliance, which means promoting China's own companies, products, technologies—and universities. [Rose Horowitch: Trump's campaign to scare off foreign students] Xi has consistently stressed the importance of education in sustaining China's rise. His government has invested heavily in China's schools and lavished resources on science and technology programs, with some success. Some of China's top institutions, such as Tsinghua University in Beijing, have gained international recognition as serious competitors in scientific research. China would like to have its own Harvards, rather than sending its elite students to the United States, for political and cultural reasons as well as economic ones. Chinese authorities have long worried that the hundreds of thousands of students it exports to America will absorb undesirable ideas about democracy and civil liberties—and that they will access information about China that is suppressed at home, such as the story of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. In fact, many young Chinese who study in the United States seem to enjoy American freedoms and seek to stay rather than return to serve the motherland. Beijing has tried to deal with this in part by monitoring the activities of its students in the U.S. and attempting to hold them firmly to the party line, including by harassing the families back home of those who stray. Within China, authorities can more easily confine students inside the government's propaganda bubble, which in recent years has become more airtight. Domestic media seek to portray the U.S. as unsafe, especially for Asians, by highlighting incidents of racial discrimination, violence, and disorder. One story published last year by the state news agency Xinhua, under the headline 'Chinese Students' Dreams Turned Into Nightmares at U.S. Doorstep,' tells the harrowing tale of a Chinese student detained and deported at an airport and claims that others had suffered the same fate. China's top spy agency, the Ministry of State Security, warned Chinese students at universities abroad against being recruited as foreign agents, and told of one such unfortunate national who was discovered and punished. Even before Trump's announcement, this climate of mutual distrust had led to a drop-off in Chinese students enrolled in American universities. The number had reached an all-time high during the 2019–20 academic year, topping 372,000, according to the Institute of International Education. But that figure has fallen since—by a quarter, to 277,000, in the 2023–24 academic year. Now India, with more than 331,000 enrolled, sends more students to American institutions than China does. The Trump administration appears to believe that curtailing Chinese access to American technology, money, and, in this case, education will give the U.S. the edge over its closest competitor. In some areas, this might work: Restricting the export of advanced U.S. semiconductor technology to China seems to have helped hold Beijing's chip industry back. So why not do the same with higher education? A case can be made that keeping Chinese students out of some of the world's top research institutions will hold back their skills acquisition and, with it, the country's progress. [Adam Serwer: Trump is wearing America down] In practice, though, the effect of this policy could be hard to gauge. The engineers behind the Chinese AI firm DeepSeek, which wowed Silicon Valley by developing a competitive chatbot on the cheap, were mainly locally trained. And the skills that Chinese students can't find at home they can seek in any number of places. There may be only so many Harvards, but Chinese students can receive a good education—and a warmer reception—in countries other than the United States. Universities in Japan and Hong Kong are already trying to capitalize on Trump's harassment of international students to lure them. The idea that any American policy can effectively dampen Chinese ambition may be far-fetched. 'People wake up in the morning and it's all about education here. There is nothing more important,' James McGregor, the chair for China at the consulting firm APCO, told me. 'You're going to stop Chinese people from learning the top skills in the world? No. They'll just deploy them somewhere else.' For now, the Trump team can't seem to decide whether it wants to get tough on China or make deals with China, and the new student-visa policy reflects this confusion. 'Chinese students are coming. No problem,' Trump said in a briefing after his call with Xi. 'It's our honor to have them, frankly.' China's leadership surely knows that many Chinese families still aspire to send their young-adult children to American universities. But Beijing is much more single-minded than Washington about the future of relations between the two countries: Xi appears to see Washington as the primary impediment to China's rise, and ties to the U.S. as a vulnerability best eliminated. From that viewpoint, relying on Harvard to train China's most promising students is a national-security risk. That means that Trump may be doing Xi a favor. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Global Food Aid Matters to U.S. Workers and Manufacturers
As the CEO of a Charlotte, NC-based Design-Build firm, I have had firsthand involvement with the investment of billions of dollars in U.S.-based manufacturing facilities, and the thousands of jobs these facilities have created across our country. So, why would I have a connection to, or even care about, food aid sent to countries across the globe? My company works directly with the producer of a product that saves the lives of severely malnourished children worldwide: Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food (RUTF). These 'RUTFs' are simple, wallet-sized foil packets of mostly peanut butter, whey, and vitamins. Like a turbocharged but squeezable protein bar, this small but mighty, nutrient-dense food revives and nourishes children who otherwise might die. This product is intended for children facing severe malnourishment and starvation. Regardless of why this is occurring, the fact remains that these children lack basic staples that we in America, a global top food producer, take for granted. Unfortunately, the production and distribution of RUTF is under threat due to changes being made by the Trump administration. There is definitely merit to evaluating how taxpayer funds are being used. However, I believe it is critical that we not disrupt the flow of lifesaving products like RUTF. While it may now seem that this is just another 'tug on the heart strings' article, urging the U.S. government to spend dollars to save the world, I encourage you to