How much vital UK infrastructure does China own?

2 hours ago Share Save Ben Chu & Lucy Gilder BBC Verify Share Save

Reuters

The fate of the Scunthorpe steel works has shone a fresh spotlight on Chinese investment in the UK economy with critics raising questions over potential security risks. The British Steel plant had been owned by China's Jingye Steel. But the UK government has now taken control of the Scunthorpe site, amid claims the Chinese owners were planning to permanently decommission its two blast furnaces and use its rolling mills to process imported Chinese-made metal instead. BBC Verify looks at what we know about the extent of Chinese investment in the UK economy - and how much of a concern it should be.

How much Chinese investment is there in the UK in total?

Data from the Office for National Statistics suggests total Chinese investment in the UK in 2023 amounted to about £4.3bn - a small fraction of the total £2 trillion of overseas investment in the British economy in that year. However, this is likely to be a considerable underrepresentation of the true scale of Chinese investment in the UK because the official data only includes the immediate investing country, not the ultimate source of the money - and because of a lack of transparency from Beijing when it comes to overseas ownership stakes. Independent estimates from the American Enterprise Institute think tank, using corporate reports, suggest total public and private Chinese investment in the UK between 2005 and 2024 added up to $105bn, or £82bn. This would have made Britain the third largest national destination of Chinese investment over this period, after only the US and Australia.

What have Chinese firms invested in?

There is a wide range of Chinese investment in the UK, ranging from critical energy and transport infrastructure, to stakes in private companies and football clubs. Significant Chinese investments in UK infrastructure include a 10% stake in London's Heathrow airport by the China Investment Corporation, a sovereign wealth fund wholly owned by the Chinese state. The Hong Kong-based industrialist Li Ka-shing's investment group owns UK Power Networks, which operates electricity distribution infrastructure across London, the South East of England and the East of England. The billionaire's group also owns a 75% stake in Northumbrian Water Group, which provides water supply and sewerage in the north east of England.

There is also a large Chinese investment in the Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in Somerset. China General Nuclear Power Group originally had a 33.5% stake, with the rest owned by the French company EDF. But EDF reports that the Chinese company has stopped contributing additional financing to the joint project - which has been running over budget - and, as a result the Chinese stake at the end of last year had declined to 27.4%. The same Chinese company has an even larger stake - 66.5% - in the proposed Bradwell B nuclear site in Essex, according to the project website. EDF owns the rest.

China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN) recently halted its funding of the Hinkley Point C nuclear site, although it still has stakes in the project.

How much of a threat could these investments pose?

The potential danger posed by Chinese investment in UK infrastructure has been extensively debated in recent years - and a particular flashpoint was the involvement of the Shenzhen-based Chinese technology company Huawei in building the UK's 5G communications infrastructure. Huawei was founded by Ren Zhengfei, a former Chinese army officer, in 1987. The UK's National Cyber Security Centre initially judged in 2019 that any risk posed by Huawei was manageable. But the UK, nevertheless, required the Chinese company to begin pulling out of the UK's telecoms infrastructure in 2020, after coming under pressure from the US government during Donald Trump's first term as President. The involvement of Huawei in UK networks was also opposed by a number of MPs.

Getty Images Huawei began to be removed from the UK's telecoms infrastructure in 2020.

BBC Verify looks at what we know about the extent of Chinese investment in the UK economy.

How much vital UK infrastructure does China own?

Parents 'punished' by highest childcare costs in Britain

8 hours ago Share Save Bethan Lewis Education & family correspondent, BBC Wales News Sanjana Idnani BBC News Share Save

BBC Katie Bromley, a mum of three, says the cost of childcare means she is not able to return to work

Families in Wales are being "punished" by childcare bills for under-twos that are more than double the average of those in England, Oxfam Cymru has said. Parents in Wales with children who are under two do not receive any government help with childcare costs, whereas in England parents can claim 15 hours of free childcare a week for children aged between nine months and two years. Children's charity Coram said nursery costs for under-twos were now more expensive in Wales than anywhere else in Great Britain. The Welsh government said it had invested more than £100m a year to sustain and grow high quality childcare.

According to a survey by Coram, the cost of a part-time (25 hours per week) nursery place for a child under two in Wales is now £155. In England, the cost of a part-time place - once the funded hours are taken into account - has fallen to £70. "These are bills that many families simply cannot afford - and risk keeping parents locked out of the workplace," said Lydia Hodges, head of Coram Family and Childcare. Sarah Rees, head of Oxfam Cymru, said the data showed families in Wales were "really being punished in comparison to the offers being provided to families who need childcare in England". "People in England have access to childcare support for younger children – from nine months onwards – and that means their bills are practically half of what bills are for families in Wales."

'Childcare costs have gone up'

The cost of childcare is why mum-of-three Katie Bromley feels she is not in a position to go back to work. "Childcare costs have gone up," said Ms Bromley, who was with her one-year-old daughter at a Salvation Army baby and parent group in Tonypandy, Rhondda Cynon Taf, while her two older children were at school. "Even with my husband working full-time every day it's still expensive and hard to get back into work. "If I had more support I would definitely be looking for a job... so I can get a bit more freedom and find a job that could help me get back out there."

Parents in Wales should have help towards childcare costs from nine months, according to mum-of-three Ffion Ryan

Mum-of-three Ffion Ryan said it was a "struggle" until children turned three, after which parents can claim financial help with childcare costs wherever they live in Wales. "We're expected to go back to work after nine months and obviously it's a long time from then until three and that's when you need the help really," said Ms Ryan, a teacher from Llansannan in Conwy county who is currently on maternity leave. Ms Ryan said she believed financial support towards childcare should be available at the point that maternity pay ends. In the UK, statutory maternity pay ends at 39 weeks, or roughly nine months. "If you're asking women to go back to work after nine months, then the help should be there," said Ms Ryan.

What childcare help is there for parents?

In England, working parents of children between nine months and two years can claim 15 hours of free childcare a week, which will be expanded to 30 hours for all under-fives from September 2025. However, some childcare providers in England have expressed concerns about rising costs, leading to fears over a shortage of spaces. In Wales, funded childcare is available for children aged two, three and four. Under the Childcare Offer, parents and guardians of three and four-year-old children can claim up to 30 hours of free childcare each week, for up to 48 weeks of the year. The Flying Start programme provides 12.5 hours of free childcare to two-year-olds in eligible areas. It is being rolled out gradually to all two-year-olds, prioritising the most disadvantaged. Oxfam Cymru said it should be rolled out "much quicker" and that only 60% of families with two-year-olds had access to it so far. But nursery owner Lisa Owen said she did not believe the childcare system could support free care for children from nine months, even though she agreed with the principle.

Nursery owners like Lisa Owen are warning the sector is facing higher costs, with no option but to increase charges

Ms Owen said the money which providers received from the Welsh government for delivering the Childcare Offer did not meet costs and had an impact on parents' bills. "All of our costs have gone up," said Ms Owen, owner of Chuckles nursery in Newport. "We have staff ratios to maintain so when costs go up, the only thing we can do is put charges up. "The Childcare Offer unfortunately underfunds so we're losing money. To try to recoup those costs we've had to put our overall rates up which has a massive impact on the children two years and under." She said the increase to nurseries' National Insurance bills added to problems. "We're losing money hand over fist every day," she said, warning some settings were at risk of closing.

Getty Images Wales is the most expensive place in Great Britain for childcare for under-twos, according to Coram

Childcare costs for parents of under-twos in Wales are more expensive than anywhere else in Britain.

Childcare costs: Parents in Wales 'punished' with highest bills

China's Xi urges Vietnam to oppose 'bullying' as Trump mulls more tariffs

4 hours ago Share Save Annabelle Liang Business reporter Share Save

Getty Images Xi started his South East Asia trip in Vietnam

China's President Xi Jinping has called on Vietnam to oppose "unilateral bullying" to upkeep a global system of free trade - though he stopped short of naming the US. It comes as Xi is on a so called "charm offensive" trip across South East Asia, which will also see him visit Malaysia and Cambodia. Though the trip was long-planned, it has taken on heightened significance in the wake of a mounting trade war between the US and China. Vietnam was facing US tariffs of up to 46% before the Trump administration issued a 90-day pause last week. US President Donald Trump called Xi's meeting with Vietnamese leaders a ploy to figure out how to "screw the United States of America".

According to state media outlet Xinhua, Xi told Vietnam's Communist Party Secretary-General To Lam to "jointly oppose unilateral bullying". "We must strengthen strategic resolve... and uphold the stability of the global free trade system as well as industrial and supply chains," he said. Stephen Olson, a former US trade negotiator, said Xi's comments were "a very shrewd tactical move". "While Trump seems determined to blow up the trade system, Xi is positioning China as the defender of rules-based trade, while painting the US as a reckless rogue nation," he added. Speaking to reporters in the Oval office on Monday, Trump said he does not "blame" China or Vietnam but alleged that they were focused on how to harm the US. "That's a lovely meeting. Meeting like, trying to figure out, how do we screw the United States of America?" said Trump. The world's two largest economies are locked in an escalating trade battle, with the Trump administration putting tariffs of 145% on most Chinese imports earlier this month. Beijing later responded with its own 125% tariffs on American products coming into China. On Saturday, a US customs notice revealed smartphones, computers and some other electronic devices would be excluded from the 125% tariff on goods entering the country from China. But Trump later chimed in on social media saying there was no exemption for these products and called such reports about this notice false. Instead, he said that "they are just moving to a different tariff 'bucket'".

A 'golden opportunity' for Xi

Trump called Xi's meeting with Vietnamese leaders a ploy to figure out how to 'screw' the US.

China's Xi urges Vietnam to oppose 'bullying' as Trump mulls more tariffs

A UK-US deal sounds good but it is all about the detail

US Vice-President JD Vance said there was a "good chance" a trade deal could be reached with the UK, suggesting it would be easier to land than with other European countries due to "a much more reciprocal relationship".

UK business and trade minister Sarah Jones welcomed Vance's comments and said talks to secure a deal with the US were ongoing, but declined to provide a timeline on their progress.

"Nobody wants tariffs. No one wants a tariff war. We want to secure a deal with the US," she added.

The real question about positive comments by Vice-President JD Vance and Jones about a UK-US trade deal, is what they actually mean by the term "deal".

Just after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer's visit to the White House in February, it was rather telling that the UK delegation referred to what was being negotiated as an "economic deal".

This was meant to show that this "deal" was not about an extensive free trade agreement, covering nearly all goods.

In Trump's first term, negotiations between the UK and US progressed fairly well up until the point controversial issues about medicine pricing and food standards emerged.

Trump's team told me back then that they were waiting to see how close the UK would remain to European Union rules after Brexit.

This time around, the "deal" seems to have been about science, technology and artificial intelligence cooperation in return for avoiding tariffs.

The US has wanted to talk about the UK's "tech tax" on mainly US digital companies, and has raised issues about the Online Safety Act.

However, there is a big problem now.

The US has now levied a 10% tax on UK imports as part of what it called its "reciprocal tariffs".

But there is no general problem with this trading relationship. In fact, the UK buys more from the US than the other way around.

The mood music from Washington is that this 10% tariff is not for negotiation with anyone. That is the baseline tariff that has been levied on nearly all of America's trading partners.

Making an exception for one country would simply invite significant trade diversion.

Britain is being taxed by US despite having no trade deficit but the UK may have some leverage.

A UK-US deal sounds good but it is all about the detail

Finland's bid to win Europe's start-up crown

8 hours ago Share Save Maddy Savage BBC News, Helsinki Share Save

Maria 01 Maria 01 plans to become the biggest start-up campus in Europe

Yellow diggers are shoring up mounds of earth, as construction workers prepare to lay the foundations for what's set to become the largest start-up campus in Europe. The project is an expansion of Maria 01, a co-working and event space for entrepreneurs and investors, as well as larger corporations that want to collaborate with tech start-ups. Its existing facilities across the street already house around 240 start-ups. They are spread across six buildings that used to make up the city's first hospital, founded in the 19th Century and notorious in Helsinki for treating patients with the plague. Now, the current 20,000 sq m site is a hub for companies developing innovative health technologies, alongside AI, cybersecurity, gaming and defence tech start-ups. "The whole place is really based on community," says Maria 01's CEO Sarita Runeberg. "We bring people together so they can network… and find different kinds of resources to grow their businesses." There are also office perks including a pool table, table football, running and ice bathing clubs, and in true Finnish-style, a sauna. "We wouldn't be a proper start-up hub if we didn't have our own sauna here!" laughs Ms Runeberg.

Maddy Savage Sarita Runeberg is overseeing the big expansion of Maria 01

While co-working spaces for tech companies are well established across the Nordics, Maria 01 is the largest of its kind in the region. It is run as a not-for-profit organisation partly funded by the city of Helsinki, which has invested more than €6m ($6.7m; £5.2m) in the hub since its launch in 2016. Ms Runeberg believes it will become the biggest start-up campus in Europe following the completion of three new buildings by 2028, adding a 50,000 sqm floor area. Later this year it is launching an accelerator programme designed to support and guide high-growth start-ups. The hub's current and former members have already collectively raised over €1bn in funding. This represents around 40% of all early stage funding raised annually by Finnish start-ups. Ruben Byron is the Belgian co-founder of a start-up offering cloud services to AI developers. He has already scaled his business from a handful of staff using the hub's hot desks to a team of around 40 working from private offices in the former hospital, as well as remotely. "That has been a great experience, that we've kind of been able [to] be nurtured here in a way," he says.

Maddy Savage Ruben Byron has grown his company to 40 staff at the Helsinki start-up hub

Although not as mature – or well known globally – as other European start-up hubs like Sweden and the UK, Finland has been steadily making a name for itself in the tech scene over the last two decades. The small Nordic nation, which has a population of around 5.6 million, has spawned 12 unicorn businesses – firms worth a billion dollars or more – including sleep and fitness tracking ring Oura, game developers Supercell, Rovio (the creators of the Angry Birds game), and food delivery platform Wolt. Last year, Startup Blink, a global index mapping more than 100 countries ranked Finland's start-up ecosystem the 7th best in western Europe, and 14th in the world. The index cites factors including hubs like Maria 01, alongside high levels of state and university support, and Slush - a huge annual non-profit gathering for global start-ups and investors. It also highlights Finland's transparent and open business culture. "There is an authenticity with the Finns," says Jack Parker, a Helsinki-based founder originally from Newcastle upon Tyne, who runs a healthcare innovation start-up. "Ego doesn't really play a part. So if I reach out to somebody, it's quite likely eight out of 10 times that they will respond."

Maddy Savage British entrepreneur Jack Parker says Finns have been very welcoming

Finland's right-wing coalition, which came into power in 2023, is on a mission to push the country even further up global indices, stating in its official government programme that it wants the Nordic nation to become a leader in fostering a dynamic start-up and growth company ecosystem. "It's not just about rankings," says Marjo Ilmari, who runs the start-up services team at Business Finland, the government agency that promotes investment and innovation. In 2024 Business Finland alone invested €112m in start-ups, an increase of 30% compared to the previous year. "The real goal is to create an environment where our ground-breaking start-ups can emerge and really tackle global challenges." The agency hopes this will help drive growth in the Finnish economy, which went into recession in 2023 and is currently making a sluggish recovery, with the Bank of Finland forecasting an increase of less than 1% this year.

The country is also trying to attract more global talent by offering start-up permits for international founders who want to grow their businesses in Finland. These entrepreneurs are eligible for a so-called soft-landing support package provided by Business Finland. "They give you advice, support, sometimes grants to support the initiation phase," explains Lalin Keyvan, a Turkish-born entrepreneur at Maria 01 who says the scheme was one of the main reasons why she relocated to Helsinki. Business Finland's marketing campaigns for would-be movers highlight social and lifestyle factors too: Finns tend to prioritise wellbeing, plus there's free education and subsidised healthcare and childcare. "You don't really have to choose between building a high-growth company and enjoying life, because you can do both," says Ms Ilmari.

Getty Images Business Finland highlights lifestyle reasons for choosing Helsinki

But whether all this is enough for Finland to compete with Europe's more established start-up hubs is up for debate. Data suggests it still has a long way to go to catch up with neighbouring Sweden, long the Nordic darling of the European start-up scene. It is home to more than 40 unicorn businesses including Spotify, payments platform Klarna and game developer King. In Startup Blink's ecosystem ranking Sweden ranks second in Europe after the UK, and top in the EU. In the last decade it has attracted more than $29bn in funding compared to just over $8bn in Finland, according to the annual State of European Tech report by investment company Atomico. "I love Finland's bold approach," says Charlotte Ekelund, CEO of Sting, a non-profit organisation that helps develop start-ups in Stockholm. However she believes Finland is still years behind Sweden in terms of pulling in capital and developing its ecosystem. "We observe some of the things that the Finnish ecosystem is doing now, Sting was part of driving 10 or 15 years ago here - co-working spaces, [and] new organisations in the ecosystem that can support in different ways."

Helsinki wants to become a top European start-up hub, but can it challenge London and Stockholm?

Finland's bid to win Europe's start-up crown

Biggest choice of low-deposit mortgages for 17 years

8 hours ago Share Save Kevin Peachey Cost of living correspondent Share Save

Getty Images

More low-deposit mortgages are available to choose from than at any time since the financial crisis of 2008, according to new figures. The number of deals that need a deposit of 5% or 10% have risen to their highest level since then, data from financial information service Moneyfacts suggests. The extra choice is a boost for first time buyers, although house prices and mortgage rates are higher than they were for much of the last 17 years. And competition is tough, with homes typically listed for just over a month before a sale is agreed, according to separate figures from property website Zoopla show.

The UK housing market has been relatively settled in recent times, although buyers still need to navigate uncertainty over interest rates and changes to stamp duty in England and Northern Ireland.

'Flourishing choice'

For buyers able to offer a deposit of 5% of the home loan, there are 442 mortgages to choose from, according to Moneyfacts. Two years ago, the choice was from fewer than half of that total, at 204. Borrowers able to pay a 10% deposit now have 845 products to choose from, up from 684 in April 2023. However, they still have to pay a mortgage rate of well over 5% on average, while a borrower who pays a 40% deposit typically pays a rate of under 5%. It has been hard for many prospective first-time buyers to save due to the rising cost of renting in recent years. But Rachel Springall, from Moneyfacts, said there was a flourishing choice of mortgages for those whose ability to pay a deposit is stretched. "A rise in product availability for aspiring homeowners is a healthy step in the right direction," she said. However she said only 6% of all deals available to borrowers across fixed and variable mortgages had a deposit requirement of 5%, so there was still "room for improvement". Mortgage rates remain difficult to predict owing to uncertainty created by US tariff policy on the wider economy.

While securing a mortgage is one thing, buyers also need to act relatively quickly when it comes to finding a new home, data suggests. Homes in England and Wales spend an average of 36 days on the market before a sale is agreed, according to news figures from the property portal Zoopla. Sales were agreed on half of homes within two months of being listed, it said. To complete a sale, sellers and buyers will typically need another four to six months, depending on the complexity of the transaction. The fastest sales were agreed for two-bedroom homes, at an average of 23 days, while homes with four bedrooms or more typically took an extra 15 days. Homes in northern regions of England tended to sell faster than homes in the south, where prices are higher, it said. Even so, the fastest selling, with an agreed sale taking an average of 19 days, had a north-south mix, with Manchester and the London borough of Waltham Forest hitting that mark. "Households that are thinking about listing their home and moving in 2025 need to set their asking price at the right level and take the advice of local agents," said Richard Donnell, executive director at Zoopla. "Buyers have a lot more choice of homes for sale than a year ago. Aiming too high on the asking price is likely to impact saleability and how long you may have to wait to agree a sale." Zoopla uses a median average figure (the mid-point) for its data. It also discards homes that have been listed for more than six months, as it considers them to be unlikely to sell.

First-time buyers will welcome the greater choice although prices are still on the rise.

Biggest choice of low-deposit mortgages for 17 years

Mark Zuckerberg defends Meta in social media monopoly trial

5 hours ago Share Save Lily Jamali • @lilyjamali North America Technology Correspondent Reporting from San Francisco Share Save

Getty Images Mark Zuckerberg leaves court on Monday

Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg has taken the witness stand in a landmark antitrust trial to defend his company against allegations that his company operates a social media monopoly. His testimony is part of a case first brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2020 during the final days of the first Trump administration. The US competition watchdog alleges Meta unfairly dominated the market through its acquisitions of photo-sharing app Instagram in 2012 and the messaging service WhatsApp in 2014. The FTC is seeking to break up Meta by forcing a spinoff of Instagram or WhatsApp. Meta says there's plenty of competition in social media, including from apps such as TikTok, X, and YouTube.

Wearing a dark suit and light blue tie, Mr Zuckerberg was the first witness in the case on Monday at a federal court in Washington DC. The trial is expected to last for two months. The FTC pointed to a 2011 email Mr Zuckerberg sent saying: "Instagram seems like it's growing quickly." The following year, he sent another email saying the company was "so far behind that we don't even understand how far behind we are... I worry that it will take us too long to catch up". On the stand, Mr Zuckerberg defended his statements, calling the emails "relatively early" conversations about buying the app. He added that Meta had improved Instagram over the years.

Reuters The trial could last until July

Mr Zuckerberg also said he wanted to buy Instagram because of its camera technology, not because of its social network. He is expected to continue his testimony on Tuesday. The FTC says the company overpaid when it acquired Instagram for $1bn and WhatsApp for $19bn as a defensive move. "They decided that competition was too hard and it would be easier to buy out their rivals than to compete with them," said FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson in his opening statement at Monday's trial. Meta countered that the lawsuit from the FTC, which originally reviewed and approved both those acquisitions, was "misguided". Meta "acquired Instagram and WhatsApp to improve and grow them alongside Facebook", the company's attorney Mark Hansen argued. The FTC lawyer cited a 2012 memo from Mr Zuckerberg in which he discusses the importance of "neutralising" Instagram. Mr Matheson called that message "a smoking gun". Meta, on the other hand, said the purchases made the consumer experience better. "Acquisitions to improve and grow" have never been found unlawful, Meta's lead litigator, said on Monday, "and they should not be found unlawful here". Meta said last year that it had 3.27 billion daily active users across its products. Instagram was expected to account for more than half of Meta's advertising revenue in the US in 2025. according to research firm Emarketer.

Meta has been making regular overtures to Trump since his election. The company contributed $1m to Trump's inaugural fund, and has added former Trump adviser Dina Powell McCormick and Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) boss Dana White, a Trump ally, to Meta's board of directors this year. The company also announced in January that it was rolling back content moderation policies that Republicans said had amounted to censorship. It also agreed to pay Trump $25m to settle a lawsuit over the suspension of his accounts after the US Capitol riot in 2021. Mr Zuckerberg has also visited the White House in recent weeks. The Meta boss has lobbied Trump in person to have the FTC drop the case, according to the Wall Street Journal. When asked by the BBC to confirm that report, Meta sidestepped the question but said in a statement: "The FTC's lawsuits against Meta defies reality."

The US government is seeking to break up Meta by forcing a spinoff of Instagram or WhatsApp.

Mark Zuckerberg defends Meta in social media monopoly trial

'Good chance' of US-UK trade deal, says Vance

The unprecedented US trade policy manoeuvre included a 10% "baseline" tariff on all imports from the UK , France and other long-standing trade partners.

The global stock market has been rocked by turbulence since 2 April, after President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs on nearly every country.

"We're certainly working very hard with Keir Starmer's government," Vance said in an interview on Monday with the UnHerd website.

US Vice-President JD Vance said there was a "good chance" a trade deal could be reached with the UK, as the dust continues to settle from America's global trade shakeup.

What are tariffs and why is Trump using them?

UK government sources have suggested that recent talks with the US on a trade deal have been making good progress. It is understood that any deal would focus on more than just lowering tariffs, and cover elements of trade in both goods and services.

In Vance's wide-ranging interview with UnHerd, he suggested a US-UK trade deal would be easier to land than with other European countries due to "a much more reciprocal relationship".

He mentioned Germany as an example of a country that exported heavily to the US but by comparison was "pretty tough on a lot of American" exports.

After Trump announced his "Liberation Day" tariffs, stock markets across the globe took a tumble, with trillions of dollars wiped from the US Stock market in the days after.

The president has since made some exemptions, and stock markets on Monday showed signs of recovery, although they are still down on the month.

Vance said any implementation of a new system is going to make financial markets "jittery" and that Trump is committed to the tariff strategy as "a long-term play".

"What we want is to see lower trade deficits, really across the board," Vance said.

The vice-president also expressed an affinity for Europe, after disparaging remarks between him and other top US officials were leaked from a private chat.

"I love European people. I've said repeatedly that I think that you can't separate American culture from European culture," Vance said.

He also emphasised points that he and the White House have made repeatedly, saying that Europe needs to better fortify its own self defence.

"It's not in Europe's interest, and it's not in America's interest, for Europe to be a permanent security vassal of the United States," Vance said.

Vance went on to address the war in Ukraine and criticism that the US might be getting too cosy with Russia President Vladimir Putin.

He reiterated the administration's messaging that to end the war "you have to try to understand" both sides.

