World's largest asset manager BlackRock tells employees: You cannot carry your phones and laptops for China Travel
The world's largest asset manager, BlackRock , has asked its employees not to carry company-issued phones and laptops while travelling to China and has asked to use temporary loaner phones, according to Bloomberg News and Reuters reports.The company has detailed the policy enhancement in an internal memo which is effective from July 16 which mentions barring use of BlackRock issue iPhones, iPads, laptops and remote access via virtual private networks while in China.Also Read | Gold ETF has beaten Nifty ETF 7 times in 10 years. How to invest now? According to a Bloomberg report, the company further mentioned that employees will also lose access to BlackRock network during personal travel to the country.The move highlights growing corporate unease over operating in China amid escalating geopolitical tensions between Washington and Beijing , which are putting pressure on global business ties.The report comes as firms witness China's growing hold over access during the travel to the nation, as reported by Reuters.On Monday, the U.S. State Department said that the Chinese government had blocked an unnamed U.S. Patent and Trademark Office employee visiting the Asian country in a personal capacity from leaving. Earlier this month, a Wells Fargo banker was also blocked from leaving China. Beijing's foreign ministry said the banker was involved in a criminal case, Reuters further reported.As China implemented stricter data security laws in 2021, global financial firms have struggled to balance operational needs with compliance requirements.Also Read | Silver ETFs jump 31% in 2025 as metal hits all-time high. Should you bet on this rally? BlackRock maintains a substantial presence in China through a wholly owned mutual fund company and a wealth management company in a joint venture with China Construction Bank Corporation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
12 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Decoding China, the lessons for a vulnerable India
The exodus of over 300 Chinese engineers from Foxconn's pivotal iPhone 17 manufacturing facilities in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka — a recent move ostensibly executed under corporate directive — is far more than an administrative recalibration. It is a meticulously calibrated stratagem, designed to arrest India's burgeoning manufacturing ambitions and to perpetuate a 'unipolar Asia' under Beijing's overarching economic hegemony. A geo-economic move This calculated withdrawal is not simply a logistical reshuffling. It is a subtle, yet potent, geo-economic manoeuvre by a rival apprehensive of a rising India. The recall of these highly specialised technicians, possessed of invaluable expertise in establishing sophisticated production lines, optimising operational efficiencies, and troubleshooting the labyrinthine complexities of modern manufacturing, represents a deliberate impediment to the crucial transfer of technology. Such knowledge is the bedrock upon which India seeks to construct its edifice of advanced electronics manufacturing, and its withholding strikes at the very heart of India's aspirational ascent. In addition, China has leveraged its dominance in rare earth production and processing by restricting exports of rare earths (which include elements such as gallium, germanium, graphite), and rare earth magnets, which are crucial for electric vehicles and electronics, to India. China has also imposed curbs on the export of other critical minerals that are vital for various high-tech industries. There have also been informal trade restrictions on the export of capital equipment from China to India, including high-end manufacturing equipment for electronics assembly and other sectors, heavy-duty boring machines and solar equipment, severely impacting India's ability to set up and expand its own manufacturing facilities. The broader implication of these actions, particularly the recall of engineers and restrictions on specialised equipment, is a deliberate attempt to limit the transfer of advanced manufacturing technology and know-how to India. This aims to keep India dependent on Chinese inputs and prevent it from developing a truly self-reliant high-value manufacturing base. Crucially, many of these restrictions are not formalised bans but are implemented through verbal instructions and administrative delays. This makes them harder to directly challenge but equally effective in disrupting supply chains, increasing costs, and creating uncertainty for Indian manufacturers. In essence, China's strategy is multi-pronged, leveraging its control over crucial raw materials, manufacturing equipment, and even human capital to impede India's manufacturing ascent, especially in the high-stakes electronics and emerging technology sectors. These actions, when viewed through the prism of Beijing's anxieties concerning India's emergence as a potentially formidable manufacturing competitor in an era of 'friend-shoring' by the West, align perfectly with its broader strategic calculus. China's economic success is increasingly predicated upon maintaining robust export revenues. Consequently, any nation daring to challenge its pre-eminence in global manufacturing, particularly in high-value sectors such as electronics, is inevitably perceived not merely as a competitor but also as an existential threat. The withdrawal of these engineers, therefore, constitutes a potent stratagem to disrupt India's trajectory and safeguard China's long-entrenched export market share and economic primacy in the region and beyond. India's ambition to transform itself into a globally competitive manufacturing hub is seen in Beijing as a direct challenge to China's long-term stability. The reality in China Consider the demographic exigencies currently confronting China: an ageing and progressively shrinking populace, an unfortunate legacy of the protracted one-child policy, coupled with a palpable erosion of wealth occasioned by an enduring property crisis — even as local satraps exceed production targets in their zeal to impress Beijing. This widening structural imbalance between an excessive production capacity and faltering domestic consumption increasingly compels China to lean heavily on export revenues to underwrite its fiscal outlays and maintain a semblance of economic progress. As its social welfare and pension liabilities burgeon exponentially, the Chinese government finds itself under mounting fiscal duress. Any reduction of export revenues would directly impinge upon Beijing's capacity to fund critical domains such as domestic security and military expenditure, potentially precipitating an undesirable degree of social instability. China's formidable trade surplus, now on the cusp of a trillion dollars, is not solely a testament to its industrial prowess but also a stark manifestation of weak internal consumption and persistent industrial overcapacity. The