Tuesday, August 5, 2025
Vietnam July exports up 16% y/y, industrial production up 8.5%
Vietnam’s exports in July rose 16% from a year earlier to $42.27 billion, while industrial production increased by an annual 8.5%, government data showed on Wednesday.
Imports in July rose 17.8% to $40 billion, resulting in a trade surplus of $2.27 billion for the month, the National Statistics Office said in a report.
For the first seven months of this year, exports rose 14.8% over the same period of 2024 to $262.44 billion, while imports were up 17.9% to $252.26 billion, translating into a trade surplus of $10.18 billion.
The government said on Monday that imports and exports both increased sharply because firms were ramping up production to meet new orders.
Goods from Vietnam, a regional manufacturing powerhouse, have been slapped with a 20% tariff in the United States by the Trump administration.
The United States was Vietnam’s largest export market over the January-July period, with shipments totalling $85.1 billion, the NSO said. China was Vietnam’s largest source of imports, with a value of $101.5 billion.
Consumer prices in July rose 3.19% from a year earlier, the NSO said, adding that retail sales in July were up 9.2%.
Nvidia reiterates its chips have no backdoors, urges US against location verification
Nvidia has published a blog post reiterating that its chips did not have backdoors or kill switches and appealed to U.S. policymakers to forgo such ideas saying it would be a "gift" to hackers and hostile actors.
The blog post, which was published on Tuesday in both English and Chinese, comes a week after the Chinese government summoned the U.S. artificial intelligence (AI) chip giant to a meeting saying it was concerned by a U.S. proposal for advanced chips sold abroad to be equipped with tracking and positioning functions.
The White House and both houses of U.S. Congress have proposed the idea of requiring U.S. chip firms to include location verification technology with their chips to prevent them from being diverted to countries where U.S. export laws ban sales. The separate bills and White House recommendation have not become a formal rule, and no technical requirements have been established.
"Embedding backdoors and kill switches into chips would be a gift to hackers and hostile actors. It would undermine global digital infrastructure and fracture trust in U.S. technology," Nvidia said. It had said last week its products have no backdoors that would allow remote access or control.
A backdoor refers to a hidden method of bypassing normal authentication or security controls.
Nvidia emphasized that "there is no such thing as a 'good' secret backdoor - only dangerous vulnerabilities that need to be eliminated."
https://tech.yahoo.com/ai/articles/nvidia-reiterates-chips-no-backdoors-025056445.html
'Brazil's Lula Defiant: 'I Will Not Call Trump, Am Not Afraid''
President Trump has sent a message to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva saying the Brazilian leader could "call him anytime" to discuss the trade dispute centered on the country's treatment of ex-leader Jair Bolsonaro.
Lula has defiantly responded Tuesday with the statement, "I will not call Trump because he does not want to talk." He further asserted that nobody gives him lessons in negotiations.
Speaking during an event held in Brasilia, he made clear: "I don’t want people to think I am afraid of Donald Trump" and that "the US president had no right to announced the tariffs on Brazil the way he did" - especially as they make no sense.
Additional vehement complaints about the US position, at a moment a record-setting 50% tariff has taken effect for many Brazilian goods entering the US, are as follows via Bloomberg:
- US attacks on instant payment system Pix are unjustified, we cannot be penalized for developing a free and efficient system, said Lula
- The allegations about the Pix payment system, regulation of digital platforms and deforestation are unreasonable “Pix is a national heritage and an international reference for public and digital infrastructure. I would like President Trump to try out Pix in the US.”
- Brazil never left the negotiation table Political and electoral interests cannot contaminate commercial relations
- Critical minerals belong to Brazil and will not be explored by other nations
The Trump administration is demanding that charges against Bolsonaro, stemming from his rejection of the election results which brought Lula back to power, be dropped.
However, the government has emphasized the independence of the judiciary. A week ago the US slapped sanctions on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes.
But regional analyst Bruna Santos of the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington DC, has explained that dropping the charges against Bolsonaro is simply not going to happen.
