US Steel (X) recorded adjusted net loss of 83 cents per share for the first quarter 2017 that missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of earnings of 32 cents.
The Financial Times reports that the Trump administration is considering steel tariffs: The US has set the stage for a global showdown over steel, launching a national security investigation that could lead to sweeping tariffs on steel imports in what would be the first significant act of economic protectionism by President Donald Trump. The decision to use a 1962 law allowing the US government to limit imports that threaten its security readiness is intended to deliver on Mr Trump's campaign promises to bolster heavy industry and "put new American steel into the spine of this country", officials said on Thursday. A few observations: 1. Congress erred in delegating to the executive branch the power to set national security tariffs. Almost any industry could be deemed essential for "national security". 2. The US steel industry currently produces about 80 million tons per year. That's more than enough to meet our essential military needs. And this doesn't even account for the fact that steel production could be increased, as we are not operating at capacity. Yes, it might take a bit of time to bring mothballed plants back online, but as the following quotation suggests, new weapons now take far longer to develop than they did back in WWII: Civilian manufacturing capacity is now ALMOST ENTIRELY USELESS for defense purposes. Whereas in WWII, auto assembly lines could be used to make planes & tanks, and Singer made guns instead of sewing machines... Now all but the most basic defense products (personal firearms, sewing of uniforms, etc) must be made by specialized expert-firms. Super-weapons such as the F-22/F-35, M1A3 Abrams (it's under development now), and whatever we make when we finally field a next-generation artillery piece (cancelling the Crusader was a mistake, btw) require such a specialized knowledge-base & facilities, that they MUST be made by a dedicated defense industry - something we have (on a best-in-the-world level). Re-purposing a factory that built 2-ton SUVs to build 70-ton tanks just isn't happening. Even if it could, how much experience does your average auto-worker have in assembling uranium-ceramic-steel-composite armor properly, so as to maintain it's ability to take 125mm KE hits? A final point on this issue, is that modern war moves to fast to 'develop and manufacture new products after the fact, using civilian industries'. It's a 'run what ya brung' sort of affair And this doesn't even account for the fact that the US would likely have access to steel produced in friendly countries such as Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Japan and Germany. Sure, one could construct scenarios where some of that steel is cut off in a war (i.e., Japanese exports are disrupted by a war with China, or German exports in a war with Russia), but unless the US is fighting the entire world at once, we'd surely have access to at least some markets. And if steel imports really were cut off, where would we get our iron ore? Today we don't need much iron because of our use of scrap metal. But if we stopped building cars during a war, then far less scrap metal would be available. This also fails to account for the fact that warfare in the modern world tends to be asymmetric. The threat of nuclear annihilation means that we fight small countries, not large nuclear powers. The development of missile technology tends to make steel-intensive weapons (such as ships and tanks) more of a "sitting duck" than in the old days. I recall that a single Argentine missile took out a British destroyer in the Falklands War--and that was way back in 1983. Think about today's cruise missiles, and also consider that the sort of powerful adversary that would require the US to have a massive steel industry would be far more militarily advanced than Argentina in 1983. I'm not expert on modern weapons, but I'd wager that in today's warfare a big steel industry is less important than back in WWII. 3. One possibility is that the national security argument is simply being used as an excuse to save jobs in the steel industry. As an analogy, recall that when Trump campaigned for President he promised to ban Muslim immigration. When Rudy Giuliani told him that this was a legally dubious proposal, Trump asked for a version of the plan that would be accepted by the courts. This led to the recent dispute over the ban on immigration from seven (later six) majority Muslim countries. I don't have strong views either way on whether Trump's immigration ban was legal. But I will say that the legal argument for protecting the US steel industry on national security grounds seems far less plausible than the claim that the immigration ban protects national security (and I'm dubious of even that claim.) So you might expect the courts to question the steel tariffs on exactly the same grounds they challenged the immigration ban---Trump is on the record favoring this sort of action on entirely different grounds---jobs. On the other hand, courts have tended to show more deference to the government on economic regulation than on civil rights/equal protection issues, so I'm not making any predictions here. 4. It is likely that a suitably high steel tariff could save some jobs in the US steel industry. However, it seems much less likely that this would serve Trump's broader goals of restoring jobs in manufacturing. Tariffs protect industries by driving up the price of the commodity being imported. But if steel prices rise, then this puts other American manufacturers (cars, white goods, etc.) at a competitive disadvantage to imports. Mexican firms making cars or washing machines would be able to buy steel more cheaply than American manufacturers, and this would cost jobs in other sectors of the US economy. The net effect on the total number of jobs in manufacturing is likely to be pretty trivial, and could be either positive or negative. 5. Policies based on metaphors that romanticize and/or anthropomorphize the economy are unlikely to be wise: The decision to use a 1962 law allowing the US government to limit imports that threaten its security readiness is intended to deliver on Mr Trump's campaign promises to bolster heavy industry and "put new American steel into the spine of this country", officials said on Thursday. Sorry folks, those days are long gone: (19 COMMENTS)
Since the fall of 2016, when steel emerged as a key topic in the US presidential debates and longtime industry issues became the stuff of living room and social media conversations across the country, the steel industry in the US has felt emboldened. Download the full article (PDF) The post Making American steel great again — Trump, tweets and trade appeared first on The Barrel Blog.
