US Firm Takes Control Of One Of The "World's Largest" Cobalt Producers

An American company has secured control of one of the largest cobalt producers outside Chinese ownership, delivering a strategic boost to U.S. efforts to compete with Beijing over critical minerals, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The buyer, Virtus Minerals, completed its acquisition of Congo-based Chemaf for $30 million, along with a pledge to invest roughly $720 million. The deal caps a years-long push, spanning both the Biden and Trump administrations, to ensure U.S. access to cobalt resources in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Chemaf’s mines can supply about 5% of global cobalt output—a key material used in fighter jets, smartphones, and electric vehicle batteries. Virtus says future production will be directed toward American and allied buyers.

Despite its value, Chemaf proved difficult to sell. U.S. companies were wary of its heavy debt—around $1 billion—along with reputational concerns and the challenges of operating in Congo, including weak infrastructure, corruption risks, and labor issues.

The company has a controversial history. Its Mutoshi mine has faced repeated problems with unsafe working conditions and incursions by informal miners. In earlier years, child labor and bribery allegations also surfaced. Although some reforms were attempted, informal and hazardous mining has since returned.

WSJ writes that Virtus itself is a small, eight-person firm founded in 2022 by Phil Braun, a former Green Beret, and Andrew Powch, a Naval Academy and Harvard Business School graduate. Backed by U.S. government support, the company positions the deal as part of a broader national security effort to rebuild supply chains.

Financing for the acquisition includes $200 million from Virtus and its operating partner, India’s Lloyds Metals and Energy, along with $475 million from Orion Resource Partners and additional funding. The firm has also reached an agreement with Trafigura, Chemaf’s largest creditor.

Chemaf was put up for sale after cobalt prices fell sharply in 2023. Significant additional investment—estimated at up to $300 million—is still required to upgrade facilities and increase production capacity.

The deal faced competition from China. In 2024, Chemaf had agreed to sell to Norin Mining, a subsidiary of a Chinese state-owned defense company, for $920 million. That agreement collapsed after failing to gain approval from Congolese authorities, opening the door for Virtus.

The acquisition highlights the broader geopolitical contest over Congo’s vast mineral wealth. The country produces nearly three-quarters of the world’s cobalt, and Chinese firms have already invested heavily in its mining sector.

Still, questions remain about whether Virtus can successfully operate the assets. The company has a previous investment in Congo that remains stalled due to a legal dispute, and its partner’s experience is largely outside cobalt. Even so, Lloyds expects to begin work soon and complete upgrades within about a year.

*  *  * Only 2 more in stock

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 15:25

Trump's Jan. 6 Speech Not Covered By Immunity: Judge

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump’s speech in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, was not an official act and is thus not covered by immunity, a federal judge said in a March 31 decision.

President Donald Trump at a rally in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. Jenny Jing/The Epoch Times

“President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled.

Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, was given to a rally at The Ellipse, about 1 mile from the U.S. Capitol.

Lawmakers and others sued Trump, claiming his speech incited the crowd to go to the Capitol and riot.

Trump had sought a dismissal of the lawsuits, arguing he is entitled to immunity for official acts as president and that the speech was an official act.

Supreme Court justices ruled in 2024 that presidents enjoy immunity for core official acts, and presumptive immunity for acts within the outer perimeter of duties, but that unofficial acts are not covered.

Mehta said that contextual facts, such as that White House personnel were not involved in planning the Jan. 6 rally, besides securing an exception for the placement of the stage, supported the position that Trump’s speech fell outside his presidential duties.

The speech was made as then-Vice President Mike Pence and members of Congress met in a joint session to certify the results of the 2020 election and featured Trump urging them to consider alternate slates of electors and saying he, not Joe Biden, had actually won the election.

Mehta said the speech was focused on promoting his alleged 2020 victory, rather than on carrying out official duties, such as ensuring the faithful execution of laws.

“The content of the Ellipse Speech confirms that it is not covered by official-acts immunity,” he wrote.

Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is representing some of the plaintiffs in the consolidated case, said in a statement that “today’s ruling affirming that Donald Trump is not immune from civil liability is a monumental victory for the rule of law, affirming that no one, including the president of the United States, is above it.”

He added, “The court rightly recognizes that President Trump’s actions leading to the January 6 insurrection fell outside the scope of presidential duties.”

Lawyers for Trump did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

The ruling denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the case and means the litigation will proceed, although the judge did agree to a request from the president’s lawyers to certify certain issues for appeal, including the new decision.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 15:05

Amazon's Cloud Unit In Bahrain "Disrupted" By Iranian Strike

Just one day after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps threatened U.S. companies across the Middle East, the Financial Times reported late Tuesday morning that an IRGC strike had damaged Amazon's cloud computing infrastructure in Bahrain. 

The FT cited Bahrain's interior ministry, which said civil defense teams were "extinguishing a fire in a facility of a company as a result of the Iranian aggression."

Local authorities did not identify the company, disclose the type of air-delivered munition used, and/or provide further operational details about the strike.

But according to a person familiar with the incident cited by the FT reporters, the damaged site was part of Amazon's cloud computing operation, a reminder that civilian infrastructure, such as data centers and other digital infrastructure, is increasingly exposed to cheap one-way attack unmanned aerial systems. 

Amazon's Service Health page on its website shows that AWS is "Disrupted" in the Bahrain operating area. 

The IRGC strike on the Amazon facility in Bahrain comes one day after Sepah News, the IRGC's official news outlet, named 18 U.S. companies with operations in the Middle East that are now considered "legitimate targets."

"From now on, for every assassination, an American company will be destroyed," an IRGC-affiliated news outlet said.

The list of companies also included Cisco, HP, Intel, Oracle, IBM, Dell, Palantir, JPMorgan, Tesla, GE, Spire Solutions, Boeing, and UAE-based artificial intelligence company G42.

Let's not forget that IRGC forces struck AWS data centers in the Middle East in early March, causing outages in a number of apps and digital services across the United Arab Emirates.

The U.S.-Iran conflict has taught the world that civilian infrastructure, more importantly, data centers, has become a target, and as we warned even before the conflict erupted, there will be a push for counter-UAS technology at these facilities, as well as other high-value assets. Just this week, we learned that the U.S. military is preparing to deploy laser weapons against drones in Washington, D.C.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 14:10

More Than Half Of Americans Believe AI Will Do More Harm Than Good: Poll

Authored by Mary Prenon via The Epoch Times,

About 55 percent of Americans surveyed in a 2026 Quinnipiac poll said artificial intelligence (AI) will be more harmful than helpful.

The survey, released on March 30, was conducted in collaboration with the Quinnipiac University School of Computing & Engineering and the Quinnipiac University School of Business.

In April 2025, only 44 percent believed AI would do more harm than good in their daily lives.

In the 2026 poll, 21 percent answered that AI affects their lives a lot, while 29 percent said only somewhat, and 30 percent believed AI impacts are minimal. Only 17 percent said they are not impacted at all.

Regarding education, 64 percent of survey respondents said AI is more harmful, compared with just 27 percent who believe it will help. For health care issues, 45 percent of those surveyed believed AI will do more harm, while 43 percent said AI will be more helpful.

The employment outlook showed the greatest percentage of people worried about the future of AI, as 75 percent said continuous advancements in AI will most likely lead to a decline of job opportunities for people. While 18 percent said AI will not have much of an impact on jobs, only 7 percent said jobs for humans will increase as a result of AI.

In just one year, the fear of possible job losses due to AI increased by nearly 20 points. In April 2025, 56 percent of respondents said AI would be detrimental to human jobs.

All generations surveyed remain pessimistic about the job outlook as a result of AI’s rapid growth, with Gen Z—including ages 18 to 29—exhibiting the highest percentage at 81 percent. For millennials, aged 30 to 45, 71 percent said jobs are likely to decrease as AI grows, and 67 percent of Gen Z, aged 46 to 61, agree. Of the baby boomer generation, aged 62 to 80, 66 percent indicated that human jobs will decline.