"That doesn't mean you morally support the Russian cause, or that you support the full-scale invasion," Vance said.

"But you do have to try to understand what are their strategic red lines, in the same way that you have to try to understand what the Ukrainians are trying to get out of the conflict," he continued.

On Sunday, Russia launched its deadliest attacks on Ukraine this year, killing at least 35 people and prompting Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky to invite Trump to visit his country before any deal is struck with Russia.

The Trump administration's trade policy shakeup has caused global economic turmoil.

'Good chance' of US trade deal with UK, says Vice-President Vance

Pay continues to grow in UK but faces pressure

Average UK pay rose by 5.9%, official data suggests, while vacancies fell to their lowest since before Covid.

Wage growth is slightly ahead of the previous period and was lifted by the public sector, according to Liz McKeown, director of economic statistics at the Office for National Statistics which published the figures.

But some economists warned that salaries will come under pressure after increases to the amount of National Insurance employers pay came into force this month at the same time as rises to the National Minimum Wage.

Meanwhile, the number of jobs on offer dropped to 781,000 in the first three months of the year, falling below pre-pandemic levels in 2020.

Average wages rose by 5.9% between December and February while vacancies shrank.

Pay continues to grow in UK but faces pressure

Supplies to be sent to Scunthorpe to keep blast furnaces going

3 hours ago Share Save Michael Race Business reporter, BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

British Steel's blast furnaces are set to continue running with a delivery of enough raw materials to keep them alight for the "coming weeks" due on Tuesday, the government has said. Coking coal and iron ore from the US will be unloaded at Immingham docks and transported to the Scunthorpe site after a scramble for supplies. A separate shipment of materials is back on its way to the UK from Australia after a legal dispute over who owned the cargo was resolved between the government and British Steel's owner Jingye. The government seized control of the business over the weekend following a breakdown in talks with its Chinese owner amid accusations it was planning to switch the furnaces off.

If the furnaces were starved of fuel and went out, the UK would no longer have the capability to produce so-called virgin steel, due to the process of restarting them being extremely difficult and costly. Virgin steel-making involves iron being extracted from its original source to be purified and treated to make all types of steel used in major construction projects, such as new buildings and railways. Scunthorpe's furnaces produce molten iron by splitting rocks containing iron ore in a chemical reaction that requires intense heat. Even if the temperature of the furnaces drops too low, it can lead to permanent damage. The government said the materials from the US would be enough to keep the steel-producing furnaces running for the coming weeks and added officials were working to "get a steady pipeline of materials to keep the fire burning". The materials have been paid for by the government, but the cost has not been revealed. The plant, which employs 2,700 people, is said to be in a "far better position" as a result of the government's intervention, according to union officials. On Tuesday, the Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds will travel to Immingham in north east Lincolnshire where the raw materials will be unloaded and transported to British Steel. He said the government had moved "decisively" to secure the raw materials needed to "help save British Steel", adding that UK industries depended on the company.

Coking coal and iron ore from the US will keep the British Steel blast furnaces running for the coming weeks, says the government.

Supplies to be sent to Scunthorpe to keep blast furnaces going

US stock markets rise on Trump tariff rollback

1 hour ago Share Save Dearbail Jordan and Mitchell Labiak Business reporters, BBC News Share Save

Watch: US markets rise at open after turbulent week

US stock markets rose on Monday after the White House said tariffs on imports of Chinese-made smartphones and some other electronics devices would not apply. The rollback, issued early on Saturday, may end up being short-lived after President Donald Trump said these goods were simply being moved into a different tariff group or "bucket". In Europe, the UK's FTSE 100 closed up 2.1% while the main stock indexes in France and Germany both climbed. Despite the partial rebound, global stock markets are still lower than before Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs announcement on 2 April.

The main US and European stock markets suffered historic falls followed by record rises after Trump suspended many tariffs for 90 days. Most imports from China to the US had faced a levy of 145% under Trump's new trade regime. Beijing responded with its own 125% tariffs on American products coming into China. The Trump administration is expected to announce tariffs on semiconductors on Monday, and smartphones, computers and other electronic devices exempted will fall into this category. The technology-heavy Nasdaq index was up 1.7% on Monday. The S&P 500 nudged up 0.5% while the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.3%. Apple - which makes most of its iPhones intended for sale in the US in China - saw its share price jump 5% in early trading on Monday's before settling to 2.3% higher. Chip maker ASML and tech firm Dell also rose. "Investors were so relieved to have some good tariff news to latch onto for a change that they weren't overly concerned with the potential complications which may be coming down the line," said Danni Hewson, AJ Bell's head of financial analysis.

Getty Images

The US president exempts some Chinese goods such as smartphones from levies but says it is temporary.

US stock markets rise on Trump tariff rollback

Landmark antitrust trial could force Zuckerberg to sell Instagram

13 hours ago Share Save Lily Jamali • @lilyjamali North America technology correspondent Reporting from San Francisco Share Save

Reuters

A trial in the landmark antitrust case against social media giant Meta kicks off in Washington on Monday. The US competition and consumer watchdog alleges that Meta, which already owned Facebook, bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to eliminate competition, effectively giving itself a monopoly. The FTC reviewed and approved those acquisitions but committed to monitor the outcomes. If the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) wins the case it could force Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to sell off both Instagram and WhatsApp. Meta previously said it was sure it would win and experts have told the BBC it is likely to argue that Instagram users have had a better experience since it was taken over.

"The [FTC's] argument is the acquisition of Instagram was a way of neutralizing this rising competitive threat to Facebook," says Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a professor of antitrust at Vanderbilt Law School. Ms Allensworth says Mr Zuckerberg's own words, including those from his emails, may offer the most convincing evidence at trial. "He said it's better to buy than to compete. It's hard to get more literal than that," Ms Allensworth says. Meta, on the other hand, is likely to argue that intent is not particularly relevant in an antitrust case. "They're going to say the real question is: are consumers better off as a result of this merger?," she said. "They'll put on a lot of evidence that Instagram became what it is today because it benefited from being owned by Facebook." Mr Zuckerberg and the company's former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg are both expected to testify at the trial, which could run for several weeks.

Shifting politics

The case, FTC v Meta, was filed during US President Donald Trump's first administration but risks becoming politicized during his second term. Mr Zuckerberg has lobbied Trump in person to have the FTC drop the case, according to the Wall Street Journal. When asked by the BBC to confirm that report, Meta sidestepped the question but said in a statement: "The FTC's lawsuits against Meta defies reality." "More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the commission's action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final," a Meta spokesperson told the BBC. Relations between Mr Zuckerberg and Trump had been frosty partly because Trump was barred from Meta's social media platforms after the US Capitol riot in January 2021. Since then, the relationship has thawed somewhat. Meta contributed $1m (£764,400) to Trump's inaugural fund, and in January announced Ultimate Fighting Championship Fighter (UFC) boss Dana White, a close Trump ally, would join its board of directors. The company also announced in January that it was doing away with independent fact-checkers.

'A very clear message'

President Trump's move to fire two FTC commissioners in March also hangs over the case. As Democrats, Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya were in the minority on the five-seat commission. Until Wednesday, just two seats of those seats were filled, both by Republicans. Another Republican was confirmed by the Senate on Thursday. Slaughter and Bedoya - who are suing the Trump administration to be reinstated - say the move to push them out was meant to intimidate. "The president sent a very clear signal not only to us but to Chairman Ferguson and Commissioner [Melissa] Holyoak that if they do something he doesn't like, he could fire them too," Slaughter told the BBC in a recent interview. "So if they don't want to do a favor for his political allies, they're on the chopping block as well," Slaughter said. Slaughter and Bedoya both expressed alarm at recent reports about Zuckerberg's lobbying efforts. "My hope is that there is no political interference," Mr Bedoya told the BBC.

Reuters

The FTC did not respond to a request for comment from the BBC. Ferguson, who was appointed as FTC chair by Trump, recently told The Verge he would "obey lawful orders" when asked what he would do if the president directed him to drop a lawsuit like the one against Meta. Ferguson added that he would be very surprised if anything like that ever happened. The FTC is considered a key antitrust watchdog. In recent years, it has returned hundreds of millions of dollars to victims of fraud, in addition to passing laws that ban junk fees and subscription traps. But as the Meta trial begins, it's among the many independent regulatory agencies that the administration seems keen to rein in. Chair Ferguson is also recently quoted reaffirming his belief that independent regulatory bodies are "not good for democracy."

The FTC's 'uphill battle'

The case against Facebook owner Meta alleges the company bought Instagram and WhatsApp to wipe out competition.

Meta's antitrust trial could force Zuckerberg to sell Instagram

We're treated like peasants, say tenants in fight over mouldy homes

8 hours ago Share Save Meghan Owen Work and Money Correspondent, BBC London Share Save

BBC Lorraine Branch is one of the tenants battling the Peabody housing association

"We're treated like peasants. Like we're not good enough to live in decent homes," says Lorraine Branch, a tenant on the Nags Head Estate in east London. She is part of a group of tenants who have resorted to enlisting lawyers and health workers from the charity Medact, to fight against Peabody after complaining for years of damp and mould in their homes. The tenants said the Bethnal Green estate has had long-standing problems which they blame for health issues including respiratory illnesses, and claim previous repairs have only been a "quick fix" which have not resolved them. Peabody, one of England's largest housing associations, said it had "invested over £1m on improvements" in 2024 but "unfortunately, it will take time to resolve all the issues".

Lorraine has been living on the Nags Head Estate for 14 years with her four children. She said: "We've tried to gather all the tenants, door knocking, handing out leaflets, gatherings just to get people involved. "We've hired lawyers, we've had medical professionals run by a charity to help us."

'They're quick fixes'

Lorraine showed me a wall of one of the flats which was painted last summer. The wall was clearly still damp and the paint came off on her hand when she touched it. "They're quick fixes," she said. "They're not properly insulating the walls. Nothing is getting resolved," she said. "In the long term you'd think they'd put in the money to fix the problems rather than keep coming back, keep coming back. It's costing more money."

One wall in a flat, painted last summer, is so damp the paint comes off when touched

The BBC filmed in another flat with black mould in the hallway, kitchen and on the shower curtains. The carpet was wet and the flat smelt damp. The tenant, who did not want to be named, said they had reported the problems to Peabody but claimed it did not act for eight weeks. After the housing association organised washing the mould off, the problems "quickly returned", they added.

The BBC filmed at one flat on the estate which had black mould

Fatima Tejani has lived on the estate for 16 years with her family and said her respiratory problems started after she moved in. "I started to have COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease], lung problems," she said. "I blame the house. "When you have health problems, you have mental health problems. Peabody has made us sick." 'When I'm out I'm fine, but when I'm inside [the flat] I start to cough. It's not normal for me."

'If we go to sleep, are we going to wake up?'

In 2024 her family was moved to temporary housing for three months whilst Peabody conducted repair work. But when the family returned they found "more difficulties than before", including condensation on the windows and damp carpets.

Fatima Tejani blames her respiratory problems on long-standing issues of mould and damp

Fatima believes the repairs were cosmetic and said they did not address the root causes of the mould and damp. "I'm really worried about the combination of water and electricity," she added. "What's going to happen? If we go to sleep, are we going to wake up?" The housing association provided them with dehumidifiers but her three children, who share a room, said it makes it difficult to sleep. Her 10-year-old son said: "I would wake up and my face - it wasn't sweating - but there was water all over my face."

'High rates of health problems'

The tenants eventually decided they would begin working with professionals at the health justice campaign charity Medact, to push for a solution. In a survey it carried out in 2024 of 37 households - about a quarter of the social tenants on the estate - 35 said they had visible mould, and 30 households said they had damp in their properties. The charity said 31 households reported new symptoms or injuries since moving into their properties, and 19 said at least one member had developed a respiratory condition.

Dr Isobel Braithwaite from Medact says the charity believes high rates of health problems on the estate are linked to mould and damp

Medact said in its opinion, these were "likely related to the widespread mould and damp on the estate". Medact's Dr Isobel Braithwaite explained: "We've seen really extensive issues with damp, mould, leaks and disrepair and we've also seen that people are reporting really high rates of health problems, particularly respiratory but also affecting mental health. "We think those things are linked."

The Peabody housing association said it has invested over £1m on improvements last year

Tracy Packer, Peabody's managing director for north-east London, said it was "an important report" which "reflects survey responses from around a quarter of homes on the estate." She said Peabody wanted to hear from all Nags Head residents to "help us shape this investment and agree where the improvements will be made". "Last year we invested over £1m on improvements here and I'm committed to designing a £3m plan with residents which I hope will make a positive difference. "Unfortunately, it will take time to resolve all the issues." She added wider issues, such as overcrowding, "continue to be a huge problem and is a major part of London's housing emergency", along with "rapidly rising costs" which means its social rented homes "cost far more to run, than the rent can cover". "This makes it an exceptionally challenging situation," she said. "But we are doing our best and are determined to improve." It comes as landlords for social housing in England will have to fix damp and mouldy properties more quickly from October, the government has announced. The rules will eventually cover private landlords as well. Campaigners called for stricter rules after two-year-old Awaab Ishak died because of mould at his Rochdale home in 2020.

Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk

Residents enlist health professionals and lawyers after suffering from mouldy and damp homes for years.

Tenants enlist health professionals in Peabody mouldy homes fight

Engineering giant Wood receives £242m takeover bid

1 hour ago Share Save Ken Banks BBC Scotland, Aberdeen Share Save

Wood The Wood Group board said it was minded to recommend the offer

One of Scotland's largest companies - engineering giant Wood Group - has received a £242m takeover approach. Aberdeen-headquartered Wood said Sidara, an engineering and consultancy based in Dubai, had made the offer. Wood's board of directors said they would be "minded to recommend" the deal. The company grew from the North Sea oil boom to become a global engineering contractor, operating in dozens of countries, with tens of thousands of workers.

Wood Wood is headquartered in Aberdeen

The new proposed deal comes almost a year after talks around a previous takeover approach from Sidara collapsed. Wood's share value has since fallen. However, it was up about 10% after the announcement of the latest takeover bid.

In February, Wood confirmed it had restarted takeover talks with the UAE-based organisation, before extending discussions last month. On Monday, the company said: "The board of Wood currently believes that the possible offer represents the better option for Wood's shareholders, creditors and other stakeholders. "The board of Wood has indicated to Sidara that, should an offer be made on the terms set out, it would be minded to recommend the offer to Wood's shareholders, subject to agreement of the full terms and conditions."

Getty Images Sir Ian Wood announced he was retiring as chairman in 2012

The board of the Aberdeen-based firm says it would be "minded to recommend" the latest takeover deal.

Engineering giant Wood receives £242m takeover bid

Trump threatens new tariffs on smartphones days after exempting them

2 hours ago Share Save Madeline Halpert BBC News Share Save

Watch: Is the US heading into a recession? Three warning signs to watch

Donald Trump says Chinese-made smartphones and other electronics will not be exempt from tariffs - adding they are simply moving into a different levy "bucket". European stock markets bounced up on Monday morning after Friday's official announcement that some of these products would escape levies of up to 145%. China has called on Donald Trump to "completely cancel" his tariffs regime, and "return to the right path of mutual respect". However US officials said on Sunday that products would be subject to a "semiconductor tariff" instead, with Trump expected to reveal more details later.

US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the new levy would be in addition to a host of global tariffs the US imposed earlier this month, then paused for 90 days. "We need our medicines and we need semiconductors and our electronics to be built in America," he added. On Saturday, a US customs notice revealed smartphones, computers and some other electronic devices would be excluded from the 125% tariff on goods entering the country from China. But Trump chimed in on social media, saying there was no exemption for these products and called such reports about this notice false. Instead, he said that "they are just moving to a different Tariff 'bucket'". Trump added: "We are taking a look at Semiconductors and the WHOLE ELECTRONICS SUPPLY CHAIN in the upcoming National Security Tariff Investigations." He said he would provide an update on Monday about semiconductor duties. Everyday devices such as smartphones and laptops rely on semiconductors, which are small and powerful pieces of tech that form the basic building blocks of modern computation. Trump's iPhone olive branch is a significant trade war retreat

Trump's changing tariffs leave shoppers feeling paralysed On Monday, Sony announced that it was increasing the price of its flagship games console, the PlayStation 5, by about 10% in Europe, Australia and New Zealand, citing a "challenging economic environment", inflation and fluctuating exchange rates. It did not announce price rises in the United States. The Chinese commerce ministry had called Trump's exemptions a "small step" by the US, and said that Beijing was "evaluating the impact" of the move. But the suggestion by Trump administration officials of plans for future levies may dampen hopes of a thaw in the two rivals' protectionist posture. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer was asked on Sunday whether there were any plans for Trump to speak with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping. "Right now we don't have any plans on that," he said during an appearance on CBS's Face the Nation. Trump imposed a tariff amounting to 54% on imports of products from China at the beginning of April, before escalating to the current 145% rate.

President Trump says Chinese-made electronics are simply moving to a different levy "bucket".

Trump threatens new tariffs on smartphones days after exempting them

Those struggling in Medway can claim share of £4m

Medway Council has nearly £4m to allocate as its share of the Household Support Fund

Households in Medway struggling to meet the cost of living can claim a share of £4m.

The cash is from the Household Support Fund, introduced in October 2021, which the government has decided to extend for another year.

The money is shared out to local authorities to allocate, with Medway having £3,987,524 for the coming financial year.

Medway Council also said it would be giving free school meal vouchers to eligible families throughout the summer holidays.

The money will come from the Household Support Fund which has been extended for another year.

Households struggling in Medway can claim share of £4m fund

Pram appeal as charity sees rising demand

1 hour ago Share Save Josh Sandiford BBC News, West Midlands Share Save

Getty Images The charity Baby Godiva helps people in need across Coventry and Warwickshire

A city baby bank has issued an urgent appeal for prams and baby travel systems after seeing increasing demand from people in need. Baby Godiva was set up to support families with young children struggling to afford essentials. The organisation collects and sorts items donated by the community before distributing them. But chief executive Kate Wilson said it was down to its last handful of pushchairs and bosses needed more support.

"We've given away 32 [pushchairs] this year already so we're averaging about ten a month to families in need," she told BBC CWR. "We're working with a lot of teenage pregnancies, care leavers and people fleeing domestic abuse who just have nothing and need a lot of help when they're pregnant."

The charity, which has been recognised by the BBC Make a Difference Awards, was launched in 2019. Its founder Belle Edgar-McCabe had been at a family hub when she heard about a young mother who could not afford nappies. Since then, workers and volunteers have helped hundreds of families and linked up with midwives, health visitors and social workers to support even more. Ms Wilson said there were a number of different reasons why demand had risen. "I think some of it is the cost of living crisis," she explained. "We're all in the pinch right now and babies are very expensive. "Some of it is [because] we are trying to really promote the charity at the moment and tell people we are out there and can help. "It does lead to a need of more items."

Follow BBC Coventry & Warwickshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.

The charity, which has given 32 pushchairs to families in need this year, appeals for more donations.

Pram appeal as Coventry baby bank sees rising demand

Royal Mail: The curious case of why a billionaire wants to buy what looks like a fading relic

3 hours ago Share Save Simon Jack • bbcsimonjack Business editor Share Save

BBC

Listen to the audio version of this on BBC Sounds "A pair of scissors, one empty teapot and some hot water, please." The slightly baffled staff at Claridge's scrambled to comply with Daniel Kretinsky's breakfast order as he sanitised and moisturised his hands. The upscale hotel has been serving tea to the global elite for decades but Mr Kretinsky brought along his own packet of Chinese green tea, which he snipped open (hence the scissors) and poured into the empty pot. He was tall, perfectly groomed, steely-eyed but unfaultingly polite and thoughtful. If you told anyone in the dining room he was a billionaire, they would have no problem believing it. Known as the Czech Sphinx for his enigmatic style, Mr Kretinsky, who is 49, is worth £6bn according to the Sunday Times Rich List. He lives in plush mansions in Paris and London, was originally a lawyer and made his fortune in European energy markets.

Reuters Billionaire investor Daniel Kretinsky has major investments in Sainsbury's and West Ham United football club

Our meeting was at Claridge's in June 2024 - I was trying to convince him to give me an interview about his audacious attempt to buy a British institution that was once seen as a national treasure: Royal Mail. His profile as a buyer was one that that unions and ministers typically would be wary of because of his historic connections with Russia - his companies own a gas pipeline that has transported Russian gas to Europe. But six months on, his bid to buy Royal Mail's parent company was cleared by the UK government after he agreed "legally binding" undertakings. It was agreed that the government would retain a so-called "golden share", requiring it to approve any major changes to Royal Mail's ownership, headquarters location and tax residency. The deal was also blessed by unions. Earlier this month, the owner of Royal Mail said that the takeover could be completed by the end of April as the deal cleared the final regulatory hurdles standing in the way. But step back and Royal Mail seems a strange target for a globally mobile oil and gas billionaire investor to set his sights on. It begs the question why would anyone, let alone a successful international entrepreneur, want to buy this faded relic?

How Royal Mail's crown slipped

Royal Mail was founded by Henry VIII more than 500 years ago and still carries the royal cipher on its vans. It is part of the fabric of British life and many people still have a fond relationship with their 'postie', who walks down their path bringing their letters and parcels to their door. But in recent years Royal Mail's crown has slipped. It is losing money and market share, has been fined for missing delivery targets and has made an enemy of its own workforce through a series of bitter strikes. Royal Mail's letter business is in steep decline too. It has gone from a peak of 20 billion letters sent in 2004 to under seven billion sent last year.

In December 2024, it was fined £10.5m by the regulator Ofcom for failing to meet delivery targets for first and second class mail. While the boom in e-commerce has seen the volume of parcels rise, Royal Mail's share of that more profitable business has been falling as new competitors like DPD, DHL, Amazon and Evri have eaten into its market share. Royal Mail was split off from the Post Office in 2012 and privatised in 2013 at a value of £3.3bn. Its shares immediately rocketed by 38% on the first day of trading, leading to criticism - from the National Audit Office, among others - that it had been sold on the cheap. At its peak in Covid-era May 2021, the company was worth more than £6bn but had slumped to just over £2bn when Mr Kretinsky launched his takeover bid last April. He sealed the deal at £3.6bn - 63% higher than before he signalled his intent, but barely more than it was worth at privatisation over a decade ago.

"Royal Mail is a business that has historically found it difficult to grow revenues by more than costs," says Alex Paterson, an analyst at Peel Hunt stockbrokers. "It has seen its parcels market share eroded by more dynamic competition that has been able to invest more in technology, and it has struggled with industrial relations to keep staff working towards a common goal. "This is not a challenge to underestimate nor one that can be overcome quickly, but that requires considerable long-term investment in infrastructure, technology and staff." Part of the challenge, and one that puts Royal Mail at a disadvantage compared with its rivals, is that unlike them, Royal Mail has to meet a string of legal and regulatory obligations, says Hazel King, the editor of Parcel and Post Technology International. Under what is called the universal service obligation (USO), Royal Mail is required by law to deliver letters six days a week and parcels five days a week to every address in the UK. So it cannot pick and choose which business it wants to do. "Royal Mail must meet their universal service obligation while trying to compete with private firms who often cherry-pick the most profitable business," says Ms King.

The 'Czech Sphinx's' plan

Mr Kretinsky says he has a plan. His success in the energy sector allowed him to buy a 27.5% stake in Royal Mail's parent company, International Distribution Services (IDS). And his company – EP Group – intends to build a pan-European conglomerate built on three pillars: energy, retail and logistics. He sees IDS as the cornerstone of the logistics pillar, with a plan to go toe-to-toe with the likes of Deutsche Post DHL, DPD and Amazon. The USO has been under review by Ofcom, with Royal Mail hoping that the regulator will reduce the requirement to deliver second-class letters from six days a week to every other weekday. That single move could save Royal Mail £300m a year – putting it back on a break-even footing.

PA Media Mr Kretinsky aims to create a pan-European logistics giant, potentially rivalling Evri

Mr Kretinsky told me during our interview that he would honour the USO "as long as I am alive", but he is unsurprisingly very much in favour of changing its terms. He said he hopes that "rational minds prevail" when reforming a service that is unsustainable in its current form. So far, the noises from Ofcom seem to be supportive. The regulator's chief executive Dame Melanie Dawes told the BBC there were "real questions about what the service needs to be going into the future". Given letter numbers are falling, "we have to think about what is economical", she said, adding Ofcom would be publishing plans for the regulation of Royal Mail "to make sure it is sustainable". While Royal Mail generally welcomed the proposed changes to the Universal Service Obligation, Royal Mail pushed back against proposed new delivery time and business customer requirements. Royal Mail said last week that the level at which Ofcom is proposing to set the new delivery targets – 99.5% of First Class letters delivered within three days, and the same percentage of Second Class letters within five – is "over specified and will add significant cost to the delivery of the Universal Service". It also expressed concerns that proposals to add a new category of regulation to ensure timely delivery for business users like direct mail companies "goes against the wider government drive to reduce unnecessary regulation".

