Trump clears path for Nippon Steel investment in US Steel, so long as it fits the government's terms
Trump's order didn't detail the terms of the national security agreement.
But the iconic American steelmaker and Nippon Steel said in a joint statement that the agreement stipulates that approximately $11 billion in new investments will be made by 2028 and includes giving the U.S. government a ' golden share " — essentially veto power to ensure the country's national security interests are protected against cutbacks in steel production.
'We thank President Trump and his Administration for their bold leadership and strong support for our historic partnership," the two companies said. "This partnership will bring a massive investment that will support our communities and families for generations to come. We look forward to putting our commitments into action to make American steelmaking and manufacturing great again.'
The companies have completed a U.S. Department of Justice review and received all necessary regulatory approvals, the statement said.
'The partnership is expected to be finalized promptly,' the statement said.
The companies offered few details on how the golden share would work, what other provisions are in the national security agreement and how specifically the $11 billion would be spent.
White House spokesman Kush Desai said the order 'ensures U.S. Steel will remain in the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and be safeguarded as a critical element of America's national and economic security.'
James Brower, a Morrison Foerster lawyer who represents clients in national security-related matters, said such agreements with the government typically are not disclosed to the public, particularly by the government.
They can become public, but it's almost always disclosed by a party in the transaction, such as a company — like U.S. Steel — that is publicly held, Brower said.
The mechanics of how a golden share would work will depend on the national security agreement, but in such agreements it isn't unusual to give the government approval rights over specific activities, Brower said.
U.S. Steel made no filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday.
Nippon Steel in late 2023 offered nearly $15 billion to purchase the Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel in an acquisition that had been delayed on national security concerns starting during Joe Biden's presidency.
As it sought to win over American officials, Nippon Steel gradually increased the amount of money it was pledging to invest into U.S. Steel. American officials now value the transaction at $28 billion, including the purchase bid and a new electric arc furnace — a more modern steel mill that melts down scrap — that they say Nippon Steel will build in the U.S. after 2028.
Nippon Steel had pledged to maintain U.S. Steel's headquarters in Pittsburgh, put U.S. Steel under a board with a majority of American citizens and keep plants operating.
It also said it would protect the interests of U.S. Steel in trade matters and it wouldn't import steel slabs that would compete with U.S. Steel's blast furnaces in Pennsylvania and Indiana.
Trump opposed the purchase while campaigning for the White House, and using his authority Biden blocked the transaction on his way out of the White House. But Trump expressed openness to working out an arrangement once he returned to the White House in January.
Trump said Thursday that he would as president have 'total control' of what U.S. Steel did as part of the investment.
Trump said then that the deal would preserve '51% ownership by Americans,' although Nippon Steel has never backed off its stated intention of buying and controlling U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary.
'We have a golden share, which I control,' Trump said.
Trump added that he was 'a little concerned' about what presidents other than him would do with their golden share, 'but that gives you total control.'
The proposed merger had been under review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, during the Trump and Biden administrations.
The order signed Friday by Trump said the CFIUS review provided 'credible evidence' that Nippon Steel 'might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States,' but such risks might be 'adequately mitigated' by approving the proposed national security agreement.
The order doesn't detail the perceived national security risk and only provides a timeline for the national security agreement. The White House declined to provide details on the terms of the agreement.
The order said the draft agreement was submitted to U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel on Friday. The two companies must successfully execute the agreement as decided by the Treasury Department and other federal agencies that are part CFIUS by the closing date of the transaction.
Trump reserves the authority to issue further actions regarding the investment as part of the order he signed on Friday.
___
Levy reported from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Could Buying Lockheed Martin Stock Today Set You Up for Life?
