Latest Sectors News

Vedanta's aluminium business expects slower growth in production and earnings. Earlier projections for EBITDA to exceed $4 billion this fiscal year have been revised. The company now anticipates EBITDA of $2.7 billion in the current fiscal. Projections for FY27 and FY28 are $3.6 billion and $4.1 billion respectively. This indicates a revised outlook for the business's financial performance. View More

Mumbai: Vedanta now sees the production capacity of its aluminium business and the earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation ( EBITDA ) generated from this business growing at a slower pace than earlier anticipated. In June last year, the country's largest aluminium producer had projected EBITDA to double past $4 billion in the current fiscal, aided by a greater share of value-added products, self-sufficiency in raw materials, and the start of new smelting and refining capacities. Its latest investor presentation, though, showed that the aluminium business is likely to generate an Ebitda of $2.7 billion in the current fiscal, $3.6 billion in FY27 and $4.1 billion in fiscal 2028. .Pbanner{display:flex;justify-content:space-between;align-items:center;background-color:#ec1c40;margin-top:20px;padding:5px 10px;border-radius:4px;color:#fff;line-height:10px;} .Pbannertext{display:flex;align-items:center;font-size:16px;font-weight:600;font-family:'Montserrat';} .Pbannertext img{height:20px;margin:0 6px} .Pbannerbutton a{display:flex;align-items:center;background-color:#fff;color:#ec1c40;text-decoration:none;font-weight:600;padding:4px 8px;border-radius:6px;font-size:15px;font-family:'Montserrat';} .Pbannerbutton img{height:20px;margin-right:6px} .Pbannerbutton a:hover{background-color:#f7f7f7} Add as a Reliable and Trusted News Source Add Now! (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)

President Donald Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs were deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, but some sector-specific tariffs remain in place. View More

The Supreme Court during a rain storm in Washington, Feb. 20, 2026.Annabelle Gordon | Bloomberg | Getty Images The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump's country-specific "reciprocal" tariffs are unconstitutional, delivering a win for many consumer companies facing higher import costs.But the ruling doesn't cover all sectors. The Supreme Court reviewed tariffs enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, or IEEPA, which the Trump administration used to justify the sweeping tariff agenda. The act had never before been used by a president to impose tariffs.In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs." Still, hours after the ruling, Trump announced a new global 10% tariff, and the Supreme Court's ruling does not cover tariffs enacted under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Those duties are intended to target specific products that threaten national security, and they remain in effect after Friday's ruling. Separate from his country-specific rates, Trump has raised tariffs on imports of steel, semiconductors, aluminum and other products deemed to impair national security. Here are the sectors still facing higher levies even after the Supreme Court decision. Autos It's not immediately clear how much the decision will impact the U.S. and global automotive industry. The industry continues to face billions of dollars in tariff costs, depending on where an imported auto part or vehicle originates.The Trump administration last year broadly implemented 25% tariffs on vehicles and certain auto parts imported into the U.S., citing national security risks. It has since struck independent deals to lower the levies to 10% to 15% with countries such as the United Kingdom and Japan. Others, such as South Korea, have also struck deals for lower rates, but it's unclear if those changes have actually taken effect."With today's decision out and subsequent developments, there remain many unknowns and important questions still to be answered. This is not a moment to ease up," said Lenny LaRocca, U.S. automotive lead for consulting firm KPMG. "Automakers should continue planning for multiple scenarios and keep supply chain considerations top of mind as the trade and tariff landscape continues to evolve."America's largest automaker, General Motors, last month said it expects between $3 billion and $4 billion in tariff costs this year, and Ford Motor earlier this month said its net tariff impact is expected to be roughly flat year over year at $2 billion in 2026.Ford told CNBC in a statement that it is continuing to work with the government on policies that "promote a strong and globally competitive U.S. auto sector." GM did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Supreme Court decision. Pharmaceuticals The pharmaceutical industry is facing a lot of uncertainty over tariffs. Trump has repeatedly threatened tariffs on pharmaceutical imports, though they haven't yet taken effect, in part because of negotiated multiyear deals between the administration and drugmakers. If that were to change, however, pharmaceutical tariffs would still be covered under Section 232.The administration has floated imposing tariffs on the industry that could eventually reach up to 250%. Last July, Trump threatened 200% tariffs on pharmaceuticals, and the administration has already opened a Section 232 investigation into pharmaceuticals to investigate the impact of imports on national security.The tariff threats are a move to push drug companies to manufacture in the U.S. instead of abroad. In December, multiple companies inked a deal with Trump to voluntarily lower their prices in exchange for a three-year exemption from any pharma tariffs — as long as they invest further in U.S. manufacturing. That deal included major players like Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis and more. Furniture The furniture industry found little relief from Friday's Supreme Court ruling.Last fall, items like couches, kitchen cabinets, vanities and more were hit with higher tariffs under Section 232. The roughly 25% duties will remain in place even now that the IEEPA tariffs have been deemed unconstitutional. The furniture industry is already facing greater uncertainty, with the 25% tariff expected to rise to 50% in 2027, and more broad pressures from higher interest rates and inflation. Smaller companies are getting hit the hardest, with fewer resources to work with, while larger companies are facing bankruptcy, like Value City Furniture's parent company, American Signature Furniture, which went out of business late last year. Food and consumer packaged goods Under Section 232, steel and aluminum imports into the U.S. are still carry tariffs. With higher aluminum tariffs, companies like Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Keurig Dr Pepper and Reynolds will continue to face higher costs associated with manufacturing their products.Trump hiked aluminum tariffs to 50% last year.Still, some of the key tariffs for the sector have been rolled back, even before Friday's ruling.In November, Trump issued an executive order exempting several hundred agricultural products, including bananas, coffee and spices, from tariffs. And in September, he similarly rescinded a 10% tariff on Brazilian pulp, a key component of paper towels, diapers and toilet paper.— CNBC's Mike Wayland, Annika Kim Constantino, Gabrielle Fonrouge and Amelia Lucas contributed to this report.

