FT : New EDF boss at mercy of ‘to-do list’ that ousted predecessor

New EDF boss at mercy of ‘to-do list’ that ousted predecessor
Bernard Fontana must repair relations with the French state after the stormy end to the rein of Luc Rémont

The new boss of French state-owned energy group EDF faces the same nearly impossible tasks that led to the ousting of his predecessor: satisfying the government’s often contradictory demands for cheap power to help industry and the construction of costly new nuclear reactors. 

Bernard Fontana, nominated as chief executive on March 21, is a seasoned industrialist who has run EDF’s engineering arm Framatome for nearly nine years. He will seek to avoid the fate of the previous chief executive Luc Rémont, removed last month after just over two years because of repeated clashes with the state. 

On Fontana’s to-do list will be repairing relations with the government, the company’s only shareholder, striking energy supply deals with some of EDF’s biggest industrial clients, while also advancing plans to build six nuclear reactors in just over a decade — a key initiative of French President Emmanuel Macron, which was announced three years ago. 

“It is one of the most difficult jobs in France and perhaps the world,” said Roland Lescure, the former industry and energy minister, now a centrist MP from Macron’s party.

The challenges at EDF felled Rémont, who was removed after just over two years following repeated clashes with the state. People familiar with the matter said his abrasive style and desire to run EDF like a private sector company, with a keen eye on profits, angered government decision makers.

“The state simply cannot work with someone with whom the relationship is so stormy,” said one top government official. 

Lescure welcomed the arrival of Fontana but did not waste time in turning up the pressure. 

“Our message to Fontana is to deliver on all aspects of what is needed. Deliver competitiveness, deliver production, deliver the new nuclear plants,” he told the Financial Times. 

Fontana’s main challenge is to balance competing pressures of delivering low rates for power, demanded by government and industry, while generating profits that will help support vast investments required to launch new nuclear reactors.

The company ran over budget and behind time on the completion of Flamanville, a new nuclear reactor in northern France, and faces budget and timing issues with the UK’s Hinkley Point.

It has also faced criticism that it is yet to outline timelines and costings for the project to build the six new nuclear reactors, which were originally due by the end of 2024. Last month, the government pushed back the launch date from 2035 to 2038, although observers have long considered the 2035 target unachievable. 

The nuclear project is critical to France as more than 65 per cent of the country’s energy mix comes from this power source and demand for decarbonised electricity will grow as the continent transitions away from fossil fuels. 

Refreshing France’s ageing nuclear network will strengthen its energy self-sufficiency. Europe’s reliance on Russian gas saw energy prices surge in the wake of Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. 

But Fontana will have to satisfy demands from the government that management must offer industry cheap power as it struggles to compete with US and Chinese rivals that benefit from much lower energy prices. 

Rémont outlined his own reasons why the government opted not to extend his mandate in a no-holds-barred interview with French newspaper Le Figaro in March. “We have a fundamentally different vision of what EDF should be and the way it should be managed. And this difference of vision grew over recent months, as key choices had to be taken,” he said. 

The debate comes down to an existential question of whether EDF should be run as a normal business for profit, as a state arsenal designed to support the country’s industrial ambitions, or as something between these two aims.

Eric Lombard, French finance minister, appeared to agree with Rémont’s assessment of his removal, telling the Senate in March that there were a “certain number of disagreements”.

The ex-Bank of America Merrill Lynch banker, who worked at Schneider Electric before he took charge of EDF in November 2022, aimed to run the group as a business focused on delivering profits and lowering debt in preparation for the launch of the hugely expensive nuclear projects. 

He achieved the goal of increasing profits, delivering €36bn in operating profits in 2024 while increasing output of EDF’s nuclear plants after corrosion at some had led to costly maintenance outages in 2022. As well as nuclear reactors, the company operates offshore wind farms, solar farms, biomass and hydro power plants.

Rémont was also relatively popular with the company’s strongly unionised workforce. Alexandre Grillat, head of the CFE energy union that represents managerial workers at the group, noted that there were no major strikes during his tenure. 

But his approach was described as “inflexible” towards the government and important companies, according to people familiar with the matter. 

Rémont first ran into disagreements with the government in fractious negotiations in 2023 over changes to the way EDF sold its electricity. The sticking points were largely over the price for supplying power.  

Rémont and the government finally agreed to adopt a more market-based pricing system for much of its electricity, as well as making plans to secure long-term deals with energy intensive businesses. This new pricing system will take effect at the end of 2025.

But the state had been left “disappointed” with slow progress in reaching the long-term deals, officials said. EDF has said it has signed just two since the 2023 agreement, with many companies saying the terms are unattractive.

In parallel to the long-term contracts, EDF said last month that it would launch a new auction-like process for electricity supplies, including for foreign buyers, in a move that angered the French energy-intensive groups because negotiations for their long-term contracts are yet to be finalised. 

Another problem was Rémont’s failure to advance Macron’s plans for the six new nuclear reactors as he disagreed with government over how to finance them.

Under government plans announced last month, EDF would receive a subsidised state loan to cover half the costs of the reactors and guaranteed electricity prices of €100 once they were up and running. Contrary to Rémont’s wishes, this will probably involve EDF funding some upfront costs through debt.

Rémont’s uncompromising streak was on further display at an energy conference in December, in which he told an audience that “investing in France is hellish for regulatory and administrative reasons”.

The comments were “probably right but embarrassing” for a business backed 100 per cent by the state, said one French banker. Another said the comments called into question the “sacred dogma” of Macron, who has tried to make investing easier in France. “He’s not a diplomat,” they added.

Fontana, described as “discreet” and well respected as the head of Framatome by one union official, is set to face senate and parliamentary hearings on April 30 before he is confirmed in the role.

He will be expected to reach power supply agreements with the energy- intensive groups, which were beyond Rémont, by the summer. 

The French government’s hope is that Fontana’s engineering experience — he worked at groups such as cement company Holcim and steelmaker ArcelorMittal — will make it easier for him to agree a deal by summer and advance plans for the new reactors.

He is “quite reputed as a good industrialist and will have an awareness of how to advance different work projects”, said a former government aide. 

