Vive la resistance - in reverse. Pornhub and its sister sites YouPorn and RedTube have gone dark in France, yanking access to their content Wednesday in a dramatic protest over a government crackdown on underage users.

A screen displays a “no under-18s” sign in front of the logo of a pornographic website as regulators consider requiring such sites to ensure they are preventing minors from being exposed to their content. Lionel Bonaventure/AFP via Getty Images

The move comes after Aylo - the firm behind the trio of X-rated titans - hit pause on its French operations rather than comply with a new law requiring porn platforms to verify users are 18 or older.

“I can confirm that Aylo has made the difficult decision to suspend access to its user-uploaded platforms... in France,” a Pornhub spokesperson said Tuesday. “We will be using our platforms to directly address the French public tomorrow.”

Aylo, which operates some of the world’s most trafficked adult sites, is now in a standoff with France’s digital watchdog, Arcom, which has the power to block sites and fine operators who fail to screen out minors.

French officials aren’t exactly begging them to stay.

“If Aylo would rather leave France than apply our laws, they are free to do so,” Clara Chappaz, France’s junior minister for artificial intelligence and digital technology, posted bluntly on X.

According to Arcom, some 2.3 million minors access porn sites every month in France - a clear violation of laws requiring age gating. The government has demanded stricter controls, like government ID or verified digital passports.

But Aylo claims the measures would compromise user privacy and create security risks, setting up a classic clash between data protection and content regulation.

Now, French users clicking over to Pornhub are getting nothing but a cold shower - a sudden blackout that leaves millions of adults scrambling for alternatives.

Whether the blackout is a temporary gambit or a long-term exit remains unclear. But one thing’s for sure: in France, the liberté to browse adult content just got a whole lot harder to come by.

Authored by RFE/RL staff via OilPrice.com,

• The European Commission has given Bulgaria the green light to adopt the euro as of January 1, 2026, following a positive assessment of the country's economic convergence.

• Bulgaria's approval to join the eurozone represents a significant milestone in its broader integration into the European Union, following its recent entry into the Schengen Agreement.

• Despite facing political and economic challenges, Bulgaria has met the necessary criteria for euro adoption, with final decisions to be made by the Council of the EU.

The European Commission has given Bulgaria the go-ahead to join the eurozone single currency region as of January 1, 2026, the country's second major step in just one year on its path to full integration into the European Union.

The commission, which met on June 4 to convey its decision on the issue, said Bulgaria fulfils the four nominal convergence criteria that are used to evaluate whether a country is ready for euro adoption.

"The euro is a tangible symbol of European strength and unity," said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

The European Central Bank (ECB) also gave a positive assessment of Bulgaria's application, saying it met the criteria of currency stability, inflation, public finances, and interest rates.

“This positive assessment of convergence paves the way for Bulgaria to introduce the euro as of 1 January 2026 and become the 21st EU Member State to join the euro area,” Philip Lane, a member of the ECB Executive Board, said.

“I wish to congratulate Bulgaria on its tremendous dedication to making the adjustments needed.”

The Council of the EU will take the final decisions on euro adoption for Bulgaria, basing its decision on the opinions of the EC and the ECB, as well as from talks with the Eurogroup and European Council.

While adoption of the euro was a condition for joining the European Union, legislative failures, including reforms to combat money laundering, concerns over inflation, and political gridlock -- Bulgaria has had seven elections in the past four years -- have made the path difficult for the country.

Mass protests took place in Sofia and other cities across the country last week, and politicians said after the decision that the task now is to make sure adoption provides benefits, not disruption.

Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov said the government would work to make "the process of introducing the euro smooth, predictable, predictable" and to dispel "the fears that are instilled in people and that are used for political abuse."

Added Boyko Borisov, leader of the GERB party and a former prime minister: "A huge amount of work lies ahead, especially next year, because Bulgarians should feel the benefits of the eurozone."

The decision in favor of adoption is Bulgaria’s second big step in just one year on its path to full integration into the European Union.

In January, Sofia became a full member of Schengen agreement -- and Bulgaria’s borders with neighboring Greece and Romania are now fully open.

