Author: Uponbiz

U.S. officials are “not satisfied yet” about all the issues standing in the way of a deal to end the U.S.-China trade war but made progress in talks with China last week, a top White House official said on Monday.

The United States and China have been embroiled in a tit-for-tat tariff battle since July 2018, roiling global financial markets and supply chains and costing both of the world’s two largest economies billions of dollars.

U.S. officials are pressing China to make changes to address longstanding concerns over industrial subsidies, technology transfer and intellectual property rights.

The two sides wrapped up the latest round of talks in Washington late last week and will be resuming discussions this week remotely.

“We’re making progress on a range of things, and there’s some stuff where we’re not satisfied yet,” Clete Willems, a top White House trade official, told Reuters on the sidelines of a U.S. Chamber of Commerce event on Monday.

He declined to get into specifics on which issues remained unsettled. Last week, President Donald Trump said a deal could be reached in about four weeks.

Willems also declined to specify a timeline for the pact, noting: “It should be a good sign for people that we’re not rushing into this we want to get it right and we need to nail down specifics.”

Willems said that the two sides were still trying to settle on how to handle existing tariffs. The United States has slapped tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars worth of Chinese goods, and the Trump administration sees those as leverage to ensure Beijing keeps any promises made in the deal. Chinese officials want the levies removed.

The United States and China have agreed on an enforcement structure that would give Washington the right to retaliate if Beijing was not honoring the terms of the agreement, Willems said.

European Union leaders did not take issues with Chinese trade policy as seriously as they should have in the past, but the United States and the EU are now “working hand in hand” at the World Trade Organization on China’s non-market economic policies, Willems said earlier in remarks at the Chamber of Commerce.

The United States and the EU want to work together on joint projects that provide market-based alternatives to state-led initiatives “that can come with strings attached,” he said.

This month China is hosting its second summit for its Belt and Road initiative, which envisions connecting China with Asia, Europe and beyond with massive infrastructure spending, but the United States will not be sending high-level officials to the event.

Washington views Beijing as a major strategic rival. The United States has said it views the initiative as a way of spreading Chinese influence overseas and saddling low-income countries with unsustainable debt using opaque projects.

Willems, who has been a key figure in negotiations with China, said last month he will be leaving the White House in the coming weeks to spend more time with his family after the birth of a new baby.
…

The U.S. securities watchdog’s request that a federal judge hold Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk in contempt over the billionaire entrepreneur’s use of Twitter was “reasonable,” said a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission official on Monday.

SEC Commissioner Robert Jackson, a Democrat, told reporters at a conference in Washington that the SEC was reasonable in suggesting greater oversight of Musk’s communications, including the threat of new fines if he backslides.

“The idea (is) that we would have future oversight to prevent future problems from recurring,” Jackson said.

The SEC had asked U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan to hold Musk in contempt over a Feb. 19 tweet in which the agency said he had improperly posted material information about Tesla’s vehicle production outlook without seeking approval from its lawyers.

In a Friday order, the judge gave both sides until April 18 to reach a resolution. If they do not, the judge said she would decide whether to hold Musk in contempt. If he is held in contempt, the judge would allow discussions on possible sanctions.

“I understand those who are skeptical and who feel that it’s innovative relief … to me it was important relief and I thought enforcement took very reasonable steps, both to the nature of the relief and our oversight of that relief,” added Jackson of the judge’s order.

The SEC, which had sued Tesla, asked the company in September to consider removing Musk. The CEO agreed to step down as Tesla’s chairman in an agreement that also required pre-approval of Musk’s written communications that could be material to the company, such as volumes of cars produced or other information likely to change the value of its securities.

In a statement by Tesla on Thursday, Musk said “the tweet in question was true, immaterial to shareholders, and in no way a violation of my agreement.”

The SEC said the first of the Feb. 19 tweets conflicted with Tesla’s Jan. 30 outlook, when it targeted annualized Model 3 production exceeding 500,000 as soon as the fourth quarter, and projected 360,000 to 400,000 vehicle deliveries this year.

At the time the SEC also said Musk had violated their agreement by sending a tweet that had not been vetted by Tesla’s lawyers and he should be held in contempt. It did not say what penalties it wanted imposed, raising the question of whether it would again seek his removal or propose less drastic measures.
…

One of the key Russian officials to foster a supply pact with OPEC, Kirill Dmitriev, signaled on Monday that Russia wanted to raise oil output when it meets with OPEC in June because of improving market conditions and falling stockpiles.

Dmitriev, head of Russian sovereign wealth fund RDIF, was the first Russian official to predict a deal with OPEC in 2016 and since then has become a key defender of the pact despite pressure from domestic oil firms to drop the agreement.

Dmitriev, an envoy for Moscow in the Middle East in general and Saudi Arabia in particular, had in recent months said it was still too early to terminate output cuts, echoing the position of OPEC’s de facto leader, Saudi Arabia.

But in an apparent change of position, Dmitriev said on Monday supply cuts may not be required after June.

“It is quite possible that given the improving market situation and falling stocks, [OPEC and its allies] could decide in June this year to abandon supply cuts and subsequently increase output,” Dmitriev told a conference in Moscow.

“This decision will not mean the end of the deal, but a confirmation that participants continue their coordinating efforts when it is important not only to cut but to increase output depending on market conditions,” he told the conference.

Speaking to reporters on Monday evening, Dmitriev added that it could be appropriate for Russia to increase output by 228,000 barrels per day, by which it had previously cut production, “and maybe even further.”

