US safety board to scrutinize Boeing role in 737 MAX 9 mid-air emergency
The board is expected to harshly criticize Boeing's safety culture and its failure to install four key bolts in a new Alaska Airlines MAX 9, officials told Reuters.
NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy has said the incident was entirely avoidable because the planemaker should have addressed unauthorized production work long ago.
"This accident should have never happened. This should have been caught years before," Homendy said last August during a two-day investigative hearing. "The safety culture needs a lot of work."
The accident prompted the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation and declare that Boeing was not in compliance with a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement and CEO Dave Calhoun announced he would step down within a few months of the mid-air panel blowout.
The incident badly damaged Boeing's reputation and led to a grounding of the MAX 9 for two weeks and a 38 planes per month cap by the Federal Aviation Administration on MAX production that still remains in place.
Boeing created no paperwork for the removal of the 737 MAX 9 door plug - a piece of metal shaped like a door covering an unused emergency exit - or its re-installation during production, and did not know which employees were involved, the NTSB said last year.
Boeing did not respond to a request for comment ahead of the meeting.
Then-FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker said in June 2024 the agency was "too hands off" in Boeing oversight and it has boosted the number of inspectors at Boeing and Spirit AeroSystems factories.
Boeing had agreed last July to plead guilty to a criminal fraud conspiracy charge after two fatal 737 MAX crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia. But it last month struck a deal with the Justice Department to avoid a guilty plea.
The Justice Department has asked a judge to approve the deal, which will allow Boeing to avoid pleading guilty or facing oversight by an outside monitor but will require it to pay an additional $444.5 million into a crash victims fund to be divided equally per crash victim.
(Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Jamie Freed)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Khaleej Times
2 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
S&P affirms 'AA+' credit rating for US, cites impact of tariff revenue
S&P Global on Monday affirmed its "AA+" credit rating on the US, saying the revenue from President Donald Trump's tariffs will offset the fiscal hit from his massive tax-cut and spending bill. Trump signed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" into law in July after it was passed by the Republican-controlled Congress. The bill, which delivered new tax breaks, also made Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent. "Amid the rise in effective tariff rates, we expect meaningful tariff revenue to generally offset weaker fiscal outcomes that might otherwise be associated with the recent fiscal legislation, which contains both cuts and increases in tax and spending," S&P said in a statement. "At this time, it appears that meaningful tariff revenue has the potential to offset the deficit-raising aspects of the recent budget legislation." The U.S. reported a $21 billion jump in customs duty collections from Trump's tariffs in July, but the government budget deficit still grew nearly 20% in the same month to $291 billion. Interest on the public debt also continued to grow, hitting $1.013 trillion in the first 10 months of the fiscal year, an increase of 6%, or $57 billion, over the prior-year period due to slightly higher interest rates and increased debt levels. Since returning to power in January this year, Trump has launched a global trade war with a range of tariffs that have targeted individual products and countries. The Republican president has set a baseline tariff of 10% on all imports to the U.S., as well as additional duties on some items and trading partners. IMPACT OF TARIFFS S&P, which became the first ratings agency to cut the pristine U.S. government rating in 2011, said the outlook on the U.S. rating remains stable. The ratings agency said it expects the Federal Reserve, which Trump has criticized this year for not cutting interest rates, "to navigate the challenges of lowering domestic inflation and addressing financial market vulnerabilities." It projected the country's general government deficit to average 6.0% of GDP during the 2025-2028 period, down from 7.5% in 2024 and from an average 9.8% of GDP in 2020-2023. S&P said it could lower the rating over the next two to three years if already high deficits increase. "The ratings could also come under pressure if political developments weigh on the strength of American institutions and the effectiveness of long-term policymaking or independence of the Federal Reserve," it said. SP, however, said it could raise the U.S. rating in the event of sustained economic growth and adjustments to the U.S. fiscal profile that would diminish recent increases in the country's debt burden. There was no reaction in markets on Tuesday to SP's credit rating affirmation, which follows a U.S. sovereign credit downgrade by Moody's in May, when that ratings agency cut the triple-A U.S. rating by one notch, citing rising debt levels. The U.S. national debt load surged above a record $37 trillion last week. James Ragan, co-chief investment officer and director of investment management research at D.A. Davidson, said the SP rating affirmation was an acknowledgment of the meaningful tariff revenue generated so far. "That's all good revenue (coming) in, but that's also a drag on the economy, so I think we don't know the impact of that going forward," he said.