One adviser to the industrial groups negotiating the long-term contracts said businesses were “not welcoming Fontana as much as they are shocked by the brutality of Luc Rémont being fired”, although they remained hopeful of a better deal on power prices. 

In short, Fontana’s success will depend on whether he can walk the tightrope of running EDF profitably while delivering the vast capital outlay needed to reboot France’s nuclear sector. This will require a major shift from Rémont’s uncompromising approach. 

“If Fontana has taken the job, he’s understood the lesson [from Rémont’s sacking]. If he hasn’t, he’s an idiot,” said another adviser.

FT : Sports shoes’ supply chain is pain point in Trump’s tariff war

Sports shoes’ supply chain is pain point in Trump’s tariff war
Nike, Adidas and Puma shifted production to Vietnam for its cheap labour but will now be hit by 46% levy

The Vomero 18 running shoe on display at a Nike store in New York features thick soles, a $150 price tag and tongue labels woven with the message “Made in Vietnam”. 

That last fact is a big problem for Nike’s plans for a turnaround under chief executive Elliott Hill, who this year launched the Vomero 18 to win back runners who have switched to other brands. Vietnam has become the global centre of athletic shoe manufacturing — and it is subject to some of the most punishing US tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump this week. 

Trump has said he wants to bring manufacturing back to US shores. Analysts say the more likely effect will be higher prices for trainers, as the US lacks factories with the specialised equipment to make running shoes and workers with the knowhow to operate them. 

US-based Nike began manufacturing in Vietnam in 1995, through five contract footwear factories, becoming one of the country’s earliest foreign investors and contributing to its exports and economic growth. The company expanded its supplier base rapidly in the following years and created thousands of jobs, attracted by the cheaper labour force. 

Nike now has 130 supplier-factories in Vietnam producing shoes, clothing and equipment, and the country accounts for half of its footwear production.

Adidas, its Germany-based rival, gets 39 per cent of its shoes from the south-east Asian country.

Trump’s new 46 per cent tariff will be layered on top of 20 per cent duties already paid on US imports of athletic shoes with textile uppers, according to the American Apparel & Footwear Association. 


Manufacturers could open trainer factories in new countries, but relocating footwear supply chains typically takes about two years, said Chris Rogers, head of supply chain research at S&P Global Market Intelligence. Companies typically plan such changes on a five-year cycle. 

Adam Cochrane, a Deutsche Bank analyst, suggested that Mexico, Brazil, Turkey, and Egypt could be alternatives to Vietnam as manufacturing hubs. However, due to the length of order contracts with suppliers, it would take 18 to 24 months for any decision to result in tangible changes on the ground. 

As well, Trump has imposed so-called reciprocal tariffs at a minimum rate of 10 per cent on virtually every trading partner. For major footwear hubs such as China and Indonesia, the new rates are more than triple that. 

“Finding a cheaper market without leaving the planet is going to be tough,” said David Marcotte, senior vice-president of retail at consultancy Kantar. 

Nike did not respond to a request for comment. In a quarterly report filed on Thursday, the company said: “We are navigating through several external factors that create uncertainty and volatility in the operating environment, including, but not limited to, geopolitical dynamics, new tariffs, tax regulation and fluctuating foreign exchange rates.”  


The company last year appointed Hill as CEO after falling into a sales slump as running shoes from smaller competing brands such as On and Hoka grabbed market share.

Its shares plummeted to a nearly eight-year low this week as investors took fright at the costs associated with Trump’s new tariffs. 

For a footwear brand, “You’ve got three primary avenues here from a cost mitigation standpoint,” said Dylan Carden, analyst at William Blair. “You can push back to get your suppliers [to] charge you less. You can try to push price on consumers, and charge more. Or you can eat it.” 

Cochrane estimated that Adidas and Puma, another Germany-based brand with extensive manufacturing operations in Vietnam, would need to increase prices in the US by around 20 per cent to maintain gross profit margins following the tariffs, though price rises might spread out over time to curtail damage to market share and operating profits. Both companies could be better off than Nike though, as they sell less in the US, he said.

Felix Dennl, an analyst at Metzler bank, said that Adidas was “well positioned” for price increases due to its “broad-based brand momentum in both lifestyle and performance segments”. 

Puma, on the other hand, would find it “significantly harder to pass on increased costs”, as its efforts to rebrand as a premium shoemaker have so far failed to gain momentum — one of the reasons for the replacement of Puma chief executive Arne Freundt on Thursday. 

Overall, sporting goods manufacturers would “scrutinise their product range in the US”, Dennl said, phasing out less profitable products. 

Adidas declined to comment. Puma said it had “a multi-country-of-origin strategy and many of the long-term partners in our supplier base can produce in several different countries”.

Vietnam received a new wave of manufacturing investments during Trump’s first term in office, when he started a trade war with Beijing that prompted companies to shift production away from China. Suppliers to footwear manufacturers in Vietnam are not only local companies, but also South Korean and Taiwanese groups operating there. 


The migration to Vietnam led its trade surplus with the US to balloon to $123.5bn last year, the third largest after China and Mexico. The White House used trade balance figures to calculate each country’s “reciprocal” tariff rates. 

Cochrane, the Deutsche Bank analyst, said that the trainer brands might have to “reduce order volumes and reroute more products to Europe, the Middle East and China”, which could result in increased competition in those regions. 

In the US, where 99 per cent of footwear is imported, Carden said the market might become more like the Soviet Union, when Russian residents paid foreign visitors a handsome premium for Levi’s jeans.

“We’re behind the Iron Curtain,” he said. 

FT : Jaguar Land Rover suspends exports to US as tariff fallout spreads

Jaguar Land Rover suspends exports to US as tariff fallout spreads
Trump’s levies on foreign-made vehicles spark disruption across global carmakers’ supply chains

Jaguar Land Rover has suspended all shipments of cars to the US for a month, as disruption to global automakers’ supply chains rapidly spreads in response to US President Donald Trump’s punitive tariffs on vehicle imports.

The British carmaker has paused shipments as it works out a longer term response to the 25 per cent tariffs on vehicle imports. The duty applies to all cars assembled outside the US with partial exemptions for Mexico and Canada.

