Dollar holds losses against yen after Trump announces Japan trade deal
Live Events
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel
TOKYO -The dollar held losses against the yen on Wednesday after U.S. President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Japan ahead of an impending tariff deadline.Trump said the agreement will result in Japan investing $550 billion into the United States and a tariff rate of 15% was set on U.S. imports from Japan.With an August 1 deadline looming before the imposition of sweeping import duties on trade partners, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Monday the administration is more concerned with the quality of trade agreements than the timing.Asked whether the deadline could be extended for countries engaged in productive talks with Washington, Bessent said Trump would make that decision.Uncertainty over the eventual state of tariffs globally has been a huge overhang for the foreign exchange market, leaving currencies trading in a tight range for the most part, even as stocks on Wall Street have scaled fresh highs.The dollar index was down 0.4% to 97.423. The greenback traded at 146.65 yen, little changed from the previous session when it slid 0.5%.In a post on Truth Social, Trump said Japan would open to trade for U.S. cars, trucks, rice and certain agricultural products, among other items.Trump's announcement follows a meeting with Japan's top tariff negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa, at the White House on Tuesday, according the Asahi newspaper.The euro stood at $1.1745, down 0.1% so far in Asia. Sterling was little changed at $1.35285.The Australian dollar fetched $0.65555, flat in early trade. New Zealand's kiwi dollar traded at $0.6007, up 0.07%.Also weighing on investors' minds were worries about Federal Reserve independence , given Trump has repeatedly railed against Chair Jerome Powell and urged him to resign because of the central bank's reluctance to cut interest rates.Bessent on Monday took a softer stance, saying there is no need for Powell to step down immediately, adding that he should see through the end of his term in May if he wants.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
20 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Tata Teleservices Q1 Results: Net loss rises marginally by 0.5% YoY, revenue down by 12%
(What's moving Sensex and Nifty Track latest market news, stock tips, Budget 2025, Share Market on Budget 2025 and expert advice, on ETMarkets. Also, is now on Telegram. For fastest news alerts on financial markets, investment strategies and stocks alerts, subscribe to our Telegram feeds .) Subscribe to ET Prime and read the Economic Times ePaper Sensex Today. Top Trending Stocks: SBI Share Price, Axis Bank Share Price, HDFC Bank Share Price, Infosys Share Price, Wipro Share Price, NTPC Share Price
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
20 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump plans to rescind scientific finding that allows US fund fight against climate change threats: Report
The Trump administration is preparing to eliminate the legal and scientific cornerstone of the federal government's climate change policy. A draft Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal, not yet public, would rescind the 2009 'endangerment finding' that identified greenhouse gas emissions as a threat to human health and welfare. Legal foundation of climate policy targeted As reported by The New York Times, two individuals familiar with the draft explained that the EPA intends to roll back the finding without directly challenging the scientific consensus that emissions from fossil fuels contribute to global warming. Instead, the administration reportedly plans to argue that the EPA exceeded its legal authority when it issued a sweeping declaration under the Clean Air Act. The endangerment finding, developed during the Obama administration in response to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, provided the legal basis for federal rules limiting emissions from vehicles, power plants and industrial sources. If repealed, the decision would not only nullify existing environmental protections but also prevent future administrations from reinstating similar measures without starting over legally and scientifically. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Tailpipe emission rules also in crosshairs The draft rule also includes a proposal to revoke federal limits on vehicle emissions that were designed to speed up the transition to electric cars. The transportation sector is currently the largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in the US. The EPA is expected to argue that such regulations, based on the endangerment finding, cause harm to consumers by limiting vehicle choice and increasing prices rather than improving public health. Reports described the EPA's framing as an economic one—suggesting that federal efforts to reduce carbon emissions come at too great a financial cost. Administrator Lee Zeldin, in earlier remarks reported by The Washington Post, emphasised the need to balance environmental goals with energy security and economic freedom, framing the review of the endangerment finding as part of the administration's broader deregulatory agenda. Environmental and legal experts cited by both newspapers have expressed deep concern over the proposed rollback. The New York Times noted that critics see this move as a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's Massachusetts vs EPA decision, which concluded that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Legal analysts told The Washington Post that any attempt to withdraw the endangerment finding could unravel the EPA's authority to act on climate altogether. Some believe the rule is unlikely to survive in court but warn that even temporary setbacks could paralyse climate action. Political motives? Behind the scenes, the proposal appears to have been shaped by former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, according to The Washington Post. Clark, who was involved in legal opposition to greenhouse gas regulations during the Bush administration, is believed to be a principal architect of the repeal. His past criticisms of the endangerment finding, especially its alleged failure to weigh economic consequences, have reportedly informed the draft rule's legal strategy. Instead of contesting climate science outright, the rule reportedly focusses on legal technicalities—arguing that the EPA's authority should be limited to addressing specific pollutants in narrowly defined contexts. This approach is designed to bypass the robust scientific basis of the original finding while aiming to avoid direct confrontation with the broader consensus on climate change. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A coordinated deregulatory effort The attempt to repeal the endangerment finding is one of many efforts by the Trump administration to reverse environmental protections. As The New York Times reported, the administration has already rolled back rules targeting emissions from fossil fuels, discouraged electric vehicle development and withdrawn the US from international climate commitments. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defence Council, speaking to The Washington Post, was one of several legal experts who characterised the move as a strategy to weaken the Clean Air Act by denying the well-documented risks of climate pollution. Others noted that this rule could become the centrepiece of the administration's climate legacy—one that seeks to neutralise not just current regulations, but future ones as well. While the draft rule has not yet been formally released, the EPA was submitted to the White House for review on June 30. Once published, it will undergo a period of public comment, and potentially litigation, before becoming final. The outcome of this regulatory shift could have lasting consequences not only for current efforts to reduce emissions but also for America's long-term ability to respond to the growing climate crisis.
