Rian Howlett , Karen Friar and Ines Ferréof Yahoo Finance report the Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq slip, chip stocks rise as Wall Street ends volatile week lower:

US stocks were little changed on Friday despite growing uncertainty over the next Fed chair, while strong bank earnings and ongoing geopolitical tensions capped a volatile week.

The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) fell below the flat line, while the S&P 500 (^GSPC) was little changed. The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) declined slightly, with all three major averages losing less than 1% for the week.

The Russell 2000 (^RUT) closed at a record high as the small-cap index extended year-to-date gains to 8%.

Stocks gave up earlier gains on Friday after President Trump expressed fresh reluctance to name Kevin Hassett as the next Fed chair, fueling speculation that the central bank may not be as dovish as the market expected once Jerome Powell steps down in May.

"I actually want to keep you where you are, if you want to know the truth," he told Hassett at a White House event.

Wall Street is regrouping after a switchback week, marked by escalating Iran tensions, a dispute over Greenland, and a criminal probe risking the Federal Reserve’s independence — all with Trump behind them. Investors have a long weekend to digest those events, as stock and bond markets are closed on Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

TSMC (TSM) and Nvidia (NVDA) rose, thanks in part to a US-Taiwan trade deal that promises a $250 billion boost to American chip and tech manufacturing. On Thursday, shares in TSMC popped following a strong quarterly report that revived AI enthusiasm to buoy related stocks more widely.

Shares of regional banks such as PNC (PNC) and Regions Financial (RF) rose on the heels of quarterly results following strong performance from Wall Street majors. Goldman Sachs (GS) and Morgan Stanley (MS) shares rose Thursday after posting profit gains, giving a lift to financial stocks.

Meanwhile, silver (SI=F) fell as the threat of US tariffs eased, but prices were still up more than 15% for the week after a long-lived blistering rally for precious metals. 

The New York Stock Exchange, Nasdaq, and bond markets will be closed on Monday, Jan. 19, in observance of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Sean Conlon and Pia Singh of CNBC also report S&P 500 closes little changed Friday, posts weekly loss amid raft of Trump comments:

The S&P 500 ended Friday just below the flatline and posted a losing week as traders weighed the latest comments made by President Donald Trump related to the Federal Reserve and geopolitics.

The broad market index slipped 0.06% and closed at 6,940.01. The Nasdaq Composite inched down 0.06% to settle at 23,515.39. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 83.11 points, or 0.17%, to end at 49,359.33.

The three major averages hit their session lows after Trump delivered remarks in the White House Friday, in which the president said he’d rather have National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett stay in his current role and that he might not be chosen to become the next Fed chair.

“I actually want to keep you where you are, if you want to know the truth,” Trump said.

Hassett had been seen as a frontrunner to replace Fed Chair Jerome Powell, whose term expires in May, but prediction markets showed former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh moved ahead in the race following the president’s remarks. Traders see Hassett as the more market-friendly option to replace Powell, with Wall Street expecting him to be more willing than Warsh to keep rates low.

“Whether it’s Hassett or someone else, I think the assumption that we — at least most of us — have is that whoever it’s going to be, this person is going to certainly have a political motive and not the more traditional, trying-to-be-fully-objective mindset in regards to leading the Fed,” said David Krakauer, vice president of portfolio management at Mercer Advisors. “That threat to the independence of the Fed is certainly, you know, a concern for us and everyone.”

The major averages are coming off a winning session thanks to gains in chip stocks. Taiwan Semiconductor led the advance after a blowout fourth-quarter report. Further, the U.S. and Taiwan reached a trade agreement in which Taiwanese chip and tech companies will invest at least $250 billion in production capacity in America.

Taiwan Semi and other chip stocks like Broadcom and Advanced Micro Devices were higher Friday.

Bank stocks were weak in the weekly period despite strong earnings as concerns around Trump’s call for a cap on on credit card interest rates persisted. JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America were among the laggards, falling 5% each on the week.

It was a hectic week for investors. They’ve been grappling with a slate of headlines out of Washington, running the gamut from worries over threats to the Fed’s independence to heightened geopolitical risk in Iran and Greenland. Geopolitical risk was exacerbated Friday after Trump said he might impose tariffs on countries “if they don’t go along with Greenland.”

For the week, the S&P 500 posted a 0.4% fall, while the 30-stock Dow dropped 0.3%. The Nasdaq was down 0.7% on the week.

Alright, going to be brief tonight.

Earnings started this week with the big US banks kicking things off and it was mixed as JPMorgan (JPM), Bank of America (BAC) and Wells Fargo (WFC) got hit while Goldman Sachs (GS) and Morgan Stanley (MS) did relatively well following their earnings.

Not surprisingly, for the week, the S&P Financials sector was the worst performer, down 2.3%:

Still, when I look at the State Street SPDR S&P Bank ETF (KBE), the 5-year weekly chart remains bullish for now:

What else caught my attention this week? The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) made a new record high on great news from Taiwan Semiconductors:

It's fair to say Super Semis (Nvidia, Broadcom, Taiwan Semi, Micron, AMD, etc) have displaced the Mag-7 as the AI theme dominates early in 2026 but they are way overbought here and will definitely pull back before resuming a new uptrend.

What else? The obesity drug makers took off this week led by Novo Nordisk which had a terrible 2025 but seems to be coming back here:

Still early to call a major shift in trend but I like what I'm seeing and need to see a pullback followed by another surge higher.

Eli Lilly had a flat week but has a had a great year so far:

Structure Therapeutics was one of the best-performing large cap stocks this week as investors are excited about phase 2 data from their oral pill and are maybe betting on a takeover:

And Viking Therapeutics also caught a bid this week as investors await phase 3 data on its oral pill touted to be one of the best in the industry:

 Lots of volatility in these names, all I know is Fidelity has cornered this market and is in all of them.

Alright, that's pretty much it from me, Monday is Martin Luther King Day, enjoy the long weekend.

Here are this week's top-performing large cap stocks (full list here): 

Below, Warren Pies, 3Fourteen Research, joins 'Closing Bell' to discuss how Pies would characterize the macroeconomic backdrop, where the market may stumble and much more.

Also, the CNBC Investment Committee debate the road ahead for the rally and how to position your portfolio.

Third, New York Times columnist David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW join Geoff Bennett to discuss the week in politics, including President Trump threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act against protests in Minnesota, Trump's meeting with Venezuelan opposition leader Marina Corina Machado and his continued threats to take over Greenland.

Lastly, Senator Bernie Sanders addresses the nation warning about Trump's authoritarianism. Have a listen, scary that he's not far off in his remarks.

Clinton-Appointed Federal Judge Denies DOJ Bid To Access California Voter Registration Rolls

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge on Jan. 15 dismissed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) bid to access California’s voter registration databases, ruling that the demand for voter data from California Secretary of State Shirley Weber was “unprecedented and illegal.”

In a 33-page decision, Clinton-appointed U.S. District Judge David O. Carter sided with California, saying the DOJ cannot use civil rights legislation “as a tool to forsake the privacy rights of millions of Americans,” noting that such authority rests solely with Congress.

The DOJ filed lawsuits in September against six states, including California, alleging they violated federal law by refusing to provide voting records the department said were necessary to prevent inclusion of ineligible voters. The lawsuits were filed separately in each state.

“The Department of Justice seeks to use civil rights legislation which was enacted for an entirely different purpose to amass and retain an unprecedented amount of confidential voter data,” Carter said.

“This effort goes far beyond what Congress intended when it passed the underlying legislation.”

The judge also said the federal government’s request could deter voters from registering due to concerns about how their personal information might be used, threatening the right to vote.

“The centralization of this information by the federal government would have a chilling effect on voter registration which would inevitably lead to decreasing voter turnout as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose,” Carter said.

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber speaks in Los Angeles on April 15, 2024. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Weber welcomed the ruling and said she would continue to challenge what she described as the administration’s “disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote.”

“As California Secretary of State, I am entrusted with ensuring that California’s state election laws are enforced—including state laws that protect the privacy of Californians’ data,” Weber said in a Jan. 15 statement.

The Epoch Times reached out to the DOJ for comment, but did not receive a response by publication time.

In its complaint against California on Sept. 25, 2025, the DOJ said the state refused to cooperate with the federal government’s request for voter registration databases—including each voter’s full name, date of birth, address, state driver’s license number, and the last four digits of their Social Security number—citing concerns over privacy protections.

The DOJ had argued that its Civil Rights Division has been tasked by Congress with ensuring that states conduct voter registration list maintenance to prevent ineligible voters from being listed.

“Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement at the time.

“Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure—states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court.”