Zawya
5 hours ago
- Zawya
India suspends cotton import duty in signal to US, relief for garment industry
India has suspended an 11% import duty on cotton until September 30, in a move seen as a signal to Washington that New Delhi is willing to address U.S. concerns on agricultural tariffs, while also easing pressure on its garment industry. The temporary suspension, announced late on Monday, could benefit U.S. cotton growers and provide relief to India's apparel sector, which faces tariffs of nearly 60% on shipments to the United States from later this month. A planned visit by U.S. trade negotiators to New Delhi from August 25-29 has been called off, delaying talks on a proposed bilateral trade agreement and dashing hopes of relief from an additional 25% U.S. tariff on Indian goods from August 27. President Donald Trump earlier this month announced an extra tariff on Indian goods as punishment for New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil, doubling the total duty to 50% on U.S. imports of Indian goods from later this month. Indian exports had previously faced levies of 0-5%, with duties on some textiles ranging between 9% and 13% before Trump raised tariffs in April. The United States is the biggest market for India's garment exporters, who say steep tariffs are leading to order cancellations and making them uncompetitive against Bangladesh and Vietnam, which have U.S. duties of 20%, and China at 30%. India's labour-intensive sectors, including textiles, footwear, engineering goods and shrimp, have been jolted by U.S. tariffs, and are now seeking alternative markets. "The largest beneficiary of the duty free import will be the U.S., the second largest supplier to India," said Ajay Srivastava, founder of Global Trade Research Initiative, a New Delhi-based think tank, adding India already allows duty-free cotton imports from Australia within a quota. Cotton imports more than doubled to $1.2 billion in the 2024/25 fiscal year to March, from $579 million a year earlier, led by $258 million from Australia, $234 million from the United States, $181 million from Brazil and $116 million from Egypt, Srivastava said. The sharp rise in U.S. tariffs comes just as India was emerging as a stronger alternative for American garment buyers, with Bangladesh facing political uncertainty and companies seeking to diversify supply chains beyond China. Industry bodies such as the Confederation of Indian Textile Industry (CITI) had urged the government to scrap the cotton import duty to help make the sector more competitive. Reuters earlier reported that some Indian exporters were scrambling to explore manufacturing options overseas to offset the impact of the higher tariffs. India's garment sector was already grappling with a labour crunch and limited production capacity. The prospect of exporters relocating production abroad poses a further challenge to the government's "Make in India" manufacturing drive. Industry officials now expect the government to extend duty-free cotton imports beyond September.
