Category: 3. Business

The Magnificent Seven entered 2025 on a high note. Since then, the tune has meandered all over the place. 

Looking ahead, analysts expect the group of tech giants to continue to benefit from their size and position in the AI race, which could both fuel future growth and offer protection for investors concerned about trade-fueled uncertainty. But they also warn that their earnings growth relative to other leading companies may slow—and even in artificial intelligence, investors may start to look to other stocks in search of gains. 

Below, we’ll catch you up on the year so far for the Magnificent Seven—and go into more detail about some of the likely drivers of their performance that await in the months to come. 

How We Got Here

xExcitement about AI propelled the tech giants—Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Nvidia (NVDA), Amazon (AMZN), Alphabet (GOOG), Meta (META), and Tesla (TSLA)—to two years of outsized gains. The stocks, like the broader market, were pushed higher by post-election optimism about President-elect Donald Trump’s promises to cut taxes, roll back regulations, and welcome the business community to Washington with wide-open arms. 

No company stood to benefit more than Tesla, whose CEO Elon Musk was expected to wield immense influence within the White House after publicly, and expensively, supporting Trump’s campaign. Instead, Tesla’s sales–and stock–crashed as Musk took a public role in Trump’s administration that led to both political opposition and concern about his work with the carmaker. 

Meanwhile, Trump’s tariffs sparked panic on Wall Street that pummeled high-flying tech stocks. By the time Trump paused the tariffs, the Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) was trading more than 30% below its December high. 

Things have recovered since. Easing trade tensions, a strong U.S. economy, and resilient businesses helped the “Mag 7” claw back nearly all of those losses in the second quarter, with the Roundhill ETF having edged into the green year-to-date.

Three of the Mag 7—Nvidia, Microsoft, and Meta—are up double digits since the start of 2025 and are currently at or near record highs. Amazon and Alphabet remain slightly off their records. Apple and Tesla are down 14% and 19%, respectively, year-to-date.

These tech titans face plenty of risks—including high valuations, ongoing tariff negotiations, and geopolitical tensions that could threaten their businesses—in the second half. But experts say they also have the opportunity to use their size and deep pockets to bolster their positions in AI, which could lead to both long-term gains and near-term share-price benefits.

Hyperscalers Continue To Spend Big on AI

At times in the first half of 2025, it looked like tech giants might scale back their AI investments.

The success of China’s DeepSeek and its efficient AI reasoning model raised questions about whether hyperscalers needed to add as much computing capacity as expected. Trump’s implementation of sweeping tariffs threatened to plunge the U.S. into a period of stagflation and suppress consumer and business spending. 

Hyperscalers stood by plans to continue spending big on AI. Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and Meta this year all indicated that their cloud and AI businesses were constrained by insufficient computing capacity. Cumulatively, the four companies are expected to spend more than $300 billion on infrastructure in 2025, with much of that earmarked for data centers and equipment required to train and deploy AI. 

That spending is expected to continue benefitting the companies that design, make, and market the most advanced semiconductors, including Nvidia and Broadcom (AVGO). It should also boost sales of networking technology companies like Arista Networks (ANET), Amphenol (APH), and Coherent (COH).

Earnings Growth Could Moderate

The Mag 7 have been the main drivers of S&P 500 earnings growth in the last two years. 

The group’s profits grew nearly 28% in the first quarter, slightly below their average over the prior three quarters. The remainder of the S&P 500 reported growth of about 9%. The gap between the two groups, now 19 percentage points, was nearly 30 percentage points as recently as the second quarter of 2024.

That gap is expected to narrow further over the next year, with FactSet projecting the rest of the index’s growth will be on par with the Mag 7’s by the first quarter of 2026.

A possible caveat: Over the past year, analysts have consistently overestimated how quickly the broader market would catch up with the Mag 7.

Size Should Be a Bulwark Against Volatility

Tariffs and economic uncertainty could help the Magnificent 7 in the second half. 

Analysts at Janus Henderson expect second-quarter U.S. earnings, which kick off with big bank results in mid-July, will come under pressure from tariff anxiety before rebounding later in the year as the trade outlook becomes clearer and mitigation strategies take effect. 

