STATS Group Expands North American Operations with New Texas Manufacturing Plant | 2026 – News and Statistics

May 24, 2026

STATS Group has significantly expanded its North American operations, according to a report from OGN/TradeArabia News Service. The company has opened an 80,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in Rosenberg, Texas, marking its first dedicated production site in the United States and representing the largest capital investment in the organization’s history.

Facility and Production

The new site will manufacture pipeline fittings, specifically hot tap and line stop components. It includes a modern machine shop tailored to support STATS Group’s proprietary equipment.

Strategic Goals

The expansion is designed to reduce lead times, enhance product quality, and address increasing customer demand for locally manufactured solutions within the U.S. energy sector. The facility is supported by the company’s existing Houston office, which strengthens STATS Group’s end-to-end service capability across North America.

According to the company, the investment reflects rising demand for faster delivery, greater responsiveness, and improved manufacturing control. STATS Group expects the U.S. manufacturing base to substantially boost service delivery and aligns the move with its broader global growth strategy, which prioritizes local investment, scalability, and closer alignment with client needs.

1. 1. INTRODUCTION

   Making Data-Driven Decisions to Grow Your Business

   1. REPORT DESCRIPTION
   2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND THE AI PLATFORM
   3. DATA-DRIVEN DECISIONS FOR YOUR BUSINESS
   4. GLOSSARY AND SPECIFIC TERMS

2. 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

   A Quick Overview of Market Performance

   1. KEY FINDINGS
   2. MARKET TRENDS This Chapter is Available Only for the Professional EditionPRO

3. 3. MARKET OVERVIEW

   Understanding the Current State of The Market and its Prospects

   1. MARKET SIZE: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   2. CONSUMPTION BY COUNTRY: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   3. MARKET FORECAST TO 2035

4. 4. MOST PROMISING PRODUCTS FOR DIVERSIFICATION

   Finding New Products to Diversify Your Business

   1. TOP PRODUCTS TO DIVERSIFY YOUR BUSINESS
   2. BEST-SELLING PRODUCTS
   3. MOST CONSUMED PRODUCTS
   4. MOST TRADED PRODUCTS
   5. MOST PROFITABLE PRODUCTS FOR EXPORT

5. 5. MOST PROMISING SUPPLYING COUNTRIES

   Choosing the Best Countries to Establish Your Sustainable Supply Chain

   1. TOP COUNTRIES TO SOURCE YOUR PRODUCT
   2. TOP PRODUCING COUNTRIES
   3. TOP EXPORTING COUNTRIES
   4. LOW-COST EXPORTING COUNTRIES

6. 6. MOST PROMISING OVERSEAS MARKETS

   Choosing the Best Countries to Boost Your Export

   1. TOP OVERSEAS MARKETS FOR EXPORTING YOUR PRODUCT
   2. TOP CONSUMING MARKETS
   3. UNSATURATED MARKETS
   4. TOP IMPORTING MARKETS
   5. MOST PROFITABLE MARKETS

7. 7. PRODUCTION

   The Latest Trends and Insights into The Industry

   1. PRODUCTION VOLUME AND VALUE: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   2. PRODUCTION BY COUNTRY: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)

8. 8. IMPORTS

   The Largest Import Supplying Countries

   1. IMPORTS: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   2. IMPORTS BY COUNTRY: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   3. IMPORT PRICES BY COUNTRY: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)

9. 9. EXPORTS

   The Largest Destinations for Exports

   1. EXPORTS: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   2. EXPORTS BY COUNTRY: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)
   3. EXPORT PRICES BY COUNTRY: HISTORICAL DATA (2012–2025) AND FORECAST (2026–2035)