Citing the lawsuits, the DOJ said at the time that Bondi is uniquely charged by Congress “with the enforcement of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which were designed by Congress to ensure that states have proper and effective voter registration and voter list maintenance programs.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 17:00

Trump 'Convinced' Himself Not To Attack Iran, After Tehran Allegedly Canceled 800 Executions

Update(1658ET): President Trump issued another somewhat bizarre Iran statement on Truth Social on Friday. He repeated the White House line that 800 executions that were scheduled and supposed to take place yesterday were halted in Iran. He even 'thanked' the Iranians for not carry out the supposed mass execution plan:

"I greatly respect the fact that all scheduled hangings, which were to take place yesterday (Over 800 of them), have been cancelled by the leadership of Iran. Thank you!" he wrote earlier in the day.

He also told reporters "I convinced my myself" not to attack Iran, after painting himself in a corner by essentially setting red lines previously. Trump had said days ago if Iranian authorities kill protesters they would get hit hard by the US.

As for the "800 executions" - it's very unclear where this number came from. Certainly Iranian state media or officials haven't said any such thing, and there's a likelihood it's just propaganda. 

* * *

US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz told the UN Security Council on Thursday that the "brave people of Iran" have risen up and that President Donald Trump "has made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter" - this despite widespread reports that the protests and rioting are over at this point.

"President Trump is a man of action, not endless talk like we see at the United Nations. He has made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter," Waltz told the Security Council meeting, held at the request of Washington.

The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, via US Navy

"Everyone in the world needs to know that the regime is weaker than ever before, and therefore is putting forward this lie because of the power of the Iranian people in the streets. They are afraid. They're afraid of their own people," Waltz claimed, but he did not address the huge pro-government rallies which engulfed Iranian streets from earlier this week, which largely supplanted the protests and riots.

But a near total internet outage has endured going all the way back to January 8. This suggests the crisis may not be completely finished, but Tehran is touting that security services and police are back in control of the streets.

The US is still rushing military assets to the area. "The Pentagon is moving a carrier strike group from the South China Sea to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, which includes the Middle East, as tensions escalate between the Trump administration and Iran," according to NewsNation.

"Moving the carrier strike group - a naval formation centering around an aircraft carrier, with a variety of other vessels, including at least one attack submarine - is expected to take about a week, a source said," the report continues. "The USS Abraham Lincoln reportedly is the aircraft carrier that is on the move."

Meanwhile, Russian ​President Vladimir Putin is putting himself forward as potential mediator, ⁠which was conveyed in a fresh phone conversation with Iran's President Masoud ​Pezeshkian. Pezeshkian thanked his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin for Moscow's support at the United Nations in the wake of the crisis.

A readout indicated Pezeshkian thanked Putin for "Russia's position" and explained that "the role and direct involvement of the United States and the Zionist regime in recent events in Iran is evident" - in reference to Israel.

Previously at the UN emergency session, Russia's UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia charged the United States with convening the Security Council in a bid to "justify blatant aggression and interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state" and threats to "solve the Iranian problem in its favorite way: through strikes aimed at overthrowing an undesirable regime."

As tensions rise between U.S. and Iran, the Pentagon is moving a carrier strike group toward Middle East. The USS Abraham Lincoln, west of the Philippines, turned west yesterday, detected on @CopernicusEU satellite imagery by @oballinger’s computer program. 11.9892, 117.9423. pic.twitter.com/Zz8rokebZq

— Christiaan Triebert (@trbrtc) January 15, 2026

The swipe and reminder of Washington's addiction to regime change also comes on the heels of the Trump-ordered January 3rd overthrow of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Amb. Nebenzia said further: "We strongly urge the hot heads in Washington and other capitals… to come to their senses."

At the same time, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has urged "maximum restraint at this sensitive moment and calls on all actors to refrain from any actions that could lead to further loss of life or ignite a wider regional escalation."

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 16:58

Qatar Hired UK PR Firm To Edit Wikipedia Page: Report

Amid ongoing US probes into Wikipedia over alleged bias and foreign manipulation, sometimes framed as "Wikilaundering," a new report has found that a PR company linked to Keir Starmer's communications chief has been accused of secretly manipulating Wikipedia pages to improve or neutralize clients' public images. The allegations add another thorn in the side for Wikipedia as migration to Elon Musk's Grokpedia continues.

The Guardian cites an investigation by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) alleging that PR firm Portland Communications, founded by Tim Allan, commissioned secret page edits of Wikipedia pages for clients to restore or improve their image.

A former Portland employee told TBIJ that Wikipedia edits were contracted out: "No one said, 'We should stop doing this.' The question was how we could keep doing it without getting caught."

TBIJ's investigation focused on a network of 26 accounts that made edits, including those linked to Web3 Consulting, a firm operated by Radek Kotlarek.

Some of the high-profile clients allegedly included the Qatar government. The edits reportedly involved shifting unfavorable details into philanthropy sections or replacing critical sources with more positive ones, particularly ahead of the 2022 World Cup.

The Guardian noted that while Portland was founded by Allan, a former adviser to Tony Blair, in 2001, there is no indication that Allan personally made any of the edits. He sold most of his shares in 2012 and left the firm in 2019.

A spokesperson for Portland said, "Portland does not have a relationship with the firm mentioned and has a policy of strict adherence to the guidelines on all social media platforms." A Portland employee added, "If anyone who worked here in the past did this, they were foolish. For sure nobody does it today."

Portland denies any relationship with the contractor and says it adheres to platform rules. Former employees told TBIJ that Wikipedia edits were a frequent client request.

The Guardian reported that the network of accounts was eventually blocked by volunteer Wikipedia editors.

This report comes as no surprise, given the systemically biased nature against conservative, religious, and other points of view, according to the site's co-founder, Larry Sanger.

Elon Musk determined late last year that Wikipedia wasn't salvageable and created Grokipedia to counter the misinformation and disinformation on Wikipedia...

WATCH: Elon Musk and David Sacks brainstorm Grokipedia live

Elon:

“If you take, say Wikipedia as an example, but this really applies to books, PDFs, websites, every form of information.”

“Grok is using heavy amounts of inference compute to look at, as an example, a Wikipedia… https://t.co/wpGjpnjtr5 pic.twitter.com/cBXKdQORQe

— The All-In Podcast (@theallinpod) October 2, 2025

The shift to Grokipedia is underway.

Related:

• Musk Unveils Grokipedia Plans To Counter Wikipedia's Manipulation Of "Truth" Controlled By Leftists

• He Co-Founded Wikipedia, Now He Says The Site Needs A Radical Change

• House Republicans Probe Wikipedia Over Alleged Bias, Foreign Manipulation

Wikipedia was a great idea that lost its way. Now it's Grok's turn.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 16:40

Their "Democracy" Is Nothing More Than A Gigantic Engine Of Grift

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Act Now!

"The more contradiction you carry, the more reality resists you. Because you’re fracturing the signal with every step."

- SightBringer on "X"

Don’t be too surprised if sometime later this day, Friday, the president invokes the Insurrection Act to tranquilize the city of Minneapolis, since aerial spraying of Olanzapine is probably out of the question. Where, oh where, are the mythologized “nice,” and “above-average” people of Minnesota, once praised in song and sketch on those long-ago Saturday nights of The Prairie Home Companion?

They have been replaced by a mutant army of psychotic Transtifa wendigos on the payroll of Arabella Advisors (now operating as Sunflower Services), or the Tides Foundation, or some other Soros-connected money-laundry.

And many have come from other states, possibly even other nations (or planets), to join the Cluster-B viragos native to the city in the crusade to defend “Joe Biden’s” legion of illegally imported Democratic Party voters.

This acute agitation in the streets against federal officers is obviously and brazenly abetted by those in charge: Governor Tim Walz, Mayor Jacob Frey, and Attorney General Keith Ellison. Walz is a huckleberry for the ages.

Did you catch his smarmy sob-story act the day before yesterday, weeping for his “communities” and “neighbors-of-color,” “who continue to stand up for freedom with empathy, blah blah.” Who does this fraudster think he is kidding with his act?

Perhaps the erstwhile normies of his own sadly-deranged state, those Norwegian bachelor farmers, red-cheeked farm girls, and spelling bee champs of the Great Plains, sulking in a state of permanent cringe out in St. Cloud, Red Lake, and Sleepy Eye. It’s a wonder that these folks didn’t form a mob of their own and converge on the Governor’s mansion in St. Paul with pitchforks, torches, and thirty-odd feet of good organic sisal rope. Apparently, they are overwhelmed by the programmed mischief underway. Minneapolis has transformed itself into something unrecognizable, Somalia-on-the-Mississippi, a place not worthy of their affection or worth defending.

