Japan’s Workers Lukewarm on App-Based Salary Payments Despite Cashless Push

In response to heightened global trade uncertainty, notably triggered by U.S. tariff expansions, the South Korean government is deploying an aggressive fiscal support package. The Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOEF) confirmed it will accelerate disbursement of 70% of the supplementary budget—amounting to 9.66 trillion won—within the next three months.

This rapid fiscal rollout was announced during an economic strategy meeting between key cabinet ministers, where officials emphasized the importance of timing in enhancing policy effectiveness. By ensuring funds reach businesses and households quickly, the government hopes to buffer external shocks and stimulate domestic demand.

The budget includes targeted allocations for both export-driven firms and vulnerable microbusinesses. Approximately 400 billion won is earmarked for issuing discount vouchers to stimulate small retail businesses. Another 89.8 billion won will be used to distribute export support coupons to companies adversely affected by rising trade protectionism and shifting global supply chains.

Exporters will be eligible to utilize these support vouchers starting in June. The initiative is designed to offset rising logistics and compliance costs associated with global tariff disputes, including those originating from recent U.S. trade measures.

Meanwhile, beginning in July, small business owners—particularly in sectors with thin margins and high fixed costs—will receive direct financial assistance of up to 500,000 won each. This aid is intended to cover essential expenses such as utility bills and insurance premiums, reducing immediate cash flow pressure and preventing closures.

This policy maneuver comes amid growing fears that escalating protectionism—especially from the U.S.—could undermine South Korea’s export-led growth model. With the Korean won facing volatility and global demand becoming uneven, export-dependent SMEs have struggled with squeezed margins and delayed payments.

The supplementary budget is South Korea’s fiscal response to restore momentum in critical sectors, particularly as trade with traditional partners becomes less predictable. While short-term, the government’s plan seeks to create breathing space for domestic producers to adjust their strategies in the evolving global environment.

South Korea’s move to inject liquidity into export and microenterprise sectors underscores its commitment to proactive economic stabilization. By pre-empting the adverse effects of global tariff shifts and energy costs, the government is not only attempting to secure economic resilience but also maintain public trust in fiscal responsiveness.

Whether the support measures translate into lasting growth will depend on external trade developments and the ability of local firms to reconfigure their operations in a more protectionist global economy.

Opinions are mixed about who came out on top in the latest Indo-Pak conflict, but one thing is for certain, and it's that India's new doctrine is the lasting takeaway.

According to reports, India will regard all future acts of terrorism as acts of war by Pakistan, which will result in cross-border strikes.

That might not deter Pakistan, whose military leadership relies on the unresolved Kashmir Conflict to legitimize its outsized influence, but it could still make them think twice about orchestrating future attacks.

Moreover, the Indus Waters Treaty remains suspended despite the fragile ceasefire/”understanding” between them, which collectively contributes to the new reality in South Asia. Reports also suggest that it was Pakistan, not India, which asked the US to diplomatically intervene in the latest conflict. About that, India denied that any mediation took place despite the US’ claims, but the US probably passed along messages from Pakistan to India on Islamabad's behalf during talks between their officials.

CNN claimed that Vance called Modi after receiving “alarming intelligence”, which hints that Pakistan told the US that it might use of nuclear weapons in desperation, likely due to India bombing multiple bases across the country. If that's indeed what happened, then it would imply that Pakistan believed that was losing, thus lending credence to perceptions that India got the best of it. After all, the aforesaid strikes weren't intercepted, which shows that India achieved escalatory dominance over Pakistan.

Although some Pakistani drones and missiles hit targets inside of India, Russia's S-400s were praised by national media for neutralizing many of the incoming attacks. Likewise, the jointly produced BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles were used in India's successful attacks against Pakistani bases, thus proving that Russian military equipment is truly some of the best in the world. By contrast, Pakistan's mostly Chinese equipment fell short of some observers' lofty expectations, which reflects negatively on both.

Nevertheless, many in the Alt-Media Community – including some top “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” – insist that Pakistan defeated India, though there are reasons to suspect that they don't actually believe this but are driven by ulterior motives in claiming otherwise. Most of these same figures are known for their support of Palestine and/or China, and given that India is close to Israel and at odds with China, supporting Pakistan is “ideologically consistent” with their views and precludes accusations of hypocrisy.

No matter how reliable their takes on Ukraine, Palestine, and whatever else might be, their views on the latest Indo-Pak conflict should therefore be taken with lots of salt. This is important to keep in mind since Putin and Modi “emphasised the need to uncompromisingly fight terrorism in all its forms” during their call last week, which isn't reflected by these top “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” who present themselves as interpreters of Russian foreign policy.

