Economy
Trump to double tariffs on foreign steel to 50%
U.S. President Donald Trump is doubling the tariff on steel imports to 50%, a dramatic increase that could further push up prices for a metal used to make housing, autos and other goods.
“Today, I have a major announcement,” Trump said during a rally at a U.S. Steel facility in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
“We are going to be imposing a 25% increase. We’re going to bring it from 25% to 50% the tariffs on steel into the United States of America, which will even further secure the steel industry in the United States, nobody’s going to get around that,” Trump said.
He argued that the increase would close gaps that foreign competitors have used to bypass previous tariffs.
“So, we’re bringing it up from 25%, we’re doubling it to 50% and that’s a loophole,” he added.
In a post later on his Truth Social platform, he added that aluminum tariffs would also be doubled to 50%. He said both tariff hikes would go into effect Wednesday.
Trump spoke at U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works-Irvin Plant in suburban Pittsburgh, where he also discussed a details-to-come deal under which Japan’s Nippon Steel will invest in the iconic American steelmaker.
Though Trump initially vowed to block the Japanese steelmaker’s bid to buy Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel, he reversed course and announced an agreement last week for “partial ownership” by Nippon.
It’s unclear, though, if the deal his administration helped broker has been finalized or how ownership would be structured. Nippon Steel has never said it is backing off its bid to outright buy and control U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary, even as it increased the amount of money it promised to invest in U.S. Steel plants and gave guarantees that it wouldn’t lay off workers or close plants as it sought federal approval of the acquisition.
“We’re here today to celebrate a blockbuster agreement that will ensure this storied American company stays an American company,” Trump said as he opened an event at one of U.S. Steel’s warehouses. “You’re going to stay an American company, you know that, right?”
As for the tariffs, Trump said doubling the levies on imported steel “will even further secure the steel industry in the U.S.” But such a dramatic increase could push prices even higher.
Steel prices have climbed 16% since Trump became president in mid-January, according to the government’s Producer Price Index.
As of March 2025, steel cost $984 a metric ton in the United States, significantly more than the price in Europe ($690) or China ($392), according to the U.S. Commerce Department. The United States produced about three times more steel than it imported last year, with Canada, Brazil, Mexico and South Korea being the largest sources of steel imports.
Analysts have credited tariffs going back to Trump’s first term with helping strengthen the domestic steel industry, something that Nippon Steel wanted to capitalize on in its offer to buy U.S. Steel.
The United Steelworkers union remained skeptical.
Its president, David McCall, said in a statement that the union is most concerned “with the impact that this merger of U.S. Steel into a foreign competitor will have on national security, our members and the communities where we live and work.”
Trump stressed the deal would maintain American control of the storied company, which is seen as both a political symbol and an important matter for the country’s supply chain, industries like auto manufacturing and national security.
Trump, who has been eager to strike deals and announce new investments in the U.S. since retaking the White House, is also trying to satisfy voters, including blue-collar workers, who elected him as he called to protect U.S. manufacturing.
U.S. Steel has not publicly communicated any details of a revamped deal to investors. Nippon Steel issued a statement approving of the proposed “partnership” but also has not disclosed terms.
State and federal lawmakers who have been briefed on the matter describe a deal in which Nippon will buy U.S. Steel and spend billions on U.S. Steel facilities in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas and Minnesota. The company would be overseen by an executive suite and board made up mostly of Americans and protected by the U.S. government’s veto power in the form of a “golden share.”
Unionized steelworkers said there is some split opinion in the ranks over Nippon Steel’s acquisition, but that sentiment has shifted over time as they became more convinced that U.S. Steel would eventually shut down their Pittsburgh-area plants.
Clifford Hammonds, a line feeder at the plant where Trump spoke, said at the very least the deal will help upgrade the aging plant and help increase production.
“It’s putting money back into the plant to help rebuild it, because this plant is old, it’s falling apart. We ain’t really producing as much as we should be because, like I said, this place is old. It’s falling apart. We need some type of investment to fix the machines that we’ve got working,” Hammonds said.
