Economy

Moody’s cited rising debt, saying US had repeatedly failed to end the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and interest.

Moody’s Ratings has stripped the United States government of its top credit rating, citing successive governments’ failure to stop a rising tide of debt.

On Friday, Moody’s lowered the rating from a gold-standard Aaa to Aa1. “Successive US administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs,” it said as it changed its outlook on the US to “stable” from “negative”.

But, it added, the US “retains exceptional credit strengths such as the size, resilience and dynamism of its economy and the role of the US dollar as global reserve currency.”

Moody’s is the last of the three major rating agencies to lower the federal government’s credit rating. Standard & Poor’s downgraded federal debt in 2011, and Fitch Ratings followed in 2023.

In a statement, Moody’s said: “We expect federal deficits to widen, reaching nearly 9 percent of [the US economy] by 2035, up from 6.4 percent in 2024, driven mainly by increased interest payments on debt, rising entitlement spending, and relatively low revenue generation.’’

Extending President Donald Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, a priority of the Republican-controlled Congress, Moody’s said, would add $4 trillion over the next decade to the federal primary deficit, which does not include interest payments.

The White House adopted an aggressive tone towards Moody’s after the ratings agency downgraded the US credit rating.

White House communications director Steven Cheung reacted to the downgrade via a social media post, singling out Moody’s economist, Mark Zandi, for criticism. He called Zandi a political opponent of Trump.

“Nobody takes his ‘analysis’ seriously. He has been proven wrong time and time again,” Cheung said.

A gridlocked political system has been unable to tackle the huge deficits accumulated by the US. Republicans reject tax increases, and Democrats are reluctant to cut spending.

On Friday, House Republicans failed to push a big package of tax breaks and spending cuts through the Budget Committee. A small group of hard-right Republican lawmakers, insisting on steeper cuts to Medicaid and President Joe Biden’s green energy tax breaks, joined all Democrats in opposing it, a rare political setback for the Republican president.

Washington, DC – Three days, three countries, hundreds of billions of dollars in investments and a geopolitical shift in the United States’s approach to the region: Donald Trump’s trip to the Middle East has been eventful.

This week, the United States president visited Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates in the first planned trip of his second presidency, after attending Pope Francis’s funeral last month.

Trump was visibly gleeful throughout the trip as he secured investments, criticised domestic political rivals and heaped praise on Gulf leaders. The word “historic” was used more than a few times by US officials to describe the visits.

With Trump returning to the White House, here are five key takeaways from his trip:

A rebuke of interventionism

Addressing an investment summit in Riyadh, Trump promoted a realist approach to the Middle East — one in which the US does not intervene in the affairs of other countries.

He took a swipe at neoconservatives who oversaw the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as he lauded Gulf leaders for developing the region.

“This great transformation has not come from Western intervention or flying people in beautiful planes, giving you lectures on how to live and how to govern your own affairs,” he said.

“The gleaming marbles of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi were not created by the so-called nation-builders, neo-cons or liberal nonprofits like those who spent trillions and trillions of dollars failing to develop Kabul, Baghdad, so many other cities.”

Trump built his political brand with his “America First” slogan, calling for the US to focus on its own issues instead of helping — or bombing — foreign countries.

But his words at the investment summit marked a stern rebuke of the neo-cons who dominated Trump’s Republican Party a decade ago.

“In the end, the so-called nation-builders wrecked far more nations than they built, and the interventionists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves,” Trump said.

Israel sidelined, but no Gaza solution

It is rare for US presidents to travel to the Middle East and not visit Israel, but Trump omitted the US ally from his itinerary as he toured the region.

Skipping Israel was seen as a reflection of the deteriorating ties between the US administration and the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

This week’s trip also came in the context of several moves perceived as evidence of the US marginalising Israel. The US has continued to hold talks with Israel’s rival Iran, announced a ceasefire with the Houthis in Yemen, and conducted unilateral negotiations to release Israeli soldier Edan Alexander, a US citizen, from Hamas captivity.

Moreover, while touring the Gulf, Trump did not use his remarks to prioritise the establishment of formal diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel, which had been a top goal during his first term.

It remains unclear how Trump’s decisions will affect the “special relationship” between the two allies, but experts say it is becoming increasingly apparent that the US no longer views the Middle East solely through the lens of Israel.

“Is it a tactical problem for Netanyahu and the entire pro-Israel lobby? I think it is,” Khaled Elgindy, a visiting scholar at Georgetown University, said of Trump’s shift.

“It does throw a wrench in the machinery because it is a president who is showing openly daylight with Israeli decision-making, and not just in rhetoric, but acting on it — leaving Israel out of the process.”

With that chasm emerging, some Palestinian rights advocates had hoped that the US president’s trip to the region would see Washington pursue a deal to end Israel’s war on Gaza.

But as Trump marvelled at the luxurious buildings in the Gulf, Israel intensified its bombardment to destroy what’s left of the Palestinian territory.

No ceasefire was announced, despite reports of continuing talks in Doha. And Israel appears to be pushing forward with its plan to expand its assault on Gaza as it continues to block aid for the nearly two million people in the enclave, leading to fears of famine.

United Nations experts and rights groups have described the situation as a genocide.

But despite preaching “peace and prosperity” for both Israelis and Palestinians, Trump made no strong push to end the war during this week’s trip.

On Thursday, Trump suggested that he has not given up on the idea of depopulating Gaza and turning it over to the US — a proposal that legal experts say amounts to ethnic cleansing.

“I have concepts for Gaza that I think are very good. Make it a freedom zone,” he said. “Let the United States get involved, and make it just a freedom zone.”

Lifting Syria sanctions

In a move that surprised many observers, Trump announced from Riyadh that he will offer sanction relief to Syria, as the country emerges from a decade-plus civil war.

Trump also met with interim Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa and described him as a “young, attractive guy”.

A wholesale lifting of sanctions was not expected, in part because of Israel’s hostility to the new authorities in Syria. Israeli officials often describe al-Sharaa, who led al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria before severing ties with the group, as a “terrorist”.

But Trump said he made the decision to lift the economic penalties against Syria at the request of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

“I will be ordering the cessation of sanctions against Syria in order to give them a chance at greatness,” the US president said.

The White House said on Wednesday that Trump had a list of requests for al-Sharaa, including establishing diplomatic relations with Israel and deporting “Palestinian terrorists”.

Removing US sanctions, which had been imposed on the government of former President Bashar al-Assad, is likely to be a boost for the new Syrian authorities, who are grappling with an ailing economy after years of conflict.

“Lifting sanctions on Syria represents a fundamental turning point,” Ibrahim Nafi Qushji, an economist, told Al Jazeera.

“The Syrian economy will transition from interacting with developing economies to integrating with more developed ones, potentially significantly reshaping trade and investment relations.”

A carrot and a stick for Iran

In Saudi Arabia, Trump declared that he wants a deal with Iran — and he wants it done quickly.

“We really want them to be a successful country,” the US president said of Iran.

“We want them to be a wonderful, safe, great country, but they cannot have a nuclear weapon. This is an offer that will not last forever. The time is right now for them to choose.”

Trump warned Iran that, if it rejects his “olive branch”, he would impose a “massive maximum pressure” against Tehran and choke off its oil exports.

Notably, Trump did not threaten explicit military action against Iran, a departure from his previous rhetoric. In late March, for instance, he told NBC News, “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing.”

Iran says it is not seeking nuclear weapons and would welcome a stringent monitoring programme of its nuclear facilities.

But Israel and some hawks want the Iranian nuclear programme completely dismantled, not just scaled back.

US and Iranian officials have held multiple rounds of talks this year, but Tehran says it has not received an official offer from Washington. And Trump officials have not explicitly indicated what the endgame of the talks is.

US envoy Steve Witkoff said last month that Iran “must stop and eliminate” uranium enrichment, but days earlier, he had suggested that enrichment should be brought down to civilian energy levels.

Several Gulf countries, including the three that Trump visited this week, have welcomed the nuclear negotiations, as relations between Iran and its Arab neighbours have grown more stable in recent years.

Investments, investments and more investments

Before entering politics, Trump was a real estate mogul who played up his celebrity persona as a mega-rich dealmaker. He appears to have brought that business mindset to the White House.

