Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge has allowed the Trump administration to enforce identification requirements for immigrants present in the United States illegally.

In a ruling on Thursday, Judge Trevor Neil McFadden said that a rule by the Department of Homeland Security to require illegal immigrants to comply with statutory registration and fingerprinting may move forward as plaintiffs arguing against it failed to “demonstrate that they have standing to bring this suit.”

The case was filed on March 31 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, with the main plaintiff being the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, along with other immigrant advocacy groups.

On Jan. 20, when President Donald Trump took office for the second time, he issued an executive order, “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” in which he stated that illegal immigrants must be identified and registered with the federal government.

Following his order, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced on Feb. 25 that the DHS would fully enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), under which illegal immigrants will be tracked and compelled to leave the country voluntarily.

Criminal penalties will be imposed on those failing to leave the country, failing to register their identities with the federal government and be fingerprinted, or failing to inform authorities of a change in address.

“An alien’s failure to register is a crime that could result in a fine, imprisonment, or both. For decades, this law has been ignored—not anymore,” said the DHS announcement, referring to the Alien Registration Act, which was first enacted by Congress in 1940.

The registration requirement is set to be effective from April 11, 2025.

According to the alien registration requirement, all illegal immigrants 14 years and older who were not registered and fingerprinted when applying for a U.S. visa, and who remain in the United States for 30 days or longer, must apply for registration and fingerprinting.

The INA requires that all “parents and legal guardians of aliens below the age of 14 must ensure that those aliens are registered.”

Registered illegal immigrants over the age of 18 must carry proof of registration with them at all times, according to the rule.

“Failure to comply may result in criminal and civil penalties, up to and including misdemeanor prosecution, the imposition of fines, and incarceration.”

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services website states that, as part of enabling the requirement, the government has established a new form—G-325R, Biometric Information (Registration)—and an online process “by which unregistered aliens may register and comply with the law.”

In its lawsuit, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights argued that the DHS rule “reverses the government’s long-standing approach to registration … in a manner that will cause confusion, fear, and significant economic disruption.

“Defendants attempt to rush through these sweeping changes without any meaningful explanation for the change in policy and without the notice, public comment, and careful consideration that Congress requires to avoid exactly these types of harms.”

The plaintiffs requested a stay of the rule.

McFadden ruled that the plaintiffs failed to establish standing on an organizational level and on behalf of the organization’s members.

The coalition’s “injuries are highly speculative, sounding in prospective fears about what might happen when the rule takes effect,” he said.

The organization has also failed to demonstrate how a “mere requirement to abide by the law” constitutes a concrete injury.

The plaintiffs argued that this “compelled admission” regarding their members’ immigration status violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

In response, McFadden said that the coalition had failed to “demonstrate that any of their members would actually be subject to criminal prosecution based on their answers to Form G-325R.”

Meanwhile, according to the DHS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement made 32,809 arrests in the first 50 days of the Trump administration, a number that almost equaled the total arrests made in fiscal year 2024.

The DHS said in a post on social media platform X on April 9: “Illegal aliens should use the CBP Home app to self-deport and leave the country now. If they don’t, they will face the consequences. This includes a fine of $998 per day for every day that the illegal alien overstayed their final deportation order.”

The Epoch Times reached out to the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights for comment.

Authored by Jackson Richman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Trump administration announced on April 11 that it has reached agreements with five law firms to represent causes they both support, such as helping veterans.

These law firms are the latest to offer pro bono services to the White House. The administration has gone after law firms it says have taken stances at odds with Trump’s policies, such as practices relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

None of the law firms were targeted by the administration but reached these agreements with the White House, which has issued executive orders going after a handful of others.

A group of four law firms agreed to each provide at least $125 million, or $500 million altogether, in pro bono services: Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, Allen Overy Shearman Sterling US LLP, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, and Latham & Watkins LLP.

The firms agreed to be counsel to help veterans, law enforcement, and first responders; combat anti-Semitism; and ensure “fairness in the justice system.”