No matter the terms, the issue has outsized importance for Trump, who last year repeatedly said he would block the deal and foreign ownership of U.S. Steel, as did former President Joe Biden.
Trump promised during the campaign to make the revitalization of American manufacturing a priority of his second term in office. And the fate of U.S. Steel, once the world’s largest corporation, could become a political liability in the midterm elections for his Republican Party in the swing state of Pennsylvania and other battleground states dependent on industrial manufacturing.
Trump said Sunday he wouldn’t approve the deal if U.S. Steel did not remain under U.S. control. He said it will keep its headquarters in Pittsburgh.
The president closed his remarks Friday by thanking steelworkers.
“With the help of patriots like you, we’re going to produce our own metal, unleash our own energy, secure our own future, build our country, control our destiny,” he said. “We are once again going to put Pennsylvania steel into the backbone of America like never before.”
In recent days, Trump and other U.S. officials began promoting Nippon Steel’s new commitment to invest $14 billion on top of its $14.9 billion bid, including building a new electric arc furnace steel mill somewhere in the U.S.
He was joined onstage Friday by several U.S. Steel workers, including Jason Zugai, vice president of the United Steelworkers local union at the Irvin finishing plant that defied the international union in supporting Nippon Steel’s bid to buy U.S. Steel.
Zugai, whose father had lost his job in a steel mill years earlier, lobbied local officials and members of Congress to support the deal, believing that U.S. Steel would otherwise shut down its Pittsburgh-area plants eventually.
In his remarks, Zugai told Trump, “I knew you wouldn’t let us down” and called Nippon Steel’s proposed $14 billion in investments into steel production in the U.S. “life-changing.”
Montenegro has extended visa-free entry for Turkish citizens until the end of October, while announcing that nationals of Russia and Belarus will be required to obtain visas from November as the Balkan nation continues aligning its visa policy with European Union standards.
According to the new measures, visa-free access for citizens of Türkiye, China and Saudi Arabia will remain in force through Oct. 31, local media reported, citing a government decision.
The move forms part of Montenegro’s efforts to harmonize its visa regime with EU rules under Chapter 24 of its accession negotiations, which covers justice, freedom and security.
Under the updated rules, eligible travelers from the affected countries may stay in Montenegro without a visa for up to 30 days, provided they are traveling as part of organized tourist groups or hold diplomatic or official passports and can demonstrate onward or return travel arrangements.
Montenegro reduced the visa-free stay for Turkish citizens from 90 days to 30 days late last year following security-related incidents in the capital, Podgorica.
The government aims to complete full alignment of its visa policy with EU requirements by the end of next year under its reform agenda.
As Montenegro advances toward EU membership, its passport is expected to become more valuable in terms of international mobility, potentially increasing demand for Montenegrin citizenship, particularly among people with family ties to Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Türkiye.
An A350 jet being developed for record-setting commercial flights landed in France from Melbourne on Tuesday after Airbus completed a test flight lasting more than 24 hours, drawing heavy attention from online flight trackers.
The test marks a key step in Qantas’ Project Sunrise, which aims to launch the world’s longest commercial passenger services and reshape long-haul travel by eliminating stopovers between Australia and Europe.
The specially adapted A350-1000ULR airliner is due to debut with the Australian carrier’s nonstop Sydney-London route from 2027. Airbus has been conducting a two-month test campaign on the aircraft since June.
Airbus said the aircraft, which boasts a specially designed extra fuel tank, remained in the air for 24 hours and 24 minutes, covering 23,075 kilometers (14,338 miles) without stopping, before landing at the plane’s factory in Toulouse, France.
Flight-tracking provider Flightradar24 said the trip was the second-most-tracked flight ever on its channels, behind a 2024 flight carrying Queen Elizabeth II’s coffin, with more than 3.6 million people following its progress northward via Canada.
In 2005, a Boeing 777-200LR Worldliner flew 21,601.7 km from Hong Kong to London in 22 hours and 42 minutes.
Qantas has ordered 12 modified A350-1000ULR aircraft, designed to connect Australia’s east coast with London and New York in about 20 hours. The services aim to turn what was once a five-day journey on the “Kangaroo Route” to London into a single flight lasting 19 to 21 hours, depending on routing and winds.