So, it will be up to Mr. Trump to put an end to this effrontery. And let’s hope that includes federal marshals coming to arrest and remove Messrs. Walz, Frey, and Ellison, pending some due process to determine their deliberate malfeasance in this massive obstruction of justice. Then imagine the squealing of Hakim Jeffries and Empathy Champeen of the World Chuck Schumer: “Our Democracy! Our Democracy!” Not to put too fine a point on it, but fuck you, Hakim and Chuck, and the donkeys you rode in on. The non-psychotic citizens of this land have had enough fakery and enough of your party’s treasonous, violent revolt in the defense of fakery.

Their “democracy” is nothing more than a gigantic engine of grift, meticulously assembled over the decades in Minnesota (and, you can be sure, all over the rest of the USA), and now it has been found out. The accountants are coming for accountability. They’re going to discover exactly how it was assembled and who assembled it, and how the taxpayers’ money flowed in around and through this infernal machine and a lot of people will be going to jail. Your empathy ghost-dances will not avail to stop it.

And, by the way, this accounting will happen whether or not Mr. Trump actually invokes the Insurrection Act. After a mild Friday, next week’s temperatures in the Twin Cities are due to plunge into the single digits and below, and stay down there for the rest of month —a likely discouragement to the paid rioters. Will the Soros network just buy them all plane tickets for more temperate parts of the country and open up a new front of agitation? I’d bet on that. In fact, I’d specify Portland, OR, and Seattle, where the game-board is still out like a welcome mat, and the local cops are all trained-up to stand by and do nothing, and the vacant store-fronts are stocked with snacks and water bottles for the useful mentally ill. Let the games resume there! The elected officials of those cities and states could stand a little jail time, too, as a “learing” experience, you gotta think.

In the meantime, prepare for more startling global developments, including the collapse of the mullah’s regime in Iran. Despite the bluster emanating from Tehran, that country is at the mercy of forces greater than just folks yelling in the streets. They are running out of water and their money, the Rial, has run out of purchasing mojo. Iran’s economy has tanked. Everybody there knows it’s the result of nearly fifty years of gross mismanagement. Try governing a country with no economy. Mr. Trump’s military will probably not have to lift a finger. And, then, perhaps astounding changes follow.

Like, for instance, Iran’s oil goes offline for China, just as Venezuela’s oil did a week or so ago. Money stops flowing to Jihadis around the world. Let the Persians be Persians again. Deep reverberations anon. . . Ukraine. . . Greenland. . . .

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 16:20

Dave Smith: "America First Means Non-Interventionism"; Republicans Debate GOP Schism

Yesterday, in a special ZeroHedge debate on What Is America First?, libertarian comedian Dave Smith and conservative filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza clashed over whether the slogan implies non-intervention abroad or a more assertive, national interest-driven foreign policy. Moderated by Judge Andrew Napolitano, the exchange cut directly to the fault lines dividing the modern right into what might be coined the Carlson and Shapiro camps.

Here were the highlights for those who missed it:

“America First means non-interventionism”

Smith argued America First ought to mean “a preference for republicanism, little ‘r’, over imperialism,” citing its earliest presidential use which followed that logic. Woodrow Wilson campaigned on America First by “promising to keep us out of World War I,” before reversing course, an example of how presidents often “campaign on one thing and then do the exact opposite.”

The phrase was later used “to oppose military adventurism,” by figures like Robert Taft and by the America First Committee, which opposed U.S. entry into World War II, and by Pat Buchanan. Donald Trump picked up “the exact same theme,” pledging to “break with neoconservatism,” reject “regime change wars,” and eventually boasting of “no new wars.” 

Saying America First means “toppling the Ayatollah” or “flirting with wars of choice, and wars of aggression,” Smith said, “is nonsense.”

“We’re not gonna go fight wars to make the military industrial complex rich… we’re not gonna fight wars on behalf of Israel that are not in the interest of the United States of America.”

pic.twitter.com/NgSQaU27SA

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) January 15, 2026

“This is Idiocy”

D’Souza framed his rebuttal around national attachment: “This is our country and our patriotism is based on an attachment to our country.” Nations act on interests, where “this guy has a lot of oil and we could use some of that,” or “this country has rare earth minerals and we could use some of that.”

He stressed that the United States was no longer a weak republic. “We are a powerful country in the world today.” Early cautions by John Quincy Adams about not “go[ing] in search of monsters to destroy,” reflected, in his telling, the reality of a fledgling state. D’Souza compared that posture to “an infant in the playground” who avoided fights because “I’m three years old,” a position that changed “when his position of power is completely different.”

For D’Souza, this is realism: “We have ideals and interests and we live in a hostile world.” That world included actors who were “beneficial to our interests” and those who were “harmful or inimical to that.” He summarized the isolationist stance as “closing your eyes, sticking your two forefingers in your ears… this is idiocy.”

pic.twitter.com/TNOzR6ltLT

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) January 15, 2026

The Israel Question

When the question was posed by the Judge, D’Souza rejected the idea that the United States is subservient to Israel, arguing the power relationship ran in the opposite direction.

“It makes no sense to talk about the rabbit controlling the elephant when quite clearly the elephant controls the rabbit.” As evidence, he pointed to Iran, saying Israel would have welcomed U.S. action to “wipe out the mullahs,” but “their hand was stayed” by Trump, “a clear indication of the United States calling the shots and not Israel.”

The value of a Jewish-Christian alliance, D’Souza said, is that the LGBT community and radical Islam are forming an unholy alliance and taking over the domestic United States.

Smith argued U.S.-Israel relationship has led only to “a lot of trouble and a lot of unnecessary wars.” He mocked the “fight them over there” justification, noting that after “two plus decades fighting them over there, slaughtering them by the millions, blowing trillions of dollars,” the argument simply shifted to “look, we got to fight them over here.” 

Smith then described the pro-Israel security argument as circular. “If we support Israel, then a whole bunch of Muslims hate us because we support Israel,” he said, that hostility was then used as proof that “see, the Muslims hate us and therefore we have to keep supporting Israel.”

pic.twitter.com/nYoVcCrKGr

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) January 15, 2026

Watch the full debate on X:

https://t.co/hwDX5KTxke

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 15, 2026

Or listen on Spotify:

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 15:20

FTC Imposes 5-Year Ban On GM Disclosing Geolocation, Driver Data To Consumer Reporting Agencies

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has finalized an order banning General Motors (GM) from disclosing consumers’ geolocation and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies for a period of five years, the agency said in a Jan. 14 statement.

The FTC had filed a complaint against GM and its subsidiary OnStar LLC in January 2025.

GM “collected, used, and sold drivers’ precise geolocation data and driving behavior information from millions of vehicles—data that can be used to set insurance rates—without adequately notifying consumers and obtaining their affirmative consent,” the agency said at the time.

GM was encouraging customers to sign up for its OnStar connected vehicle service and the OnStar Smart Driver feature through a “misleading enrollment process,” the FTC said at the time.

During enrollment, the company did not “clearly disclose” that collected information—including data regarding speeding, late-night driving, and instances of hard braking—would be sold to third parties such as consumer reporting agencies, the commission said.

This information was used by reporting agencies to compile credit reports that were subsequently utilized by insurance companies to set rates and deny insurance, the commission said. The FTC said that tracking and collecting geolocation data was an invasion of privacy.

The five-year ban is part of the FTC’s settlement order with GM. The ban is appropriate “given GM’s egregious betrayal of consumers’ trust,” the FTC statement said. The order was issued against OnStar LLC, General Motors LLC, and General Motors Holdings LLC, which are all owned by the General Motors Company.

In addition, for the next 20 years of the order, GM is required to obtain “affirmative express consent from consumers prior to collecting, using, or sharing connected vehicle data” except under certain circumstances, such as providing location data to emergency first responders, the FTC said.

During that period, GM must ensure that U.S. customers can request a copy of their data, ask for their data to be deleted, and opt out of geolocation and driver behavior data collection.

“The Federal Trade Commission has formally approved the agreement reached last year with General Motors to address concerns,” a GM spokesperson told The Epoch Times on Jan. 15.

“As vehicle connectivity becomes increasingly integral to the driving experience, GM remains committed to protecting customer privacy, maintaining trust, and ensuring customers have a clear understanding of our practices.”

In a statement on Jan. 16, 2025, GM said that although Smart Driver was created to promote safer driving among users, the company ended the program following customer feedback.

“Last year, we discontinued Smart Driver across all GM vehicles, unenrolled all customers, and ended our third-party telematics relationships with LexisNexis and Verisk,” GM said at the time.

“The FTC consent order includes new measures that go above and beyond existing law, while capturing steps we’ve already taken to establish choices for customer data collection and communications about how the information is used.”

