Labor Day is a time to recognize the contributions of American workers, but it also draws attention to the risks many face on the job.

Logging was the most dangerous occupation in America in 2024, with 110.4 fatal work injuries per 100,000 full time equivalent workers, more than 33 times the national rate of 3.3, according to a new study by Moneygeek.

Fishing and hunting workers ranked second at 88.8, followed by roofers at 48.7, structural iron and steel workers at 37.8, and refuse and recyclable collectors at 37.4. Each of the five occupations had a fatality rate at least 11 times the national average, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries.

The Labor Day reminder is especially stark when looking at the national toll. A total of 5,070 workers died from job related injuries in 2024, equivalent to one death every 104 minutes. That was a 4% decline from 5,283 deaths in 2023 and marked the second consecutive annual decrease. The national fatality rate also fell from 3.7 per 100,000 workers in 2022 to 3.5 in 2023 and 3.3 in 2024.

The occupations with the highest fatality rates are not necessarily those with the most deaths. Logging recorded 51 fatalities, while driver/sales workers and truck drivers accounted for 950, the largest total of any occupation, despite a substantially lower rate of 25.7 per 100,000.

Moneygeek wrote that construction laborers recorded 334 deaths at a rate of 15.8. The difference reflects workforce size, since a smaller occupation can carry a much greater risk per worker without producing the largest number of fatalities.

The dangers also vary considerably by occupation. Contact with objects and equipment accounted for 40 of the 51 logging deaths, while falls, slips and trips caused 83 of the 104 roofing fatalities.

Transportation incidents were the leading cause in several other high risk occupations, including truck driving, fishing, refuse collection and grounds maintenance. Nationwide, transportation incidents caused 1,937 fatal work injuries, representing 38.2% of all workplace deaths.

The data also highlights the growing toll among older workers. Workers age 65 and older recorded 824 fatal work injuries in 2024, a five year high and a 21.9% increase from 2020. Their share of all workplace deaths rose from 14.2% to 16.3% over that period.

The under 25 group also saw a 19.3% increase, while workers ages 55 to 64 were the only age group to record a decline.

Fatality risk and nonfatal injury rates tell different stories. Forestry and logging had a nonfatal injury rate of 1.3 per 100 workers, below the private industry average of 2.3, despite logging’s exceptionally high fatality rate.

Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction showed a similar contrast, with a nonfatal rate of 1.2. Waste collection and transportation and warehousing, meanwhile, recorded higher nonfatal injury rates of 4.7 and 4.4, respectively. The figures show that the jobs with the greatest risk of death are not always those reporting the most nonfatal injuries.

Workplace risk also varies by state. Wyoming had the highest fatality rate in 2024 at 13.9 deaths per 100,000 workers, followed by Mississippi at 8.0, Alaska at 7.1 and North Dakota at 6.8. Rhode Island had the lowest rate at 1.1, while Texas stood above the national average at 3.9. These differences reflect where hazardous industries and work activities are concentrated rather than where workers permanently reside.

For workers in dangerous occupations, the risks highlighted by Labor Day can also raise questions about financial protection for their families. A hazardous job does not automatically prevent someone from obtaining life insurance.

According to Ethos Chief Underwriter Nichole Myers, underwriting focuses on the specific activities a worker performs, such as working at heights or operating heavy machinery, rather than relying solely on a job title. Ethos reports that approximately 86% of applicants in dangerous job categories are approved for coverage, close to its overall approval rate.

Occupational risk may affect how an application is evaluated, but it does not necessarily make coverage unavailable.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

A district court denied a motion from three Stars and Stripes journalists that sought to block the Department of War from firing them.

While plaintiffs argue that the terminations “violate their First Amendment rights to communicate as citizens on matters of public concern,” such rights have “some limitations” when applied to people employed in public service, Judge Trevor N. McFadden, from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said in the Sept. 4 order.

“When government employees provide public commentary in their official capacity, their speech is government speech, and the First Amendment does not apply,” the judge said, adding that the plaintiffs have not demonstrated any “irreparable harm.”

The journalists – Max D. Lederer, Erik A. Slavin, and Lara S. Korte – filed their lawsuit on Aug. 27.

On July 5, Korte and Slavin gave interviews to CBS News. The program discussed changes to Pentagon regulations governing Stars and Stripes and their impact on its independence.

