The United States will impose a 17.5 percent tariff on Mexican tomato imports starting on Tuesday, as the two countries were unable to renew a 2013 agreement that suspended a U.S. anti-dumping investigation, a Mexican official said on Monday.

The U.S. Commerce Department said in early February that the United States would resume an anti-dumping investigation into Mexican tomatoes, withdrawing from a so-called suspension agreement that halted the anti-dumping case as long as Mexican producers sold their tomatoes above a pre-determined price. U.S. growers and lawmakers say that deal has failed.

At the time, Commerce said it was giving the required 90-day notice before terminating the six-year-old agreement.

“As of tomorrow a tariff of 17.5 percent will be applied on the value of the product … Mexican exporters will be affected, it’s going to affect their financial flows but that is going to be directly transferred to U.S. consumers,” said Mexican Deputy Economy Minister Luz Maria de la Mora.

She added that the U.S. measures will remain in place until a new suspension agreement is reached.

“We’re very disappointed but the good news is that negotiations continue, looking for a solution. And we hope that in the coming weeks we can in fact reach an agreement,” said de la Mora.

Mexico exports around $2 billion worth of tomatoes to the United States annually, according to de la Mora.

A trade war over tomatoes was averted twice since the 1990s, most recently in the 2013 deal that put a price floor on Mexican tomatoes sold in the United States while barring U.S. growers from pursuing anti-dumping charges against Mexican exporters.

Fruit and vegetable growers in the southeastern U.S. had persuaded the Trump administration to seek the ability to impose seasonal anti-dumping duties against Mexican produce in negotiations to update the North American Free Trade Agreement.

But this demand was withdrawn in the final talks over the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade deal reached last October.

A month later, the Florida Tomato Exchange, which represents growers in the state, had petitioned the Commerce Department to terminate the 2013 tomato pact. It argued that the agreement could not be enforced and contained too many loopholes through which Mexican growers could dump tomatoes in the U.S. market.

Vietnam has long been a tough place to hire and keep employees, but it’s even tougher now, as business trends force companies to scramble to recruit enough staff, according to a new report.

Foreign retail brands are entering the market for Vietnamese customers, factories and other businesses are relocating here from China, and employers increasingly need staff with advanced technical skills. All three of these changes triggered a “sudden growth in demand” for a limited pool of talent, said Navigos Group, a company that sells recruitment services and operates the biggest job portal in the country, VietnamWorks.

New Companies Need Workers

“Companies shifting production from China to Vietnam continue to increase strongly, especially in supporting industries and wood furniture industry,” Navigos Group said in the April report assessing the first quarter of 2019. “There are projects that launch new factories in Vietnam, which are expected to greatly increase the number of employees by double, or triple during the year, especially in the field of electronics, high-end components manufacturing.”

Vietnam ranked No. 1 in an analysis of six countries in Asia where manufacturers could move as they leave China, according to a report in December from Natixis, an investment bank. The analysis was based on four criteria: demographic trends, input costs, infrastructure, and the share of foreign manufacturing.

Low Supply of Workers Nothing New

With all of these investors flooding into Vietnam, the calculus of supply and demand is changing in the workforce. There is a lot of new demand for labor. But supply has been a challenge for years even before this, thanks to a number of reasons.

The Southeast Asian country of 100 million people has a low unemployment rate, usually around 2 percent, so most of the people who want jobs already have them. Vietnam’s communist government also guarantees many worker protections, from paid holidays to restrictions on firing.

Many Workers Like to Move Around

For possibly related reasons, employees, especially younger ones, prefer to leave a job after about three years. This can cut both ways.

On the one hand, it might be a good sign that workers do not feel locked into a job just to keep their health insurance or other benefits and have the freedom to move.

On the other hand, employers do not want to have to pay to train new people every few years. Add to that challenge the fact that more employers are coming into the country.

Gaku Echizenya, the CEO of Navigos Group, sees “the recruitment market in Vietnam becoming more and more vibrant and competitive due to the investment of FDI enterprises,” or foreign direct invested.

That includes in the information technology sector, where skill levels are not keeping up with new technologies like artificial intelligence, blockchain, and the internet of things.

“The demand for recruiting IT human resources is increasing more and more in the digital era, which leads to many challenges to attract and retain talents,” Echizenya said.

This demand is rising by 47 percent per year in Vietnam, according to CUTS International, a non-profit consumer advocacy organization.

Solutions

A possible solution to filling in the skills gap is to train current staff again. Microsoft Asia released data in April showing that employees are far more willing to retrain than their employers think. The study, which covered 15 countries in the Asia Pacific region including Vietnam, found that 22 percent of business leaders think workers do not want to reskill, whereas just 8 percent of workers themselves say that, marking a large disconnect between the two sides.

Companies also can broaden their net by hiring candidates with skills obtained through online classes, said Alice Pham, CUTS International country director.

“If employers and recruiters do not recognize online degrees, or see knowledge and skills attained digitally as being inferior to those provided by established educational institutions, the learners’ motivation and incentives would be negatively affected and ultimately the appeal of e-learning would be corroded, partially or completely,” Pham wrote in a report for CUTS in August.

People in Vietnam traditionally prefer to hire employees with qualifications on paper, from college diplomas to number of years worked. But with talent in short supply, the times are changing, and preferences may have to change with them.

Farah Ballout’s big, infectious smile is the first thing that greets you at her workplace, a cafe in Lebanon with a mission to do more than just brew coffee.

Before she was hired, the 29-year-old — who has Angelman Syndrome, a genetic disorder that means she has developmental disabilities — had struggled to find work in a country with high unemployment.