GM had affirmed that it would obtain customer consent before collecting, using, or disclosing certain types of connected vehicle data, in line with its agreement with the FTC.

Vehicle Data Collection

Multiple other car companies admit to collecting driver data as part of their privacy policies.

For instance, Honda gathers geolocation and driver behavior data, according to its data privacy practices webpage.

Driver behavior information includes “vehicle speed, vehicle acceleration and deceleration, pedal positions, engine speed, direction and time of travel, steering angle, yaw rate, vehicle control, and Honda Sensing or Acura Watch system settings and usage,” it said.

In a Jan. 6 statement, Toyota said it collects a vehicle’s precise location, within 1,850 feet. The company clarified that it does not use the location or driving data for marketing purposes or offer it to third parties.

Kia’s privacy policy states that the company collects geolocation data and other vehicle information that could be shared with third parties for purposes such as crash notification assistance, content-based services, roadside assistance, and determining driving score and usage-based insurance.

In April, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) introduced the Connected Vehicle National Security Review Act, which would allow the Department of Commerce to ban or restrict connected vehicles or components coming from China or other nations of concern if deemed to pose a threat to national security, according to an April 10, 2025, statement from the lawmaker’s office.

“Chinese vehicles, which are dirt cheap thanks to state subsidies, could collect full motion video of sensitive sites, 3-D mapping, and geolocation of individual drivers—all of which could be sent back to Beijing,” Slotkin said.

The bill was referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in June 2025.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 15:00

The Wrong Solution: AI Productivity, Employment, & UBI

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

It is expected that AI productivity increases will vastly transform the U.S. economy. Firms are utilizing AI productivity enhancements to automate repetitive tasks, and research and coding functions have already been implemented. The obvious problem is that when machines perform functions once done by humans, what are the humans supposed to do for income? This increase in AI productivity is measurable across various sectors, as supply chains operate more efficiently, data analysis accelerates, and customer service utilizes automated agents to streamline tasks. Manufacturing, once considered a stable sector of the economy, is increasingly using robotics to reduce labor costs. Professional services are also increasingly displacing workers in medical, legal, and other areas of the service economy to improve output (read: profits) per worker.

This is not a new thing. It has been accelerating since the invention of the fax machine and phone answering devices. The use of AI productivity-enhancing technology is becoming increasingly apparent. But as shown, the shift by corporations to focus on worker productivity is ongoing.

Recent corporate statements confirm this shift. At a 2025 financial conference, JPMorgan Chase reported that AI adoption doubled productivity gains in certain operations from 3% to 6%, with some roles seeing efficiency increases of 40% to 50%. Other banks said AI allows them to accomplish more work with the same headcount.

In theory, the promise of AI productivity increases is alluring. While firms can produce more with fewer inputs, humans will have more time to pursue education, leisure, and spend time with their families, increasing overall health and happiness. Again, that is theory, and the subject of today’s commentary.

Productivity Set To Surge

The strict definition of “productivity” is the output per unit of input. In other words, if output rises, it should correspond to an increase in employee compensation, as economic demand leads to the production of more products. Since 1947, a correlation has existed between economic output and the 3-month average of the annual rate of change in employee compensation.

Between 2004 and the pandemic, annual labor productivity growth averaged just 1.5% per year, significantly below the pace required for sustained real wage improvement. Recent gains measured in 2023 showed a temporary uptick; however, whether this marks a trend driven by AI rather than short-term business cycles remains unclear.

Furthermore, emerging research suggests that AI has the potential to deliver significant productivity improvements. A study of generative AI usage found that average workers using tools like ChatGPT completed tasks 40% faster with higher quality, implying substantial productivity enhancements when AI is integrated into work processes. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis estimated that generative AI contributed a roughly 1.1% boost to aggregate productivity, with individual workers saving multiple hours per week on routine tasks. Lastly, a TIME-published analysis of Anthropic research suggests that AI has the potential to double U.S. labor productivity growth, increasing it by approximately 1.8% if widespread adoption occurs.

These projections also align with broader institutional forecasts. The IMF reports that AI could significantly impact nearly 40% of jobs worldwide, presenting both opportunities and risks for income growth and inequality. Yet, productivity gains alone do not automatically lead to wage increases or employment growth.

The Problem

The problem arises when productivity increases without a corresponding demand for labor. AI operates without downtime, 24/7, and does not require traditional wages, benefits, or breaks. If AI performs tasks that previously employed millions of workers, the question of how displaced workers earn income becomes central. Corporate leaders acknowledge this challenge. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has highlighted the unpredictability of AI’s impact, noting that productivity gains may come with labor market disruptions that current policy tools are ill-equipped to manage.

Historical examples show how technological shifts displace workers in the short term. For instance, during the “Industrial Revolution,” artisans lost jobs to mechanized production. Horse‑drawn carriage drivers disappeared with the advent of automobiles. Yes, workers eventually moved into new fields, but the transition involved hardship and community upheaval. Automation in prior eras often created new kinds of jobs, but the pace and breadth of AI disruption could set this wave apart. Instead of merely replacing manual labor, AI now substitutes for tasks across both blue-collar and white-collar jobs. Research by Oxford economists Carl Frey and Michael Osborne highlighted that many occupations have tasks that are susceptible to automation, and could disappear entirely.

Compounding the challenge, since the late 1970s, productivity gains started diverging from typical worker compensation. According to the Economic Policy Institute, productivity growth far outpaced wage growth for the median worker, signaling that gains from technology and economic expansion have accrued disproportionately to capital owners and high‑skill labor. This productivity-pay gap signals that, even before AI’s full impact arrives, workers were not sharing equitably in productivity-driven prosperity.

The pace of technological change means millions of Americans face an uncertain labor market. Young workers entering the workforce find fewer traditional hiring pathways and rising expectations around digital and AI‑related skills. Older workers frequently lack the time or resources to retrain in rapidly shifting skill environments. Across age groups, employers deploying AI experience reduced labor costs and increased productivity, which simultaneously puts pressure on wages and job security.

The reality is stark. The economy may grow, but how the gains are distributed will determine whether everyday Americans thrive or struggle. Without structural policy interventions, technological displacement risks widening income inequality and weakening labor market attachment. The promise of more leisure, education, and family time from productivity gains remains theoretical. If workers lack stable incomes, employment opportunities, or bridging support, the rest won’t matter.

But, this is where the “cries for UBI” become most vocal.

The Wrong Solution

Legendary investor Howard Marks has described AI’s impact on employment as “terrifying.” He emphasized that work provides purpose and identity beyond mere income. Notably, he stated that “…financial support alone will not replace the psychological and social benefits of employment.” That is a crucially important statement, which we now have the data to support. Universal Basic Income (UBI) is the default proposal to offset the impacts of increased AI productivity. The logic sounds simple enough: “If AI displaces workers, send checks to households to replace lost wages and economic stability returns.”

The problem is that the evidence does not support this conclusion.

Following the pandemic-driven shutdown of the economy, we sent checks to households, which was a form of Universal Basic Income. Many articles espoused the benefits of such an operation, but the results were far less appealing. Surging inflation eroded the benefits of the stimulus and left Americans far worse off than they would have been otherwise. However, other real-time tests have also yielded less than promising outcomes.

We previously discussed one of the UBI experiments, which found predictable results. Short-term relief did not translate into higher employment, improved skills, or long-term income growth. Cash transfers temporarily increased consumption but did not raise productivity, increase labor force participation, or improve economic mobility.

“Participants in the study generally did not use the extra time to seek new or better jobs—even though younger participants were slightly more likely to pursue additional education. There was no clear indication that the participants in the study were more likely to take the risk of starting a new business, although Vivalt points out that there was a significant uptick in “precursors” to entrepreneurialism. Instead, the largest increases were in categories that the researchers termed social and solo leisure activities.”

The Argument magazine also reviewed multiple studies on guaranteed income and reached a similar conclusion. While recipients reported lower stress and higher short-term satisfaction, these gains faded quickly. Employment outcomes showed little improvement, job search intensity declined in several cases, and participation in education and retraining did not rise significantly.

In other words, giving people money without purpose helped much less than promised.

The core flaw in UBI is structural, as it treats income as the problem. Employment is the real issue. Yes, work provides wages, but it also offers skill development, social structure, and a sense of purpose, along with long-term stability. A simple check replaces none of those, and unfortunately, as 2020 shows, when producers realize that checks are being sent, they raise prices to capitalize on it. In other words, an artificial increase in incomes will quickly be absorbed by higher prices (inflation), effectively rendering the UBI useless.

Here is the most critical point.

