Business

Nissan has unveiled the third-generation Leaf, its flagship electric vehicle, which will be built in the UK at the company’s Sunderland plant as part of a major push towards sustainable, UK-based EV production.

The updated Leaf will offer up to 375 miles (604km) of range on a single charge, and customers will be able to place orders later this year, the Japanese manufacturer confirmed. The car will be powered by batteries produced by AESC UK, Nissan’s long-standing battery partner whose facility sits adjacent to the Wearside assembly plant.

The launch marks a milestone for the EV36Zero project—Nissan’s blueprint for EV manufacturing and sustainability—which will bring the new Leaf to market with a focus on reducing emissions across the entire supply chain.

The Sunderland facility, which currently produces the Juke and Qashqai models, employs more than 6,000 people and has been at the centre of Nissan’s UK operations for nearly four decades. The factory first began building the Leaf in 2013, making it the first mass-produced electric vehicle to be manufactured in Britain.

“It’s with immense pride that we unveil the third generation of our pioneering electric Leaf, 12 years after we brought EV and battery manufacturing to the UK,” said Alan Johnson, senior vice president of manufacturing and supply chain management at Nissan Motor Manufacturing.
“It’s a testament to the skill of our world-class team that we can bring into mass production a vehicle with such advanced technology and aerodynamic design.”

The announcement also signals Nissan’s confidence in the UK as a hub for future vehicle manufacturing amid ongoing questions over post-Brexit trade and the competitive pressure of global EV production. The new Leaf is the first vehicle to launch under Nissan’s EV36Zero strategy, which aims to integrate EV production with battery supply and renewable energy use on-site.

Earlier this year, £1 billion of investment was secured for a second AESC battery plant in Sunderland, bolstering the UK’s capacity to support next-generation electric vehicles.

James Taylor, managing director of Nissan GB, said the new model built on the Leaf’s legacy as a trailblazer for electric motoring in the UK.

“Leaf is a pioneering electric vehicle that has encouraged thousands to make the switch to electric motoring — and best of all, it’s built here in Britain,” he said.

The new Leaf is expected to feature cutting-edge aerodynamics, an updated design, and enhanced connectivity features, with full specifications to be confirmed ahead of its release.

Nissan’s announcement comes at a critical time for the UK automotive industry, which is under pressure to scale up EV production and battery supply chains ahead of the 2035 ban on new petrol and diesel cars. The firm’s continued investment in UK manufacturing has been widely seen as a vote of confidence in the country’s industrial base.

As global competition intensifies, Nissan’s Sunderland expansion and the new Leaf rollout will play a key role in the UK’s ability to remain competitive in the electric vehicle revolution.

Read more:
Nissan unveils new electric car to be built in UK

Britain’s banking sector is preparing for a fresh wave of consolidation, as major lenders and challengers alike position themselves for strategic acquisitions that could reshape the industry.

Leading the charge is specialist lender Shawbrook, backed by private equity firm Pollen Street Capital, which is reportedly circling high street player Metro Bank in a potential deal that would mark a significant shift in the challenger banking landscape. Shawbrook has already pursued a series of bold moves in recent years, including a proposed £5 billion merger with Starling Bank and a failed attempt to acquire the Co-operative Bank.

Meanwhile, Banco Sabadell, the Spanish owner of TSB, has confirmed it has received expressions of interest in its UK retail banking arm. This adds further fuel to speculation that the British banking sector is on the brink of a major shake-up.

Analysts see these manoeuvres as part of a broader trend toward consolidation that has gathered pace over the last two years. According to William Howlett, financials analyst at Quilter Cheviot, the flurry of dealmaking reflects the growing imperative for banks to achieve greater scale. Larger banks, he said, are better positioned to absorb the rising costs of technological transformation and heightened regulatory demands.

The consolidation trend has already produced significant deals in recent months. Last year, Nationwide Building Society completed its £2.9 billion takeover of Virgin Money, while Barclays snapped up Tesco Bank in a £600 million transaction. HSBC, too, has moved to strengthen its consumer finance footprint by renewing its partnership with the M&S Bank arm.

Now, attention is turning to the UK’s Big Four banks—Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, and NatWest—which collectively hold around 85 per cent of UK business accounts and 75 per cent of current accounts, according to figures from Moneyfacts.