Trump has revealed economic data before its official release on multiple occasions, raising questions about possible policy violations View More

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the Coosa Steel Corporation on Feb. 19, 2026 in Rome, Georgia. Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images Forty minutes before the federal government revealed that economic growth slowed sharply in the last quarter, President Donald Trump dropped a hint that the incoming data would be weaker."The Democrat Shutdown cost the U.S.A. at least two points in GDP. That's why they are doing it, in mini form, again," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post at 7:50 a.m. ET.At 8:30 a.m., the Commerce Department reported that U.S. gross domestic product rose at an annualized rate of just 1.4% in the fourth quarter of 2025. That's a decline of 3 percentage points from the previous three-month period. Trump's Friday morning post referred to last year's record-length government shutdown, which began Oct. 1 — the start of the fourth quarter — and lasted 43 days.The federal funding lapse was expected to take a toll on GDP. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office estimated that, depending on its length, the shutdown would shrink annualized real GDP growth in Q4 by up to 2 percentage points.But economists from Dow Jones were still estimating a 2.5% gain for the period.Trump has previously revealed economic data before its official release, raising questions about possible policy violations and concerns that traders may be getting a heads-up from the president, who can be briefed on the data before it comes out. The Office of Management and Budget not only prohibits executive branch officials from commenting early on such releases, but forbids public statements about them until 30 minutes after they have come out.A White House official defended Trump's post, telling CNBC on condition of anonymity that the president has consistently pointed out how the shutdown has been a drag on the economy, including by sharing GDP percentage figures "consistent with his 2% Truth this morning."In a Truth Social post in January, Trump indirectly revealed forthcoming nonfarm payrolls data.The White House at the time admitted that there was an "inadvertent public disclosure of aggregate data" while attacking the media for "grasping at straws to foment another fake controversy." Read more CNBC politics coverageDueling PACs take center stage in midterm elections over AI regulationTrump order pushes glyphosate production; Roundup chemical hated by MAHASen. Warren tells Fed and Treasury: No bailout for crypto billionaires During his first presidential term, Trump signaled optimism about a blowout jobs report shortly before its release.Trump's post Friday morning also reiterated his long-running criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell over his refusal to lower interest rates as sharply or quickly as the president wants."Also, LOWER INTEREST RATES. 'Two Late' Powell is the WORST!!!" Trump wrote.He has previously branded Powell with the derisive nickname "Too Late"; it was unclear if the president meant to misspell the nickname in Friday's post.The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment on Trump's social media post. watch nowVIDEO3:5603:56Fourth-quarter U.S. GDP up just 1.4%, badly missing estimateSquawk Box