10. 10. PROFILES OF MAJOR PRODUCERS

    The Largest Producers on The Market and Their Profiles

11. 11. COUNTRY PROFILES

    The Largest Markets And Their Profiles

    This Chapter is Available Only for the Professional Edition
    PRO

    1. 11.1

       United States

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    2. 11.2

       China

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    3. 11.3

       Japan

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    4. 11.4

       Germany

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    5. 11.5

       United Kingdom

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    6. 11.6

       France

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    7. 11.7

       Brazil

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    8. 11.8

       Italy

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    9. 11.9

       Russian Federation

       • Market Size
       • Production
       • Imports
       • Exports

    10. 11.10

        India

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    11. 11.11

        Canada

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    12. 11.12

        Australia

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    13. 11.13

        Republic of Korea

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    14. 11.14

        Spain

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    15. 11.15

        Mexico

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    16. 11.16

        Indonesia

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    17. 11.17

        Netherlands

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    18. 11.18

        Turkey

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    19. 11.19

        Saudi Arabia

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    20. 11.20

        Switzerland

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    21. 11.21

        Sweden

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    22. 11.22

        Nigeria

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    23. 11.23

        Poland

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    24. 11.24

        Belgium

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    25. 11.25

        Argentina

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    26. 11.26

        Norway

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    27. 11.27

        Austria

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    28. 11.28

        Thailand

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    29. 11.29

        United Arab Emirates

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    30. 11.30

        Colombia

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    31. 11.31

        Denmark

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    32. 11.32

        South Africa

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    33. 11.33

        Malaysia

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    34. 11.34

        Israel

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    35. 11.35

        Singapore

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    36. 11.36

        Egypt

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    37. 11.37

        Philippines

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    38. 11.38

        Finland

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    39. 11.39

        Chile

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    40. 11.40

        Ireland

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    41. 11.41

        Pakistan

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    42. 11.42

        Greece

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    43. 11.43

        Portugal

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    44. 11.44

        Kazakhstan

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    45. 11.45

        Algeria

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    46. 11.46

        Czech Republic

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    47. 11.47

        Qatar

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    48. 11.48

        Peru

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    49. 11.49

        Romania

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

    50. 11.50

        Vietnam

        • Market Size
        • Production
        • Imports
        • Exports

12. LIST OF TABLES

    1. Key Findings In 2025
    2. Market Volume, In Physical Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    3. Market Value: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    4. Per Capita Consumption, by Country, 2022–2025
    5. Production, In Physical Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    6. Imports, In Physical Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    7. Imports, In Value Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    8. Import Prices, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    9. Exports, In Physical Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    10. Exports, In Value Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    11. Export Prices, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)

13. LIST OF FIGURES

    1. Market Volume, In Physical Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    2. Market Value: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    3. Consumption, by Country, 2025
    4. Market Volume Forecast to 2035
    5. Market Value Forecast to 2035
    6. Market Size and Growth, By Product
    7. Average Per Capita Consumption, By Product
    8. Exports and Growth, By Product
    9. Export Prices and Growth, By Product
    10. Production Volume and Growth
    11. Exports and Growth
    12. Export Prices and Growth
    13. Market Size and Growth
    14. Per Capita Consumption
    15. Imports and Growth
    16. Import Prices
    17. Production, In Physical Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    18. Production, In Value Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    19. Production, by Country, 2025
    20. Production, In Physical Terms, by Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    21. Imports, In Physical Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    22. Imports, In Value Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    23. Imports, In Physical Terms, By Country, 2025
    24. Imports, In Physical Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    25. Imports, In Value Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    26. Import Prices, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    27. Exports, In Physical Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    28. Exports, In Value Terms: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    29. Exports, In Physical Terms, By Country, 2025
    30. Exports, In Physical Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    31. Exports, In Value Terms, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)
    32. Export Prices, By Country: Historical Data (2012–2025) and Forecast (2026–2035)

Source link

U.S. Clean Energy Manufacturing Surges Ahead Despite Policy Hurdles, Reports The American Clean Power Association

Momentum in the American clean energy manufacturing sector continues to build despite ongoing policy challenges, according to the second annual State of Clean Energy Manufacturing report released by the American Clean Power Association. The report shows that clean energy manufacturing has become a key pillar of the U.S. industrial economy, offering affordable, reliable and quickly deployable domestic solutions to meet the nation’s growing energy needs.

By increasing production within the United States, the industry also boosts national security by reducing dependence on foreign energy supplies and international supply chains.Speaking about the findings, Jason Grumet emphasized that rising energy demand makes it essential to expand clean power systems built in the U.S.

He explained that to sustain the current manufacturing growth, the country needs clear, targeted and consistent international trade policies. This includes reasonable timelines for complying with tariffs and greater regulatory certainty, which would allow clean energy manufacturers to continue supporting economic development and strengthening local communities across the nation.The report highlights several important trends.

It notes that every clean energy manufacturing job generates four additional jobs across the wider economy—one through supply-chain activities and three more through household spending. It also points out that more than 235 new clean energy manufacturing facilities have opened in the United States over the past five years.

Today, more than 300 factories nationwide produce essential components such as wind turbine blades, towers, nacelles, solar modules and batteries. The report further states that domestic manufacturing capacity is now sufficient to fully meet U.S. demand for solar modules, battery modules, wind towers and wind nacelles.

Overall, the findings reinforce that clean energy manufacturing is not only advancing the country’s energy infrastructure but also significantly contributing to economic growth and national resilience, even in the face of policy headwinds.

Related

Source link

Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. Opens New Mega Facility in Portland, Tennessee, Reinforcing American Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chain

News Summary:

• 
  Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. opened its new 638,000-square-foot Mega Facility in Portland, Tennessee, bac
  
  
  ked by a $30 million investment.
  
• 
  The new campus expands domestic U.S. manufacturing capacity and strengthens the American supply chain to meet growing demand for solar, battery energy storage systems (BESS), and data center infrastructure.
  
• 
  The milestone also commemorates Shoals’ 30th anniversary and included a $20,000 donati
  
  
  on to Hands of Hope to support meals across Portland and Sumner County.
  
  

PORTLAND, Tenn., May 19, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —

(“Shoals”) (NASDAQ: SHLS), a global leader in electrical infrastructure solutions for the energy transition market, announced the grand opening of its new Mega Facility in Portland, Tennessee, marking a major milestone in the company’s continued investment in American manufacturing and the future of energy infrastructure.