Analysts believe NatWest is especially well-positioned to lead the next wave of acquisitions. Having recently returned to full private ownership, the bank is seen as eager to capitalise on its newfound strategic freedom. Market watchers say a deal for TSB could be on the cards, with RBC Capital Markets analysts naming NatWest the “most likely acquirer,” arguing such a deal “would make the most sense” given its growth trajectory and domestic retail focus.

NatWest has already shown strong appetite for expansion. In early 2024, it acquired the majority of Sainsbury’s lending assets and later bought Metro Bank’s £2.5 billion residential mortgage book. Earlier this year, the bank also made headlines with an £11 billion bid for Santander UK’s retail arm, a deal that ultimately fizzled out but would have marked the biggest banking acquisition in the UK since the financial crisis.

According to John Cronin, founder of Seapoint Insights, the larger banks are likely to remain “active” as they seek out new acquisitions. The race for scale, Cronin said, is driving institutions to explore deals that not only increase customer bases but also allow them to streamline operations and invest more effectively in technology.

The renewed interest in mergers and acquisitions comes at a time when banks are under mounting pressure to modernise their services, upgrade legacy IT systems, and improve digital infrastructure. All of this requires capital—something smaller banks often lack in sufficient scale. In contrast, larger institutions see consolidation as a path to efficiency, resilience, and long-term competitiveness.

With political stability returning following the general election and post-Brexit market uncertainties easing, many believe the UK banking sector is entering its most active period of restructuring since the wave of post-2008 financial crisis mergers. For institutions like Metro Bank and TSB, the next few months could be decisive in determining whether they remain independent or are absorbed into larger, more formidable banking groups.

What’s clear is that the UK banking sector is on the move again. With major players jostling for position and regulatory reform on the horizon, the market looks set for one of its most transformative periods in recent memory.

Read more:
Banking giants plot takeovers to ramp up market share

UK inflation edged down to 3.4 per cent in May, slightly lower than April’s 3.5 per cent, in a sign that price pressures across the economy are gradually easing—though inflation remains well above the Bank of England’s 2 per cent target.

The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) also showed a fall in core inflation, which strips out volatile categories like food, energy, alcohol and tobacco. Core inflation dropped to 3.5 per cent, from 3.8 per cent in the previous month, offering policymakers some encouragement that underlying pressures are starting to subside.

Services inflation, a key metric closely watched by the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) as an indicator of persistent domestic price pressures, also dipped slightly—from 5.4 per cent in April to 5.3 per cent in May.

Despite the slowdown, the Bank is expected to hold interest rates steady at 4.25 per cent when the MPC meets on Thursday, as it awaits more consistent evidence that inflation is returning sustainably to its target.

Richard Heys, acting chief economist at the ONS, said the largest downward contribution to the monthly inflation figure came from transport, particularly air fares, which fell in May compared with a sharp rise during the same period last year. The timing of Easter and school holidays, which had pushed travel costs higher last spring, helped bring the annual comparison down. Petrol prices also contributed to the decline.

However, the downward momentum was partially offset by rising food prices, including chocolates and meat, as well as increased costs for furniture and household appliances, such as fridge freezers and vacuum cleaners.

Economists say that while inflation is on the right path, the Bank of England will need to see further falls in services and wage growth figures before it is confident enough to begin cutting interest rates. With inflation still more than a percentage point above the target, and services inflation remaining sticky, many analysts believe the Bank will remain in a holding pattern until later in the summer.

Markets are currently pricing in a rate cut by September, depending on the trajectory of wage data and inflation expectations.

Read more:
UK inflation cools to 3.4% in May as Bank of England holds rates

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander is set to deliver a damning assessment of the previous Conservative government’s handling of the HS2 high-speed rail project, accusing ministers of wasting billions of pounds through poor oversight, mismanagement, and politically driven indecision.

In a statement to be made in the House of Commons on Wednesday, Alexander will unveil the findings of two major reviews into the troubled project, as government sources brace for confirmation that the total projected cost of HS2 could exceed £100 billion—five times the original 2012 estimate for phase one.

“Billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been wasted by constant scope changes, ineffective contracts and bad management,” Alexander will tell MPs. “It’s an appalling mess. But it’s one we will sort out.”

The reviews, led respectively by James Stewart and Mark Wild, paint a bleak picture of how costs spiralled out of control and key decisions were taken—or delayed—with little regard for commercial or operational consequences.