TCE, a 63-year-old company which has designed the new Parliament building, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train and the Ayodhya temple, focuses only on design and engineering consultancy.It operates under the owner's engineer and project consultant (OEPC) model. View More

Mumbai: Tata Consulting Engineers (TCE), a Tata Sons-owned design engineering consultancy, is seeing strong business growth as investments increase across power, metals, semiconductors and data centres in India . TCE, a 63-year-old company which has designed the new Parliament building, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train and the Ayodhya temple, focuses only on design and engineering consultancy.It operates under the owner's engineer and project consultant (OEPC) model. It does not execute construction directly as an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor but undertakes EPC and project management consultancy assignments. The company reported total consolidated income of ₹2,092 crore for 2024-25 and employs nearly 8,000 engineers. Its revenue is evenly split between India and international markets. "India's market remains strong, driven by projects in semiconductors, power generation and transmission, chemicals, aluminium, copper, steel and data centres," said Amit Sharma, managing director and CEO of TCE, adding that the power sector is currently its fastest-growing segment. This includes work across thermal power, pumped storage, solar, wind, and transmission and distribution. .Pbanner{display:flex;justify-content:space-between;align-items:center;background-color:#ec1c40;margin-top:20px;padding:5px 10px;border-radius:4px;color:#fff;line-height:10px;} .Pbannertext{display:flex;align-items:center;font-size:16px;font-weight:600;font-family:'Montserrat';} .Pbannertext img{height:20px;margin:0 6px} .Pbannerbutton a{display:flex;align-items:center;background-color:#fff;color:#ec1c40;text-decoration:none;font-weight:600;padding:4px 8px;border-radius:6px;font-size:15px;font-family:'Montserrat';} .Pbannerbutton img{height:20px;margin-right:6px} .Pbannerbutton a:hover{background-color:#f7f7f7} Add as a Reliable and Trusted News Source Add Now! (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)

The U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 to strike down large parts of President Trump's tariff policies Friday. View More

