FIS Partners With Circle to Offer Bank Stablecoin Payments
The companies aim to help US banks offer their customers the option to make domestic and cross-border payments using USDC, a cryptocurrency intended to track the value of a dollar one-for-one that's backed by short-term US Treasuries and cash. FIS is integrating the token into its money movement hub, a service designed to help financial institutions connect with multiple payment networks. The service is expected to go live before the end of the year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Coinbase shares fall 11.2% after profit drop
LONDON (Reuters) -Coinbase's Frankfurt-listed shares tumbled 11% on Friday, a day after the cryptocurrency exchange reported a drop in adjusted profit for the second quarter, as gains in subscription and services revenue were offset by weaker trading activity. Shares in the company fell almost 7% in after-hours trading on Thursday following the release of its results. 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
Forbes
7 minutes ago
- Forbes
A Big, Beautiful Fiction - Does The EU/US Trade Deal Make Sense?
James Thurber's famous book 'The Secret Life of Walter Mitty' is yet another book I would recommend to readers, to continue a recurring theme of recent weeks. It is especially apt in the context of the US-EU trade deal. Walter Mitty appeared at the end of the 1930's, a decade that was shaped by Herbert Hoover's tariff policy, and that was marked by profound economic and geopolitical tensions. Mitty's fantasies were provoked by the reality of his pedestrian, harangued life – which will appeal to European leaders who care to dream of better days. Equally, the giddiness of Mitty's fantasies has its equivalent in the promises that Donald Trump has elicited from the EU – namely, to buy and invest hundreds of billions of dollars in energy. One week on, reaction to the US-EU trade deal is still mixed, and it is not quite clear who has 'won'. This may be because it is not a trade deal in the classical sense – at least in the sense of the laborious trade deals that the EU is used to striking, partly because a large facet of the 'deal' is based on a promise and also because the optics of the deal are quite depressing for Europe. At the headline level, EU exports into the US will be met with a 15% tariff to be paid by the US consumer, not unlike the Japanese 'deal'. Auto companies will not be displeased with a 15% tariff. Wines and spirits, steel and notably pharmaceuticals have yet to have tariff levels finalised and there will be some relief on the confirmation of 15% tariffs on pharmaceuticals, though the investigation into pharmaceutical exports back to the US is a tail risk. Interestingly, the EU has resisted attempts to water down its digital regulations. Politically the spin that the EU is putting on the agreement is that it was the best possible outcome in a difficult geopolitical climate (recall that the recent EU-China summit was a damp-squib). While there were some public expressions of dismay, notably from the French prime minister Francois Bayrou – these can be seen to be largely aimed at the public, rather than Brussels. Though Ursula von der Leyen is unpopular with EU governments for the singular way she runs her office – it is populated with officials who are close to national government (i.e. Alexandre Adam one of von der Leyen's key deputies is an arch Macronist) – there is no sense that the large countries were left out of the negotiation process, and any effort to isolate von der Leyen for blame, is ignoble. However, amongst the professional trade staff, there is still some despair at the humiliating optics of the deal, the fact that it is in many ways not binding, and the risk that there is no undertaking that it is final in the sense that another round of tariffs is imposed later. On the positive side for Europe, and flipping to the 'Mitty-esque' part of the deal, two of the key undertakings in the deal – that European companies invest USD 600 bn in the US, in addition to a commitment to purchase microchips, as well as a commitment from the EU to buy USD 750bn in energy from the US over the course of the Trump presidency – are not at all clear in their implementation, and very much open to a fudge, with the right accounting treatment. In particular the energy purchase commitment is unrealistic because it exceeds what the EU spends on energy in a given year and US energy firms do not have the capacity to service a commitment of USD 250bn in demand from Europe, whilst also serving other markets. In my view there are several aftershocks to watch for. The first is that the deal further damages trans-Atlantic relations, and the level of trust between the EU and the US is likely the lowest it has ever been, and this has strategic implications as far afield as Russia/Ukraine and the Middle East. One other implication may be a drift, by government and consumers, away from US brands – as this may well be an effect that is seen in other regions. Two financial market implications are that the dampening of growth in Europe will maintain downward pressure on rates in Europe. More importantly, in the context of a very oversold dollar, there is now an incentive for EU policy makers to try hard to talk down the euro, and we may see a short-term rebound in the currency pair. On the whole, if this is a 'final' deal and the topic of tariffs does not re-emerge in the next three years, it is not a bad deal for the semi's, autos and aerospace sectors in Europe, though the public optics are not good for the EU. The best parts of the deal for Europe are the fantastical claims of incoming European investment and energy purchases in the US. This is a Mitty style fairy tale that the Europeans hope Mr Trump believes in. The telling factor is that this deal has now emptied all goodwill from the trans-Atlantic relationship, and effectively completes another diplomatic rupture by President Trump. From a European point of view, this is yet another 'wake up call' and the best that can be hoped for is that it accelerates projects like the savings and investment union and 'strategic autonomy'. European leaders and the European policy elite keep talking about this, but until we see hard evidence (for example, German real GDP over the last five years is close to zero), they are the fantasists. Have a great week ahead Mike
