You will pay more and more and more......

How US shoppers will be hit as 'de minimis' tariff exemption ends

Osmond Chia & Laura Blasey

The US has pulled the plug on a long-running global tariff exemption that has been widely used by buyers of low-cost goods.

From Friday, imports valued at $800 (£592) or less will no longer be duty-free and will face tighter customs checks, in a move set to affect millions of shipments a day.

Last year, almost 1.4 billion packages - worth a total of more than $64bn - entered America without being charged duties under a rule called the de minimis exemption, according to US Customs.

Experts say US President Donald Trump's policy change will hit small businesses hardest and shoppers should brace for higher prices and fewer options - at least until the dust settles.

"I've reached the point of acceptance, but when I first heard the news about two and half, three weeks ago, I felt like it might be the end for my business," said Katherine Theobalds, founder and creative director of Buenos Aires-based shoe brand Zou Xou. "It still might - that remains to be seen."

What's the de minimis rule?

De minimis is a Latin term that broadly translates to "about the smallest things", often used in legal contexts to describe matters too trivial to merit concern.

The de minimis exemption was introduced in 1938 to avoid the expense of collecting only small amounts of import duties in the US.

The rule's threshold rose over the years, allowing e-commerce firms and global retailers that ship small packages to the US to thrive.

The exemption was often associated with companies like Chinese e-commerce giants Shein and Temu, which delivered Americans cheap goods that could be quickly shipped from the manufacturing source - with no warehouse stock or associated overhead costs.

But while Shein and Temu helped pioneer this way of working, many other businesses - foreign and domestic, large and small - came to incorporate the "loophole" into their supply chains and sales models.

Executives at Tapestry - the parent company of US fashion brand Coach, which is known for leather bags that sell from roughly $200 to $1,000 - told analysts this month that it expects to take a $160m hit to its profits due to changing tariff policies, with about a third of that attributed to the elimination of the de minimis rule.

Coach has rapidly expanded in recent years in a comeback campaign fuelled by Gen Z shoppers and Tapestry remains confident the momentum will offset some of the impact of tariffs. Still, the elimination of de minimis represents a logistical challenge.

Shipments under the exemption made up more than 90% of all the cargo entering the country, according to US customs.

The president and his predecessor, Joe Biden, criticised the policy as harmful to US businesses and said it has been abused to smuggle illegal goods, including drugs like fentanyl.

In a phone call with reporters on Thursday, Trump's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, said the move will "save thousands of American lives by restricting the flow of narcotics" through the mail, as well as add $10bn a year to US coffers.

Trump fast-tracked the rule's repeal with an executive order this year, well ahead of a planned 2027 expiry date.

With the necessary documentation, shippers will pay duties based on the country of origin's tariff rate. Otherwise, they can choose to pay a fixed fee between $80 and $200 per package, according to the White House.

The second option, which is aimed to give postal services more time to adjust to the change, will only be available for six months.

Mainland China and Hong Kong were the first to be cut from the de minimis rule in May, prompting e-commerce giant Temu to halt direct sales to the US.

Letters and personal gifts worth less than $100 will still be duty-free.

Smaller variety, longer waits

US consumers may see less variety of goods in shops and on e-commerce platforms as businesses get to grips with customs documentation, trade experts have told the BBC.

Smaller firms need time to adjust as they have mostly been spared from such paperwork until now, said Tam Nguyen from logistics administration firm GOL Solution. The company handles exports from South East Asia to the US.

"You need to indicate the source of all the materials in a product, which can come from many countries with different tax rates. This would absolutely make shipments slower."

The complexity could deter sellers from offering a broader range of products for export, she added.

That could have a particular impact on more niche markets.

Christopher Lundell, is a 53-year-old psychologist based in Portland, Oregon who also DJs and mixes music as a hobby. He is an avid vinyl record collector who recently became aware of the de minimis exemption suspension when he tried to - unsuccessfully - buy a $5 rare record from a seller in the UK.

"He cancelled my order and said, 'I'm sorry but the UK is not shipping to the United States anymore.'"

Mr Lundell says he tries his best to find US-based record sellers before searching online for overseas sellers based in countries like the UK, Japan and China. He adds that he understands the need to protect US businesses, but says that he believes a blanket suspension of the de minimis exemption is "political theatre".

Some orders may also be frozen for the next few weeks. Ms Nguyen said clients, including some in the healthcare sector, have halted orders.

Major postal services in the UK, Europe and and the Asia-Pacific region paused deliveries to the US this week.

The operators blamed uncertainty about how the tariffs would work and a lack of time to prepare.

Prices to rise

Without the exemption, businesses will have to factor in tariffs the US has imposed on the country of origin, which came into effect for most nations in August.

Those levies can be as low as 10% for countries like the UK and Australia, while goods from Brazil and India face the highest tariffs at 50%.

Following the change, specific duties will be imposed of $80 per item for countries with tariffs of 16% or less, $160 for shipments from countries with between 16% and 25% tariffs or $200 for items from countries with higher tariffs.

A senior administration official downplayed consumer concerns, saying that the move will "benefit" Americans by making them "safer" and "prosperous".

Some American businesses welcomed the news, arguing the elimination would level the playing field.

"Gap Inc. welcomes the Administration's decision to suspend duty-free de minimis treatment worldwide. The de minimis loophole has long provided an opportunity for some importers & retailers to avoid paying their fair share of US duties," the company said in a statement.

Small firms, in particular, will feel the strain from the costly audits needed to clear US customs, making it tough for sellers to keep prices stable, said trade expert Deborah Elms.

With many postal services holding off on US shipments, sellers may have to pay for more expensive express couriers to reach American buyers for now, said Ms Elms from research firm Hinrich Foundation.

British retailer Wool Warehouse is among firms that have paused orders from the US.

"There is a lot of uncertainty at the moment" due to the short time firms have had to figure out shipment process and fees involved, said managing director Andrew Smith.

His firm hopes to resume orders to the US – its largest export market – within two weeks, he said, adding that time is needed to wait to see how other companies have responded to the changes.

Prices of its goods – mostly wool and crafting materials sourced globally - are likely to rise by up to 50%, said Mr Smith.

The company also plans to revamp its website to indicate the tariff rate chargeable for each product, he said.

"We're aiming for full transparency so people know what it will cost with certainty and then they can decide whether they want to make the purchase or not."

At Zou Xou, Ms Theobalds specialises in artisan-made women's shoes, crafted by small workshops in Argentina, that sell for between $200-$300. She began her career in New York, and has focussed her business on American customers.

She has long operated a two-tier system - customers either receive shoes from a US warehouse where she keeps some stock, or shipped direct from Argentina through DHL.

A boost for China?

Larger shipments of shoes into the US were already subject to customs fees, she says, but sending one or two pairs from Buenos Aires to a customer was achieved cheaply and efficiently because of the de minimis exemption.

Now, she's not sure how to factor in the added costs and is exploring several options and hoping to get more clarity on how to shift her business model.

Equally important, she said, is how businesses like hers explain the changes to consumers.

She worries that even if pricing doesn't change much, a duty process that seems too complicated could turn off even those who want a higher-end product.

"The reason our customers come to us is because they appreciate the artisanal quality. They could have always gone to a mass retailer," she says. "But what people will have to think about is 'does that matter to me all that much, or do I just want a pair of shoes?'"

US-based retailers stand to gain if prices of goods ordered from overseas rise, Ms Elms said.

"If it's too expensive, they'll probably go to Walmart or Target to buy it there," she said.

But with so many goods being sent from around world now being subject to customs duties, US consumers may once again turn to China for cheaper options.

Chinese companies like Shein and Temu have set up distribution centres in the US that will help ease some of the cost of tariffs, said Ms Nguyen.

And China is "months ahead" in figuring out the paperwork as compared to firms in other countries that are now scrambling to get up to speed, she added.

There may be fewer competitors in the overall market, as the end of the de minimis exemption makes it harder for small businesses to launch e-commerce sites, said Ms Nguyen.

"It used to be: Set up a site, list products and start shipping. But now that low-cost entry point is gone."

LDN 234

The diffuse hydrogen-alpha glow of emission region Sh2-27 fills this cosmic scene. The field of view spans nearly 3 degrees across the nebula-rich constellation Ophiuchus toward the central Milky Way. A Dark Veil of wispy interstellar dust clouds draped across the foreground is chiefly identified as LDN 234 and LDN 204 from the 1962 Catalog of Dark Nebulae by American astronomer Beverly Lynds. Sh2-27 itself is the large but faint HII region surrounding runaway O-type star Zeta Ophiuchi. Along with the Zeta Oph HII region, LDN 234 and LDN 204 are likely 500 or so light-years away. At that distance, this telescopic frame would be about 25 light-years wide.

