NewzIntel.com

Category: Business

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security

    Source: The White House

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

         Section 1.  Purpose and Policy.  Since its enactment in 1977, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 78dd-1 et seq.) (FCPA) has been systematically, and to a steadily increasing degree, stretched beyond proper bounds and abused in a manner that harms the interests of the United States.  Current FCPA enforcement impedes the United States’ foreign policy objectives and therefore implicates the President’s Article II authority over foreign affairs.

         The President’s foreign policy authority is inextricably linked with the global economic competitiveness of American companies.  American national security depends in substantial part on the United States and its companies gaining strategic business advantages whether in critical minerals, deep-water ports, or other key infrastructure or assets. 

         But overexpansive and unpredictable FCPA enforcement against American citizens and businesses — by our own Government — for routine business practices in other nations not only wastes limited prosecutorial resources that could be dedicated to preserving American freedoms, but actively harms American economic competitiveness and, therefore, national security. 
         It is therefore the policy of my Administration to preserve the Presidential authority to conduct foreign affairs and advance American economic and national security by eliminating excessive barriers to American commerce abroad. 

         Sec. 2.  Policy of Enforcement Discretion.  (a)  For a period of 180 days following the date of this order, the Attorney General shall review guidelines and policies governing investigations and enforcement actions under the FCPA.  During the review period, the Attorney General shall:
              (i)    cease initiation of any new FCPA investigations or enforcement actions, unless the Attorney General determines that an individual exception should be made;
              (ii)   review in detail all existing FCPA investigations or enforcement actions and take appropriate action with respect to such matters to restore proper bounds on FCPA enforcement and preserve Presidential foreign policy prerogatives; and
              (iii)  issue updated guidelines or policies, as appropriate, to adequately promote the President’s Article II authority to conduct foreign affairs and prioritize American interests, American economic competitiveness with respect to other nations, and the efficient use of Federal law enforcement resources.
         (b)  The Attorney General may extend such review period for an additional 180 days as the Attorney General determines appropriate.
         (c)  FCPA investigations and enforcement actions initiated or continued after the revised guidelines or policies are issued under subsection (a) of this section:
              (i)   shall be governed by such guidelines or policies; and
              (ii)  must be specifically authorized by the Attorney General.
         (d)  After the revised guidelines or policies are issued under subsection (a) of this section, the Attorney General shall determine whether additional actions, including remedial measures with respect to inappropriate past FCPA investigations and enforcement actions, are warranted and shall take any such appropriate actions or, if Presidential action is required, recommend such actions to the President.

         Sec. 3.  Severability.  If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

         Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: 
              (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or 
              (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. 
         (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. 
         (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.  
     
     
     
     
     
    THE WHITE HOUSE,
        February 10, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Adjusting Imports of Steel into The United States

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-center”>BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
     
    A PROCLAMATION

    1. On January 11, 2018, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) transmitted to me a report on the Secretary’s investigation into the effect of imports of steel mill articles (steel articles) on the national security of the United States under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1862) (section 232).  The Secretary found and advised me of his opinion that steel articles are being imported into the United States in such quantities and under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security of the United States.
    2. In Proclamation 9705 of March 8, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), I concurred in the Secretary’s finding that steel articles, as defined in clause 1 of Proclamation 9705 (as amended by clause 8 of Proclamation 9711 of March 22, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States)), are being imported into the United States in such quantities and under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security of the United States, and decided to adjust the imports of steel articles by imposing a 25 percent ad valorem tariff on such articles imported from most countries.  Proclamation 9705 further stated that any country with which the United States has a security relationship is welcome to discuss alternative ways to address the threatened impairment of the national security caused by imports from that country, and noted that, should the United States and that country arrive at a satisfactory alternative means to address the threat to the national security such that the President determines that imports from that country no longer threaten to impair the national security, I may remove or modify the restriction on steel articles imports from that country and, if necessary, adjust the tariff as it applies to other countries, as the national security interests of the United States require.
    3. In Proclamation 9705, I also directed the Secretary to monitor imports of steel articles and inform me of any circumstances that in the Secretary‘s opinion might indicate the need for further action under Section 232, as amended, with respect to such imports.  Pursuant to Proclamation 9705, the Secretary was authorized to provide relief from the additional duties, based on a request from a directly affected party located in the United States, for any steel article determined not to be produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or of a satisfactory quality, or based upon specific national security considerations.

    In subsequent proclamations, I noted the conclusion of discussions or the agreement on certain measures with the Argentine Republic (Argentina), Proclamation 9759 of May 31, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); the Commonwealth of Australia (Australia), Proclamation 9759; the Federative Republic of Brazil (Brazil), Proclamation 9759; Proclamation 10064 of August 28, 2020 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Canada, Proclamation 9894 of May 19, 2019 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States; the United Mexican States (Mexico), Proclamation 9894; and the Republic of Korea (South Korea), Proclamation 9740 of April 30, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States).  President Biden noted the conclusion of discussions or the agreement on certain measures with the European Union (EU) on behalf of its member countries, Proclamation 10328 of December 27, 2021 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Proclamation 10691 of December 28, 2023 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Japan, Proclamation 10356 of March 31, 2022 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); and the United Kingdom (UK), Proclamation 10406 of May 31, 2022 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), on alternative ways to address the threat to the national security.  In addition, then-President Biden acknowledged the close relationship with Ukraine and exempted steel articles from Ukraine from the tariff. Proclamation 10403 of May 27, 2022 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Proclamation 10588 of May 31, 2023 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Proclamation 10771 of May 31, 2024 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States).  In Proclamation 10783 of July 10, 2024 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), President Biden noted that imports of steel articles from Mexico had increased significantly as compared to their levels at the time of Proclamation 9894.  Accordingly, he implemented a melt and pour requirement for imports of steel articles that are products of Mexico and increased the section 232 duty rate for imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles that are products of Mexico that are melted and poured in a country other than Mexico, Canada, or the United States.

    • The Secretary has informed me that the initial 25 percent ad valorem tariff imposed by Proclamation 9705 has been an effective means of reducing imports, encouraging investment and expansion of production by domestic steel producers, and mitigating the threatened impairment of U.S. national security.  Following the initial imposition of 25 percent ad valorem tariffs, the U.S. steel capacity utilization rate increased to above 80 percent.
    • The Secretary has also informed me that, notwithstanding the impact of the tariff imposed by Proclamation 9705, imports of steel articles from certain countries exempted from the tariff or subject to alternative agreements have increased significantly, while excess capacity in the global steel industry has begun to increase again in recent years.  For example, imports from Canada increased 18 percent since Canada was excluded from the section 232 tariffs.  According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), global steel excess capacity is projected to reach approximately 630 million metric tons by 2026, more than total steel production in all OECD countries.  At the same time, exports of steel from the People’s Republic of China (China) have recently surged, exceeding 114 million metric tons through November 2024 while displacing production in other countries and forcing them to export greater volumes of steel articles and derivative steel articles to the United States. 
    • Total steel imports as a share of U.S. consumption increased significantly in 2024, reaching nearly 30 percent, similar to the import share of U.S. consumption at the time the Secretary issued his January 11, 2018, report.  Imports from countries with which the United States has reached alternative agreements have increased significantly as a share of total imports, from 74 percent in 2018 to 82 percent in 2024, while imports from countries subject to quantitative restrictions remain elevated regardless of changing U.S. demand conditions and the substantial investments made to expand the capabilities of the domestic industry.  Increasing and persistently high import volumes from countries exempted from the duties or subject to other alternative agreements like quotas and tariff-rate quotas have captured the benefit of U.S. demand at the domestic industry’s expense and transmitted harmful effects onto the domestic industry.  As steel import market share has increased, the domestic industry’s performance has been depressed, resulting in capacity utilization rates persistently lower than the 80 percent target level highlighted in the Secretary’s report. 
    • The Secretary has informed me that imports of steel articles from Canada and Mexico have increased significantly to levels that once again threaten to impair U.S. national security.  Volumes from both Canada and Mexico increased overall, from 7.77 million metric tons in 2020 to 9.14 million metric tons in 2024.  Imports have also surged in excess of historical norms of trade across numerous key product lines, such as long reinforcing bars, which have experienced import increases of 1,678 percent from Mexico and 564 percent from Canada.  These surges have occurred while authorities in those countries have supported otherwise uncompetitive producers with subsidies and other interventions that have exacerbated the global excess capacity crisis.  In addition, increasing import volumes and including Mexico’s imports from China, support a conclusion that there is transshipment or further processing of steel mill articles from countries that remain subject to the additional ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705, or from countries seeking to evade quantitative restrictions.
    • The Secretary has also informed me that alternative agreements with trading partners including Australia, the members of the EU, Japan, and the United Kingdom have been less effective in eliminating the threatened impairment of U.S. national security than the additional ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705.  As a result, imports of steel articles from these countries have increased as a share of total U.S. steel imports from 18.6 percent in 2020 to 20.7 percent in 2024.  In addition, from 2022 to 2024, imports from countries subject to quotas (Argentina, Brazil, and South Korea) increased by approximately 1.5 million metric tons, even as U.S. demand declined by more than 6.1 million tons during the period.  Argentina has continued to export steel to the United States at unsustainable quantities, especially a recent surge of semifinished products. Furthermore, Argentina’s lack of data transparency has continued to be of concern for the United States.  From official trade statistics released by Argentina, it is difficult to assess the levels of steel being imported from places like China and Russia, and other potential sources of excess capacity. Brazilian imports from countries with meaningful levels of overcapacity, specifically China have grown tremendously in recent years, more than tripling since the institution of this quota arrangement. 
    • At the same time, these alternative agreements have not resulted in sufficient action by these trading partners to address non-market excess capacity caused primarily by China, or sufficient cooperation by these trading partners on issues like trade remedies and customs matters or monitoring bilateral steel trade.  Some countries have also welcomed steel industry investments from non-market producers in countries like China seeking to exploit the agreements to obtain preferential access to the U.S. market.  The agreements have therefore been detrimental to U.S. steel production and national security.
    • The Secretary has informed me of similar problems with respect to the temporary exemption for imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Ukraine.  Rather than supporting the Ukrainian steel industry and alleviating the economic harm caused by the ongoing conflict, the benefits of this temporary exemption have accrued primarily to producers in EU member countries, which have significantly increased duty-free exports to the U.S. market of steel articles processed from Ukrainian semi-finished steel.  Since 2021, imports from Ukraine have remained steady at 0.5 percent of total U.S. imports, while imports from the European Union have increased 11.2 percent to 14.8 percent.  As a result of the temporary exemption, these imports enter the U.S. market subject to neither the ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705, nor the tariff-rate-quota system applicable to other imports of steel articles from EU producers as proclaimed in Proclamation 10328.  This has facilitated evasion of both the section 232 measures and of antidumping duties that would be paid if the finished products were imported directly from Ukraine.
    • The Secretary has informed me that producers in countries that remain subject to the program have continued to evade the measures by processing covered steel articles into additional downstream steel derivative products that were not included in the additional ad valorem tariffs proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980 of January 24, 2020 (Adjusting Imports of Derivative Aluminum Articles and Derivative Steel Articles Into the United States).  Imports of products such as fabricated structural steel, prestressed concrete strand, and others, have increased significantly since the issuance of Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980, eroding the domestic industry’s customer base and resulting in depressed demand for steel articles produced in the United States.
    • The Secretary has also informed me of certain ongoing challenges with the product exclusion process authorized by Proclamation 9705, Proclamation 9777 of August 29, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), and Proclamation 9980 and implemented by subsequent regulations.  This process has resulted in exclusions for a significant volume of imports, in a manner that undermines the purpose of the section 232 measures and threatens to impair national security.  Certain general approved exclusions remain in effect for entire tariff lines of steel articles, notwithstanding the domestic industry’s potential to produce many excluded products. 
    • I determine that these developments and modifications to the tariffs announced in Proclamation 9705 have undermined the program’s national security objectives by preventing the domestic steel industry from achieving sustained production capacity utilization of at least 80 percent, as determined necessary in the Secretary’s report of January 11, 2018.  I also determine that they have failed to achieve their articulated objectives.  As a result, I determine that they have resulted in significantly increasing imports of steel articles that threaten to impair the national security.    
    • In light of the Secretary’s findings regarding the alternative agreements with South Korea proclaimed in Proclamation 9740; Argentina, Australia, and Brazil proclaimed in Proclamation 9759; Canada and Mexico proclaimed in Proclamation 9894; EU countries proclaimed in Proclamation 10328; Japan proclaimed in Proclamation 10356; and the United Kingdom proclaimed in Proclamation 10406, I have revisited the determinations in these proclamations.  In my judgment, the arrangements with these countries have failed to provide effective, long-term alternative means to address these countries’ contribution to the threatened impairment to the national security by restraining steel articles exports to the United States from each of them, limiting transshipment and surges and distorted pricing, and discouraging excess steel capacity and excess steel production. Thus, I have determined that steel articles imports from these countries threaten to impair the national security, and I have decided that it is necessary to terminate these arrangements as of March 12, 2025.  As of that date, all imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, EU countries, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the United Kingdom shall be subject to the additional ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 with respect to steel articles and Proclamation 9980 with respect to derivative steel articles.  In my judgment, these modifications are necessary to address the significantly increasing share of imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from these sources, which threaten to impair U.S. national security.  Replacing the alternative agreements with the additional ad valorem tariffs will be a more robust and effective means of ensuring that the objectives articulated in the Secretary’s January 11, 2018, report and subsequent proclamations are achieved.
    • For the same reasons, I have also revisited the determinations in Proclamation 10403, Proclamation 10558, and Proclamation 10771.  In my judgment, the arrangement with Ukraine has failed to provide effective, long-term alternative means to address Ukraine’s contribution to the threatened impairment to our national security by restraining steel articles exports to the United States from Ukraine, limiting transshipment and surges, and discouraging excess steel capacity and excess steel production. Thus, I have determined that steel articles imports from Ukraine threaten to impair the national security and have determined that it is necessary to terminate the temporary exemption for imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Ukraine as proclaimed in Proclamation 10403, Proclamation 10558, and Proclamation 10771.  In my judgment, terminating this exemption will prevent abuses that have resulted in significantly increasing imports from sources other than Ukraine, will prevent evasion of antidumping duties, and will support the domestic steel industry without harming Ukraine’s economic recovery. 
    • In light of the information provided by the Secretary that significantly increasing imports of certain derivative steel articles have depressed demand for steel articles produced by domestic steel producers, I have determined that it is necessary and appropriate in light of U.S. national security interests to adjust the tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980 to apply to additional derivative steel articles.  As of March 12, 2025, the additional derivative steel articles covered by this proclamation, as set out in Annex I to this proclamation, shall be subject to the ad valorem duties proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980, except for derivative steel articles processed in another country from steel articles that were melted and poured in the United States.  For any derivative steel article identified in Annex I that is not in Chapter 73 of the HTSUS, the additional ad valorem duty shall apply only to the steel content of the derivative steel article.  The Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register to this effect, including Annex I to this proclamation. 
    • The Secretary has informed me that his findings with regard to the product exclusion process present circumstances that in the Secretary’s opinion indicate the need for further action by the President under section 232.  Accordingly, as of the date of this proclamation the Secretary is no longer authorized to provide relief from the additional duties set forth in clause 2 of Proclamation 9705 for any steel article determined not to be produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or a satisfactory quality or based on specific national security determinations, and the product exclusion process as authorized in clause 3 of Proclamation 9705, clause 1 of Proclamation 9777, and clause 2 of Proclamation 9980 is terminated, effective immediately.  I have determined that terminating product exclusions is necessary to ensure that overly broad exclusions do not allow high volumes of imports to undermine the objectives articulated in the Secretary’s January 11, 2018, report and relevant subsequent proclamations.  This change will also relieve the administrative burden that the process has created.  Following this proclamation, and subject to any restrictions set forth in or pursuant to other provisions of applicable law, imports of any steel article or derivative steel article from any source and in any quantity will be available to U.S. importers, provided that the additional ad valorem tariffs are paid upon entry or withdrawal from warehouse for consumption.
    • Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, authorizes the President to take action to adjust the imports of an article and its derivatives if the President concurs with the Secretary’s finding that the article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security. 
    • Section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2483), authorizes the president to embody in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) the substance of statutes affecting import treatment, and actions thereunder, including the removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.