The first aircraft, which carries 20,000 liters of fuel and can seat 238 passengers, is due for delivery in April 2027. Qantas expects to operate daily nonstop flights between Sydney and London from October 2027.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Tuesday that Australia will consider building its first new oil refinery in more than 60 years, as conflict in the Middle East tightens overseas supplies and highlights the need to strengthen energy security.
Albanese said the project will help build Australia’s resilience and sovereign capability on fuel, potentially helping shield the country from future supply shocks.
If the project proves feasible, the new large-scale oil refinery will be built by industrial chemical producer Perdaman in Western Australia, Albanese said.
“The war in the Middle East … is having an impact here, like it’s having an impact right around the world,” Albanese told reporters from Karratha in Western Australia’s Pilbara region.
“One of the things that building national resilience does is it makes Australia less vulnerable to the impact of events around the world.”
Albanese said his government and the Western Australia state government will jointly spend AU$4 million ($2.8 million) on a feasibility study for the refinery.
“We want to make sure that we get the right location but we want to make sure as well that it’s a project that stacks up, that can go forward,” Albanese added.
Australia depends on imports for about 80% of its fuel needs and has been racing to secure supplies amid the Iran war.
The government’s push to cut its import dependence on oil comes after an Australian Treasury report warned that the global oil market has become more vulnerable “with weaker buffers against supply shocks.”
Global oil inventory levels have dropped since conflict in the Middle East intensified. At the same time, refined fuel markets are now at risk of tightening further, the treasury said in a briefing provided to Treasurer Jim Chalmers over the weekend.
Most of Australia’s domestic oil refineries were built during the 1950s and 1960s, but high operating costs and the emergence of large refineries across Asia forced many to shut down over the past three decades.
Ampol’s Queensland refinery and the Viva Energy facility in Victoria – both on the country’s east – are the only two operational now, compared to eight in 2000.
Western Australia’s only refinery was shut down in 2021 after BP decided to convert its 146,000 barrels per day Kwinana plant into a fuel import terminal.
The bar for a U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) interest rate hike this week is likely higher than rate futures markets suggest, owing not only to softer-than-expected inflation data and a fresh easing of hostilities between the U.S. and Iran, but also to concerns that markets would interpret a single hike as a sign that more increases are ahead.
Going into the July 28-29 policy meeting, just the second one led by Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, the U.S. central bank had left its benchmark policy rate unchanged in the 3.50%-3.75% range since December.
The probability for a hike this week, as reflected in rate futures prices, had been growing on the renewed rise in energy prices and the hawkish intonations of a number of Warsh’s colleagues.
If history is any guide, though, when the Fed hikes or cuts rates after an extended hold, it keeps going in the same direction for at least a few meetings, and policymakers may not be quite ready to send that signal.
“They don’t usually do a one-and-done, so it really means … the (policy) committee has to decide whether they’re going to commit to a sequence of rate increases,” said James Bullard, who led the St. Louis Fed from 2008 until 2023 before becoming the dean of the Mitch Daniels School of Business at Purdue University. “I don’t think they’re ready to do that at this meeting.”
Hawks versus doves
At the Fed’s June 16-17 meeting, Warsh’s first as head of the central bank, all 18 of his colleagues supported the decision to leave the target for short-term borrowing costs unchanged, despite a few who, even then, saw the case for a rate hike.
In the weeks since, the hawkish case has lost a little steam. Consumer prices rose 3.5% in June from a year earlier, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported earlier this month, still high but down from 4.2% in May as a U.S.-Iran cease-fire lowered fuel prices.
Trend inflation, estimated by stripping out volatile energy and food prices, also eased, with the core Consumer Price Index measure dropping to 2.6% from 2.9%. The influential head of the New York Fed expressed some conviction earlier this month that the trend would continue.
