Most US firms in Ireland to grow or keep jobs despite global pressure, survey finds
Marking the July 4 Independence Day celebrations, the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) released the results of a survey conducted of its members, where 92.5% said they planned to increase or maintain their current level of employment in Ireland.
Of those, 60% said they planned to increase employee numbers, while a third said they would maintain their current number.
Nine in 10 survey respondents also said their corporate headquarters had a positive view of Ireland as an investment location, and 68% said their corporate headquarters already had plans to invest in Ireland over the next five years.
US multinationals have formed a key part of the modern Irish economy, employing large numbers of workers in key sectors such as pharmaceuticals and technology.
However, the Trump administration is engaged in an ongoing tariff war with much of the world, as he demands US companies operating abroad bring more of their operations back home.
American Chamber chief executive Paul Sweetman said: "Almost 7.5% of Ireland's entire population is employed — directly or indirectly — by US multinationals. Ireland is a strategic hub for innovation and global decision-makers in major American corporations.
"On the flip side, Ireland is the sixth largest source of FDI into the US, and Irish companies are employing almost as many people in the US as US companies are employing in Ireland. It truly is a genuine two-way economic relationship.
"Against the geopolitical backdrop of trade, tariffs and uncertainty — which are unquestionably causing challenges for our members — we see a real and emerging optimism that the business community is ready to get moving through accelerating innovative projects and strategic investments."
The survey also found a third of US businesses here said housing was the most important challenge for Ireland to overcome for their company to invest and expand here.
Other challenges include cost competitiveness, a skills shortage, the complexity of the planning process, supply chain disruption and the need to enhance R&D tax incentives.
When asked about the biggest risk is to continued FDI in Ireland over the next five years, housing was cited as the biggest risk (31%), ahead of public infrastructure, trade tariffs, labour costs and availability of skilled talent.
On investment in AI and new technologies, 92.5% of respondents said they had increased or maintained AI investment this year, while 65% said they planned to increase investment in AI, automation or data analytics initiatives.
When asked how they expect the AI transformation to affect their organisation over the next five years, 82.5% said they expected it to result in either increased or maintained investment.
"In the long term, Ireland has a significant opportunity — built on a pedigree of delivery and a can-do attitude — to win new investments and grow.
Read More
A strong euro against the dollar is creating a new headache for Irish exporters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
17 minutes ago
- Irish Examiner
Trump says he expects Hamas decision in 24 hours on 'final' peace proposal
US President Donald Trump said on Friday it would probably be known in 24 hours whether the Palestinian militant group Hamas has agreed to accept what he has called a "final proposal" for an Israel-Hamas ceasefire in Gaza. The president also said he had spoken to Saudi Arabia about expanding the Abraham Accords, the deal on normalization of ties that his administration negotiated between Israel and some Gulf countries during his first term. Trump said on Tuesday Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war. He was asked on Friday if Hamas had agreed to the latest ceasefire deal framework, and said: "We'll see what happens, we are going to know over the next 24 hours." A source close to Hamas said on Thursday the Islamist group sought guarantees that the new US-backed ceasefire proposal would lead to the end of Israel's war in Gaza. Two Israeli officials said those details were still being worked out. Dozens of Palestinians were killed on Thursday in Israeli strikes, according to Gaza authorities. The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered in October 2023 when Hamas attacked Israel, killing 1,200 and taking about 250 hostages, Israeli tallies show. Gaza's health ministry says Israel's subsequent military assault has killed over 56,000 Palestinians. It has also caused a hunger crisis, internally displaced Gaza's entire population and prompted accusations of genocide at the International Court of Justice and of war crimes at the International Criminal Court. Israel denies the accusations. A previous two month ceasefire ended when Israeli strikes killed more than 400 Palestinians on March 18. Trump earlier this year proposed a US takeover of Gaza, which was condemned globally by rights experts, the UN and Palestinians as a proposal of "ethnic cleansing." Abraham Accords Trump made the comments on the Abraham Accords when asked about US media reporting late on Thursday that he had met Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman at the White House. "It's one of the things we talked about," Trump said. "I think a lot of people are going to be joining the Abraham accords," he added, citing the predicted expansion to the damage faced by Iran from recent US and Israeli strikes. Axios reported that after the meeting with Trump, the Saudi official spoke on the phone with Abdolrahim Mousavi, chief of Iran's General Staff of the Armed Forces. Trump's meeting with the Saudi official came ahead of a visit to Washington next week by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. - Reuters
Irish Times
42 minutes ago
- Irish Times
‘Ireland is not anti-Semitic': Taoiseach rejects criticism from veteran US senator