“It is possible that as part of the June [meeting] a decision may be taken, subject to market conditions at that time, that it is necessary to remove these reductions,” he said.

Dmitriev and energy minister Alexander Novak have come under increased pressure over the past year from firms such as Rosneft , whose boss Igor Sechin, a close ally of President Vladimir Putin, has said Russia should abandon output cuts.

Sechin is arguing that Russia is losing market share to the United States, which is not participating in production cuts and has hence been boosting output to record levels of some 12 million barrels per day.

Russia and Saudi Arabia produce around 11 million and 10 million barrels respectively, but could raise output fairly quickly if needed.

In January, Dmitriev said Russia should not unleash an oil price war against the United States but rather stick with output cuts even at the cost of losing market share in the medium term.

Saudi Energy Khalid al-Falih has also said it was important to extend oil cuts until the end of the year.

But on Monday he said the market was moving towards balance and added that the picture would become clearer in May.

Global oil markets have tightened despite booming U.S. production after Washington imposed new sanctions on Iran and Venezuela, reducing their output and exports and effectively grabbing their market share.

OPEC and its allies had to cancel their meeting in April and will now convene on June 25-26 as officials said they needed to see first what new sanctions Washington will impose on Iran in early May.
…

Ford workers in Russia have started work-to-rule action over plans to close a plant.

Mikhail Sergeyev, head of a trade union which represents around a third of the St. Petersburg plant’s 900-strong workforce, has told The Associated Press on Monday the work-to-rule will continue until Ford negotiates, and it’s already causing disruption.

Sergeyev says his union is pushing for more generous layoff packages equivalent to twice a worker’s annual salary.

Ford said last month that it’s leaving the Russian car market and closing two assembly plants and an engine plant, after years of lackluster sales. Ford will keep making vans at another site through a joint venture.

Organized industrial action is uncommon in Russia, where many unions have close ties to management, though the auto industry is a rare exception.

 
…

American Airlines is extending by over a month its cancellations of about 90 daily flights as the troubled 737 Max plane remains grounded by regulators.

American said Sunday it is extending the cancellations through June 5 from the earlier timeframe of April 24. The airline acknowledged in a statement that the prolonged cancellations could bring disruption for some travelers.

The Boeing-made Max jets have been grounded in the U.S. and elsewhere since mid-March, following two deadly crashes in Ethiopia and Indonesia. Airlines that own them have been scrambling other planes to fill some Max flights while canceling others.

American Airlines Group Inc., the largest U.S. airline by revenue, has 24 Max jets in its fleet. The Dallas-based airline said it is awaiting information from U.S. regulators, and will contact customers affected by the cancellations with available re-bookings.

Boeing and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration said last week the company needs more time to finish changes in a flight-control system suspected of playing a role in the two crashes. That means airlines could be forced to park their Max jets longer than they expected.

American said Sunday that by canceling the flights in advance, “we are able to provide better service to our customers with availability and re-booking options,” and to avoid last-minute flight disruptions.

American’s reservations staff will contact affected customers directly by email or phone, the airline said. “We know these cancellations and changes may affect some of our customers, and we are working to limit the impact to the smallest number of customers,” the statement said.

Boeing said Friday that it will cut production of the Max jet, its best-selling plane, underscoring the mounting financial risk it faces the longer the airliner remains grounded.

Starting in mid-April, Boeing said, it will cut production of the plane to 42 from 52 planes per month so it can focus on fixing the flight-control software that has been implicated in the two crashes.

Preliminary investigations into the deadly accidents in Ethiopia and Indonesia found that faulty sensor readings erroneously triggered an anti-stall system that pushed down the plane’s nose. Pilots of each plane struggled in vain to regain control over the automated system.

In all, 346 people died in the crashes. Boeing faces a growing number of lawsuits filed by families of the victims.

The announcement to cut production came after Boeing acknowledged that a second software issue has emerged that needs fixing on the Max — a discovery that explained why the aircraft maker had pushed back its ambitious schedule for getting the planes back in the air.
…

Top EU leaders meet Chinese Premier Li Keqiang this week at a summit in Brussels, but their hopes of winning solid commitments on trade look set for disappointment.

Brussels is trying to beef up its approach to the Asian giant as it shows little willingness to listen to longstanding complaints about industrial subsidies and access to its markets, and as fears grow about growing Chinese involvement in European infrastructure.

But the half-day summit on Tuesday is on course to fizzle out with little to show in terms of agreements, with European sources saying it looks highly unlikely a final joint statement will be agreed.

EU officials say China is unwilling to give binding commitments on their key demands, including the inclusion of industrial subsidies as part of World Trade Organization reform, and they are reluctant to agree the kind of anodyne declaration of good intentions pushed out after last year’s summit in Beijing.

The European Commission last month issued a 10-point plan proposing a more assertive relationship with Beijing, labelling China a “systemic rival” — a move welcomed by French President Emmanuel Macron as a belated awakening.

But while the EU’s 15 trillion euro market gives it significant economic clout, it struggles to maintain unity among its 28 members on issues of foreign policy, allowing China to pursue one-on-one deals with individual countries.

“When economic policy intersects with foreign policy and security, the EU lacks the will and capacity to act strategically,” Philippe Legrain, visiting senior fellow at the London School of Economics’ European Institute, wrote in an analysis for Project Syndicate magazine.