“I feel like it is a dream that I started here,” Ballout said as tears rolled down her face. “It feels like you are walking into your home — it doesn’t feel like you are going to work.”

Almost all the 14 staff at the Agonist coffee shop near Beirut where Ballout has worked for the past five months have special needs, from autism to Down’s Syndrome.

Wassim El Hage set up the business in December to help people with disabilities, who are typically excluded from the workforce in Lebanon.

As a social enterprise — a business that aims to do good as well as make profit — it faces even more of a challenge than most startups in a country whose economy has been badly hit by years of political instability and a mass influx of refugees.

The country is grappling with an unemployment rate of 30 percent, and nearly 2,200 businesses closed last year, according to Lebanon’s chamber of commerce.

For El Hage, that was part of the motivation — Lebanon, he said, desperately needs organizations prepared to hire people who would otherwise struggle to find jobs.

“It is not my target to make money or to make profit for my own self. My target is to give them back this money [for them] to be integrated, to be independent, to have a real life,” he told Reuters. “We need it in Lebanon.”

The tiny country is home to more than a million refugees, mostly from its war-ravaged neighbor Syria.

Since its own civil war ended in 1990, Lebanon has faced a raft of challenges, from electricity shortages to garbage mountains due to a lack of landfill sites — and now social enterprises are stepping in to help.

These include Compost Baladi, which manages waste and compost, and SunRay Energy, which helps rural communities in Lebanon adopt solar energy with a lease program and flexible payments.

But social entrepreneurs say a lack of funding and government support are making it difficult for such ventures to thrive.

‘Snowball of change’

Unlike many countries including Britain and Thailand, Lebanon offers no tax breaks or other incentives to help the sector.

“There is no single governmental policy or strategy to manage the social enterprises field,” said George Ghafary, head of a social enterprise that employs former substance abusers, prisoners and disadvantaged women to work on environmental projects. “Social enterprises can create a snowball of change, especially if the government offers incentives to existing companies … thus creating even bigger impact.”

No one at the Labor Ministry was available for comment on the government’s policy.

Samer Sfeir co-founded ProAbled, which trains people in Lebanon with special needs to work and companies to hire them. He bemoaned a lack of funding for social enterprises and contrasted the government’s approach with that of Britain, where the government actively seeks out such businesses to supply publicly funded goods and services.

“It is not difficult to start a social enterprise, but to scale it is hard … everybody is focused on starting something new, not working on helping what already exists,” he said.

“Regular business already struggle in Lebanon’s economy, but social enterprises have even a more difficult time, because it is more costly to run, and eventually your profit margin is less because you are giving back.”

Acceptance

It is a problem El Hage, 32, is familiar with. He started Agonist with his own money after failing to raise private investment due to skepticism the cafe would be a success.

In fact, he said, Lebanese people have come from all over the country to get their caffeine fix with a side of banter from people they would not usually get to meet.

As coffee and pastries are handed out, staff often sit and chat with customers. Before leaving, each customer is asked to put their hand in a basket and pick a positive proverb.

“This big-time changes the way Lebanese see people with disabilities — to accept them exactly as they are,” said one return customer, Vincent El Khoury. “Many people look at them as less than, and I hate this.”

Lebanese central bank employees went on strike on Monday over state budget proposals that would cut their benefits but Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri said failure to pass a “realistic” budget would be like a “suicide operation” against the economy.

Hariri said he expected a resolution of the row at the central bank on Tuesday but criticized a wave of “preemptive” strike action over the draft austerity budget, adding that the government was taking measures to avoid economic collapse.

“We can’t continue in this situation and that doesn’t mean we will collapse tomorrow,” Hariri said, adding that Lebanon was “far from bankruptcy.”

He was speaking after a meeting with President Michel Aoun and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, which a senior official said aimed to give extra political support to the government in the face of the protests and strikes over the draft budget.

Saddled with one of the world’s heaviest public debt burdens, the government is debating a draft 2019 budget which Hariri has said may be the most austere in Lebanon’s history.

Druze leader Walid Jumblatt threw his weight behind the plan on Monday, calling it “better than suicide.”

The public sector wage bill is the state’s biggest expense, followed by the cost of servicing the public debt. Army retirees have been among the opponents of the draft budget, which they fear may target some of their benefits.

The strike by central bank workers prompted the Beirut Stock Exchange to suspend trading until further notice on Monday because the clearance and settlement process for transactions could not be done on time, it said in a statement.

The head of the central bank workers’ syndicate said the strike action had caused negative effects and pressure “on the market, on the governor of the central bank, and on all Lebanese.”

Syndicate head Abbas Awada, in an interview with the broadcaster al-Jadeed, said a decision on next steps would be taken at their general assembly meeting on Tuesday, but said they may take “a positive decision” to relieve the situation.

He warned that if the budget was passed without addressing their concerns “we will proceed in an open strike.”

Hariri warned in a statement earlier of “legal consequences” for strikers who jeopardized work at state institutions.

Central bank governor Riad Salameh had earlier convened a meeting with central bank employees where it was agreed to open Lebanese pound pricing operations against foreign currencies and to reopen financial transfers, the state-run National News Agency reported. The pound is pegged against the U.S. dollar.

Speaking after his meeting with Aoun and Berri, Hariri said he expected the government to approve the budget on Friday, Saturday or Sunday after which it would go to parliament. Once the government had approved it, Hariri said international institutions would raise their sovereign ratings for Lebanon.

Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil has said the draft budget involves “wide reductions” in spending based on the need for “exceptional austerity measures.”

The aim is a deficit of less than 9 percent of gross domestic product, compared to 11.2 percent in 2018.

China says its negotiators are preparing to travel to the United States for their next round of trade talks this week, even after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened higher tariffs on billions of dollars of Chinese goods after he complained the process is taking too long.

Trump’s comments about the new tarifs on Twitter on Sunday sent Asian stocks and U.S. futures tumbling Monday and added uncertainty over the figure of U.S.-China trade negotiations. Despite the market drop, China’s official media stayed silent on Trump’s comments all morning.

Hours later, Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang told reporters that China is “trying to get more information” about Trump’s comments about new tariffs but stressed that Beijing’s negotiating team is still preparing to travel to the U.S. for talks this week.

“The tweet is a big wrench in China’s foreign trade policy,” Nick Marro, Analyst at The Economist Intelligence Unit (The EIU) told VOA. “There were a lot of expectations that at least the groundwork for a deal will be finalized this week,” he said, explaining why Beijing should be upset by the new threat.

Tweet with teeth

In his tweet issued on Sunday, Trump said he would increase tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from 10 percent to 25 percent on Friday. This would mark a reversal of a decision Washington took last February to keep it at 10 percent in the midst of trade talks.

“The Trade Deal with China continues, but too slowly, as they attempt to renegotiate. No!,” Trump said expressing dissatisfaction about the pace of trade negotiations and what he considers Chinese attempt to renegotiate some aspects of the proposed deal.

President Trump also said that his policy of hiking taxes on Chinese goods had paid dividends. “These payments are partially responsible for our great economic results,” he said.

He went further saying another $325 billion of Chinese goods which “remain untaxed” will be taxed at 25 percent. He did not specify a timeline for making this change.

Unaffected stance

In its response Monday, Chinese foreign ministry expressed hope there is no change in the situation and the two countries will continue to strive for an end to the trade war.

“What is of vital importance is that we still hope the United States can work hard with China to meet each other half way, and strive to reach a mutually beneficial, win-win agreement on the basis of mutual respect,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng said.

What the ministry did not clarify is whether China would send the same envoy, Vice Premier Liu He, as head of the official delegation as originally planned.

Echoing China’s confidence that trade talks would not be disrupted by Trump’s tweet, Shanghai based expert Shen Dingli said, “China and the U.S. have big and overlapping stakes in bilateral trade. They will overcome any difficulties for a successful outcome of the trade talks.”

The tweet has also made it difficult for Chinese President Xi to make a proposed China-U.S. deal acceptable to his domestic audience. Xi does not want to be seen as being bulled into accepting a deal by the U.S., Nick Marro said. “It has shattered the potential optics around the deal. The tweet makes the deal look like China has no choice but to listen to the U.S.”

Dingli sees nothing odd about Trump’s use of tweet as a foreign policy instrument although this aspect has been widely criticized in some circles.

“America does not have a propaganda department like the Chinese government. Therefore, Trump has invented something that is good for him,” Dingli said. “A competent propaganda department has made China powerful. My President does not need to use his own account in WeChat [Chinese social media app] to communicate,” he said.

Washington and Beijing have engaged in reciprocal tariff hikes over the last year while negotiators have engaged in lengthy trade talks, alternating negotiations between the two capitals.

Despite an initial goal of finishing by March 1, the two countries have continued to debate several issues, but have yet to complete a deal. Both sides, representing the world’s two biggest economies, have said progress is being made.

The two countries have been trying to resolve disputes over intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers. It is not clear whether the tariffs both countries have imposed will remain in place if an agreement is reached.

Pipeline operator Ukrtransnafta said on Monday that clean Russian oil had started flowing from Belarus towards Ukraine and it was ready to resume oil exports to the European Union following a transit hiatus over contaminated crude.

Flows through the Druzhba pipeline were suspended in late April because tainted crude had entered the system, sending shocks through global oil markets and damaging Russia’s image as a reliable supplier of energy.

The southern spur of the Druzhba pipeline passes from Belarus through Ukraine to Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic. It was not immediately clear if clean supplies were also flowing on the northern spur, which runs directly between Belarus and Poland and Germany.

“The oil with the quality, which is in line with the standard, has started to flow…to the Druzhba pipelines system in the direction of Ukraine for further transportation to the EU countries,” Ukrtransnafta said.

It said that the deliveries of clean oil started at 1417 Kiev time (1117 GMT).

The Russian oil pipeline monopoly Transneft did not reply to a request for comment.

The Energy Ministry in Moscow said on Saturday that clean Russian oil had arrived at the Mozyr hub in southeast Belarus, where the Druzhba pipeline splits to the north and the south.

However, earlier on Monday, sources at Belarusian state oil firm Belneftekhim and in the trading sector said that Belarus had no idea when clean Russian oil flows would resume. The section of the pipeline inside Belarus is controlled by a local firm, Gomeltransneft Druzhba.

The clean oil is backed up behind millions of barrels of contaminated crude in the pipeline system and there is no clear plan yet on how to discharge the tainted supply, traders and industry sources have said.

The Soviet-built Druzhba (Friendship) pipeline normally transports around 1 million barrels per day of crude, which accounts for some 1 percent of global oil trade.

Transmission via the pipeline was halted due to high levels of organic chloride, a chemical compound used to boost oil extraction by cleaning wells and accelerating the flow of crude.

Options for disposing of the contaminated oil include selling it at a heavy discount or storing it in tanks. But customers are not keen and there is insufficient storage capacity, trading sources say.