Their support of Pakistan over India contradicts Russian interests.

All told, while opinions are mixed about who came out on top in the latest Indo-Pak conflict, India arguably won seeing as how it punished Pakistan for the Pahalgam terrorist attack by bombing multiple bases, the Indus Waters Treaty remains suspended, and a new military doctrine has entered into effect. Pakistan achieved no comparable outcomes despite its supporters' claims. Even though it lost, Pakistan might not have learned its lesson, so a re-eruption of hostilities at some future time can't be ruled out.

India’s textile industry is at the heart of a global supply chain realignment catalyzed by Washington’s aggressive tariff measures. As President Trump prepares to impose a 26% tariff on Indian textile and apparel products starting July—significantly lower than the 37% for Bangladesh and 145% for China—India is emerging as an increasingly attractive supplier for U.S. importers.

According to 2024 U.S. textile import data, adjusted post-tariff export prices place India’s apparel at $4.31/m²—comparable to Bangladesh at $4.24/m² and more competitive than China at $4.35/m². This narrow price gap signals India’s strengthened appeal in the tariff era.

Retail giants such as Walmart and Costco are actively diversifying their supplier base, with India gaining prominence. A survey by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) in 2024 found nearly 60% of U.S. brands plan to expand sourcing from India. This trend aligns with broader geopolitical risk aversion and the gradual move away from China-dependent supply chains.

Shipping data further reinforces India’s rise. Between April 2 and May 4, Walmart imported over 1,100 containers of garments and household goods from India—nearly twice the volume from the same period last year. Given that the U.S. accounts for 28% of India’s $36 billion in annual textile exports, these dynamics could reshape the sector’s trajectory.

Despite favorable trade winds, India’s textile sector is constrained by deep-rooted inefficiencies. Labor shortage is the most critical bottleneck. In Tiruppur—India’s knitwear hub with over one million workers—the industry still needs at least 100,000 additional employees to meet demand, according to the Tiruppur Exporters’ Association.

Many firms report idle production lines due to the lack of skilled labor. Workers often leave larger factories for smaller, informal setups offering more overtime and higher pay. This movement undermines training efforts and affects product consistency, making it difficult to meet international labor standards and cost expectations simultaneously.

Moreover, over 90% of India’s labor force is employed in the informal sector. This reality complicates Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “Make in India” campaign, especially in labor-intensive industries like textiles that demand scale, regulation, and consistency.

India’s textile enterprises also struggle with production scale. Whereas the average factory in Bangladesh employs over 1,200 workers, Indian facilities often range between 600–800. In Tiruppur, just 100 exporters contribute half of the region’s $5 billion in annual exports, with the rest coming from thousands of fragmented smaller players—highlighting the sector’s lack of consolidation.

Operational costs also weigh heavily. Labor costs in India average $180 per month—far higher than Bangladesh’s $139. Regulatory compliance related to overtime and shift limits further drives up expenses, reducing India’s price competitiveness.

American buyers are increasingly price-sensitive. Suppliers report pressure from U.S. clients demanding pricing parity with Bangladesh, regardless of India’s higher costs. Without a significant reduction in unit costs or productivity improvements, India’s long-term ability to capture market share remains uncertain.

As Mahesh Kumar Jegadeesan of Balu Exports noted, U.S. retailers will only shift orders to India if it matches Bangladesh’s pricing. Raft Garments’ CEO echoed this concern, stating that pricing remains the biggest hurdle, even with a surge of inquiries from new clients.

While political unrest and rising tariffs are affecting Bangladesh’s reputation, it continues to hold ground due to its mature infrastructure, consistent quality, and economies of scale. According to Anwar-ul-Alam Chowdhury of Dhaka-based Evince Group, American buyers remain loyal due to lower costs and delivery reliability.

For India, this underscores that tariff advantage alone does not equate to market dominance. Unless India addresses productivity bottlenecks and narrows the cost gap, it may struggle to convert its current opportunity into sustainable growth.

India stands at a crossroads: a rare tariff-induced opportunity could help it displace traditional textile giants, but only if longstanding issues around labor, scale, and cost are systematically resolved. As global supply chains rebalance and protectionism reshapes trade, India’s challenge will be to align internal capacity with external demand.