Korte said that restrictions may come on her reporting. “I’m working for Stars and Stripes … not for the Pentagon, not for any administration, not for any policymaker. I’m here to cover the military community,” she said.

Meanwhile, Slavin said he would not comply if the Pentagon requested depictions of the story that were inaccurate.

On Aug. 11, Stars and Stripes published a story about “deteriorating conditions” aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, according to the lawsuit. The vessel had been on extended duty amid the U.S.-Iran war.

On Aug. 12, a day after the article was published, Lederer was allegedly ordered to give Slavin and Korte Notices of Separation, citing insubordination for statements made in the July 5 interview.

However, Lederer did not deliver the notices. Instead, he announced his retirement.

Moreover, on Aug. 18, Lederer gave an interview with Stripes, raising concerns about the “direction” of the publication, the complaint said.

On Aug. 21, the Pentagon delivered Notices of Separation for all three plaintiffs, accusing them of insubordination and violating other Department of Defense rules, according to the lawsuit. Defendants in the case include the Pentagon and officials from the department.

“Defendants seek to terminate Plaintiffs because they publicly expressed their personal opinions about Stripes’ operations as citizens and because Defendants disapproved of Stripes’ publication of the Lincoln Story. The terminations violate Plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights,” the lawsuit said.

The U.S. Central Command has accused media reports of publishing false reports regarding USS Abraham Lincoln, including one which claimed multiple sailors died aboard the ship in a fight. “No service members aboard the aircraft carrier have died,” the Central Command said.

According to the recent court order in Slavin and Korte, the judge held that the plaintiffs failed to show that they participated in the CBS News interview as private citizens.

As for Lederer, the judge observed that his “failure to carry out a directive from a supervisor finds no shelter under the First Amendment.”

The judge denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction.

The Epoch Times reached out to the legal representative for Slavin, Korte, and Lederer for comment and did not receive a response by publication time.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which provides free legal services to news organizations and journalists, said in a Sept. 4 statement that the court should block the War Department from terminating the three employees.

“The government’s actions in this case pose a threat to the historical independence of a news outlet that publishes stories of interest to the U.S. military community,” the group said.

Meanwhile, the USS Abraham Lincoln arrived in Thailand this week after spending 286 days at sea. The roughly 5,000 sailors and Marines aboard the vessel got the chance to be on land for the first time since November last year.

One of the reasons why the price of oil failed to soar during the “actively kinetic” phase of the Iran war, when shipments through Hormuz were effectively halted and the world faced a shortage of about 10-15mmb/d, is that Chinese oil demand plunged. Whether due to a sharp slowdown in the economy (which after the sudden “recap” of China’s banks appears very likely) or due to an aggressive drain of China’s strategic reserve, the reality is that, as discussed here extensively, both Chinese oil imports…

… and local product refining…

… cratered for much of 2026, signaling that Chinese oil demand has indeed plunged.

But no more: one of the telltale signs of the period of weak Chinese demand was the collapse in the Brent-Shanghai crude spread, which traded as negative as -$20 in late April. However, in the past few weeks, we have seen a dramatic jump in Shanghai crude, which is trading just shy of the highest level hit since the Iran war, well above $100. More importantly, it now trading a sizable premium to Brent, indicating that the period of weak Chinese demand is finally over. 

And sure enough, as Bloomberg report, China – the world’s largest oil importer – is now aggressively bidding up crude prices across Africa, Canada, and Latin American markets as disruptions in the Hormuz chokepoint and limited Iranian supplies intensify competition for alternatives. The scramble is squeezing smaller Chinese refineries that once relied on heavily discounted Iranian barrels; the same refineries simply shut down a few months ago when there was not enough domestic demand.

But now, something has finally flipped, and demand for oil is suddenly soaring, sending Shanghai crude above $100 and threatening to push Brent prices – earlier today rising above $97 for the first time in over a month – also above $100 for the first time since May. 

The renewed Chinese buying marks a major shift from a period when subdued Chinese buying helped restrain crude oil prices. With Iranian exports almost entirely shut off by the US blockade and fighting flaring again, as seen Monday when Saudi Aramco’s Jizan oil facilities were reportedly hit, the race to find replacement supplies around the world is becoming an increasingly expensive task for the Chinese. 