Via Remix News,

Farmers in Spain and France were again protesting agricultural imports from Ukraine and South America under the Mercosur trade agreement ahead of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva visiting France and the expiration of a free trade agreement with Ukraine, writes TopAgrar.pl.

Da Silva wants to convince President Emmanuel Macron to drop his opposition to the EU-Mercosur Agreement, and at a press conference with the French head of state, told press that he would not “leave the Mercosur presidency without having concluded the trade deal,” a position he will be taking up in a few weeks. 

Meanwhile, the French Federation of Agricultural Unions (FNSEA) has once again called on Macron to take action to create a minority in the EU to block the ratification of the Mercosur Agreement by the Council of the European Union.  

In a statement quoted by Reuters, the French organization warned that the agreement will be “devastating for the beef, poultry and sugar industries and compromise the EU’s ambitions in terms of food sovereignty.” 

“We are raising the alarm!” said Alain Carre, head of the French sugar industry group AIBS. 

If an agreement with Mercosur is reached, the French are demanding clear trade rules: “Our demands (for an EU-Mercosur deal) are simple: reciprocity of regulations, traceability of products abroad and much clearer labeling,” said Jean-Michel Schaeffer, head of French poultry industry group Anvol. 

In Spain, hundreds of farmers gathered in Madrid to protest excessive grain imports from Ukraine, which have resulted in grain prices below production costs.

“Spanish farmers will lose €1 billion this year,” Javier Fatas, leader of the farmers’ union COAG from the Aragon region in northeastern Spain, said. 

Spaniards also refuse to import genetically modified grain from Mercosur, which is cheaper than Spanish grain, into the EU.  

Similar sentiments are prevalent in Poland. In June, farmers took to the streets again to express opposition to trade liberalization with Ukraine, the Mercosur agreement, and the Green Deal, reminds TopAgrar.

“Our position should be firm and clear: the customs and limits from before the war must return. Otherwise, we will not be able to compete on the European market, and especially in Poland,” said Stanisław Barna from the grassroots All-Poland Farmers’ Protest.

At the protest in Krążkowy in Wielkopolska, another OOPR representative, Krzysztof Olejnik, called the provisions of the EU-Mercosur Agreement a “spit in the face” of farmers: “If we are talking about Mercosur, we still do not have detailed information about the terms of this agreement. We assume that the terms of this agreement will probably not be favorable for us,” said Krzysztof Olejnik.

The lack of hope for economic improvement in agriculture is combined with a sense of lack of action on the part of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Government and the European Commission. Maciej Zawadzki from the Association of Farmers of Southern Wielkopolska said, “We decided to take to the streets because our issues that were supposed to be resolved are still unresolved. The government remains passive. (…) Unfortunately, we do not see any actions that would improve our position and situation. Quite the opposite: what is happening is working to our disadvantage.”

Stanisław Barna says the only option for farmers now is to put pressure on decision-makers via protests. 

“We want to work with dignity, have a stable situation. Have a decent salary for our work (…) This is what we are reduced to, to make our farms fail. If you do not fight for yourselves, no one will do it for you! Thank you and God bless you for your determination and showing strength today. Let the government see, and Minister Siekierski will finally get down to work, because he has been talking to us for a year and a half, saying that he will prepare a position, but let him finally come to West Pomerania and talk,” he said.

Farmers also hope the newly elected president, Karol Nawrocki, will come through for them. “Mr. President, we are here, we are watching, we are waiting for your decision,” Barna added. “We farmers would like these promises to be fulfilled and not forgotten.”

Macron and Lula did not appear to make much headway on EU-Mercosur trade deal. Macron clearly wants to boost trade and relations with Brazil but he also made clear that he cannot accept the deal in its current form, emphasizing the need for “either mirror clauses or safeguard measures” to ensure Brazilian products conform with EU production standards.

Read more here...

Gun violence remains one of the most pressing public health issues in the United States.

But as Visual Capitalist;s Bruno Venditti shws in the following chart, according to data from USAFacts as of December 2023, gun-related deaths vary significantly across states, reflecting long-standing regional and demographic differences.

Preliminary numbers show that between January and August 2024, an estimated 30,100 people died from gun-related injuries in the U.S., 5% fewer than during the same period in 2023.