World leaders during the G7 Leaders' Summit in Kananaskis, in Alberta, Canada, June 17, 2025.Amber Bracken |Reuters U.S. trading partners offered a cautious welcome to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision Friday to strike down large parts of President Donald Trump's flagship trade policy on global tariffs — but global trade bodies warned of lingering uncertainty surrounding import levies.The law that undergirds the import duties "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," the majority ruled six to three in the long-awaited Supreme Court decision.Trump's tariff regime impacted a swathe of countries from the U.K. to India and the European Union. Some governments, like Vietnam and Brazil are still in negotiation.A U.K. government spokesperson said the country would continue to work with the White House administration to understand how the ruling will affect tariffs for the U.K. and the rest of the world"This is a matter for the U.S. to determine but we will continue to support U.K. businesses as further details are announced," the spokesperson said."The U.K. enjoys the lowest reciprocal tariffs globally, and under any scenario we expect our privileged trading position with the U.S. to continue." The U.K. agreed a wide-ranging trade deal with the U.S. in May last year, which imposed a broad 10% levy on many goods, but also included certain carve-outs on steel, aluminium, cars and pharmaceuticals.The Supreme Court case focused mainly on reciprocal tariffs, and the ruling leaves much of the U.K.'s trade deal with the U.S. — including preferential sectoral tariffs on steel, pharmaceuticals and autos — unaffected.However, the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) trade body said the U.S. Supreme Court decision adds to the ongoing uncertainty around levies. watch nowVIDEO3:5603:56SCOTUS ruling 'a very clear rebuke' of Trump tariffs, says Jamil JafferSquawk on the Street William Bain, head of trade policy at the BCC, said the move "does little to clear the murky waters" for British businesses, warning that the President still has "other options at his disposal" to retain his current regime on steel and aluminium tariffs.  "The court's decision also raises questions on how U.S. importers can reclaim levies already paid and whether U.K. exporters can also receive a share of any rebate depending on commercial trading terms," Bain said in a statement. "For the U.K., the priority remains bringing tariffs down wherever possible."Olof Gill, European Commission spokesperson for trade and economic security, said businesses on both sides of the Atlantic depend on "stability and predictability." "We remain in close contact with the U.S. Administration as we seek clarity on the steps they intend to take in response to this ruling," Gill said. "We therefore continue to advocate for low tariffs and to work towards reducing them."Meanwhile, Dominic LeBlanc, Canada's minister for U.S.-Canadian trade relations, said the decision "reinforces Canada's position that the IEEPA tariffs imposed by the United States are unjustified." No trade 'win' yet Elsewhere, Swissmem, Switzerland's technology industry association, welcomed the ruling — but warned that the Trump administration could invoke other laws to "legitimize tariffs," and called on Swiss policymakers to strengthen the competitiveness of the country with new free trade agreements."From the perspective of the Swiss export industry, this is a good decision. The high tariffs have severely damaged the tech industry. However, today's ruling doesn't win anything yet," Swissmem said."The high tariffs have severely damaged the tech industry," Swissmem wrote on X. "The crucial thing now is to quickly secure relations with the U.S. through a binding trade agreement."The International Chamber of Commerce noted that many businesses will welcome the ruling given the "significant strain" that has been placed on balance sheets in recent months."But companies should not expect a simple process: the structure of U.S. import procedures means claims are likely to be administratively complex. Today's ruling is worrying silent on this issue and clear guidance from the Court of International Trade and the relevant U.S. authorities will be essential to minimise avoidable costs and prevent litigation risks," the ICC said.— CNBC's Jackson Peck and Greg Kennedy helped contribute to this story.