“Younger Americans report the highest familiarity with AI tools, but they are also the least optimistic about the labor market,” Tamilla Triantoro, associate professor of business analytics and information systems at Quinnipiac University School of Business, said in the report.

“AI fluency and optimism here are moving in opposite directions.”

Among those currently employed, 30 percent reported being very or somewhat concerned about AI rendering their jobs obsolete, but 69 percent said they are not very worried about it. Compared with last year’s survey, only 21 percent of employed Americans expressed fear of losing their jobs to AI.

“Americans are more worried about what AI may do to the labor market than about what it may do to their own jobs,” Triantoro said.

“People seem more willing to predict a tougher market than to picture themselves on the losing end of that disruption—a pattern worth watching as the technology moves deeper into the workplace.”

An overwhelming 85 percent of Americans said they would be unwilling to work a job where their direct supervisor was an AI program that assigned their tasks and schedules.

When asked how much they trust AI, 76 percent of respondents said that they hardly ever trust it, while just 21 percent admitted they do trust AI. Still, 51 percent said they often use AI for researching topics. Only 20 percent said they relied on AI for medical advice, and just 15 percent for personal advice.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 13:50

Beta: A Powerful But Faulty Tool For Managing Risk

Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

When investors want to reduce risk, one commonly used tool is beta. For instance, an investor may sell higher-beta stocks and replace them with lower-beta ones to cushion against an expected market decline. Such a strategy is intuitive and widely used; however, it can be greatly flawed.

We recently received a question from a client about how we use beta to manage our portfolios. Given recent volatility and declining prices, the timing could not be better to explore both the power of beta and its important constraints.  

What Is Beta

In simplistic terms, beta answers one question: when the market moves, how much does a stock tend to move with it? To wit, a stock with a beta of 0.50 should move roughly half as much as the market in either direction. A stock with a beta of 2.0 should move roughly twice as much.

In statistics, beta is the slope of the best-fit line through a scatter plot comparing a stock’s weekly returns to the market’s returns.  The steeper the line, the higher the beta, and vice versa.

To clarify, consider the graph below. Each dot on the scatter chart shows the intersection of the weekly returns of Exxon (XOM) and the S&P 500 over the last five years. The beta of XOM, or the slope, quantifies the angle of the best-fit line (orange line). XOM has a beta of 0.43. Thus, for every 1.00% increase or decrease in the S&P 500, the orange line will rise or fall by 0.43%. The yellow circle shows that an approximate 5.00% increase in the S&P 500 equates to an expected 2.15% (0.43% * 5%) increase in XOM.

If an investor fears a market drawdown, they might want to replace higher-beta stocks with lower-beta ones like XOM. Conversely, they might do the opposite if they think the market will move higher.

If only portfolio management were that easy!

Correlation Matters- Analyzing XOM

Let’s stick with the XOM analysis to demonstrate how misleading beta can be. As noted above, the beta of XOM over the last five years, using weekly data, is 0.43. But that figure doesn’t address how much we should trust it.

To quantify our confidence, we calculate the relationship’s R-squared. R-squared measures how closely the dots cluster around the trend line on a scale of zero to one. A reading near one means beta is highly reliable. A reading near zero means the relationship between the stock and the market is essentially random. The R-squared for the XOM graph we showed above is statistically insignificant at 0.0645, indicating a weak correlation between XOM and the market.

Beyond the R-squared, it’s also important to understand that beta is not static. It changes with new data and with changes to the time frame used to calculate it. As shown in the table below, XOM’s five-year beta differs markedly from the most recent 3 and 6-month calculations.  

Correlation Matters- Nvidia

We shift our focus to Nvidia (NVDA), a stock with a higher beta, to further illustrate why correlation (R-squared) is critical to understanding the efficacy of a stock’s beta. As shown below, NVDA has a five-year beta of 2.07; however, like XOM, it has been declining, with its three-month beta sitting at 1.10. This is not surprising given that Nvidia’s contribution to the S&P 500 has surged from about 1% to nearly 8% over the last five years. Its short-term beta implies that NVDA behaves similarly to the market, not twice the market as its longer-term beta claims.

The graph below shows that NVDA’s best-fit trend line has a steeper slope than XOM’s. Moreover, we can see that the dots are more closely clustered around the trend line than XOM’s are. The relationship between NVDA returns and the market, as measured by R-squared, is 0.4785 compared to XOM’s insignificant 0.0645.

Idiosyncratic Risk

Some describe beta as if it were like a volume control on a stereo, simply tune it up or down, and your risks change accordingly. The dispersion of weekly returns around the trend line indicates that factors beyond market returns drive individual stock returns. While there are many factors driving returns, they can largely be classified as systematic or idiosyncratic.

Beta only helps explain the fraction of a stock’s return attributable to systematic (market) risks. These are market risks that affect all investments simultaneously and include factors such as recessions, interest rate changes, and geopolitical events.

Idiosyncratic risk, on the other hand, is the company-specific risk. It includes unique factors such as management decisions, product sales, and competitive positioning. It also includes non-company-specific factors, such as investor preferences.

Together, systematic and idiosyncratic risks help us fully quantify risk.

As we discussed, XOM had a very low R-squared because many of the data points were randomly scattered across the graph. We can deduce from the low correlation (low R-squared) that changes driven by idiosyncratic factors greatly outweigh those driven by movements in the S&P 500.

Using Beta On A Portfolio

So far, we have only discussed the beta of an individual stock. Given the idiosyncratic risks and low correlation (R-squared) of many stocks, and the fact that beta shifts with the selected time frame, beta can be an inadequate tool.

However, when managing a portfolio, beta’s usefulness as a portfolio management tool increases. In the extreme, think of it this way: if you bought all 500 S&P stocks in the same percentages as the index, the portfolio’s beta would equal one, R-squared would be one, thus you would have zero idiosyncratic risk. The idiosyncratic risks associated with all 500 stocks would cancel each other out. The graph below plots this scenario.

In more realistic terms, the more diversified your portfolio, the more idiosyncratic risk you remove from your portfolio. To highlight this, we created a simple three-stock portfolio containing equal amounts of XOM, NVDA, and Duke Energy (DUK).

As shown below, the beta of our portfolio is 0.9994, and the R-squared is 0.5855. Below the graph is the summary of market and idiosyncratic risks for the three stocks and the portfolio.

Even with three stocks and minimal diversification in our portfolio, we have substantially reduced the idiosyncratic risk relative to that implied by the individual stocks.  

Summary

Beta is useful but imperfect. And, unfortunately, its imperfections tend to matter most when the need to manage risk is most critical. As the age-old saying goes: “In the midst of a crisis, all betas go to one.”  Simply, beta can be a broken compass when you need it most.

For individual stocks with low R-squared values and high idiosyncratic risk, such as XOM, beta can be a poor predictor of actual price behavior, particularly during periods of sector- or company-specific volatility.

For well-diversified portfolios, however, it is considerably more reliable, as idiosyncratic risks of the underlying stocks cancel out and systematic market risk dominates.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 13:20

SpaceX Files Confidentially For IPO, Setting Up Record-Breaking Offering

SpaceX has confidentially filed for an IPO, potentially setting up a June listing on U.S. stock exchanges that could become the largest public offering ever. The offering could value the rocket, satellite, and AI company at more than $1.75 trillion and raise as much as $75 billion, far exceeding Saudi Aramco's 2019 IPO record.

Bloomberg states that SpaceX has just submitted a draft IPO registration to the SEC for nonpublic review. That allows SEC staff to review the filing, ask questions, and require any changes before the company reveals all of its financials and offering details to the public.

"The filing puts it on track for a June listing, which would make SpaceX the first of what could be a trio of mega-IPOs, ahead of OpenAI and Anthropic PBC," the outlet noted.