The rate of gun-related deaths in the U.S. has shifted over time. In the early 1990s, the rate fluctuated between 14.5 and 15.0 deaths per 100,000 people. From 2000 to 2014, however, that figure declined and remained below 10.5 deaths per 100,000.

By 2023, the rate rose again to 13.7 per 100,000—still 8% lower than its peak in 1993.

States With the Highest Gun Death Rates

Washington, DC recorded the highest rate in the country in 2023, with 28.5 deaths per 100,000 residents, more than 60% above the next highest state.

States With the Lowest Gun Death Rates

At the other end of the spectrum, several states reported significantly lower rates. Those include Hawaii, Utah, and Nebraska.

Although they receive less public attention than gun-related homicides, suicides have consistently made up the majority of gun deaths in the United States. In 2023, suicides accounted for 58% of all gun-related fatalities, totaling 27,300 deaths, according to CDC data. By comparison, 38% were classified as murders (17,927 deaths).

The U.S. has more guns than people, with nearly 400 million in civilian possession. In this map, we rank states by the highest percentage of gun ownership for adults.

Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times,

Just as the internet radically changed how America conducts business, artificial intelligence (AI) is also making waves in the workplace by taking thousands of jobs. It’s an outcome that industry experts have warned would happen, and professionals across multiple employment sectors have already been affected.

Beyond artists and content creators, AI is also impacting professionals in marketing, technology, translation, various levels of administration, and management. It has been a silent and ongoing trend for two years, but tech insiders say this is just the beginning.

A senior software engineer at Microsoft, Nandita Giri, shared her thoughts with The Epoch Times on what kind of near-term changes Americans can expect as a result of ramped-up workplace AI integration.

“AI is particularly effective at replacing routine, predictable tasks ... jobs in data entry, customer support, transcription, and logistics are the most vulnerable,” Giri said. “In software engineering, even some junior [developer] testing roles are being replaced or reshaped with AI-driven tooling. Back-office operations across health care, finance, and legal are also at high risk.”

Giri has observed a shift away from human workers in favor of AI in enterprise software development, where she said companies are quietly removing what they call “coordination overhead.” She said this is happening as AI tools become more reliable for things like task triage, scheduling, and summarization.

“AI agents have enabled a single engineer to manage what used to be a multi-person workflow, especially in automation pipelines and internal support tasks,” she said.

Restructuring Workflow

Cahyo Subroto, founder of the AI-powered data extraction platform MrScraper, agrees with this perspective.

“I’ve spent the last few years building systems that automate work, so I’ve seen firsthand where AI adds value and where it quietly pushes people out of the picture,” Subroto told The Epoch Times.

Like Giri, Subroto said that the jobs most in danger of AI replacement are those that rely heavily on structured, repetitive digital labor.

“That includes early-stage analysts, junior QA [quality assurance] testers, data entry staff, and even support roles in HR and customer service,” he said.

Subroto explained that when AI can learn workflow patterns, it can perform them faster and without the payroll cost. “At my last company, I watched a client eliminate three QA positions after switching to a tool that could auto-generate test cases and report bugs in real time.”

These decisions are based strictly on efficiency, he added. “That’s what makes this shift so difficult to stop.”

In January, the World Economic Forum (WEF) released a report that estimated 92 million jobs would be displaced by AI by 2030. The think tank surveyed more than 1,000 of the world’s largest employers, accounting for 22 industry groups and more than 14 million workers.

There is a silver lining, however. The WEF—and many others—predict that AI will also create new jobs and reshape existing positions, allowing current employees in various sectors to focus on more high-value tasks instead of routine work.

A robot sprinkles cheese over a pizza at the Institute for Artificial Intelligence of the University of Bremen, Germany, on March 8, 2017. Ingo Wagner/dpa/AFP via Getty Images

Jobs with declining demand include customer service representatives, claims adjusters, bank tellers, graphic designers, accountants, and auditors, the WEF report said.

Subroto believes much of the shift toward AI will be subtle. “Instead of replacing people, we’re restructuring the workflow to rely on AI for the mechanical parts, while humans take on broader accountability.”

“That’s a harder conversation because it’s not about job loss. It’s about job transformation, and not everyone will be equipped and ready to make that jump,” he said.