“The USA is an important market for JLR’s luxury brands. As we work to address the new trading terms with our business partners, we are enacting our short-term actions including a shipment pause in April,” it said in a statement.

The producer of the Range Rover and the Land Rover Defender, which is owned by India’s Tata Motors, is highly exposed to the tariffs since it generates almost a quarter of its sales in the US but has no local manufacturing capability in the US.

People briefed on the matter said JLR had previously considered building a plant in the US but instead chose to build another plant in Slovakia before the start of Trump’s first presidency.

The move by the British car company underlines the chaos that Trump’s tariffs are unleashing on a global car industry that has built up complex supply chains underpinned by free trade.

It follows the decision by Chrysler and Jeep maker Stellantis on Friday to furlough 900 employees in the US after putting a temporary pause on production in Mexico and Canada.

The chief executive of Swedish carmaker Volvo said on Thursday that it was considering adding production of another car model to its US plant in South Carolina, which has 150,000 cars per year capacity.

The group, owned by China’s Geely, recently brought back its former boss Håkan Samuelsson to navigate the geopolitical challenges caused by the global tariff war.

Japan’s Nissan is also looking to rework its supply chains in response to the tariffs.

On Friday, the Japanese group said that it would not take any new US orders of two models from its Infiniti luxury range built in Mexico. It also said that it plans to maintain two shifts at a production line on its Smyrna plant in Tennessee, having earlier said it would go down to one shift to save costs.

Nissan has drawn up plans to shift some production of the Rogue SUV from its domestic plant in Kyushu to Smyrna, according to a person familiar with Nissan’s plans. Nissan declined to comment.

The attempt to reshape car supply chains comes after equity markets suffered a brutal plunge this week with the S&P 500 losing 10 per cent in two days.

The impact of the tariffs on the auto industry could be enormous — and become even more severe if 25 per cent tariffs on a wide variety of imported parts comes into effect on May 3, adding to the levy on finished cars imposed on Thursday.

Analysts at Wedbush estimate that the tariffs could reduce new auto purchases by up to 20 per cent and raise the prices of a typical car to a US consumer by $5,000 to $10,000.

Nissan shifting production out of Japan will be politically sensitive given mounting strains felt by thousands of small and medium-sized car suppliers, whose profit margins have already been put under pressure by rising wage costs.

Likewise, JLR’s pause will add to concerns about the future health of the British car industry, where about one in six of all shipped cars goes to the US.

Toyota, the world’s largest carmaker, has signalled to suppliers that it intends to reduce manufacturing costs in response to the tariffs in an attempt to avoid rising prices for consumers.

The Japanese carmaker was singled out by Trump in his speech unveiling “reciprocal” tariffs. He said Toyota sells 1mn foreign-made cars every year in the US. Japan was the “worst violator” and “in many cases, the friend is worse than the foe in terms of trade”, the US president said.

Many Japanese carmakers already have factories in the US and may be wary of assembling huge investment packages, analysts say, given concerns about the high costs and the availability of labour in the US.

FT : A dark hour for American science

A dark hour for American science
Other countries have a chance to attract US talent driven out by Trump’s policies

Right-wing populism routinely contains a strong vein of scepticism towards science, or at least some fields. Yet nowhere has the populist backlash been as virulent as in Donald Trump’s second term. US science and health research are being hit by planned large-scale funding cuts and lay-offs at federal agencies, and a clampdown on what are regarded as permissible areas of scientific inquiry. The impact on US public health and the economy could be profound; America’s scientific verve has underpinned its entrepreneurial success. Countries elsewhere — notably in Europe — have a responsibility to ensure US researchers can continue vital work. They have opportunities, too, to turn America’s self-imposed loss into their own gain.

In the past week alone, thousands of employees across the US health and human services department began to be laid off in a sweeping downsizing by Robert F Kennedy Jr, the vaccine sceptic who is now in charge. (The top US vaccine regulator earlier quit over Kennedy’s “misinformation and lies”.) Leaders at the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes for Health have been put on administrative leave and offered reassignment. More than 1,900 leading US scientists have written to the Trump administration to decry its “wholesale assault on US science”. The slapdash calculation of “reciprocal” tariffs on trade partners last week only added to the White House’s perceived lack of respect for rational thought.

Cuts to grant funding from the NIH — by far the world’s largest funder of biomedical research — have thrown researchers into uncertainty. Cutbacks there and elsewhere are also being driven by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency of Elon Musk; some experts suspect Musk wants to push parts of publicly-funded science into the private sector, including his own companies.

White House directives attacking climate science and diversity and inclusion policies are meanwhile putting under threat research on global warming or even on different ethnic groups’ vulnerability to diseases. Global progress on dealing with climate change and preventing disease and epidemics could be at risk.

That creates a clear incentive for other countries to safeguard such work by providing havens to US-based academics. But there is a broader chance for Europe. By offering unimpeded academic freedoms, it could start to reverse a long transatlantic brain drain and invigorate its own research and start-up efforts.

The hurdles are strained public finances and sensitivities over immigration. Some institutions, though, are already taking initiatives. Aix-Marseille University in France has set up a “Safe Place For Science” scheme and Brussels’ two top universities are similarly offering grants to “scholars looking to relocate”.

France’s research minister Philippe Baptiste, himself a scientist, co-ordinated a letter signed by 11 other European ministers calling for an EU-wide effort to attract “foreign talents ”. One possibility could be to expand the EU’s seven-year, €95bn Horizon Europe initiative — the world’s largest multilateral research programme to which Canada, South Korea, Turkey and others have been granted associated membership — in its next phase from 2028 to woo displaced US-based scientists.

The UK, also a Horizon associate, could benefit. But while a shared language and its university strengths should give Britain a golden opportunity to attract “exiled” US academics, visa costs and restrictions put it at a competitive disadvantage that prime minister Sir Keir Starmer urgently needs to address.

Donald Trump’s second term may prove to be a temporary, if destructive, interlude after which US science can begin to be rebuilt — or it may not. The challenge is to be ready for both eventualities, by doing as much as possible to preserve all facets of American scientific endeavour, at home or abroad.