European parcel know-how

But there are other factors that may have driven the sale. Some analysts have speculated that there is another jewel in the crown of IDS - and that Mr Kretinsky may really be after a different part of the business. Along with Royal Mail, IDS also owns a European parcels business called GLS which it acquired in 1999 – long before Royal Mail was split off from the Post Office and privatised. Last year GLS made a profit of £320m, compared to Royal Mail, which lost £348m as letter volumes continued to plunge and new competitors ate into its market share of the more profitable parcels business.

"GLS has been a profitable growth business, which has seen investment whereas Royal Mail has been a perpetual underperformer, as the board of parent company IDS has invested where it thinks it will see the best returns," says Mr Paterson. Mr Kretinsky rejects suggestions from some quarters that he wants to break up the group and has committed to keeping it together for at least five years. Even beyond that, he says the plan is to grow the company rather than shrink it, so a disposal of GLS would be "nonsensical". In fact, Mr Kretinsky says he hopes to bring the European parcel know-how at GLS to bear on Royal Mail's operations. What the unions are hoping, and Kretinsky is promising, is that Royal Mail will see greater investment and over time begin to look a bit more like GLS and its European counterparts such as Deutche Post DHL.

Catching up with competitors

Given all the challenges Royal Mail faces, there's an obvious question - why would a billionaire want to chance his arm on turning round something that others couldn't, while up against powerful competitors? Well, if you believe as Kretinsky does - and he is surely right - that getting parcels to people is a profitable and growing industry, then buying Royal Mail and GLS gives you a way to become a big European player in logistics quickly. Add to that a powerful and historic brand, a database with every single UK address and a frontline workforce that most of its customers are fond of and pleased to see when they walk down the path - then, despite the challenges, it begins to make sense.

Reuters The Czech entrepreneur has been described as a "quiet sphinx" for his inscrutable style

Mr Kretinsky is convinced future growth lies in out-of-home (OOH) delivery. The parcel lockers found in supermarket car parks and elsewhere, operated by the likes of Amazon, Evri and UPS, have grown quickly across Europe. Earlier this month it was reported that Sainsbury's would be the first supermarket to partner with Royal Mail and install parcel lockers at supermarkets. Some are already operating at several stores including ones in Clapham, Kidderminster and Chislehurst. Royal Mail has also trialled a new postbox that can take small parcels. Customers procure a barcode from an app, then at the postbox they scan the barcode and drop the parcel into a drawer - this is all powered by solar panels on the box. Emma Gilthorpe, Royal Mail chief executive, called it an "historic change" to give postboxes "a new lease of life". All of this boils down to the same thing: convenience. It means customers don't have to wait at home for a delivery - the sender or parcel business emails or texts a code to unlock the locker. For the business it's more efficient, allowing couriers to deliver lots of parcels to one place - meaning fewer miles on the road and less time.

Getty Images Royal Mail has long been part of the fabric of British life

"If they can grow the parcels business and claw back market share, there is every chance that they can add new jobs that could offset the reduction in jobs in the declining letters business," says Mr Paterson. "There is a significant long-term opportunity to run Royal Mail more successfully with regulatory changes to the USO and greater investment in technology and out-of-home deliveries." But Royal Mail still has a lot of catching up to do with its competitors. It currently has 1,500 lockers in the UK and aims to grow this figure to at least 20,000 over time. By contrast, Amazon already has 5,000 lockers across the UK and InPost has 7,500 across the UK.

Winning over doubters

That Mr Kretinsky has pulled off the takeover is no easy feat. Royal Mail is, after all, considered vital national infrastructure and as such the deal required review under national security laws. Then there is the fact that his companies own a gas pipeline that has transported Russian gas to Europe – paid for and approved by EU member states. The small amount that was transported was reduced to zero at the end of 2024 when Ukraine refused to renew permission for any gas to flow across its borders. Speaking in front of MPs in November, UK Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds referred to Mr Kretinsky as a "legitimate business figure" whose alleged links to Russia had already been reviewed and dismissed when he became the biggest shareholder in the company two years ago. Getting the unions on board seemed even more of a challenge and the Communication Workers Union was wary of Mr Kretinsky. "The CWU believes Royal Mail should be in public hands," Dave Ward, the CWU's general secretary, told the BBC in June. "We know there are legitimate concerns about Royal Mail Group being owned by a foreign private equity investor." But during negotiations, union representatives secured a series of time-limited commitments from him, including guarantees that he will protect Royal Mail's pension surplus, that there will be no compulsory redundancies for two years, no sell-off or break-up of any operational part of the existing company and no outsourcing of grades represented by the CWU.

Getty Images Royal Mail, a key part of British infrastructure, is set for a new chapter

Mr Kretinsky also agreed to restrictions on moving dividends out of Royal Mail Group and to respect agreements with and recognition of the CWU. He said he would keep the brand name and Royal Mail's headquarters and tax residency in the UK for the next five years. Union bosses told me that a life under Mr Kretinsky "couldn't be any worse than what we have had for the last 10 years". So, as Mr Kretinsky looks certain to pull off the sale, what will customers notice? The frequency of second-class deliveries may be reduced after the Ofcom review. We will see new Royal Mail lockers appearing in our neighbourhoods. And the price of first-class mail may go up: second-class stamps are regulated by Ofcom, while first-class ones are not. The monarch's head will still be on those stamps, but there is a new king of our mail system. And his name is Daniel Kretinsky. Top image credit: Getty

From the end of April, the 500-year-old Royal Mail will be controlled by Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky who co-owns a football club - but why does he want it?

Royal Mail: What made a billionaire want to buy this fading relic

In Canada's car capital, auto workers brace for the worst

2 hours ago Share Save Ali Abbas Ahmadi BBC News Reporting from Windsor, Ontario Share Save

Ali Abbas Ahmadi/BBC Ford workers Kathryn Lawton (L) and Christina Grossi are afraid the tariffs could upend their lives

A Lawton has worked in Canada's auto sector for more than a century. Their children are "fifth generation Ford workers", Kathryn Lawton said, and she and her husband both work for the carmaker in Windsor, the heart of Canada's automobile sector, just a bridge away from the US state of Michigan. So when US President Donald Trump suggested that Canada stole the American auto industry, Chad Lawton calls it "ludicrous". "These were never American jobs. These were Canadian jobs," he told the BBC, on the day that Trump's auto tariffs came into force. "They've always been Canadian jobs, and they're going to stay Canadian jobs because we didn't take them from them. We created them, we sustained them." Kathryn agreed: "This is Ford City right here." Tucked away in southwestern Ontario, Windsor and the surrounding Essex county now finds itself on one of the front lines of Trump's trade war as it faces a 25% tariff on foreign-made vehicles (though for Canada, that will be reduced by half for cars made with 50% US-made components or more) as well as blanket 25% US tariffs on steel and aluminium imports. US tariffs on auto parts are expected next month.

Ali Abbas Ahmadi/BBC A mural harking back to the history of the Windsor neighbourhood around the Ford plant, when it was known simply as 'Ford City'

The region of just over 422,000 grew alongside Detroit - nicknamed Motor City for its role as an auto manufacturing hub - turning the region into an important centre for North American automobile production. Ford first established its presence in Windsor in 1896, while the first Stellantis (then Chrysler) factory arrived in 1928, with dozens of factories and suppliers springing up around the city and surrounding region in the ensuing decades. Much of the manufacturing has since left the city, though it still boasts two Ford engine factories and a Stellantis assembly plant, which employ thousands. WATCH: Is the US heading for a recession?

EXPLAINER: What are tariffs, and why is Trump using them? Workers on both sides of the border have built iconic vehicles over the decades, most recently models like the Dodge Charger and the Ford F-150. Some 24,000 people work directly in the automotive industry in Windsor-Essex, while an estimated 120,000 other jobs depend on the sector. A drive through the neighbourhood around the Ford factory feels like a trip back in time, showcasing classic bungalows from the last century. Many have seen better days, though each boasts a verandah and small front yard. Large murals celebrating the city's automotive history punctuate the scenery.

Ali Abbas Ahmadi/BBC Chad Lawton has been at Ford for 31 years, and says he has never seen a crisis like this

Windsor has weathered the challenges of the North American auto sector alongside Michigan, as the industry shares a deeply integrated supply chain. Chad Lawton points to the 2008 financial crisis, when the Big Three American automakers - Ford, General Motors and Chrysler - faced staggering losses, and GM and Chrysler received billions in US bailouts to avoid bankruptcy. That period was "bad, not just for next door, but also we went through a very, very rough time", he said. "This feels the same. The level of anxiety with the workers, the level of fear, the idea and the belief that this is just something that is so completely out of your control that you can't wrap your head around what to do." John D'Agnolo, president of Unifor Local 200, which represents Ford workers in Windsor, said the situation "has created havoc". "I think we're going to see a recession," he said. He continued: "People aren't going to buy anything. I gotta tell my members not to buy anything. They gotta pay rent and food for their kids."

Ali Abbas Ahmadi/BBC Windsor residents have a front-row seat to Detroit and the struggles of its auto sector

What makes the tariffs such a hard pill to swallow for auto workers the BBC spoke to is that this situation has been brought about by the US, Canada's closest economic and security ally. "It seems like a stab in the back," said Austin Welzel, 27, an assembly line worker at Stellantis. "It's almost like our neighbors, our friends - they don't want to work with us." Christina Grossi, who has worked at Ford for 25 years, said the prospect of losing her job, and what it will mean to her family, is "terrifying". But Ms Grossi also fears losing the meaning she gets from her work. "You've been doing this job for so long and you really take pride in it, you're proud of what you're putting out to the public," she said. "And now someone's taking away the opportunity to do that."

Laura Dawson, the executive director of Future Borders Coalition, said the tariffs could cause major upheavals throughout the sector due to its deep integration, with ripple effects felt across the continent if exports from Canada stop for more than a week. She said the US tariffs structure is extremely complicated. Cars crossing the border will need every component to be assessed for "qualifying content" - where it originates, the cost of labour to produce it, and - if it contains steel or aluminium - where that metal came from. "Every part of an automobile is literally under a microscope for where it was produced and how," she said. The US tariffs have been a major factor in Canada's general election, which is on 28 April, with Canada's political parties rolling out suites of plans on the campaign trail to help the auto sector. A simple guide to Canada's federal election

Who's who in Canada's federal election

LISTEN: World Questions programme - Canada Liberal leader Mark Carney, the current prime minister, has pledged to create a C$2bn ($1.4bn; £1.1bn) fund to boost competitiveness and protect manufacturing jobs, alongside plans to build an "all-in-Canada" auto component parts network. In his role as prime minister, he imposed last week a reported C$35bn in counter auto tariffs, in addition to previously announced reciprocal measures on the US. Carney's main rival, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, has vowed to remove sales tax on Canadian vehicles, and to create a fund for companies affected by the tariffs to help keep their employees. Jagmeet Singh, whose left-wing New Democratic Party is fighting for a competitive seat in Windsor, has pledged to use every dollar from counter tariffs to help workers, and to stop manufacturers from moving equipment to the US.

Ali Abbas Ahmadi/BBC Many patrons at Van Niforos's restaurant work for Stellantis

The auto sector in Windsor, Ontario, has employed generations of Canadians. Now the future is uncertain and US tariffs are "like a stab in the back".

In Canada's car capital of Windsor, auto workers brace for the worst

Was China the reason Guyana faced higher Trump tariff?

2 hours ago Share Save Gemma Handy Business reporter Reporting from St John’s, Antigua Share Save

Getty Images Guyana, and the wider Caribbean region, are concerned Trump's price hikes will increase the cost of their imports

The Caribbean nation of Guyana is breathing a sigh of relief after US President Donald Trump announced a 90-day pause on the introduction of higher tariffs on a number of countries. Guyana, which is nestled between Venezuela and Suriname on the South American mainland, had been singled out for rates of 38% on many of its exports. Following Trump's change in policy, it now faces tariffs of only 10% - the same as all countries apart from Canada, China and Mexico. But why had Guyana been facing a higher levy in the first place?

Guyanese political commentator Francis Bailey says the country is caught in a geopolitical battle between the US and China. Or more specifically - Washington objects to Beijing's "very strong foothold" in Guyana. Recent years have seen billions of dollars of investment in Guyana by Chinese entities, in everything from roads and hospitals, to hotels and shopping centres. And a crucial new bridge linking the capital Georgetown to the western region of Demerara-Mahaica is currently under construction by a Beijing-based company. For its part, the US continues to be happy to buy Guyana's key exports of crude oil, gold and bauxite, which is the ore from which aluminium is extracted. These were all to be exempt from the planned 38% tariff, which instead would have hit Guyana's fishing and sugar industries. The US also backs Guyana in its territorial dispute with Venezuela over the vast Essequibo region that forms the western two thirds of Guyana. During a visit to Georgetown in March, Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned Venezuela of "consequences" if it were to use force against Guyana. But the planned high tariff showed Washington's ire, says Mr Bailey. "I think the reason we had been given such high tariffs is to apply pressure on Guyana. "The US is saying, 'if you want our protection you need to chase the Chinese out of your country'. Trump is a very transactional president – and Guyana is in a very precarious position against its sabre-rattling adversary Venezuela which has been ramping up acts of aggression."

Francis Bailey Guyanese political commentator Francis Bailey says the US is pressurising Guyana to reduce its ties with China

The Guyanese government did not respond to requests for comments. The country, once one of the poorest nations in the western hemisphere, and a former British colony, has been enjoying a surge in wealth since it first discovered oil in its territorial waters in 2015. Last year it exported $3.13bn (£2.4bn) of crude oil to the US, according to United Nations figures. Across the Caribbean all countries now face a 10% tariff on their exports to the US. However, it is the price impact of Trump's global tariffs on what they import from the US that is of most concern. This is because the Caribbean's love for, and reliance on, US products is immediately apparent when you glance at a High Street or supermarket shelf across the region. In fact, some islands are said to import as much as 70% of their consumer goods from their North American neighbour. And with American goods that rely on overseas raw materials or components set to go up in price, this will inevitably be passed on to consumers in the Caribbean. Also, much of what Caribbean nations buy from other countries around the world comes to them via the US. So with the White House now hitting Chinese goods coming into the US with tariffs of 125%, Chinese items that are then reexported to the Caribbean should see price hikes of a similar amount. And by around 10% for goods from other countries that arrive via the US. With already ever-increasing shipping costs in the Caribbean, and high local import duties causing exorbitant prices in a region beset by low wages, the impact of Trump's tariffs could be profound and keenly felt.

Getty Images US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was recently in Guyana and the US backs the country in its border dispute with neighbouring Venezuela

In Antigua and Barbuda, interior designer Carissa Warner tells the BBC that 70% of her materials are imported from the US, and 20% from China. "Some of my projects are on hold while we wait to see what happens," she explains. "I am extremely worried from a business aspect but also just as a local consumer. "I'm so worried about the cost of food I have been looking online for pots to start growing fresh produce. I don't think people realise the impact it will have on us." Ms Warner believes one way Caribbean governments could ease the squeeze on their people is by lowering their own import duties, which are partially calculated using a percentage of an item's cost. Antigua and Barbuda's Prime Minister Gaston Browne has dubbed global tariffs "extremely worrisome" and is urging citizens to "buy smarter and buy local".

Supermarkets across the Caribbean are full of products imported from the US

Trump's tariffs come as the Caribbean is already grappling with a confluence of harsh economic conditions from the cost of cleaning up after frequent natural disasters like hurricanes, to the aftereffects of the Covid pandemic. Antigua and Barbuda's ambassador to the US, Sir Ronald Sanders, says that the US has long enjoyed a trade surplus with most Caribbean countries. "For decades, we have helped sustain American prosperity by collectively importing far more from the United States than we export," he says. "The problem we have created for ourselves is that we have been dependent on the US market for such a long time and have not sought to diversify into other markets." As for the 10% tariff on Caribbean exports to the US, Sir Ronald says: "Any loss is not a good thing for our small economies, but the 10% that we face is not going to disrupt our goods from going to the US market." The Caribbean islands' small market sizes, high labour costs and remoteness from principle markets has kept their manufacturing sectors relatively modest. Their exports include many niche products like specialist rums and indigenous foods such as ackee, a fruit from Jamaica. "These kinds of products are all orientated to a certain kind of market and will not face any competition because the US does not produce them, and the countries that do face their own tariffs," Sir Ronald continues.

Exacerbating worries in the Caribbean are potential additional taxes on Chinese-built ships entering US ports of up to $1.5m per docking. This idea was mooted by the White House in February. Many fear that will aggravate freight costs in the Caribbean, and lead to further hikes in the price of everyday goods, given the large volume of items sold in the region that are manufactured in China. Sir Ronald adds that tacking the problem of an overreliance on the US "can only come from diversifying the market, but that's not an overnight achievement". He adds: "It's not as easy to set up new markets as people think. It's not governments who control trade; it's the private sector. And much of what we buy will still come via the US." Many Caribbean leaders feel the best strategy to thwart the fallout from tariffs is to negotiate as a bloc.

A Guyanese political commentator says Washington objects to Beijing's "very strong foothold" in the country.

Was China the reason this Caribbean nation faced higher Trump tariff?

Race to keep furnaces burning at British Steel plant

"My team are already hard at work on the ground to keep jobs going and furnaces burning," the business secretary said in a statement.

The government said work was under way on Monday to obtain the coking coal and iron ore that power the plant's two furnaces - materials it previously said owners Jingye had been selling off.

An emergency law rushed through Parliament on Saturday gave the government control of the Lincolnshire site to prevent its Chinese owner shutting it down.

Officials are working to deliver essential raw materials to British Steel's Scunthorpe plant, the government has said, as it races to keep its blast furnaces burning.

Restarting a furnace that has shut down is also a costly and complex process.

How quickly materials get to the site is important because blast furnaces can sustain permanent damage if their temperature drops too low.

Dozens of businesses including steel producers Tata and Rainham Steel have offered help and to supply their raw materials, the government added.

Reynolds refuses to say if steel furnaces can keep running

Chris Mason: British Steel law rushed through Parliament but it is just a stop gap

Why did the government take control of British Steel?

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: "When I said steelmaking has a future in the UK, I meant it.

"That's why we've passed these new powers to save British Steel at Scunthorpe and that's why my team are already hard at work on the ground to keep jobs going and furnaces burning."

Civil servants and British Steel officials are trying to secure one such shipment of materials which is sat 30 miles east of Scunthorpe at Immingham Docks.

It comes after Reynolds refused to confirm on Sunday whether the government could obtain the materials in time.

"I'm not going to get into that," he told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, but said the takeover gave the "opportunity" to obtain the materials needed.

The Scunthorpe plant employs 2,700 people and is the last site in the UK that can produce virgin steel.

Without the plant, the UK would be the only member of the G7 group of leading economies without the ability to make virgin steel - which the government believes is a risk to the country's economic security.

The government fast-tracked legislation which gave it control of the plant after talks with Jingye to save it appeared to break down.

The company said in March it was losing £700,000 a day at the site, which it called "no longer financially sustainable," and began a consultation on its closure.

Reynolds told the BBC it "became clear" during negotiations that Jingye was intent on closing down the blast furnaces no matter the financial support offered.

The government said Jingye refused an offer of some £500m and demanded more than twice as much money, with few guarantees it would keep the plant open.

"It might not be sabotage, it might be neglect," Reynolds said of the company's actions.

The Conservatives have criticised the government for not stepping in sooner to save the plant.

Tory shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith said the party had supported the emergency law because "it's the least worst option on the table".

The government is working to obtain coal to power the company's furnaces after passing an emergency law to take control of its site.

British Steel: Government races to keep Scunthorpe furnaces burning

'I can't keep up': Trump's changing tariffs leave shoppers feeling paralysed

5 hours ago Share Save Natalie Sherman BBC News Reporting from New York, New York Share Save

BBC Days after Richard Medina went looking for a smartphone to beat new tariffs, the US announced the devices would be exempt from the duties

When his camera stopped working on his iPhone recently, New Yorker Richard Medina didn't waste any time. With the threat of tariff-fuelled price hikes on smartphones bearing down, he quickly called his phone company for a new one. "I said, 'We've got to switch this out now,'" the 43-year-old recalled. "Let's take care of it." The move was a sign of the pressure rising across the US, where households are being buffeted by what could be staggering price rises, and even possible shortages triggered by the sweeping tariffs that US President Donald Trump announced this month. Some are trying to stock up. Others say they feel paralysed by the changes, which have come quickly, or hope Trump will change his mind and reverse course - not an entirely unreasonable hope given the rapid changes in policy. Trump, facing financial market revolt over his latest tariffs, has already altered his plans repeatedly. First, he scaled back duties that had been planned on some countries, such as the European Union, in what was described as a 90-day pause. Then, as market turmoil continued, he exempted smartphones and other electronics from the duties, announcing the carve-out just a few days after Mr Medina felt pressure to make a purchase. "I can't keep up with the president. Every day is something new," said Anna Woods, 42, who recently received a message from her son's summer camp warning that the tariffs might affect pricing of standard gear such as T-shirts. The 42-year-old, who works in legal operations, says she is nervous but unclear how to proceed. "I just feel like we're living in uncertain times," she said, adding: "I do need to make some purchases .... Everything is going up."

Anna Woods is worried about summer camp costs for her son

The latest tariffs include a 10% tax on the vast majority of imports - and an eye-popping 145% duty on goods from China, which is the third biggest supplier of imports to the US after the European Union and Mexico and a key source of essentials such as smartphones, shoes and umbrellas. The measures followed previous orders that added 25% levies on cars, steel, aluminium and some goods from Canada and Mexico. In all, Trump's orders have pushed the average effective tariff rate on imports in the US to the highest level in more than a century.

In stores, the immediate impact has been limited, since many firms stockpiled some products in anticipation of some tariffs. But the tariffs are widely expected to lead to higher prices in the months ahead, especially for items such as clothing, leather goods, electronics and toys, many of which are made in China. The Budget Lab at Yale forecasts that prices for clothing could soar by more than 60% in the short run; basic pharmaceutical products could jump by 12%, and food prices rise by 2.6%. All told, the typical US family is facing a roughly $4,700 jump in costs due to the new taxes, if purchase patterns remain the same, it estimates.

Jamie Casey is monitoring prices and worried about the future

"I'm extremely worried about it," said 38-year-old mother Jamie Casey, one of more than a dozen people shopping at a Target in Brooklyn on a recent afternoon who shared their thoughts with the BBC about the tariffs. She was in the store picking up formula - and some onesies and outfits for her daughter, who has yet to turn one. "I wouldn't say I'm panic-buying yet, but I am interested in how it plays out."

Major retailers experienced a jump in visits in the weeks leading up to Trump's tariff announcement, according to research firm Placer.ai, while purchases at the likes of Walmart and Target increased markedly in the immediate aftermath, according to data tracked by ConsumerEdge. There has also been an uptick in US purchases on Amazon's e-commerce platform, where Chinese sellers dominate, CEO Andy Jassy told CNBC recently. "I don't know if we can necessarily conclude it's panic-buying but there seems to be broad stock-up behaviour," said Michael Gunther, head of insights at ConsumerEdge, noting that two separate data sets used by the firm showed a pick-up.

Cristina Montoya said she had been buying extra canned food and frozen fruit, a little at a time for a few months, anxious about possible price increases, especially as a pensioner reliant on a fixed income. "You never used to do your shopping nervous," the 74-year-old said. "I feel like you have to buy a lot of things because you don't know what's going to happen."

Cristina Montoya is on a fixed income and worried over the uncertainty

The dynamic has added to the tariff turmoil. Last week, as the measures came into effect, some businesses started introducing tariff surcharges, while others abruptly cancelled shipments from China, unwilling to risk being unable to recoup the cost of the duties. The disruption has the potential to cause near-term shortages in the US of items where China dominates the supply, such as baby carriages, colouring books and umbrellas, analysts at Macquarie noted this week.

Analysts say the pickup in consumer purchases is likely to prove temporary, or an acceleration of transactions that would have happened anyway. If price rises start to hit, many economists expect Americans to opt for cheaper substitutes, delay purchases, or simply do without - a pullback with major consequences for an economy driven by consumer spending. Kathy Bostjancic, chief economist at Nationwide, is predicting the US economy will grow just 0.5% this year, and the unemployment rate will rise to 5% - the highest level since 2021 amid Covid. Other firms, such as JP Morgan, are forecasting an outright recession. "In terms of the consumer, it does get a little tricky," Ms Bostjancic said. "We could see consumer spending actually be strong in March and April but it's just because of this surge ahead of the tariff increases," she added. "Going forward, consumer spending is going to be weaker."

The rapid change of Trump's tariff policy has shoppers wondering if they should stock up or just wait this out.

Trump's changing tariffs causes panic buying and paralysis

Reynolds refuses to say if steel furnaces can keep running

2 hours ago Share Save Sam Francis Political reporter Share Save

Business secretary refuses to answer if steel plant can keep running

The business secretary has refused to confirm if the government can get the sufficient raw material supplies in time to keep the blast furnaces at British Steel running, after it took control of the Chinese-owned plant. Emergency legislation was rushed through Parliament on Saturday to prevent owners Jingye shutting down its two blast furnaces in Scunthorpe. Asked if he could guarantee the furnaces would remain open, Jonathan Reynolds said he would not comment "on the commercial aspect of supply" but the takeover gave the "opportunity" to obtain the coal needed. The government said Jingye had been selling off raw materials, as well as not ordering more, before officials took control.