Big Changes Ahead

In May, Microsoft announced plans to lay off 3 percent of its employees across the board, affecting roughly 6,000 people. In a statement to CNBC, a spokesperson for the tech giant said, “We continue to implement organizational changes necessary to best position the company for success in a dynamic marketplace.” The spokesperson confirmed that the job cuts weren’t related to worker performance.

It’s reportedly the largest series of layoffs at Microsoft since 2023.

This arrives on the heels of reported cuts at Amazon, which in January said it would lay off what it called a “small number” of its communications and sustainability employees. It followed that by announcing in March plans to eliminate 14,000 managerial positions by early next year.

Among those who lost their job at Microsoft is former senior data scientist Tatiana Teppoeva, founder and CEO of One Nonverbal Ecosystem. She told The Epoch Times that increased tech layoffs alongside the rise of AI integration is an industry red flag.

“This has sparked genuine concerns over the future need for human programmers and signals a real, accelerating shift in how companies evaluate which human roles are essential,” Teppoeva said.

Like Giri and Subroto, Teppoeva identified industries that have a lot of unchanging, rules-based tasks like back-end software development, data entry, finance, and logistics as areas with a high probability of AI job replacement.

“The most realistic near-term disruption is task-level automation, not full job replacement,” she said. “For example, in sales, AI tools can draft outreach emails or analyze deal data, but they cannot replicate the human-to-human trust, nonverbal signals, and presence that close high-ticket deals.”

Teppoeva said the human-AI gap is now a point of focus for her business. “Helping sales teams, executives, and companies align their human communication, body language, voice, [and] nonverbal presence [is] what advanced AI tools still can’t do,” she said, then added, “At least not yet.”

On June 2, a Midwest-based web content manager for a major U.S. company—who asked to be identified only as “Tom”—was laid off with the rest of his department and most of the company’s marketing staff. Tom requested the company not be identified out of fear it could affect his severance.

Having worked in web development for more than 15 years, Tom said he saw the “AI blitz” coming and had a gut hunch it would only be a matter of time before he was made redundant.

“The worst part is the lack of honesty,” Tom said. “Companies aren’t being straight with people, they’re just saying things like ’sales are down‘ or ’we need to improve efficiency,' but the reality is it’s about increasing profit by any means.”

Tom said he has a friend who spent nearly two decades working in marketing and kept up with changing industry trends before being laid off a year ago because of AI integration.

“There are entire careers with university degrees behind them that are ending now,” Tom said.

“It’s not necessarily a one-to-one ratio,” he added. “Maybe an AI tool automates half of a department’s workload. That means you can redistribute the remaining work amongst a smaller team.”

Since the Hollywood writers’ strike in 2023, the potential for AI to disrupt careers has been under a microscope, and it’s easy to see why. Out of more than 80,000 jobs cut in May 2023, nearly 4,000 were due to AI, according to a layoffs report from the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray, and Christmas, Inc.

The trend continued last year. In 2024, the Society of Authors surveyed 12,500 workers in different creative industries, revealing many had already lost work to AI. According to the survey, 26 percent of illustrators and 36 percent of translators had already lost work because of generative AI.

Tesla co-founder Elon Musk also shared his views on AI job replacement during the Viva Technology conference in Paris in 2024, following news that Tesla planned to lay off 10 percent of its workforce.

A 3D-printed miniature model of Elon Musk and the Tesla logo are seen in this image from Jan. 23, 2025. Dado Ruvic/Illustration/Reuters

“If the computer and robot can do everything better than you, what meaning does your life have? ... In a negative scenario ... we’re in deep trouble,” Musk said.

Other tech insiders share this point of view. During an episode of “The Artificial Intelligence” show, Marketing AI Institute founder Paul Roetzer said AI is fundamentally reshaping the human workforce.

“It’s not like we’re drawing some difficult-to-find conclusion here,” Roetzer said when discussing Microsoft’s most recent layoffs. “If the CTO [chief technology officer] of the company is saying that within five years we expect 95 percent of all code to be written by AI, then what do you need a bunch of engineers for?”

Subroto used an example from his work, describing the use of AI for “task sequencing and code generation,” which allowed his company to launch features faster and fix bugs before users even saw them. However, he said the improved work efficiency came at the cost of no longer needing manual testers checking outputs line by line.