Here is what some traders who spoke with Bloomberg had to say: 

The turnaround is producing spikes in the price of various grades. Congo’s Djeno crude was offered to Chinese buyers at premiums of as high as $20 a barrel over ICE Brent this week, up from around $15 a couple of weeks ago, according to traders who asked not to be named as they’re not authorized to speak to the media.

Chinese buyers are also buying tanker loads of crude from Canada, Brazil, and Argentina, while stronger demand has lifted prices for Russia’s ESPO crude. Asian buyers are also pushing Dubai crude futures toward $100 per barrel.  

While Chinese seaborne crude imports are still below prewar levels and are currently trending toward 10 million barrels per day, the Shanghai crude spread indicates that imports are aggressively rising, and that the race for alternative supplies may still intensify. 

Bloomberg pointed out that the rebound in crude imports comes as refinery math improves and inventories are being rebuilt in China. Improved processing margins, the resumption of fuel exports, and commercial restocking are encouraging refiners to ramp up purchases, according to GL Consulting founder Liao Na. 

Smaller independent refiners, known as teapots, face the greatest pressure because their traditional sourcing channels for Iranian and Venezuelan crude have eroded this year as access to those supplies has collapsed amid the Trump administration’s push to rewire global energy markets. 

Liao said, “China’s robust buying lately is largely driven by refiners taking advantage of decent margins,” adding, “Active restocking by commercial players has also helped, but it’s not necessarily a sign of stronger underlying demand that’s supporting the recovery.”

Separately, Goldman Sachs energy expert Daan Struyven expects China’s ability to adjust purchases to prices to help moderate any spikes in crude prices, although he also warned that Brent may rally to as much as $120 a barrel if attacks on shipping in the Middle East increase.

“Events over the last few days do suggest that the risk of shipping disruptions broadening and intensifying is an important one,” Daan Struyven, co-head of global commodities research, said in an interview on Bloomberg TV.

Goldman’s preferred way to trade another oil spike is buy going long natural gas and diesel as a way to capture gains:  “While we see meaningful upside to crude oil prices, we do recommend to investors to hedge geopolitical risks by going long in global natural gas and refined-oil products,” Struyven said, referring to bets on gains. “The supply shocks are bigger than in the crude market.”

Authored by Turner Wright via CoinTelegraph.com,

Hunter Biden will reportedly distribute 200 million of the LAPTOP token to his substack subscribers, members of a mailing list and investors in President Donald Trump’s memecoin.

Hunter Biden, son of former US President Joe Biden, announced that he plans to launch a memecoin based on the reports of his infamous laptop, which has been subject to intense media scrutiny.

In a Monday announcement on X, Hunter Biden posted the memecoin’s ticker symbol, $LAPTOP, signaling a Wednesday launch. The Wall Street Journal reported that Biden would send 20% of the one-billion token supply to substack subscribers, members of a mailing list and investors in President Donald Trump’s memecoin, Official Trump (TRUMP), whose value has dropped by about 97% since reaching an all-time high price in January 2025.

Source: Hunter Biden

The basis for the memecoin’s namesake is Biden’s computer, whose existence and contents were subject to scrutiny before the 2020 election, in which his father was running against Trump. The laptop continues to be invoked by many right-wing media figures and was the subject of two lawsuits filed by Biden over privacy laws. 

Since his father left office in January 2025, Biden has stepped up his rhetoric on crypto and blockchain, specifically criticizing the Trump family’s entanglements with the industry through its World Liberty Financial business. 

In August, he called World Liberty “corruption at a scale we’ve never seen,” comparing its business practices with those of defunct crypto exchange FTX and pointing to its ties to foreign governments like the UAE. Biden also said in June that “decentralized digital currency and the blockchain are the inevitable future.”

The LAPTOP founders, holding 30% of the token supply, will reportedly burn up to 30% of the memecoins depending on the outcome of events, including a Democrat winning the presidency in 2028, the price of Bitcoin (BTC) reaching an all-time high and LAPTOP’s fully diluted value exceeding TRUMP’s.

CLARITY Act vote set for later this month

The LAPTOP memecoin, if launched as planned, could shine more of a spotlight on Trump’s crypto ventures at a time when lawmakers in Congress are considering a comprehensive market structure bill to regulate the digital asset industry. The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, also known as the CLARITY Act, is scheduled for a cloture vote in the Senate on Sept. 15.

Cointelegraph reached out to the White House for comment but did not receive an immediate response.