While in the wealthy Gulf region, Trump was in his element. He announced deals that would see Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE buy US arms and invest in American firms. According to the White House, Trump secured a total of $2 trillion in investments from the Middle East during the trip.

And his administration is framing the deals as a major political and economic victory for Trump.

“While it took President Biden nearly four years to secure $1 trillion in investments, President Trump achieved this in his first month, with additional investment commitments continuing to roll in,” the White House said.

“President Trump is accelerating investment in America and securing fair trade deals around the world, paving the way for a new Golden Age of lasting prosperity for generations to come.”

The strike leaves hundreds of thousands of commuters in New Jersey and New York without rail access.

New Jersey’s commuter rail engineers are on strike after negotiations for higher wages failed to materialise, leaving trains idle for commuters in the third-largest transit system in the United States for the first time in more than 40 years.

The strike began on Friday after The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, which represents 450 NJ Transit engineers who drive the agency’s commuter trains and agency management, broke off talks late Thursday after an unsuccessful 15-hour bargaining session.

The labour clash came weeks after negotiators had agreed on a potential deal in March, but the union’s members voted overwhelmingly to reject it.

NJ Transit has said it cannot afford the pay rises that the engineers are seeking because 14 other unions that negotiate separate labour contracts with the agency would demand the same, higher wage rates for their members.

The union pushed back on the gripe and has said that “NJT claims it doesn’t have the money to pay engineers a salary in line with industry standards, but somehow found a half-billion dollars for a new and unnecessary headquarters.”

New Jersey Transit opened a new headquarters earlier this year.

The union has said it is simply aiming to raise the engineers’ salaries to match those at other commuter railroads in the region.

“They [rail engineers]  have gone without a raise for six years and have been seeking a new contract since October 2019,” the union said in a statement.

NJ Transit says the engineers currently make $135,000 on average and that management had offered a deal that would yield an average salary of $172,000. But the union has disputed those figures, saying the current average salary is actually $113,000.

The parties have exchanged accusations of bad-faith bargaining.

The strike means that hundreds of thousands of daily passengers in New Jersey and New York are without service. NJ Transit said its rail system began its shutdown at 12:01am local time Friday.

In a news conference, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy and NJ Transit’s Chief Executive Officer Kris Kolluri told reporters talks had paused but that management remained willing to resume negotiations at any time.

“We must reach a final deal that is both fair to employees and affordable,” Murphy, a Democrat, told reporters. “Let’s get back to the table and seal a deal.”

Murphy and Kolluri said the US National Mediation Board had reached out to both sides to propose reopening talks on Sunday morning, or sooner if the parties wished.

The union statement made no mention of when talks might be restarted. Protests began at several locations across the rail system, including NJ Transit’s headquarters in Newark, Penn Station in New York City, and the Atlantic City rail terminal.

The governor and the NJ Transit CEO also outlined contingency plans for dealing with the work stoppage, the first transit strike to hit New Jersey since a three-week walkout in 1983.

Workers urged to stay home

The looming strike had already prompted the agency to cancel trains and buses to MetLife Stadium for pop star Shakira’s concert last night and again for this evening.

In an advisory, NJ Transit encouraged commuters to work from home starting on Friday if possible.

The agency said it would increase bus services on existing lines and charter private buses to operate from several satellite lots in the event of a rail strike but warned buses would only be able to handle about 20 percent of rail customers.

Kolluri said last week that the union was “playing a game of chicken with the lives of 350,000 riders”.

“We have sought nothing more than equal pay for equal work, only to be continually rebuffed by New Jersey Transit,” Tom Haas, the union’s general chairman, said earlier this week.

Days earlier, Novo Nordisk cut its sales and profit forecast for first time since the launch of Wegovy four years ago.

Wegovy-maker Novo Nordisk has pushed out CEO Lars Fruergaard Jorgensen over concerns the company is losing its first-mover advantage in the highly competitive obesity drug market.

Novo Nordisk announced the decision on Friday.

Days earlier, Novo Nordisk cut its sales and profit forecast for the first time since the launch of Wegovy four years ago, though Jorgensen had predicted a return to growth in its biggest market in the second half of this year.

Novo’s chairman, Helge Lund, tried to reassure analysts and investors on a call that the company’s strategy was intact and the plan for executing it had not changed.

He told the Reuters news agency that discussions to replace Jorgensen had occurred over the past few weeks. Novo said earlier that Jorgensen will remain in his role until a successor is found.

Under Jorgensen’s leadership, Novo Nordisk became a world leader in the weight-loss drug market, with skyrocketing sales of its Wegovy and Ozempic treatments.

Analysts and investors were unconvinced of the need to replace him.

“He was leading the company for eight years and was, in my opinion, extremely successful,” Lukas Leu, a portfolio manager at Bellevue Asset Management, told Reuters.

Danske Bank analyst Carsten Lonborg Madsen was similarly caught off guard.

“The way we know Novo Nordisk is that normally you have patience when you’re on the right track, and then you let things move in the right direction once you have the strategy right,” he said.

“It just feels like there’s something that has gone pretty wrong here,” he said on the call.

Novo’s shares have plunged since hitting a record high in June last year as competition, particularly from US rival Eli Lilly, makes inroads into its market share and as its pipeline of new drugs has failed to impress investors.

“The changes are made in light of the recent market challenges Novo Nordisk has been facing, and the development of the company’s share price since mid-2024,” Novo said in its statement.

Shares down

Jorgensen, at 58, has been CEO since 2017. He said in an interview with Danish broadcaster TV2 that he did not see the decision coming, and was only informed very recently.

Booming sales of Wegovy helped make Novo the most valuable listed company in Europe, worth $615bn at its peak in June last year, but its market value has halved to about $310bn.

Novo Nordisk’s share price fell on the news, trading 0.8 percent lower by 14:01 GMT after being 4 percent higher earlier in the day.

The shares are down 32 percent year-to-date and 59 percent from their all-time high.

Eli Lilly has seen US prescriptions for its Zepbound obesity shot surpass Wegovy since mid-March in its biggest market. Eli Lilly shares were up 2.6 percent after the news.

Camilla Sylvest, Novo’s head of commercial strategy and corporate affairs and a consistent presence alongside CEO Jorgensen, stepped down last month without citing a reason.

Former CEO of Novo Nordisk for 16 years and current chair of the Novo Nordisk Foundation, Lars Rebien Sorensen, will join the board as an observer with immediate effect with the aim of taking a seat at the next annual general meeting, Novo said.

The company is controlled by the Novo Nordisk Foundation through its investment arm, which owns 77 percent of the voting shares.

United States President Donald Trump has signed several economic deals on his visit to the Gulf region.

One of the biggest deals was signed in Qatar, where Boeing secured its largest-ever order of wide-body jets from Qatar Airways.

Doha also promised to invest more than $10bn in the Al Udeid Air Base, one of the US’s biggest military facilities in the world.

Trump says he’s forging a future with the Middle East defined by commerce, not chaos. But could that mean regional stability and security are now taking a back seat?

And how likely is it that the US president would throw US weight behind ending the devastating war in Gaza?

Presenter: Dareen Abughaida

Guests:

Faisal al-Mudahka – Editor-in-chief, Gulf Times

Andreas Krieg – Senior lecturer, King’s College London’s School of Security Studies

Paul Musgrave – Associate professor of government, Georgetown University in Qatar

Avelo Airlines, a Texas-based budget carrier, is facing backlash from both customers and employees over its decision to operate deportation flights under a new contract with the Trump administration.

Avelo, which has been struggling financially, signed a contract with the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) last month to transport migrants to detention centres inside and outside the US, according to an internal company memo reviewed by the Reuters news agency.

On Monday, the airline flew its first flight under the deal from Arizona to Louisiana, data from flight-tracking services FlightAware and Flightradar24 showed.

Avelo plans to dedicate three aircraft to deportation operations and has established a charter-only base in Mesa, Arizona, specifically for these flights, according to the company memo.

The union representing Avelo’s flight attendants called the contract “bad for the airline”, and one customer has helped organise a petition urging travellers to boycott the airline.

