Category: 3. Business

The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has set a Rs. 200,000 transaction limit for cash payments on e-commerce Cash on Delivery (CoD) orders. This decision was announced through Circular No. 02 of 2025-26 (Income Tax), dated August 12, 2025.

The move supports the government’s ongoing push toward a cashless economy. Section 21(s) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, confirms that this cash limit applies to retail outlets as well.

FBR explained that the new limit aims to promote digital payments and reduce dependence on cash transactions. It is also expected to improve transparency, simplify payment processes, and curb tax evasion.

E-commerce businesses and consumers must now comply with the Rs. 200,000 cash limit for CoD orders. Authorities believe this step will strengthen Pakistan’s shift toward digital financial systems.

Client Alert  |  August 15, 2025

From the Derivatives Practice Group: This week, ISDA and the Futures Industry Association submitted a joint response to the Reserve Bank of Australia on its consultation on guidance for Australia’s clearing and settlement facility resolution regime.

New Developments

CFTC Staff Issues No-Action Letter Regarding Event Contracts. On August 7, the CFTC’s Division of Market Oversight and the Division of Clearing and Risk announced they have taken a no-action position regarding swap data reporting and recordkeeping regulations for event contracts in response to a request from the Railbird Exchange, LLC, a designated contract market, and QC Clearing LLC, a derivatives clearing organization.

SEC Division of Corporation Finance Issues Staff Statement on Certain Liquid Staking Activities. On August 5, the SEC issued a statement regarding certain liquid staking activities. The statement aims to provide greater clarity on the application of federal securities laws to crypto assets, specifically addressing a type of protocol staking known as “liquid staking.” Liquid staking refers to the process of staking crypto assets through a software protocol or service provider and receiving a “liquid staking receipt token” to evidence the staker’s ownership of the staked crypto assets and any rewards that accrue to them. The statement clarifies the division’s view that, depending on the facts and circumstances, the liquid staking activities covered in the statement do not involve the offer and sale of securities within the meaning of Section 2(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. [NEW]

Acting Chairman Pham Launches Listed Spot Crypto Trading Initiative. On August 4, CFTC Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham announced that the CFTC will launch an initiative for trading spot crypto asset contracts that are listed on a CFTC-registered futures exchange (a designated contract market). This is the first initiative in the CFTC’s crypto sprint to start implementation of the recommendations in the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets report.

Acting Chairman Pham Announces CFTC Crypto Sprint. On August 1, CFTC Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham announced that the CFTC will kick off a crypto sprint to start implementation of the recommendations in the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets report.

New Developments Outside the U.S.

ESMA Publishes Data for Quarterly Bond Liquidity Assessment. On August 1, ESMA published its new quarterly liquidity assessment of bonds. For this period, there are currently 1,346 liquid bonds subject to Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (“MIFID II”) transparency requirements. As indicated in the public statement released on March 27, 2024, the quarterly liquidity assessment of bonds will continue to be published by ESMA.

New Industry-Led Developments

ISDA and FIA Respond on Australian Clearing and Settlement Facility Resolution Regime. On August 11, ISDA and the Futures Industry Association (“FIA”) submitted a joint response to the Reserve Bank of Australia (“RBA”) on its consultation on guidance for Australia’s clearing and settlement facility resolution regime. The associations welcome publication of the draft guidance, which provides greater clarity and transparency on the RBA’s approach to the resolution of clearing and settlement facilities in Australia. However, the associations encourage the RBA to provide greater detail on certain aspects of its approach to resolution, including explicit assurance that the power to direct a central counterparty to amend its rules would not be used to amend any rights that any clearing participant has to terminate contracts with or take other action against a clearing house and, more broadly, under what circumstances the RBA would use this direction power. [NEW]

ISDA Releases SwapsInfo First Half of 2025 and the Second Quarter of 2025. On August 7, ISDA released a research note that concludes interest rate derivatives trading activity increased in the first half of 2025, driven by continued interest rate volatility, evolving central bank policy expectations, and persistent macroeconomic uncertainty. Trading in index credit derivatives also rose, as market participants responded to a changing macroeconomic environment and sought to manage credit exposure.

ISDA Responds to IFSCA on Derivatives Reporting and Clearing. On August 5, ISDA responded to the International Financial Services Centres Authority’s (“IFSCA”) consultation on reporting and clearing of over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives contracts booked in International Financial Services Centres. In the response, ISDA provided several recommendations including removing one-to-one hedging requirements for OTC derivatives, especially those referencing foreign or IFSC-listed securities, to align with global practice and support flexible risk management.

The following Gibson Dunn attorneys assisted in preparing this update: Jeffrey Steiner, Adam Lapidus, Marc Aaron Takagaki, Hayden McGovern, Karin Thrasher, and Alice Wang*.