One of the central criticisms in Stewart’s review is the decision to sign major construction contracts in 2020, despite recommendations from the Oakervee Review—commissioned by then Prime Minister Boris Johnson—that the government delay contracting until a clear scope had been agreed. Alexander will highlight how successive ministers pressed ahead with signing off on billions in spending before making core political decisions about the route and design of the railway.

Wild’s early assessment, meanwhile, focuses on how to proceed with the now truncated phase one line between London and Birmingham. His findings, according to sources briefed on the report, suggest the entire budget will need to be restated in current prices, pushing the official cost closer to £100bn, compared with the £20bn estimate made in 2012.

Among the most egregious examples of waste, Alexander will cite the £250 million spent on two separate sets of designs for the new HS2 station at Euston, both of which were ultimately discarded. Meanwhile, £2 billion was spent on preparatory work for the now-cancelled northern leg from Birmingham to Manchester, which was scrapped by Rishi Sunak in October 2023.

Despite Sunak announcing the formation of a ministerial task force to oversee improvements to Euston following the cancellation, government sources now confirm the task force never held a meeting.

A Labour source close to the project called it a “comedy of errors” caused by political indecision and inadequate ministerial oversight:

“The cost inflated out of all control. Billions were wasted due to political dithering and a delivery company not fit for purpose. It’s a comedy of errors, but no one’s laughing.”

The transport secretary is also expected to address allegations of fraud within the HS2 supply chain, following whistleblower reports that a labour supplier charged inflated rates for staffing. HS2 Ltd has launched an internal investigation and reported the matter to HMRC.

“There are allegations that parts of the supply chain have been defrauding taxpayers,” Alexander will tell MPs. “These need to be investigated rapidly and rigorously. If fraud is found, then the consequences will be felt by all involved.”

To try and rescue the beleaguered scheme, Alexander will announce the appointment of Mike Brown, the former Transport for London commissioner, as the new chair of HS2 Ltd, replacing Jon Thompson, who resigned earlier this year after publicly criticising the project’s direction—including the now-infamous £100m bat tunnel.

Brown is expected to work closely with Mark Wild, who has laid out the terms for a “reset” of the project. Wild, credited with eventually delivering the Elizabeth Line, has proposed a revised approach aimed at cutting costs and rebuilding credibility. However, insiders suggest this will likely mean pushing back HS2’s full opening into the 2030s, even for the reduced London-Birmingham route, while admitting that real-terms costs will continue to rise.

Despite the challenges, ministers maintain that delivering even a slimmed-down HS2 is vital to modernising Britain’s rail network and increasing capacity in the decades ahead.

The disclosures mark a watershed moment for a project once billed as the crown jewel of Britain’s infrastructure future but now viewed by many as a case study in failed governance. As Labour ministers attempt to clean up what they describe as “an appalling mess”, Wednesday’s statement will crystallise the scale of the financial damage — and the uphill task now facing the new government to get HS2 back on track.

The Conservative Party, which championed HS2 through successive governments, has yet to issue a comment.

Read more:
Reviews show Tories wasted billions of pounds on HS2, transport secretary to say

The UK’s data protection regulator has fined genetic testing firm 23andMe £2.31 million following a large-scale data breach in 2023 that exposed the personal and sensitive health information of thousands of users, including over 155,000 UK residents.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) said on Monday that 23andMe had failed to implement basic security measures, leaving sensitive user information—including health reports, racial and ethnic identity, profile images, and family histories—vulnerable to cyberattack.

“This was a profoundly damaging breach that exposed sensitive personal information, family histories, and even health conditions,” said Information Commissioner John Edwards. “Their security systems were inadequate, the warning signs were there, and the company was slow to respond.”

The breach originated in October 2023, when hackers launched what’s known as a “credential stuffing” attack. Using usernames and passwords obtained from previous unrelated data leaks, attackers were able to access 14,000 individual 23andMe accounts. Crucially, because 23andMe links users to their genetic relatives, this gave attackers the ability to extract data on an estimated 6.9 million people connected through the platform.

Although DNA data was not compromised, the stolen information included special category data under UK law—such as ethnicity, health information and familial relationships—which requires stricter protection under GDPR due to its highly sensitive nature.

“As one of those impacted told us: once this information is out there, it cannot be changed or reissued like a password or credit card number,” Edwards said.