A listing for SpaceX would raise $75 billion for the rocket company and dwarf Saudi Aramco's $29 billion debut in 2019. The money raised would be used to fund an "insane flight rate" for the Starship rocket and to push ahead with deploying orbital data centers in low Earth orbit.

Sources familiar with the listing say that SpaceX has lined up Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley for senior roles on the IPO.

A report last week from The Wall Street Journal said that Musk wants to allocate upwards of 30% of the IPO stock to retail investors, far beyond the typical allocation. He is also exploring giving priority access to loyal supporters, such as Tesla shareholders and individuals who have backed his other ventures, reinforcing his pattern of rewarding his existing base.

Last month, Morningstar released a note estimating that SpaceX generated nearly $16 billion in revenue in 2025 and $7.5 billion in EBITDA, driven "almost entirely by explosive subscriber growth" from its Starlink satellite internet unit, which had 10 million active customers as of March. The company forecasts revenue of $150 billion in 2040, with EBITDA of $95 billion.

After the SEC review process for a possible IPO is complete, the question then becomes: What will SpaceX's ticker symbol be?

Polymarket bets show that "X" is in the running at 44% ...

There is no fixed SEC timetable from a confidential IPO filing to an actual public debut. That process can take anywhere from several weeks to several months.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 13:00

Swalwell Demands FBI Not Release His Files As Epstein Hypocrisy Surfaces

Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

Embattled Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., who has long demanded that President Donald Trump release the Epstein files, now faces scrutiny as the FBI prepares to release documents tied to its investigation into his alleged ties to a Chinese intelligence operative.

The scrutiny comes after Swalwell demanded Monday that FBI Director Kash Patel refrain from declassifying the potentially damaging files, which could shed light on his relationship with Christine Fang, the suspected Chinese spy also known as “Fang Fang.”

On X, critics highlighted what they called blatant hypocrisy, pointing to Swalwell’s prior demands that Trump release the Epstein files.

One widely shared X post from July 2025 read, “Trump has the files. Why won’t HE release them,” in reference to the Epstein files.

Wait suddenly you’re against releasing files @RepSwalwell??? What changed https://t.co/AAwu8QRWlf pic.twitter.com/M47vWbRouz

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 31, 2026

On Sept. 25, Swalwell himself replied to a post from Patel, writing, “Blah blah blah. Where are the Epstein Files?”

On Oct. 7, Swalwell again pressed Patel, adding, “Where are the Epstein Files?”

Just 10 days later, Swalwell escalated further, branding House Speaker Mike Johnson the “pro-pedophile Speaker” and again demanding the Epstein files be released.

I refer to Johnson by his more accurate description, the pro-pedophile Speaker.

Release the Epstein Files.
Open the Government. https://t.co/NJRMHf6qoP

— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) October 17, 2025

Swalwell conveyed his opposition in a cease-and-desist letter to Patel, urging that his own FBI files are not released.

“The congressman has never been accused of wrongdoing in that matter and your attempt to release the file is a transparent attempt to smear him and undermine his campaign for governor of California,” the letter said, as quoted by the leftist Washington Post.

It added, “Your actions threaten to expose you, others at the FBI, and the FBI itself to significant legal liability.”

The Post reported over the weekend that Patel had deployed agents to California to review the documents ahead of a potential public release.

The forthcoming release of the files could provide clarity on the FBI’s investigation into Swalwell’s early political career. He joined Congress in 2013 after serving three years on the Dublin City Council.

The probe centered on Fang’s alleged efforts to act as a Chinese intelligence operative by cultivating relationships with up-and-coming politicians.

Swalwell has not definitively denied having a sexual relationship with Fang. He purportedly cut off contact with her after being briefed by the FBI.

What Swalwell knew about Fang, and what he told the FBI, has largely remained speculative, but that could change if the files were released.

* * * Sink your fengs into these

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 12:40

Trump May Pull Out Of 'Paper Tiger' NATO After Starmer Stiffs Strait Support

In a blistering exclusive interview with The Telegraph, President Trump has declared he is "strongly considering" pulling the United States out of NATO, branding the 77-year-old alliance a "paper tiger" after European allies - including the UK under Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer - refused to join America’s military campaign against Iran or help reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump told the newspaper the decision was now “beyond reconsideration,” adding: “I was never swayed by Nato. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way.” He singled out Britain, mocking its naval capabilities and Starmer’s green-energy focus: “You don’t even have a navy. You’re too old and had aircraft carriers that didn’t work… All Starmer wants is costly windmills that are driving your energy prices through the roof.”

The row erupted after Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz - through which 20 per cent of the world’s oil flows - in response to US-Israeli strikes launched on February 28. Allies have been reluctant to deploy warships, prompting Trump to accuse NATO of operating a “one-way street.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the president on Fox News, warning that America would have to “re-examine” its NATO membership once the Iran conflict ends. “If Nato is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked, but them denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement,” Rubio said. Trump later told The Telegraph he was “glad” Rubio had spoken out.

Starmer Fires Back: “This Is Not Our War”

Starmer moved quickly to reaffirm Britain’s commitment to NATO while drawing a firm line on the Iran conflict. “This is not our war, and we’re not going to get dragged into it,” he told The Telegraph, describing the alliance as “the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen.” He signalled a pivot toward closer European cooperation “whatever the noise” from Washington.

Absolute humiliation for the White House. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer publicly brushes off Donald Trump's threats to leave NATO. He explicitly states that despite massive pressure from Washington, Britain will never be dragged into this disastrous war on Iran. pic.twitter.com/vkniEBVSW5

— Furkan Gözükara (@FurkanGozukara) April 1, 2026

The UK’s military vulnerabilities have only added fuel to the fire. On Tuesday, the First Sea Lord admitted the Royal Navy was not ready for war. Four of Britain’s six destroyers were out of service at the conflict’s start, forcing London to borrow a German warship to meet NATO obligations in the North Atlantic.

Any formal US withdrawal would require Congressional approval under 2023 legislation co-sponsored by Rubio himself. However, experts note Trump could still gut American participation by pulling troops, bases, and command support - effectively hollowing out the alliance without a full exit.

Trump is expected to deliver a national address on Wednesday evening outlining the Iran war’s status and, according to Reuters sources, to voice further disgust at NATO’s lack of reciprocity.

As oil prices spiral and recession fears mount, the standoff over the Strait of Hormuz has exposed raw fractures in the Western alliance. Whether Trump’s latest broadside is negotiation theatre or the beginning of America’s strategic retreat from Europe remains to be seen — but the “paper tiger” label has already left its mark.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 12:20

"Finish This Thing, Finish It Right": JPM CEO Jamie Dimon Weighs In On Iran War

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon appeared on Fox & Friends on Tuesday, covering everything from artificial intelligence to the economy to the continuing exodus from radical-left blue states. More notably, he offered his views on the U.S.-Iran war, which this week entered its fifth week and has remained at the center of the news cycle.

Dimon was first asked about the energy shock from the US-Iran conflict and whether surging fuel prices would impact the American economy.

"Look the markets are unpredictable and it's hard to for me to tell you exactly what," Dimon said of a potential impact.

"But I think they're just looking at, is there a chance something can go wrong now? We should all hope nothing goes wrong. We should all hope that … we win this thing and clean up the straits and that Iran is no longer a threat to everybody. The markets will be concerned until it's over."

Dimon added, "It's much more important that this be successfully completed than what the market does."

He noted, "Yes, I hear people say they were not an imminent threat. But these people have been engaged in violent acts for 47 years, killing people, killing Americans, and funding Hamas. Several Americans were killed on October 7. They have fought proxy wars and threatened people. A ballistic missile can travel 3,000 miles. These are bad people who needed to be stopped. I do not know what the military and the president know, but we have to finish this thing and finish it right." 

Layered on top of Dimon's comments yesterday is a broader geopolitical framework laid out earlier this month by Zoltan Pozsar of Ex Uno Plures.