“These were smart, capable people, and yet the structure of the work changed so much that their role no longer made sense,” he said.

The current phase-out of human work roles due to increased AI efficiency is nuanced, but some don’t think it will stay that way for much longer.

A McKinsey Global Institute analysis from July 2023 predicted that 30 percent of total hours worked could be absorbed by generative AI by 2030. Researchers estimated that 11.8 million employees working in sectors with shrinking demand may need to shift into other departments, while roughly 9 million may need to change careers entirely.

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities (full pdf available here)

Just last weekend, we discussed Confusion versus Uncertainty. We have a long list of potential market moving-events, many of which might be at pivotal moments.

• The Big Beautiful Bill. Not letting tax cuts expire is crucial. Additional targeted tax cuts would also be helpful – especially anything that would drive growth and innovation.
   
  • The new “twist” here was the apparent falling out, played out via social media, between President Trump and Elon Musk. It seems to have quieted down, which is a good thing. While we are correct to worry about the deficit, at this point in time, moving the bill along seems more important. Will Thursday’s “social media storm” be a one-time event, or do we need to think about potential ramifications for the Trump agenda without Musk’s support? I don’t think so, but it is a concern.
     
• Tariffs.
   
  • With July 8th approaching rather quickly, and only the U.K. deal signed, it seems unlikely that many more fully done deals will be inked before the deadline. On the other hand, the market is pricing in a “worst” case of extensions on the pause. We get some deals announced with a few countries and we get a pause extension on countries where there has been some initial negotiating. That seems reasonable for the markets to assume, given everything that has gone on.
     
  • A deal with China seems to have become the top priority.
     
    • The Geneva Deal doesn’t seem to be working as either side expected.
    • The President is apparently getting directly involved with Xi, which is what the President wanted all along, though I’m not sure that is the best approach, given China has known this all along.
    • We fully expected the administration to try to isolate China. We were wrong. While it is encouraging to see how the policy is being portrayed, there is a real concern, especially amongst the Geopolitical Intelligence Group, that we might not get the international cooperation against China that many think is necessary for the plan to succeed.
    • Short-term wins versus longer-term risks. If the purpose of the deal is to buy time to prepare for more separation, then we have to structure the deal very carefully. China has the resources and global integration to also work aggressively during any “cooling off” period. Protecting IP and National Security Interests should remain an integral part of any deal. There is a real struggle on this front between short-term and longer-term needs.
    • The processing of rare earths and critical minerals. The one “card” that China seems to have immense control over is the processed/refined rare earths and critical minerals. While Greenland and Ukraine might help get access to these raw materials (though we don’t see that as the major problem), they don’t do much for us in terms of processing/refining where China continues to dominate the market. We don’t know just how big of a card this is (quite large if they are actually willing to use it broadly for an extended period), but getting these businesses up and running domestically should be the biggest priority of the admin once Budget 2025 is passed. It still would have made sense, according to the GIG, to also include close allies in this crucial supply chain, but that ship may have sailed.
       
  • Are tariffs tools to negotiate, there to generate revenue, or designed to bring manufacturing back to the U.S.? Recently Japan cited some uncertainty, from their perspective (on the U.S. side) regarding what the goal is.
     
    • It seems reasonable to expect that after the Big Beautiful Bill is passed (I’m assuming that it will be passed), we will get more clarity on the direction the admin is headed in on tariffs. The President, even working almost 24/7, can only focus on so much, so getting the budget passed is likely taking his attention away from other things (and the bizarre “feud” on Thursday certainly doesn’t help). We should also learn whether the revenue was an artifice to pull in some votes to get approval for the bill (arguing that tariff revenues will offset some costs, until growth kicks in). The “revenue” side of tariffs might be less important after the bill gets passed. On the other hand, maybe the administration doesn’t want to “upset the apple cart” and risk not getting the bill passed? So, after the bill is passed, will we go back to being more aggressive on tariffs?
      
      
      This chart might be a bit simplistic (data centers and AI still play a huge role in the movements of the market, but it isn’t too far off).
       