FT : UK to scrap or merge more quangos in anti-regulation drive

UK to scrap or merge more quangos in anti-regulation drive
Government wants to close superfluous agencies and bring responsibility for decisions back in-house

More than 300 arm’s-length bodies will be considered for abolition or merger under UK government plans to cut waste and restore ministerial control over swaths of policy areas.

Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden has written to Whitehall departments demanding they justify the existence of every quango — a quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation — to which decisions are currently outsourced, with a view to closing superfluous agencies and bringing responsibility for decisions back in-house.

He is expected to announce the first targets to be scrapped soon, according to government officials.

“We are taking action to ensure decisions of national importance that affect everyone in this country are made by those who have been elected to do so,” said McFadden on Sunday.

It is the latest move in the government’s programme to overhaul the state to improve its efficiency, in response to Sir Keir Starmer’s concern about Whitehall’s ability to deliver his five core missions.

Some arm’s-length bodies are already under review. In February chancellor Rachel Reeves announced an audit of Britain’s 130 or so regulators, with a view to refocus them on boosting growth. She gave notice that she would look at whether some should be scrapped.

Since then, the Payment Systems Regulator is the only regulator that has been abolished, with its operations merged into the Financial Conduct Authority.

Last month it became clear that ministers intended to review a wider category of arm’s length body, however, when Starmer announced that NHS England, the world’s largest quango, would be axed and its functions brought back into the Department of Health and Social Care.

Starmer said the abolition of the organisation — which employed more than 15,000 staff — would put the NHS “back at the heart of government” and return it to “democratic control”, while freeing it up to “focus on patients” and cut waiting lists.

Under the latest review, quangos found to be duplicating work conducted elsewhere across government will be abolished to slash bureaucracy and save money, while those with large policy functions will be merged back into departments so they fall under the oversight of ministers.

Officials said that arm’s-length bodies with a genuine need to remain independent from ministers — because they scrutinised the government or protected the rule of law — would be exempt.

Clearer accountability will be introduced for the quangos that remain after the review, however, with relevant Cabinet ministers and permanent secretaries, plus the cabinet secretary, being held responsible for their activities. Legislation may be required to deliver these reforms.

Simon Hoare, Conservative chair of the Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee, told the Financial Times last autumn that UK quangos lacked accountability and some had become a “law unto themselves”.

He also complained that officials had been unable to confirm the exact number of quangos in operation. The last audit four years ago recorded 295 such bodies.

It recorded 38 executive agencies, including the corporate registry Companies House and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency; 237 non-department public bodies, such as the Environment Agency and British Council; plus 20 non-ministerial departments, such as the Crown Prosecution Service and Food Standards Agency.

Trade unionists took a wary view of McFadden’s announcement. Mike Clancy, general secretary of Prospect union, warned that many quango staff around the country performed “incredibly important work” that was “often under-appreciated” in Westminster.

“Any reorganisation must not jeopardise the essential expertise and specialist skills contained within arm’s length bodies, and must make it easier to recruit and retain the specialists the civil service needs,” he said.

>>> Weekend Papers Summary

FINANCIAL TIMES
-In 1987, Donald Trump complained about the global system's disadvantage to the US, arguing that a strong dollar would negatively impact manufacturing, Japan's trade surplus, and military aid costs. He aimed to end deficits, reduce taxes, and allow the economy to grow. Now, nearly four decades later, with his popular vote victory in November's election, Trump believes he is finally in a position to reverse economic history. His "liberation day" speech reflects his core impulses about trade, aiming to unwind the multi-decade process of integrating the global economy. While the global trading system has helped America become the most prosperous nation in history, Trump sees the US as a victim, claiming that the country has been "looted, pillaged, raped, and plundered" by both friends and foes for the past five decades. He believes it is now his turn to prosper.
-Donald Trump's plan to impose massive tariffs on the international trading order has caused a significant drop in US stocks, resulting in a $5.4T loss in two days. The S&P 500 index fell 6%, shedding $5.38T in market value, following the US president's "liberation day" announcement. The blue-chip index's 9.1% fall was the largest since the pandemic began five years ago. Tech stocks, including Apple and Amazon, retreated, pushing the NASDAQ Composite down over 20% from its mid-December peak. Across the Atlantic, Europe's Stoxx 600 shed 8.4%, the UK's FTSE 100 fell 7.5%, and MSCI's Asia index fell 4.5%. Trump's plans to impose a 10% universal tariff and hit many countries with larger reciprocal duties have shaken investor confidence and triggered fears of a slowdown in the world's largest economy. China, the world's largest exporter, announced duties of 34% on all US imports. If the reciprocal tariffs are not withdrawn by April 9, a US recession is expected this year.
-Republican senator Ted Cruz warns of a possible "bloodbath" for his party in the 2026 midterm elections if Donald Trump's tariffs cause the US economy to enter recession. Cruz also predicted a "terrible" fate for the world's largest economy if a full-blown trade war erupts and Trump's tariffs, along with any retaliatory measures on US goods, stay in place long-term. Republican lawmakers have begun to worry about the effects of Trump's tariffs on the economy and their party's prospects for maintaining control of both chambers of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections. Republican Chuck Grassley introduced a bill in the Senate to reassert Congressional control of tariff policy, which would expire new levies in 60 days unless approved by Congress and allow lawmakers to cancel tariffs at any point. Support for the bill increased as Republican senators signed on as co-sponsors.
-Italy's EU partners are pressuring Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to choose a side in the transatlantic trade war, as she has an effective veto over a push for Brussels to hit back against US tariffs. Meloni opposes a Franco-German push to escalate the EU's response to the 20% "reciprocal tariff" imposed on its exports. Paris and Berlin are among member states urging the European Commission to hit US services exports, such as technology, in response to Trump's measures affecting over €360bn of its trade. The EU's "trade bazooka" anti-coercion instrument could be blocked by a weighted minority of member states.
-Mexican and Canadian officials were granted a reprieve from further tariffs by Donald Trump due to an exemption for goods exported to the US under their free trade agreement. This was due to the good relationship between the two countries. However, Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney warned that the US administration's actions would rupture the global economy and adversely affect global economic growth. In response, he announced 25% tariffs on non-USMCA compliant vehicles imported from the US, which is expected to raise C$8B (US$5.6B) to provide relief packages for workers and businesses.
-Bryan Johnson, 47, believes that we are part of the first generation who won't die due to potential AI breakthroughs. He has reduced his biological age by five years to 42, but his goal is to make his body age 18 using a strict regimen that borrows from existing medicine, technology, drugs, and scientific literature. Johnson is spending millions to measure factors that might make his body age faster, such as water quality and food toxins, and charting every health indicator in his body. In 2023, Johnson received a liter of blood from his 17-year-old son Talmage, but later halted the transfusions due to lack of benefits.
-Dilek Imamoglu, a prominent figure in Turkey, has come to symbolize hope and change amid financial instability, inflation, and rising authoritarianism. His slogan, "Everything will be beautiful," was coined by a young student, Berkay Gezgin. However, Gezgin has been arrested along with Imamoglu. Among those arrested was deputy secretary-general Mahir Polat, a respected art historian with a doctorate in cultural heritage. Polat launched the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Heritage Unit, restored historical buildings, and invested in public spaces, libraries, and art centers. Despite his dedication to culture and art, he is currently incarcerated.
-Taiwan's top national security official, Joseph Wu, is in Washington for secret talks with the Trump administration as China intensifies military pressure on Taiwan. Wu leads a delegation for a meeting known as the "special channel," which has been in use between the US and Taiwan for years but was first revealed in 2021. The US has kept the channel under wraps to avoid triggering any provocation by Beijing towards Taiwan. Washington has severed official relations with Taipei after normalizing relations with Beijing in 1979 but maintains unofficial relations with the country. China frequently criticizes US ties with Taiwan. Wu and his team arrived in the Washington area as China's military and coastguard began large-scale exercises around Taiwan. The People's Liberation Army's increasingly sophisticated exercises have raised US concerns about its stance on Taiwan.
-US initial public offerings of $15B fintech Klarna and $50B medtech company Medline have been postponed due to Donald Trump's aggressive tariffs. Klarna, Medline, and ticket company StubHub had planned to go public but were put on hold due to market turbulence. All companies had confidentially filed plans to list shares in recent months. Klarna was planning to start the investor roadshow for its $15B listing next week, while Medline, backed by Blackstone, Carlyle, and Hellman & Friedman, planned to file publicly earlier this week with a near-$50B valuation. StubHub and Hinge Health, which had publicly filed their paperwork last month, were holding off before starting talks with potential investors. The companies were under no obligation to float within a specific timeframe and the listing could still happen in the weeks ahead.
-US tourism hotspots and border towns are expecting a decline in visitors from Canada, the country's largest international tourist market, due to Trump's threats of annexation and tariffs. This has led to a patriotic boycott of US goods and increased travel in Canada. Statistics Canada reports a quarter decrease in Canadians returning from road trips to the US in February compared to 2024. Cross-border air travel has also slowed, prompting some airlines to reduce flights to the US.