No authority to do this.. Let's see if the spineless Maggots do anything

White House declares $4.9B in foreign aid unilaterally canceled in end-run around Congress' funding power

The administration is setting up clash with Capitol Hill over its use of the "pocket rescission."

By Jennifer Scholtes and Kyle Cheney

President Donald Trump threw a grenade Friday into September government funding negotiations on Capitol Hill, declaring the unilateral power to cancel billions of dollars in foreign aid by using a so-called pocket rescission.

Escalating the administration’s assault on Congress’ funding prerogatives, the White House budget office announced Friday morning that Trump has canceled $4.9 billion through the gambit that Congress’ top watchdog and many lawmakers argue is an illegal end-run around their “power of the purse.”

The move to unilaterally nix money previously approved by Congress raises tensions on Capitol Hill as lawmakers face an Oct. 1 deadline to avoid a government shutdown, pitting Republicans at the White House against GOP lawmakers and increasing pressure on Democrats to force a funding lapse unless Trump stands down.

Democrats and Republicans alike have warned that a pocket rescissions request would hamper cross-party talks to avert a shutdown at the end of September, while fulfilling White House budget director Russ Vought’s wish that the process of funding the government be “less bipartisan” to accommodate a raft of conservative priorities.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer hinted Friday that Democrats could refuse to offer the votes to get a government funding bill through the chamber before funding lapses late next month if congressional Republicans don’t push back against Trump’s latest funding move.

“Republicans don’t have to be a rubber stamp for this carnage,” Schumer said, adding that “if Republicans are insistent on going it alone, Democrats won’t be party to their destruction.”

Yet three congressional Republicans, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said they expect Vought to send additional requests to revoke funding between now and the end of the current fiscal year, which would only inflame tensions.

“Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law,” the Senate’s top Republican appropriator, Maine Sen. Susan Collins, said in a quick and clear rebuke of the Trump administration’s gambit.

But the Trump administration is embracing the strategy boldly and without apology, while also signaling it intends to stare down any legal challenges that may come its way as a result: “Congress can choose to vote to rescind or continue the funds — it doesn’t matter,” an official from the White House budget office said in a statement. “This approach is rare but not unprecedented.”

The White House is allowed to send Congress a clawbacks request and then withhold the cash for 45 days while lawmakers consider whether to approve, reject or ignore the proposal. Because there are less than 45 days left before the end of the fiscal year, Trump’s top budget officials — led by Vought — argue that they can employ the so-called pocket rescission to withhold the funding until it lapses at month’s end, ensuring its cancellation regardless of what Congress decides.

Collins’ Democratic counterpart on the Senate Appropriations Committee, Washington Sen. Patty Murray, called Friday for Republicans to reject Vought’s “brazen attempt to usurp their own power,” arguing that the White House budget director is trying to market an illegal tactic as “some sort of get-out-of-jail free card for this administration to simply not spend investments Congress has made.”

Trump’s new spate of clawbacks, first reported by the New York Post, targets more than $3.2 billion that runs through the U.S. Agency for International Development, which the president has been moving to dismantle since he was inaugurated in January and which Vought will now oversee, according to a Friday social media post from Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for peacekeeping efforts is also deemed canceled under the White House’s latest moves.

The administration filed the rescissions memo in court on Friday, adding another twist to a prominent case moving through the federal courts challenging Trump’s withholding of USAID funding.

That case has already been complicated this month by other questions beyond the expiration of the funds, including whether the head of the GAO — the comptroller general — is the only one who can sue over federal funding being withheld in violation of decades-old impoundment law.

Trump’s latest action is likely to supercharge this legal fight, which is back in the hands of U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, a Biden-era appointee who previously found the administration’s withholding of USAID funds to be illegal on multiple grounds.

Ali is expected to rule quickly on whether there are other bases to order the administration to restore the funding — including whether the cuts were “arbitrary and capricious” under the law.

His decision is likely to send the case surging back to the appellate courts, and possibly even the Supreme Court, to determine whether Trump’s pocket rescissions withstands legal scrutiny. It’s unclear whether the comptroller general, Gene Dodaro, intends to take any additional legal action to force the restoration of funds.

Just stupid

‘His inexperience shines through’: Steve Witkoff struggles to manage Russia as Trump peace envoy

Witkoff’s solo approach has led to repeated miscues with Russia, leaving Trump’s pledge to quickly end the war between Russia and Ukraine adrift.

By Felicia Schwartz

President Donald Trump’s surprise Anchorage summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin could have been a signature achievement for Steve Witkoff, the developer-turned-diplomat who facilitated the meet up.

But promised follow-up meetings between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have not materialized, ceasefire demands were dropped, threats of tough action have disappeared and Trump’s team has offered no clear road ahead.

Some frustrated U.S., Ukrainian and European officials say part of the problem is the go-it-alone style of Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy for peace missions and go-to negotiator on Ukraine. He has refused to consult with experts and allies, leaving him uninformed at times and unprepared at others, according to seven people familiar with internal discussions. Two said he misses the mark by viewing the conflict through a real estate lens, like a land dispute.

Trump’s unconventional fixer has met Putin five times over six months, but he has yet to translate his access to the Russian leader into any breakthroughs on Ukraine.

There were many barriers to the summit in Anchorage yielding results — Putin’s unwillingness to make significant concessions to end his war against Ukraine the major one, but many of those familiar with Witkoff’s role in the negotiations with Russia say he has made talks more difficult.

Witkoff is still trying to make inroads.

He is meeting Friday in New York with Andriy Yermak, head of Zelenskyy’s presidential office, part of an effort to get Russia and Ukraine meeting for technical talks ahead of an eventual trilateral summit. The lower level discussions between Russian and Ukrainian officials, should they happen, are expected to cover territory, security guarantees and other issues and to pave the way for higher level conversations, a senior administration official said.

“What we’re trying to do is put Putin and Zelensky together and create the opportunity to have a successful meeting,” Witkoff said in an interview.

This article is based on conversations with 13 people, including U.S. and foreign officials and other people familiar with the diplomatic effort to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. Many were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations and internal deliberations.

A number of those people argue that the war is much more complex than Trump’s confidant seems to grasp, and blame him for American efforts that have yet to net any meaningful concessions from Moscow.

“His inexperience shines through, he has the president’s ear, which is evident, but there has been some confusion about what has been said and agreed,” said a person familiar with the diplomatic effort.

A second senior administration official defended Witkoff’s approach, saying the outcomes of his diplomacy “speak for themselves, in the form of the historic bilateral meeting [between Trump and Putin] and European leaders coming to the White House less than 48 hours later.”

That’s not enough to declare success, his detractors say.

“He’s kind of a rogue actor,” said a U.S. official familiar with Witkoff’s diplomatic style. “He talks to all these people, but no one knows what he says in any of these meetings. He will say things publicly but then he changes his mind. It’s hard to operationalize that.”

Witkoff’s Washington office is sparsely staffed, and short on people with Russia expertise or experienced in complex diplomatic negotiations. And he has refused to do typical consultations with Russia and Ukraine experts in and outside of government, according to the five people familiar with internal discussions.

Different definitions of success

The summit in Alaska was notable in part because of how little preparation went into it. Typically ahead of such a high-profile meeting, foreign ministers and lower level staffers reach agreement on the choreography and outcomes ahead of time to make sure the meeting is productive and worthwhile.

The new goal of organizing lower-level technical meetings suggests Witkoff’s team may be returning to a more traditional approach and is a reversal from the White House’s previous insistence on the importance of bringing the leaders together immediately.

The second senior administration official said that Witkoff has plenty of access to expertise, adding that he is in regular communication with Secretary of State and acting national security adviser Marco Rubio, along with National Security Council officials ahead of conversations with Putin and other leaders.

As a sign of Witkoff’s success, the official pointed to comments from Finnish President Alexander Stubb, who said during the White House meeting 11 days ago, “in the past two weeks we’ve probably had more progress in ending this war than we have in the past three and a half years.”

After hearing about POLITICO’s reporting, the White House sent over laudatory statements from six people. In one of those, U.K. National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell said Witkoff “has been able to open doors that no one else could” and “is exactly [the] sort of person” who gets results in diplomacy by concentrating “on building trust between key leaders … and moving quietly to cut a deal.”

In another, Vice President JD Vance said “Witkoff has made more progress towards ending the bloodshed in Ukraine than all his critics combined.”

Free-wheeling style

People familiar with Witkoff’s style liken it to Trump’s free-wheeling approach of doing business.

His staff, to the extent he has any, often doesn’t know where he is or what he is doing, according to four people familiar with the dynamics of the office. They said he spends most of his time at his office in the White House, while the rest of his team is at the State Department.