“An economy cannot function on transfers alone; production must precede consumption. UBI reverses this order.“

Cost also matters. A national UBI program large enough to offset AI-driven displacement would require trillions of dollars annually. Funding such a program would either require higher taxes, debt expansion, or both. While each option will reduce future growth, higher taxes reduce investment incentives, while increased debt raises interest costs and crowds out private capital. Neither path supports long-term prosperity.

UBI also weakens the labor signal. Wages communicate where labor is needed, and training follows opportunity. UBI dulls this signal by separating income from work, and, over time, workforce attachment erodes, skills decay, and reentry into employment becomes increasingly complex. This dynamic showed up repeatedly in pilot programs.

Most importantly, UBI avoids the hard work of reform. It sidesteps education reform, workforce retraining, mobility assistance, and pro-growth labor policy. It accepts displacement as inevitable and permanent. History shows this approach fails, and past technological shifts succeeded because workers moved into new roles. In other words, policy supported adaptation, not withdrawal.

AI productivity gains will demand active solutions, not government gifts. Skill development, apprenticeships, employer-based training, wage insurance, and mobility support. These tools address displacement directly, while UBI does not.

Defaulting to UBI is an admission of policy failure and signals surrender to the disruption rather than managing it. The United States grew prosperous by expanding opportunity, not replacing work with checks. That lesson remains relevant today as AI continues to reshape the economy.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 14:20

LIS Technologies Launches $1.4 Billion Laser Uranium Enrichment Project In Tennessee

LIS Technologies announced a $1.4 billion uranium enrichment project in Oakridge, Tennessee at the former iconic K-25 site, which until 1987 was a massive gaseous diffusion facility built for the Manhattan Project to enrich uranium-235 for atomic bombs. The company will set up shop on the 206-acre on Duct Island, which will be renamed to LIST Island.

Following the renaming of the 206-acre Duct Island to LIST Island and its redevelopment to house the Company's commercial laser-based uranium enrichment headquarters, Oak Ridge, TN is expected to become the site of the world's first US-origin commercial laser uranium enrichment facility, supporting U.S. utilities, next-generation reactor developers, and national defense requirements while helping to reestablish a resilient domestic nuclear fuel supply chain.

"Tennessee continues to lead the nation in advancing American energy independence, which is why innovative companies like LIS Technologies recognize our efforts through projects like this," said Tennessee Governor Bill Lee. "By creating the Nuclear Energy Fund, we have uniquely positioned our state at the forefront of cutting-edge R&D, and I look forward to the positive impact this project will have for Tennesseans across our state."

The company intends to break ground and begin site preparation and civil construction in 2026 subject to licensing, permitting, and final investment decisions.

LIST is targeting initial commercial operations before 2030, positioning its laser enrichment facility to meet accelerating demand for domestically sourced uranium enrichment.

LIST has partnered with Nano Nuclear to vertically integrate the nuclear fuel chain with reactor development and deployment. The companies are working together to commercialize the Kronos, Zeus, and Loki reactors and supply the necessary fuel for them to operate.

Nano Nuclear CEO Jay Yu, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee and Christo Liebenberg, co-foundder and president of LIS Technology

As the push for US nuclear development goes into high gear, the 3rd-generation laser enrichment technology from LIST could be used to produce low enriched uranium (LEU) and high-assay LEU (HALEU) for use in both traditional commercial reactors and advanced reactors throughout the US. The Department of Energy is pursuing the revitalization of the nuclear supply chain due to a current heavy reliance on foreign imports to fuel the nation's reactor fleet. LIST's major advantage over its peers in the laser enrichment field is that its process is the only US-origin technology in development. 

LIST states they will pursue site characterization and the initial phases of construction during this calendar year. It is then anticipated the company will begin discussions with the NRC to submit an application for the new nuclear fuel facility.

Nano Nuclear, a developer of small modular reactors, first invested in LIST in 2024, which included an enriched uranium supply agreement between the two companies and a potential for future collaboration on fuel fabrication facilities. Nano is still exploring the potential for entering the fabrication market, but has yet to make any announcements regarding land acquisition or regulatory engagement.

Nano recently entered into an engineering agreement with Ameresco for eventual commercialization of their reactor designs, and most recently started the process for preparing the Loki design for use in space applications. Nano Nuclear acquired the Kronos and Loki designs from the now-defunct Ultra Safe Nuclear Corp during bankruptcy proceedings at the end of 2024.

Nano claims the Kronos design is in a high technical readiness state and is one of the leading high-temperature gas-cooled reactor designs in development. It is expected to enter commercial production by the end of the decade.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 14:00

Democrats Fight To Keep Insurrection Myth Alive In New J6 Committee

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The new J6 Committee has started its hearings and, unlike the prior Committee, Republicans have allowed Democrats to select members to sit in opposition. That has led to sharp exchanges, but one of the more interesting occurred between Rep. Harriet Hageman (R., Wyo.) and Jamie Raskin (D., Md.). After Hageman got a witness to admit that no one was charged with incitement, Raskin made the clearly false statement that a few defendants charged with seditious conspiracy was the same thing as incitement. It is not.

Rep. Raskin triggered the confrontation by making a clearly false claim about one of those charged by the Biden Administration: “I would just commend to everybody the testimony of Pamela Hemphill, who was a convicted insurrectionist that was pardoned. She rejected her pardon.”

In reality, Hemphill was charged (like most of the rioters) with relatively minor misdemeanors. She pleaded guilty to one count of demonstrating, picketing, or parading in a Capitol building and received just 60 days in prison, 36 months of probation, and a $500 fine for restitution. She was never charged with insurrection or any felony.

Rep. Hageman pounced on the comment and asked former Justice Department prosecutor Michael Romano whether any January 6 protester had actually been convicted under the federal insurrection statute.

Romano tried to dodge the question but admitted that no one, not Trump nor any rioter, was ever charged with insurrection. Notably, after January 6th, there was a great amount of coverage on Trump and his aides being possibly charged with insurrection or incitement. Despite some of us noting that the speech was clearly protected under the First Amendment, the press portrayed such a charge as credible and heaped coverage on District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine, who announced that he was considering arresting Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, and U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks and charging them with incitement. It never happened. The reason is obvious. It could not be legally maintained.

While the FBI launched a massive national investigation, it did not find evidence of an insurrection. While a few were charged with seditious conspiracy, no one was charged with insurrection.

The Supreme Court later reduced charges further by rejecting obstruction charges in some cases.

Yet that did not stop members and the media from repeating the false mantra that this was an insurrection, despite some of us immediately rejecting it as legally unsustainable. Indeed, Democrats used the false claim to seek to disqualify Trump and dozens of Republicans from ballots.

Now back to the hearing.

Hageman asked the witness, “Mr. Romano, did you prosecute anyone related to January 6th for engaging in an insurrection?” she asked. Romano responded, “No, congresswoman.”

That is when Raskin objected and tried to interrupt the confirmation that, in fact, there never was an insurrection or any such charges.

Hageman persisted, “So, Mr. Raskin’s statement that someone was a ‘convicted insurrectionist’ is actually inaccurate, isn’t that correct?”

When Romano again tried to pivot, she pressed further, “She wasn’t a convicted insurrectionist, was she?”

“For the crime of insurrection, no,” he admitted.

Raskin shouted, “Do you accept seditious conspiracy as insurrection?”

It was a telling statement.

For the record, I have long been a critic of sedition crimes. As I discuss in my book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,”sedition was a noxious import from Great Britain. British judges had balked at the effort to accuse citizens of treason for things like telling bawdy jokes about the queen in some pub.

However, putting that aside, the handful of charges for seditious conspiracy are not legally the same or even close to an insurrection charge. Rep. Raskin, a former law professor, must know that.

The provision in 18 U.S.C. 2384 has long been controversial because it is so sweeping and includes any effort “by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law.” While the provision can also entail an intent to overthrow the country, the provision covers any interference with federal proceedings or laws.

Ironically, Raskin opposes the invocation of the Insurrection Act in cities like Minneapolis on the basis of the interference with federal officials in the enforcement of federal law. However, he seems to view this provision as endlessly malleable, so that anyone accused of hindering the execution of a federal law is an insurrectionist.

After January 6th, Justice Department official Michael Sherwin publicly declared that “our office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe” in hitting people with a maximal level of charges. Yet, despite that “shock and awe” effort, not a single charge for insurrection was ever brought — an inconvenient truth for members like Raskin.

None of this excuses the outrageous riot that occurred on that terrible day. However, seeking to conform the criminal code to the political narrative serves neither the Congress nor the public.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 13:40

The post We’re Paying the Tariffs #53,464 appeared first on CEPR.

