The US government has taken an unprecedented 10% stake in Intel under a deal with the struggling chipmaker and is planning more such moves, according to Donald Trump and the commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, the latest extraordinary intervention by the White House in corporate America.
Lutnick wrote on X: “BIG NEWS: The United States of America now owns 10% of Intel, one of our great American technology companies. Thanks to Intel CEO @LipBuTan1 for striking a deal that’s fair to Intel and fair to the American People.”
Trump met with Lip-Bu Tan on Friday and posed for a photo with Lutnick. The development follows a meeting between Tan and Trump earlier this month that was sparked by the US president’s demand for the Intel chief’s resignation over his ties to Chinese firms.
“He walked in wanting to keep his job and he ended up giving us $10bn for the United States. So we picked up $10bn,” Trump said on Friday.
While Trump did not provide detail on the $10bn, the equity stake is about equal to the amount Intel is set to receive in grants from the government under the Chips and Science Act to help fund the building of chip plants in the US.
The Intel investment would be the latest of several unusual deals struck by the Trump administration with US companies, including agreeing to allow the AI chip giant Nvidia to sell its H20 chips to China in exchange for the US government receiving 15% of those sales. Chipmaker AMD struck a similar deal.
The Pentagon is also slated to become the largest shareholder in a small mining company to boost output of rare-earth magnets and the US government negotiated for itself a “golden share” with certain veto rights as part of a deal to allow Nippon Steel to buy US Steel.
The US government’s broad intervention in corporate matters has worried critics who say Trump’s actions create new categories of corporate risk.
Trump’s move follows a $2bn capital injection from SoftBank Group in what was a major vote of confidence for the troubled US chipmaker in the middle of a turnaround. Daniel Morgan, senior portfolio manager at Synovus Trust, said Intel’s problems were beyond a cash infusion from SoftBank or equity interest from the government.
“Without government support or another financially stronger partner, it will be difficult for Intel foundry unit to raise enough capital to continue to build out more Fabs at a reasonable rate,” he said, adding Intel “needs to catch up with TSMC [Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company] from a technological perspective to attract business”.
skip past newsletter promotion
after newsletter promotion
A 10% stake at current share prices would be worth roughly $10bn. Lutnick said this week any stake would be non-voting, meaning it would not enable the US government to tell the company how to run its business.
Federal backing could give Intel more breathing room to revive its loss-making foundry business, analysts said, but it still suffers from a weak product roadmap and challenges in attracting customers to its new factories.
Tan, who took the top job at Intel in March, has been tasked to turn around the American chipmaking icon, which recorded an annual loss of $18.8bn in 2024 – its first such loss since 1986.
Pietilä, M. & Kangas, K. Examining the relationship between recreation settings and experiences in Oulanka National Park – A Spatial approach. J. Outdoor Recreation Tourism. 9, 26–36 (2015).
Google Scholar
Puhakka, R., Hakokoengaes, E. & Peura, S. The memorable nature experiences of youth: a phenomenological approach to visualized and written experiences. J. Youth Stud. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2023.2296675 (2023).
Google Scholar
Viñals, M. J., Morant, M. & Teruel, L. Confort psicológico y experiencia turística. Casos de estudio de espacios naturales protegidos de La Comunidad Valenciana (España). Bol. Asoc. Geógr Esp. https://doi.org/10.21138/bage.1754 (2014).
Google Scholar
McNally, D., Price, L. & Crang, P. Geographies of Comfort https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315557762 (Routledge, 2020).
Nagy, G. & Carr, N. Comfort and the tourism accommodation sector: A central, yet under-studied issue. Int. J. Hospitality Manage.74, 224–226 (2018).
Google Scholar
Pritchard, A., Morgan, N. & Ateljevic, I. Hopeful tourism: A new transformative perspective. Annals Tourism Res.38, 941–963 (2011).
Google Scholar
Zhao, Y. & Agyeiwaah, E. Understanding tourists’ transformative experience: A systematic literature review. J. Hospitality Tourism Manage.54, 188–199 (2023).
Google Scholar
Meng, L. & Yang, P. Assessment and evaluation of rural sports tourism activities with emphasis on agritourism: a convolutional neural network approach. Pak J. Agric. Sci.61, 381–391 (2024).
Google Scholar
Yang, R. Use and experience of tourism green spaces in Ishigaki City before and during the COVID-19 pandemic based on web review data. Sustainability15, 9554 (2023).
Google Scholar
Christou, P. & Simillidou, A. Tourist experience: the catalyst role of tourism in comforting melancholy, or not. J. Hospitality Tourism Manage.42, 210–221 (2020).
Google Scholar
Zhu, L., Wang, B. & Sun, Y. Multi-objective optimization for energy consumption, daylighting and thermal comfort performance of rural tourism buildings in North China. Build. Environ.176, 106841 (2020).
Google Scholar
Esau, D. & Senese, D. M. The sensory experience of wine tourism: creating memorable associations with a wine destination. Food Qual. Prefer.101, 104635 (2022).
Google Scholar
Lin, K. M., Shen, S. X. & Yuan, X. C. Exploratory research on recreation amenity of National parks:a new perspective based on the Bio-psycho-spirit-social dynamic Model(BP2S). Tourism Sci.38, 102–117 (2024).
Google Scholar
Shao, Q., Lo, H. W., Liou, J. J. H. & Tzeng, G. H. A Data-Driven model to construct the influential factors of online product satisfaction. Int. J. Info Tech. Dec. Mak. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021962202350013X (2023).
Ahmadpour, N., Robert, J. M. & Lindgaard, G. Aircraft passenger comfort experience: underlying factors and differentiation from discomfort. Appl. Ergon.52, 301–308 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hertzberg, H. T. E. The human buttocks in sitting: pressures, patterns, and palliatives. 720005 https://doi.org/10.4271/720005 (1972).
