'Supreme Court Appears Divided Over Whether States Can End Planned Parenthood Funding: AP'

 The Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday over whether states should be able to cut off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood, a case that comes amid a wider push from abortion opponents to defund the nation's leading abortion provider.

Low-income patients who go there for things like contraception, cancer screenings, and pregnancy testing could see their care upended if the court sides with South Carolina leaders who say no public money should go to the organization.

The court is considering a legal question that could have wider effects: Whether Medicaid patients can continue to sue over the right to choose their own qualified provider.

South Carolina says those lawsuits aren't allowed and barring them would save public money in legal fees. Some conservatives appeared open to that argument, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh saying there has been confusion among lower courts. "One of my goals coming out of this will be to revive that clarity," Kavanaugh said.

The state says people could go through an administrative appeal process if denied coverage, though Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised questions about whether that would work for low-income patients who'd have to risk paying out of pocket before they could appeal for reimbursement.

Planned Parenthood argues Congress clearly wanted people to be able to make their own "intensely personal" decisions about which doctor to visit, and lawsuits are the only real way that right has been enforced.

Justice Elena Kagan agreed that patients do have the right to choose their doctor under the law, and suggested that blocking them from suing would be a sea change. "This is kind of changing the rules midstream, isn't it?" Kagan said.

People on both sides of the issue gathered outside the court for demonstrations that included a brass band before arguments unfolded.

The case started in 2018, before the court's decision that overturned the nationwide right to abortion. South Carolina has since banned it after around 6 weeks' gestation.

Federal law prohibits Medicaid money from being used for abortions, with very limited exceptions, but patients often go there for other services because it can be tough to find doctors who accept the publicly funded insurance program and can schedule appointments quickly.

Other conservative states have also moved to cut Planned Parenthood out of the Medicaid program, and more would likely follow if South Carolina prevails.

About one-quarter of everyone in the U.S. is enrolled in the program, and the American Cancer Society has said that losing the ability to sue would hurt their access to care, especially in rural areas.

In South Carolina, $90,000 in Medicaid funding goes to Planned Parenthood every year -- a tiny fraction of a percentage point of the state's total Medicaid spending.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/washington-watch/washington-watch/114940

TESLA : Receives a Buy rating from Deutsche Bank

Analyst Edison Yu from Deutsche Bank research considers the stock attractive and recommends it with a Buy rating. The target price is still set at USD 345.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/TESLA-INC-6344549/news/TESLA-Receives-a-Buy-rating-from-Deutsche-Bank-49513214/

Fact Sheet: Trump Declares National Emergency to Up Competitive Edge, Sovereignty, National Security

 PURSUING RECIPROCITY TO REBUILD THE ECONOMY AND RESTORE NATIONAL AND ECONOMIC SECURITY: Today, President Donald J. Trump declared that foreign trade and economic practices have created a national emergency, and his order imposes responsive tariffs to strengthen the international economic position of the United States and protect American workers.

• Large and persistent annual U.S. goods trade deficits have led to the hollowing out of our manufacturing base; resulted in a lack of incentive to increase advanced domestic manufacturing capacity; undermined critical supply chains; and rendered our defense-industrial base dependent on foreign adversaries.
• President Trump is invoking his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) to address the national emergency posed by the large and persistent trade deficit that is driven by the absence of reciprocity in our trade relationships and other harmful policies like currency manipulation and exorbitant value-added taxes (VAT) perpetuated by other countries.
• Using his IEEPA authority, President Trump will impose a 10% tariff on all countries.
  • This will take effect April 5, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. EDT.
• President Trump will impose an individualized reciprocal higher tariff on the countries with which the United States has the largest trade deficits. All other countries will continue to be subject to the original 10% tariff baseline.
  • This will take effect April 9, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. EDT.
• These tariffs will remain in effect until such a time as President Trump determines that the threat posed by the trade deficit and underlying nonreciprocal treatment is satisfied, resolved, or mitigated.
• Today’s IEEPA Order also contains modification authority, allowing President Trump to increase the tariff if trading partners retaliate or decrease the tariffs if trading partners take significant steps to remedy non-reciprocal trade arrangements and align with the United States on economic and national security matters.
• Some goods will not be subject to the Reciprocal Tariff. These include: (1) articles subject to 50 USC 1702(b); (2) steel/aluminum articles and autos/auto parts already subject to Section 232 tariffs; (3) copper, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and lumber articles; (4) all articles that may become subject to future Section 232 tariffs; (5) bullion; and (6) energy and other certain minerals that are not available in the United States.
• For Canada and Mexico, the existing fentanyl/migration IEEPA orders remain in effect, and are unaffected by this order. This means USMCA compliant goods will continue to see a 0% tariff, non-USMCA compliant goods will see a 25% tariff, and non-USMCA compliant energy and potash will see a 10% tariff. In the event the existing fentanyl/migration IEEPA orders are terminated, USMCA compliant goods would continue to receive preferential treatment, while non-USMCA compliant goods would be subject to a 12% reciprocal tariff.