Some crude that reaches Mozyr is fed into a refinery there.

The Mozyr plant has yet to resume crude processing and is still cleaning tainted equipment, the Belneftekhim source said.

Separately, the Russian Baltic Sea port of Ust-Luga, which is linked to Druzhba, is still loading contaminated oil onto tankers, trading sources said. It was hard to find a buyer for this oil, they added.

The Russian Energy Ministry has said clean oil was expected to arrive at the port on May 7.

The Peruvian government passed a law on Monday aimed at closing loopholes that allow companies to avoid paying taxes, estimating it will be able to collect additional revenues equal to nearly 1 percent of gross domestic product per year.

The law, which was passed by decree after being approved by Congress, targets tax schemes including corporate reorganizations and contracts that defer earnings or bring forward spending in order to avoid taxes, the finance ministry said in a statement.

The government expects the new law to generate an additional 6 billion soles ($1.8 billion) per year, Prime Minister Salvador del Solar said in an interview with state-run TV Peru.

The measure will likely help the government meet its goal of trimming the fiscal deficit to its goal of 2.2 percent of GDP this year and 1 percent in 2021, when President Martin Vizcarra’s term ends.

Peru, the world’s second-biggest copper producer, is one of Latin America’s most stable economies. Gross domestic product expanded 4 percent last year.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday he would raise tariffs to 25 percent from 10 percent on $200 billion of Chinese goods.

The United States has levied tariffs on a total of $250 billion of Chinese imports, global steel and aluminum imports, and shipments of washing machines and solar panels since January 2018, when Trump’s administration levied its first trade tariffs.

Trump has referred to himself as a “Tariff Man” and says the duties he has imposed on a range of goods and metal imports are filling up state coffers.

Through mid-March, Washington netted $15.6 billion through tariffs imposed since February 2018, according to data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Customs duties receipts in the first half of the current fiscal year, which began on Oct. 1, have shot up by 89 percent from a year ago to $34.7 billion, data from U.S. Treasury shows.

WHO IS PAYING THE TARIFFS?

Trump says China foots the bill for U.S. tariffs on imported Chinese good.

“For 10 months, China has been paying Tariffs to the USA” he wrote on Twitter on Sunday.

“We have billions of dollars coming into our Treasury — billions — from China. We never had 10 cents coming into our Treasury; now we have billions coming in,” he said on Jan. 24.

PAID AT CUSTOMS

A tariff is a tax on imports. The CBP typically requires importers to pay the duties within 10 days of their shipments clearing customs.

So the tariffs are paid to the U.S. government by importing companies. Most importers of Chinese-made goods are U.S. companies, or the U.S.-registered units of foreign companies that import goods from China.

Every item imported into the United States legally has a customs code. Importers are expected to check the tariffs and other taxes and duties due on the goods they bring in, calculate what they owe, and pay it.

The CBP reviews the payments. If it discovers an underpayment, U.S. customs will send the importer a fresh bill.

DO U.S. IMPORTERS PASS ON THE COSTS OF TARIFFS TO THEIR SUPPLIERS IN CHINA?

Some of them do, yes. So Chinese companies pay some of the cost. An importing company paying tariffs can manage the cost in several ways:

1. Pay the full cost and live with a lower profit margin.

2. Cut costs to offset higher tariffs.

3. Ask suppliers in China for a discount to help offset the higher tariffs.

4. Seek to source supplies from outside China. So some Chinese companies are losing business.

5. Pass the tariff costs on to customers by increasing retail prices.

Most importers could use a mix of those options to spread the cost between suppliers, themselves, and consumers or buyers.

HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK?

For example, higher duties on imports of metals and Chinese products increased Caterpillar’s production costs by more than $100 million last year. In response, the heavy-duty equipment maker increased prices for its products.

Tractor manufacturer Deere & Co estimates a $100 million increase in its raw materials costs this year because of Trump’s tariffs on Chinese imports. Deere has cut costs and increased prices to protect its profits.

A Congressional Research Service report in February found that the tariffs had led to an increase of as much as 12 percent in the price of washing machines in the United States, compared to January 2018 when the duties were not in effect.

According to a study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the steel and aluminum tariffs increased the price of steel products by nearly 9 percent last year, pushing up costs for steel users by $5.6 billion.

Separately, a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Princeton University, and Columbia University concluded that the Chinese and steel and aluminum tariffs cost companies and consumers $3 billion a month in additional taxes and companies a further $1.4 billion in efficiency loses in 2018.0

WHAT DO CHINESE FIRMS PAY?

China has retaliated against U.S. tariffs by imposing its own tariffs on imports from the United States.

Most importers in China are Chinese. So in the same way the U.S. government is receiving import taxes on Chinese goods from U.S. importers, the Chinese government is receiving taxes on U.S. goods from Chinese importers.

WHAT’S THE TOTAL BILL?

Trump has imposed a 25 percent tax on $50 billion of Chinese goods, and a 10 percent tax on goods worth $200 billion more.

That, in theory, would mean the U.S government would receive a total of $32.5 billion per year on top of whatever duties were already in place.

U.S. tariff revenue in 2018 was $49.7 billion. That was up 41.2 percent from the $35.2 billion in 2017 before the trade wars started.

China has imposed 25 percent tariffs on $50 billion of U.S. imports, and also has tariffs of 5 to 10 percent on $60 billion more. That equates to around $15.5 billion to $18.5 billion in tariffs.

Chinese tariff revenue in 2018 was 284.8 billion yuan ($42.41 billion), down from 299.8 billion yuan ($44.65 billion) in 2017.

