Tag: United States International Relations

  • Tariffs on China Aren’t Likely to Rescue U.S. Medical Gear Industry

    Tariffs on China Aren’t Likely to Rescue U.S. Medical Gear Industry


    Few domestic industries have been as devastated by the flood of cheap Chinese imports as manufacturers of face masks, exam gloves and other disposable medical gear that protects health care workers from infectious pathogens.

    The industry’s demise had calamitous consequences during the Covid pandemic, when Beijing halted exports and American hospital workers found themselves at the mercy of a deadly airborne virus that quickly filled the nation’s emergency rooms and morgues.

    But as President Trump unveiled his tariff regimen earlier this month, and Beijing retaliated with an 84 percent tax on American imports, the few remaining companies that make protective gear in the United States felt mostly unease.

    “I’m pretty freaked out,” said Lloyd Armbrust, the chief executive of Armbrust American, a pandemic-era startup that produces N95 respirator masks at a factory in Texas. “On one hand, this is the kind of medicine we need if we really are going to become independent of China. On the other hand, this is not responsible industrial policy.”

    The United States once dominated the field of personal protective equipment, or P.P.E. The virus-filtering N95 mask and the disposable nitrile glove are American inventions, but China now produces more than 90 percent of the medical gear worn by American health care workers.

    Despite bipartisan vows to end the nation’s dependency on foreign medical products — and to shore up the dozens of domestic manufacturers that sprang up during the pandemic — federal agencies have resumed their reliance on inexpensive Chinese imports. Industry experts say the country’s renewed dependence on imported medical products is especially concerning given an expanding measles outbreak, the threat of avian flu and a trade war with China that some worry could affect global supply chains.

    “It’s the same movie again and again,” said Mike Bowen, whose company, Prestige Ameritech, was one of the few domestic mask makers before the pandemic, and who repeatedly warned Congress about the risks of relying on foreign-made P.P.E.

    Mr. Bowen, who retired four years ago but maintains a stake in Prestige Ameritech, said the rise and fall of the American P.P.E. sector over the past few years was entirely predictable. “We didn’t learn a thing,” he said.

    Shocked by the images of nurses donning trash bags, John Bielamowicz, a commercial real estate broker in Texas, opened a N95 factory near Fort Worth with a friend, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on machinery that would eventually churn out 1.2 million masks a month.

    “It just seemed like the right thing to do,” said Mr. Bielamowicz, whose company, United States Mask, was one of more than 100 start-ups that sprung up during the first terrifying year of the pandemic.

    Five years later, United States Mask and most of the other start-ups are gone. The companies were hit hard by slowing demand for P.P.E. as the pandemic retreated and as masks became a symbol of government overreach and loss of freedom for many Americans. But the death blow was seemingly preordained: the return of Chinese-made gear.

    Only five of the 107 companies created during the pandemic are still making masks and gloves, according to a review of the membership list created by the American Medical Manufacturers Association.

    Eric Axel, the association’s executive director, said the tariffs on Chinese-made protective gear, if they remained high, would give American producers a leg up. “I think it will change behavior, because people will have to adjust to the reality that you can’t buy below-market price rate stuff from China anymore,” he said.

    But other industry executives worry the escalating retaliatory moves by the United States and China could lead to supply chain disruptions and a return of P.P.E. shortages. Many say the economic uncertainty prompted by Mr. Trump’s tariff rollout will chill new investment.

    “It’s difficult to make business decisions when policies change every four years, and now every couple of days,” said Scott McGurl, a health care industry expert at the consultancy firm Grant Thornton.

    Given the ability of Chinese manufacturers, with support from their own government, to circumvent trade restrictions, many executives are unconvinced the tariffs will have a lasting impact. What’s needed, they say, are legislative and policy mandates that push government agencies and hospital networks to buy American-made masks and gloves.

    “Even with a 100 percent tariff, the Chinese mask that sells for a penny is still going to be cheaper than the American-made one that sells for eight cents,” Mr. Armbrust said.

    The silver-lining story about how altruistic entrepreneurialism rallied to meet a grave public health emergency wasn’t supposed to end this way.

    Political leaders from both sides of the aisle had vowed to never again to allow the nation to become reliant on foreign-made medical gear, and the Defense Department spent $1.3 billion helping American companies make N95 respirator masks and nitrile exam gloves in the United States.

    In 2021, Congress drafted legislation to ensure that federal agencies prioritized the purchase of domestically made medical equipment to sustain the sector through the inevitable peaks and troughs of demand.

    It is a model long embraced by the Pentagon, which spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year on contracts that sustain defense-related companies during times of war and peace.

    But the P.P.E. measure, folded into the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, contained loopholes that experts say rendered it ineffective as federal agencies sought waivers to buy less expensive imports.

    When Mr. Axel of the medical manufacturer’s association recently traveled through John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York, he was flabbergasted to discover that the masks used at a federal health screening station were made in China.

    “Our national security is at risk because we’ve once again put ourselves at the mercy of adversarial, nondemocratic countries,” he said.

    Mr. Trump has not mentioned personal protective equipment since returning to office, but during his first term he often spoke about the need to wean the country off foreign-made medical gear as part of his “America first” economic policy.

    “Never again will another president inherit empty shelves,” he said in May 2020, speaking at a Pennsylvania mask facility operated by Owens & Minor. “My goal is to produce everything America needs for ourselves and then export to the world.”

    Experts say the tariffs that Mr. Trump imposed on Chinese goods during his first term did little to level the playing field, mostly because Beijing’s generous industrial policy helped Chinese companies maintain their price advantage.

    The Trump administration did not respond to requests for comment.

    For now, the vast majority of masks purchased by hospital chains, federal agencies and state governments are imported, mostly from China, and to a lesser extent, from Thailand, Vietnam and Mexico — countries that often repackage Chinese-made products to avoid the tariffs that were imposed on Beijing by the last two administrations.

    Owens & Minor, the health care logistics company that Mr. Trump singled out for praise during the pandemic, sells masks that are assembled in Mexico. The company declined to discuss its production.