Asked several times by Laura Kuenssberg on whether he was sure he would be able to get the supply of coal before current stocks run out, Reynolds insisted "I'm not going to get into that" but the takeover "was essential to maintaining steel production in the UK". Speaking on the programme, Reynolds said the situation remains "difficult and challenging". But Saturday's emergency legislation "enables" the government to keep the blast furnaces working, he said. Once a blast furnace is switched off it becomes incredibly difficult to restart production. "If we hadn't acted the blast furnaces were gone and in the UK primary steel production would have gone," he said. "If we hadn't acted, you'd be asking how we support the thousands who've lost their jobs." The Conservatives have criticised the government for not stepping in sooner to save the plant and protect jobs. Speaking to the BBC, Tory shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith said "the government could have seen this coming earlier". He called the deal a "botched nationalisation" but argued the Conservatives supported the deal because "this because it's the least worst option on the table".

Reynolds said the government intervened after "it became clear" that Jingye was intent on closing down the blast furnaces, no matter what financial support it received from the government. The company rejected an offer of support in the region of £500 million, the government said, instead demanding more than twice that figure with few guarantees the blast furnaces would stay open. In the Commons on Saturday, Reynolds said Jingye had not been negotiating "in good faith", while on Sunday he suggested it had not been acting "rationally". Jingye had put the UK's ability to produced virgin steel at risk, Reynolds told the programme - adding "it might not be sabotage, it might be neglect". British Steel's plant in Scunthorpe is the last plant in the UK capable of producing virgin steel, which has fewer imperfections and is used in major construction projects like new buildings and railways. Were the plant to cease production, the UK would become the only member of the G7 group of leading economies without the ability to make it - a prospect the government views as a risk to the country's long-term economic security.

The government is looking for a buyer to take over British Steel. Earlier on Sunday, Reynolds told Sky News he would not sell it to another Chinese company. He said: "I think we have got to be clear about what is the sort of sector where, actually, we can promote and co-operate, and ones frankly where we can't. I wouldn't personally bring a Chinese company into our steel sector." Reynolds told the BBC he could not say what the British Steel takeover will cost taxpayers while a buyer is found. He argued the market value of the company is "effectively zero" and the taxpayer will have to "stand behind" the company's losses of around £700,000 a day.

Asked about whether the 2019 sale to Jingye was a mistake by the Boris Johnson government, Griffith said the Conservatives had approved "the only deal on the table" - and with support from unions and local MPs. Since then the "world has changed" and China has become a less reliable partner, he argued.

The government took control of the steelworks to prevent Chinese owners Jingye shutting down production.

Reynolds refuses to say if British Steel furnaces in Scunthorpe can keep running

Trump's iPhone olive branch is a significant trade war retreat

3 hours ago Share Save Faisal Islam • @faisalislam Economics editor Share Save

Getty Images

Well, well, well. In a US customs messaging note quietly slipped out in the early hours of Saturday, a series of numbers were listed as exempt from the 125% tariff on goods entering the country from China. The code "8517.13.00.00" means very little to most of the world, but in the US customs list it represents smartphones. The inclusion meant the number one Chinese export to America by value last year was exempted from the import taxes, alongside other electronic devices and components, including semiconductors, solar cells and memory cards. In the context of the US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick just days ago announcing that part of the point of escalating tariffs on China was to bring back iPhone production to the US, this was a stunning about-turn. The US has now excluded the single biggest Chinese export, and certainly the most high-profile finished good from tariffs, without publicly announcing it at first.

It is worth considering what would have happened in the absence of this exemption. The effect of 125% tariffs on Apple's Zhengzou manufacturing facility in eastern China would have started to show in weeks at most American Apple stores. It would have been a totemic "sticker shock" for the White House's tumultuous tariff push. According to Counterpoint, a global technology market research firm, as much as 80% of Apple's iPhones intended for US sale are made in China. The tech giant's manufacturing profit margins are estimated to be between 40-60%. Typical iPhone prices might have moved closer to $2,000 (£1,528) than $1,000. The other option for Apple could have been to spread the cost across all of its global prices, but would the rest of the world accept paying a Trump tariff tax? A very public repricing of iPhones has been avoided, but still may occur if, as the White House has said, the previously imposed 20% tariffs on China related to the powerful opioid fentanyl, remain in place. Tim Cook, the chief executive of Apple, is a key player here. He can walk into a meeting with both US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. It is not an outlandish prediction to suggest that, if it comes, any peace in the US-China trade war could be brokered by Mr Cook. That's based on his deep fundamental role in connecting the two economies. He was hand-selected by Apple's co-founder Steve Jobs for his unrivalled expertise in just-in-time supply logistics.

'Art of the Repeal'

Exempting electronics from US tariffs is a stunning about-turn by the Trump administration after 10 days of chaos.

Trump's iPhone olive branch is a significant trade war retreat

UK takes control of British Steel under emergency powers

8 hours ago Share Save Brian Wheeler Political reporter Share Save

House of Commons

The UK government is taking control of Chinese-owned British Steel after emergency legislation was rushed through Parliament in a single day. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told MPs the government's likely next step would be to nationalise the Scunthorpe plant, which employs 2,700 people. But he said he was forced to seek emergency powers to prevent owners Jingye shutting down its two blast furnaces, which would have ended primary steel production in the UK. MPs and peers were called back from their Easter holidays to debate the legislation in an extremely rare Saturday sitting of both houses of Parliament. It has now received Royal Assent after being passed by the Commons and Lords.

PA Media Sir Keir Starmer met steelworkers at a village hall near the Scunthorpe plant

The BBC understands UK government officials are at the Scunthorpe site ready to take control of operations. After the legislation was given royal assent, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said: "Today, my government has stepped in to save British steel. "We are acting to protect the jobs of thousands of workers, and all options are on the table to secure the future of the industry." He said steel made in Britain "will be the backbone as we get Britain building once more," adding: "Our industry is the pride of our history – and I want it to be our future, too." Speaking to steelworkers earlier on Saturday at a village hall near Scunthorpe, Sir Keir said: "You are the people who have kept this going." It came as several hundred people, including steelworkers and their families, took part in a march and a rally at Scunthorpe United's Glanford Park stadium, chanting "we want our steel back". British Steel worker Rob Barroclough told the BBC: "Our family, like many others, is built around the steelworks. Who knows... my boys might end up working there one day, if it can be saved." He added: "We're hoping for the best but planning for the worst." Meanwhile, it has emerged that police were called to the steel works this morning after a suspected breach of the peace. Jingye officials have been on-site regularly in recent days, and it's thought that relations between them and the workers have become increasingly tense. Sources told BBC News that when Jingye executives arrived at the plant this morning, the automatic number plate recognition scanners didn't allow them through the site barriers. Humberside Police said officers conducted checks and spoke to individuals but that there were no concerns raised and no arrests were made.

The legislation going through Parliament was not resisted by opposition parties – but the Conservatives said the government should have acted sooner and made "a total pig's breakfast of this whole arrangement". The new law hands Reynolds sweeping powers to control management and workers at the plant to ensure production continues, including entering it by force, if necessary, to secure assets. But Jingye will retain ownership of it for now. The government remains hopeful it can secure private investment to save the loss-making plant, but ministers concede there are currently no companies willing to make an offer. In the Commons, Reynolds acknowledged that public ownership was "the likely option". He said the government would "pay the fair market rate" to shareholders in the event of nationalisation but added: "In this case the market value is effectively zero." Keeping a loss-making plant open could come at a high cost to taxpayers. But Reynolds insisted it was in the "national interest" to retain the ability to make steel from scratch and he believed the company had a future, particularly as the government was boosting infrastructure spending. "Steel is fundamental to Britain's industrial strength, to our security, and to our identity as a primary global power", he told MPs. He said he had been forced to take over the running of the plant because Jingye, which bought British Steel in 2020, had rejected the government's offers to buy raw materials to keep the blast furnaces running. "Despite our offer to Jingye being substantial, they wanted much more. Frankly, an excessive amount. We did however remain committed to negotiation. "But over the last few days, it became clear that the intention of Jingye was to refuse to purchase sufficient raw material to keep the blast furnaces running, in fact, their intention was to cancel and refuse to pay for existing orders. "The company would therefore have irrevocably and unilaterally closed down primary steel making at British Steel."

'Transformation'

Reform UK's deputy leader Richard Tice urged the government to "show your cojones" and go further by fully nationalising British Steel "this weekend". Several Conservative MPs also spoke in favour of nationalisation. Liberal Democrat Treasury spokeswoman Daisy Cooper said recalling Parliament had been "absolutely the right thing to do" but urged ministers to use the "unprecedented legislation judiciously". Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, now an independent MP, urged the government to nationalise all steelmaking in the UK. Green MP Ellie Chowns said steel is integral to the "green industrial transformation" - including making wind turbines, trains and tracks - and nationalisation would give the UK the control it needs to renew the industry. The government came under fire for acting to save the Scunthorpe plant but not taking the same action when the Tata Steel works in Port Talbot was threatened with closure. Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader Liz Saville Robert said it was a "bitter day for the people of Port Talbot", as she urged the government to change the legislation to take control of what is left of the steelworks there. The SNP's Westminster leader Stephen Flynn asked why the legislation only applies to England, when a Scottish oil refinery is facing closure. "Why is this not being extended to Scotland? Why is Grangemouth not being included?" he asked Reynolds, adding the UK government was "not interested in Scotland". Reynolds said Grangemouth was "not comparable" with the situation at Scunthorpe, which he said was "unique". "The question for all members is whether we as a country want to continue to possess a steel industry, do we want to make the construction steel and rail we need here in the UK, or do we want to be dependent on overseas imports?" he told MPs.

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds says nationalisation is "likely" next step as Parliament rushes law through.

UK takes control of British Steel under emergency powers

Trump exempts smartphones and computers from new tariffs

Late on Saturday, while travelling to Miami, Trump said he would give more details of the exemptions at the start of next week.

It marks the first significant reprieve of any kind in Trump's tariffs on China, with one trade analyst describing it as a "game-changer scenario".

In a notice, US Customs and Border Patrol said that the goods would be excluded from Trump's 10% global tariff on most countries and the much larger Chinese import tax.

US President Donald Trump's administration has exempted smartphones, computers and some other electronic devices from "reciprocal" tariffs, including the 125% levies imposed on Chinese imports.

"We'll be very specific," he told reporters on Air Force One. "But we're taking in a lot of money. As a country we're taking in a lot of money."

The move came after concerns from US tech companies that the price of gadgets could skyrocket, as many of them are made in China.

Exemptions - backdated to 5 April - also include other electronic devices and components, including semiconductors, solar cells and memory cards.

"This is the dream scenario for tech investors," Dan Ives, who is the global head of technology research at Wedbush Securities, posted on X. "Smartphones, chips being excluded is a game-changer scenario when it comes to China tariffs."

Big tech firms such as Apple, Nvidia, Microsoft and the broader tech industry can breathe a huge sigh of relief this weekend, he added.

The White House indicated the exemptions were made to ensure companies had more time to move production to the US.

"President Trump has made it clear America cannot rely on China to manufacture critical technologies such as semiconductors, chips, smartphones, and laptops," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.

"At the direction of the president, these companies are hustling to onshore their manufacturing in the United States as soon as possible."

Trump, who is spending the weekend at his Florida home, told reporters on Friday he was comfortable with the high tariffs on China.

"And I think something positive is going to come out of that," he said, touting his relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

These electronic goods are still subject to the 20% tariff on China related to fentanyl, White House Deputy Chief of Staff on Policy Stephen Miller posted on X.

Some estimates suggested iPhone prices in the US could have as much as tripled if costs were passed on to consumers.

The US is a major market for iPhones, while Apple accounted for more than half of its smartphones sales last year, according to Counterpoint Research.

It says as much as 80% of Apple's iPhones intended for US sale are made in China, with the remaining 20% made in India.

Like its fellow smartphone giant Samsung, Apple has been trying to diversify its supply chains to avoid an over-reliance on China in recent years.

India and Vietnam emerged as frontrunners for additional manufacturing hubs.

As the tariffs took effect, Apple reportedly looked to speed up and increase its production of India-produced devices in recent days.

Trump had planned for a host of steep tariffs on countries around the world to take effect this week.

But on Wednesday he announced he would implement a 90-day pause for countries hit by higher US tariffs - except China, whose tariffs he raised to 145%.

Trump said the tariff increase for China was because of the country's readiness to retaliate with its own 84% levy on US goods.

In a dramatic change of policy, Trump said all countries that had not retaliated against US tariffs would receive the reprieve – and only face a blanket tariff of 10% – until July.

The White House then said the move was a negotiating tactic to extract more favourable trade terms from other countries.

Trump has said his import taxes will address unfairness in the global trading system, as well as bring jobs and factories back to the US.

It follows concerns that tech prices could skyrocket, as many gadgets are made in China, with the US president saying he will give more detail on Monday.

Trump exempts smartphones and computers from new tariffs

Chris Mason: British Steel law rushed through Parliament but it is just a stop gap

4 hours ago Share Save Chris Mason • @ChrisMasonBBC Political editor Share Save

PA Media The prime minister met steelworkers in Lincolnshire shortly after the House of Commons sitting

There was a moment where all they could do was wait. Government officials were holed up in a Premier Inn down the road from British Steel's steelworks in Scunthorpe and parliament's work to change the law to allow them to take control of the Chinese-owned company was complete. But they couldn't move yet. All they could do – along with all the politicians 200 miles south in Westminster - was wait. They were waiting for Royal Assent, the formality in the legislative process when the King formally agrees to make a bill an act of parliament, and so the law. Not that this was snail's pace law-making, far from it. This was a legislative sprint, the timeline from First Reading to Royal Assent measured in hours, not the months it would normally take. That moment of Royal Assent happened at around 18:00 on Saturday night and with that those officials could head into the plant. The after emergency legislation was rushed through Parliament in a single day.

There were concerns in government about the prospect of unrest. Around 40% of the workforce there are Chinese, 60% are British. Many of the Chinese staff have worked for British Steel's parent company, Jingye, all of their working lives. Some have parents or grandparents who worked for the firm too. Most are now leaving. A new management structure has been put in place, with the professional services firm EY having been hired by the government to assist with this. There is an optimism among ministers that with the law changed they can secure the necessary raw materials to keep the two working blast furnaces in Scunthorpe doing just that - working.

Reuters The British Steel plant in Scunthorpe employs 2,700 people

Jingye had been seeking to sell off to other buyers raw materials already en route to Lincolnshire, which is what convinced the government it had to act and act quickly. Others, not least the Conservatives, wonder if it really did need to be so last minute and whether some of these problems could have been anticipated much sooner. And some within the industry say the moment of jeopardy has not yet passed. Why is British Steel in trouble and who owns it? Securing the necessary materials to keep blast furnaces up and running isn't like ordering something online via click and collect - these are highly complex international supply chains with long time lags and at a time of trading turmoil with President Trump's tariffs. And remember all of this, for all of the Westminster drama of a weekend sitting, is just a stop gap. Nationalisation, the government taking on full ownership of British Steel, looks increasingly likely.

PA Media Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds acknowledged in the Commons that public ownership was "the likely option"

For all of Saturday's drama, the government's intervention so far is just a stop gap, writes our political editor.

Chris Mason: British Steel law rushed through Parliament but it is just a stop gap

What's Trump's tariff hokey cokey all about? What's Trump's tariff hokey cokey all about?

Catch up on your favourite BBC radio show from your favourite DJ right here, whenever you like. Listen without limits with BBC Sounds.

The Briefing Room - What's Trump's tariff hokey cokey all about? - BBC Sounds

Can UK afford to save British Steel – and can it afford not to?

2 hours ago Share Save Laura Kuenssberg • @bbclaurak Presenter, Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg Share Save

BBC

"Who was going to blink first?" A source involved in the fraught negotiations since the election over the future of British Steel told me that as time passed, and literally, coal to keep the furnaces burning started to run out, that was the question - was the government going to offer even more to the Chinese owners of British Steel, Jingye, or act itself? On Saturday, the government is changing the law to answer that question. Unless something truly weird happens, Parliament will vote to give Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, the power to tell British Steel what to do – in practice, buying coal to keep the fires burning, to keep the once mighty steel industry alive. Even on Thursday he was offering taxpayers' cash to buy the raw materials to keep the furnaces alive as a sweetener for Jingye. At one point in the talks, sources suggest they were asking for a billion-pound taxpayer bailout to keep the plant alive. But I'm told that price wouldn't have been accompanied by any guarantee that jobs would be saved, or the plant protected for good. Taking control on Saturday does not do that. The Chinese owners will remain the shareholders, for now. But Labour's decision literally and metaphorically keeps the flames alive – the government hopes. And it commits taxpayers to start coughing up to save the steel industry – for how long, is a more complicated question.

PA Media The government says it has not ruled out nationalising British Steel, which employs 2,700 people

So what then? Theoretically, Jingye could "get their act together and take the company back", one insider suggests. Talking to interested parties on Friday night, that seemed vanishingly unlikely. The UK government has spent the last couple of weeks trying to tempt them to stay on board with huge inducements. That failed, so the chances of getting back involved seem pretty slim. Why is British Steel in trouble and who owns it? There is the possibility that another company wants to swoop in and rescue the business. Again, don't hold your breath – the company has been losing money hand over fist, the blast furnaces are nearing the end of their useful life, and the cost of energy it gulps is enormous. So in the current state, taking on the business as an offer? It's not that pretty. Remember Jingye were the only bidder last time round – when a Conservative source says, "there were no other bidders – the alternative was closure or nationalisation, and the Conservatives were never going to nationalise". So will Labour?

Reuters British Steel says it may soon run out of raw materials needed to keep its two blast furnaces running

As of this weekend, that seems pretty likely. Remember the action in Parliament later does not mean nationalisation. But it's a necessary first step if that is what's going to happen. You've probably heard ministers again and again say "all options are on the table" - that's their get out of jail card where they don't commit to anything in case their preferred option suddenly disappears. But as MPs gather to vote on the next steps, a journey towards nationalisation certainly feels like the direction. Two different sources who have been part of the wider discussions tell me the prime minister has come to believe that taking British Steel back into public hands is what the government will have to do. There are practical and political reasons for why that might come to pass. First, for the government to have a hope of achieving its aims - building infrastructure, spending more on defence at home, growing the economy and protecting jobs - it is logical to preserve a steel industry in this country. That's not just because ministers are loathe to see good jobs disappear. But because in government, the capacity to make steel is an important part of what the UK needs to be able to do. If the plant closes, the UK would become the only G7 country without primary steel making capability. That wasn't something the government was willing to tolerate. So if the private sector won't do it – enter the state. Although, it wouldn't be unfair to wonder why they have ended up making this decision at the last minute when the fuel for the furnaces is about to run out, given it was three weeks ago that the company sounded the alarm about possible closures.

Reuters Rachel Reeves has told workers the government will consider nationalisation if needed to protect jobs

Second, that requirement to act has become politically attractive because it fits into Sir Keir Starmer's more and more familiar script, that the new world order has changed – governments need to be more active and agile in protecting their own interests. It follows, if, as Treasury Minister Darren Jones, told us last week, globalisation is over, then the UK has to be able to make the materials and products like steel that it really needs itself. One source remarks: "Dragging the Tories to Parliament over the weekend to back the Labour government's plans to save British steel: I can finally see why people said government was worth it". It is politics after all. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has blamed the government's "incompetence" for the last-minute recall, while Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said it was an opportunity to come up with "a serious plan" for domestic steel production. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said the government's plan was just a "short-term sticking plaster" and both he and the Green Party have called for public ownership as the only option. It is worth remembering the problems in the steel industry didn't start with Donald Trump, or this government, or even Jingye. Steel was nationalised in 1967, then sold back into the private sector in 1988. Frantic negotiations with government about jobs, bailouts, survival are familiar. But there is gathering momentum around nationalisation as the solution, in a way unthinkable not so long ago. Hypothetical conversations started at the top of government a couple of months ago about the possibility, detailed work only in the last week or so. But there is a growing consensus - one source familiar with the situation even says, "nationalisation is inevitable and has been for some time".

Getty Images Talks have been held this week to try to keep the company running, after its Chinese owner said the blast furnaces are no longer financially viable

But – "the hurdles are huge" – a source tells me. The most obvious obstacle? Cold hard cash, way beyond the initial price tag for raw materials to keep Scunthorpe going for a few more weeks. In the long term, the blast furnaces are near the end of their life, the plant needs investment, massive investment, to make it safe and to have a proper future. One industry source told me modern electric furnaces could have a price tag as as much as £3bn each, and Scunthorpe might need two. Energy costs for new or existing furnaces are enormous. In Number 10 and Number 11 there is an acknowledgement that the costs of energy for industry can be crippling. That could be another area where government is keen to act. The government hasn't yet shared, or hasn't yet worked out, what the potential cost of taking on the plant in the long term might be. A Treasury source says it will have to be within the current plans for spending. And you don't need me to remind you again how tight Number 11 says money is, how tightly Chancellor Rachel Reeves wants to stick to her spending rules. And yet – if a big ticket effective nationalisation is the political choice, and it runs to many billions? Let's see. MPs voting later won't determine the entire future for British Steel. But it puts the government on a path to make real some of its rhetoric in recent weeks, as one figure put it – "neoliberalism is over. Ownership matters again - Labour needs to define Britain's place in this new, new world order". But passing a law in a rush is one thing. Political excitement another. Sir Keir used to attract ire from the left of his own party for walking away from some of his previous beliefs in common ownership, nationalising vital industries. Embarking on an expensive and complicated adventure to preserve a struggling multi-billion pound industry was not meant to be part of the plan.

Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.

The vote later won't determine British Steel's future, but is a first step towards a possible nationalisation.

Laura Kuenssberg: Can UK afford to save British Steel – and can it afford not to?

Why is British Steel in trouble and who owns it?

1 hour ago Share Save Jennifer Meierhans Business reporter Sean Seddon BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

The UK government is poised to take control of a major British Steel plant in Scunthorpe, which is at risk of imminent closure. MPs have been called back from their Easter break to pass an emergency law which would keep the Chinese-owned site operating.

What is British Steel and how many people work there?

British Steel's plant in Scunthorpe, Lincolnshire, employs 2,700 people, about three-quarters of the company's entire workforce. It is the last plant in the UK capable of producing virgin steel, which is used in major construction projects like new buildings and railways. Two huge blast furnaces are used to produce the steel, which has fewer imperfections than the recycled steel made elsewhere in the country. Were the plant to cease producing virgin steel, then the UK would become the only member of the G7 group of leading economies without the ability to make it - a prospect the government views as a risk to the country's long-term economic security.

Who owns British Steel and why is it losing money?

The company was founded in 2016 when Tata Steel sold its loss-making long products division in Scunthorpe to private investment firm Greybull Capital for a token £1. The new owners renamed the business British Steel. Following a period of financial instability, British Steel was taken over by the government's insolvency service in 2019 and then acquired by Chinese steel-making firm Jingye the following year. The company says the plant continues to lose £700,000 a day despite £1.2bn of investment. It has begun a 45-day consultation on job cuts. Jingye says the blast furnaces are no longer sustainable, blaming "highly challenging" market conditions, tariffs and costs associated with transitioning to lower-carbon production techniques.

Reuters

The blast furnaces generate the extreme heat needed to produce virgin steel and are fuelled by coking coal and iron pellets - but supplies of those raw materials at the Scunthorpe plant are running low. That adds a time pressure to the British Steel talks because once a blast furnace shuts down, it is a costly and complex process to restart it again. Last month, the company was accused by one of its customers of failing to order the raw materials needed to keep the site going, a claim which Jingye rejected. UK steel production has been falling for several decades and the financial pressures facing the industry were heightened in March when the US imposed a 25% tariff on any steel it imports. Global over-production of steel has created "a glut of steel on the international market", according to a UK government briefing on the industry, which has pushed prices down. British manufacturers also face higher costs, particularly on electricity, than elsewhere.

Could the UK government take control?

The government has ordered MPs to return from their Easter breaks for an unusual weekend sitting in the Commons, as it weighs up options to protect the site. On Friday, Sir Keir Starmer announced plans to fast-track a law through Parliament which would give the government the power to assume control of some of the site's operations. That would include the ability to order raw materials to keep the furnaces running and to direct the company's workforce and board. The government has told the company's UK management to keep the site operational, and the emergency law will ensure that any employees who are sacked by the Chinese owners can be reinstated. This intervention stops short of nationalisation - when a government takes ownership and control of a company - but Sir Keir said the government would do "everything possible" to "protect" the UK's steel industry.

Getty Images Sir Keir Starmer has said he is committed to keeping UK steel operations going

The prime minister's decision to announce emergency legislation follows tense talks between the government and Jingye earlier this week, which appear to have largely broken down. The government offered to buy the raw materials needed to keep the furnaces going but Jingye did not agree to that proposal. Unions have said the situation is on a "cliff-edge", while the Community Union described the lack of supplies needed to keep the furnaces operational as an "extreme emergency". Linda McCulloch from the Unite union said they would like the government to nationalise the site "to keep steelmaking alive in the UK". The GMB trade union has raised concerns to the BBC about the way Jingye is operating the plant.

