Fresenius: Q2 Earnings Snapshot
The Bad Homburg, Germany-based company said it had profit of 44 cents per share. Earnings, adjusted for non-recurring costs, were 52 cents per share.
The dialysis services provider posted revenue of $5.44 billion in the period.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
a minute ago
- Associated Press
Trump's pursuit of meeting with Chinese leader reveals the complex web of US-China relations
WASHINGTON (AP) — China, the adversary. China, the friend? These days, maybe a bit of both. From easing export controls to reportedly blocking the Taiwanese president's plans to travel through the United States, President Donald Trump is raising eyebrows in Washington that he might offer concessions that could hurt U.S. interests in his quest to meet, and reach a deal with, the Chinese leader. There is no firm plan for Trump to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping. But it's widely believed that the men must meet in person, likely in the fall, for the two governments to ink a trade deal, and some are worried that Xi is leveraging Trump's desire for more giveaways. 'The summit mismatch is real. There's a clear gap between Trump's eagerness for a face-to-face with Xi and Beijing's reluctance to engage,' said Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Washington-based think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies. There are concerns that Trump may throttle back on export controls or investment curbs to preserve summit prospects, Singleton said, warning the risk 'isn't just in giving away too much' but also 'in letting Beijing set the tempo.' China-U.S. relations have pinballed often since Washington established relations with communist-led Beijing in 1979. They've hit highs and lows — the latter in the aftermath of the 1989 massacre of pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square, after a 2001 incident involving a U.S. spy plane, during the COVID pandemic and right now. Both countries have struggled to understand each other, which has sometimes gotten in the way of deeper partnerships. And this time around, there's a wild card: the anything-might-happen second presidency of Trump. Disputes often accompany potential US-China leader meetings Efforts by a U.S. president to meet the head of the authoritarian Chinese government have often met with partisan outcries — which happened when former President Joe Biden hosted Xi in California in 2023. But Trump's case is peculiar, partly because he is willing to break with conventional political restraints to make deals and partly because his own party has grown hawkish towards China over national security. 'With President Trump, everything seems to be open for negotiation, and there are few if any red lines,' said Gabriel Wildau, managing director of the global consultancy Teneo. 'The hawks worry that if Trump gets into a room with Xi, he will agree to extraordinary concessions, especially if he believes that a big, beautiful deal is within reach.' While most Republican lawmakers have not voiced their concerns openly, Democrats are vocal in their opposition. 'President Trump is giving away the farm to Xi just so he can save face and reach a nonsensical trade deal with Beijing that will hurt American families economically,' said Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. On Tuesday, Kush Desai, a White House spokesman, said the Trump administration 'has not wavered — and will never waver — in safeguarding our national and economic security to put America first.' 'The administration continues to have productive conversations with China to address longstanding unfair trade practices,' Desai said, adding that export controls on cutting-edge technology and many tariffs remain in place. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, after his latest round of trade negotiations with the Chinese in July, told CNBC that the team was 'very careful to keep trade and national security separate.' And Secretary of State Marco Rubio, appearing on Fox News Radio, said the U.S. remains 'as committed as ever to our partners ... in places like Taiwan' but also spoke of the strategic need to keep trade ties with China steady. 'In the end, we have two big, the two largest economies in the world,' Rubio said. 'An all-out trade conflict between the U.S. and China, I think the U.S. would benefit from it in some ways, but the world would be hurt by it.' There's worry over Taiwan Taiwan is concerned that the self-governing island could be 'trade-able' when Trump seeks a deal with Beijing, said Jason Hsu, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a former legislator in Taiwan. 'Our concern is that, will any of the trade deals lead to concession on political support for Taiwan?' Hsu said, citing the case last month where the White House allegedly blocked a request for Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te to transit through the United States. The U.S. maintains unofficial ties with Taiwan and has always allowed such transits in the past. Experts are worried that the Trump administration is setting a bad precedent, and Democrats have seized on it to criticize Trump. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, the top Democrat on the House Select Committee on China, called the move 'both a sharp break from precedent and another example of the Trump administration caving to China in hopes of reaching a trade deal.' He said the policy decision 'sends a dangerous signal' that Taiwan's democracy is negotiable. Hsu said Taiwan fears that Trump could be coerced or compelled to support the one-China principle, as espoused by Beijing, that acknowledges Beijing's sovereignty claim over the island. There are also concerns that Trump might utter anything in support of 'unification.' That was a request Beijing raised with the Biden administration, though it failed to get a positive response. Now, it's upon Taiwan to persuade Trump to think of the island as 'an economic partner rather than something that he can trade when he negotiates with China,' Hsu said, suggesting that Taiwan step up defense commitments, increase energy procurement, open its market to U.S. companies and invest more in the U.S. But Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, said Trump is bound by the Taiwan Relations Act, a domestic law that obligates the U.S. to maintain an unofficial relationship with the island and provides it with sufficient hardware to deter any invasion by China. 