The ICO’s investigation, conducted in parallel with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC), found that 23andMe had breached UK data protection law by failing to implement multi-factor authentication (MFA), weak password policies, and insufficient controls over downloading raw genetic data.

The fine comes as 23andMe is undergoing bankruptcy proceedings and preparing to sell its assets. The company said last week it had agreed to a $305 million sale to the TTAM Research Institute, a non-profit biotechnology group led by co-founder and former CEO Anne Wojcicki. The deal is set to be reviewed by a bankruptcy court on Wednesday.

The sale replaces a previously proposed $256 million deal with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. According to 23andMe, the higher-value TTAM deal includes binding commitments to enhance customer privacy and data protection—key concerns raised by regulators in both the UK and Canada.

Under the terms of the acquisition, the company said it would continue to allow users to delete their accounts, erase genetic data, and opt out of research participation.

In a statement, 23andMe said it had addressed the issues raised by the ICO and OPC by the end of 2024, implementing the recommended changes including additional security features.

Still, regulators remain cautious. Both watchdogs have called on the company to uphold ongoing privacy standardsduring and after the bankruptcy sale, particularly due to the sensitive nature of the data it holds.

The case represents a significant moment in the regulation of consumer-facing tech firms handling biometric and health-related data. While companies like 23andMe have gained popularity for their accessible genetic testing services, privacy advocates have long raised concerns about how such sensitive data is stored, shared, and monetised.

The ICO said it hoped the fine would send a message across the sector.

“This case highlights the need for robust authentication and verification processes,” Edwards added. “Organisations handling sensitive data must do more than the minimum to protect it.”

As data security standards tighten globally and consumer trust continues to falter in the wake of high-profile breaches, companies dealing in personal genomics may face increased scrutiny over how they manage the intersection of science, commerce, and privacy.

Read more:
UK watchdog fines 23andMe for ‘profoundly damaging’ data breach

Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has vowed that the Labour government will defeat those seeking to derail the UK’s net zero agenda, arguing that the green transition will succeed by delivering thousands of new jobs in Britain’s former industrial heartlands.

Speaking at the launch of a £1 billion investment scheme to boost the country’s offshore wind supply chain, Miliband said the government would win the political and economic case for net zero, not just through policy but by driving job creation in areas historically left behind.

“We’re going to win this fight, and we’re going to win this fight partly because of all the jobs that these companies are creating with us,” Miliband told an energy industry conference on Tuesday. “The forces that want to take us backwards, the forces that oppose net zero, will have to reckon not just with the government. They will have to reckon with all these companies that are creating jobs.”

The remarks were widely seen as a pointed response to the Reform UK party, which has vowed to scrap the country’s legally binding net zero targets if elected, and to Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who has described the 2050 goal as “impossible” and signalled her intent to withdraw the party’s support for it.

The new investment scheme, unveiled at the event, aims to catalyse a “green industrial revolution” by channelling support into supply chain companies across Teesside, Scotland, south Wales and East Anglia. These regions—once the heart of Britain’s manufacturing might—are expected to be at the forefront of a new wave of clean energy growth.

The £1 billion package includes:
• £300 million from Great British Energy, the state-backed renewable energy developer
• £300 million in match funding from the offshore wind industry
• £400 million from the Crown Estate, which leases the UK seabed for offshore wind developments

The government expects the funding to unlock thousands of long-term skilled jobs, from turbine manufacturing and electrical engineering to windfarm construction and ongoing maintenance.

The announcement comes as the UK wind sector continues to expand rapidly. A new report from RenewableUK, the clean energy trade body, revealed that the UK wind industry now employs 55,000 people, with 40,000 in offshore wind alone—a 24% rise in just two years.

To meet the government’s plan to quadruple offshore wind capacity by 2030, the industry will require between 74,000 and 95,000 additional workers, pushing the total wind workforce to more than 112,000 by the end of the decade.

The largest concentration of these new jobs is expected in the east of England and Yorkshire and the Humber, both areas where Reform UK made significant gains in recent local elections. New jobs are also projected for Scotland, ahead of its 2027 local elections.

Miliband said the clean energy transition offers not just an economic opportunity, but a chance to renew the social contract between government and communities that were neglected under previous industrial policies.

“This is about more than megawatts and investment figures—it’s about giving people a future. A net zero economy will be one that works for every part of the country, and the transformation is already under way.”