“Companies with strong balance sheets, scale, pricing power, and supply chain flexibility could weather this earnings pressure and recover faster,” they wrote.

Most of the Mag 7 operate high-margin businesses. All have scale that should give them a competitive advantage in times of uncertainty. 

Against “a backdrop of sluggish interim growth and higher-for-longer rate environment, we are likely to see a repeat of the 2023-2024 playbook of unhealthy narrow market leadership and high market concentration,” JPMorgan analysts expect.

But The AI Trade Is Broadening

The extent to which the Mag 7 companies are synonymous with the AI trade could decline and take some of the wind out of their stocks’ sails.

JP Morgan analysts expect “a broadening AI theme” that could “accelerate further with the potential for greater productivity and efficiency gains.” Semiconductor, power, data center, and cybersecurity are their preferred AI themes outside the Mag 7. 

To be sure, the Mag 7 are still some of Wall Street’s favorite AI stocks. “Our preferred way to play the AI theme are the hyperscalers,” particularly Microsoft, “and key data/analytics consumption names,” including Snowflake (SNOW) and MongoDB (MDB), said Citibank application software analyst Tyler Radtke. 

Citi analysts covering systems and back-office software have also emphasized the importance of AI monetization in the coming months. Companies that can develop AI programs that improve their customers’ efficiency—like Cyberark (CYBR) in the cybersecurity space and Monday.com (MNDY) in project management software—are best positioned to lead the AI rally, some argue.

An online booking system to improve community recycling centre services (CRCs) is being launched by Surrey County Council.

The council said the initiative, due to run between 11 August and 10 November, is for residents at the Camberley and Lyne (Chertsey) CRCs.

It added the scheme was being trialled to ease congestion at peak times and help the local authority manage the CRCs more effectively.

Natalie Bramhall, cabinet member for property, waste and infrastructure, said: “We’ve seen booking systems at CRCs introduced by councils in other areas of the country with great success and would like to trial a system of our own.

“We will continue to listen to residents and businesses to help shape the CRC service to make it as easy and effective as possible for Surrey residents.”

The council added that following the trial, the booking system would be evaluated and residents asked for feedback.

Slots will be available to book two weeks in advance, with the system going live on 28 July.

Residents can make up to 10 appointments per month with each slot lasting 15 minutes.

The council has confirmed that until 11 August residents can still visit both CRCs as usual, and no other CRCs will be impacted by the system.

Mature OT cybersecurity programs span beyond perimeter defenses, with an emphasis on deep visibility, continuous risk assessment, and strong governance reflecting the unique conditions and needs of OT (operational technology) environments. The roadmap accounts for legacy systems, scattered industrial installations, multilayer network segmentation, secure remote access to the plant, and asset inventories that are up to date, even as critical equipment ages. But most industrial companies are still stuck using legacy risk models designed for the way our systems used to be, rather than the way they are today. The question remains, however, is most, if not all, of the installed base is not hardened for modern threats, including ransomware, nation-state, and supply chain compromise, and leaves critical industrial environments at risk.

As cyber threats and attacks increasingly become physically and geographically charged, the responsibility for OT cybersecurity is being redrawn. Formerly the responsibility of control engineers and plant managers, OT security is now the responsibility of CISOs and enterprise security teams. This is not a smooth transition. For those environments that are intolerant of downtime, where production outages are not only cost-prohibitive but physically intolerable, the concept of chaos can seem like anathema to traditional security teams who have been weaned on IT-centric ‘patch and reboot’ playbooks. Even worse, these environments are not simple to secure while still servicing production workloads, requiring expertise, patience, and coordination.

Building OT cybersecurity programs must also deal with the pressure of cultural gaps between IT security practitioners and OT teams. Engineers may see security controls as impediments to safety or productivity, just as security teams may not recognize how arcane industrial systems are. These disconnects can throw even the most well-considered programs off track, creating a breach for attackers to take advantage of unguarded paths. 