'He can dial the (U.S.-Taiwan) relationship up and down,' Sun said, 'but he can't remove the relationship.' Export controls have been instituted, to mixed results In April, the White House, citing national security, announced it would restrict sales of Nvidia's H20 computer chips to China. The ban was lifted about three months later, when the two governments had climbed down from sky-high tariffs and harsh trade restrictions. The decision upset both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Select Committee on China, wrote to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to stress that the U.S. cannot let the Chinese Communist Party 'use American chips to train AI models that will power its military, censor its people, and undercut American innovation.' In Stockholm, Bessent pushed back at the concern that national security might be compromised. 'We are very diligent,' Bessent said, adding there's an interagency process that involves the National Security Council and the Defense Department for decisions. 'There's nothing that's being exchanged for anything,' Bessent said. Addressing H20 chips specifically, Bessent said they 'are well down' Nvidia's 'technology chips stack.' U.S. companies are banned from selling their most advanced chips to China. That might not be persuasive enough. Teneo's Wildau said China hawks are most worried that the H20 decision could be the beginning of a series of moves to roll back export controls from the Biden era, which were once considered 'permanent and non-negotiable.'
a minute ago
New Jersey reaches historic $2 billion environmental settlement with DuPont over 'forever chemicals'
Three chemical producers have reached a historic settlement with the state of New Jersey over "forever chemicals" and other pollutants released into the environment. Global chemical manufacturer DuPont and its affiliates, Chemours and Corteva, have agreed to a $2 billion settlement with New Jersey to resolve environmental claims tied to decades of pollution involving Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), commonly known as 'forever chemicals,' as well as other pollutants originating from four industrial sites across the state. NJDEP Commissioner LaTourette and NJ Attorney General Platkin made the announcement on Monday, calling the deal the 'largest environmental settlement ever achieved by a single state'. The proposed settlement, which still requires court approval, obligates the companies to pay $875 million in natural resource and other damages to the state over a 25-year period. It also mandates that DuPont and its affiliates create a $1.2 billion remediation fund for cleanup efforts at the four industrial sites and establish a separate $475 million reserve fund to ensure that, if any of the companies go bankrupt or otherwise fail to meet their obligations, New Jersey taxpayers are not left footing the bill. "Polluters who place profit above public well-being by releasing poisonous PFAS and other contamination in our State can expect to be held responsible to clean up their mess and fully compensate the State and its citizens for the precious natural resources they've damaged or destroyed," Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner Shawn LaTourette said. The proposed settlement will resolve the Chambers Works case, a 2019 lawsuit against Delaware-based E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. (now known as EIDP, Inc.) and other DuPont-related entities, officials said. The settlement follows a month of trial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. In a press release, DuPont, Chemours and Corteva said the settlement will not only resolve the 2019 lawsuit, but 'all legacy contamination claims related to the companies' current and former operating sites (Chambers Works, Parlin, Pompton Lakes and Repauno) and claims of statewide PFAS contamination unrelated to those sites." ABC News reached out to the companies for comment, and they declined to comment further. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are a group of manufactured chemicals that have been used for decades in a wide range of products, including non-stick cookware. Commonly referred to as 'forever chemicals,' PFAS do not break down easily in the human body or the environment, and are associated with certain cancers, hormonal dysfunction, and other health problems, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). New Jersey's extensive industrial and manufacturing history has put it on the front lines of pollution monitoring and remediation. New Jersey was the first state in the nation to set a maximum contaminant level for certain PFAS. The affected sites include Pompton Lakes Works in Pompton Lakes and Wanaque in Passaic County; the Parlin Site in Sayreville, Middlesex County; the Repauno Site in Greenwich Township in Gloucester County; Chambers Works, in Pennsville and Carney's Point in Salem County. The Sierra Club, one of the largest and most influential grassroots environmental organizations in the country, called the settlement 'an incredible and historical achievement' for the state. 'DuPont has finally been held responsible for what they have done to New Jersey, to our public health, and to our environment', NJ Sierra Club Chapter Director, Anjuli Ramos-Busot, said in a statement. 'DuPont has been knowingly poisoning our lands and waters for decades. As an entity of chemical innovation, DuPont brought prosperity to New Jersey. But, like with all polluters with a ROI bottom line, the true impact brought to New Jersey was hidden from us'. 'This outcome proves that New Jersey will fight to ensure that polluters pay their fair share for the devastating damages they have caused. I remain committed to working alongside the Attorney General and the DEP to ascertain how to swiftly and effectively allocate these funds to best clean up our communities and protect public health in the future,' State Senator Linda Greenstein (D-Middlesex/Mercer) said. The DuPont settlement will be published in the New Jersey Register and is subject to a public comment period before it can be finalized. Following that, the proposed agreement must be approved by the U.S. District Court.