Authored by Carey Wedler via TheAntiMedia.org, Multiple Indiana beaches have been shut down following a spill of wastewater containing hexavalent chromium, a highly toxic chemical linked to cancer. The United States Steel company reported the leak occurred on Tuesday due to equipment failure at its Portage, Indiana, plant, a lapse that “resulted in a chemical leak into the waterway that forced the shutdown of a drinking water intake along Lake Michigan and several nearby beaches,” the Northwest Indiana Times explained. Local outlet The Indy Channel also documented the circumstances, acknowledging the release of hexavalent chromium into the water: “The USS Midwest Plant reported that they had a spill into the Burns Waterway Tuesday afternoon. The Environmental Protection Agency says the spill contained hexavalent chromium from the US Steel facility in Portage, Indiana.” U.S. News reported that U.S. Steel said the leak was a result of a malfunctioning pipe, asserting “an expansion joint failed Tuesday in a pipe at its Portage, Indiana, facility, allowing wastewater from an electroplating treatment process that contains hexavalent chromium to flow into the wrong wastewater treatment plant at the complex.” The spill has led to the National Park Service’s closure of “West Beach and Portage Lakefront and Riverwalk at Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore and Ogden Dunes’ town beach.” On Wednesday, the service also shut down Cowles Bog Beach. According to U.S. News, in addition to causing beach closures, Tuesday’s spill “prompted a local water utility to stop drawing water from the lake out of ‘an abundance of caution,’ the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said.” The EPA is leading an investigation into the wastewater spill into the waterway, which the agency says is just 100 yards away from Lake Michigan. Hexavalent chromium carries several health risks. The Occupation Safety and Health Administration warns of the risk of “lung cancer in workers who breathe airborne hexavalent chromium, irritation or damage to the nose, throat, and lung (respiratory tract) if hexavalent chromium is breathed at high levels, [and] irritation or damage to the eyes and skin if hexavalent chromium contacts these organs in high concentrations.” Skin contact with chromium can also cause dermatitis and skin ulcers, and the EPA cautions that ingesting it, particularly through drinking water, can also lead to dermatitis. It claims it is reviewing the results of a long-term 2008 study that “suggested that chromium-6 may be a human carcinogen if ingested.” It is difficult to estimate the spill’s potential health hazards, especially because the amount of wastewater leaked through the broken pipe has not yet been disclosed. U.S. Steel said it is working with authorities to ensure proper cleanup: “Additional steps to mitigate the impact are being taken. These steps include the isolation and repair of the damaged pipe, recovery of material, and the addition of a water treatment compound, sodium trithiocarbonate (CNa2S3), to the wastewater treatment plant to convert and aid in the removal of hexavalent chromium.” “We are gathering information right now. It is too early to tell if there is an impact on the town,” said Ogden Dunes Town Council President Tim Nelson. Save the Dunes, a conservancy organization, warned that “people and pets should avoid direct contact with Lake Michigan.” In shutting down the beaches, the National Park Service warned that residents “should avoid contact with the water of Lake Michigan or Burns Waterway in the West Beach and Portage Lakefront areas until further notice.”
Because tax reform is currently in the news, I thought it would be useful to describe what economists know, and don't know, about taxes. I'll start with what we know: 1. Legal tax incidence doesn't matter. If a tax is imposed on a market, it makes no difference whether the buyers or sellers are legally obligated to pay the tax. Thus the payroll tax is legally split 50-50 between the employers and the employees, but the take home pay of workers would be exactly the same if the tax were paid 100% by employers, or 100% by employees. Ditto for a gas tax. If the original price of gasoline is $1, then a 25-cent gas tax might cause the price to rise to $1.24. If the gas station paid the tax, they'd just boost the price to $1.24. If the consumer had to pay the tax, the gas station would charge $0.99, and then add the 25-cent tax on at the pump (as sales taxes are collected.) This is one issue on which all economists agree, at least on the long run. (Due to sticky wages and prices, the short run outcome may be different.) If you find an economist that does not agree, I'll reply with the "no true Scotsman" argument. 2. The true economic burden of a tax depends on the elasticity of supply and demand. In most industries, supply curves are very elastic, especially in the long run. Thus most of the burden of sales taxes probably falls on the consumer. If we take the 25-cent gas tax above, it would lead to slightly less driving. This would slightly depress world oil prices. This would slightly depress wholesale gasoline prices. In my example above, I assume the wholesale price of gasoline fell by 1 cent. If so, the 96% of the gas tax would be borne by consumers, and 4% by suppliers (probably oil producers, not gas retailers). This is also an issue on which economists agree. Here's an excellent graph from John Taylor's textbook: 3. A more difficult question arises when we look at various types of income taxes. In that case, the long run elasticities are difficult to estimate. Economists do not have a good sense of how much of corporate taxes (or even top bracket personal income taxes) are borne by the rich, and how much are passed on to the general public via higher prices and/or lower wages. We also don't know much about the Laffer Curve. No one really knows the maximum amount of revenue, per capita, that a developed country can raise via taxes. 4. We do know that subsidies are negative taxes, with effects that are the exact mirror image of taxes. Taxes raise revenue but reduce quantity of what's taxed, whereas subsidies cost revenue but increase the quantity of what is being subsidized. Again, it makes no difference whether a subsidy is paid to the provider or the consumer. 