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Union Pacific Hopes to Win Back Volume in Proposed $85B Norfolk Southern Deal
Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern have unveiled an agreement to merge, setting the groundwork to create America's first transcontinental railroad. Under the terms of the agreement, Union Pacific will acquire Norfolk Southern for $85 billion in stock and cash, resulting in a combined enterprise value of $250 billion for both companies. More from Sourcing Journal CMA CGM Watching Hutchison Port Sale 'Very Closely' As Potential Suitor Convoy Finds New Home: DAT Acquires Flexport's Freight-Matching Tech UP-Norfolk Southern Merger Would Control Nearly Half of US Rail Container Traffic The deal will connect more than 50,000 miles of tracks across 43 states, combining UP's presence in 23 states in the western and Midwestern U.S., along with NSC's network across 22 states on the East Coast, southeast and Midwest. Union Pacific CEO Jim Vena said in a Tuesday morning conference call that the new network would create new direct single-line services—where trains traveling in both directions share the same track—that will design new routes and open options to and from underserved areas like the Ohio Valley and the Mississippi River Watershed. These services are expected to reduce strain at interchange points in areas like Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans, where carloads are transported from one railroad to the other. Vena said this would cut transit times on those routes by one-to-two days. As one railroad network, the new Union Pacific will operate out of roughly 100 U.S. ports and serve 10 international gateways with Mexico and Canada. 'The combined network will capitalize on the strength of Union Pacific's West Coast ports and Norfolk Southern's East Coast ports,' said Vena. 'Merging the strength of both companies' intermodal networks facilitates the capture of international trade volumes and domestic truck conversion. The beauty of U.S. ports is the population centers around the ports as well as the inland reach, thus making our ports a more natural destination.' The board of directors of both Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern unanimously approved the transaction, which is subject to review and approval by the U.S. railroad regulatory body, the Surface Transportation Board (STB). The deal still needs approval from shareholders. The companies are targeting closing the transaction by early 2027. Vena will lead the combined company, while Norfolk Southern CEO Mark George will join Union Pacific's board of directors. Both railroad's management teams will operate independently until the deal closes. But the path to getting there could be arduous, as the companies have to convince the STB that the merger is both in the best interests of the public, and will enhance competition on the Class I railroads. The companies expect to file their application with the STB within six months. After the filing, the combined railroads will be up for a review process that lasts 16 months. Potentially working in the deal's favor is the possible shifting role of the STB, which is currently reforming its regulatory framework under President Donald Trump-appointed chairman Patrick Fuchs. Union Pacific brass argues that creating a coast-to-coast railroad covers both the STB's standards for rail consolidation, noting that such a railroad will compete more effectively with Canadian railroads to win back U.S. freight volume and American jobs. Additionally, the company says the deal will strengthen competition with North American truck networks, with Vena noting that the merger will reduce highway congestion. While the railroads are bullish on bringing back freight volumes, whether it be from the trucking industry or the rail sector north of the border, a transcontinental network may not be the panacea needed to fight off wider secular headwinds. 'Carload has been on a secular decline since the Global Financial Crisis, with carload volumes falling by ~400,000 units monthly today relative to 2007,' said Jason Miller, interim chairperson, department of supply chain management at Michigan State University's Eli Broad College of Business. 'I'm skeptical that the railroads can do much to convert more truck traffic to carload moves.' And although intermodal traffic increased nearly 15 percent from the same period to 1.13 million units, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, they have struggled to stay above 1.2 million units a month since first amassing the mark in March 2018, observed Miller. 'While a UPNS merger may allow for more rapid movement across a unified network, I don't see this being a catalyst for substantial intermodal market share gains, especially given intermodal remains ~25 percent cheaper than dry van truckload based on Journal of Commerce's Contract Intermodal Savings Index,' Miller told Sourcing Journal. The transaction doesn't have solid support from laborers working at the rail companies. SMART Transportation Division, the largest railroad operating union in North America with more than 500 locals and 125,000 active and retired workers, said in a statement that it intends to oppose the deal in proceedings before the STB. The IAM Union Rail Division said it was 'closely monitoring' the acquisition, calling it out for raising 'serious concerns about community safety, job security/workers' rights, competition, and long-term industry stability.' As of now, union jobs won't be impacted as part of the merger, but Vena did not comment on non-organized labor. 'All of our union employees who have a job today will have jobs tomorrow in our merged company,' Vena said in the call.
