Miscellaneous News

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Trump to Europe: Buy more of our oil and gas or face tariffs​

President-elect Donald Trump doubled down on his tariff threats Thursday night, pledging to raise tariffs on European Union nations unless they increase their purchases of American oil and gas to narrow the trade gap with the United States.

“I told the European Union that they must make up their tremendous deficit with the United States by the large scale purchase of our oil and gas. Otherwise, it is TARIFFS all the way!!!” Trump posted on Truth Social, which is owned by his media company.

Trump has continued to use the threat of tariffs as a negotiating tactic with countries he believes are treating the United States unfairly. In November, Trump threatened a massive 25% across-the-board tariff on all imported goods from Canada and Mexico unless those countries tighten up what he viewed as lax drug and border enforcement.

The specter of higher tariffs, or even a trade war, also adds to the confusion and uncertainty facing business leaders in the United States and overseas. Some experts have warned that even the threat of tariffs can cost business investment and jobs, not to mention hit share prices.

On the campaign trail, Trump routinely said he would work to ramp up America’s fossil fuel production — even though the United States produces more oil than any nation in history. He has promised to loosen regulations on new drilling and fracking, and his message that Europe must buy more energy from America is consistent with his pledges.

But the United States is already the largest supplier of liquefied natural gas to Europe, according to the US Energy Information Administration. Europe has largely weaned itself off Russian natural gas during the ongoing war with Ukraine, making large-scale purchases of gas from America to make up for some of the difference.

Still, Europe exports far more goods to the United States than it imports from America. Although trade gaps are common — Americans don’t demand as many European goods as they do goods from China, Canada and Mexico — Trump has consistently lashed out against trade gaps as evidence of unfair trade practices.

European stocks fell sharply Friday, and US stocks were slightly lower in premarket trading. Trump’s tariff threat adds more uncertainty into a market that is already weary of stalled-out progress on inflation. Higher tariffs could reignite a global inflation crisis, economists have predicted.
 

In4ser

Junior Member
OMG! Thomas Friedman must be going insane. I’m watching him on cable news right now and he has his NYTimes column on how the US and China can resolve their differences. He’s saying China should allow US tariffs without Chinese retaliation so that Elon Musk can rebuild the US’s manufacturing capability to catch up with China and in exchange the US will allow Taylor Swift to perform in China because if they don’t, Chinese young people will tear China apart because they’re big Taylor Swift fans and will riot. The US military won’t destroy China. China’s young will for the US. He admits because of Trump starting his trade war on China during his first term, that ignited China’s technology and manufacturing skyrocketing past the US. So he wants China to allow the US to catch up or else the US will deny Taylor Swift to China which will cause China’s destruction. I’m having internet access issues so maybe somebody here can check his article out getting past the paywall to confirm if he’s gone senile. I dare you to deny Taylor Swift!!!
Is @henrik secretly Thomas Friedman?
 

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

US Graphite Firms Seek 920% Duty to Thwart China on EV Material​

US producers of a crucial material used in electric vehicle batteries have initiated a trade action seeking sharp tariff increases on Chinese graphite, arguing that Beijing’s massive state subsidies are artificially lowering prices and making it impossible for their companies to compete.

A trade association representing US graphite producers filed petitions with two federal agencies Tuesday after the close of business asking for investigations into whether Chinese companies are violating anti-dumping laws, according to documents seen by Bloomberg News.

The industry group hopes to trigger punitive tariffs of as much as 920% on Chinese graphite in response, opening a battle that is an early indication of high-stakes conflicts ahead among strategic industries as Donald Trump enters office on a promise of dramatically higher import duties.

Higher EV Costs

A sharp tariff increase would raise the cost of US-made electric vehicles at a time that the incoming Trump administration is already threatening EV subsidies.

Graphite currently accounts for about 10% of the cost of making an EV battery cell, according to Sam Abuelsamid, an analyst with Guidehouse Insights. A 900% increase in the cost of graphite would double the overall cost, at least until alternative suppliers could increase output. Producing a battery in the US already costs at least 20% more than doing so in China, according to the International Energy Agency.

Punitive tariffs also would impose significant financial costs on one of Trump’s most prominent allies, Elon Musk, chief executive officer of Tesla Inc., the dominant domestic EV manufacturer. Tesla successfully lobbied for an exclusion from tariffs on Chinese graphite during the first Trump administration.

The US currently does not produce any natural graphite, according to the US Geological Survey, and the government has been pushing for more investment in both mining and the production of synthetic graphite to reduce dependence on China. But the US graphite industry argues that without additional protections from Chinese imports many of those efforts will falter.

‘Smothered’ Industry

The industry is “at risk of being smothered by China’s malicious trade practices,” said Erik Olson, a lobbyist who serves as spokesman for the American Active Anode Material Producers, which filed the petition.