5. We also know that an equal tax and subsidy exactly offset one another. Thus if gas stations must pay a 25-cent gas tax, but also receive a 25-cent subsidy for each gallon sold, it's as if nothing happened. No effect at all. If we combine this result with point one above, we know for certain that a 25 cent gas tax on producers combined with a 25-cent subsidy to gas consumers has absolutely no effect on anyone. This is not controversial. However, the price at the gas pump would rise to $1.25 in the second case. After consumers got their 25-cent rebate from the government, they would still be paying $1.00 per gallon. So it would look different. 6. When we move to the realm of international trade, economists see exports as the way of paying for imports (money is just a veil, trade is actually all about barter.) Thus economists believe that a 25% tax on all imports, combined with an equal subsidy to all exports, would have zero effect, for reasons identical to the gas example above. But there is one complication. The exchange rate would rise by 25%, so that the net price paid by importers, and received by exporters, would not change at all. 7. In contrast, if there were only a tax on imports, or only a subsidy to exports, then trade would be distorted. The exchange rate would rise by less than 25%. Importantly, both sides of the trade equation are impacted by tariffs and subsidies, as exports are the way we pay for imports. If we import less, then we export less, at least in the long run. Thus a 25% tariff would appreciate the dollar by less that 25%, and both imports and exports would decline. Protectionism would hurt West Virginia coal, Iowa farmers and Seattle jet makers. And an export subsidy (like Ex/IM Bank) boosts both exports and imports, hurting firms like US Steel, which compete with imports. Bob Murphy asked me to address three questions: I think you might also clarify--are you saying the following? (Because it's very counterintuitive.) 1) An import tax by itself will reduce the trade deficit. 2) An export subsidy by itself will reduce the trade deficit. 3) An import tax coupled with an export subsidy will not affect the trade deficit. So far I've been ignoring trade deficits. When we run a trade deficit, it means we import stuff now in exchange for exporting stuff later. If it seems like we'll never have to pay for the imports (as trade deficits seem to run on year after year) it's because the accounting is flawed. To some extent we are paying for imports by earning big profits on overseas investments. That's the whole "dark matter" debate, which is worth a blog post on its own. Or we might give them some of our property. But the key point is that we must give other countries something of real value (not just paper) for all the cars they send us, unless the other countries are essentially giving us Lexuses and BMWs as gifts. Tariffs and subsidies don't have major first order effects on the deficit. Tariffs reduce both imports and exports, and subsidies raise both imports and exports. To the extent they matter at all, it is due to the impact on national saving and investment. Thus tariffs might boost national saving, which would reduce the trade deficit, while subsidies might reduce national saving, which would increase the trade deficit. I say, "might" because there are many factors to take into account, including Ricardian equivalence. Most economists believe that Reagan's expansionary fiscal policy boosted the US trade deficit. If so, then you'd expect Trump's likely fiscal policies to do the same. But of course it also depends on what's happening in the rest of the world, not just the US. To answer Bob's three questions: yes (a little bit), no, yes. 8. Let me end up on a point where I'm not well informed. Although in theory the proposed border adjustment tax/subsidy should be completely neutral to trade, there are some real world complexities that I don't fully understand. Suppose part of our goods imports are paid for by UK tourists at Disney World. That service export probably won't be subsidized. Also suppose part of our goods imports are paid via high overseas profits earned by US multinationals. Is that going to be subsidized? What about sales of LA homes to Chinese buyers? In other words, if the actual plan differs from the textbook assumptions of 100% tax and subsidy, do we still get a 25% appreciation in the dollar? And if we do, is it possible that it occurs not through changes in the nominal exchange rate, but rather the real exchange rate. Thus because of countries like Hong Kong that stubbornly peg their currency to the dollar (nominally), might the dollar only appreciate by 12.5% in nominal terms? In that case, the real adjustment would have to occur via a combination of higher than normal inflation in the US, and deflation in places like Hong Kong, or indeed much of the world. Central banks play a key role here. Even with all that uncertainty, it's important to know that economists do understand an awful a lot about taxes. I see many commenters who seem unaware of even points 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, which are all extremely well understood. PS. If you think that a subsidy of 20% on sales of LA homes to Chinese buyers would be more controversial than the subsidy on goods exports, you are probably right. Which shows just how irrational we are when it comes to trade. We claim to love it when American blue collar workers build jets and bulldozers and sell them to the Chinese, but freak out when America blue collar workers build high rise condos in LA and sell them to Chinese buyers. (10 COMMENTS)
What some are describing as the Trump Factor appears to be emboldening US steel producers to embark on new capital projects. Since the November 8 election of Donald Trump as US president, several mills have announced restarts of idled operations as well as major mill upgrades and expansions. Trump’s steel-friendly administration is boosting confidence on […] The post Steel announcements pick up as new US administration settles in appeared first on The Barrel Blog.