The Taoiseach has rejected criticism of the Occupied Territories Bill from the chairman of the United States Senate foreign relations committee, describing the accusation of anti-Semitism as appalling. Idaho Republican Jim Risch said Ireland was on 'a hateful, anti-Semitic path' and that the US would have to reconsider the bilateral relationship if the legislation proceeded. 'I would reject any assertion that this is anti-Semitic. I'm appalled of that assertion and that's something we're going to correct,' Micheál Martin told The Irish Times. Speaking in Osaka during a four-day visit to Japan, Mr Martin said the war in Gaza was causing pressure on politics throughout Europe. But he insisted the Government did not have to choose between defending Ireland's economic interests and taking a tough position against Israel's actions. 'We've been very responsible in terms of looking at everything through the prism of humanitarian rights. I don't know how anyone can justify the blockade in Gaza. The reports we're repeatedly getting from UN agencies in respect of starving children and the slaughter of children, that is absolutely unacceptable,' he said. READ MORE 'It's not one or the other. We will work on our economic interests. We'll work to explain our position to interlocutors in the US and to the US administration.' The Taoiseach said he was encouraged by Donald Trump's 'absolute opposition to war' to hope that the US president could succeed in bringing an end to the killing in Gaza. Martin said that during his visit to Washington in March, it was clear Israel was galvanising opinion in the US against Ireland. 'We were getting feedback that there was a certain undermining of Ireland unjustifiably and endeavouring to position Ireland's opposition into the conduct of the war and the breaching of international humanitarian law by Israel, and labelling that as anti-Semitic,' he said. 'Ireland is not anti-Semitic. We've been very strongly supportive of international and global efforts to oppose anti-Semitism. We've signed significant declarations in that respect, but also in terms of our own education system, we've been very strong in terms of teachings on the Holocaust and the horrors of all of that. We would reject that very strongly, and that's a bit of a smear on Ireland.' Much of the focus of the Taoiseach's visit to Japan is on the bilateral economic relationship and Japanese investment in Ireland. Japan's population is declining by more than 800,000 every year and Martin said that contrary to anti-immigration rhetoric, Ireland's growing population is one of its attractions for foreign investors. 'I said it this week to a couple of Japanese companies, there is no issue with human capital in Ireland because we have access to the European labour market. It's been a powerful incentive, whereas tax would have been an earlier incentive. In the modern world, it's human capital,' he said. 'I acknowledge that our population has gone up by one-third in two decades. That's what's creating the pressure on services, creating huge demand on housing, but also on health services, education services. But there's something to reflect on that we're now, for the first time since the famine, over seven million people. To me, that's an extraordinary achievement by modern Ireland. It should be seen as an achievement.'
RTÉ News
an hour ago
- RTÉ News
Bob Vylan: Is there a clear legal basis for a case against them?
Police in the UK have confirmed they are investigating a performance by punk duo Bob Vylan at the Glastonbury Festival, after the group's singer led chants of "Death to the IDF [Israel Defence Forces]" during their set on Saturday, 28 June. Several UK-based politicians and commentators have condemned the remarks, with some claiming they amount to antisemitism. What chance is there of the case progressing to prosecution or trial? To try to understand that we asked legal experts where UK law draws the line on protest, free speech, hate crime, and public order. What are the police investigating? On Monday evening, Avon and Somerset Police confirmed they had "recorded" Bob Vylan's Glastonbury performance as a public order incident and have launched a criminal investigation into both the band and Irish rap trio Kneecap, based on potential hate crime or public order offences linked to their sets on Saturday. It has not yet been defined which parts of either group's performances are being examined as part of the criminal investigation. Within minutes of Bob Vylan coming off stage at the festival, several accounts online accused the group of antisemitism. During their set, they had led the crowd with chants of "Death to the IDF," and "Free, Free Palestine." Over the days that followed, the band faced both support and criticism for the language used. While most vocal support came from pro-Palestinian fans, activists, and fellow artists, the band has faced significant backlash from politicians, commentators and prominent Jewish figures, including the UK Chief Rabbi. On Sunday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer labelled the comments as "hate speech." Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy followed on Monday, arguing that because Israel's military conscription system requires all young people to serve in the military "chanting death to the IDF is equivalent to calling for the death of every single Israeli Jew." Despite pushing back strongly against accusations of antisemitism on Tuesday, and saying they were "being targeted for speaking up," the band have since been dropped by their agency and management, had upcoming shows cancelled, and now face the prospect of a potentially lengthy legal battle. What would form the basis of a prosecution? While the police can investigate and recommend any charges, it is ultimately up to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to launch a prosecution. Prof David Mead, an expert in protest and public order law at the University of East Anglia, says any prosecution would have to pass two main legal tests. "First, the CPS would need to be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction. Second, they would have to decide whether bringing charges is in the public interest," Prof Mead said. Prof Mead added that a conviction would ultimately require a jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that all elements of the offence are proven, including the words used, how they were intended, and their likely impact on the audience. The legal burden: What prosecutors must prove Jonathan Hall KC is a leading UK barrister and the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation appointed by the UK's Home Secretary. Speaking to RTÉ, Mr Hall said the key piece of legislation that could be used