“The thing is, Witkoff isn’t consistently engaged. He will pop in for a visit to Vladimir Putin, say a bunch of stuff, not tell anyone what really happened and then just fuck off to his life again. Meanwhile, the Russians are talking to you about how ‘Witkoff says…’ and you don’t know whether they’re right or not, but you can’t get a readout from the Russians,” the U.S. official said.

Witkoff at times appears to struggle to focus on more than one task at a time, the U.S. official and another one of the people said, adding that when a flurry of developments occurs in one portfolio, say Gaza or Iran or Ukraine, other priorities take a backseat. He is not a voracious consumer of his intelligence briefing materials and doesn’t read them every day, the second person said.

Witkoff rarely reads his government email, according to one of the people and the U.S. official familiar with his role.

The second senior administration official rejected this characterization, saying Witkoff checks his government email daily and receives a daily intelligence briefing. After receiving criticism for using Putin’s translator in Russia, Witkoff now uses a State Department translator during official meetings, the official said.

New positions, new challenges

Part of the issue for Witkoff may be the manner in which he came into his role as chief Ukraine negotiator. During the transition after the 2024 election, Trump named Witkoff to be his special envoy for the Middle East, while Trump named Keith Kellogg as the special envoy for Russia and Ukraine.

At that time, many State Department Russia and Ukraine experts went to work for Kellogg, a second U.S. official said.

But Kellogg was sidelined in dealing with Russia after Moscow complained about him, as POLITICO previously reported. Witkoff became the de facto Putin go-between after he made his first trip to Russia in February to secure the release of a detained American schoolteacher and kick off a monthslong effort at rapprochement after he made the prisoner deal with Moscow.

But many of the staff that specialize in the region stayed at Kellogg’s office, leaving Witkoff’s office with no dedicated Russia or Ukraine experts, the second U.S. official said. That hasn’t changed even as his official remit has expanded to “special envoy for peace missions” to include a number of global disputes.

Discontent on Russia’s side

Witkoff’s Russian interlocutors are also frustrated, particularly with his inability to properly convey Putin’s messages and red lines to Trump, according to the person familiar with his diplomatic efforts, another person familiar with the matter and the first U.S. official.

Russian officials value that Trump has sent someone who is close to the president and can speak for him, but are concerned that Witkoff doesn’t fully understand what Putin is telling him, they said.

Witkoff made a trip to Moscow this month to try to make headway with Putin before Trump’s now-lapsed deadline on steep tariffs for purchasers of Russian oil.

Witkoff left his August visit with Moscow convinced that Russia had agreed to significant territorial concessions — shaping his advice to Trump that the president should grant Putin the one-on-one summit he had long sought, the second U.S. official said.

When he returned to the U.S., Witkoff and Trump both touted those concessions on territory in Eastern Ukraine. His European and Ukrainian interlocutors did not see it that way, the second U.S. official and one of the people familiar with the diplomacy said.

Witkoff said he has not misconstrued the message coming from Moscow.

“I have tremendous support from the State Department, from lots of Russian experts. There’s a lot of very smart people in our system. And not one of them, not in our system, not one of them on the U.S. side has ever said to me, ‘you missed something here,’” he said.

In the discussions, Russia has offered what the Trump administration sees as a significant compromise, a senior administration official said. Under the deal, the U.S. would recognize Russian control over Luhansk, Crimea and Donetsk at their official boundaries and Kherson and Zaporizhia at the contact line, or battle lines on the ground.

“Never before had there been any discussion about this, a compromise on the regions,” the senior administration official said.

But many of Washington’s European and Ukrainian partners do not see this as Russia meaningfully yielding, the second U.S. official said. Such a deal would require Ukraine to withdraw from some of its most heavily fortified territory in Donetsk. Ukraine and its allies see that as legitimizing Putin’s land grab.

Putin’s talking points coming through

There are other instances that have frustrated U.S. and European officials well. In a CNN interview after Trump and Putin’s Alaska summit, Witkoff said Moscow had conceded that Ukraine’s Western partners could provide security guarantees modeled on NATO’s Article 5, which obligates members to treat an attack on one as an attack on all.

However, two of the people familiar with the matter said, Russia had actually suggested conditions similar to those it offered in 2022 during ultimately failed peace talks in Istanbul — that Ukraine could have a so-called deterrence force but that Russia would have a veto over when it was used.

As one person familiar with Witkoff’s role in the process put it: “There’s what Russia says, and what Russia means.”

The second senior administration official said Witkoff “understands all the complexities.”

When Witkoff flies to Moscow, he uses his own plane and brings no policy experts. He is usually only accompanied by his chief of staff, a translator and diplomatic security, according to two people familiar with the matter and the second senior administration official, who added that he pays for all of it himself.

Following the Alaska meeting, European officials have impressed upon Witkoff and Trump the strategic importance of the Donbas region for Ukraine — and how ceding all of it, including territory Russia hasn’t captured, is unacceptable to Kyiv, according to two of the people familiar with internal discussions.

“He seems to have bought into the false Russian narrative that they are winning on the front lines, which we all know is not true,” another one of the people familiar with the discussions said.

Witkoff rejected this characterization.

“What I’m here to do is actually bring two sides together, narrow the issues and get it to a place where we can build political capital and fix this stupid thing,” he said.

At the White House last week, the assembled European leaders likened giving up the Donbas to giving up Florida, trying to phrase it in ways that Trump and Witkoff could grasp, two of the people familiar with internal discussions said.

Some of Ukraine’s allies have suggested comparing the area to the Golan Heights in Israel, likening the strategic importance to another area of the world Witkoff is better steeped in, one of the people said.

Ukraine’s allies look for other avenues

European and Ukrainian officials are buoyed by the presence of other officials working on the process. Kellogg, damaged from his sidelining this year, has managed to come back more into the fold.

But allies were disappointed to see that Kellogg, whose approach they prefer to Witkoff’s, was left out of the Alaska trip after clearing his schedule to go.

Kellogg did later join the meetings with the Europeans in Washington, reassuring those who think he has a more clear-eyed view of the war than Witkoff does, according to the person familiar with internal discussions and another person.

Missteps with Russia aside, European and Ukrainian officials are thrilled that the intense diplomacy of the past several weeks has led to a serious conversation on security guarantees and what the U.S. and Europe would commit.

But, both U.S. officials noted, this process is being led by Rubio and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine, both of whom they much prefer to work with and feel have a clearer-eyed take on the war.

Ukraine, meanwhile, is hoping that Witkoff’s Friday meeting brings new options. A Ukrainian official said the meeting comes after Yermak and secretary of the Ukrainian National Security Council Rustem Umerov visited Qatar to scout the country as a possible location for a meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin.

“Our main focus is to reiterate that Ukraine is ready to meet Russia at the presidential level but Russia continues to delay the process and constantly invents new pretexts as to why to delay it,” the Ukrainian official said, adding that they hoped Witkoff would be receptive to their arguments.

Suspending....

List of places suspending some US parcel shipments grows as tariff exemption ends

By Kathleen Magramo

Japan, Australia, Taiwan and Mexico have joined a growing list of places suspending some parcel shipments to the United States following the implementation of new rules under President Donald Trump’s administration that will end tariff exemptions.

The “de minimis” exemption, which allowed shipments of goods worth $800 or less to enter the United States duty free, will be eliminated starting Friday.

The change by the Trump administration is aimed at slowing the pace of low-cost imports in a bit to bolster domestic manufacturing but has triggered global disruptions to postal networks and e-commerce supply chains.

Countries like India, Thailand, South Korea, and New Zealand have already announced service suspensions until further notice, citing logistical challenges and uncertainty over the US’s tariff policies.

More postal providers across the Asia Pacific are now also temporarily halting services to the US, impacting low-value parcels sent by individuals and small businesses alike.

Japan Post announced it will temporarily suspend deliveries of small packages with values exceeding $100 to the US starting Wednesday, according to a statement Monday. And Mexico on Wednesday announced that it will temporarily suspend shipments to the US, according to a press release.

Australia Post said it will “temporarily partially suspend postal services to the United States and Puerto Rico, effective 26 August 2025 until further notice,” according to a update Tuesday.

“This response is in-line with action taken by numerous postal operators internationally,” it added.

Australian public broadcaster ABC reported uncertainty with postage has also created chaos for e-commerce retailers based in the country.

Speaking with ABC, co-founder of maternity wear brand Apéro, Laz Smith, said: “The volatility in decision making, and the volatility of the market, and, quite frankly, the lack of ability of even Australia Post to be able to address these issues in a timely manner, puts us, and all of Australian fashion, in a really precarious position.”

Taiwan’s postal service has also suspended deliveries of small parcels bound for the US, effective from Tuesday, according to a statement Monday.

