Inkhabar webdesk

By Trevor Hunnicutt WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump revived the trade war against Beijing on Friday, ending an uneasy truce between the two largest economies with promises to sharply hike tariffs in a reprisal against China curbing its critical mineral exports. The president unveiled additional levies of 100% on China's U.S.-bound exports, along with new export controls on "any and all critical software" by November 1, nine days before existing tariff relief is set to expire. Trump also called into question the prospects for a previously announced meeting set for three weeks from now with Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea, saying on Truth Social that "now there seems to be no reason to do so." "I haven't canceled," Trump later told reporters at the White House. "I would assume we might have it." Beijing has never confirmed the meeting. The new trade steps were Trump's reaction to China dramatically expanding its rare earth element export controls. China dominates the market for such elements, which are essential to tech manufacturing. "It was shocking," Trump said of China's steps, which did not specifically target Washington. "I thought it was very, very bad." The actions signaled the biggest rupture in relations in six months between Beijing and Washington – the world's biggest factory and its biggest consumer. Many questioned whether an uneasy economic detente reached over the summer can survive. It was a swift and dramatic response by Trump, a Republican who has wielded tariffs paid by U.S. importers against friends and foes. It could escalate a trade war that Washington and Beijing paused earlier this year after painstaking diplomacy. Experts said restrictions on U.S. software shipments to China could be a massive blow to the country's tech industry, including cloud computing and artificial intelligence. Trump also threatened new export controls on airplanes and airplane parts, and a person familiar with the matter said the administration was sketching out other possible targets. Beijing has long called for Washington to abandon unilateral trade restrictions it says undermine global commerce. MARKETS DIVE ON NEW THREATS Trump's trade threats – delivered in a series of social media posts and a public back-and-forth with reporters – sent markets and relations between the world's largest economies into a spiral. China produces over 90% of the world's processed rare earths and rare earth magnets. Many are vital materials in products ranging from electric vehicles to aircraft engines and military radars. Trump's unexpected broadside shook global financial markets, sending the benchmark S&P 500 Index sliding by more than 2%, its biggest one-day drop since April when a steady barrage of tariff announcements by Trump stoked market volatility. Investors fled into the safe haven of gold and U.S. Treasury securities, and the U.S. dollar weakened against a basket of foreign currencies. Tech stocks piled on losses in after-market trading after Trump detailed the tariff and export control measures. "Trump's post could mark the beginning of the end of the tariff truce," said Craig Singleton, a China expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Singleton said Washington viewed China's export control steps as a betrayal. "Beijing appears to have overplayed its hand." In his first social media post on Friday, Trump said China has been sending letters to countries worldwide saying it planned to impose export controls on every element of production related to rare earths. The reference to letters was an apparent reference to Beijing's policy papers. Trump said he had been contacted by unnamed countries incensed over Beijing's steps and said he was surprised because of the "very good" recent relationship with China. TRUMP CONDEMNS BEIJING'S 'HOSTILE ORDER' Terming China's actions a "hostile order," Trump said he had been forced "to financially counter their move." "For every Element that they have been able to monopolize, we have two," Trump said. The White House and the Chinese embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for the U.S. Trade Representative declined comment on what countermeasures Trump was contemplating while a spokesperson for the U.S. Treasury did not respond to a request for comment. The two offices have led talks with Beijing on trade. Economic tensions had been rising in recent days. On Thursday, the Trump administration proposed banning Chinese airlines from flying over Russia on routes to and from the U.S. On Friday, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission said on major U.S. online retail websites have removed millions of listings for prohibited Chinese electronics. China's move on Thursday included adding five new elements as well as dozens of pieces of refining technology to its export-restricting control list. It also required foreign rare earth producers that use Chinese materials to comply with its rules. Analysts said the stakes had risen for a positive outcome from a Trump-Xi summit, if it still happens, on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum starting October 31 in South Korea. "Things are going to get interesting," said Scott Kennedy, a China business and economics expert at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank. "They both are hoping that amping up pressure will lead the other to make concessions in advance of APEC, or they are now re-escalating assuming a deal at APEC is impossible and are gaining leverage for the next round of the fight." (Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; additional reporting by David Brunnstrom, Jarrett Renshaw, Steve Holland, David Lawder and Maiya Keidan; Editing by Dan Burns, Deepa Babington and David Gregorio)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Ryan Woo, Lisa Baertlein and Arathy Somasekhar BEIJING/LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -China will slap port fees on U.S.