    20.  The United States will monitor the implementation and effectiveness of these actions in addressing our national security needs, and I may revisit this determination, as appropriate.

         NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, do hereby proclaim as follows: 

    • The provisions of Proclamation 9740 with respect to imports of steel articles from South Korea; Proclamation 9759 with respect to imports of steel articles from Argentina, Australia, and Brazil; Proclamation 10064 with respect to imports of steel articles from Brazil; Proclamation 9894 with respect to imports of steel articles from Canada and Mexico; Proclamation 10783 with respect to imports of steel articles from Mexico; Proclamation 10328 and Proclamation 10691 with respect to imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from the EU; Proclamation 10356 with respect to imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Japan; Proclamation 10406 with respect to imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from the United Kingdom; and Proclamation 10403, Proclamation 10558, and Proclamation 10771 with respect to steel articles and derivative steel articles from Ukraine shall be ineffective as of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025.  The provisions of clause 1 of Proclamation 9740 as applicable to imports of steel articles or derivative steel articles from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and EU member countries shall be ineffective as of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025.  The provisions of clause 1 of Proclamation 9980 as applicable to imports of derivative steel articles from Argentina, Australia, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea shall be ineffective as of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025.  As of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025, all imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from these countries shall be subject to the additional ad valorem tariffs proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980.
    • Clause 2 of Proclamation 9705, as amended, is revised to read as follows:

    “(2)(a)  In order to establish certain modifications to the duty rate on imports of steel articles, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS is modified as provided in the forthcoming annex to this proclamation set out in a subsequent Federal Register notice and any subsequent proclamations regarding such steel articles.

         (b)  Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, or in notices published pursuant to clause 3 of this proclamation, all steel articles imports covered by heading 9903.80.01, in subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS, shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, as follows: (i) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 23, 2018, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and the member countries of the European Union; (ii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2018, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and South Korea; (iii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on August 13, 2018, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, South Korea, and Turkey; (iv) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on May 20, 2019, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, South Korea, and Turkey; (v) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on May 21, 2019, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea; (vi) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on January 1, 2022, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive; (vii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on April 1, 2022, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.80, inclusive; (viii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2022, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan and the United Kingdom (UK), for steel articles covered by subheadings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.78 and heading 9903.81.80, and from the member countries of the European Union, for steel articles covered by heading 9903.81.81; (ix) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2024, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan and the UK, for steel articles covered by subheadings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.78 and heading 9903.81.80, and from the member countries of the European Union, for steel articles covered by heading 9903.81.81, and from the member countries of the European Union where the steel used in the manufacture of the steel article is melted and poured in Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2024, (x) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on January 1, 2024, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea, and except for Ukraine in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, and except the member countries of the European Union in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan and the UK , in accordance the relevant proclamation as amended, for steel articles covered by subheadings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.78 and heading 9903.81.80, and from the member countries of the European Union in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, for steel articles covered by heading 9903.81.81, and from the member countries of the European Union where the steel used in the manufacture of the steel article is melted and poured in Ukraine in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, and (xi) from all countries on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025, unless suspended. Further, except as otherwise provided in notices published pursuant to clause 3 of this proclamation, all steel articles imports from Turkey covered by heading 9903.80.02, in subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS, shall be subject to a 50 percent ad valorem rate of duty with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on August 13, 2018, and prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern time on May 21, 2019.  These rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported steel articles, shall apply to imports of steel articles from each country as specified in the preceding three sentences.“

    • The first two sentences of clause 1 of Proclamation 9980 are revised to read as follows:

    “In order to establish increases in the duty rate on imports of certain derivative articles, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS is modified as provided in Annex I and Annex II to this proclamation.  Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, all imports of derivative aluminum articles specified in Annex I to this proclamation shall be subject to an additional 10 percent ad valorem rate of duty, and all imports of derivative steel articles specified in Annex II to this proclamation shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty, with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, as follows: (i) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 8, 2020, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, the Commonwealth of Australia (Australia), Canada, and the United Mexican States (Mexico), and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea; (ii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on January 1, 2022, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, and Mexico, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, and South Korea; (iii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on April 1, 2022, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, and Mexico, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, and South Korea; (iv) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2022, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, and the UK, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the UK, and except from Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023; (v) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 10, 2023, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, the UK, and Russia, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the UK, and except from Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023; (vi) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, the UK, and Russia, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the UK, and except from Ukraine om accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended; and (vii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2025, unless suspended, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, taxes, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries.”

    • Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, all imports of derivative steel articles specified in Annex I to this proclamation or in any subsequent annex to this proclamation, as set out in a subsequent notice in the Federal Register, shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty, with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on the Commerce certification date in clause 8. These rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, taxes, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries, but shall not apply to derivative steel articles processed in another country from steel articles that were melted and poured in the United States. The Secretary shall continue to monitor imports of the derivative articles described in Annex I to this proclamation, and shall, from time to time, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative, review the status of such imports with respect to the national security of the United States.
    • For purposes of implementing the requirements in this proclamation, importers of steel derivative articles shall provide to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol within the Department of Homeland Security (CBP) any information necessary to identify the steel content used in the manufacture of steel derivative articles imports, covered by this Proclamation. CBP shall implement the information requirements as soon as practicable.
    • Within 90 days after the date of this proclamation, the Secretary shall establish a process for including additional derivative steel articles within the scope of the ad valorem duties proclaimed in Proclamation 9705, Proclamation 9980, and clause 4 of this proclamation.  In addition to inclusions made by the Secretary, this process shall provide for including additional derivative steel articles at the request of a producer of a steel article or derivative steel article, or an industry association representing one or more such producers, where the request establishes that imports of a derivative steel article have increased in a manner that threatens to impair the national security or otherwise undermine the objectives set forth in the Secretary’s January 11, 2018, report or any Proclamation issued pursuant thereto.  When the Secretary receives such a request from a domestic producer or industry association, the Secretary shall issue a determination regarding whether or not to include the derivative steel article or articles within 60 days of receiving the request. 
    • The provisions of clause 3 of Proclamation 9705, clause 1 of Proclamation 9777, clause 2 of Proclamation 9980, or any other provisions authorizing the Secretary to grant relief for certain products from the additional ad valorem duties or quantitative restrictions set forth in prior proclamations are hereby revoked.  As of 11:59 p.m. eastern time on the date of this proclamation, the Secretary shall not consider any product exclusion requests or renew any product exclusion requests in effect as of that date.  The Secretary shall take all necessary action to rescind the product exclusion process, including publication in the Federal Register.  Granted product exclusions shall remain effective until their expiration date or until excluded product volume is imported, whichever occurs first.  The Secretary shall terminate all existing general approved exclusions as of March 12, 2025.   
    • The modifications made by this proclamation in clause 4 shall be effective upon public notification by the Secretary of Commerce, that adequate systems are in place to fully, efficiently, and expediently process and collect tariff revenue for covered articles.
    • Any steel article or derivative article, except those eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, that is subject to the duty imposed by this proclamation and that is admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2025, must be admitted as “privileged foreign status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, and will be subject upon entry for consumption to any ad valorem rates of duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading.  Any steel article or derivative steel article, except those eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, that is subject to the duty imposed by this proclamation, and that was admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone under “privileged foreign status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2025 , will likewise be subject upon entry for consumption to any ad valorem rates of duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading added by this proclamation.  Pursuant to clause 8, the duties on steel derivatives established by clause 4 of this Proclamation shall be suspended until public notification by the Secretary of Commerce that adequate systems are in place to fully, efficiently, and expediently process and collect tariff revenue applicable to covered articles.
    • Any product listed in Annex Ito this proclamation or any subsequent annex published in the Federal Register pursuant to this Proclamation, that is subject to the additional duties imposed by this proclamation, and that is admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone, except any product that is eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, may only be admitted as “privileged foreign status,” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, effective as of the date that the additional duties are imposed.
    • The Secretary, in consultation with the Commissioner of CBP, Security, and the heads of other relevant executive departments and agencies, shall revise the HTSUS so that it conforms to the amendments and effective dates directed in this proclamation within ten days of March 12, 2025.  The Secretary is authorized and directed to publish any such modification and future modifications to the HTSUS in the Federal Register.
    • CBP shall prioritize reviews of the classification of imported steel articles and derivative steel articles and, in the event that it discovers misclassification resulting in non-payment of the ad valorem duties proclaimed herein, it shall assess monetary penalties in the maximum amount permitted by law and shall not consider any evidence of mitigating factors in its determination.  In addition, CBP shall promptly notify the Secretary regarding evidence of any efforts to evade payment of the ad valorem duties proclaimed herein through processing or alteration of steel articles or derivative steel articles prior to importation.  In such circumstances, the Secretary shall consider the processed or altered steel articles or derivative steel articles for inclusion as derivative steel articles pursuant to clause 5 of this proclamation.
    • No drawback shall be available with respect to the duties imposed pursuant to this proclamation.