NEW YORK TIMES
-The Senate approved Republicans' budget blueprint just after 2:30 a.m. on Saturday to clear the way for passing President Trump's domestic agenda, after Democrats forced an overnight session to protest the G.O.P. push to deliver what the president has called "one big beautiful bill" of spending and tax cuts. The 51-to-48 vote, mostly along party lines, was a crucial step in the Republican effort to fast-track budget legislation through Congress and shield it from a filibuster through a process known as reconciliation. Disagreements between Republicans in the House and the Senate about what should be in that bill had paralyzed them for weeks, but they have forged a fragile and complex compromise allowing them to move forward.
-Investors worldwide have expressed dissatisfaction with President Trump's new tariff policy, which was announced as a remaking of the economic order. The S&P 500 fell 6% on Friday, bringing its losses for the week to 9.1%. This was the steepest weekly decline since March 2020. The S&P 500 is approaching bear market territory, a 20% drop from the latest high, indicating extreme pessimism among investors. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite and the Russell 2000 index of smaller companies have already fallen into a bear market. The meltdown was not driven by a new virus or an unforeseen housing crisis, but by changes in the economic outlook. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite and Russell 2000 index have already fallen into bear markets.
-Two days after President Trump announced his global tariffs, China retaliated against American goods, causing markets to plummet due to concerns of a persistent trade war. The world braced for Trump to begin imposing nearly across-the-board taxes on imports, marking the first salvo in a potentially costly trade conflict. China, which has already hit Trump with 20% tariffs, announced plans to retaliate, promising to impose a 34% tariff on American goods next week, including agricultural products. This tit-for-tat delivered a significant blow to financial markets, as Wall Street reckoned with the rising odds of an escalating global trade standoff. The S&P 500 fell by almost 6%, pulling it closer to a bear market, while the NASDAQ fell 5.8%, pushing it into bear market territory.
-The Trump administration has rejected a Biden plan that would have required Medicare and Medicaid to cover obesity drugs and expanded access for millions of people. The Biden administration's proposal last November attempted to sidestep the ban on paying for drugs for "weight loss," arguing that the drugs would be allowed to treat obesity and its related conditions. Expanding coverage of the drugs would have cost the federal government billions of dollars, with the Congressional Budget Office estimated the federal expense would amount to about $35B over 10 years. The decision was part of a larger 438-page regulation updating parts of Medicare's Part D drug benefits and Medicare Advantage, the private insurance plans that about half of Medicare beneficiaries now use.
-More than 500 law firms have signed a legal brief supporting Perkins Coie, the first firm to receive an executive order restricting its business. The firms, totaling 504, declared that President Trump's crackdown on the law firm industry poses a "grave threat" to the rule of law and the system of constitutional governance. The brief was drafted by Donald B. Verrilli Jr., a solicitor general during President Barack Obama's administration. Perkins Coie sued the Trump administration, and a judge has temporarily blocked the president's order, which jeopardized its ability to represent government contractors and limited its access to federal buildings. A wide-ranging effort has been underway to collect signatures for the brief.
-A federal judge has permanently barred the Trump administration from limiting funding from the National Institutes of Health, which supports research at universities and academic medical centers. The ruling restores billions of dollars in grant money but sets up an almost certain appeal. Judge Angel Kelley's ruling was one of the first final decisions in the barrage of lawsuits against the Trump administration. The government asked the court to enter the verdict earlier to move ahead with an appeal. The decision was an initial win for various medical research institutions, who warned that the policy change threatened American scientific prowess and innovation, estimating that the change could force them to cover a nearly $4B shortfall.
-The firing of over a half-dozen national security officials on Laura Loomer's advice has caused concern among some Trump officials. The situation exemplifies Trump's tendency to seek information from shady sources. However, in his second term, he has fewer people to keep these voices away. Loomer explained that Gen. Timothy D. Haugh, head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, was chosen by Gen. Mark Milley, a former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, whom she deemed a traitor. Haugh's deputy, Wendy Noble, was close to James Clapper, a former director of national intelligence and critic of Trump.
-The New York State Education Department has reacted strongly to the Trump administration's threats to withdraw federal funding from public schools over certain diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The department's deputy commissioner for legal affairs, Daniel Morton-Bentley, stated that while the administration seeks to censor anything it deems 'diversity, equity & inclusion,' there are no federal or state laws prohibiting the principles of D.E.I. Morton-Bentley also noted that the federal government has not defined what practices it believes violate civil rights protections. The letter was sent after the federal government issued a memo to education officials asking them to confirm the elimination of all programs it argues unfairly promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.
-A video captured the moment Israeli troops opened fire on a group of medics in Gaza in late March. The video, discovered on the cellphone of a paramedic who was found along with 14 other aid workers in a mass grave in Gaza, shows that the ambulances and fire truck they were traveling in were clearly marked and had their emergency signal lights on when Israeli troops hit them with a barrage of gunfire. Officials from the Palestine Red Crescent Society presented the nearly seven-minute recording, which was obtained by The New York Times, to the UN Security Council.
-A federal judge has given the Trump administration until the end of Monday to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was inadvertently deported to El Salvador last month. The judge, Paula Xinis, ruled that federal officials acted without "legal basis" when they arrested Garcia and put him on a plane to a notorious Salvadoran megaprison without due process. The decision is a sharp rebuke to the Trump administration, who had acknowledged that Garcia's deportation was a mistake. The judge's ruling could put her on a collision course with the White House, as President Trump and his top aides have repeatedly attacked other federal judges who have questioned their attempts to carry out their deportation policies.