1. Candidate registration for South Korea's presidential election closes with seven candidates in the race

2. Putin proposes restarting talks with Ukraine

3. The U.S. government may exhaust its cash reserves and debt management tools by August, with the Treasury Secretary warning of a potential "X-date" in August

4. Medicaid cuts bill aims to seek Republican middle ground

5. Cook: Tariffs may reduce productivity and fuel inflation

6. Japan's Prime Minister reiterates call for zero tariffs on U.S. exports

7. Trump's announcement of India-Pakistan ceasefire sparks resentment in India, leaving risk of future conflict alive

8. China and the U.S. have reached an important consensus

The South Korean National Election Commission announced on the 11th local time that the registration process for candidates in the 21st presidential election had concluded. A total of seven presidential candidates completed the registration, including Lee Jae-myung from the Democratic Party, Kim Moon-soo from the People Power Party, Lee Jun-seok from the Reform Party, Kwon Young-guk from the Democratic Labor Party, and Gu Ju-wha from the Free Unification Party, along with independent candidates Song Jin-ho and Hwang Kyo-ahn. The National Election Commission stated that the official campaign period for the candidates would commence at midnight on the 12th local time, lasting for 22 days.

President Putin of Russia has stated that Russia has, on multiple occasions, proposed ceasefire initiatives to Ukraine, which Kyiv has subsequently violated. Russia had previously indicated a potential extension of the recent ceasefire, a proposition to which Kyiv did not respond. During the three-day ceasefire, Ukraine attempted incursions into Russian border territories. These attacks were repelled. Kyiv has sought to intimidate international leaders scheduled to attend the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow. Russia has consistently maintained an openness to dialogue with Ukraine. President Putin has proposed that Kyiv recommence negotiations, suggesting direct talks in Istanbul on May 15. The objective is to engage in substantive negotiations, addressing the fundamental causes of the conflict. These negotiations do not preclude the possibility of achieving a genuine cessation of hostilities. The onus is now on Ukraine to make a decisive determination.

Multiple foreign media outlets reported on the 10th that U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent wrote to the U.S. Congress on the 9th, stating that the federal government's cash reserves and its means of controlling debt within the statutory limit could be depleted in August. He urged the U.S. Congress to take action to raise or suspend the debt ceiling before the mid-July congressional recess. Fortune magazine reported on the 10th that the U.S. had reached the current statutory debt ceiling of US$36.1 trillion at the beginning of January this year, and the Treasury Department has been taking so-called extraordinary measures to avoid a possible default on federal debt. According to The Wall Street Journal, Republicans are advancing legislation that could raise the debt ceiling by US$5 trillion, but the report suggests that a vote on the debt ceiling could be politically challenging.

House Republicans are poised to unveil their strategy for curtailing Medicaid expenditures, with advocates within the Republican party appearing to gain ground in the internal debate over the extent of reforms to the program. Medicaid provides healthcare coverage to over 70 million individuals with low incomes and disabilities.

A section-by-section summary of the bill, reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, encompasses certain adjustments to Medicaid that Republicans had previously contemplated, including work requirements and more frequent eligibility verifications. However, the bill does not diminish the minimum federal contribution to state Medicaid programs, nor does it establish a per capita federal spending cap for the program, and it refrains from adopting other measures sought by fiscal hawks.

In an interview, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie characterized these adjustments as a means to decelerate the escalating growth of Medicaid, rather than outright expenditure reductions, while cautioning that the program's annual costs could surpass US$1 trillion within the next decade if lawmakers fail to control spending. The Kentucky Republican acknowledged that the Republican plan to reduce Medicaid spending might be more palatable to moderates and centrists compared to conservatives who advocate for more substantial cuts to the program. "I think the people who are the hardest to get on board will feel like it doesn't go far enough, and we'll do everything we can to get to 218 votes," Guthrie stated in a conference room filled with the committee's policy staff.

Federal Reserve Governor Cook stated last Friday that the trade policies enacted by U.S. President Trump could potentially impede U.S. productivity, necessitating an increase in interest rates to curb inflation within a less efficient economic framework. I anticipate that alterations in trade policies, coupled with the ensuing uncertainties, will exert a drag on productivity in the near term.

The ambiguity surrounding Trump's plans may deter investment, while the escalating costs of imported intermediate goods and equipment could also postpone projects that would otherwise enhance productivity. Uncertainty in trade policy may diminish future business investments, as enterprises currently lack clarity regarding the ultimate tariff levels, their scope, and duration.

