British Airways owner IAG buys 32 new Boeing planes from US amid trade deal
British Airways' parent company has bought 32 new Boeing planes from the US, following the country's trade agreement with the UK on Thursday.
International Airlines Group (IAG) confirmed the order of the Boeing 787-10 aircraft for its BA fleet, alongside 21 Airbus planes for its other airlines on Friday morning.
The US and the UK said they had struck what Sir Keir Starmer called a 'historic' deal on Thursday, which saw American import taxes on British goods like cars and steel either slashed or removed completely.
US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick said on Thursday that plane engines and other aeroplane parts would also be excluded from trade tariffs as part of the trade deal.
'We've agreed to let Rolls Royce engines and those kind of plane parts come over tariff-free,' he said.
He told reporters that an unnamed British airline had agreed to buy 10 billion US dollars (£7.56 billion) of Boeing planes as the trade deal was agreed.
IAG did not confirm how much it had paid for the planes in its Friday announcement.
Chief executive Luis Gallego said the order was a 'milestone' for the conglomerate and would 'strengthen our core markets' over the next decade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
We should all hope Rachel Reeves delivers growth - or our taxes are going up: SIMON LAMBERT
Rachel Reeves faced a big challenge in her spending review. This is the event where she sets down a marker for what Labour plans to do under Sir Keir Starmer and herself as Chancellor. Funds are pledged to projects and government departments that fit with Labour's priorities – future Budgets should align with a plan to make this happen. Reeves faced a double challenge though, as she also needed to convince the country Labour can deliver growth and improve Britain, while balancing the books in a way that convinces markets the UK's finances are under control. The first element involves a commitment to spend, the second requires spending less or raising taxes. Clearly, this is a difficult balancing act to pull off at the best of times. But if you've promised not to raise taxes and many in your party are vehemently opposed to spending cuts to already threadbare public services, it's even harder. Add in the backdrop of a screeching U-turn on winter fuel payments, a rise in job losses blamed on the Autumn Budget 's employer national insurance rise, and a Spring Statement that regained a wafer-thin £9.9billion fiscal rule buffer only for this to be wiped out soon after by Donald Trump's tariff ructions, and you don't envy Reeves at all. As the old asking for directions joke punchline goes: 'Well, I wouldn't start from here'. There was more money for defence, schools and the NHS and less money for other public services deemed less important, or able to be brushed under the carpet for now. Ultimately though, the economic story remains the same as it was with Reeves' Tory predecessors: meet your targets by outlining plans that involve growth picking up, productivity improving and cutting spending in the future. Since Rishi Sunak there's also been some fiscal drag from frozen tax thresholds chucked in for good measure. Based on the OBR's five-year outlooks, this allows Chancellors to meet their fiscal rules. The fact that these forecasts inevitably turn out to be wrong, productivity doesn't improve, and things don't end up balancing is conveniently ignored. Yet, still we continue with the farce of policy by spreadsheet. As I've written before this fairytale economics is a terrible way to make decisions. Fortunately, the Chancellor had one card up her sleeve, the change to borrowing rules that allowed extra infrastructure investment. It freed her up to announce £113billion of plans to knock Britain into shape. These ranged from £39billion for affordable homes over a decade, to £30billion on nuclear power, £15billion on transport schemes. Among the beneficiaries will be rail and bus links in the North, the Oxford to Cambridge Arc, and the Sizewell C nuclear plant. Will these things deliver growth? Over time, they should do, but we will have to wait for that to arrive. In the meantime, we face a summer of speculation over tax rises in an Autumn Budget – and with the three big earners of income tax, national insurance and VAT off the table due to Labour's pre-election promise, that would mean more tinkering around the edges. The target of tax rises is likely to be wealth, and hitting the wealthy means potentially going after pensions, savings and investments – the OECD even called for a council tax hike on big homes last week. What if things can only get better? But there is an alternative scenario. Through a combination of bad luck and her own mistakes, such as the mystifying '£22billion black hole' gloomfest, Reeves has been caught out in her time as Chancellor. Government borrowing costs have risen, borrowing itself has come in higher than forecast, and growth has disappointed. Meanwhile, the second iteration of President Trump has proved even more erratic than the first. If things move in the opposite direction though, the UK's finances could improve, and Reeves would catch a lucky break and not have to raise taxes in autumn. This is not an entirely far-fetched scenario, GDP growth in early 2025 was better than expected, a calmer period could see government borrowing costs fall, and a pick-up in the economy would deliver extra tax revenue. Its doubtful that much benefit will be seen from the infrastructure splurge for a while, but the government's pledge to build homes and its threats against reluctant councils are already seeing more approved. I'm reading increasing reports of councils waving through schemes they would previously have said no to. Most likely as they are worried about appeals if they turn developers down and get over-ruled. This may come at a cost to the environment and local communities, while developers cash in, but if enough spades go in the ground, it will boost growth. Meanwhile, companies seem to have front-loaded job cuts, the UK stock market is on the up, and I feel that we may be past the moment of peak consumer gloom. All this could bring that much hoped for improvement in growth. I know this would mess with many of our readers' desire for schadenfreude over Labour, but to my mind, greater prosperity is definitely a better outcome. Otherwise, taxes will surely be going up again soon. How far would you go to avoid your personal tax raid? Tax is an increasingly taxing subject for many people who feel hard done by as Britain's complicated system catches them out. And, it's getting worse. So how far would you go to avoid your personal tax raid? And is it changing people's behaviour? On this podcast, Georgie Frost, Lee Boyce and Simon Lambert dive into how the British tax tail is wagging the dog - and what you can do to avoid infuriating tax traps.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Boris Johnson: ‘Feeble' defence budget will leave us at Russia's mercy