Rybczynski, W. Home: A Short History of an Idea (Viking, 1986).
Brager, G. S. & De Dear, R. J. Thermal adaptation in the built environment: a literature review. Energy Build.27, 83–96 (1998).
Google Scholar
Hasanah, N. A. I., Maryetnowati, D., Edelweis, F. N., Indriyani, F. & Nugrahayu, Q. The climate comfort assessment for tourism purposes in Borobudur temple Indonesia. Heliyon6, e05828 (2020).
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Lopes, H. S., Remoaldo, P. C. & Ribeiro, V. Martín-Vide, J. A comprehensive methodology for assessing outdoor thermal comfort in touristic City of Porto (Portugal). Urban Clim.45, 101264 (2022).
Google Scholar
Wang, L. et al. Optimizing forest environments for human comfort: the F-MECI approach. Ecol. Ind.176, 113625 (2025).
CAS
Google Scholar
Cardinali, P., Varani, N. & Migliorini, L. Sustainable tourism attitude and preference in Italian adults: Value orientation and psychological need satisfaction. Sustainability12, (2020).
Jung, C. & Mahmoud, N. S. A. Exploring customer behavior in shopping malls: A study of rest areas in dubai, united Arab Emirates. Sustainability15, 9169 (2023).
Google Scholar
Shove, E. Converging conventions of comfort, cleanliness and convenience. J. Consum. Policy. 26, 395–418 (2003).
Google Scholar
Pereira, L. C. C. et al. How sustainable are recreational practices on Brazilian Amazon beaches? J. Outdo Recreat Tour Res. Plan.45, 100741 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhou, G., Liu, Y., Hu, J. & Cao, X. The effect of tourist-to-tourist interaction on tourists? Behavior: the mediating effects of positive emotions and memorable tourism experiences. J. Hosp. Tour Manag. 55, 161–168 (2023).
Google Scholar
Gatti, E. & Brownlee, M. Outdoor recreationists’ engagement with weather: the weather-outdoor recreation process model. J. Outdo Recreat Tour Res. Plan.45, 100707 (2024).
Google Scholar
Buckley, R., Zhong, L. & Martin, S. Mental health key to tourism infrastructure in china’s new megapark. Tourism Manage.82, 104169 (2021).
Google Scholar
Zhou, Y. & Geng, L. Getting outdoors for ordinary beauty: exposure to nature promotes meaning in life through enhanced savoring. J. Outdoor Recreation Tourism. 50, 100883 (2025).
Google Scholar
Lin, K., Zhang, Q., Lu, Q., Meng, F. & Chen, C. Linking protected areas with health and well-being: reconstructing the recreational amenity experience model in the Chinese context. J. Outdoor Recreation Tourism. 50, 100867 (2025).
Google Scholar
Zare, S. et al. Assessing thermal comfort in tourist attractions through objective and subjective procedures based on ISO 7730 standard: A field study. Urban Clim.26, 1–9 (2018).
Google Scholar
Richards, L. G., Jacobson, I. D. & Kuhlthau, A. R. What the passenger contributes to passenger comfort. Appl. Ergon.9, 137–142 (1978).
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Aggarwal, D. A., Malkoti, S., Xess, A., Sharma, I. & Mittal, A. Why do hotels go for sustainable practices? Eliciting the behavioral intentions of mid-market hotel guests. J. Vacation Mark. https://doi.org/10.1177/13567667241268663 (2024).
Google Scholar
Helander, M. G. & Zhang, L. Field studies of comfort and discomfort in sitting. Ergonomics40, 895–915 (1997).
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Chuang, L. Z. H., Chen, C. L., Kung, C. W. & Shih Y.-C. A nuisance at sea: decoding tourists’ comfort on Whale watching vessels. Ocean. Coastal. Manage.184, 104915 (2020).
Google Scholar
Cheung, M. L., Leung, W. K., Cheah, J. H. & Ting, H. Exploring the effectiveness of emotional and rational user-generated contents in digital tourism platforms. J. Vacat Mark.28, 152–170 (2022).
Google Scholar
Brochado, A. & Pereira, C. Comfortable experiences in nature accommodation: perceived service quality in glamping. J. Outdoor Recreat Tour. 17, 77–83 (2017).
Google Scholar
Liu, C. H., Tzeng, G. H. & Lee, M. H. Improving tourism policy implementation – The use of hybrid MCDM models. Tour. Manag.33, 413–426 (2012).
Google Scholar
Álvarez-Carmona, M. Á. et al. Natural Language processing applied to tourism research: A systematic review and future research directions. J. King Saud Univ. – Comput. Inform. Sci.34, 10125–10144 (2022).
Google Scholar
Wang, Y. L. & Tzeng, G. H. Brand marketing for creating brand value based on a MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP and VIKOR methods. Expert Syst. Appl.39, 5600–5615 (2012).
Google Scholar
Hou, Z., Cui, F., Meng, Y., Lian, T. & Yu, C. Opinion mining from online travel reviews: A comparative analysis of Chinese major OTAs using semantic association analysis. Tour. Manag.74, 276–289 (2019).
Google Scholar
Nguyen, P. M. B., Pham, X. L. & Truong, G. N. T. The influence of source credibility and inspiration on tourists’ travel planning through travel vlogs. J. Travel Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875231206538 (2023).
Google Scholar
Xiang, Z., Schwartz, Z., Gerdes, J. H. & Uysal, M. What can big data and text analytics tell Us about hotel guest experience and satisfaction? Int. J. Hospitality Manage.44, 120–130 (2015).
Google Scholar
Kanwal, B. et al. Opinion mining from online travel reviews: an exploratory investigation on Pakistan major online travel services using natural Language processing. IEEE Access.11, 29934–29945 (2023).