They “will take on a wide range of pro bono matters that represent the full political spectrum, including conservative ideals,” President Donald Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

The law firms agreed to end the use of DEI in hiring personnel and “affirm that it is their policy to give fair and equal consideration to job candidates, irrespective of their political beliefs, including candidates who have served in the Trump administration, and any other Republican or Democrat administration,” according to Trump. They will also advise other law firms regarding employment practices.

The four firms said they will not refuse to represent those who have not been clients of prominent nationwide law firms due to holding political beliefs that contrast those of their firm’s lawyers.

The White House celebrated the agreement.

“President Trump and his administration have entered into an agreement with these long established firms, which have affirmed their strong commitment to ending the Weaponization of the Justice System and the Legal Profession. The President continues to fulfill his promise to the American people that the age of partisan lawfare in America is over,” the White House said, according to Trump’s post.

In a joint statement, which Trump shared on Truth Social, the law firms said they “look forward to a continued constructive and productive relationship with President Trump and his team.”

A fifth law firm, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, LLP, agreed to provide at least $100 million in pro bono counseling, also in helping veterans; combating anti-Semitism; assisting law enforcement, military personnel, and first responders; and “ensuring fairness in our justice system.”

The law firm agreed to hire personnel based on merit and not on DEI.

Like with the four other firms, this includes not discriminating based on political beliefs. They will also assist other law firms on hiring practices and not refuse representation to those whose political beliefs do not align with the firm’s attorneys.

Cadwalader said it worked with Trump and his team to reach the agreement.

“The substance of our agreement is consistent with the principles that have guided Cadwalader for over 230 years: We always put our client’s interests first; we believe that Justice should be available to everyone; and we are committed to attracting, retaining and nurturing the very best talent from all backgrounds,” it said in a statement, according to Trump’s post.

Other law firms that have come to agreements with the White House include Skadden, Milbank, and Willkie Farr and Gallagher, which each will provide at least $100 million in pro bono representation.

Paul Weiss agreed to provide $40 million in free counseling in areas such as combating anti-Semitism and assisting veterans.

With these arrangements so far, the law firms have agreed to provide at least $940 million in pro bono representation to some of the causes supported by the president.

Meanwhile, Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, and WilmerHale have taken legal action against the administration, seeking to reverse the executive orders against them.

Trump signed an executive order on April 9 to effectively blacklist Susman Godfrey from engaging with the U.S. government. The law firm represented Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation lawsuit against former Trump lawyer and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

The president said on April 10 that the law firms may help the administration with negotiating trade deals with countries.

Enacting what gun-grabbers see as the next-best thing to an outright “assault weapon” ban, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis on Thursday signed off on a law that will make it a much bigger hassle purchase many semiautomatic firearms. The law, which will face immediate legal challenges from gun rights groups, also takes aim at bump stocks and binary triggers, while increasing the penalty for violating the state’s magazine restrictions. It’s set to take effect on August 1 of next year, with violators facing up to 120 days in jail, a fine, or both. Repeat offenders could be locked up for 18 months.  

“The bill enacts some of the most sweeping gun regulations ever considered in the Centennial State, even compared to the few dozen restrictions Colorado lawmakers have been stacking up over the last decade,” notes The Reload‘s Jake Fogleman. The law affects the purchase of so-called “assault rifles” — like AR-15s and AK-47s — as well as gas-operated pistols that use a detachable magazine. Recoil-operated handguns aren’t subject to the restrictions; the bill’s advocates say 90% of the pistol market won’t be affected. Examples of affected gas-operated handguns include the Desert Eagle, Walther PPK, Sig Sauer MPX Copperhead and Smith & Wesson MP 5.7. 