Chunghwa Post said it has stopped delivering packages as “the global postal system has not yet provided a service allowing senders to prepay customs duty, and Chunghwa Post’s contracted carriers have also announced suspension of merchandise mail deliveries.”

The de minimis change is expected to affect discount sellers, like Amazon Haul and TikTok Shop, as well as online marketplaces Etsy and Shopify, all of which have connected US consumers to businesses worldwide.

The looming tariff exemption deadline has prompted international postal service DHL to stop accepting shipments to the US starting August 25, joining European peers in halting shipments.

        

Small businesses are scrambling as US tariff exemption comes to an end

US Customs and Border Protection estimated that more than 1.36 billion de minimis shipments entered the country last fiscal year, with more than 4 million de minimis shipments processed each day.

According to the latest executive order, businesses may face an $80 per item charge for a country with a tariff rate less than 16%, or costs as high as $160 per item for a country with a tariff rate of between 16% and 25%, and $200 per item for a country with a tariff rate above 25%.

Countries who stopped mail to the US... Are you waiting for something?

 

Dollar crashing for the last 8 months.....

 

Murder rates in the US...

 DC is bad, but the south is a murder zone..

No point to it... Just a fuck you.

Kristi Noem Waives Environmental Laws to Build Trump’s Wall Through a Wildlife Refuge

It’s not justified, conservationists say. “It’s just incredibly cruel.”

Martha Pskowski

The Department of Homeland Security announced on Tuesday that Secretary Kristi Noem has waived the protections of the Endangered Species Act and other federal statutes to “ensure the expeditious construction” of the border wall through the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge in Texas.

Funds were appropriated for border wall construction in the Rio Grande Valley during the first Trump administration. Now, the administration is eyeing this biodiverse area in Starr County for its next stage of border fortification.

By the time the refuge was established in 1979, the Rio Grande Valley had already lost most of its native habitat. The US Fish and Wildlife Service pieced together property to protect biodiversity and create a wildlife corridor along the Rio Grande.

Endangered ocelots are being reintroduced in the scrub thorn landscape of Starr County. Other notable species in the area include green jays and the chachalaca, a tropical bird known for its distinctive call. 

Following Noem’s waivers, the federal government will no longer have to follow the National Environmental Protection Act, the Clean Water Act, the Migratory Bird Conservation Act and other seminal federal laws to construct the border wall on 13 tracts in the national wildlife refuge. 

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 granted the Department of Homeland Security the authority to waive federal laws to expedite border wall construction. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have used these waivers. In June, DHS issued waivers for 36 miles of border wall construction in Arizona and New Mexico.

Conservation advocates said that there is no national security justification for building a wall through the national wildlife refuge. They warn that the wall will threaten wildlife and cut off communities from the Rio Grande.

“The government owns this land for the sake of conservation,” said Laiken Jordahl, a Southwest conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. “But this administration is willing to pick those places to be the first to destroy. It’s just incredibly cruel.”

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for further comment. In addition to environmental laws, the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, the National Trails System Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act will be waived.

Congress appropriated funds for the border wall in the Rio Grande Valley in 2019. Now the second Trump administration is picking up where it left off, targeting federal land in the wildlife refuge for border wall construction to avoid the lengthy process encountered by the first Trump administration for condemning private property in the Rio Grande Valley.

Many landowners have fought back, significantly slowing down construction. Texas is also building its own border wall but has made little progress. The Department of Homeland Security under President Joe Biden invoked waivers to continue construction in Starr County in 2023. 

Noem authorized the waivers in the Federal Register, stating that the Rio Grande Valley is “an area of high illegal entry.” The order states that between fiscal years 2021 and 2025, over 1.5 million undocumented immigrants were apprehended in Custom and Border Protection’s Rio Grande Valley sector.

“Since the President took office, DHS has delivered the most secure border in history,” the order states. “More can and must be done.”

The authorization does not reference any specific information about apprehensions in the national wildlife refuge tracts. The number of migrant apprehensions has plummeted since Trump took office. CBP reported fewer than 1,000 monthly migrant encounters in the Rio Grande Valley sector in June and July this year. The sector spans more than 34,000 square miles.

“There is no possible way that someone could argue that there is an emergency at the border that necessitates waiving our nation’s most important environmental laws,” CBD’s Jordahl said.

Scott Nicol, an artist and activist in the Rio Grande Valley, said that the Trump administration is targeting federal lands for border wall construction because it’s “easier” than seizing private property.

“If you’re tasked with doing this tremendously environmentally destructive project, the waivers make it easy,” Nicol said. “The big thing slowing them down is they can’t waive property rights so they have to go through condemnation.”

Nicol said he has spent significant time in the parts of the wildlife refuge targeted for the wall and has rarely seen border crossers or Border Patrol agents. He said that border wall construction is a “spectacle” and that there is no “particular tactical reason” to target the national wildlife refuge.

The area targeted for construction falls within the Rio Grande floodplain. A 1970 treaty between the US and Mexico commits both countries to ensuring that construction along the Rio Grande does not obstruct the river or the flow of flood waters. Mexican agencies have previously objected to border wall plans under the treaty terms.

Nicol was dubious that US federal agencies would adequately integrate flood risks into their construction plans. “They’re not going to worry about it until they have a big flood,” he said.

The International Boundary and Water Commission reviews construction along the border, including flood risk. “The IBWC fully supports President Trump’s and DHS actions to secure the border for all Americans,” said spokesperson Frank Fisher. “IBWC and DHS have an excellent cooperative relationship that allows the IBWC to carry out all its responsibilities.”

Troll is right......

“The Most Transparent Administration In History” Refuses to Say Who’s Behind Their Batshit Social Media

Government trolls spread cruel memes and “textbook propaganda” on behalf of Trump.

Anna Merlan

The way the U.S. government communicates online has shifted dramatically since Donald Trump returned to power on January 20. Before then, for instance, it wasn’t likely that the official White House Twitter/X account would tweet “Go woke, go broke” over a cartoon of the president meant to look like the (original, newly restored) Cracker Barrel logo. Nor was it likely that the Department of Homeland Security would share a constant string of cruel and gross tweets, jokes, and memes about deporting immigrants, repelling “invaders,” and thinly-veiled references to white supremacist talking points. (DHS recently shared a meme bearing the phrase “Which way, American man,” a barely-altered nod to Which Way, Western Man?, a book by white supremacist author William Gayley Simpson.) And while the White House, DHS, ICE and other agencies have thrown themselves into full-time shitposting, there is one question they don’t seem to want to answer: who, exactly, is behind these messages and memes? 

As disinformation researcher Joan Donovan recently pointed out to Mother Jones, the often overtly bigoted, xenophobic posts emanating from the current version of the U.S. government aren’t signed or attributed to anyone in particular. “They’re most effective when they’re authorless,” Donovan said, calling the posts “classic, textbook propaganda.” It’s unusual for the administration not to take any opportunity to brag about a perceived win, but that’s what they’ve done here: the White House hasn’t, for instance, appointed a Meme Czar or made someone available to boast about the aggressive new direction their social media strategy has taken. And as I learned this week, even asking who’s writing this stuff can elicit a very strange, remarkably sloppy, and weirdly personal response. 

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on who’s writing their posts or directing their social media strategy. But the Department of Homeland Security did. In response to an email asking about the authorship of their social media posts—and whether the agency was aware that “Which way, American man?” is a barely-altered reference to a white supremacist text, they sent an (unsigned) email that completely ignored the former question. They demanded the message be attributed to “DHS Spokesperson” and reprinted in full. 

“DHS will continue using every tool at its disposal to keep the American people informed as our agents work to Make America Safe Again,” the statement began. “Unfortunately, the American people can no longer rely on journalists like Anna Merlin [sic], who has tweeted the F-word 67 times in her illustrious career at (checks notes)… Jezebel and Mother Jones;  to give them the clear unvarnished truth on the work our brave agents are doing on a daily basis. Until Mother Jones returns to relevancy (unlikely), and becomes a neutral arbiter, DHS will continue cutting through the lies, mistruths, and half-quotes to keep Americans informed.”

DHS did not respond to a follow-up email about what “F-word” they are referring to here, but if it’s the word “fuck,” 67 seems like a drastic undercount. I did not, however, count for myself the number of times I have tweeted the word “fuck” or any of its related words or phrases and so cannot vouch for the agency’s math. 

“Calling everything you dislike ‘white supremacist propaganda’ is tiresome,” they added, seeming to refer to the cartoon the agency tweeted alongside the “American man” tweet, which showed a rumpled-looking Uncle Sam regarding a sign at a crossroads, bearing words like “CULTURAL DECLINE” and “INVASION,” facing opposite from words like “HOMELAND” and “OPPORTUNITY.”