European stocks finished higher on Friday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a sizeable chunk of U.S. President Donald Trump's global tariffs. View More

In this articleMONC-ITAAL-GB.FTMIB.FCHI.GDAXI.FTSE.STOXXFollow your favorite stocksCREATE FREE ACCOUNT Flags of the European Union fly outside the EU headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, on December 19, 2025. (Photo by Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto via Getty Images)Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images LONDON — European stocks moved higher on Friday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a sizeable chunk of U.S. President Donald Trump's global tariffs.The pan-European Stoxx 600 ended the session 0.8% higher following the Supreme Court's decision by 6-3 to strike down the tariffs policy. All major bourses and most sectors in the region advanced into positive territory in afternoon dealmaking. Friday saw more European companies reporting earnings, including Air Liquide, Danone, Sika, Anglo American, and Kingspan Group. Shares of Italian luxury player Moncler soared 15% on Friday, pushing it to the top of the Stoxx 600, after the company posted its full-year earnings after the closing bell on Thursday. Group sales hit 3.13 billion ($3.7 billion) euros in 2025, up 3% at constant exchange rates, beating analysts' estimates. Mining giant Anglo American closed about 1% higher after reporting adjusted core earnings of $6.4 billion for 2025, up from $6.3 billion the prior year, driven by strong performance in copper and premium iron ore, as well as significant cost savings amounting to $1.8 billion for the year. Its net debt decreased to $8.6 billion. However, the group reported a $3.7 billion net loss, largely due to a $2.3 billion pre-tax impairment on its De Beers diamond unit, amid challenging market conditions. Anglo American's CEO Duncan Wanblad said the company is progressing with the separation of De Beers. watch nowVIDEO2:1802:18Central Bank Watch: A divided Fed and Lagarde succession rumoursEurope Early Edition Elsewhere, the U.K.'s retail sales figures were estimated to have risen 1.8% in January 2026, up from a 0.4% increase in December 2025, pointing to an uptick in the economy, according to data from the Office for National Statistics. Additionally, sales volumes rose by 4.5% over the year. Britain's public finances, released Friday, showed that the public sector recorded a £30.4 billion ($40.8 billion) surplus in January 2026, which is double the level recorded a year earlier. Public borrowing stood at £112.1 billion since the start of the fiscal year in April 2025, 11.5% less than the same period a year ago. The British pound was last seen trading 0.2% higher against the dollar at $1.349. British government bond yields, known as gilts, were mixed. The 10-year Gilt was down 2 basis points to 4.35%, while the 2-year Gilt rose less than 1 basis point to around 3.58%. Across the Atlantic, data showed U.S. GDP for the fourth quarter came in well below expectations at just 1.4%. Geopolitical tensions remain in focus with President Trump reportedly now considering launching limited strikes on Iran in response to Tehran's resistance to a nuclear agreement.When asked if he is considering a limited strike on Iran, Trump responded, "I guess I can say I am considering that," Reuters reported. The president's comments come amid a major U.S. military buildup in the Middle East region in recent days. Earlier, Trump said Thursday he would decide whether to take military action against Iran in the next 10 days.