This is a preview of what every state with an assault weapon ban will do if the Supreme Court strikes down such bans. Colorado is getting ahead of Snope. https://t.co/DMEHiYDYvX

— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) April 11, 2025

Polis had kept his intentions regarding the law to himself until it came time to sign it. “I am focused on improving public safety and making Colorado one of the top ten safest states in the country,” said Polis, who’s considered a potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidate. “This law is not a ban, and I have been clear that I oppose banning types of firearms.” Despite his claim, the law is structured as a ban on the weapons that’s only circumvented via specific exceptions.  

The law impedes the acquisition of covered weapons by throwing bureaucratic hurdles in front of would-be purchasers. First, they’ll have to obtain a “firearms safety course eligibility card” issued by their sheriff. That means being fingerprinted, paying a fee and passing a background check. “Sheriffs will have broad authority to deny applications from people seeking to buy otherwise banned firearms, including those they believe may be a risk to themselves or others,” explains the Colorado Sun. If you don’t like the decision, you’ll have to sue. 

As for the safety course, if you’re a Coloradan with a hunter education certificate, you can get by with a four-hour, in-person “basic” class. Those without a hunter certificate will be required to attend an “extended” course, which has to come in the form of at least 12 hours of in-person classes divided into at least two days. Either way, attendees will need to score at least 90% on the final exam.The eligibility card is only good for five years, at which point the same hoops have to navigated all over again to purchase another covered semiautomatic. Cardholders’ data will be stored in a new database to be overseen by the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife, a department that’s never had anything to do with regulating the firearm business. 

Having previously navigated the red tape and long waits to obtain a Colorado concealed handgun permit gets you nothing: “Because they want to make things difficult on purpose, it will be two separate permits (instead of having a CCW permit be an exemption to the [“assault weapon”] permit),” observed gun rights litigator Kostas Moros on X as he predicted other states will use Colorado’s approach if assault weapon bans are struck down by the Supreme Court. Coloradans can’t legally sidestep the law by making their purchase in another state, as federal law requires dealers to follow the rules of the state where the purchaser lives.  

The new law also raises the stakes for violators of Colorado’s 12-year-old ban on the sale, transfer or possession of magazines that can hold more than 15 rounds — with an exception for those that were already owned before July 1, 2013. Violating the ban becomes a Class 1 misdemeanor carrying up to a year in jail. Rapid-fire trigger devices such as bump stocks are banned immediately. 

“We’re not going to let this law stand,” a defiant Ian Escalante, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners told the Denver Post, “whether it’s through litigation or whether we kick these bastards out and we replace them with people who will repeal it.”

Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

News Analysis

For more than a decade, cybersecurity experts across the government and private sectors have sounded the alarm about the increasing risks posed by technology products manufactured in China.

The United States’ longstanding dependency on Chinese-made devices has been repeatedly exploited as part of a state-backed effort by China’s ruling communist regime to undermine the strategic interests and national security of the United States, from preinstalled malware on consumer devices to sabotage operations in critical infrastructure.

While not every Chinese-made device poses such a risk, the growing catalog of cyberattacks exploiting Chinese hardware underscores the need for vigilance when purchasing or using such products, and suggests the U.S. government may need to do more to curb its reliance on China for a broad array of devices.

Here’s a look at some of the most egregious documented uses of Chinese devices in cyberattacks from the last decade.

Chinese Malware Preinstalled on US Government-Funded Phones

Sending Americans’ most sensitive personal information directly to China probably wasn’t what the Federal Communications Commission had in mind when it decided to subsidize affordable mobile phones for millions of low-income Americans.

That’s exactly what happened, however.

Beginning in 2015, a wide range of budget Android phones manufactured by American company BLU in China were systematically preloaded with malware by suspected Chinese state-backed actors.

Those phones were found by cybersecurity company Kryptowire to have been preloaded with malicious software by the Shanghai Adups Technology Company, an opaque IT services company established in China in 2012, with which BLU had contracted to provide service updates for its devices.

The Adups malware operated at the most foundational level of the phones, including in the wireless update and settings apps, meaning that the malware could not be removed without rendering the phones unusable.