CNN
14 minutes ago
- CNN
China used to fine couples for having too many babies. Now it can't pay them enough
Zane Li was nine years old when he got a baby sister – and her arrival plunged the family in a small city in eastern China into crippling debt. Under China's stringent one-child policy at the time, Li's parents were fined 100,000 yuan (about $13,900) for having a second child – nearly three times their annual income from selling fish at the local market. 'We were barely able to survive,' Li recalled. The then third grader was forced to grow up overnight, taking on most of the housework and spending school holidays helping his mother at her stall. Now 25, Li says he has no plans to have children – a stance increasingly common for his generation and something that worries China's government as it tries to avert a population crisis of its own making. For decades, officials pressured couples to have fewer children through hefty fines, forced abortions and sterilizations, only to now plead with Li's generation to make more babies. Last week, in the latest push to boost flagging birth rates, China announced it would offer parents an annual subsidy of 3,600 yuan ($500) for every child until age three, effective retroactively from January 1. But for many young adults like Li, the offer falls flat. 'The cost of raising a child is enormous, and 3,600 yuan a year is a mere drop in the bucket,' said Li, who took out a student loan to study for a master's degree in health services in Beijing. Raising a child to the age of 18 costs an average of 538,000 yuan ($75,000) in China, more than 6 times its GDP per capita – making it one of the most expensive places in the world to have children in relative terms, according to a recent study by the Beijing-based YuWa Population Research Institute. In Shanghai, the cost soars past 1 million yuan, with Beijing close behind at 936,000 yuan. '(Having kids) would only bring more hardship. I'm not a capitalist or anything, and my kid probably wouldn't have much of a good life either,' said Li, who's anxious about his job prospects and contemplating pursuing a PhD. Such a dim outlook on future parenthood – fueled by China's slowing economy and soaring youth unemployment – presents a major hurdle to the government's push for young people to get married and have children. Faced with a shrinking workforce and a rapidly aging population, China scrapped its one-child policy in 2016, allowing couples to have two children, then three in 2021. But birth rates have continued to slide. The population has now been shrinking for three consecutive years despite a modest rebound in births last year, and experts are now warning of an even sharper decline. The newly announced national childcare subsidy marks a significant step in China's pro-birth campaign. For years, local authorities have experimented with a raft of incentives – from tax breaks, housing perks and cash handouts to extended maternity leaves. Now, the central government is taking the lead with a standardized, nationwide program, allocating 90 billion yuan ($12.54 billion) in subsidies expected to benefit 20 million families this year. 'It's no longer just a local experiment. It's a signal that the government sees the birth rate crisis as urgent and national,' said Emma Zang, a demographer and sociology professor at Yale University. 'The message is clear: we're not just telling you to have babies, we are finally putting some money on the table.' The new scheme, which also offers partial subsidies for children under three born prior to 2025, has been welcomed by eligible parents but Zang said it's unlikely to move the needle on fertility rate. Similar policies have largely failed to boost births in other East Asian societies like Japan and South Korea, she added. For many Chinese young people grappling with unattainable housing prices, long workdays and a precarious job market, the subsidy doesn't even begin to address the deep-seated anxieties that underpin their reluctance to start a family. 'It's really not just about the cost. Many young adults are skeptical about the future, such as job security, aging parents, social pressure, so a cash handout doesn't address the emotional fatigue people are facing these days,' Zang said. The irony of the shift from fining parents for unsanctioned births to subsidizing them to have more children is not lost on China's millennials and Gen Zs – especially those who have witnessed the harsh penalties of the one-child policy firsthand. On Chinese social media, some users have posted photos of old receipts showing the fines their parents once paid for giving birth to them or their siblings. Among them is Gao, who grew up in the remote mountains of Guizhou and asked to only be identified by her family name. The southwestern province is one of China's poorest and was among the many areas granted a carve-out under the one-child policy, allowing rural couples a second child if their first born was a girl – a concession to the country's traditional preference for sons. Like her two older sisters, Gao was sent to live with her grandmother shortly after she was born to hide from family planning officials, so that her parents could keep trying for a boy. They went on to have four daughters before finally having a son. Now living in the eastern province of Jiangsu, Gao, 27, says she has no interest in marriage or raising children. 