An American Airlines flight was forced into an emergency landing Thursday evening after an unhinged passenger was duct-taped to his seat after a racist, sexist meltdown, according to multiple reports.

The raging flyer, identified as 67-year-old Arthur Layne Lundeen, allegedly hurled the N-word and anti-gay slurs at flight attendants and unloaded a series of “very offensive” remarks at female passengers, eyewitnesses told ABC News.

Fellow passenger Richard O’Lenick told NJ.com that Lundeen made statements about Jesus and said the plane was going to crash, then struck a pastor seated next to him and a woman who intervened. Witnesses said Lundeen had been served at least one drink.

That prompted O’Lenick and his coworker Juan Mejia, a retired Weehawken police officer, to step in. According to the New York Times, Lundeen bit Mejia’s hand before a flight attendant handed over the tape that Mejia wrapped around the man’s body, seat and head.

Shocking footage shows Lundeen’s head, hands and torso duct-taped to the chair and his wrists bound together.

The Dallas-to-Newark flight was diverted to Baltimore, where Lundeen was hauled off the plane and arrested before passengers could continue on to their destination, according to the New York Post.

Lundeen was charged with misdemeanor second-degree assault and disorderly conduct, while the real estate agent’s employer, Long Realty, cut ties in a statement.

“Long Realty is aware of reports concerning criminal charges filed against a former affiliated real estate agent arising from an incident that allegedly occurred during a commercial flight.

“Upon learning of the incident, Long Realty promptly ended its affiliation with the individual. The individual is no longer associated with or authorized to represent Long Realty in any capacity.

“The conduct described in the reports is wholly inconsistent with the professionalism, integrity, compassion, and respect for others that Long Realty expects from those affiliated with the company. We expect those associated with our company to uphold those values, and we have no tolerance for conduct that so clearly falls short of those expectations. Our thoughts are with the passengers, crew members, and others affected by this incident.”

Federal authorities are now weighing whether to file additional charges.

“The FBI is currently conducting interviews to gather the facts and will consult with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland to determine if federal charges will be filed,” the bureau said in a statement.

Lundeen was released on his own recognizance on Sept. 4 and waived an attorney at his initial appearance, court records show. His trial is set for Oct. 19 in Anne Arundel County District Court. The charges are allegations and he is presumed innocent.

Late last month, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney walked away from a trade deal with the United States. According to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Canada was “offered the best trade deal of any country on the globe,” but Carney abandoned the deal “at the last minute.”

According to the White House, “the U.S. offered Canada the most preferential market access of any country on Earth, with deep cuts on steel, aluminum, autos, lumber, and more. Instead of partnership, Canada chose unreasonable demands, walk-backs, and flat-out rejection.” Canada responded with retaliation rather than negotiation, becoming the only other country besides China to do so.

And the reason is that Canada is trying to influence the 2026 midterm elections in the United States.

After the trade negotiations failed, Canadian officials announced that tariffs of up to 50% will hit roughly 700 American products starting September 8, covering close to $20 billion in goods, about 7% of everything Canada imports from the United States. The rates range from 15% to 50%, and tariffs on American steel and aluminum will double from 25% to 50%. This was a targeted economic strike meant to hit key states before the midterm elections.

Ottawa has barely bothered to deny it. Canadian Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said the tariffs were built to apply political pressure on specific states, telling reporters: “We are also targeting products that can target specific states in the United States. We are being smart and strategic in order to apply political pressure, and I think it’s the right thing to do right now.”

Asked directly about the political intent by the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., Joly did not walk it back: “We are putting pressure clearly on different states and different people. We don’t want to do that. We don’t want this trade war. We didn’t start it.”

The target list reads like a midterm map. Cheese products from Wisconsin. Washers and dryers from Kentucky, where GE Appliances is a major employer. Steel, aluminum and auto parts from Michigan. The Wall Street Journal reported that Canadian officials designed the package to protect domestic industry and to “sting President Trump and his Republican Party” heading into November.

“The states that are most reliant on Canada as an export market are often the northern-tier states – Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire,” Ed Gresser told the Wall Street Journal. He argued that Canada is “trying to show the Republican party that there’s a systemic cost to doing this sort of thing.”