Backed by a $30 million investment with a total commitment of up to $80 million over five years, the facility strengthens Shoals’ ability to deliver safe, efficient and reliable power infrastructure solutions across solar power, battery energy storage systems (BESS), and mission-critical facilities, including data centers. This investment comes as the need for resilient, domestically produced electrical infrastructure continues to grow across the United States.

“As demand for energy infrastructure continues to accelerate, this new Mega Facility allows Shoals to scale alongside our customers and meet the needs of a rapidly evolving energy landscape,” said Brandon Moss, chief executive officer at Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. “By expanding our domestic manufacturing footprint and bringing increased capacity, we are strengthening the American energy supply chain and enabling faster, more efficient energy deployment.”

Located at 1500 Shoals Way, the new 638,000-square-foot, state-of-the-art manufacturing campus consolidates Shoals’ three existing Tennessee facilities into one centralized location, significantly expanding production capacity, increasing automation in production and packaging, and leveraging operational efficiencies to support increasing demand across the energy sector.

The opening of the Mega Facility also coincides with Shoals’ 30th anniversary, celebrating three decades of innovation. On May 18, Shoals marked both milestones with a ribbon-cutting ceremony for its new Mega Facility and a $20,000 donation to Hands of Hope, helping provide meals to residents in Portland and across Sumner County. The donation underscores Shoals’ ongoing commitment to supporting the community that has played an important role in the company’s success over the past 30 years.

“Shoals’ 30th anniversary is a moment to celebrate both our company’s success and the people and communities who have helped make it possible,” said Mr. Moss. “The opening of our new Mega Facility is an investment in the future of energy infrastructure and a commitment to the Portland community, creating jobs and supporting local families through our donation to Hands of Hope as we look ahead to our next chapter of growth.”

For more information, visit:

.

About Shoals Technologies Group, Inc.



Shoals Technologies Group is a leading manufacturer of advanced electrical infrastructure solutions for mission-critical applications across utility‑scale solar, battery storage, and data center power systems. Since its founding in 1996, the Company has designed innovative technologies and systems solutions that allow its customers to substantially increase installation efficiency and safety while improving system performance and reliability at scale. Shoals Technologies Group is a recognized leader in the energy transition industry. For additional information, please visit:

.

MEDIA CONTACTS


Lindsey Williams

Kelly Nguyen

609-385-6701

Photos accompanying this announcement are available at


https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/11d9500b-0f99-40f8-b6fe-645ec168a555



https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/649e52d0-f9d8-45bb-9dc7-df495b8b3d37



https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/775e9125-7d3c-450a-8948-272e7dcaa58c

Source link

Toyota Plans $2bn Texas Expansion as Automakers Deepen North American Manufacturing Push

Toyota Motor Corporation is seeking approval to build a new vehicle assembly line at its manufacturing complex in Texas as the Japanese automaker accelerates long-term investment in North American production amid intensifying competition in trucks, electric vehicles, and regional supply-chain localization.

According to a filing with the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Toyota plans to invest roughly $2 billion in the proposed expansion project, internally named “Project Orca,” at its existing San Antonio manufacturing site. The filing shows construction is expected to begin by the end of 2026, while vehicle production at the new assembly line is targeted to commence in 2030.

Toyota plans to spend approximately $1.05 billion on buildings and property improvements, alongside another $950 million dedicated to machinery and manufacturing equipment. The project is also expected to create about 2,000 new jobs between 2028 and 2030, adding to Toyota’s already substantial employment footprint in Texas and reinforcing the growing importance of the southern United States in the global automotive industry.

In a statement to Reuters, Toyota said, “We regularly evaluate our manufacturing footprint to ensure we remain competitive and aligned with customer demand. This reflects our long-term commitment to investing in the North American region, local manufacturing/jobs, and suppliers.”

Toyota’s San Antonio facility has historically focused heavily on pickup truck production, including the Toyota Tundra and Toyota Sequoia, two models central to the company’s efforts to compete in the highly profitable North American truck and SUV market. The new assembly line could significantly expand Toyota’s ability to serve U.S. demand locally at a time when automakers are under growing pressure to shorten supply chains and reduce exposure to overseas manufacturing risks.

Texas has become increasingly attractive to automakers and industrial manufacturers because of its large labor market, logistics infrastructure, relatively lower operating costs, and business-friendly regulatory environment. The state is also emerging as a major center for energy-intensive industries, including electric vehicles, semiconductors, and artificial intelligence data centers.

Toyota’s investment adds to a broader wave of manufacturing expansion across the southern United States, where automakers are pouring billions into new factories, battery plants, and supplier networks. The region has become particularly important as companies attempt to comply with North American sourcing requirements tied to trade incentives and industrial policies in both the United States and Canada.