“If we want this industry to grow, if we want this industry in North America, we need to protect it,” Olson added. “We’re never going to have this industry here if we don’t put some roadblocks in the way of the Chinese.”

The trade group petitioned the Commerce Department to investigate whether Chinese companies are violating anti-dumping laws by selling battery-grade graphite below fair market value.

The group on Tuesday also asked the International Trade Commission for a determination that China’s industrial policies encouraging overproduction of graphite and the artificially cheap imports that result from that have materially harmed the North American graphite industry’s development.

Decisions on whether to impose the tariffs would only happen after investigations that would not conclude until well into 2025 — after Trump takes office.

Trump’s first-term trade war led to a scramble by companies in the US to win exemptions from import taxes and domestic skirmishes over those exclusions that dragged on through the Biden administration.

The latest battle effectively pits domestic graphite producers led by Novonix, an Australian-listed company with a graphite production plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee — and plans to expand it — against Tesla.

During Trump’s first term in 2018, his administration levied tariffs on a broad swath of imports from China, including 25% tariffs on imports of synthetic graphite. Graphite is used to make the anodes of batteries, and has other uses, including in military hardware and steel-making, because of its hardness and resistance to heat.

Exemption Fight

Starting in 2019, Tesla repeatedly applied for and won exemptions from Trump’s 25% tariff on graphite imports from China. In its original application for an exclusion the carmaker argued that a denial of its request “would create a competitive disadvantage to Tesla.” Approval, it said, would allow it to continue investing in and expanding its so-called “Gigafactory” in Nevada.

In February of this year, it applied again for an exemption from the tariffs on synthetic graphite arguing that it had been unable to find a replacement for Chinese graphite and needed until the end of 2025 to do so. “There is no single manufacturer outside of China that currently meets Tesla’s specifications and additional capacity requirements (which have increased exponentially since the exclusion requests were initially submitted),” Miriam Eqab, Tesla’s associate general counsel, wrote in a series of submissions.

In her submissions, Eqab wrote that while Tesla had tested potential substitutes “the majority of suppliers are still at pilot scale or are still planning to build the mass production capacity and cannot supply to Tesla in the 2024/2025 timeframe.”

In separate submissions, two South Korean battery makers who operate plants in Michigan and Georgia, LG and SK Battery America, said they had also struggled to find reliable sources of graphite outside of China.

Extension Denied

But the Biden administration rebuffed the requests to extend the exemption when it expired in June of this year, leaving graphite imports from China subject to a 25% tariff.

Trump has long spoken skeptically about EVs and the negative impact of the transition to them on manufacturing jobs reliant on combustion engine vehicles. He also has decried China’s increasing dominance of the sector. Yet the dispute over graphite highlights the difficult position he will face particularly with Musk now his leading donor and an influential voice on policy.

Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Graphite makers say the existing 25% tariffs aren’t nearly enough to blunt what they say is intentional over-production by China. The companies charge that China’s over-capacity in the battery industry has distorted markets, and that state subsidies have allowed the country’s battery suppliers to easily absorb existing tariffs.

In 2023, China controlled 92% of the market for high-grade graphite used in battery production, according to a study by Oxford Economics that was commissioned by the North American Graphite Alliance, a trade group.

There are signs that domestic alternatives are taking root. Tesla supplier Panasonic in February announced an agreement with Novonix to buy synthetic graphite from its existing Tennessee plant starting in 2025.

The Department of Energy on Monday announced a $755 million loan to fund the construction of an additional plant in Chattanooga that would eventually produce enough synthetic graphite annually for the batteries of 325,000 EVs.

Sounds like they need a +900% tariff to stay competitive against Chinese miners.
 

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Trump wants 5% Nato defence spending target, Europe told​

Donald Trump’s team has told European officials that the incoming US president will demand Nato member states increase defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP, but plans to continue supplying military aid to Ukraine. The US president-elect’s closest foreign policy aides shared his intentions in discussions with senior European officials this month, according to people familiar with the talks, as he firms up his policies towards Europe and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

During his White House campaign, Trump vowed to cut off aid to Ukraine, force Kyiv into immediate peace talks, and leave Nato allies undefended if they failed to spend enough on defence — spooking European capitals. But in a boost for allies deeply concerned over their ability to support and protect Ukraine without Washington’s backing, Trump now intends to maintain US military supplies to Kyiv after his inauguration, according to three other people briefed on the discussions with western officials.

At the same time Trump is to demand Nato more than double its 2 per cent spending target — which only 23 of the alliance’s 32 members currently meet — to 5 per cent, two people briefed on the conversations said. One person said they understood that Trump would settle for 3.5 per cent, and that he was planning to explicitly link higher defence spending and the offer of more favourable trading terms with the US.