US President Donald Trump has launched a hardline crackdown on undocumented immigration, including the deportation of Venezuelan migrants he accuses of being gang members to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador. Immigration authorities also detained and moved to deport some legal permanent US residents. Trump’s policies have triggered a rash of lawsuits and protests.

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for public affairs at DHS, said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was deporting illegal aliens who broke the country’s laws. She called the protests “nothing more than a tired tactic to abolish ICE by proxy”.

“Avelo Airlines is a sub-carrier on a government contract to assist with deportation flights,” McLaughlin said in a statement. “Attacks and demonization of ICE and our partners is wrong.”

On defence

The airline on Wednesday confirmed its long-term agreement with ICE and said it was vital to Avelo’s financial stability. It also shared a statement from CEO Andrew Levy acknowledging that it is a “sensitive and complicated topic”, but saying that the decision on the contract came “after significant deliberations”.

The statement added that the deal would keep the airline’s “more than 1,100 crewmembers employed for years to come”.

Avelo said it will use three Boeing 737-800 planes in Mesa, Arizona.

“Flights will be both domestic and international,” the company said, declining to share more details of the agreement.

Avelo, which launched in 2021, was forced to suspend its most recent fundraising round after reporting its worst quarterly performance in two years.

In a message to employees last month, Levy said the airline was spending more than it earned from its customers, forcing it to seek repeated infusions of capital from investors.

“I realize some may view the decision to fly for DHS as controversial,” Levy wrote in the staff memo, which was reviewed by Reuters, but said the opportunity was “too valuable not to pursue”.

Widespread backlash

The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, which represents Avelo’s crew, has urged the company to reconsider its decision, which it said would be “bad for the airline”.

“Having an entire flight of people handcuffed and shackled would hinder any evacuation and risk injury or death,” the union said. “We cannot do our jobs in these conditions.”

The Trump administration has deported hundreds of migrants labelled as Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador. Photos and videos have shown deportees in handcuffs and shackles.

Customers have also expressed outrage. Anne Watkins, a New Haven, Connecticut, resident, said she has stopped flying with Avelo. She and her co-members at the New Haven Immigrants Coalition have launched an online petition urging travellers to boycott the airline until it ends its ICE flight operations. The petition has garnered more than 38,000 signatures.

Watkins, 55, said the coalition also organised a vigil on Monday to mark the launch of Avelo’s deportation flights.

“Companies can decide to operate in wholly ethical and transparent ways,” she said. “Avelo is not choosing to do that right now.”

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a Democrat, has threatened to review the state’s incentives for Avelo, which has received more than $2m in subsidies and tax breaks.

In California, Los Angeles resident Nancy K has co-founded a campaign called “Mothers Against Avelo”. She plans to lead weekly protests every Sunday in May at Hollywood Burbank airport, one of Avelo’s six operating bases.

Republicans have proposed the remittance tax as part of a broader push to crack down on undocumented immigration.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has denounced a provision in a tax bill being considered in the United States Congress that would impose duties on remittances — a term used to describe the money people send abroad for non-commercial reasons, often as gifts to family and loved ones.

On Thursday, during her morning news conference, Sheinbaum addressed the tax bill directly, calling the remittances proposal “a measure that is unacceptable”.

“It would result in double taxation, since Mexicans living in the United States already pay taxes,” she said.

She added that her government was reaching out to other countries with large immigrant populations to voice concern about the US proposition.

“This will not just affect Mexico,” she said. “It will also affect many other countries and many other Latin American countries.”

According to World Bank data from 2024, India is the top recipient of international remittances, with $129bn coming from abroad, followed by Mexico with more than $68bn.

In Mexico, in particular, experts estimate that remittances make up close to 4 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

But a far-reaching tax bill championed by US President Donald Trump includes language that would impose a 5-percent excise tax on remittances sent specifically by non-citizens, including visa holders and permanent residents.

That bill would affect nearly 40 million people living in the country. US citizens, however, would be exempt from the remittance tax.

Trump has led a campaign to discourage immigration to the US and promote “mass deportation” during his second term in office, as part of his “America First” agenda.

Proponents of that platform say taxing remittances would serve as clear deterrence to immigrants who come to the US looking for better economic opportunities for themselves and any loved ones they hope to support back home.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, an anti-immigration think tank, told The Associated Press news agency that he believes barriers to remittances can help curb undocumented immigration to the US.

“One of the main reasons people come here is to work and send money home,” Krikorian said. “If that’s much more difficult to do, it becomes less appealing to come here.”

Under the bill being weighed in the House of Representatives, the 5-percent tax would be paid by the sender and collected by “remittance transfer providers”, who would then send that money to the US Treasury.

But President Sheinbaum and other leaders have called on Republicans in Congress to reconsider that provision, given the unintended consequences it could create. Sheinbaum even suggested that the tax could be seen as unconstitutional in the US.

“This is an injustice, apart from being unconstitutional,” she said on Thursday. “But in addition, it is the tax on those who have the least. They should charge taxes to those at the top, not those at the bottom.”

Critics of the measure point out that remittances can help stabilise impoverished areas abroad, thereby limiting the likelihood of undocumented migration from those areas.

Additional barriers to sending remittances could create economic setbacks for those communities, not to mention make the process more difficult for US citizens who are exempted from the proposed tax.

Still, even if the tax bill is defeated or the provision on remittances removed, the Trump administration has signalled it plans to move forward with other measures designed to discourage migrants from sending funds abroad.

On April 25, Trump posted on his media platform, Truth Social, a list of “weekly policy achievements”.

On the final page, the top bullet point under “international relations” was “finalizing a Presidential Memorandum to shut down remittances sent by illegal aliens outside the United States”. Trump called the document a “MUST READ”.

Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, will have to start raising prices later this month due to the high cost of tariffs, executives have warned in a clear signal that United States President Donald Trump’s trade war is filtering through to the US economy.

As a bellwether of US consumer health, Walmart’s explicit statement on Thursday is also a signpost for how the trade war is affecting companies as Walmart is noted for its ability to manage costs more aggressively than other companies to keep prices low.

Walmart’s shares fell 2.3 percent in morning trading after it also declined to provide a profit forecast for the second quarter, even as the company’s US comparable sales surpassed expectations in the first quarter.

Net sales rose 2.5 percent to $165.6bn, a hair shy of estimates, while same-store sales were up 4.5 percent. Walmart’s quarterly adjusted profit was 61 cents per share, ahead of the analyst consensus for 58 cents per share.

Many US companies have either slashed or pulled their full-year expectations in the wake of the trade war, as consumers stretch their budgets to buy everything from groceries to essentials at cheaper prices. But Walmart’s statement will resonate nationwide, as roughly 255 million people shop in its stores and online weekly around the world, and 90 percent of the US population lives within 10 miles of a Walmart.

US shoppers will start to see prices rise at the end of May and certainly in June, Walmart’s Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey said in a CNBC interview. On a post-earnings call with analysts, he said the retailer would also have to cut back on orders as it considers price elasticity.

As the largest importer of container goods in the US, Walmart is heavily exposed to tariffs, and even though the US and China reached a truce that lowered levies for imports on Chinese goods to 30 percent, that’s still a high cost to bear, executives said.

“We’re very pleased and appreciative of the progress that has been made by the administration to bring tariffs down … but let me emphasise we still think that’s too high,” Rainey said on the call, referring to the tariff cuts negotiated over the weekend.

“There are certain items, certain categories of merchandise that we’re dependent upon to import from other countries and the prices of those things are likely going to go up, and that’s not good for consumers,” he added.

Other retailers also said they would be boosting prices. German sandal maker Birkenstock on Thursday said it plans to raise prices globally to fully offset the impact of the US tariff of 10 percent on European Union-made goods.

US consumer sentiment ebbed for a fourth straight month in April, signaling watchful purchasing, while the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) contracted for the first time in three years during the first quarter, fanning worries of a recession.

Narrow margins

Walmart’s CEO Doug McMillon said the retailer would not be able to absorb all the tariffs’ costs because of narrow retail margins, but was committed to ensuring that tariff-related costs on general merchandise – which primarily come from China – do not drive food prices higher.

To mitigate the impact, Walmart is working with suppliers to substitute tariff-affected components, such as replacing aluminium with fibreglass, which is not subject to tariffs.