    (14)  The Secretary may issue regulations and guidance consistent with this proclamation, including to address operational necessity.

    (15) Any provision of a previous proclamation or Executive Order that is inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation is superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this

    tenth day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Whether we carve out an exemption or not, Trump’s latest tariffs will still hit Australia

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott French, Senior Lecturer in Economics, UNSW Sydney

    US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese have stated an exemption for Australia from Trump’s executive order placing 25% tariffs on all steel and aluminium imported into the US is “under consideration”. But prospects remain uncertain.

    Albanese would do well to secure an exemption using similar arguments as then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull did in 2018.

    If Australia cannot obtain a carve-out from the tariffs, the main group affected will be the Australian producers of steel and aluminium. But the size of the hit they will take is difficult to predict.

    Regardless of whether Australia gets an exemption, the world economy – and Australians – will be affected by Trump’s latest round of tariffs.

    Producers will be hit

    If ultimately imposed by the US, these tariffs will make steel and aluminium produced in Australia more expensive for US manufacturers relative to domestically produced alternatives. This will certainly result in reduced demand for the Australian products.

    However, three factors will help limit the effects:

    1. The price of metals produced in the US will rise

    It will take time to ramp up US production to fill the gap of reduced imports, and the extra production will likely come from less efficient domestic producers. This means that US manufacturers will continue to buy imported metals, despite the higher prices.

    2. The US is not a huge market for Australian steel and aluminium

    Australia produced A$113 billion of primary and fabricated metal in the 2022-23 financial year, according to the ABS.

    By comparison, less than $1 billion of steel and aluminium was exported to the US in 2023, according to data from UN Comtrade, consisting of about $500 million of aluminium and less then $400 million of steel. Exports to the US account for about 10% of Australia’s total exports of these metals.

    3. Major markets

    If major markets such as China and the European Union enact retaliatory tariffs on US metals, this could make Australian metals more competitive in these markets.

    Some stand to benefit

    While workers in Australian steel and aluminium plants will be watching the news with trepidation, some of Australia’s biggest manufacturing companies may be less concerned.

    For example, BlueScope Steel has significant US steel operations, and saw its share price increase on news of the tariffs.

    US-based Alcoa, which owns alumina refineries in Western Australia and an aluminium smelter in Victoria, will also expect to see its US operations benefit.

    And Rio Tinto will be most concerned about its substantial Canadian operations. Its Canadian hub is responsible for close to half of its global aluminium production.

    Demand for iron ore could fall

    The US tariffs will also have wider ranging effects on the Australian economy, regardless of whether Australia’s products are directly targeted.

    While aluminium is Australia’s top manufacturing export, it still makes up only about 1% of total exports, and steel makes up less than half that.

    Iron ore, by contrast, makes up more than 20% of Australia’s exports, with aluminium ores making up an additional 1.5%.

    This means the effect of the tariffs on demand for the raw materials to make steel and aluminium may have the largest detrimental effect on the Australian economy.

    Because the tariffs will make steel and aluminium more expensive to US manufacturers, they will seek to reduce their use of them. This means global demand for the metals, and the ores used to produce them, will decline.

    Investors appear to be betting on this, with shares of Australian miners like Rio Tinto and BHP falling since Trump announced the tariffs.

    Imported goods will become more expensive

    Many of the things Australians buy are likely to get more expensive.

    All US products that use steel and aluminium at any stage of the production process will also become more expensive. Tariffs will raise the cost of steel and aluminium for US manufacturers, both directly and by reducing overall productivity in the US.

    About 11% of Australia’s imports come from the US. And about half of this consists of machinery, vehicles, aircraft, and medical instruments, which typically contain steel and aluminium. Further, these goods are used by manufacturers around the world to produce and transport many of the other things Australians buy.

    Scott French does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Whether we carve out an exemption or not, Trump’s latest tariffs will still hit Australia – https://theconversation.com/whether-we-carve-out-an-exemption-or-not-trumps-latest-tariffs-will-still-hit-australia-249493

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: The Office of Markets Development and Public–Private Partnership

    Source: Asia Development Bank

    It outlines how OMDP helps developing member countries (DMCs) access the tools they need to engage businesses. It shows how it helps DMCs create conducive environments for investors and build up their private sectors. Highlighting the $4.3 billion in private capital OMDP mobilized since 2016, it shows why working with businesses to develop infrastructure helps DMCs harness cutting-edge technologies, boost project efficiency, and achieve transformative growth. 

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI China: Dongfeng, Changan revamp to give global edge to automakers

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    The planned restructuring of Wuhan, Hubei province-headquartered Dongfeng Motor Corp and Chongqing-based Changan Automobile is expected to create a more integrated and competitive automaker capable of competing with global giants like Toyota, Volkswagen and Tesla in the coming years, said analysts on Monday.

    A number of listed subsidiaries of State-owned Dongfeng Motor and CSGC, the parent company of Changan Automobile, including Dongfeng Automobile Co and Harbin Dongan Auto Engine Co, announced possible changes to their controlling shareholders on Sunday.

    The listed companies under CSGC announced that they had received a notice from their parent company regarding ongoing restructuring plans with other State-owned enterprises.

    They said that while the restructuring could result in changes to their controlling shareholders, it would not affect the ultimate controlling entity. They also emphasized that the plan remains subject to approval from the relevant authorities.

    Even though Dongfeng Motor and CSGC have not explicitly named each other as restructuring partners, market watchers said that there is a high possibility of integration among China’s State-owned automakers’ passenger vehicle businesses.

    Currently, Changan Automobile, in partnership with Chinese technology company Huawei Technologies Co, maintains a leading position in the transition to new energy vehicles and intelligent mobility development, said Zhang Xiang, an auto industry researcher at the Beijing-based North China University of Technology.

    “Therefore, it is expected that Changan Automobile will play a leading role in the future integration of the passenger vehicle businesses owned by centrally administered SOEs,” Zhang said.

    Dongfeng Motor reported vehicle sales of 2.48 million units in 2024, reflecting a 2.5 percent year-on-year increase, according to information released by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the country’s Cabinet.

    Meanwhile, Changan Automobile achieved total sales of 2.68 million vehicles last year, marking a 5.1 percent growth compared to the previous year. Notably, the company’s NEV sales surpassed 734,000 units, representing a 52.8 percent year-on-year surge.

    Based on their production capacity, the restructuring will effectively enhance the competitiveness of Chinese vehicle brands on the global stage, Zhang added.

    In terms of component integration, the restructuring of these two SOEs will significantly expand the procurement scale, enhancing their bargaining power with component suppliers. This is expected to cut procurement costs and improve the overall efficiency of the supply chain, said Ding Rijia, a professor specializing in industrial economy at the China University of Mining and Technology in Beijing.

    Further, if both companies integrate their component technologies, it will enhance the technical sophistication and performance of vehicle components, Ding said.

    Speaking at a news conference in Beijing last month, Lin Qingmiao, head of the SASAC’s bureau of enterprise reform, said the government’s key focus will be on the restructuring and integration of central SOEs this year, in order to further promote the optimization of the State-owned economy’s structural adjustment going forward.

    Lin said that China will speed up the allocation of State capital to critical industries related to national security and the lifeline of national economy, public services, emergency response capabilities, public welfare and strategic emerging industries.

    Eager to enrich user experience, Dongfeng Motor announced last week the successful integration of the full range of DeepSeek’s open-source large language model. Its brands, such as M-Hero and Nano Box, are set to incorporate and deploy this technology in their vehicles soon.

    Among these, the intelligent cockpit of the M-Hero 917, one of Dongfeng Motor’s luxury models, has already integrated the DeepSeek-R1 model, with an over-the-air update scheduled for April 2025.

    Through continuous customized model distillation and AI training, M-Hero owners will enjoy a significantly enhanced smart cockpit, featuring faster voice recognition, improved semantic understanding and humanlike responses, as well as expanded functionality for offroad driving scenarios, said Dongfeng Motor.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Tesla battery Megafactory in Shanghai launches production

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    This photo shows a production launch ceremony of U.S. carmaker Tesla’s Megafactory in Shanghai, east China, Feb. 11, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    U.S. carmaker Tesla’s new Megafactory in Shanghai, dedicated to manufacturing its energy-storage batteries, known as Megapacks, launched production on Tuesday, marking a significant expansion of the company’s presence in China.

    With an initial annual production capacity of 10,000 units, or roughly 40 gigawatt-hours of energy storage, this Megafactory is set to significantly contribute to Tesla’s global energy storage goals. The company anticipates a year-on-year increase of 50 percent in energy storage deployments in 2025.

    Covering an area of approximately 200,000 square meters, the new Shanghai plant represents a total investment of about 1.45 billion yuan (around 202 million U.S. dollars), according to the administration of the Lin-gang Special Area of China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, where this Tesla facility is located.

    Notably, mass production at the factory commenced just eight months after construction began, serving as a new example of “Tesla speed” in China, with the Shanghai Gigafactory, Tesla’s first plant in the country’s eastern financial hub, having been built and inaugurated within a year in 2019.

    “We’ve witnessed the incredible speed of Shanghai and Tesla once again. I’m excited to have this factory kick off an exciting year for Tesla,” said Mike Snyder, vice president of Tesla, at the launch ceremony on Tuesday, expressing confidence that the new factory will become a cornerstone of Tesla’s global production network. 

    An aerial drone photo shows U.S. carmaker Tesla’s Megafactory in Shanghai, east China, Feb. 8, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    This photo shows a commercial energy-storage system at U.S. carmaker Tesla’s Megafactory in Shanghai, east China, Feb. 11, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    This photo shows U.S. carmaker Tesla’s Megafactory in Shanghai, east China, Feb. 8, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – CBA extends commitment to regional branch network until 31 July 2027

    Source: Commonwealth Bank of Australia

    CBA has extended its commitment to regional Australia, with all regional branches to remain open until at least 31 July 2027.

    Our focus is on supporting our customers in regional and remote communities into the future.  

    We’re actively and directly communicating with community leaders across Australia so we can serve and support our regional retail and business customers with their banking needs, as well as help familiarise communities with the full range of banking services available to them.  

    As part of maintaining Australia’s largest banking presence, CBA will this year invest $100 million in upgrading its branches and ATM fleet.

    The extension of the commitment announced in July 2023 ensures CBA continues to offer the largest branch network in Australia and offers reassurance to regional communities.