Gibson Dunn’s lawyers are available to assist in addressing any questions you may have regarding these developments. Please contact the Gibson Dunn lawyer with whom you usually work, any member of the firm’s Derivatives practice group, or the following practice leaders and authors:

Jeffrey L. Steiner, Washington, D.C. (202.887.3632, jsteiner@gibsondunn.com)

Michael D. Bopp, Washington, D.C. (202.955.8256, mbopp@gibsondunn.com)

Michelle M. Kirschner, London (+44 (0)20 7071.4212, mkirschner@gibsondunn.com)

Darius Mehraban, New York (212.351.2428, dmehraban@gibsondunn.com)

Jason J. Cabral, New York (212.351.6267, jcabral@gibsondunn.com)

Adam Lapidus, New York (212.351.3869,  alapidus@gibsondunn.com )

Stephanie L. Brooker, Washington, D.C. (202.887.3502, sbrooker@gibsondunn.com)

William R. Hallatt, Hong Kong (+852 2214 3836, whallatt@gibsondunn.com )

David P. Burns, Washington, D.C. (202.887.3786, dburns@gibsondunn.com)

Marc Aaron Takagaki, New York (212.351.4028, mtakagaki@gibsondunn.com )

Hayden K. McGovern, Dallas (214.698.3142, hmcgovern@gibsondunn.com)

Karin Thrasher, Washington, D.C. (202.887.3712, kthrasher@gibsondunn.com)

Alice Yiqian Wang, Washington, D.C. (202.777.9587, awang@gibsondunn.com)

*Alice Wang, an associate in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office, is not admitted to practice law.

© 2025 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.  All rights reserved.  For contact and other information, please visit us at www.gibsondunn.com.

Attorney Advertising: These materials were prepared for general informational purposes only based on information available at the time of publication and are not intended as, do not constitute, and should not be relied upon as, legal advice or a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. Gibson Dunn (and its affiliates, attorneys, and employees) shall not have any liability in connection with any use of these materials.  The sharing of these materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship with the recipient and should not be relied upon as an alternative for advice from qualified counsel.  Please note that facts and circumstances may vary, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

TORONTO — More than 300 Air Canada flights, many of them international trips, have been canceled as the clock ticked closer Friday to a possible strike by flight attendants, leaving travelers stranded around the world and scrambling during the peak summer travel season.

The bitter contract fight between Canada’s largest airline and the union representing 10,000 of its flight attendants escalated Friday as the union turned down the airline’s request to enter into government-directed arbitration, which would eliminate its right to strike and allow a third-party mediator to decide the terms of a new contract.

Flight attendants were poised to walk off the job around 1 a.m. EDT on Saturday. Around the same time, Air Canada said it would begin locking out the flight attendants from airports. The actions threaten to impact about 130,000 travelers a day.

Federal Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu on Friday urged both sides to work with federal mediators “and get a deal done.”

“Time is precious and Canadians are counting on you,” Hajdu said in a statement.

The Canadian carrier already started canceling flights Thursday. It expects to call off 500 flights by the end of Friday and almost all of its flights by Saturday morning. A complete shutdown threatens to impact about 130,000 people a day, and it could affect some 25,000 Canadians a day who may become stranded abroad.

By Friday afternoon, Air Canada had called off at least 128 domestic flights and 194 international flights that were scheduled to depart on Friday and Saturday, according to aviation analytics firm Cirium. On Thursday, when the airline said it was beginning it’s “phased wind down” of most operations, 18 domestic flights and four international flights were canceled.

Montreal resident Alex Laroche, 21, and his girlfriend had been saving since Christmas for their European vacation. Now their $8,000 trip with nonrefundable lodging is on the line as they wait to hear from Air Canada about the fate of their Saturday night flight to Nice, France.

Laroche said he considered booking new flights with a different carrier, but he said most of them are nearly full and more than double the $3,000 they paid for their original tickets.

“At this point, it’s just a waiting game,” he said.

Laroche said he was initially upset over the union’s decision to go on strike, but that he had a change of heart after reading about the key issues at the center of the contract negotiations, including the issue of wages.

“Their wage is barely livable,” Laroche said.

Air Canada and the Canadian Union of Public Employees have been in contract talks for about eight months, but they have yet to reach a tentative deal.

Both sides say they remain far apart on the issue of pay and the unpaid work flight attendants do when planes aren’t in the air.

The airline’s latest offer included a 38% increase in total compensation, including benefits and pensions over four years, that it said “would have made our flight attendants the best compensated in Canada.” But the union pushed back, saying the proposed 8% raise in the first year didn’t go far enough because of inflation.

Passengers whose travel is impacted will be eligible to request a full refund on the airline’s website or mobile app, according to Air Canada.

The airline said it would also offer alternative travel options through other Canadian and foreign airlines when possible. But it warned that it could not guarantee immediate rebooking because flights on other airlines are already full “due to the summer travel peak.”

How long the airline’s planes will be grounded remains to be seen. But Air Canada Chief Operating Officer Mark Nasr has said it could take up to a week to fully restart operations once a tentative deal is reached.

___

Associated Press airlines writer Rio Yamat reported from Las Vegas.

Unitree Robotics brought the spotlight-grabbing machines at Beijing’s set piece robots competition on Friday, burnishing its reputation as a national champion for China’s ambitions in developing AI and humanoids.

The Hangzhou-based company’s H1 robot won gold in a 1,500-meter humanoid race with a listed time of 6 minutes and 35 seconds, beating the average mile time on Strava by close to four minutes. Another Unitree machine also made it to the podium in a race that highlighted day one of the World Humanoid Robot Games.