Despite these efforts, McMillon noted that adjusting costs is more challenging in cases where Walmart imports food items like bananas, avocados, coffee, and roses from countries such as Costa Rica, Peru, and Colombia.

Analysts said Walmart was better positioned than rivals, as its scale enables it to lean on its suppliers and squeeze out efficiencies to shield customers from tariffs, but only so much.

“There will likely be some demand destruction from tariffs; a complete wreck is unlikely,” said Brian Jacobsen, chief economist at Annex Wealth Management.

Walmart on Thursday kept its annual sales and profit forecast intact for fiscal 2026, but withheld second-quarter operating income growth and earnings per share forecasts, citing a “fluid operating environment … [which] makes the very near term exceedingly difficult to forecast at the level and speed at which tariffs could go up”.

The United States and China have surprisingly agreed to a dramatic de-escalation in their trade war.

Under the agreement, the world’s two largest economies have paused their respective tariffs for 90 days.

That breaks an impasse which has brought much of the commerce between the two nations to a halt.

Critics say the talks in Geneva did not appear to yield any meaningful concessions. The two sides aim to reach a broader deal, but this takes too long to negotiate.

Also in this episode, we examine whether the US-UK trade pact will deliver real benefits, or is it symbolism over substance?

Also, Senegal is capitalising on its energy wealth to change its fortunes.

The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) is carrying out a criminal investigation into UnitedHealth Group for possible Medicare fraud.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) first broke the story on Wednesday.

UnitedHealth said it had not been notified by the DOJ about the “supposed criminal investigation reported”, and the company stood by “the integrity of our Medicare Advantage program”.

The DOJ’s healthcare-fraud unit is overseeing the criminal investigation, which focuses on the company’s Medicare Advantage business practices, WSJ reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

While the exact nature of the potential criminal allegations against UnitedHealth is unclear, it has been an active probe since at least last summer, the newspaper said.

A DOJ spokesperson declined to comment to the WSJ about the fresh criminal probe. The department did not immediately respond to requests for comments from the Reuters news agency.

Last week, UnitedHealth said in a regular filing that it had been “involved or is currently involved in various governmental investigations, audits and reviews”, without disclosing further details.

The new investigation follows broader scrutiny into the Medicare Advantage programme, in which Medicare-approved plans from a private company supplement regular Medicare for Americans age 65 and older by covering more services that the government-only plans do not, such as dental and vision services.

In February, the WSJ reported a civil fraud investigation into UnitedHealth’s Medicare practices. The company had then said that it was unaware of any new probe.

In the same month, US Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa launched an inquiry into UnitedHealth’s Medicare billing practices, requesting detailed records of the company’s compliance programme and other related documents.

The DOJ earlier this month filed a lawsuit accusing three of the largest US health insurers of paying hundreds of millions of dollars in kickbacks to brokers in exchange for steering patients into the insurers’ Medicare Advantage plans.

Nearly half of the 65 million people covered by Medicare, the US programme for people aged 65 and older or with disabilities, are enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans run by private insurers.

The insurers are paid a set rate for each patient, but can be paid more if patients have multiple health conditions. Standard Medicare coverage is managed by the government.

Brewing turmoil

The health insurer has been under pressure for months. On Tuesday, UnitedHealth Group’s CEO, Andrew Witty, stepped down unexpectedly, and the company simultaneously suspended its 2025 financial forecast due to rising medical costs, triggering an 18 percent drop in shares to a four-year low.

Stephen Hemsley, who led the company for more than a decade until 2017, is taking back the reins following setbacks including the December murder of Brian Thompson, the CEO of its insurance unit, which catapulted UnitedHealth into the public consciousness.

On Thursday, after the news of the probe broke, UnitedHealth Group shares plunged 18 percent to hit a five-year low.

“The stock is already in the doghouse with investors, and additional uncertainty will only pile on,” James Harlow, senior vice president at Novare Capital Management, which owns shares in UnitedHealth, told the news agency Reuters.

If losses hold, UnitedHealth will be the worst-performing stock on the S&P 500 index in two of the last three days.

The past month’s selloff has wiped out nearly $300bn from UnitedHealth’s market capitalization, or more than half of its value since its shares hit a record high in November.

State-owned airline Qatar Airways has signed an agreement to buy 210 aircraft from United States manufacturer Boeing, coinciding with President Donald Trump’s visit to Qatar as part of his tour of the Gulf region.

Trump and Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, witnessed the signing ceremony in Doha on Wednesday. The White House said that the deal for the Boeing 777X and 787 planes with GE Aerospace engines was worth $96bn.

Trump said Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg, who signed the deal with Qatar Airways CEO Badr Mohammed Al Meer next to Trump and the emir, told him: “It’s the largest order of jets in the history of Boeing. That’s good.”

Trump had initially said that the deal was worth more than $200bn and was for 160 planes, before the White House issued updated numbers after his comments.

The White House also said that agreements signed by the US and Qatar would “generate an economic exchange worth at least $1.2 trillion”.

“This is a critical next step for Qatar Airways on our path as we invest in the cleanest, youngest and most efficient fleet in global aviation,” Qatar Airways Group CEO Badr Mohammed Al-Meer said in a statement.

“After two consecutive years of record-breaking commercial performance and with this historic Boeing aircraft order – we’re not simply chasing scale; we’re building strength that will allow us to continue to deliver our unmatched products and customer experiences.”

The sale is also a boost for Boeing and its biggest engine supplier at a time when large versions of rival Airbus’ A350, powered by Rolls-Royce engines, have struggled with maintenance problems from operating in the world’s hottest climates, including the Gulf region.

Boeing shares rose 0.9 percent in New York, while GE Aerospace stock edged up 0.1 percent.

For the 787s, Qatar opted for GE Aerospace’s GEnx engines rather than Rolls-Royce’s Trent 1000, according to the administration. GE Aerospace’s GE9X is the only engine option for the 777X.

It is the largest widebody engine deal for GE Aerospace, the company’s CEO Larry Culp said in a statement.

Faisal al-Mudahka, editor-in-chief of the Gulf Times, said the Qatar Airways purchase of Boeing aircraft is a “win-win”.

As one of the world’s top airlines with a growing market, Qatar Airways has more demand than supply at the moment and will need the fleet, he said.

“I think Donald Trump and Qatar know how to package things to make political gains and economic gains.”

Trump’s Qatar visit is the second destination of his Gulf tour, after an initial stop in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where he made a surprise announcement about lifting sanctions on Syria and then met the country’s president, Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Trump is to land on a third and final stop in the United Arab Emirates on Thursday for a one-day visit.

No mention of Gaza

The Qatari emir said the two leaders had a “great” few hours of discussion covering a range of issues. “I think after signing these documents, we are going to another level of relations,” he said.

Trump thanked the emir and said it had been a “very interesting couple of hours” discussing topics including the Russia-Ukraine war, Iran and trade relations.

However, Israel’s war on Gaza was not mentioned by either leader.

Omar Rahman, a fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the fact that Gaza wasn’t mentioned led him to believe the discussion is “ongoing”.

“When it comes to Gaza, you have the Israelis there as well. On the issue of a ceasefire, Trump can put pressure on the Israelis, … but you still have the Israelis there making decisions. This is going to be a little bit more difficult to work out,” he told Al Jazeera.

US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who was also in Doha, said “we’re making progress” in response to a question by Al Jazeera Diplomatic Editor James Bays on whether discussions on Gaza were ongoing.

“His tone was pretty telling. He was very positive,” Bays said. “When I asked him whether that was regarding aid deliveries or a ceasefire, he said, ‘We’re making progress on all fronts.’”

“He said he hopes there would be a positive announcement ‘soon’, but we have no indication of what that might mean,” Bays added.

Taipei, Taiwan – As Taiwan prepares to shut down its last nuclear reactor, soaring energy demand driven by the island’s semiconductor industry is rekindling a heated debate about nuclear power.

Taiwan’s electricity needs are expected to rise by 12-13 percent by 2030, largely driven by the boom in artificial intelligence (AI), according to the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

Environmental group Greenpeace has estimated that the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the world’s largest contract chipmaker, will by itself consume as much electricity as roughly one-quarter of the island’s some 23 million people by the same date.