Who else produces steel in the UK?

MPs are having an emergency debate on the future of the UK's only remaining plant making virgin steel.

Why is British Steel in trouble, who owns it and what will the government do?

A bitter price hike in US coffee shops after tariffs

7 hours ago Share Save Sakshi Venkatraman and Imogen James BBC News, Washington DC Share Save

BBC Jorge Prudencio says the price of his Colombian-imported coffee is rising

The price for a cup of coffee in the US is going up as tariffs put the squeeze on local café and bakery owners. Some US businesses say the queues for a morning latte are already getting shorter as customers tighten their belts and imported beans become more expensive. Americans spend $100bn (£76bn) a year on coffee, though that might be about to change. Jorge Prudencio, who runs Bread Bite Bakery in Washington DC, says his Colombia-based coffee distributer just increased prices after the sweeping tariffs went into effect last week.

The vast majority of coffee in the US is imported. In fact, the US is the world's second-leading importer of coffee, with the majority coming from Brazil and Colombia, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Since 5 April, coffee imports have been affected by the 10% US tariffs against most countries. Speaking to the BBC, Mr Prudencio said his coffee suppliers have told him his next order will carry yet another price hike. He added that his bakery will "definitely" be increasing prices for customers just to break even. Asked if he is worried, Mr Prudencio said: "Of course."

Kamal Mortada says: "We have less customers for coffee"

The manager of Au Lait café just down the street, Kamal Mortada, said he's been seeing the effect of steadily increasing prices for a while now. Inflation spiked to a 40-year high under former US President Joe Biden. Before the tariffs kicked in, ground coffee reached the highest ever recorded price in March 2025, and was over a dollar more expensive than the previous year, and $3 above March 2020 prices. "We have less customers for coffee," Mr Mortada said.

"Most customers just get plain coffee," instead of adding syrups and milks, he said. The prices on the menu have gone up by 25% and people are now buying smaller coffees. Mr Mortada has also changed his own habits as a consumer. Instead of his regular trip to Starbucks, he brews coffee at home. He said he has seen the price of a cup of coffee go up by at least half a dollar, and is worried prices will rise again.

Jenny Ngo Jenny Ngo says: "We unfortunately project to raise prices again"

On the opposite coast in San Francisco, another local coffee shop owner is grappling with what the tariffs will mean for her business. Jenny Ngo, who runs Telescope Coffee, said she was waiting to hear how much her roaster will hike prices. The coffee she sells is sourced from Ethiopia and Guatemala, both facing the standard 10% tariff. She also imports her iced coffee cups from China - and said she noticed the prices on those jumped overnight. "We unfortunately project to raise prices again in order to sustain our business," she said.

Mr Prudencio remains confident that people will still come to his shop and buy coffee. He said it is something people need. But recent inflation has also affected the price of eggs, crucial to his bakery side of the business. He said they paid $42 per case when the bakery opened five months ago, but two weeks later it was more than $100 per case.

"Everybody is going through the same thing. We all pay the price." The price of eggs is a key symbol of the health of the US economy, often an arguing point for politicians. President Donald Trump has argued he will get the cost of eggs down, blaming rising prices on the Biden administration, which culled millions of egg-laying chickens amid a bird flu outbreak. But in March, egg prices reached a record high at $6.22 per dozen, according to the Consumer Price Index.

Higher prices are worrying independent US coffee shops, which import almost all their beans.

Trump tariffs: A bitter price hike in US coffee shops

Investors facing tariff turmoil: 'It's fastest finger first'

24 hours ago Share Save Mitch Labiak & Natalie Sherman BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

As a former champion runner, Richard McDonald can move quickly. But the speed of the market falls, triggered by the sweeping global tariffs Donald Trump announced last week, still kept him on his toes. Previously a trader for Credit Suisse, he now buys and sells stocks privately. At his laptop in London last week, he watched as the president unveiled a poster board outlining tariff rates, some as high as 50%, for imports from countries around the world. He raced to understand which companies might be worst hit. Then he sold.

"There are billions being wiped off share prices every second, so it's really 'fastest finger first'," he said. "My mind was sprinting." In 25 years of trading, he said he had rarely experienced anything like it.

Richard McDonald

Trillions were wiped off the value of financial markets around the world in the aftermath of Trump's "Liberation Day" announcement. Leading share indexes in the US and UK saw some of the steepest declines since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, dropping more than 10% over three days. Oil prices sank and so did the dollar. By Wednesday, the worries had spread to the bond market, as investors started dumping US government debt, usually a safe haven for investors in times of uncertainty. When Trump announced he was putting some of the most eye-watering tariffs on pause, shares stopped sliding and rallied. But the market turmoil was far from over. Trump left in place a tariff of 10% on imports from most countries and a tariff of 145% on goods from China, America's third largest source of imports after the European Union and Mexico. A day after the announcement, the S&P 500 dropped another 3.5%, the Dow slid 2.5% and the Nasdaq fell 4.3%.

At St Louis-based Argent Capital Management, the mood, said portfolio manager Jed Ellerbroek, was "still miserable". Some of his firm's holdings, like health insurance giant United Healthcare, have done well over the last week, as investors look for companies likely to be able to weather the tariff storm. But his third largest investment is Apple, which makes the majority of its iPhones and other products in China. "Trump has induced a gigantic amount of uncertainty into the global economy and consumers and investors and business managers are reeling and unable to make long-term decisions," Mr Ellerboek said. "We are really on hold, because we only trade when we have high conviction levels," he said. "What do we do with Apple? I don't know. I'm not going to change when I have no clue what the tariff rate is going to be next week," he said.

Traders are trying to reckon with impact of Trump's shifting tariff policy.

Investors facing tariff turmoil: 'It's fastest finger first'

Why Beijing is not backing down on tariffs

In response to why Beijing is not backing down to Donald Trump on tariffs, the answer is that it doesn't have to.

China's leaders would say that they are not inclined to cave in to a bully – something its government has repeatedly labelled the Trump administration as – but it also has a capacity to do this way beyond any other country on Earth.

Before the tariff war kicked in, China did have a massive volume of sales to the US but, to put it into context, this only amounted to 2% of its GDP.

That said, the Communist Party would clearly prefer not to be locked in a trade war with the US at a time when it has been struggling to fix its own considerable economic headaches, after years of a real estate crisis, overblown regional debt and persistent youth unemployment.

However, despite this, the government has told its people that it is in a strong position to resist the attacks from the US.

It also knows its own tariffs are clearly going to hurt US exporters as well.

Trump has been bragging to his supporters that it would be easy to force China into submission by simply hitting the country with tariffs, but this has proven to be misleading in the extreme.

Beijing is not going to surrender.

Amid a trade war with the US, our China correspondent explains why Beijing doesn't need to change tactics.

Analysis: Why Beijing is not backing down to Trump on Tariffs

Jobs fears as disability scheme owes businesses thousands

6 hours ago Share Save Michael Buchanan Senior Social Affairs Correspondent Share Save

Contributor handout It took six months for Lucy Earle to be assigned an Access to Work caseworker

Businesses employing disabled people say they are owed hundreds of thousands of pounds by the government, and fear they may have to let staff go. Under the Access to Work scheme, companies and employees can apply for grants to help support disabled people in the workplace. But businesses have told the BBC there are backlogs and huge payment delays leaving them out of pocket. One company told the BBC it is owed nearly £200,000 by the Access to Work scheme and is worried it may have to close. Another said it had already been forced to shut down in part due to problems with the programme. Access to Work was highlighted by ministers as a way of boosting the job prospects of disabled people when the government announced multi-billion pound welfare cuts last month. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said they had recently introduced a "streamlined claims process" to make swifter payments to businesses. The programme can pay individuals with disabilities and the businesses that employ them for the extra costs associated with being in work. It covers a broad range of support, from paying for taxis to powered wheelchairs.

Chief Executive Sheldon McMullan says problems with the scheme present "an existential threat"

Yateley Industries is a near 90-year-old charity in Hampshire that employs almost 60 people, most of whom have disabilities, in a range of packaging jobs. It says it is owed £186,000 by the Access to Work scheme. "It's an existential threat to us," says chief executive, Sheldon McMullan. "If we don't get it, we could potentially close this magical place forever, and that would be a tragedy for the local community and for the government's agenda more broadly." Yateley Industries is part of a nationwide forum of dozens of supported businesses - companies specialising in employing disabled people. Mr McMullan says many others are affected by the backlog. "The annoying thing is that it's money that's been granted to us," he adds. "We have the paperwork saying this is what each person's been awarded, but the claim system is not set up for us to draw down the money effectively." Businesses say that as well as poor internal processes at the Department for Work and Pensions, there has also been a large increase in the bureaucracy associated with Access to Work in recent months, with many more forms having to be filled in and then posted – not uploaded or emailed – to the DWP. "Until ministers realise that they've got this wrong, they're in danger of pushing so many disabled people out of the workplace," says Steven McGurk, president of the trade union, Community Union. "Its very bureaucratic, very difficult to claim - it's the biggest threat to disabled people's employment."

Sarah Thorp's No Limits cafe employed people with learning disabilities

In Newton Abbott in Devon, a cafe that employed people with learning disabilities shut last month. Its founders say new restrictions and problems with Access to Work contributed to the closure. Sarah Thorp, who set up the No Limits cafe, said the scheme had in recent months started to refuse funding for people who wanted to get some work experience. The decision came despite the local Job Centre recommending the individuals to the cafe. The change left the business with a shortfall of £800 a week. "In the last 18 months, we've got 20 people into paid employment, all with disabilities," she says. "When the issues around work experience changed in the last few months, we had to turn people down because we could not fund the support. It just seems really counter-intuitive when all the rhetoric is around getting disabled adults into work." When the government unveiled cuts and restrictions to disability benefits last month, the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, name-checked the Access to Work scheme as a programme that could help those who will lose out to get a job. As well as businesses being able to claim, disabled people themselves can apply for help under the scheme. They are also suffering delays and backlogs; in October, there were 55,000 outstanding applications, according to the DWP. Some claimants are waiting more than six months to be assessed, with people writing on social media that the delays have resulted in them losing job offers. The Department for Work and Pensions says it prioritises those who are newly offered a job.

Contributor handout Lucy has struggled going into work because she does not have a suitable wheelchair

One firm says it is owed £186,000 by the Access to Work scheme and is worried it may have to close.

Jobs fears as Access to Work disability scheme owes businesses thousands

Parliament to debate emergency law to save British Steel

13 minutes ago Share Save Paul Seddon Political reporter Zoe Conway Employment correspondent Share Save

Reuters

Parliament will be recalled on Saturday to pass an emergency law to save British Steel's plant in Scunthorpe from imminent closure. At a press conference, Sir Keir Starmer said the legislation would allow ministers to "take control" of the Lincolnshire plant, which employs 2,700 people. The move opens the door to a full nationalisation of the company at a later stage, with the prime minister saying "all options" remained on the table. Talks have been taking place this week to keep production going at the firm, after its Chinese owner said its blast furnaces are "no longer financially sustainable". MPs left Westminster for their Easter break on Tuesday, and were not due to return until 22 April.

Both Houses of Parliament are being recalled, with Sir Keir confirming the government wants to pass the legislation in a single day. The prime minister added that the future of the company "hangs in the balance". Adding that steelmaking was "essential for our future", he added: "our economic and national security are all on the line". Chinese company Jingye, which bought British Steel in 2020, says it has invested more than £1.2bn into the company to maintain operations, but has been suffering financial losses of around £700,000 a day. The business department said the new law would give the government powers to order raw materials to keep the site's two running blast furnaces going, with supplies otherwise due to run out in the coming weeks. It added it would also allow ministers to direct the company's board and workforce, and ensure anyone at the plant "who takes steps to keep it running, against the orders of the Chinese ownership" can be reinstated if they are sacked.

'Foundation industry'

The company announced plans last month to shed jobs at the Scunthorpe site, blaming "highly challenging" market conditions, tariffs and costs associated with lower-carbon production techniques. The government has offered £500m of support to partly fund a switch from blast furnaces to more energy efficient electric arc furnaces. But the offer has been rejected by the company. Earlier this week, the government offered to buy the coking coal to keep the blast furnaces running until a longer-term solution to saving the plant could be found, but was unable to get the company to agree to this in tense negotiations this week. The business secretary is thought to have lost confidence in the company's Chinese owners, with a government source saying they are "no longer trustworthy partners". The move to take control of the company has been welcomed by unions representing employees at the site, with Unite saying it would grant workers a "reprieve" whilst a longer-term solution is worked out. "Ministers could not have allowed a foundation industry to go under," added general secretary Sharon Graham. The GMB union said the government's move looked like the "first step" towards nationalisation, which it supported as the "only way to save the UK steel industry". Steelworkers' union Community said the government could not allow the UK to become the only country in the G7 group of advanced economies "without primary steelmaking capacity".

'Sticking plaster'

The PM says legislation will allow the government to "take control"' of the firm's Scunthorpe plant.

Parliament recalled to debate emergency law to save British Steel

Global breakthrough to tackle shipping emissions

5 hours ago Share Save Esme Stallard Climate and science reporter Share Save

Costfoto/NurPhoto/Getty Images

Countries have agreed a global deal to tackle shipping emissions, after nearly ten years of negotiations. The agreement covers the vast majority of the world's commercial shipping and means that starting in 2028, ship owners will have to use increasingly cleaner fuels or face fines. The deal was nearly derailed after Saudi Arabia forced a last minute vote and the US pulled out of talks in London – but it eventually passed on Friday. Small island states and environmental groups were angry that a blanket tax was not agreed to and called the deal "unfit for purpose".

Shipping accounts for around 3% of global emissions. But unlike many other sectors it has struggled to reduce its carbon footprint over the last decade and is reliant on fossil fuels like diesel. But the agreement means it is now the first industry in the world with internationally mandated targets to reduce emissions. The agreement was passed at the UN's International Maritime Organisation (IMO) meeting. It will require owners of large international vessels to increase their use of less carbon intensive fuels or face a penalty of up to $380 per tonne of carbon dioxide emissions they emit from burning fuel. Although the final agreement was passed, it had to be put to a vote - an unusual move for UN bodies that usually agree measures by consensus. The vote was requested by Saudi Arabia, who did not support the agreement, and this position was shared by a dozen other oil-producing nations, including Russia. Although they opposed the proposal, they will be bound to implement it because they are members of the IMO. There have been moves to improve the efficiency of ships, but emissions have continued to increase in line with global trade - 90% of which is carried by ships. The most effective measure would be to switch ships away from fossil fuels to green fuels, but that would be very expensive. "There is no fuel as cheap as diesel that ships use today because when we take crude oil out of the ground, we take out all the nice bits, that's the kerosene for aviation, diesel and petrol for cars," said Faig Abbasov, programme director for maritime transport at think tank Transport and Environment. "Whatever is left at the bottom, that's what ships burn. So no fuel will be as cheap as this because not much energy goes into its production," he said. In comparison, the most environmentally friendly fuels like e-kerosene and ammonia are created from initially splitting water atoms to obtain hydrogen, which is a very energy-intensive and costly process. Figures vary depending on the fuel type but the World Economic Forum estimates that these green fuels are 3-4 times more expensive to produce. "There's still a huge cost gap between the fossil fuels and the zero emission fuels and we need to close this gap. So you need carrots and sticks and in shipping the stick is not that big yet to use sustainable fuels," said Refke Gunnewijk, program manager for sustainable transport at the Port of Rotterdam.

Reuters Nearly 90% of the world's goods are moved via ship and the industry continues to grow in line with trade volumes

Some island states also abstained and said the deal was a watered down version of what they hoped for. An earlier proposal to apply a blanket carbon tax or levy - which would have been a world first - was dropped. "Let us be clear about who has abandoned 1.5°C. Saudi Arabia, the US and fossil fuel allies pushed down the numbers to an untenable level and blocked progress at every turn," said Ralph Regenvanu, minister of energy and climate change for Vanuatu. Their disappointment was shared by environmental groups. "This week, IMO member states squandered a golden opportunity for the global shipping sector to show the world how it can turn the tide on catastrophic climate heating, putting their own goals out of reach", said Delaine McCullough, president of the Clean Shipping Coalition. It is estimated that the agreement could achieve an 8% reduction in emissions for the sector by 2030, according to the maritime consultancy UMAS. This would be short of the IMO's target agreed two years ago to cut emissions by 20% by the end of the decade. But China and Brazil had previously raised concerns that a levy could result in a significant price increase for basic goods like food. Both countries backed the final deal. Jesse Fahnestock, director of decarbonisation at the Global Maritime Forum, said that the deal was a compromise. "It is a difficult set of decisions, but it is the first regulation of its kind and that is to be celebrated," he said. Listen: How to clean up the shipping industry Fahnestock added it was unclear if the penalties were enough to close the cost gap between the fuel types. "You may have incentivised shipowners to prepare a bit for the future fuels but whether the signal is strong enough to get the billions of dollars of investment into the production facilities for these fuels - I don't think these regulations will overcome that. I think more will need to be done," he said. Any money raised from the penalties will be put into a "Net Zero" fund, with money spent on scaling up greener fuels and supporting developing countries. It is this "redistribution" that prompted the US delegation to pull out of the talks on Tuesday night. A letter was sent by the US to all countries at the IMO negotiations saying any levy would cause inflation and if it was passed then "reciprocal measures" would be taken. Although the US move was at odds with its long-held position at the IMO, it was in keeping with President Trump's push back on climate action seen over the last few months - such as withdrawing the US from the Paris Climate Agreement. But industry and country delegates appeared unperturbed when speaking to the BBC on Wednesday and continued with negotiations. The US only flags 178 cargo ships that represent 0.57% of worldwide commercial shipping tonnage. So if it took the decision not to implement the new proposals it is unlikely to make a significant difference to the funds raised. Now the committee have agreed the measure, it is expected to be formally adopted in October.

Countries break ten-year deadlock to agree measures to reduce commercial shipping emissions.

Global breakthrough agreement to tackle shipping emissions

Trump recognises tariff 'transition problems' as US markets fall again

Watch: Trump cites 'transition costs' and 'problems' in wake of tariff fallout

Meanwhile, markets continued to face a turbulent time on Thursday, following Trump's 10% tariff announcement for all countries except China.

Despite this, Trump said he was still hoping to secure a deal with China. "I think we'll end up working something out that's very good for both countries. I look forward to it," he said.

His statement on Thursday comes hours after the White House said that tariffs on China would reach 145% for some products due to a pre-existing 20% levy imposed on those producing the drug fentanyl.

Donald Trump has said there will "always be transition problems" and "difficulty" as markets fell again amid continued uncertainty over the US president's global tariff war.

Trump on Wednesday paused his threat to impose tariffs as high as 50% on "worst offender" countries, but pressed on with his trade war with China.

Beijing has shown no sign of backing down, this week increasing its retaliatory tariffs to 84% on American products.

The three major US stock markets managed to regain some initial ground early on Thursday. However by closing, the S&P 500 lost 3.6%, the Dow Jones 2.5% and the Nasdaq 4.31%. Warner Bros Discovery shares fell 14% on Thursday, while Amazon and Apple who were both down 7%.

In a televised cabinet meeting, Trump said there would "always be transition difficulty" but added that "it was the biggest day in history in markets".

He said that investors were happy with how the US was running and that they were "trying to get the world to treat us fairly".

He claimed that "everybody wants to come and make a deal" to reduce tariffs.

Echoing Trump's statements in the meeting, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said that many countries were coming to talk and that they'd come with "offers they never would have" if it was not for the president's policies.

"We're getting the respect we deserve now," he added. "I think you're going to see historic deals one after the other."

Trump said the US would "love to be able to work a deal (with China)", adding that he had "great respect for President Xi" and thought that they would "end up working something out that's very good for both countries".

However, he repeated his claims that China had "taken advantage" and "ripped off" the US "more than anybody" for a long time.

China announced that it would cut the number of American-made films shown in its cinemas, and claimed the tariff dispute has dampened audience appetite for Hollywood.

Beijing already restricts US releases to 34 a year, and Hollywood has become less important in China as homegrown films increase in popularity.

The European Union meanwhile said it would be pausing the countermeasures it had planned to impose on the US from 15 April also for 90 days.

Twenty-six EU member states – all bar Hungary – had voted to impose retaliatory tariffs on Wednesday if the US imposed its levy of 20%.

In a statement, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that the EU wanted "to give negotiations a chance".

The White House also confirmed that the tariffs on China would reach 145% due to a pre-existing 20% levy on fentanyl

Trump recognises tariff 'transition difficulty' as US markets fall again

Police raid hundreds of barber shops, vape stores and mini-marts suspected of being fronts for crime gangs - the BBC follows the operation

Police Raid Shops Suspected Of Money Laundering

Luxury watch firm to close showrooms and cut jobs

4 hours ago Share Save Tom Oakley BBC News, East Midlands Share Save

Getty Images The watch retailer opened 22 showrooms, refurbished 15 and acquired 15 through Ernest Jones last year

A luxury watch retailer has confirmed it will close 16 showrooms across the country and has put dozens of roles at risk. The Watches of Switzerland Group - based at Carlton Park in King Edward Avenue, Leicestershire - said 40 people were expected to leave the business. Where possible, affected staff at the company - which has 709 support service staff members - will be redeployed. The company said its "priority [was] to support all affected colleagues".

It comes after the business, which has 155 showrooms across the UK, opened "one of the largest" Rolex boutiques in Europe in London earlier this month, a spokesperson said. In the last reported financial year, the group opened 22 showrooms, refurbished 15 and acquired 15 through jewellers Ernest Jones. A statement from the Watches of Switzerland Group said: "We continually assess our operations to remain as efficient and productive as possible. "Whilst we intend to continue growing our showroom estate organically and by acquisition, following a recent review, we have regrettably made the difficult decision to close 16 showrooms in the UK. "We have also reviewed our support services to ensure we are operating in the most efficient and productive way to power our retail growth and are regrettably proposing that circa 40 roles will be at risk of redundancy." The firm has not yet said which showrooms will close.

Follow BBC Leicester on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.

The firm, based in Leicestershire, expects 40 roles to go as part of the changes.

Watches of Switzerland Group to close showrooms and cut jobs

Woman creates community pantry at front of house

3 hours ago Share Save Eleanor Maslin BBC News Kofi Smiles BBC News Reporting from Hull Share Save

BBC Sarah Dolan says she has had an amazing response after setting up the cabinet outside her house

A woman has set up a community pantry at the front of her house in Hull to help people who are struggling and needing food. Sarah Dolan set up the Avenues and Dukeries Community Pantry using a cabinet donated by a Perth Street neighbour. She said it was quickly filled with food and toiletries after an "amazing" response from the community. Ms Dolan said: "How many people have just got stuff sat at the back of their cupboards? Rather than it going to waste, it might as well help someone who needs some food."

The pantry was quickly filled up with food from the local community

On a sign made by her friends, the message on the cabinet reads: "Community Pantry: Please take what you need. Community is helping where we can". Items in the pantry so far include sanitary towels, baby food, teabags, dog food and beans. Ms Dolan said she had seen a similar idea for a community pantry online which sparked her interest to set up her own. After posting about the pantry on social media to let people know it was there, she said it "went a bit nuts". "Within five minutes of me putting it on Facebook, one of the neighbours was out putting stuff in it. "In less than half a day, we must have had between about five to 10 people come and make donations. "One person came who said she's been struggling and this would really help her."

'No judgement'

Sarah Dolan says she has had an amazing response after setting up the cabinet outside her home.

Hull woman creates community pantry at front of house

Bus users bemoan company's fare increases

31 minutes ago Share Save Alice Cunningham BBC News Reporting from Ipswich Share Save

Alice Cunningham/BBC Ipswich Buses will be changing its fares due to increases in operating costs

Bus passengers have criticised a company's decision to put up fares, as it announced changes due to "increases in operating costs". Dan Bassett, Ipswich Buses's managing director, said the company had "tried hard to maintain affordability and offer value for money" as labour costs and taxes rise. Among the changes from 20 April are rising prices for single journeys and the scrapping of return tickets, but a reduction in day ticket fares. One bus user told the BBC "it's going to get to the point where it's cheaper to get a cab", but some were also sympathetic due to the cost of living crisis.

Ipswich Buses introduced increases and changes to tickets last year too following a review. This year, the company said it had carried out analysis of local and national operators' fares before making its decision. Single fares are due to rise from £2 to £2.30 for an adult and from £1.40 to £1.70 for under-20s. The £2 National Bus Fare Cap for single journeys was raised to £3 by the government in its October Budget. Return tickets are being withdrawn and replaced instead with a reduced day ticket, from £4.50 to £4.40 for an adult and £3.30 to £3 for under-20s. The company said its app continued to offer a reduction in fares for family tickets and for those wanting to buy in bulk. Other bus operators in the county have made similar changes. First Bus, which operates across the county, introduced changes at the start of the year in response to the National Bus Fare Cap change. Hedingham & Chambers buses, that operates in a small part of Suffolk as well as Essex and is due to rebrand later this year, has also brought in new fares.

