TikTok bidder: South Dakota ‘certainly the front-runner'
'I think what you guys are advancing right here at Dakota State is a perfect match for what we're looking for, and your research will prove to be very essential to us and our plans moving forward,' Rasner said.
'I was of the opinion that it would be absolutely poetic for an American-owned TikTok to wind up in South Dakota, whether that would be in part or the whole thing,' Rhoden said.
Police present at protest outside SF Penitentiary
TikTok's parent company ByteDance is based out of China. Amid national security concerns, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a law saying ByteDance must sell the social media app. President Donald Trump, however, has delayed an outright ban.
'Assuming they sell by the June 19th deadline, we would begin opening up discussions with Governor Rhoden further and implementing our public/private partnerships right here with Dakota State,' Rasner said.
Rasner was full of praise for Rhoden as he looked ahead to TikTok's possible future.
'He has partnered with us in a very strong and vocal way,' Rasner said. 'We appreciate that. We love South Dakota, and we find that this is going to be a very great home for TikTok in the future and have a very special place with TikTok in the future, so it'll have a very strong footprint here.'
And if Rasner's bid is successful, he says South Dakota is more than just a candidate for where TikTok might have a footprint.
'They're certainly the front-runner for our infrastructure right now, 100%,' Rasner said.
How much of TikTok's infrastructure might be located in the state is unclear. Rasner unsuccessfully ran for a U.S. Senate seat in Wyoming as a Republican in 2024.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
13 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Eric and Donald Trump Jr. Are Backing a U.S. Manufacturing SPAC
Eric and Donald Trump Jr. are helping to launch a SPAC targeting American manufacturers, adding to the array of companies the president's sons are involved in beyond their family's real-estate empire. New America Acquisition I Corp. on Monday filed paperwork for what it hopes will be a $300 million public offering on the New York Stock Exchange. SPACs, or special-purpose acquisition companies, are blank-check firms that look for a private company to merge with. The private company then takes the SPAC's listing, essentially going public while avoiding some of the red tape of a traditional IPO.
CNN
13 minutes ago
- CNN
Elon Musk awarded $29 billion pay package from Tesla
Tesla's board is giving CEO Elon Musk another huge pay day. The company's latest CEO pay package, worth about $29 billion, comes several months after a Delaware court rejected for a second time Musk's 2018 performance award following a shareholder lawsuit. Musk is currently appealing the order. In an letter to shareholders Monday, Tesla said that Musk has 'not received meaningful compensation for eight years' and that its 'legal efforts continue' to reinstate the 2018 pay package, adding that there's 'clear timeline for resolution.' The package would give Musk 96 million shares of Tesla, each of which trades at just over $300. Musk would have to pay $23.34 for each of those shares, equal to the amount he was expected to pay when he was first awarded his 2018 compensation package. 'Despite these legal challenges, we can all agree that Elon has delivered the transformative and unprecedented growth that was required to earn all milestones of the 2018 CEO Performance Award,' wrote board members Robyn Denholm and Kathleen Wilson-Thompson. 'This growth has translated into immense value generated for Tesla and all our shareholders.' Musk is not paid a cash salary or bonus for working at Tesla. Rather, Musk, one of the world's richest people, makes his money through lucrative packages of stock options that allow him to purchase millions of Tesla shares for a fraction of their market price. Musk is Tesla's largest individual shareholder — he owns about 13% of the company. The CEO caught the ire of many shareholders last year and earlier in 2025, however, when he shifted his focus to politics, spending huge sums of money and time trying to get Republican candidates elected for office. Musk was largely successful in his efforts, but his entry into politics backfired on Tesla. Political opponents have protested at Tesla dealerships throughout the year, and the company's sales have been falling sharply. President Donald Trump's domestic policy agenda also strips Tesla and other EV makers of tax incentive for vehicle sales and regulatory credits from other automakers – a major driver of Tesla's revenue. Shares of Tesla (TSLA) have fallen 25% this year. The stock rose nearly 3% in premarket trading. However, Musk has recently said he would return to his companies full time – a demand many shareholders had made of the CEO, given his considerable track record for success in the past. Monday's pay package keeps Musk at the helm of the struggling company. Musk has recently tried to remake Tesla, focusing the company on AI and robotics, shifting away from its reliance on car sales. 'Through Elon's unique vision and leadership, Tesla is transitioning from its role as a leader in the electric vehicle and renewable energy industries to grow towards becoming a leader in AI, robotics and related services,' the pair wrote. Tesla is currently in the midst of rolling out its much-publicized robotaxi service, albeit in a much slimmed down fashion than Musk promised a few years ago.