The self-ruled island’s soaring appetite for power complicates Taipei’s pledge to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, which is heavily dependent on raising renewable energy production to about 60-70 percent of the total from about 12 percent at present.

Nuclear power advocates argue that the energy source is the most feasible way for Taiwan to reach its competing industrial and environmental goals.

On Tuesday, Taiwan’s legislature passed an amendment to allow nuclear power plants to apply for licences to extend operations beyond the existing 40-year limit.

The opposition Kuomintang and Taiwan People’s Party passed the bill over the objections of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, which came to power in 2016 on a pledge to achieve a “nuclear-free homeland”.

The legal change will not halt Sunday’s planned closure of the last operating reactor – the No 2 reactor at the Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant – though it casts doubt over the island’s longstanding opposition to nuclear power.

The government said after the vote that it had no immediate plans for any future nuclear power projects, though Premier Cho Jung-tai indicated earlier that the government would not oppose the restoration of decommissioned reactors if the amendment passed.

Cho said Taipei was “open” to nuclear power provided safety was ensured and the public reached a consensus on the issue.

Any move to restart the local nuclear industry would, at a minimum, take years.

Taiwan began its civilian nuclear programme in the 1950s with the assistance of technology from the United States.

By 1990, state-owned power firm Taipower operated three plants with the capacity to generate more than one-third of the island’s electricity needs.

‘Renewable energy isn’t stable’

Angelica Oung, a member of the Clean Energy Transition Alliance who supports nuclear power, said Taiwan could generate about 10 percent of its energy requirements from nuclear plants when the DDP came to power nearly a decade ago.

“Energy emissions at the time were lower than now – isn’t that ridiculous?” Oung told Al Jazeera.

“At the time, it was reasonable to launch the anti-nuclear policy as the public was still recovering from the devastating Fukushima nuclear disaster … but now even Japan has now decided to return to nuclear,” Oung said, referring to Tokyo’s plans to generate 20 percent of its power from the energy source by 2040.

“That’s because renewables simply don’t work.”

“The supply of renewable energy isn’t stable … solar energy, for example, needs the use of batteries,” Oung added.

While the 2011 Fukushima disaster helped solidify opposition to nuclear power, Taiwan’s history of anti-nuclear activism stretches back decades earlier.

The DPP was founded just months after the 1986 Chornobyl disaster and included an anti-nuclear clause in its charter.

The following year, the Indigenous Tao people launched protests against Taipower’s policy of dumping nuclear waste on Orchid Island, helping cement the civil anti-nuclear movement.

Nuclear energy attracted further negative scrutiny in the 1990s, when it emerged that about 10,000 people had been exposed to low levels of radiation due to the use of radioactive scrap metals in building materials.

In 2000, Taipei halted construction of a planned fourth nuclear plant amid protests by environmental groups.

A 2021 referendum proposal to restart work on the mothballed project was defeated 52.84 percent to 47.16 percent.

Chia-wei Chao, research director of the Taiwan Climate Action Network, said nuclear power is not the answer to Taiwan’s energy needs.

“Developing nuclear energy in Taiwan often means cutting the budget for boosting renewables, as opposed to other countries,” Chao told Al Jazeera.

Chao said Taiwan’s nuclear plants were built without taking into account the risk of earthquakes and tsunamis, and that establishing a local industry that meets modern standards would be costly and difficult.

“Extension of the current plants and reactors means having to upgrade the infrastructure to meet more updated safety standards and factoring in quake risks. This costs a lot, so nuclear energy doesn’t translate into cheaper electricity,” he said.

Lena Chang, a climate and energy campaigner at Greenpeace East Asia, said that reviving nuclear energy would not only be costly, but potentially dangerous, too.

“We, Greenpeace, firmly [oppose] restarting nuclear plants or expanding the use of nuclear because nuclear poses an unresolved safety, waste and environmental risk, particularly in Taiwan – a small island that can’t afford a nuclear and environmental disaster,” Chang told Al Jazeera.

Chang said the chip industry should have to contribute to the cost of switching to renewable energy sources.

“They should be responsible for meeting their own green energy demand, instead of leaving all the work to Taipower, as any of the money to build more energy plants and storage facilities ultimately comes from people’s tax money,” she said.

Chao agreed, saying chip giants such as TSMC should lead the push to go green.

“The chipmaking industry is here to stay … Sure, energy supply will be tight in the next three years, but it’s still enough,” he said.

US federal prosecutors say defendant and co-conspirators got the company to pay for deliveries that never occurred.

A former food delivery driver pleaded guilty to conspiring to steal more than $2.5m from the food delivery service DoorDash.

Sayee Chaitanya Reddy Devagiri pleaded guilty on Tuesday in a federal court in San Jose, California, to a single count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, the US Attorney’s Office said.

Devagiri and his co-conspirators would get the company to pay for deliveries that never occurred, federal prosecutors said.

Devagiri, 30, of Newport Beach, California, admitted to working with three others in 2020 and 2021 to defraud the San Francisco-based delivery company, federal prosecutors said. The other three were indicted by a federal grand jury in August.

Prosecutors said Devagiri used customer accounts to place high-value orders and then used an employee’s credentials to gain access to DoorDash software and manually reassign the orders to driver accounts that he and others controlled. He then caused the fraudulent driver accounts to report that the orders had been delivered when they had not and manipulated DoorDash’s computer systems to pay the fraudulent driver accounts for the nonexistent deliveries, officials said.

Devagiri would then use DoorDash software to change the orders from “delivered” status to “in process” status and manually reassign the orders to driver accounts he and others controlled, beginning the process again, prosecutors said.

Devagiri is the third defendant to plead guilty to having a role in this conspiracy. Two co-defendants previously entered pleas to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, authorities said.

Manaswi Mandadapu pleaded guilty this month, and Tyler Thomas Bottenhorn pleaded guilty in November 2023. Bottenhorn was charged separately.

Devagiri faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. He is scheduled to return to court on September 16.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has slashed another $450m in grants from Harvard University, amid an ongoing feud over anti-Semitism, presidential control and the limits of academic freedom.

On Tuesday, a joint task force assembled under Trump accused Harvard, the country’s oldest university, of perpetrating a “long-standing policy and practice of discriminating on the basis of race”.

“Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination. This is not leadership; it is cowardice. And it’s not academic freedom; it’s institutional disenfranchisement,” the task force said in a statement.

“By prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support.”

The elimination of another $450m in grants came in addition to the more than $2.2bn in federal funds that were already suspended last week, the task force added.

The feud between the president and Harvard – a prestigious Ivy League campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts – began in March, when Trump sought to impose new rules and regulations on top schools that had played host to pro-Palestinian protests over the last year.

Trump has called such protests “illegal” and accused participants of anti-Semitism. But student protest leaders have described their actions as a peaceful response to Israel’s war in Gaza, which has elicited concerns about human rights abuses, including genocide.

Columbia University was initially a centrepiece of the Trump administration’s efforts. The New York City school had seen the first major Palestine solidarity encampment rise on its lawn, which served as a blueprint for similar protests around the world. It also saw a series of mass arrests in the aftermath.

In March, one of Columbia’s protest leaders, Mahmoud Khalil, was the first foreign student to be arrested and have his legal immigration status revoked under Trump’s campaign to punish demonstrators. And when Trump threatened to yank $400m in grants and research contracts, the school agreed to submit to a list of demands to restore the funding.

The demands included adopting a formal definition of anti-Semitism, beefing up campus security and putting one of its academic departments – focused on Middle East, African and South Asian studies – under the supervision of an outside authority.

Free speech advocates called Columbia’s concessions a capitulation to Trump, who they say has sought to erode academic freedom and silence viewpoints he disagrees with.

On April 11, his administration issued another list of demands for Harvard that went even further. Under its terms, Harvard would have had to revamp its disciplinary system, eliminate its diversity initiatives and agree to an external audit of programmes deemed anti-Semitic.

The demands also required Harvard to agree to “structural and personnel changes” that would foster “viewpoint diversity” – a term left ambiguous. But critics argued it was a means for Trump to impose his values and priorities on the school by shaping its hiring and admissions practices.

Harvard has been at the centre of controversies surrounding its admissions in the past. In 2023, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that Harvard’s consideration of race in student admissions – through a process called affirmative action – violated the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution.