    There are a few exceptions to the narrative. SafeSource Direct, one of the few companies that makes nitrile exam gloves in the United States, has been surviving, largely because of a partnership with the hospital network Ochsner Health, which buys a steady stream of them, according to Justin Hollingsworth, the chief executive of SafeSource Direct. Ochsner said its investment in SafeSource was intended to ensure its hospitals and clinics have a reliable source of medical supplies.

    Armbrust American, the other pandemic-era startup still in business, gets by on purchases from travelers who don’t trust Chinese-made masks, and on bulk purchases by the retailer Target. Mr. Armbrust said Target executives were willing to pay 50 percent more for his masks and gloves because they saw the value in having a high-quality product made on U.S. soil.

    Like most Americans, Dan Izhaky, a former wholesale distribution executive in New York, wasn’t familiar with the acronym P.P.E. when friends of his began complaining about waning supplies of masks and exam gloves at hospitals where they worked.

    Six months later, United Safety Technology, the company he created to make P.P.E., won a $96 million federal contract to build a nitrile glove factory outside Baltimore.

    The company moved quickly to outfit a massive 700,000-square-foot warehouse with machinery to produce 200 million gloves a month, but as pandemic-related supply chain issues led to spiraling costs for steel beams, computer chips and shipping containers, the company needed an additional $50 million to finish the project.

    Federal officials were unmoved, he said.

    “One or two long-term government purchase contracts would have gotten us over the finish line, but the team at H.H.S. just wasn’t interested anymore,” he said, referring to the Department of Health and Human Services.

    And by the time federal officials pulled the plug, Chinese-made nitrile gloves were becoming plentiful again — and charging 1.3 cents a glove, about half what the company was planning to charge.

    Still, Mr. Izhaky said he was cautiously optimistic Mr. Trump’s tariffs. “Things are going on the right trajectory,” he said on Friday. “I just wish they were a little bit less chaotic.”



    Source link

  • Trump Moves to Put New Tariffs on Computer Chips and Drugs

    Trump Moves to Put New Tariffs on Computer Chips and Drugs


    The Trump administration took steps on Monday that appear likely to result in new tariffs on semiconductors and pharmaceutical products, adding to the levies President Trump has put on imports globally.

    Federal notices put online Monday afternoon said the administration had initiated national security investigations into imports of chips and pharmaceuticals. Mr. Trump has suggested that those investigations could result in tariffs.

    The investigations will also cover the machinery used to make semiconductors, products that contain chips and pharmaceutical ingredients.

    In a statement confirming the move, Kush Desai, a White House spokesman, said the president “has long been clear about the importance of reshoring manufacturing that is critical to our country’s national and economic security.”

    The new semiconductor and pharmaceutical tariffs would be issued under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows the president to impose tariffs to protect U.S. national security.

    Earlier in the day, Mr. Trump hinted that he would soon impose new tariffs on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, as he looked to shore up more domestic production.

    “The higher the tariff, the faster they come in,” Mr. Trump told reporters at a White House appearance, citing import taxes he has imposed on steel, aluminum and cars.

    Semiconductors are used to power electronics, cars, toys and other goods. The United States is heavily dependent on chips imported from Taiwan and elsewhere in Asia, a reliance that Democrats and Republicans alike have described as a major risk to national security.

    As for pharmaceuticals, Mr. Trump argued that too many vital medicines were imported. “We don’t make our own drugs anymore,” he said.

    Some drugs are produced at least in part in the United States, though China, Ireland and India are significant sources of some types of pharmaceuticals.

    Mr. Trump also signaled Monday that he could offer certain companies relief from his tariffs, as he did for electronics imports in recent days — a break from his past insistence that he would not spare entire industries.

    The president said he was “looking at something to help some of the car companies, where they’re switching to parts that were made in Canada, Mexico and other places.” He added, “And they need a little bit of time because they’ve got to make them here.” Shares of General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis jumped after his comments.

    “I’m a very flexible person. I don’t change my mind, but I’m flexible,” Mr. Trump said on Monday when asked about possible exemptions. He added that he had spoken to Apple’s chief executive, Tim Cook, and “helped” him recently.

    The president has announced significant changes over the last week to his trade agenda, which has roiled markets and spooked the businesses that he is trying to persuade to invest in the United States.

    Mr. Trump announced a program of global, “reciprocal” tariffs on April 2, including high levies on countries that make many electronics, like Vietnam. But after turmoil in the bond market, he paused those global tariffs for 90 days so his government could carry out trade negotiations with other countries.

    Those import taxes came in addition to other tariffs Mr. Trump has put on a variety of sectors and countries, including a 10 percent tariff on all U.S. imports; a 25 percent tariff on steel, aluminum and cars; and a 25 percent tariff on many goods from Canada and Mexico. Altogether, the moves have increased U.S. tariffs to levels not seen in over a century.

    Amid a spat with China, Mr. Trump raised tariffs on Chinese imports last week to an eye-watering minimum of 145 percent, before exempting smartphones, laptops, TVs and other electronics on Friday. Those goods make up about a quarter of U.S. imports from China.

    The administration argued that the move was simply a “clarification,” saying those electronics would be included within the scope of the national security investigation on chips.

    But industry executives and analysts have questioned whether the administration’s real motivation might have been to avoid a backlash tied to a sharp increase in prices for many consumer electronics — or to help tech companies, like Apple, that have reached out to the White House in recent days to argue that the tariffs would harm them.

    Mr. Trump has already used the legal authority under Section 232 to issue tariffs on imported steel, aluminum and automobiles. The administration is also using the authority to carry out investigations into imports of lumber and copper.

    The notices on Monday said the administration had begun its investigations into imports of pharmaceuticals and semiconductors on April 1. Neither the White House nor the president previously said the process had officially begun.

    Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, told reporters on Monday that the chip tariffs were needed for national security.

    “The example I like to use is, if you have a cannon but you’re getting the cannonballs from an adversary, then if there were to be some kind of action, then you might run out of cannonballs,” he said. “And so you can put a tariff on the cannonballs.”

    Mr. Trump has argued that tariffs on chips will force companies to relocate their factories to the United States.