“Apart from France and the UK, which is leaving the EU, member governments lack a geopolitical mindset.”

This most striking recent example came last month when Italy became the first G7 nation to sign up to China’s “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI), a massive network of transport and trade links stretching from Asia to Europe.

Concerns have been raised about the way the BRI saddles countries with Chinese debt and leaves key infrastructure nodes owned by a potential strategic rival, though Beijing insists the initiative is a “win-win” arrangement.

Former Greek finance minister and scourge of the EU, Yanis Varoufakis, said Europe only had itself to blame if Mediterranean countries turned to China.

“We created a vacuum and the Chinese are filling it. The Chinese are coming in because there is a dearth of investment in this continent… We are failing to generate investment that would give our business the opportunity to compete with them,” he said in Brussels last week.

‘The summit has already taken place’

Macron’s own China initiative last week — hosting President Xi Jinping for a summit with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker — may also have been a double-edged sword for the EU.

The meeting in Paris gave the EU — through its two most powerful members — the chance to press its concerns directly with the paramount Chinese leader.

But analysts say it also seriously undercut this week’s summit in Brussels, where Li will hold talks not with heads of government but with Juncker and EU Council President Donald Tusk.

“The China summit has already taken place. It is not Europe for China without France and Germany in the same room,” Hosuk Lee-Makiyama, director of the ECIPE Brussels think tank, told AFP.

“Xi has already spoken. Xi has already shaken hands with his counterparts so by default the summit has already taken place. In a sense, they only bring out Li for Europe or when something bad is going to happen and somebody needs to take the blame.”

At the same time, Lee-Makiyama warned, Europe risks being left playing catch-up if ongoing U.S.-China trade talks result in a deal between the world’s two biggest economies.

“China is going to probably offer us some watered down version of what they gave to the Americans, but that also means that we have to give something,” he said.

But while Tuesday’s meeting may not yield a breakthrough in the EU’s complex relationship with China, European officials insist it still has value in keeping up the pressure.

“There is broad agreement within the EU that it is important to communicate to China that we are at a point where we want to see… concrete steps forward on their willingness to work with us at the WTO,” an EU diplomat told AFP.

“What is important is that we give a signal to China that the EU is partner but also a competitor and requires Beijing to make some steps.”

 
…

in the United States rebounded in March as U.S. employers added a solid 196,000 jobs, up sharply from February’s scant gain and evidence that many businesses still want to hire despite signs that the economy is slowing.

The unemployment rate remained at 3.8 percent, near the lowest level in almost 50 years, the Labor Department reported Friday. Wage growth slowed a bit in March, with average hourly pay increasing 3.2 percent from a year earlier. That was down from February’s year-over-year gain of 3.4 percent, which was the best in a decade.

The employment figures reported Friday by the government suggest that February’s anemic job growth — revised to 33,000, from an initial 20,000 — was merely a temporary blip and that businesses are confident the economy remains on a firm footing. Even with the current expansion nearly 10 years old, the U.S. economy is demonstrating its resilience.

At the same time, the economy is facing several challenges, from cautious consumers to slower growth in business investment to a U.S.-China trade war that is contributing to a weakening global economy.

Stock futures rallied after Friday’s jobs data was released at 8:30 a.m., and bond prices rose as well, with yields slipping.

So far this year, U.S. job gains have averaged 180,000 a month, easily enough to lower the unemployment rate over time, though down from a 223,000 monthly average last year.

Last month, job growth was strongest in the service sector. Health care added 47,000 jobs, restaurants and bars 27,000 and professional and business services, which includes such high-paying fields as engineering and accounting, 37,000.

Manufacturers cut 6,000 jobs, marking their first decline in a year and a half. The weakness stemmed from a sharp drop in employment at automakers, likely reflecting layoffs by General Motors. Construction firms added 16,000.

The overall economy is sending mixed signals. Most indicators suggest slower growth this year compared with 2018. That would mean hiring might also weaken from last year’s strong pace.

Consumers have shown caution so far this year. Retail sales fell in February, and a broader measure of consumer spending slipped in January, potentially reflecting a waning effect of the Trump administration’s tax cuts. Businesses have also reined in their spending on industrial machinery and other equipment and on factories and other buildings.

And in Europe and Asia, weaker economies have reduced demand for U.S. exports. Europe is on the brink of recession, with its factories shrinking in March at the fastest pace in six years, according to a private survey.

The U.S. trade war with China has weighed on the Chinese economy, which has hurt Southeast Asian nations that ship electronic components and other goods that are assembled into consumer products in China’s factories.

Economists now forecast that the U.S. economy will expand roughly 2 percent to 2.5 percent this year, down from 2.9 percent last year.

Some positive signs for the economy have emerged in recent weeks: Sales of both new and existing homes rose in February after declining last year. More Americans are applying for mortgages now that rates have fallen.

And some of the weakness in spending earlier this year likely reflected delays in issuing tax refunds because of the government shutdown. Refunds largely caught up with their pace in previous years in March, economists at Bank of America Merrill Lynch said, suggesting that spending may as well.
…

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told visiting NATO foreign ministers Thursday that the 29 country alliance must alter its approach to developing threats, singling out Russian aggression and China’s “strategic competition.” Pompeo cautioned his NATO allies that there is a risk the U.S. will not be able to share information in the same way it could if there were not Chinese network supplier systems operating inside of their networks. VOA’s diplomatic correspondent Cindy Saine reports.
…

The U.S. president and the vice premier of China confirmed on Thursday that while significant progress has been made, there is no new trade agreement yet between the world’s two largest economies. 