Tuesday’s letter referenced that court decision in arguing that “Harvard University has repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and anti-Semitic harassment plaguing its campus”.

A pair of reports in April, created by Harvard University’s own task forces, also found that there were cases of anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish violence on campus in the wake of Israel’s war in Gaza, a divisive issue in US politics.

Ultimately, on April 14, Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, rejected the Trump administration’s demands, arguing they were evidence of government overreach.

“No government – regardless of which party is in power – should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” Garber wrote in his response.

But Trump has continued to pressure the campus, including by threatening to revoke its tax-exempt status. Democrats and other critics have warned that it would be illegal for the president to influence the decisions of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with regard to individual taxpayers, like the university.

Under Trump, the Department of Homeland Security has also threatened to bar foreign students from enrolling at the university if Harvard did not hand over documents pertaining to the pro-Palestine protests.

On Monday, Garber, Harvard’s president, wrote a response to Trump’s secretary of education, Linda McMahon, defending his campus’s commitment to free speech while also addressing the spectre of anti-Semitism.

“We share common ground on a number of critical issues, including the importance of ending antisemitism and other bigotry on campus. Like you, I believe that Harvard must foster an academic environment that encourages freedom of thought and expression, and that we should embrace a multiplicity of viewpoints,” his letter read.

But, he added, Harvard’s efforts to create a more equitable learning environment were “undermined and threatened” by the Trump administration’s “overreach”.

“Harvard will not surrender its core, legally-protected principles out of fear of unfounded retaliation by the federal government,” Garber said.

“I must refute your claim that Harvard is a partisan institution. It is neither Republican nor Democratic. It is not an arm of any other political party or movement. Nor will it ever be.”

United States President Donald Trump has announced that US sanctions on Syria will be lifted, in a huge boost to the government in Tehran, which took power after the overthrow of longtime leader Bashar al-Assad in December.

“There’s a new government that will hopefully succeed in stabilising the country and keeping peace,” Trump said in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, the first of a three-day visit to the Middle East, including Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. “I will be ordering the cessation of sanctions against Syria in order to give them a chance at greatness.”

Trump is also expected to meet Syria’s president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, in Riyadh on Wednesday, in a further signal to the world that the international isolation of Syria should end.

In Syria, the news has been met with celebrations in the capital, Damascus, and elsewhere. There is hope the move will help turn around the country’s economy after more than a decade of war.

Let’s take a closer look.

What sanctions had been placed on Syria?

The US was just one of many countries that had placed sanctions on Syria during the former al-Assad regime, which governed the country from 1971 to 2024.

The US sanctions were wide-ranging. The US initially designated Syria a “State Sponsor of Terrorism” in 1979, which led to an arms embargo and financial restrictions, including on foreign assistance.

Further sanctions were imposed in 2004, including more arms export restrictions and limits on Syria’s economic interactions with the US.

After the war in Syria began in 2011, and al-Assad’s regime started attacking civilian antigovernment protesters, numerous other wide-ranging sanctions were imposed on Syria and regime-linked individuals. This included a freeze on Syrian government assets held abroad, a ban on US investments in Syria and restrictions on petroleum imports.

The US had also announced a $10m reward for the capture of Syria’s current leader, al-Sharaa, and listed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the organisation he ran before its dissolution with the fall of al-Assad, as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization”.

Why was Syria under sanctions?

The main tranche of sanctions was imposed during the early years of Syria’s war, when the US was supporting the country’s opposition and attempting to isolate the al-Assad regime, pointing to its human rights abuses, including the use of chemical weapons.

The “terrorist” designation placed on Hayat Tahrir al-Sham was a result of its former association with al-Qaeda. This was one of the reasons there has been international wariness to remove sanctions on Syria even after the fall of al-Assad.

Why are they being lifted now?

Al-Sharaa has slowly been gaining international legitimacy for his government since it came to power in December. The US had already removed the reward for his capture, and the Syrian president has been able to travel internationally and meet world leaders, including in Saudi Arabia and France.

The new Syrian government has made a concerted effort to present itself as a moderate force that could be acceptable to the international community, including by distancing itself from designated “terrorist” groups, promising to cooperate with other countries on “counterterrorism” efforts and making statements supporting minority rights. The latter has been particularly important in light of sectarian fighting involving pro-government forces and minority groups after the fall of al-Assad.

The Reuters news agency also reported this week that Syria has attempted to convince the US that it is not a threat but a potential partner, including by saying it was engaged in indirect talks with Israel to deescalate tensions with the US’s Middle eastern ally – despite Israel’s bombing of Syria and occupation of its territory. There had also been talk of US-Syria business deals, even including a Trump Tower in Damascus.

Trump on Tuesday said that his decision to end the sanctions came after discussions with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

“Oh, what I do for the crown prince!” he said.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Omar Rahman, a fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said that US relationships with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE – all countries that had been pushing for an end to sanctions and support for the new Syrian government – had been an integral part of Trump’s decision.

“This wasn’t something that was too difficult for Trump to do,” Rahman said. “He didn’t need to get permission from anybody. He didn’t even need consent from Congress.”

Will investment now pour into Syria?

Because of the central role the US plays in the global financial system, the lifting of sanctions is a signal to the world that it can do business in Syria.

The sanctions had been economically debilitating for Syria, and presented a huge impediment for the new government, which is under pressure to improve living standards in a country where unemployment and poverty levels are high, and electricity blackouts are common.

Whether the US itself invests in Syria remains to be seen, but increased Arab and Turkish investment is likely.

“[The removal of sanctions] takes away a key obstacle in [Syria’s] ability to establish some kind of economic development, economic prosperity,” Rahman told Al Jazeera. “But there are plenty of other obstacles and challenges the country is facing.”

United States President Donald Trump has started his Middle East tour, arriving in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, just after 10am, where he was greeted by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS).

During his three-day trip, he will also travel to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), with a focus on securing economic agreements with three of the world’s wealthiest nations.

The trip will involve discussions on investment opportunities, and some experts say Trump may urge the Gulf countries to lower oil prices.

When will Trump be visiting each country?

Trump arrived in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on Tuesday just before 10am local time (07:00 GMT), where he was greeted by MBS. The same day, he is scheduled to attend a Saudi-US investment forum featuring leading companies such as BlackRock, Citigroup, Palantir, Qualcomm, and Alphabet.

On Wednesday, he is scheduled to take part in a Gulf summit in Riyadh, before travelling to Qatar later that day. He will conclude his trip in the UAE on Thursday, May 15.

Trump’s first visit as president was to Saudi Arabia

During his first term, 2017 to 2021, Trump became the first US president to make the Middle East his first international destination, breaking with the longstanding tradition of visiting neighbouring North American countries first.

His trip to Saudi Arabia from May 20 to 22, 2017 – during which he attended the Riyadh Summit – was a calculated move to bolster defence ties and secure substantial arms deals.

During that trip, Trump also visited Israel and Palestine.

While Trump did not go to Qatar or the UAE during his first term, he met Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi at the Riyadh Summit.

During the summit, Trump and Saudi King Salman bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud signed a $110bn arms deal, including missile defence systems, tanks, combat ships and cybersecurity technology, with the intent of buying $350bn worth of arms over 10 years.

A memorable moment from that 2017 trip to Saudi Arabia was during the inauguration of the Global Center for Combating Extremist Ideology in Riyadh. In a surreal photo op that quickly went viral, Trump stood alongside King Salman and President el-Sisi with their hands on a glowing orb.

What is the value of US-Gulf investments?

Sami al-Arian, director of the Center for Islam and Global Affairs at Istanbul Zaim University, told Al Jazeera that Trump has been very vocal about his objective in visiting the three Gulf states: investments.

Trump’s administration has reportedly discussed the possibility of expediting investments by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE before his trip to the region.

“He’s trying to get trillions of dollars out of these countries,” al-Arian told Al Jazeera.

“He’s already said that he’s hoping to get $1 trillion from Saudi Arabia in terms of arms sales and commercial deals,” he said.

US-Saudi investments

According to the latest data from the US Department of Commerce, the total stock of US foreign direct investment (FDI) in Saudi Arabia reached $11.3bn in 2023.