    Some tech companies have been responsive to the president’s requests to build more in the United States. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s largest chip manufacturer, announced at the White House in March that it would spend $100 billion in the United States over the next four years to expand its production capacity.

    Apple has announced that it will spend $500 billion in the United States over the next four years to expand facilities around the country.

    On Monday, Nvidia, the chipmaker, announced that it would produce supercomputers for artificial intelligence made entirely in the United States. In the next four years, the company said, it will produce up to $500 billion of A.I. infrastructure in the United States in partnership with TSMC and other companies.

    “The engines of the world’s A.I. infrastructure are being built in the United States for the first time,” Jensen Huang, Nvidia’s chief executive, said in a statement.

    The White House blasted out the news in an announcement that credited the president.

    “It’s the Trump Effect in action,” the statement said, adding, “Onshoring these industries is good for the American worker, good for the American economy and good for American national security — and the best is yet to come.”

    But some critics have questioned how much tariffs will really help to bolster the U.S. industry, given that the Trump administration is also threatening to pull back on grants given to chip factories by the Biden administration. And foreign governments like China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan all subsidize semiconductor manufacturing heavily with tools like grants and tax breaks.

    Globally, 105 new chip factories, or fabs, are set to come online through 2028, according to data compiled by SEMI, an association of global semiconductor suppliers. Fifteen of those are planned for the United States, while the bulk are in Asia.

    Mr. Trump has criticized the CHIPS Act, a $50 billion program established under the Biden administration and aimed at offering incentives for chip manufacturing in the United States. He has called the grants a waste of money and insisted that tariffs alone are enough to encourage domestic chip production.

    Jimmy Goodrich, a senior adviser to the RAND Corporation for technology analysis, said tariffs could be effective “if used smartly, as part of a broader strategy to revitalize American chip making that includes domestic manufacturing and chip purchase preferential tax credits, along with clever ways to limit the coming tsunami of Chinese chip oversupply.”

    “However,” he added, “the United States on its own only accounts for about a quarter of all global demand for goods with chips in them, so working with allied nations is critical.”

    Administration officials have suggested that chip tariffs could be applied to semiconductors that come into the United States within other devices. Most chips are not directly imported — rather, they are assembled into electronics, toys and auto parts in Asia or Mexico before being shipped into the United States.

    The United States has no system to apply tariffs to chips encased within other products, but the Office of the United States Trade Representative began looking into this question during the Biden administration. Chip industry executives say such a system would be difficult to establish, but possible.

    Rebecca Robbins contributed reporting from Seattle.



    Source link

  • Trump Threatens Huge Tariffs on China in Response to Its Retaliation

    Trump Threatens Huge Tariffs on China in Response to Its Retaliation


    President Trump on Monday issued a new ultimatum to China: Rescind its retaliatory tariffs, or face a 104 percent tax on its exports to the United States starting later this week.

    The president’s threat risked another major escalation in what has already become a costly and damaging global trade war, one that has roiled financial markets as countries around the world scramble to calibrate a response to Washington.

    After Mr. Trump announced last week that he would impose a new 34 percent tariff on China, Beijing responded in force, threatening to impose a 34 percent tax on U.S. imports.

    In response, Mr. Trump said Monday in a post on Truth Social that the United States would “impose ADDITIONAL Tariffs on China of 50%, effective April 9th.” White House officials later clarified that the tariff would be additive, potentially bringing the total taxes that Mr. Trump has imposed on Chinese imports since he came into office to 104 percent.

    Those levies would come in addition to tariffs Mr. Trump placed on many products from China in his first term, along with tariffs that apply to individual products because of specific trade violations.

    The escalation could result in a huge surcharge for importers bringing clothing, cellphones, chemicals and machinery in from China, which may see the cost of their imports double. American consumers last year bought $440 billion of goods from China, the second-largest source of U.S. imports after Mexico.

    The president also threatened that talks with China “will be terminated!” if Beijing did not back down from its pledge to retaliate.

    In making that threat, Mr. Trump appeared to issue a stark warning to nations around the world that he would issue punishing additional tariffs if U.S. trading partners tried to rebuff his policies. His comments carried particular urgency on a day that officials in the European Union planned to circulate a list of U.S. products that they could soon subject to tariffs.

    Mr. Trump explicitly referred to his earlier threat that “any country that Retaliates against the U.S.” would be “immediately met with new and substantially higher Tariffs, over and above those initially set.” But he also said negotiations would begin with “other countries” starting immediately.

    Jeanna Smialek contributed reporting.



    Source link

  • Vietnam Urges United States to Delay Imposing Tariffs On It

    Vietnam Urges United States to Delay Imposing Tariffs On It


    Vietnam’s top leader, To Lam, has asked President Trump to delay the imposition of tariffs for at least 45 days so the two sides can avert a move that would devastate the Vietnamese economy and raise prices for American consumers.

    The 46 percent tariff rate the United States has said it will impose on Vietnam is among the highest any country faces. The prospect of such a steep tariff has left Vietnam with a sense of whiplash and deep apprehension. It also presents a sharp contrast to Washington’s recent embrace of Hanoi as an important bulwark against China and a manufacturing destination for many American apparel brands.

    Mr. Lam’s proposal to President Trump was laid out in a letter dated Saturday, according to a copy obtained by The New York Times. In the letter, Mr. Lam called on Mr. Trump to appoint a U.S. representative to lead negotiations with Ho Duc Phoc, a Vietnamese deputy prime minister, “with the goal of reaching an agreement as soon as possible.”

    Mr. Lam had been one of the first world leaders to reach out to Mr. Trump after the tariffs were announced. In a phone call, he offered to reduce tariffs on U.S. imports to zero, and urged Mr. Trump to do the same, according to the Vietnamese government. Vietnam has said its tariffs on U.S. goods is an average of 9.4 percent.

    Mr. Trump later described the call as “very productive.”

    In his letter, Mr. Lam asked Mr. Trump to meet him in person in Washington at the end of May “to jointly come to an agreement on this important matter, for the benefit of both our peoples and to contribute to peace, stability and development in the region and the world.”

    Vietnam’s Foreign Ministry did not respond to a request for comment.