“We’re certainly getting a lot closer,” Trump said sitting at his desk in the Oval Office with Chinese Vice Premier Liu He alongside him.

Announcement of a deal could come in “the next four weeks, maybe less, maybe more” and at that time, something “monumental could be announced,” he said, adding, “We are rounding the turn. We’ve made a lot of progress.” 

Liu, speaking in English, praised the direct guidance of Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, adding: “Hopefully, we’ll get a good result.”  

Trump said if a deal can be reached, then he will hold a summit with Xi.

“If we have a deal, there will be a summit,” he said. “I look forward to seeing President Xi. It’ll be here.” 

Intellectual property protection, as well as certain tariffs remain under discussion, Trump confirmed.  

“Some of the toughest things have been agreed to,” he added. 

Asked to make a comment by the president about the status of the negotiations, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer was more cautious, replying, “We’ve made a lot of headway. We’re working very hard,” but “there are still some major, major issues left.” 

Responding to questions from reporters, Trump said, “We’ve never done a deal like this with China,” predicting the agreement could be “the granddaddy of them all” and “a tremendous thing for the world.”

He also described it as potentially “epic” and “historic.” 

The two countries had originally hoped to reach an agreement by March 1, but negotiations have extended well beyond that date.

“The relationship with China is very strong, probably the strongest it’s ever been,” Trump declared. 

Liu had met Wednesday in Washington with Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

​

For months, the economic superpowers have engaged in a reciprocal tariff war, with both countries imposing levies on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of each other’s exports, which could be eased or ended with a deal. 

Officials familiar with their negotiations say an agreement could give Beijing until 2025 to meet its commitment on U.S. commodity purchases and allow U.S. companies to wholly own businesses in China.

“Nobody thought these talks would be easy, but as they enter these final stages, we’re encouraged by the continued progress towards detailed text on both structural and enforcement issues,” said Linda Dempsey, National Association of Manufacturers vice president of International Economic Affairs, following Thursday’s Trump-Liu meeting.

“Manufacturers in the United States have long been harmed by China’s unfair trade practices. That is why we believe negotiations must result in an innovative, enforceable bilateral trade agreement that levels the playing field for manufacturers in the United States,” Dempsey added.

Trump’s meeting with Liu came just days after a Chinese woman, Yujing Zhang, was arrested trying to enter the U.S. president’s Atlantic oceanfront retreat in Florida, and detained after she entered the compound claiming she was there for what turned out to be a non-existent event.

She was charged with illegal entering and lying to U.S. agents. The U.S. Secret Service, which protects Trump and his family, said she was carrying four cellphones, a laptop computer, an external hard drive, thumb drive containing computer malware and two Chinese passports.
…

U.S. lawmakers of both parties say hurdles remain for approving a new trade pact between the United States, Canada and Mexico, rejecting President Donald Trump’s call for prompt votes on a replacement for the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA.

Last year, the administration made good on one of Trump’s main campaign promises – negotiating a replacement for NAFTA, which went into effect in 1994, with a new trade accord, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA.

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California made headlines Tuesday demanding changes to the pact to strengthen enforcement provisions and announcing the chamber will not vote on the accord until Mexico approves and implements tougher labor standards.

“No enforcement, no treaty,” Pelosi said at a Politico event, adding, “It’s a big issue, how workers are treated in Mexico.”

Senate Democrats echoed the speaker.

“There’s still work to do [on the USMCA]“ Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen told VOA. “I agree with Speaker Pelosi that Mexico needs to fully enact the labor rights reform measures. There are also a number of issues on the environmental front, and we need to make sure we have an effective enforcement mechanism.”

“We’re waiting to see whether or not the proposal will have a lot more fortified enforcement provisions, that’s my top concern,” Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania said. “That’s always been a major concern of trade agreements generally. That’s why I have always been an aggressive skeptic, and I remain so.”

Democrats are not alone in expressing reservations. Forty-six House Republicans wrote a letter to the White House opposing language in the USMCA proposed by Canada to protect the rights of LGBT sexual minorities.

“A trade agreement is no place for the adoption of social policy,” conservative Freedom Caucus members said in the letter.

Devil in the details

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio said he, like all lawmakers, needs time to assess the USMCA’s impact on economic sectors in his state.

“Trade deals are generally difficult to get votes on because, the bigger they are, the likelier there are individual industries affected by some detail of the deal – Florida included, with our vegetable growers [who complete with Mexico],” Rubio said.

To go into effect, the USMCA would have to be approved by legislatures in the United States, Mexico and Canada. Some on Capitol Hill railed against any delay.

“It would be a killer, a big mistake” the Senate’s number two Republican, John Thune of agriculture-rich South Dakota, told VOA. “That’s a very carefully negotiated agreement we got signed, sealed and delivered. Now it’s just a function of signing off on it. And we just need to get it done.”

Thune added, “Any attempt to go back and rewrite it is a non-starter.”

Thune’s impatience matches that of the White House, which is pressing Congress to act on the USMCA as soon as next month to get the vote out of the way before the 2020 U.S. election cycle fully heats up, at which point trade votes could be even more dicey.

Administration officials have sought to reassure wavering lawmakers that their concerns can be addressed in side agreements with Canada and Mexico, rather than reopening negotiations on the pact itself.