    Notes to Editor

    Branch locations are defined in line with the Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA+), which is recognised as a leading indicator of remoteness in Australia. ARIA+ is used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) for its Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS) Edition 3, and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) for its annual ADI Points of Presence report. ARIA+ is an objective measure of physical distance of populations to services.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Money Market Operations as on February 10, 2025

    Source: Reserve Bank of India
    (Amount in ₹ crore, Rate in Per cent)
      Volume
    (One Leg)    		 Weighted
    Average Rate    		 Range
    A. Overnight Segment (I+II+III+IV) 5,66,515.61 6.28 5.00-6.75
         I. Call Money 12,879.97 6.32 5.15-6.45
         II. Triparty Repo 3,80,693.90 6.25 5.95-6.35
         III. Market Repo 1,71,142.14 6.35 5.00-6.60
         IV. Repo in Corporate Bond 1,799.60 6.53 6.40-6.75
    B. Term Segment      
         I. Notice Money** 1,280.50 5.92 5.90-6.35
         II. Term Money@@ 597.50 – 6.35-6.60
         III. Triparty Repo 724.60 6.34 6.20-6.45
         IV. Market Repo 328.11 6.36 6.35-6.40
         V. Repo in Corporate Bond 585.00 8.00 8.00-8.00
      Auction Date Tenor (Days) Maturity Date Amount Current Rate /
    Cut off Rate
    C. Liquidity Adjustment Facility (LAF), Marginal Standing Facility (MSF) & Standing Deposit Facility (SDF)
    I. Today’s Operations
    1. Fixed Rate          
    2. Variable Rate&          
      (I) Main Operation          
         (a) Repo          
         (b) Reverse Repo          
      (II) Fine Tuning Operations          
         (a) Repo Mon, 10/02/2025 1 Tue, 11/02/2025 2,01,310.00 6.26
         (b) Reverse Repo          
      (III) Long Term Operations^          
         (a) Repo          
         (b) Reverse Repo          
    3. MSF# Mon, 10/02/2025 1 Tue, 11/02/2025 4,125.00 6.50
    4. SDFΔ# Mon, 10/02/2025 1 Tue, 11/02/2025 67,439.00 6.00
    5. Net liquidity injected from today’s operations [injection (+)/absorption (-)]*       1,37,996.00  
    II. Outstanding Operations
    1. Fixed Rate          
    2. Variable Rate&          
      (I) Main Operation          
         (a) Repo          
         (b) Reverse Repo          
      (II) Fine Tuning Operations          
         (a) Repo          
         (b) Reverse Repo          
      (III) Long Term Operations^          
         (a) Repo Fri, 07/02/2025 56 Fri, 04/04/2025 50,010.00 6.31
         (b) Reverse Repo          
    3. MSF#          
    4. SDFΔ#          
    D. Standing Liquidity Facility (SLF) Availed from RBI$       8,328.42  
    E. Net liquidity injected from outstanding operations [injection (+)/absorption (-)]*     58,338.42  
    F. Net liquidity injected (outstanding including today’s operations) [injection (+)/absorption (-)]*     1,96,334.42  
    G. Cash Reserves Position of Scheduled Commercial Banks
         (i) Cash balances with RBI as on February 10, 2025 9,13,487.07  
         (ii) Average daily cash reserve requirement for the fortnight ending February 21, 2025 9,12,240.00  
    H. Government of India Surplus Cash Balance Reckoned for Auction as on¥ February 10, 2025 1,25,736.00  
    I. Net durable liquidity [surplus (+)/deficit (-)] as on January 24, 2025 -34,103.00  
    @ Based on Reserve Bank of India (RBI) / Clearing Corporation of India Limited (CCIL).
    – Not Applicable / No Transaction.
    ** Relates to uncollateralized transactions of 2 to 14 days tenor.
    @@ Relates to uncollateralized transactions of 15 days to one year tenor.
    $ Includes refinance facilities extended by RBI.
    & As per the Press Release No. 2019-2020/1900 dated February 06, 2020.
    Δ As per the Press Release No. 2022-2023/41 dated April 08, 2022.
    * Net liquidity is calculated as Repo+MSF+SLF-Reverse Repo-SDF.
    ¥ As per the Press Release No. 2014-2015/1971 dated March 19, 2015.
    # As per the Press Release No. 2023-2024/1548 dated December 27, 2023.
    ^ As per the Press Release No. 2024-2025/2013 dated January 27, 2025.
    Ajit Prasad          
    Deputy General Manager
    (Communications)    
    Press Release: 2024-2025/2125

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What are physician assistants? Can they fix the doctor shortage?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Nissen, HERA Program Director – Health Workforce Optimisation Centre for the Business & Economics of Health, The University of Queensland

    Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock

    If you’ve tried to get an appointment to see a GP or specialist recently, you will likely have felt the impact of Australia’s doctor shortages.

    To alleviate workforce shortages, the Queensland government is considering introducing health workers called physician assistants more widely to the state’s health system.

    But the medical body representing physicians, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, has warned thorough consultation with medical experts is needed first.

    So what exactly are physician assistants? And are they the solution to our workforce issues we’ve been looking for? Let’s look at what the evidence says – and the lessons from abroad.

    What is a physician assistant?

    Physician assistants, also known as physician associates, are trained health professionals who work under the supervision of a doctor. They undertake a variety of tasks including:

    • examining patients
    • ordering and interpreting blood tests
    • assisting in surgery
    • prescribing medicines.

    In general practice, physician assistants may also provide preventative health care such as giving vaccinations and providing health advice.

    Physician assistants commonly complete postgraduate-level university education and a hands-on training program. They may also need to have completed a health-based undergraduate degree.

    In most countries, physician assistants work under a “delegation” model. This means the treating doctor and physician assistant together determine the tasks the physician assistant can undertake, depending on their competence. As their skills and knowledge increase, the level of supervision changes accordingly.

    When were they first used?

    Similar roles have been used throughout history, including in the military. As early as the 1800s, trained assistants known as feldshers (or feldschers) provided basic medical care during times of war, for example in Russia, Bulgaria and Poland.

    The contemporary physician assistant role evolved in the 1960s in the United States. It was initially designed to use the skills of medically trained military servicemen.

    The first physician assistants were military servicemen.
    Andy Gin/Shutterstock

    Since then, it has become an accepted and well established part of the health care team in the US, where the medical profession supports the physician assistant role and contributes to its regulation.

    There are currently more than 178,000 physician assistants practising in the US, across a wide range of settings. Around one-quarter work in family/general medicine and one-fifth in rural and medically under-served areas.

    Physician assistants can be found in many countries, including Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands.

    Australia previously trialled physician assistant in two states, Queensland and South Australia. Like other countries, the role was found to be effective and acceptable.

    What does the research say about their use?

    Most research about physician assistants originates from the US. Studies spanning several decades show physician assistants provide safe and appropriate care. They can competently undertake consultations, perform complex procedures, provide preventative health care, treat non-complex patients in the emergency department and provide a wide range of services in rural areas.

    Most studies have reported patient satisfaction with the physician assistant role.

    Research has found it’s cost-effective to use physician assistants, including for complex patients.

    Physician assistants can improve the continuity of patient care in hospitals, as they remain with their supervising doctor rather than moving between hospital areas as trainee doctors do. This enables them to maintain consistent contact with patients, their families and other members of the health-care team.

    Using physician assistants in emergency departments enables doctors to review more complex patients.

    In surgery, physician assistants can reduce the workload on resident doctors. They can prepare patients for surgery, review them afterwards and perform some surgical procedures. They can also reduce the time patients stay in hospital.

    Physician assistants can also provide care in rural and remote areas and have worked with Aboriginal health workers in remote areas of Australia.

    What do Australian policymakers need to consider?

    Like many other countries, the Australian health workforce is under pressure. Recent reviews have highlighted the need to examine how the health system and workforce can more effectively meet the needs of the community. This includes making better use of all current health professions by enabling them to perform the tasks they have been trained to do.

    Health professionals must ensure their care keeps patients safe and aligns with public expectations. This relies on appropriate education and training, funding and payment policies, governance and regulation. Effective regulation ensures health professionals are held accountable for their practice, according to defined professional practice expectations.

    Despite physician assistants being trialled in Queensland and SA, the role did not gain the support of the medical profession. As a result, only a small number of physician assistants are currently practising. And Australia no longer provides education programs for physician assistants.

    Several factors affected the acceptance of the physician assistant role.

    Their skills and competence weren’t widely understood or recognised. This meant their scope of practice was poorly defined, which may have been confusing for both patients and health professionals.

    The profession was also unable to access Medicare rebates or Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme subsidies for patient consultations or scripts. This limited their full involvement in some health services such as general practice.

    What could we do better?

    Australia needs to learn from the available evidence when considering a possible role for physician assistants.

    In the US and Canada, for example, a close relationship between the medical and physician assistant professions has provided guidance and support for the role, and ensured physician assistants are accountable for their practice, through the development of “expected standards” of practice.

    As demand for health services increases, it makes sense to explore the addition of physician assistants to Australia’s health-care workforce, if safety and quality can be assured, and health care teams function optimally.

    Lisa Nissen receives funding from the Commonwealth Department and Aging and jurisdictional health departments for research related to Health Workforce Optimization and team based care.

    Lynda Cardiff does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. What are physician assistants? Can they fix the doctor shortage? – https://theconversation.com/what-are-physician-assistants-can-they-fix-the-doctor-shortage-247560

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Explainer: what does it actually mean to ‘firm’ renewables?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peta Ashworth, Professor and Director, Curtin Institute for Energy Transition, Curtin University

    Large power grids are among the most complicated machines humans have ever devised. Different generators produce power at various times and at various costs. A generator might fail and another fills the gap. Demand soars in the evenings and on hot days. In Australia, eastern and southern states trade power across borders. Meanwhile, Western Australia has two grids and the Northern Territory has several.

    But these complicated machines are undergoing major change, as we shift from large fossil fuel plants to cleaner forms of power. Wind and sun are now the cheapest way to produce electricity. These renewable sources will soon overtake coal and gas – they’re already averaging 40% of power flowing through the national grid.

    Solar and wind are often called “variable” renewable energy sources. Variable, here, refers to the fact the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. On sunny, windy days we get lots of cheap power. But on still nights, we might get little.

    This is where “firming” comes in. To firm renewables is to convert this cheap but variable source of power into what we really want: a reliable supply of electricity, there when we need it. Big battery projects are one way to do it. But there are others.

    Solar and wind are often called ‘variable’ renewable energy sources.
    Damitha Jayawardena/Shutterstock

    How does firming work?

    Storage is the best known way to firm renewables. As floods of cheap power come in, you can store it for later use.

    Storage can be performed by grid-scale batteries, where the power is stored directly. But it can also be done by pumped hydro, where water is pumped uphill when power is cheap and plentiful and run back downhill, through turbines, when power is harder to source.

    Firming can also be done by virtual power plants – aggregated fleets of smaller batteries in homes and electric vehicles.

    Gas peaking plants are another way of firming renewables. In the future, gas plants will go from being a mainstay to the equivalent of a backup generator, fired up only when needed.

    Generally, energy storage facilities offer either short- or long-term firming. As more renewable power enters Australia’s grids, we will need both. This is because they offer different levels of storage and response times.

    Short term can be as short as seconds to a few hours. Batteries are a common way to provide short-term firming, because they can ramp up very quickly to tackle sudden fluctuations in supply or demand. These fast-response systems help stabilise the grid by smoothing out spikes caused by changing weather.

    Long-term firming can be for hours, days or even weeks. This includes large-scale battery storage or back-up generators such as gas plants. Long-term options are crucial to maintain power supply during extended periods of low renewable generation, such as still, cold days and nights in winter.

    Firming turns cheap solar and wind into reliable, stable power.
    Taras Vyshnya/Shutterstock

    How are we tracking with firming renewables?

    In recent years, large-scale battery announcements have ramped up. Almost 8 gigawatts of battery capacity is now in progress or anticipated to start construction shortly. But the pipeline of future projects is much larger: 75 gigawatts of firming will be required.

    While renewable power is cheap, to make it useful and reliable in addition to storage, we need transmission lines to connect large renewable zones to cities and towns. All this adds extra costs.

    As the level of renewables in our power grids inches higher, firming costs increase. This is especially true when a grid goes from 95% to 100% renewables, when there’s a sudden jump in cost.

    This is why experts have argued for keeping a few gas peaking plants. While they are not emission-free, they are flexible and can start up much more rapidly than coal. They will likely play a key role in firming the grid during renewable droughts and extreme demand – an estimated 5% of the year. That sounds small, but they will be essential.

    Eventually, gas peaking plants could switch to hydrogen, if the fuel becomes cost effective. This would cut emissions further.