 
TAKING BACK OUR ECONOMIC SOVEREIGNTY: President Trump refuses to let the United States be taken advantage of and believes that tariffs are necessary to ensure fair trade, protect American workers, and reduce the trade deficit—this is an emergency.

• He is the first President in modern history to stand strong for hardworking Americans by asking other countries to follow the golden rule on trade: Treat us like we treat you.
• Pernicious economic policies and practices of our trading partners undermine our ability to produce essential goods for the public and the military, threatening national security.
• U.S. companies, according to internal estimates, pay over $200 billion per year in value-added taxes (VAT) to foreign governments—a “double-whammy” on U.S. companies who pay the tax at the European border, while European companies don’t pay tax to the United States on the income from their exports to the U.S.
• The annual cost to the U.S. economy of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets is between $225 billion and $600 billion. Counterfeit products not only pose a significant risk to U.S. competitiveness, but also threaten the security, health, and safety of Americans, with the global trade in counterfeit pharmaceuticals estimated at $4.4 billion and linked to the distribution of deadly fentanyl-laced drugs.
  • This imbalance has fueled a large and persistent trade deficit in both industrial and agricultural goods, led to offshoring of our manufacturing base, empowered non-market economies like China, and hurt America’s middle class and small towns. 
  • President Biden squandered the agricultural trade surplus inherited from President Trump’s first term, turning it into a projected all-time high deficit of $49 billion.
• The current global trading order allows those using unfair trade practices to get ahead, while those playing by the rules get left behind.
• In 2024, our trade deficit in goods exceeded $1.2 trillion—an unsustainable crisis ignored by prior leadership.
• “Made in America” is not just a tagline—it’s an economic and national security priority of this Administration. The President’s reciprocal trade agenda means better-paying American jobs making beautiful American-made cars, appliances, and other goods.
• These tariffs seek to address the injustices of global trade, re-shore manufacturing, and drive economic growth for the American people.
• Reciprocal trade is America First trade because it increases our competitive edge, protects our sovereignty, and strengthens our national and economic security.
• These tariffs adjust for the unfairness of ongoing international trade practices, balance our chronic goods trade deficit, provide an incentive for re-shoring production to the United States, and provide our foreign trading partners with an opportunity to rebalance their trade relationships with the United States.

 
REPRIORITIZING U.S. MANUFACTURING: President Trump recognizes that increasing domestic manufacturing is critical to U.S. national security.

• In 2023, U.S. manufacturing output as a share of global manufacturing output was 17.4%, down from 28.4% in 2001.
• The decline in manufacturing output has reduced U.S. manufacturing capacity.
  • The need to maintain a resilient domestic manufacturing capacity is particularly acute in advanced sectors like autos, shipbuilding, pharmaceuticals, transport equipment, technology products, machine tools, and basic and fabricated metals, where loss of capacity could permanently weaken U.S. competitiveness.
• U.S. stockpiles of military goods are too low to be compatible with U.S. national defense interests.
  • If the U.S. wishes to maintain an effective security umbrella to defend its citizens and homeland, as well as allies and partners, it needs to have a large upstream manufacturing and goods-producing ecosystem.
  • This includes developing new manufacturing technologies in critical sectors like bio-manufacturing, batteries, and microelectronics to support defense needs.
• Increased reliance on foreign producers for goods has left the U.S. supply chain vulnerable to geopolitical disruption and supply shocks.
  • This vulnerability was exposed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and later with Houthi attacks on Middle East shipping.
• From 1997 to 2024, the U.S. lost around 5 million manufacturing jobs and experienced one of the largest drops in manufacturing employment in history.

 
ADDRESSING TRADE IMBALANCES: President Trump is working to level the playing field for American businesses and workers by confronting the unfair tariff disparities and non-tariff barriers imposed by other countries.

