US to release result of probe into chip imports in two weeks
Lutnick told reporters after a meeting between Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that the investigation was one of the "key reasons" the European Union sought to negotiate a broader trade agreement that would "resolve all things at one time."
Trump said many companies would be investing in semiconductor manufacturing in the United States, including some from Taiwan and other places, to avoid getting hit by new tariffs.
He said von der Leyen had avoided the pending chips tariffs "in a much better way."
Trump and von der Leyen announced a new framework trade agreement that includes across-the-board 15 per cent tariffs on EU imports entering the United States.
Trump said the agreement included autos, which face a higher 25 per cent tariff under a separate sectoral tariff action.
The Trump administration in April said it was investigating whether extensive reliance on foreign imports of pharmaceuticals and semiconductors posed a national security threat.
The probe, being conducted under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, could lay the groundwork for new tariffs on imports in both sectors.
The Trump administration has begun separate investigations under the same law into imports of copper and lumber. Earlier probes completed during Trump's first term formed the basis for 25 percent tariffs rolled out since his return to the White House in January on steel and aluminum and on the auto industry.
Trump has upended global trade with a series of aggressive levies against trading partners, including a 10 percent tariff that took effect in April, with that rate set to increase sharply for most larger trading partners from Aug 1.
The US relies heavily on chips imported from Taiwan, something Democratic former President Joe Biden sought to reverse during his term by granting billions of dollars in Chips Act awards to lure chipmakers to expand production in the United States.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
How Trump-vetted scientists are trying to shred the climate consensus
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Climate experts say it will hobble the country's efforts to rein in rising temperatures. NEW YORK – A new report from the US Department of Energy says projections of future global warming are exaggerated, while benefits from higher levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) such as more productive farms are overlooked. It concludes, at odds with the scientific mainstream, that policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions risk doing more harm than good. Released on July 28, the report is part of an effort by the Trump administration to try to end the US government's authority to regulate greenhouse gases. It's the output of scientists known for contradicting the consensus embodied in volumes of research by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose work is approved by virtually every nation. Publishing an alternate approach to the science of global warming on the same day that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it plans to revoke the endangerment finding – a determination that greenhouse gases harm public health and welfare – marks a step up in the administration's war on regulations. Since its adoption in 2009, the endangerment finding has become the bedrock of many US environmental rules. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said repealing the finding would 'end US$1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.' Climate experts say it will hobble the country's efforts to rein in rising temperatures and lessen the impacts, such as more intense storms, droughts and wildfires. The federal government's own research shows climate-fuelled extreme weather is already causing US$150 billion (S$193.2 billion) in losses a year in the US. In its proposed rule to nix the finding, the EPA references the Energy Department's report more than two dozen times. Energy Secretary Chris Wright wrote in the report's foreword that he had commissioned it and selected the authors to form a working group. The agency's support for the contrarian research stands in contrast to the broad rollback of other climate work under President Donald Trump. Since his inauguration in January 2025, hundreds of scientists have been dismissed from agencies , including some who had focused on climate change. The EPA recently moved to shutter its main scientific research arm, which has been a crucial tool for policymaking. The US cancelled a landmark climate change report , the sixth National Climate Assessment, and has taken down numerous webpages on climate science. Some of those were related to previous National Climate Assessments – studies that hundreds of researchers spent years painstakingly compiling. The new report's authors include Steven Koonin, a fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution who wrote a 2021 booking arguing that climate science is 'unsettled'; Roy Spencer, a University of Alabama in Huntsville scientist and senior fellow at the climate-denying group Cornwall Alliance; and Judith Curry, a climatologist formerly of Georgia Tech who testified to a Senate committee in 2023 that climate change has been mischaracterised as a crisis. An Energy Department spokesman said the report's authors 'represent diverse viewpoints and political backgrounds and are all well-respected and highly credentialed individuals.' The spokesman added that the report 'was reviewed internally by a group of DOE scientific researchers and policy experts from the Office of Science and National Labs,' and that there will be a 30-day comment period for the public to weigh in. Ann Carlson, an environmental law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles, said the report presents a series of arguments the administration can draw on to contend 'public health and welfare is not endangered by emissions that come from the auto sector, from the trucking sector, from the electricity sector.' Rather than denying climate change is occurring, Prof Carlson said, 'What they're trying to say instead is, 'Well, it's not so bad. It's really expensive to mitigate. And that expense actually harms people more than anything we could do' to slow it down. That's in keeping with past comments by members of Trump's cabinet that have downplayed global warming or public concern about it. Prof Carlson said the report is 'a wholesale assault' on climate science and previous policy. Zeke Hausfather, the climate lead at Stripe Inc and a research scientist at nonprofit Berkeley Earth, has contributed to major US and international climate reports. He described the Energy Department publication as 'scattershot' and said it 'would not pass muster in any traditional scientific peer review process'. That the administration released it after taking down webpages hosting 'the actual, congressionally mandated National Climate Assessments,' he said, is 'a farce'. The report is a 'package of punches' against the scientific consensus that previously grounded US climate policy, and against that policy itself, said Jennifer Jacquet, a professor of environmental science and policy at the University of Miami. 