Google Scholar
Ma, S., Li, H., Hu, M., Yang, H. & Gan, R. Tourism demand forecasting based on user-generated images on OTA platforms. Curr. Issues Tour. 27, 1814–1833 (2024).
Google Scholar
Chu, K. M. Innovation practices of new technology adoption for the business survival strategy of online travel agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic: two case studies in Taiwan. J. Knowl. Econ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01480-w (2023).
ADS
Google Scholar
Wan, X., Jha, A. K., Kazantsev, N. & Boh, W. F. Online-to-Offline platforms: examining the effects of Demand-Side usage on Supply-Side decisions. Inf. Manage.60, 103757 (2023).
Google Scholar
Tsai, P. H. & Chen, C. J. Entertainment in retailing: challenges and opportunities in the TV game console industry. J. Retailing Consumer Serv.60, 102503 (2021).
Google Scholar
Kazancoglu, Y. & Aksoy, M. A. Fuzzy Logic-Based Qfd to identify key factors of E-Learning design. Procedia – Social Behav. Sci.28, 322–327 (2011).
Google Scholar
Ohe, Y., Ikei, H., Song, C. & Miyazaki, Y. Evaluating the relaxation effects of emerging forest-therapy tourism: A multidisciplinary approach. Tour. Manag.62, 322–334 (2017).
Google Scholar
Wang, S., Lehto, X., Cai, L., Behnke, C. & Kirillova, K. Travelers’ psychological comfort with local food experiences and place attachment. J. Hosp. Tour Res.47, 1453–1477 (2023).
Google Scholar
Dimmock, K. Finding comfort in adventure: experiences of recreational SCUBA divers. Leisure Stud.28, 279–295 (2009).
Google Scholar
Leong, A. M. W., (Cj) Lin, Z., Zhou, Y. & Wong, I. A. Healing the Mind and soul through meditation pilgrimage: Understanding recreation specialization, attention restoration, and emotion regulation. Tour Manag Perspect.50, 101202 (2024).
Google Scholar
Terzidou, M., Scarles, C. & Saunders, M. N. K. The complexities of religious tourism motivations: sacred places, vows and visions. Ann. Touris Res.70, 54–65 (2018).
Google Scholar
Riper, C. J. V., Kyle, G. T., Sutton, S. G., Barnes, M. & Sherrouse, B. C. Mapping outdoor recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National park, Australia. Appl. Geography.35, (2012).
Qu, Y., Zhou, Q. & Cao, L. How do positive host-guest interactions in tourism alter the indicators of tourists’ general attachment styles? A moderated mediation model. Tour. Manag.105, 104937 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhang, X., Cheng, L. & Ma, G. Eliciting Eudaimonic well-being in the tourism experiential space: evidence from online reviews. Tourism Manage.105, 104955 (2024).
Google Scholar
Pung, J. M., Gnoth, J. & Del Chiappa, G. Tourist transformation: towards a conceptual model. Annals Tourism Res.81, 102885 (2020).
Google Scholar
Teoh, M. W., Kwek, A. & Wang, Y. An analytical autoethnographic study of culture’s role in transformative tourism experiences. Tourism Manage. Perspect.46, 101097 (2023).
Google Scholar
Kay Smith, M. & Diekmann, A. Tourism and wellbeing. Annals Tourism Res.66, 1–13 (2017).
Google Scholar
Gili et al. Recreation as an ecosystem service in open landscapes in the mediterranean region in israel: public preferences. Isr. J. Ecol. Evol.57, 151–171 (2011).
Google Scholar
Wideman, T. H. et al. Biopsychosocial model. in Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine (eds Gellman, M. D. & Turner, J. R.) 227–228 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_1095. (Springer, 2013).
Google Scholar
Koenig, H. G. Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications. ISRN Psychiatr. 1–33 (2012).
Davari, D. & Jang, S. Travel-based learning: unleashing the power of destination curiosity. J. Travel Tour Mark.41, 396–417 (2024).
Google Scholar
Lindgren, E., Almqvist, M. S. & Elmqvist, T. Ecosystem services and health benefits—an urban perspective. https://doi.org/10.1093/MED/9780198725916.003.0017 (2018).
Chan, I. C. C., Chen, Z. & Guo, J. Exploring the influence of soundscape on visitors’ emotional experience and stickiness to attractions. Asia Pac. J. Tour Res. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2024.2333479 (2024).
Google Scholar
Stephan, E. & Sedikides, C. Mental time travel as Self-Affirmation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev.28, 181–208 (2024).
Cheng, T., Zhao, Y. & Zhao, C. Exploring the spatio-temporal evolution of economic resilience in chin Ese cities during the COVID-19 crisis. Sustainable Cities Soc.84, 103997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103997 (2022).
Article
Google Scholar
Zhou, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, W. & Sun, Y. Spatial-temporal variation of economic resilience and its influencing factors under COVID-19: evidence from Henan province, China. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.105, 104357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104357 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Chen, Y., Li, K., Zhou, Q., SPATIAL DIFFERENTIATION OF URBAN & ECONOMIC RESILIENCE AND ITS INFLUENCI. Technological Economic Dev. Econ.29, 353–381 https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2023.17869 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Lu, R. & Yang, Z. Analysis on the structure and economic resilience capacity of china’s regional economic network. Appl. Econ.56, 3920–3938. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2023.2208852 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
He, C., Li, J., Wang, W. & Zhang, P. Regional resilience during a trade war: the role of global connections and local networks. J. World Bus.59, 101567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2024.101567 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Janowski, T. Digital government evolution: from transformation to contextualization. Government Inform. Q.32, 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001 (2015).
