3 Whitehorse breweries to attend Haines Beer Festival, apprehensively
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Financial crime loopholes in U.S. stablecoin law offer a cautionary tale for Canada
Hoopla over America's new stablecoin law is fuelling fears that Canada is missing out on the latest cryptocurrency boom. The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, or the Genius Act, was signed into law by President Donald Trump last week, creating a regulatory framework for stablecoins pegged to the U.S. dollar. (Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies that have values tied to another form of currency or financial asset to maintain steady prices.) A related bill, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, advanced to the U.S. Senate. The Clarity Act for short, it proposes to divvy up regulatory oversight for virtual assets between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The crypto irony: Trump's new laws for stablecoins will only reinforce U.S. dollar dominance At first blush, the U.S. government's 'crypto week' was a resounding success because those two pieces of legislation are helping digital assets go mainstream south of the border. But anti-corruption groups, including Transparency International U.S., are warning the Genius Act and the Clarity Act include loopholes for money laundering and sanctions evasion, a forewarning for other countries, including Canada, as they vie for leadership in the US$5.7-billion global digital asset economy. 'To other countries, I would encourage lawmakers to actually take a risk-based approach and take into consideration that we have a global economy,' said Gary Kalman, executive director of Transparency International U.S., in an interview on Thursday. As Mr. Kalman points out, crypto is not a typical brick-and-mortar business and it carries a higher risk for illicit finance. That's because it is relatively easy to set up offshore crypto-issuing companies that sell into other countries without having a physical presence in those jurisdictions, he said. 'That is the type of risk analysis we would urge other countries to consider when moving forward with legislation,' he added. Transparency International U.S., the Free Russia Foundation, the Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency Coalition and the Hudson Institute's Kleptocracy Initiative offer a sobering analysis of America's signature stablecoin legislation. 'The risks are real and urgent. Iran, North Korea and Russia have turned to cryptocurrency and stablecoins to bypass international sanctions and move illicit funds,' the anti-corruption groups state in a joint letter to top U.S. congressional leaders, including the Speaker of the House of Representatives Mike Johnson. 'If the U.S. does not close the loopholes that can be exploited by these actors, the financial architecture advanced in GENIUS and CLARITY will further accelerate the growth of opaque and lawless financial networks.' Specifically, the groups outlined four key problems with the two pieces of legislation. The first involves the Genius Act's differential treatment of stablecoin issuers registered in the United States versus those based in foreign or offshore jurisdictions. Under the law, foreign stablecoin issuers, such as Tether, the world's largest stablecoin, are able to participate in U.S. markets via decentralized exchanges and peer-to-peer transfers even if they don't register, the groups say. The U.S. Treasury, meanwhile, has the latitude to provide exemptions to foreign issuers, allowing them to participate in centralized exchanges after the expiration of a three-year grace period. As a result, foreign issuers will not receive proper regulatory oversight. A second problem involves the Genius Act's failure to impose anti-money-laundering (AML) and anti-terrorist-financing obligations on secondary-market participants, including digital asset exchanges, custodians and brokers. 'The result is a bill that affirms the status quo while ignoring how kleptocrats, terrorists and other criminal actors access and move digital assets,' states the letter. 'Further, GENIUS weakens compliance by stating that issuers must follow AML rules, only 'as applicable' – a vague and unenforceable standard.' A third weakness involves glaring gaps in sanctions enforcement. Notably, the Genius Act does not apply to anonymizing technologies, such as mixers, and other intermediaries that obscure funding sources, the groups say. The Clarity Act, meanwhile, overlooks sanctions evasion entirely even though digital assets have become a favoured tool of criminals to sidestep economic restrictions. Lastly, exemptions for decentralized services and platforms under the Genius Act, coupled with the Clarity Act's failure to require ownership disclosures from all market participants, will frustrate enforcement of those laws, according to the groups. We won't let Americans buy our biggest bank. Why let them buy our biggest crypto firm? Canada, meanwhile, is facing mounting calls to create its own comprehensive national strategy for crypto, including stablecoins. 'Stablecoins are reshaping global finance, but Canada is still on the sidelines,' states a new report by Western University's Ivey Business School. 'While other countries use them to strengthen payments and attract investment, Canada lacks a homegrown alternative tied to its currency.' The report rightly urges Canada to create a 'unified regulatory framework' for digital assets, noting oversight is currently split among regulators including the Canada Revenue Agency, the Canadian Securities Administrators, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada and provincial agencies. Creating a national regulatory framework should indeed be a priority because businesses need a consistent set of rules. But in doing so, the federal government must draw lessons from America's legislative missteps on financial crime. Canada is already being marketed abroad as a secrecy jurisdiction that can be readily exploited by kleptocrats, money launderers, sanctions evaders and other crooks. In the rush to catch up on crypto, Ottawa cannot afford to replicate Washington's mistakes.