    Vietnam, which faces punishingly high tariffs along with China, Cambodia and Laos, would be the hardest-hit economy in Asia if the tariffs are imposed as planned on Wednesday, according to economists. The United States is Vietnam’s largest export market, accounting for about 30 percent of the country’s total exports. A 46 percent tariff rate would put 5.5 percent of Vietnam’s gross domestic product at risk, according to ING, a Dutch financial services company.

    It would also hurt American consumers, because Vietnam is crucial in the global manufacturing supply chain. For decades, the country has built its economy around attracting foreign investment with cheap labor and a young work force. It is now a top manufacturer of brands such as Adidas and Lululemon. Nike makes about 50 percent of its footwear in Vietnam.

    After Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on China during his first term, Vietnam benefited from companies shifting their manufacturing there.

    Within Hanoi, the recent moves by the Trump administration have cast doubts on the reliability of the United States, which in recent years has assiduously courted Vietnam. In 2023, the two former enemies cemented a new strategic relationship, a move seen as a milestone in U.S. foreign policy. Even though Vietnam fought a brutal, decades-long war against the United States, surveys had shown that many Vietnamese welcomed the political and strategic influence of the United States.

    The Biden administration viewed Vietnam — one of the few Southeast Asian nations that has publicly pushed back against China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea — as critical to the U.S. effort to counter China’s mounting ambitions in the region.

    “Vietnam’s position in the Pacific, its view on China, its willingness to work with America, was its strongest card,” said Huong Le Thu, the deputy program director for Asia for the International Crisis Group. “Trump doesn’t see it that way. He doesn’t see allies or strategic values. He just sees numbers and tariffs, so Vietnam needs to try harder.”

    Analysts say Vietnam had a largely positive opinion of Mr. Trump during his first administration, seeing him as a pragmatic businessman who would not moralize with them over human rights.

    While explaining the tariffs, Mr. Trump said: “Vietnam: great negotiators, great people, they like me. I like them.” He said “the problem” was that the country charges the United States “90 percent,” a figure apparently reached by basing it on Vietnam’s current trade surplus with the U.S., worth $123.5 billion. (Vietnam disputed that calculation.)

    The tariffs come at a precarious time for Mr. Lam, who was named as general secretary of Vietnam’s ruling Communist Party last year after the death of the previous party chief, Nguyen Phu Trong. Mr. Lam needs to secure a strong economic performance as he heads into next year’s party congress, where the country’s top leaders will be selected.

    Even before Mr. Trump’s tariff announcement, Vietnam was working to win favor with the new administration. It signed provisional deals to import U.S. liquefied natural gas, cut some tariffs on American imports, and allowed SpaceX to open a company to launch its Starlink satellite internet service in Vietnam. The Trump organization is developing a $1.5 billion golf course and hotel project in Vietnam’s northern Hung Yen province, Mr. Lam’s home province.

    Alexandra Stevenson contributed reporting.



    Source link

  • After Trump Tariffs, Volkswagen to Add ‘Import Fees’ to Cars Sold in U.S.

    After Trump Tariffs, Volkswagen to Add ‘Import Fees’ to Cars Sold in U.S.


    Volkswagen, the German automaker, has told its car dealers that it plans to add an import fee later this month to the price of imported cars sold in the United States.

    The company’s move is one of the first and clearest examples of automakers using price increases to deal with the 25 percent tariffs President Trump imposed on car and auto parts imports. The tariffs on vehicles went into effect on Thursday and the levies on parts will become effective on May 3.

    In an April 1 memo to dealers, Volkswagen said that the exact fees would be determined by the middle of April. The New York Times reviewed a copy of the memo. The automaker also told dealers it planned to cut back on sales incentives and had halted rail shipments of cars to the United States from its plants in Mexico, although shipments by sea continue.

    Volkswagen plans to hold cars that are subject to the tariffs in port for “the near term.” It also told dealers that the price of the Volkswagen Atlas sport utility vehicle, which is made in Chattanooga, Tenn., could be affected by the tariffs because it includes important imported components. The extent of the impact most likely will not be known until May, the memo said.

    The automaker, including its Audi and Porsche brands, imports almost all the cars it sells in the United States. Besides the Atlas, Volkswagen also assembles the ID.4 electric sport-utility vehicle in Tennessee.

    In a statement, Volkswagen confirmed it had sent the memo to dealers because it wanted to be “very transparent about navigating through this time of uncertainty.”

    “We have our dealers’ and customers’ best interest at heart, and once we have quantified the impact on the business we will share our strategy with our dealers,” the company said.

    Other automakers are also making adjustments to respond to the tariffs. Stellantis, which owns Jeep, Ram, Dodge and Chrysler, said on Thursday that it is temporarily halting production at a plant in Mexico and another in Canada in response to the auto tariffs.

    The company said that a factory in Windsor, Ontario, that makes the Chrysler Pacifica minivan and the Dodge Charger muscle car will shut down for two weeks. And a plant in Toluca, Mexico, that makes the Jeep Compass and Wagoneer S will be idled starting on April 7 for the rest of the month.

    Stellantis said that the production stoppages in Canada and Mexico would force it to lay off about 900 workers in Indiana and Michigan.



    Source link

  • A U.S. Investor Helped Build Russia’s Economy. He Was Jailed on Bogus Charges.

    A U.S. Investor Helped Build Russia’s Economy. He Was Jailed on Bogus Charges.


    A foul cell in a Moscow detention center was about the last place an American businessman named Michael Calvey expected to find himself after spending 25 years building a flourishing venture capital firm in Russia that transformed some tech startups into global brands.

    First, beefy agents from the F.S.B., the federal security service, ransacked his apartment before dawn. Hours later he was confined to a holding cell with two other inmates and a filthy hole in the floor for a toilet.

    “The cell is stuffy and hot, an oppressive stench hanging in the air as if from accumulated decades of human sweat mixed with the indescribable horrors emanating from the toilet hole area,” Mr. Calvey wrote in a new book out this week called “Odyssey Moscow.” It details his extended ordeal through the Russian court system in a fabricated fraud case initiated in 2019: “In the course of a few surreal, terrifying hours I have morphed from one of the most successful Western businessmen in Russia into a prisoner of the state.”