The CISOs, sometimes now charged with protecting OT, are ill-prepared to make this cross-cultural and technical leap. Policy updates will not be enough to ensure organizational success. Focusing on OT cybersecurity programs that require realizing the operational significance of cyber investments, investing in developing required skills, and leadership that understands the mission to keep production on, as well as recognizes the need for increases in protection as the threat environment continues to change. Anything less risks getting industrial cybersecurity mired in the past. 

What makes a mature OT cybersecurity program?

Industrial Cyber reached out to industrial cybersecurity experts to explore what defines a mature OT cybersecurity program today. They also look into why so many industrial organizations still fall short of that standard.

Jeff Johnson, OT cyber program lead at MorganFranklin Cyber, told Industrial Cyber that a mature program should have holistic cybersecurity management that defines governance, roles, and process life cycles. It should follow a risk-based architecture using ISA/IEC 62443-3-2 for risk assessment and set security-level targets, with zoning and segmentation based on the Purdue Model or operational needs. Secure-by-design principles should be built into future architecture as a standard. 

He also identified that throughout the ICS/OT lifecycle, product-level controls should enforce defense-in-depth, least privilege, and availability requirements, with security by design integrated into any new infrastructure from the outset. Finally, continual improvement through regular assessments, patching, monitoring, and incident readiness is essential.

On why most industrial organizations lag, Johnson pointed to legacy ecosystems that dominate with proprietary protocols and limited patching capabilities. OT teams are wary of changes that risk availability or safety… ‘This is the way we’ve always done it.’ He also added complexity and cost as formalizing cybersecurity management systems, asset inventories, segmentation, and secure procurement got pushed to the back burner. Additionally, these older devices are expensive and, in most cases, unnecessary in their eyes, from a productivity perspective. 

Dino Busalachi, director for OT cybersecurity at Barry-Wehmiller Design Group, told Industrial Cyber that mature programs share several key characteristics. Mature organizations typically adopt a security framework, such as NIST, IEC 62443, or NERC CIP, and integrate it across their operations.

He added that a critical gap often emerges when organizations fail to communicate their OT cyber strategy to key suppliers. CIO and CISO leadership need to build stronger relationships with original equipment manufacturers and system integrators, since these suppliers serve as the primary delivery teams responsible for bringing OT assets into manufacturing environments. Beyond designing and building these OT systems, they also handle ongoing support and maintenance, making their involvement essential.

Busalachi added that many IT departments have chosen their cybersecurity path without incorporating the broader OT ecosystem, both internally and externally. “This siloed approach prevents organizations from reaching the maturity level required to improve their cybersecurity programs effectively.”

“A mature program is one with clear expectations, executive support, defined governance, collaborative culture, smart resourcing, dedicated OT security policies, controls and procedures, fit-for-purpose tools, measurable outcomes, a roadmap, and repeatability,” Jason Rivera, co-founder and CEO at Cabreza, told Industrial Cyber. “Any organization can get wrapped around the axle of one of those topics, but if they’re willing to collaborate, communicate, and compromise, maturity gains can be achieved.”

“What defines a mature OT cybersecurity program is having a grasp on the people, process, and technologies (including third parties) that make a business function in a safe and secure manner,” Kevin Kumpf, OT/ICS Strategist at Hard Hat Cybersecurity Services, told Industrial Cyber. “It includes C-Level leadership, IT, OT, change management, and third parties all working together and truly understanding the safety, availability, integrity, and confidentiality of their systems and their physical infrastructure.”

Kumpf said that most organizations have not achieved this because it is costly, and many organizations are outsourcing resource-driven driven using contractors to maintain systems and physical plants. “Outsourcing not only task-driven menial roles but also expertise-focused roles as well. While this produces cost savings on the bottom line, it sacrifices safety and security overall.”

Outdated risk models continue to weaken OT cybersecurity defenses

The executives address whether today’s OT cybersecurity programs are truly prepared to defend against modern threats like ransomware and nation-state attacks, or if they’re still relying on outdated risk models that can no longer keep up.