"The ask for Lula was undoable," he was quoted in the Associated Press as saying. "In the long run, you are leaving a scar on the relationship between the two largest democracies in the hemisphere."
As of Monday Bolsonaro has been ordered under house arrest, with the federal top court citing violations related to stoking resentment via social media and public messaging. For now at least, it looks like the government is backing down, despite the damage to trade relations and future economic pain.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/brazils-lula-defiant-i-will-not-call-trump-am-not-afraid
Breaking China’s Rare Earth Dominance
by Adam Sharp
The price of samarium has risen 60-fold over the past year.
What the heck is samarium, you ask? It’s a rare earth element (REE) used to create magnets designed for high temperature applications.
Samarium-cobalt magnets are about 60 times as powerful as your average fridge magnet. They are used in fighter jet engines, where actuators and generators must be able to withstand temperatures up to 350 degrees celsius.
Even other rare earth magnets, such as those made with neodymium, would lose their magnetization in such high-temp environments.
So why is the price of samarium up 60x over the past year? Because China produces almost 100% of the world’s supply.
In this trade war, China is using its control over samarium and other REEs as a powerful lever. And it’s been effective. At this point, they have essentially cut off the U.S. defense sectors’ access to rare earths. And it’s becoming difficult for auto and electronics manufacturers to secure enough supply as well.
But defense contractors are worse off. They’re barely getting by on previous stockpiles. And those are dwindling.
From Sunday’s Wall Street Journal:
On Wednesday, the chief executive of Leonardo DRS said the U.S.-based defense firm is down to its “safety stock” of germanium.
“In order to sustain timely product deliveries, material flow must improve in the second half” of 2025, Chief Executive Bill Lynn said on a conference call. The company is the U.S. subsidiary of Italian defense giant Leonardo.
The Pentagon is requiring defense contractors to stop buying rare-earth magnets that contain China-sourced minerals by 2027.
This is why America’s Department of Defense has stepped in to support Western efforts to develop rare earth mines and separation and refining plants, as we covered in The Pentagon’s Top Stock Pick.
My guess is that the U.S. government is just getting started. They’ve already invested more than $400 million in MP Materials, and put a price floor on rare earth elements. But they’re going to need to pick up the pace if we have any chance of hitting that 2027 goal. Uncle Sam will need to invest many billions, and quickly.
As investors, we should be exploring ideas in the rare earth space aggressively. MP Materials, which my colleagues James Altucher and Enrique Abeyta both recommended, has done extremely well over the past year, with a 525% return.
Beside MP, the next largest rare earth firm (outside China) is an off-the-radar company from Australia.
Circling Back to Lynas Rare Earths (OTC: LYSDY)
In June, we covered Lynas Rare Earths, a $7B Australian company with a unique portfolio of REE mines and refining facilities in Australia, Malaysia, and soon, the U.S.
Back then, I was still doing my research and hadn’t bought any shares yet. In full disclosure, I have initiated a small position since.
What I’ve learned during my research is encouraging. Here are a few notes from Lynas’ latest quarterly report:
- Sales revenue grew 38% on the prior quarter to A$170.2m with sales receipts of A$152.7m.
- Lynas is the world’s only commercial producer of separated Heavy Rare Earth oxides outside China.
- Dysprosium Oxide (Dy) and Terbium Oxide (Tb) were produced on the new production line at Lynas Malaysia in May and June respectively, the first commercial production of separated Heavy Rare Earths (HRE) for Lynas and the first commercial production outside China in decades.
- a first MOU has now been signed with JS Link (Korea) to collaborate on the development of a new magnet manufacturing facility in Malaysia
When we first covered Lynas, it was trading at $5.87. It has since risen to $7.78, and might be due for a pullback. But in this market, who knows? And over the longer term, there is still significant room for this one to run.
The company has decades of experience in the rare earth field, quite a rare attribute in the Western world.
Additionally, this is still a very under-the-radar company. Lynas’ primary stock listing is in Australia, where volume is relatively low. Here in the U.S., it trades OTC on the pink sheets, so most investors are still unaware or avoiding it.