Pelosi rejected such assurances.

“We’re saying that enforcement has to be in the treaty,” the House speaker said. “[I]f you don’t have enforcement, you ain’t got nothing.”

Enforcement is key

American business and labor groups are weighing in, as well.

“This agreement right now, for it to be voted on, would be premature,” Richard Trumka, president of America’s largest labor federation, the AFL-CIO, told Bloomberg TV. “The Mexican government has to change their [labor] laws, then they have to start effectively enforcing them, and then they have to demonstrate that they have the resources necessary to enforce those laws, because if you can’t enforce a trade agreement, it’s useless.”

The U.S. Farm Bureau, by contrast, urged swift implementation of the USMCA.

“Farmers know a good deal when we see one,” Farm Bureau president Zippy Duvall wrote in a statement. “Without USMCA, our most critical markets hang in the balance. Both Canada and Mexico have already signed another deal that does not include the United States.”

The USMCA would replace NAFTA, a pact implemented under the Clinton administration in the 1990s. NAFTA has been credited with vastly expanding trade in North America, but also blamed for accelerating the pace of manufacturing job losses in the United States.

Trump repeatedly blasted NAFTA as a disastrous trade deal for America during his successful 2016 campaign — a view Pelosi and other Democrats have echoed.

“I, myself, voted for NAFTA the first time,” the speaker said at the Politico forum. “I do think I was burned by it. I don’t think it lived up [to its promises].”

 
…

Joyce Huang contributed to this report.

BEIJING – An online campaign protesting the long hours Chinese high-tech employees work has gone viral on the Internet in China. At the same time, it is putting an uncomfortable light on the labor practices of China’s biggest high-tech firms.

The campaign known as 996.icu may have been small when it started on Microsoft’s code sharing website Github.com, but now, it is the second highest bookmarked project on the open source collaborative site. It has also spread quickly on Weibo, China’s version of Twitter, where it is a hotly discussed topic. One posting alone had more than half a million views.

Chinese programmers came up with the ironic name 996.icu to draw attention to a work schedule reality and problem. The name is a pithy way of saying if you work the 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. six-day-a-week work schedule, you’ll end up in the intensive care unit of a hospital.

And while the campaign takes aim at some of China’s biggest tech firms and includes a blacklist that details labor practices, organizers have been careful in their approach to addressing the problem.

“This is not a political movement,” the campaign said, in a bullet point outline of its principles and purposes. “We firmly uphold the labor law and require employers to respect the legitimate rights and interests of their employees.”

Beyond guidelines

China’s labor law states that employers can request employees to work overtime for an hour or even three hours a day, but no more than 36 hours of overtime in total over a month’s period.

Clearly, 72 hours a week, goes far beyond that guideline. Labor activists and lawyers, note however, that companies have many ways of getting around the law.

According to 996.icu, the 72-hour work week schedule has long been practiced in “secret,” but recently more companies have been openly discussing the arrangement.

The campaign notes that in March, e-commerce company J.D. Com said it had begun adopting 996 or 995 work schedules for some departments. Other companies made similar pledges at the beginning of the year.

Commenting on its 996 work schedule, J.D. Com said that it was not a mandatory policy, but that all of its employees should be fully committed (to their work).

Tougher times

Tech companies have always pushed their employees very hard and that has been a problem for many years, said Geoffrey Crothall, of the Hong Kong-based China Labour Bulletin.

What’s interesting about the anti-996 pushback is that wages in the tech sector were always much higher than anywhere else, he said.

“But now people are being laid off, people are not getting the same kind of bonuses, they are not getting the same pay increases that they are used to and so people are saying I am not getting paid as much, why should I work as hard,” Crothall said.

How big the movement’s impact will be remains to be seen. Crothall said it is still too early to say whether the campaign will be a game changer or short-term phenomenon.

Game changer?

The key goal of the anti-996 campaign is to get employers to buy into the movement by attaching an Anti-996 license to software to show their support for labor standards. A push that reportedly is already gaining some traction.

Going forward, getting the campaign to move from online to offline will be a big challenge.

It is also unclear how long the debate online will be allowed to continue in China’s tightly controlled cyberspace. Already, internet users have reported that some Chinese-made browsers are blocking access to the 996.icu page on Github.

A post on Zhihu.com, a Chinese question and answer website that asked what the electronics chain Suning’s view was on the debate was shut down. Earlier posts remain, but a message at the top of the discussion page reads: “this question has been closed for infringing on company rights.”

Chinese state media seemed to voice support for the concerns of young high-tech workers and long work hours.

An editorial in the state-run China Youth Daily newspaper portrayed young tech workers as being besieged by the 996-work week. The piece argued that it was time for labor regulators to get more actively involved. It also noted that the 996-work week was not just a problem facing high-tech employees, but something workers in other sectors face as well.

 
…

Britain’s government redoubled its efforts Thursday to win over the main opposition party in a last-gasp bid to avoid a chaotic exit from the European Union next week.

The latest round of talks came after lawmakers tried to safeguard against a doomsday ending to the 46-year partnership by fast-tracking a bill Wednesday night seeking to delay Brexit.

May is racing against the clock in a desperate search for votes that could push her ill-loved divorce deal with the other 27 EU leaders through parliament on the fourth attempt.

May’s spokesman said there would be “intensive discussions over the course of today”, noting the “urgency” of the situation.

Britain’s latest deadline is April 12 and resistance to May’s plan remains passionately strong.