Trade consultant Eric Miller, who heads the Washington-based Rideau Potomac Strategy Group, said Canada picked targets with available substitutes, either domestic production or imports from Mexico and China, items like air conditioners and appliances, while simultaneously hitting producers in swing states and reliably Republican territory.

Nowhere was the targeting clearer than Maine, and nowhere did it collapse faster. Ottawa’s original list carried a 25% tariff on American lobster, set to bite during the fall season when roughly half of Maine’s catch goes to Canadian processors. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), facing re-election in November, had already warned that the trade war would hurt her state. The Maine Lobstermen’s Association warned on Aug. 26 that the duty would land at the worst possible moment for an industry running on thin margins.

One day later, Canada removed seafood and fish products from the list entirely, citing “select adjustments” made “based on feedback” while insisting it was maintaining a dollar-for-dollar response. Collins applauded the reversal. Ottawa aimed at a vulnerable Republican senator’s most iconic industry, took one day of political heat from that state, and backed off – which tells you the aim was never really about lobster.

The rest of the list is still standing.

Desjardins Capital Markets economist Royce Mendes estimates that the tariffs could add about 0.2 percentage points to Canadian inflation, already near 3%. The central bank is already managing higher energy costs and the risk of a slowdown, which makes this move extremely complicated for Canada, and, according to Corpay chief market strategist Karl Schamotta, Canada’s strategy may backfire.

“An intensified trade war will hurt the country more than the U.S.,” Schamotta explained. “Countertariffs will not help. In Canada, just as in the U.S., they are effectively taxes on domestic consumption. They raise the cost of living while doing little to shift trade balances or improve overall economic welfare.”

Authored by Juan Galt via BitcoinMagazine.com,

The Liquid Network said Sunday that purported white-hat hackers withdrew about 4,000 bitcoin, worth about $320 million, from the federation wallet that backs L-BTC.

Bridge nodes were disabled, and the sidechain was paused. Other issued assets, including USDT, DePix and RWAs, were unaffected, the official account said on X.

The Liquid Network is a federated sidechain of Bitcoin, founded by Adam Back’s Blockstream. The Liquid chain issues a variety of assets such as LBTC, which it backs with BTC on the Bitcoin main chain, held in a large multisig of 15 corporate and known members. 11 of the 15 members need to sign a valid multi-signature transaction to move coins from the treasury. Before the hack, the treasury held over 4200 BTC; after the hack, Blockstream’s proof of reserves page reports a little over 207 BTC left. 

The hackers withdrew 4,019.4 BTC from the reserve address in a peg-out transaction using the SideSwap Peg-out Authorization Key. SideWap is a bridge exchange and a member of the Liquid Federation. While details on the mechanism of the hack are not confirmed yet, it appears an inflation bug on the LBTC side chain was exploited by the hackers to create over 4,000 LBTC that did not exist before, and cash them out for on-chain bitcoin from the federation. Because the transaction appeared as valid, given the consensus bug, the federation members’ HSM security servers signed the BTC withdrawal transaction, worth roughly 320 million at the time. 

The hacker moved the funds to an address ending in 6gyqjlte, from which they quickly signed a new transaction with a message on the OP_RETURN arbitrary data field saying “we are whitehats. contact us on chain.” Those coins were still at that address at the time of writing.

A small mainnet transaction to the hacker address followed by an OP_RETURN saying “Please contact security@blockstream.com”, presumably from a Blockstream public address, though that remains unconfirmed. A later OP_RETURN spend from the hacker address carried “Please contact us on Signal @m671aw.70”, however, this may be spam and does not share a link to the address with the stolen funds.

In response to the breach, exchanges were told to pause L-BTC deposits and withdrawals. Bridge nodes on the Liquid Network have been paused, limiting access to the side chain, which continues to produce blocks. 

JAN3 CEO Samson Mow said Aqua’s Liquid features were affected and that on-chain bitcoin still worked. Other wallets in the industry that use the Liquid Network are expected to be affected. Users holding LBTC now effectively have their savings at risk, since the underlying BTC is currently not redeemable. Given the private nature of the Liquid chain, user onchain analytics are scarce and not much public information is known about how much LBTC is held by retail users versus corporations of Blockstream itself. Nevertheless, should the funds not be returned, it would be a heavy blow to the Liquid Network’s user base.

Users of LBTC don’t have many options but to wait for conversations with the hackers to resolve. Given the size of the hack, it would be difficult for the hackers to get away with stealing all that bitcoin, though perhaps not impossible.