    Firming – at home?

    Homes with batteries can also help firm the network by joining a virtual power plant. These networks of batteries can be digitally coordinated to function as a single power plant, helping stabilise the grid.

    If a home owner signs up to a virtual power plant program, they hand over some control in return for income. Technologies such as this can support grid stability by charging or discharging in response to supply fluctuations.

    These networks are a flexible energy resource. They can inject power to the grid instantly if there’s a sudden drop in solar or wind generation. They can also soak up surplus energy.

    These aren’t hypothetical. Several are running or in development in Australia, such as the AGL virtual power plant in South Australia, SolarHub in New South Wales and the new ARENA-funded Project Jupiter in Western Australia, which will commence soon.

    Is firming helping?

    Firming technologies are already helping in high-renewable grids overseas. Big batteries now allow California’s grid to absorb more renewables, by soaking up daytime solar and releasing it at evening peak.

    Power from renewables such as solar need to be firmed to maximise use in the grid.
    The Desert Photo/Shutterstock

    We’re seeing the benefits of firming locally, too.

    On January 20 this year, a heatwave in Western Australia triggered a new record for peak electricity demand – 4.4 gigawatts – in the state’s main electricity network, the South West Interconnected System.

    In response, recently built battery storage at Kwinana, Collie, and Cunderdin stored excess power and discharged it at peak times.

    The next day, dense clouds swept in, slashing solar output and reducing peak demand. In response, gas generators increased output to firm the grid.

    Firming technologies are already playing a vital role in keeping our electricity supply stable, reliable and resilient – and it’s just the start.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Explainer: what does it actually mean to ‘firm’ renewables? – https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-it-actually-mean-to-firm-renewables-248134

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Thousands of Australian pets may soon have ‘useless’ microchips. It’s a symptom of a bigger problem

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bronwyn Orr, Veterinarian, Southern Cross University

    Mitchell Orr/Unsplash

    Late last year, rumours swirled online that HomeSafeID, a private Australian pet microchip registry, had stopped operating.

    On Feburary 5 2025, a notice appeared on the HomeSafeID website, ostensibly from the site’s administrator. It states the website “is likely to go offline” soon due to unpaid bills. This means the database of information stored on HomeSafeID would also go offline.

    There has been no official word from HomeSafeID as to the status of the company. HomeSafeID did not respond when The Conversation reached out for comment.

    According to the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC), the company is still registered and no insolvency notice has been published. However, it’s possible HomeSafeID has stopped operating or will do so in the near future.

    If this happens, any pet with a HomeSafeID registered microchip would no longer have searchable microchip details. If these pets become lost, vets and shelters will have no way of finding or verifying their owner.

    The situation is a symptom of a bigger problem with pet microchip registries in Australia – a lack of national oversight.

    Why should you microchip your pet?

    If your pet goes missing, their microchip is key to you being reunited. Vets and shelters can scan a stray animal’s microchip, search one of the seven microchip registries in Australia, find the pet owner’s details and contact them. Pet microchips significantly increase the likelihood lost pets will be reclaimed by their owners.

    In fact, microchipping pets is a legal requirement in all states and territories of Australia except the Northern Territory, although it is required in the City of Darwin. In New South Wales, fines for failing to microchip your pet range from A$180 to $880.

    A pet microchip should contain up-to-date details of the pet’s owner so they can be contacted if the animal becomes lost.
    Todorean-Gabriel/Shutterstock

    If HomeSafeID does go offline, many pets will have microchips that don’t connect to a database any more, making them essentially useless.

    It’s difficult to estimate the scale of the problem, but it could affect hundreds of thousands of pets, including ones adopted from RSPCA Queensland.

    According to ASIC, RSPCA Queensland was a part-owner of HomeSafeID until 2020. A spokesperson for the charity told The Conversation it has no current partnership with HomeSafeID, and “don’t know the extent of how many animals are affected”. Yesterday, RSPCA Queensland issued advice for pet owners to check their registration details.

    Where are microchip details stored?

    There are currently seven registries in Australia. Five are privately owned, including HomeSafeID, and two are owned by state governments, in NSW and South Australia. Pets microchipped in those states are meant to be registered with the state registry.

    The five private registries jointly fund a website called Pet Address, which allows you to search the five private databases to find where your pet’s details are stored.

    However, Pet Address doesn’t cover the state registries – these have to be searched separately. Only NSW vets and “authorised identifiers” (such as shelters) can access the pet owner details stored in the NSW registry.

    If a pet is moved to another state but their owner doesn’t update the registry, their microchip won’t be readable in the new location by non-NSW vets and shelters.

    There are currently no rules, regulations or even guidelines around how private pet microchip registries should operate in Australia. If a microchip database were to cease operating, there is no safety net to ensure information is automatically moved to another database.

    A vet can scan your pet’s microchip to retrieve the number and find out the registration details.
    Lucky Business/Shutterstock

    What can I do to make sure my pet’s microchip is up to date?

    Given current uncertainty around the HomeSafeID registry, pet owners across Australia should check their pets’ microchip numbers and find out which database they’re registered in.

    If you don’t already know your pet’s microchip number, vets and shelters can use a microchip scanner to find that number for you. Then, you can run it through Pet Address or the SA and NSW registries where relevant, to find out which database the number is registered on.

    If your pet’s microchip is currently with HomeSafeID, it might be prudent to move your pet’s details to another database. You can do this by contacting one of the other microchip registries and applying to register with their database (this may involve a small fee).

    Australia needs national coordination on pet microchipping

    Given it’s mandatory to microchip dogs and cats, it might seem strange there are no regulations or guidelines around how microchip registries should operate. However, this is a symptom of a much bigger issue.

    There is almost no national leadership or collaboration on companion animal issues in Australia. Pets are firmly the domain of state governments, with the federal government only really involved in the export and import of companion animals.

    There are, however, avenues for national coordination. The renewal of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy is one, and the national Animal Health Committee is another.

    Regardless of who takes responsibility, it’s clear a round table on pet microchipping is urgently required to prevent hundreds of thousands of pets walking around with microchips that don’t work anymore.

    Otherwise, lost pets may find themselves at shelters and pounds unnecessarily, and animals that might have otherwise been returned home could end up being adopted, or worse, euthanised.

    Bronwyn Orr is a Director of the Walk In Clinic For Animals and Veterinary Support Group.

    – ref. Thousands of Australian pets may soon have ‘useless’ microchips. It’s a symptom of a bigger problem – https://theconversation.com/thousands-of-australian-pets-may-soon-have-useless-microchips-its-a-symptom-of-a-bigger-problem-249492

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: At CFPB Headquarters, Warren Sounds Alarm on Elon Musk’s Attack against Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren

    February 10, 2025

    “Donald Trump ran his campaign on lowering costs for working families…now he and his co-president, Elon Musk, have tried to shut down the agency that has delivered $21 billion to hardworking families.”

    “Congress built [the CFPB], and no one other than Congress — not Donald Trump, not Elon Musk, no one – can fire the financial cops.”

    Video of Remarks

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs (BHUA), delivered remarks at the headquarters of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) in defense of the agency. The rally comes in response to billionaire Elon Musk and Project 2025 architect Russ Vought attempting to shut down the CFPB. 

    Transcript: Rally to Defend the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
    February 10, 2025 
    As Delivered

    Senator Elizabeth Warren: I am so glad to be here with you today. My name is Elizabeth Warren, and I’m here with you to fight for our Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

    The CFPB is the cop on the beat, and that cop is the one that caught the crooks and, so far, has made them give back $21 billion. 

    That cop is the one that put that $21 billion right back into the hands of the American people who got cheated.  

    That cop is the one who has worked, day by day, to get your money back when some slimeball decided they could cheat you and there wouldn’t be anything you can do about it.

    Now, the CFPB is the little agency that has fought for us, and we’re here today to fight for the CFPB. Let’s give a huge cheer for the CFPB!  

    Donald Trump ran his campaign on lowering costs for working families. Yeah, now, he and his co-president, Elon Musk, have tried to shut down the agency that has delivered $21 billion to hardworking families. $21 billion to people who got cheated—and Trump and Musk want to just take that agency away.   

    Donald Trump and Elon Musk have told the financial cops at the CFPB to stand down. Now, think about this – I want you to think about this for a minute – no matter how big the scam, no matter how bold the trap, they have said just stand by and let the Wall Street boys take your money.  

    Well, we are here to fight back! We want our financial cops back on the beat! 

    This is a fight – and I want you to watch who this fight is between – this is a fight between millions of hardworking people, who just don’t want to get cheated, and a handful of billionaires like Elon Musk who want the chance to cheat them. 

    So here’s how we have to think about this: for every person who wants to buy a home without getting scammed, this fight is your fight.

    For every family that doesn’t want to get put out on the street in an illegal foreclosure, this is your fight.

    For every student who wants to borrow money to go to school without getting defrauded, this is your fight.

    For every member of our military who doesn’t want to get trapped by some sleazy payday lender – say it with me: this is your fight. 

    For every person who borrows money to buy a car and doesn’t want to get trapped in the fine print, this is your fight.

    For every American who doesn’t want to see Wall Street crash our economy again, this is your fight.  

    And for every American who doesn’t want some weird Elon Musk suck-up searching through your personal, private data, this is your fight.

    Your fight, my fight, our fight—and we will win this fight!

    Because, understand this – this fight is about more than one little agency.

    This fight is about more than just our financial rules and regulations.

    This fight is about more than just Democrat versus Republican politics. 

    This fight is about hardworking people versus the billionaires who want to squeeze more and more and more money out of them. And now, now is our time to put a stop to this!

    Look, these damn billionaires are making their moves right out in the open. Look at Elon. Please. No, just look. He invested $288 million to buy an election for Donald Trump. And now he is right here to collect on that investment.  

    Elon Musk owns “X,” which has been losing money like crazy. So Elon has a plan for a new payment platform called “X Money”. Elon wants X Money to touch every part of your financial life. 

    But Elon has got a problem: the financial cops. The CFPB is there to make sure that Elon’s new project can’t scam you or steal your sensitive personal data. So Elon’s solution? Get rid of the cops. Kill the CFPB. 

    This is like a bank robber trying to fire the cops and turn off the alarms just before he strolls into the lobby.

    We are here to fight back!  

    So I’ve got to ask: are you ready to stand up to the scammers?

    Are you ready to push back against the fraudsters?

    Are you ready to say no to Elon Musk?

    Look, after the 2008 financial crash and the big bank bailout, Congress created the CFPB to protect people from getting swindled.  

    Congress built it, and no one other than Congress — not Donald Trump, not Elon Musk, no one can fire the financial cops. 

    We are fighting back, and understand this: there is power in fighting back. Real power. We, the people, not Elon Musk, we the people have the real power in this country—and we are going to use that power.  

    So here it is: are you ready to fight for the little agency that fights for us? Are you ready to fight the billionaires who are trying to take over this country? Are you ready to say no to Elon Musk? 

    We will fight it out in Congress. We will fight it out in the courts. We will fight it out all across this country—and I promise you, we will win.  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese Tencent Cloud launches Middle East cloud region

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    The Chinese Tencent Cloud Company has launched its first Middle East Cloud Region in Saudi Arabia, featuring two availability zones with full redundancy, advanced cloud services, and AI capabilities.

    In a statement on Sunday, the company revealed that the new availability zones, expected to be operational in 2025, will integrate Saudi Arabia into Tencent Cloud’s global network of over 50 availability zones across 21 regions. It will enable the delivery of an expanded suite of cutting-edge Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) and Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) solutions, including advanced analytics, AI, digital media innovations, superapp technologies, and more.

    Hu Dan, vice president of Tencent Cloud International for the Middle East and North Africa, hailed the new Cloud Region as a milestone in Tencent Cloud’s Middle East growth story.

    He said the new Cloud Region will strengthn Saudi Arabia’s digital transformation efforts across key sectors, including digital media and streaming, video gaming, esports, e-commerce, tourism, financial services, telecommunications, and more.