Article
Google Scholar
Wu, H. X. & Yu, C. The impact of the digital economy on china’s economic growth and produ Ctivity performance. China Economic J.15, 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538963.2022.2067689 (2022).
Article
Google Scholar
Nambisan, S. Digital entrepreneurship: toward a digital technology perspective of E ntrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract.41, 1029–1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12254 (2017).
Article
Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Zhao, X., Liu, Y. & Kong, F. The dynamic impact of digital economy on the green development of trad itional manufacturing industry: evidence from China. Economic Anal. Policy. 80, 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2023.08.005 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Finkelstein Shapiro, A. & Mandelman, F. S. Digital adoption, automation, and labor markets in developing countrie s. J. Dev. Econ.151, 102656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102656 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
Boh, W., Constantinides, P., Padmanabhan, B. & Viswanathan, S. Building digital resilience against major shocks. MIS Q.47, 343–360 (2023).
Google Scholar
Popkova, E. G., De Bernardi, P., Tyurina, Y. G. & Sergi, B. S. A theory of digital technology advancement to address the grand Challe Nges of sustainable development. Technol. Soc.68, 101831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101831 (2022).
Article
Google Scholar
Simmie, J. & Martin, R. The economic resilience of regions: towards an evolutionary approach. Camb. J. Reg. Econ. Soc.3, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsp029 (2010).
Article
Google Scholar
Sutton, J., Arcidiacono, A., Torrisi, G. & Arku, R. N. Regional economic resilience: A scoping review. Prog. Hum. Geogr.47, 500–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/03091325231174183 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Wang, J., Dong, K., Dong, X. & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. Assessing the digital economy and its carbon-mitigation effects: the c Ase of China. Energy Econ.113, 106198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106198 (2022).
Article
Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Shen, L., Sang, M. & Ding, X. The impact of digitalization on urban sustainable development – An eco nomic perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.212, 124005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124005 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Chen, Y. et al. The development of china’s Yangtze river economic belt: how to make it in a green way. Sci. Bull.62, 648–651 (2017).
Google Scholar
Ye, C., Zhu, J., Li, S., Yang, S. & Chen, M. Assessment and analysis of regional economic collaborative development within an urban agglomeration: Yangtze river delta as a case study. Habitat Int.83, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2018.10.010 (2019).
Article
Google Scholar
Kitsos, A., Carrascal-Incera, A. & Ortega-Argilés, R. The role of embeddedness on regional economic resilience: evidence Fro m the UK. Sustainability11, 3800. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143800 (2019).
Article
Google Scholar
Duan, X., Yu, X. & Nipper, J. Economic polarized trends, function and expanded boundaries of the Yan Gtze delta region. J. Geogr. Sci.19, 733–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-009-0733-5 (2009).
Article
Google Scholar
Rizzi, P., Graziano, P. & Dallara, A. A capacity approach to territorial resilience: the case of European re Gions. Ann. Reg. Sci.60, 285–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-017-0854-1 (2018).
Article
Google Scholar
Brown, L. & Greenbaum, R. T. The role of industrial diversity in economic resilience: an empirical examination across 35 years. Urban Stud.54, 1347–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015624870 (2016).
Article
Google Scholar
Cheng, Y., Zhou, X. & Li, Y. The effect of digital transformation on real economy enterprises’ total factor productivity. Int. Rev. Econ. Finance. 85, 488–501 (2023).
Google Scholar
Xu, Y. & Wang, T. The Spatiotemporal evolution of digital technology innovation and mult idimensional mechanism of digitalization. Appl. Geogr.182, 103714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2025.103714 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Li, H., Zhang, Y. & Li, Y. The impact of the digital economy on the total factor productivity of manufacturing firms: empirical evidence from China. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.207, 123604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123604 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Cheng, X., Ge, F., Xu, M. & Li, Y. The heat Island effect, digital technology, and urban economic resilie nce: evidence from China. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.209, 123802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123802 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Long, Y. & Wang, J. Does the innovation-driven digital economy improve the resilience of i ndustrial and supply chains? J. Innov. Knowl.10, 100733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2025.100733 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Dearnley, P. A. An investigation into database resilience. Comput. J.19, 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/19.2.117 (1976).
Article
Google Scholar
Xu, Q., Zhong, M. & Dong, Y. Digital economy and risk response: how the digital economy affects urb an resilience. Cities155, 105397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105397 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Woodall, B. et al. Institutional resilience and disaster governance: how countries respon d to black Swan events. Progress Disaster Sci.22, 100329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2024.100329 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Zhou, Y., Dan, Z. & Yu, X. Climate-adaptive resilience in district buildings and cross-regional e Nergy sharing in Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong greater Bay area. Energy Build.308, 114004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.114004 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Wei, N. Green finance, market integration, and regional economic resilience. Finance Res. Lett.67, 105777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.105777 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Martin, R. Regional economic resilience, hysteresis and recessionary shocks. J. Econ. Geogr.12, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbr019 (2012).
Article
Google Scholar
Leavitt, H. J. Management in the 1980’s. Harv. Bus. Rev.36, 41–48 (1958).
Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. & Millar, V. E. How information gives you competitive advantage. (1985).
Brynjolfsson, E. & Yang, S. Information technology and productivity: a review of the literature. Adv. Computers. 43, 179–214 (1996).
Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J.28, 1319–1350 (2007).
Google Scholar
Castells, M. Toward a sociology of the network society. Contemp. Sociol.29, 693–699 (2000).
Google Scholar
Florida, R. The economic geography of talent. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr.92, 743–755 (2002).
Google Scholar
Bharadwaj, A., Sawy, E. & Pavlou, O. A. P. A. & Venkatraman, N. V. Digital business strategy: toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly, 471–482 (2013).