The labor market, meanwhile, has remained on solid ground. Job growth slowed sharply in June, but the gain of 57,000 in nonfarm payrolls was above what economists estimate is the so-called break-even rate where there are enough jobs generated to keep up with workforce growth. The unemployment rate ticked down to 4.2%. Hourly wage growth was 3.5% on a year-over-year basis, suggesting the labor market was not contributing to inflation.
Warsh, though quiet on his own rate-path views, has said he believes productivity growth may allow for faster economic expansion without stronger price pressures.
Still, the underlying reasons prompting half of the Fed policymakers at the June meeting to pencil in a higher policy rate by the end of this year remain intact. Inflation has been running above the Fed’s 2% goal for more than five years, and it reaccelerated in the first half of this year. Oil prices shot upward again this month as the cease-fire in the Middle East war fell apart, rekindling inflation concerns that some economists and Fed policymakers worry are already broadening beyond fuel and grocery prices, particularly as investment in artificial intelligence supercharges demand in some sectors of the economy.
The Fed will announce its policy decision at 2 p.m. EDT (6 p.m. GMT) on Wednesday following the end of a two-day meeting. Most economists say they expect at least one and as many as three dissents from policymakers favoring a rate hike, laying the groundwork for the start of a sequence of rises in borrowing costs in September unless inflation takes a decided turn for the better before then.
“September remains our base case for the first hike,” analysts at Capital Economics wrote last week. “By then, the Fed should have greater evidence that strong goods price pressures are not fading, despite the easing of tariff effects. Moreover, a September hike is now fully priced into markets, which Warsh has stressed will be an important steer for policy decisions under his chairmanship.”
Some analysts, however, see a case to get going now, especially if the new Fed chief is as serious about containing inflation as he has stated. “We doubt Warsh would face widespread opposition if he argued for tightening. The final decision could go either way, but we think the Fed is more likely to raise rates by 25 basis points on Wednesday than to stand pat,” analysts at Wrightson ICAP said.
Once Fed hikes, it usually keeps going
An isolated Fed rate hike is rare. The last time the central bank raised rates without delivering another one soon after was in 2015, but it wasn’t for lack of trying, with policymakers led by then-Fed chief Janet Yellen repeatedly promising “normalization” after years of a near-zero policy rate. It took a year for policymakers to feel the economy was strong enough to handle more rises in borrowing costs, but eventually they got there.
The one clear exception was in March 1997, the only interest rate adjustment of the modern era that was sandwiched by moves in the opposite direction. Transcripts from that meeting show that while then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan felt “the odds are better than 50/50” that the central bank would raise rates again, he preferred markets not make that presumption, and took the unusual step of issuing a statement to announce the move.
The minutes of each subsequent meeting that year did note a “firming” bias, but in the end inflation never accelerated enough to force the Fed to follow through. Ultimately, the shock of Russia’s debt default and the near-failure of a prominent U.S. hedge fund triggered a series of rate cuts starting in September 1998.
At this week’s meeting, markets are pricing about a one-in-three chance of a hike. Economists say it’s worth looking beyond a single meeting for a read on what’s actually at stake.
“The real discussion is whether the Fed will start a proper hiking cycle, which is typically delivered through at least three hikes, or not hiking at all,” analysts at Bank of America wrote.
Forty years after the Chernobyl disaster spread radiation across Europe and prompted Italy to abandon nuclear power, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government is preparing the ground for its return as the country scrambles to strengthen energy security.
The government is counting on a new generation of Italians who see nuclear power as a source of low-carbon electricity, a tool to help fight climate change and a way to strengthen stable energy supplies amid shocks from the Ukraine and Iran wars.
It’s betting that such support will blunt the opinions of Italians who lived through the 1986 nuclear accident, still view atomic energy through the lens of risk and disaster, and twice rejected nuclear power in national referenda, experts say.
Next week, Parliament is expected to approve government-sponsored legislation establishing a legal framework for next-generation nuclear technologies. The government would then have 12 months to draft implementing decrees covering reactor licensing, safety standards, waste management and siting.
“The duty of the government at this moment is to create the conditions so that those who will eventually decide on installations will be able to do so,” Gilberto Pichetto Fratin, minister for the environment and energy security, told The Associated Press (AP) in an interview ahead of the vote.
