Economics

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, natural gas prices in Europe have stayed far above those in the United States — with serious implications for competitiveness, energy security, and the transition to clean energy. In September 2025, European natural gas averaged $11.1 per MMBtu, 274% higher than the U.S. price of $3.0 per MMBtu — nearly four times as high. Before the crisis, in 2019, Europe’s price was $4.8 per MMBtu, already 87% above the U.S. level. Despite progress on diversifying supply and reducing demand, this persistent price gap underscores the structural challenges Europe faces as it shifts away from fossil fuels while maintaining industrial competitiveness. The long-term answer? Investing in energy efficiency, renewables, and electrification — the only sustainable way to reduce both dependency and exposure to volatile global gas markets.

As expected, the Fed cut rates by 25 basis points and announced an end to quantitative tightening—both steps toward further easing. However, the meeting revealed some notable divisions within the Federal Open Market Committee. One member voted against the rate cut, while another favored a larger, 50 basis point cut. This dissent was a bit unexpected. Chair Powell also highlighted strong differences of opinion about a potential December rate cut and discussed the “neutral rate”—the level at which the Fed is neither stimulating nor restraining the economy. Powell suggested a range between 3 and 4%, higher than the 3% median estimate from FOMC members. These factors led markets to pause and reassess the likelihood and pace of future rate cuts. While markets still anticipate a December cut, the path ahead may be shallower than previously expected. Both stock and bond markets reacted with caution. For investors, this complexity is a sign that the Fed is weighing risks carefully—balancing the dangers of being too easy or too tough in today’s environment.  

The House Budget Bill explained… for utility-scale solar developers. This week, I’m sharing sector-specific explainers of the House-passed reconciliation bill to help each business and worker understand the impact. Yesterday, I covered the manufacturing provisions in the bill. Today, I’ll talk about utility-scale solar and tomorrow will be on the residential sector.   For large-scale solar developers, the biggest and most important provision is the functional elimination of the 48E and 45Y tax credits.   Instead of phasing out the credits, the text of the House bill requires that projects begin construction within 60 days after enactment of the bill AND be placed in service before January 1, 2029.   This effectively eliminates the credits for all new grid-scale solar energy projects going forward. As well as hundreds of projects already under development. Remember, if construction doesn’t begin within 60 days of President Trump signing the legislation, then the investment tax credit won’t be available. Full stop. This has implications for other aspects of the tax credit regime. The other provisions that restrict these credits — like ending transferability and the Foreign Entities of Concern (FEOC) rules — wouldn’t end up applying to 48E or 45Y because the credits would be eliminated before those restrictions would go into effect at the end of the year. Communities across the nation would lose $286 billion in local investments and 330,000 American jobs would be gone.   By 2030, America would produce 173 fewer TWh of energy annually (That’s about the size of Illinois’ energy consumption each year).   That’s the OPPOSITE of American energy dominance.   Let’s keep up the pressure: https://lnkd.in/evBBCp4h

It’s one of those rare instances when AMUL’s top man (Jayen Mehta) has got me a little worried about his plans 🙏🙏 In the last few days, Sir has expressed optimism about what Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs mean for Indian dairy exports. He has made a case that: - Nearly 50% of the US dairy exports are to places in India's vicinity, including West Asia, North Africa, China, Southeast Asia, Sub Saharan Africa, Japan, and South Korea - Biggest of them, China has imposed 34% retaliatory tariffs on dairy imports from the US and many more countries are expected to follow These markets will need alternate suppliers, for which AMUL is ready and roaring, as per Jayen Sir. .. All of this SOUNDS great. After all, India is the world’s largest milk producer at 230mn tonnes in 2024 (NDDB). But this ‘win’ for dairy farmers spells disaster for crores of Indian households already crushed by skyrocketing milk prices. Here’s the ugly truth: - India’s milk production growth is slowing-down. It crashed to a measly 1% in 2023 from a 5-6% annual average pre-2022 (Department of Animal Husbandry). And 2024 is widely reported to have remained a measly growth year - Meanwhile, costs are spiraling. Fodder prices jumped 20% since 2022, and as per NABARD’s official stats, lumpy skin disease killed ~97k cattle in 2022 alone, slashing yields Result? Procurement prices for dairies like Amul have (as per news reports) almost doubled from Rs 18/litre pre-Covid to Rs 36/litre in 2023, forcing retail milk prices up 15-18% - from Rs 50 to Rs 70/litre in just about 4yrs 🙏🙏 .. With that context, imagine boosting exports. Pushing more exports - say, to China or Southeast Asia - will shrink our already strained and slow-growing supply while demand continues to be gangbusters in domestic market. - More exports mean even less milk at home, driving prices higher. With demand projected at 274 million tonnes by 2032 (Fortune Business Insights), we need a 5mn tonne annual increase—double the current pace. We’re nowhere close! - Yes, exports could bring in millions of dollars annually, boosting dairy farmers and giants like AMUL. But, crores of households, already paying much higher sums for milk, paneer, curd, and ghee, will suffer Thus, as good as it sounds, India’s dairy isn’t ready to ‘feed the world’ when our own people are struggling. Unless production growth increases, this export dream is a nightmare for consumers. .. Check out my WhatsApp communities: 1> With 28k+ members - Biz News+ : https://lnkd.in/gUKkNXPS 2> With 3k+ members - PrimeStuff : https://lnkd.in/g6tc9VNq Also check out my newsletters with ~9k others here: https://linktr.ee/jmundhra Best, Jayant