Pan, W., Xie, T., Wang, Z. & Ma, L. Digital economy: an innovation driver for total factor productivity. J. Bus. Res.139, 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.061 (2022).
Article
Google Scholar
Ritter, T. & Pedersen, C. L. Digitization capability and the digitalization of business models in business-to-business firms: past, present, and future. Ind. Mark. Manage.86, 180–190 (2020).
Google Scholar
Wang, K., Sun, K., Li, Y. & Xie, Q. Can digital technology break the financing dilemma of innovative smes?? Based on the perspective of enterprise innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.214, 124030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124030 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Zhao, L., Zhu, T., Chen, J. & Zhao, L. Impact of digital economy on upgrading of industrial structure: from t he financial development perspective. Finance Res. Lett.81, 107503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.107503 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Li, G., Du, K., Liu, L. & Su, F. Digital transformation and organizational resilience: unveiling The Pa Th to sustainable performance in adversity and crisis. Int. J. Inf. Manag.84, 102934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2025.102934 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Cheng, Q., Peng, C., Wan, H., Dai, Y. & Zhang, S. How to realize digital knowledge innovation through digital technology ? A perspective based on knowledge digitization and inter-organization al knowledge sharing. Technol. Soc.82, 102905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102905 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Kusiak, A. Open manufacturing: a design-for-resilience approach. Int. J. Prod. Res.58, 4647–4658. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1770894 (2020).
Article
Google Scholar
Wang, H., Ding, L., Guan, R. & Xia, Y. Effects of advancing internet technology on Chinese employment: a Spat Ial study of inter-industry spillovers. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.161, 120259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120259 (2020).
Article
Google Scholar
Tranos, E., Kitsos, T. & Ortega-Argilés, R. Digital economy in the UK: regional productivity effects of early Adop Tion. Reg. Stud.55, 1924–1938. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1826420 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. et al. Analysis of the impact of dynamic economic resilience on post-disaster recovery secondary shock and sustainable improvement of system perf ormance. Saf. Sci.144, 105443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105443 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
Corodescu-Roșca, E., Hamdouch, A. & Iațu, C. Innovation in urban governance and economic resilience. The case of Tw o Romanian regional metropolises: Timișoara and Cluj Napoca. Cities132, 104090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104090 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Shobande, O. A., Ogbeifun, L. & Tiwari, A. K. Re-evaluating the impacts of green innovations and renewable energy on carbon neutrality: does social inclusiveness really matters? J. Environ. Manage.336, 117670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117670 (2023).
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Ge, R. & Bao, H. Digital transformation and resilience of supply chain in manufacture l Isted firms: A backward spillover effects in the vertical supply chain relationship. Finance Res. Lett.65, 105516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.105516 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Al-Omoush, K. S., de Lucas, A. & del Val, M. T. The role of e-supply chain collaboration in collaborative innovation a Nd value-co creation. J. Bus. Res.158, 113647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113647 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Wang, C. & Hu, Q. Knowledge sharing in supply chain networks: effects of collaborative i nnovation activities and capability on innovation performance. Technovation94–95 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.12.002 (2020).
Si, S., Hall, J., Suddaby, R., Ahlstrom, D. & Wei, J. Technology, entrepreneurship, innovation and social change in digital economics. Technovation119, 102484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102484 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Hinings, B., Gegenhuber, T. & Greenwood, R. Digital innovation and transformation: an institutional perspective. Inf. Organ.28, 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.004 (2018).
Article
Google Scholar
Ciarli, T., Kenney, M., Massini, S. & Piscitello, L. Digital technologies, innovation, and skills: emerging trajectories an d challenges. Res. Policy. 50, 104289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104289 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
von Briel, F., Davidsson, P. & Recker, J. Digital technologies as external enablers of new venture creation in t he IT hardware sector. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract.42, 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258717732779 (2017).
Article
Google Scholar
Nyström, K. Regional resilience to displacements. Reg. Stud.52, 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1262944 (2018).
Article
Google Scholar
Varriale, V., Cammarano, A., Michelino, F. & Caputo, M. The role of digital technologies in production systems for achieving s ustainable development goals. Sustainable Prod. Consum.47, 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.03.035 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Lythreatis, S., Singh, S. K. & El-Kassar, A. N. The digital divide: A review and future research agenda. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.175, 121359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121359 (2022).
Article
Google Scholar
Bohnsack, R., Kurtz, H. & Hanelt, A. Re-examining path dependence in the digital age: the evolution of Conn ected car business models. Res. Policy. 50, 104328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104328 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A. & Sokolov, B. The impact of digital technology and industry 4.0 on the ripple effect and supply chain risk analytics. Int. J. Prod. Res.57, 829–846. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1488086 (2019).
Article
Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Fang, Y., Wang, N. & Su, X. Mitigating information asymmetry to acquire venture capital financing for digital startups in china: the role of weak and strong signals. Inform. Syst. J.33, 1312–1342. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12452 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Priem, R. L., Li, S. & Carr, J. C. Insights and new directions from Demand-Side approaches to technology innovation, entrepreneurship, and strategic management research. J. Manag.38, 346–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311429614 (2012).
Article
Google Scholar
Jiang, W. & Li, J. Digital transformation and its effect on resource allocation efficienc y and productivity in Chinese corporations. Technol. Soc.78, 102638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102638 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Wan, Q., Tang, S. & Jiang, Z. Does the development of digital technology contribute to the Innovatio n performance of china’s high-tech industry༟. Technovation124, 102738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102738 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Wang, M., Zhu, X. & Yin, S. Spatial–temporal coupling coordination and interaction between digital Ization and traditional industrial upgrading: a case study of the yell Ow river basin. Sci. Rep.13 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44995-7 (2023).
Steele, W., Hussey, K. & Dovers, S. What’s critical about critical infrastructure?? Urban Policy Res.35, 74–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2017.1282857 (2017).