• National Production for National Security. If that has the sound of something that might have been said in a Communist country, I’m okay with it. Prioritizing what is needed and pushing the agenda as aggressively as possible is key for our success and ability to compete with China down the road. Subsidies would help, but they don’t seem to be on the agenda with the urgency many of our National Security experts think is needed. On the other hand, deregulation is also a crucial step and that is something we have argued, since day 1, that Trump has specialized in. Why he didn’t start with deregulation and fighting NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) is a question I would love to have answered (the chart above would look a LOT different if the admin had come out of the gates focused on this front rather than tariffs). Treasury Secretary Bessent talks about this as being one of the “legs of the stool” and the more we turn our attention to this, the better. While it is also designed to take jobs away from elsewhere and bring them to the U.S., it seems less aggressive than using tariffs and is far more in our own control.
   
• When, or if, will the impact of existing tariffs, policy uncertainty, or even confusion hit the economic data and the markets? We discuss this in our NFP Reaction, and remain convinced that the market, at these levels, has become too complacent with risks on the economic front. While backing off on tariffs has been great, and has greatly reduced the risk of recession, that is still a risk as the global economy takes time to adjust to the level of uncertainty (and even confusion) that has been set in motion since Inauguration Day. I completely believe the worst is behind us on the tariff headlines, but the impact has not been felt in the real world, and while 10% (or just higher) is “manageable,” there are likely going to be costs.
   
• Peace. While we argued peace in a short timeframe was achievable (peace in a single day seemed impossible), that has stalled, at least in Russia. We published a Drone Attack SITREP on Monday. The mix of carrots and sticks was confusing to many of the GIG members, and maybe it is surprising we are here. The geopolitical situation is different than the economic situation, but if I had to be cautious about something right now – it is the growing difference between how confidently the President predicted peace, and where we are now. It is “different” than tariffs with China, right? Maybe not?

Bottom Line

I still like rates. Friday’s move could have pushed the Fed’s second cut out to next year, while, for me, the jobs data solidified the chance of a July cut, with 3 to 4 for the year. 10s back to 4.5% is a buying opportunity, though a range of 4.2% to 4.6% seems about right. A bit of a wide range, but the volatility around so many of the topics listed above, especially the bill, still needs to be considered.

Credit boring. Crypto exciting.

Credit, which I think I understand, should do okay here. So far the calendar hasn’t slowed much, but credit has held in very well. Across the globe, anyone looking for corporate credit risk needs to come to the U.S. as the market is the only place big enough to offer diversification across industries, ratings, and maturities. Also, the companies issuing corporate debt are often global in nature, so the exposure isn’t confined to the U.S.

On Crypto, I don’t understand the rush for governments to get involved, but it seems that is the trajectory we are on. So long as corporations can add crypto to their balance sheets and see their stock valuations rise more than the amount of crypto they bought, I can understand why they would do that. However, I cannot understand that relationship, which is driving the process. I do understand anxiety around FX globally and deficits globally, but I’m still not sure how that translates into owing crypto – but certainly I am more tempted to jump back on the bandwagon than fight it here.

Equities. Maybe not “priced to perfection” but getting close. When we examine the list of risks, uncertainties, or even things to be confused about, the market seems positioned to the optimistic side. That could be proven correct, but the risk/reward has definitely shifted with the recent legs of this rally (China, chips, and deficit spending). The IPO market is wide open and that could be a big benefit not just to markets, but also for the economy as new and innovative companies are brought to the forefront of daily market headlines!

It has been great being on the road a lot (on the road again this week) and talking to so many of our clients, colleagues, and members of the Geopolitical Intelligence Group.

• There is a decent amount of concern about small and midsize businesses, especially related to tariffs.
• A blind faith that the consumer keeps consuming (which has been the correct call).
• A more optimistic outlook for dealing with China from most people, than generally expressed by our Geopolitical Intelligence Group. We had a great outing with two GIG colleagues from the CIA last week, demonstrating how we are moving deeper into national security and policy.

Today, I just wanted to conclude by thanking all of those who take time out of their hectic schedules to meet with, talk to, or even just respond to Academy Securities as it helps us grow and get better!

If we go back to today’s question “Where are We Now?” the answer is at some pivotal moments for some major drivers to kick into gear, or stumble, as they near the goal line.

Chinese-owned AESC has halted construction of its $1.6 billion battery plant in America's emerging "Battery Belt," citing economic uncertainty tied to President Trump's trade war and tariffs and the potential early termination of federal clean energy subsidies.