“Uncle Sam, who represents America, is at a crossroads, pondering which way America should go,” the statement continues. “Under the Biden Administration America experienced radical social and cultural decline. Our border was flung wide open to a horde of foreign invaders and the rule of law became nonexistent, as American daughters were raped and murdered by illegal aliens. Under President Trump and Secretary Noem we are experiencing a return to the rule of law, and the American way of life.”

In some ways, DHS’ bizarre email isn’t a surprise, given the new breed of Trump administration flacks who are hyperaggressive, doggedly loyal, and work very hard to sound like the president. But it is a bit ironic that the posts’ authors are such a closely guarded secret; Trump’s White House has repeatedly declared itself “the most transparent administration in history,” promising a constant string of disclosures—albeit ones that don’t always pan out. (See Jeffrey Epstein.) Nevertheless, they’ve turned the transparency boast into a bit of a tagline, while churning out a constant string of videos, press releases and, of course, social media posts that claim to debunk the work of F-bomb dropping journalists like myself.

And yet, they seem remarkably reluctant to talk about who, exactly, is producing the harmful slop they’re spilling into the American political discourse. As with so many things related to the Trump administration, a great deal can be gleaned from what they don’t want to discuss. 

This is what the mafia does...

‘It sickens me to the core’: Newsom slams Trump's Intel deal

The California governor hit out at the president's deal for the federal government to take a stake in the Silicon Valley icon.

By Christine Mui

Gov. Gavin Newsom said on Wednesday that people would be “outraged” if former President Joe Biden tried to strike the same deals that the Trump administration has with chipmakers Intel and Nvidia.

“This is outrageous. It’s reckless. If Joe Biden tried to nationalize Intel, if Joe Biden did a deal to send to H20 chips to China,” Newsom told POLITICO. “People would be outraged. Are you kidding me?”

President Donald Trump announced this month that the federal government would take a 10 percent equity stake in Intel, the only American manufacturer of advanced chips, weeks after negotiating for profits from semiconductor firms, Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices. All three companies are headquartered in California.

The Nvidia and AMD agreements drew backlash from national security hawks for allowing the two to once again export certain chips to China in exchange for giving the U.S. government 15 percent of the revenue.

But Intel, whose rise decades ago made it an icon of Silicon Valley, was the sticking point for Newsom.

“It sickens me to the core,” Newsom said earlier during POLITICO’s “The California Agenda: Sacramento Summit.”

“You just socialize and nationalize Intel.”

He returned to the issue a third time at the event, pointing out that the “nationalization of private industries is something they’re pretty good at in China” and predicting Beijing’s leader, Xi Jinping, was “loving this.”

Trump’s dealmaking in the sector marked a deviation from his predecessor in both cases.

He paid for the government’s $8.9 billion investment in Intel stock by repurposing funds that Biden had awarded it through grants from his signature CHIPS Act and a secretive Pentagon deal.

Nvidia designed the H20 chip to sell for the Chinese market after the Biden administration imposed export controls on more advanced versions. While the product offers less computational power than Nvidia’s top offerings, Beijing’s domestic tech giants have kept using it to train AI systems.

Biden national security officials had discussed placing additional restrictions to cover the H20 chip, but never took official action. The Trump administration initially banned it from being sold to China earlier this year, before reversing course ahead of trade talks with Xi.

Dictator? A stupid fat moronic turd more like it......

Gavin Newsom: ‘I don't think Donald Trump wants another election’

The California governor painted a bleak picture of the state of American democracy under President Trump.

By Melanie Mason and Dustin Gardiner

Gavin Newsom warned the country is on the precipice of tipping into authoritarianism, predicting that President Donald Trump does not want to leave office after his term ends and accusing federal immigration officials of acting as “the largest private police force in history.”

The California governor, speaking at POLITICO’s “The California Agenda: Sacramento Summit” on Wednesday, repeatedly urged the audience to “wake up” to dangers he said are posed by the president. He cast Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, as well as Border Patrol agents, as acting in Trump’s interests instead of the general public.

“When they’re done with this — all that funding and that ‘big beautiful betrayal’ allows more resources for this private police force that increasingly is showing a tendency not to swear an oath to the Constitution, but to the president of the United States,” Newsom said.

Newsom — stating that “the rule of law is being replaced by the rule of Don” — predicted the federal agents would be sent to voting booths and polling places across the country. But he later questioned whether there would be future democratic elections at all.

“I don’t think Donald Trump wants another election,” he said, adding he has two dozen “Trump 2028" hats sent to him by the president’s supporters. He suggested that people dismissing talk of a third term were naive.

Newsom described a moment during his 90-minute Oval Office meeting with Trump in February when the president pointed to a painting of former President Franklin D. Roosevelt — which he interpreted as a nod to Trump’s desire to serve a third term.

Trump said this month he would “probably not” run for a third term, which would be in violation of the Constitution.

Newsom, a likely 2028 candidate, struck an angry and pugilistic tone throughout his interview as he implored Democrats to be more assertive and “stand tall” against Trump. He repeated a piece of advice that he said he once heard from former President Bill Clinton on the rise of American populism: “‘Given the choice, the American people always support strong and wrong versus weak or not,’” Newsom recalled. “And I think our party needs to wake up.”

“We’re losing this country in real time,” he said. “It’s not bloviation, not exaggeration. It’s happening.”

Newsom himself has recently embraced a more aggressive approach on social media, mocking Trump and Republicans through his personal and press office accounts on X. He said he’s pulling few punches on that front as his team deploys more satirical memes and splashy AI-generated content.

“We have a ‘Kill Switch,’” Newsom said, responding to a question about whether he approves the posts. The governor added that he’s killing “less every day,” prompting laughter from the audience.

Fuck the orange fat toad...

'Fine for what'? Newsom doubles down on refusal to give in to Trump's UCLA demands

The Democratic governor was adamant that California should not "sell out our values" over funding.

By Eric He

Gavin Newsom forcefully doubled down Wednesday on his belief that California should not give into the Trump administration’s demand that UCLA pay $1 billion to restore hundreds of millions of dollars in frozen research funding.

Speaking at POLITICO’s “The California Agenda: Sacramento Summit,” Newsom said the UC Board of Regents, which has remained tight-lipped about whether it plans to negotiate with the administration or dig in for a fight, needs to “do the right thing” but understands that “they’re all scared.”

“How could you possibly accept the fine?” an exasperated governor said, referring to the billion-dollar demand or some smaller amount the regents could negotiate. “Fine for what?”

With Trump alleging UCLA has fostered a campus atmosphere hostile to Jewish students and faculty, Newsom hailed efforts by state institutions to combat antisemitism. He expressed dismay that the state could pay to settle with “the guy who had dinner with Nick Fuentes telling us about antisemitism” — a reference to a far-right activist who Trump hosted at Mar-a-Lago in 2022. “Are you kidding me?”

The governor, who previously described the settlement proposal as “extortion” and threatened to sue over it, said the matter is bigger than just UCLA. It is about “anybody or any institution that disagrees with them,” he said.

The Trump administration suspended more than $500 million in research funding from UCLA in late July over allegations of antisemitism on campus. It followed with its opening bid for what it wanted to restore the money: the $1 billion payment and a host of reforms including eliminating scholarships based on race or ethnicity and a ban on the use of proxies for race in its admissions process.

The governor said he would be fine with a deal that “means nothing and has the form and substance of fog.”

“But the minute we sell our souls or sell out our values, that ain’t going to happen,” Newsom said.

Newsom, who sits on the regents as an ex officio member, called the demands a “false pretense” and praised the state Legislature’s Jewish caucus for “finally pushing back” when it issued a statement defending the UCs. He has previously called out two other universities, Brown and Columbia, for reaching deals with the Trump administration in recent weeks to get research funding back and said Harvard’s president should resign for reportedly considering a settlement.

“Everyone’s scared,” Newsom said. “That’s why they sold out at Columbia.”

The governor added that he doubted Trump would negotiate with the UCs given that he was “mocking Harvard.”

“This guy will take anything down, and he’s trying to shut them down,” Newsom said. “I mean, a billion-dollar fine in UCLA shuts them down. It shuts down one of the finest research institutions in the world. But it’s a consistent pattern. Any institution that cultivates individual or independent thinking is under assault. And we’re going to do everything in our power to stop folks from selling out.”

Earlier in the day, Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla told POLITICO he’d leave the door open for UCLA to reach a deal with Trump if it was a “minor, negligible” payment or policy change in exchange for the restoration of research funding. The UC administration has only publicly stated that it is “evaluating” the administration’s proposal and called the demands “devastating” and “far-reaching.”

Tariff confusion

Mexico suspends postal shipments to United States over tariff confusion

Other countries have made similar moves as they seek clarity on the Trump administration's policies.