The timing of Toyota’s proposed expansion is notable because it comes during one of the most significant transitions in automotive history. The industry is simultaneously managing the shift toward electrification, the rise of software-defined vehicles, growing competition from Chinese manufacturers, and changing consumer demand patterns.

While Toyota was initially criticized by some investors and environmental groups for moving more cautiously on fully electric vehicles than rivals such as Tesla or BYD, the company has increasingly accelerated investment across hybrid, battery-electric, and hydrogen technologies.

At the same time, Toyota has maintained a strong focus on profitability and production discipline, particularly in trucks and hybrid vehicles, where demand remains resilient. The company’s continued investment in U.S. manufacturing suggests it expects North America to remain one of its most important long-term growth markets regardless of how rapidly electrification evolves.

Industry analysts believe that local manufacturing has become strategically more important for automakers following the supply-chain shocks triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical tensions between the United States and China. Semiconductor shortages, shipping disruptions, and rising trade frictions exposed vulnerabilities in globally dispersed production networks, pushing many manufacturers to localize more operations closer to major consumer markets.

Toyota’s Texas expansion fits squarely within that broader industrial realignment.

The planned investment also reflects the enormous capital requirements now confronting global automakers. Companies are simultaneously funding traditional internal combustion production, electric vehicle development, battery manufacturing, software systems, and advanced automation technologies.

For Toyota, maintaining a competitive scale in North America is especially important because the region remains one of the company’s largest profit generators, particularly in larger vehicles and hybrid models.

The proposed spending on machinery and equipment indicates the new line could incorporate significant automation and advanced manufacturing technologies designed to improve efficiency and production flexibility.

Modern vehicle plants increasingly rely on robotics, AI-assisted quality systems, and digitally integrated supply-chain management tools to manage rising production complexity.

Toyota has historically been regarded as one of the world’s leading manufacturing companies through its “Toyota Production System,” which revolutionized lean manufacturing and operational efficiency across the global auto industry. The San Antonio expansion, therefore, likely represents not just additional capacity, but also another phase in Toyota’s modernization of North American operations.

Like this:

Like Loading…

Source link

Nvidia CEO says AI partnership with Corning will ‘revitalize American manufacturing’

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang announced a partnership with Corning aimed at revitalizing American manufacturing by expanding domestic optical connectivity manufacturing. The collaboration will create over 3,000 jobs with new facilities in Texas and North Carolina. Huang emphasized the opportunity to rebuild the technology supply chain in the U.S. amid a significant AI infrastructure buildout, highlighting the increasing demand for skilled workers in various sectors. The partnership focuses on enhancing optical technologies essential for AI data centers, marking a pivotal moment for U.S. manufacturing.

Log in to access the full 0 words article for free

Sign up / Log in

Due to copyright restrictions, please log in to view.
Thank you for supporting legitimate content.

Source link

$9 Trillion Is Pouring Into American Manufacturing — And It’s Just Getting Started

Apple, Nvidia, Taiwan Semiconductor, Eli Lilly, and dozens of other major companies have committed nearly $9 trillion in U.S. manufacturing investment in under a year. Former CIA and Pentagon advisor Jim Rickards says most people are missing the bigger story underneath it all.

Washington, D.C., May 03, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In less than a year, some of the largest corporations on Earth have committed a staggering $9 trillion to build, expand, and relocate manufacturing operations on American soil. Jim Rickards has released a free video presentation examining what he believes is the most important and least-covered story underneath those headline numbers — and why he says most Americans are looking at only the surface of what is actually unfolding.

Apple has pledged $500 billion for a new advanced manufacturing facility in Houston. Nvidia has announced plans to invest as much as $500 billion. Taiwan Semiconductor is putting $100 billion toward manufacturing advanced chips domestically. Eli Lilly is investing $50 billion to establish four new U.S. manufacturing sites. Hyundai, GE Aerospace, Abbott Laboratories, and dozens of others are following suit.

It’s a wave of capital flowing into American industry at a scale that hasn’t been seen in generations. And according to Jim Rickards — an economist, best-selling author, and former advisor to the CIA, the Pentagon, and the White House — most people are focused on the headline number without asking the question that actually matters.

“You cannot have an industrial boom without energy from coal, oil, natural gas, or nuclear power,” Rickards said. “And you cannot have an industrial boom without metals like copper, iron ore, rare earth elements, lithium, and silicon.”

In other words, $9 trillion in new factories means an unprecedented surge in demand for the raw materials required to build and power them. And Rickards believes almost nobody is paying attention to what that means.

The Supply Chain Nobody’s Watching

Every new manufacturing facility requires steel, copper, concrete, and wiring. Every factory that comes online needs a power source. Every piece of advanced technology rolling off a new production line depends on critical minerals — many of which the U.S. currently imports almost entirely from abroad.

After years of offshoring production and neglecting domestic mining, the United States now relies on China for 100% of 15 key minerals. These are the materials that go into fighter jets, electric vehicle batteries, smartphones, laptops, and the semiconductor chips that the new factories are being built to produce.