NEW YORK POST
-Former Vice President Kamala Harris was shocked by her loss to President Trump in November 2024, having "bought the hype" that her campaign was in good shape in the run-up to Election Day. The Hill correspondent Amie Parnes, co-author of "FIGHT: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House," told the podcast "Somebody's Gotta Win with Tara Palmeri" that Harris was completely shocked and Tim Walz was shocked as well. Walz was so "stunned" by Harris' crushing defeat that he was unable to speak. Harris was also asked if a recount was necessary, and she was asked if she was sure about the situation. Parnes reported that some members of Harris' team felt they were being "gaslit" by senior campaign officials, who were confident that "things were looking good" for the Democratic nominee. Harris "bought the hype," according to the journalist, and thought she was on a path to victory. The book "FIGHT: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House" provides a detailed account of Harris' shock and the subsequent confusion surrounding her election loss.
-JPMorgan has increased its likelihood of the US economy entering a recession to 60% due to President Donald Trump's tariff plans. The lender, led by CEO Jamie Dimon, had previously put the chances of a recession at 40% before the announcement of tariffs on Wednesday. JPMorgan's chief economist Bruce Kasman believes that disruptive US policies have become the biggest risk to the global outlook all year. The latest news reinforces their fears, as US trade policy has turned less business-friendly than they had anticipated. JPMorgan's probability scenario tree now raises the risk of a recession to 60%, as the US and possibly the global economy could be forced into recession if sustained. Trump's tariffs include a 10% baseline tariff on most US imports and higher reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries.

>>> Barron’s Weekend Summary

Cover:
-President Trump's tariff shock has prompted a reassessment of the post-World War II global economic order, prompting investors to revise assumptions about profit margins, investments, and inflation. The administration's 10% tariffs and country-specific tariffs, as high as 49%, on countries with trade deficits with the US were higher than expected. Capital Economics estimates that the average tariff is set to jump from about 2% last year to just over 20%, drawing comparisons to the Smoot-Hawley tariffs that deepened a recession in the 1930s. The tailspin in stocks, with the S&P 500 index shaving $2.5T in one day, underscored the shock. Trump's latest tariffs aim to narrow the US $1.2T trade deficit in goods, which he describes as a national emergency. While the administration may intend to negotiate these tariffs down, the magnitude and creation of these tariffs have eroded trust among US allies.

Interview:
-No update

Tech Trader:
-Apple, a major tech company, is facing significant challenges due to President Donald Trump's recent tariffs and the global trade war. The company's stock has fallen 15.9% since the announcement of the tariffs. Apple has been warning about geopolitical risks since early in Trump's first term, with trade disputes now being the second most prominent risk category. The company has a large global business, with sales outside the US representing a majority of its total net sales. In 2024, 64% of Apple's revenue came from outside the US, making it a clear target for potential tariffs. Apple would have to choose between raising prices, accepting lower gross margins, or a combination of both in the face of a trade war.

