Displaying items by tag: Trump

(Washington)

The back and forth on the burgeoning trade war with China is getting exhausting and confusing. Only a day after US officials tried to clam down the situation by saying that a trade war would be avoided, President Trump announced a further $100bn of proposed tariffs on Chinese goods. Trump explained his response to China’s hike in tariffs on US goods this way, saying “Rather than remedy its misconduct, China has chosen to harm our farmers and manufacturers … In light of China’s unfair retaliation, I have instructed the [US Trade Representative] to consider whether $100bn of additional tariffs would be appropriate . . . and, if so, to identify the products upon which to impose such tariffs”.

FINSUM: So we understand why the US wants to raise tariffs, but at the same time, it is hard to root for a trade war which seems like it will hurt all involved.

(Washington)

The Wall Street Journal says that the source of Donald Trump’s push to regulate Amazon has nothing to do with tech industry issues or the Post Office. They say it is personal. In particular, the WSJ contends that Trump’s anger is personally directed toward Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, who owns the Washington Post, a publication with which there is mutual ire with Trump. The president dislikes the Post’s coverage of him, so he attacking Amazon as a proxy, says the WSJ.

FINSUM: If you are in investor in Amazon, then this is likely good news, as Trump’s ire might just be hot air that doesn’t materialize into any new rules.

(Washington)

The market is increasingly worried about a big regulatory push against the tech industry. Amazon, along with Facebook, are dead center in the bullseye of the push. However, Bloomberg tells investors not to be too worried. The reason why is that according to five sources inside the White House, there are no active discussions or planning about any regulation that would impact the ecommerce retailer. Even in the case of the Post Office, which Trump has focused on, rates are set by a commission, and the organization is legally barred from charging any shipper less than its cost of delivery, meaning Amazon can’t be underpaying.

FINSUM: This is quite relieving if you are an Amazon investor. However, beyond any immediate threats, we do agree that the government is going to have to reconsider anti-trust regulation in light of how data is being used an abused by large tech companies.

(Washington)

In what could either be a big worry for tech or a pile of unwarranted hot air, there are rumors circulating that President Trump may be obsessed with regulating Amazon. Last week, the president escalated his calls for regulating the company, tweeting “I have stated my concerns with Amazon long before the Election … Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!”. Trump has also repeatedly attacked the Washington Post, which is owned by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. Trump’s 2020 campaign manager said in a tweet that “Amazon has probably 10x the data on every American that Facebook does. All that data and own a political newspaper, The Washington Post. Hmm.....”.

FINSUM: Our other perspectives aside, we do think governments may need to adopt updated views of when regulation is called for. In Amazon’s case, the company is clearly not a monopoly in any sector, but the data it has does give it heightened importance. The context of monopoly laws, which are essentially modeled on 19th century ideas, don’t seem to have much scope to account for this.

(Washington)

Donald Trump may be in some very hot water soon. Stormy Daniels’ lawyer has just moved to interview the president under oath in relation to her lawsuit against him. Her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, has just asked a California court for the right to depose the president and his lawyer. The president’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, reject Daniels’ claim, defending his payment to her saying “just because something isn’t true doesn’t mean that it can’t cause you harm or damage”.

FINSUM: We suspect this request will not actually lead to Trump speaking under oath, but that does not mean something else in the case (or others) will not eventually put the president in that position.