Construction of AESC's electric-vehicle battery plant in Florence, South Carolina, began in 2023 after securing a deal with BMW to make battery cells. 

On Thursday, the company sent a letter to employees regarding the construction halt, as obtained by The Wall Street Journal. The letter laid out:

• Tariffs on Chinese-made machinery, steel, and aluminum, which significantly raise costs.

• A proposed tax bill in Congress that would end EV battery production subsidies early and restrict eligibility for China-linked companies.

• Broader industry pressure as automakers slow or cancel EV rollouts.

"Our intent is to finish construction of the facility once stability and predictability have returned to the market," Knudt Flor, AESC's chief executive for the U.S. and Europe, wrote in the memo.

Current and former employees told WSJ that construction of the building has been completed, but all work on installing equipment and battery cell assembly lines has been halted.

Sources noted that AESC would face steep tariffs on EV battery machinery imported from China and said that recent steel and aluminum tariffs imposed by the Trump administration have further compounded the company's cost challenges.

In recent years, Biden-era green energy policies fueled a surge in battery factory construction across parts of the Midwest and Southeast, driven by cheap land, proximity to major automotive hubs, and generous state-level incentives. This region—stretching from Tennessee and Alabama to the Carolinas, Ohio, and Michigan—has become known as America's "Battery Belt."

Some major projects across the belt include:

• Ford and SK On: $11.4B battery and EV campuses in Tennessee and Kentucky

• LG Energy Solution: Multiple joint ventures with GM, Stellantis, and Honda in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana

• Hyundai and SK: $5B EV battery plant in Georgia

• Toyota: Expanding EV battery production in North Carolina

"Now many of those subsidies are being targeted by Republicans at the same time regulations and tax credits aimed at driving EV sales are also at risk," WSJ noted, adding, "The current version of a tax bill before Congress would end EV battery production subsidies a year early and make them unavailable to companies with ties to certain countries, including China."

Long-simmering tensions between Elon Musk and other members of the Trump administration exploded into physical violence in mid-April, with Musk aggressively shouldering Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Bessent battling back, according to a second-hand account from Trump political advisor and Musk-despiser Steve Bannon. First reported by the Washington Post on Saturday, Bannon's tale comes amid a raging battle between Trump and Musk that's left Trump saying he has no desire to patch things up and assumes their relationship -- which by all accounts played a decisive role in Trump's return to power -- is over.  

The alleged fight between Musk and Bessent erupted after an Oval Office discussion over who should be the IRS acting commissioner (Reuters)

Citing what he'd been told by others, Bannon said the two rivals had been with Trump in the Oval Office to pitching their respective preferred picks for the role of acting IRS commissioner. According to earlier reporting by the New York Times, Bessent was irate that Musk had managed to go around him and install Gary Shapley in the role, despite the fact that the IRS reports to the Treasury Department. Bessent told Trump he wanted Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender in the slot -- and Trump agreed, capping a chaotic spectacle that saw the IRS overseen by three different acting commissioners in a single week. 

As they left the office and headed down a West Wing hallway, Bessent and Musk started insulting each other, Bannon said, with Bessent ridiculing Musk for claiming he would identify over a trillion dollars in government waste, fraud and abuse, with Bessent apparently claiming Musk was coming nowhere close: "You’re a fraud. You’re a total fraud!" 

That line of attack allegedly prompted Musk to slam his shoulder into Bessent's ribs, hitting him hard "like a rugby player," said Bannon. The Treasury secretary physically retaliated in some manner, before multiple bystanders outside the national security adviser's office intervened to break up the fight. Musk was then supposedly escorted from the West Wing. “President Trump heard about it and said, ‘This is too much’,” Bannon said. In the following days, Musk announced that he would start easing back from his role in the administration to give more attention to his many businesses.  

I've received reliable reports that Scott Bessent fought Musk from a classical Wall Street office boxing stance similar to below pic.twitter.com/eZ58tIOqFf

Bannon's gossipy, second-hand account in the Washington Post's decidedly Musk-hostile report came two days after the told the New York Times that he was pushing to have Musk deported. “They should initiate a formal investigation of his immigration status, because I am of the strong belief that he is an illegal alien, and he should be deported from the country immediately,” Bannon said, adding that he also told Trump to pursue a narcotics investigation against Musk. 