'Knowing that I can't provide a child with a good environment for education and life, choosing not to have one is also an act of kindness,' she said. 'I definitely don't want my child to grow up like me … with no chance of upward mobility and struggling at the bottom of society, just as I have.' For decades, as China's economy boomed and living standards improved, generations of young people had grown up with the belief that they would live a better life than their parents. That optimism is now fading. Today, many youngsters raised on the promise of upward mobility through hard work and education are growing disillusioned: property prices have soared beyond their reach, and a university degree no longer guarantees a good job – with coveted opportunities increasingly going to those with family connections. There is a growing sense of futility that their relentless effort yields only diminishing returns in an ever more competitive society – a trend summed up by the popular buzzword 'involution,' a term borrowed from sociology to describe a self-defeating spiral of excessive competition. In response, many are choosing to 'lie flat' – another catchphrase that refers to opting out of the grind of meeting society's expectations, including marriage and childrearing. June Zhao, 29, grew up in a middle-class family in one of the most 'involuted' places in China: Beijing's Haidian district. Home to 3 million people and many of the nation's top universities, Haidian is equally famous for its hyper-competitive approach to raising children. Zhao started attending tutoring classes every weekend in third grade – and she was already a few years behind her peers. After finishing her bachelor and postgraduate degrees overseas, Zhao returned to Beijing to work in investor relations. She says the immense pressure she grew up with – and still feels – has played a big part in her decision not to have children. 'The cost is simply too high and the returns too low,' she said. 'In general, I have a rather pessimistic outlook on life – I've put in so much, yet received very little in return.' Zhao considers herself lucky – her job rarely demands much overtime. Even so, she struggles to imagine finding the time to raise a child. After commuting and eating dinner, she has just two or three hours of free time each day before going to bed. It would be even harder for her friends trapped in the '996' grind of working from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week, she said. Like many of her contemporaries, Gao simply is not optimistic about the life she could provide for a child, or the society it would be born into. 'You only feel the urge to have children when you believe the days to come will be good,' she said. Then there's the longstanding gender imbalance in childrearing, along with the physical and emotional toll it takes on women. In Zhao's case, it was her mother who had to juggle having a full-time job and helping her with homework, or escorting her to tutoring classes. 'I saw firsthand how hard it was for my mother to raise me. I know for a fact that women bear a much heavier burden and cost than men when it comes to raising a family,' she said. As the fertility rate drops, the ruling Communist Party has emphasized women's domestic role as a 'virtuous wife and good mother' – touting it as a cherished part of China's traditional culture and essential to the 'healthy growth of the next generation.' Officials have exhorted women to establish a 'correct outlook on marriage, childbirth and family.' Zang, the demographer, said it's simply unrealistic to expect women to have more children without addressing the real barriers they face. 'You can't turn back the clock and hope that women will just embrace more traditional roles. Today's young women are highly educated, career oriented, and want more equality. Unless policies support that reality through things like paternity leave, workplace protection and flexible jobs, fertility rates won't rebound,' she said. 'The government wants more babies, but society isn't structured to support families,' she added. 'Right now, parenting looks like a trap, especially for women. Until that changes, subsidies won't be enough.'