Labour’s push to accelerate clean energy investment comes against a backdrop of increasing political division over the cost and pace of the net zero transition. While Labour remains committed to reaching net zero emissions by 2050, Reform UK and sections of the Conservative Party have sought to position climate policies as economically damaging and electorally risky.

However, business leaders in the renewables sector have broadly welcomed the government’s approach. The investment package, combined with the establishment of Great British Energy, signals a more hands-on industrial strategy focused on scaling up domestic manufacturing, reducing supply chain bottlenecks, and securing energy independence.

As offshore wind remains central to the UK’s net zero strategy and energy security plans, Labour appears determined to anchor its green agenda in the creation of visible, well-paid jobs that will resonate with voters across political divides.

By making the case that net zero is not just an environmental imperative but a pathway to national renewal, Miliband and the government hope to win over critics and reframe the climate debate in terms of economic dignity, regional regeneration and long-term resilience.

As Miliband put it: “We are not just backing net zero. We are backing Britain.”

Read more:
Ed Miliband says Labour will ‘win fight’ against UK net zero critics with offshore wind jobs push

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering softening Labour’s flagship plans to scrap the non-domiciled tax regime, amid rising concern over the growing exodus of wealthy individuals and business leaders from the UK.

The Treasury is reportedly reassessing proposals to apply inheritance tax to the global estates of non-doms—UK residents who consider their permanent home to be abroad—after warnings that the measure could drive significant capital and talent out of the country. The changes, part of a wider overhaul of the centuries-old regime, are due to take effect in April 2025, but concerns are mounting that the new system is triggering a level of flight far beyond what had been forecast.

At the heart of the reconsideration is the government’s plan to charge inheritance tax at 40% on worldwide assets held by wealthy non-doms once they have lived in the UK long enough to become deemed domiciled under the new rules. The Treasury is now thought to be exploring revisions or exemptions to this aspect of the policy, in an effort to stem the tide of departures.

“There will most likely be some tweaks to inheritance tax to stop the non-dom exodus,” a senior City figure told the Financial Times.

The exodus of wealthy individuals is already visible in the data. Companies House filings analysed by Bloomberg show that more than 4,400 company directors have left the UK in the past year, with a particularly sharp rise over the past few months. In April alone, departures were 75% higher than the same month in 2023, with the greatest concentration in the finance, insurance and property sectors—fields long favoured by non-doms.

The exodus includes a growing list of high-profile names. Bloomberg has reported that figures such as billionaire heiress Anne Beaufour, investor Max Gottschalk, Magna Capital CEO Alexander Ginzburg, JC Flowers co-president Tim Hanford, and boxing promoter Eddie Hearn have recently left the UK. The steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal, whose family is worth nearly £15 billion and who has lived in Britain since 1995, is also reported to be considering relocation due to the new tax regime.

The Treasury has acknowledged the concerns, issuing a statement saying: “The government will continue to work with stakeholders to ensure the new regime is internationally competitive and continues to focus on attracting the best talent and investment to the UK.”

The original non-dom regime, in place for decades, allowed wealthy foreigners living in the UK to shield foreign income and assets from British taxation for an annual fee starting at £30,000. It was scrapped by Jeremy Hunt during his tenure as chancellor in March 2024, pre-empting Labour’s own pledge to end non-dom status.

Under the new residence-based tax regime, individuals who have been in the UK for more than four years will be taxed on worldwide income and capital gains, and after a longer period, on global estates for inheritance tax purposes. While the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) originally forecast that between 12% and 25% of non-doms would leave, a more recent Oxford Economics survey of tax advisers found that 60% expected over 40% of their non-dom clients to relocate within two years of the change.

Critics have argued that while Labour’s reform was intended to ensure fairness in the tax system, the loss of non-doms—and the high levels of capital, spending and business investment they bring—could ultimately result in lower tax receipts and damage to the UK’s competitiveness.

Non-doms often support a wide ecosystem of private employment, investment, and philanthropic activity. Their departure, some fear, may create a ripple effect, weakening everything from real estate investment to venture funding.

Rachel Reeves, who has pitched herself as a pro-business chancellor focused on growth, now faces a delicate political and economic balancing act. On the one hand, Labour’s plans to scrap the non-dom regime were central to its pre-election narrative of building a fairer tax system. On the other, the government is now under pressure to reassure international investors and avoid scaring away entrepreneurs, executives, and wealth creators.