Johnson said that most organizations are in the process of rationalizing what OT means to their risk, business and bottom-lines, while ‘traditional OT verticals’ (utilities, etc.) tend to have more experience than most, the real challenge is creating space for a different kind of security within non-traditional verticals (healthcare, fintech, telecom, etc).

“This assumes that there is an OT cybersecurity program in place in the first place, focusing mainly on safety, downtime, and compliance, and underestimating cyber-physical attack vectors,” according to Johnson. “Modern threats have evolved fast: ransomware now includes extortion, disruption, and kinetic consequences. Gaps remain, as until ISA/IEC 62443 frameworks are fully applied, especially zones, monitoring, and SL-T enforcement, as many OT programs remain vulnerable.”

Busalachi sees a technology readiness vs. implementation issue, as cybersecurity technologies continue to advance and mature, but the problem lies with end users (asset owners) who are not moving the needle on implementation. 

He added that proven frameworks remain valid. The SANS 5 OT Cybersecurity Critical Controls are not outdated and provide solid foundations, including defensible architecture, incident response, secure remote access, continuous monitoring, and vulnerability and risk management. 

When it comes to critical visibility gaps, Busalachi identified that too many organizations fall short on OT asset discovery. “Many claim they want 100% visibility without understanding what this process truly means. There’s more to a plant than capturing only North-South traffic. The East-West traffic controls are equally critical for comprehensive security.”

Rivera said, “Unfortunately, probably not. A small manufacturer may be better equipped through a few smart, tactical decisions than a global distributor with politics, risk aversion, or special interests prevailing over site defense and resilience measures. This is what happens in the absence of meaningful, sector-specific standardization and benchmarking, apart from maybe the energy sector, with NERC-CIP.”

“That said, one issue with all the risk models is when they end up suggesting untenable efforts focused in one direction, causing the classic front door closed, back door wide open scenario,” he added. “That’s why I advocate for capability-based prioritization: Determining what can be done now, to get to next, and what can be done later, by when. The best equipped OT security programs are also built with achievability in mind, as well as risk reduction, and an unwavering tether to business and security resilience.”

Kumpf said that while the programs / regulatory standards themselves are attempting to align with cyber threats and risks, the organizations themselves are lacking a true understanding of what their risks truly are.

“As an example, while many organizations know what systems control OT resources, they do not have the depth of understanding on the interconnection of that system to others or how it impacts both upstream and downstream people, process, technologies, supply chain, etc.,” according to Kumpf. “Without clearly defined baselines, interconnectivity models, business risk quantifications, etc., there is no way to truly define a proper risk model.”

Industrial cybersecurity sees changing lines of responsibility

The executives examine who traditionally owns OT cybersecurity within industrial organizations, and how that ownership is shifting as cyber risks grow more physically and geopolitically charged.

“OT security historically has sat with plant engineering or operations teams—aligned to safety/process reliability. And from what I’m seeing, the majority still do,” Johnson said. “However, I do see a shift underway where CISOs, or embedded OT security leads, are now increasingly leading programs supported by cross-functional governance boards (OT Centers of Excellence in some cases).” 

He added that cyber risk is rapidly merging with physical and geopolitically driven threats. Centralized cyber oversight ensures a coherent risk posture spanning IT, OT, supply chain, and geopolitical contingencies.

Busalachi said that ownership varies by sector. In critical infrastructure organizations, OT teams usually take responsibility for OT cybersecurity. However, they face significant challenges with limited resources and budget, especially in smaller organizations and municipalities.

He also identified an authority vs. responsibility disconnect. “IT departments may have cybersecurity responsibility, but they lack authority in OT environments. Ultimately, OT teams own the OT assets, not the other way around.”

From an engagement imperative, Busalachi said that IT leadership must decide whether to engage the OEMs and system integrators who are the primary deliverers of OT assets on the plant floor. “If these groups aren’t providing a clear path forward for their clients (OT asset owners), there’s a critical gap. IT is not currently engaging them effectively.”

“The CISO or CSO usually ‘owns’ programs, but that’s not to say they call every shot, or should. The most accountable and responsible parties need to listen, ask questions, and collaborate to prevent their program from dying on the vine,” Rivera said. “So, the evolved successful model of ownership is distributed between global security and the local, more operational teams.”