-owned, operated, built, or flagged vessels on Tuesday as a countermeasure to U.S. port fees on China-linked ships starting the same day, China's transport ministry said on Friday. Later in the day, U.S. President Donald Trump said he was raising tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S. to 100% and imposing export controls on critical software in a reprisal to export limits by China on rare earth minerals. There are relatively few U.S.-built or U.S.-flagged vessels conducting international trade, but China will ensnare more ships by applying levies to companies with 25% or more of their shares or board seats held by U.S.-domiciled investment funds, analysts said. "This casts a wide net and could affect many public shipping companies with a listing on U.S. stock exchanges," said Erik Broekhuizen, a marine research and consulting manager at ship brokering firm Poten & Partners. "The potential impact is significant." On Tuesday, ships built in China – or operated or owned by Chinese entities – will also need to pay a fee at their first port of call in the United States.  SOME VESSELS TO PAY BOTH CHINA, U.S. FEES U.S.-based shipping company Matson told customers it is subject to the new China port fees and has no plans to change its service schedule. Also likely affected are CMA-CGM's U.S.-based American President Lines and Israel-based Zim, which appears to have more than 25% of its shares owned by U.S. entities, Lars Jensen, CEO of container shipping-focused consultancy Vespucci Maritime, said on LinkedIn. The fees in both China and the U.S. will apply to 100 vessels owned by Poseidon's Seaspan and chartered by container lines, said Jensen. Maersk Line Limited, APL, Zim and Seaspan did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the fees. Oil tanker operators are mostly based outside the United States, but they may get stung by China's port fees because they are listed in the U.S., analysts said. For example, Scorpio Tankers has the industry's largest and youngest fleet and is U.S.-listed. It did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Chinese port fees "have thrown the tanker market in turmoil," Broekhuizen said in a client note, adding many vessels that could be affected are already on their way to China. Nearly 10% of the very large crude carrier fleet, and 13% of the Suezmax, Afra and LR2 fleet would be affected, according to an analysis by ship broker and fleet data provider Fearnleys. An analysis by Vortexa showed 43 liquefied petroleum gas-carrying super tankers, or 10% of the global fleet, will be affected by China's port fees, said Samantha Hartke, who heads Americas analysis for the energy research firm.  Vessels owned or operated by a Chinese entity will face a flat fee of $50 per net tonnage per voyage to the U.S. China-owned carrier COSCO, including its OOCL fleet, is the most exposed with fees of around $2 billion in 2026, analysts said. COSCO did not immediately comment. CHINA CALLS U.S. FEES DISCRIMINATORY The U.S. fees on China-linked vessels, following a probe by the U.S. Trade Representative, are part of a broader U.S. effort to revive domestic shipbuilding and blunt China's naval and commercial shipping power. "It is clearly discriminatory and severely damages the legitimate interests of China's shipping industry, seriously disrupts the stability of the global supply chain, and seriously undermines the international economic and trade order," the Chinese ministry said.  The USTR's office did not respond to a request for comment. Over the past two decades, China has catapulted itself to the No. 1 position in the shipbuilding world, with its biggest shipyards handling both commercial and military projects. The fees announced by China, like those put in place by the U.S., "add further complexity and cost to the global network that keeps goods moving and economies connected, and risk harming their exporters, producers, and consumers at a time when global trade is already under pressure," said Joe Kramek, president and CEO of the World Shipping Association. RATES RISE OVER THREE YEARS For U.S.-linked vessels berthing at Chinese ports starting Tuesday, the rate will be 400 yuan ($56.13) per net metric ton, the Chinese transport ministry said. That will increase to 640 yuan ($89.81) from April 17, 2026, and to 880 yuan ($123.52) from April 17, 2027.  For vessels calling at Chinese ports from April 17, 2028, the charge will be 1,120 yuan ($157.16) per net metric ton. Tensions between China and the United States have deepened since September, with the two superpowers struggling to move beyond their trade tariff truce – a 90-day pause from August 11 that ends around November 9.  Retaliatory tariffs in the U.S.