Conversely, Saudi Arabia’s FDI stock in the US stood at $9.6bn, mostly in transport, real estate, plastics, automotive, financial services and communications, according to the Commerce Department.

These figures are only FDI, not other investments, like portfolio investments or short-term financial flows.

US-Qatar investments

In 2023, the total stock of US FDI in Qatar was estimated at $2.5bn.

According to the US-Qatar Business Council, US companies that have facilitated FDIs in Qatar focused on the fields of energy, petrochemicals, construction, engineering, and communications technology.

Conversely, Qatari FDI stock in the US reached $3.3bn in 2023, with investments concentrated in financial services, energy and real estate.

US-UAE investments

In 2023, the total stock of US FDI in the UAE reached $16.1bn.

According to the Reuters news agency, in 2023, the main FDI drivers were manufacturing, finance and insurance, construction and wholesale and retail trade sectors.

Meanwhile, UAE FDI stock in the US totalled $35bn in 2023 – in financial services, transport, food and beverages, aerospace, and business services, according to the Commerce Department.

In March, UAE National Security Adviser Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan met Trump and committed $1.4 trillion in investments to the US over 10 years in sectors such as artificial intelligence, semiconductors, energy and manufacturing.

Weapons trade between the nations

The US is the biggest exporter of arms globally and a top supplier to Gulf countries.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia each accounted for 6.8 percent of the world’s total arms imports for 2020-24, making them the third and fourth largest importers globally.

The UAE is the 11th largest importer of arms, accounting for 2.6 percent of global imports for the same period.

Saudi Arabia is the main recipient of US arms, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). Between 2020 and 2024, Saudi Arabia received 12 percent of the US’s total arms exports.

About 74 percent of Saudi arms imports come from the US.

Trump is poised to offer Saudi Arabia an arms package worth more than $100bn during his trip, according to Reuters.

In the 2020-24 period, the US was the top supplier of arms to Qatar, accounting for 48 percent of its imports.

In March, the US Department of State approved a large weapons package to Qatar worth $2bn, which includes long-range maritime surveillance drones and hundreds of missiles and bombs.

In the same period, the US was also the top supplier of weapons to the UAE, accounting for 42 percent of the country’s arms imports.

Beijing and Washington have both hailed the progress made at the end of a weekend of closed-door discussions in Switzerland aimed at de-escalating trade tensions sparked by US President Donald Trump’s aggressive worldwide tariff rollout in March and China’s retaliation.

Following the talks on Sunday at the Geneva villa of the Swiss ambassador to the United Nations, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters: “I’m happy to report that we’ve made substantial progress between the United States and China in the very important trade talks.”

“The talks were productive,” he added.

Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, who also took part in the two days of closed-door talks with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, said that the differences between the sides were “not so large as maybe thought”.

He also lauded what he called “important progress” in the trade talks with the US.

Speaking to reporters in Geneva, he said the atmosphere of the talks with Bessent and Greer had been candid, in-depth, and substantive, echoing similar language from the US delegation.

Both countries said they would put out a joint statement on the talks on Monday.

After the first day of negotiations, Trump had posted on his social network Truth Social that the discussions had been “very good”, describing them as “a total reset negotiated in a friendly, but constructive, manner”.

Beijing had yet to comment Sunday, but on Saturday, Chinese state news agency Xinhua described the talks as “an important step in promoting the resolution of the issue”.

The Chinese delegation was expected to speak to the media on Sunday evening.

The meetings marked the first time that senior officials from the world’s two largest economies have met face-to-face to tackle the topic of trade since Trump slapped steep new levies on China last month, sparking a robust retaliation from Beijing.

“The talks reflect that the current state of the trade relations with these extremely high tariffs is ultimately in the interests of neither the United States nor China,” Citigroup global chief economist Nathan Sheets told news agency AFP. He called the tariffs a “lose-lose proposition”.

The tariffs imposed by Trump on the Asian manufacturing giant since the start of the year currently total 145 percent, with cumulative US duties on some Chinese goods reaching a staggering 245 percent.

Keeping expectations low

In retaliation, China put 125-percent tariffs on US goods.

Ahead of the meeting, Trump signalled he might lower the tariffs, suggesting on social media that an “80% Tariff on China seems right!”

However, his press secretary Karoline Leavitt later clarified that the US would not lower tariffs unilaterally, as China would also need to make concessions.

Going into the meeting, both sides played down expectations of a major change in trade relations.

Bessent underlined a focus on “de-escalation” and not a “big trade deal”, while Beijing insisted that the US had to ease tariffs first.

The fact that the talks are even happening “is good news for business, and for the financial markets”, said Gary Hufbauer, a senior non-resident fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

But Hufbauer cautioned that he was “very sceptical that there will be any return to something like normal US-China trade relations”. Even a tariff rate of 70 to 80 percent would still potentially halve bilateral trade, he said.

Among some of the more moderate Trump officials, such as Bessent and US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, “there’s a realisation that China is better equipped to deal with this trade war than the US”, said Hufbauer.

The Geneva meeting comes after Trump unveiled a trade agreement with the United Kingdom on Thursday, the first deal with any country since he unleashed his blitz of global tariffs, but which maintains a 10-percent baseline levy on most British goods.

Following the US-UK trade announcement, analysts have voiced pessimism about the likelihood that negotiations will lead to any significant changes in the US-China trade relationship.

In his Truth Social post, Trump claimed the talks had made “GREAT PROGRESS!!”

“We want to see, for the good of both China and the U.S., an opening up of China to American business,” he said.

Since returning to the White House, US President Donald Trump has touted corporate and foreign US investment announcements as proof he is ushering in “the golden age of America”.

On January 21, Trump said that before he’d finished the “first full business day” of his second term, the United States had “already secured nearly $3 trillion of new investments”.

On April 2, he said, “It looks like we’re going to have about $6 trillion of investments”. Six days later, Trump told National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner attendees that the investment total was “now revised up to about $7 (trillion)”.

During an April 30 NewsNation town hall, Trump speculated that “it could be more than $8 trillion”.

On May 4, Trump told Kristen Welker, the host of the NBC News programme Meet the Press, “I think we probably have close to $9 trillion of investments coming into this country.”

On May 6, Trump told reporters, “I think the real number could be $9 or $10 trillion.”

Finally, on May 8, Trump said, “We have now close to $10 trillion — think of that, $10 trillion” in investments. “We’re talking about essentially two months.”

That’s far beyond the figures the White House has released publicly.

We tallied the White House’s public lists of investments; they amount to $2.1 trillion in corporate investments, or at most $5.1 trillion when including promised investments from other countries. Experts cautioned that the promised corporate investments are not guaranteed to materialise in full, or during Trump’s presidency, and some of them would have occurred regardless of who was president.

Trump isn’t the first to overstate new investments on his watch. Outgoing US President Joe Biden said in 2024 that his bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act had attracted $640bn in private investments; economists told PolitiFact that Biden’s numbers were based on what companies had announced, which is not the same as dollars already spent.

Roman V Yampolskiy, a University of Louisville professor and a specialist in artificial intelligence, which dominates the promised investments Trump cited, said, “Historically, large-scale investment announcements often overpromise and underdeliver. There is a performative element to them, especially in politically charged contexts. They function as political theatre as much as economic commitment.”

White House lists do not match Trump’s words

Since Trump’s inauguration, the White House has publicised investment announcements from three countries and roughly 60 companies on its website, including in a “non-comprehensive running list”. Many of the highest-dollar corporate announcements were in March and April.

Corporate announcements in the White House’s lists total approximately $2.1 trillion worth of US investment.

The White House separately has cited commitments from the United Arab Emirates to invest $1.4 trillion over the next 10 years; from Japan to “boost” its investment in the US to $1 trillion; and from Saudi Arabia to invest $600bn in the US during Trump’s presidency. Combined with the corporate announcements, these bring the total to about $5.1 trillion, $4.9 trillion short of Trump’s figure.

But the $5.1 trillion total has caveats. For example, the White House said “Japan announced a $1 trillion investment in the US”, but the article it linked said in 2023, Japan’s US investment was $783.3bn and Japan would “boost” that to $1 trillion. That’s an increase of $216.7bn rather than a new $1 trillion investment. That would put the total value of newly pledged US investment at about $4.3 trillion.