But increasingly weary EU leaders — tired of Britain’s political drama and eager to focus on Europe’s own problems — want to see either a done deal or a new way forward from May before they all meet in Brussels on Wednesday.

Her European counterparts will decide whether to grant May’s request to push back Brexit until May 22 — the day before nations begin electing a new European Parliament.

One alternative is to force her to accept a much longer extension that could give Britain time to rethink Brexit and possibly reverse its decision to leave.

The other is to let Britain go without a deal on April 12 in the hope that the economic disruption is short-lived and worth the price of eliminating long-term Brexit uncertainties.

‘Sense of resignation’

May dramatically ended her courtship of her own party’s holdouts and resistant Northern Irish allies by turning to the main opposition Labour Party this week.

The premier met Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn on Wednesday for a reported 100 minutes of talks both sides described as “cordial” but inconclusive.

The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier on Thursday welcomed the cross-party effort to resolved the deadlock.

“It’s time for decisions,” he tweeted.

But May’s decision to hear out Corbyn’s demands for a closer post-Brexit alliance with the bloc that includes membership in its customs union has enraged Britain’s right-wing and seen two junior ministers resign.

One senior minister said May had no other choice.

“It’s very simple — there’s nowhere else to go,” the unnamed cabinet minister told the news website Politico.

“There’s a sense of resignation about her that ‘we get this through and I take the flak’.”

Pro-European members of May’s team also insisted that it was time to compromise on long-standing political beliefs for the benefit of safe resolution of Britain’s biggest crisis in decades.

“Both parties have to give something up,” finance minister Philip Hammond told ITV.

“There is going to be pain on both sides.”

Competing visions

May and Corbyn have competing visions of Britain’s place in Europe and neither has shown much willingness to compromise in the past.

Corbyn said late Wednesday that he did not see “as much change as I expected” from May.

The Times newspaper quoted an unnamed government source as saying that May’s office thought it more likely than not that the negotiations would fail.

May has resisted the customs union idea because it bars Britain from striking its own independent trade agreements with nations such as China and the United States.

And Corbyn is under pressure from Labour’s pro-EU wing to push for a second referendum that would pit May’s final deal against the option of staying in the bloc.

Corbyn has shied away from backing another vote due in part to his own sceptical view of Brussels.

The Labour-backing Mirror newspaper said May and Corbyn would let their teams negotiate Thursday before deciding on whether to meet again face to face Friday.

 
…

White House adviser Ivanka Trump is planning a trip to Africa to promote a global women’s initiative she’s leading.  

President Donald Trump’s daughter will visit Ethiopia and Ivory Coast over four days this month. The White House said Wednesday that her schedule includes a women’s economic empowerment summit in Ivory Coast as well as site visits and meetings with political leaders, executives and female entrepreneurs in both countries. 

Accompanying her will be Mark Green, administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. On parts of the trip, they will be joined David Bohigian, acting president of the Overseas Private Investment Corp., and Kristalina Georgieva, interim president of the World Bank Group. 

OPIC provides loans, loan guarantees and political risk insurance, funding projects that stretch across continents and industries. 

It will be Ivanka Trump’s first visit to Africa since the White House undertook the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative in February. In a statement to The Associated Press, she said she was “excited to travel to Africa” to advance the effort. 

Multi-agency effort

The initiative involves the State Department, the National Security Council and other U.S. agencies. It aims to coordinate current programs and develop new ones to assist women in job training, financial support, legal or regulatory reforms and other areas.  

Ivanka Trump says the goal is to economically empower 50 million women in developing countries by 2025.  

Money for the effort will come through USAID, which initially set up a $50 million fund using dollars already budgeted. The president’s 2020 budget proposal requests $100 million for the initiative, which will also be supported by programs across the government as well as private investment. The White House spending plan would cut overall funding for diplomacy and development.  

Ivanka Trump has made women’s economic empowerment a centerpiece of her White House portfolio. She has made a number of international trips, with a focus on these issues, including to Japan and India. Her travel to Africa follows a five-day tour that first lady Melania Trump made there last year, with a focus on child welfare.  

Like the first lady, Ivanka Trump’s efforts could be complicated by the president, who was criticized last year after his private comments about “s—hole countries” in Africa and other regions were leaked to journalists.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump met NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the White House Tuesday, where he took credit for increased burden sharing in collective defense spending. As White House Correspondent Patsy Widakuswara reports, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is commemorating its 70th birthday in Washington with less pomp than usual, out of concerns for further verbal attacks from an American president who has repeatedly criticized the trans-Atlantic military alliance.
…

The United States will not send high-level officials to attend China’s second Belt and Road summit in Beijing this month, a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department said on Tuesday, citing concerns about financing practices for the project.

China’s top diplomat, Yang Jiechi, said on Saturday that almost 40 foreign leaders would take part in the summit due to be held in Beijing in late April. He rejected criticisms of the project as “prejudiced.”

The first summit for the project, which envisions rebuilding the old Silk Road to connect China with Asia, Europe and beyond with massive infrastructure spending, was held in 2017 and was attended by Matt Pottinger, the senior White House official for Asia.

There are no such plans this year.

“We will not send high-level officials from the United States,” a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department said in answer to a question from Reuters.

“We will continue to raise concerns about opaque financing practices, poor governance, and disregard for internationally accepted norms and standards, which undermine many of the standards and principles that we rely upon to promote sustainable, inclusive development, and to maintain stability and a rules-based order.