    For his part, Mohammed Alrobayan, deputy minister for technology at Ministry of Communications and Information Technology of Saudi Arabia, said, “Tencent Cloud’s decision to launch its first cloud region in Saudi Arabia represents a significant milestone for digital transformation in the Middle East.”

    “This new cloud region will enhance the Kingdom’s digital infrastructure and accelerate the adoption of advanced technologies. It also reflects confidence in Saudi Arabia’s ambition to become a global hub for digital solutions and smart technology, fostering an economy driven by innovation and knowledge,” he added.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Tesla’s Shanghai battery Megafactory launches production

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    An aerial drone photo taken on Dec. 15, 2024 shows a view of Tesla’s megafactory in east China’s Shanghai. [Photo/Xinhua]

    U.S. carmaker Tesla’s new Megafactory in Shanghai, dedicated to manufacturing its energy-storage batteries Megapacks, launched production on Tuesday, marking a significant expansion of the company’s presence in China.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Europe vows to defend interests amid new US tariff threats

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Flags of the European Union fly outside the Berlaymont Building, the European Commission headquarters, in Brussels, Belgium, Jan. 29, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    The European Commission on Monday rejected the rationale for new U.S. tariffs on European exports, vowing to protect businesses, workers, and consumers across the bloc.

    The statement came after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to impose 25-percent tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports, reigniting fears of a transatlantic trade war.

    European Union (EU) leaders swiftly condemned the proposed tariffs, which are expected to be formally announced later on Monday. The Commission said there is “no justification” for the U.S. measures, calling them unlawful and economically harmful, particularly given the deeply integrated EU-U.S. supply and production chains.

    With European leaders signaling their readiness to retaliate, concerns are growing that the looming trade dispute could strain economic ties and disrupt global markets.

    Tariffs could backfire

    The European Commission, the EU’s executive body, strongly criticized the proposed tariffs, warning they would ultimately hurt U.S. businesses and consumers.

    “Tariffs are essentially taxes,” it said in a statement, emphasizing that the move would increase costs for American companies, drive inflation, heighten economic uncertainty, and disrupt global market integration. Given the deep interdependence between European and American industries, the EU warned that such measures would be counterproductive, effectively imposing taxes on U.S. citizens as well.

    European officials fear a repeat of 2018, when Trump’s previous steel and aluminum tariffs triggered swift EU retaliation. At the time, Brussels imposed countermeasures on U.S. goods such as whiskey, motorcycles, and orange juice.

    With the formal announcement of the new U.S. tariffs expected later on Monday, European leaders are bracing for another escalation in trade tensions.

    EU weighs retaliation

    France was among the first to respond to Trump’s tariff threat, with Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot warning on Monday that the EU would retaliate if the proposed tariffs take effect.

    “There is no hesitation when it comes to defending our interests,” Barrot told French television TF1, recalling how the EU countered similar tariffs in 2018 and vowing to take the same approach if necessary.

    Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is also preparing for action. A spokesperson for the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action stated that while the EU and Germany are working to prevent the tariffs, they stand ready to implement countermeasures if needed.

    During a televised debate on Sunday ahead of upcoming elections, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned that the EU could “act within an hour” if Trump proceeds with tariffs on European goods.

    Industry leaders are also pushing for a firm response. Gunnar Groebler, president of the German Steel Association, urged the EU to react in a “united, strategic, and swift manner” to counter the tariff threat. “The U.S. is the largest buyer of European steel, importing around 1 million tonnes of mostly special steels from Germany alone each year,” he noted.

    A lose-lose scenario

    French President Emmanuel Macron cautioned that tariffs on EU goods would not be in the interests of the United States.

    “If Washington imposes tariffs across multiple sectors, it will drive up the cost of goods and fuel inflation in the United States,” Macron said, pointing out that European savings play a crucial role in financing the U.S. economy.

    Economic experts share Macron’s concerns. Paul Johnson, director of the London-based Institute for Fiscal Studies, warned that Trump’s planned tariffs could push up interest rates worldwide, having ripple effects on global monetary policy.

    “It is going to create additional inflation, at the very least, in the United States, and that will have knock-on effects globally, particularly on interest rates,” Johnson explained.

    Ferdinand Dudenhoeffer, a German automotive expert, argued that Trump is leveraging economic power to siphon off jobs and prosperity from other countries through his tariff policies. “He knows no friends or enemies. Even U.S. car manufacturers GM and Ford would suffer considerably from tariffs on cars from Canada and Mexico,” he said.

    Dudenhoeffer noted that U.S. net vehicle imports totaled 5.6 million units in 2024. “Trump might ask how many jobs could be created if all these vehicles were produced domestically,” he said.

    Despite the growing alarm, some analysts hold that the impact of Trump’s tariffs may be limited. Christian Helmenstein, chief economist of the Federation of Austrian Industries, described Trump’s plan as an “unfriendly pinprick” but not a severe blow.

    He told the Austrian newspaper Kurier that the U.S. imports about a quarter of its steel needs, with much of it coming from Canada, Brazil, Mexico, and South Korea rather than Europe.

    But Harald Oberhofer, an economist at the Austrian Institute of Economic Research, described Trump’s tariff plans as “an economically high-risk game.”

    He pointed out that the United States was Austria’s largest export growth market last year amid weak overall exports and a trade war could further weaken Austria’s already fragile economy, which is projected to grow by just 0.6 percent this year.

    As Trump moves closer to making his tariff announcement official, European leaders are making their stance clear: if the U.S. imposes new trade barriers, the EU stands ready to defend its economic interests with countermeasures.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: China Development Bank issues 1.53 trillion yuan in infrastructure loans

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    China Development Bank issued 1.53 trillion yuan (about 213.37 billion U.S. dollars) in infrastructure loans across the country in 2024, the bank said on Monday.

    The loans were granted for major infrastructure areas such as industrial upgrading, urban development and national security, the bank noted.

    Last year, China Development Bank strengthened its support for medium and long-term financing, and helped advance the implementation of the 102 key projects listed in the country’s 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025).

    It also supported projects to implement major national strategies and build security capacities in key areas, as well as the implementation of large-scale equipment upgrades and consumer goods trade-in programs.

    The bank has also been actively supporting the construction of information infrastructure, integrated infrastructure and innovation infrastructure, all of which have broad application potential, strong enabling capabilities and significant driving effects.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: China Harbour’s moduling building factory begins operations in Saudi Arabia

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    A moduling building factory under China Harbour Engineering Company’s (CHEC) Sedra project in Saudi Arabia has officially commenced operations.

    Spanning approximately 200,000 square meters, the factory will supply prefabricated components for the Sedra project’s fully modular villas, while laying the industrial foundation for future prefabricated construction initiatives in Saudi Arabia, the CHEC announced in a statement on Sunday.

    The facility is equipped with an independently developed production management system and advanced robotics, enabling a fully digitalized workflow covering design, production, and storage.

    At the inauguration ceremony on Sunday, Iain McBride, head of commercial at Saudi ROSHN Real Estate Company, praised the factory’s remarkable speed of completion, commending its design, construction quality, and safety standards.

    “We look forward to deepening our collaboration with China Harbour in alignment with Vision 2030, the subsequent phases of the Sedra project, and expansion plans, working together to create a new chapter of mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Saudi Arabia,” he said.

    Yang Zhiyuan, general manager of CHEC (Middle East), said China Harbour will continue working closely with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund and ROSHN to establish a leading prefabricated construction production base in the Middle East.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Shanghai to issue consumption vouchers for service sector

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    Tourists admire the skyline view of Lujiazui area at the Bund in Shanghai, east China, Jan. 6, 2020. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Shanghai will allocate 500 million yuan (about 69.73 million U.S. dollars) from its municipal budget to issue vouchers for the service sector, local officials announced at a press briefing on Monday.

    As part of an effort to boost spending, the vouchers will mainly support catering, tourism, cinemas and sports. The funds will be distributed as follows: 360 million yuan for catering, 90 million yuan for tourism, 30 million yuan for cinemas, and 20 million yuan for sports.

    Consumers can register for the lottery to receive catering and tourism vouchers starting Feb. 22. All vouchers will be valid for redemption starting from March 1 and will be fully distributed by the end of June.

    According to Zhu Min, director of the Shanghai Municipal Commission of Commerce, spending in the service sector is key to enhancing and upgrading Shanghai’s consumption market, as well as driving commodity consumption.

    In 2024, Shanghai issued 500 million yuan worth of vouchers for the catering, accommodation, cinema and sports sectors.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Better competition on the way for Kiwis

    Source: New Zealand Government

    The Government is progressing its ambitious, economy-wide review to improve competition, lift productivity, and drive down the cost of living, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly says.

    “Improved competition is a top priority for this Government. When competition is working well, New Zealand businesses – both big and small – can thrive. This has knock-on benefits for consumers, including greater choice and lower prices in key sectors like fuel, groceries, and banking,” says Mr Bayly.

    “That’s why I launched a review of our competition settings, set out in the Commerce Act, in December last year. Much of the Commerce Act has not been reviewed for over 20 years. I want to ensure our competition settings keep pace with market developments so both Kiwi businesses and consumers can get ahead.

    “Recent tweaks to our competition rules have mainly involved sector-specific legislation. In contrast, this review will improve our overarching competition settings and reduce the need for layers of reactive regulation in individual sectors.

    “We are moving at pace to progress this work. Public consultation has now closed on key parts of the review, including our merger control settings, potential new code-making powers, and modern tools to address anti-competitive conduct.

    “A big focus of the review is on merger settings. Over many decades, New Zealanders have felt first-hand some of the effects of mergers and unhealthy market competition: reduced innovation, a smaller range of goods and services, and increased prices.

    “Many of these could have been avoided if we had more robust merger controls in place. Improved merger settings can lead to better competition and Kiwis getting a fairer deal, and that is why I’ve ensured this is a core part of the review.

    “Thank you to those who provided feedback during this consultation period. Your views will help shape changes to our competition settings to support competitive, dynamic markets that will boost economic productivity and living standards.

    “I expect to announce decisions on next steps in due course.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump agrees to consider Australian exemption from tariffs, describing Albanese as ‘very fine man’

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    US President Donald Trump has agreed to “consider” exempting Australia from the 25% tariff he has imposed on imports of steel and aluminium to the US.

    Trump gave the undertaking during a wide-ranging 40-minute conversation with Anthony Albanese early Tuesday morning (Australian time). The prime minister, speaking to a news conference soon afterwards, stressed that Trump had agreed on the precise words to be used to describe the outcome.  

    “I presented Australia’s case for an exemption and we agreed on wording to say publicly, which is that the US president agreed that an exemption was under consideration in the interests of both of our countries.”

    Albanese gave no indication of when he expects a decision.

    Meanwhile, Trump has signed the executive orders for the 25% tariffs on steel and aluminium without exemptions.

    The Australian government might be able to take heart from Trump’s later comments on the discussion.

    The president described Albanese as a “very fine man”.

    “We have a surplus with Australia, one of the few, and the reason is they buy a lot of airplanes. They’re rather far away and they need lots of airplanes. We actually have a surplus. It’s one of the only countries which we do. I told him that that’s something that we’ll give great consideration to,” he told the media.

    Pressed on whether he was confident of an exemption, Albanese would not speculate beyond the agreed words. “The words that I’ve used are the words that I’ll stick to,” he said.

    “It’s appropriate when you’re dealing with the president of the United States to not speak on his behalf. And those are the words that were agreed.”

    “We’ll continue to engage diplomatically.” Albanese said, “Australia will always stand up for Australia’s interests […] We’ll continue to put the case.”

    The prime minister described the call as “constructive and warm” and posted on social media that it was a “great conversation”.

    Outlining Australia’s argument for an exemption Albanese said the US had a trade surplus with Australia of about two to one, and steel supplier BlueScope had extensive production in the US.

    “When you look at the imports of these products into the US, it’s about 1% of imports of steel, 2% of aluminium,” he told his news conference.

    “Our steel is an important input to US manufacturing. BlueScope is the US’s fifth largest steelmaker. They’ve invested $5 billion in the US across a range of states. I think there’s more than 30 different investments there.

    “Of course the major export is Colorbond there, for roofs in California on the west coast. And it plays an important role.