• For generations, countries have taken advantage of the United States, tariffing us at higher rates. For example:
  • The United States imposes a 2.5% tariff on passenger vehicle imports (with internal combustion engines), while the European Union (10%) and India (70%) impose much higher duties on the same product. 
  • For networking switches and routers, the United States imposes a 0% tariff, but India (10-20%) levies higher rates.
  • Brazil (18%) and Indonesia (30%) impose a higher tariff on ethanol than does the United States (2.5%). 
  • For rice in the husk, the U.S. imposes a tariff of 2.7%, while India (80%), Malaysia (40%), and Turkey (31%) impose higher rates. 
  • Apples enter the United States duty-free, but not so in Turkey (60.3%) and India (50%).
• The United States has one of the lowest simple average most-favored-nation (MFN) tariff rates in the world at 3.3%, while many of our key trading partners like Brazil (11.2%), China (7.5%), the European Union (5%), India (17%), and Vietnam (9.4%) have simple average MFN tariff rates that are significantly higher.
• Similarly, non-tariff barriers—meant to limit the quantity of imports/exports and protect domestic industries—also deprive U.S. manufacturers of reciprocal access to markets around the world. For example:
  • China’s non-market policies and practices have given China global dominance in key manufacturing industries, decimating U.S. industry. Between 2001 and 2018, these practices contributed to the loss of 3.7 million U.S. jobs due to the growth of the U.S.-China trade deficit, displacing workers and undermining American competitiveness while threatening U.S. economic and national security by increasing our reliance on foreign-controlled supply chains for critical industries as well as everyday goods.
  • India imposes their own uniquely burdensome and/or duplicative testing and certification requirements in sectors such as chemicals, telecom products, and medical devices that make it difficult or costly for American companies to sell their products in India. If these barriers were removed, it is estimated that U.S. exports would increase by at least $5.3 billion annually.
  • Countries including China, Germany, Japan, and South Korea have pursued policies that suppress the domestic consumption power of their own citizens to artificially boost the competitiveness of their export products. Such policies include regressive tax systems, low or unenforced penalties for environmental degradation, and policies intended to suppress worker wages relative to productivity.
  • Certain countries, like Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, and Vietnam, restrict or prohibit the importation of remanufactured goods, restricting market access for U.S. exporters while also stifling efforts to promote sustainability by discouraging trade in like-new and resource-efficient products. If these barriers were removed, it is estimated that U.S. exports would increase by at least $18 billion annually.
  • The UK maintains non-science-based standards that severely restrict U.S. exports of safe, high-quality beef and poultry products.
  • Indonesia maintains local content requirements across a broad range of sectors, complex import licensing regimes, and, starting this year, will require natural resource firms to onshore all export revenue for transactions worth $250,000 or more.
  • Argentina has banned imports of U.S. live cattle since 2002 due to unsubstantiated concerns regarding bovine spongiform encephalopathy.  The United States has a $223 million trade deficit with Argentina in beef and beef products.
  • For decades, South Africa has imposed animal health restrictions that are not scientifically justified on U.S. pork products, permitting a very limited list of U.S. pork exports to enter South Africa. South Africa also heavily restricts U.S. poultry exports through high tariffs, anti-dumping duties, and unjustified animal health restrictions. These barriers have contributed to a 78% decline in U.S. poultry exports to South Africa, from $89 million in 2019 to $19 million 2024.
  • U.S. automakers face a variety of non-tariff barriers that impede access to the Japanese and Korean automotive markets, including non-acceptance of certain U.S. standards, duplicative testing and certification requirements, and transparency issues. Due to these non-reciprocal practices, the U.S. automotive industry loses out on an additional $13.5 billion in annual exports to Japan and access to a larger import market share in Korea—all while the U.S. trade deficit with Korea more than tripled from 2019 to 2024.
• Monetary tariffs and non-monetary tariffs are two distinct types of trade barriers that governments use to regulate imports and exports. President Trump is countering both through reciprocal tariffs to protect American workers and industries from these unfair practices.

 
THE GOLDEN RULE FOR OUR GOLDEN AGE: Today’s action simply asks other countries to treat us like we treat them. It’s the Golden Rule for Our Golden Age.