The Trader:
-President Donald Trump has initiated a trade war by imposing tariffs on nearly every country worldwide, leading to a 9.3% plunge in the Dow Jones Industrial Average and a 9.1% drop on the S&P 500. The president's statements, which are considered literal, have been interpreted as the only way to stop the selling. On Friday, Trump chose not to back down and reduce tariff rates, sending a message that his policies would never change. On Saturday, 10% baseline global tariffs will kick in, followed by higher tariffs on China, Vietnam, and the European Union. China is set to impose 34% retaliatory tariffs on the U.S., while Canada has announced a 25% retaliatory tariff on automobiles. Some stocks, like General Motors, are trading as if the tariffs won't be fully implemented. However, markets are aware of the danger they are in, especially if a recession occurs. Since 1950, there have been 56 pullbacks of 10% or more, and of the seven times they failed to rebound, six of them occurred during a recession. The odds of a recession in the next 12 months have been increasing, with an average economist surveyed by Bloomberg at the end of March seeing a 30% chance.
-Energy stocks have experienced a significant decline since President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs, with oil prices plummeting to their lowest level in nearly four years. The sector has lost over 15% of its gains in the first quarter, making it the worst performer in the S&P 500 index. Natural-gas stocks may fare better if Trump doesn't back off, as their prospects shouldn't be significantly affected by tariffs. The industry is vulnerable due to the potential trigger of an economic slowdown or global recession. Any drop in demand will force operators to slow production or prices to continue falling. OPEC and its allies are ramping up production, with a planned increase in output scheduled for May. Analysts say OPEC players are fighting for market share, and there's an internecine battle between big OPEC players and countries like Kazakhstan. If OPEC's priorities change, it could negatively impact US oil producers, as they may need to reset expectations about the leadership's willingness to provide perpetual price support.

Features:
-Investors are concerned about the impact of the Trump tariffs on the US stock market, with the S&P 500 falling 4.8% in response to the news. The key index has a year-to-date loss of 13.7%. Even if Trump retreats, some of the stock market losses may not be easily recouped, as US business and consumer confidence have been hurt and so likely has America's standing globally. Some industry groups are already pricing in the higher likelihood of a recession, and some investors may be time to consider hard-hit groups rather than defensive sectors like telecom, utilities, tobacco, property and casualty insurance, and consumer staples that held up well during the latest downdraft. One strategy is to buy the strongest companies in the weak groups as a way to potentially limit risk. Such a basket would include JPMorgan Chase, Delta Air Lines, Lennar, Amazon.com, Exxon Mobil, and Freeport-McMoRan. ETF’s focused on these sectors can provide broad exposure for investors. Delta Air Lines is the class act of the airline industry, thanks to its success in maximizing cabin revenue with premium seating, a lucrative credit card relationship with American Express, and an improved balance sheet since the pandemic. Lennar and D.R. Horton are the top home builders in the country with roughly 10% market shares each. Both stocks are down more than 30% from their 2024 peaks and trade for about 10 times projected 2025 earnings.
-Barry Bannister, a Wall Street strategist, has warned that the S&P 500's performance in 2023 is unlikely to improve soon. Bannister, who correctly predicted the index's performance in 2023, believes that the index will likely hover around the 5,500 mark in the second quarter due to investors expecting no major equity index upside absent a sharp reversal by the White House. Tariffs are just one issue, as Bannister notes persistently stubborn inflation and slowing gross domestic product growth were headwinds he was already clocking into this year. The earnings picture for the S&P 500 this year looks gloomier than just a few weeks ago, below general expectations on Wall Street but more in line with his prediction. Bannister expects less than 10% year-over-year growth, compared with the average estimate for midteens. Many other strategists are also warning that S&P 500 profits will be much lower than previously thought because of tariffs. For now, the S&P 500 is pricing in a slowdown, and Bannister thinks it's too early to call a recession. However, he believes his long-held view that stock returns will be more modest in the future. Bannister argues against buying the dip in tech and instead focusing on defensive value sectors like utilities, consumer staples, and various aspects of healthcare, including pharmaceuticals and equipment services.

Europe:
-ASML Holding stock has fallen sharply from its highs last year, with Mizuho predicting that the chipmaking equipment company's stock will not improve until customers Intel and Samsung Electronics invest more. ASML has a virtual monopoly on advanced machines used to manufacture the latest chips, making it a popular stock to play the artificial-intelligence boom. However, its American depositary receipts have fallen by nearly a third over the past 12 months. The slowdown on spending on ASML's advanced extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUV) machines by Samsung and Intel is a pressing issue. Mizuho analyst Kevin Wang lowered his rating on ASML to Neutral from Buy and lowered his target price to €650. ASML's sales are set to drop 3% in 2026, and earnings per share are likely to stay broadly flat as total EUV shipments fall to 49 units from 53 units in 2025.

Emerging Markets:
-No update

Commodities:
-Soybean prices have fallen by 3.7% since June 2023, with prices dropping from $15 per bushel two years ago to $10. The drop comes as China announced an additional 34% tariff on American goods starting from April 10, in response to President Donald Trump's 34% levies on Chinese imports. China has already imposed 10% to 15% on roughly $21B worth of agricultural imports from the US, which have been in effect since March 10. China's General Administration of Customs also suspended import qualifications for three US entities, effectively halting their soybean shipments to China. Analyst Leah Fahy at Capital Economics noted that during the first trade war, China's imports of US goods fell more abruptly than US imports from China, even though China's tariffs went up by less. China is one of the largest export markets for US agricultural products, and soybeans alone were nearly half of the total in 2024. The renewed tension between Beijing and Washington is expected to accelerate the process and leave American farmers holding the bag.

Streetwise:
-Spirit Airlines offers low fares, with a New York City to Houston flight costing about $70 per person round trip, plus $80 in airport fees and taxes. Southwest Airlines, which is attempting a turnaround while suffering an identity crisis and possibly entering an industry slump, is leading the group with a 4% increase since the end of January. Southwest offers two free checked bags as long as you book before May 28. After that, it will start charging for bags like everyone else. Southwest has been offering baggage fees since 2007, but it has been able to maintain its position for 18 years. Melius Research analyst Conor Cunningham recently raised his rating to Hold from Sell, stating that the product in the US domestic market is arguably the best it has ever been. Cunningham believes that many customers have gotten used to flying without checked bags, and an airline that doesn't charge for them is missing an opportunity to add free bags as a perk for its rewards credit card.

WSJ : Here’s the iPhone. Here’s the iPhone With Tariffs.

Here’s the iPhone. Here’s the iPhone With Tariffs.
This is what Apple pays for components inside its bestselling phone, and how Trump’s China tariffs could raise the bill

The dream of the Trump tariffs is to bring high-tech manufacturing to the U.S. The reality could be a bajillion-dollar iPhone.

Apple’s AAPL -7.29%decrease; red down pointing triangle big moneymaker is a global patchwork. It has components sourced from all over the world, brought together primarily in China, where electronics manufacturing has been perfected over a generation.