-China trade war this year have sharply curtailed Chinese imports of U.S. agriculture and energy products. ($1 = 7.1241 Chinese yuan renminbi) (Reporting by Ryan Woo in Beijing, Naveen Thukral in Singapore and Lisa Baertlein in Los Angeles, additional reporting by Jonathan Saul in London and Arathy Somasekhar and Georgina McCartney in Houston; Editing by Kim Coghill, Kate Mayberry, Rod Nickel)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Blake Brittain (Reuters) -A federal jury in Marshall, Texas found on Friday that Samsung Electronics owes patent owner Collision Communications nearly $445.5 million in damages for infringing on patents related to 4G, 5G and Wi-Fi communications standards. The jury said that Samsung's laptops, Galaxy smartphones and other wireless-enabled devices infringe four Collision patents. The verdict is one of several nine-figure patent infringement verdicts that Samsung has been hit with in the same Marshall, Texas court in recent years. Spokespeople and attorneys for the companies did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Peterborough, New Hampshire-based Collision sued Samsung in 2023 for infringing patents related to improving wireless network efficiency. Collision said in the lawsuit that the patents stemmed from research conducted by defense contractor BAE Systems, which is not involved in the case. Samsung denied the allegations and argued that the patents were invalid. (Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Diane Craft)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Vallari Srivastava and Curtis Williams (Reuters) -Venture Global shares plunged nearly 25% on Friday to their lowest level in five months after it lost an arbitration case with BP over the U.S. LNG exporter's failure to deliver on a long-term gas supply contract, stoking worries of similar verdicts in disputes with other customers seeking billions of dollars in compensation. The ruling was a surprise after Venture Global's recent arbitration win against Shell. BP is seeking more than $1 billion in damages plus interest and legal costs, with the final amount to be determined in a separate hearing in 2026. Venture Global, the second-largest U.S. liquefied natural gas supplier, is facing other arbitration claims with customers seeking compensation of more than $4 billion linked to the delayed commercial start-up of the Calcasieu Pass project in Louisiana, according to the company's 2024 annual report.  The company previously warned that losing current or future arbitration cases could result in significant financial penalties, the termination of some gas supply contracts, and accelerated repayment of project debt. All of the companies that have filed arbitration are seeking compensation, and none of them have sought to terminate their contracts in their proceedings, Venture Global has said. It is unclear why the result of the BP arbitration was different to the Shell case, and whether the outcome was due to differences in contracts or in the company's legal strategies. PENDING ARBITRATION CASES COULD BRING ADDITIONAL DAMAGES Deutsche Bank said in a note to clients on Friday that the latest outcome pushed it to revise the risk that Venture Global will face negative decisions from the remaining arbitrations to 50%. Venture Global told analysts on Thursday that the BP ruling has no impact on its current sale and purchase agreement with the company, according to two people who recounted the call to Reuters. Gabriel Moreen, a managing director at Mizuho Securities, called the ruling a "negative surprise," saying it introduces uncertainty for the remaining claims. "How two arbitrations over the exact same facts and circumstances led to two different outcomes is perhaps more a comment on the arbitrary nature of unilateral decision-making in arbitration hearings than anything else," J.P. Morgan analysts wrote in a note to clients on Friday. Should the company lose the remaining arbitration cases, it could face damages in the vicinity of $4.8 billion. If it continues to see split results, however, the total damages would be closer to $2.9 billion, the analysts said. The Venture Global share drop looked set to wipe out nearly $8 billion from the company's market valuation, if current losses hold. Since the company's initial public offering in January, its shares have fallen almost 61%.  The stock declines also reflect ongoing investor caution over LNG commissioning risks.  Venture Global is expanding its production amid surging global demand, with the U.S. becoming the world's top LNG supplier in 2023. CALCASIEU PROJECT IN SPOTLIGHT In addition to BP and Shell, Italy's Edison, Portugal's Galp, Spain's Repsol, and Poland's Orlen have filed arbitration claims accusing Venture Global of profiteering by selling LNG cargoes at higher spot market prices, rather than delivering them under long-term contracts. Edison and Repsol told Reuters they were still pursuing their arbitration cases against Venture Global. Orlen declined to comment, but said it remains in arbitration with the U.S. company. Venture Global has argued that the Calcasieu Pass export facility start-up was unavoidably delayed and could not reach the status of commercial operations for almost three years, even though it was exporting the superchilled gas from the plant. Long-term contracts did not take effect until the plant reached commercial operations in April 2025. Citi said the arbitration result was "unexpected," adding that the tighter language in BP's contract likely contributed to the outcome. The International Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration found that Venture Global had breached its obligations to declare commercial operations had begun at the Calcasieu Pass plant in a timely manner and act