In Pozsar's view, the Trump administration is "methodically building a portfolio of assets" from Venezuela to the Panama Canal to Iran's oil flows and the Strait of Hormuz, a strategy aimed at reasserting American dominance, securing the empire for years to come, and tightening the screws on Beijing after last year's rare earths stunt.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 12:00

Aluminum Supply Shock: Top Gulf Producer Halts Operations After Iran Strike, Price To Spike

Over the weekend, both Emirates Global Aluminum (EGA) - the largest aluminum producers in the Gulf - and Aluminium Bahrain (ALBA) reported drone attacks damaging smelting facilities after hits on Iranian steel infrastructure last week.

Neither company (at the time) confirmed whether supply will be impacted, but this morning the worst case appears to be confirmed with Reuters reporting that according to a Wednesday note by consultancy Wood Mackenzie "EGA's Al Taweelah facility in the United Arab Emirates halted operations after an Iranian missile and drone attack on Saturday damaged a power plant." A subsequent report from Bloomberg confirmed the report, writing that "Emirates Global Aluminium, the Middle East’s top producer of the metal, halted operations at its Al Taweelah smelter after the site was struck by Iranian missiles and drones over the weekend, according to a person familiar with the matter."

At the same time, the smelter belonging to Aluminium Bahrain – Alba – which was also targeted on Saturday, “sustained significant damages and is expected to operate at an estimated utilisation of 30 percent”, Wood Mackenzie said.

“The ongoing Middle East conflict is triggering a critical supply crisis in the global aluminium market, with disruptions potentially removing 3 to 3.5 million tonnes of output in 2026,” Wood Mackenzie said. For context, the world produced just under 74 million tonnes of primary aluminum last year.

Wood Mackenzie’s press office said its information was sourced from the consultancy’s contacts in the Middle East, but declined to provide further details. 

As a reminder, the aluminum smelter in Al Taweelah, in the emirate of Abu Dhabi, has a capacity of roughly 1.5 million metric tonnes per year, and an alumina refinery. Alba’s capacity of 1.6 million tonnes per year in Bahrain makes it the world’s biggest single-site aluminium smelter. The Middle East as a whole produces about 9% of global supply, with EGA and others playing a key role in supplying manufacturers across Europe, Asia and the US. Even before the industry was directly targeted, the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz had already left the region’s major producers short of critical inputs, with the sector anticipating a cascading wave of production cuts unless the strait reopens soon.

As Goldman commodity specialist James McGeoch writes, it's "hard to think of a bigger metal supply shock: High degree of expectation this was where it was heading, but the initial reaction was to fade the uncertainty yesterday, that should be replaced by fresh length if history is a guide."

This is how the Goldman trader does the math on lost output:

Lost ALBA 1mm + EGA 1.6mm + Qatalam 0.3mm  + Mozal 0.6mm = 3.5m on a 74mt mkt = 4.7% impact to supply, and 7.7% of ex china supply

Balance this with Oil price demand destruction ~1mm, assume China overproduce and ship 500k - need to price demand destruction to balance ~2mt (inventory we see at ~1.5mt but majority of that is China link).

McGeoch says that in light of the shut downs, some traders have been eyeballing a significant surge in the aluminum price to $4500 (15% premium to LME for China is a clear starting point).

• The Goldman trader also writes that if the report is accurate, the market will first draw LME stocks, which is hard as not everyone can take Russian units, both regionally and financially.
• Second, market needs to solve for the China export tax.
• Third, it will be important to see China ramp supply, which means you have to convince them its a good use of power allocations.  

Aluminum futures on the London Metal Exchange have surged since the strikes, with LME Aluminum trading up 50% from a year ago, and if production remains shuttered, it will likely move notably higher.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 11:52

The Kohn Solution For An Uncertain Fed

Via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Dario Perkins of TS Lombard wrote a piece titled “How to Respond to Oil Shocks.”

His analysis draws on the Fed’s history to address how it should respond to today’s oil shock.

While researching Fed transcripts from the 1990 Gulf War, he discovered a proposal by Don Kohn, senior Fed staffer, that offers a solution to the central bank’s oil shock problem: nominal GDP targeting.

Kohn’s logic is straightforward and makes sense in the current environment where the Fed is contemplating monetary policy as oil prices spike, simultaneously boosting inflation and reducing economic growth. Per Kohn, if those two forces balance out, the Fed should hold rates steady. But if one dominates, the Fed should respond: “hike if nominal GDP growth rises” and “cut if nominal GDP growth falls.”

In other words, a demand shock calls for higher rates, while a supply-side shock calls for lower rates.

Historically, as he shares in the table below, nominal GDP almost always falls after a supply-driven oil shock.

Today’s spike, driven by the Iranian conflict and “the Iranian weaponization of the Strait of Hormuz,” is unambiguously a supply shock. By the Kohn framework, the Fed should be cutting the Fed Funds rate, not considering hiking it.

The current counterargument is the high-inflation era of the 1970s, when central banks were allegedly too dovish on inflation and allowed inflation expectations to spiral out of control.

Perkins dismisses this comparison directly. To wit:

The 1973-74 recession “was one of the worst in history” and “in terms of its impact on unemployment, it was only slightly better than the GFC.”

Importantly, he notes that the 1970s featured widespread union membership and inflation-indexed wage contracts that caused wages to “accelerate even as the economy sank.”

That wage-price spiral is nonexistent today.

Thus, the inflationary danger of easing into an oil shock is considerably lower than the popular 1970s narrative suggests.

His conclusion: Central banks don’t need to hike today. In fact, if they follow the advice of Don Kohn, they will probably need to ease policy.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 11:40

Beyond Cheap Fish Oil: How A 5:1 DHA Ratio Powers Brain Health & Vision

Omega-3s are an amazing family of fats that our bodies can't make efficiently on their own. Long used for general heart and inflammation support, research shows that when formulated with a heavy emphasis on DHA plus targeted eye nutrients, they can support brain structure, cognitive performance, memory, attention, and eye/retinal health. 

Most people get very little DHA from their modern diet, especially with high intake of processed seed oils that compete with omega-3s. Studies suggest that boosting DHA intake with a targeted formula can support brain function in everyday healthy adults.

But before we get into the science...

We sell this unique Omega-3 formulation, so this is obviously an ad. As always, whether or not you buy from us - you should take note of what these studies have found when considering your daily supplement stack. 

Long story short, what we sell is a specialized 5:1 DHA-to-EPA ratio fish oil fortified with lutein and zeaxanthin (more on that below). It's designed specifically for brain and eye support. Support yourself & support the site - buy some here. 

Actual product:

And now for the science

Most people think “omega-3 = fish oil = heart health.” That's true for many standard formulas, but the type and ratio of omega-3s matter a lot when targeting the brain and eyes.

DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) is the dominant omega-3 actually built into brain cell membranes and retinal photoreceptors (making up ~50-60% of PUFAs in the retina and a major part of brain gray matter). It supports membrane fluidity, neural signaling, and visual processing. EPA is more involved in inflammation pathways. Standard cheap fish oils are often balanced or EPA-heavy. A DHA-dominant approach (like 5:1) better aligns with how the brain and eyes use these fats.

Brain Benefits in Healthy Adults

Studies on DHA-rich or high-DHA omega-3 supplementation in healthy (non-demented) adults have found:

• Improvements in memory performance, including episodic memory, working memory, and delayed recall
• Faster attention and quicker processing speed
• Particularly noticeable memory gains in healthy older adults or those with lower dietary DHA intake
• Benefits for cognitive function in people with suboptimal omega-3 status
• Associations with better brain structure measures (e.g., larger hippocampal volumes, greater white matter volume, and entorhinal cortex thickness)
• Modest but consistent effects across multiple randomized trials and meta-analyses

A 2025 dose-response meta-analysis of 58 studies (Nature) found that omega-3 supplementation was associated with modest but consistent improvements in attention, perceptual speed, language, primary memory, visuospatial function, and global cognition in adults. A 2013 randomized controlled trial showed that DHA supplementation improved episodic memory and reaction time of working memory tasks in healthy young adults with low dietary DHA intake (with some sex-specific effects).