What may happen is that the hackers ask for a finder’s fee and return the majority of the funds. 

Iron ore futures in Singapore surged above $100 a ton, the highest level since mid-July, as tightening Chinese coking coal supplies lifted steelmaking costs and early signs of improving seasonal demand supported prices across the steel supply chain.

Rafael Barcellos, head of Latin American metals and mining, pulp and paper equity research at Bradesco BBI, wrote in a note last week that the coal squeeze is helping support steel prices, with rebar and hot-rolled coil reaching multi-month highs. Improving downstream conditions are, in turn, providing support for iron ore.

Barcellos pointed to China’s August manufacturing purchasing managers’ index as another encouraging economic signal. 

Iron ore inventories also continued to decline, spot activity at Chinese steel-trading houses increased for a second consecutive week, and steelmaker margins improved. Blast furnace utilization, however, declined for a second week, tempering the recovery picture.

Barcellos flagged a recovery: 

Even so, the recovery we flagged in VALE: Calling the Iron Ore Bottom? Attractive Asymmetry After 2Q26 Results is now playing out, with prices largely rebounding from the lows of the past couple of weeks — a trend we expect to persist amid firm cost support and improving downstream conditions. 

Barcellos’ trade recommendation: 

Against this backdrop, we continue to favor Vale and Ternium over CSN, Gerdau, and Usiminas.

China’s prolonged property downturn has weakened a major source of steel demand, weighing on iron ore prices despite periodic rebounds. 

The latest recovery to $100 a ton raises the question of whether improving seasonal conditions can translate into a sustained demand growth story, keeping prices in triple-digit territory. 

In the metals complex on Monday, London copper futures reached a new high of $14,530 a ton. For further context, we direct readers to our note, “The Copper Chart Causing Alarm.”

Professional subscribers can read much more about the latest metals space here on our new Marketdesk.ai portal. 

Authored by Arthur Zhang via The Epoch Times,

A bipartisan group of lawmakers wants to know whether enforcement is keeping pace after the Department of Homeland Security last month added 43 companies to its forced-labor Entity List – the largest single expansion since the list was created.

Their Sept. 3 letter welcomed the expansion but cited reports of “substantially declining detention activity” in some high-risk sectors, continued imports through transshipment hubs, and what the lawmakers described as “hundreds more Entity List packages” remaining in the approval pipeline.

Reps. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.) and Chris Smith (R-N.J.) led the request for a DHS briefing within 30 days. It was also signed by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.), Young Kim (R-Calif.), and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.).

The lawmakers want DHS to explain what it is stopping at the border, what is being released, how quickly companies are being added to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, and how the government is tracing Chinese inputs that move through other countries before reaching the United States.

“Strong enforcement protects human rights, supports American workers, and helps ensure that U.S. businesses are not undercut by illegal and unfair trade practices,” they wrote.

A Wider Range of Products

The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, or UFLPA, took effect in 2022. It creates a rebuttable presumption that goods made wholly or partly in Xinjiang, or by entities on the UFLPA Entity List, were made with forced labor and are barred from entering the United States unless the importer meets the law’s requirements.

DHS said in its 2025 UFLPA strategy update that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had reviewed more than 16,700 shipments worth nearly $3.7 billion under the law and denied entry to more than 10,000.

The government has also widened the range of products receiving closer scrutiny. Its high-priority sectors include apparel and cotton, seafood, aluminum, polysilicon, and newer areas such as copper, lithium, and steel.

The Aug. 3 Entity List expansion brought the total to 187 entities and reached industries ranging from textiles and food to pharmaceuticals, aluminum, copper, lithium, and battery materials.

One addition, Xinjiang Tianyun Organic Agriculture Co., produces fish, including salmon. The Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force said it had reasonable cause to believe Tianyun participates in government-sponsored recruitment and labor-transfer programs involving Uyghurs, Kazakhs, or Kyrgyz people. DHS also listed the company under a separate UFLPA category covering entities that source materials from Xinjiang or government-linked labor programs.

The lawmakers specifically asked DHS how it is handling forced-labor exposure in seafood supply chains, including abuses aboard fishing vessels, transshipment, and coordination with other federal agencies.

Labubu Brings the Issue to Consumer Goods

The congressional letter also points to consumer products, including Labubu toys made by Beijing-based Pop Mart.