    With President Trump lauding the possibility of “major economic development transactions” between the United States and Russia as he seeks improved relations with Moscow, Mr. Calvey’s fate stands as a cautionary tale about the significant personal and professional risks involved in doing business in Russia, particularly given the arbitrary nature of its courts.

    Perhaps no Western businessman promoted foreign investment in Russia more than Mr. Calvey, 57, who helped to forge internet titans from tech startups like Yandex — a version of Google, Amazon and Uber rolled into one — or Tinkoff Credit Systems, one of the world’s biggest digital banks. The firm he founded, Baring Vostok Capital Partners, earned colossal returns.

    Then Baring Vostok got mired in a nasty commercial dispute with two dubious Russian partners who were stripping assets out of a bank in a troubled merger. Once, Mr. Calvey’s empty Moscow apartment mysteriously caught fire hours before a dinner involving tense negotiations.

    After his firm filed a case with a London arbitration court, the partners convinced Department K of the F.S.B., responsible for internal financial crimes, that the American and several partners had perpetuated a massive fraud as part of a dastardly foreign plot to undermine Russia’s financial sector.

    The agents pounced in February 2019, and although no evidence of wrongdoing ever emerged in court, Mr. Calvey and several partners spent years in jail or under house arrest.

    “Once the F.S.B. gets involved in a case, they’re like a car with six gears going forward and none in reverse,” Mr. Calvey said in an interview in Switzerland, his home since finally being allowed to leave Russia in 2022. Lanky and trim, he retains a boyish air despite his gray hair. “They will never back up or lose face.”

    His arrest stunned Western investors. “Everyone I knew was incredulous, angry and shocked,” said Bernie Sucher, an American banker with extended experience in Russia. “It was viewed as a direct assault on the very idea of long-term investment in the Russian economy.”

    Unusually, dozens of influential Russians defended Mr. Calvey. They included Kirill Dmitriev, the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund and now a key negotiator for ending the Ukraine war; German Gref, the chief executive of Russia’s largest bank; and Alexei Kudrin, a previous finance minister. The U.S. Embassy in Moscow also objected strenuously to his arrest.

    Mr. Calvey thought such interventions, combined with the blow to investor confidence, would get the case dropped. But nothing outweighed the F.S.B.

    President Vladimir V. Putin did summon top Kremlin officials, ordering them to get the American businessman out of prison, but also to find something illegal that Mr. Calvey had done, he said he later learned. At a tense time in U.S.-Russia relations, the Kremlin could not admit to arresting a prominent American businessman on false pretenses, he said.

    Released from prison after two months, Mr. Calvey was confined to his apartment with an electronic monitoring device strapped around his ankle for two years, and spent a third under court-ordered supervision with an 8 p.m. curfew. When he developed a cancerous tumor in one leg, the court refused to allow him to remove the device, so doctors operated without benefit of an M.R.I.

    The Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian Embassy in Washington did not respond to requests for comment about Mr. Calvey’s account. At the time of his conviction, Dmitry Peskov, the presidential spokesman, quoted Mr. Putin as saying that the government could not interfere in the courts.

    When first arrested, Mr. Calvey was jailed in Matrosskaya Tishina prison, near downtown Moscow. It is sometimes called “Kremlin Central” because so many inmates face charges in high-profile corruption cases pushed by the Kremlin. There were no violent criminals, but nobody is ever acquitted, either, Mr. Calvey wrote.

    His cellmates greeted him with a nonalcoholic toast: “Novoselye,” or welcome. One was a former deputy minister of culture. Another was an army general. A younger one was a computer hacker, and three were construction moguls. Trust nobody, one of them confided.

    Their cell, 13 feet by 16 feet, was tidy and somewhat comfortable, with a television and a separate toilet. The men shared everything equally from cleaning chores to food supplies from outside. He dedicated his book to the men of Cell 604, and tears up when he talks about them. The book will be released Thursday in Britain and in April in the United States.

    Throughout his detention, Mr. Calvey endeavored to avoid his jailers seeing him disturbed. His reading list included Kafka as an apt reflection of his fate.

    When one prosecutor summarized the case, for example, she admitted that not a single witness testified to a crime being committed, then added, “That just proves what a well-organized criminal group we are dealing with.” The entire courtroom laughed aloud, Mr. Calvey said.

    The trial underscored F.S.B. control over the courts, with the closing statements repeating the opening accusations almost exactly, Mr. Calvey said. All the witness testimony might never have happened. “Russian people are of course the main victims of its courts,” he wrote.

    In August 2021, Mr. Calvey was convicted of the misappropriation of funds and given a five-year suspended sentence. The conviction on false charges grated, he said, a stain on all his work for Russia.

    His Russia saga started in 1991, when just two years out of the University of Oklahoma, Mr. Calvey went to work for his former Wall Street boss at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. It was established to help the former Soviet bloc transition to a market economy.

    He worked on financing energy sector projects. Considered young for the magnitude of the deals, he tried to camouflage his age by adopting a serious demeanor at work, said Charlie Ryan, his first Moscow roommate.

    “Life for an expat in 1990s Moscow was equal parts bizarre and marvelous,” Mr. Calvey wrote. Pizza Hut was considered a high-end restaurant to impress a date. Kilos of inexpensive caviar proved a substitute for breakfast cereal.

    Mr. Calvey established Baring Vostok to build businesses catering to the new middle class. He married a Russian woman named Julia, with whom he had two sons and a daughter, now all young adults.

    He existed within an elite business bubble, surrounded by people eager to integrate Russia into the global economy. At the time of his trial, Baring Vostok said that overall, it had invested more than $2.8 billion in 80 companies across the region, making it the biggest such Western player.

    He learned Russian through countless hours he spent with young, ambitious entrepreneurs. “It was hard to spend time with them and not feel like Russia was a much, much better place than at the time of their grandparent’s generation,” he said.

    When prominent businessmen got arrested, Mr. Calvey attributed it to their meddling in politics. He considered his Russian associates overly gloomy about the direction of their country.