The Eye Health Advantage: Lutein + Zeaxanthin

What really sets this formula apart is the addition of lutein and zeaxanthin - the only two carotenoids that accumulate in the macula (the central part of the retina responsible for sharp, detailed vision). 

They help:

• Filter blue light
• Reduce oxidative stress
• Support visual performance in high-screen environments

This matters because the retina is not separate from the brain - it is an extension of it. DHA provides structural support to retinal cells, while lutein and zeaxanthin provide protective and performance-enhancing effects.

The landmark AREDS2 trial and its long-term follow-up showed that lutein and zeaxanthin can safely support eye health and may help slow progression toward advanced age-related macular degeneration in certain populations, particularly those with lower dietary intake.

Why This Isn't "Regular" Omega-3

Cheap fish oils are inexpensive because they're often EPA-focused or balanced for broad inflammation/cardio support. IQ Ultimate is intentionally engineered differently:

• A much higher DHA-to-EPA ratio (5:1) to better match brain and retinal biology
• Fortified with lutein + zeaxanthin for direct macular support - something most standard omega-3s completely lack

If you're spending hours in front of screens, noticing subtle changes in focus or visual comfort as you age, or simply want to be proactive about long-term brain and eye resilience, this targeted formulation addresses needs that basic supermarket fish oil typically doesn't.

Safety and Practical Takeaways

Omega-3 fatty acids in triglyceride form have a strong safety record at standard supplemental doses. High-purity products tested for contaminants (like this one) are preferred. Consult your doctor if you're on blood thinners or have specific health conditions.

Cheap omega-3s are everywhere because they're easy to manufacture. This one is different because it's built for the two organs that run everything else in your life - your brain and your eyes.

We take it daily for that reason. If you're ready to upgrade from generic fish oil to something more targeted, grab a bottle of IQ Ultimate Omega-3 here.

This is for informational purposes only and not medical advice. Consult your doctor before starting any supplement.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 11:35

29 Killed In One Of Worst Russian Military Air Disasters Of Ukraine War

Russia has suffered one of its worst aerial disasters of the Ukraine war, as an An-26 Military Transport aircraft went down in Crimea with no survivors reported.

The aerial disaster happened Tuesday, with state media reporting that the aircraft slammed into a cliff during what was described as a routine flight over the Black Sea peninsula.

via TASS

All 29 onboard, including 23 passengers and six crew, were killed in the crash, marking one of the deadliest recent incidents involving Russian military aviation in the region.

Officials say the trouble began very quickly into the flight. "On 31 March at around 18:00 Moscow time, contact was lost with the An-26 military transport aircraft whilst it was on a scheduled flight over the Crimean Peninsula," the defense ministry said.

Shortly after, confirmation came from the ground: "The An-26 aircraft, with which communication was lost earlier, crashed into a cliff, it was reported to TASS from the site of the crash."

While no official cause has been confirmed, early indications point to possible technical failure, which if accurate would mark another blow to aging Soviet-era hardware still widely used across Russia’s military fleet, also as sweeping Western sanctions have been in effect, impacting aviation parts and software.

A huge search effort for bodies is ongoing and is difficult, given the crash happened in a mountainous region. Various emergency units - local and national - are involved.

Meanwhile, separately there are reports of a new drone attack on a Russian petrochemical plant:

"RUSSIA: Mass casualty event declared after a Ukrainian drone strike hit one of Russia’s largest petrochemical complexes, Nizhnekamskneftekhim"
[Amir Tsarfati post quoting Open Source Intel] pic.twitter.com/Hd5ZE9yOxl

— LarryE (@LarryE77197284) April 1, 2026

"A criminal case was opened into the crash of the aircraft due to alleged violations of Article 351 of the Russian Criminal Code which pertains to violations of flight rules or regulations governing flight preparation, according to a report from the Russian Investigative Committee press office," one regional report says.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 11:20

"No One Knows What Will Happen Now": Justice Jackson Warns Against Unbridled Free Speech

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is again warning of a growing threat to the nation. In her lone dissent in Chiles v. Salazar, Jackson observed that “to be completely frank, no one knows what will happen now.” The ominous tone stemmed from the fact that free speech had prevailed over state-imposed orthodoxy in a Colorado case.

Eight justices, including her two liberal colleagues, ruled that Colorado could not prevent licensed counselors from “any practice or treatment” that “attempts or purports to change” a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

The win for free speech was catastrophic for Jackson and many on the left. Allowing counselors to discuss the causes and basis for sexual orientation changes, Jackson maintained, would “open a can of worms.” It would be far better for the majority to simply silence such dissenting voices in the name of science.

The dissent in Chiles is only the latest example of the chilling jurisprudence of Justice Jackson, including a pronounced dismissal of free speech values. Consider the holding of her colleagues that Jackson finds so horrific.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the First Amendment “reflects … a judgment that every American possesses an inalienable right to think and speak freely, and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for discovering truth … any law that suppresses speech based on viewpoint represents an ‘egregious’ assault on both of those commitments.”

What a nightmare.

Instead, Jackson would have declared the ban on anything deemed “conversion therapy” to be “conduct,” not speech.

It is that easy.

You simply impose an orthodoxy and then treat any dissenters as being regulated for their conduct, not their viewpoints.

Justice Elena Kagan could not withhold her frustration with her colleague, noting that “[b]ecause the State has suppressed one side of a debate, while aiding the other, the constitutional issue is straightforward.” She added that Jackson’s view “rests on reimagining—and in that way collapsing—the well-settled distinction between viewpoint-based and other content-based speech restrictions.”

Other countries have embraced Jackson’s permissive approach to speech curtailment.

Recently, Malta failed to convict a man who was facing five months in prison for merely discussing his own abandonment of homosexuality due to a religious conversion.

Of course, we just went through a pandemic when censorship and orthodoxy were dressed up as science.

Leading scientific figures were canceled and harassed. That was the case with Jay Bhattacharya, who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration and was a vocal critic of COVID-19 policies. Bhattacharya was targeted due to his dissenting views on health policy, including opposing wholesale shutdowns of schools and businesses.

He and other scientists were later vindicated. European allies that did not shut down their schools fared far better than we did, including avoiding a national mental health and learning crisis. We simply never had that debate.

He was recently honored with the prestigious “Intellectual Freedom” award from the American Academy of Sciences and Letters. He is also now the 18th director of the National Institutes of Health.

Yet, years ago, the courts, the media, and politicians joined in treating dissenting views as “conspiracy theories.”

Some argued that the virus’s origin was likely the Chinese research lab in Wuhan. That position was denounced by the Washington Post as a “debunked” coronavirus “conspiracy theory.” The New York Times Science and Health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli called any mention of the lab theory “racist.”

Federal agencies now support the lab theory as the most likely based on the scientific evidence.

Likewise, many questioned the efficacy of those blue surgical masks and supported natural immunity to the virus — the government later recognized both positions.

Others questioned the six-foot rule, which shut down many businesses, as unsupported by science. In congressional testimony, Dr. Anthony Fauci later admitted that the rule “sort of just appeared” and “wasn’t based on data.” Yet not only did it result in heavily enforced rules (and meltdowns) in public areas, but the media further ostracized dissenting critics.

For years, pundits portrayed those who questioned gender reassignment surgeries and treatments as bigots. Now, leading medical associations and European nations have decided that such procedures should not be generally allowed.

All of it was orthodoxy masquerading as science.

Yet, Jackson sees the protection of dissenting scientific and professional views as a “can of worms” that the courts should avoid in favor of state and assocational imposed truths.  She wrote that allowing such opposing views “ultimately risks grave harm to Americans’ health and wellbeing.”

Keep in mind that counselors can still be sued for any harm that they cause due to malpractice or negligence. Indeed, recently in New York, a jury awarded $2 million to Fox Varian, 22, over the double mastectomy performed on her while she was a minor.