The Wire
24 minutes ago
- The Wire
The Gujarat Model: At a Dangerous Crossing
'He is incorruptible'; the middle-aged founder of a well-known chartered accountancy firm in Mumbai looked palpably thrilled. It was another of Mumbai's social get togethers following a business conference where India's supposedly best minds exchanged political gossip and fulminated on the state of the nation, including its celebrated potholes. 'He is ushering in changes. He looks like a man on a mission.', the exuberant gentleman continued, like a rollercoaster on steroids. I saw a Narendra Modi 'bhakt' long before that dodgy sobriquet became a national meme. The year was 2004. The Gujarat chief minister had already assiduously created a political narrative about himself, even as an ageing PM Atal Behari Vajpayee was selling the chimera of India Shining. But I am not easy pickings; we are not an argumentative nation for nothing. 'These things don't matter. They happen all the time' 'Do you endorse what happened in Gujarat in 2002? Is that okay? Does that not alone disqualify Modi from holding such an august office?'. The gentleman was unperturbed. If at all, he seemed stunned at my apparent naivete. He looked at me with a bemused expression of a laboratory scientist who was about to do a surgery on a trapped cockroach: "These things don't matter. They happen all the time'. Whataboutery would go on to become India's favorite sport on prime-time TV to rationalise the worst of shenanigans, corruption, violence, sectarianism and riots. Fast forward to 2014: Modi was the presumptive prime ministerial candidate of the BJP. He had graduated from being a regional satrap ( as TV anchors brand ambitious provincial leaders) into a national alternative. By that time, I had morphed from being a part-time, quasi-back-office analyst for the Congress to becoming its ubiquitous face on television networks. Modi willy-nilly would become the surname I encountered at every nook and corner. And on every show. 'Mr Jha, Modi stands for development', the popular bespectacled face who had mesmerised the nation with his trademark theatrics, was implacable. 'India needs his Gujarat model'. He sounded like the saffron party's campaigner-in-chief himself. ' Seriously? ', I pushed back. 'Are we saying that we have become a $ 2 trillion economy without development? Are you aware that India has grown at nearly 7.8% average GDP during 2004-14 and lifted over 140 million people out of poverty ? Yes, there are problems, but we are the global sweet spot after China. So what new 'development' are we talking about?'. It was my early discovery that facts, data, statistics and evidence mattered little in the noisy public discourse. Modi's Acche Din ( Happy days) was a precursor to what would be Donald Trump's astonishingly successful Make America Great Again ( MAGA) shibboleth that would transmogrify into a movement, a neo-Republican vote bloc. On every parameter, America was the dominant superpower in 2016, but Trump had altered the political conversation. Both Modi and Trump would go on to annihilate their beleaguered and stunned opponents. On July 11, 2025 , a bridge in Vadodara district of Gujarat collapsed. It killed 20 innocent people for no fault of theirs. Barring a tiny fleeting mention, the news cycle cursorily buried it. They cannot be blamed. When the Morbi bridge fell in October 2022, its death toll of 135 people did not affect the electorate whatsoever. The BJP returned to power in the assembly elections that were held just a few months later with a massive mandate. In Uttar Pradesh's Lakhimpur-Kheri, the son of the local Member of Parliament was arrested for driving his jeep mercilessly into protesting farmers in October 2021. In the assembly elections just five months later, the BJP won all 8 assembly seats in the Lok Sabha constituency with handsome margins. I was reminded of my unforgettable confabulation with the suited-booted corporate schmoozer in 2004: 'These things don't matter. They happen all the time'. But do they? And just because they happened in the past, true or exaggerated, must we silently condone the brazen dismantling of what was once a democratic and secular role model to the world? We were once a newly independent country that had boldly resurrected itself from a pulverised economy and a harrowing bloody partition, to embrace religious diversity and inclusive growth, and become a lighthouse to new societies battling seemingly irreconcilable contradictions. Societies pay a huge price for not just bad choices but even for temporary blind-sidedness. The Congress's underwhelming defense of itself led to an unprecedented wave of support for Modi, enough for its people to shockingly ignore the deadly pogrom of 2002, fake encounter killings, rise of crony capitalism, the ruthless decimation of dissenting voices, the unrelenting intimidation of brutalised minorities. A manufactured cult A cult was born, or more appropriately, manufactured. The Gujarat model is now trumpeted as Modi's India by his acolytes. In his model, all you do is build highways, expressways, metro lines, trains, ports and highways. And even have an eponymous cricket stadium. In her Pulitzer Prize winning book Autocracy Inc, author Anne Applebaum talks of disinformation, surveillance and propaganda as the trifecta of modern-day autocracies, democratically elected leaders who surreptitiously through regulatory and media capture change the destinies of nations. As I write, the Supreme Court calling out India's police state (Why are you fighting political battles, ED?) , and the alleged attempt by the Election Commission to disenfranchise voters in Bihar are a warning; Politicians may love power, but despots will never give it up. Even as Modi continues to boast about his infrastructure push, he has not yet understood the core principle of political leadership; societies need a bridge between communities before they pay their toll-tax for a shimmering patch of concrete. And tragically for Modi, even they are crumbling. And broken. Sanjay Jha is an author and former national spokesperson for the Congress. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