Kumpf said that cybersecurity risk is owned at the Board and C-suite level. “The C suite is responsible for the execution of the program, and in most organizations, this aligns to a CISO of IT. While some high areas of critical infrastructure (oil and gas, power, air and rail, etc) have an OT CISO, it is not the norm.”

“Implementation of the program resides with the plant manager or operational management of an OT area. There is a disconnect between this level and the levels above in nearly every organization I have worked with,” according to Kumpf. “There are not two communications, and this inhibits the true flow of information regarding physical and geopolitical risks. A CISO does not know where things are produced at the intimate level of a plant manager. A CISO does not understand the physical consequences of not having redundancy in core systems and why, in many instances, you cannot (digital twins are attempting to become a solution to this).”

Coping with cyber risk in downtime-averse OT environments

The executives explore how organizations are managing visibility and risk in legacy-heavy OT environments where downtime is intolerable and many assets remain difficult to identify.

Johnson said that organizations often start with asset inventory, using agentless discovery and network traffic analysis to map devices without disrupting operations. Risk-prioritized segmentation is then enforced through zoning and conduits to limit lateral movement. 

In cases where patching is impossible, Johnson leaned towards hybrid compensating controls being deployed, including DMZs for devices that require both OT and IT access, along with firewall rules and other network-based protections. Finally, continuous monitoring and incident response provide situational awareness through network detection and response, anomaly detection, and response plans aligned with service-level agreements.

Busalachi said that maturity levels vary significantly, as less than 80% of organizations are mature enough to have developed comprehensive metrics. “Some sophisticated clients use Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) to benchmark and improve manufacturing productivity.”

He added that the OT cybersecurity value proposition is that many organizations fail to realize these technologies actually help prevent events that cause unplanned and unscheduled downtime, improving OEE and overall operational efficiency.

“Well, organizations with programs should have control (and compensating control) criteria and requirements established for asset, detection/monitoring, and risk management,” Rivera said. “They’re entity-level exercises with outcomes that can be iterated on as people and technologies change. But for the organizations that just passed ‘Go’ and grabbed a tool off the shelf, they’re probably not managing well.”

“The only absolute way you can resolve this is to walk the plant floor and take a physical inventory. Once that inventory is collected, you need to ensure it is given to an owner (not an outside third party) who will continually update, maintain, and control its existence,” according to Kumpf. “You need to understand the who, what, when, where, and why of the asset. Who owns it, what it does for the organization, when it is used (non stop running, once a week, etc.), where it is located and how it is connected/accessed, and why the organization needs it (can another device already in place do the same function or task). Lastly, you need to understand its BIA/BCP if that device has an event/issue.”

Misaligned cultures threaten industrial security programs

The executives look into the cultural disconnects that exist between operations and cybersecurity teams, and how these tensions impact the success or failure of security initiatives.

Using the ‘Apples and Oranges’ analogy, Johnson said that OT leaders emphasize uptime and safety; cyber teams emphasize defense and confidentiality. “Both are good on their own, but I don’t want warm orange juice with spices in the fall, or cold apple juice with my cereal in the morning.” 

“OT sees cyber as a threat to physical continuity, especially when misconceived as IT-centric. Cyber side frames standards/tools in IT jargon, while OT values safety, functional continuity, and risk-driven practices,” according to Johnson. “This friction leads to stalled segmentation, delayed patching, and token compliance. Using ISA/IEC 62443 ‘s shared language—zoning, risk scores tied to operational impact, measurable controls—to translate requirements into operational benefits for both sides, you can bridge the gap and provide a win for everyone.”

Highlighting the visibility problem, Busalachi said that too often, “when visiting manufacturing facilities to tour plant floors (OT environments), it’s the first time many IT team members (infosec, networking) have been onsite. In many cases, they haven’t visited the plant in years or have never been on the plant floor to review industrial control system architecture, applications, infrastructure, and networks.”

He added that IT departments have significant blind spots related to OT environments. “The critical question is – what is IT’s relationship with internal OT teams and their third parties (vendors, OEMs, and system integrators)? If these relationships don’t exist, cybersecurity initiatives will inevitably fall short.”