For years, Adups collected granular location data, contact lists, logs for calls and texts, and even the full contents of texts from Americans’ phones. Some of the phones even allowed remote actors believed to be based in China to take screenshots or otherwise seize control of the devices.

To make matters worse, all that data were encrypted and sent back to a server in China, where Chinese Communist Party (CCP) law mandates that information is a national resource, effectively transferring Americans’ most personal data directly to the regime.

The malign activity was able to bypass detection for some time because the malware was embedded in the software of the phone and therefore automatically whitelisted by most malware detection tools, which were programmed to assume that a product’s rudimentary software and firmware would not be malicious.

It’s still unclear just how many Americans were caught up in the operation. Adups claimed on its website in 2016 to have a worldwide presence with more than 700 million active users, and that it also produced firmware integrated into mobile phones, semiconductors, wearable devices, cars, and televisions.

In 2017, the Federal Trade Commission reached a settlement with BLU, finding that the company had knowingly misled its customers about the extent of data that could be collected by Adups.

Yet Adups emerged again in 2020, when cybersecurity firm Malwarebytes found that the company had preinstalled malware on budget mobile phones offered by Virgin Mobile’s Assurance Wireless program, another government-subsidized effort to make mobile phones available for low-income Americans.

Mystery Routers Hidden in US Ports

A congressional probe revealed in 2024 that Chinese-made routers used in U.S. ports could facilitate cyber espionage and sabotage.

The report revealed that giant ship-to-shore cranes, which are used to unload cargo throughout the United States’ largest ports, had been equipped with Chinese-manufactured modems with no known function.

Investigators warned that the technology embedded in the devices could allow unauthorized access to sensitive U.S. port operations and that some of the modems were also found to have active connections to the operational components of the cranes, suggesting they could be remotely controlled by a device no one previously knew existed.

All of the cranes in question were manufactured in China by Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries, a subsidiary of the state-owned China Communications Construction Co.

U.S. lawmakers noted at the time that Zhenhua’s manufacturing facility was located adjacent to China’s most advanced ship-making facility, where the regime builds its aircraft carriers and houses advanced intelligence capabilities.

In a letter dated Feb. 29, 2024, addressed to the president and chairman of Zhenhua, the lawmakers demanded to know the purpose of the cellular modems discovered on crane components and in a U.S. seaport’s server room that houses firewall and networking equipment.

U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. John Vann, who led the Coast Guard’s Cyber Command at the time, said there were more than 200 China-manufactured cranes operating across U.S. ports and other regulated facilities, less than half of which had been thoroughly inspected for the Chinese devices.

Exploitation of Chinese Routers, Cameras

Chinese state-sponsored cyber actors have also been found exploiting vulnerabilities in network devices such as home routers, storage devices, and security cameras.

These devices, often manufactured in China, have been targeted to serve as additional access points for conducting network intrusions on other entities, effectively leveraging vulnerabilities inherent in certain Chinese-made devices to gain a foothold in American networks, according to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

In one such major incident in 2016, Dahua Technology, a leading Chinese manufacturer of surveillance equipment, was linked to a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack and, again in 2021, security researchers found a flaw in Dahua’s software that allowed hackers to bypass authentication protocols and seize control of the devices.

In that incident, more than a million devices were exploited and used to create two botnets, which were then used to target the website of a cybersecurity journalist in a DDoS and extortion campaign.

Chinese state-sponsored cyber actors have continued to extensively target these and similar vulnerabilities in Chinese-made security cameras and webcams in the years since.

In February of this year, the Department of Homeland Security distributed a bulletin warning that innumerable such cameras were still being used throughout U.S. infrastructure sites, including in the electrical grid and ports.

That bulletin warned that Chinese-manufactured devices were especially likely to be exploited in cyber attacks and that tens of thousands of the devices had already been used to that end.

Read the rest here…

A top US immigration judge has ruled that the Trump administration can deport Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil under a decades-old federal statute.

