US and China sign trade agreement, Donald Trump says
The US and China have signed an agreement on trade, President Donald Trump said, adding he expects to soon have a deal with India.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg TV that the deal was signed earlier this week. Neither Mr Lutnick nor Mr Trump provided any details about the agreement.
Advertisement
'We just signed with China the other day,' Mr Trump said late on Thursday.
Mr Lutnick said the deal was 'signed and sealed' two days earlier.
It follows initial talks in Geneva in early May that led both sides to postpone massive tariff hikes that were threatening to freeze much trade between the two countries.
Later talks in London set a framework for negotiations and the deal mentioned by Mr Trump appeared to formalise that agreement.
Advertisement
Mr Lutnick said: 'The president likes to close these deals himself. He's the dealmaker. We're going to have deal after deal.'
China has not confirmed any new agreements, but it announced earlier this week that it was speeding up approvals of exports of rare earths, materials used in high-tech products such as electric vehicles.
Beijing's limits on exports of rare earths have been a key point of contention.
The Chinese Commerce Ministry said on Thursday that Beijing was accelerating a review of export licence applications for rare earths and had approved 'a certain number of compliant applications'.
Advertisement
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court expected to rule on Obamacare preventive care task force
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Friday on the legality of a key element of the Obamacare law, formally called the Affordable Care Act, that helps guarantee that health insurers cover preventive medical care such as cancer screenings at no cost to patients. The federal government has appealed a lower court's determination that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which under Obamacare has a major role in choosing what services will be covered, is composed of members who were not validly appointed. Its 16 members are appointed by the U.S. secretary of health and human services without Senate confirmation. Several individual Christian plaintiffs and two small businesses sued in federal court in Texas in 2020 to challenge the task force's structure. It was the latest in a years-long series of challenges to Democratic former President Barack Obama's signature legislative achievement to reach the Supreme Court. Before the case was narrowed to the appointments issue, the plaintiffs had included a religious objection to being required to cover pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV. They claimed that such drugs "facilitate and encourage homosexual behavior, prostitution, sexual promiscuity and intravenous drug use." The U.S. government's appeal of the decision by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals initially was filed by Democratic former President Joe Biden's administration before being taken up by Republican President Donald Trump's administration. Public health advocates had warned that life-saving tests and treatments that have been cost-free under most insurance plans may become subject to co-pays and deductibles, deterring many Americans from obtaining them, if the justices upheld the 5th Circuit's ruling. A key question in the case was whether the task force wields power to such an extent that its members, under the Constitution's "appointments clause," are "principal officers" who must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate or "inferior officers" not subject to these requirements. The task force is made up of medical experts who serve four-year terms on a volunteer basis. It reviews medical evidence and public feedback and issues recommendations about which preventive services would be most effective for detecting illnesses earlier or addressing ailments before a patient's condition worsens. The task force has identified, opens new tab dozens of preventive services as having a high or moderate net benefit to patients including screenings to detect diabetes and various types of cancer, statin medications to lower the risk of heart disease and stroke, and interventions to help patients quit smoking or unhealthy alcohol use. The 5th Circuit ruled in 2024 that the task force's structure violates the Constitution, as the plaintiffs claimed. The justices during April 21 arguments in the case posed questions over whether the law gives the HHS secretary the appropriate level of supervision over the task force, including the power to influence its recommendations and fire members at will, or if it operates as a largely independent governmental body whose recommendations effectively have the force of law. The Justice Department urged the justices to view the task force's members as "inferior officers." Hashim Mooppan, a Justice Department lawyer, told the justices that the HHS secretary can remove task force members at will, review their recommendations and prevent them from taking effect, and can require the task force to obtain his approval before it issues any recommendations. The plaintiffs contended that the task force's lack of supervision and insulation from removal makes its members "principal officers." The 5th Circuit's ruling also rejected the government's request to remove certain offending words from the Obamacare provision at issue - a process called severing - in order to make that part of the law conform to the Constitution.
Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court set to rule in dispute over LGBT storybooks in school classes
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Friday in a bid by Christian and Muslim parents in Maryland to keep their elementary school children out of certain classes when storybooks with LGBT characters are read in the latest case involving the intersection of religion and LGBT rights. Parents with children in public schools in Montgomery County, located just outside of Washington, appealed after lower courts declined to order the local school district to let children opt out when these books are read. The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has expanded the rights of religious people in several cases in recent years, including in cases involving LGBT people. For instance, the court in 2023 ruled that certain businesses have a right under the First Amendment's free speech protections to refuse to provide services for same-sex weddings. The school board in Montgomery County approved in 2022 a handful of storybooks that feature LGBT characters as part of its English language-arts curriculum in order to better represent the diversity of families living in the county. The storybooks are available for teachers to use "alongside the many books already in the curriculum that feature heterosexual characters in traditional gender roles," the district said in a filing. The district said it ended the opt-outs in 2023 when the mounting number of requests to excuse students from these classes became logistically unworkable and raised concerns of "social stigma and isolation" among students who believe the books represent them and their families. Opt-outs are still allowed by the district for sex education units of health classes. The plaintiffs - who are Muslim, Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox - said in their lawsuit that the storybooks "promote one-sided transgender ideology, encourage gender transitioning and focus excessively on romantic infatuation - with no parental notification or opportunity to opt out." They said the First Amendment protects their right to instill religious beliefs and practices in their children, including on gender and sexuality that are "crucial for their children's ability to fulfill religious aspirations concerning marriage and family." Represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty conservative legal group, the parents who sued included Tamer Mahmoud, Enas Barakat, Chris Persak, Melissa Persak, Jeff Roman and Svitlana Roman, along with an organization called Kids First that seeks opt-out rights in Montgomery County. The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2024 denied a request by the plaintiffs for a preliminary injunction. The 4th Circuit said that there was no evidence that the storybooks are "being implemented in a way that directly or indirectly coerces the parents or their children to believe or act contrary to their religious faith." The plaintiffs told the Supreme Court that the 4th Circuit's decision undermined the right of parents to "protect their children's innocence and direct their religious upbringing." The school board emphasized in a brief to the court that mere exposure to content that parents find religiously objectionable does not violate the First Amendment. The Freedom From Religion Foundation secularism advocacy group in a filing to the Supreme Court supporting the school board said parents should not have the constitutional right "to ensure that all secular education materials conform with their personal religious beliefs." Such a rule would be boundless because "almost any book or idea - however commonplace or innocent - likely contradicts some religious ideals," the group said. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on April 22. The court's three liberal justices raised concerns about how far opt-outs for students could go beyond storybooks in public schools, offering examples of subjects such as evolution, interracial marriage or women working outside the home that might come up in classes. During the arguments, conservative Justice Samuel Alito cited one of the disputed storybooks that portrays a same-sex wedding and emphasized that the material promotes a moral message "that a lot of people who hold on to traditional religious beliefs don't agree with." In another religious rights case involving education, the Supreme Court in a 4-4 ruling on May 22 blocked a bid led by two Catholic dioceses to establish in Oklahoma the first taxpayer-funded religious charter school in the United States.
Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
Rupee posts best week in over two years as dollar's struggles resurface
MUMBAI, June 25 (Reuters) - The Indian rupee had its best week since January 2023, as an Iran-Israel ceasefire cooled oil prices and sapped safe-haven dollar demand, while worries over the Federal Reserve's future independence added pressure on the greenback. The rupee gained 1.3% on the week, its best performance in two and a half years, to close at 85.4750 per U.S. dollar on Friday. Crude oil prices retreated by over 11% this week after Iran and Israel reached a ceasefire following a 12-day war, which saw involvement of the U.S. Meanwhile, the dollar index was down 1.5% on the week as investors, unnerved by fresh signs of an erosion in U.S. central bank independence, wasted no time in pushing the greenback back to its lowest levels in over three years. "Part of the sell-off of the dollar is due to the unpredictability of policy from Washington and that is unlikely to change," MUFG Bank said in a note. The rupee rose this week but it continues to lag behind its Asian peers amid persistent dollar weakness seen over 2025. While currencies like the Korean won and offshore Chinese yuan are up between 2% and 9% this year so far, the rupee is little changed. Bankers and analysts reckon that while the rupee's underperformance is likely to persist, a broadly weaker dollar alongside portfolio inflows should support the currency in the near term. Foreign investors have turned buyers on Indian government bonds over the last few sessions, while block trades and initial public offerings have drawn interest from global investors. Later on Friday, the focus will be on U.S. personal consumption expenditure (PCE) inflation data alongside remarks from Fed policymakers as investors try to gauge the future trajectory of the central bank's policy rates.