Sources close to the Treasury have indicated that any softening of the policy would be focused specifically on mitigating the impact of inheritance tax—widely regarded as the most punitive element of the changes—while keeping the broader reform intact.

With Mittal, Beaufour, and others already exploring exit strategies, the government is expected to signal its intentions in the coming months, ahead of the policy’s implementation in April. Until then, advisers say the uncertainty alone is fuelling further departures, adding urgency to the debate over how far Labour is prepared to go to keep Britain attractive to global wealth.

Read more:
Rachel Reeves reconsiders non-dom tax changes to halt exodus of wealthy individuals

Global investors are increasingly turning their backs on US stocks and the dollar, shifting their focus toward eurozone equities and emerging markets, according to the latest Bank of America (BoA) fund manager survey.

The closely watched monthly poll of 190 institutional investors overseeing a combined $523 billion in assets reveals a decisive rotation away from American assets following the turbulence caused by President Trump’s renewed trade tariff threats in April. While global confidence has largely recovered from the initial shock, sentiment toward the US remains muted — with dollar holdings now at their lowest levels in two decades and allocations to American equities sharply reduced.

A net 35 per cent of respondents said they were underweight in US stocks, the highest level of scepticism toward American equities in recent memory. By contrast, the eurozone has emerged as a key beneficiary of the shift, with a net 35 per cent overweight in continental European shares. Meanwhile, emerging markets are also attracting strong inflows as risk appetite gradually returns.

The survey, conducted between 6 and 12 June, captures a moment of cautious optimism. It followed a partial easing of US-China trade tensions, though before the recent flare-up in Middle East hostilities. The average investor cash balance dropped from 4.8 per cent in April to 4.2 per cent in June — a signal that many fund managers are moving back into risk assets and away from the safety of cash.

BoA’s analysts describe the post-April rally as driven by what they dubbed the “Taco trade” — a cynical nod to investors’ belief that “Trump Always Chickens Out” after making initial aggressive threats. Markets have responded with gusto. Since the low point on April 8, the S&P 500 has surged 20.6 per cent, while the FTSE 100 and Stoxx Europe 600 have also gained 15 per cent and 15.4 per cent, respectively.

Despite the broader recovery, UK equities remain out of favour, with only a modest improvement in sentiment. The survey shows a net 4 per cent of global investors are still underweight UK stocks, though that figure is less negative than much of the past 25 years. “People are clearly getting less pessimistic about the UK, but it is still missing out on the surge of confidence seen for the rest of Europe,” said Andreas Bruckner, European equity strategist at BoA.

Perhaps the most striking data point in the survey is the scale of the shift away from the US dollar. BoA found that investors are now the most underweight on the greenback in two decades, a sign of mounting concerns about US macroeconomic risks and long-term competitiveness. The dollar’s role as a global reserve currency remains unchallenged for now, but the figures suggest its reputational appeal is weakening among institutional capital allocators.

That sentiment is echoed in longer-term expectations. When asked which asset class or geography would deliver the best returns over the next five years, 54 per cent chose non-US equities, while just 23 per cent backed US stocks. Gold came in third, at 13 per cent, suggesting some residual caution remains baked into portfolios.

One of the most encouraging findings is the sharp turnaround in economic sentiment. Back in April, 42 per cent of investors polled thought a global recession was likely. That figure has now swung to a net 36 per cent who think a recession is unlikely — a remarkable reversal in just two months.

Still, recession remains the top “tail risk”, cited by 47 per cent of respondents. Other perceived threats include a resurgence of inflation leading to higher US interest rates (17 per cent), a bond market crash (16 per cent), and a potential dollar crash (11 per cent) caused by international buyers abandoning US assets.

BoA’s findings add to growing evidence that investors are hedging against American economic volatility by diversifying into alternative markets — particularly those in Europe and Asia that appear to be benefiting from relatively more stable policy environments.

The challenge for the US now lies in restoring confidence amid ongoing geopolitical tensions and domestic fiscal pressures. With President Trump’s trade rhetoric continuing to cast a long shadow over market sentiment, investors appear more inclined to seek opportunities beyond US borders — even as stock indices near all-time highs.