Trump’s second-term White House tally of US investments 

The White House figures can’t easily be used for apples-to-apples comparisons. Some of the investments are planned over Trump’s four-year term, others over five years or a decade. In one case – ADQ and Energy Capital Partners’ planned $25bn investment — it isn’t limited to US-based projects.

The White House declined to detail additional investments. A spokesperson pointed to federal Bureau of Economic Analysis data that shows a 22 percent increase in business investment in the first quarter of 2025, calling it a historic increase.

However, experts cautioned this increase was shaped by businesses stocking up on inventory before Trump’s tariffs take effect and said the increase is unlikely to be sustained.

Many of the announcements are aspirational, experts say

Experts told PolitiFact that each of the five biggest investments on Trump’s list warrants some caution, because they might not reach Trump’s cited dollar amounts or were not solely prompted by Trump’s policies.

“Many of these announcements, particularly those in the AI and semiconductor sectors, appear to be, at least in part, aspirational in nature,” Yampolskiy said. “They serve a signalling function: to attract investor attention, shape policy discourse, and secure favourable regulatory or funding environments.”

The five largest company investments collectively account for 82 percent of the dollar value on the White House’s corporate list.

Five companies accounting for the majority of new investment promises are:

Stargate

The Stargate Project is an artificial intelligence collaboration among OpenAI, Oracle and SoftBank, announced during a January 21 White House event. The White House values the investment at $500bn.

The company’s official announcement says $100bn will be invested “immediately” and that it “intends to invest” a total of $500bn over the next four years, a goal repeated by SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son at the White House event.

“Whether that much will ultimately get spent remains to be seen,” wrote John Higgins, chief economist at Capital Economics, an international consulting firm.

Enrique Dans, who studies technology and policy at Madrid’s IE Business School, said the $500bn figure is “astronomical – roughly 2 percent of US gross domestic product – and lacks clear documentation”.

At the White House event, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said, “We wouldn’t be able to do this without you, Mr President.” But Altman had been discussing plans for a $100bn investment 10 months before Trump won his second term, The Washington Post reported, including an Abilene, Texas, data centre that began construction in summer 2024.

“AI investments have been on a global trajectory driven by technological maturity and competitive pressure, especially from China,” Dans said. “Any US president would have seen a surge.”

Nvidia

Nvidia Corp, another AI company, said it plans to invest up to $500bn in US infrastructure over the next four years. Previously, Nvidia manufactured most of its chips in Taiwan.

“It is unlikely Nvidia would have moved any production to the US if it was not for pressure from the Trump administration,” Gil Luria, an analyst with the financial services firm D.A. Davidson, told Reuters. However, Luria added, “The half a trillion number is likely hyperbole.”

Dans said that although tax cuts from Trump’s first term have benefited the company’s focus on US-based efforts, “the core growth likely would have occurred anyway”, regardless of the president.

Apple

On February 24, days after Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, met with Trump, the consumer electronics giant announced it plans to spend “more than $500bn in the US over the next four years.”

Analysts have expressed scepticism that this represents new investment. Dans called the investment “simply more of what [Apple] already does,” from “day-to-day activities with thousands of suppliers in all 50 states to the operation of its domestic data centres, as well as its investments in Apple TV+ and other projects already manufactured in the country.”

In a note to investors, David Vogt, an analyst with the Swiss-based bank UBS, wrote, “Call us a sceptic. … We believe [the figure] lacks substance.”

IBM

IBM announced April 28 plans to invest $150bn in the US, including more than $30bn in research and development on US-based manufacturing of mainframe and quantum computers.

This is “not clearly Trump-related,” Dans said. “IBM’s strategy pivots have been under way since the 2010s.”

Luria said, “While we believe IBM will continue to invest in the emerging area of quantum technology, the bombastic figure is more likely a gesture towards the US administration,” Reuters reported.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co, which makes semiconductors for computing and electronics, has pledged to spend $100bn in the US. Analysts said this number is the most well-supported among the investments that Trump cites. Although bringing semiconductor production back to the US began during Trump’s first term, it was “greatly accelerated by” Biden’s CHIPS and Science Act, which prompted years of investment before Trump’s second term, Dans said.

Over the past five years, the company has spent at least $65bn on fabrication facilities near Phoenix, Arizona, funded in part by $6.6bn from the CHIPS and Science Act.

Overall, Dans said, “Trump might deserve some partial credit for setting a more aggressive tone on economic nationalism and supply chain reshoring, and for lowering the corporate tax reform, which did affect repatriation and some investment decisions. But most of these trends — the AI boom, the semiconductor reshoring, the cloud computing infrastructure — are long-term structural shifts that predate Trump and will continue regardless of who is in office.”

Our ruling

Trump said, “We have now close to $10 trillion, think of that, $10 trillion” in investments. “We’re talking about essentially two months.”

The White House has pointed to investment announcements totalling $5.1 trillion, including $2.1 trillion from companies and the rest from countries.

That’s at least $4.9 trillion short of Trump’s figure, and these announcements represent future spending, some of which is planned over four years, five years or a decade.

Experts said many of the dollar amounts are aspirational and that the investments announced might never be fully reached. They also said some of this investment would have occurred regardless of who was president.

We rate the statement false.

EXPLAINER

US is looking to fast-track investments by UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Bloomberg News said.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration has reportedly discussed the possibility of expediting investments by the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Qatar before his trip to the region next week.

The early-stage talks were reported first by Bloomberg News. Any such development would require the US government to reform the Committee for Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS), an interagency organisation led by the US Department of the Treasury, and which also includes representatives from the Departments of Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security and State that review foreign real-estate investments to evaluate if any prose a national security risk.

While it is not clear what a reform would entail, the goal would be to fast-track investments from these countries, with whom Trump had fostered a close working relationship during his first term, and bring in billions of dollars into the US economy.

The president might announce more information about the status of the changes and what it entails during his visit, which begins May 13.

Investment surge

Five of the top 10 most active wealth funds come from these three countries. Three of those five funds are in the UAE. In March, UAE National Security Adviser Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed met the president and later committed $1.4 trillion in investments to the US over a 10-year period.

The commitment includes investments in sectors such as artificial intelligence, energy, and aluminium manufacturing, including the first new aluminium smelter in the US in 35 years. It also includes a $1.2bn mining partnership with Abu Dhabi-based ADQ, a sovereign wealth fund, and the New York City-based investment firm Orion Resource Partners to mine for “critical minerals” in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

The largest segment of the proposed investment is in artificial intelligence. An Abu Dhabi-based investment fund called MGX has promised to invest $100bn in a data centre and energy infrastructure to support AI development in the United States.

In January, in less than a week of Trump taking office, Saudi Arabia pledged to spend $600bn in the US over the next four years. Trump later said at the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland, that he pushed the country to invest $1 trillion in the economy. Trump and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman have a close relationship, which the two developed during Trump’s first term in office.

Qatar already had a strong investment relationship with the US. In 2015, the Qatar Investment Authority pledged a $35bn investment and opened offices in New York and Washington to facilitate the investments. QIA later committed $45bn in 2019.

Some of QIA’s most notable investments include $200m in EatJust, an alternative meat and egg brand, and major real-estate investments in New York City, including a 10 percent stake in the Empire State Building.

Conflict of interest concerns

Despite no direct involvement of the Trump Organization — the private company housing the Trump family-owned brands, including Trump Hotels and Golf Resorts – Trump’s upcoming trip and the proposed fast-tracking of investments have raised concerns of conflict of interest.

A month after winning the US election, the Trump Organization announced it had leased its brand to two new real estate projects in Saudi Arabia.

The president’s company also has projects and developments in all three of the countries he is set to visit, and that might receive fast-track status for investments.

“This trip, where Trump will meet with foreign officials who have the ability to make decisions affecting his company and business partners, poses enormous conflicts of interest for Trump, whose company is engaged in significantly more foreign business than during his first term”, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington wrote in a note published on Thursday.

On April 30, the Trump Organization, whose real-estate development arm is led by his son Eric, announced a new luxury golf resort in Qatar. Unlike in the first Trump administration, the Trump Organization said in advance of Trump’s inauguration in January that it would not shy away from foreign property investments.