Assistant Chief Immigration Judge Jamee Comans, who was appointed to her position in 2023 by the Biden DOJ, found that due to Khalil’s involvement in violent pro-Palestinian protests in the waning days of the Biden administration, his continued presence in the United States raised “potentially serious foreign policy consequences.”

The decision is the latest development in Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s efforts to deport Khalil under the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, which allows Rubio to deport noncitizens that pose a risk to the government’s foreign policy aims.

According to Comans, the government had shown “clear and convincing evidence that he is removable.”

Khalil, who is a lawful permanent US resident but not a citizen, was arrested on March 8 in his university apartment as part of a series of arrests resulting from President Trump’s vow to deport students who took part in riots and protests across American universities last year.

Rubio concluded that Khalil was eligible for deportation under the law, which prohibits “presence or activities in the United States the secretary of state has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.”

In her ruling, Comans said that Khalil has no basis to challenge that determination – but has until April 23 to request a state of his deportation. If he does not request one by that deadline, he will be deported to either Syria or Algeria, NPR reports.

His lawyers are expected to appeal, according to AP.

Authored by Wim De Gent via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced the establishment of a task force aimed at protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens.

“For too long, the Second Amendment, which establishes the fundamental individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms, has been treated as a second-class right. No more,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi wrote in a Tuesday memorandum to all DOJ employees.

“President [Donald] Trump has made protecting the Second Amendment rights a priority for this administration,” she said.

The attorney general said the president directed her to propose a plan of action designed “to protect the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.”

Bondi said the prime objective of the “Second Amendment Task Force” is to develop policies and legal strategies to “advance, protect, and promote compliance with the Second Amendment.”

The task force, chaired by Bondi, will consist of staff members from her office and from the Deputy and Assistant AGs’ offices, from the Solicitor General’s office, the Civil Division, the Civil Rights Division, the Criminal Division, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), and the FBI.

Personnel from additional agencies may be summoned to assist in the task force’s operations as needed.

Trump’s Executive Order

The task force serves to implement Trump’s Executive Order 14206, “Protecting Second Amendment Rights,” which instructed the attorney general to review all of the Biden administration’s firearms-related actions.

In a Wednesday press release, Bondi said the “prior administration placed an undue burden on gun owners and vendors by targeting law-abiding citizens exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.”

On Monday, the ATF said it had repealed President Joe Biden’s Enhanced Regulatory Enforcement Policy. The 2021 initiative—also known as the “Zero Tolerance Policy”—set strict inspection standards for arms dealers and allowed the ATF to revoke licenses over minor clerical errors that were previously considered excusable.

“This Department of Justice believes that the 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right,” Bondi said in an ATF press release.

“The prior administration’s ‘Zero Tolerance’ policy unfairly targeted law-abiding gun owners and created an undue burden on Americans seeking to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms—it ends today,” she said.

The DOJ and the ATF are also planning to revise the “stabilizing brace rule” and the boundaries for determining who is considered “engaged in the business” of selling firearms.

The stabilizing brace rule sought to reclassify guns with attached stabilizing braces—accessories originally designed to help people with disabilities shoot pistols more comfortably—as short-barreled rifles, which implies stricter regulations. Critics argued the rule turned millions of law-abiding gun owners into potential felons overnight by reclassifying their legally purchased pistols.

The 2024 “engaged in the business” of firearms dealing rule expanded the definition of who qualifies as a firearms dealer under federal law, which critics said blurred the line between private sales and commercial dealing, potentially criminalizing hobbyists.

Then-acting ATF Director Kash Patel, who was succeeded at the ATF by Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll on Wednesday, called the measures “a pivotal step toward restoring fairness and clarity in firearms regulation.”

The DOJ said it will work with gun rights organizations, gun manufacturers, and legal experts over the coming months to ensure that the polices align with Americans’ constitutional rights.

From NTD News

The U.S. Postal Service has proposed raising the price of a “forever” stamp from 73 cents to 78 cents as part of a broader rate hike set to take effect July 13, pending approval from the Postal Regulatory Commission, according to CBS News. 