    “Aluminium is a critical input for manufacturing in the United States and our steel and aluminium are both key inputs for the US-Australian defence industries. in both of our countries.”

    Albanese said that in the conversation, “We spoke about a range of other things as well, including the fact that Jordan Mailata is a Super Bowl champion and I did point out that he was a South Sydney junior”.

    The call, which was in train before the tariff announcement, also canvassed critical minerals and AUKUS.

    Opposition Leader Peter Dutton again criticised Albanese over his past comments about Trump. But the opposition leader told a news conference: “What’s important now is the Trump administration hears there is a bipartisan position in Australia to stand up for our national interest and that national interest is best served by a removal of the tariff as it applies to Australia.”

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Trump agrees to consider Australian exemption from tariffs, describing Albanese as ‘very fine man’ – https://theconversation.com/trump-agrees-to-consider-australian-exemption-from-tariffs-describing-albanese-as-very-fine-man-248886

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Gillibrand Op-Ed in CoinDesk: Why We Need A Bipartisan Stablecoin Bill

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New York Kirsten Gillibrand
    In case you missed it, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand published an opinion piece in CoinDesk explaining the need for a bipartisan bill to regulate stablecoins – cryptocurrencies whose values are pegged to national currencies or high-quality financial assets. The op-ed follows the introduction of the bipartisan Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, which she introduced alongside Senators Bill Hagerty, Cynthia Lummis, and Tim Scott.
    Read the full op-ed here or below:
    Why We Need a Bipartisan Stablecoin Bill – Gillibrand
    Kirsten Gillibrand | February 10, 2025
    The new Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act lays the groundwork for a new era of American exceptionalism, says Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, of New York.
    For the past century, the U.S. has reigned as the economic superpower of the world. The key to this sustained economic might is a regulatory environment that encourages and enables technological innovation. From semiconductors to personal computers to internet 1.0 and 2.0, U.S. companies have led in developing cutting-edge technologies because our country empowers its builders and creators. Unfortunately, when it comes to Web3 – the next generation of the internet built on blockchain, digital assets, and cryptocurrencies – we are trailing and are at risk of falling further behind.
    In 2023, the European Union passed comprehensive cryptocurrency regulation [americanbar.org], and numerous meaningful provisions went into effect this past summer. China’s central bank has been promoting its digital yuan [forbes.com], which threatens the U.S. dollar’s role as the global reserve currency. The U.S. is just watching, while our opponents move pieces on the chessboard.
    It is absolutely essential to our country’s future that the U.S. enact clear and sensible cryptocurrency regulations that foster innovation and keep Web3 jobs within our borders, protect consumers, and maintain the dominance of the U.S. dollar.
    We should start with stablecoins.
    For newcomers, stablecoins are cryptocurrencies whose values are pegged to national currencies or high-quality financial assets. This gives them stability and enables them to play a crucial role in the digital economy, where they combine the transaction speed and low cost of digital assets with the price stability of traditional reserve currencies. The U.S. is already playing a major role in this space. According to one report, more than 95% of stablecoins are “linked to the U.S. dollar.”
    The many use cases of stablecoins have earned them support from policymakers across the ideological spectrum. Conservatives value their low-cost, frictionless and instantaneous payment abilities, which can lower costs on merchants and consumers and spur startups and economic activity. Progressives appreciate their use in lowering the cost of remittances and reaching the underbanked and underserved, and their ability to increase access to basic financial services.
    It must be acknowledged that, as with any new technology, stablecoins have challenges. Some stablecoins, backed by complex algorithms instead of stable reserve currency, have collapsed due to design flaws. Additionally, unlike bank deposits, stablecoins are not FDIC insured, creating risks should the issuer go bankrupt. While concerns have been raised about money laundering, stablecoins aren’t misused for this purpose any more than traditional cash. But for the public to have confidence in stablecoins, and for businesses to adopt them, we need clear regulations to provide consumer protection, to govern issuers and to guard against money laundering.
    The bipartisan Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, which I introduced Feb. 4 alongside Senators Bill Hagerty, Cynthia Lummis, and Tim Scott, will address these challenges, and create a clear regulatory environment that enables the cryptocurrency environment to thrive.
    It protects consumers by holding stablecoin issuers to strict reserve requirements, requiring them to maintain one-to-one reserves in cash and cash equivalents. The bill prohibits the issuing of unbacked, algorithmic stablecoins, the collapse of which have led to substantial losses. To address their use for illicit purposes, it requires approved stablecoin issuers to comply with U.S. anti-money laundering and sanctions rules. Finally, the bill clarifies rules around conservatorship and procedure should a stablecoin issuer experience insolvency.
    While this bill will undoubtedly be tweaked as it moves through Congress, it has already received input from a wide swath of stakeholders, including industry participants, academic experts and federal regulators. It’s a true bipartisan effort that will empower innovators and builders while simultaneously rooting out bad actors.
    Laying the groundwork for the next century of American exceptionalism is a mission that should unite us all, and positioning the United States at the leading edge of the next iteration of the internet is key to that goal. Stablecoins are already playing an important role, and it’s critical we act now to maintain our position as the leader in global economic competitiveness.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Crapo, Risch Introduce Constitutional Amendment to Prevent Supreme Court Packing

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Idaho Mike Crapo
    Washington, D.C.–U.S. Senators Mike Crapo and Jim Risch (R-Idaho) joined Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in introducing a constitutional amendment to maintain a total of nine Supreme Court justices on the bench at one time.
    Once approved by Congress, the amendment would go to the states for ratification.
    “Throughout our nation’s history, the Supreme Court has successfully safeguarded our Constitution,” said Crapo.  “Packing the Court would unnecessarily increase partisanship within the institution, creating greater challenges in settling the pressing cases that matter to Americans in a constitutional and just way.”
    “Democrats’ attempts to pack the Supreme Court with radical appointees undermines our democracy and American confidence in our judicial system,” said Risch.  “The Keep Nine Constitutional Amendment would ensure justices focus on upholding the rule of law rather than legislating from the bench.”
    “For years, Democrats have openly said they intend to pack the Supreme Court,” said Cruz.  “They seek to use the Court to advance policy goals they can’t accomplish electorally.  Such a move would be a direct assault on the design of our Constitution, which is designed to ensure the Supreme Court remains a non-partisan guardian of the rule of law.  This amendment is a badly-needed check on their efforts to undermine the integrity of the Court.”
    Additional co-sponsors of the proposed constitutional amendment include Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Shelley Moore Capito (R-West Virginia), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana), Todd Young (R-Indiana), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Mississippi), Jim Banks (R-Indiana), Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), Bill Hagerty (R-Tennessee), Katie Britt (R-Alabama), Tim Sheehy (R-Montana), Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) and Deb Fischer (R-Nebraska).
    Read the complete text of the amendment here.
    BACKGROUND:
    Senators Crapo and Risch previously co-sponsored this amendment in 2023.
    Over the past several years, top Democrats have pledged to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court when they are able to.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst Slashes the Red Tape

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)

    WASHINGTON – After the Biden administration enacted more than $1.8 trillion in regulations that added 356 million new hours of paperwork, Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship Chair Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) is undoing the damage with legislation aimed at disrupting the bloated bureaucracy.
    Ernst’s Prove It Act requires federal agencies to demonstrate that any new regulation is compliant with existing laws and considers both the direct and indirect costs placed on small businesses.
     “As chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, unleashing Main Street by slashing red tape is a top priority,” said Ernst. “We are curbing the bloated bureaucracy and empowering job creators to innovate and lead us forward. If Washington thinks more regulations are needed, it will have to prove it.”
    Congressman Brad Finstad (R-Minn.) is introducing companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    “As a member of the House Committee on Small Business, I am committed to protecting Main Street business owners in southern Minnesota from costly and burdensome regulations,” said Finstad. “The Prove It Act, which passed the House of Representatives in the 118th Congress with bipartisan support, is commonsense legislation that gives small business owners a seat at the regulatory table and holds federal agencies accountable for the impacts of their regulations. I’m proud to reintroduce this important legislation and look forward to continuing to fight against overregulation.”
    The Prove It Act would:

    Create a way for small businesses to raise concerns when regulators do not consider both the direct and indirect costs their regulations place on them;

    Allow small businesses to ask their chief advocate in government to review agencies’ work and make the government regulators prove they are fully compliant with existing laws;

    Exempt small businesses from the agency’s regulations altogether if regulators fail to comply with this review process; and
    Ensure small businesses can easily access preexisting guidance documents online and create a way for small businesses to directly raise questions or concerns with their regulators.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Markey Leads Members of Massachusetts Delegation Blasting Trump’s Drastic Cuts to National Institutes of Health Funding

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey

    Washington (February 10, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), top Democrat on the Primary Health and Retirement Security Subcommittee of the Health Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, along with Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Representatives Richard Neal (MA-01), Jim McGovern (MA-02), Lori Trahan (MA-03), Katherine Clark (MA-05), Seth Moulton (MA-06), Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Stephen Lynch (MA-08), and Bill Keating (MA-09) released the following statement today on the Trump administration’s cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).     

    “Investments in medical research lead to cures, jobs, and economic growth,” said the Massachusetts lawmakers. “The Trump administration is drastically cutting NIH funding and giving away the United States’ and Massachusetts’ leadership in biomedical innovation to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. These cuts and the chaos this announcement has created is already being felt across the country by hospitals, state universities, and research institutions, by the people whose jobs rely on this funding, and by families who will have to wait longer for treatments and cures for Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, cancer, diabetes, and more.     

    Massachusetts is a national leader in developing groundbreaking treatments and cures, giving hope to patients, families, and caregivers in need of breakthroughs and discoveries. Committed health providers, researchers, and workers drive these innovations, relying on sustainable funding to do their work. The Trump administration’s illegal NIH funding cut is not only going to impede their work to improve our health care system and save lives, but also diminish our competitiveness and cede leadership to China. This action must be reversed.”  

    In 2024, Massachusetts received nearly 6,000 grants amounting to $3.5 billion, or 9.3 percent of all NIH funding, despite having just 2% of the population.

    President Trump’s nominee for NIH director, Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D. will appear before the HELP Committee.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cantwell Statement on Trump’s Latest Steel & Aluminum Tariffs: “He Wants to Double Down on Raising Costs for Americans Even More”

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

    02.10.25

    Cantwell Statement on Trump’s Latest Steel & Aluminum Tariffs: “He Wants to Double Down on Raising Costs for Americans Even More”

    In 2024, state imported $1.2B worth of steel & aluminum for aerospace, shipbuilding, electronics & more; Last week, Cantwell delivered a speech on Senate floor calling for increasing exports & voted against advancing Trump’s trade nominee

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and a senior member of the Senate Committee on Finance, issued the following statement in response to President Donald Trump’s new 25% tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports.

    “Many of Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum have been in place since 2018. Nothing was resolved and they added costs to cars, building materials, and energy projects. Now in 2025, he wants to double down raising costs for Americans even more,” Sen. Cantwell said.

    In Washington state, two out of every five jobs are tied to trade and trade-related industries. Combined, the state imported $1.21 billion worth of steel and aluminum last year – and the major industries and employers in Washington that rely on steel and aluminum include aerospace, shipbuilding, utilities, and electronics. When President Trump imposed steel tariffs in 2018, our trading partners immediately responded by imposing tariffs of their own on Washington products, especially agriculture, including cherries, apples, pears, and potatoes. Nationally, across all industries, the steel and aluminum tariffs resulted in a decrease in production worth about $3.4 billion per year, according to an ITC report.  The United States imports $58.81 billion in steel and aluminum every year.

    Last week, Sen. Cantwell also delivered a major speech on the Senate floor last week, arguing that the president’s arbitrary tariffs would threaten domestic job creation and economic growth in an Information Age. She outlined a strategy focused on building coalitions, growing exports, and establishing principles to support innovation in the Information Age.

    Sen. Cantwell also voted against advancing the nomination of Howard Lutnick, President Trump’s choice to be Secretary of the Department of Commerce, citing concerns with Lutnick’s support for Trump’s proposed tariffs. More information on how President Trump’s proposed tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada, and China would affect consumers and businesses in the State of Washington can be found HERE.