against the member of the group Bob Vylan who uses the stage name 'Bobbie Vylan' would be Section 18 of the Public Order Act 1986. "The principal candidate for people who make public pronouncements that could bring down hatred on groups, on minority groups or protected groups, is what's called stirring up racial hatred," Mr Hall said. However, he added that the police could struggle to bring charges under that legislation "unless their investigation turns up something that we don't know about." "It's quite hard to show off the back of saying 'Death to the IDF' that he intended people in the audience to hate Jews," Mr Hall said, "that's because what he said was to a military of a country - although, there is an exceptionally strong link between Jews and that country." There is another possible interpretation of that same offence, Mr Hall said, that even if Bobby Vylan "didn't intend" people in the audience to hate Jews "he must have known that was the likely effect." "Again, I think it's quite hard to prove the likely effect of saying, 'death to the IDF' that people are going to hate Jews, rather than just be very hostile towards that military body," Mr Hall said. Prof Mead agrees that the key legal test hinges on interpretation. "The battle is this: should 'Death to the IDF' be seen as aimed at stirring up hatred against the Israeli military, or against Israelis as a people more broadly? Only if it targets a group defined by race or nationality can the offence possibly be made out," he said. When does protest cross into harassment? However, Prof Mead says another charge could potentially be brought against Bob Vylan under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, which covers threatening or abusive language likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. "This is the most commonly used public order 'speech' crime as it is easiest to prove and thus very likely here that CPS would go for it," Prof Mead said. The CPS would only need to show that someone present was likely to feel harassed or alarmed, even if no one actually did, a threshold already established in case law, Prof Mead explained. Mr Hall also said it would be possible to bring a case on those grounds but that he would "have to see what the investigation shows, because it's hard to prove that he [Bob Vylan's singer] realised that there were Jews in the audience, and he was saying this in order to harass them." In a statement on Tuesday, Bob Vylan attempted to clarify their position saying: "We are not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people," adding that they "are for the dismantling of a violent military machine" that "has destroyed much of Gaza." Whether or not that defence holds weight would depend heavily on intent, which is central to any criminal prosecution under UK law, Mr Hall says. "The 'intending' is really important with criminal law, particularly with what you call speech offences," he said. "From a criminal law perspective, the circumstances in which you make it a crime to say something are limited. One of the key limits is what do you intend, or what do you believe is going to happen?" Referring to the music of NWA, a hip-hop group that rose to prominence in Compton, California in the 1980s, Mr Hall said there are examples in their music which is "implicitly saying 'kill the cops.'" "No one's going to say that's what they were intending anyone should do as a result of it," he said. "I think that if you had a prosecution of someone involved in a music festival, they would inevitably say, 'I'm a performer, I'm on stage. How can you begin to prove that I meant that like some gang lord telling his lieutenant to carry out a hit?'" How does this compare to other recent cases? In recent days, a number of prominent UK politicians and commentators - including the Conservative Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp - have likened the situation to the case of Lucy Connolly. Connolly was jailed for 31 months in October 2024 after using social media to call for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set on fire during the Southport Riots last summer. In a post on X, Mr Philp said of Bob Vylan "they should be arrested and prosecuted – just like some of those who did the same during the riots." The case has also reignited claims of a so-called "two-tier" approach to policing. Andrea Jenkyns, a Reform UK mayor, said that if Bob Vylan are not arrested over their chants, it would be evidence of a "two-tiered justice system." But there is little legal basis for that claim, according to Prof David Mead. "The idea of a 'two-tier' criminal justice system following the conviction of Lucy Connolly is, in my view, very misplaced. The IDF is a powerful state army thousands of miles away. Those seeking refuge in the UK are vulnerable private citizens at immediate risk should anyone take up her suggestion," Prof Mead said. Steve Kuncewicz is a partner at a law firm in Manchester and specialises in legal issues involving social media. In the Lucy Connolly case, he said, there was a "very different set of an awful lot of other evidence that went into that case." "That was a very specific call to action to cause harm to a very specific part of the community. There was a real risk in... the Southport riots, that that would be likely to happen." "It's a recurrence that's being drawn, but again, it's a very dangerous one, and it's an incorrect one. It's the two completely different kinds of incidents." The likeliest outcome? Ultimately, any prosecution would hinge on proving intent, that the Bob Vylan chant was meant to stir up racial hatred or harass Jewish people. "At the moment, I think that off the back of what I've seen from the footage of Glastonbury, I'm sceptical that they would have that," Mr Hall said. He's also, he says, "sceptical that you could prove in the course of law that he was using the IDF as a substitute code word for Jews." In the current climate in the UK, Mr Kuncewicz believes the wider political pressure could still influence how police approach the case. "Whatever happens, it's going to be very, very heavily scrutinised. But I do think given the current atmosphere we're in, the police may feel a bit more compelled to make an example here because they might see it as an incitement to violence."