“We have repeatedly called on China to address these concerns,” the official added.

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative has proven controversial in many Western capitals, particularly Washington, which views it as a means to spread Chinese influence abroad and saddle countries with unsustainable debt through non-transparent projects.

On Saturday, Yang called such criticisms “prejudiced,” saying China has never forced debt upon participants and the project was to promote joint development.

On Saturday, he did not name the 40 leaders he said would attend, but some of China’s closest allies have already confirmed they will be there, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen.

​The United States has been particularly critical of Italy’s decision to sign up to the plan this month, during a visit by Xi to Rome, the first for a G7 nation.

Washington sees China as major strategic rival and the Trump administration has engaged Beijing in a tit-for-tat tariff war. 

The world’s two biggest economies have levied tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of bilateral trade since July 2018, raising costs, disrupting supply chains and roiling global markets.

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow on Tuesday said the countries “expect to make more headway” in trade talks this week, while the top U.S. business lobbying group said differences over an enforcement mechanism and the removal of U.S. tariffs were still obstacles to a deal.
…

Trade tensions between China and the United States are putting a drag on economies in the region, with growth likely to continue to slow in the coming two years, the Asian Development Bank says in a report released Wednesday.

The Manila, Philippines-based regional lender’s latest economic outlook forecasts that growth in developing Asia will slow slightly to 5.7 percent this year and 5.6 percent in 2020. In 2017 growth was at 6.2 percent.

“The main risk to the outlook is still the ongoing trade conflict, as heightened trade policy uncertainty can negatively affect investment and manufacturing activity,” it said. “A sharper slowdown in the advanced economies or the PRC (People’s Republic of China) is another risk.”

The annual update comes as China and the U.S. prepare for another round of talks, this week in Washington, aimed at resolving their dispute over China’s industrial policies and acquisition of technology.

After the dispute escalated in mid-2018, with both sides imposing billions of dollars’ worth of tariffs on each other’s products, world trade weakened, contracting nearly 2 percent in January from a year earlier, the report shows.

It said the solid growth momentum in the first nine months of the year began to fade in the last quarter. Growth in industrial production also showed signs of weakness, the ADB report said.

This is an added burden as the business cycle for major economies heads into a “negative trend,” said the ADB’s chief economist, Yasuyuki Sawada.

“This global business cycle seems to create some impact on Asian economies,” he said in an interview. “It’s not only trade tensions.”

Other reports show similar sluggishness in the region, which remains the main driver for world economic growth.

The latest set of purchasing manager indexes showed slight improvements in exports in March from January-February for Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and Taiwan as well as China.

“But other data suggest that growth in China could well weaken again in the near term,” Capital Economics said in a report. “As such, we think it is too soon to predict a turn in fortunes for the region’s manufacturing sectors.”

The Asian Development Bank forecasts that growth in major economies will slip to 1.9 percent in 2019 and 1.6 percent in 2020 from 2.2 percent last year. The U.S. economy is forecast to expand at a 2.4 percent annual rate this year, slowing from 2.9 percent in 2018, and to decelerate to 1.9 percent growth in 2020. Japan’s growth will remain flat at 0.8 percent this year, it estimates, and fall to 0.6 percent next year.

The bank expects growth in the area using the euro to fall to 1.5 percent in 2019 and 2020 from 1.8 percent in 2018.

On the positive side, inflation should remain manageable and domestic demand in many economies in Southeast and South Asia is vibrant, the Asian Development Bank said.

That’s less true of East Asia, where consumers have grown more cautious about spending: auto sales in China, for example, have plunged in recent months in one of the biggest reversals of sentiment.

Developing countries in Asia are seeing an uptick in investment from many parts of the world, especially China, it noted. China’s foreign direct investment in new projects such as renewable energy, textile factories and property in the region nearly tripled, while investment by the U.S. jumped by nearly three-quarters.

While much of the ADB’s report focused on trade and investment, the bank urged governments across the region to devote more resources to cultivating resilience and taking measures to help prevent or mitigate natural disasters.

The report noted that 84 percent of the 206 million people affected by natural disasters each year in 2000-2018 lived in developing Asian economies. More than half of the 60,000 deaths from such catastrophes each year were in this region, which suffers a large share of extreme weather events and earthquakes.

The report says that a large share of the $1.7 trillion in annual investments in infrastructure needed over the coming decade should go to reducing risks from such disasters.

One area of concern is insurance.

“Almost all direct damage is not covered by insurance,” Sawada said.

Another area that could yield strong results is in weather forecasting and warnings in the Asia-Pacific, home to four of every five people affected by storms and other disasters.

While earthquakes and tsunamis are virtually impossible to predict, when it comes to extreme weather, “there is room for constructing mechanisms and building up early warning systems,” Sawada said. “There is huge potential.”
…

Royal Dutch Shell on Tuesday became the first major oil and gas company to announce plans to leave a leading U.S. refining lobby due to disagreement on climate policies, citing its support for the goals of the Paris climate agreement.

In its first review of its association with 19 key industry groups, Shell said it had found “material misalignment” over climate policy with the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and would quit the body in 2020.

The review is part of Shell’s drive to increase transparency and show investors it is in line with the 2015 Paris climate agreement’s goals to limit global warming by reducing carbon emissions to a net zero by the end of the century.