People's Bank of China's repeated interest rate reductions on savings accounts have largely failed to ignite internal demand. This chronic overcapacity, therefore, constrains Chinese enterprises to aggressively depress prices and inundate international markets in a desperate bid to remain solvent — a strategy that has, perhaps ironically, severely eroded profitability across a plethora of sectors. As a result, China's determined endeavours to stymie competition are not merely a reflection of simple geopolitical rivalry. Rather, they are an undeniable reflection of profound domestic compulsions. Should India, by dint of astute policy and diligent execution, succeed in getting its house in order and convincingly demonstrate the potential to compete comprehensively in the global manufacturing landscape, Beijing is highly likely to escalate its countermeasures. These could range from the insidious pressures of economic coercion to outright military posturing, all in a relentless quest to safeguard its core economic interests and, by extension, its internal stability. However, the news of the U.S. raising India's tariffs to 50%, even while China enjoys a 90-day exemption from punitive tariffs despite buying more Russian oil and gas than India does, makes India less of a threat to China. While India has been seen as a key partner in western efforts to diversify supply chains away from China, the imposition of the new U.S. tariffs serves as a reminder that all alignments carry their own fragilities, and underscores the need for India to build true strategic autonomy. The Indian Prime Minister's forthcoming visit to Beijing comes against this complex backdrop. An appraisal of India's strengths, shadows China's industrial pre-eminence is not fortuitous or trivial; it is a systemic dominance that spans critical and emerging sectors, from the esoteric realms of Artificial Intelligence and quantum computing to the cutting-edge frontiers of 6G telecommunications and electric vehicles. We need to understand that China does not merely export goods; it orchestrates and largely controls global supply chains in these advanced technologies. Even its overcapacity, otherwise a sign of economic infirmity, is being deftly weaponised as a strategic instrument for price suppression and audacious market capture. The aggressive pricing strategies employed by behemoths such as BYD in the electric vehicle segment are a quintessential illustration: by flooding global markets with irresistibly priced goods, China effectively stifles nascent competition and inexorably solidifies its global market share. This is economic statecraft in action. In stark contrast, India's manufacturing ecosystem, despite its vibrant aspirations, remains undeniably nascent. The cherished dream of transforming into a global 'manufacturing hub' frequently founders upon a litany of formidable hurdles, including persistent infrastructure lacunae and the pervasive sclerosis of bureaucratic red tape. We remain regrettably reliant on imports for a pantheon of crucial components — ranging from sophisticated chips and engines to semiconductors and sensors — even for the foundational 'screwdriver technology' indispensable for basic assembly. This profound reliance on external sources underscores the considerable ground India must traverse to genuinely metamorphose into a self-sufficient manufacturing powerhouse. 'Make in India' still needs help from outside India. From Beijing's vantage point, China has nothing to worry about yet; its actions against India are an effort to neutralise potential 'noise' within its immediate periphery while it assiduously scales up its economic and political corridors with key strategic partners across the sprawling geographies of Pakistan,the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Africa, and Latin America. India's narrative of offering an alternative to the Chinese behemoth falters on our own dependence. If India genuinely harbours the ambition to 'compete' on the global stage, it needs a laser-like focus on its own foundational development. That is what China's behaviour has taught India: The onus is on us Indians. Shashi Tharoor is a former Under-Secretary General of the United Nations, a fourth-term Member of Parliament (Congress), Lok Sabha, for Thiruvananthapuram, Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, and the Sahitya Akademi Award-winning author of 27 books, including 'Pax Indica: India and the World of the 21st Century' (2012)
Time of India
15 minutes ago
- Time of India
PM Modi likely to visit China for SCO Summit from Aug 31 to Sept 1
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel New Delhi: Prime minister Narendra Modi is expected to visit China to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation or SCO summit in Tianjin from August 31 to September 1, his maiden trip to the neighbouring country since highlight of the visit will be a possible meeting between Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Modi had last met Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan in October 2024 that set the ball rolling for stabilising was the first to report that Modi could travel to China early September for the SCO summit preceded by a trip to Japan for the annual summit. Modi could also meet other SCO leaders on the sidelines of the summit, including the Russian President which would be their first meeting since the Kazan BRICS summit. This meeting would assume significance in the backdrop of the US President's criticism on Indian purchase of Russian oil and defence 2018, Modi had travelled to China for the first informal summit with Xi, followed by the second informal summit in Tamil Nadu in 2019. However, ties touched a new low in recent decades following the Galwan crisis and while ties are stabilising, it has not yet normalised. Trade restrictions from China remain in place and direct flights are yet to be June, defence minister Rajnath Singh had refused to sign a joint statement at a defence ministers' meet under SCO because it skipped any mention of the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 lives and instead, mentioned Balochistan, tacitly accusing India of creating unrest China issued a statement against terror as the US designated The Resistance Front, a proxy of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, as a foreign terrorist organisation for its involvement in the Pahalgam attack."China firmly opposes all forms of terrorism and strongly condemns the terrorist attack that occurred on April 22... China calls on regional countries to enhance counterterrorism cooperation and jointly maintain regional security and stability," foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian had this year, India and China explored ways to rebuild ties and agreed to initiate efforts to promote people-to-people exchanges, including resumption of the Kailash Manasarovar Yatra this year. The yatra was suspended since the Covid-19 outbreak. India also resumed tourist visas for Chinese nationals.