Reversal of positions after Ukraine
Italy’s debate comes as several European countries, including France and Poland, expand or pursue nuclear power amid concerns about energy security and climate goals. Unlike them, however, Italy is trying to rebuild an industry voters dismantled decades ago.
Italy was once among Europe’s nuclear pioneers. Four reactors operated until a 1987 referendum effectively ended the country’s nuclear program in the aftermath of Chernobyl. Another attempt to revive nuclear power collapsed after Japan’s Fukushima disaster in 2011, when about 94% of voters opposed plans for new reactors.
As a result, Italy’s shift would mark one of Europe’s most ambitious energy reversals.
Meloni’s government argues that rising electricity demand, climate goals and energy-security concerns following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine justify bringing nuclear power back into Italy’s energy mix.
Pichetto Fratin said electricity demand could increase by at least 30% within about a decade, requiring a broader mix of energy sources than renewables alone.
Rather than reviving the large plants of the past, the government is focusing on small modular reactors, or SMRs, and other advanced technologies that supporters say could be safer, more flexible and faster to build.
“We are talking about the third advanced generation (of nuclear power), much more workable compared to what are the needs, much safer because it is small in size with very short construction times,” Pichetto Fratin said.
“When people ask me for a timeline, I say 2033, 2034, 2035,” he added, referring to when the first next-generation reactors could realistically begin operating.
Nuclear power produces about 10% of the world’s electricity, equivalent to about a quarter of all low-carbon power. Italy’s aim for a nuclear comeback is part of a global trend of countries rebooting nuclear power options, bolstered by steady improvements in technology, including more safety features and making reactors cheaper to build and operate.
Country divided by generations
At the sprawling Latina nuclear power plant south of Rome, workers in protective suits and masks are still dismantling the remains of Italy’s first nuclear era even as politicians discuss how to build a second.
The contrast is not lost on Viviana Cruciani, who oversees nuclear decommissioning at the site run by the state-owned company Sogin.
“There is a generation that came right after Chernobyl that still sees nuclear energy in light of the accident at Chernobyl only,” Cruciani told AP.
“But there is another generation, a lot younger, that is enthusiastic about nuclear, and it is even sorry that the country has not yet made any progress toward a comeback to this technology.”
A June 2026 survey by research firm Only Numbers found that about 55% of Italians support next-generation nuclear plants.
Michele Governatori, a senior energy adviser at climate and energy think tank ECCO, said support is more visible among younger Italians.
“There is greater openness, especially among younger generations,” he said, noting that many associate nuclear power with technological progress rather than with the accidents that shaped public opinion in earlier decades.
Cruciani said younger Italians are more likely to view nuclear power through the prism of future energy needs and climate goals than through memories of Cold War-era disasters.
“I think nuclear power can help the environment too. It’s more sustainable,” said Cristian Giannetti, a 20-year-old tourist from the Tuscan seaside town of Forte dei Marmi visiting Rome.
Asked about the possibility of another Chernobyl-type accident, he said technological advances had reduced the risks.
“With the expertise we have and all the resources available today, I think the probability is really minimal.”
Others support a return to nuclear power for practical reasons.
“We have an energy problem, so it’s very important that nuclear power gets the green light in Italy too,” said Paola Giovannini Pasti, president of Confagricoltura Donna, the women’s branch of Italy’s main agricultural lobby.
Critics question economics
Not everyone is convinced.
“If we use nuclear as a backup … the average energy costs become devastating. So unfortunately it’s not a good complement to renewables and it’s not cheap,” Governatori said.
Pichetto Fratin acknowledged that nuclear power is not a short-term solution to high electricity prices.
“Nuclear power does not lower consumers’ bills today,” he said. “The nuclear power of tomorrow can help reduce them.”
Industry estimates suggest a single 300-megawatt SMR could cost between 3 billion ($3.4 billion) and 6 billion euros before infrastructure and grid expenses. The government hopes much of that financing would come from private capital, Pichetto Fratin said.
Governatori believes that cost remains the weakest part of the government’s case.
