The trade war is rattling global business travel — 4 charts show how
Optimism in the global business travel sector has dropped by more than half this year, according to a report published by the Global Business Travel Association.
Positive sentiment fell from 67% in November 2024 to 31% in April 2025, according to the report which surveyed more than 900 business travel professionals on the affect of tariffs, tightened border policies and other U.S. government policies announced this year.
More than one in four respondents in Canada, the United States and Europe said they felt "pessimistic" or "very pessimistic" about industry outlook this year.
However, 40% of those surveyed said they felt neither positive nor negative.
"Since I have been in my role for four years, I haven't seen this high of a level of uncertainty," Suzanne Neufang, the association's CEO, told CNBC Travel Tuesday.
The survey showed nearly 30% of business travel buyers anticipate their companies will reduce employee trips this year, while some 20% said they weren't sure, it showed.
"They're not even confident enough to be able to say things will be fine or things won't be fine," she said.
Some 27% of respondents also said they expect business travel spending to decrease as well.
A third of business travel buyers said their companies have either changed, or are considering changing, policies regarding travel to or from the United States, the report showed.
Some 6% said their companies had relocated events from the U.S. to another country.
"From an APAC perspective, and certainly from a European perspective, maybe even LATAM, there's the opportunity to be the source of where these meetings take place," Neufang said. "There are many other opportunities to be a winner in this trade game."
Business travel professionals expressed several concerns about the potential for the long-term impact caused by decisions of the Trump Administration this year, led by worries over business travel costs (54%) and problems processing visas (46%).
Global airfares, however, are slightly down — about $17, or 2.2% year-to-date — according to the travel data company FCM Consulting.
Nevertheless, the global business travel market is still on track to top $1.6 trillion by the end of 2025, Neufang said.
However, she said that's only "if the last 100 days don't impact negatively everywhere."
By 2028, the Global Business Travel Association expects, that number will cross the $2 trillion mark, she said. She noted that while business travel volumes haven't returned to pre-pandemic levels, business travel spending fully recovered in 2024, partly as a result of inflation.
But she said the trade war initiated by the Trump Administration could spell a bout of new business trips.
"During times of trade wars, business travel may actually increase for at least a period of time — for new partners to be found [and] new markets to be built," she said. "You lose a customer, you need to find another one. So I think that perspective doesn't mean all doom and gloom for us."
However, if tariffs remain elevated, "There will definitely be an impact to U.S. travel ... But I think Europe, Asia, Europe to Asia, Asia to Europe. I think anywhere to Africa, all of those are probably fine."
Leisure travel to the United States has fallen in 2025. International visitor spending is projected to drop 4.7% from 2024, representing some $8.5 billion for the U.S. travel industry, in a year revenues were once widely expected to grow.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
21 minutes ago
- Forbes
Should AI And Robots Be Taxed To Protect Workers?
HAI'AN, CHINA - JUNE 29, 2020 - Tax officials in the robot industrial park to understand the ... More production status of enterprises. Hai'an City, Jiangsu Province, China, June 29, 2020.- (Photo credit should read Costfoto/Future Publishing via Getty Images) Detroit used to be the richest city in America, some said it was the wealthiest in the world (in the early 1950's). Within a period of fifty years, it became the USA's poorest city, ignominiously falling victim to the largest municipal bond default in 2013. I visited the city some eight years ago, to witness the kick-off of an ambitious plan to revive the city, led by Mayor Mike Duggan, with the support of local business leaders. For instance, Dan Gilbert, an insurance firm owner bought and then gave away inner-city apartments to encourage people to move back into the city. Having spent a couple of days in Detroit last week I am pleased to report that the renewal of the city centre is bearing fruit – it is a hive of construction activity, iconic buildings have been impressively scrubbed up and there are plenty of stylish restaurants and shops. My initial visit to Detroit sticks in my mind for two reasons. The first is that I did a speech there alongside JD Vance – my topic was how small European countries managed to achieve high growth rates and social cohesion (as an example to Detroit), and his emphasis was on the need to focus resources and policy on 'forgotten' parts of America like Michigan. Our double act was good enough that we were invited to do another event in the new World Trade Centre in New York. At the time, I recall he was anti-Trump, pro-innovation and very much an advocate of third level education. A lot has changed since, but his book 'Hillbilly Elegy' is still worth a read. My second memorable Detroit experience was a visit to the Ford factory in Dearborn, to witness the full power of a robot-based manufacturing line, which at times was quite intimidating. I am tempted to say that in the next ten years, robots will have a bigger impact on America's society and economy than JD. The rise and fall of Detroit, and its wide hinterland out to Michigan towns like Flint has been undercut by many factors – immigration, the exit of the wealthy to other America cities, a failure to renew skill sets and an industrial base, and the economic side-effect of the rise of China as a manufacturing zone. The issue worrying people in states like Michigan is whether AI and robotics will have the same effect on the local economy, as the model