According to the Post, the Musk-Bessent fight was just one of many manifestations of friction between the world's richest man and others in the administration who resented his "move fast and break things" approach and the influence he wielded not as a Senate-confirmed cabinet member but as a mere "special government employee." Musk was seen as failing to stay in his ill-defined lane, with no better example than his bypassing of cabinet members by issuing direct, emailed commands to nearly every employee in the federal government: 

The first signs of trouble emerged in February, when an email landed in inboxes throughout the government directing federal employees to describe their five accomplishments over the past week. Cabinet officials and other agency leaders weren’t given advance notice of the memo, causing consternation at the highest levels of Trump’s administration.

This week's massive meltdown in the Trump-Musk relationship started when Musk lashed out against the "Big Beautiful Bill," calling Trump's cornerstone legislation a "disgusting abomination" and heaping scorn on House members who voted for it (Kentucky's Thomas Massie and Ohio's Warren Davidson were the sole GOP "no" votes).   

I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore.

This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination.

Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.

Things quickly went downhill, with Trump threatening to kill Musk's SpaceX and Starlink contracts, only to have Musk announce he was immediately decommissioning SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft, which NASA relies on to transport supplies and crew members to the International Space Station (he later eased back on that threat.) Musk also backed a suggestion that Trump be impeached, and said "the real reason [the Epstein files] have not been made public" is that Trump is in them. 

For now, the outright hostilities have eased, but there's little reason to think the Trump-Musk relationship will be meaningfully restored. As an unnamed administration ally close to the Trump and Musk camps told the Post, "There’s hope that there’s going to be a reconciliation. But it’ll never be the same.” 

Authored by Chase Smith via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is warning borrowers to steer clear of student loan debt-relief scams, after shutting down a group of companies last month that allegedly charged millions in illegal fees and left customers worse off.

Graduates attend a commencement ceremony at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., on May 29, 2025. Rick Friedman/AFP via Getty Images

The warning, issued June 6, comes as part of a broader push by the FTC to raise awareness about deceptive debt-relief schemes targeting Americans with student loans.

In a recent enforcement action, the agency permanently banned California-based Panda Benefit Services and its affiliates from the debt-relief industry. The FTC said the companies posed as partners of the Department of Education and promised borrowers quick loan forgiveness in exchange for upfront payments.

According to the FTC, the companies collected more than $16.7 million from consumers who were told their loans would be forgiven or significantly reduced. Instead, the scammers kept the money and never delivered on their promises.

“It’s illegal for anyone to charge fees before they help you or to pretend they’re affiliated with the Department of Education,” the FTC said in the consumer alert.

The Education Department does not work with private companies that demand payment in advance, and borrowers should be cautious of anyone claiming otherwise.

The now-banned companies, including those doing business under names like Prosperity Benefit Services and Pacific Quest Services, were first sued in 2024. At the time, the FTC alleged the operators sent deceptive mailers marked “FINAL NOTICE” and “Time Sensitive,” and made false promises of full loan forgiveness.

Borrowers were also misled into sharing personal financial details, including their Federal Student Aid ID, which scammers could use to access accounts or steal identities.

The case was one of the FTC’s first under a new federal rule that strengthens its ability to penalize those impersonating government agencies. Several judgments in the case ordered the defendants to surrender assets and banned them from telemarketing and making misrepresentations about financial services.

The FTC emphasized that no private company can do anything for borrowers that they can’t do themselves for free at StudentAid.gov. This includes applying for income-driven repayment plans, consolidating loans, or exploring forgiveness options—none of which require payment to third-party services.

Federal law also prohibits companies from pretending to be affiliated with the Department of Education. But scammers frequently misuse official-sounding names and seals to appear legitimate.

Borrowers struggling to repay federal loans can explore free options, including deferment, forbearance, and income-driven repayment plans. In some cases, they may also qualify for forgiveness based on long-term payment history or employment in public service.

The agency is urging the public to report suspected scams at ReportFraud.ftc.gov, contact their state attorney general, and find out more at ftc.gov/StudentLoans.