In May, advocacy groups State Armor and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation asked DHS and CBP to investigate after isotopic testing of 20 Labubu products purchased in the United States found that cotton in 16 was traceable to Xinjiang, according to their letter.

The groups asked CBP to detain and test related shipments and urged the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force to consider adding Pop Mart and associated entities to the UFLPA Entity List. Their letter said the testing was conducted by Oritain, which uses chemical signatures to assess geographic origin.

That finding concerns where the cotton came from. A separate labor investigation has focused on Jiangxi Shunjia Toys Co., a major manufacturer of Labubu products for Pop Mart.

China Labor Watch said it interviewed 51 workers at the factory, which employed over 4,500 workers at the time, and documented alleged excessive overtime, wage deductions, irregular contracts, extensive use of dispatched labor, and other workplace problems.

Li Qiang, founder and executive director of China Labor Watch, told The Epoch Times on Sept. 4 that the organization’s concerns go beyond ordinary violations of Chinese labor law.

“Our investigation identified indicators that we believe are relevant to a forced-labor assessment, including the withholding of workers’ wages, elements of involuntary work, and exploitation of workers’ vulnerabilities,” Li said.

Li said China Labor Watch has submitted additional evidence to CBP that has not been made public while the matter remains under review.

“The central concern is whether particular employment practices restrict workers’ genuine ability to leave or refuse work, rather than simply whether the factory violated Chinese labor law,” Li told The Epoch Times.

Li said firsthand worker testimony is particularly important in forced-labor investigations but generally needs to be corroborated through interviews with other workers, employment and payment records, recruitment information, company and supply-chain records, photographs, and other documentation.

“The key issue is not simply demonstrating serious labor-law violations, but establishing evidence of coercion or other indicators relevant to forced labor,” he said.

CBP has not publicly announced a Labubu-specific enforcement action.

Questions Over Enforcement

The lawmakers asked DHS for shipment outcomes broken down by sector and country, staffing levels devoted to UFLPA enforcement, the evidence importers must provide to overcome the law’s presumption, and information on newer supply chains such as silicon-carbon battery anodes and critical minerals.

They also want to know how DHS is using artificial intelligence to check shipment country of origin and supply chain documentation, and how the department is working with foreign governments to reduce transshipment and strengthen forced labor import restrictions.

Under DHS’s public process, any member agency of the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force may recommend an entity for addition to the UFLPA Entity List. Member agencies review the recommendation, and additions are decided by majority vote.

CBP acknowledged questions from The Epoch Times about shipment releases, sector-specific enforcement trends and the difficulty of tracing Chinese upstream inputs through third countries, but said it needed more time to research the questions.

DHS had not responded by publication.

The lawmakers asked DHS to provide the briefing by Oct. 3.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

We ended last week with the Dutch thinktank acknowledgement that “The world as we knew it no longer exists.” We start this week knowing many are going to be profoundly uncomfortable with the new world that replaces it.  Not the weekend op-ed in the Financial Times asking, ‘Is Keynesianism dead?’ adding “When debt is the disease, fiscal medicine may be as likely to harm as heal,” though that will shock many. Nor that the US just blew up three Iranian tankers, and Iran is firing at others, when such economic warfare is only going to drive inflation higher.

Rather, Germany’s state election in Saxony-Anhalt saw the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) emerge by far the largest party with 44%, over double what it got in the last election. It may be able to govern alone depending on what happens to smaller parties falling under the 5% threshold. If not, it will need a coalition partner. The mainstream –but no longer main— parties like the Social Democrats (SDU), on 9%, and governing Christian Democrats (CDU), on 17%, refuse to work with it. However, the far left populist BSW party, which won 5%, might do so.

To say this upends post-war German electoral politics is an understatement: it would be the first time the “far right” would be in power since 1945. Moreover, the two extremes of the German political spectrum would be the majority, not “the sensible center combines to win – because markets.” Indeed, a ‘horseshoe effect’ of opposed anti-establishment parties could work together to dynamite that system. After all, the AfD and BSW have the same views on immigration and deportations; on Russia and Ukraine (pro-Russia, anti-the Ukraine war and Germany’s role in it – and in NATO); and on energy (favoring a return to Russian gas as soon as possible).