of globalization was perceived to do (by the likes of JD Vance) in recent years. Indeed, there has been a flurry of articles in the US press in recent days warning that AI will wipe out swathes of jobs (for example a pwc report on Agentic AI promises cost cuts of up to 40% in the software and legal sectors). My instinct is that new technologies do not necessarily 'kill' jobs but shift them to other sectors and value chains, a process that is usually contingent on the quality of education systems and government policy. Much of the research on the potential impact of AI on work (from McKinsey for instance and most notably David Autor at MIT and Carl Benedikt-Frey at Oxford) points to a nuanced view that sees AI and robotics helping less able workers participate in the workforce, and emphasises reskilling. The risk to this enlightened outlook is that AI is unique in the sense that its take-up is rapid, especially so within large services firms, and this may give corporations greater power over labour (and downward pressure on wages). Equally there is not enough commentary on the fact that the critical AI projects are owned by a small, connected set of investors. In the emerging world, AI will likely have the greatest positive impact on public administration and on healthcare (through better and broader diagnoses), though employment in service sectors (especially where those services are exported) may take a hit. With professional and specialised workers in mind, I would also like to re-state my 'One Man and His Dog' hypothesis as a model for how professionals can use AI. 'One Man and His Dog' was a cult British tv show based on sheepdog trials. In this context the sheepdog is an intelligent, non-human actor helping the human to solve a complex problem – which is what AI does. Like a dog, if mistreated or provoked, AI can bite back but in general the idea is that like the sheepdog, AI can make the professional (doctor, commando or researcher) do their job in a more effective way. Those who worry about the labour market should instead focus on debt, and the perilous finances of the developed world. The global financial crisis demonstrated that debt can kill millions of jobs when it provokes a deep recession. To that end, the Trump budget will prove increasingly controversial, and arguably what America needs is a very different fiscal approach. The lesson from Hillbilly Elegy is that the spoils of globalization went to the few – bankers in New York, scientists in Boston and tech firms in California. Arguably they should have paid much higher taxes and this then used to bolster education, training and infrastructure across America. The same logic is true with AI – its commercial benefits will accrue to a very small number of people, but millions will need help readjusting to the side-effects it has on labour markets. The debt outlook makes this doubly the case and the Trump budget, which will add USD 2.4 trillion to the national debt by 20234 (according to the Congressional Budget Office) will not only break the bank but break the labour market.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Germany's Merz: Some US lawmakers unaware of scale of Russia's rearmament
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has expressed that some US lawmakers do not understand the scale of Russia's rearmament campaign. Source: Reuters, citing Merz in a statement at a business conference in Berlin, as reported by European Pravda Details: Merz made the statement the day after holding talks with US President Donald Trump at the White House. "I met with some senators on Capitol Hill and told them to please look at the rearmament Russia is doing," Merz said "They clearly have no idea what is happening there right now," he added, without naming the senators he spoke to. Since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russia has established a 24-hour production cycle in the defence industry and secured arms supplies from North Korea and Iran. This development has prompted European officials to warn that Moscow may soon be capable of attacking NATO territory. Russia denies having such intentions. Merz is the latest European leader to visit Donald Trump in an attempt to persuade him of the importance of continued support for Ukraine and reinforcement of European security through NATO. He said he was reassured by Trump's response, especially his very clear "no" when asked whether the United States was planning to leave NATO. Merz also endorsed Trump's call for NATO members to more than double their defence spending commitments to 5% of GDP. Trump welcomed this pledge on Thursday and told Merz that American troops would remain stationed in Germany. "Whether we like it or not, we will remain dependent on the United States… for a long time to come," Merz said on Friday. Background: Following his meeting with Trump, Merz also stated that Germany and the US share a joint responsibility to exert stronger pressure on Russia. Overall, Merz deemed his first visit to Trump as positive. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
CNBC
38 minutes ago
- CNBC
This uranium company wants to break the grip that foreign state corporations have on U.S. nuclear fuel
