Crude Tumbles After Trump Signals No Iran Strike

The Trump administration has initiated a new strategy to secure the United States' access to critical mineral imports, following a months-long national security review of foreign supply chains.

At a White House ceremony on Wednesday, Staff Secretary Will Scharf explained the directive's purpose. "It sets up a mechanism, a process by which the United States will seek to secure its international supply chain of critical minerals," he stated.

However, both President Trump and Scharf left a key question unanswered: whether the new mechanism will include tariffs on materials like rare earth elements. The White House is expected to release further details on how the plan will be implemented.

A Direct Response to China's Dominance

This move comes after significant pressure on the administration to counter China, the world's largest processor of many critical minerals. Last year, during a trade dispute, Beijing demonstrated its leverage by constraining access to rare earths, which are essential for advanced technologies.

The decision stems from an investigation launched last April by the Commerce Department under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. This authority examines whether imports threaten national security and is viewed as a potential avenue for the administration to impose new tariffs, especially if other global levies are struck down by the Supreme Court.

Will New Tariffs Destabilize the Trade Truce?

The introduction of additional duties could disrupt the fragile trade truce established last fall between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. That agreement involved lowering import taxes and easing export controls.

The policy may also have significant implications for uranium. As the U.S. looks to rapidly expand its nuclear power capacity to meet the enormous energy demands of artificial intelligence, a secure uranium supply is becoming increasingly vital.

The Challenge of Onshoring a Supply Chain

A major hurdle for the administration, should it impose tariffs, is the near-total lack of domestic production for most of these critical raw materials.

Traditionally, trade lawyers argue that tariffs are meant to shield an existing domestic industry from being overwhelmed by foreign suppliers. This allows local companies to grow and compete.

But in this case, the logic is complicated. China processes over 80% of the world's rare earths, and Kazakhstan is a primary source of uranium. With minimal domestic production, U.S. companies would still be forced to rely on foreign sources, making it unclear how they would benefit from new import taxes.

Source: Bloomberg

The United States will impose a 25% tariff on certain semiconductors transshipped through the country, a key component of a new agreement approved by President Donald Trump. The deal clears the way for Nvidia Corp. to export its Taiwan-made H200 artificial intelligence processors to China.

Under an order signed by Trump, the government will collect the duty on the chips as they are brought into the U.S. before being shipped to their final destinations in China and other foreign markets.

Nvidia relies on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) to produce its advanced chips, including the H200 model that was officially cleared for sale to China in December.

"It's not the highest level, but it's a very good level," Trump told reporters during the signing ceremony. "And China wants them, and other people want them, and we're going to be making 25% of the sale of those chips, basically."

How the New 25% Chip Tariff Works

The new directive applies a surcharge on chips that are specifically routed through the United States en route to other countries. According to White House staff secretary Will Scharf, the duty applies to chips "transshipped through the United States to other foreign countries" and not to those intended for domestic use.

This tariff was a condition set by Trump in exchange for greenlighting Nvidia's sales to the lucrative Chinese market.

While the order is a major step, Nvidia still requires formal export licenses from the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) before shipments can begin. This licensing process can take weeks or even months. The move came just one day after the BIS eased its criteria for securing licenses to export H200 chips to China.

The full text of the presidential directive has not been released, leaving open the possibility that the tariff could apply to chips beyond Nvidia's H200. Although Trump did not mention Nvidia by name, he referenced its Blackwell and Rubin platforms, calling the product "a very good chip, and people want it, and we think it's in our best interest to do it."

A Major Win for Nvidia Amid Policy Reversal

This decision marks a significant victory for Nvidia, which has actively lobbied U.S. policymakers to relax export controls. These controls have previously blocked the company from selling its top-tier AI chips in China, the world's largest semiconductor market.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has cultivated a close relationship with Trump, arguing that stringent U.S. restrictions ultimately benefit Chinese domestic competitors like Huawei Technologies Co.