📢 New analysis on the leaked EU Omnibus Proposal – What will be the planetary price of simplification? Can Europe combine sustainability and competitiveness? Big changes are certainly coming to the EU’s sustainability reporting landscape. A leaked draft of the European Commission’s Omnibus Proposal suggests major rollbacks in the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), and the EU Taxonomy Regulation. 💡 To help navigate these changes, our put together a comparison table—let us know if it’s useful! Here are some highlights of what’s being proposed: 🔹 𝗖𝗦𝗥𝗗 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱 – Only companies with 1,000+ employees and €450M turnover may need to comply (previously 250 employees, €40M). This scopes out 85% of firms previously covered. 🔹 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿-𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗱 – Industry-specific ESG reporting rules may be permanently shelved. 🔹 𝗗𝘂𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗱 – Companies only need to assess direct suppliers, not the full supply chain. 🔹 𝗖𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹 𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗱 – Under CSDDD, firms won’t face legal consequences for failing to meet sustainability obligations. 🔹 𝗧𝗮𝘅𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗴𝗼 𝘃𝗼𝗹𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 (not directly mentioned in the leak) – Instead of mandatory reporting, firms could opt-in, aligning with corporate lobbying efforts. ⚖️ I am wondering about if this is simplification or just plain deregulation. In addition, what will the effects be of a watered-down EU Green Deal for the bloc's sustainability leadership and for firms that have already invested in reporting? How do you see the balance between competitiveness and sustainability? Can we reduce red tape and still protect the planet? Drop your thoughts below! 👇 #CSRD #CSDDD #EU #Sustainability #ESG #SustainabilityReporting #ESGRegulation #Climate #Finance #CorporateResponsibility

The European wind industry stands as an example for many industries in the EU where we have to decide, what we want to fight for. I believe it is worth fighting for the European wind industry as it can create hundreds of thousands of jobs, strengthen our industrial base, and make us less dependent on energy imports.  Yesterday, we met with members of the new European Commission and representatives of the European Wind Value Chain. Here we discussed key actions Europe needs to take on wind to enhance competitiveness and economic resilience. Four points I want to highlight: ⏩ Drive fair Competition: We need criteria that reflect local value creation, R&D work in Europe, resilience, and cybersecurity in the evaluation of tender processes. A pure price-driven competition will not sustain a European wind industry.  ⏩ A balanced business model for Wind: Europe must increase wind power capacity to 425 GW by 2030, adding 200 GW in six years and requiring investment of up to €400 billion. Such an investment will only materialize if there is a profitable business model for both investors and supply chain companies. This, in turn, will require competitive financing costs and derisking elements such as counter guarantees.  ⏩ We need innovation and implementation: The close interlink between innovating and manufacturing is essential to be resilient. Innovation is the entry ticket into a market, but it needs a manufacturing base in Europe to be successful. ⏩ General boundary conditions for industry: A reduction of complexity and bureaucracy also helps the wind industry. A key focus needs to be on the productivity of doing business in Europe.   We will not get a second shot at this. Initiatives like the Clean Industrial Deal and the Competitiveness Compass that President von der Leyen announced last week need to be delivered so that wind can prosper in Europe. #Europe #WindIndustry #CleanIndustrialDeal