• Access to the American market is a privilege, not a right.
• The United States will no longer put itself last on matters of international trade in exchange for empty promises.
• Reciprocal tariffs are a big part of why Americans voted for President Trump—it was a cornerstone of his campaign from the start.
  • Everyone knew he’d push for them once he got back in office; it’s exactly what he promised, and it’s a key reason he won the election.
• These tariffs are central to President Trump’s plan to reverse the economic damage left by President Biden and put America on a path to a new golden age.
  • This builds on his broader economic agenda of energy competitiveness, tax cuts, no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security benefits, and deregulation to boost American prosperity.

 
TARIFFS WORK: Studies have repeatedly shown that tariffs can be an effective tool for reducing or eliminating threats that impair U.S. national security and achieving economic and strategic objectives.

• A 2024 study on the effects of President Trump’s tariffs in his first term found that they “strengthened the U.S. economy” and “led to significant reshoring” in industries like manufacturing and steel production.
• A 2023 report by the U.S. International Trade Commission that analyzed the effects of Section 232 and 301 tariffs on more than $300 billion of U.S. imports found that the tariffs reduced imports from China and effectively stimulated more U.S. production of the tariffed goods, with very minor effects on prices.
• According to the Economic Policy Institute, the tariffs implemented by President Trump during his first term “clearly show[ed] no correlation with inflation” and only had a temporary effect on overall price levels.
• An analysis from the Atlantic Council found that “tariffs would create new incentives for US consumers to buy US-made products.”
• Former Biden Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen affirmed last year that tariffs do not raise prices: “I don’t believe that American consumers will see any meaningful increase in the prices that they face.”

A 2024 economic analysis found that a global tariff of 10% would grow the economy by $728 billion, create 2.8 million jobs, and increase real household incomes by 5.7%.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-declares-national-emergency-to-increase-our-competitive-edge-protect-our-sovereignty-and-strengthen-our-national-and-economic-security/

DOGE is cutting waste, not the Constitution

 The “Scream and Fuss” crowd is sure the world is ending, with Elon Musk a shadow president. They are sure he has already fired more federal employees than we have, is violating something, and if not ought to held to account anyhow. When they get tired, they still huff and wonder how Trump won.

Here is the truth about DOGE, that high-energy advisory group Elon Musk manages for OMB as a private citizen, no pay. Note: The head of OMB is Senate confirmed. He runs the show – for Trump.

A few facts … should calm the heart. They should also help assure neighbors life does go on, the Constitution is fine, President Trump – our elected president – is in charge, respecting The People.

History is the best guide to “now,” and “now” is the best guide to what follows. In 1982, Reagan felt the federal government was too big. He had thought so for a while, campaigned on cuts – spending and tax cuts – and delivered. Just like Trump.

To get at excess spending – what Reagan called “waste, fraud, and abuse,” because that summed it up – he set up “The Private Sector Survey or Cost Control,” or a “DOGE” by any other name.

Reagan signed an executive order early in his first administration, EO 12369, a lot like Trump’s order establishing DOGE – the “Department of Government Efficiency” – EO 14158.

Like Trump, Reagan appointed a private sector wizard, a thoughtful, experienced, principled manager of people and man of big ideas, Peter Grace, to make the federal government smaller.

Peter Grace had run W.R. Grace for 48 years and knew efficiency better than any federal bureaucrat ever could, and Reagan released him on the beast.

Reagan coined the phrase “Drain the swamp!” telling the assembled Grace Commission, “I’ll repeat to you today what I said a week ago when I announced Peter’s appointment: Be bold. We want your team to work like tireless bloodhounds. Don’t leave any stone unturned in your search to root out inefficiency.”   

Where President Trump picked Elon Musk, who has built great companies, is a powerhouse of ideas, and still manages 145,000 people, Reagan picked Peter Grace, who was also straight to the point, clear and real.

In 1984, when Walter Mondale ran against Reagan and said we needed to spend more and raise taxes again, someone asked Peter Grace what he would tell Mondale. He looked at the questioner, said: “I’d tell him he’s nuts. He’s wrong. He’s wrong.”

The Grace Commission did recommend deep cuts, 2000 of them, ending useless overlap, excess, and waste, not to mention referring to then-Attorney General Ed Meese the “fraud and abuse.”

Like those Reagan days, only more aggressively, these warming days of Trump involve a return – hard as it is to accountability, no more vague, useless, misdirected, counterproductive spending.

So, what has Musk advised? What has the Othe MB and the Trump Cabinet been directed by the President to undertake? Yes, some high-level program and eventual agency closures, and job cuts.