“We’re completely dependent on our number one strategic competitor,” Rickards said. “That’s a huge problem for America.”

The $9 trillion in new manufacturing investment doesn’t just represent a reshoring trend. Rickards argues it represents a structural surge in demand for resources that the U.S. doesn’t currently produce at anywhere near sufficient scale.

A Government Response Unlike Anything in Modern History

Rickards’s presentation points to an aggressive federal push to close that gap — one he says has no modern precedent in scope or speed.

Earlier this year, an executive order titled “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production” directed federal agencies to ramp up mining operations on public lands. The Financial Times has estimated those lands hold as much as $100 trillion in untapped mineral wealth.

Through a program called FAST-41, critical mining projects are being fast-tracked from permitting timelines that once stretched to 10 years down to a matter of weeks. The Thacker Pass lithium project in Nevada received its federal permits in just 89 days. The stated goal is to push that timeline down to 28 days.

“This is a true game-changer for the industry,” Rickards said. “A lot of big investors want nothing to do with mining projects because it normally could take over a decade for them to see any return. But with these accelerated permits, that entire equation has changed.”

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has captured the administration’s posture in a single phrase: “Everybody likes to say, ‘drill, baby, drill.’ I know that President Trump has another initiative for us, which is ‘mine, baby, mine.’”

The Pentagon Is Buying Mining Companies

Beyond regulatory changes, the federal government has taken an even more unusual step — investing directly in mining companies.

The Department of Defense put $400 million into MP Materials, a rare earth producer, becoming the company’s largest shareholder. As part of the deal, the government agreed to purchase the company’s output at a guaranteed floor price.

“The company now basically has a guaranteed buyer for its products,” Rickards said in his presentation. “The best kind of buyer you can ask for — a buyer with unlimited spending power. The U.S. government.”

A $35 million federal investment followed in Trilogy Metals, securing critical mining operations in Alaska. Reports indicate the administration is planning a direct equity stake in Lithium Americas. And a $5 billion mining investment fund is in the works, designed to take direct stakes in companies producing critical minerals domestically.

The CEO of the National Mining Association, Rich Nolan, has called it “the New Deal for minerals” — comparing the scale to FDR’s infrastructure programs during the Great Depression.

A Pattern That’s Repeated Throughout History

Rickards’s presentation says this isn’t theory. It’s a pattern that has played out before — and the results were staggering.

In the early 2000s, China’s state-backed industrialization effort consumed twice as much steel between 2000 and 2020 as the United States used during the entire 20th century. That state-driven demand triggered what economists call a supercycle — a sustained, multi-year boom in the value of metals, energy, and raw materials.

Rickards believes the same dynamic is now emerging in the United States, driven by two forces converging at once: a government-backed push to rebuild American industry, and a wave of nearly $9 trillion in private capital pouring in on top of it.

“Throughout history, every single industrialization effort has been powered by natural resources,” Rickards said. “I honestly never thought I would see another supercycle in my lifetime. But here we are.”

He’s not alone in that view. Adam Rozencwajg, who manages a natural resource hedge fund, has called this “the best opportunity that I’ve seen probably in the 150-odd years that we’ve been studying these markets.”

The Connection Most People Haven’t Made

Rickards believes the core disconnect is that most Americans see the manufacturing headlines — Apple building in Houston, Nvidia expanding domestically, chip fabs going up across the country — and think of it as a jobs story or a trade story. What they’re not seeing, he says, is the cascade of demand those commitments create underneath.

More factories mean more power consumption. More power means more nuclear energy, more natural gas, more uranium. More advanced manufacturing means more copper, more lithium, more rare earth elements. And all of it has to come from somewhere.

“After many years of underinvestment in the mining sector, we now rely on China for 100% of 15 key minerals,” Rickards said. “That’s why the response you’re seeing now is so aggressive. And that’s why I believe this is just the beginning.”

Rickards has published his full analysis through his research service, which is followed by thousands of readers nationwide.

About the Presentation

Jim Rickards’ full video presentation is free to watch and available for on-demand viewing at no cost. To access the complete session, click here.

About Jim Rickards and Paradigm Press

Jim Rickards is an economist, best-selling author, and former advisor to the CIA, the Pentagon, and the White House. Across nearly five decades in international finance, he played direct roles in the resolution of the Iran hostage crisis, the creation of the Petrodollar Accord, and the Federal Reserve’s response to the Long-Term Capital Management banking crisis. His books, including Currency Wars and The Death of Money, have been widely read across both Wall Street and the intelligence community. His work is published by Paradigm Press, an independent financial research firm. The publisher maintains a 4.8-star rating on Google across more than 1,900 public reviews from readers who follow its research and commentary.

CONTACT: Derek Warren Public Relations Manager Paradigm Press Group Email: dwarren@paradigmpressgroup.com

Source link

Billionaire behind ‘American Factory’ firm warns of US exit amid trade friction with China

As one of the world’s largest automotive glass producers, and the subject of an Oscar-winning documentary, Fuyao Glass is a familiar name in the United States. Now, its founder has warned he is prepared to shut down his American plants if trade friction and tariffs cause severe losses.