'It's really surreal to think that's where we are in 2025.' The EPA will have to go through the lengthy federal rulemaking process to try to abolish the endangerment finding. If the proposed rule is finalised, legal challenges are inevitable. The issue could end up before the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2007's Massachusetts v EPA that greenhouse gases were pollutants the EPA could regulate under the Clean Air Act. Getting the court, which now has a conservative supermajority, to overturn the 2007 decision may be the endgame, said Prof Carlson. The effort would be risky but could succeed, she said. 'I think on every front, the arguments that the [EPA] administrator is going to make – based on the DOE report – are extremely weak,' said Prof Carlson. 'But we also have a court that's very hostile to environmental regulation.' BLOOMBERG
AsiaOne
4 hours ago
- AsiaOne
Trump orders nuclear submarines moved after Russian 'provocative statements', World News
WASHINGTON — US President Donald Trump on Friday (Aug 1) said he had ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in "the appropriate regions" in response to remarks from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev about the risk of war between the nuclear-armed adversaries. Security analysts called Trump's move a rhetorical escalation with Moscow, but not necessarily a military one, given that the United States already has nuclear-powered submarines that are deployed and capable of striking Russia. Medvedev on Thursday said Trump should remember that Moscow possessed Soviet-era nuclear strike capabilities of last resort, after Trump had told Medvedev to "watch his words". "Based on the highly provocative statements of the Former President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev ... I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that," Trump said in Friday's social media post. He added: "Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances." Asked later by reporters why he ordered the submarine movement, Trump said: "A threat was made by a former president of Russia, and we're going to protect our people." The US Navy and the Pentagon declined to comment about Trump's remarks or on whether submarines had been moved. It is extremely rare for the US military to discuss the deployment and location of US submarines given their sensitive mission in nuclear deterrence. Trump's comments came at a time of mounting tension between Washington and Moscow as Trump grows frustrated with what he sees as President Vladimir Putin's failure to negotiate an end to his more than three-year-old invasion of Ukraine. He did not specify what he meant by "nuclear submarines". US military submarines are nuclear-powered and can be armed with nuclear-tipped missiles, although not all are. But any talk by a US president about potential nuclear military capabilities raises concerns, the security experts said, noting that the United States has historically refrained from matching Russia's nuclear-saber rattling given the risks surrounding the world's most devastating weaponry. "This is irresponsible and inadvisable," said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association advocacy group. "No leader or deputy leader should be threatening nuclear war, let alone in a juvenile manner on social media." Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists noted that US nuclear submarines — part of the so-called nuclear triad with bombers and land-based missiles — were always positioned to launch nuclear-armed missiles at targets in Russia. "The subs are always there all the time and don't need to be moved into position," he said. "He grants Medvedev a response to these crazy statements." The United States has a total of 14 Ohio Class nuclear-powered submarines, each capable of carrying up to 24 Trident II D5 ballistic missiles that can deliver multiple thermonuclear warheads up to 4,600 miles. Between eight and 10 Ohio Class submarines are deployed at any one time, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative arms control group. [[nid:720369]] 'Commitment trap' Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, has emerged as one of the Kremlin's most outspoken anti-Western hawks since Russia sent tens of thousands of troops into Ukraine in 2022. Kremlin critics deride him as an irresponsible loose cannon, though some Western diplomats say his statements illustrate the thinking in senior Kremlin policy-making circles. US officials had told Reuters prior to Trump's latest remarks that Medvedev's comments were not being taken as a serious threat, and it is unclear what drove Trump's latest announcement beyond the public clash between the two on social media. Trump and Medvedev have traded taunts in recent days after Trump on Tuesday said Russia had "10 days from today" to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine or be hit with tariffs. Kristensen said that Trump was creating a "commitment trap" by fuelling expectations that he could resort to nuclear weapons if tensions escalated further with Russia. Still, Evelyn Farkas, executive director of the McCain Institute and a former senior Pentagon official, played down the idea that this could lead to nuclear conflict. "It's really signalling. It's not the beginning of some nuclear confrontation and nobody reads it as such. And I would imagine the Russians don't either," she said. She added that Trump's actions, however, were unlikely to get Russia to change course in Ukraine. Moscow, which has set out its own terms for peace in Ukraine, has given no indication that it will comply with Trump's 10-day deadline of Aug 8. Putin said on Friday that Moscow hoped for more peace talks but that the momentum of the war was in its favour. He made no reference to the deadline. Trump, who in the past touted good relations with Putin, has expressed mounting frustration with the Russian leader, accusing him of "bullshit" and describing Russia's latest attacks on Ukraine as disgusting. ALSO READ: Putin, facing Trump deadline, signals no change in Russia's stance on Ukraine