“Disconnects in responsibilities, expectations, decisions, risks, and feedback loops are going to happen. They can become some of the most defining moments of an organization’s OT security journey,” Rivera said. “But they’re also where the juiciest work is, which pays off greatly for any organization serious about doing OT security the right way. It’s important to learn from them and continuously strengthen relationships. On that note, incentivization models go a long way.”

Noting that there is a disconnect between plant-level operations and the C-suite, Kumpf said that “They do not have a true voice or advocate at the table. People at the C-level are dollar and risk-driven. Can we do it cheaper (put things in the cloud, outsource, etc.) and by the need to automate security through instant patching, AI-driven threat mitigation, shutting down systems that are outdated?”

“I equate this to the vision of the smartphone in today’s world. Why do you need a phone, camera, computer, desk calendar, etc., when you can do it all in one device (IT thinking)? OT is not built like that,” Kumpf added. “You would not expect a photographer you hired at a special event to show up with a cell phone and begin to take pictures or a person you paid to build you a custom cabinet to just go to a home improvement store and buy one, and just add hardware you selected.”

He also mentioned that OT is driven by many unique processes and situations. “There is always room to improve and streamline, but every plant and OT operation is unique and with its own challenges. It is not a ‘one size fits all.’”

CISOs struggle to bridge IT-OT cyber divide

The executives assess whether CISOs are well-positioned to lead OT cybersecurity efforts or whether a cultural and technical divide between IT and OT still hinders effective leadership. 

“CISO leadership is increasingly essential as they bring board-level visibility, governance expertise, and a holistic risk mindset,” Johnson said. “However, many CISOs lack deep OT fluency, without operational credibility, and OT teams resist their guidance.” He added that CISOs with dedicated OT deputies or cross-functional steering committees bridge domain knowledge gaps. “CISOs must speak OT’s language— connecting cyber measures to safety, reliability, and business continuity.”

Identifying that the clear answer is ‘no,’ Busalachi said that CISOs are not well-positioned to lead OT cybersecurity efforts if they’re not engaging the external OT ecosystem operating in their manufacturing facilities. “This engagement gap represents a fundamental barrier to effective OT cybersecurity leadership. The technical and cultural divide between IT and OT continues to hinder progress until leadership bridges these gaps through meaningful engagement with all stakeholders in the OT ecosystem,” he added.

Rivera said that barring a substantial rise in CSO surpassing CISO roles within industrial organizations, “the CISO is the best positioned to lead, even despite being classically trained in IT security first. If there is some great divide, that’s the CISO allowing that kind of culture to exist, and they need to address it.” 

He concluded that every moment of division is really just a moment for collaboration that’s lost its way.

Story Continues

BEIJING  –   China is not merely becoming an innovation superpower of the world, but also scripting its own version of techno-industrial ascendancy. Despite the geopolitical crosswinds and a chorus of Western skepticism, Beijing has kept its eye firmly on the twin imperatives of innovation and sustainability. China’s experiment with innovation- driven development has started to yield quantifiable returns. The numbers are instructive: in 2024 alone, the country’s integrated circuit (IC) industry expanded by 22.2%, with exports of ICs surpassing 1.1 trillion yuan ($153 billion), an all-time high. In an era where semiconductors are as strategically valuable as oil once was, this marks not just economic success but geopolitical leverage.

Take the example of EVs. According to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, China exported more than 1.2 million electric vehicles in the first five months of 2025 alone – a 20% year-on-year increase. Many of these are now hitting markets from Southeast Asia to Europe. The underlying technological capacity – battery efficiency, intelligent systems, and lightweight chassis – are no longer licensed or imported; they are largely homegrown. The State Council’s new report confirms this quiet revolution: China’s “modern industrial system,” as it calls it, is no longer aspirational. It’s operational.