Responding to questions regarding geopolitical risks at the company’s annual general meeting, Cao Dewang said that the company would not engage in loss-making ventures.

“How much in duties you want to impose is your business,” said the billionaire, who turns 80 next month. “If we encounter unreasonable situations, we’ll simply shut down the [US] factories.”

While Fuyao’s American roots stretch back to 1995, its presence is now anchored by its plant in Moraine, Ohio – a shuttered General Motors factory that Fuyao purchased in 2014.

The 2019 film American Factory documented the site’s transformation, tracing both its role in revitalising a depressed local economy and Cao’s harsh campaign against unionisation.

Today, Fuyao Glass employs thousands of American workers across facilities in Ohio, Illinois and South Carolina, supplying leading automotive manufacturers including General Motors, Ford and BMW in the United States, according to its website.

The company also holds the distinction of being the first Chinese firm to successfully sue the US Department of Commerce, winning a landmark case that virtually exempted Fuyao from anti-dumping duties in 2004.

09:42

Trump promises to bring US manufacturing back from China, but will his tariffs work?

Trump promises to bring US manufacturing back from China, but will his tariffs work?

Cao’s comments earlier this week – widely reported by Chinese media, including state-owned The Paper – came just over a year after US President Donald Trump launched his “Liberation Day” tariffs on major trading partners. The move ignited a renewed trade war with Beijing that saw duties on Chinese imports peak at 145 per cent before tensions de-escalated.



Source link

American manufacturing is a nonnegotiable 

While the ceasefire holds in Lebanon, the Strait of Hormuz is back open. The disruption caused by its prolonged closure and the increased cost of critical goods have made the importance of domestic manufacturing more clear than ever. In times of crisis, we must be able to manufacture products vital for national security, including steel and aluminum, here in the United States.

Fortunately, President Donald Trump’s Section 232 tariffs are finally bringing manufacturing back home after years of foreign cheating. With renegotiation of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on the horizon, it is important for the Trump administration to continue putting America first, even as left-wingers push for handouts to foreign countries at the expense of American jobs. 

A flood of imported metals, often subsidized by the socialist policies of foreign governments, have cheated American steel and aluminum workers out of business for years. During my time in Congress, I witnessed the consequences of this dynamic firsthand when fighting for my constituents within the U.S.’s manufacturing community. Mexico is particularly notorious, using Chinese aluminum to cheaply manufacture products they ship across our borders tariff-free under the USMCA. 

To make matters worse, when the USMCA replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement during the first Trump Administration, Mexico and Canada tied the agreement’s ratification to tariff relief. While some tariff relief was granted, the newly minted USMCA should have prevented the unfair trade practices that necessitate these tariffs. Unfortunately, when the Biden Administration took office shortly after the USMCA took effect, vital aspects of the USMCA went unenforced, including mechanisms intended to prevent import surges. Tariff exemptions were handed out left and right by the autopen. Once again, American jobs were shipped over the border. 

The entire aluminum supply chain was devastated, including extruders, who represent the vast majority of American aluminum workers. Extruders produce the essential aluminum parts used in everything from building materials to cars. Biden’s failures accelerated the trend of offshoring that began with NAFTA: thousands of aluminum extrusion jobs were wiped out across the country and American businesses were forced to shut down as operations moved to Mexico and the imports came flooding in. 

Now that he is back in the Oval Office, Trump wants to stop the bleeding caused by Biden’s reckless negligence, and he has made great progress through the reinstatement of his Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum. 

If we want to keep manufacturing at home and extend the benefits of an “America First” trade agenda to aluminum extruders, we can’t afford to repeat past mistakes. Mexico and Canada want Trump to fold under globalist pressure and hand out Section 232 tariff exemptions tied to the USMCA renegotiation. It’s the same play they made last time, and as we learned from Biden, any preferential treatment or signs of weakness turn free and fair trade into a rigged game.

And guess what? The worker always loses. We must firmly maintain the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum at all stages of the supply chain, so that U.S. manufacturers can compete on a level playing field. 

At the same time, the USMCA renegotiation represents an opportunity to rebalance the agreement and correct NAFTA’s original flaw, made worse by China’s cheating. Rather than protect North American manufacturers, this agreement has become an outlet for foreign adversaries, namely communist China, to use Mexico as a back door to cheap U.S. market access. Now we have Chinese aluminum being fabricated into “Mexican” auto parts that are shipped into the U.S. fully processed. 

This means a product made with entirely Chinese aluminum can receive the benefits of USMCA that are meant to be exclusive to North America. As a result, Automakers are assembling these 100% foreign parts in the U.S. and calling the cars American made so they can cash in on lucrative rebates funded by taxpayers. 