If Lynas were to uplist to the Nasdaq or NYSE, I suspect many more investors would jump on board. With a market cap of over $7 billion, it’s not a small company. They could afford to list on the big board to attract a higher class of investor.
If Lynas were to uplist, I expect it would attract significant institutional buyers.
Of course, there’s no guarantee Lynas will uplist to a more premier exchange, but it would make sense in this environment. To be clear, I don’t have any relationship with the company other than being a shareholder. This is simply an educated guess.
To get a technical analysis perspective on Lynas’ chart, I asked my colleagues Enrique Abeyta and Greg Guenthner to take a look. Enrique said it has “$6.25 written all over it, but it might go to $15 before that.” Greg said it’s “Bumping up against those 2022 highs. Lotto ticket for sure”.
So it sounds like from a technical perspective, the stock may be overbought short-term.
However, I’m not giving up on the name simply due to the chart. I’ve done my due diligence on the name, and it’s one of the only legit rare earth stocks outside China. The fundamentals look good, and the rare earth story should provide a tailwind going forward. The possibility of government support could provide additional juice.
My hope is that the company continues to invest in its heavy rare earth mining and processing facilities in Australia, and particularly in Malaysia, which produces some of the more exotic “heavy” REEs. That could begin to break China’s monopoly on these critical elements.
Needless to say, there are significant risks at play here. There’s always a chance that China drops its export restrictions and floods the market with REEs. But if the U.S. government is smart (no guarantees there), they will continue to support Western REE independence.
It is absolutely vital that we develop our own mining, refining, separation, and magnet manufacturing expertise. And fast. Until we do, China will hold powerful leverage in any trade negotiations.
Lynas could play a significant role in making that Western rare earth independence happen. We’ll keep watching this name and update you with any major news.
https://dailyreckoning.com/breaking-chinas-rare-earth-dominance/
'UK Zara ads banned for 'unhealthily thin' models'
Two adverts by fashion brand Zara have been banned for featuring models who appeared "unhealthily thin".
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said shadows and a slick back bun hairstyle made one model appear "gaunt" while the pose and low cut design of a shirt in another image showed the model's "protruding" collarbones.
The watchdog ruled that the "irresponsible" adverts must not appear again in their current form and that Zara must ensure all its images were "prepared responsibly."
Zara has removed the adverts and said that both models in question had medical certification proving they were in good health when the pictures were taken.
The two banned adverts previously appeared on the retailer's app and website in a carousel of images showing clothes on and off models.
One advert was for a short dress and the ASA felt shadows were used to make the models legs look "noticeably thin".
It also said the positioning of her upper arms and elbow joints made her look "out of proportion."
'Protruding collarbones'
ZaraThe other banned advert was for a shirt and the model was said to be in a position that made "protruding" collarbones a "focal feature" of the advert.
The ASA investigated two other Zara adverts but neither were banned.
Zara chose to remove all the images flagged and said it had not received any direct complaints.
The retailer told the ASA that none of the images had been modified beyond "very minor lighting and colouring edits".
It added that it followed recommendations of a report called Fashioning a Healthy Future, which was published in 2007 by the UK Model Health Inquiry.
Zara said it specifically complied with recommendation three of that report which said models "should provide a medical certificate attesting their good health from doctors with expertise in recognising eating disorders."
It comes after adverts by other retailers were banned earlier this year for models being too thin.
In July, an advert by Marks & Spencer was banned because the model appeared to be "unhealthily thin".
The ASA said the pose of the model and the choice of clothing - including "large pointed shoes" which emphasised "the slenderness of her legs" - made the advert "irresponsible".
Earlier this year, fellow retailer Next also had an advert for blue skinny jeans banned.
The ASA said the advert emphasised the thinness of the model's legs using camera angles, and deemed it "irresponsible".
Next said it disagreed with the advertising watchdog's decision and said the model, while slim, had a "healthy and toned physique".
The Next advert ban left BBC readers asking why adverts showing models who appear unhealthily overweight are not banned.