WEEK FOUR: Rumors of a massive staff shakeup -- NYT: Inside the turmoil on the National Security Council -- THE JUICE: Puzder gets reinforcements and female biz leaders huddling with Trudeau/Trump
Listen to Playbook in 90 Seconds http://bit.ly/2kj1ybs … Subscribe on iTunes http://apple.co/2eX6Eay … Visit the online home of Playbook http://politi.co/2f51JnfWELCOME TO WEEK FOUR OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. Twenty-four days into Donald Trump’s presidency there is already public musing about drastic senior staff shakeups that would reshape the new White House.JOSH DAWSEY and ALEX ISENSTADT -- “Trump reviews top White House staff after tumultuous start”: “Trump has told several people that he is particularly displeased with national security adviser Michael Flynn over reports that he had top-secret discussions with Russian officials about and lied about it. The president, who spent part of the weekend dealing with the Flynn controversy, has been alarmed by reports from top aides that they don’t trust Flynn. ‘He thinks he’s a problem,’ said one person familiar with the president’s thinking. ‘I would be worried if I was General Flynn.’ “Yet Trump’s concern goes beyond his embattled national security adviser, according to conversations with more than a dozen people who have spoken to Trump or his top aides. He has mused aloud about press secretary Sean Spicer, asking specific questions to confidants about how they think he’s doing behind the podium. During conversations with Spicer, the president has occasionally expressed unhappiness with how his press secretary is talking about some matters -- sometimes pointing out even small things he’s doing that he doesn’t like. Others who’ve talked with the president have begun to wonder about the future of Chief of Staff Reince Priebus. Several Trump campaign aides have begun to draft lists of possible Priebus replacements, with senior White House aides Kellyanne Conway and Rick Dearborn and lobbyist David Urban among those mentioned. Gary Cohn, a Trump economic adviser who is close with senior adviser Jared Kushner, has also been the subject of chatter.” http://politi.co/2lAFeu5 -- STEPHEN MILLER is one aide who appears to have only solidified his strong standing with Trump this weekend. @realDonaldTrump: “Congratulations Stephen Miller- on representing me this morning on the various Sunday morning shows. Great job!”**SUBSCRIBE to Playbook: http://politi.co/1M75UbXCHRIS RUDDY, the CEO of Newsmax who is a confidant of President Donald Trump, went on CNN and called the New York Times and Washington Post Sunday saying Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, needs to go, citing a botched rollout of the immigration executive order and broad mishandling of government affairs.-- NYT: Ruddy “said Mr. Priebus was in over his head, and he hinted that Mr. Trump may already be growing weary of the man he chose to run the White House. ‘He doesn’t waste a lot of time,’ Mr. Ruddy said of the president. ‘If he thinks somebody is not performing, he moves pretty quickly.’” http://nyti.ms/2kiO67o -- WaPo: “A lot of people have been saying, ‘Look, Donald has some problems,’ and I think he realizes that he’s got to make some changes going forward,’ Ruddy said in an interview with The Washington Post. Ruddy went on to detail his critique of White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus: ‘It’s my view that Reince is the problem. I think on paper Reince looked good as the chief of staff -- and Donald trusted him -- but it’s pretty clear the guy is in way over his head. He’s not knowledgeable of how federal agencies work, how the communications operations work. He botched this whole immigration rollout. This should’ve been a win for Donald, not two or three weeks of negative publicity.’” http://wapo.st/2kJNFli SUNDAY EVENING, Ruddy softened his stance and tweeted: “Reince just briefed me on new WH plans. Impressive! CNN today my personal view. Told him I have ‘open mind’ based on his results. ... Jared Kushner tells me COS Reince is doing ‘amazing job.’ Disagrees with me!”SPOTTED at church in Washington yesterday: Reince Priebus and his family.TRUMP’S WASHINGTON -- “Trump undertakes most ambitious regulatory rollback since Reagan,” by WaPo’s Juliet Eilperin: “President Trump has embarked on the most aggressive campaign against government regulation in a generation, joining with Republican lawmakers to roll back rules already on the books and limit the ability of federal regulators to impose new ones. After just a few weeks in office, the new administration is targeting dozens of Obama-era policies, using both legislative and executive tactics. … Before Trump took office, the Congressional Review Act had been successfully used only once, to overturn a Clinton administration ergonomics rule in 2001. So far this year, the House has moved to nullify eight new rules and is considering dozens more. Two of those measures — which would loosen environmental restrictions on waste-mining companies and financial disclosure requirements on oil and gas firms — have cleared the Senate and are on their way to the White House for the president’s signature.” http://wapo.st/2kBupnu-- IMPORTANT NOTE: The Trump administration and Republicans on Capitol Hill would like you to believe that they are charting an aggressive agenda, but view that with a healthy dose of skepticism for the following reasons: 1) infighting in the White House is distracting and tiring. If people are warring with each other, it makes it much harder to get things done. 2) Yes, Jared Kushner seems like a smart and capable guy. But consider what he’s been tasked with: solving Middle East peace, patching up relations with Mexico, working on tax reform, sitting in on foreign leader calls and generally advising the president of the United States. He’s never worked in government before. 