How many job cuts? Well, so we do not get too excited, in a government of more than 3 million full-time employees, possibly the same number of contractors, the President, with the help of DOGE, has so far managed to trim 200,000 jobs. So, we have cut one-fifteenth of the total.

Where have they come from? In a government that spends 3.4 trillion dollars, or will in FY25, Trump, Musk, and DOGE have managed to trim 2050 jobs from the federal Department of Education – which did not exist in 1978, when I got loans to go to college. That leaves 2,183 jobs in place.

At NASA, they cut 20 jobs. At Defense, 4000 cuts are planned. At the IRS – which Democrats grew by magnitudes, arming agents in the process – Trump has cut 7000 and plans to cut half of the 90,000 remaining. My sense is that most Americans will not shed much for new employees cut.

At Interior, they downsized by 1000; EPA by 300; Veterans Administration (VA) – which has been a sprawling, often unaccountable agency, hundreds of Inspecter General reports – they cut 1,300. At the Housing and Urban Development, they managed to sift by 780 jobs, Agriculture by 2000, Energy 700, FAA 400, and the newly invented Consumer Financial Protection Bureau some 200, with a large number pending still at the US Post Office, which has not been thinned in decades.

Some will say cuts are hard to fathom, but they miss the point. Many bureaucrats have, for many years, stayed home, collected a check, counted on no oversight, and seen themselves as beyond review.  That era is over. Trump – like Reagan – is reminding us that tax dollars come from hard-working families, many pressed to take two or three jobs to make ends meet.

The time is now for accountability, and the “Scream and Fuss” crowd should take stock of how America got here by limiting government, balancing the books, empowering those who work, and making no apologies for accountability. 

Or… as Thomas Paine, Revolutionary author of Common Sense, wrote: “A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody, ought not to be trusted by anybody.” Long live accountability. 

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman for AMAC. Robert Charles has also just released an uplifting new book, “Cherish America: Stories of Courage, Character, and Kindness” (Tower Publishing, 2024).

https://amac.us/newsline/society/doge-long-live-accountability/

Trump's tariffs on cars will create good jobs and increase wages in America

 Brave American soldiers helped win World War II. But they could not have succeeded without a rock-solid auto industry that mass-produced tanks, trucks and jeeps by the millions.

Today, this key pillar of America’s once-vaunted “Arsenal of Democracy” has been hollowed out by decades of unfair trade. No longer does America fully manufacture its own automobiles. We largely assemble high-value parts made overseas.

To restore our auto industry to strategic dominance, President Donald Trump has imposed 25% tariffs not just on foreign-built autos but also on imported auto parts. These new Trump tariffs will provide powerful incentives for automakers to bring engine, transmission and drivetrain production back to American soil.

About half of autos sold in US are imports

Of the 16 million passenger vehicles, SUVs and light trucks Americans buy annually, about 8 million are imported, primarily from Germany, Japan, Mexico and South Korea. Of the other 8 million vehicles assembled in America, about 50% of their content is made in America.

This means that just 25% of the dollar value of the vehicles Americans buy each year actually supports American manufacturing. The rest of our hard-earned money goes to pay for foreign-made parts and labor.

What caused this decline in America’s once-mighty auto sector?

It’s the same story we’ve seen across industries: Other nations use unfair trade practices and predatory industrial policies to flood our market with subsidized vehicles and parts while blocking U.S. exports from reaching their own consumers.

Take Germany: It imposes a 10% auto import tariff, four times higher than the previous U.S. rate of 2.5%. It further stacks the deck by heavily subsidizing exports, offering VAT tax rebates and erecting technical barriers to trade − bogus safety standards that disqualify U.S. vehicles. The result? Germany exports six times more vehicles to America than we export to Germany.

Japan’s official auto tariff is low, but that’s not the point. Its domestic market is locked down by deeply entrenched distribution networks and technical regulations. For example, U.S. cars must pass a hood impact test − a pedestrian safety standard requiring the hood to deform when struck by a falling object, simulating a human head impact. Vehicles that fail can’t be sold in Japan. Not surprisingly, over 95% of vehicles sold in Japan are made in Japan.

Americans are losing out on high-paying jobs

The real threat from Germany and Japan isn’t just about finished vehicles. It’s their strategic dominationof powertrain manufacturing − the engine, transmission and drivetrain components that are the heart and brain of a vehicle. These components not only offer the highest profit margins, they also support the highest-paying manufacturing jobs.