'Keep the return ticket'

Alice Cunningham/BBC Darrell Dragon said he did not have a choice but to pay the increased fares

Regular bus user Darrell Dragon, 45, felt the changes by Ipswich Buses were not fair. "They should keep the return ticket. By all means take it up, but to scrap it is just a joke," he said. "I can understand the price increase, but to scrap one ticket is a joke and to take it up as much as they are for the day ticket is ridiculous. "It puts me off [using the buses], but unfortunately I don't have a choice. "It's going to get to the point where it's cheaper to get a cab than it is to get the bus."

'It inconveniences me'

Alice Cunningham/BBC Vakare Rimkute said she felt young people were struggling generally to afford travel

Vakare Rimkute, 19, from Leiston, uses the buses regularly to get to Ipswich and said despite being small increases, they eventually add up. "You think at the time it's not that much, but then when you add it up at the end of the month you think, 'Oh, a chunk of my money is gone'," she explained. "It does make a difference, that extra little bit that you could save over a few weeks to buy yourself some lunch or something more useful." Ms Rimkute said she understood the reasons behind the changes, but felt wages often did not match the cost of living. Despite the changes, she said she would still need to use the service. "It doesn't put me off it - it inconveniences me and makes me think," she added.

'People just can't afford it'

Alice Cunningham/BBC Megan Clarke said the increase in fares would mean she would have to pick and choose when she travels

Megan Clarke, 35, is another regular bus user from Ipswich and said the changes would force her to "pick and choose" when she could go out or enjoy other things in her life. "Sometimes it's weighing the option, so I must ensure I've got money for the bus, but I can't just use it frivolously because I might need it for something else," she said. "For some of the buses they go really regularly, they're clean and the staff are really helpful and friendly, that's good value. "But when buses are not as up-to-date, or they're not clean or they're not as regular, that feels a bit painful when you're paying so much for it. "I think we might lose some bus services because people just can't afford it."

'Tried hard to maintain affordability'

Alice Cunningham/BBC Ipswich Buses said the changes would come into force from 20 April

Mr Bassett, from the bus company, said: "We understand the cost of living continues to be challenging for many people, and whilst we have had to make alterations to our fares, including increasing several prices, we have tried hard to maintain affordability and offer value for money for our customers. "The removal of return tickets and adult transfer tickets, replacing them with discounted day tickets further simplify our fare structure, making ticketing easier to understand and buses easier to use. "We will continue to offer 'on the day' bus fares which are the lowest and best value in the region, and some of the lowest and best value fares in the country."

Follow Suffolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

Increases to operating costs are behind the changes to fares, the company says.

Ipswich Buses passengers bemoan fare increases

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced a 90-day pause on higher-band tariffs with the exception of China, imposing a 125% tariff on Chinese goods.

The White House has said the change of course was all part of the president's plan to leverage for negotiations, but it initially took many by surprise.

The BBC's Bernd Debusmann Jr unpacks the twists and turns of Trump's tariffs upset.

News of the US president's plan to halt higher-band taxes came as a surprise on Wednesday, but was it part of a plan?

Watch: Did Trump plan for the 90-day tariffs pause?

Oldest Post Office scandal victim says new compensation offer 'not good enough'

Post Office minister Gareth Thomas, who had previously promised to look at her case, said it was always the government's priority to pay as much redress as it could.

However the former sub-postmistress told the BBC justice was still being denied.

Betty Brown, 92, was originally offered less than a third of what she had claimed for, but she has now received a new offer of 60%.

The oldest surviving victim of the Post Office Horizon scandal has had her offer of compensation increased but she said "it's still not good enough".

Betty said she was forced out of her branch in Country Durham in 2003 after she and her late husband spent more than £50,000 of their savings to cover shortfalls that did not exist.

It was the faulty software that made it look like money was missing from their branch.

Her post office had been one of the most successful in the region but she was later forced to sell it at a loss.

The Horizon IT system was responsible for more than 900 sub-postmasters being wrongfully accused of theft, with many being prosecuted and some even being sent to jail. The scandal has been described as one of the widest miscarriages of justice in the UK, and was the subject of ITV drama "Mr Bates vs The Post Office".

"It absolutely destroyed my whole life," she told the BBC.

She thanked Mr Thomas for helping her but said there was "still a long way to go to get the justice that we were promised".

Betty has been waiting 26 years for things to be put right.

"We're just getting fobbed off. The evidence is all there," she said.

More than £892m has now been paid to over 6,200 claimants across four different compensation schemes, according to the latest government figures.

But a group of MPs in January said compensation is not being paid quickly enough, and called for changes to the way redress was being delivered.

Mrs Brown was one of the original 555 victims who took part in the landmark group legal action led by Alan Bates against the post office. And she is seeking her compensation via the GLO scheme, established just over three years ago.

Betty's story has become a high-profile case. Mr Thomas was pressed about it on BBC's Newsnight in January, where he promised to look into her case. He met Betty and several other victims the following day.

Although Betty's offer has now increased from 29% to 60% of her claim it is still far less than what she says experts told her she could expect.

News of her revised offer will not be encouraging for other victims also embroiled in disputes over what is full and fair redress.

Post Office Minister Mr Thomas said he can "understand the frustration when lawyers are not able to reach an agreement on a claim".

"It is always our priority to pay as much redress as we can, and in some cases, we have been able to offer more than has been claimed," he said, adding that the government would take "further steps to quickly and fairly resolve" challenges in disputes such as Betty's."

Betty is determined fight on to get what she still believes she is owed.

Betty Brown's offer was increased from 30% to 60%, but still below what she claimed when her life was "destroyed" by scandal.

Oldest Post Office victim says new compensation 'not good enough'

GP's fears for patients over benefits changes

2 hours ago Share Save Lucy Ashton BBC News, South Yorkshire political reporter Share Save

Lucy Ashton/BBC Sheffield GP Maria Read says benefit changes could prove "crippling" for many people

The cost of living crisis was making people ill and there would be a "flood" of people needing support as benefit changes came into force, a Sheffield GP has warned. Dr Maria Read said the Dovercourt Surgery at Sky Edge where she worked was braced to deal with more patients as the changes were introduced at the same time as bills were increasing. Ms Read said: "The fear now about the benefit changes is palpable, people are terrified." Responding, a Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) spokesperson said the social security system would always be there for those with severe health conditions and a new premium was being introduced for those who would never be able to work.

Last month, the government announced plans for major changes to the benefits system aimed at cutting the growing amount the UK spent on welfare. Those changes would include stricter tests for personal independence payments and the halving of incapacity benefits under universal credit for new claimants.

'Crippling changes'

Ms Read, who has been a GP for 44 years and who works in a disadvantaged area of Sheffield, said people had been struggling since the Covid pandemic, but things were getting worse. "It has been going on for years, but in the last few months it feels like the pressure on households has stepped up," she said. "We have known for a long time that people who struggle with finances have their life chances and aspirations affected very much - and with the cost of living crisis things are getting gradually worse." Ms Read said while people needed to try and live healthier lives, that was a "big problem" because many "simply can't afford healthy food or warm homes". "The benefits changes are going to be crippling," the GP said. "I understand people need to be helped back into work, but for people who have been out of work with chronic pain or multiple conditions there has to be some kind of provision. "Anxiety levels are huge and that affects people's ability to go to work. It's anxiety that is not caused by medical issues and if we just focus on medication, we are only papering over the cracks."

'Dignity and independence'

Ms Read said she worked in an area where people were affected by long-term conditions "much earlier" than in more affluent areas. "They are getting more than one long-term condition in their late 30s and early 40s, compared to their 70s in more affluent areas." Meanwhile, she said that GPs often found themselves depending on voluntary organisations to help support people. "We are afraid we are going to be flooded with people calling up about their benefits changes, but this is not something we can deal with," Ms Read said. "This is why the voluntary sector is so important and incredibly helpful." In a statement, a DWP spokesperson said the government would "protect people in need". "Our reforms will unlock work for sick and disabled people who can and want to be in employment." That would be backed by "a £1bn support offer to guarantee tailored help into work", the spokesperson said. Such help would ensure people were "supported to live with dignity and independence, while making sure everyone who can realise the benefits of work is expected and supported to do so", they added.

Listen to highlights from South Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North

People are "terrified" about the impact of changes to the system, Sheffield GP Maria Read warns.

Sheffield GP's fears for patients over benefits changes

Tensions rise at one of the UK's biggest van-dwelling sites

2 hours ago Share Save James Diamond BBC News, Bristol Mike Gilmore BBC News, Bristol Reporting from The Downs, Bristol Share Save

Why I live in a van on Bristol’s Downs

Plans to move one of the UK's biggest van-dwelling communities are under way amid growing tensions with people who live nearby. At least 60 caravans and vans are parked around Durdham Down, as a rising number of people can no longer afford Bristol's rental prices. But some Clifton residents said there were problems with litter and human waste appearing at the beauty spot. The rising cost of living is making the situation worse, with the number of people choosing to live in vans across the city up from 150 in 2020 to 680 in 2025. Bristol City Council has announced proposals to create a permanent site for van-dwellers in another part of the city, which could be the first of its kind in the country.

Dave Knight moved into a van after renting a three-bed room house became unaffordable.

Dave Knight, 60, moved into an old removal van on the Downs four years ago. He said: "Work dropped off [and] I was short on money. I couldn't afford the rent on my three-bedroom house in Dursley." Another person who decided that living in a vehicle is the best option is Jane, who said she adopted the lifestyle due to financial reasons. "I've paid over £100,000 in rent and bills in my time," she said. "I'm just paying someone else's mortgage. "The only thing that was happening with me financially was I was getting more into debt."

A builder, who wished not to be named, lives in a caravan he bought for £500. He told the BBC: "I ran out of money, I had nowhere to live. I was living in my car after they refused my application for a council home. "I work, I'm always working. I build houses that I can't afford to live in."

The number of van dwellers in Bristol has quadrupled in the last five years

On 26 March, so many people tried to attend a meeting on the issue that many were unable to get inside St Alban's Church in Redland. Organised by the Sneyd Park Residents Association, many took the chance to voice their opposition to the city council's policy, which has so far been not to move the majority of those living in vans on the Downs. Resident Sharon Scott said: "[As] local residents, we're angry. We're angry that the council hasn't taken any action. "The Downs was left to the people of Bristol. It's a place of natural outstanding beauty and it no longer is. "As a resident I don't come to the Downs anymore. I see litter, we hear about the noise and the anti-social behaviour."

Flora Sidebottom is one of a number of people who have chosen to live in vans in Bristol

Discussing the potential of moving, van-dweller Flora Sidebottom said she has been evicted nine times in the past year. "Every eviction that I've been through causes trauma and mistrust around figures of authority and the ways in which you're going to be worked with," she said. "It makes it harder to attend work [and] it causes negative impacts on mental and physical health and wellbeing. "If you're already having to source your wood and water, suddenly you're having to think about where you're going to go next, and you're also trying to attend work and your relationships are under strain with the people around you. "It feels like it's coming in from all angles."

It is thought around 60 people are now living in vans parked around The Downs

The council has recognised the growing need to offer alternative housing and is now looking to find a permanent site for van-dwellers. "It's an example I think of the way that we're really sort of pioneering in this area," councillor Barry Parsons said. "We're looking to find long-term solutions for an issue that's a challenge all across the country." He added lots of people living in vans have a "number of health vulnerabilities and mental health needs". Mr Parsons said that is why the council has decided to boost its outreach and support for people living in vans.

The number of people choosing to live in vans across Bristol is up from 150 in 2020 to 680 in 2025.

Tensions rise at one of the UK's biggest van-dwelling sites

UK economy grew more than expected in February

10 minutes ago Share Save Charlotte Edwards Business reporter, BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

The UK economy grew by more than expected in February, according to the latest official figures. The economy expanded by 0.5%, with the services sector having a strong month, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said. Economists had predicted growth of just 0.1%, but the ONS said several factors contributed to the surprise rise which was driven by a boost in manufacturing and production. The better-than-expected figures comes as the UK economy braces itself for the impact of tariffs imposed on goods being imported to the US.

The economy grew by 0.5% in February, thanks to a strong month for the services sector.

UK economy grew more than expected in February

Do we need cocoa-free chocolate and is it nice?

3 hours ago Share Save Chris Baraniuk Technology Reporter Share Save

Chris Baraniuk Soaring cocoa prices are spurring cocoa-free treats

The first thing I notice is the lack of a strong aroma. There's no familiar, powerful waft of cocoa when opening this bag of sweets, the packet of biscuits, or the caramel-filled truffles. And as I taste each one as part of my solemn commitment to inform the public, I don't get quite the same burst of chocolate flavour that you might expect from treats with that familiar, waxy, light brown chocolate-like coating. The thing is, this isn't chocolate. It's made with sunflower seeds. Or fava (also called broad) beans. The selection before me is just a smattering of the non-cocoa containing alternatives to chocolate that are creeping into the European retail market right now. Their makers have spied an opportunity, partly because real chocolate prices are soaring. "The average increase in price for chocolate was 9% over 2024," says Richard Caines, principal analyst in UK food and drink research at market research firm Mintel. "In January just gone, it's shot up by 14%." That's the retail price of chocolate. The wholesale price of the key ingredient, cocoa – which is made from fermented, roasted and ground cacao beans – has increased by an astonishing 300% in 2024. "I have been looking at this chocolate market for quite a few years now – I don't remember a big story like this on costs going up," adds Mr Caines. A key reason for this increase is climate change-related weather impacts on cacao farms, particularly in West Africa. Plus, some farmers in Ghana are turning away from cacao production in favour of illegal gold-mining, according to reports. It means that there was a deficit of roughly 500,000 tonnes of cocoa in the global market last year.

Getty Images West Africa accounts for most of the world's cocoa production

Real chocolate could become a "luxury" item in the future says Massimo Sabatini, co-founder and chief executive of Italian firm Foreverland, which makes a cocoa powder alternative called Choruba. The company opened its production facility in March, where staff process not cacao beans but carob husks. Carob trees produce small, brown, banana-shaped pods containing seeds. It's possible to process the pods to create a cocoa-like powder. This chocolate alternative has a long history, however – and not a very happy one. A New Yorker article claims a generation was "traumatized" by carob-based confectionary during the 1970s. It didn't taste as good as real chocolate, and it didn't melt in your mouth in the same way, apparently. But Mr Sabatini insists that he and his colleagues have come up with a worthy product. He acknowledges that carob "really doesn't taste like chocolate" but adds that Foreverland's fermentation and roasting process removes some of the carob flavour to get it closer to cocoa. Their carob-based dark chocolate alternative is sweeter and more caramel-like than real dark chocolate, he explains. There could be health benefits to this. "We can reduce drastically the sugar content," says Mr Sabatini. Carob is also higher in fibre and lower in fat than cocoa.

Foreverland Roasted carob is the cocoa-replacement at Foreverland

German food manufacturer Planet A Foods has developed a different chocolate alternative. Sara Marquart, co-founder and chief technology officer, says her goal is not to replace chocolate but to help fill the gap in the market caused by volatility in cocoa availability and prices. Unlike Foreverland, Planet A Foods have chosen sunflower seeds as the key ingredient in their cocoa powder alternative, ChoViva. "We process sunflower seeds like cocoa beans," explains Dr Marquart. "It's a highly abundant ingredient, there's millions and millions of tonnes on the market." ChoViva is now present in roughly 35 different retail products, mostly on the market in Germany and France – though it also appears in mini egg-shaped sweets sold by Aldi in the UK. The sweets are made with peanuts and have a chocolate-like coating containing ChoViva. When I try them, the flavour is overwhelmingly dominated by the salty peanut at the egg's core. But the chocolatey texture of the coating is impressive. The same applies to ChoViva-covered biscuits made by the firm. I note that the chocolate-like coating is rather thin and not overly flavourful. But again, the texture is pretty much what you'd expect from real chocolate, though not quite as melty. The company's ChoViva-covered popcorn is probably the most chocolatey item I try – the popcorn doesn't usurp its coating. Overall, there's nothing here that would perturb a consumer. Especially one unaware that these products don't actually contain chocolate.

Daniel Schvarcz Sunflower seeds are the key ingredient for Planet A Foods

A UK start-up also keen to compete in this space is Nukoko. Two of its founders previously ran a real chocolate business and teamed up with a food scientist to form their new venture. "We saw first-hand the issues with the chocolate supply chain," says Ross Newton, co-founder. Like Foreverland and Planet A Foods, Nukoko has opted for a key ingredient that the firm can source and process locally – to reduce food miles and insulate against supply chain risks. But in Nukoko's case the raw material of choice is not carob or sunflower seeds but fava beans. "There's around a million tonnes harvested in the UK every year," says Mr Newton. It's early days for the company but he adds that he hopes to begin selling their cocoa powder alternative to food firms later this year. Mr Newton says imitating the flavour of real chocolate is very hard but that, out of 25 crucial flavour compounds in real chocolate, his company's product manages to include 24 of them – though in some cases at slightly different concentrations. The company sends me four caramel-filled truffles to try. The caramel totally dominates and the truffles are very sweet. But the chocolate alternative is as smooth and glossy as you'd expect, and very satisfying to chew. "Anything new that comes out has got to meet equal taste expectations," says Mr Caines, noting how discerning consumers are when it comes to their favourite chocolate-containing products. Getting them to embrace alternatives devoid of cocoa will be no mean feat. He adds that alternatives might fare best when used in bakery products – such as the chips in chocolate chip cookies: "The chocolate is not so much the star of the show there so it might actually be more acceptable."

Cocoa prices are soaring so new chocolate firms are looking at an alternative ingredient.

Do we need cocoa-free chocolate and is it nice?

Prada to buy rival fashion brand Versace for $1.36bn

The Prada Group already owns several other designer labels including Miu Miu and luxury footwear brand Church's.

"We aim to continue Versace's legacy celebrating and re-interpreting its bold and timeless aesthetic," said Prada chairman Patrizio Bertelli.

The deal to unite the two Italian brands has an estimated value of $1.36bn (£1.06bn), the Prada Group said on Thursday.

Prada has agreed to buy its smaller rival Versace in a billion dollar deal to unite two of the biggest designer fashion labels.

Its acquisition of Versace will create a multi-billion dollar luxury fashion group, putting the brands in a position to compete with the likes of French luxury fashion conglomerates LVMH and Kering.

Negotiations to buy Versace between Prada and Capri began in February.

The price Prada agreed to pay for Versace is significantly lower than the $2.15bn that Capri Holdings spent when it bought Versace in 2018.

The deal, which includes the brand's debt pile, comes as Versace has been operating at a loss amid a slowdown in demand for luxury fashion worldwide.

Capri also owns other fashions brands including Jimmy Choo and Michael Kors.

Mr Bertelli said that the Prada Group would provide Versace with "a strong platform".

"Versace has huge potential. The journey will be long and will require disciplined execution and patience," added Andrea Guerra, the chief executive of Prada.

In March, Donatella Versace stepped down from her creative director role at the luxury brand after nearly 30 years.

She had held the position since 1997 and took over after the murder of her brother Gianni.

The 69-year-old has a new role as the chief brand ambassador for Versace, while Dario Vitale, who is a former design and image director of Miu Miu, took over as chief creative officer.

The deal to unite the two Italian brands has an estimated value of $1.36bn (£1.06bn).

Prada buying rival fashion brand Versace in $1.36bn deal

Trump may have backtracked, but this is far from over

3 hours ago Share Save Faisal Islam • @faisalislam Economics editor Share Save

BBC

There were some heroic efforts overnight from Donald Trump and those around him to suggest the past seven days were something other than absolute chaos. By this reading, Trump's 4D game of chess has left China in check. Certainly the Chinese economy faces a massive hit from punitive tariffs in its biggest market. But even accounting for the President's roll back, the US has still erected a massive protectionist tariff wall, not seen since the 1930s. The world is left with a universal 10% tariff, irrespective of whether that country (for example the UK or Australia) actually sells less to the US than the US sells to it. There is now no difference between the EU, which clearly does have a massive trade deficit in goods and was preparing to retaliate, and the UK.

Getty Images Could President Trump push ahead with tariffs on medicines next?

There is also an anxious wait to find out what comes next. One of the questions is whether President Trump pushes ahead with tariffs on medicines, the UK's second biggest goods export. Plus there is potential logistical chaos on the cards from a little-noticed multi-million dollar port tax for every cargo vessel docking in the US that was "made in China". That is more than half of the global merchant fleet - and it is due next Friday. Even with Trump's stated 90 day pause on implementing higher tariffs, there remains too much uncertainty for companies to go through the rigmarole of rerouting global trade.

The China fallout

The central issue today, however, is that the world's two great economic superpowers are now facing off against each other like rutting stags. Tariffs at these sky-high rates are massively hitting business between two nations which together account for around 3% of the entire world's trade. The main motorway of the global economy is effectively shut. The visible tangible consequences of all this will become very real very quickly: Chinese factories will close, workers will stroll from plant to plant looking for work. Beijing will need to organise a stimulus package to account for the loss of whole percentage points of GDP, the kind of thing that happens when a natural disaster flattens a major city. Painful, but manageable at a cost, though not forever.

Getty Images China is expected to launch a stimulus package to make up for the economic damage

Meanwhile the US will see consumer prices surge. President Trump might try to order these US companies not to raise prices, but the effect will come through soon enough. In theory this will be in sharp contrast to what is happening in other countries in the world. Across the border in Canada, or in Europe, not only will there not be such China-sourced price rises, there could be price cuts.

From trade wars to currency wars

Trade wars on this scale do not stay confined to the flow of goods. They tend to become currency wars. What we saw last night was the trade turmoil spread to credit markets, especially the US bond market, having already hit share prices. Indeed there was an invaluable reveal for the game theory of this conflict. The Trump administration revealed a key pressure point with its concern about the "yippy" - as Trump called it - bond market. As trading in US government debt continued overnight in Asia, the effective interest rate on these bonds rose to 5%. This sort of borrowing should not move in such an erratic fashion. The last time this happened was in the "Dash for Cash", the key moment of financial fragility at the very beginning of the pandemic. The world was focussed on life or death in March 2020, but this potential further crisis was alleviated only by emergency action. Effectively, the President's row back was a form of emergency policy change. Was the Chinese government behind this rash of US government bond sales in Asia? Probably not. However, what happened on Wednesday highlighted a vulnerability for Trump.

Getty Images Interest rates on US government bonds rose to 5% in overnight trading in Asia

China is the second biggest holder of US government debt in the world and if it chose to, dumping all that debt would be catastrophic for America. But doing so would be a form of mutually assured economic destruction - the losses for China would be huge. More importantly, what the bond markets were telling Trump is that they are deeply sceptical about his tariff policy. The US does have the Federal Reserve, which does have some power to tranquillise bond markets. But right now it does not look like its chairman Jerome Powell will ride to the rescue. The bond market scepticism echoes the sentiment of the ascendant Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He is now pushing for Trump to reach trade deals with their allies because the US needs them to take on China.

Getty Images The bond market doubts echo the scepticism of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent

Given the US was previously calling these same close allies cheaters, looters and pillagers, there is no way this was the strategy all along. This does matter. The US needs the EU, UK, the rest of the G7 on side in terms of China. China probably needs those countries just to stay neutral, and carry on soaking up its exports. The rest of the world has seen Trump's team struggle to explain tariffing penguin islands or poor African economies and the President himself recirculating the suggestion he was crashing stock markets on purpose. And they've witnessed the fact that the tariff rates were changed after they came into effect and also the absurd nature of the equation used to calculate them. It's in this context that Trump's handling of the situation has handed leverage back to the rest of the world, because neither friend nor foe will negotiate with America while things are as they are. There is a calm, welcomed by all, but it could be rather brief.

There is an anxious wait to find out what comes next - and if a currency war will follow.

Trump has backtracked, but this is far from over

British Steel talks still deadlocked, source says

2 hours ago Share Save Zoe Conway Employment correspondent Joshua Nevett Political reporter Share Save

BBC

The talks to keep production going at the UK's last virgin steel plant in Scunthorpe are yet to reach a resolution, the BBC has been told. British Steel has been warning the raw materials used to produce steel in two blast furnaces at the plant may soon run out. On Wednesday, sources said the government had offered to buy the coking coal that is essential to keep the blast furnaces going. A meeting between government officials and Jingye, the Chinese owner of the plant, was held virtually on Thursday.

But one source close to the negotiations told the BBC the issues under discussion remained unresolved. The source said negotiations were ongoing and may roll into Friday. Trade unions who represent workers at the plant said they had not been updated on the negotiations. Government sources had told the BBC production could cease at the plant within weeks if the raw materials were not paid for soon. The Department of Business and Trade did not comment. Coking coal is a source of fuel in the blast furnace process used to make virgin steel, which is made from iron ore rather than recycled steel. Jingye has said the furnaces are "no longer financially sustainable". The government has not ruled out nationalising British Steel, which employs 2,700 people, saying all options remain on the table.

A source said the issues being discussed by government officials and the firm remain unresolved.