as a "reasonable and prudent operator," the company said on Thursday. Venture Global said it is evaluating all options and will continue to vigorously defend its position. A SEPARATE ARBITRATION DISPUTE WAS SETTLED The settlement of a separate arbitration dispute with Venture Global, meanwhile, involved Unipec, a trading unit of Chinese state-owned oil and gas firm Sinopec, according to two sources with knowledge of the matter. Venture Global first announced the resolution on Thursday without disclosing the other party involved, adding the agreement would have no material impact on its business. Unipec had previously entered into a fixed-price, three-year take-or-pay sales purchase agreement for one million metric tons per annum from Calcasieu Pass, according to a regulatory filing in March. While it did not name the company, Venture Global also said at the time that a mid-term customer had been seeking damages of around $200 million. The Chinese firm sued for arbitration in late 2023, becoming one of seven Venture Global customers to ultimately do so, claiming the U.S. supplier breached its contract by selling cargoes on the spot market before honoring its long-term purchase agreement. Venture Global declined to comment about Unipec when contacted by Reuters. Unipec did not immediately respond to a request for comment. (Reporting by Vallari Srivastava in Bengaluru and Curtis Williams in Houston; Additional reporting by Marwa Rashan in London, Francesca Landini in Milan and Marek Strzelecki in Warsaw; Editing by Sriraj Kalluvila, Nathan Crooks, Paul and Diane Craft)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Steve Holland and Michael Erman WASHINGTON (Reuters) -President Donald Trump unveiled a deal with UK-based drugmaker AstraZeneca on Friday under which the company will sell some medicines at a discount to the government's Medicaid health plan in exchange for tariff relief, similar to a drug pricing pact reached last week with Pfizer. The deals set a framework the White House will use to try to reach its goal of lowering U.S. prescription medicine prices. The president sent letters to 17 leading drugmakers in July telling them to slash prices. Pfizer and Astra are the first two companies to reach a deal with the administration. AstraZeneca will also offer some of its drugs at up to 80% off their list price through the TrumpRx website planned for next year, CEO Pascal Soriot said at an event in the Oval Office. He said the company will receive a three-year tariff exemption "to localize the remainder of our products." HIGHEST PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES U.S. patients currently pay by far the most for prescription medicines, often nearly three times more than in other developed nations, and Trump has been pressuring drugmakers to lower their prices to what patients pay elsewhere or face stiff tariffs. Last month, Trump threatened 100% tariffs, ratcheting up pressure on the pharmaceutical industry to agree to price cuts and shift manufacturing to the U.S., after negotiations broke down earlier this year, lobbyists and executives told Reuters following the Pfizer deal. More than 70 million people are covered by Medicaid, the state and federal government program for low-income people. Drug spending in that program is dwarfed by that of Medicare, which covers people aged 65 and older or those with disabilities and is not included in Friday's announcement. Medicare's drug spending reached $216 billion in 2021, while Medicaid's gross spending was around $80 billion. The Medicaid program already receives the lowest drug prices in the U.S., so the additional savings may be modest, said Craig Garthwaite, a professor at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. "If you look at AstraZeneca's portfolio, I don't think there are a bunch of drugs that exist where that's going to involve them giving a very big discount to Medicaid," Garthwaite said. AstraZeneca's Pfizer‑like deal may spare it tariffs, but will not move the needle on U.S. rising health insurance premiums and out‑of‑pocket drug costs, said Rena Conti, an associate professor at Boston University. "It's good for the companies, and has very uncertain if any benefit for Americans struggling with the affordability of prescription drugs," Conti said. ASTRAZENECA ALREADY PLEDGED MANUFACTURING MOVE Soriot has worked to keep his company close to Washington while pursuing its growth strategy. AstraZeneca in July announced it will invest $50 billion in U.S. manufacturing and research and development by 2030. It will build its biggest site worldwide in Virginia, and expand facilities in five other U.S. states. In September, the company announced it will sell its diabetes and asthma drugs direct to cash-paying U.S. patients at a discount of up to 70% off list prices, another move in response to Trump's pressure campaign. Soriot this year has played up the company's U.S. credentials. He described the Anglo-Swedish firm as a "very American company," highlighting its identity shift toward its largest market. AstraZeneca will list its shares in the United States as well as its current markets in the UK and Europe. (Reporting by Steve Holland in Washington and Michael Erman in New Jersey; Additional reporting by Jarrett Renshaw and Ahmed Aboulenein in Washington, Maggie Fick in London, Patrick Wingrove in New York and Mariam E Sunny in Bengaluru; Editing by Caroline Humer and Bill Berkrot)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)