But perhaps most remarkable is the balancing act being performed between economic expansion and environmental restraint. In 2024, China managed to reduce its energy consumption per unit of GDP by over 3%. That might seem incremental, but for the world’s secondlargest economy – and its largest emitter – it’s a signal that low-carbon development is no longer a peripheral concern. At the national level, coal dependency is being shaved off gradually, while renewable energy infrastructure – particularly in wind and solar – is scaling at breakneck speed. As of mid-2025, China accounts for more than 40% of global clean energy investments, according to the International Energy Agency.

China’s model is not pretending to be Silicon Valley. It is building something more systemic – where industrial strategy, academic research, and climate goals are braided together under the umbrella of national rejuvenation. For a country that was once the poster child of copycat manufacturing, this evolution is more than symbolic. China’s innovative development points to a diverse future: innovation is not a monopoly of the West, and sustainable development is not the preserve of the already developed. That, in itself, is a development worth applauding.

LAHORE – The Punjab Excise and Taxation Department is responsible for the registration of motor vehicles across the province.

Vehicle registration ensures legal ownership and enables law enforcement to track vehicles for taxation and security purposes.

The process begins with the submission of necessary documents, including proof of ownership, CNIC, and payment of applicable taxes and registration fees. Once verified, the department issues a computerized registration certificate and number plates.

Timely registration helps the government maintain accurate vehicle data, improve traffic management, and generate revenue for public welfare. The Punjab Excise and Taxation Department continues to upgrade its systems to provide efficient and citizen-friendly vehicle registration services.

In recent years, the department has introduced digital services to streamline the registration process. Through the online system, vehicle owners can check token tax status, verify registration details, and even book appointments to avoid long queues. The department also offers biometric verification to prevent fraud and ensure transparency.

Excise New Registration Fee for Suzuki Alto, Every, Cultus

The Punjab excise department receives one percent of the value of the vehicle with engine capacity up to 1000cc in wake of new Registration Fee, as per the official website of the department.

All the three Suzuki Alto, Every and Cultus features engine capacity below 1000cc. Therefore, the buyers of these vehicles will pay 1% of the vehicle value for new registration.

Suzuki Cars Latest Prices

Recently, Pak Suzuki Motor Company has officially announced an increase in the retail prices of its automobile lineup following the new taxation measures introduced in the Federal Budget 2025–26.

Effective from July 1, 2025, the revised prices reflect higher Sales Tax rates and a newly introduced NEV Levy on vehicle sales by the Government of Pakistan.

The price hikes vary across different models and trims, with some variants witnessing increases of over Rs. 180,000.

Suzuki Alto New Prices 

VXR: Old price Rs. 2,827,000 → New price Rs. 2,994,861 (Increase: Rs. 167,861)

VXR AGS: Old price Rs. 2,989,000 → New price Rs. 3,166,480 (Increase: Rs. 177,480)

VXL AGS: Old price Rs. 3,140,000 → New price Rs. 3,326,446 (Increase: Rs. 186,446)

Suzuki Cultus (Upgraded) New Prices

VXR: Old price Rs. 4,049,000 → New price Rs. 4,089,490 (Increase: Rs. 40,490)

VXL: Old price Rs. 4,316,000 → New price Rs. 4,359,160 (Increase: Rs. 43,160)

AGS: Old price Rs. 4,546,000 → New price Rs. 4,591,460 (Increase: Rs. 45,460)

Investment firm Azoria Partners said on Saturday it will postpone the listing of its Azoria Tesla (NASDAQ:) Convexity exchange traded fund after Tesla CEO Elon Musk said he was forming a new U.S. political party, News.az reports citing Investing.

Musk made the announcement a day after polling his followers on the X social media platform he owns, declaring, “Today the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.”

Azoria was set to launch the Tesla ETF, which would invest in the electric vehicle company’s shares and options, next week.

However, following Musk’s announcement Azoria CEO James Fishback posted on X several critical comments of the new party and repeated his support for U.S. President Donald Trump.

That culminated in a post where Fishback announced the postponement of the ETF.

“I encourage the Board to meet immediately and ask Elon to clarify his political ambitions and evaluate whether they are compatible with his full-time obligations to Tesla as CEO,” Fishback said.