“It’s clear that we are talking about 3 per cent or more for [Nato’s June summit in] The Hague summit,” said another European official briefed on Trump’s thinking. Nato allies are already in discussions about increasing the target to 3 per cent at that meeting of leaders in June, but many capitals are concerned about the difficult fiscal decisions that would be required to do so.

According to the White House’s office of management and budget, the US will spend about 3.1 per cent of GDP on defence in 2024. During the last year of Trump’s first presidency in 2020, Pentagon spending hit 3.4 per cent. Key European Nato allies — including France, Germany, the UK, Italy and Poland — met Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Brussels on Wednesday night to discuss how the continent would adapt defence policies in response to Trump’s return.

German chancellor Olaf Scholz separately had a telephone call with Trump on Thursday during a summit of EU leaders. Scholz later told reporters that he was “quite confident that the US and Europe will continue their support to Ukraine”. Senior British security officials travelled to Washington earlier this month to assess the president-elect’s plans. While

Trump still believes Ukraine should never be given membership of Nato, and wants an immediate end to the conflict, the president-elect believed that supplying weapons to Kyiv after a ceasefire would ensure a “peace through strength” outcome, they added. After 24 hours of meetings with Nato and EU leaders in Brussels this week, Zelenskyy said on Thursday that European pledges to defend Ukraine would “not be sufficient” without US involvement.
 

quim

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
This only corroborates what I have been saying here.

Trump would be discredited in politics if he immediately cut off aid to Ukraine while Putin only shows fear and weakness in the face of so many provocations.

Russia has lost deterrence. Which is a setback, since Trump was counting on resolving the conflict by justifying Russia's power in the event of a WWIII. Since Russia only shows fear, the Ukrainians regain vain hopes of winning and continue fighting and receiving aid.

Therefore, I maintain that the war is heading towards a stalemate that is unfavorable for Russia.
 

Rafi

Junior Member
Registered Member
This only corroborates what I have been saying here.

Trump would be discredited in politics if he immediately cut off aid to Ukraine while Putin only shows fear and weakness in the face of so many provocations.

Russia has lost deterrence. Which is a setback, since Trump was counting on resolving the conflict by justifying Russia's power in the event of a WWIII. Since Russia only shows fear, the Ukrainians regain hope of winning and so continue fighting and receiving aid.

Therefore, I maintain that the war is heading towards a stalemate that is unfavorable for Russia.

you are wrong, this war of attrition is devastating for Ukraine and could entail a total collapse of Ukraine in 2025-26
 

iewgnem

Senior Member
Registered Member
This only corroborates what I have been saying here.

Trump would be discredited in politics if he immediately cut off aid to Ukraine while Putin only shows fear and weakness in the face of so many provocations.

Russia has lost deterrence. Which is a setback, since Trump was counting on resolving the conflict by justifying Russia's power in the event of a WWIII. Since Russia only shows fear, the Ukrainians regain hope of winning and so continue fighting and receiving aid.

Therefore, I maintain that the war is heading towards a stalemate that is unfavorable for Russia.
You're certainly optimistic about Ukrainian birthrate, lol
Ukraine already ran out of 25-65 year olds after 3 years, how long do you think 18-25 can last? Then what? 10-18 year olds? Then infant to 10 year olds?
Also if the war is "heading toward" stalemate, where is it right now?

Losing most of your adult male population after 3 years isn't stalemate buddy, it's the worst defeat of any nation has ever experienced in the last 200 years, it's losing at the annihilation level.
 

duskseeker

Junior Member
Registered Member
This only corroborates what I have been saying here.

Trump would be discredited in politics if he immediately cut off aid to Ukraine while Putin only shows fear and weakness in the face of so many provocations.

Russia has lost deterrence. Which is a setback, since Trump was counting on resolving the conflict by justifying Russia's power in the event of a WWIII. Since Russia only shows fear, the Ukrainians regain vain hopes of winning and continue fighting and receiving aid.

Therefore, I maintain that the war is heading towards a stalemate that is unfavorable for Russia.
How much land has Ukraine gained again?
 

quim

Junior Member
Registered Member
you are wrong, this war of attrition is devastating for Ukraine and could entail a total collapse of Ukraine in 2025-26
As long as Ukraine's leadership is functional and receives sufficient international aid, Ukraine will not collapse. The war will last for years and if Putin remains fearful he will receive attacks closer and closer to his inner circle.

You are counting on magic and cheerleading while the real world works on mathematics and logic. You are moving away from reason just to defend Putin's supposed 4D chess game...

How much land has Ukraine gained again?
About 30,000 square kilometers since Russia lost the Kiev, Kharkiv and Sumy oblasts and northern Kherson.

In blue
800px-2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine.svg.png


Since then, progress has been minimal for both sides, increasingly close to a stalemate.
 
Top