    He ignored repeated red flags that Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. agent, had handed control over every major institution to the siloviki, a Russian term incorporating all security agencies. Not even the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 deterred Mr. Calvey.

    What I didn’t really appreciate, and only realized with my arrest, was the depth of the control and influence of the ruling caste of Russia, which is F.S.B. and the other siloviki,” he said.

    Mr. Calvey’s businesses thrived even while he was imprisoned, and he pulled the plug only after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. The hasty disinvestment cost his company billions of dollars, he said.

    He is done with Russia. Although under Russian law his conviction was nullified after his five-year probation period ended a year ago, last week a Moscow court changed the probationary sentence given to a French defendant in the case to a prison term in absentia.

    Mr. Calvey expects some American businesses to return, although he considers Russia too risky for long-term investments. A peace deal might prompt him to invest in Ukraine, however. He is fostering internet startups elsewhere, employing young tech talent that fled Russia.

    The simmering geopolitical differences between Moscow and Washington mean that any businessman can become a chessboard pawn, he said, adding: “You may hope that you’re not going to get stepped on the head, but ultimately it could happen at any time.”



    Source link

  • Trump’s Tariffs Have Sown Uncertainty. That Might Be the Point.

    Trump’s Tariffs Have Sown Uncertainty. That Might Be the Point.


    Follow the latest news on the Trump administration.

    Since taking office, President Trump and his advisers have explained the president’s aggressive economic approach to tariffs with a litany of conflicting ideas. Other countries are “ripping off” America and need to be stopped. The United States is fighting a drug war with Canada, Mexico and China. Tariffs will help pay down the nation’s $36 trillion debt load.

    The messaging hodgepodge comes as the U.S. economy shows signs of strain in response to Mr. Trump’s steep tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China and as he prepares to enact “reciprocal” tariffs on imports from around the world on April 2.

    The tariffs have sowed uncertainty and dampened business investment and consumer sentiment while sending markets gyrating daily. They are also likely to prevent the Federal Reserve from cutting rates as policymakers wait to see exactly what measures Mr. Trump follows through with and how they affect the economy.

    But rather than trying to provide more coherence about their economic strategy, Mr. Trump and his advisers seem to be embracing the uncertainty of his approach as a feature, not a bug.

    “Absolutely, between now and April 2, there’ll be some uncertainty,” Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House’s National Economic Council, said on CNBC this week amid questions about what investors are to make of Mr. Trump’s trade agenda.

    Mr. Trump, when asked whether he would give the business community more clarity about his overall approach, largely dismissed concerns that corporations needed predictability.

    “No, I think that they say that,” he told Maria Bartiromo, the host of “Sunday Morning Futures” on Fox News, this month. “You know, it sounds good to say. But, for years, the globalists, the big globalists have been ripping off the United States. They have been taking money away from the United States. And all we’re doing is getting some of it back. And we’re going to treat our country fairly.”

    Mr. Trump has also refused to rule out a recession, an outcome that economists and analysts warn could become more likely amid such uncertainty.

    The uncertainty has caught the attention of the Federal Reserve, which on Wednesday kept rates steady and projected higher inflation and slower growth for the U.S. economy.

    “Uncertainty is remarkably high,” Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, said.

    The ratings firm Fitch warned this week that the global trade war Mr. Trump has started will reduce global growth and slow U.S. output while increasing prices and delaying the Federal Reserve’s interest rate cuts.

    “Tariff hikes will result in higher U.S. consumer prices, reduce real wages and increase companies’ costs, and the surge in policy uncertainty will take a toll on business investment,” said Brian Coulton, Fitch’s chief economist.

    The surge of uncertainty can largely be attributed to the fact that Mr. Trump views tariffs as a negotiating tool for solving policy issues of all varieties rather than an instrument for fixing trade distortions. As part of that approach, he aims to remain unpredictable to maximize his negotiating leverage.

    “It does not help that the Trump 2.0 rollout to date has lacked strategic coherence and effective orchestration,” Navin Girishankar, the president of the economic security and technology department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in an analysis this week. “The resulting policy volatility is already flowing through to financial markets and, by some accounts, to the real economy and communities around the country.”

    Henrietta Treyz, the director of economic policy at the investment firm Veda Partners, said that lawmakers remained hopeful that the tariffs were a saber-rattling negotiating tactic and that markets would calm down when there was finally “certainty” about them. Investors, however, remain skittish.

    “There is an emerging view on Capitol Hill that once we get past April 1, there will be certainty, and markets will calm down,” Ms. Treyz said. “That view is not shared by most investors who think the uncertainty is the near-term volatility driver but take the economic ramifications equally if not more seriously.”

    While Mr. Trump has demonstrated a willingness to delay or water down tariffs as part of his negotiating strategy, it is not clear that market reaction has influenced his decisions in his second term. And in a contrast to his first term, Mr. Trump’s top economic aides do not appear to be overly inclined to moderate his instincts.

    “These policies are the most important thing America has ever had,” Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, told CBS News when asked this month if Mr. Trump’s tariffs were worth it even if they tipped the U.S. economy into a recession. “It is worth it.”

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who declined this week to rule out the possibility of a recession, suggested in an interview on Tuesday that he was optimistic that some of the looming tariffs could be scaled back if other countries lowered their trade barriers. He did not, however, shy away from the idea that protectionism is good policy.

    “President Trump has identified several critical industries, critical industries that we let get away from us,” Mr. Bessent said on the Fox Business Network. “He wants to bring back manufacturing to the United States, and we are putting these tariffs on.”

    The continuous drama does appear to be taking a toll on the U.S. economy, stalling corporate deal activity and slowing some types of business investment.

    Lawrence H. Summers, who served as Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton, said that even if Mr. Trump ended up scaling back his tariffs, they were already doing damage.

    “These are profoundly problematic steps even if reversed,” Mr. Summers said. “They generate immense uncertainty which overhangs the economy.”



    Source link

  • Dismayed by Trump, the Star Pianist András Schiff Boycotts the U.S.

    Dismayed by Trump, the Star Pianist András Schiff Boycotts the U.S.