The Hill
14 minutes ago
- The Hill
We must loosen China's chokehold on battery supply chains
A ceasefire in the U.S.-China trade war doesn't change the fact that Americans are subject to Beijing's whims when it comes to critical supplies of everything from magnets to minerals. This is not an accident but the result of decades of Beijing's deliberate practices to build monopolies, dominate supply chains, stifle competition, and foster resource dependencies. But the U.S. and its allies can break China's stranglehold on the battery supply chain, if they work together now to build the components and mine the minerals that go into advanced batteries, while fighting back against China's market manipulation. In our new report, Unplugging Beijing: A Playbook to Reclaim America's Advanced Battery Supply Chains, we lay out the scale and scope of China's non-market practices in battery supply chains — dumping, price manipulation, intellectual property theft, monopolies, and forced technology transfers — and, more importantly, say what America can do about it. One key way in which China controls the battery market is through intentional overproduction — making too much of everything — driving prices below profitability in ways that push out competition. For 2025, Chinese analysts are projecting that China will make twice as many electric cars as the entire global demand from last year. While enormous subsidies and state support cushion Chinese companies, American companies cannot sustain unprofitable production. China's decision to dump cheap batteries and underlying minerals on global markets sustains their monopolies but harms free markets and open competition. Beijing may finally be acknowledging that its massive overproduction of just about everything is fueling a race to the bottom. But as the central government frets about what Xi Jinping has labeled 'disorderly price competition,' local governments in China are still backing absurd strategies to juice production, such as state-sponsored programs to sell brand new cars as 'zero-mileage' used cars — sold at a loss and dumped on foreign markets, but allowing companies to inflate sales numbers to justify factories operating at full tilt. While Beijing deploys a suite of non-market tactics at scale, its price manipulation is especially damaging. Advanced batteries depend on a host of refined minerals — lithium, nickel, cobalt, and graphite — that are responsible for most of the cost of the resulting battery. China's intervention in nickel markets, for instance, has saddled Western producers with unsustainable costs. In lithium, Beijing has driven prices up or down at will, undermining competing U.S. projects. To counter this, we propose creating a critical minerals and metals exchange, backed by physical assets and a U.S. strategic stockpile. This would offer offtake guarantees above a price floor to support domestic processors. China's monopolies on mineral processing have also become a weapon in the broader trade war. Beijing has imposed export restrictions on key minerals, including graphite — of which it controls more than 95 percent of global battery-grade processing. To reduce these choke points, we advocate for the creation of special economic zones that co-locate processing, infrastructure, and energy access near known reserves. These zones could take advantage of colocation synergies around large reserves, such as the Salton Sea, and could feature pre-vetted environmental analysis and rigorous safety protocols to localize mining, on-site processing, downstream fabrication, energy, and water needs for all related infrastructure. We also recommend expanding the U.S. Development Finance Corporation's risk appetite to back more processing projects internationally. Beyond supply and demand, China's record on intellectual property theft is extensive. Most Chinese espionage cases involve attempts to acquire commercial technology. The battery sector is a repeated target: the Justice Department has charged Chinese actors with stealing battery tech from Tesla and Phillips 66. Many of China's non-market tactics — from forced labor to environmental shortcuts — thrive in secrecy. To increase transparency, we recommend that the U.S. bar foreign firms from selling into American markets unless they meet strict digital customs and trade data standards. U.S.-listed companies should also be required to map their full supply chains to expose any hidden reliance on forced labor. To compete with all this, the U.S. must invest in cleaner, more efficient, and higher-performing manufacturing processes. We propose increased academic research in battery science in exchange for low-cost licensing to U.S. companies, full cost recovery for research and development in the tax code, and publicly owned modular testing facilities to reduce innovation barriers for smaller firms. There is a way forward — if we choose to act boldly. New supply chains won't emerge from one nation alone. We need domestic reindustrialization and international ally-shoring. Both require upgraded infrastructure and reliable access to the raw inputs of advanced manufacturing — minerals, chemicals, and tooling. Strengthened trade rules, coordinated tariffs, and harmonized regulations among market economies are essential. Most importantly, this effort must be spearheaded by strong American leadership and a dynamic, integrated North American trading bloc. Rebuilding America's supply chains will take industrial work and political will, but we must commit to the hard tasks now to protect our economic security and resilience for the long term. The future of American prosperity depends on it. Elaine Dezenski is senior director and head of the Center on Economic and Financial Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Joshua Birenbaum serves as deputy director.