By Associated Press

Mexico said Wednesday its postal service was suspending package shipments to the United States ahead of an end to the exemption on tariff duties for low-value packages by the Trump administration.

The announcement follows similar moves by postal services from the European Union and several other countries to pause shipping as they await more clarity on the U.S. measure. It also comes during monthslong negotiations between the Mexican government and the Trump administration to avoid wider tariffs.

The exemption — known as the “ de minimis” exemption, which allows packages worth less than $800 to come into the U.S. duty free — is ending Friday. A total of 1.36 billion packages were sent in 2024 under this exemption, for goods worth $64.6 billion, according to data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Mexico’s government said its postal service, Correos de Mexico, will temporarily suspend package deliveries to the U.S., starting Wednesday.

“Mexico continues its dialogue with U.S. authorities and international postal organizations to define mechanisms that will allow for the orderly resumption of services, providing certainty to users and avoiding setbacks in the delivery of goods,” the statement read.

With the announcement, Mexico joins several European and other countries, including Australia and Japan, in suspending the shipments to the U.S. amid confusion over new import duties.

Yunnueth Hernández brought her two children to the post office Wednesday to send a letter to a relative in the U.S., to show them “how we used to communicate” before emails and internet, but left disappointed.

“Unfortunately, we couldn’t send it because they told us with the tariffs, shipments to the U.S. were canceled,” she said.

Outside the building, a woman was in tears after being unable to send a 10-page letter and photographs to her boyfriend in the U.S.

Mexico has tried to negotiate with President Donald Trump to avoid increased tariffs by taking more aggressive security measures against the country’s drug cartels and sending dozens of imprisoned cartel figures to the U.S. for prosecution.

Over tourism........

‘Naples is dead’: How over tourism is hollowing out Italian cities

Rising numbers of visitors are swamping the locals, making housing scarce, increasing pollution and even emptying churches.

By Martina Sapio

Via dei Tribunali is one of Naples’ busiest arteries, filled with restaurants and shops. Down one of its side alleys stands a bronze statue of Pulcinella, the trickster who has long symbolized the city. In high season, the queue to rub his nose can stretch half a kilometer as tourists chase an ancient Neapolitan good-luck ritual.

But locals know that tradition is fake.

The statue was erected only in the 2010s, and was largely ignored by Neapolitans. Only in recent years influencers discovered it, fabricated a folkloric backstory, and suddenly no tourist felt their trip to Naples was complete without it. The result is a paradoxical “local” tradition without any locals — and a good example of what overtourism is doing to Italian cities.

“The historic center of Naples is dead,” said sociologist and activist Francesco Calicchia, who lives and works in the working-class Sanità neighborhood. “Those streets aren’t neighborhoods anymore. There are no Neapolitans left, no real life left. They’ve become playgrounds, open-air shopping malls.”

Sipping a coffee on Via Foria, just outside the tourist grid, he noticed a shirtless man ambling past, dragging a suitcase down the middle of the street. “The problem,” Calicchia said, eying the man cutting across the street, “is that this kind of tourism isn’t being managed or controlled.”

Many cities across Italy are wrestling with the same pressures. But Naples — with its tangled history and outspoken residents — offers a particularly vivid case study.

Activists, workers, experts and local politicians all argue that overtourism is hollowing out the fabric of the city — and while it’s often touted as a source of money and jobs, they say it mostly enriches the wealthy instead.

Housing scarcity

One of the main ways tourism is reshaping Naples is through its impact on housing.

“Short-term rentals have grown exponentially in Naples, just like in other Italian cities,” said Chiara Capretti, a municipal councilor and member of Resta Abitante — an association defending the right to housing — as she hunted for a free table in the tourist-clogged San Domenico Square.

In some working-class districts, there’s one B&B for every three homes. “If this were happening in wealthier neighborhoods, locals might absorb higher rents and rising costs,” said Ivan Avella, a local urban planning graduate. “But in poorer districts, the impact is much harsher. The area stays poor — but now it’s also touristy.”

The result is that residents are being displaced. “There’s been a noticeable increase in evictions,” Capretti said.

Giuseppe Giglio, a humanitarian worker who also moonlights as a tour guide in Naples, is one of many pushed out by the B&B boom.

In 2023, his landlord told him he was converting the apartment into a business project backed by state funds to spur investment in southern Italy. For the landlord it seemed easier — and more profitable — to evict Giglio and turn the apartment into a short-term rental.

Before his notice period was even up, Giglio woke one morning to find workers already tearing out gas pipes in the next room.

“I lost everything and ended up crashing with friends, my cat in tow, until I could move into another place. For a while, I was literally on the street,” he recounted over the phone before his work shift. But what shocked him most was how quickly the whole building was transformed.

“That building is still home to families who’ve lived there for generations … but many of them don’t have the tools — financial or cultural — to fight situations like this,” he said. “Four floors, two apartments per floor, all the apartments on my side — first, second, and fourth floors — have been converted into short-term rentals, bed and breakfasts, or student housing.”

“So gradually, one by one, long-term residents have been pushed out to make room for tourists and temporary renters.”

“I once heard about an elderly Neapolitan woman who lived in the city center and couldn’t get home because the streets were too crowded,” said Gaia Portolano, who works at a tourist infopoint, explaining what it’s like to coexist with overtourism. “A tourist overheard her complaining and told her that she was the one living in the wrong place.”

The pressure on Naples’ housing is so intense that local urban planning discussions now revolve around investing in the eastern part of the city, Capretti said, which is full of neglected and abandoned areas. The idea is to “recover lost livability in the historic center by building it in the eastern zone” — supposedly by moving residents out of the city center to make room for tourists.

Supporters of the tourism boom argue that platforms like Airbnb can benefit small landlords.

However, in 2023 Avella noted that almost two-thirds of Airbnb hosts owned more than one property, and the top five hosts controlled roughly 500 listings. He suggested that means the largest landlords are companies, not people. And even when owners are individuals, they are often from wealthier cities like Rome or Milan, he added.

“There’s no redistribution of money locally,” Calicchia said, adding that Naples is being used as a postcard for Italy while the profits flow north or abroad.

One striking example, he added, is an ancient residential building in the central square of Rione Sanità. The Turin-based coffee giant Lavazza painted a mural on the façade, blending Neapolitan slang with a street art style popularized in town by football fan murals — and even added a QR code linking to the company’s website.

“This is what Naples has become,” he says. “An open-air supermarket for northern Italian companies that come here and take pieces of our neighborhoods.”

Some Italian cities and regions have tried to regulate the Airbnb explosion, but local officials say their hands are tied without national backing. In fact, critics argue the government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has only made matters worse.

Capretti, who is part of the left-wing Power to the People opposition party, said new laws make it easier to renovate apartments and change their intended use. She pointed to a 2024 law, promoted by current Infrastructure Minister Matteo Salvini, which introduced measures to simplify construction and urban planning.

Meloni’s government also challenged a law in Italy’s northern Tuscany region that allowed municipal administrations, in agreement with the region, to identify zones where they could set rules and limits on short-term rentals. The central government argued it restricted business freedom and competition.

“There’s still no national law on short-term rentals, and that’s obviously a problem for local governments,” Capretti said, adding that municipalities and regions can only do so much. “The real decisions can only be made at the national level.”

“We need a national law to set some boundaries,” confirmed Gennaro Acampora, the leader of the opposition Democratic Party in Naples’ City Council. He suggested urban plans to set a maximum percentage of short-term rentals to prevent the displacement of residents.

Inauthentic cities

Visitors are drawn to Naples and to Italy for what they see as authenticity — vibrant street life, colorful murals, food culture and the warmth of local people. But as residents are priced out, that very authenticity is eroding.

Critics increasingly describe the city’s historic center as an “open-air fry shop,” overrun by stalls selling near-identical snacks. International chains keep multiplying, leaving locals asking how many pizzerias can realistically fit on a single street.

“On Via Toledo, in 46 meters, there was only one food-related business in 2015. By 2023, there were already five — one every 9 meters,” said Avella, referring to one of Naples’ busiest thoroughfares.

This proliferation of eateries has displaced important local landmarks. The Pironti bookstore in Dante Square, where generations of students bought their schoolbooks, has been replaced by a tavern.

City authorities tried to curb the restaurant boom by allowing new businesses only in certain cases, such as if they offered something beyond food. The unintended result, explained Capretti, is that “now every tavern calls itself a book-osteria.”

The boom in food tourism has also amplified long-running waste management challenges. Disposable packaging from takeout businesses piles up in the streets, much of it left by visitors. “In many neighborhoods, it’s now impossible to walk without being hit by the constant smell of frying,” Capretti complained.

The transformation is also tearing at the social fabric. The city’s homeless population, once a visible part of central Naples, has been pushed into other neighborhoods.