“Nuclear power that is being built today in Europe has exorbitant costs,” he said. “On the one hand, costs are extremely high, and on the other, private investors are running away.”
He also questioned whether SMRs would dramatically improve those economics, noting that the technology has yet to be commercially proven at scale.
Even so, some critics support establishing a regulatory framework that could allow future projects to be evaluated on their merits.
Political test ahead
The biggest political obstacle might be finding locations to build reactors and store the waste.
Italy still lacks a national repository for existing nuclear waste, much of which remains stored at temporary facilities across the country. Any future reactor or waste-storage site is likely to face strong local opposition.
Even if Parliament approves the legislation, opponents – including environmental groups and left-wing parties – could seek a new referendum once specific reactor locations and waste-storage plans emerge.
Surveys suggest support for nuclear power drops sharply when people are asked whether they would accept a reactor near where they live. Polls cited by experts indicate that about six in 10 Italians oppose having a reactor in their own province.
“When you have to seriously ask where a plant will be built and how much it will cost, it is likely that public opinion could become negative again,” Governatori said.
Türkiye’s exports to Syria rose 26.4% year-over-year in the first half of 2026, extending strong trade momentum with its southern neighbor as shipments of cement, food products and energy-related goods increased sharply, official data showed.
Exports totaled $1.28 billion in January-June, according to data compiled from the Türkiye Exporters Assembly (TIM), while export volumes climbed 36.6% from a year earlier to 3.18 million metric tons.
Trade between the two countries gained momentum after the ouster of longtime dictator Bashar Assad in late 2024.
Ankara was the main backer of the opposition forces that overthrew Assad and has since pledged to help Syria’s reconstruction and economic revival.
Mill products accounted for the largest share of exports at $103.9 million, followed by cement at $102.3 million and electrical and energy products at $80.1 million. Cement exports more than doubled from a year earlier, rising 116.8%.
The southeastern region of Türkiye remained the largest contributor to exports to Syria, accounting for $461.8 million during the period. Export volumes from the region increased 34.6% year-over-year, while export value rose 11.4%.
Celal Kadooğlu, a board member of TIM and head of its Syria Desk, said exports to Syria had increased by about 70% in 2025 and that the upward trend had continued this year.
He said closer integration of Syria’s banking system with the international financial system, improving security conditions, and preparations to fully reopen the Islahiye and Nusaybin border crossings would further support bilateral trade.
“The positive steps taken by the leadership of both countries reinforce our goals for the future,” Kadooğlu said.
He also expressed confidence that Syria’s revised customs tariffs, introduced in June and covering more than 1,000 products, would be reassessed in line with the two countries’ common trade objectives.
Kadooğlu said high tariffs on certain product groups had significantly increased exporters’ costs, noting that customs duties of up to $1,000 per metric ton could raise the total cost of a standard 20-ton truck shipment by around $25,000, including additional charges.
Reducing those costs through bilateral dialogue would both strengthen Türkiye’s export potential and improve access to essential goods in Syria at more affordable prices, he said.
Kadooğlu added that revising customs tariffs in line with mutual interests and reinstating the bilateral free trade agreement would be important steps toward making trade between the two countries more predictable and sustainable.
-
Daily Agenda3 days agoThere may be new arrests – Breaking News
-
Politics2 days agoEU eyes say in Cyprus while ignoring Turkish Cypriots
-
Daily Agenda3 days agoMay the resurrection of Hagia Sophia be blessed – Breaking News
-
Daily Agenda2 days agoInterior Minister Çiftçi emphasizes determination in the fight against crime
-
Daily Agenda3 days agoBREAKING NEWS… Separation debate in CHP! Voters evaluated the seat fight to AHaber: They do not represent the will of the nation!
-
Daily Agenda3 days agoIsrael is stuck, Greece is trapped: Dirty plans in the Eastern Mediterranean are stuck in the ‘Blue Homeland’!
-
Politics2 days agoKılıçdaroğlu hails purifying Türkiye’s CHP of corruption
-
Daily Agenda1 day agoExtra fight between CHP and New Party