USMCA’s rules of origin must be strengthened to discourage companies who assemble aluminum parts from moving their operations to Mexico, where they use Chinese metal to cheat the system. It is no accident that our trade deficit with Mexico is the largest it has ever been, even larger now than the trade deficit with China. By imposing stronger rules of origin and specific U.S. content requirements for aluminum, the USMCA can become the tool for fair North American trade it was meant to be. 

HEY SOCIALISTS, WE’VE ALREADY FIGURED OUT THE SUPERMARKET

As the master negotiator, it is up to Trump and his trade team to fight for us. If we maintain the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum, without exceptions and exemptions, while taking these steps to strengthen the USMCA, millions of U.S. workers will benefit. Let’s keep fighting for the forgotten men and women of the U.S. and truly make our country great again! 

Rep. Jason Chaffetz served as chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He is a contributor for Fox News networks and the author of They’re Coming for You.

Source link

Tariffs alone won’t save American manufacturing — here’s what actually will

As this year’s State of the Union made clear, President Trump places manufacturing — and tariffs — at the center of his economic agenda. Even with the Supreme Court striking down the IEEPA tariffs, other tariffs, including Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum, are here to stay. In fact, last week the United States Trade Representative announced the initiation of its first investigation under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 with the stated aim of replacing the IEEPA tariff regime.

President Trump’s goal of ushering in the greatest manufacturing era in American history remains intact, but the fatal flaw of the administration’s current tariff strategy is that it is making it more expensive to manufacture in America.

Trump allies, including Oren Cass at American Compass, argue that tariffs and reshoring are essential to securing supply chains and rebuilding America’s manufacturing base. Cass recently told the Financial Times that tariffs are strategic levers to restore industrial capacity. Michael Lind, in his essay “So What If Tariffs Are Taxes?”, portrays tariffs as a public good that can reassert national control over markets. Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s former trade representative, defends tariffs as central to safeguarding U.S. manufacturing. These arguments carry populist appeal, but they falter when confronted with the economics of manufacturing and the realities of global supply chains.

Cass and Lind suggest that reshoring can be accomplished swiftly. But the equipment manufacturing industry, which I advocate on behalf of, demonstrates otherwise. Supply chains are vast, intricate, and global. Companies operate on multi-year investment cycles, and suppliers cannot be uprooted overnight. Attempting to force rapid reshoring risks bottlenecks, shortages, and inefficiencies that weaken U.S. equipment manufacturers rather than strengthen them. The Trump administration has wisely provided glide paths for industries facing regulatory changes; reshoring requires similar patience, not blunt instruments.

Tariffs, meanwhile, raise the cost of U.S. manufacturing. Steel and aluminum tariffs, along with levies on derivative components, have already inflated input costs for American equipment manufacturers. The United States is already the highest-cost producer of heavy equipment globally, and additional tariffs only exacerbate this disadvantage. Cass and Lind argue that tariffs level the playing field, but in practice they make U.S.-made equipment less competitive both at home and abroad. Lighthizer’s defense of tariffs as a bulwark against globalization ignores a fundamental reality: higher costs erode competitiveness.

Export competitiveness suffers as well. Higher input costs make U.S. goods less attractive in foreign markets, forcing manufacturers to either absorb losses or relocate production abroad to remain competitive. This dynamic undermines the President’s vision of global manufacturing leadership and his claim to be the “Affordability President.” Cass, Lind, and Lighthizer frame tariffs as tools to reduce deficits, but in practice they risk expanding them by driving production offshore.

Even if reshoring could be swiftly accomplished through tariffs — a premise many economists dispute — expanding domestic manufacturing capacity runs into a more fundamental constraint: the nation’s workforce. The U.S. manufacturing sector is already struggling to fill open positions. As of late 2025, between 394,000 and 449,000 manufacturing jobs remain unfilled nationwide, according to U.S. Department of Labor and Federal Reserve data. In equipment manufacturing specifically, vacancies remain high, with more than 85,000 job openings. A Deloitte study forecasts a shortfall of 2.1 million manufacturing workers by 2030 — a gap large enough to cost the U.S. economy as much as $1 trillion in lost output.

This looming deficit is driven in part by accelerating retirements among Baby Boomers and Generation X, who make up a disproportionate share of today’s skilled industrial workforce. Compounding the challenge, current and anticipated immigration policies are shrinking the pool of available workers at precisely the moment labor demand is rising. With immigration now the primary driver of growth in the working-age population, these declines significantly constrain labor supply across industrial sectors. It will take far more than tariffs to rebuild domestic manufacturing. Meaningful increases in workforce availability — through training, retention, workforce participation strategies, and immigration reforms — are essential before the U.S. can fill today’s job openings, let alone the additional labor required to support large-scale reshoring.

President Trump’s vision of industrial strength can be realized through investment in innovation, workforce development, and critical new infrastructure. Advanced manufacturing technologies, automation, and national energy dominance can give U.S. equipment manufacturers a decisive edge. Expanding apprenticeships, vocational training, and STEM education will ensure a skilled and growing workforce ready for modern industry. Modernizing ports, rail, and digital infrastructure will reduce logistical costs and enhance supply chain efficiency. Strategic partnerships with allies can diversify supply chains without resorting to blunt tariffs. These measures align with President Trump’s goals while avoiding the pitfalls of Cass, Lind, and Lighthizer’s protectionism.

