IMF Sees Requests From Africa Rising as Trump's Policies Bite
The International Monetary Fund is anticipating an increase in funding support requests from Africa as US President Donald Trump's tariffs and aid cuts reduce options.
'We live in a shock-prone world,' Abebe Aemro Selassie, director of the African Department of the Washington-based lender, told reporters Tuesday in Senegal's capital, Dakar. 'The poorest and least resilient countries are increasingly turning to institutions like ours. I don't rule out' more African countries seeking support, he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UBS faces $26B in capital requirements from Swiss bank reforms, Bloomberg says
UBS (UBS) is facing as much as $26B in capital requirements to be phased over the next decade under banking reform proposals from the Swiss government, Bastian Benrath-Wright and Noele Illien of Bloomberg reports. The largest hit to the bank is set to come from a proposal that would require the company to increase the capital held at home against its stakes in foreign units to 100% from the current 60%. The government estimates this will force UBS to add as much as $23B in capital to its Swiss-based main unit. Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter Published first on TheFly – the ultimate source for real-time, market-moving breaking financial news. Try Now>> See Insiders' Hot Stocks on TipRanks >> Read More on UBS: Disclaimer & DisclosureReport an Issue UBS Lowers Price Target on Berkshire Hathaway Stock (BRK.B) as 'Buffett Premium' Ends UBS Group AG Faces Sell Rating Amid Regulatory Uncertainty and Capital Challenges UBS call volume above normal and directionally bullish UBS upgraded to Buy from Hold at Jefferies Unusually active option classes on open May 27th Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Verge
34 minutes ago
- The Verge
A ban on state AI laws could smash Big Tech's legal guardrails
Senate Commerce Republicans have kept a ten year moratorium on state AI laws in their latest version of President Donald Trump's massive budget package. And a growing number of lawmakers and civil society groups warn that its broad language could put consumer protections on the chopping block. Republicans who support the provision, which the House cleared as part of its 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' say it will help ensure AI companies aren't bogged down by a complicated patchwork of regulations. But opponents warn that should it survive a vote and a congressional rule that might prohibit it, Big Tech companies could be exempted from state legal guardrails for years to come, without any promise of federal standards to take their place. 'What this moratorium does is prevent every state in the country from having basic regulations to protect workers and to protect consumers,' Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), whose district includes Silicon Valley, tells The Verge in an interview. He warns that as written, the language included in the House-passed budget reconciliation package could restrict state laws that attempt to regulate social media companies, prevent algorithmic rent discrimination, or limit AI deepfakes that could mislead consumers and voters. 'It would basically give a free rein to corporations to develop AI in any way they wanted, and to develop automatic decision making without protecting consumers, workers, and kids.' 'One thing that is pretty certain … is that it goes further than AI' The bounds of what the moratorium could cover are unclear — and opponents say that's the point. 'The ban's language on automated decision making is so broad that we really can't be 100 percent certain which state laws it could touch,' says Jonathan Walter, senior policy advisor at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. 'But one thing that is pretty certain, and feels like there is at least some consensus on, is that it goes further than AI.' That could include accuracy standards and independent testing required for facial recognition models in states like Colorado and Washington, he says, as well as aspects of broad data privacy bills across several states. An analysis by nonprofit AI advocacy group Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI) found that a social media-focused law like New York's ' Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation for Kids Act ' could be unintentionally voided by the provision. Center for Democracy and Technology state engagement director Travis Hall says in a statement that the House text would block 'basic consumer protection laws from applying to AI systems.' Even state governments' restrictions on their own use of AI could be blocked. The new Senate language adds its own set of wrinkles. The provision is no longer a straightforward ban, but it conditions state broadband infrastructure funds on adhering to the familiar 10-year moratorium. Unlike the House version, the Senate version would also cover criminal state laws. Supporters of the AI moratorium argue it wouldn't apply to as many laws as critics claim, but Public Citizen Big Tech accountability advocate J.B. Branch says that 'any Big Tech attorney who's worth their salt is going to make the argument that it does apply, that that's the way that it was intended to be written.' Khanna says that some of his colleagues may not have fully realized the rule's scope. 