British Steel talks still deadlocked, source says

Tesco braces for grocery price war with rivals

A price war could benefit many households struggling with the cost of living, especially after a number of bills increased in April .

Tesco's chief executive Ken Murphy said that there had been an "intensification" of competition across the industry.

The British retail giant said profits could be up to £400m lower if it is forced to reduce the cost of groceries after rival Asda recently announced big price cuts to try to restore its fortunes.

Tesco has said it expects to make lower profits this year as it faces a potential price war with the UK's other major supermarkets.

"Any pressure on grocers to lower prices will be welcomed by shoppers, even if it adds further pressure on retailers who are navigating rising costs across their operations," said Nick Carroll, director of retail insights at Mintel, a market research firm.

Tesco said operating profits would likely be between £2.7bn and £3bn, below what it made for the last financial year and lower than the £3.2bn forecast by analysts.

Mr Murphy said guiding down the profit expectations will give Tesco the "flexibility and the fire power to maintain our position in the market".

The company said: "We see further opportunities to protect and strengthen our competitiveness."

Several supermarkets saw share prices fall on Thursday. Tesco's dropped by 6% while rival Sainsbury's fell 4.8% and Marks & Spencer traded 2.6% lower.

Last month, Asda's executive chairman Allen Leighton said the supermarket would aiming for its prices to be 5% to 10% cheaper than its rivals in the future in an attempt to win back customers.

Lucy Rumbold, equity research analyst at Quilter Cheviot, said: "We don't see Asda's recent pricing reset as something Tesco will worry about, with it likely to have little material impact on its profitability."

But Richard Lim, chief executive of Retail Economics, said there were "certainly signals in the market" that a price war is in the offing.

He said supermarkets had engaged in these battles in previous years. "And we live in an incredibly competitive sector when it comes to the grocery sector so price and value is always that key determinant that drives consumers through the doors of the supermarkets," he told the BBC's Today programme.

Tesco, like its competitors, is facing increased costs due to rises in employer National Insurance Contributions (NICs) and minimum wages. The company said its bill had risen by £235m.

Mr Murphy said despite fears of US tariffs stoking inflation, he did not think the impact would be "significant for Tesco", stating that the supermarket gets a large amount of its products from the UK.

He made the comments as Tesco announced a 4% rise in full-year sales to £63.6bn for the 12 months to 22 February.

Pre-tax profit fell by 3.2% to £2.2bn while like-for-like sales grew by 3.1%.

Shoppers could benefit as the supermarket giant said competition with rivals over prices had intensified.

Tesco braces for grocery price war with rivals

Barclays cuts rates on some mortgages to below 4%

51 minutes ago Share Save Shanaz Musafer Business reporter, BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

Barclays has become the biggest UK lender so far to cut mortgage rates as the continued uncertainty caused by US tariff policy raises expectations of interest rate cuts this year. Barclays is reducing the rate on certain fixed-term deals to 3.99%, joining several other lenders who have cut mortgage rates this week. US President Donald Trump has brought in import taxes on dozens of countries since re-entering the White House, although on Wednesday he paused the higher rate on some of them. But concerns that tariffs may cause an economic slowdown has led to many analysts predicting the Bank of England will reduce borrowing costs by more than expected this year in order to boost growth.

Barclays is cutting rates on several of its products, including its two-year and five-year fixed deals, from Friday. However, these fixed rates of below 4% are only available to borrowers with a 60% loan-to-value and an £899 fee applies. Coventry Building Society, TSB, the Co-operative Bank and Bank of Ireland are among those to have cut rates this week. According to the financial data company Moneyfacts, the average two-year fixed mortgage rate ticked down on Thursday from 5.3% to 5.29%. The average five-year fix dipped from 5.15% to 5.14%.

It is the biggest lender so far to offer cheaper deals as the Bank of England is forecast to make more interest rate cuts this year.

Barclays cuts rates on some mortgages to below 4%

Will iPhones cost more because of Trump's tariffs on China?

37 minutes ago Share Save Liv McMahon Technology reporter Zoe Kleinman • @zsk Technology editor Share Save

Reuters

The world's most popular gadgets - phones, laptops, tablets, smartwatches - could be about to get a lot more expensive in the US. Many of them are made in China, which now faces a 125% tariff on its goods imported to the US, under President Donald Trump's controversial trade policy. And the effect this may have on the iPhone and its maker Apple is under the spotlight. Some analysts say that if costs incurred by tariffs are passed onto consumers, iPhone prices in the US could rise by hundreds of dollars.

Where are iPhones made?

The US is a major market for iPhones and Apple accounted for more than half of its smartphones sales last year, according to Counterpoint Research. It says as much as 80% of Apple's iPhones intended for US sale are made in China, with the remaining 20% made in India. Along with fellow smartphone giants such as Samsung, Apple has been trying to diversify its supply chains to avoid over-reliance on China in recent years. India and Vietnam emerged as frontrunners for additional manufacturing hubs. As tariffs took effect, Apple reportedly looked to speed up and increase its production of India-produced devices in recent days. Reuters reported on Thursday that Apple chartered cargo flights to ship more than 600 tons of iPhones from India to the US. Amid Trump's 90-day pause on tariffs, including those levied on India, the country may be set to benefit from an iPhone manufacturing boost. The BBC has approached Apple for comment on the impact of tariffs on their operations and prices, but has not had any response yet.

How exposed is Apple to tariffs?

Trump and his advisors have said the aim of its tariffs are to encourage more US manufacturing. However, the tech industry relies on a global network of suppliers for product components and assembly. This, and finding skilled workers to match the fast pace and low cost of production in Asia, means relocating supply chains is no simple feat. Apple committed a $500bn investment in the US in February - which the Trump administration believes will result in more homegrown manufacturing. But Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives said shifting parts of its supply chain from cheaper manufacturing hubs in Asia to the US will take a lot of time, and money. "The reality is it would take 3 years and $30 billion dollars in our estimation to move even 10% of its supply chain from Asia to the US with major disruption in the process," he wrote on X on 3 April.

Will iPhone prices go up?

Apple have not revealed yet whether they plan to pass on the costs of the tariffs onto consumers in the US and increase prices. Some analysts believe Apple is in a more fortunate position than others, having reaped more money from its products than it has spent on making them. "As a company with lucrative margins on its devices, Apple can absorb some of the tariff-induced cost increases without significant financial impact, at least in the short term," says Forrester principal analyst Dipanjan Chatterjee. But he notes the company's strong branding and popularity may allow it to pass some costs to consumers without too much backlash. "The brand commands better loyalty than its competitors, and it is unlikely that a manageable price increase will send these customers fleeing into the arms of Android-based competitors." Some estimates suggest iPhone prices in the US could as much as triple if costs were passed to consumers. Following Trump's tariff increase on China to 125%, the cost for a China-made iPhone 16 Pro Max with 256GB storage would have surged from $1,199 to $1,999, according to estimates by investment banking firm UBS. They estimate a less significant increase on the iPhone 16 Pro 128GB storage - which is made in India - by five percent from $999 to $1046. While some analysts such as Dan Ives have suggested that the cost of a "Made in USA" iPhone could soar to as much as $3500.

What can consumers do about it?

Some analysts say that if costs incurred by tariffs pass to consumers, US iPhone prices could rise by hundreds of dollars.

Will iPhones cost more because of Trump's tariffs on China?

US stocks make historic gains after Trump pauses some tariffs

4 hours ago Share Save Natalie Sherman BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

US shares have rocketed after US President Donald Trump said he would suspend steep tariffs on goods from most countries, and instead impose a 10% import tax rate. The White House said it was backing off on higher levies for trade partners that had agreed to negotiate, although Trump said he would raise tariffs on goods from China even further, to at least 125% "effective immediately". The S&P 500 soared 9.5% in the biggest one-day rally since 2008, following days of turmoil sparked by the tariffs. Trump's decision came less than 24 hours after the latest round of tariffs had come into force, hitting key trade partners, such as Vietnam, which saw its imports facing a new levy of 46%.

The duties, which the president had announced last week, were higher and more far-reaching than many on Wall Street had anticipated. In the aftermath of the announcement, the S&P plunged more than 10% and many analysts warned of the rising risk of economic recession in the US and globally. By Wednesday, the fears had hit the bond market, where investors started dumping US government debt. "Although President Donald Trump was able to resist the stock market sell-off, once the bond market began to weaken too, it was only a matter of time before he folded," said Paul Ashworth, chief North America economist for Capital Economics. He said he expected Trump to return to the plan for a 10% universal tariff that he called for in his presidential campaign last year, though warned that it would take time for for the US and China to work out a deal. "It is difficult to see either side backing down in the next few days," he said. "But we suspect that talks will eventually happen, although a full rollback of all the additional tariffs applied since Inauguration Day appear unlikely." The Dow ended the day up more than 7.8% and the Nasdaq skyrocketed more than 12%. Live updates Companies such as Nike, which makes roughly half its footwear in Vietnam, jumped 11%, while Apple soared roughly 15%. Despite the gains on Wednesday, the leading indexes in the US remained lower than they were before Trump's announcement, with the S&P 500 off about 3% and down more than 8% for the year.

The levies on goods from China, America's third largest supplier of imports, remain an economic challenge. The country sent more than $400bn in goods to the US last year and was the source of an estimated 60% of footwear imports and roughly 36% of clothing imports in January, according to the American Apparel and Footwear Association. Before Trump's announcement, the National Retail Federation had warned that shipments handled by US ports in May were likely to be 20% lower than a year earlier due to the tariffs. In appearances after his decision on Wednesday, Trump said that he hoped to strike a deal with China, and was also considering granting exemptions to tariffs for individual companies, a shift from earlier comments. "I saw last night where people were getting a little queasy," he said, acknowledging the concerns, though he has signalled he remains committed to duties on key strategic sectors, such as cars, steel and aluminium, and is eyeing other industries such as pharmaceuticals and lumber.

But Trump also raises tariffs on goods from China to at least 125% "effective immediately".

Stocks soar as Trump pauses some tariffs for talks

How exposed is the UK to Trump's tariff chaos?

3 hours ago Share Save Dharshini David Deputy economics editor Share Save

Getty Images

Warnings of a global recession have been intensifying as the trade war heats up. As of Wednesday night, the main animus seems to be between the US and China who are flinging ever-increasing tariffs at each other. For most other nations, Donald Trump has paused implementing higher taxes on US imports for 90 days. It means that those countries will now face a lower levy of 10% - the same level as Trump as imposed on the UK when he made his initial announcement last week. The UK appeared to have come off lightly compared to other economies. But, British exporters still face an extra charge on goods sold into the US and there are many other ways the UK will be affected, from growth to inflation. The exact impact remains very uncertain. But some of the emerging fallout may have an upside - and here's why.

Business

Those most directly exposed in the UK to this trade war are British businesses - from carmakers to food producers - selling goods into the US. As American importers buying their products pay 10% more, they face a dilemma of whether to squeeze profits, share the pain across the supply chain or hope customers will be prepared to pay higher prices. They already risk a dent to their sales from tariffs, threatening jobs and investment plans. Other companies too could be squeezed by more competition, if cheap imports from other nations are diverted to the UK - China makes a third of global goods. And the complexities of global supply chains means UK business will notice the impact of tariffs in other nations.

Growth

The blow to growth via trade will likely be less marked in the UK than elsewhere, in part because of what Britain sells to America. Two-thirds of British exports to the UK are services - the likes of banking, insurance and advertising - which aren't subject to tariffs. The UK's success in this area makes it a particular area of strength in its trade portfolio. But that strength can also be a weakness. Some services exports are linked to goods; think after-sales services or marketing. The demand for those could be affected by tariffs in the US. Sales of services exports could more broadly be impacted elsewhere if demand from other countries suffers. Some in the advertising industry are already fretting because spending on their services are often to first to suffer when there are budget cutbacks. And that trade success could be a vulnerability. The Bank of England notes that the size of the UK's export sector compared to the economy, and its financial sector, means it may be susceptible to risks to financial stability from weaker global growth. It's for all these reasons that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is warning that growth in the UK will be hit, even if we're now on a level playing field with other countries in terms of the 10% tariff. That's worrying, not just for households and businesses, but for the chancellor's own sums - weaker growth puts more of a strain on the public finances. That's why there's been speculation that we may see more tax rises come the Autumn Budget, if she's to stick to her fiscal rules.

ISAs and pensions

Compounding that dilemma - potentially - are movements in the bond markets. Those are usually seen as safe investments in times of strife but there has been signs of heavy-selling, which could lead to higher borrowing costs for governments. And the wild swings in stock markets around the world, egged on by the heightened risk of global recession, have not been good news for investors in the UK. When share prices drop, they reduce the value of products such as ISAs and pension funds. But as seasoned analysts caution that those sort of funds are long-term ones. Swings in the value of investments tend to get smoothed out over time - and most people aren't drawing from such funds day-to-day. On the whole, households here are less exposed to the stock market directly than those in America are.

Interest rates

The exact impact remains uncertain - but some of the emerging fallout may have an upside - here's why.

How exposed is the UK to Trump's tariff chaos?

The plans to put data centres in orbit and on the Moon

3 hours ago Share Save Emma Woollacott Technology reporter Share Save

Intuitive Machines Data centre firm Lonestar recently sent its test equipment to the Moon on this lunar lander

It sounds like something from a science fiction movie, but Stephen Eisele is confident that one day his company will open a data centre on the Moon. "The way we see it is that by putting the data centre in space, you're really offering unparalleled security," says the president of Lonestar Data Holdings. Last month, the Florida-based firm claimed to have successfully tested a tiny data centre the size of a hardback book that hitched a ride to the Moon on the Athena Lunar Lander from US space exploration firm Intuitive Machines. This, in turn, had been launched by a rocket from Elon Musk's SpaceX. Data centres are the vast warehouses that house stacks of computers that store and process data used by websites, companies and governments. Lonestar says that putting them on the Moon will offer customers secure, reliable data processing, while taking advantage of unlimited solar energy to power them.

And while space-based data centres may sound far-fetched, it's an idea that's really starting to take off. Part of the reason is rocketing demand and the difficulty of finding suitable sites on Earth. The ever-expanding use of artificial intelligence (AI) computing has seen a massive increase in the amount of data that needs to be stored and processed around the world. As a result, the need for data centres has shot up too, with annual demand set to rise between 19% and 22% by 2030, according to global management consultants McKinsey. New facilities are springing up all the time - but it's getting hard to find places to put them. Data centres are large and sprawling, and use enormous amounts of power and water for cooling. And increasingly local people don't want them built nearby.

Hugh Kenny Data centres require vast amounts of electricity

Putting data centres in space – either in orbit around Earth, or on the Moon - the theory goes, means they can't do quite so much harm. There's more-or-less unlimited energy available from the sun, for example, and no neighbours to complain about the environmental impacts. Not only that, space-based data centres could specialise in services for spacecraft and other space facilities, with space-to-space data transfers quicker than from the ground. Last summer, a European Commission-funded feasibility study into orbiting data centres published its results. The Ascend report by carried out by Thales Alenia Space - a joint venture between French and Italian aerospace groups Thales and Leonardo - published its results. It determined that deploying data centres in space "could transform the European digital landscape", and be "more eco-friendly". Thales Alenia Space envisages building a constellation of 13 satellites measuring a combined 200m-by-80m, and with a total data processing power of around 10 megawatts (MW). That's equivalent to a current medium-sized, ground-based data centre, with some 5,000 servers. Based on technologies that already exist or are under development, the satellites would be assembled in orbit.

Damien Dumestier, Ascend project architect at Thales Alenia Space, says that for space-based data centres to be more environmentally friendly than existing ground-based ones it will be necessary to make the rocket launchers 10 times less emissive over their lifecycles. He says this looks possible. "But in order to cover the new technology's developments and the production capacity ramp-up to benefit from scale, we have to consider larger system capacity, around 200MW, meaning 200 of our envisaged large space infrastructures and 200 launches," he says. "The main question is when an adapted launcher will be ready. Depending on the investment and decisions to be taken, this could be done for 2030 or 2035, meaning commercial viability before 2037."

However, despite this optimism from firms aiming to develop the technology, Dr Domenico Vicinanza, associate professor of intelligent systems and data science at Anglia Ruskin University in the UK, says there are numerous big hurdles before space-based data centres can be a viable proposition. "Even with the contribution and advancements of companies like SpaceX, launching hardware into orbit remains extremely expensive," he says. "Each kilogram sent into space costs thousands of dollars. "Space-based data centres would require not only the data equipment but also the infrastructure to protect, power, and cool them. All of which add up in weight and complexity." Cooling the equipment will be a particular problem, because even though space is cold, conventional cooling systems don't work will without gravity. Meanwhile, space weather can damage electronics, while the ever-increasing quantity of space debris puts the physical hardware at risk. Dr Vicinanza adds: "And fixing problems in orbit is far from straightforward. Even with robotics and automation, there are limits to what can be repaired remotely. "A big hardware failure might necessitate a costly human mission, potentially making downtime stretch for weeks or months."

Starcloud Starcloud proposes a modular system, whereby data centres can be expanded

Proponents say space-based data centres will be more secure, but sceptics say big hurdles remain.

The plans to put data centres into orbit and on the moon

UK mortgage lenders cut rates after Trump tariffs

3 hours ago Share Save Mitchell Labiak Business reporter, BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

A growing number of UK lenders are cutting mortgage rates as the fallout from US tariffs continues to fuel forecasts of deeper than expected interest rate cuts. Coventry Building Society became the largest mortgage provider to trim its two-year fixed rate mortgage to below 4% on Wednesday, joining a number of lenders who made similar moves. Financial markets and economists are predicting that the Bank of England will reduce borrowing costs by more than expected this year to avoid a downturn. The risk of global economic instability has grown after Donald Trump pressed ahead with trade taxes on US imports from more than 60 countries.

According to the financial data company Moneyfacts, the average two-year fixed mortgage rate ticked down to 5.3%. The average five-year fix edged lower to 5.15% Coventry Building Society is lowering its two-year fixed rate deal to 3.89% to the end of October 2027. Head of mortgage relations at Coventry, Jonathan Stinton, said there is "growing demand for shorter-term flexibility in an uncertain market". However, the product is only for borrowers with a 65% loan-to-value and comes with a £999 fee. Clydesdale Bank and Newcastle Building Society have also cut their rates. But despite the recent falls, many mortgage holders coming off fixed deals signed before interest rates started rising in mid-2021 are likely to face a more expensive loan when they refinance. Around 1.3 million homeowners will see their existing fixed-rate deals end between April and December this year, according to figures from the Financial Conduct Authority.

Lenders lower mortgage costs as experts forecast interest rates will be cut by more than expected.

UK mortgage lenders cut rates after Donald Trump tariffs

Struggling families can apply to £2m fund for help

Several schemes are offering help with cost-of-living, the council said

More than £2m has been made available for families struggling in the cost-of-living crisis.

People struggling to pay for energy and other essentials are being encouraged to check if they are eligible before applying to Herefordshire Council for a share of the fund.

The authority said the government had provided £2.3m. Residents could use the money to get help with paying for energy and water, as well as food, clothing and hygiene products.

It is one of several schemes supporting people through the cost-of-living crisis, the council said, with other schemes available for carers, care leavers, pensioners and others.

Residents can get cash to help with paying for energy, water, food, clothing and hygiene products.

Struggling Herefordshire families can apply to £2m fund for essentials

Talks to save British Steel reach crunch point

54 minutes ago Share Save Jack Fenwick Political reporter Alex Forsyth Political correspondent Share Save

Getty Images

Talks aimed at saving steel production in Scunthorpe are deadlocked over who will pay for the raw materials needed to keep the blast furnaces going. The materials need to be paid for within the next two days, according to government sources, or production will cease at the British Steel plant within weeks and cannot be restarted. British Steel's Chinese owner Jingye say the furnaces are "no longer financially sustainable" and they are unwilling to purchase new raw materials. Talks are set to resume between British Steel bosses and government officials on Thursday, with unions saying the situation is on a "cliff-edge".

The government has not ruled out nationalising British Steel, which employs 2,700 people, saying all options remain on the table. Ministers are thought to prefer a commercial solution to secure the long-term future of the plant. But due to the urgent need to acquire new raw materials, talks about the longer-term future of steelmaking in Scunthorpe are now largely on hold. The immediate issue is who will pay for a shipment of iron pellets, which have been delivered but are waiting in a dock, and coke, which has been ordered and is en route to the plant. One option being discussed is whether the government can directly buy the materials using taxpayers' money. But ministers have come up against legal barriers that make it tricky to intervene in such circumstances. It is understood that the easiest legal avenue would be to come to a deal with Jingye, whereby they agree to carry on running the plant, as long as the government pays for the raw materials.

When Jingye announced last month that thousands of jobs were at risk, that triggered a consultation period that legally must last a minimum of 45 days. Government representatives are said to be frustrated with Jingye, at what they see as an effective shutting down of British Steel, with the consultation period still ongoing. One source involved in the negotiations, who two weeks ago was optimistic about the future relationship between Jingye and the UK government, said they could no longer foresee long-term Chinese involvement in British steelmaking. If the government can find a way over that more immediate hurdle, then longer-term talks about British steelmaking are expected to be picked back up. One source said the government is now likely to look for an alternative commercial partner, outside of China, to take over the steelmaking operations at Scunthorpe. Alun Davies, national secretary in charge of steel and metals for the Community Union, said the raw materials issue was an "extreme emergency" . "We just need them to be paid for, once that happens then there can be further discussions with the government about how we secure steel making for Scunthorpe," he told the BBC. Emerging from talks, Linda McCulloch from the Unite union said they would like the government to nationalise the site "to keep steelmaking alive in the UK".

One of Scunthorpe's blast furnaces is set to be temporarily shut down next week, in order to buy more time before the raw materials needed to keep the steelworks going run out. The North Lincolnshire town's skyline boasts four blast furnaces, all named after English Queens - Bess, Mary, Anne and Victoria. Bess and Anne are currently the only two steelmaking blast furnaces operational in the UK. Turning off a blast furnace without making it permanently unusable is notoriously difficult. A so-called "Salamander Tap" can be used to temporarily shut down a blast furnace by drilling a hole to remove any remaining hot metal. It is seen as a generally dangerous process, but engineers on site at Scunthorpe are now confident they can carry out the procedure. The "Bess" blast furnace is currently scheduled to be taken temporarily out of action on 14 April. This would leave "Anne" as the only remaining operational blast furnace in the country, but would mean raw material stockpiles last twice as long. Reform UK is calling for British Steel to be nationalised until a buyer can be found. The Green Party also favours nationalisation and a switch to "green" steel production. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have said other options should be considered first.

The government has two days to reach a deal with the plant's Chinese owners to keep blast furnaces running.

Talks to save British Steel reach crunch point

Government considers nationalising British Steel

4 hours ago Share Save Chris Mason • @ChrisMasonBBC Political editor Hannah Miller Political correspondent Share Save

Reuters British Steel said its Scunthorpe plants are 'no longer financially sustainable' as fears grow over job losses

The government is considering nationalising British Steel as fears grow among ministers that only days remain to secure raw materials for the company's blast furnaces in Scunthorpe. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has sought to reassure workers at the Lincolnshire plant that the government would consider nationalisation if necessary. Reeves spoke to trade unions over the weekend to explain the government's outlook on the steelworks' future. It is understood she told them she was acutely aware of the steel industry's strategic importance to the UK. US President Donald Trump has levied a 25% tariff on American imports of steel.

British Steel has said its two blast furnaces in Scunthorpe are "no longer financially sustainable" and there are fears that without government support 2,700 jobs could be lost. The firm has been owned by the Chinese company Jingye since 2020. Jingye says it has invested more than £1.2bn into British Steel to maintain operations and claims it suffered financial losses of around £700,000 a day.

Taking questions from MPs on the Commons Liaison Committee on Tuesday, the prime minister reiterated "all options remain on the table" when it comes to potential government support. "I'm absolutely committed to steel production in this country," he said. He declined to provide further details, but added: "I can reassure the committee that we're doing everything we can to ensure there is a bright future for Scunthorpe." The government has offered £500m of support to partly fund a switch from blast furnaces to what are known as electric arc furnaces. But that has been rejected by the company. Senior figures in Whitehall are concerned negotiations are reaching a crunch point this week, when an order for fresh raw materials needs to be placed in order to keep the blast furnaces going. If they are turned off, it would make the site's existing vulnerability even more perilous.