“What happens if I install uncomfortable benches — or remove them altogether? Suddenly, staying isn’t an option. A tourist won’t notice, because they rarely stop,” but residents will, said Adolfo Baratta, an architecture professor at Rome’s Roma Tre University.

“In city centers, public restrooms have all but disappeared, and it’s a real problem,” added Baratta. “Someone who needs a toilet is forced to go into a café and consume, or else relieve themselves in the street. You’re being pushed into private consumption because a public service is no longer offered.”

This logic, he said, disproportionately affects the poor.

“Homeless people are expelled, also because their presence is deemed unpleasant for tourists. They’re pushed out of historic centers and given no conditions to remain. If you can’t even lie on a bench, you’re forced to move. But has the problem been solved? No — it’s just been shifted elsewhere.”

Praying for change

Even religious practices are changing. Churches that once served as gathering places for residents are now tourist attractions, pushing worship out of the historic center.

“Of course, places of worship located in areas that have become economically unsustainable lose their community of faithful. And it’s not just happening in Naples,” said Domenico Bilotti, a professor of canon law at Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro.

If younger generations are forced to live ever farther from their workplaces because city centers are economically inaccessible, he said, churches and religious associations will take on new roles. “They become welfare providers.”

Culture is also tailored for tourists and not locals, often becoming too expensive. “Many things that were free are now paid,” confirmed Marina Minniti, an activist with Mi Riconosci, a group defending cultural workers’ rights.

Ironically, tourism often erases the very qualities that attracted visitors in the first place. Avella said that in his research, speaking directly with tourists, he has started to notice some complaints that there are simply too many food businesses and that the city’s commercial life feels increasingly lopsided.

“Tourism isn’t going to stay this strong forever,” Calicchia warned. “Without political planning and a plan B, letting it continue unchecked carries serious risks.” He sipped his coffee and told the story of a woman from his neighborhood who once worked as a cleaner.

“The lady got a couple of B&Bs to host, and her son opened a bar and also took on a couple of B&Bs. So, you see, tourism can be a way to escape poverty quickly,” he said.

“But the problem is there’s no plan B when tourism dries up, like it is doing now,” he added, referring to the recent flattening of visitor numbers in Naples. “She had to close her B&Bs because fewer tourists are coming now. She had to take a job in a restaurant, but that’s only until it closes too, because that too, like everything else, depends on tourism.”

Time to hit back...

Putin defies pressure for peace with massive strike hitting EU mission in Kyiv

EU building was severely damaged but staff are safe after an attack that Ukraine’s foreign minister said deliberately targeted diplomats.

By Zoya Sheftalovich and Nette Nöstlinger

The pressure being put on Vladimir Putin by Donald Trump and European leaders to end the war in Ukraine shows no sign of having an effect. Early Thursday, Russia launched a deadly attack on Kyiv that killed at least 12 and damaged buildings housing the EU and British delegations.

There were no injuries to EU staff in the attack. Commission spokesperson Arianna Podestà said Thursday: “The attacks are completely unacceptable. In no way will they shake our support for Ukraine.” She added that diplomatic staff would remain in Ukraine despite the attack.

The EU’s ambassador to Ukraine, Katarina Mathernova, said the building was “severely damaged by the shock wave” of the “massive” barrage of drones and ballistic missiles Russia launched at Ukraine overnight.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha accused Russia of having “targeted diplomats — in direct breach of the Vienna Convention.” The EU’s foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas called it “a deliberate choice to escalate and mock” peace efforts, and said the Russian envoy in Brussels was being summoned.

The British Council’s Kyiv office, which is close to the EU delegation building, was also hit. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the attacks were “senseless” and added that “Putin is killing children and civilians, and sabotaging hopes of peace. This bloodshed must end.” According to Sky News, the Russian ambassador to the U.K. will be summoned by the Foreign Office.

French President Emmanuel Macron was among those who condemned the attacks, which he described as “terror” and “barbarism.”

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said during a press conference in Estonia that “this cannot remain without consequences” and the Russian attacks will be discussed at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Copenhagen.

The strikes come as Trump is ramping up pressure on Putin as he seeks to forge a peace deal to end the war.

Ukraine has made Western-backed security guarantees a central demand in any settlement to prevent further Russian attacks. After the country’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and some of his key European backers gathered in the White House on Aug. 18, Trump’s administration signaled it would support a European-led force helping guarantee Ukrainian security, providing intelligence assets and battlefield oversight and taking part in an air defense shield.

But while Trump said afterward that he would soon convene a trilateral meeting with Putin and Zelenskyy, and that the Russian had agreed to the idea, Kremlin-watchers have cast doubt on Putin’s intentions.

The Russian president has prevaricated, dragging his heels on any direct meeting with Zelenskyy and on peace negotiations.

Moscow has doubled down on its asks, including demanding that Kyiv cede the entire Donbas region, among them key strategic strongholds that Russia does not control. Zelenskyy has ruled that out, saying doing so would provide Putin a springboard for a future invasion. Russia on Wednesday also rejected the idea of European peacekeeping troops serving in Ukraine — contradicting Trump’s claim that Putin would accept them under a peace deal.

Thursday’s attack on Kyiv comes on the same day as the EU’s defense ministers are due to arrive in Copenhagen to discuss how to put more pressure on Russia via both sanctions and support for Ukraine.

Germany’s Wadephul said Thursday: “The Russian president is not yet ready to meet with President Zelenskyy. We will not be blinded by delaying tactics and will instead continue to support Ukraine with weapons, with all the necessary support, and with political backing on its path to the European Union and NATO.”

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said EU delegation staffers were safe, and called for Russia to “stop its indiscriminatory attacks on civilian infrastructure immediately.”

European Council President António Costa said the damage to the EU delegation building in Kyiv overnight was “deliberate,” adding that he was “horrified” by the Russian attacks. But, he said, “The EU will not be intimidated. Russia’s aggression only strengthens our resolve to stand with Ukraine and its people.”

European Parliament President Roberta Metsola condemned “another indiscriminate Russian attack during this senseless aggression,” calling the delegation “the EU’s voice on the ground in Ukraine” in a post on X.

“I strongly condemn these brutal attacks, a clear sign that Russia rejects peace & chooses terror,” the EU’s Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos said in a statement on social media.

“Our full solidarity goes to EU staff, their families, & all Ukrainians enduring this aggression,” she continued.

Does anyone even care???????

 ANOTHER SHOOTING IN AMERICA.....

I don't know.. Maybe she is stupid, ignorant, moronic, toadstoolish????

Trump pick for CDC director ousted weeks after Senate confirmation

Nadine Yousif

The director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Susan Monarez, has been ousted from her role as head of the public health agency, a source familiar with the matter told the BBC's US partner CBS News.

It comes less than a month after she was confirmed by the Senate. It is unclear why she was removed from the job.

The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) confirmed her departure in a post on X, thanking her "for her dedicated service to the American people."

Ms Monarez, a long time federal government scientist, was nominated by President Donald Trump to lead the CDC and was confirmed in a Senate vote in July.

Her nomination came after Trump withdrew his first pick, former Republican congressman Dave Weldon, who had come under fire for his views on vaccines and autism.

In its post on X, the HHS said that US Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr "has full confidence" in the CDC team, "who will continue to be vigilant in protecting Americans against infectious diseases at home and abroad."

Shortly after Ms Monarez's departure was announced, at least three other senior CDC leaders resigned from the agency, according to emails obtained by CBS.

Daniel Jernigan, who led the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, quit the agency citing "the current context in the Department".

It is unclear whether his resignation is linked to Ms Monarez's ousting.

Also on Wednesday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved new Covid vaccines while limiting who could receive them.

The vaccines will be available for all seniors, but younger adults and children without underlying health conditions will be excluded.

"The emergency use authorizations for Covid vaccines, once used to justify broad mandates on the general public during the Biden administration, are now rescinded," Kennedy wrote on X.

The BBC has contacted the CDC for comment.

Ms Monarez was the first CDC director in 50 years to not hold a medical degree. Her background is in infectious disease research.

In her month as the CDC leader, she helped comfort agency employees after the CDC's headquarters in Atlanta was attacked by a gunman who believed he had been harmed by Covid vaccines.

The attack, in which hundreds of bullets struck the building, killed one police officer.

Earlier this month, current and former employees of the agency wrote an open letter accusing Kennedy of fuelling violence towards healthcare workers with his anti-vaccine rhetoric.

Ms Monarez departure comes about a week after a union representing CDC employees announced that it had fired about 600 employees.

The wide-ranging layoffs included employees working on the government's response to infectious diseases, including bird flu, as well as those researching environmental hazards and handling public record requests.

You go along with it, you are a NAZI...