    Sen. Cantwell has remained a steadfast supporter of free trade to grow the economy in the State of Washington and nationwide. Sen. Cantwell was the leading voice in negotiations to end India’s 20 percent retaliatory tariff on American apples, which was imposed in response to tariffs on steel and aluminum and devastated Washington state’s apple exports. India had once been the second-largest export market for American apples, but after then-President Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum in his first term, India imposed retaliatory tariffs in response and U.S. apple exports plummeted. The impact on Washington apple growers was severe:  apple exports from the state dropped from $120 million in 2017 to less than $1 million by 2023.  In September 2023, following several years of Sen. Cantwell’s advocacy, India ended its retaliatory tariffs on apples and pulse crops which was welcome news to the state’s more than 1,400 apple growers and the 68,000-plus workers they support.

    In May 2023, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter urging the Biden Administration to help U.S. potato growers finally get approval to sell fresh potatoes in Japan. In June 2023, Sen. Cantwell hosted U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), then-chair of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, in Washington state for a forum with 30 local agricultural leaders in Wenatchee to discuss the Farm Bill.

    In 2022, Sen. Cantwell spearheaded passage of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, a law to crack down on skyrocketing international ocean shipping costs and ease supply chain backlogs that raise prices for consumers and make it harder for U.S. farmers and exporters to get their goods to the global market.

    In August 2020, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter to then-Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue requesting aid funds be distributed to wheat growers. In December 2018, Sen. Cantwell celebrated the passage of the Farm Bill, which included $500 million of assistance for farmers, including those who grow wheat.

    In 2019, Sen. Cantwell helped secure a provision in the $16 billion USDA relief package, ensuring sweet cherry growers could access emergency funding to offset the impacts of tariffs and other market disruptions.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Armstrong appoints Levi Bachmeier, Patrick Sogard to North Dakota Board of Higher Education

    Source: US State of North Dakota

    Gov. Kelly Armstrong announced today he has appointed Levi Bachmeier of West Fargo and Patrick Sogard of Williston to four-year terms on the State Board of Higher Education starting July 1.

    “Levi and Pat bring valuable experience in education policy, finance and operations to the State Board of Higher Education as our colleges and universities are being challenged by changing demographics and learning models. Our University System is still the best workforce recruiting tool we have, and we need our campuses to align their offerings with workforce needs, adapt to trends and thrive, not just survive,” Armstrong said. “We’re thankful for their willingness to serve and the passion for higher education shared by all the candidates.”

    Bachmeier has served as business manager of the West Fargo School District since 2019. From 2016 to 2019 he served as an education policy adviser and policy director for then-North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum. Bachmeier previously taught high school social studies for two years with Teach for America and spent a summer as a policy analyst fellow at the U.S. Department of Education. A native of West Fargo, Bachmeier earned a bachelor’s degree in education from Concordia College in Moorhead, Minn. He currently serves on the North Dakota Board of Public Education and North Dakota Career and Technical Education Board, in addition to coaching track and field.

    Sogard has chaired the board of American State Bank & Trust Co. in Williston since 2003, also serving as a trust officer from 2000 to 2005. He previously worked as an attorney in private practice from 1986 to 2000. A native of Alamo, N.D., Sogard studied at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and earned his bachelor’s degree in geological engineering from the University of North Dakota in Grand Forks and his law degree from the UND School of Law. He is a past board member of Mercy Medical Center and St. Joseph’s Elementary School, both in Williston, and currently serves on the board of the UND Alumni Association & Foundation.

    Both appointments are subject to confirmation by the state Senate. Bachmeier will succeed board member Casey Ryan, a Grand Forks physician who is completing his second term on the board, the maximum allowed by the state Constitution. Sogard will succeed board member Jeffry Volk, a retired Fargo consulting engineer who has served on the board since 2021.

    The Board of Higher Education has eight voting members appointed by the governor, including one student member, and two non-voting members who represent the North Dakota University System’s faculty and staff. The board oversees the system’s 11 public colleges and universities.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Improving resilience on State Highway 1 in Marlborough – stage 2 works brought forward

    Source: New Zealand Transport Agency

    New resilience work recently got underway on State Highway 1 in Marlborough, south of Blenheim at Dashwood.

    • The start date for the second stage of this work has now been brought forward to start on Monday, 17 February to help avoid the upcoming grape harvest, says NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA).

    During this time one lane of the highway will remain open under stop/go traffic management 24/7 and a 30 km/h temporary speed limit. 

    • Work is expected to continue until 9 April 2025, but NZTA is aiming to have an end to stop/go traffic management by early March.

    The work involves raising the height of the road to minimise future flooding and complete drainage improvements.

    Wayne Oldfield, Marlborough System Manager, says the 500-metre section of state highway between Awatere Valley Road and the Awatere Bridge is prone to flooding.

    “Making these improvements and increasing the highway’s resilience will help keep the road open in bad weather, and ensure people, products, and places remain connected on this busy arterial route.”

    “It means the transport network will be stronger and better prepared for any future disruption,” Mr Oldfield says.

    The work on the three-lane section of the state highway will be carried out in stages.

    Stage 1 will see the start of new drainage works alongside the highway. During Stage 2, one lane of the highway will remain open under a stop/go traffic management 24/7 and a 30 km/h temporary speed limit.  For Stage 3, two lanes will be open under a 30 km/h temporary speed limit.

    Keeping the road open while work is done is particularly important given the Marlborough grape harvest will soon be underway.

    Mr Oldfield says the work is funded by the Crown Resilience Programme.

    “The fund is about covering the cost of resilience improvements on the state highway network and minimising damage from future weather events.”

    “Marlborough residents know only too well how big an impact floods can have. In previous years, heavy rainfall has resulted in the closure of this stretch of the highway. Investments like this can make a big difference,” Mr Oldfield says.

    Other resilience works recently completed in Marlborough include State Highway 6 Rai Saddle and State Highway 63 at the Wash Bridge.

    Works Schedule overall

    Stage 1 – Early February to 9 April

    • Drainage works undertaken in the swale alongside the highway.
    • Northbound passing lane will be closed during the work activities.

    Stage 2 – 17 February to early March (amended from our first notice of this work)

    • Stop/Go temporary traffic management in place from 24/7 – No work on Sundays.
    • A temporary speed limit of 30 km/h will be in place at the site 24/7.
    • Expect delays of up to 10 minutes.
    • This work is subject to weather and unforeseen circumstances.

    Stage 3 – Early to late March

    • State Highway 1 reopened to two lanes
    • A temporary speed limit of 30 km/h will be in place at the site 24/7.

    More Information

    • The Crown Resilience Programme (previously the Transport Resilience Fund) is a $419 million investment package of resilience improvement activities that will reduce the impact of severe weather events on our national roading networks. This will ensure a more resilient and efficient network now and into the future. The total crown resilience programme comprises $279 million for activities on State Highways, and $140 million for activities on Local Roads.
    • This seven-year programme aims to advance proactive resilience improvements on the roading network to minimise the future damage caused to New Zealand roads by weather events, which have been increasing in frequency and severity.
    • Crown Resilience Programme

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Local News – Waimate waste incinerator plan fails 11 February 2025

    Source: Zero Waste Network

    The Waimate incinerator project will not proceed as planned. The sale and purchase agreement for the land has lapsed, and the landowner has said the incinerator does not meet its plans for future growth. The incinerator “Project Kea” by South Island Resource Recovery Ltd has been opposed by the Zero Waste Network and community group Why Waste Waimate for the past three and a half years.

    “We are thrilled that this project is not going ahead. The community of Waimate and local iwi, Te Rūnanga o Waihao, have worked tirelessly to ensure that this toxic project never sees the light of day,” said Dorte Wray, General Manager of the Zero Waste Network.

    “This incinerator project has no social license to operate. It would never get resource consent under normal conditions given its widespread air pollution and climate impacts. The project was included on the Fast Track list meaning that community concerns, human health and environmental considerations would all have been disregarded in favour of the company’s claimed economic benefits.”

    “The Zero Waste Network does not support waste incineration because it locks us into the production of waste. Incinerators require huge capital investment that would be better spent building the waste minimisation infrastructure we need to actually solve our waste crisis and build in the reuse of valuable materials. Incinerators are the old ‘business-as-usual’ linear model of take-make-waste. They are not a realistic solution to the real challenges we face.”

    “The use of the term ‘waste-to-energy’ is almost always an industry sales pitch for burning rubbish, and it represents some of the dirtiest forms of power on earth. A recent UK investigation revealed their so-called ‘waste to energy’ plants that were worse than coal fired power plants.”

    “We pay our deep respects to all of the community of Waimate, to the people of Waihao marae, and to our allies in the movement for a zero waste, zero carbon Aotearoa NZ. We say ‘regenerate, don’t incinerate!’”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Three People Charged in Commercial Bribery Scheme

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    DENVER – The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado announces that Edward Joseph Chmiel, 49, Henry Lozano, 43, and Sabino Loera, 51, have been charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering arising out of a scheme to submit fraudulent invoices to a contractor providing services for a Colorado electrical utility.

    Loera and Lozano made their initial appearances in federal court on February 10. Chmiel is expected to have his initial appearance later this month.  According to the criminal information, Chmiel and Loera worked for a company providing electrical contracting services to a utility company in Colorado. Lozano owned a company providing trucking and hauling services. In August 2018, the three agreed that Lozano’s company would provide those services in exchange for kickback payments to Chmiel and Loera.  To generate the money that would pay the kickbacks, the three schemed to submit false invoices from Lozano’s company to Chmiel and Loera’s. Once Lozano was paid for those invoices, Loera would direct Lozano to issue checks to a network of 15 other people. Those people cashed the checks and then gave the cash to Chmiel and Loera.  Between August 2018 and June 2020, the false invoices generated approximately $1,495,781.51 in kickback proceeds.

    The charges in the indictment are allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    The investigation is being conducted by the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation and the FBI Denver Field Office. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Sonia Dave and Bryan Fields.

    Case Number: 25-cr-00024-RMR             

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Humboldt County Woman Charged With Embezzling Over $500,000 From Construction Company Employer

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    SAN FRANCISCO – A federal grand jury has indicted Christina Ann Mobley, also known as Kris Mobley, 58, on charges that she defrauded her former employer, a construction company located in Fortuna, Calif.  

    According to an indictment filed Feb. 5, 2025, Mobley was employed as the business manager for a Fortuna construction company.  When the company’s bookkeeper retired, Mobley took on the accounting and bookkeeping duties, including inputting entries into the company’s accounting software and assisting with bill payments, payroll taxes, employee health benefits, government contracts, and other tasks.

    The company maintained an account at a bank and had several business credit cards through the bank for its employees.  It also held a business credit card at another bank, where Mobley maintained at least two personal credit card accounts.  The indictment describes that Mobley’s scheme to defraud took on several forms.  Mobley allegedly directed checks mailed from the company’s bank account to be applied to the accounts for her personal credit cards; issued electronic payments of company funds to her personal credit cards; misused the company’s credit card for personal expenses such as cash advances at casinos and personal travel; wrote checks from the company to herself; inflated her vacation time, work hours, and bonuses in the company’s payroll system; and issued duplicate payroll checks and unearned bonus payments to herself.  Between January 2022 and November 2024, Mobley allegedly embezzled more than $500,000 from her employer.  

    The indictment charges Mobley with three counts of mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 and seven counts of wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343.  Mobley made an initial appearance in federal district court in McKinleyville, Calif., this morning, and was released on bond with conditions set by the Court.  Mobley is next scheduled to appear on Feb. 26, 2025, at 1:30 p.m., before Senior U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer.

    United States Attorney Ismail J. Ramsey and FBI Acting Special Agent in Charge Dan Costin made the announcement.

    An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  If convicted, Mobley faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each count under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343, a fine of $250,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the transactions, and forfeiture and restitution.  Any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin Barry is prosecuting this case with the assistance of Marina Ponomarchuk.  This prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI.

    Christina Ann Mobley Indictment
     

    MIL Security OSI –