Boris Johnson has said Labour's 'feeble' spending on defence leaves Britain at the mercy of Russia. The former prime minister told The Telegraph that Rachel Reeves's claims that defence spending would rise to 2.6 per cent of GDP by 2027 had left him 'very puzzled' and that the Chancellor's reluctance to pump more money into the sector suggested she did not view it as a priority. On Wednesday, Ms Reeves said defence spending would rise to 2.6 per cent by April 2027, but did not confirm whether it would climb higher, as demanded by Nato. 'This is feeble,' Mr Johnson said. 'They [Labour] have wasted a big opportunity. 'My view is that this Government is completely failing to show the leadership that is needed to defend Britain and defend Europe. 'Labour are congenitally hostile to defence spending. Their grass roots are still basically Corbynistas who think Russia is a great thing. Those views are still highly influential in Labour.' At the start of this year, Sir Keir Starmer pledged to send British troops into Ukraine in the event that a ceasefire between the two warring nations was negotiated by Donald Trump. A ' coalition of the willing ' was also established between European nations, with the UK said to be leading the group that would establish a road to peace in Ukraine. However, talk on both of these subjects appears to have gone quiet. Mr Johnson, who was prime minister when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in Feb 2022, and has remained close with Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, since leaving government, said: 'What's happened to the boots on the ground initiative? 'As with Ukraine, the way to peace is through strength. If you talk to people in Ukraine or the US, they will say leadership on protecting Ukraine is now being offered by Germany and France.' Mr Johnson also said the Chancellor's increase in the welfare budget was 'out of control' and that such sums should be invested in defence instead. At a summit in the Hague later this month, which Mr Trump will attend, all Nato members will be expected to agree to committing 5 per cent of GDP on defence. Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary-general, has called for all alliance members to get to 3.5 per cent by 2032 and 5 per cent by an unspecified date. Earlier this week, Mr Rutte told The Telegraph that if Nato nations failed to achieve this percentage, then they needed ' to start learning to speak Russian '. Ms Reeves told the Commons: 'A new era in the threats we face demands a new era for defence and security. That's why we took the decision to prioritise our defence spending by reducing overseas development aid so that defence spending will now rise to 2.6 per cent of GDP by April 2027, including the contribution of our intelligence agencies. 'That uplift provides funding for the Defence Secretary, with a £11 billion increase in defence spending and a £600 milllion uplift for our security and intelligence agencies.' However, Tory sources claimed that by adding the single intelligence agencies budget in with the defence budget, it was eating into what money was left for the Armed Forces and did not account for 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence. 'Labour have taken money from a different department and pretended it was going to the Armed Forces,' one said. However, a Labour source accused the Tories of 'getting their numbers wrong' and insisted Wednesday's announcement was 'not a cut to defence' based on the Nato qualifying spend.
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
Porn Britannia, Xi's absence & no more lonely hearts?
OnlyFans is giving the Treasury what it wants – but should we be concerned? 'OnlyFans,' writes Louise Perry, 'is the most profitable content subscription service in the world.' Yet 'the vast majority of its content creators make very little from it'. So why are around 4 per cent of young British women selling their wares on the site? 'Imitating Bonnie Blue and Lily Phillips – currently locked in a competition to have sex with the most men in a day – isn't pleasant.' OnlyFans gives women 'the sexual attention and money of hundreds and even thousands of men'. The result is 'a cascade of depravity' that Perry wouldn't wish on her worst enemy. In business terms, however, OnlyFans is a 'staggering success', according to economics editor Michael Simmons. 'Britain's sex industry brings in far more to the economy than politicians are comfortable admitting'; OnlyFans might just be Britain's most profitable tech start-up. 'If we are going to wage a moral war on porn,' Simmons argues, 'we should at least be honest about what we're sacrificing.' Louise and Michael joined the podcast to discuss further (1:21). Next: could Xi Jinping's time be up? Historian Francis Pike writes about the unusual absence of China's President Xi. China-watchers have detected some subtle differences from the norm in Chinese media, from fewer official references to Xi to changes in routine politburo meetings. So, could Xi Jinping be forced to step down? And if so, who is on manoeuvres and why? Francis joined the podcast alongside former diplomat Kerry Brown, professor of China Studies at King's College London (22:31). And finally: is the era of the lonely hearts ad coming to an end? Tony Whitehead provides his notes on lonely hearts columns this week, writing about how, 330 years after they first appeared in print in Britain, they may soon disappear. Francesca Beauman – who literally wrote the book on the subject, Shapely Ankle Preferr'd – and Mark Mason join the podcast to provide their favourite examples, from the serious to the humorous (35:13). Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast. Produced by Patrick Gibbons.