State associations can also publish positions on such therapy and seek to convince both professionals and the public on the best practices for children.

None of that was sufficient for Justice Jackson or Colorado. Ironically, Colorado has now succeeded in dramatically strengthening free speech in its repeated failures to curtail it. The Democratic legislators have made the state arguably the most hostile to free speech in the nation.

Colorado’s Supreme Court sought to bar President Donald Trump from the ballot. Notably, while many of us viewed Trump’s views on the 2020 election to be protected speech, Colorado treated it as conduct and advocacy of insurrection.

It was Colorado that sought to force bakers, photographers, and web designers to produce work in favor of same-sex marriages despite their religious objections.  Each effort was supported by the Tenth Circuit and each failed in spectacular fashion before the Supreme Court.

As many of us celebrate this victory for free speech, these advocates are denouncing the ruling in apocalyptic terms.

What is most chilling is that Jackson is now routinely called the model for new nominees, including the push to pack the Supreme Court with an instant liberal majority.

If so, Jackson’s radical views on constitutional interpretation could be replicated on a new packed Court. To paraphrase this decision, “to be completely frank, we know exactly what will happen then.”

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 11:00

WTI Dips After Big Crude Inventory Build, US Production Slows

Oil prices are down overnight but playing headline roulette with every word that comes out of any leaders' (or non-leaders') mouth as ceasefire chatter (now denied) has WTI riding a roller-coaster (but below $100 once again as we write).

“Flows and actions matter more than words,” said Giovanni Staunovo, a commodity analyst at UBS Group AG.

And while inventory data may not be the market-moving event in this new regime, it is useful to see signs of stockpiling or demand.

DOE

• Crude +5.45mm (+10.3mm API, +2mm exp)

• Cushing +520k

• Gasoline -586k

• Distillates -2.11mm

A sizable crude build (the sixth weekly rise in total US crude stocks in a row) was mirrored by the seventh weekly drawdown in gasoline stocks...

Stockpiles at Cushing, Oklahoma, also rose for the sixth consecutive week.

A 520,000-barre- build takes inventories at the storage hub to the highest level since July 2024. Stockpiles at Cushing are now firmly above 30 million barrels. 

Stocks for all transport fuels in the US dropped this week with diesel falling 2 million barrels to the lowest level since mid-March.

That fuel, alongside jet, is in the spotlight as the Iran war has had an outsized impact on the price of those fuels compared with gasoline. 

Interestingly, US crude production slipped lower again last week. Refinery crude runs fell for the first time in five weeks. Despite the drop, they remain at a multi-year seasonal high. 

Oil prices dipped after the data...

The surge in market volatility has made intraday trading choppier, with many traders having to curb position sizes.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 10:38

Markets Have Returned To Taking Headlines As Gospel

By Molly Schwartz, cross-asset macro strategist at Rabobank

US Treasury yields have been falling for the past two days. On Monday, we saw US rates grind lower after Powell gave a speech at Harvard University where he seemed to hint that hikes were not part of the Fed’s plan for the immediate future, noting that “tariffs have a one-time impact on inflation” and that “there are risks to both sides of the mandate.” In times like these where inflation fears have been the headline, Powell’s refusal to doomspeak on the inflationary impacts of the war and elevated energy prices said enough on its own.

Powell also took time to talk about the continued issue of Fed independence, or lack thereof, highlighting how “there’s broad consensus” that the Fed requires independence on monetary policy. However, as we have noted previously, history suggests otherwise. The Fed was not independent from the Treasury until 1951 when the Treasury-Fed Accord was signed, and the Bank of England wasn’t formally independent until 1997.

But Powell has taken the issue of independence to heart, having announced that if he feels that Fed independence is at stake, and so long as the DoJ investigation continues, he will remain on the Board of Governors even after his term as Fed Chair ends, preventing Trump from appointing a third Governor to the Board this term.

However, the move lower yesterday was sparked after a Wall Street Journal article reported that “President Trump told aides he’s willing to end the US military campaign against Iran even if the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed.” Should this statement hold water, this would bring a whole new meaning to the TACO trade. But, it appears more likely that it doesn’t, especially when this announcement was sprinkled between threats from the Administration to decimate Iranian desalination and energy infrastructure.

Yet, markets have returned to taking headlines as gospel and 2 year yields closed down more than 3bp yesterday. Meanwhile, whereas last Friday the OIS curve indicated investors were positioned for around 6bp worth of hikes from the Fed by 2026 year-end, yesterday they were positioned for 8bp worth of cuts. USD came under pressure due to the broad move in yields as the DXY Index closed down 0.65%, back below the 100-handle for the first time since Friday. USD weakness was especially visible against the euro, with EUR/USD closing the day up 0.80%, back to 1.15. We will also note that yesterday was the end of March and the end of Q1, so some of yesterday’s price action may also be a result of rebalancing flows.

What markets cared significantly less about was a new five point peace plan proposed by China and Pakistan. The plan includes talk of an immediate ceasefire and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. This is likely to go the same way as Iran’s proposed five point plan and the US’ fifteen point plan—nowhere at all. Markets were rocked, however, after a report circulated that Iranian President Pezeshkian stated that Iran was prepared to end the war if they “receive guarantees.” These guarantees, of course, are the same as the five point plan already proposed, and there was no confirmation that this announcement was a tangible indicator that the war will come to a close anytime soon, as FX and rates markets quickly retraced in response. The S&P 500, however, took that move and ran with it, jumping 1.16% to $6,515, and grinding above that level the rest of the US afternoon.

Trump’s focus, however, has shifted back to Europe. In a Truth Social post, Trump bemoaned Europe’s refusal to get involved, and has especially called out the UK’s Keir Starmer, saying that “all of those countries that can’t get jet fuel because of the Strait of Hormuz, like the United Kingdom, which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, I have a suggestion for you…build up some delayed courage…and just TAKE IT…the USA won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!”

Trump’s ire comes as several European countries, including the UK, have pushed back on US demands in the context of the war. This includes France’s refusal to allow American planes headed to Israel to flay over French territory, Italy denying US aircraft access to a base in Sicily, and of course, the UK’s hesitancy and red tape in allowing American access to British military bases.

While markets have focused on the energy crisis in the middle east, another war is fueling its own energy crisis further north. Russia’s Ust-Luga port was damaged after being struck by Ukrainian drones for the fifth time in ten days. According to Bloomberg, “Primorsk and Ust-Luga handled about 45%, or 1.72 million barrels a day, of Russia’ seaborne crude exports,” and the damage has set  Russia’s oil flows to its lowest level in more than a year

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 10:10

"Resilient" US Manufacturing Sector Surges In Face Of War, Prices Paid Up

Amid the fog of war and fading 'hard' data, the final March S&P Global Manufacturing PMI printed 52.3 (a small drop from the flash 52.4 print), higher than the 51.8 print for February.

“Faster growth of output in March points to encouraging resilience for US manufacturing in the face of the outbreak of war in the Middle East," according to Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence.

The ISM Manufacturing PMI also rose from 52.4 to 52.7 - the highest since August 2022...

Source: Bloomberg

Under the hood, Prices Paid continued to rise dramatically while New Orders and Employment dipped...

Business confidence regarding output in the year ahead has also so far held up well, if one follows the S&P Global report.

"This sustained resilience in part reflects reduced concerns over government policies such as tariffs, but also indicates that producers anticipate only a short-term and modest impact from the war, which is clearly uncertain.

It remains early days in terms of the impact of the conflict, and a sharp rise in prices and delivery delays has cast a cloud over the outlook, threatening to drive inflation higher, dampen demand and throttle supply chains, warns S&P Global's Williamson.

Factory input costs have already jumped higher on the back of surging oil prices and supplier delays have become more widespread than at any time since October 2022, linked to the war exacerbating existing shipping, haulage and port delays.

“Some manufacturers are hence reporting stock building as a precaution against future price rises or supply shortages, and hiring has almost stalled in order to reduce staffing costs, underscoring the growing concern about how the war might cause problems for factories in the coming weeks."