Article
Google Scholar
Hanisch, M., Goldsby, C. M., Fabian, N. E. & Oehmichen, J. Digital governance: A conceptual framework and research agenda. J. Bus. Res.162, 113777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113777 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Bernini, C., Cracolici, M. F. & Nijkamp, P. Micro and macro resilience measures of an economic crisis. Netw. Spat. Econ.20, 47–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-019-09470-9 (2019).
Article
Google Scholar
Eichengreen, B., Park, D. & Shin, K. Economic resilience: why some countries recover more robustly than Oth Ers from shocks. Econ. Model.136, 106748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2024.106748 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Zhang, F., Yang, B. & Zhu, L. Digital technology usage, strategic flexibility, and business model in novation in traditional manufacturing firms: The moderating role of Th e institutional environment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.194, 122726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122726 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Bonina, C., Koskinen, K., Eaton, B. & Gawer, A. Digital platforms for development: foundations and research agenda. Inform. Syst. J.31, 869–902. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12326 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
Wu, K., Yang, S., Li, Y. & Zhu, M. The effect of regional integration on the efficiency of enterprise res Ource allocation. Sci. Rep.15 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-85034-3 (2025).
Chen, Y., Jiang, C., Peng, L., Zhao, S. & Chen, C. Digital infrastructure construction and urban industrial chain resilie nce: evidence from the broadband China strategy. Sustainable Cities Soc.121, 106228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2025.106228 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Zhang, S., Hua, Y. & Wang, H. Mapping the digital transformation of AEC industry: content analysis o f digital public policy in China. Developments Built Environ.21, 100621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2025.100621 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Lu, D., Hui, E. C. M., Shen, J. & Shi, J. Digital industry agglomeration and urban innovation: evidence from Chi Na. Economic Anal. Policy. 84, 1998–2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2024.10.047 (2024).
Article
Google Scholar
Zhou, D., Kautonen, M., Dai, W. & Zhang, H. Exploring how digitalization influences incumbents in financial servic es: the role of entrepreneurial orientation, firm assets, and organiza Tional legitimacy. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.173, 121120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121120 (2021).
Article
Google Scholar
Yang, M. J. & Zhu, N. Online public opinion attention, digital transformation, and green Inv estment: A deep learning model based on artificial intelligence. J. Environ. Manage.371, 123294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123294 (2024).
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Li, X. & Yue, S. Does the government digital attention improve china’s digital economy output efficiency: accelerator or inhibitor. Economic Anal. Policy. 85, 607–625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2024.12.020 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Gao, D. Study on the coupling coordination and barrier factors between agroeco logical security and rural green development in China. Sci. Rep.14 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-80669-8 (2024).
Dagum, C. Decomposition and interpretation of Gini and the generalized entropy inequality measures. Statistica57, 295–308. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1973-2201/1060 (1997).
Article
Google Scholar
Li, M., Liu, X. & Yang, M. Analyzing the regional inequality of renewable energy consumption and its driving factors: evidence from China. Renew. Energy. 223, 120043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2024.120043 (2024).
The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has moved to strip thousands of federal health agency employees of their collective bargaining rights, according to a union that called the effort illegal.
HHS officials confirmed Friday that the department is ending its recognition of unions for a number of employees and reclaiming office space and equipment that had been used for union activities.
It’s the latest move by the Trump administration to put an end to collective bargaining with unions that represent federal employees. Previously affected agencies include the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
In May, an appeals court said the administration could move forward with Donald Trump’s executive order that the president aimed at ending collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of federal employees while a lawsuit plays out.
“This action ensures that HHS resources and personnel are fully focused on safeguarding the health and security of the American people,” department spokesperson Andrew Nixon said in a statement.
Officials with the American Federation of Government Employees said strong union contracts do not hinder strong responses to public health emergencies. Rather, they help make agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have a stable, experienced and supported workforce, the union said.
Some CDC employees said the union has been a source of information and advocacy for the agency’s employees during layoffs this year and in the wake of the 8 August shooting attack at the CDC’s main campus in Atlanta.
Since then, the union has been trying to advocate for a better emergency alert system and better security.
Other affected agencies include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response and the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Administration for Children and Families.
Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META) is trying to squash rumors it’s easing up on artificial intelligence. Chief AI Officer Alexandr Wang, who now runs Meta’s Superintelligence Labs, said Thursday the company is only ramping up spending.
We are truly only investing more and more into Meta Superintelligence Labs as a company, Wang wrote on X. Any reporting to the contrary of that is clearly mistaken. The post came as Meta shares drifted 1.2% lower in afternoon trade.
His pushback follows a string of headlines suggesting the opposite. The Wall Street Journal reported Meta has paused hiring in its AI unit after a spree that added more than 50 researchers and engineers, some lured with packages topping $100 million. The New York Times added that Meta is considering downsizing the group, which has grown into the thousands, while restructuring it into four teams amid internal tensions.
For investors, the mixed messaging underscores how expensive Meta’s AI ambitions have becomeand how quickly speculation over hiring and budgets can rattle sentiment in a space where the stakes are sky-high.
Michael Yu, partner in charge of Cooley’s Hong Kong office, was quoted in a South China Morning Post article about the increase in biotech and technology initial public offering (IPO) applications in Hong Kong. Cooley was also mentioned for advising Innogen Pharmaceutical on its IPO.