President Trump is right to champion manufacturing as the backbone of American strength. But tariffs and forced reshoring are costly detours. Global supply chains cannot be redirected overnight. Tariffs raise input costs, and higher costs erode American competitiveness domestically and abroad. Cass, Lind, and Lighthizer offer patriotic rhetoric, but their solutions undermine the very industries they seek to protect. To truly make American manufacturing great again, the administration should double down on building strength through competitiveness, not barriers.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Source link

Editorial: Battle Creek, a Rust Belt icon, battles back as American manufacturing jobs decline | Entertainment

For generations, the Kellogg food company and Battle Creek, Michigan, went together like corn flakes and milk. Then came 2023.

After decades as an independent public company, Kellogg split in two, later selling its storied cereal business to Italy’s Ferrero Group and its valuable snack business to Mars Inc., which has extensive operations in Chicago.

When Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker bragged in March about hundreds of jobs being transferred to the Windy City in the wake of the deals, that sounded like a tough blow in the offing for Michigan’s “Cereal City.”

As it turned out, not so much.

Many of those jobs being consolidated in Chicago come from Mars’ operations elsewhere. And while Kellogg was indeed busted up and sold off, it remains one of the biggest employers in its old hometown, maintaining a global research and development facility and a local headquarters at One Kellogg Square.

The Kellogg Foundation still supports education, housing and revitalization in Battle Creek. A local student can still attend Ann J. Kellogg Elementary, Kellogg Prep High School and Kellogg Community College. The Kellogg Arena, Kellogg Community Credit Union and Kellogg Bird Sanctuary just outside town are still notable landmarks.

Like many other small industrial cities across the Midwest, Battle Creek is diversifying beyond its roots. A community built on blue-collar union jobs and paternalistic corporate leadership has had to evolve as those one-time pillars of prosperity weakened.

Battle Creek today is much different than it was, but it is not circling the drain. Its resilience in the face of change shows that, under pressure, the Rust Belt’s factory towns can carve out a future based on their long-time strengths.

American manufacturing shed an estimated 100,000 jobs last year amid tariff chaos and persistent inflation. Sustained downward pressure could herald an even worse performance this year.

Battle Creek would be in big trouble had it depended only on Kellogg as its economic engine. Instead, over the years, the city’s economic development brain trust got creative.

Back in the 1980s, Battle Creek courted Japanese companies, overcoming skepticism and occasional hostility from some locals. Today, Denso Manufacturing is considered the area’s No. 1 employer. Other Japanese companies took note as Denso grew and prospered in this unlikely spot midway between Chicago and Detroit.

The Fort Custer Industrial Park, launched in the 1970s at a time when such ventures were hit-or-miss propositions, now hosts dozens of companies. Some of the big ones are Japanese manufacturers turning out auto parts, Denso included.

Like so much of Battle Creek, the industrial park was something else before its current incarnation. The sprawling Fort Custer helped train generations of soldiers throughout the 20th century, and part of it still serves the Michigan National Guard.

The Milton is another example of a white elephant that became a unicorn. At 19 stories, the former Heritage Tower is one of the city’s tallest buildings. Built in 1931 for a long-gone bank, it fell into disrepair until the Michigan Economic Development Corp. undertook a high-stakes renovation, supported by local patrons.

The result is an office, retail and residential property anchoring downtown, its art deco mezzanine beautifully restored. On a recent visit, the leasing office reported that just two of its 85 apartments were available.

Battle Creek’s people needed to reinvent themselves, too. Consider Michael “Mac” McCullough, former editor of the Battle Creek Enquirer, a once-robust local newspaper that operates today with a stretched-thin staff. McCullough is now a librarian and archivist at the public library downtown, and a walking encyclopedia of local knowledge.

McCullough is clear-eyed about the ongoing challenges — the empty buildings, silent churches and all-too-conspicuous poverty that followed the loss of good-paying union jobs. Battle Creek long benefited from talented executives serving on civic boards, organizing charity drives and coaching youth sports. They’re scarce these days, and much of Battle Creek’s workforce commutes to the city while living outside it. “There was more of a mindset that their jobs were to be stewards of the community,” he recalled.

As he spoke, not far from the library’s Japanese-language section, McCullough was setting up a local-history archive with 7,000 historical books and other items. “Tales of Battle Creek” tells of the connection with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, established in the city more than a century ago and instrumental in promoting healthier corn flakes over the pork-heavy diet of the era. “Small Town: Giant Corporation” describes the origins of Denso’s ongoing, transformative investment in Battle Creek.

McCullough misses the city that moved to the rhythm of a three-shift workday when he arrived to join the newspaper in 1998. But he says he’s not going anywhere. “Battle Creek is a town you can fight for, care for,” he said. “I love it here.”

____

Source link