Key Points The medium-term outlook for defense spending is positive, with both the U.S. and other NATO countries looking to ramp up investment. Lockheed Martin is well positioned to benefit from President Trump's defense budget. The company's execution issues have troubled it in recent years, and many defense companies have faced margin pressures. 10 stocks we like better than Lockheed Martin › There's a lot to like about defense giant Lockheed Martin's (NYSE: LMT) stock, but is it enough to make it an investment that investors can feel comfortable with, knowing it will generate life-changing long-term returns? The bulls' case for Lockheed Martin The investment case for the stock is relatively easy to understand. It's based on the enduring need for defense equipment and services, as well as its increasing importance in an age of geopolitical conflict. Not only is President Donald Trump seeking to ramp up the defense budget to a record $1.01 trillion, but NATO has also been enlarged, and its members have recently agreed to invest 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) on core defense requirements as well as defense and security-related spending by 2035. Moreover, much of the spending, at least in the U.S., focuses on missile defense and tactical missiles, which Lockheed Martin specializes in. Indeed, discussing the matter on an earnings call in April, CEO Jim Taiclet said, "Our 21st century security strategy, where we integrate existing and new satellites, aircraft, ships, missile launchers, and command and control systems with constantly upgradable digital technologies, was tailor-made for [missile defense system] Golden Dome." Furthermore, Lockheed Martin's current backlog of $173 billion represents 2.3 years' worth of sales based on the midpoint of management's guidance for full-year 2025 revenue. It's also worth noting that its core customer, the U.S. government, is a highly reliable payer. Turning to valuation, the midpoint of management's guidance range calls for $23.15 in earnings per share and $6.7 billion in free cash flow (FCF). Based on the current price, it would put the stock at 17.2 times earnings and 16.3 times FCF. They are attractive valuations for a company with such solid growth prospects. So is it that case closed? As usual, investing is rarely that simple. The bears' case for Lockheed Martin The negative case for the stock can be seen in three interrelated arguments: Lockheed Martin's execution challenges in recent years, notably with its most important single program, the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, have damaged confidence in its ability to produce "long-run franchise" programs. Lockheed Martin, like many other defense contractors, including Boeing and RTX, has struggled to achieve margin expansion in recent years, as the U.S. government has become more adept at negotiating contracts, particularly through the use of fixed-price contracts. The current environment is highly conducive to defense spending, but that doesn't guarantee that it will be the case in the future. Lockheed Martin's execution and margin challenges The company's execution challenges are encapsulated in two events this year. First, a Department of Defense description of the proposed 2026 defense budget included reducing F-35 procurement. There's little doubt why procurement has been reduced. The DOD is focusing on making existing F-35s mission-capable (able to perform a core mission) rather than procuring new planes. According to just 51.5% of F-35s were mission-capable in 2024. High-profile delays and issues on the Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) on the F-35 have reduced that percentage. In addition, the cost overrun on the F-35 has been so significant that the military is now considering flying it less to reduce costs. These issues damage confidence in Lockheed Martin, not least as it faces upfront costs on programs in expectation of turning them into "long-run franchises." As such, there are questions about its ability to grow margins in the future. The second issue is the loss of the next-generation air dominance (NGAD) contract to Boeing, a decision highly likely to have been influenced by the issues with the F-35. Long-term defense spending This isn't the place to enter a detailed debate over the sustainability of government spending. Still, it's worth noting that if you are buying defense stocks based on the security of long-term growth in spending from the U.S. government (which currently accounts for two-thirds of NATO spending), then you will be comfortable with the following chart of U.S. public debt to GDP and the idea that the possibility of rising debt levels won't constrain spending on defense and other matters in the future. In addition, it's extremely difficult to predict where global defense priorities will be over the next few years, let alone a lifetime. Is Lockheed Martin stock a buy? On balance, defense stocks appear slightly undervalued; however, Lockheed Martin's issues with the F-35 may not make it the best way to capitalize on a positive medium-term outlook for defense spending. As such, Lockheed Martin isn't likely to be a stock that investors can make a life-changing investment in. Should you buy stock in Lockheed Martin right now? Before you buy stock in Lockheed Martin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Lockheed Martin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $652,133!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,056,790!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,048% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 15, 2025 Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Lockheed Martin and RTX. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Could Buying Lockheed Martin Stock Today Set You Up for Life? was originally published by The Motley Fool
Miami Herald
41 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Stocks and Markets Podcast: Prairie Operating CEO on energy business