 

 

Boeing did not tell U.S. regulators for more than a year that it inadvertently made an alarm alerting pilots to a mismatch of flight data optional on the 737 MAX, instead of standard as on earlier 737s, but insisted on Sunday the missing display represented no safety risk.

The U.S. plane maker has been trying for weeks to dispel suggestions that it made airlines pay for safety features after it emerged that an alert designed to show discrepancies in Angle of Attack readings from two sensors was optional on the 737 MAX.

Erroneous data from a sensor responsible for measuring the angle at which the wing slices through the air – known as the Angle of Attack – is suspected of triggering a flawed piece of software that pushed the plane downward in two recent crashes.

In a statement, Boeing said it only discovered once deliveries of the 737 MAX had begun in 2017 that the so-called AOA Disagree alert was optional instead of standard as it had intended, but added that was not critical safety data.

A Federal Aviation Administration official told Reuters on Sunday that Boeing waited 13 months before informing the agency in November 2018.

By becoming optional, the alert had been treated in the same way as a separate indicator showing raw AOA data, which is seldom used by commercial pilots and had been an add-on for years.

“Neither the angle of attack indicator nor the AOA Disagree alert are necessary for the safe operation of the airplane,” Boeing said.

“They provide supplemental information only, and have never been considered safety features on commercial jet transport airplanes.”

Boeing said a Safety Review Board convened after a fatal Lion Air crash in Indonesia last October corroborated its prior conclusion that the alert was not necessary for the safe operation of commercial aircraft and could safely be tackled in a future system update.

The FAA backed that assessment but criticized Boeing for being slow to disclose the problem.

Boeing briefed the FAA on the display issue in November, after the Lion Air accident, and a special panel deemed it to be “low risk,” an FAA spokesman said.

“However, Boeing’s timely or earlier communication with the operators would have helped to reduce or eliminate possible confusion,” he added.

Boeing attributed the error to software delivered to the company from an outside source, but did not give details.

Sunday’s statement marked the first time since the two fatal accidents that Boeing explicitly acknowledged doing something inadvertently in the development of the 737 MAX, albeit on an issue that it contends has no impact on safety.

​Boeing has said the feeding of erroneous Angle of Attack data to a system called MCAS that pushed the planes lower was a common link in two wider chains of events leading to both crashes, but has stopped short of admitting error on that front.

The angle of attack measures the angle between the air flow and the wing and helps determine whether the plane is able to fly correctly. If the angle becomes too steep, the flow of air over the wing is disturbed, throwing the plane into an aerodynamic stall. That means it starts to fall instead of fly.

Although the angle itself is key for onboard systems, the industry has debated for years whether such data should be included in already crowded cockpit displays because it is directly related to airspeed, which pilots already scrutinize.

Some analysts and academics say having the AOA Disagree alert installed would have helped Lion Air maintenance crew diagnose a problem on the penultimate flight of the 737 MAX jet that crashed in October, killing all 189 on board.

The 737 MAX was grounded worldwide over safety concerns following the Ethiopian crash in March, killing 157 people.

When the jet returns to service, all new aircraft will have a working AOA Disagree alert as a standard feature and a no-charge optional indicator showing the underlying data, Boeing said. That restores the situation found on the displays of previous 737NG models since around the middle of last decade.

Airlines with grounded 737 MAX jets will be able to activate the AOA Disagree function directly.

Boeing is also developing a software upgrade and training changes to the MCAS system that must be approved by global regulators before the jets can fly again.

Boeing has yet to formally submit the upgrades to the FAA for approval but could do as early as this week once it completes a special test flight.

Federal prosecutors, the Transportation Department inspector general’s office and a blue-ribbon panel are also looking into the 737 MAX’s certification. A U.S. House of Representatives panel will hold a hearing on the plane’s status with the FAA’s acting chief, Dan Elwell, and National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Robert Sumwalt on May 15. 

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders on Sunday proposed a sweeping agriculture and rural investment plan to break up big agriculture monopolies and shift farm subsidies toward small family farmers.

 

“I think a farmer that produces the food we eat may be almost as important as some crook on Wall Street who destroys the economy,” Sanders said during a campaign event in Osage, a town of fewer than 4,000 people. “Those of us who come from rural America have nothing to be ashamed about, and the time is long overdue for us to stand up and fight for our way of life.”

 

Sanders’ plan expands on themes that have been central to his presidential campaign in Iowa since the start, including his emphasis on rural America and pledge to take on and break up big corporations.

 

During his Sunday speech, Sanders outlined the dire circumstances confronting rural America — population decline, school and hospital closures and rising addiction and suicide rates in many rural counties nationwide — as the impetus for his policy.

 

His plan includes a number of antitrust proposals, including breaking up existing agriculture monopolies and placing a moratorium on future mergers by big agriculture companies. He would also ban “vertically integrated” agribusinesses — companies that control multiple levels of production and processing of a product.

One of his competitors in the Democratic race, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, included several of those antitrust planks in the agriculture policy she released in March. But Sanders’ policy is more expansive than just targeting major agriculture corporations — he’s also proposing greater government involvement in setting price controls and managing supply and demand of agriculture commodities.

 

His plan calls for a shift from the current farm subsidy system toward a “parity system,” which means “setting price floors and matching supply with demand so farmers are guaranteed the cost of production and family living expenses.” Critics of the farm bill have argued that the current government subsidy system favors large family farms and corporate farms over small family farms, and Sanders’ policy aims to make that distribution more equal.