The National
5 hours ago
- The National
India needs to find its own ‘Trump whisperers' to deal with the US tariff threat
The threat of up to 50 per cent US tariffs on goods from India, which emerged from the White House over the past month, struck many as a bolt seemingly out of the blue. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had had a good visit to Washington in February, and a detailed trade deal between Washington and New Delhi seemed all set for approval at the end of this month. While India will probably avoid the worst-case outcome, the level of surprise indicates that New Delhi lacks high-level advocates in Washington with the inside track. As a result, it is still struggling to grasp how US President Donald Trump makes decisions, or how he views both trade and the Indo-US equation. Until those inter-linked problems are sorted out, bilateral relations will continue to bounce between the highs of periodic direct contact by the two national leaders, and regular lows in between. India's diplomatic and business communities continue to wonder how things went so wrong between the two governments in recent months. The answer to this question lies in New Delhi's struggle to adapt to Mr Trump's commercial (rather than diplomatic) approach to dealmaking. The tariff threats to India come from two directions: the Russia-Ukraine war and the emergence of competition – as opposed to co-operation – between major trading powers facing the threat of tariffs from Washington. The war in Ukraine is the more volatile of the two factors, with the Trump administration's policy veering from Moscow's point of view, then to that of Kyiv and Brussels, and now back to Moscow's following the US-Russia summit in Alaska last Friday. This latest swing is good news for New Delhi, as the threat of secondary sanctions for buying Russian oil is likely to recede at least temporarily. But even if (or more likely when) the pendulum swings again, it is unlikely that the US will be maximalist in its demands. Any rapid and major change in Indian oil purchases would put strains on global oil supply and send prices shooting up for American voters, something that no administration wants to see. The battle between the EU and UK on the one hand, and Russia on the other, to influence Mr Trump on the war in Ukraine also provides an essential window into the challenges of diplomacy with the administration. Much has been made in commentary about the importance of top-level chemistry, and the natural advantage of strong leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin winning Mr Trump's respect and agreement. However, Russia's example goes to show why this just isn't enough. Mr Putin's ability to effectively communicate Russia's perspective is extremely powerful. But the lack of any other interlocutors who can engage with Mr Trump as persuasively means that Moscow struggles to build momentum. In contrast, the EU and UK have found a range of 'Trump whisperers', people below the head-of-state level who understand the US President. It is these contacts who have managed to stay appraised of Mr Trump's ever-shifting priorities and perspectives and convince him of the relevance of their positions to those priorities. Until India can find its own Trump whisperers, the positive, can-do Trump-Modi personal equation will not be enough to keep the bilateral relationship on the rails. The other half of the tariff threat is closely tied to this problem. Mr Modi's productive meeting with Mr Trump in February gave India's notoriously tough negotiators a sense of what it would take to craft an agreement that would satisfy both sides. But one of the Trump administration's greatest successes is that it has created competition rather than co-operation between countries facing the threat of US tariffs. Over the course of the summer, the larger trade partners of the US – led by the EU and UK – showed a new willingness to cross their own previous red lines to make deals with Washington. Mr Trump seems to regard it as axiomatic that these developments shifted the baseline of expectations for all others who followed. In this view, it would be up to India (currently only the US's 10th-largest trade partner) to try to improve its offer and match the depth of concessions granted by the larger US trade partners. Despite all this, India and the EU find themselves in a similar boat. The Trump administration does not view either entity to be dominant security actors in their regions (unlike say China, Russia or Israel). This magnifies his annoyance when they offer a narrative that contradicts his own – for example, the EU's constant reminders that Russia is the aggressor in the Ukraine war, or New Delhi's rejection of Mr Trump's claim that he mediated the end of the recent hostilities between itself and Pakistan earlier this year. Similarly, the US President's anger with European and Indian trade surpluses with Washington is complemented by a lack of fear over their economic advantage. In contrast, Mexico, China and Canada have greater political leverage than the EU or India that goes beyond the sheer volume of trade with the US. These exporters supply daily goods from food to energy and mid-to-low-range cars and phones that have a critical direct impact on the everyday lives of average American voters. Any trade war brings serious political costs for the Trump administration. Indian exports, on the other hand, range from engineering goods to gems and jewellery that do not carry the same risks. Neither do luxury European goods, whether cheese, wine or limousines. The one exception is India's supply of generic medications, which have become a cornerstone of American health care; a canny Mr Trump may extend a temporary waiver to generate pressure while avoiding backlash. In short, the strength of India's hand in dealing with the Trump administration is fundamentally different than it looked at the start of the US President's second term, when the new rules of the power game were just beginning to emerge. But on the other hand, the European experience suggests that even a so-so hand can be played to great advantage once those new power rules have been understood and applied.