ACLU And Celebs Release Cringe Appeal To Allow Men In Women's Sports

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The American Civil Liberties Union has rolled out a new campaign pushing for biological males to compete in women’s sports, just as the Supreme Court takes up cases that could finally protect female athletes from unfair competition.

Featuring ‘stars’ including Megan Rapinoe and Naomi Watts, the ad frames this as a fight for “freedom,” when in reality it’s just another leftist assault on women’s rights and fair play.

The ACLU’s “More Than A Game” ad, launched during women’s basketball games on January 12, features celebrities and young people delivering lines like: “When you’re young, you believe that you can do anything. And then the world tries to set limits for you. Tell you what’s allowed, what is normal, who you’re supposed to be.”

It continues: “But on the field, the track, the court, here you get to be exactly who you want. Because at our core, we still are kids that just want to play. The go big game changers. The living, breathing fabric of this country.”

The ad closes with: “Supporting trans youth isn’t just about sports. It’s about freedom on and off the field. It’s more than a game.”

The campaign ties directly to Supreme Court cases challenging bans on transgender girls in school sports in West Virginia and Idaho.

WATCH: "This is an opportunity that the Supreme Court has to tell women that we matter." pic.twitter.com/1NUM988J8a

— Alliance Defending Freedom (@ADFLegal) January 15, 2026

Rapinoe has stated: “I am not going to be tricked into sacrificing hard fought civil rights protections because of anti-trans rhetoric. All women will be harmed if the Court rules against the young trans people at the center of these cases and I wanted to make unambiguously clear that I am on the side of equality and justice.”

Watts, whose child reportedly identifies as transgender, adds in the ad: “It’s about freedom.”

Of course, this completely ignores the real victims: female athletes robbed of opportunities, safety, and medals by males leveraging biological edges.

This push comes right after the Olympics finally acknowledged what everyone knows: men have inherent advantages over women in sports, leading to a ban on transgender athletes in women’s events. As we previously highlighted, the IOC’s policy shift was a win for science and fairness, highlighting decades of evidence that no amount of ideology can erase.

Former Olympic swimmer Sharron Davies, who spoke at a Supreme Court rally against male inclusion in women’s sports, slammed the ACLU’s arguments in one case, noting males’ inherent advantages like bone structure and reduced injury risk. “We cannot remove male physical advantage. NO male belongs in female sport. It’s cheating,” she posted. Davies emphasized: “The Supreme Court’s trans athlete ruling matters to women everywhere.”

The Supreme Court's trans athlete ruling matters to women everywhere https://t.co/VdsnAuToFJ

— Sharron Davies MBE (@sharrond62) January 15, 2026

Tennis legend Martina Navratilova blasted human rights groups like the ACLU for prioritizing trans demands over women’s rights: “Unreal how all these ‘human rights’ organizations are so willingly chucking women’s rights out the window…”

Unreal how all these “human rights” organizations are so willingly chucking women’s rights out the window. Money talks etc…. https://t.co/Jes1lNLk5g

— Martina Navratilova (@Martina) January 12, 2026

XX-XY Athletics, a brand championing women’s sports, fired back at the ACLU directly: “The only rights being violated when males compete in women’s sports are those of the women. You are fighting for the wrong side here.” They shared footage from rallies, underscoring the fight to keep sports fair.

Truth https://t.co/ZQhDUwWZNI

— XX-XY Athletics (@xx_xyathletics) January 15, 2026

My speech on the steps of the Supreme Court. With better sound this time. pic.twitter.com/eEGNA1O4Qk

— Jennifer Sey (@JenniferSey) January 15, 2026

The world does have limits, actually. One of them is when your “freedom” strips other people of their opportunities, rights and dignity.

Also, when did the Left become so bad at making ads? https://t.co/Z9A8jBTumu

— XX-XY Athletics (@xx_xyathletics) January 15, 2026

Leftist campaigns like this one expose the hypocrisy: claiming to empower women while stripping them of hard-won spaces. Real freedom means safeguarding biology-based categories, not bowing to ridiculous woke pressure that endangers girls’ dreams and safety.

As the Supreme Court deliberates, this could be a turning point—rejecting the erasure of women’s rights in favor of common-sense protections for female athletes.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 13:00

EU Mulls Ditching Accession System Used Since Cold War To Fast-Track Ukraine

When in doubt, just change the rules - or so goes the thinking in Brussels as it seeks to get creative on ways to allow Ukraine's quick accession to the European Union, despite it being consistently ranked among the most corrupt governments on earth.

EU officials have described that a current plan being taken seriously is a 'limited' membership tier, part of a proposed European peace deal to end the Russia-Ukraine war, but which would withhold full membership rights for Kiev, which later must be "earned" according to a phrased transition.

Financial Times puts it this way: "Brussels is drafting proposals to tear up the EU accession system used since the cold war, replacing it with a contentious two-tier model that could fast-track Ukraine's entry in any peace deal to end Russia’s invasion."

File image via CEPA

These alternative plans have taken greater urgency after "Ukrainian EU membership in 2027" was added into the 20-point peace plan which has been subject of intense back-and-forth between the US, Ukraine, and EU.

As far as drastically changing the accession process for merely a single 'exception' - one EU official who is a proponent was quoted in NBC as saying, "We have to recognize that we are in a very different reality than when the (accession) rules were first drawn up."

And yet immense hurdles would remain, regardless, especially those states seen as 'Russia-friendly' and heavily reliant on Russian energy, Hungary and Slovakia. Joining the bloc requires formal approval of all 27 EU member nations. On top of this, as NBC points out:

But many E.U. governments believe that date, or any other fixed date, is completely unrealistic, because E.U. accession is currently a merit-based process, moving forward only when there is progress in adjusting a country's laws to E.U. standards.

Joining the bloc also requires sign-off from the national parliaments of the EU's 27 member states. Some kind of 'staged access' plan could then open the flood gates for others who are not ready, and whose economies would be a drag and drain and the rest of the EU.

A somewhat recent member like Poland was not even at war when it joined in the 2004 membership wave during the Bush era. Poland itself could stand in the way of fast-tracking Ukraine, with the two eastern European neighbors recently being engaged in several tense diplomatic disputes.

But one unnamed diplomat has argued:

"It is Europe’s interest to have Ukraine in the E.U., because of our own security," an E.U. diplomat said.

"It is why we need to look for creative solutions - how to get Ukraine in the E.U. quickly. The reversed membership concept reflects this idea - to have Ukraine joining the E.U. politically and then getting full rights and full-fledged membership once all conditions are met," the diplomat said.

The European Union has meanwhile continued full steam ahead in efforts to ramp up support to Ukraine's defense sector, even as Washington has been seen as largely withdrawing. For example last November European Parliament voted to approve a 1.5 billion euros ($1.7bn) program which seeks to deepen integration between Ukraine and Europe on military-industrial relations.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 12:40

Shale Pioneer Harold Hamm Steps Back From Bakken After Decades

Harold Hamm says low oil prices are forcing a step he hasn’t taken in decades: shutting down drilling in North Dakota’s Bakken, according to Bloomberg.

“This will be the first time in over 30 years that Harold Hamm has not had an operation with drilling rigs in North Dakota,” he said. “That tells you a whole lot right there: There’s no need to drill it when margins are basically gone.”

The decision underscores how far conditions have shifted in the region that once defined the US shale boom. The Bakken was where Hamm showed that fracking could unlock oil long thought unreachable, helping transform the US into the world’s leading producer and reshaping global energy markets.

Bloomberg writes that the pullback reflects pressure across the industry. Even as Hamm backs President Donald Trump, producers are feeling the strain from policies aimed at pushing oil prices lower to fight inflation, at the expense of profitability.

Costs are rising just as prices fall. BloombergNEF estimates that a typical Bakken well now needs about $58 a barrel to break even, nearly 4% higher than a year ago. At the same time, US benchmark crude has slid about 25% over the past year to roughly $59, weighed down by fears of oversupply and expectations of more barrels entering the market, including from Venezuela.

Drilling activity has dropped nationwide, with US rig counts down 15% over the past year and the biggest reductions coming from the Permian Basin.

“A lot of people are assessing their activity in all the basins,” Hamm said.

He made clear the pause may not be permanent. “We’re price takers, as you’re aware — not price makers,” he said with a laugh. “See what we can get.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 12:00

Isotopes 101

Submitted by TightSpreads 

Many smart investors are catching up to the nuclear story already, but there is another angle to it that is grossly uncovered: isotopes.

This educational primer provides a useful starting point for understanding isotope market opportunities and the nuclear equities or advanced materials companies to be featured soon.

Why is this timely?

• Because Oklo management has told the street that radioisotope revenues could begin as early as Q1-2026.
• Isotopes are about to drastically change the semiconductor, industrial, and medical industries.

What is an isotope?