 

Such a major change in agriculture policy would require congressional action and would likely face fierce opposition from the farm lobby — but Sanders pledged to fight for farmers against corporate interests.

 

“In rural America, we are seeing giant agribusiness conglomerates extract as much wealth out of small communities as they possibly can while family farmers are going bankrupt and in many ways are being treated like modern-day indentured servants,” Sanders said.

 

Sanders would also classify food supply security as a national security issue and increase scrutiny over foreign ownership of American farmland. And he suggests re-establishing a “national grain and feed reserve” in case of a natural disaster or severe weather event — a proposal inspired in part by the recent flooding on Iowa’s eastern and western borders, which swamped acres of cropland and wiped out farmers’ stores.

Sanders also wants to change patent law to protect small farmers from lawsuits brought by corporate farms, strengthen organic standards and bolster programs aimed at supporting minority farmers. He includes in his proposal planks focused on rural economic and infrastructure development and on incentivizing the agriculture industry to help combat climate change by shifting to more sustainable farming practices.

 

Sanders’ agriculture proposal includes planks that specifically tailor some of his broader policy priorities to rural America. He has proposed increasing funding for public education and establishing a universal childcare system, and his agriculture plan seeks an increase in funding for rural education and a universal childcare system that provides access for rural Americans to daycare.

U.S. President Donald Trump, looking to pressure China to speed up talks on a new trade agreement, says that starting Friday he will impose sharply higher tariffs on billions of dollars of Chinese exports to the United States.

Trump said Sunday on Twitter, “For 10 months, China has been paying Tariffs to the USA of 25% on 50 Billion Dollars of High Tech, and 10% on 200 Billion Dollars of other goods. These payments are partially responsible for our great economic results.”

He said, “The 10% will go up to 25% on Friday. 325 Billions Dollars of additional goods sent to us by China remain untaxed, but will be shortly, at a rate of 25%. The Tariffs paid to the USA have had little impact on product cost, mostly borne by China. The Trade Deal with China continues, but too slowly, as they attempt to renegotiate. No!” 

There was no immediate reaction from China about Trump’s announcement.

Washington and Beijing have engaged in reciprocal tariff hikes over the last year while negotiators have engaged in lengthy trade talks, alternating negotiations between the two capitals. Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had agreed last December to forestall new tariffs while the talks were going on, but it was not clear how Trump’s announcement would affect the negotiations, set to resume in Washington on Wednesday.

Despite an initial goal of finishing by March 1, the two countries have continued to debate several issues, but have yet to complete a deal. Both sides, representing the world’s two biggest economies, have said progress is being made.

The two countries have been trying to resolve disputes over intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers. It is not clear whether the tariffs both countries have imposed will remain in place if an agreement is reached.

U.S. employers added a robust 263,000 jobs in April, suggesting that businesses have shrugged off earlier concerns that the economy might slow this year and anticipate strong customer demand.

The unemployment rate fell to a five-decade low of 3.6% from 3.8%, though that drop partly reflected an increase in the number of Americans who stopped looking for work. Average hourly pay rose 3.2% from 12 months earlier, a healthy increase though unchanged from the previous month.

Friday’s jobs report from the Labor Department showed that solid economic growth is still encouraging strong hiring nearly a decade into the economy’s recovery from the Great Recession. The economic expansion is set to become the longest in history in July.

Many businesses say they are struggling to find workers. Some have taken a range of steps to fill jobs, including training more entry-level workers, loosening educational requirements and raising pay.

The brightening picture represents a sharp improvement from the start of the year. At the time, the government was enduring a partial shutdown, the stock market had plunged, trade tensions between the United States and China were flaring and the Federal Reserve had just raised short-term interest rates in December for a fourth time in 2018. Analysts worried that the economy might barely expand in the first three months of the year.

Yet the outlook soon brightened. Chair Jerome Powell signaled that the Fed would put rate hikes on hold. Trade negotiations between the U.S. and China made some progress. The economic outlook in some other major economies improved. Share prices rebounded.

And in the end, the government reported that the U.S. economy grew at a 3.2% annual rate in the January-March period — the strongest pace for a first quarter since 2015. That said, the growth was led mostly by factors that could prove temporary — a restocking of inventories in warehouses and on store shelves and a narrowing of the U.S. trade deficit. By contrast, consumer spending and business investment, which more closely reflect the economy’s underlying strength, were relatively weak.

Yet American households have become more confident since the winter and are ramping up their spending. Consumer spending surged in March by the most in nearly a decade. A likely factor is that steady job growth and solid wage increases have enlarged Americans’ paychecks.

Businesses are also spending more freely. Orders to U.S. factories for long-lasting capital goods jumped in March by the most in eight months. That suggested that companies were buying more computers, machinery and other equipment to keep up with growing customer demand.

Housing, too, is rebounding after home sales had slumped in the second half of last year. Mortgage rates rose to nearly 5% last fall as the Fed raised interest rates. With the Fed now putting rate hikes on hold, borrowing costs have declined.

In February, sales of existing homes jumped by the most in three years. And in March, more Americans signed contracts to buy a house. Contract signings usually lead to finished sales one to two months later.

A White House meeting between the current U.S. president and a prominent businessman who is seeking to become president of Taiwan is causing concern. 

The White House on Thursday sought to downplay any diplomatic or political sensitivities, saying President Donald Trump and Foxconn founder Terry Gou did not discuss support for the billionaire’s presidential campaign in Taiwan. 

“He is just a great friend” of Trump, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement. 