Moving just the assembly process to the U.S.? Not cheap and definitely not easy.


Take a look at this iPhone 16 Pro. Your cost, for the 256GB version, is $1,100. The cost of all the hardware inside—aka the bill of materials—was about $550 to Apple when the phone was introduced, says Wayne Lam, research analyst at TechInsights, which breaks down major products. Throw in assembly and testing and Apple’s cost rises to around $580. Even when you account for Apple’s advertising budget and all the included services—iMessage, iCloud, etc.—there’s still a healthy profit margin.

Now factor in the newly announced tariff for goods from China, which currently totals 54%. The cost rises to around $850. That profit margin would shrink dramatically if Apple didn’t up the price. And you don’t become a trillion-dollar gadget company by charging for things at cost.

An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment on the company’s pricing plans or manufacturing details.

So what about that American-made iPhone? Wouldn’t it at least save on tariffs? Apple would still pay levies on the device’s many imported parts. Plus, a manufacturing move to the U.S. would be “a massive, mammoth undertaking” that would take years, says Barton Crockett, senior research analyst at brokerage firm Rosenblatt Securities.

And the phone itself would likely cost more—a lot more. The assembly ecosystem in China is labor intensive and wouldn’t make economic sense in the U.S., Crockett explains. “It’s not clear you can make a competitively priced smartphone here.”

By Lam’s estimates, the assembly labor that might cost $30 per phone in China could cost $300 in the U.S. And if every single component, from the touchscreen display to the internal storage were built here? Yep, a bajillion dollars. And maybe a magic wand.

This tariff matter is far from settled. Our advice is to hold off on stockpiling last year’s iPhones, and make that one in your hand last as long as it can.

WSJ : A Billionaire’s Son and First-Time Novelist Satirizes His Own People

A Billionaire’s Son and First-Time Novelist Satirizes His Own People
In an age of fiction about the wealthy, Daniel Breyer, son of billionaire Breyer Capital founder and CEO Jim Breyer, has written his own take

Daniel Breyer didn’t have to go far to observe the ultra-wealthy for his first novel.

In “Smokebirds,” a social satire out Tuesday that explores the dark side of inherited riches, Breyer observes the psyche of the elite from his own privileged perch. As a child of venture-capital billionaire Jim Breyer, he’s been a fly on lots of the walls that separate the 0.0001 percent from the rest of the world.

The writer, 30, who currently works for his father, did not build his novel around the San Francisco tech world that raised him. Instead, he centered it on a northern California logging dynasty, from the bullying lumber baron grandpa who profits off wildfires and climate change to the toxic nepo-babies ruined by their riches.

Breyer spoke with the Journal about his father’s reaction to the book, the difference between millionaires and billionaires and why his dog is in his author photo.

What gave you the idea for the book?

This book is about fire season. The impetus came in 2020, during I guess it was called “Orange Sky Day,” somewhat comically, but it was like an Armageddon event in San Francisco where the sky was bright orange and everything was dark and gloomy and nobody knew what time it was. And the reaction of a lot of people was, “How do we get out of the city?” What an ultimate privilege—a climate-change event is happening and feeling like, “Oh, how do we escape from this?” Instead of snowbirds fleeing the winter, they’re fleeing the smoke.

A smoke vacation. What did they call it?

“Fire season sabbatical.”

What in this book comes directly from your own upbringing?

I’m the ultimate nepo-baby in a lot of senses. I grew up in these circles and there’s a sense that comes with that, the worst kind, of feeling like you’re better than other people. Then there’s the other side, in the sense of social currency, of calling it out. That makes people inherently like you because you’re self-aware. I’m very fascinated by the world of people who grew up with everything, like myself, and how they justify that, what they try to do with that, how they talk about it.

What do your parents think of the novel?

This is not a book about my dad or my mom or my brother, my sister or so on. I give my dad so much credit because there could be interviews about this book where it’s like, “You wrote about your dad, he’s evil.” It’s just so not the case. From the very beginning he was like, “You should go write books.” I think he’s very proud. And my mom, she would defend this book to the death.

What’s something in the book that happened in real life?

There’s a scene at a luau barbecue and an older gentleman talks about moving out of the country because the taxes are so much better. That was an interaction I had with an individual at some mixer, and he was just talking about how he has to get away from the United States because he’s so sick of this. I remember thinking to myself, you can have all sorts of views about what’s wrong with America, or what’s good about America, but the idea of just someone to be like, “I’m going somewhere else entirely because I don’t want to pay these taxes anymore,” I found that humorous.

I wondered if you related to the critical inner voice of some of your characters.

I think a lot of writing this book is about owning my own hypocrisy. I’m writing a social satire of the crazy rich and people who’ve benefitted from nepotism. I’ve been incredibly grateful to work with my dad. At the same time, I recognize there’s thousands of other people who’d be terrific investors. Breaking into that industry is so, so tough. My friends who did it without any background, I have way more pride in them.

Did some people write you off when you started working for your dad?
They have every right to write me off, to think, “What has this guy earned to get to do this?” And it’s up to me over a long period of time in the venture-capital space to work with founders, entrepreneurs and other people and try to really help them out. That chip on my shoulder of, “How dare these people dismiss me. I deserve to be here, too,” that kind of thinking is dangerous. I’ve been given a crazy opportunity and people can think what they want, and a lot of those thoughts might be accurate, and I can control what I can control and to try to be good at my job and try not to be super obnoxious about it.

What’s the difference between millionaires and billionaires?

There is a level of excess that is different. And the problems are different. It turns into less of, “OK, how do I get to this next point in my career to get an even nicer house for my family?” to “Ok, how am I being portrayed among my peers? Do they respect me? Am I as respectable as this person or this person?” As you get to the next stage, I think the competition changes. If there’s a big difference, I think it’s that a lot of billionaires hang out with billionaires and a lot of millionaires hang out with millionaires and the social status of both have changed.

Why is your dog in your author photo?

I joke with my wife that my true love is this dog. He’s a Samoyed. They’re crazy cute. They’re also a handful. They bark a lot. His name is Nahko.