Obviously, if price pressures and supply delays persist, demand, employment and production capabilities will inevitably start to be more seriously affected.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 10:07

Palantir Develops IRS Tool To Flag "Highest Value" Audits, Are Crypto Bros Next?

Crypto bros and those of you with 'creative' accountants, heads up - the IRS is beefing up its ability to flag accounts for audits. Not only is this the first year that major US-based custodial crypto brokers are reporting gross proceeds to the agency, the IRS is getting aggressive elsewhere. Last year they paid Palantir $1.8 million to identify cases for audits, collections, and potential criminal investigations with a high probability of success. The contract was the latest in over $200 million the IRS has paid Palantir since 2014. 

According to documents obtained by WIRED, the new tool - called the Selection and Analytic Platform (SNAP) - is designed to help IRS staff analyze unstructured data from the agency's existing internal databases. The goal is to more efficiently identify "high-value" targets amid the IRS's fragmented legacy systems, which include over 100 business systems and 700 case-selection methods built up over decades.

The pilot is currently focused on areas like Residential Clean Energy Credits, disaster-zone tax relief claims, and gift tax returns. It also helps extract key details from supporting documents, such as contracts, vendors, and related records, to flag potential fraud or underreporting more efficiently. Importantly, SNAP works only with the IRS’s existing internal data - it doesn’t (yet) pull in fresh external feeds like social media or third-party apps.

Those who may get SNAPped up for an audit include;

• People or businesses with big clean energy credit claims (especially if documentation is weak, inflated, or mismatched with other IRS records)
• Individuals who filed disaster relief deductions/credits that appear suspicious
• High-net-worth individuals making large gifts that may trigger gift tax issues

In broader terms, anyone whose filings show high potential recovery value (big underreported income, large credits/deductions, or patterns the IRS flags as risky) could be surfaced faster once SNAP is fully operational. The tool aims to replace inefficient, fragmented manual processes with smarter, data-driven selection.

So why should crypto holders care?

Wired casually mentions that the IRS has experimented in the past with “contracting with companies like Coinbase to analyze information about crypto transactions” as one of several methods to improve audit targeting.

And look at this; they're looking at mining social media posts.

Neuman has studied other methods the IRS has experimented with to improve its case selection process, including contracting with companies like Coinbase to analyze information about crypto transactions, and mining public social media posts for clues that an individual or business may be underreporting their income. 

Meanwhile, Gemini, Kraken, Binance, Coinbase, Robinhood, Crypto.com, PayPal, and Cash App are all reporting 2025 gross proceeds to the IRS starting this year via 1099-DA. 

And while this isn't tied to this Palantir/SNAP project - the broader picture is clear: the IRS is aggressively upgrading its ability to spot underreporting and fraud. Crypto remains a high-priority area for the agency. Between the new 1099-DA reporting forms that Coinbase and other platforms are already sending to the IRS, ongoing blockchain analytics tools, and now a deeper partnership with Palantir’s data-crunching tech, the net is getting tighter and more sophisticated.

Bottom line for crypto users:

• Accurate record-keeping and proper tax reporting have never been more important.
• “It’s on-chain so they’ll never find it” is not a strategy anymore.
• The IRS is investing serious money in tools designed to surface the biggest potential recoveries — and crypto has long been on their radar.

In other words, get your house in order.  If you’ve been sloppy with cost basis, mixing personal and business wallets, or treating crypto like the Wild West, the combination of better data analytics and old-fashioned enforcement could make for a very expensive wake-up call.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 09:25

The Barbell Economy: Why The Middle Is Vanishing

Authored by Tamuz Itai via The Epoch Times,

There’s a pattern quietly reshaping daily life, work, and society itself. Economists now call it the “barbell economy.” Value, growth, and opportunity concentrate at the two extremes—ultra-cheap utility on one end, premium experience and status on the other—while the broad, reasonable middle thins out. Once you start noticing it, you can’t unsee it. And the data show it isn’t a fleeting trend.

Start with something as ordinary as dinner. Fast-food drive-throughs, delivery apps, and value menus deliver speed and rock-bottom prices with almost no human interaction. At the opposite pole, tasting menus and farm-to-table experiences turn meals into curated stories worth premium prices. The casual sit-down restaurant is struggling or closing—that reliable neighborhood spot that was neither rock-bottom cheap nor luxurious.

The same appears in travel. Airlines sell ultra-low fares for tighter seats but tack on fees for seat selection, bags, and boarding, while business- and first-class cabins keep expanding, with more space, better food, and priority service. Premium-cabin bookings on U.S. domestic flights have grown nearly three times faster than economy seats since 2020. Hotels follow suit: luxury and upper-upscale properties posted stronger revenue growth per available room (RevPAR) in early 2025 than midscale or economy tiers, where occupancy often hovers in the mid-50 percent range and room rates struggle to keep pace with inflation.

Even cars illustrate the point. The average new-vehicle transaction price hit roughly $49,353 in February 2026—up 3.4 percent from the prior year and near all-time highs. For many families, that means heavy debt, stretched budgets, or leaving the new-car market altogether. Some trade down to older or used vehicles; others finance their way into premium models. A reliable new car without major financial strain is becoming rare.

The pattern repeats across many sectors. In education, elite universities grow more expensive and selective, free online resources explode at the low end, and middle-tier institutions face rising costs alongside skepticism about value.

In the workplace, highly skilled, high-pay roles in tech, finance, and specialized fields expand at one pole; gig and service work grow at the other. Stable mid-skill, mid-income jobs have been under pressure for decades. Their share of employment fell from about 59 percent in 1983 to 45 percent by 2012, with high- and low-skill roles filling the gap—a trend that recent analyses tie directly to the barbell shift. Retail mirrors it: ultra-cheap, high-volume platforms on one side, luxury brands on the other, and many traditional mid-tier department stores and general retailers struggling to hold ground. Everywhere, it seems, the middle ground of reliability, reasonable quality, and fair pricing is becoming the hardest place to sustain.

Why the Middle Gets Squeezed

Some of the forces behind include several reinforcing dynamics. Technology drives costs down at the low end—through automation, digitization, and global scale—while amplifying differentiation at the high end, enabling personalized experiences, strong brands, and ecosystems that command premium prices. Globalization intensifies the pressure: mid-tier businesses now compete with both lower-cost producers abroad and globally scaled luxury players, forcing them to slash costs dramatically or move upmarket.

Markets themselves reward extremes. Massive scale wins on price; strong differentiation wins on margins. Being “solid and reliable” without either advantage leaves you exposed. Consumer psychology gravitates toward either “the cheapest thing that works” or “what feels worth it and represents me.” Mid-tier operators also face rising fixed costs—rent, labor, regulation, supply chains—without the efficiencies of giants or the pricing power of luxury brands. The math is getting tighter.

Why the Middle Still Matters

Historically, the middle wasn’t just a pricing tier. It was a stabilizing feature of society. A large middle class with stable work, enough income to build a life, and independence from both the state and the elite acted as an anchor. These people invested in communities, cared about long-term stability, participated in institutions, and generally worked within the system because they had a genuine stake in it.

When the middle thins, shared experiences shrink. Different groups consume, travel, learn, and even perceive reality differently. Social mobility feels less realistic. Trust in institutions erodes as more people feel the system no longer includes or needs them. Ancient to modern political thinkers have warned that societies dominated by extremes tend to be less stable.

What makes the pattern subtle—and hard to reverse—is that almost every individual decision makes sense. Companies cut costs or differentiate to survive. Consumers hunt for deals or splurge on what feels special. Governments open trade for growth. Investors seek returns. But cumulatively, they push supply and demand toward the extremes. It’s a classic case of local optima creating a suboptimal system-level outcome.

The Fork in the Road

If the middle continues to thin, and societies nevertheless wish to re-stabilize it, three broad paths are visible.