Elevated costs for imported materials and components could also prompt businesses to defer or curtail investment initiatives. Reduced capital investment may lead to a deceleration in technological innovation and adoption, resulting in an overall decline in efficiency. Simultaneously, heightened trade barriers could bolster less efficient enterprises, thereby diminishing economic competitiveness.

Supply chain disruptions may further exacerbate inefficiencies. Cook indicated that while artificial intelligence holds the potential to augment productivity, its ultimate long-term effects remain uncertain. Tariffs themselves could lead to a reduction in potential output. Just as recent productivity gains have contributed to economic expansion and a decrease in U.S. inflation, a decline in potential GDP signifies a reduction in economic slack, consequently intensifying inflationary pressures and potentially leading to higher interest rates.

On the 11th, local time, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba reiterated his intention to demand the complete elimination of all imposed tariffs during negotiations with the U.S., with a particular focus on automotive tariffs. Ishiba emphasized that Japanese automakers currently contribute significantly to the U.S. economy through investments and job creation. He further stated that any weakening of Japan's automotive industry due to U.S. tariff measures would render Japanese companies "unable to invest in the U.S." Ishiba also acknowledged the recent trade agreement between the U.S. and the UK as a potential model, while firmly maintaining Japan's demand for zero tariffs on exports to the U.S.

Over the weekend, President Trump purportedly proclaimed that India and Pakistan had reached a "comprehensive and immediate ceasefire agreement." This announcement, however, engendered considerable consternation among senior officials in New Delhi. Sources indicate that Trump's pronouncement caught key Indian officials off guard. Their ire was not merely directed at the U.S.'s mediation efforts, but rather at Trump's perceived usurpation of Prime Minister Modi's authority. Furthermore, it undermined India's longstanding policy of resolving the Kashmir territorial dispute through bilateral negotiations. Most critically, Trump's actions appeared to place the two adversaries on equal footing, a proposition that New Delhi officials have consistently resisted, given India's superior economic standing relative to Pakistan.

While financial markets may applaud any ceasefire accord, its durability remains uncertain. Mere hours after Trump's declaration, both sides reported drone attacks along the Line of Control in Kashmir, although the ceasefire appeared to hold through Sunday. India has also declined to reinstate a decades-old water treaty, vital to Pakistan's economy. Moreover, the very nature of the ceasefire may inadvertently lay the groundwork for future, more intense hostilities.

The high-level economic and trade talks between China and the U.S. convened in Geneva, Switzerland, from May 10 to 11. He Lifeng, the lead representative for the Chinese side in these discussions and Vice Premier of the State Council, stated during a press conference held by the Chinese delegation on the evening of May 11 that the talks were candid, in-depth, and constructive, resulting in significant consensus and tangible progress. Both parties concurred on establishing a mechanism for economic and trade consultations. The specifics will be finalized promptly by both China and the U.S., with a joint statement on the outcomes of the talks scheduled for release on May 12.

He Lifeng noted that the current circumstances have garnered considerable international attention for these talks. Through the collaborative efforts of both nations, the discussions proved fruitful, marking a crucial step towards resolving disagreements through equitable dialogue and consultation, thereby laying the groundwork for further reconciliation and enhanced cooperation. He emphasized the substantial importance of the China-U.S. economic and trade relationship for both countries, as well as its critical impact on global economic stability and development. China is prepared to collaborate with the U.S. to actively implement the significant consensus reached during the phone call between the two heads of state on January 17 of this year. This will be done by adopting a pragmatic approach to problem-solving, engaging in candid dialogue, conducting equal consultations, managing differences, exploring avenues for cooperation, expanding the scope of collaboration, and amplifying the benefits of cooperation. The aim is to foster new advancements in China-U.S. economic and trade relations, thereby injecting greater certainty and stability into the global economy.

UTC+8 16:00 BOE Deputy Governor Lombardelli Speaks

UTC+8 18:30 BOE Monetary Policy Committee Member Greene Speaks

UTC+8 20:50 BOE Monetary Policy Committee Member Mann Speaks

UTC+8 22:25 Federal Reserve Governor Kugler Speaks

In early Asian trading, the dollar rose 0.6% to 146.19 yen and edged 0.1% higher on the broader dollar index, which now sits near a one-month high. The greenback’s resurgence follows a turbulent month in which sweeping tariffs imposed by the U.S. under President Trump rattled confidence in American financial assets and triggered a global market selloff. Since those April 2 announcements, the dollar index remains down 3.5%, though signs of stabilization are emerging.