Isotopes are atoms of the same element with identical chemical properties (same protons/electrons) but differing neutron counts, leading to variations in atomic mass and nuclear behavior. So if elements are families, isotopes are siblings. Being that sibings are similar, but not identical. They arise naturally as the result of ancient stellar explosions, cosmic ray interactions, and radioactive decay; or artificially via nuclear reactors/particle accelerators.

There are two types of isotopes: stable and unstable/radioactive. Stable isotopes have energetically balanced nucleus (protons/neutrons) and don’t decay. They are ideal for long-term uses like environmental tracking and are more ‘commoditized’ compared to radioactive isotopes. In contrast, radioactive isotopes have an imbalanced nucleus. This imbalance of energy, typically caused by an excess or deficiency of neutrons, forces the isotope to undergo spontaneous radioactive decay

Radioactive decay is a process exclusive to radioisotopes. It’s the transformation of an unstable atomic nucleus rebalancing into a more stable configuration. This process involves the release of energy through various decay modes, primarily alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. It is important to note that decay often occurs in sequences known as decay chains, where a parent isotope transforms into one or more daughter isotopes before reaching a final, stable state. The opportunity set of daughter isotopes have been increasingly researched and pursued in private markets, and more recently, public equity markets.

The rate of this transformation is measured by an isotope's half-life—the time required for half of a given sample to undergo decay. Half-lives vary significantly across the isotopic spectrum. This especially important for logistical considerations of isotope production and end-market delivery. Radioactive half-lives can be as short as septillionths of a second, but most commonly-used radioactive isotopes will have half-life spans of a few hours or days.

Major Applications

• Nuclear Energy & Fuel Cycle:

  • Enrichment Services: Focus on Enriched U-235 for the existing fleet and HALEU (High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium) for next-generation SMRs (Small Modular Reactors). Exacerbated by the “Russia Exit” play to shift the U.S. from Russian enrichment reliance and assert our own nuclear and material dominance.

  • Specialty Lithium: Lithium-7 is critical for pH control in pressurized water reactors (PWRs) to prevent corrosion, while Lithium-6 is the primary precursor for Tritium in the burgeoning fusion energy sector.

  • Market Tailwinds: The Nuclear Energy Institute estimates the nuclear fuel enrichment opportunity will grow from ~18.0 MT/ year in 2024 to ~613.8 MT/ year in 2035, reflecting a ~37.8% CAGR.

• Medical (Primary Growth Engine):

  • Diagnostics: Technetium-99m (Tc-99m) remains the industry workhorse, utilized in approximately 80–85% of all nuclear diagnostic scans worldwide.

  • Theranostics (Targeted Therapies): The “Oncology Boom” is driven by Actinium-225 and Lutetium-177, which allow for “search and destroy” cancer treatments.

  • Market Tailwinds: According to Allied Market Research, the nuclear medical isotope market was estimated at ~$6.6B in 2025 and is projected to reach ~$14B by 2034 (8.8% CAGR). Growth is catalyzed by: the targeted oncology boom, a massive influx of biotech capital into radiopharmaceutical pipelines, aging global demographics, and the urgent need to diversify supply away from aging legacy reactors.

Supply Chain Fragility: The medical isotope market is notoriously fragile because it relies on a linear, "just-in-time" supply chain with almost no buffer for error. Much of the world’s supply currently relies on a handful of aging legacy reactors

• High-Value Industrial & Tech Niches:

  • Semiconductors and Quantum Computing: Isolating and enriching materials like Silicon-28 or Phosphorus-31, can unlock significant technological performance enhancements. McKinsey estimates the global semiconductor market will reach ~$1T by 2030, up from ~$527B in 2023 (~7.7% CAGR).

  • Industrial and Tech: Germanium isotope end use cases span electronics, infrared optics, solar cells, and fiber optics, among other applications.

  • Industrial/Research: Helium-3 for cryogenics and neutron detection; Carbon-13 for metabolic research and gas tracing.

  • Resource Management: Isotopes are essential for oil/gas reservoir tracing and high-precision environmental monitoring (e.g., tracking carbon sources or water table movement).

Isotope Production and Enrichment

As we recently mentionef, elements come as a mix of “heavy” and “light” versions of their atomic masses. Thus, elements may have a variety of isotopes found and to be made. Production methods work by bombarding target materials with high-energy particles—such as neutrons in nuclear reactors to create neutron-rich isotopes or protons in cyclotrons to create proton-rich isotopes. Enrichment takes a natural mixture (like raw Uranium) and use precision methods such as lasers to "sort" or separate the isotopes that are already there.

In a high-tech supply chain, you often need both enrichment and production to get to a final product.

Production Methods:

The Future, Nuclear Reactors

• The Process: Reactors act as “controlled furnaces” that generate a dense flux of neutrons. Target materials are inserted into the reactor core where they are “baked” or irradiated by these neutrons to create a radioactive isotope.

• The Reaction (Neutron Capture): Because neutrons have no electrical charge, they easily enter the nucleus of a target atom. The nucleus absorbs the neutron, becoming a heavier and often unstable isotope that then decays into the desired material.

Why it’s better:

• Massive Scale: Reactors are the only cost-competitive machines capable of “bulk” production, irradiating dozens of targets simultaneously. Making nuclear reactor isotope producers such as Oklo’s Versatile Isotope Production Reactors (VIPR) a strong contender for scaling U.S. domestic supply amid global shortages with uniform distribution.

• Unique Capabilities: Only reactors can produce the neutron-rich therapeutic isotopes and industrial dopants that represent the current largest growth drivers in healthcare and AI.

The Specialized Alternative, Cyclotrons

• The Process: Magnets and electricity fire a high-speed “proton beam” in an ever-widening spiral at a target.

• The Result: This “proton bombardment” creates proton-rich isotopes.

Status: Commercially scaled and widely distributed, often found directly in or near hospitals due to the short half-lives of the isotopes they produce.

 

The Precision Straight-Line, Linear Accelerators (Linacs)

• The Process: Propels charged particles in a straight line through a long vacuum tube using electric fields.

• The Result: Produces a wide range of isotopes with high precision and reduced beam loss compared to cyclotrons.

• Status: Commercially scaled for both isotope production and medical radiotherapy, though they often require significantly more physical space than cyclotrons.

The High-Energy Ring, Synchrotrons

• The Process: Guides particles in a circular path using variable magnetic fields to keep them in a fixed ring as they gain extreme energy.

• The Result: Capable of reaching GeV energy levels, far beyond what standard cyclotrons can achieve.

• Status: Not typically used for commercial isotope production; they are primarily “frontier” machines for high-energy physics research and specialized cancer treatments like carbon-ion therapy.

Enrichment Methods:

The Current Standard, Gas Centrifuge

• The Process: The material is turned into a gas and spun at incredibly high speeds in a cylinder.

• The Result: The “heavy” pieces are thrown to the outside walls, while the “lighter” ones stay in the center. By repeating this hundreds of times through a cascade of centrifuges, the desired isotope is concentrated.

The Retired Method, Gaseous Diffusion

• The Process: Pumping gas through miles of filters with tiny holes.

• Status: This was the original Cold War method. It is now obsolete because it uses massive amounts of electricity and is far too expensive compared to modern spinning.

The Future, Laser Enrichment

After 50 years of development, laser technology is the “next frontier.” Unlike the methods above, lasers are surgical and precise. The only downfall has been their ability to scale lasers for mass commercialization.

• How it works: Scientists “tune” a laser to a specific frequency that only hits the target isotope. It’s like using a specialized magnet to pull only the copper pennies out of a jar of mixed coins.

• Why it’s better: It is much more efficient and can handle materials that centrifuges can’t.

Key laser types:

• Atomic Vapor Laser Isotope Separation (AVLIS): Heat the element to gas atoms → lasers selectively charge (ionize) the target isotope → charged atoms stick to a collector plate (opposites attract). Was not scaled due to technical challenges.

• Molecular Laser Isotope Separation (MLIS): Convert to a gas molecule → lasers excite/break bonds in molecules with the target isotope → enriched part is collected via collector plate.

SILEX (most advanced version, from Australia’s Silex Systems): A smarter MLIS approach. Lasers excite target molecules → in a fast-moving gas jet, excited (lighter) ones resist clumping/condensing and separate differently.

Avlis technique:

* * * 

Read more at the TightSpreads substack.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 11:33

Another $3.5 Billion For Gas Power Generation

Talen Energy is following in the footsteps of utility peers Vistra and Constellation by spending billions of dollars acquiring gas generation assets to expand their capacity and grow market share in the growing power demand market.