3) Republicans on Capitol Hill are beginning to view Trump with distrust. Many do not believe he has surrounded himself with people who know how to get from point A to point B in Washington. Running as an anti-establishment and anti-Washington candidate is certainly smart and effective. But once you’re here, you need to play the game. Why? Because everyone else is. And if you’re not, you’re going to lose. HERE’S OUR GUESS: In the next few days, we’ll continue to hear a bunch of new names for chief of staff. Replacing Reince right now would be a sure sign of turmoil. But D.C. insiders have been placing bets since inauguration on which senior staff member would be out first. Will it be Reince?HOW TRUMP’S AGENDA COULD STALL:-- “Speed Limits on Trump’s Infrastructure Drive: Federal Laws, Rare Species and Nimbys,” by WSJ’s David Harrison: “Many lawmakers and economists agree with President Donald Trump that America needs to fix a backlog of infrastructure needs, which the Transportation Department pegs at $926 billion. There’s a similar agreement that conservation and preservation laws have helped mitigate damage on neighborhoods and the environment. A tour through of the nation’s thorniest infrastructure struggles shows how these two goals are often in conflict. As a result, long, costly reviews and legal battles will likely confront Mr. Trump’s efforts, just as they delayed much of President Barack Obama’s 2009 economic-stimulus efforts.” http://on.wsj.com/2kiU0Wj-- “Trump’s plan to revive US steel industry faces barriers,” by the Boston Globe’s Annie Linskey: “Industry analysts say the idea of forcing the Keystone and Dakota pipelines to be made from American steel is, well, a pipe dream. The Dakota pipeline is almost complete, so its developers don’t need to buy much, if any, additional pipe. As for Keystone, just drive a few miles east of Scranton in North Dakota, where hundreds of miles worth of 36-inch pipe -- already purchased for the project -- is stacked in a field and waiting for construction to begin. Add to that the fact that few American steelmakers make the type of steel required for the pipeline. All told, it looks as if Trump’s pipeline declaration is another example of facts and details getting in the way of the president’s original wishes -- like finding a quick fix for the Affordable Care Act.” http://bit.ly/2kJNMNATOP READ -- NYT A1 -- “Turmoil at the National Security Council, From the Top Down,” by David Sanger, Eric Schmitt and Peter Baker: “Three weeks into the Trump administration, council staff members get up in the morning, read President Trump’s Twitter posts and struggle to make policy to fit them. Most are kept in the dark about what Mr. Trump tells foreign leaders in his phone calls. Some staff members have turned to encrypted communications to talk with their colleagues, after hearing that Mr. Trump’s top advisers are considering an ‘insider threat’ program that could result in monitoring cellphones and emails for leaks. ...“The national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, has hunkered down since investigators began looking into what, exactly, he told the Russian ambassador to the United States about the lifting of sanctions imposed in the last days of the Obama administration, and whether he misled Vice President Mike Pence about those conversations. … There are transcripts of a conversation in at least one phone call, recorded by American intelligence agencies that wiretap foreign diplomats, which may determine Mr. Flynn’s future. … Many of those who remain, who see themselves as apolitical civil servants, have been disturbed by displays of overt partisanship. At an all-hands meeting about two weeks into the new administration, [Deputy National Security Adviser K.T.] McFarland told the group it needed to ‘make America great again,’ numerous staff members who were there said. …“[W]hile Mr. Obama liked policy option papers that were three to six single-spaced pages, council staff members are now being told to keep papers to a single page, with lots of graphics and maps. ‘The president likes maps,’ one official said. … Two people with direct access to the White House leadership said Mr. Flynn was surprised to learn that the State Department and Congress play a pivotal role in foreign arms sales and technology transfers. So it was a rude discovery that Mr. Trump could not simply order the Pentagon to send more weapons to Saudi Arabia -- which is clamoring to have an Obama administration ban on the sale of cluster bombs and precision-guided weapons lifted -- or to deliver bigger weapons packages to the United Arab Emirates.” http://nyti.ms/2lAveB5 WHAT TRUMP IS WAKING UP TO: NYT -- A two-column photo of his two sons with the headline: “Piloting an Empire Through a Tempest: President’s Sons Work to Expand Brand Amid Ethical Qualms” http://nyti.ms/2lABHfl … The Trump Corp story http://nyti.ms/2lAKwpB … N.Y. POST: “BEGGING FOR TROUBLE: DeB legal fund hit as ethics trap” http://nyp.st/2lG1iPP … WaPo http://bit.ly/2lHjppF THE JUICE …-- FIRST IN PLAYBOOK -- PUZDER BUSINESS SUPPORTERS OUT IN FORCE -- More than 100 trade associations have signed onto a letter of support backing Trump labor nominee Andy Puzder. Organized by the International Franchise Association, other groups lending their names to the effort include The American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Association of Manufacturers, American Hotel & Lodging Association and the Financial Services Roundtable. The letter is part of a broader business effort to defend Puzder. There is also pressure on Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). State restaurant associations from their respective home states are sending letters this morning to the lawmakers urging their support of Puzder. IFA letter http://politi.co/2kiP2J2 … Maine letter http://politi.co/2lAFBF3 … Alaska letter http://politi.co/2l6u5ke-- SUPREME COURT NOMINEE NEIL GORSUCH is meeting today with Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa).-- UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO spring 2017 fellows: Najla Ayubi, human rights activist and former Afghani judge; Tony Blinken, former deputy secretary of state and deputy National Security Adviser; Alfredo Corchado, journalist; Bob Dold, former Illinois Republican member of the House of Representatives; Jennifer Granholm, former governor of Michigan; Steven Greenhouse, former labor reporter for the New York Times; Shailagh Murray, former top adviser to President Obama.-- PRESIDENT TRUMP hosts Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau today at the White House. He will announce the Canada-United States Council for Advancement of Women Entrepreneurs and Business Leaders. The following executives will participate in a roundtable with the leaders: Elyse Allan, CEO of General Electric Canada, Dawn Farrell, CEO of TransAlta Corp., Linda Hasenfratz, CEO of Linamar Corp., Tina Lee of T&T Supermarket Inc., Tamara Lundgren, CEO of Schnitzer Steel Industries, Julie Sweet, CEO-North America of Accenture, Annette Verschuren, CEO of NRStor, Monique Leroux, chair of the board of directors for Investissement Québec, and Carol Stephenson, board of directors for General Motors Co. --AP’s Catherine Lucey: “Ivanka Trump, who has been a vocal advocate for policies benefiting working women, was involved in recruiting participants and setting the agenda for the meeting and will attend, [an] official said. Ivanka Trump stressed the importance of maternity leave and child care on the campaign trail, and has recently been meeting with business leaders to discuss those issues.” http://abcn.ws/2l6wk6V PICS DU JOUR -- @maxwelltani: “Here’s Sean Spicer lint-rolling Stephen Miller’s jacket this morning (via Reuters)” http://bit.ly/2l6CdRr ... @DannyAyalon: “Glad to meet Charles & Josh Kushner, dad & brother of @JaredKushner, @POTUS’s son-in law & senior advisor. They are true friends of #Israel.” http://bit.ly/2l6G9Su (h/t Jewish Insider)HAPPENING TODAY -- In addition to Trudeau's visit, Trump will speak with President Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria, and President Jacob Zuma of South Africa. Trump meets this afternoon with RNC Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel. He'll participate in a pinning ceremony for Major Ricardo Turner, and speak to Maureen Scalia on the phone.SOUND SMART AT THE WATER COOLER -- “Grammys 2017: Complete list of winners and nominees,” by LA Times: http://lat.ms/2kBHddnINSIDE 1600 -- “The husband-and-wife team driving Trump’s national security policy,” by Eli Stokols, Bryan Bender, and Michael Crowley: “Before they became a Trump administration power couple, Sebastian and Katharine Gorka were prolific collaborators on research about the Islamic terrorist threat who built a fan base in far-right circles. Business partners as well as published co-authors, the Gorkas made successful careers out of their shared passion. ‘Our pillow talk is the Islamic State and al Qaeda,’ Sebastian Gorka, now a senior White House aide, said during a talk in Florida last November.” http://politi.co/2knJY0X-- “Mnuchin looks to Wall Street to fill key Treasury roles,” by Ben White: “Senior Goldman Sachs banker Jim Donovan is under strong consideration for deputy Treasury secretary and could serve as Mnuchin’s number two if confirmed by the Senate, people familiar with the matter said. Justin Muzinich, a former Morgan Stanley banker now at Muzinich & Co., is likely to take a senior position possibly as undersecretary for domestic finance or counselor, the people said. The counselor position would not require Senate confirmation. Economist David Malpass, a veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, is expected to be nominated by President Trump to serve as undersecretary for international affairs.” http://politi.co/2lGe1lLSUSAN GLASSER’s new “Global Politico” podcast – “Can a ‘Wrecking Ball’ of a President Evolve? An exclusive with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on his disagreements with Trump—and how he views a White House torn between deals and disruption”: “Would-be Republican allies on Capitol Hill like [Bob] Corker hold out hope of exerting real influence over the new administration’s moves and see ‘evolution’ in Trump’s embassy delay and other early moves like his about-face reaffirming America’s ‘One China’ policy after flirting with Taiwan. But even those most ready to do business with Trump have been rattled by his unpredictability, contradictory statements and angry outbursts. Trump, Corker says when we meet in his Senate office for his first extensive interview about the new administration, is a ‘wrecking ball’ when it comes to longstanding American foreign policy, a newcomer to the burdensome demands of being the world’s lone superpower who remains determined ‘to just destroy everything about’ the U.S. establishment’s view of the world.” http://politi.co/2kZ5cV1 ... Transcript http://politi.co/2lG2SkH FOR YOUR RADAR -- “Mexican Presidential Hopeful Wins Support With Trump Stance,” by WSJ’s Santiago Perez and Juan Montes: “Leftist presidential hopeful Andrés Manuel López Obrador is gaining momentum in the race to lead