The announcement undermines the confidence shareholders had in Tesla’s future after Musk said in May he was stepping back from his role leading the Department of Government Efficiency, Fishback said.

Tesla did not immediately respond to a Reuters’ request for comment.

News.Az 

The BTC Bull Token presale is in its final stretch, with less than 48 hours left for buyers to join at discounted rates before token claiming goes live. The presale has already raised over $8 million, showing strong interest in this new project.

Many believe this token could take off this month as Bitcoin edges closer to new all-time highs. Positive signs across macroeconomic factors, including an increase in the global money supply, the likelihood of the Federal Reserve cutting interest rates, and growing talk of Bitcoin adoption in national reserves and by companies, have investors watching the crypto space closely.

With the project having scheduled Bitcoin airdrops to holders when BTC hits new price milestones, BTC Bull Token (BTCBULL) could become one of the biggest winners from Bitcoin’s future bull rallies.

Meme Coin With Real Bitcoin Rewards

BTC Bull Token is a meme coin at its core, but it also rewards its token holders with real BTC rewards as Bitcoin reaches key price milestones. For example, when BTC reaches $150K and $200K for the first time, BTCBULL token holders will receive Bitcoin airdrops in their wallets.

When BTC hits $250K, a massive BTCBULL token airdrop will take place. For airdrops, the team has allocated 10% of the total token supply.

Another way to earn tokens is to stake your BTCBULL and earn a dynamic yield of 51%. This can be an excellent way to increase token holdings without making new purchases. However, as we approach the token claim and the launch on exchanges, staking at this point may not be suitable for all investors.

Aside from airdrops and staking rewards, BTCBULL uses token burn mechanisms to lower its supply. As Bitcoin reaches $125K, $175K, and $225K, the team will burn up to 15% of its tokens, reducing the supply and increasing scarcity.

In a surprise announcement, the team has already burned around 35% of the total token supply, reducing it from 21 billion to 13.65 billion. A low token supply at launch gives the token a higher chance to explode depending on demand.

Because token holders get Bitcoin rewards, a popular crypto YouTube channel called Cryptonews believes the BTCBULL token can 100x.

SUPER 100X PRESALE | GET PAID IN FREE BITCOIN TO HOLD BTC BULL TOKEN

BTCBULL Leverages the Ethereum Blockchain

Unlike Bitcoin, the BTCBULL token is built on the Ethereum blockchain, which provides it with several advantages. Ethereum’s EVM standard is widely used and compatible with many popular wallets and exchanges. This makes it simple for people around the world to buy, store, and trade BTCBULL.

Once the token claim goes live, BTCBULL will be listed on decentralized exchanges, making it easy for new buyers to join in.

The team also formed a partnership with Best Wallet, a multi-chain crypto wallet app. This lets users buy into the presale, store or stake their tokens, and claim them when they go live. Since Best Wallet is a multi-chain wallet, BTCBULL token holders can receive their BTC airdrop rewards in the same wallet, simplifying the process.

BTC Bull Token Could Outperform Bitcoin

Bitcoin is the best-performing asset in modern history, having grown more than 200 million percent since its creation. Its average annual return stands around 230%. Analysts expect BTC to keep climbing, with price targets of around $200K by the end of 2025 and beyond $1 million within the next 8 years.

The BTCBULL token has a lower market cap, giving it a higher likelihood of a 10x return this year, something that BTC is unlikely to achieve. Still, BTC doubling its price this year means BTCBULL token holders will get two BTC airdrops.

This passive income makes BTCBULL stand out from other meme coins. With the presale having raised over $8 million, and the token claim going live in 48 hours, this could be the last chance to buy BTCBULL token at a discounted price.

Interested investors can buy BTCBULL by visiting the BTC Bull Token presale site, connecting their crypto wallet, and using ETH, BNB, USDT, or a bank card.

Alternatively, investors can download Best Wallet and buy BTCBULL from the Upcoming Tokens tab.

Visit BTC Bull Token Presale

This article is for informational purposes only and does not provide financial advice. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile, and the market can be unpredictable. Always perform thorough research before making any cryptocurrency-related decisions.

Story Continues