President Donald Trump's push to dramatically increase nuclear power in the U.S. will require a tremendous amount of fuel, but the country remains heavily dependent on foreign state-owned companies for its supplies, the CEO of the only publicly traded uranium enricher in the world told CNBC. "There's barely enough Western enrichment, if at all, to satisfy existing operating plants," Centrus Energy CEO Amir Vexler said in an interview. "If the nuclear industry is to add all this generation capacity, there will have to be a tremendous amount of enrichment capacity that's added." Trump issued a series of executive orders on nuclear power last month that set a target for the U.S. to quadruple the sector's capacity to 400 gigawatts by 2050. Nuclear energy is one of the few issues in deeply polarized Washington these days that enjoys some level of bipartisan support. Trump's push expands on former President Joe Biden's goal to triple nuclear power by midcentury. Most nuclear plants worldwide use low-enriched uranium, or LEU. The U.S. relied on foreign countries for around 70% of the fuel for its reactors in 2023, according to data from the Energy Information Administration. About 27% of U.S. fuel purchases came from Russia that year, one of the principle geopolitical foes of the U.S. But Russian uranium will be forced out of the U.S. supply chain by 2028 at the latest, after Biden signed legislation in 2024 to ban imports over Moscow's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. faces a looming nuclear fuel supply gap due to the loss of Russian uranium. Western enrichment capacity, meanwhile, is dominated by two players that are not American owned. They are France's Orano and a British-Dutch-German consortium called Urenco, according to the World Nuclear Association. The European enrichers are reliable partners and have done a good job supporting the market, Vexler told CNBC. But trade tensions threaten to disrupt global supply chains, he said on the Centrus first-quarter earnings call. "We don't have any domestic fuel cycle capacity, almost at all," Vexler told CNBC, referring to American-owned companies. "We don't mine anything, we don't convert anything. We don't enrich anything. We rely on others. And others are all state-owned enterprises, maybe with a few minor exceptions." The only commercial enrichment facility operating in the U.S. is owned by Urenco, the European consortium. It is located in Eunice, New Mexico. Centrus wants to break the stranglehold that state-owned corporations have over the U.S. nuclear fuel supply chain. "The circumstances in the market are such that we believe and we're staking everything we have on the fact that the market needs another enricher," Vexler said. "It needs competition." Trump directed federal agencies on May 23 to develop a plan to expand uranium enrichment capabilities in the U.S. to meet the needs of the civilian and defense sectors. The president's order is sparse on concrete details about how domestic enrichment will be stood up in the U.S. But Centrus' stock has gained 46% as of Thursday's close since Trump's announcement as Wall Street sees the company playing a key role in the effort. The company's shares have risen more than 7% this week as Meta's deal to buy nuclear power from Constellation Energy has reinforced the view that demand is increasing as the tech sector hunts for electricity for its data centers. Centrus is one of just two companies that are licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to produce low-enriched uranium in the U.S., the other being Urenco. Bethesda, Maryland-based Centrus is also the only company in the U.S. that has a license to produce a type of fuel that some next-generation nuclear plant designs, such as small modular reactors, are planning to use. The U.S. wasn't always dependent on foreign countries. It was the first country to enrich uranium for the commercial market and was a dominant player in the market through the 1980s. The federal government owned and operated the nation's enrichment facilities during that period. The U.S. sold its enrichment business through a company called the United States Enrichment Corp. in a public offering in 1998. USEC went bankrupt in 2014 as nuclear plants struggled to compete against cheap natural gas and support for the industry declined in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan. Centrus emerged from the reorganization of USEC later that year and is now profitable. "We were just not able to compete with other government, state-owned competitors," said Vexler, who took over the helm at Centrus in 2024. When times got tough for the industry, national governments in Europe and Russia would not allow their state-owned enrichers to fail, he said. Centrus operates an enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio, about 95 miles east of Cincinnati that could one day supply a major portion of U.S. nuclear fuel needs. The Ohio facility has a footprint the size of the Pentagon and could produce enriched uranium equivalent to about 25% of the total purchased by U.S. power plants in 2023, according to Centrus. This is nearly equivalent to the amount of enriched uranium imported from Russia that year. "If that is not sufficient, if domestic requirements, national security requirements, export requirements exceed that, then obviously we have the capability to expand as well," Vexler said. The Ohio plant has not launched commercial operations yet. It is currently producing a small amount of the fuel that the developers of advanced reactor designs are banking on, called high-assay low-enriched uranium, or HALEU. The Department of Energy buys the fuel that Centrus produces. Centrus' main business right now is importing LEU for U.S. nuclear plants with contracts that run through 2040. It has a waiver to import Russian LEU through 2025 and has applied for waivers through 2027. Under U.S. law, exceptions that allow Russian imports will cease by 2028. Centrus plans to transition away from its trading business as it stands up its domestic enrichment capacity. The vast majority of the enriched uranium produced in Ohio will be sold on the commercial market and potentially for export, Vexler said. "I would certainly aim for us to not only backfill sort of the vacancy that the Russians are creating, but I also hope that we're going to gain market share, both in the LEU and in the HALEU market," Vexler said. But this will require some level of government support given the state-owned competition, he said. Congress has passed $3.4 billion to support domestic enrichment and reduce U.S. dependence particularly on Russia. Centrus is one of several companies competing for the funding. "We've always said that it has to be a public-private partnership," Vexler said. "We've been raising our own funds. We've been raising our own financing. We will contribute significantly to this, but we have to have government support." "There is a path here where we could have a prosperous, commercially competitive American industry," he said.