Read the article
This content is provided for general informational purposes only, and your access or use of the content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you or your organization and Cooley LLP, Cooley (UK) LLP, or any other affiliated practice or entity (collectively referred to as “Cooley”). By accessing this content, you agree that the information provided does not constitute legal or other professional advice. This content is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction, and you should not act or refrain from acting based on this content. This content may be changed without notice. It is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up to date, and it may not reflect the most current legal developments. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Do not send any confidential information to Cooley, as we do not have any duty to keep any information you provide to us confidential. When advising companies, our attorney-client relationship is with the company, not with any individual. This content may have been generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence (Al) in accordance with our Al Principles, may be considered Attorney Advertising and is subject to our legal notices.
This report is provided in accordance with section 608(d)(1) of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, as amended (the Act) (22 U.S.C. 7707(d)(1)). This is the third such report for fiscal year (FY) 2025, following the August 2025 MCC Board decisions to select Fiji as eligible to develop a compact and Tonga to develop a threshold program.
The Act authorizes the provision of assistance under section 605 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7704) to countries that enter into compacts with the United States to support policies and programs that advance the progress of such countries in achieving lasting economic growth and are in furtherance of the Act. The Act requires the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) to determine the countries that will be eligible to receive assistance for the fiscal year, based on their demonstrated commitment to good governance, economic freedom, and investing in their people, as well as on the opportunity to invest in shared prosperity. The Act also requires the submission of reports to appropriate congressional committees and the publication of notices in the Federal Register that identify, among other things:
The countries that are “candidate countries” for assistance for FY 2025 based on their per-capita income levels and their eligibility to receive assistance under U.S. law, and countries that would be candidate countries, but for specified legal prohibitions on assistance (section 608(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7707(a)));
The criteria and methodology that the Board of Directors of MCC (the Board) used to measure and evaluate the policy performance of the “candidate countries” consistent with the requirements of section 607 of the Act in order to determine “eligible countries” from among the “candidate countries” (section 608(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7707(b))); and
The list of countries determined by the Board to be “eligible countries” for FY 2025, with justification for eligibility determination and selection for compact negotiation, including with which of the eligible countries the Board will seek to enter into compacts (section 608(d) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7707(d))).
This is a report that fulfills the requirements under the third of the above-described reports by MCC for FY 2025. Two prior reports were sent to Congress on December 19, 2024 and January 10, 2025. These reports identify countries determined by the Board to be eligible under section 607 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7706) for FY 2025 with which MCC seeks to enter into compacts under section 609 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7708), as well as the justification for such decisions. This report also identifies a country selected by the Board to receive assistance under MCC’s threshold program pursuant to section 616 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7715).
Eligible Countries
Earlier in FY 2025 the Board selected Albania and Liberia as eligible countries with which the United States, through MCC, will seek to enter into Millennium Challenge Compacts pursuant to section 607 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7706). Those selections were notified to Congress previously.
On August 21, 2025, the Board selected Fiji as eligible to develop a compact.
Criteria
In accordance with the Act and with the “Selection Criteria and Methodology Report for Fiscal Year 2025” formally submitted to Congress on September 20, 2024, selection was based primarily on a country’s overall performance in three broad policy categories: Ruling Justly, Encouraging Economic Freedom, and Investing in People. The Board relied, to the fullest extent possible, upon transparent and independent indicators to assess countries’ policy performance and demonstrated commitment in these three broad policy areas. The Board compared countries’ performance on the indicators relative to their income-level peers, evaluating them in comparison to either the group of countries with a GNI per capita equal to or less than $2,165, the group with a GNI per capita between $2,166 and $4,515, or the group with a GNI per capita between $4,516 and $7,895.
The criteria and methodology used to assess countries, including the methodology for the annual scorecards, are outlined in the “Selection Criteria and Methodology Report for Fiscal Year 2025.” Scorecards reflecting each country’s performance on the indicators are available on MCC’s website at https://www.mcc.gov/who-we-select/scorecards.
Beyond the scorecard, the Board considered additional quantitative and qualitative supplemental information, including the investment climate and opportunities to strengthen market fundamentals, countries’ commitment to undertake reforms, the ability to advance U.S. investments and objectives in the country, the likelihood that MCC investments will be maintained and deliver long-term results, and the opportunity to advance shared prosperity.
The Board sees selection decisions as an opportunity to determine where MCC funds can be most effectively deployed. The Board carefully considers the appropriate nature of each country partnership on a case-by-case basis.
This is the first fiscal year in which the Board used its new authority under the MCC Candidate Country Reform Act to select from the additional group of countries newly included for consideration for MCC assistance. The new authority aligns the income threshold for a country to be an MCC candidate county with the World Bank threshold for initiating the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development graduation process ($7,895 gross national income per capita for fiscal year 2025). In considering any new countries in MCC’s candidate pool, the Board will continue to apply MCC’s statutorily mandated eligibility criteria and selectivity model.
Country newly selected for compact assistance
Using the criteria described above, Fiji, a candidate country under section 606(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7705(a)), was newly selected as eligible for assistance under section 607 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7706). Fiji is invited by MCC to develop a potential compact.
Fiji: The selection of Fiji presents strategic opportunity to leverage MCC’s expertise to advance America First priorities and demonstrate U.S. commitment to strengthening partnerships in the Pacific. Not only is Fiji a vital security and economic partner for the United States, but it also has a promising environment for advancing private sector growth and U.S. business opportunities, as evidenced by the country’s strong performance on the MCC scorecard. As a regional hub for transport, business, and workforce development, an MCC program with Fiji also has the potential to economically benefit a broader set of Pacific Island countries and to demonstrate constructive U.S. engagement in the region. In consideration of these factors, MCC’s Board of Directors selected Fiji as eligible to develop a compact.
Country newly selected to receive threshold program assistance
The Board selected Tonga to receive threshold program assistance for FY 2025.
Tonga: The Government of Tonga has demonstrated a commitment to undertaking good governance reforms to boost economic growth and attract private investment, as evidenced by its performance on the MCC scorecard. Since opening a new embassy in Tonga in 2023, the United States has worked to strengthen its economic and security cooperation with this increasingly important maritime partner. In consideration of these factors, MCC’s Board of Directors selected Tonga to develop a threshold program.