The move represents a sharp turn from years of U.S. policy aimed at limiting Beijing's access to advanced American technology. It has drawn criticism from Democrats and national-security hawks who argue the deal will empower a strategic adversary in the race for AI dominance.

Broader Context and Future Chip Deals

Trump's approach to China has evolved from initiating a trade war with high tariffs to striking truces with President Xi Jinping. This new arrangement underscores his willingness to conduct business in sensitive sectors, provided the U.S. government secures a financial benefit.

He has also suggested that similar deals could be in the works for other major chipmakers, including Intel Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc.

In a post on December 8, Trump stated, "This policy will support American Jobs, strengthen U.S. Manufacturing, and benefit American Taxpayers."

The policy shift coincides with broader trade discussions. Taiwanese products have generally been subject to a 20% tariff upon entering the U.S., though semiconductors were granted an exemption while the Commerce Department conducted a national security investigation into the sector. Meanwhile, top Taiwanese officials were in Washington to finalize a deal aimed at lowering the overall tariff rate to 15% and expanding TSMC's production facilities in the United States.

A high-stakes meeting between the United States, Denmark, and Greenland over the future of the Arctic island has ended with a "fundamental disagreement," prompting several European nations to dispatch military personnel to the region.

Foreign ministers from Denmark and Greenland met with US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington. While both sides agreed to form a working group to discuss the path forward, the US has not backed down from its demands for control over the territory.

High-Stakes Washington Meeting Fails to Bridge Divide

The talks, described in Danish media as one of the most significant diplomatic moments for the Kingdom of Denmark since World War II, were an attempt to de-escalate the situation. Denmark and Greenland sought to persuade the US administration that a takeover of the semi-autonomous Arctic island was unnecessary.

However, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen confirmed the core conflict remains unresolved. "Ideas that would not respect territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark and the right of self-determination of the Greenland people are of course totally unacceptable," he told reporters. "We therefore still have a fundamental disagreement. We will, however, continue to talk."

When asked for comment, the Vice President's office referred to President Donald Trump's social media posts reiterating his demand for US control over Greenland for national security purposes. The White House redirected all questions back to the Vice President's office.

European Allies Deploy Military Personnel to the Arctic

In a sign of growing urgency, European allies are now stepping in. Germany is sending an "exploration mission" of 13 military personnel to Greenland's capital, Nuuk, from January 15 to 17. According to Germany's Defense Ministry, the goal is to "explore the framework conditions for possible military contributions to support Denmark in ensuring security in the region, for example, for maritime surveillance capabilities."

Sweden, Norway, and the UK have also announced plans to send military personnel. This follows reports that Germany intended to propose a joint NATO mission to monitor and protect security interests in the Arctic, highlighting a swift European response to the US threats.

In parallel, Denmark announced it would strengthen its own military presence in the far North with permanent military drills involving NATO allies.

Denmark Rejects US Demands, Cites 1951 Defense Pact

The Danish government argues that a US takeover of Greenland would be futile. A comprehensive defense agreement signed in 1951 already grants the United States the right to use the territory for its defense needs. Danish officials attempted to use this long-standing pact to convince the US administration, but the argument failed to gain traction.

Looking ahead, Rasmussen expressed a cautious hope for a diplomatic solution. "We agreed that it makes sense to try to sit down on a high level to explore whether there's possibilities to accommodate the concerns of the president while we at the same time respect the red lines of the Kingdom of Denmark," he said. "Whether that's doable—yeah, I hope and I would like to express that it could take down the temperature."

President Donald Trump has indicated he may hold off on a military response to Iran's crackdown on protesters, stating he received assurances that the killing of demonstrators has ceased.

"We've been told that the killing in Iran is stopping—it's stopped," Trump told reporters from the Oval Office on Wednesday. "And there's no plan for executions or an execution."

However, the president cautioned that he would be "very upset" if this information turned out to be false and the violent repression were to resume.

US Escalates Pressure on Tehran

The statement follows a period of heightened rhetoric where Trump actively encouraged Iranians to continue protesting against the government led by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In a social media post, he declared that "help is on the way" for the demonstrators.

