Pharma drags London stocks lower after Trump's tariff blitz
The blue-chip FTSE 100 was down 0.7% as of 0915 GMT, on track to snap a six-week winning streak.
The domestically focused midcap FTSE 250 fell nearly 1% and headed for its second straight weekly decline.
Late on Thursday, Trump slapped steep tariffs on exports from dozens of trading partners including Canada, Brazil, India, Taiwan and Switzerland, pressing ahead with his plans to reorder the global economy.
British healthcare stocks dropped the most, down 2.3%, after Trump sent letters to the leaders of 17 major pharmaceutical companies on Thursday, including AstraZeneca and GSK, outlining how they should slash U.S. prescription drug prices.
AstraZeneca shed 3.4%, while GSK slipped 1.3%.
Industrial Support Services sector fell 2.1% after Intertek Group missed its half-year organic revenue growth. The British product testing firm fell the most in the FTSE 100, down 7.7%.
British Airways owner IAG dropped 2.1% after the airline group said it expected a slight rise in costs linked to air traffic control issues.
Watches of Switzerland was the biggest drag on the FTSE 250, down 8%, after the U.S. imposed a 39% tariff on Swiss imports.
Conversely, Melrose Industries rose 6.5% to the top of the benchmark index, after the defence company beat operating profit expectations on strong demand.
Pearson rose 4.5% after the British education company forecast stronger growth in the second half.
Meanwhile, Britain said the European Union will remove tariffs on key steel products under a quota system from Friday as part of a reset of ties and a recent deal to ease trade barriers.
However, London is yet to conclude negotiations with the U.S. after both sides agreed in May to work toward removing tariffs on British steel exports.
Also, data showed on Friday that British house prices rose slightly faster than expected in July.
(Reporting by Sanchayaita Roy in Bengaluru; Editing by Sahal Muhammed)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Saudi chemical maker Sabic reports third straight quarterly loss
Saudi Basic Industries Corporation, the Middle East's biggest petrochemicals company, reported a third consecutive quarterly loss on Sunday, after deciding to shut a cracker production plant in the UK as part of a restructuring drive. Sabic posted a net loss for the three months to the end of June of 4.07 billion riyals ($1.09 billion), compared with a net profit of 2.18 billion riyals during the same period last year, it said in a filing to the Tadawul stock exchange, where its shares are traded. The results missed analysts' expectations of a profit of 504 million riyals, Reuters reported. Sabic, which is 70 per cent owned by oil major Saudi Aramco, has posted three consecutive losses in quarterly profits as the chemicals industry grapples with weak demand that has affected sales. The company attributed the latest loss mainly to a 3.78-billion-riyal impairment related to the closure of its cracker plant in Teesside, the UK. 'This action is in line with the company's review of its business portfolio with the aim of reducing costs and improving profitability,' Sabic said. It also cited impairment charges for its investment in Swiss speciality chemicals maker Clariant due to its share price decline. Revenue during the latest quarter, however, rose 3 per cent from the previous three-month period, to 35.6 billion riyals due to 'increased sales volumes offset by a decrease in average product selling prices', the company said. As a result of excess production capacity, operating rates remain below the historical global average, leading to margin pressure due to oversupply Abdulrahman Al Fageeh, Sabic chief executive 'As a result of excess production capacity, operating rates remain below the historical global average, leading to margin pressure due to oversupply,' said Abdulrahman Al Fageeh, chief executive of Sabic. 'The cost optimisation initiatives we launched in the first quarter … aim to deliver, by 2030, a recurring annual Ebitda impact of $3 billion.' The company plans to spend between $3 billion and $3.5 billion this year. The global economy is facing headwinds as US President Donald Trump's push to impose heavy tariffs on trading partners stokes fears. The disruption in global commerce will severely dent economic growth. In another filing on Sunday, Sabic proposed a dividend of 1.5 riyals per share for the first half of the year. Shares declined 2 per cent to 53.55 riyals each. Market sentiment remained uncertain during the second quarter of 2025, weighed down by global economic uncertainty and geopolitical tension, Sabic said. The manufacturing purchasing managers' index averaged slightly below 50, signalling persistent softness in demand, the company added. Sabic is playing a key role in Saudi Arabia's plan to reduce its reliance on oil exports. The company said projects such the Petrokemya MTBE plant in Saudi Arabia and Sabic Fujian complex in China were progressing according to plan. Last year, Sabic announced investments worth $6.4 billion in the Sabic Fujian petrochemical complex as part of its expansion plans in the world's second-largest economy.