Gold prices rallied sharply after Powell’s dovish tone highlighted employment risks despite persistent upside risks to inflation.
Traders priced in a 90% probability of a 25 basis-point Fed cut, with key data still ahead before September.
Next week’s US docket includes Durable Goods, GDP, and the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, the Core PCE Price Index.
Gold prices continue to trend higher on Friday after the Federal Reserve (Fed) leaned dovish, as commented by the Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who said that “downside risks to the labor market are rising.” XAU/USD trades at $3,371 after hitting a daily low of $3,321.
The day arrived and Powell hinted that there’s a “reasonable base case” to think that tariffs would create a “one-time” increase in prices. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that risks to inflation are tilted to the upside and risks to employment to the downside, a “challenging situation.”
After his remarks, Bullion prices initially soared towards the $3,350 area before resuming to the upside, heading to a daily high of $3,378 before retreating somewhat to current price levels.
Market participants had priced in a 90% chance that the Federal Reserve will cut 25 basis points (bps) from its main reference rate, according to Prime Market Terminal. However, there are two inflation prints left and the following Nonfarm Payrolls report on September 5.
Source: Prime Market Terminal
After Powell’s speech, Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack said that she heard that Powell is open-minded about the policy outlook, and she reiterated her stance to get inflation back to target.
Next week, the US economic docket will feature Fed speeches, Durable Goods Orders, CB Consumer Confidence, GDP figures, Initial Jobless Claims, and the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge measure, the Core Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index.
Daily digest market movers: Gold boosted by speculation of September rate cut
Following Powell’s remarks, US Treasury yields tumbled, flattening the yield curve. The 10-year Treasury note is down nearly seven basis points at 4.261%. US real yields —which are calculated from the nominal yield minus inflation expectations— are down seven bps at 1.871% at the time of writing.
The US Dollar Index (DXY), which tracks the performance of the USD against a basket of six currencies, drops more than 1% to 97.55.
Fed Chair Powell said, “The baseline outlook and the shifting balance of risks may warrant adjusting our policy stance.” He added that “the stability of the unemployment rate and other labor market measures allows us to proceed carefully.”
Cleveland’s Fed Beth Hammack added that the Fed is a small distance away from the neutral rate and that the “Fed needs to be cautious about any move to cut rates.” She expects a rise in inflation and in the unemployment rate.
Technical outlook: Gold price surges towards $3,400
Gold price has risen sharply, but it remains shy of testing the $3,400 mark. Bulls emerged on Powell’s remarks but remain cautious as geopolitical risk had de-escalated following upbeat news at the beginning of the week, regarding Russia and Ukraine.
If XAU/USD climbs past $3,400, the next resistance would be the June 16 high of $3,452, ahead of the record high of $3,500. On the flipside, the $3,300 figure would be the first demand zone.
Conversely, if Bullion retraces, it could halt its stop at the 50-day Simple Moving Average (SMA) at around $3,350. On further weakness, the 20-day SMA at $3,345 is up next, followed by the 100-day SMA at $3,309.
Fed FAQs
Monetary policy in the US is shaped by the Federal Reserve (Fed). The Fed has two mandates: to achieve price stability and foster full employment. Its primary tool to achieve these goals is by adjusting interest rates.
When prices are rising too quickly and inflation is above the Fed’s 2% target, it raises interest rates, increasing borrowing costs throughout the economy. This results in a stronger US Dollar (USD) as it makes the US a more attractive place for international investors to park their money.
When inflation falls below 2% or the Unemployment Rate is too high, the Fed may lower interest rates to encourage borrowing, which weighs on the Greenback.
The Federal Reserve (Fed) holds eight policy meetings a year, where the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) assesses economic conditions and makes monetary policy decisions.
The FOMC is attended by twelve Fed officials – the seven members of the Board of Governors, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and four of the remaining eleven regional Reserve Bank presidents, who serve one-year terms on a rotating basis.
In extreme situations, the Federal Reserve may resort to a policy named Quantitative Easing (QE). QE is the process by which the Fed substantially increases the flow of credit in a stuck financial system.
It is a non-standard policy measure used during crises or when inflation is extremely low. It was the Fed’s weapon of choice during the Great Financial Crisis in 2008. It involves the Fed printing more Dollars and using them to buy high grade bonds from financial institutions. QE usually weakens the US Dollar.
Quantitative tightening (QT) is the reverse process of QE, whereby the Federal Reserve stops buying bonds from financial institutions and does not reinvest the principal from the bonds it holds maturing, to purchase new bonds. It is usually positive for the value of the US Dollar.
Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) is giving data centers a new way to scale. The chip giant on Friday unveiled Spectrum-XGS Ethernet, a networking platform built to connect AI factories not just within one building but across cities, countries and even continents. Shares rose 1.7% in late morning trading.
CEO Jensen Huang called the launch a cornerstone for the next phase of AI growth. The AI industrial revolution is here, he said, describing Spectrum-XGS as a scale-across system that extends beyond the traditional scale-up or scale-out models, linking massive compute clusters into what he calls giga-scale AI factories.
The tech plugs directly into Nvidia’s Spectrum-X platform and automatically manages latency, congestion and telemetry over long distances. The company said it nearly doubles the performance of its Collective Communications Library. Hyperscaler CoreWeave (NASDAQ:CRWV) is already among the first to test the system by tying its data centers together.
The timing is key. Nvidia is set to report results on Aug. 27, with Wall Street expecting $46 billion in revenue and EPS of $1.01. Investors will be watching if the networking push strengthens Nvidia’s grip on the AI infrastructure market.