According to a White House official, the president has been briefed on several military options, including strikes on nonmilitary sites within Iran. While Trump was in Michigan for an economic speech, Vice President JD Vance led a National Security Council meeting on Tuesday to discuss the situation in Iran.

Economic and Diplomatic Squeeze

Alongside potential military action, the Trump administration is tightening its economic grip. On Monday, the president announced the US would impose a 25% tariff on any nation that continues to do business with Iran.

Further isolating Tehran, Trump said on Tuesday that he had "canceled all meetings with the Iranian officials until the senseless killing of protesters stops."

Regional Tensions and Military Posturing

The Middle East remains on high alert for a potential US intervention. These concerns have been amplified by recent US actions elsewhere, such as the special forces raid in Caracas that led to the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who now faces federal charges in the United States.

Iran has issued warnings to both the US and Israel, which conducted coordinated strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities last year, cautioning them against any interference amidst the mass unrest. Tehran and Washington have lacked formal diplomatic relations for decades.

Adding to the tension, officials reported to Bloomberg on Wednesday that the US has redeployed some military personnel in Qatar and other American bases across the region.

Major U.S. banks are refusing to comply with President Donald Trump's call to slash credit card interest rates, setting the stage for a high-stakes confrontation ahead of the president's appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Executives from JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup have made it clear they will not implement a 10% interest rate cap demanded by Trump. Instead, they warned this week that such a policy would force them to close customer accounts.

Banks Warn of Account Closures and Economic Harm

The industry's response has been firm. Citigroup CFO Mark Mason told reporters on Wednesday that the bank could not support a government-mandated interest rate cap.

Citigroup CFO Mark Mason stated that an interest rate cap is not something the bank could support.

"It would restrict access to credit to those who need it the most and frankly would have a deleterious impact on the economy," Mason said.

JPMorgan CFO Jeremy Barnum echoed this sentiment a day earlier, suggesting the industry was prepared for a legal fight. When asked about a potential response, Barnum stated that "everything's on the table."

Trump's Push for Lower Rates Lacks Formal Policy

President Trump initiated his campaign against the banks with a social media post, accusing them of overcharging credit card customers. He has since reinforced his position in media interviews and endorsed separate legislation aimed at reducing merchant swipe fees, framing the issue around affordability for voters ahead of this year's midterm elections.

Despite the president’s Jan. 20 deadline, bankers and lobbyists told CNBC that the Trump administration has not provided any formal or written guidance on the policy. This lack of official action has led some industry insiders to believe the administration may not be serious about pursuing the rate cap.

Currently, there is no U.S. law that caps credit card interest rates. A bill introduced last year that would impose a 10% cap for five years has stalled in Congress. "We are legally compliant right now," noted one source with knowledge of a major card issuer's operations.

What's Next: A Political Deal or a Legal Battle?

Analysts are watching the situation closely. Tobin Marcus and his team at Wolfe Research suggested in a note that the outcome could resemble Trump's previous dealings with the pharmaceutical industry, where he secured concessions without imposing crippling financial damage.

"We continue to view the drugmakers as the case study in how this kind of dealmaking-under-threat could go," Marcus wrote. "In that case, Trump had enough leverage to secure some new pricing commitments, but not enough to extract truly painful commitments."

This suggests the banks might be forced to offer concessions rather than face a direct legislative cap.

All Eyes on Davos and Senate Meetings

The financial sector is monitoring two key events for clarity on how the credit card battle will play out.

First are the Senate meetings this month, where Trump's proposed rate cap or interchange fee limits could be attached to other bills under consideration. However, this path is uncertain, as several Republicans, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, have already voiced opposition to price controls on credit cards.

The second critical date is next Wednesday, the day after Trump's deadline. The president is scheduled to address global corporate and political leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon are also slated to attend. This follows last year's conference, where Trump publicly accused Dimon and Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan of discriminating against conservatives in providing bank accounts.