Ed Kovalik wants you to know the importance of petroleum. "I always remind people that everything in their daily life is made in some way, shape, or form with a petroleum-based product," he said. "The computers that we're using right now to talk to one another, with the makeup that our wives wear, the surfboard my kids use at the beach," Kobalik added. "They're fossil fuels and everything, fossil fuels, everything. I think the only thing I've ever seen that's as prolific is corn," Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Kovalik, chairman and CEO of Houston-based Prairie Operating Co. (ticker: PROP) shared his experiences with Chris Versace, TheStreet Pro portfolio's lead manager, during the July 16 edition of TheStreet Stocks & Markets Podcast. "We're energy-dense form of energy," he said. "The only competitive form of energy is nuclear. And nuclear is going to take decades to work itself out of the regulatory quagmire that it's in and get built going to see demand for fossil fuels increase every year." Fossil fuels play an important role in meeting the ever-growing demands of AI data centers, he said. Goldman Sachs Research forecast in February that global power demand from data centers will increase 50% by 2027 and by as much as 165% by the end of the decade compared with 2023. More Economic Analysis: Federal Reserve prepares strong message on long-term interest ratesMassive city workers union approves strikeAnalyst makes bold call on stocks, bonds, and gold "Low-energy-dense forms of generation like solar and wind are not going to take over the industry," Kovalik said. Kovalik, who came out of the investment banking world, said he fell in love with the industry during the first generation of shale companies that emerged in the early went on to work in private equity and merchant banking, investing in mostly upstream exploration and production across all the basins in the US. "We started Prairie two years ago, really with a very focused mission to create a pure play under levered, high growth, DJ basin focused smidcap company," he said, referring to the Denver-Julesburg Basin centered in eastern Colorado. "And so that was really in response to what we've seen over the last decade, which has been a massive amount of consolidation in our industry." Today there are far fewer public oil companies, he said, and far fewer small-cap companies, in particular. "There are no growth-oriented small-cap companies," Kovalik said. "And so we really wanted to create an investment alternative that looked like that." "So, it's fair to say that you've seen the trials, the tribulations, the rewards, throughout economic cycles and what commodity prices have done," Versace said. "So, you're well aware of the bigger opportunities and mindful of the risks." "Yeah, 100%," Kovalik said. "In that period of time shale has been through an entire evolution from the first days of drilling to today. From a pure operational technological perspective, a lot of innovation has happened in the industry, where we're able to drill much better wells than we did 25 years ago." M&A is a pillar of the company's strategy, he said, noting that Prairie Operating recently acquired the assets of Edge Energy for $12.5 million. Related: Stocks and Markets Podcast: Why Now Is the Time to Buy High-Yielding Small-Cap Stocks "When we purchased the Bayswater assets, for example, we hedged 85% of that production on a three-year roll-forward basis," he said. (The $603 million deal closed in February.) "I think we locked in our oil-price hedges at $68 (per barrel) and change and our gas hedges above $4 (per 1,000 cubic feet), and so we're big believers in taking that risk off as we drill wells, which we're doing every day." "We'll continue to hedge as we bring those new wells [into] production," Kovalik said. "And so that's the biggest risk." "We've talked a little bit about the oil market, the opportunities with Prairie," Versace said. "But, for someone who's new to the story, Ed, what are the one or two risks that you and the rest of the management team continue to focus in on, or [that folks should be] mindful of?" "The] big elephant in the room is commodity price risk," Kovalik said. "And you can't be an oil company without assuming that risk. We hedge for that. So we're certainly not believers in the idea that people ought to buy Prairie stock as a way to expose themselves to oil prices." "You can do that yourself without we do is we try to eliminate that risk to the best of our ability." Related: Fund-management veteran skips emotion in investment strategy The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Tech firm CEO resigns amid Coldplay concert kiss cam controversy
Software developer Astronomer says former Chief Executive Officer Andy Byron resigned amid controversy following his attendance at a recent Coldplay concert. New York-based Astronomer confirmed Byron's resignation on Saturday and said co-founder and Chief Product Officer Pete DeJoy is its interim chief executive officer while its board of directors seeks a permanent replacement for Byron. 'Astronomer is committed to the values and culture that have guided us since our founding,' Astronomer officials said Saturday in a post on X. 'Our leaders are expected to set the standard in both conduct and accountability, and recently, that standard was not met.' Byron is married but was caught attending a Coldplay concert with another woman on Wednesday night at Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass. The stadium's 'kiss cam' zeroed in on Byron with his arms wrapped around a woman standing in front of him during the concert, NBC News reported. When they realized they were on the kiss cam, Byron ducked out of the camera shot, while the unidentified woman covered her face. Coldplay's lead singer Chris Martin noticed the pair's reaction during the concert and opined: 'Either they're having an affair or they're just very shy.' The video of the moment went viral, and social media sleuths identified the man as Byron. Astronomer placed him on leave on Friday before accepting his resignation a day later, according to NBC News. The tech firm is a relatively small company with fewer than 500 employees and noted the viral incident's impact on its operations. 'While awareness of our company may have changed overnight, our product and our work for our customers have not,' Astronomer said in its X post. 'We're continuing to do what we do best: helping our customers with their toughest data and AI problems.' Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