The political backdrop to the arguments about the plant's future is the race to be Lincolnshire's first directly elected mayor. The election is on 1 May. The Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and his deputy Richard Tice – himself a Lincolnshire MP - visited the works on Tuesday, with Mr Farage claiming there were "3 days to save British Steel" and the way to do that was to take it "into public ownership." The Conservative MP for nearby Brigg and Immingham, Martin Vickers, told the Commons on Monday: "It is very obvious that Jingye has cancelled the raw material orders that are essential to keep the furnaces going; those orders were due in mid-May. "When I was at the steelworks on Friday, I was told that unless another order for iron ore pellets could be placed this week, it would be too late." Vickers added that "nationalisation on a temporary basis" would "provide an opportunity to rebuild the industry, hopefully secure new private sector involvement and convince the customers—most notably Network Rail, which gets 95% of its rail track from the Scunthorpe works—that supply will continue." The Conservative frontbench has not committed the party to backing nationalisation. The party leader, Kemi Badenoch, said "nationalisation has got to be a last resort," adding "we need steel production in this country, it is important for national resilience." In a written statement published on Tuesday, the Business Minister Sarah Jones said: "Our priority is respecting workers, safeguarding jobs, and retaining steelmaking. "We have been clear that the best way forward is for British Steel to continue as a commercially-run business with private investment and government acting in support. "We call upon British Steel to accept our generous offer of financial support, and the associated conditions. "However, no options are off the table. The government remains resolute in our desire to secure a long-term future for the Scunthorpe steelworks, retaining steel production and putting an end to the years of uncertainty." The Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and an independent candidate are also contesting the Lincolnshire mayoral race. You can see a full list of candidates here.

There are fears among ministers that the company's blast furnaces could run out of raw materials within days.

Nationalisation an option for British Steel, says government

India cuts rates as Trump's tariffs put growth at risk

India's central bank has cut interest rates as growth slows down in Asia's third largest economy

The RBI also brought down its growth projections for this year from 6.7% to 6.5%. It said India's gross domestic product (GDP) will grow at 6.5% next year as well.

The repo rate is the level at which the central bank lends to commercial banks, influencing borrowing costs.

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) reduced repo rates from 6.25% to 6%, a second cut since February when rates were brought down after nearly five years .

India's central bank has cut interest rates by 0.25% amid a spate of downgrades to growth following Donald Trump's tariff announcements.

Crucially, the RBI shifted its monetary policy stance to "accommodative" from "neutral", which means that the central bank would be more open to cutting rates in the future to stimulate a slowing economy.

"Concerns on trade frictions are coming true" and unsettling the global community, RBI governor Sanjay Malhotra said in his speech, adding that headwinds from disruptions to trade would continue to pose challenges for the economy.

Most economists who had previously expected only one more rate cut this year are now predicting more softening as Trump's tariff war puts growth in the world's fastest growing major economy at risk.

"The magnitude of rate cuts in the cycle now could be as high as 100bps (1%)," ICICI Bank said in a note, a view echoed by many other analysts.

Moderating inflation will give the RBI further elbow room to slash borrowing costs, according to several brokerages, as growth momentum further loses steam due to Trump's global trade war.

HSBC calculates GDP could take a direct hit of as much as half a percent this financial year due to slower export volumes around the world and weaker inflows of foreign funds.

The government's capacity to stimulate the economy to counter the impact of Trump's tariffs is also limited because "spending and tax revenues have lost steam in recent months", according to HSBC.

Starting Wednesday, Indian goods being exported to the US will face additional tariffs of up to 27%.

Tariffs on India are lower than 104% on China and 46% and 49% respectively on Vietnam and Cambodia.

The final impact on India's trade will depend on "how long the announced tariff structure lasts", ratings agency Crisil said. "The outcome will also be influenced by how other countries retaliate or negotiate with the US on tariffs."

China has already retaliated by imposing 34% reciprocal tariffs on US imports, while Europe is considering counter-measures.

India on the other hand has assumed a more restrained stance and is working towards concluding a trade deal with the US.

India has "agreed on the importance of the early conclusion of the Bilateral Trade Agreement", Foreign Minister S Jaishankar said on X (formerly Twitter) this week after his meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

But even with a trade deal in place, India's economy is unlikely to be immune to a slowdown in other parts of the world with demand for its exports potentially reducing in the event of global growth falling off a cliff.

Wall Street bank JP Morgan has put the chance of a global recession at 60%, while ratings agency Moody's said the odds had risen from 15% to 35% due to tariffs.

At 6.5%, India continues to remain the world's fastest growing major economy, but its growth has sharply come off the 9.2% high recorded in financial year 2023-24.

India's central bank has cut interest rates by 0.25% and lowered its growth projections for this year.

RBI: India cuts rates as Trump's tariffs put growth at risk

Trump's tariffs are a huge blow to Vietnam's economic ambitions

7 hours ago Share Save Jonathan Head South East Asia correspondent Reporting from Bangkok Share Save

Getty Images Trump's tariffs are a blow for countries like Vietnam that rely heavily on exports

US President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs targeting most of the world are now in effect – and outside China, no other region has been hit as hard as South East Asia. Near the top of the list are Vietnam and Cambodia which have been hit by some of the highest tariffs: 46% and 49%. Further down are Thailand (36%), Indonesia (32%) and Malaysia (24%). The Philippines gets a tariff of 17%, and Singapore of 10%. This is a huge blow for a region highly dependent on exports. Its widely admired economic development over the past three decades has largely been driven by its success in selling its products to the rest of the world, in particular to the US. Exports to the US contribute around 30% of Vietnam's GDP, and 25% of Cambodia's. That growth story is now imperilled by the punitive measures being imposed in Washington. The longer-term impact of these tariffs, assuming they stay in place, will vary, but will certainly pose big challenges to the governments of Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia in particular.

Vietnam's "bamboo diplomacy", where it attempts to be friends with everyone and balance ties with both China and the US, will now be tested. Under the leadership of the new Communist Party Secretary-General To Lam, Vietnam has embarked on an ambitious plan to build an upper-income, knowledge-and-tech-based economy by the year 2045. It has been aiming for annual growth rates in excess of 8%. Exporting more to the US, already its biggest market, was central to that plan. It was also the main reason why Vietnam agreed to elevate their relationship to that of a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2023. The Communist Party, which tolerates little dissent and has no formal political opposition, depends on its economic pledges for its legitimacy. Already viewed by many economists as too ambitious, these will now be even harder to meet.

Getty Images Vietnam's leader To Lam is aiming for an annual growth rate that is more than 8%

Thailand depends on US exports less than Vietnam – under 10% of GDP – but the Thai economy is in much worse shape, having underperformed for the past decade. The Thai government is trying to find ways to lift economic growth, most recently attempting but failing to legalise gambling, and these tariffs are another economic blow it cannot afford. For Cambodia, the tariffs pose perhaps the greatest political threat in the region. The government of Hun Manet has proved just as authoritarian as that of his father Hun Sen, whom he succeeded two years ago, but it is vulnerable. Keeping the Hun family's hold on power has required offering rival clans in Cambodia economic privileges like monopolies or land concessions, but this has helped create a glut of property developments, which are no longer selling, and a mass of grievances over land expropriations. The garment sector, which employs 750,000 people, has been a crucial social safety valve, giving steady incomes to Cambodia's poorest. Thousands of those jobs are now likely to be lost as a result of President Trump's tariffs.

BBC/ Xiqing Wang Exports to the US account for 25% of Cambodia's GDP

Unlike China, which has hit back with its own levies, the official message from governments in South East Asia is don't panic, don't retaliate, but negotiate. Vietnam has dispatched deputy prime minister Ho Duc Phoc to Washington to plead his country's case, and has offered to eliminate all tariffs on US imports. Thailand plans to send its finance minister to make a similar appeal, and has offered to reduce its tariffs and buy more American products, like food and aircraft. Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is also heading to Washington, though with exports to the US making up only 11% of Malaysia's total, his country is less affected than some of its neighbours. However, the Trump administration appears to be in no mood to compromise. Peter Navarro, President Trump's senior counsellor on trade and manufacturing and one of the main thinkers behind the new policy, said in interviews on Monday that Vietnam's offer of zero tariffs was meaningless, because it would not address the deficit in trade where Vietnam sells $15 worth of goods to the US for every $1 it buys. He accused Vietnam of keeping multiple non-tariff barriers to US imports, and said that one-third of all Vietnamese exports to the US were actually Chinese products, trans-shipped through Vietnam. The proportion of Vietnamese exports which are being made or trans-shipped there to avoid US tariffs on China is difficult to assess, but detailed trade studies put it at between 7% and 16%, not one-third.

Getty Images Asian stocks plunged this week as Trump's tariffs kicked in

US exports have driven the economic success of countries like Vietnam and Cambodia.

Trump's tariffs are a huge blow to Vietnam's economic ambitions

British Steel solution is within reach, minister says

1 hour ago Share Save Charlotte Edwards Business reporter, BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

A "commercial solution" for British Steel is "within reach" according to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, as the government considers nationalising the Chinese-owned business. Nandy told the BBC that British Steel - which employs 2,700 people - will "continue to be an important part of our economy for years to come" and an agreement over its future was "achievable and within sight". The company is at risk of running out of raw materials within weeks, raising fears over whether its blast furnaces which make high grade steel can keep running. It comes as the steel industry deals with a 25% tariffs on exports to the US, which came into force last month.

British Steel, which has been owned by China's Jingye since 2020, has said its two blast furnaces in Scunthorpe are "no longer financially sustainable". Jingye said it has invested more than £1.2bn into British Steel to maintain operations and claims it suffered financial losses of around £700,000 a day. "I am absolutely confident that we are doing every single thing that we can to secure the future of British Steel and particularly the site at Scunthorpe," said Nandy. Simon Boyd, managing director of REIDsteel, a British Steel customer, told the BBC that government intervention was the "only solution if we want to keep steel making in the UK". He said the firm only has "days left to secure the order of materials to prevent the forced closure of the blast furnaces over the next month". "We're talking days," he warned. The government has offered £500m of support to partly fund a switch from blast furnaces to more energy efficient electric arc furnaces. But the move has been rejected by the company. Electric arc furnaces also do not burn hot enough to make virgin steel, and are fed with scrap steel. Mr Boyd said Scunthorpe's current blast furnaces produce "the highest grade of steel available". "If we lose that capability we'll be wholly reliant on [countries] like China producing the blast furnace steel and electric arc furnaces, which make steel out of scrap, are all well and good but they're at least five years away," he said. It is very difficult and very expensive to get blast furnaces running again once they have been turned off, which would make the Scunthorpe site's existing vulnerability even more perilous. Mr Boyd added that he was "very encouraged" to hear the government is "finally" considering nationalisation. Roy Rickhuss, general secretary of the UK's largest steel workers union Community, told the BBC he agreed with the prime minister that "all options should be on the table and that includes nationalisation". "Whatever you decide to do, will come with a cost and if the government own the business then they'll have to pick up that cost," he added.

'Active discussions'

The UK government is considering nationalising the Chinese-owned firm which employs 2,700 people.

British Steel solution is within reach, minister says

Trump tariffs spark US government debt sell-off

23 minutes ago Share Save Michael Race Business reporter, BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

Confidence in the US economy is plummeting as investors dumped government debt amid escalating concerns over the impact of Donald Trump's tariffs. The interest rate on US bonds - traditionally considered a "safe haven" investment in times of crisis - spiked on Wednesday to touch the highest since February. Sweeping taxes on goods being imported into the US from around 60 countries came into effect at midnight, while a tit-for-tat trade war between America and China gathered pace. After the US went ahead with a 104% tariff on products from China, Beijing hit back with 84% levy on American products.

Stock markets have been falling sharply over the past few days in reaction to Trump pressing ahead with tariffs. However, the sale of bonds - which are essentially an IOU issued by a government to raise money from financial markets - poses a major problem for the world's biggest economy. Buying US government debt, or Treasuries as they are known, is viewed as a safe investment because the state will pay back what it owes. But on Wednesday, the yield - or interest rate - on US bonds touched the highest level since February at 4.5%, making it more expensive for America to borrow money. Some analysts suggested that the US Federal Reserve might be forced to step in if turbulence continues, in a move reminiscent of the Bank of England's emergency action in 2022 following Liz Truss's mini-Budget. "We see no other option for the Fed but to step in with emergency purchases of US Treasuries to stabilise the bond market," said George Saravelos, global head of FX research at Deutsche Bank. "We are entering uncharted territory," he said, adding that it was "very hard" to predict how markets would react in the coming days as the bond market suggested investors had "lost faith in US assets".

'US recession a coin toss'

The cost of borrowing for the US government rose as confidence in the economy waned

Trump tariffs spark US government debt sell-off

Post Office to offload all directly-owned branches

The Communication Workers Union (CWU) called for the government to intervene immediately and examine alternative options.

It is understood the Post Office has received interest from potential retail partners including Tesco and Ryman, as well as sub-postmasters, to take on the loss-making branches.

About 1,000 staff working in these branches will be offered a choice to move to work for any new owner or take voluntary redundancy.

The Post Office has said it will offload the remaining 108 branches it directly owns and will move to a fully franchised network.

CWU general secretary Dave Ward said: "The Post Office's claim that these community services will be maintained by their failed franchising model is laughable to anyone who has seen their local Post Office services reduced to the back of a shop.

"The sell-off of WH Smith last week shows just how fragile and ill-thought out this model is. This is the full privatisation of the Post Office via the back door."

The Post Office confirmed last November that the future of the these sites would be under review as part of a five-year plan to overhaul the business.

A decision on who will take them over will be made in the coming weeks. The Post Office will stop running them by the autumn, subject to government funding.

Post Office chairman Nigel Railton said the 108 branches will either stay in the same location or be relocated nearby so customers continue to have access to the services.

He said moving to a fully franchised network was one part of enabling the Post Office to deliver a new deal for postmasters.

"By franchising these branches, we are protecting access to our services for communities right across the UK and realising £40m worth of savings that will enable us to uplift postmasters' remuneration by up to 10%," he said.

He said over the coming months the Post Office would continue to work with unions to consult with staff in the 108 branches and support them through the transition.

The Post Office said it would work with franchise partners with a clear track record of successfully running Post Office services or similar customer-focused retail to ensure customers continue to receive a high level of service once the branches are franchised.

The company said it remained committed to meeting the current requirement to have a minimum of 11,500 branches across the UK and to meet the six access criteria set by government.

Further details on proposals will be shared with local communities and stakeholders for individual branches in the coming weeks.

About 1,000 staff will be offered the choice to work for any new owner or take voluntary redundancy.

Post Office to offload all directly-owned branches

As Trump hikes tariffs again, nervous businesses weigh what comes next

3 hours ago Share Save Natalie Sherman Business reporter, New York Share Save

Watch: Trump says tariffs will be 'legendary' ahead of 104% tax on China

US President Donald Trump is ripping up the rulebook on trade that has been in place for more than 50 years. His latest round of sweeping tariffs, which came into force shortly after midnight on Wednesday, hits goods from some of America's biggest trading partners including China and the European Union with dramatic hikes in import duties. The president and his allies say the measures are necessary to restore America's manufacturing base, which they view as essential to national security. But it remains a potentially seismic action, affecting more than $2tn worth of imports, which will push the overall effective tariff rate in the US to the highest level in more than a century.

In the US, key consumer goods could see huge price rises, including an estimated 33% for clothing, and analysts are warning of near-certain global economic damage as sales in America drop, trade shrinks and production abroad falls. With the stock market reeling and political pressure in the US starting to build, the White House has worked to soothe nerves by floating the possibility of trade talks, touting conversations that have already begun with Japan, Vietnam and South Korea. But Trump has signalled resistance to the kinds of exemptions he granted during his first term, and even if these talks are ultimately productive, country-by-country deal-making will no doubt take time. "The primary question... is whether or not there will be negotiations," said Thierry Wizman, a global strategist at the investment bank Macquarie. "And no one has an answer to that because it's going to depend on the approach and the disposition of the negotiating parties." LIVE: Follow updates and analysis

EXPLAINED: What would S US-China trade war do?

WATCH: Is the US heading for a recession?

REACTION: The Canadians and Danes boycotting US products

The US already appears set on a collision course with China, which was its third biggest supplier of imports last year. The White House said on Tuesday that it was moving ahead with Trump's social media threat to add a further 50% levy on imports from China, on top of the 54% duties that had already been announced, unless Beijing agreed to withdraw its retaliation. Liu Pengyu, a spokesman for the Chinese embassy in Washington, declined to say if the two sides had spoken directly since the threat. But publicly, China has shown little willingness to back down, describing Trump's moves as "bullying" and warning that "intimidation, threat and blackmail are not the right way to engage with China". "If the US decides not to care about the interests of the US itself, China and the rest of the world, and is determined to fight a tariff and trade war, China's response will continue to the end," he said in a statement.

Watch: How Beijing is responding to Trump's tariff hike

The rapid change has shaken US businesses with decades of ties to China, which now find themselves paralysed and unsure how this escalating trade fight might end. "You would laugh if you weren't crying," said US businessman Jay Foreman, whose toy company Basic Fun! is known for classics such as Tonka Trucks and Care Bears, the vast majority of which are made in China. He put out notice to his suppliers to halt any shipments to the US earlier this week, as the US announced it would hit goods from China with duties starting at 104%. "We just have to hold our shipments until this thing gets sorted out," he said. "And if it doesn't get sorted out, them I'm going to sell down the inventory that I have in my warehouse and pray." Speaking to Congress on Tuesday, Jamieson Greer, who leads the office of the US Trade Representative, declined to set a timeline for how quickly talks might progress. "The president is fixed in his purpose. This trade deficit and offshoring and the loss of jobs has persisted for too long," he said, while acknowledging the measures might lead to a "challenging" economic adjustment. "It is a moment of drastic, overdue change, but I am confident the American people will rise to the occasion as they have done before," he said.

Shares in the US resumed their downward slide on Tuesday, giving up early gains spurred by Trump comments about trade talks that the fight might see a quick resolution. The S&P 500 is now trading at its lowest level in more than a year, after seeing roughly 12% of its value wiped out since the announcement last Wednesday. Stock markets from Japan to Germany have also been shaken, as investors assess the wider repercussions of the actions. In the UK, the FTSE 100 has dropped about 10%. "What I'm really seeing is trepidation, uncertainty, a lot of questions, a lot of people wanting us to predict what will happen next," said Amy Magnus, director of compliance and customs affairs for Deringer, a Vermont-based firm that is one of America's top five customs brokers. "But I have entered into a world that I cannot predict." Erin Williamson, vice-president of US customs brokerage at GEODIS, a global supply chain operator, said on Tuesday afternoon, said that the uncertainty had prompted some of her firm's clients to simply put shipments on pause. "One of the top ways that you can confirm that you're not putting your business at risk is really holding off until maybe the dust settles," she said. The uncertainty is raising the risks to the economy, said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics of the Budget Lab at Yale, which is not predicting a recession in the US, but still expects tariffs announced so far this year will cost the US 600,000 jobs and lead to a roughly $3,800 hit to purchasing power for the average household.

Business owners say the rapid change in US trade policy, including major tariffs on China, has left operations in flux.

As Trump hikes tariffs, nervous businesses weigh what comes next

Councils offer grants to help with living costs

Households claiming certain benefits and in energy-efficient properties are eligible (stock photo)

Hundreds of households in West Sussex have benefited from cash grants to help with the cost of living.

Adur & Worthing Councils said they had written to more than 600 households claiming Housing Benefit or Council Tax Support and living in energy-efficient properties, to offer £150 towards bills and essential items.

So far, more than 400 households have successfully applied for the grant, which was paid directly into bank accounts last week, the authorities said.

Adur councillor Sharon Sluman said "innovative database technology" had been used to "target support to some of the most vulnerable members of our community".

More than 400 households have successfully applied, with £150 going directly into their accounts.

Adur & Worthing Councils offer grants to help with cost of living

The Canadians and Danes boycotting American products

3 hours ago Share Save Anne Cassidy Business reporter Share Save

Getty Images Supermarkets in Canada have been putting Canadian flag stickers on domestic goods

Todd Brayman is no longer buying his favourite red wine, which is from California. A veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces, he is one of a growing number of people in Canada, Europe, and other parts of the world, who are avoiding buying US products due to President Trump's tariffs and treatment of US allies. "I have in my life served alongside American forces. It is just profoundly upsetting and disappointing to see where we are given the historical ties that our two countries have," says Mr Brayman, who lives in Nova Scotia. "But I think right now it's time to stand up and be counted, and in my mind, that means buying local and supporting Canadian business." Together with his wife, Mr Brayman has replaced all the American products he used to buy, including his previous wine of choice, with Canadian alternatives. "Luckett Phone Box Red wine, which is from right here in Nova Scotia, is great," he says.

Determining which products are Canadian isn't always easy however. "Sometimes labelling can be misleading," adds Mr Brayman. To help, he now uses an app on his phone that can scan a product's barcode and identify where it's from. If the product is identified as American, the app suggests Canadian alternatives. The app, called Maple Scan, is one of numerous emerging in Canada to help people shop local. Others include Buy Canadian, Is This Canadian? and Shop Canadian. Maple Scan's founder, Sasha Ivanov, says his app has had 100,000 downloads since it launched last month. He believes the momentum around buying Canadian is here to stay. "Lots of Canadians have told me, 'I'm not going back'. It's important that we support local regardless," he says. Canadians like Mr Brayman are boycotting American products in response to a raft of import tariffs introduced by Trump. These included tariffs of 25% on all foreign cars, steel and aluminium, and 25% tariffs on other Canadian and Mexican goods. Meanwhile, other European Union exports will get tariffs of 20%, while the UK is facing 10%. Trump says the tariffs will boost US manufacturing, raise tax revenue and reduce the US trade deficit. However, they have spooked global markets, which have fallen sharply over the past month. Trump has even expressed a desire for Canada to join the US as its 51st state, something the Canadian government was quick to strongly reject. Ottawa has also responded with C$60bn ($42bn; £32bn) in counter tariffs, as well as additional tariffs on the US auto sector. And there has been a substantial drop in the number of Canadians travelling to the US.

Todd Brayman Royal Canadian Navy veteran Todd Brayman says he is "profoundly upset" by the current bad relations between the US and Canada

Groups dedicated to boycotting US goods have also emerged in European countries. Momentum behind the boycott is particularly strong in Denmark, whose territory of Greenland Trump has said he wants to acquire. Denmark's largest grocery store operator, Salling Group, recently introduced a symbol, a black star, on pricing labels to denote European brands. Bo Albertus, a school principal who lives in Skovlunde, a suburb of Copenhagen, says joining the boycott was his way of taking action. "Statements that Trump made about wanting to buy Greenland, that was just too much for me," he says. "I can't do anything about the American political system, but I can vote with my credit card." One of Mr Albertus's first moves was to cancel his subscriptions to US streaming services, including Netflix, Disney Plus and Apple TV. "My 11-year-old daughter is a bit annoyed about it, but that's the way it is. She understands why I do it," he says. Mr Albertus is the administrator for a Danish Facebook group dedicated to helping people boycott US goods. In the group, which has 90,000 members, people share recommendations for local alternatives to US goods, from shoes to lawnmowers. Mr Albertus says: "It's a movement that is quite a lot bigger than just our little country, so it all that adds up."

Mette Heerulff Christiansen, the owner of a grocery shop in Copenhagen called Broders has stopped stocking American products, such as Cheetos crisps and Hershey's chocolate, in her store. She is substituting them with Danish or European products where possible. Ms Christiansen is also swapping out products she uses at home. She's finding some easier to replace than others. "Coca-Cola is easy to substitute with Jolly Cola, a Danish brand," she says. "But technology, like Facebook, that's totally difficult to avoid." She believes the boycott movement in Denmark is helping people to channel their anger at Trump's policies and rhetoric. "I think it's more for the Danish people to feel good that they are doing something," she says.

Mette Heerulff Christiansen Danish shopkeeper Mette Heerulff Christiansen has removed US products from her shelves

Douglas Irwin, a professor of economics at Dartmouth College in the US, who specializes in the history of US trade policy, believes the economic impact of the boycott may be limited. "It is hard to judge how economically significant the consumer boycotts will be in terms of reducing trade with the United States," he says. "In the past, boycotts have not lasted long and have not achieved much. It starts as a hostile reaction to some US action but tends to fade with time," he says. For now though, the rising Buy Canadian sentiment in Canada is boosting sales for many local brands. The CEO of Canadian grocer Loblaw posted on LinkedIn that weekly sales of Canadian products were up by double digits. Bianca Parsons, from Alberta in Canada, is behind an initiative to promote locally-made goods, called Made In Alberta, which she says has had a surge in interest since the tariffs were introduced. "We're now getting over 20,000 hits [to the site] every two weeks." Ms Parsons, who is the executive director of the Alberta Food Processors Association, adds: "I've had producers reach out to us and say: 'I'm selling out at stores that I would never sell out before, thank you so much'."

Several Canadian provinces, including Ontario and Nova Scotia, have removed US-made alcoholic beverages from their liquor store shelves in response to tariffs, a move the boss of Jack Daniel's maker Brown-Forman has said is "worse than tariffs". Among the American businesses feeling the impact is Caledonia Spirits, a distiller based in Vermont, near the Canadian border. Ryan Christiansen, Caledonia's president and head distiller, says his business had an order on track for shipment to Quebec cancelled directly after tariffs were announced. "My sense is that everyone's just being a little too aggressive and, unfortunately, I think America started that," says Mr Christiansen. "I do understand that the action America took needed a counter reaction. "If it were up to me, I'd be at the table trying to resolve this in a friendly way, and I'm hopeful that the leaders in America take that approach."

Ryan Christiansen US distiller Ryan Christiansen wants American leaders to take a more "friendly" approach to trade issues

As anger grows over Trump's tariffs, apps and social media groups are helping people avoid US goods.