Arabian Post
12 hours ago
- Arabian Post
Trump's Tariff War Creates De Facto Counter-Axis Driven By Common Cause
By K Raveendran Donald Trump's aggressive tariff regime, launched under the guise of bolstering American strength and reclaiming lost economic ground, has triggered a worldwide response that may ultimately defeat the very goal it seeks to achieve. Framed as a nationalist project to assert America's economic primacy, the tariff war has turned out to be a catalyst for an accelerating global shift away from unipolar US dominance toward a truly multipolar world order. What was once largely speculative—the idea of a global economic architecture not centred on Washington—is now becoming tangible as Trump's trade brinkmanship compels other nations to rethink, regroup, and realign. The essential flaw in Trump's strategy lies in its assumption that the rest of the world would blink first, caving in to American demands under the weight of economic pressure. But the world hasn't blinked. Instead, countries are finding common cause in resisting what they perceive as economic coercion masquerading as negotiation. The result is a fluid yet increasingly coherent realignment of powers—chief among them China, Russia, and India—that is beginning to operate as a de facto counter-axis to the United States. Driven by shared grievances and the common objective of shielding their strategic autonomy, these nations are cooperating more closely in trade, investment, and energy. The irony is that Trump's pursuit of economic supremacy is hastening the erosion of the very system that enabled US dominance for decades. Beijing, long a prime target of Trump's tariffs, has responded with both retaliation and redirection. Rather than capitulating to Washington's demands, China has expanded its outreach to other major economies, particularly in Asia and Africa, while deepening its engagement with Russia and India. The Belt and Road Initiative, initially conceived as a means of global infrastructure connectivity, is now also a tool for economic realignment. As Trump builds tariff walls, China builds roads, ports, and financial networks that bypass the United States. Moscow, for its part, has welcomed this pivot. Isolated by US and European sanctions, Russia sees opportunity in closer ties with China and India, both of which have shown increasing willingness to defy Western pressure. India, though traditionally more aligned with the West and an enthusiastic participant in global liberal markets, has found itself inching toward the emerging non-Western axis. Trump's tariffs on Indian goods, coupled with his administration's threats of secondary sanctions on countries trading with Russia or buying Iranian oil, have forced New Delhi to draw red lines. India's stance on Russian oil, for instance, has been unambiguous: it is a matter of national interest and energy security. Any effort by Washington to curtail these purchases is seen not just as economic interference but as a direct challenge to sovereign decision-making. In retaliation, India has dangled the cancellation of key defence deals, including the proposed purchase of the F-35 fighter jets—a symbolic snub that indicates a broader reassessment of strategic alignment. What makes this realignment especially potent is the breadth of its scope. It is not merely a matter of retaliatory tariffs or diplomatic rhetoric; it includes infrastructure cooperation, technological integration, and long-term investment planning. China and India, despite historic differences, have increased dialogue in recent months on trade facilitation and regional connectivity. Russia's role as a common energy partner and military supplier to both nations gives it leverage in the triangle. And with US credibility as a dependable trade partner being questioned, many smaller nations are also hedging their bets, diversifying their economic relations away from a US-centric model. Even traditional US allies in Europe are uneasy. Germany and France have voiced concerns about the destabilizing effects of Trump's tariffs on global trade norms. The EU is pursuing its own trade treaties with countries like Japan and Vietnam, carving out autonomous space in global commerce that doesn't necessarily involve Washington. At the heart of this geopolitical churn is a growing skepticism toward the idea that the United States can or should dictate the terms of global trade. The Trump administration's belief that economic might translates automatically into negotiating power has ignored the subtle but critical fact that globalisation has made nations more interconnected and interdependent. Trying to weaponise trade may yield short-term leverage, but it also creates lasting rifts and compels partners to seek alternatives. The economic structures of the 21st century no longer afford any single nation the luxury of acting as an economic autocrat without consequences. Furthermore, the economic impact within the United States is more complex and less flattering than the populist rhetoric suggests. While certain domestic industries may benefit from tariff protections, others are suffering from rising input costs and retaliatory measures. American farmers have been hit particularly hard by Chinese tariffs on agricultural imports, prompting the Trump administration to introduce multi-billion dollar bailout packages that, in effect, cancel out the supposed gains of the trade war. Manufacturing, far from being resurgent, is experiencing uncertainty and disruption due to volatility in global supply chains. The idea that tariff wars are 'easy to win' has proven to be one of the most misguided statements of Trump's presidency. Even American multinationals, once eager advocates of 'America First' policies, are quietly relocating parts of their supply chains to countries not caught in the tariff crossfire. This shift not only diminishes the US's leverage but also accelerates the decentralization of economic power. No longer is the American market an irresistible magnet for global commerce; it is increasingly seen as a zone of instability and risk. For many countries, the trade war has been a wake-up call—an impetus to invest in regional blocs, alternative trade corridors, and new financial instruments insulated from US influence. In the broader scheme, what Trump has unwittingly triggered is a reimagination of how global power is structured. The post-Cold War illusion of US-led globalisation is being replaced by a more pluralistic, competitive, and fragmented order. Emerging powers are no longer content to play by rules written in Washington. They are building parallel systems: China's digital yuan aims to reduce dependency on the dollar; India and Russia have revived rupee-rouble trade mechanisms; and regional trade agreements like RCEP are functioning without US participation. What's being born is a new kind of globalization—less hierarchical, more balanced, and far less dependent on any single country. (IPA Service)
Gulf Today
18 hours ago
- Gulf Today
India will buy Russian oil despite Trump's threats of penalties
India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources said, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. 'These are long-term oil contracts,' one of the sources said. 'It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight.' Trump last month indicated in a Truth Social post that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard that India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had 'not given any direction to oil companies' to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. 'On our energy sourcing requirements... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances,' India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal added that India has a 'steady and time-tested partnership' with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stand on their own merit and should not be seen from the prism of a third country. The White House in Washington did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners — Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100% tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35% of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35% of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up 1% from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. Last month, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported late last month. Reuters