'I don't think they have thought through how broad the moratorium is and how much it would hamper the ability to protect consumers, kids, against automation,' he says. In the days since it passed through the House, even Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), a staunch Trump ally, said she would have voted against the OBBB had she realized the AI moratorium was included in the massive package of text. California's SB 1047 is the poster child for what industry players dub overzealous state legislation. The bill, which intended to place safety guardrails on large AI models, was vetoed by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom following an intense pressure campaign by OpenAI and others. Companies like OpenAI, whose CEO Sam Altman once advocated for industry regulation, have more recently focused on clearing away rules that they say could stop them from competing with China in the AI race. 'What you're really doing with this moratorium is creating the Wild West' Khanna concedes that there are 'some poorly-crafted state regulations' and making sure the US stays ahead of China in the AI race should be a priority. 'But the approach to that should be that we craft good federal regulation,' he says. With the pace and unpredictability of AI innovation, Branch says, 'to handcuff the states from trying to protect their citizens' without being able to anticipate future harms, 'it's just reckless.' And if no state legislation is guaranteed for a decade, Khanna says, Congress faces little pressure to pass its own laws. 'What you're really doing with this moratorium is creating the Wild West,' he says. Before the Senate Commerce text was released, dozens of Khanna's California Democratic colleagues in the House, led by Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA), signed a letter to Senate leaders urging them to remove the AI provision — saying it 'exposes Americans to a growing list of harms as AI technologies are adopted across sectors from healthcare to education, housing, and transportation.' They warn that the sweeping definition of AI 'arguably covers any computer processing.' Over 250 state lawmakers representing every state also urge Congress to drop the provision. 'As AI technology develops at a rapid pace, state and local governments are more nimble in their response than Congress and federal agencies,' they write. 'Legislation that cuts off this democratic dialogue at the state level would freeze policy innovation in developing the best practices for AI governance at a time when experimentation is vital.' Khanna warns that missing the boat on AI regulation could have even higher stakes than other internet policies like net neutrality. 'It's not just going to impact the structure of the internet,' he says. 'It's going to impact people's jobs. It's going to impact the role algorithms can play in social media. It's going to impact every part of our lives, and it's going to allow a few people [who] control AI to profit, without accountability to the public good, to the American public.'
News24
34 minutes ago
- News24
Elon Musk deletes post claiming Trump 'in the Epstein files'
Elon Musk accused Donald Trump of being linked to Jeffrey Epstein through secret government files, but provided no evidence to back up his claims and later deleted the posts. The ongoing feud between Musk and Trump escalated rapidly after Musk criticised a spending bill. Trump and Epstein were known to have socialised in the past, though Trump has denied involvement in Epstein's alleged crimes, which remain a controversial topic among conspiracy theories. Tech billionaire Elon Musk has deleted an explosive allegation linking Donald Trump with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein that he posted on social media during a vicious public fallout with the US president this week. Musk -- who exited his role as a top White House advisor just last week -- alleged on Thursday that the Republican leader is featured in secret government files on former associates of Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while he faced sex trafficking charges. The Trump administration has acknowledged it is reviewing tens of thousands of documents, videos and investigative material that his "MAGA" movement says will unmask public figures complicit in Epstein's crimes. "Time to drop the really big bomb: (Trump) is in the Epstein files," Musk posted on his social media platform, X as his growing feud with the president boiled over into a spectacularly public row on Thursday. "That is the real reason they have not been made public." Musk did not reveal which files he was talking about and offered no evidence for his claim. He initially doubled down on the claim, writing in a follow-up message: "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out." However, he appeared to have deleted both tweets by Saturday morning. Supporters on the conspiratorial end of Trump's "Make America Great Again" base allege that Epstein's associates had their roles in his crimes covered up by government officials and others. They point the finger at Democrats and Hollywood celebrities, although not at Trump himself. No official source has ever confirmed that the president appears in any of the material. Trump knew and socialised with Epstein but has denied spending time on Little Saint James, the private redoubt in the US Virgin Islands where prosecutors alleged Epstein trafficked underage girls for sex. "Terrific guy," Trump, who was Epstein's neighbour in both Florida and New York, said in an early 2000s profile of the financier. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." Just last week Trump gave Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But their relationship imploded within days as Musk described as an "abomination" a spending bill that, if passed by Congress, could define Trump's second term in office. Trump hit back in an Oval Office diatribe and from there the row detonated, leaving Washington and riveted social media users alike stunned by the blistering break-up between the world's richest person and the world's most powerful. With real political and economic risks to their row, both men appeared to inch back from the brink on Friday, but the White House denied reports they would talk.