    András Schiff, an eminent concert pianist who has boycotted strongman rule in Russia and his native Hungary, said on Wednesday that he would no longer perform in the United States because of concerns about President Trump’s “unbelievable bullying” on the world stage.

    Mr. Schiff, 71, a towering figure in classical music, said he was alarmed by Mr. Trump’s admonishments of Ukraine; his expansionist threats about Canada, Greenland and Gaza; and his support for far-right politicians in Germany. Mr. Schiff, who was born to a Jewish family in Budapest that witnessed the horrors of the Holocaust, said that Mr. Trump’s calls for mass deportation reminded him painfully of efforts to expel Jews during World War II.

    “He has brought an ugliness into this world which hadn’t been there,” Mr. Schiff said in a telephone interview this week from Hong Kong, where he is performing. “I just find it impossible to go along with what is happening.”

    So Mr. Schiff decided to stop performing in the United States. He said that he was canceling appearances next spring with the New York Philharmonic and the Philadelphia Orchestra, and a recital tour this fall with a stop at Carnegie Hall.

    Mr. Schiff, revered for his interpretations of the music of Bach and Mozart, is the latest artist to boycott the United States because of Mr. Trump. Last month the German violinist Christian Tetzlaff announced he would no longer perform in the country, citing Mr. Trump’s embrace of Russia, among other concerns.

    The small but growing cultural boycott is a jarring reversal. In the past, it was American performers who often canceled engagements overseas to protest war, autocracy and injustice. Now the United States is seen by some as a pariah.

    The White House has appeared unconcerned by boycotts by foreign artists, saying Mr. Trump’s priority is the United States.

    Stephen Duncombe, a professor of media and culture at New York University, said it was not surprising that performers were shunning the United States because, he said, it is “lurching away from democracy.” He noted that these artists follow a long tradition. Pablo Picasso, for example, refused to have his “Guernica” displayed in Spain until it embraced democratic rule.

    Mr. Schiff has been an outspoken critic of right-wing movements in Europe. He has denounced the erosion of democracy in his native Hungary under the far-right populist leader Viktor Orban, a Trump ally. (Mr. Schiff said he could not believe that Mr. Trump had expressed admiration for Mr. Orban: “Viktor Orban is the last person I would think of as a role model,” he said.)

    Mr. Schiff has not returned to Hungary since 2010. He told the BBC in 2013 that he faced threats that his hands would be cut off if he returned.

    In the early 2000s, Mr. Schiff, who lived for years in Austria, spoke out forcefully against anti-immigrant and antisemitic rhetoric embraced by some conservative politicians there. And after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Mr. Schiff refused to play in the country, joining many Western artists in a cultural embargo.

    Mr. Schiff is considered one of the greatest pianists in the world, and has made a number of classic recordings. He holds German and British citizenship, and was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2014. He has been a fixture in the United States since the late 1970s and built a devoted following. He said that he had long cherished the United States as a “beacon of freedom and liberty and democracy.”

    It was not just Mr. Trump’s rise that had disturbed Mr. Schiff in recent years: He was also alarmed by some actions taken by the far left in the United States, including efforts to limit speech at universities.

    Mr. Schiff said that he waited a few weeks to see how Mr. Trump’s second term unfolded before making a decision about his commitments in the United States.

    Mr. Schiff said he agreed that the war in Ukraine should be brought to an end, but that he was taken back by the president’s “methods and manners,” which he called “truly unacceptable.” He was particularly disturbed, he said, by Mr. Trump’s attacks on President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine during an explosive meeting in the Oval Office in February.

    Equally distressing, Mr. Schiff said, were Mr. Trump’s immigration policies.

    “When I hear this word deportation, it rings a bell — it rings a terrible bell,” he said. “My family, my Jewish family, was deported — some to Auschwitz, and some to other concentration camps.”

    Ultimately, Mr. Schiff said, he could no longer appear in a country whose politics he so viscerally disagreed with. “The general election shows that a substantial part of people support these viewpoints and actions,” he said.

    Mr. Schiff said that he did not expect his boycott would have much of an impact, but that it was important to speak up.

    “Maybe it’s a drop in the ocean; I’m not expecting many musicians to follow,” he said. “But it doesn’t matter. It’s for my own conscience. In history, one has to react or not to react.”



    Source link

  • Trump’s Moves Are Boosting Stocks … Overseas

    Trump’s Moves Are Boosting Stocks … Overseas


    President Trump has promised to create an age of American exceptionalism with policies that put the United States first, and ahead of other nations.

    But Mr. Trump’s moves in the early days of his administration have had the opposite outcome for the American stock market.

    The S&P 500, which for years had been soaring above the stock indexes of other countries, is now trailing major markets in Europe and China, as investors have started to pull money from the United States and reallocate it around the world.

    Since Mr. Trump’s inauguration, the S&P 500 has fallen 6 percent, while the Dax index in Germany has risen 10 percent and the Europe-wide Stoxx 600 index has gained more than 4 percent. Other U.S. indexes have fared even worse, as European markets have been buoyed by plans for military spending on the continent after Mr. Trump made it clear he wants those nations to do more to protect themselves.

    The Hang Seng Index in Hong Kong has soared further, rising more than 20 percent since Mr. Trump took office in January, driven by the Chinese government’s efforts to stimulate its economy. Mexico’s IPC index, which is domestically focused and proving resilient to Mr. Trump’s steep tariffs, is 5 percent higher.

    With American markets being whipsawed by the uncertainties over Mr. Trump’s tariff policies and deep cuts to the federal government, investment advisers have started steering clients to other stock markets around the world.

    “It is definitely time to be looking at ex-U.S.,” said Jitania Kandhari, deputy chief investment officer of the solutions and multi-asset group at Morgan Stanley Investment Management. She said she had noticed an uptick in conversations with clients looking to increase their exposure to international stocks.

    Even global markets that have slumped have managed to outperform the S&P 500. The FTSE All-World index has dropped 2.9 percent since the inauguration, weighed down by U.S.-listed stocks. Canada’s TSX index has dropped 2 percent. And the Japanese Nikkei 225 has fallen 3.6 percent.