• One is passive stability through distribution—ideas such as universal basic income. It could cushion immediate hardship but risks weakening the historical link between contribution, purpose, and livelihood. Also, large-scale central planning has a poor track record of sustaining broad prosperity (e.g., socialism).

• A second path is a controlled middle class, common in centralized systems. People can still live comfortably, but their position depends more heavily on alignment with the state or institutions. This often limits the autonomy that made the traditional middle class a genuine stabilizer. We can see that in China today, under the CCP, where the middle class is not fulfilling its traditional role.

• The third—and most hopeful—path is actively rebuilding a productive middle. This means reindustrialization, stronger domestic supply chains, infrastructure investment, technical education, and new pathways that don’t require elite credentials. The goal is restoring roles in which a broad group of people create real economic value.

Lessons From History—and Today

The old debate of “more free market” versus “more state” often misses how some countries actually succeeded. South Korea in the 1950s was poor and war-torn. Under President Park Chung-hee, the government didn’t simply let markets run free or impose permanent control. It provided guided support—directing credit to key industries, investing heavily in infrastructure and education, and pushing exports—but tied that support to performance. Companies that failed to compete internationally lost backing. As industries matured and became globally competitive, the state gradually stepped back, allowing more market autonomy. Success came from smart sequencing: early coordination to build capacity, followed by increasing competition within a strengthening institutional framework.

We see initiatives of a similar breed today in the United States, where recent policies have aimed to reshore manufacturing, support strategic sectors such as semiconductors and energy, and rebuild domestic capacity.

These efforts represent attempts to reform a system that long optimized purely for efficiency.

Rebuilding—or thoughtfully reshaping—the middle will require understanding the forces at work and making deliberate choices about the kind of society we want the economy to support.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 09:05

Trump To Address Nation With 'Important Update' On Iran War: What Will He Say?

Update (0845ET): Minutes after we prepared this post, President Trump posted on his social media feed that Iran has asked for a ceasefire:

"Iran’s New Regime President, much less Radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE!"

Trump added that he will consider it if the Strait is opened... or else!

"We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!"

Presumably this will be a topic of tonight's address to the nation, but once again it takes two (or three) to TACO and until the Strait is open, all bets are still off.

*  *  *

President Donald Trump is scheduled to address the nation on April 1 to give an update on the military operation in Iran, according to the White House.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a post on X that the president will provide “an important update” about the ongoing war at 9 p.m. ET on Wednesday.

During a White House press conference on March 31, Trump indicated that the U.S. military may conclude its combat operations against Iran within weeks.

“I would say that within two weeks, maybe two weeks, maybe three. We’re hitting them very hard. Last night we knocked out tremendous amounts of missile-making facilities,” he told reporters.

“We’re finishing the job, and I think within, maybe two weeks, maybe a couple of days longer, to do the job. But we want to knock out every single thing they have.”

As The Epoch Times' Aldgra Fredly reports, Trump said while there is a possibility of reaching a deal with Iran to end the military operations for Tehran’s surrender of its nuclear weapons program, the operation could still be ended without any deal.

“If they come to the table, that’ll be good. But it doesn’t matter whether they come or not. We’ve set them back, it’ll take 15 to 20 years for them to rebuild what we’ve done to them,” the president said.

When asked about the impact of the war on gas prices, Trump said, “All I have to do is leave Iran, and we’ll be doing that very soon, and they’ll come tumbling down.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has denied engaging in direct negotiations with the United States. He told Al Jazeera on March 31, “We do not have any faith that negotiations with the U.S. will yield any results.”

Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has been disrupted since the United States and Israel began military operations against Iran at the end of February. Tehran has retaliated by firing missiles and drones at Israel and U.S. military assets and targets across Gulf nations.

Oil prices have surged in recent weeks, with the U.S. national average retail price for a gallon of regular gasoline exceeding $4 on March 31 for the first time since August 2022, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began.

At a Pentagon press briefing on March 31, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said the previous 24 hours had marked the lowest number of Iranian missile and attack drone launches since the fighting began.

“The latest intel is clear ... our strikes are damaging the morale of the Iranian military, leading to widespread desertions, key personnel shortages, and causing frustrations amongst senior leaders,” Hegseth said.

Since the start of the military campaign—dubbed Operation Epic Fury—U.S. forces have struck more than 11,000 targets, according to U.S. Central Command.

So what will President Trump say?

With the recent deployment of A-10s and Apaches (consistent with a military option that involves close-air support and/or attacks on Iranian fast boats and water drones) in mind, Larry Johnson lays out three possibilities:

Option 1 — Declare that negotiations with Iran via intermediaries (e.g., Pakistan) are progressing and that they United States is going to cease combat operations against Iran in order to support the negotiations and achieve a peaceful resolution.

Option 2 — Declare that victory has been achieved and that US forces will begin withdrawing from the region, leaving the status of the Strait of Hormuz in limbo.

Option 3 — Announce a massive air and ground operation to secure the freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

The deployment of the A-10s and the Apaches can only mean one of two things:

1. It is a show of force intended to pressure Iran to return to the negotiating table.

2. The US is going to launch a massive attack against Iranian assets in the Persian Gulf, especially those located in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

Since Monday, March 30, 2026, President Donald Trump has made several public comments on the ongoing US-led Operation Epic Fury against Iran, primarily via Truth Social posts, interviews (including with the New York Post), and remarks to reporters. His statements emphasize US military successes, threats of further escalation if demands are unmet, criticism of allies, and a potential near-term wind-down of direct US involvement.

On Monday, Trump described Iran as effectively “decimated” or “obliterated,” with its air force, navy, and many ships sunk or destroyed. He portrayed the campaign as highly successful and “way ahead of schedule” in prior context, but continued highlighting strikes on “long-sought-after targets.” He shared video footage on Truth Social of a massive explosion and secondary blasts in Isfahan (linked to strikes on uranium-related or military sites), without additional caption in one instance.

Trump also posted that the US was in “serious discussions with a new, and more reasonable, regime” to end operations. He warned that if the Strait of Hormuz is not “immediately ‘Open for Business’” and a deal is not reached shortly, the US would “completely obliterate” Iran’s electric generating plants, oil wells, Kharg Island, and possibly desalination plants. He framed this as concluding the US “lovely ‘stay’ in Iran.” In follow-up comments, he suggested the US could respond to Iranian actions “twenty times harder” with “Death, Fire, and Fury.”

Overall, Trump’s messaging since March 30 combines triumphalism about US achievements, escalatory warnings tied to the Strait of Hormuz and energy targets, frustration with allies, and signals of de-escalation with a short timeline for reduced US involvement. These comments have influenced market reactions (e.g., oil prices and equities) and drawn responses from Iranian officials and international observers.

Trump’s remarks since Monday have boosted the confidence of the folks on Wall Street and contributed to a significant surge in the stock market, with the Dow up 1,125 points. The price for BRENT oil dropped from 118 to 103 during Tuesday trading. This means the financial folks believe the war is going to end.

I think Trump is counting on Iran offering up some concessions in the face of the US buildup of additional air combat assets.

Netanyahu reportedly just said Iran no longer poses threat to Israel’s existence… A dramatic pivot if true.

However, over the last few hours, Israel and the US carried out a large wave of attacks across Iran.

They struck targets across several parts of Tehran, as well as in the cities of Karaj, Shahriar, Ahvaz, Shiraz, Abadeh, Isfahan, and Bandar Abbas. Iran will retaliate in force to these latest attacks.

In short, I believe Donald Trump will announce a major offensive to try to force Iran to release its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz… I believe that offensive will fail and that the war will escalate unless the US and Israel agree to two critical Iranian demands: the end of all sanctions and the removal of US military bases from the Persian Gulf arab countries.

Russia and China are two wild cards that could change the trajectory of the current war. If they engage and apply pressure on the diplomatic front — including ironclad security guarantees to Iran — Donald Trump may take the exit ramp.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/01/2026 - 08:46