The European Commission has introduced a new carbon tax on imported goods called the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). This is meant to make sure that European companies and companies from other parts of the world are on the same page when it comes to carbon pricing and environmental commitments. Here are the main changes: 🔴 Emissions Reporting: Starting in October this year, companies have to start keeping track of how much carbon is linked to the goods they import. They need to start reporting this data by January 2024. This reporting will continue until the end of 2025. 🔴 Carbon Leakage Prevention: CBAM is a way to prevent companies from moving their production to places with weaker environmental rules to avoid carbon costs. It makes sure that European products and products made outside of Europe have similar carbon costs. 🔴 CBAM Certificates: Importers have to get CBAM certificates to match the carbon pricing between EU and non-EU products. They need to provide details about the product's carbon footprint, where it's from, how it's made, and its emissions data. This includes emissions during production and indirect emissions, like electricity use. 🔴 Covered Sectors: CBAM applies to industries with high carbon emissions like iron and steel, cement, fertilisers, aluminium, electricity, hydrogen, and some downstream products like screws and bolts. It also covers certain indirect emissions under certain conditions. Importers mainly need to report emissions during the transition phase until 2026. To help importers and producers outside of the EU adapt, the EU Commission is providing guidelines and tools to calculate emissions. They're also offering training materials and webinars. Some important data points to consider: 🟢 Carbon Leakage: A study by the European Environmental Bureau warns that unchecked carbon leakage could cause a 15% increase in global emissions, undermining climate efforts. CBAM aims to prevent this. 🟢 Emissions Differences: The World Trade Organization says that different countries have different emissions rules, leading to different carbon costs. CBAM aims to make this fairer. 🟢 Economic Impact: The European Commission estimates that the global carbon allowance market could be worth €4.5 billion per year by 2030. CBAM will significantly affect international trade and revenues. 🟢 Industry Shift: A study by the European Parliament Research Service shows that without CBAM, high-emission industries might move to places with weaker rules, leading to job losses and less competitiveness in the EU. 🟢 Green Transition: The International Monetary Fund says that well-designed carbon pricing like CBAM can encourage industries to become more environmentally friendly, contributing to a greener global economy. 🟢 Regulatory Challenges: CBAM's reporting requirements might be tough for importers initially. However, the long-term benefits of fair carbon pricing are expected to outweigh the challenges.

Given the plan to have the steel & aluminum tariffs jump to 50% this week, I wanted to share data on the downstream industries whose cost structures are most impacted by this action. I've done this by using the latest benchmark use table from the input-output accounts (https://lnkd.in/eQdPji9) and calculated each industries' combined use of (i) Iron and steel mills and ferroalloy manufacturing [331110]; (ii) steel product manufacturing from purchased steel [331200]; (iii) Alumina refining and primary aluminum production [331313]; and (iv) Aluminum product manufacturing from purchased aluminum [33131B]. I then summed the use across these four commodities and divided this sum by each industries' total intermediate inputs (which includes all goods, utilities, and services). Below are the top sectors. Thoughts: •For many industries in fabricated metals (starting with NAICS 332), we see steel and aluminum make up more than 40% of the cost structure. If we assume that domestic prices ultimately rise something like 35% from a non-tariff scenario, that would represent a 15% increase in costs. This is a conservative estimate because I'm using all intermediate inputs as the denominator; if I used only goods and utilities, this figure would be much higher. •As expected, we see substantial impacts on transportation equipment (the major impact on military armored vehicles is a bit ironic) and machinery. Transportation equipment and machinery are two sectors where the USA is very globally competitive; these tariffs make us less competitive by raising producers' costs. For example, the last thing John Deere needs is to be paying higher prices for steel and aluminum as it tries to compete with European rivals for business in Australia. •It's worth again stressing these affected downstream industries employ far more people than employed in making steel and aluminum. This is why tariffing upstream industries has been termed "Self-Harming Trade Policy" (see https://lnkd.in/gWgxQjtY). Implication: many industries will be starting this week with the reality that they are looking at their costs rising substantially due to POTUS's steel and aluminum tariff escalation. This is precisely the type of action that makes the FOMC less likely to reduce interest rates anytime soon. #supplychain #economics #shipsandshipping #manufacturing #freight