The increase would raise mailing service prices by about 7.4%.

The USPS says the hike is necessary for financial stability, continuing a trend of rate increases under former Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who warned customers to expect “uncomfortable” pricing adjustments after a decade of flawed pricing models.

CBS writes that DeJoy stepped down in March after nearly five years, as the Trump administration and the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), headed by Elon Musk, floated the idea of privatizing mail delivery.

Deputy Postmaster General Doug Tulino is serving as interim chief while a permanent replacement is chosen. Trump has suggested moving USPS under the Commerce Department to curb ongoing financial losses at the $78 billion agency.

Back in March our friends at the Epoch Times wrote that the DeJoy informed Congress that he signed an agreement with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and the General Services Administration (GSA) to help the U.S. Postal Service improve operations and cut costs.

In a letter, DeJoy said the agencies will assist in addressing mismanaged retirement assets, excessive workers’ compensation costs, unfunded legislative mandates, and outdated regulatory burdens—issues he claims have cost USPS over $50 billion.

Highlighting the Postal Service’s broken business model and $100 billion in past losses, DeJoy stressed the need for deep reform, noting that 10,000 workers will soon be offered early retirement following previous workforce reductions. 

Authored by Jim Rickards via Investors Daily,

Gold has reached a new all-time high, surpassing $3,200 per ounce. I anticipate it could climb even higher in the near future.

Gold’s going up against the dollar, meaning it takes more dollars to buy an ounce of gold. If you’re long dollars and long gold, you’re doing well on both accounts.

Central bank gold holdings are surging

One reason for gold’s surge is the role of central banks. Retail and institutional investors may not be that interested in gold, but central banks definitely are.

In recent years, central bank holdings of gold have surged from 33,000 metric tonnes to over 36,000 metric tonnes, a 9.0% gain measured by weight.

This increase has been heavily concentrated in two countries – Russia and China. Russian gold reserves have risen from 600 metric tonnes in 2008 to 2,335 metric tonnes today, a gain of 1,735 metric tonnes or nearly 300% from the 2008 base.

China also had about 600 metric tonnes in 2008 and today has 2,280 metric tonnes, a 275% gain. (There is good reason to conclude that China has undisclosed gold reserves which would make those total and percentage gains ever higher).

The Big Ten holders of gold include the usual suspects – the US, Germany, Italy, France, Switzerland and Japan. But the list also includes some newcomers such as Russia, China and India.

Why the large gold holdings and why the rapid additions to gold reserves if gold is not a monetary asset? The question answers itself. Gold is a monetary asset.

Central bank net buying is equivalent to about 20% of annual gold mining output. That does not indicate a gold shortage, but it does put a firm floor under the dollar price of gold.

The asymmetric gold trade

That creates what we call an asymmetric trade. On the upside, the sky’s the limit, but on the downside, the central banks have your back to some extent because they will definitely buy the dips to increase their gold hoards. That’s the best type of trade to be in.

So, the stage is set. The simple maths of easier percentage gains for constant dollar gains is the dynamic that can set off a buying frenzy and lead to super-spikes in the dollar price of gold.

Central bank buying causes a relentless increase in the dollar price of gold and offers limited downside because they will buy the dips. All that is needed to set off the super-spike is an unexpected development that is not already priced in.

True to form, we may have it. Trump announced his tariff plans for Canada, Mexico and China. Tariffs on the EU are not far behind. These tariffs would come on top of existing ones, which are quite high in the case of China.

No doubt those tariff threats are the starting place for all three countries to negotiate with Trump on a bilateral basis to arrive at policy changes (or not) that could avert or mitigate the added tariffs. Still, no one should doubt Trump’s willingness to move forward with the tariffs if he is not satisfied with the response.

‘BRICS is dead’

In a press conference, President Trump repeated his warning from months ago. He said he would impose 100% tariffs on any BRICS member that took steps to create a new BRICS currency that would rival the US dollar. He believes the BRICS nations have backed off since this threat and called the group ‘dead’.