The reversal in sentiment was sparked by weekend trade talks between Washington and Beijing in Geneva. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer signaled a deal to reduce the trade deficit with China, setting the stage for further details expected Monday. Though specifics remain vague, the shift in tone provided a psychological lift for markets seeking clarity.

Beyond trade headlines, market focus will soon shift to upcoming U.S. economic data, particularly Tuesday’s release of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and Thursday’s retail sales and jobless claims. These indicators will shape expectations for future Federal Reserve policy moves, especially after inflationary concerns and rate hike speculation have buffeted markets throughout 2025.

Michael McCarthy, CEO of trading platform Moomoo Australia, noted that while inflation remains critical, the evolving narrative around global trade will likely dominate investor behavior this week. He added that recent fears about the dollar’s status as a reserve currency may have been overblown and predicted a return to more stable trading conditions once trade relationships are clarified.

The New Zealand dollar—often viewed as a proxy for global risk appetite—rose 0.3% to $0.5924, while the Australian dollar gained 0.2% to $0.6425. Both currencies benefited from improved risk sentiment tied to the positive trade tone and relative calm on the geopolitical front.

In addition to trade news, recent global flashpoints appear to be cooling. India and Pakistan declared a ceasefire over the weekend following several days of border clashes, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced plans for direct talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Turkey—potentially the first since early 2022.

This broader geopolitical de-escalation has complemented the improved trade outlook, reducing demand for safe-haven assets like the yen and bolstering higher-yielding or risk-sensitive currencies.

The euro fell 0.2% to $1.1224, while the British pound slid 0.3% to $1.3277, retreating alongside the broad resurgence of the dollar. As expectations mount for a more assertive Fed stance—pending key inflation and spending data—European currencies may face renewed downward pressure, particularly if U.S. yields begin to firm up again.

While optimism around U.S.–China trade negotiations has helped stabilize currency markets and revive dollar strength, investors remain cautious. With CPI and retail sales data approaching, the extent to which macroeconomic fundamentals align with improving sentiment will be pivotal in determining whether the dollar rally has staying power.

Brent crude rose by 27 cents (0.4%) to $64.18 per barrel, while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude gained 28 cents (0.5%) to reach $61.30 in early Monday trading. The rally followed a week in which both benchmarks surged more than 4%, their first weekly gain since mid-April, driven by a growing belief that trade frictions between the world’s two largest oil consumers may be easing.

Investor confidence was lifted after US and Chinese officials signaled progress during weekend negotiations in Geneva. American representatives touted a deal aimed at reducing the US trade deficit, while Chinese authorities acknowledged an “important consensus” had been reached. While specifics were withheld, a joint statement is expected to be released, suggesting continued diplomatic engagement.

The trade detente has fueled expectations that global trade flows—disrupted by tariffs exceeding 100% on some goods—may gradually recover, thereby strengthening demand for crude. Analysts like Toshitaka Tazawa of Fujitomi Securities noted that optimism around the negotiations helped bolster oil sentiment in early trading sessions.

Despite positive signals from the trade front, oil’s upward momentum is being restrained by supply-side factors. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies (OPEC+) are moving ahead with a plan to raise output in May and June, aiming to stabilize prices while meeting expected demand. Increased supply tends to limit price growth, especially in an environment of fragile recovery.

However, according to a Reuters production survey, OPEC’s output in April actually edged slightly lower, indicating that actual supply increases may lag official targets. This temporary shortfall could offer some near-term support for prices, though the medium-term effect of rising supply remains a bearish factor.

Oil markets are also navigating geopolitical developments with conflicting implications for price trends. Talks between US and Iranian officials over Tehran’s nuclear program concluded in Oman with further discussions planned. Although the talks kept diplomatic channels open, Iran’s continued insistence on uranium enrichment reduces the likelihood of a swift deal.

Should a nuclear agreement be reached, it could pave the way for Iranian oil exports to return to global markets, potentially alleviating supply concerns and exerting downward pressure on prices. For now, uncertainty around the negotiations adds to market volatility.

At the same time, US energy production continues to slow. Baker Hughes reported that the number of operating oil and gas rigs has dropped to its lowest since January. A sustained decline in US drilling activity could counteract some of the upward pressure from OPEC+ and help maintain price stability.

The modest rise in oil prices reflects a delicate balance between improving demand prospects driven by US–China diplomacy and structural concerns over rising supply and geopolitical instability. While investor optimism has returned, the sustainability of the rally depends on follow-through in trade agreements, clarity from OPEC+ on production plans, and the trajectory of US–Iran relations.