Nokia reports net profit drop, says 'not immune' to tariff wars
The company said tariffs imposed by the United States could result in "some short-term disruption".
"We are not immune to the rapidly evolving global trade landscape. However based on early customer feedback, I believe our markets should prove to be relatively resilient", Justin Hotard President and CEO of Nokia said in a statement.
"Based on what we see today, we currently expect a EUR 20 to 30 million impact to our comparable operating profit in the second quarter from the current tariffs", Hotard said.
US President Donald Trump implemented a tariff of 10 percent on global imports this month, but he paused plans for higher duties on dozens of countries, including a 20 percent duty for goods from EU nations.
Nokia also reported net sales of 4.4 billion euros ($4.9 billion), down one percent compared to a year ago.
It had posted a net profit of 438 million euros in the first quarter of last year.
The company said it expects its Network Infrastructure and Cloud and Network Services divisions to see sales growth this year, while Mobile Networks to hold steady.
Alongside its first quarter report, it announced a contract extension with US operator T-Mobile on Thursday, saying it continued "to see positive signs of stabilisation" in its Mobile Networks business.
Stay informed with the latest
business
news, updates on
bank holidays
and
public holidays
.
Master Value & Valuation with ET! Learn to invest smartly & decode financials. Limited seats at 33% off – Enroll now!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
35 minutes ago
- United News of India
British CDS Admiral Tony Radkin says NATO can handle any Russian military venture
London, Aug 15 (UNI) The UK Chief of Defence Staff, and commander of the Royal UK Navy Tony Radkin, has urged NATO nations to not be afraid of Russia, stating that Moscow was just one while the bloc has 32 nations, and are capable of tackling any possible Russian aggression, reports Pravda. While speaking to PolitNavigator, Radkin said "The Black Sea Fleet was destroyed by a country that barely has a navy. Russia's strategic bombers were destroyed by a country that barely has an air force, and Russia was forced to restructure its economy on a war footing that will be incredibly difficult to get off... We should not be afraid of Putin's rhetoric or his campaign of state sabotage. 'As disgusting as they are, they do not change the situation. In fact, Russia is conducting covert attacks on us precisely because it cannot do so more openly - Putin does not want a war with NATO, he cannot even win a war with Ukraine.' The British Defence Chief's comments come ahead of increased fears by EU nations that Moscow could wage war against Europe if it wins its war in Ukraine, with the bloc agreeing to increasing its defence budget by 5% of its total GDP by 2035. The EU is also opting for increased militarisation, having already increased its total military expenditure by over 30% from 2021-2024, and committing to divert increased civilian funding towards Europe's defence infrastructure to reduce reliance on US munitions. Stating that Russia had grown 'weaker' and thus more 'dangerous', he added 'Putin is not shy about using violence to achieve his goals. And we must clearly understand the threat that the Baltic and Scandinavian countries bordering Russia are particularly acutely aware of.' Urging joint defence cooperation between members, he said 'We need to defend ourselves on the front line. Russia has more reason to fear the union of 32 countries than the other way around.' UNI ANV SSP
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Streamer Aria, while supporting child safety goals, opposes the EU Chat Control law, saying 'Mass surveillance… sets dangerous precedent'
(Image via Linux user's 'X' Account) The European Union's controversial Chat Control Law, since proposed, faced fierce backlash. Recently, even the streaming industry weighed in. Popular streamer Aria joined the list of critics, calling the law a suggested mass surveillance approach to be a threat to privacy, despite its support for child safety goals. The legislation that is set for a vote on October 14, 2025, has ignited heated debate, with many echoing the concerns over the overreach of the government. Streamer Aria speaks against the EU Chat Control law Aria, in her made comment, specifically targeted the core privacy concerns of the Chat Control law proposal. While firmly stating her support for protecting the children, Aria warned that this legislation would mandate private messages' mass scanning. Aria on X stated, "while protecting children' is important, private communications' 'mass surveillance' will set 'dangerous precedent." She further added, there is a need for a 'better solution' which would not ' compromise everyone's privacy rights.' With her words, Aria perfectly resonated with the social media's widespread anxiety about this law. While Aria's comment echoed many X users' opinions, there has already been fierce criticism against the law. A user on X, specifically talking about the law and casting doubt on the law's motive, stated, " Just remember that anytime they do something to "protect the children", the last thing they care about is protecting the children." Another user, echoing deeper skepticism about the law, accused the supporters of being "stupid' and 'deluded idiots." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 21st Century Skills Start with Confident Communication Planet Spark Learn More Undo The user even questioned the law's true intent. Similarly, a user framed this entire proposal as an inevitable erosion of the citizen's privacy. The comment read, 'You think needing an ID for accessing online services is bad? It's just a matter of time until the EU 🇪🇺 will pass the 'Chat Control' law, which is about scanning all communications, especially encrypted ones, via backdoors.' Another detailed critique called out the proposal to be "horrifying" and unsafe, technically. The user argued that it destroys private communications, under the guise of child protection, while it exempts the politicians. A user even expressed fury by labelling this law "dystopian" and reliant upon public "negligence and disinterest" for passing. The user emphasized that this law would subject 450 million EU citizens to automated scanning, and all of it would happen without their consent. What is the controversial European Union's Chat Control law? The European Union Chat Control Law, at its core, is aimed at combating the spread of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) online. It's mechanism that is causing such uproar online is the client-side scanning. It will require applications like Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp, etc., to scan all the user content. It would include scanning of texts, images and videos, before the same gets encrypted. Critics argue that this law will fundamentally break the end-to-end encryption system that remains digital privacy and security's bedrock. To create such a scanning mechanism would effectively install a permanent backdoor. Experts are even warning that this will make all communication completely vulnerable, not just for state surveillance but also to potential exploitation by hostile actors and hackers. The law will apply to the citizens indiscriminately, irrespective of suspicion. Some proponents, like the Danish EU's current presidency, have been pushing hard for the adoption of this law by mid-October 2025. It's been insisted that it is necessary for law enforcement to tackle the rising serious crime. However, the opponents are countering this motive. As per them, mass surveillance would violate the fundamental EU rights to data protection and privacy. It would set a dangerous global precedent, and it could expand beyond CSAM in the near future. Currently, 19 EU states are backing the law's proposal. The Netherlands, Austria and Poland are on the opposing end. The pending decision from Germany is being considered to be pivotal for the voting that is to be held on October 14, 2025. How is the world reacting to this law? While streamers have joined people opposing the law, privacy experts and the technology firms have already blasted the proposal as dangerous and unworkable. Signal, as per reports, has already threatened to pull the application from the European Union if the new law passes, as it would cause irreparable harm to the encryption system. Legal analysts, on the other hand, highlight the conflict between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and GDPR, which are meant to safeguard private communications. Some campaigns, including Fight Chat Control, are urging citizens to pressure lawmakers. They are warning of the false accusations and the eroded freedom that would come if the law is implemented. With the voting still looming, the debate that is all over social media is child safety vs privacy concerns. It's a clash that can redefine Europe's digital rights. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Resisting the coercive new global trade order
How should India respond to the challenges posed by the US tariffs of 50%? Some believe that this crisis presents an opportunity for India to implement deeper economic reforms aimed at enhancing the overall competitiveness of its economy. Others argue that India should intensify its efforts to integrate with non-American economies, such as the EU. Trump has inaugurated a new chapter in the global imperial project, which his successor may continue. Efforts are underway to establish new rules for international trade. (Bloomberg) While these measures are undoubtedly necessary, many Indian analysts overlook a larger issue — the new ideological contestation on the global stage aimed at reshaping international law norms governing world trade. Many believe that US President Donald Trump has upended the rule-based international trading order established by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, there is a prevailing belief that this disruption is temporary. Once Trump leaves office, the status quo would be restored. This view, however, is overly sanguine. There appears to be a bipartisan consensus among both Republicans and Democrats in the US regarding the substance of Trump's actions, even though they may differ in their approach. The Biden administration did little to revive the moribund WTO during