The Supreme Court is poised to rule on a broad swath of President Donald Trump's tariff agenda. The decision carries big implications for household finances. View More

The Supreme Court in Washington, Jan. 27, 2026.Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images The Supreme Court may decide the fate of President Donald Trump's tariff agenda as soon as Friday — and the ruling has implications for consumers' wallets, according to economists. If the high court were to rule that certain tariffs are unconstitutional, it could yield financial relief for consumers, who have at least partly borne the cost of those import taxes via higher prices, economists said.The tariffs in question are those levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.The Trump administration used the IEEPA as a legal pathway to impose tariffs on a broad swath of trading partners and raise the tariff rate on imports to their highest level since the early 20th century. No president had previously used the law to impose tariffs. The cost of tariffs to consumers — and potential savings Tariffs are a tax on imports. Those taxes are largely paid by the U.S. entity that imports the item, not foreign exporters, economists said.The U.S. currently has an average effective tariff rate of 16.9%, the highest since 1932, according to John Ricco, associate director of policy analysis at the Yale University Budget Lab.A paper published last week by researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York said that U.S. firms and consumers bore "the bulk" — roughly 90% — of the economic burden of tariffs imposed in 2025. White House officials disputed that finding. watch nowVIDEO6:2406:24Tariff study fallout: Are Americans footing the bill?Squawk Box Businesses generally pass on at least some of their costs to consumers, according to economists and various economic analyses. Tariffs have made everything from furniture to clothing, food, electronics and cars more expensive, according to the Yale Budget Lab.The Tax Foundation found that Trump's tariffs cost each U.S. household $1,000 in 2025, and will cost each household $1,300 in 2026.The Yale Budget Lab reached a similar conclusion: Based on the current tariff rate, the average consumer will pay an additional $1,300 to $1,700 in 2026, compared to what they would have paid pre-2025, Ricco said. If the court strikes down IEEPA tariffs as unconstitutional, that burden would fall by about half in 2026, to about $600 to $800, Ricco said.A majority of Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical about the legality of IEEPA tariffs during oral arguments in November. Read more CNBC personal finance coverageWhat a Supreme Court tariff ruling may mean for your moneyTrump officials warn hundreds of colleges with low student loan repayment ratesAs AI puts the squeeze on entry-level jobs, teens remain optimistic: reportTrump administration finds more borrowers eligible for student loan forgivenessMore used cars are for sale, but ones under $20,000 are 'harder to find': ExpertHow to claim Trump's 'no tax on overtime' deduction this seasonParents with student debt face deadline to secure affordable repayment, forgivenessSecure 2.0 let employers pair emergency savings and 401(k)s, but few have done soHome sellers start getting lower prices at 70, research shows — here's whyAverage IRS tax refund is up 10.9% so far this season, early filing data showsEarly estimates point to lower Social Security COLA for 2027Senators call for longer Social Security Fairness Act lump-sum payment timelineHere's the inflation breakdown for January 2026 — in one chartAverage tax refund is up 22%, Bessent says — what filers can expect this seasonK-shaped economy looks like 'jaws of a crocodile,' economist says: Here's whyHow EPA 'endangerment finding' repeal could impact your walletMedical emergencies can lead to debt and bankruptcy — even for insured AmericansCNBC's Financial Advisor 100: Best financial advisors, top firms ranked Without those tariffs, the effective tariff rate would drop to about 9%, which is still much higher than the roughly 2% rate before Trump started his second term in office, Ricco said.The consumer burden doesn't fall to zero because the Trump administration has other tariffs on the books that rely on different authorities — and ones that stand on firmer legal ground, economists said. The Trump administration has said it will use those pathways to impose new tariffs — and get to the "same place" — should the Supreme Court strike down IEEPA tariffs. "Even if we assume IEEPA is ruled to be used unconstitutionally, it won't change a lot," said Gary Hufbauer, a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and a former Treasury Department official focused on international trade. "The president will come in and use other statutes for virtually the same tariffs."The Tax Policy Center estimates that if the Supreme Court rules against IEEPA tariffs — and they aren't replaced — taxes on households would fall by $1.4 trillion over 10 years, saving families an average of $1,200 in 2026. How Trump has used IEEPA tariffs Trump has invoked emergency powers under IEEPA to impose a broad swath of his tariff regime. U.S. Customs and Border Protection collected about $133.5 billion of tariff revenue under IEEPA in fiscal year 2025 and in fiscal year 2026 through Dec. 14, according to a Cato Institute analysis of federal data. That's about 60% of total tariff revenue collected during that time. Trump used IEEPA to impose a 10% baseline tariff on all U.S. trading partners on so-called liberation day in April 2025, and he put even higher "reciprocal" tariffs on dozens of nations to narrow the trade deficit. Since Inauguration Day, he has also invoked IEEPA to put tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico — the U.S.'s largest trading partners — for allegedly failing to prevent fentanyl trafficking. Since the start of his second term, he also invoked the law to suspend the "de minimis" rule, which exempted imports under $800 from tariffs, and to put levies on countries like India for importing Russian oil and on Brazil for the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro, according to a Congressional Research Service analysis in January. Other Trump tariffs on the books However, there are several other laws the Trump administration has relied on to impose tariffs — and can leverage more forcefully if the Supreme Court strikes down IEEPA tariffs, said Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute.That would "take away some of the relief" for consumers, he said.One of the "easiest" existing authorities is Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Hufbauer said. watch nowVIDEO2:5202:52How tariffs are pushing America's furniture industry to the brinkCNBC Digital Original Video Indeed, Trump has already used Section 232 to implement tariffs on a range of items, such as steel, aluminum, automobiles and auto parts, copper, trucks and wood products. "We believe the White House could recreate a number of the existing tariffs using numerous other statutes ... within days should IEEPA be struck down," according to a January research note by Chris Krueger, a strategist in TD Cowen's Washington Research Group. Business and consumer refunds? It's unclear to what extent businesses and consumers might receive refunds after a Supreme Court ruling. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's, said he thinks the odds "are better than even" that impacted businesses would get some form of compensation from the federal government if the Supreme Court strikes down the IEEPA tariffs. "If the Supreme Court is silent on this issue and the Administration doesn't provide compensation, there will likely be significant legal actions by businesses, that the Court will ultimately need to adjudicate on," he wrote in an e-mail.Trump had also floated the idea of sending Americans $2,000 tariff "dividend" checks from the generated revenue.However, it's unlikely the government would send checks to consumers regardless of the Supreme Court outcome, except perhaps in the event of a near-term recession, Zandi said. "This would require legislation, and I don't see Congress passing it, even under reconciliation," Zandi said.