WIPO’s global report on IP filings is out and records are being broken. 2024 saw the highest ever patent filings – 3.7 million worldwide. Design filings also peaked at a record 1.6 mln, while trademark filings stabilized after two years of decline. But within this rich trove of data from nearly 150 IP offices, a few deeper insights stand out. First, emerging and developing countries continue to embrace IP-driven growth and transformation, whether driven by the need to diversify engines of growth, support increasing aspirations of local innovators and entrepreneurs, create more attractive investment environments, or simply seek new sources of growth. For the sixth consecutive year, India posts double-digit growth in patent filings, with Türkiye also up some 15%. Among the top 20 countries of origin, 12 saw increases in trademark filings, led by Argentina, Brazil and Indonesia, and with strong growth in upper middle-income economies like Colombia, South Africa, Thailand and Viet Nam. Design filings tell a similar story, with the fastest growth in India, Morocco and Indonesia. What this means is that many emerging economies are following the path of the world’s established innovation powerhouses in using IP as a strategic lever for economic growth, diversification, development and resilience. The next challenge is commercializing more of these filings, so they become real-world products and services. Second, we’re seeing more domestic, or “resident” filings. In areas like trademarks and designs, resident filings have traditionally made up the vast majority (+70%) as local businesses often register IP to protect brands and designs serving domestic markets. Now, we’re seeing the same dynamics in patents. Resident patent filings grew almost 7% last year, the fastest rise since 2016, to 72% of the total. This growth in domestic filings suggests that innovation ecosystems are maturing (even for high-tech discoveries, inventors typically file at home first before expanding abroad). It may also reflect shifts in global trade flows, with some industries becoming more localized. Third, many of the major trends in recent years continue to accelerate. Just as AI and digital innovation dominate the headlines, computer technology remains the top field for patent activity, with its growth outpacing all others. The gender balance in innovation is also improving. The proportion of women inventors in international patent applications has increased from 11.6% in 2010 to 18% last year. Beyond the individual data points, the value of this report lies in what it reveals about the global state of innovation and the direction it’s heading. This year’s WIPI shows that people everywhere continue to believe in the power of IP to protect ideas and incentivize innovation, and it gives WIPO the energy to continue strengthening IP ecosystems everywhere to give these innovators and creators the tools to protect and commercialize their ideas. 🔗 https://ow.ly/gub150XqnE7

How digital can help achieve the SDGs 💻 In the intersection of digital advancements and sustainability, technology emerges as a potent tool, driving us toward realizing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The introduction of digital IDs linked with financial resources, such as bank and mobile-money accounts, signifies a strategic move towards amplifying social protection. It ensures that support reaches those most in need, streamlining processes and reducing both errors and costs. Additionally, the application of digital technology in agriculture, such as drone monitoring and IoT-based precision irrigation, exemplifies a smart, resource-efficient approach, ensuring the judicious use and management of vital resources. Connectivity opens vital pathways for empowerment and education, especially among women and girls, providing a platform for information access, communication, and expression. This enhanced access to information and connectivity not only supports personal and community development but also finds applications in resource management. Harnessing data and artificial intelligence accelerates innovation and productivity across various sectors, blending technology and sustainability. Employing satellite imaging and machine learning to manage marine waste, specifically the approximately 5 trillion pieces of plastic debris in the ocean, demonstrates how technological interventions can substantiate environmental conservation efforts. Furthermore, information and communication technologies (ICT) promise a greener future by curbing carbon emissions, reinforcing the symbiotic relationship between digital advancements and sustainability. Collaborations across states, the private sector, and civil society are pivotal, leveraging collective capabilities and digital tools to foster development across the SDGs. Through strategic alliances and coalitions focused on digital infrastructure and environmental sustainability, synergized efforts from varied sectors amplify the collective impact towards a digital, sustainable future. The stark reality brought to light by the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the pivotal role of digital means in crisis management and ongoing development. The pandemic has accelerated reliance on digital platforms, and therein lies a potent reminder of a pervasive digital divide. Ensuring inclusive access to digital tools is imperative, emphasizing that the benefits of digital advancements, especially in progressing toward the SDGs, must be universally accessible. Source: SDG Digital Acceleration Agenda #sdgs #sustainability #impact #digital #technology