Yes, ‘This is only Saxony’, and the AfD is polling at 28% in west Germany vs. the 44% it just got in the east. However, add leftists Die Linke and BSW 17% and it’s again close to half of voters. That’s as VW fires another 50,000 workers, deindustrialisation accelerates, and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov just warned Germany is moving towards war with Russia, all of which might see further voting shifts. The “sensible center” doesn’t seem to have any answers to those huge problems regardless of whether one likes the AfD and BSW proposals. As such, could markets start considering a second German structural shift in the space of a few years? First, ‘Germany will never borrow’ became ‘Germany is borrowing hugely’; could ‘Germany is politically stable’ now become ‘Germany is politically unstable’? “Was gibt, Mr Market?”

That’s as French far-left presidential candidate Melenchon, who wants more public spending, declared: “The ECB holds an enormous amount of French state debt. I propose to all the states of the eurozone to cancel this debt held by the ECB.” He added, “We are all members of the euro system, so this is a debt we owe to ourselves. The media establishment has tried to manipulate this reasonable proposal. It took us a few days of explanation to untangle their lies. That is now done. From now on, a poll shows that the French who support this proposal to cancel the debt are more numerous than those who oppose it.“ That’s on top of, “We will establish a public banking hub. Our country has a lot of money.” Melenchon also wants “cooperative non-alignment” with Russia and blames US and NATO expansionism for provoking the crisis; he strongly opposes a new Cold War with China or any potential conflicts over Taiwan and sees closer ties with Beijing as part of a multipolar world order that undermines US hegemony.

However, nationalist Le Pen is the election favorite. She promises a “golden rule” to keep fiscal deficits under 3% of GDP and a cost-cutting package – which includes €125bn from migration, “useless” public agencies, and France’s EU contribution; plus, she wants to roll back Macron’s pension reform so workers can retire at 62. Le Pen also favors a strategic rapprochement with Moscow, once the war is over, opposes economic sanctions, and aims to limit aid to Kyiv.

In Italy, PM Meloni, now the longest serving post-WW2 leader, is heading into a 2027 election with a political rival to her far right; she is moving in that direction as a result. As Le Monde puts it, ‘Meloni’s migration policy becomes lever for Italy’s illiberal shift: Questioning the work of magistrates, bypassing parliament, putting the press under surveillance, marginalizing human rights: The Italian prime minister’s ongoing escalation is undermining the rule of law.’

Spain has its own problems, and a recent immigration incident in Ceuta, as PM Sanchez is moving to the progressive left geopolitically, including towards China, leading to clashes with not just Trump but Meloni. There, the right-wing PP is polling at around 33%, the far-right Vox at around 18%, and the further right SALF, promising an “iron fist” on around 6%.  

Germany, France, Italy, and Spain account for 60% of Eurozone GDP. Yes, there is a technocratic rules-based EU superstructure, and the ECB’s Transmission Protection Instrument that allows it to buy Eurozone government bonds during periods of market stress or disorderly conditions not justified by country-specific fundamentals. (Just imagine if the Fed under Warsh were to consider putting that kind of monetary policy in place in the current market environment: quelle horreur!) However, how comfortably could that trundle on if we were to see conflated trouble in the Big Four Eurozone political economies? But this isn’t a ‘European’ issue any more than it is a ‘US’ one.

In Australia, the One Nation Party is now supported by a quarter of all voters and breathing down the neck of the center-right Liberal-National coalition, pulling the center right to the right as center-left Labor is pulled to the left. The same trend is clear in the UK with Reform vs the Conservatives (and Restore vs Reform, as we just saw the first proto ‘Blackshirts’ rally in the UK since the 1930s) and Labour vs the Greens and sectarian parties. Canadian PM Carney meanwhile seems to have found “sensible centrist” political support by being the ‘anti-Trump’… while embracing his policies like defence spending, fiscal deficits, tariffs, and national security subsidies.

As with geopolitics, markets generally only react to ‘political issues’ once they are in their faces. However, the number of such political backdrops should be seen as a whole, not separate pieces: first, because this populism is a logical and predictable byproduct of the current system; second, because Trump aside, populists are non-linearly disruptive for “because markets” in direct correlation with their numbers in power.

One populist leader may be cowed by a “coalition of the willing centrists” around them; two may not be as much; three are less likely to be again, etc. And we are looking at a possible near future where populists are no longer the angry minority but the majority. Happy Monday, and welcome to the world that now exists.