its term from 2020 to 2024. Trump has inaugurated a new chapter in the global imperial project, which his successor may continue. Efforts are underway to establish new rules for international trade. This was made clear by ambassador Jamieson Greer, the US Trade Representative. Greer posits that the US has initiated a new 'Trump round' of trade negotiations that, unlike previous rounds at the GATT and WTO, will not rely on consensus-based decision-making. The key elements of this new global trade order include legitimising American coercion for deeper market access, establishing stronger links between trade and non-trade issues like labour, and, most importantly, implementing unilateral enforcement by the US, as opposed to the apolitical dispute settlement system employed by the WTO. If these rules of coercive capitalism become codified as a new international trade order, it could be disastrous for countries in the Global South, including India. Therefore, it is essential to engage in an ideological battle on the global stage against the radical American populist right. It is crucial to understand the intriguing relationship between imperialism and international law. The mainstream belief has been that there is a clear distinction between the imperial past and modern international law. The former is often viewed as a historical anomaly, while the latter is promoted as universal and liberal, representing a narrative of decolonisation and development. However, critical international lawyers argue that international law never severed its ties with its imperial and colonial history. Genealogy, they argue, plays a crucial role in shaping international law norms. Therefore, the expansion of capitalism has played a pivotal role in the growth of international law. As India's foremost international lawyer, B S Chimni, argues, akin to the 'spirit of capitalism' — capitalism's ability to reinvent itself in different phases — there is also a 'spirit of international law'. This spirit allows international law to evolve continually, ably disguising imperial ambitions within the narrative of progress. On one hand, international law presents itself as a universal tool that promotes the global common good and aims to establish a just world order. On the other hand, it also reinforces the imperial agendas of the Global North. The evolution of the multilateral trade order from the establishment of GATT in 1948 to the formation of the WTO in 1995 and beyond reflects the 'spirit of international law.' This rule-based international trade system, influenced by the assertiveness of the decolonised world, made several concessions to developing countries by recognising principles such as non-discrimination, special and differential treatment, preferential market access, and a depoliticized dispute settlement system that aims to resolve trade disputes without resorting to coercive trade diplomacy. Simultaneously, international trade law has promoted and exported American and European norms, leading to their universal adoption. A notable example is the treatment of intellectual property rights (IPR). Economist Robert Reich argues that private property is a fundamental element of the Western capitalist model based on free markets. Over time, the rules governing the protection of private property have expanded to include new types of property, such as IPR. International trade law has played a vital role in establishing binding rules for the global enforcement of IPR through the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement within the WTO. This framework primarily benefits the corporate interests of countries in the Global North, often at the expense of those in the Global South. Another significant example is agricultural trade. The US and the EU provide substantial subsidies to their agricultural sectors. They managed to include an Agreement on Agriculture in the WTO rulebook, allowing them to continue offering significant subsidies to their farmers. Despite its weaknesses, the WTO systemoffers a platform for deeper engagement and the possibility of reform. It provides an opportunity to mainstream the development argument and hold the Global North accountable in a depoliticised international court. The consensus-based decision-making process has mostly prevented the adoption of rules inimical to the developing world. However, the emerging global trade order appears to be unabashedly imperial, abandoning any pretensions of development and equity and sacrificing the spirit of international law. It unapologetically aims to legitimise unilateralism and coercion, validating the connection between imperialism and international law that critical international lawyers draw. Consequently, the Global South, particularly India, must engage in an ideological battle to defend the existing order. For India, the stakes extend beyond mere market access or a trade deal with the US. India must be at the vanguard in defending the WTO-based international trade system, which, while not perfect, is certainly preferable to the impending new imperial trade order. Prabhash Ranjan is professor and vice-dean (research), Jindal Global Law School, OP Jindal Global University. The views expressed are personal.