The Taiwanese businessman, however, in a Facebook posting after Wednesday’s meeting and in a discussion with reporters, said he told the president of his candidacy and Trump responded that being president “was a tough job.” 

He also displayed a pen and autographed coin he said that Trump gave him.

“If I am elected president of the Republic of China, I will be a peacemaker and won’t become a troublemaker,” Gou told reporters. “I will strengthen Taiwan and the U.S. economically.” He also boasted that of all the presidential contenders, he is the only one to have secured an Oval Office meeting. 

Wednesday’s discussion is the first known circumstance of a sitting American president meeting with a Taiwanese presidential candidate since Washington broke diplomatic ties with Taipei in 1979 as part of its recognition of the communist government in Beijing. 

Gou is to seek the nomination of the opposition Kuomintang party in Taiwan’s 2020 presidential election. The party is regarded as having a friendlier stance toward Beijing than the ruling Democrat Progressive Party of President Tsai Ing-wen. 

Trump also was seen as breaking protocol as president-elect when he had a phone conversation with Tsai, something that prompted protest from the Chinese government, which regards Taiwan as a renegade island province. 

The Trump-Gou meeting occurred at a particularly sensitive time. The United States is in the final stages of negotiating a sweeping trade deal with China amid growing strategic tension between the two Pacific powers. 

Meanwhile, Gou — who has appeared in public previously alongside Trump to tout economic investment — is receiving criticism in the U.S. state of Wisconsin because what was envisioned as a $10 billion liquid crystal display factory project has fallen behind schedule. 

“Mr. Gou is spending a lot of money in Wisconsin and soon will announce even more investment there,” the White House press secretary said in her statement. 

Foxconn, which is a major supplier for Apple Inc. products, says Gou and Trump discussed the “positive progress of the Wisconn Valley Science and Technology Park project and other matters.” 

Trump, a strong supporter of the project in the political swing state, has proclaimed it the “eighth wonder of the world” for its scope and its projected economic impact, including as many as 13,000 jobs. 

There is concern about whether it will become a reality as envisioned because Foxconn failed to meet its job targets in 2018 to qualify for state tax credits and it has reduced the size of the factory it originally announced it would construct. 

Gou, speaking to reporters on Wednesday, disputed that anything significant has changed. 

“It is not right to say our investment in Wisconsin has changed,” he said. “We suspended the work around October and November last year because the weather there was snowy and icy cold. We will continue our work in May when the weather gets warmer.”

Gou on Thursday flew to Wisconsin on his private jet and met with Gov. Tony Evers at an airport terminal to further try to allay concerns about the project. 

Evers earlier told reporters he would emphasize to Gou that there must be adequate protections for taxpayers and environmental standards. 

The Nasdaq is adding fake meat to its diet.

Beyond Meat, the purveyor of plant-based burgers and sausages, made its debut on the stock exchange Thursday. It’s the first pure-play maker of vegan “meat” to go public, according to Renaissance Capital, which researches and tracks IPOs.

Beyond Meat raised about $240 million selling 9.6 million shares at $25 each. That values the company at about $1.5 billion.

The 10-year-old company has attracted celebrity investors like Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and actor Leonardo DiCaprio and buzz for placing its products in burger joints like Carl’s Jr. It sells to 30,000 grocery stores, restaurants and schools in the U.S., Canada, Italy, the United Kingdom and Israel.

Beyond Meat CEO Ethan Brown said the IPO timing is right because the company wants to expand overseas. He also wants consumers to be able to buy shares since they have fueled the company’s growth.

“It really is a wonderful feeling to be able to welcome people in who have helped this brand,” Brown told The Associated Press.

Still, Beyond Meat has never made an annual profit; it lost $30 million last year. It’s also facing serious competition from other “new meat” companies like Impossible Foods and traditional players like Tyson Foods Inc. Tyson recently sold a stake in Beyond Meat because it plans to develop its own alternative meat.

The IPO comes amid growing consumer interest in plant-based foods for their presumed health and environmental benefits. U.S. sales of plant-based meats jumped 42% between March 2016 and March 2019 to a total of $888 million, according to Nielsen. Traditional meat sales rose 1% to $85 billion in that same time frame.

The trend is a global one. U.K. sales of meat alternatives jumped 18% over the last year, while sales of traditional meat and poultry slid 2%.

Even Burger King has recognized the appeal. Earlier this week, the fast food chain announced that it would start testing the Impossible Whopper, made with a plant-based burger from Impossible Foods, in additional markets after its monthlong test in St. Louis proved successful.

Brown says Beyond Meat’s ingredient list — it only uses natural ingredients that haven’t been genetically modified and doesn’t use soy — sets it apart from competitors. Its products are made from pea protein, canola oil, potato starch and other plant-based ingredients. Its burgers “bleed” with beet juice; its sausages are colored with fruit juice.

Unlike competitors, Beyond Meat products have also been sold in the meat section of groceries since 2016. That has broadened their appeal beyond vegetarians. Beyond Meat says a 26-week study last spring showed that 93% of Kroger customers who bought its burgers also bought animal meat during the same period.

Health comparisons are mixed. A four-ounce 92% lean burger from Laura’s Lean Beef has higher fat and cholesterol than a Beyond Meat burger, but Beyond Meat’s burger has higher sodium and carbohydrates and slightly less protein. The lean beef burger is 160 calories; a Beyond Meat burger is 270 calories.

Brown says Beyond Meat is working on reducing sodium, which is a natural byproduct of its manufacturing process. But he also points out that red meat and processed meat have been classified as possible carcinogens by the World Health Organization.