Powertrain assembly demands deep experience and skilled labor, which is why wages inpowertrain facilities are 10-20% higher than those in final assembly plants.

And here’s the gut punch: America produces fewer than 20% of the engines for the vehicles it sells. Germany and Japan together produce a much greater shareof the engines and transmissions powering vehicles sold on American roads.

At BMW’s massive plant in Spartanburg, South Carolina, building SUVs for global export, nearly all engines and transmissions are imported from Germany and Austria. 

Mercedes-Benz follows the same model in Alabama. These are not “American-made” vehicles. They are German-engineered machines assembled by lower-wage American labor.

In Indiana, Subaru assembles the Outback and Ascent, but the engines are imported from Japan. 

Toyota and Honda use more U.S.-made components, but they still rely heavily on Japanese powertrains.

Even the major Detroit automakers have offshored the heart of their vehicles. More than half of Ford’s U.S.-assembled vehicles use Mexican engines. Stellantis (formerly Chrysler) sources many of its engines from Italy and Mexico, while relying on transmissions built by German-based ZF Friedrichshafen AG. General Motors, while somewhat more balanced, still depends on imports from Mexico, Austria and South Korea.

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) was supposed to change this. Instead, under the Biden administration’s lax enforcement, Mexico became the new Michigan. A string of Mexican cities now forms a "Motor City diaspora" − Volkswagen and Audi in Puebla, GM and Stellantis in Ramos Arizpe, Ford in Hermosillo, Nissan and Mercedes-Benz in Aguascalientes.

By extending tariffs to both autos and auto parts, President Trump is confronting this threat to America’s economic and national security. He understands that powertrain design and production are not just technical challenges − they are strategic capabilities. Lose them, and we don’t just lose good jobs − we lose the industrial strength needed for national defense.

This isn’t protectionism. It’s restoration. Restoration of full-spectrum manufacturing, from bolt to body. Restoration of high-wage, high-skill jobs. And restoration of America’s arsenal of democracy.

Let the restoration begin.

Peter Navarro is White House senior counselor for manufacturing and trade.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2025/04/02/trump-tariffs-auto-imports-ford-toyota-honda/82754296007/

Trump Unveils 'Make America Wealthy Again' Tariff Plans

 

As Trump discusses reciprocal tariffs (and the legacy media claims he is 'punishing allies') keep this chart in mind - does that seem like 'free trade'?

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/trumps-liberation-day-live-blog-all-you-need-know

Inventiva stock rises following NATiV3 trial enrollment completion

 Shares of Inventiva Sa (Nasdaq: IVA) climbed 5.4% as the company announced the completion of patient enrollment for its NATiV3 Phase 3 clinical trial, which exceeds its initial patient target. The clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, which specializes in oral therapies for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and other diseases, reported the randomization of the last patient in the main cohort of the trial.

The company’s CEO, Frederic Cren, expressed that this achievement marks a significant milestone for Inventiva’s leading drug candidate, lanifibranor, and its development. With topline results anticipated in the second half of 2026, there is potential for lanifibranor to become an approved oral therapy for MASH treatment. Prof. Arun Sanyal, co-principal investigator of NATiV3, also conveyed strong confidence in lanifibranor’s potential, highlighting the significant unmet medical need for MASH patients and the drug’s unique mechanism of action.

Inventiva’s stock movement reflects investor optimism following the update on the NATiV3 trial, which also aligns with the conditions for the second tranche of approximately €116 million of structured financing announced in October 2024. The successful enrollment supports the satisfaction of specific conditions related to the funding, although the company notes that there is no guarantee that all conditions for the financing will be met.

Stifel analyst Samimy Annabel has reiterated a Buy stock rating and a $17.00 price target on Inventiva shares. "With multiple positive safety reviews from an independent DMC and a blinded interim review (Sep. 2024) indicating improving trends on multiple key biomarkers, we believe NATiV3 has a high likelihood to replicate the positive Ph.2b NATIVE trial—topline results are expected in 2H26," said Annabel.

Investors are now eyeing the next major milestone for Inventiva, which is the expected release of topline results from the NATiV3 trial in the latter half of 2026. The company’s progress and the analysts’ positive outlook contribute to the current upward trend in stock price.

https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/inventiva-stock-rises-following-nativ3-trial-enrollment-completion-93CH-3963646