Here’s the X post by Trump on this matter back in November:

Of course, 100% tariffs are extreme by any measure and are more like an act of war than a legitimate economic policy. Still, today he stood by what he said back in November.

What’s important to keep in mind

The BRICS are a multilateral economic organisation including Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, the UAE and several other nations. At least twenty other countries, including some large economies such as Malaysia and Turkey, have applied for membership.

Collectively the BRICS represents about half the population of the planet and about 30% of global GDP (or over 50% of global GDP if the purchasing power parity method of calculation is used). The BRICS are not some polyglot collections of developing economies. They represent a large proportion of the entire global economy.

BRICS members Russia and Iran are already subject to extreme US economic sanctions. But Brazil, China and India are not subject to extensive sanctions and are among the largest US trading partners. Tariffs of 100% are onerous even when legitimate economic goals are being pursued.

Importantly, the BRICS are not currently working on a new currency although they are working on a new global payments system to bypass SWIFT and Eurodollar banks — something quite different.

Any 100% tariffs of the kind described would result in retaliation from the BRICS that would hurt major US exporters such as Boeing, John Deere, Cargill, Dow Chemical and Koch Industries.

It may be that Trump is just trying to draw some lines in the sand before any action is required. It may be that he is just setting up a situation where he can boast about “success” in scaring off the BRICS from launching a new currency when there was no actual currency launch plans in the near future.

But he believes the BRICS nations will not go any further in trying to replace the US dollar. Trump is a master of the art of the deal and his statement today may be a reflection of his negotiating style.

The BRICS’ currency solution: gold

Was this a warning shot about future actions even though Trump claimed action is not imminent?

The truth is the BRICS nations already have a common currency but no one in Washington understands what it is. That common currency is gold.

Today, if BRICS want to avoid the US dollar, they have to trade in their local currencies. China can pay for Russian energy exports using yuan. Russia can pay for Brazilian aircraft using rubles. India can pay for manufactured goods from China using rupees. And so on.

That method works fine. The payments can move between local banks without relying on the SWIFT payment message system in Belgium. (Russia and Iran are both banned from SWIFT).

Central banks in each BRICS country can pay local buyers and sellers in their home currency (or offer dollars through separate channels if needed to buy inputs from other countries). Those central banks then maintain a ledger showing the gross amount of other BRICS currencies they hold in their reserves.

Difficulties arise when one country runs a continual surplus with another and accumulates more of that trading partner’s currency than the surplus country can put to good use. Reserve positions in trading partner currencies also pose liquidity risks and foreign exchange risks to the holder.

A simple solution is to settle the balance in gold. This can be done on a net basis, which requires far less gold than gross settlements. It can also be done periodically (say quarterly or twice per year) which is also far easier than real-time settlement.

The gold itself can easily be transported by plane or kept in an agreed vault location with a digital ledger identifying how much gold was in each country’s account and reflecting transfers of ownership as needed.

This arrangement is not a gold standard. None of the BRICS members are offering to freely exchange gold for any currency. None of the members is offering to buy or sell gold at a fixed exchange rate.

The purpose of gold is simply to provide an agreed medium of exchange and store of value for settling trade surpluses and deficits among willing members. This is a solution for the BRICS, but there’s no reason why participation in such an arrangement must be limited to the BRICS. Any trading country could in principle join the arrangement.

What this method does do is allow participants to settle trade differences in something other than US dollars. Trade takes place in local currencies and differences are settled in gold. No dollars are needed.

This is why Trump’s tariff threat is really just for show. He won’t impose 100% tariffs on countries working on dollar alternatives because no countries are actually doing that. The settlement medium of exchange is already here. It’s gold.

And that’s good news for gold investors because the BRICS and other nations will have to acquire gold themselves (which they are already doing) in order to participate. Other investors who buy gold are along for the ride and it’s a ride that should lead to even higher dollar prices for gold.

I have my gold. It’s time to consider getting yours.