Mexico, tapping into a nationalist backlash against the U.S. as President Donald Trump upends bilateral relations. The former Mexico City mayor, narrowly beaten in Mexico’s two previous presidential elections, is now widening his lead in opinion polls ahead of next year’s contest.” http://on.wsj.com/2lAALYrNEW WIRED COVER STORY – GABRIEL SNYDER, “The News in Crisis -- Keeping Up With the Times -- The New York Times Claws Its Way Into the Future”: A.G. “Sulzberger, like more than three dozen other executives and journalists I interviewed and shadowed at the Times, is working on the biggest strategic shift in the paper’s 165-year history ... It’s to transform the Times’ digital subscriptions into the main engine of a billion-dollar business, one that could pay to put reporters on the ground in 174 countries even if (OK, when) the printing presses stop forever. To hit that mark, the Times is embarking on an ambitious plan inspired by the strategies of Netflix, Spotify, and HBO: invest heavily in a core offering (which, for the Times, is journalism) while continuously adding new online services and features (from personalized fitness advice and interactive newsbots to virtual reality films) so that a subscription becomes indispensable to the lives of its existing subscribers and more attractive to future ones. ...“The Times has had more success at building its digital subscriber base than any other publication. Its nearly $500 million in digital revenue not only dwarfs what any print publication has managed online, it also far exceeds leading digital-only publishers. At The Washington Post, which has invested heavily in digital growth since it was acquired by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, digital revenue was reported in 2016 to be in the neighborhood of $60 million. In 2015, BuzzFeed brought in a reported $170 million, while the Huffington Post’s 2014 revenue, the most recent reported figure, was $146 million.” http://bit.ly/2kiJvC2 ... The cover http://bit.ly/2l6C2py MEDIAWATCH -- OFF MESSAGE -- “Jon Karl’s front-row seat to the Trump White House,” by Isaac Dovere: “Karl, recently promoted to chief Washington correspondent for ABC, was well known for sparring with Jay Carney, who served as former President Barack Obama’s press secretary. Life in the Trump White House has gotten off to a similar start: his first question at Trump press secretary Sean Spicer’s first briefing was to ask him to pledge to tell the truth. Spicer’s answer was that his intention was never to lie and to correct mistakes when he made them.” http://politi.co/2kZf2Go DESSERT -- “Patrick Park may get to realize dream as Austrian ambassador,” by Palm Beach Daily News’ Shannon Donnelly: “Patrick Park is an avid fan of ‘The Sound of Music.’ You might say he’s obsessed with it. ‘Really, I’ve seen it like 75 times,’ the concert pianist/industrialist said. ‘I know every single word and song by heart. I’ve always wanted to live in the Von Trapp house.’ Well, if he can’t live there, at least he’ll be close enough to visit. Park has received unofficial word from President Donald Trump -- well, as unofficial as a handwritten note saying ‘on to your next chapter, Ambassador!’ can be — that he is the president’s choice to be U.S. ambassador to Austria. The president said he thought it would be a good match for Park because it is steeped in musical culture.” http://bit.ly/2l6p7UC TRANSITIONS -- Patrick Burgwinkle, former regional communications director for Hillary for America, has joined the DCCC as deputy communications director. … Matt Baker, formerly of the Podesta Group and Ogilvy Washington, is leaving Edelman to join Samsung as their manager of corporate reputation. OBAMA ALUMNI -- As of Monday, the 270 Strategies originals are all back at the firm. Meg Ansara, Marlon Marshall and Lauren Kidwell are rejoining the founding partners. Meg served most recently as battleground states director for Hillary Clinton and Marlon was director of states and political engagement for Clinton. Lauren was most recently deputy chief of staff at the U.S. Department of Commerce after more than a decade in the Obama world -- she was an intern in his Senate office.-- Former WH climate adviser and OMB senior official, Ali Zaidi – an eight-year veteran of the administrated who started with Obama in New Hampshire 10 years ago this month – is now a senior adviser to Morrison & Foerster, focusing on opportunities and risks around changing clean energy, infrastructure and environmental policy. He’s also serving as a Precourt Energy Scholar at Stanford University. … Susan Lagana joins Burson-Marsteller today as a managing director in the public affairs and crisis practice. She most recently served as director of public affairs and adviser to the secretary of transportation, where she also served as deputy assistant secretary for transportation policy. Prior to DOT, she served as director of strategic communications for the Secretary of the Navy. BIRTHWEEK (was yesterday): Chris Hodgson of Team ScaliseBIRTHDAY OF THE DAY: Chip Smith, EVP of global public affairs and policy at 21st Century Fox, celebrating in London with his UK public affairs team -- read his Playbook Plus Q&A: http://politi.co/2lAJbyY BIRTHDAYS: Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) is 71 ... former Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is 61 … Jerry Springer is 73 ... Politico’s Peter Lettre and Jeffrey Banasiak ... Pew’s Chris Conway ... Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center ... Alex Burgos of Rubio Senate office … Bloomberg’s Stacie Sherman ... Raven Reeder, COS to DC Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton ... Lila Nieves-Lee, LA for Ways and Means ... Samantha Slater, former comms director for Rep. Steve Israel ... Megan Becker ... Danielle Baussan, CAP’s managing director of energy policy … Lauren Hammond, Sen. John Thune’s Senate Commerce Committee press secretary (hat tip: Fred Hill) ... Mae Stevens, Sen. Cardin’s transportation and environmental adviser, is 35 -- ask her about sailing in Jamaica ... Brian Szmytke, former deputy state director for Mike Pence and Michigan Republican Party/RNC alum, now working behind the scenes on the Supreme Court confirmation (h/t Tony Gio) ... Les Francis (h/t Jon Haber) ...... Jill Barclay of Advoc8 and a RNC and Romney alum (h/t Ryan Williams) ... Georgetown’s Erum Haider - scholar and troublemaker, celebrating in Philly (h/t Tim Murphy) ... Sunny Mehta, Clyde Group new business director and a Politico alum ... Shannon Murphy, Clyde Group Healthcare Director (h/ts Alex Slater) ... Rob Crampton, business development for Bloomberg LP in Washington (h/t Tess Glancey) … Stephen Bauer (h/t Teresa Vilmain) ... Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Tex.) is 54 ... Politico Europe’s Gloria Osman ... Camille Johnston of Siemens (h/t JoJo) ... Betsy Ankney, campaign manager for Ron Johnson’s 2016 win, the pride of Toledo, and basically the patron saint of Senate campaign managers (h/t Brian Reisinger) ... Diane Ward ... George Kundanis … Simone White … Newsweek’s Jeff Stein ... Mark Cohen, former senior speechwriter for ex-Treasury Secretary Lew … J.R. Claeys, Kansas state representative ... Unjin Lee ... Mary Tiffany Cownie, director of the Iowa Dept. of Cultural Affairs and a Bush 43 WH alum ... Bill McCarren, executive director of National Press Club ... Ryan Cunningham ... WSJ auto reporter Mike Spector is 36 ... Maruffe S. Oliveira ... Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life … George Kundanis ... U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. Charles E. “Chuck” Yeager (ret.) is 94 ... Stockard Channing is 73 ... Michael Joseph Jackson Jr. (also known as Prince Michael Jackson I) is 2-0 (h/ts AP)
Американский рынок акций продемонстрировал невыразительный подъем в среду, при этом Nasdaq Composite отличился опережающей динамикой благодаря сильной отчетности компаний, в первую очередь Apple Inc., имеющей максимальный удельный вес в этом индексе.
Индекс Dow Jones Industrial Average в среду впервые преодолел рубеж 20 тыс. пунктов и на момент закрытия сессии оставался выше этого уровня.
Индекс Dow Jones Industrial Average в среду впервые преодолел рубеж 20 тыс. пунктов и на момент закрытия сессии оставался выше этого уровня.
политика Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:46:36 +0600 nikandrovich 512746 Встреча президента Трампа с главами большого бизнеса США http://news2.ru/story/512745/ Президент США Дональд Трамп провёл встречу с главами большого бизнеса. Президент Трамп сосредоточен на выполнении своих обещаний в сфере торговой политики, которая ставит Америку на первое место. Президент начал свой день с завтрака с ключевыми руководителями бизнеса в США. Основной фокус в обсуждении был сделан на создание рабочих мест и расширение производственной базы посредством сокращения налогов, отмены жёстких регуляционных норм и возвращения производственных мощностей в США. На встрече присутствовали главы Wirlpool, Ford, Lockheed Martin, Arconic, DOW, US Steel, SpaceX, Tesla и другие. (https://www.youtube.com/w...)
Перевод: Денис Владимирский. 23.01.2017 г. президент США Дональд Трамп провёл встречу с главами большого бизнеса. Президент Трамп сосредоточен на выполнении своих обещаний в сфере торговой политики, которая ставит Америку на первое место. Президент начал свой день с завтрака с ключевыми руководителями бизнеса в США. Основной фокус в обсуждении был сделан на создание рабочих мест и расширение производственной базы посредством сокращения налогов, отмены жёстких регуляционных норм и возвращения производственных мощностей в США. На встрече присутствовали главы Wirlpool, Ford, Lockheed Martin, Arconic, DOW, US Steel, SpaceX, Tesla и другие.
The New Year’s hangovers have all worn off by now and US sheet market players are all back at their desks, but questions remain about what should be expected in 2017. The age-old response — “If I knew, I’d certainly be making more money than I am right now” — has echoed through phones and […] The post Should we expect the expected in the US steel sheet market in 2017? appeared first on The Barrel Blog.
Президент Дональд Трамп провел встречу с главами американских компаний, заявив им о своих намерениях уменьшить налоги и регулирование внутри США, а также предупредил их о возможном повышении налогов в случае вывода производства за пределы страны.
Президент Дональд Трамп провел встречу с главами американских компаний, заявив им о своих намерениях уменьшить налоги и регулирование внутри США, а также предупредил их о возможном повышении налогов в случае вывода производства за пределы страны.
Крупнейшая американская сталелитейная корпорация U.S. Steel по итогам III квартала увеличила чистую прибыль в 2 раза в годовом значении. Спрос на трубы от нефтегазового сектора оказался выше, чем ожидалось.Чистая прибыль корпорации за июль-сентябрь выросла до $44 млн, или 28 центов на акцию. В III квартале 2011 г. прибыль составила $22 млн, или 15 центов на акцию.За исключением разовых факторов прибыль U.S. Steel составила 14 центов на акцию. Эксперты прогнозировали прибыль компании в размере 2 цента на акцию.Выручка U.S. Steel упала до $4,65 млрд с $5,1 млрд в III квартале прошлого года. Эксперты прогнозировали выручку в размере $4,64 млрд. По итогам III квартала компания поставила 5,3 млн тонн стали против 5,5 млн тонн годом ранее.