James Cameron, award-winning director of "Avatar" and "Titanic," calls Netflix's proposed acquisition of WBD assets "disastrous" for the theater business. View More

In this articleWBDNFLXFollow your favorite stocksCREATE FREE ACCOUNT Canadian filmmaker James Cameron poses during a photocall for the opening of the exhibition entitled 'The Art of James Cameron' at the Cinematheque Francaise in Paris on April 3, 2024.Stephane De Sakutin | AFP | Getty Images Legendary "Titanic" director James Cameron is likening the theatrical experience to a "sinking ship" if Netflix acquires Warner Bros. Discovery's film studio. Cameron penned a letter last week to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, that was obtained by CNBC, in which he argues Netflix's proposed acquisition of WBD's studio and streaming assets could lead to massive job losses in Hollywood, fundamentally alter the theatrical landscape in the U.S. and negatively affect one of America's largest export sectors.Lee chairs the Senate subcommittee on antitrust, competitive policy and consumer rights, which held a hearing on Feb. 3 to discuss the potential impact of the Netflix-Warner Bros. transaction. Cameron sent his letter after the hearing, during which Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos and WBD executive Bruce Campbell testified. "I believe strongly that the proposed sale of Warner Brothers Discovery to Netflix will be disastrous for the theatrical motion picture business that I have dedicated my life's work to," Cameron wrote to Lee. "Of course, my films all play in the downstream video markets as well, but my first love is the cinema."Cameron has been vocal in his opposition to the proposed tie-up, and his concerns echo those of the broader filmmaking industry, which generally sees combinations of movie studios resulting in fewer releases and less work. Cameron's letter to Lee, which has not been previously reported, escalates his concerns to the lawmakers who could potentially stand in the way of Netflix completing its acquisition. "We have received outreach from actors, directors, and other interested parties about the proposed Netflix and Warner Brothers merger, and I share many of their concerns," Lee said in a statement. "I look forward to holding a follow-up hearing to further address these issues."In response to a request for comment, a Netflix representative pointed to Netflix's written testimony and Sarandos' comments during the hearing. In its written testimony, Netflix outlined its investments in the film and TV production industry and its impact on the overall U.S. economy, including $20 billion in planned film and TV spend in 2026, a majority of which it said will be spent in America. "With this deal, we're going to increase, not reduce, production investments going forward, supported by a stronger combined business and balance sheet," Netflix said, noting its production facilities, such as one in New Mexico and an upcoming New Jersey-based studio. Since the deal's announcement, Netflix's top brass have consistently voiced their belief that the deal would not only win regulatory approval but would be good for the media industry.During a recent earnings call, Sarandos called the deal "pro-consumer ... pro-innovation, pro-worker."He has said on multiple occasions that the addition of WBD's studio would preserve jobs — even as layoffs roil the media ecosystem — and has said the assets would bring new businesses under Netflix's umbrella."We're going to need those teams, these folks that have extensive experience and expertise. We want them to stay on and run those business," Sarandos said. "So we're expanding content creation, not collapsing it in this transaction." In addition to concerns specific to filmmakers and across the theater industry, the proposed Netflix-WBD transaction has awakened other regulatory questions. In particular, critics have raised alarm about bringing together two of the top global streaming services — Netflix with 325 million global subscribers and WBD's HBO Max with 128 million as of Sept. 30. Lawmakers have already questioned how a merger of those services would affect consumers and prices.Paramount Skydance has leveraged some of the same arguments in its attempt to unseat Netflix and buy the entirety of WBD through a hostile tender offer. Sarandos and co-CEO Greg Peters have argued that competition for viewers includes various platforms — from traditional TV to streaming services to social media platforms such as YouTube — making Netflix a small part of the ecosystem. watch nowVIDEO2:4002:40Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos: Government has no grounds to block Netflix-Warner Bros. dealClosing Bell: Overtime Theatrical shifts Cameron, who has pioneered the creation of new filming technologies during his decadeslong career, including 3D production systems, advanced visual effects and high-frame-rate display, noted that theatrical exhibition has been a critical part of his "creative vision."He also highlighted previous comments by Sarandos calling movie theaters "an outdated concept" and an "outmoded idea," in addition to comments telling investors that "driving folks to a theater is just not our business.""The business model of Netflix is directly at odds with the theatrical film production and exhibition business, which employs hundreds of thousands of Americans," Cameron wrote. "It is therefore directly at odds with the business model of the Warner Brothers movie division, one of the few remaining major movie studios."Cameron noted that WBD releases around 15 theatrical films a year, volume that movie theater operators rely on at a time when production has shrunk and consumer habits have shifted.He also suggested that the merger would "remove consumer choice by reducing the number of feature motion pictures that are made" as well as "restrict the choices of film-makers looking for studios to invest in their projects, which will in turn reduce jobs."Cameron touched on recent trade policy shifts by the Trump administration that have sought to protect U.S. exports. President Donald Trump has more than once floated the idea of tariffs to protect Hollywood. "The US may no longer lead in auto or steel manufacturing, but it is still the world leader in movies," Cameron said. Under a Netflix-WBD merger, "That will change for the worse."Cameron also questioned whether Netflix would honor verbal commitments its executives have made around future theatrical releases, including how long they would play in theaters and how many theaters they would play in. In its written testimony from earlier this month, Netflix said it plans to put Warner Bros. films in theaters with 45-day windows and would continue to employ these employees, since "we don't have those kinds of workers at Netflix today." "We are not acquiring these amazing assets to shut them down, but to build them up," according to the testimony.Still, Cameron questioned whether those commitments would hold. "Their pledge to support theatrical releases (a business fundamentally at odds with their core business model) is likely to evaporate in a few years," he said. "Once they own a major movie studio, that is irrevocable," he added. "That ship has sailed (as I like to say, mindful that I directed 'Titanic.' I am very familiar not only with ships that sail, but also those that sink. And the theatrical experience of movies could become a sinking ship.)"