read on. I do believe in assisting those in need, wherever they may live. But there is another side to this story that affects U.S. workers, farmers, and business interests. In fact, the RUTF aid program aligns with the Trump administration's stated goal of realigning U.S. foreign aid to support humanitarian and national interests, such as local industries, workers, and economies. My firm, A M King, is a classic American business success story. Started more than 20 years ago in one room as a bootstraps local job-creating enterprise, today we are 100% employee-owned, with 80 team members in highly paid professional jobs, and have generated more than $2.5 billion in revenue since our inception. Our specialty is designing and building food processing and food-storage facilities across the United States. That's what brought me to RUTF, professionally and personally. We have worked with an RUTF manufacturer, MANA Nutrition, to improve its Georgia production facilities. This nonprofit corporation buys 2 million pounds of peanuts a month from local farmers. From its 135,000 square-foot Fitzgerald production and warehouse facility, MANA Nutrition can produce 500,000 pounds of RUTF product per day and feed 10 million children a year. The facility also brings vital jobs to the community, supporting the economy and providing opportunities for families across the region. I believe this is what the Trump administration means by supporting U.S. manufacturing. Over the past several years of working closely with MANA Nutrition, I've come to know, understand, and appreciate their purpose, mission, and business. In my 40-year career of working with some of the nation's largest companies and a range of CEOs, I can truly say MANA Nutrition is a company founded on a noble cause, with a desire to change the world for the better. It's also a well-managed company, focused on efficient, effective business principles. Team members are all dedicated professionals who work hard and expect little in return. Mark Moore, MANA Nutrition's founder and CEO, was a missionary in Africa for many years. He knows the need from personal experience. He and others who fund this cause have made it their mission to end malnourishment. All funding to develop and build MANA Nutrition's production facilities comes from private donors. This is not a company seeking government handouts to build and sustain a business. I also know non-profits. I can discern when their mission is true and if their management is ethical. I also believe a non-profit should operate like a successful business, with efficiency and accountability. MANA Nutrition is one of these organizations. The only money MANA receives from USAID is to buy its RUTF product, which is then used only for humanitarian purposes. Lest anyone wonder, while MANA Nutrition is a customer, my support for continuing the production and distribution of RUTF is in no way an indirect business plea. My company is well-established and financially strong. My goal is to see MANA's mission and purpose continue, knowing they save lives every day with the product they produce. If RUTF funding isn't reinstated, MANA Nutrition may have to shut down, hurting not only the producer and their farmers, but their workers, community, and supply chain businesses. Most of all, it will impact those children who depend on America's big heart. As an entrepreneur, business founder, and a CEO, I understand the goal of ensuring U.S. taxpayer dollars are spent wisely, including on foreign aid. I also recognize that worthy investments that serve our national interests, even if they have broad bipartisan support, sometimes get caught up and canceled in efforts to make government work better. RUTF is worth saving. I'm urging the White House and Congress to keep funding the production and distribution of RUTF, for the benefit of American farmers and workers and children all over the world. Brian T. King is founder and CEO of A M King.
New York Times
12 minutes ago
- New York Times
Shaquille O'Neal Agrees to Pay $1.8 Million to Settle FTX Class-Action Suit
Shaquille O'Neal, the retired basketball star, agreed to pay $1.8 million to settle a class-action suit brought by customers of FTX, the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange, accusing him and other celebrities of illegally promoting the exchange. The settlement, which was disclosed in a filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida this past week, signaled an imminent resolution for Mr. O'Neal in a case that had questioned the liability of celebrities and influencers who endorse cryptocurrencies and other risky financial products. At the center of the dispute was FTX, the cryptocurrency exchange that suddenly collapsed in 2022, taking $8 billion in customer funds with it. Sam Bankman-Fried, a founder of the exchange, was convicted on charges of fraud, conspiracy and money laundering and sentenced to 25 years in prison. The demise exposed the underbelly of the loosely regulated world of cryptocurrencies, and it devastated investors who in some cases experienced crippling financial losses. It also embroiled in legal action celebrities, influencers and venture capital firms that had endorsed the exchange, with FTX customers arguing that they had been deceived. In 2022, a group of FTX customers sued Mr. O'Neal and a string of other high-profile actors and athletes for compensation. Mr. O'Neal's $1.8 million settlement, which the filing said was finalized in April, makes him one of several defendants who have settled the suit since it was filed. Trevor Lawrence, the football player, and popular content creators were among a group who agreed in 2024 to a settlement of about $1.3 million. This settlement, which pertains only to Mr. O'Neal, still needs court approval. Sunil Kavuri, an FTX customer who has said he lost his life savings of about $2 million, welcomed the news. 'Settling with Shaquille O'Neal helps bring closure to the darkest period of our lives,' he said on Saturday. Other defendants, including Tom Brady, Gisele Bündchen, Larry David and Steph Curry, have argued for the claims to be dismissed. A judge dismissed some of the claims, which include conspiracy and deceptive practices, but allowed others to proceed. In an interview in 2023 with Vanity Fair, Ms. Bündchen said that she had 'trusted the hype' and felt 'blindsided.' The actions have not been limited to high-profile celebrities: Some YouTube influencers have also settled after FTX customers accused them of illegally promoting the exchange on their platforms. Lawyers listed for Mr. O'Neal and for the FTX customers who brought the suit did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Saturday.