Globe and Mail
3 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Better EV Stock: Alphabet vs. Tesla (Hint: Robotaxis Are the Key)
Key Points The future of the auto industry lies in electric vehicles and ridesharing in autonomous vehicles. After many years in service, Waymo still can't point to a timeline of profitability. Tesla also faces challenges with its robotaxi offering, but it's well positioned, provided it can demonstrate safety and efficacy. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG)(NASDAQ: GOOGL) isn't, strictly speaking, an electric vehicle (EV) company. However, its autonomous driving technology company, Waymo, is committed to only using EVs in its fleet. Funnily enough, it could be argued that Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) isn't really a pure EV company either. After all, most of its sky–high valuation is attributable to the potential of its robotaxis. However, the comparison of these two as EV companies is valid because the future of the auto industry is EVs, and ridesharing in autonomous vehicles will be a larger part of the industry in the future. But which company is better placed, and which is the better stock? Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » Alphabet vs. Tesla It's entirely possible that Alphabet could decide to spin off Waymo, not least because it reportedly could be valued at more than $45 billion. Meanwhile, one of Tesla's biggest supporters, Cathie Wood's Ark Invest, ascribes 88% of Tesla's enterprise value (market cap plus net debt) to robotaxis in its investment case for the stock, producing an expected value of $2,600 for the stock in 2029. As I have previously discussed, the Ark targets should be taken with a pinch of salt, as its track record on Tesla hasn't been good. However, Ark's core argument is sound and points to Tesla being potentially a far more valuable stock than Waymo ever will be. Pathways to profitability The core argument is that Tesla's business model is scalable to profitability while Waymo's is far less so. The issue of Waymo's profitability arose in a recent CNBC interview with Waymo co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana, where she was asked whether Waymo is profitable. She replied, "We're proving out that it can be a profitable business." When asked when Waymo would be profitable, she replied, "not clear." It's also not clear if Alphabet/Waymo doesn't have an internal forecast for when it will hit profitability, or if Mawakana preferred not to divulge what the company considers an uncertain forecast. However, it's inconceivable that Alphabet is not internally crunching the numbers on this, and if it does decide to spin off Waymo, it's a question that needs to be answered. The point here is that a business that can't be profitable isn't worth anything, let alone $45 billion, so at some point, its management is going to have to set some timelines. Tesla and timelines Whereas investors need to hear more about timelines from Waymo, whose public self-driving ride-hailing service was launched in 2018, there's probably a need for fewer declared timelines from Tesla, or, rather, a need for more accurate ones. For example, in 2019, CEO Elon Musk famously told investors to expect a million self-driving vehicles on the road by mid-2020. In April 2022, he also stated that Tesla aspired to reach volume production of a dedicated robotaxi (Cybercab) in 2024 -- a timeline that has now been pushed back to 2026. These timeline estimates matter because plugging overly optimistic assumptions from them into valuation models can produce dramatically erroneous conclusions. Why Tesla is better positioned With all that said, Tesla has clear advantages over Waymo, provided it can demonstrate safety and reliability and achieve regulatory approvals. Its advantages include: Lower vehicle costs, with Musk aiming for a $30,000 price tag for a dedicated robotaxi, the Cybercab. Meanwhile, Wall Street analysts estimate Waymo's current vehicles cost more than $120,000. In addition, Tesla manufactures its own cars (Waymo does not), and existing Teslas can be converted into robotaxis using Tesla's as-yet-unreleased-to-the-public unsupervised full self-driving (FSD) software, giving Tesla a significant advantage in scaling the robotaxi business. Tesla's use of camera-centric technology is inherently less expensive than Waymo's combination of cameras, light detection and ranging (Lidar) lasers, and high-definition maps. Every Tesla car (robotaxi or not) on the road is effectively a data gatherer, with the data used to improve the AI that powers its AI models. As such, even though Waymo was first, Tesla has significantly more data than Waymo. Which is the better EV stock? Waymo may become profitable in the future, particularly if Lidar costs continue to drop. However, it's challenging to think that it will be a strong competitor to Tesla, provided Musk's company can master safe, unsupervised FSD using a camera-centric approach. That's a big "if" at this stage, but it becomes a smaller "if" as time goes by and Tesla expands its nascent robotaxi offering across new geographies. Tesla's next robotaxi launch is expected to be in Phoenix, as it plans to continue slowly building its robotaxi business. I think Tesla is the better EV stock when comparing Tesla and Alphabet. Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $449,961!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $40,603!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $636,628!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join Stock Advisor, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon. See the 3 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025
National Post
3 hours ago
- National Post
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. Article content While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Article content Article content Article content Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Article content Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Article content Article content Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Article content The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Article content The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. Article content Article content The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. Article content George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses.