Straits Times
4 hours ago
- Straits Times
Peace offering? Donald Trump's Nobel obsession
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Pakistan nominated US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, as did Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. WASHINGTON - A craving for international prestige, a decade-long Obama rivalry and perhaps a dash of provocation: a mercurial melange of factors is at play in US President Donald Trump's obsession with the Nobel Peace Prize. 'It's well past time that President Trump was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on July 31, prompting reactions of disbelief and sarcasm from the Republican leader's opponents. Since his Jan 20 return to power, the US president 'has brokered, on average, one peace deal or ceasefire per month,' Ms Leavitt said, citing as examples his mediations between India and Pakistan; Cambodia and Thailand; Egypt and Ethiopia; Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC); Serbia and Kosovo; and others. His leading spokeswoman also mentioned Iran, where Mr Trump ordered US strikes against the Islamic republic's nuclear facilities, as evidence of decisions Ms Leavitt claims have contributed to world peace. She made no mention of the conflict in Ukraine, which Mr Trump pledged multiple times to end on 'day one' of his term, or the war in Gaza, which rumbles on and for which the US supplies Israel with weapons. Pakistan, Israel For some foreign leaders, mentioning the prestigious award has become a sign of diplomatic goodwill toward an American president who envisions himself as a peacemaker. Pakistan nominated Mr Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, as did Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Despite bag checks and warnings, young partygoers continue to vape in clubs in Singapore Singapore Ong Beng Seng to plead guilty on Aug 4, more than 2 years after trip to Qatar with Iswaran Singapore LTA, Singapore bus operators reviewing Malaysia's request to start services from JB at 4am Singapore NDP 2025: Veteran Red Lion says each leap 'feels like 5km run' Business Decoupling to save on tax? You may lose right to property if ties go awry Singapore Lessons learnt from Singapore's love-hate relationship with e-scooters Opinion At UN's Wipo, Singaporean Daren Tang strives to create an equal music for haves and have-nots Asia Mass grave with over 100 skeletons in Sri Lanka brings up old wounds During an early July meeting at the White House, a journalist asked the presidents of Liberia, Senegal, Mauritania, Guinea-Bissau, and Gabon whether Trump deserved the award. Basking in the flattering responses from the African leaders, a smiling Mr Trump said: 'We could do this all day long.' Tens of thousands of people can offer a nomination to the Nobel committee, including lawmakers, ministers, certain university professors, former laureates and members of the committee themselves. Nominations are due by Jan 31, with the announcement coming in October 2025 on the 10th of the month. Law professor Anat Alon-Beck, who is an Israeli-American, submitted Mr Trump's name to the committee's five members, who were appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. The assistant professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law told AFP she did so because of the 'extraordinary leadership' and 'strategic brilliance' he has shown, in her opinion, in advancing peace and securing the release of hostages held in the Gaza Strip. 'Never' getting the nobel prize For some, the prospect of handing the prize to someone who has upended the international order is untenable. 'Nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize is like entering a hyena in a dog show,' US history and politics researcher Emma Shortis wrote on news site The Conversation. 'Of course Trump does not deserve it.' The American president disagrees. 'I deserve it, but they will never give it to me,' Mr Trump told reporters in February as he hosted Mr Netanyahu at the White House, lamenting not ticking the Nobel box in his life. 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be,' Mr Trump griped on his Truth Social platform in June. 'But the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' Mr Trump is well-known as someone who is particularly fond of accolades and prizes, Professor Garret Martin, a professor of international relations at American University, told AFP, 'so he would welcome this major international recognition'. And since the beginning of his presidential ambitions 10 years ago, 'he has put himself in opposition to Barack Obama, who famously won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009,' Prof Martin added. The prize awarded to the Democratic former president, barely nine months after he took office, sparked heated debate – and continues to do so. 'If I were named Obama I would have had the Nobel Prize given to me in 10 seconds,' Mr Trump bellyached in October 2024, during the final stretch of the presidential campaign. 338 candidates Three other US presidents have also been so honored: Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Jimmy Carter. The prize was also awarded to Dr Henry Kissinger in 1973 for his efforts to help end the war in Vietnam. The choice of the one-time US secretary of state was heavily criticized. The full list of Nobel Peace Prize nominees is confidential – except for individual announcements by sponsors – but their number is made public. In 2025, there are 338 nominees. Some betting sites have Mr Trump in second place to win, behind Ms Yulia Navalnaya, the widow of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny. AFP