Treatment with adagrasib (Krazati) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and improved responses compared with docetaxel among patients with previously treated KRAS G12C-mutant non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to findings from the phase 3 KRYSTAL-12 trial (NCT04685135) published in The Lancet.¹

After a median follow-up of 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.8-8.7), data showed a median PFS of 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.5-6.7) with adagrasib vs 3.8 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.7) with docetaxel based on blinded independent central review (BICR; HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76; P <.0001). Adagrasib improved PFS across all patient subgroups, which included those with brain metastases at baseline.

The objective response rate (ORR) was 32% (95% CI, 26.7%-37.5%) in the adagrasib arm vs 9% (95% CI, 5.1%-15.0%) in the docetaxel arm (OR, 4.68; 95% CI, 2.56-8.56; P <.0001), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 78% vs 59% in each arm. The median duration of response (DOR) was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.1-10.4) with adagrasib vs 5.4 months (95% CI, 2.9-8.5) with docetaxel.

Among patients with measurable or non-measurable baseline brain metastases in the adagrasib arm (n = 78) and docetaxel arm (n = 36), the intracranial ORRs were 24% (95% CI, 15.3%-35.4%) vs 11% (95% CI, 3.1%-26.1%), respectively. Additionally, intracranial disease control occurred in 82% and 56% of patients in each arm. The median intracranial time to progression was 18.6 months (95% CI, 9.6-not evaluable [NE]) with adagrasib and NE (95% CI, 4.2-NE) with docetaxel (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.26-1.40). Data showed an HR of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.50-1.73) for intracranial PFS.

“[A]dagrasib significantly improved [PFS] and [ORR] compared with docetaxel, confirming the initial results from KRYSTAL-1 [NCT03785249] that supported the accelerated or conditional approval of adagrasib for patients with previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC,” lead study author Fabrice Barlesi, MD, PhD, a professor from Gustave Roussy in Villejuif, France, and Paris Saclay University in Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France, wrote with coauthors in the publication.^1,2 “The safety profile of adagrasib was manageable and consistent with previous reports. Despite the current absence of overall survival [OS] data, these results reinforce adagrasib as an efficacious treatment option for patients with KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC after disease progression on previous chemotherapy and immunotherapy.”

The FDA previously granted accelerated approval to adagrasib as a treatment for this NSCLC population in December 2022 based on data from the single-arm phase 2 KRYSTAL-1 trial.² At the time of the approval, adagrasib demonstrated a confirmed ORR of 43% (95% CI, 34%-53%) and a median DOR of 8.5 months (95% CI, 6.2-13.8) among 112 evaluable patients.

In the open-label KRYSTAL-12 trial, 453 patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive adagrasib at 600 mg orally twice a day (n = 301) or docetaxel at 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks intravenously (n = 152).

The trial’s primary end point was PFS per BICR across the intent-to-treat population. Secondary end points included ORR per RECIST v1.1 criteria, DOR, OS, 1-year OS rate, patient-reported outcomes, and safety.

Patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC harboring a KRAS G12C mutation, prior treatment with a platinum-containing chemotherapy regimen plus an anti–PD-(L)1 agent, measurable lesions per RECIST v1.1 guidelines, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for study entry. Those with active brain metastases were ineligible to enroll.

The median age was 64.0 years (IQR, 59.0-69.0) in the adagrasib arm and 65.0 years (IQR, 59.0-69.5) in the docetaxel arm, and most patients in each arm were male (64% vs 72%) and White (45% vs 53%). Additionally, most patients in each respective group had an ECOG performance status of 1 (68% vs 68%), metastatic disease (94% vs 95%), adenocarcinoma (94% vs 97%), current or former smoking status (94% vs 93%), and 1 prior line of treatment in the advanced or metastatic setting (68% vs 72%).

Based on the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS), patients who received adagrasib experienced a longer median time to deterioration at 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.1) vs 1.5 months (95% CI, 1.3-1.9) in the docetaxel arm (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.74).

Treatment-related adverse effects (TRAEs) of any grade affected 94% of the adagrasib arm vs 86% of the docetaxel arm; 47% and 46% in each arm experienced grade 3 or higher toxicities. In the adagrasib and docetaxel arms, respectively, TRAEs led to dose reduction in 48% vs 24%, dose interruption in 59% vs 19%, and treatment discontinuation in 8% vs 14%.

The most common grade 3 or higher TRAEs in the adagrasib arm included increased alanine aminotransferase (8%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (6%), and diarrhea (5%). Four patients in the adagrasib arm experienced treatment-related deaths, including 1 instance each due to epilepsy, hepatic failure, hepatic ischemia, and an unknown cause.

References

1. Barlesi F, Yao W, Duruisseaux M, et al. Adagrasib versus docetaxel in KRASG12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (KRYSTAL-12): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2025;406(10503):615-626. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(25)00866-9
2. FDA grants accelerated approval to adagrasib for KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC. News release. FDA. December 12, 2022. Accessed August 12, 2025. https://bit.ly/3UUVphS