Motilal Oswal View More

The Supreme Court has decided not to interfere with the Karnataka government's decision to confiscate JSW Steel's performance securities valued at Rs 128 crore. This decision comes from allegations that the company failed to achieve specified iron ore production benchmarks. View More

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday refused to stay the Karnataka government’s direction to banks to forfeit JSW Steel ’s Rs 128 crore performance securities. The state’s mines and geology director had issued the direction to banks citing the company’s failure to meet minimum production requirement of iron ore from a mine in Chitradurga district. JSW Steel approached the top court after it did not get a favourable order Monday from the Karnataka High Court. The company through senior counsel AM Singhvi told an SC bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant that the state mining department issued the order without affording it any opportunity of hearing or even without a notice to show cause as to why the action should not be taken. "It, therefore, constitutes a classic case of violation of fundamental principles of natural justice and is violative of Article 14 as per the law settled by the SC," the appeal stated. Singhvi argued that the demand was made after more than four years for 2020-22, ignoring several representations by the company in which it had pointed out that circumstances caused by the authorities themselves had disabled it from achieving the production requirement. JSW Steel said in its representations it had requested the authorities to remove the impediments and, in the meanwhile, to relax the mandate of minimum production and despatch requirement. Live Events According to the company, it could not take up production during 2020-22 for reasons beyond its control, including the Covid-19 pandemic and the grade and quality of ore deposits being significantly lower than depicted in the bid documentation. JSW Steel won the leasing rights for the mine in an auction in 2019. .Pbanner{display:flex;justify-content:space-between;align-items:center;background-color:#ec1c40;margin-top:20px;padding:5px 10px;border-radius:4px;color:#fff;line-height:10px;} .Pbannertext{display:flex;align-items:center;font-size:16px;font-weight:600;font-family:'Montserrat';} .Pbannertext img{height:20px;margin:0 6px} .Pbannerbutton a{display:flex;align-items:center;background-color:#fff;color:#ec1c40;text-decoration:none;font-weight:600;padding:4px 8px;border-radius:6px;font-size:15px;font-family:'Montserrat';} .Pbannerbutton img{height:20px;margin-right:6px} .Pbannerbutton a:hover{background-color:#f7f7f7} Add as a Reliable and Trusted News Source Add Now! (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)