    In recent weeks, Wall Street has sent out a raft of bank research notes, client presentations and trade ideas that recommend a pivot away from the United States.

    “Respect resilience, fade U.S. exceptionalism, and worry about policy shocks,” read the title of one of those presentations from Bruce Kasman, chief economist and global head of economic research at J.P. Morgan.

    Brad Rutan, a market strategist at MFS Investment Management, said he also saw opportunities outside the United States. “It’s safe to say that there is plenty of room now for international equities.”

    Over the past week, investors pulled money from funds that buy U.S. stocks for the first time this year, according to weekly data that runs through Wednesday from EPFR Global. The withdrawal totaled a modest $2.5 billion, which compares with the roughly $100 billion inflow in the first nine weeks of 2025.

    While some traders are exceptionally quick to react to new information in the market, others, especially those that expect to be invested for a long time like pension funds or university endowments, can take months to move their money around.

    “After such a protracted outperformance of the U.S. versus Europe, these things can’t turn 180 degrees in a month,” said Greg Boutle, head of U.S. equity and derivative strategy at BNP Paribas. “There are probably many investors that have not reallocated yet.”

    If investors continue to pull their money from U.S. stocks and invest in foreign markets, it could add to the selling pressure that last week dragged the S&P 500 into correction, defined as a fall of more than 10 percent from its peak.

    U.S. markets are so large that a complete exodus by foreign investors is near impossible, Ms. Kandhari said, “but the shift can definitely create market moves.”

    The recent withdrawal comes after years when the U.S. stock market was the envy of the world, attracting foreign investors looking for higher returns than their home markets could provide.

    Roughly $420 billion flowed into funds that buy U.S. stocks in 2024, according to data from EPFR Global, helping lift major indexes higher and contributing to the growth of a handful of big technology companies. Roughly two-thirds of the valuation of the FTSE All-World Index comes from U.S. stocks, with nine of the top 10 stocks in the index by size coming from the United States.

    In the year leading up to the presidential election, the S&P 500 outperformed many of the other indexes around the globe, rising 32 percent. The next best was Germany’s Dax, up 27 percent.

    Many investors are still bullish on U.S. stocks over the long term and believe they will again outperform foreign stocks.

    Europe may be ramping up government spending, potentially spurring growth. But that boom could be driven by a fear of war, not because of sustainable economic strength. And if the United States enters an economic downturn, the rest of the world is unlikely to be spared from the fallout.

    “I think eventually all of this uncertainty settles down and we will still be left with a U.S. that has advantages that Europe and other countries don’t have,” said Paul Christopher, head of global market strategy at the Wells Fargo Investment Institute.

    Other investors are wondering whether the current moment could be the beginning of an inflection point, upending the long-running trend of U.S. exceptionalism in financial markets.

    “I think that discussion is happening,” Ms. Kandhari said.



    Source link

  • China’s Tariffs on U.S. Agricultural Products Take Effect

    China’s Tariffs on U.S. Agricultural Products Take Effect


    Beijing began imposing tariffs on Monday on many farm products from the United States, for which China is the largest overseas market. It is the latest escalation of a trade fight between the world’s two largest economies.

    The Chinese government announced the tariffs last week, shortly after President Trump raised tariffs on Chinese products for the second time since he took office in January. The Chinese tariffs will include a levy of 15 percent on U.S. products like chicken, wheat and corn, as well as 10 percent on products like soybeans, pork, beef and fruit.

    Beijing said that goods that had already been shipped by Monday and imported by April 12 would not be subject to the new tariffs.

    A spokesman for the National People’s Congress, China’s annual legislative session, said last week that Mr. Trump’s latest tariffs had “disrupted the security and stability of the global industrial and supply chains.”

    The Chinese government also said it was blocking 15 U.S. companies from buying Chinese products unless it granted special permission, including a manufacturer of drones that supplies the U.S. military. And it said it was blocking another 10 U.S. companies from doing business in China.

    Mr. Trump imposed a 10 percent tariff on almost all imports from China in early February, and raised the tariff to 20 percent last week. He has said the actions were intended partly to pressure China to reduce the flow of the opioid fentanyl into the United States.

    Mr. Trump also imposed 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico last Tuesday, though he abruptly suspended many of those levies two days later.

    He has added 20 percent tariffs to the roughly $440 billion worth of Chinese goods that the United States imports annually. The average U.S. tariff on affected Chinese goods now stands at 39 percent, up from 3 percent when Mr. Trump began his first term eight years ago. Other than China, Canada and Mexico, the United States collects tariffs averaging about 3 percent on most countries.

    Despite the recent escalations in the trade war between Washington and Beijing, both sides have signaled that they may be open to a compromise. Last week, China’s commerce minister told reporters that he had invited his American counterpart and the U.S. trade representative to a meeting. And last month, Mr. Trump said that a new trade deal with China was “possible.”

    Monday’s levies are not the first time in recent weeks that China has responded in kind to Mr. Trump’s trade actions. After the president imposed 10 percent tariffs in early February, China said it would place tariffs on natural gas, coal and farm equipment purchased from the United States.

    But the United States has more targets in a trade war because Americans purchase far more goods from China than the Chinese purchase from Americans. This enabled the United States to one-up China relatively easily after China imposed reciprocal tariffs on U.S. goods during Mr. Trump’s first term.

    China is also hamstrung by a number of economic problems, including weak foreign investment and the aftermath of a real estate bust.

    Still, China has other tools for managing the ongoing trade skirmish. In the past, it has cut taxes on Chinese companies that export goods to the United States, enabling them to lower prices and dampen the effects of a U.S. tariff.

    Chinese companies have also moved final assembly of their products to countries like Vietnam and Mexico, with which the United States has had relatively free trade relations in recent decades. But Mr. Trump has tried to tighten this loophole by threatening tariffs on Mexico.

    And Chinese companies have sought to exploit the so-called de minimis rule, which exempts packages from tariffs if their value is $800 or less. Mr. Trump has tried to crack down on this practice, but the crackdown proved complicated to execute and Mr. Trump has largely paused the effort.



    Source link