Beyond Meat also costs more. For $5.99, consumers can get two 4-ounce patties of Beyond Burger or four 4-ounce patties of Laura’s Lean Beef.

Brown said Beyond Meat has a five-year goal of getting at least one product — most likely beef — to cost less than the animal version. He expects the supply chain will grow as sales expand, which will lower the cost of raw ingredients like peas.

But Beyond Meat touts environmental benefits as well. The company says a plant-based burger takes 99% less water and 93% less land to produce than a beef burger, and generates 90% fewer greenhouse gas emissions.

Beyond Meat was founded in 2009 by Brown, a former clean energy executive. Brown’s family part-owned a Maryland dairy farm, so as a child, Brown spent weekends and summers on the farm. As he grew older, he began to question whether people really needed animals to produce meat.

Brown teamed up with two professors from the University of Missouri, Fu-hung Hsieh and Harold Huff, who had been developing soy-based chicken since the 1980s. By 2013, Beyond Meat was selling plant-based chicken strips nationwide at Whole Foods. (The company discontinued chicken earlier this year but says it’s working on a better recipe.)

For investors, the stock is not without risk. Amid its annual losses, Beyond Meat must also continue to spend heavily on research and development. The El Segundo, California-based company employs 63 scientists, engineers, researchers, technicians and chefs at its 30,000-square-foot lab. It also has manufacturing facilities in Columbia, Missouri.

Renaissance Capital, which has researched the company, says investors will likely tolerate the losses because the business is growing so quickly. Beyond Meat’s net revenue was $87.9 million last year, 170% higher than 2017.

In documents filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Beyond Meat says it will invest $40 million to $50 million in current and new manufacturing facilities and spend $50 million to $60 million on product development and sales. The rest will be used to pay down debt and fund operations.

President Donald Trump is increasingly reliant upon economic sanctions to achieve his foreign policy goals, despite a repeated emphasis that the use of military force remains a viable option.  However, these coercive measures, analysts say, have not produced their intended results, and at times have put the United States at odds with allies.  

Venezuela

In the case of Venezuela, the Trump sanctions that include the seizure of Venezuela’s oil assets in the United States, along with joining more than 50 other countries in recognizing Juan Guaido, the head of the National Assembly, as the interim president, have energized the opposition.  Despite the economic pain caused by the sanctions, the massive protests in the country, and reports of growing mid-level military support for the opposition, socialist leader Nicolas Maduro has continued to hold on to power through increasing political repression.

Short of using military force that could entangle the United States in a protracted civil war, there are few other measures the Trump administration can take to force democratic change in Venezuela.

“Because the costs are limited to us.  It also means the benefits will likely be limited.  We could accept more costs and achieve more benefits if we were for example, to invade these countries, change their governments, force them to adopt policies we want,” said Richard Weitz, a political-military analysis at Hudson Institute in Washington, DC.

Iran

Trump has more aggressively imposed unilateral sanctions than past presidents against countries like Venezuela, Iran, Cuba and North Korea, and in threatening to target more third party countries that violate U.S. restrictions.

“He’s following the thesis that, you know, began to be articulated in the Congress and in the 90s, which is you should force other countries to make a choice.  They can do business with us, or they can do business with Iran, or Cuba, North Korea,” said William Reinsch, an international business analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC.

After withdrawing from the Iranian nuclear deal, negotiated by the previous administration of President Barack Obama, Trump’s security team recently warned third party countries, including allies South Korea and Japan, of impending sanctions if they continue to buy Iranian oil.

The unilateral sanctions have worked to some degree to force reluctant allies to go along with increasing economic pressure on the Iranian Islamic Republic to end its nuclear ambitions and support of armed militant groups in the Middle East.

“They’ve reassured allies in the Middle East that we’re taking a strong stand in Iran, they have caused European countries to disengage from the Iranian economy, even as their governments, although they are clearly opposed to his policies, they haven’t taken strong measures to confront the U.S. on that,” said Weitz.

Cuba

Trump on Wednesday threatened an economic embargo of Cuba for allegedly supporting Maduro in Venezuela with 20,000 troops.  The United States also recently announced it would enforce sanctions against Cuba permitting U.S. businesses that had property seized by the communist government of Fidel Castro 60 years ago, to sue international companies, some in Europe and Canada, that have since taken over these buildings.

These restrictions on Cuba and Iran not only potentially target allies that violate U.S. policy, they could also hurt American businesses by excluding them from these markets.

“The worst case for American companies is if they’re out, and the German, French, British competitors are in, because then they’re losing market share, and they’re losing market share long term, because they’re not going to get that back when the political situation changes,” said Reinsch.

North Korea

On North Korea the Trump administration led efforts for increased United Nations sanctions in 2017 that ban most of that country’s exports, along with unilateral sanctions on companies in China and Russia for supporting the North’s weapons program.  These restrictions likely contributed to Pyongyang suspending ballistic missile and nuclear tests and agreeing to engage in denuclearization talks.  However, the talks remain deadlocked over Washington’s demand for Pyongyang’s near complete disarmament prior to sanctions relief.

While sanctions can impose increased economic costs on an adversary country, analysts are skeptical they can force sweeping change, and say that over time these measures can become less effective as targeted countries step up evasion efforts.  

President Donald Trump is increasingly reliant upon economic sanctions to achieve his foreign policy goals, even as he also asserts that the use of military force is a viable option. However, as VOA’s Brian Padden reports, in three key countries subjected to sanctions Trump’s approach so far hasn’t produced the intended results and at times has put the U.S. at odds with allies.