Slouching Into Fascism

Are we already past the tipping point?

Garrett Graff

The United States, just months before its 250th birthday as the world’s leading democracy, has tipped over the edge into authoritarianism and fascism. In the end, faster than I imagined possible, it did happen here. The precise moment when and where in recent weeks America crossed that invisible line from democracy into authoritarianism can and will be debated by future historians, but it’s clear that the line itself has been crossed.

I think many Americans wrongly believe there would be one clear unambiguous moment where we go from “democracy” to “authoritarianism.” Instead, this is exactly how it happens — a blurring here, a norm destroyed there, a presidential diktat unchallenged. Then you wake up one morning and our country is different.

Something is materially different in our country this week than last.

Everything else from here on out is just a matter of degree and wondering how bad it will get and how far it will go? Do we end up “merely” like Hungary or do we go all the way toward an “American Reich”? So far, after years of studying World War II, I fear that America’s trajectory feels more like Berlin circa 1933 than it does Budapest circa 2015.

Saying that our country has tipped over an invisible edge into an authoritarian state plainly is important — and easier than most in the media and pundit class will pretend it is. They will presumably for some period of time — perhaps even a long period of time — stick to euphemisms (with lines like “No president has asserted such direct and sweeping control over the nation’s capital” and “Through immigration crackdowns and cultural purges, President Trump is wielding government power to enforce a more rigid, exclusionary definition of what it means to be American”) and continue to give voice to “both siders,” but the reality is that only one political party is responsible for this moment. They will say that Trump’s motives are inscrutable or unclear — but the effect of Trump’s governing style is undeniable.

American fascism looks like the president using armed military units from governors loyal to his regime to seize cities run by opposition political figures and it looks like the president using federal law enforcement to target regime opponents.

American fascism looks like the would-be self-proclaimed king deploying the military on US soil not only not in response to requests by local or state officials but over — and almost specifically to spite — their vociferous objections.

The president’s military occupation of the capital has escalated in recent days into something not seen since British troops marched the streets of colonial Boston — even though precisely nothing has happened to warrant it, the Pentagon has now armed the National Guard patrolling DC and armored vehicles, designed for the worst of combat, are patrolling the capital, where they’re colliding with civilian vehicles because war transports are not supposed to be on civilian streets. (Why a 14-ton MRAP is in any way necessary for a domestic police mission is its own worthy line of questioning!)

Word came over the weekend that the president is now drawing up plans and explicitly threatening domestic political opponents like the governors of California and Illinois with similar military occupations — exercising emergency powers in a moment where the only emergency is his own abuse of power.

Civilians who try lawfully to exercise their right to document the abuses of the regime are themselves arrested and charged with felonies through trumped-up charges teeming with official lies. The fact that this military takeover and federal occupation is being done to the city’s residents — and not on their behalf — is evident in how deserted DC has become as residents refuse to enter public spaces where they might have to interact with agents of the state.

America has become a country where armed officers of the state shout “Papers please!” on the street at men and women heading home from work, a vision we associate with the Gestapo in Nazi Germany or the KGB in Soviet Russia, and where masked men wrestle to the ground and abduct people without due process into unmarked vehicles, disappearing them into an opaque system where their family members beg for information.

It looks like a president, who is supposed to be the figurehead of the party of small government, is extorting US companies for the regular act of doing business — earning his good will in recent weeks has required seizing parts of major US companies or imposing bizarre taxes on others in exchange for his personal support.

It looks like a country where our largest and most powerful corporate titans line up to pay tribute personally — delivering literal gold to the president in full view of cameras — and where foreign governments bribe him with largesse as gross as a 747 plane for his personal use after he leaves office, and where media companies have to censor their own staffs in order to be allowed to operate.

It looks like a country where inconvenient figures are kidnapped and disappeared overseas to torture gulags with no due process or dumped in countries where they have no possible connection. Kilmar Albrego Garcia has been punished for months with the full weight of the US government simply because he embarrassed the Trump administration. It looks like a country where the government, devoid of irony, is reopening concentration camps on the site of some of the country’s darkest hours of history where it previously hosted concentration camps.

It looks like a government where agency by department, people who try to uphold the rule of law are being purged — sometimes for nothing more than personal friendships or because they voiced an inconvenient fact, and where even the loyalists deemed insufficiently loyal are cashiered. Billy Long, the stunningly unqualified former cattle auctioneer placed in charge of the IRS, evidently was removed after he tried to uphold the most basic legal requirements for sharing taxpayer data.

It looks like a country where Trump assumes he can control and dictate our history, what books we read, our arts, and even our sports heroes. He assumes there is no line between his taste and our nation.

Just months short of the nation’s 250th birthday, Donald Trump is close to batting a thousand at speed-running the very abuses of power that led the Founders to write the Declaration of Independence in the first place, as David Corn and Tim Murphy have noted. Does any of this sound familiar:

• He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good

• For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments

• He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

• He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

• He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

• He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

• For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world

• For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent

• For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury

• For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses

And so on.

One could say that Trump has blown through the nation’s constitutional and political guardrails, but a more accurate assessment is that both Congress and the Supreme Court — who have, as I wrote earlier this spring, effectively rolled over and played dead when it comes to their constitutional duty to exert checks and balances — removed those guardrails helpfully in advance.

In a dissent last week, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compared the Court’s current approach, which has allowed Trump to stream roll past the normal constraints of the presidency through one procedural sleight-of-hand after another, to the game Calvinball, played by Calvin & Hobbes. “Today’s ruling is of a piece with this Court’s recent tendencies. ‘[R]ight when the Judiciary should be hunkering down to do all it can to preserve the law’s constraints,’ the Court opts instead to make vindicating the rule of law and preventing manifestly injurious Government action as difficult as possible,” she writes. “This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.”

The response, meanwhile, by Democrats has been unconscionably weak. It’s no coincidence that governors like Gavin Newsom and J.B. Pritzker have been the leaders of recent days; they are clear-eyed about what is happening. As Greg Sargent writes, “Newsom shapes everything around the brute fact that Trump is serially breaking the law and using government sponsored violence and intimidation to entrench authoritarian power. He accepts this as the core fact of our moment.”

By contrast, I challenge you to find even a moderately tepid and clear-eyed statement from any national Democrat. National Democrats seem all invisible as the military takes over policing the streets of the capital and prosecuting its crimes. This should be a lay-up to oppose — the most basic duty of any congressional figure, and yet, “House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, along with other senior Democrats, have not been a part of any concerted effort to voice opposition to the occupation.”

It’s still a party paralyzed by their own creaking gerontocracy; DC’s own nearly ninety-year-old congressional delegate hasn’t been seen in public since the occupation of her city — and her statement protesting it was accompanied by a photo of her at a different, previous, unrelated protest.

There’s a story that I think a lot about — on September 29, 2008, I went to one of those friendly background lunches that reporters in DC do all the time with newsmakers. It was the heart of the financial crisis and a group of us were meeting with Rep. Eric Cantor, a rising star in the GOP and party whip. The House was about to vote on a bailout for Wall Street that effectively everyone agreed was necessary to hold together the global economy — President Bush, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, Fed chair Ben Bernanke, GOP presidential nominee John McCain (who had even suspended his campaign to focus on the crisis) and Democratic nominee Barack Obama. Cantor casually told us over lunch that his caucus was going to vote it down. We reporters, many of them far more experienced Hill veterans than me, were incredulous — all of his party’s leaders, the ones in the roles who knew the stake, the ones the party was supposed to listen to and follow, said this was critical — and yet the House GOP was going to let it burn?

Cantor was right — the House voted down the bailout and the stock market dropped 800 points. The end seemed nigh.

I remember walking out of that luncheon feeling like I had glimpsed something important. The beating heart of the GOP no longer cared about principles or policy. There was a nihilist wing in control that scared me; they were happy to let it all burn.

For years in covering the rise (and return) of Trump and Trumpism, I imagined there was some line that the GOP would not be willing to compromise for greed and power — some incident that would bring party leaders to their senses, some principle or red-line would be unwilling to trade or cross in pursuit of furthering Trump’s agenda. Even after January 6th, I held hope that might be the end. But then Eric Cantor’s buddy Kevin McCarthy showed up at Mar-a-Lago and the rehabilitation tour began.

It has led here, to this moment, where all three branches of the GOP-controlled government have been willing to torch the republic and democracy that generations of elected officials and citizens have tended for 249 years simply to please Donald Trump and avoid running afoul of his temper.

Where America goes from here is a story yet to be written. It will surely get worse — Trump’s push now is clearly focused on locking in an illegitimate claim to power. Whether we can come back from this moment is a story yet unknown. But it’s clear today America is different and, even if we fight our way back, it will never be the same again.