India.com
41 minutes ago
- India.com
Trump's Tariffs On India Were Meant To hurt Russia – Here's How It Could Boomerang And Hit U.S. Economy Instead
Washington: U.S. President Donald Trump is ramping up economic pressure to force Russia into agreeing to a peace deal in Ukraine. But as his administration pushes new tariffs on nations buying oil from Moscow, analysts say this decision could swing back and hurt the U.S. economy instead. This week marks the expiration of Trump's 50-day deadline to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The ultimatum is accept peace in Ukraine or face fresh tariffs, which are not directly aimed at Moscow, but at its oil customers, especially India and China. The two countries account for the majority of Russian oil exports and are also two of America's largest trading partners. They together sent $526 billion worth of goods to the United States last year, official data shows. After a high-stakes meeting between Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and Putin in Moscow on Wednesday (August 6), the U.S. president decided to move ahead. Hours after the meeting ended, he imposed an additional 25% tariff on India. 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian oil, they are then, for much of the oil purchased, selling it on the open market for big profits. They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine,' Trump posted on Social Truth, justifying his decision. But back in Washington, concern is growing that these moves may ricochet. Speaking to CNN, Clayton Seigle, a senior fellow in energy and geopolitics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), warned of serious domestic fallout. 'The punishment for those countries that continue to take big volumes of Russian energy… would also hurt the United States' economy in a material way,' he said, adding that 'it would lead to more inflation' and increase import costs for U.S. businesses. Commodity analysts are sounding similar alarms. They say that tariffs on Chinese goods, which are already taxed at 30%, could further drive up prices on everyday products such as smartphones. Trump had earlier announced that he would raise tariffs to 100% on countries continuing to buy oil from Moscow. India, which sources 36% of its crude oil from Russia, and China, where Russian oil now accounts for 13.5% of imports, have both strengthened energy ties with Moscow since the war with Ukraine began in 2022. As of now, the White House has not announced if similar tariffs on Chinese imports are imminent. But Staunovo doubts the administration could sustain the economic hit. 'Trump blinked first (because of) the implication it had on the imports into the United States,' he said, referring to a similar round of tariffs earlier this year that were quickly scaled back during trade negotiations with Beijing. Energy analysts believe the stakes are even higher when considering oil prices. They argue that Russia is too big to fail. It exports 7 million barrels per day of crude and refined products. These are massive amounts that cannot so easily be replaced. Russia's oil exports account for nearly 5% of global consumption. Any disruption in this supply, they say, could drive global oil prices higher and this hike would directly hit the United States, which still imports large volumes of crude oil. Brent crude prices as of early Wednesday had risen slightly to $68.2 per barrel, FactSet reported. But despite being down over 8% this year, analysts warn the market could tighten quickly if secondary sanctions disrupt the flow of Russian oil. Trump's team is watching the energy market closely. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has spoken with Witkoff, who was returning from Moscow after a three-hour meeting with Putin. '…I think there will be some announcements here fairly soon. Maybe positive, maybe not, we will see,' he told CNN. The Kremlin described the talks as 'constructive and useful', though no public readout has been shared. Back in Ukraine, the violence continues. Hours after the meeting, Russian strikes killed at least six civilians across the country. A recreation centre was bombed in the southeastern city of Zaporizhzhia. Two people died and 12 were wounded, including four children. President Volodymyr Zelensky called the strike 'cruelty aimed at instilling fear'. Other Russian attacks also targeted Ukrainian energy infrastructure. A gas transmission station near the Romanian border was hit by drones, leaving hundreds of homes without fuel. Meanwhile, NATO countries have pledged more than $1 billion in aid, and the U.S. State Department has approved a $200 million deal to help Ukraine's allies procure military supplies on Kyiv's behalf. Back in Washington, the broader implications of Trump's trade crackdown remain uncertain. Some believe there is still room for strategic adjustment. Instead of imposing high tariffs, they suggest a more moderate approach (a tariff between 10% and 30%). Trump's approach may be aimed at punishing oil trade that allegedly funds Russia's war, but the economic pain is already surfacing closer to home. As pressure mounts on India and China, U.S. consumers and companies may soon feel the squeeze of their president's tariff war.