It is the latest sign of how investor pressure on oil companies, particularly in Europe, is leading to changes in their behavior around climate. Last year, Shell caved in to investor pressure over climate change, setting out plans to introduce industry-leading carbon emissions targets linked to executive pay.

Its chief executive, Ben van Beurden, has since repeatedly urged oil and gas producers to take action over climate and pollution, staking out a more radical position than the heads of other major oil companies.

“AFPM has not stated support for the goal of the Paris Agreement. Shell supports the goal of the Paris Agreement,” the Anglo-Dutch company said in its decision.

“The need for urgent action in response to climate change has become ever more obvious since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015. As a result, society’s expectations in this area have changed, and Shell’s views have also evolved,” van Beurden said in the report.

The company has disagreed with AFPM on a number of issues for some time, according to two lobbying sources. Shell said it also disagreed with AFPM’s opposition to a price on carbon and action on low-carbon technologies.

Shell and AFPM have also been at odds in recent months over regulation over the use of renewable fuels. While Shell and other large refiners invested in cleaner fuel technology, AFPM has fought hard against standards requiring refiners to blend or subsidize the blending of biofuels into the gasoline pool – saying it hurts independent refiners.

Shell and rivals Exxon and BP have in recent years left the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative political group, over its stance on climate change.

AFPM Chief Executive Chet Thompson thanked Shell for its “longstanding collaboration.”

“We will also continue working on behalf of the refining and petrochemical industries to advance policies that ensure reliable and affordable access to fuels and petrochemicals, while being responsible stewards of the environment,” Thompson said in a statement.

AFPM counts around 300 U.S. and international members including Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP and Total SA that operate 110 refineries and 229 petrochemical plants, according to its 2018 annual report.

French oil major Total said in a statement to Reuters that consensus required by organizations such as AFPM does not always reflect its position, and that it regularly monitors the relevance of its participation.

“In this case, Total takes a pro-active approach in order to convince its peers, particularly on climate issues. In case of differing points of view, Total publicly defends its position, and is ready to reconsider its participation in case of disagreement,” the company said.

Total said it was fully aware of climate issues, has publicly recognised them and takes them into its strategy.

Shell’s review was welcomed by Adam Matthews, director of ethics and engagement for the Church of England Pensions Board, which invests in Shell and led discussions with the company over its climate policy.

“This is an industry first,” Matthews said. “With this review Shell have set the benchmark for best practice on corporate climate lobbying not just within oil and gas but across all industries. The challenge now is for others to follow suit.”

Walk Away

Shell also found “some” misalignment with nine other trade associations, including the American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry’s main lobby.

Shell said that while it had some climate-related differences with the API, it welcomed the lobby’s advocacy on a range of state and federal issues such as trade and transport, as well as the API’s efforts to reduce methane emissions.

Shell said it will continue to engage with the API and other groups over climate policies and monitor their alignment.

Shell last month urged President Donald Trump’s administration to tighten restrictions on emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, instead of weakening them as planned.
…

As movie theater owners converge on Las Vegas for their annual convention, one topic that keeps coming up is how they contend with a company that has resisted their traditional business model: Netflix.

The world’s most successful streaming service sends some movies to theaters but has insisted on making them available on Netflix at the same time, or just a few weeks later. That has upset big movie chains, which refuse to show Netflix films and want a longer “window” of time to play films exclusively.

The issue of how Netflix fits into, or threatens, the theater business dominated a press conference on Tuesday at CinemaCon, the theater industry trade show.

“All of your questions from the first 17 minutes or whatever are about Netflix,” grumbled John Fithian, president and chief executive of the National Association of Theatre Owners.

He insisted that Netflix and theaters can happily co-exist, citing data that showed the biggest consumers of streaming video visit theaters more often. He also said Netflix had helped revive interest in documentaries, which had helped draw people to theaters to see them.

Earlier, Fithian told a crowd in a Caesars Palace theater that films reached their full potential only with a “robust theatrical release.” He spoke just after “Crazy Rich Asians” director Jon M. Chu said his film would not have had as big an impact if it had debuted on a streaming service.

Some members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, the group that hands out the Oscars, have been debating whether films must play in theaters for a specific length of time to compete for the awards, which could exclude Netflix or force the company to agree to longer exclusive theatrical runs.

Department of Justice Weighs In

Hollywood publication Variety reported on Tuesday that the Department of Justice had weighed in on the issue.

Antitrust chief Makan Delrahim sent a letter to the academy warning that any changes that limited eligibility for the industry’s highest honors “may raise antitrust concerns,” according to Variety.

An academy spokesperson confirmed it had received the letter and said any rule changes would be considered at an April 23 meeting. A source close to Netflix said the company was not involved with or aware of the Justice Department’s letter.

Netflix is a member of the Motion Picture Association of America, the trade association for Walt Disney Co., AT&T’s Warner Bros. and other movie studios.

“We are all stronger advocates for creativity and the entertainment business when we are working together … all of us,” MPAA CEO Charles Rivkin said on the CinemaCon stage.

Both Rivkin and Fithian noted that box office receipts hit a record $11.9 billion in the United States and Canada in 2018 even as Netflix released dozens of original movies.

Mitch Neuhauser, managing director of CinemaCon, also was asked to address the issue when he wandered into a work room for reporters.

“Streaming is not a problem!” he exclaimed, noting that there are limits to how much people can stand to stay at home with all of the modern conveniences including grocery delivery. “We’ve got to get out of the house. We are talking about becoming a society of hermits!”
…