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.
U.S. Steel rose $2.66, or 5%, to $54.85 in afterhours trading Friday. Nippon Steel's original bid to buy the Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel in late 2023 had been valued at $55 per share.
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 originally offered nearly $15 billion to purchase 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.
Boak and Levy write for the Associated Press.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Livestock Improvement Reports Full Year 2025 Earnings
Livestock Improvement (NZSE:LIC) Full Year 2025 Results Key Financial Results Revenue: NZ$295.1m (up 10% from FY 2024). Net income: NZ$30.6m (up 296% from FY 2024). Profit margin: 10% (up from 2.9% in FY 2024). The increase in margin was driven by higher revenue. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. All figures shown in the chart above are for the trailing 12 month (TTM) period Livestock Improvement's share price is broadly unchanged from a week ago. Risk Analysis It is worth noting though that we have found 4 warning signs for Livestock Improvement (2 are concerning!) that you need to take into consideration. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
Guardians president responded to Trump's random tirade about name change
At this present moment in time, you might think Donald Trump would realize he has bigger fish to fry than ranting and raving about professional sports teams changing their nicknames to decidedly non-racist labels. And, well, you'd probably be right. But that didn't stop the 47th U.S. President from going on an arbitrary (and pretty nonsensical, with all things considered) diatribe about how American sports teams like the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians should revert back to their old, decidedly racist nicknames. Somewhere along the way, Trump invented the concept of an "original six" in baseball out of thin air (which doesn't exist and is actually an NHL concept) to invoke the Guardians, for which an "original six" label wouldn't even apply. Again, it really seems like Trump may be brazenly trying to drum up some sort of cannon fodder grievance to distract from other, more pressing issues. I mean, I'm just saying that I wouldn't rule it out, is all. Shortly after Trump's Sunday morning shot in the dark, er, I mean, testimonial, Guardians president Chris Antonetti responded to his reference about the franchise's name. In short, Antonetti politely declined, citing an "opportunity to build the [Guardians'] brand" while being "excited" for the future. You know what the amusing kicker is here? It would take years for the Guardians, or anyone in a similar position, to go back and earnestly rebrand. It's not as if it's some overnight, effortless operation that can be done on someone's whim. How long have the Cleveland Guardians had their current nickname? After years of backlash, in late 2020, the Guardians revealed they would drop their old "Indians" nickname after the conclusion of the 2021 season. They have been the Guardians ever since. It was the eighth official name change in franchise history for an organization that officially started as the Columbus Buckeyes/Senators in 1896. It was the fifth name change since they started calling Cleveland home in 1900.
Chicago Tribune
21 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Request to unseal Jeffrey Epstein grand jury transcripts likely to disappoint, ex-prosecutors say
NEW YORK — A Justice Department request to unseal grand jury transcripts in the prosecution of chronic sexual abuser Jeffrey Epstein and his former girlfriend is unlikely to produce much, if anything, to satisfy the public's appetite for new revelations about the financier's crimes, former federal prosecutors say. Attorney Sarah Krissoff, an assistant U.S. attorney in Manhattan from from 2008 to 2021, called the request in the prosecutions of Epstein and imprisoned British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell 'a distraction.' 'The president is trying to present himself as if he's doing something here and it really is nothing,' Krissoff told The Associated Press in a weekend interview. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche made the request Friday, asking judges to unseal transcripts from grand jury proceedings that resulted in indictments against Epstein and Maxwell, saying 'transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration.' The request came as the administration sought to contain the firestorm that followed its announcement that it would not be releasing additional files from the Epstein probe despite previously promising that it would. Epstein killed himself at age 66 in his federal jail cell in August 2019, a month after his arrest on sex trafficking charges, while Maxwell, 63, is serving a 20-year prison sentence imposed after her December 2021 sex trafficking conviction for luring girls to be sexually abused by Epstein. Krissoff and Joshua Naftalis, a Manhattan federal prosecutor for 11 years before entering private practice in 2023, said grand jury presentations are purposely brief. Naftalis said Southern District prosecutors present just enough to a grand jury to get an indictment but 'it's not going to be everything the FBI and investigators have figured out about Maxwell and Epstein.' 'People want the entire file from however long. That's just not what this is,' he said, estimating that the transcripts, at most, probably amount to a few hundred pages. 'It's not going to be much,' Krissoff said, estimating the length at as little as 60 pages 'because the Southern District of New York's practice is to put as little information as possible into the grand jury.' 'They basically spoon feed the indictment to the grand jury. That's what we're going to see,' she said. 'I just think it's not going to be that interesting. … I don't think it's going to be anything new.' Both ex-prosecutors said that grand jury witnesses in Manhattan are usually federal agents summarizing their witness interviews. That practice might conflict with the public perception of some state and federal grand jury proceedings, where witnesses likely to testify at a trial are brought before grand juries during lengthy proceedings prior to indictments or when grand juries are used as an investigatory tool. In Manhattan, federal prosecutors 'are trying to get a particular result so they present the case very narrowly and inform the grand jury what they want them to do,' Krissoff said. Krissoff predicted that judges who presided over the Epstein and Maxwell cases will reject the government's request. With Maxwell, a petition is before the U.S. Supreme Court so appeals have not been exhausted. With Epstein, the charges are related to the Maxwell case and the anonymity of scores of victims who have not gone public is at stake, although Blanche requested that victim identities be protected. 'This is not a 50-, 60-, 80-year-old case,' Krissoff noted. 'There's still someone in custody.' She said citing 'public intrigue, interest and excitement' about a case was likely not enough to convince a judge to release the transcripts despite a 1997 ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that said judges have wide discretion and that public interest alone can justify releasing grand jury information. Krissoff called it 'mind-blowingly strange' that Washington Justice Department officials are increasingly directly filing requests and arguments in the Southern District of New York, where the prosecutor's office has long been labeled the 'Sovereign District of New York' for its independence from outside influence. 'To have the attorney general and deputy attorney general meddling in an SDNY case is unheard of,' she said. Cheryl Bader, a former federal prosecutor and Fordham Law School criminal law professor, said judges who presided over the Epstein and Maxwell cases may take weeks or months to rule. 'Especially here where the case involved witnesses or victims of sexual abuse, many of which are underage, the judge is going to be very cautious about what the judge releases,' she said. Bader said she didn't see the government's quest aimed at satisfying the public's desire to explore conspiracy theories 'trumping — pardon the pun — the well-established notions of protecting the secrecy of the grand jury process.' 'I'm sure that all the line prosecutors who really sort of appreciate the secrecy and special relationship they have with the grand jury are not happy that DOJ is asking the court to release these transcripts,' she added. Mitchell Epner, a former federal prosecutor now in private practice, called Trump's comments and influence in the Epstein matter 'unprecedented' and 'extraordinarily unusual' because he is a sitting president. He said it was not surprising that some former prosecutors are alarmed that the request to unseal the grand jury materials came two days after the firing of Manhattan Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey, who worked on the Epstein and Maxwell cases. 'If federal prosecutors have to worry about the professional consequences of refusing to go along with the political or personal agenda of powerful people, then we are in a very different place than I've understood the federal Department of Justice to be in over the last 30 years of my career,' he said. Krissoff said the uncertain environment that has current prosecutors feeling unsettled is shared by government employees she speaks with at other agencies as part of her work in private practice. 'The thing I hear most often is this is a strange time. Things aren't working the way we're used to them working,' she said.