After spending about $3.5 billion to acquire gas generation capacity in Pennsylvania and Ohio back in July 2025, the company announced it spent another $3.5 billion to acquire two more gas facilities in Ohio. With the newly announced 2.6 GW added to last year’s 2.9 GW, Talen is getting just as aggressive as others with acquiring as much capacity as possible.

We previously discussed Vistra’s stock price popping after they purchased multiple gas plants for $4 billion, adding 5.5 GW to their portfolio across the US. The PJM market seems to be a focus of much of the capacity expansion efforts due to the extreme strain on the grid with data centers growing like weeds in places like northern Virginia. That acquisition is also in addition to their $2 billion Q4 purchase of seven gas plants for 2.6 GW.

Acquisitions by Talen and Vistra are still dwarfed by Constellation’s massive acquisition of Calpine announced one year ago. Acquiring 23 GW of mostly gas power, Constellation paid about $30 billion to further expand their generation capabilities. Constellation also currently holds ownership of the most commercial nuclear reactions in the US.

The frantic scramble to acquire as much capacity as possible, as quickly as possible, is due to the desperation for answering the demand from the US grid as it struggles to keep up with new demand growth not seen in decades due to electrification and AI data centers.

While it is far from being as dangerous as coal plants to the environment, gas generation is far from being considered as friendly as renewable and carbon-free sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and nuclear. This is one of the main reasons nuclear energy has come back into the conversation as more people than ever now approve of the use and construction of new nuclear power plants.

But, with data centers being built right now, the only way to meet their current demands is with gas and existing nuclear while the industry prepares to transfer to new and advanced nuclear in the future, most likely after 2030. There is a general concern that the nuclear bullishness of the Trump administration could be overridden by a left-wing government should parties switch after the next election, but due to nuclear being one of the most “purple” means a power production, those fears could be mostly over blown. 

Regardless, Energy Secretary Chris Wright is promoting and pushing nuclear developments harder than anyone since Admiral Rickover, with the near-term potential to bring at least three new reactor designs critical by July 4 of this year.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 11:25

Underwater Auto Trade-Ins Reach Record Highs: Edmunds

Authored by Rob Sabo via The Epoch Times,

A record number of automobile owners are carrying negative equity of $10,000 to more than $15,000 into trade-ins on new vehicles, according to online vehicle data analytics website Edmunds.

In the fourth quarter of 2025, a record high of 27 percent of vehicle trade-ins involved negative equity of at least $10,000, Edmunds reported on Jan. 15. Just more than 17 percent of trade-ins involved loans with $10,000 to $15,000 of negative equity, while 9.2 percent of trade-ins had loan balances exceeding $15,000.

Negative equity on auto loans is commonly referred to as being “upside down” or “underwater,” a situation where the vehicle is worth less than what’s currently owed on the loan. Nearly 30 percent of all vehicles traded in during the fourth quarter of last year carried some amount of negative equity, Edmunds said. It’s the highest amount of underwater loans on record since the first quarter of 2021, when nearly 32 percent of trade-ins carried negative equity.

The average negative equity of $7,214 that was rolled over into new auto loans in the fourth quarter was the highest amount ever recorded.

Ivan Drury, director of insights at Edmunds, said carrying negative equity into a new auto loan can be a difficult cycle to escape.

“Rolling debt forward may offer short-term relief, but it often leaves buyers with higher payments, and fewer options the next time they’re in the market,” Drury said in the report.

“Avoiding that cycle generally comes down to fundamentals: understanding how much a vehicle is worth relative to what’s owed, choosing purchases that hold their value and align with long-term needs, and recognizing that focusing only on monthly payments can obscure the true cost of a purchase.”

The all-time highs on upside down loans come at a time when more Americans are being approved for auto loans. According to Cox Automotive, the overall approval rates for auto loans in December 2025 jumped 90 basis points from a month earlier, to roughly 74 percent. Loans to riskier subprime borrowers—applicants with fair to poor credit scores—dipped slightly, to just more than 14 percent, Cox Automotive noted. However, subprime lending was still up by 230 basis points from year-ago figures.

Jonathan Gregory, senior manager for Cox Automotive’s economic and industry insights team, said borrowers should take a broad view of total ownership costs when evaluating loan offers.

“Ongoing improvement in credit access, especially in both the new and used markets, continues to offer financing opportunities,” Gregory said in a Jan. 12 analysis.

“While approval rates increased, the slight decline in down payments combined with longer loan terms may indicate stretched affordability.”

The amount of down payment borrowers brought to auto loans dipped slightly in December, to 13.3 percent, Cox Automotive noted.

Edmunds said the imbalance in auto loans largely stems from loans taken out during the COVID-19 pandemic, when chip shortages led to a dearth of new-vehicle inventory and pushed automobile prices higher. As those borrowers seek to upgrade their vehicles, more are finding themselves significantly underwater, Edmunds said.

“Loans that originated when prices were elevated are now aging into a market where values are no longer inflated, making the gap between what many buyers owe and what their vehicle is worth more apparent,” the report states.

“Combined with higher borrowing costs in today’s market, that dynamic has left more buyers facing steeper financial trade-offs when it comes time to replace a vehicle.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 11:05

Canada's PM Carney Praises "New World Order"; Opens Door To Chinese EVs

The invasion of Chinese electric vehicles into North America is set to accelerate after Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney agreed to roll back the triple-digit tariffs previously imposed on Chinese EVs. The move sharply diverges from President Trump's America First policy, which aims to revitalize the North American auto industry. While Chinese EVs remain effectively blocked from US import, there has been a noticeable increase in BYD Motor vehicles on highways in Mexico.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who appears to have deep ties with Beijing, was the first prime minister to visit China since 2017 and is seeking a major thaw in relations after years of tense diplomatic and trade ties.

Carney's move abandons the 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs imposed by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2024, replacing them with a 6.1% rate capped at 49,000 Chinese EVs. In 2023, China exported 41,678 EVs to Canada. The shift in trade policy will certainly capture the Trump administration's attention.

"In order for Canada to build our own competitive EV sector, we need to learn from innovative partners, access their supply chains and increase local demand," Carney told reporters after talks with President Xi Jinping.

Carney may have given the wrong answer. Logically, if Canada wanted to build out an EV sector, it would turn to American expertise, such as Tesla, Rivian, Lucid, or even legacy Detroit automakers. Instead, that does not appear to be the case, raising questions about where Carney's allegiance truly lies, whether with the East or the West.

A recent report via The Bureau's Sam Cooper only suggests Carney's allegiance points towards Beijing...

• Brookfield's Deep Ties To Chinese Land, Loans & Green Deals

And there it is...

“The world has changed much since that last visit, I believe the progress that we have made in the partnership sets us up well for the new world order,” declared the Prime Minister of Canada.

His face really says it all!

Watch as Scott Moe reacts to Mark Carney’s New World Order remark. pic.twitter.com/DyKZB62Rnh

— Rebel News (@RebelNewsOnline) January 15, 2026

Also during his Beijing trip, Carney told Zhao Leji, the third-highest ranking member of the CCP, “We’re heartened by the leadership of President Xi Jinping and the speed with which our relationship has progressed,” Reuters reported.

He added that recent trade friction forced Beijing to slap 100% duties on Canadian canola oil - also known as rapeseed oil - as well as other ag products, with 25% on pork and seafood.

"China used to be the largest market for Canadian canola seed," Carney said. "We want to not just return to those levels, but to surpass them."

It appears Carney has not learned the lesson from Europe, where flooding the market with Chinese EVs helped decimate automakers across the continent.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 11:00

In its June 2024 projections for fiscal year 2025, CBO underestimated revenues by 6 percent and outlays by 2 percent. The agency overestimated the federal budget deficit by 0.7 percent of GDP.

Trump Says Wants To Keep "Hassett Where He Is" Sending Warsh Fed Chair Odds Soaring; Gold Slides

In a strong hint ahead of Trump's decision later this month who the next Fed chair will be, the president appears to have hobbled the chances of one of the Kevins when he said that Kevin Hassett was "fantastic on TV today", and Trump wants to "keep him where he is" since "Fed officials don't talk much" while Hassett is "good at talking."

“I actually want to keep you where you are, if you want to know the truth,” Trump told Hassett during a White House event.

“If I move him, these Fed guys — certainly the one we have now — they don’t talk much. I would lose you. It’s a serious concern to me.”

The news promptly sent Kevin Warsh's Polymarket up to 54% from 34% previously making him the favorite, while Hassett tumbled from a 34% chance to be nominated to a 16% chance, below Chris Waller whose odds also jumped, from 9% to 18%.

And since Warsh is generally viewed more hawkish than Hassett, we have seen an instant jump in the Dollar index...

.. and a slide in gold.

...as rate-cut expectations plunge...

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 10:51