Whether this rotation proves to be a temporary correction or the beginning of a more structural shift in global capital flows remains to be seen. But for now, the message from institutional investors is clear: the era of unchallenged US exceptionalism is on pause — if not under full review.

Read more:
Global investors ‘turning away from US stocks and dollar’ amid Trump-era market unease

If it sounds like a conspiracy theory, that’s because it almost was—until the FBI got involved.

Before A Crypto Tale – Checkmate was a film in development, it was the reality that nearly ended Enzo Zelocchi’s life. A Hollywood actor, producer, and entrepreneur, Zelocchi wasn’t chasing a plotline—he was surviving one. In 2018, after launching the early stages of a healthcare platform called A-Medicare, he became the central target of a tangled network of cybercriminals, terrorists, and corrupt law enforcement officers, all with one goal: stealing his encrypted Bitcoin wallet—and silencing him in the process.

The players were real. The threats were violent. And the conspiracy ran deeper than anyone imagined.

The Criminal Network No One Saw Coming

It started with two cybersecurity experts—on paper, just contractors hired to help draft a white paper for A-Medicare’s blockchain component. In reality, they were affiliated with UGNAZI, an underground hacktivist group infamous for high-profile data leaks, identity theft, and coordinated cyberattacks.

One of those contractors, Troy Woody Jr., would later flee to the Philippines, where he and his accomplice Mir Islam (known online as “Josh the God”) were arrested for the murder of Woody’s girlfriend, Tomi Masters. The body was found taped up and dumped in a river. The motive? She wanted to return home, and she knew too much.

But that was just the surface. Mir Islam, a U.S. fugitive and ISIS affiliate, had been sending threats to Zelocchi through encrypted messaging platforms. The demands were clear: surrender the password to the Bitcoin wallet, or face devastating consequences. It wasn’t just about money—it was about erasing a man who stood in their way.

The Man They Couldn’t Intimidate

Zelocchi didn’t cave. Instead, he documented everything. He handed over evidence to U.S. Marshals, connected with intelligence operatives, and began tracking the same men who were hunting him. What followed were months of escalating attacks: stalking, false lawsuits, cyber defamation, and a coordinated effort to smear his name in the press, including a slanderous article planted in TMZ.

But the most brazen moment came when Zelocchi was nearly kidnapped at gunpoint at a gas station in Riverside County. According to reports and witness statements, two armed men—later identified as Sheriff’s Deputies—jumped out of a black SUV and attempted to force him inside. Zelocchi resisted, physically fought off both men (twice his size), and ran bleeding into the gas station to call the police. It didn’t end there. Months later, armed men broke into his apartment during the night. Zelocchi, anticipating the move, fired back.

Why the Silence?

Despite the gravity of the threats and the eventual arrests, coverage of the story was curiously limited during the last months of the Biden administration. Some outlets hesitated to touch the case. One reason: the political discomfort around Adam Iza (also known as Ahmed Faiq), a co-conspirator and ISIS sympathizer whose family had immigrated from Iraq under the Obama administration with US tax payer money. Others balked at the layers of local law enforcement corruption, fearing blowback.

But behind the scenes, Zelocchi continued to pursue justice. A federal civil lawsuit was filed against Adam Iza and his criminal organization that includes members of the LA and Riverside Sheriff’s Departments. Meanwhile, investigative documents revealed that inmates like Mir Islam and Troy Woody were still running operations from inside their cells, using smuggled laptops and cell phones while detained for murder in the Philippines.

A Script Pulled from Hell—and Turned Into Firepower

Checkmate is more than a movie title. It’s the move Zelocchi made to take control of his own story. After withstanding everything from murder plots to psychological warfare, he decided the best way to dismantle the silence was to put the truth on screen.

The emotional cost has been steep. Friends were threatened. His reputation was dragged. His family lived in fear. But Zelocchi emerged not as a victim, but as a man with evidence, strategy, and now, a film.

As development continues on A Crypto Tale – Checkmate, the film is set to shine a harsh light on the blurred lines between crypto anarchy, domestic terrorism, and institutional failure. It’s not fiction—it’s the part of America’s story no one wanted to admit happened.

And Enzo Zelocchi? He’s making sure it won’t be forgotten.

Read more:
ISIS Terrorists, Dirty Deputies, and Cryptocurrency: The Shocking True Story Behind ‘A Crypto Tale – Checkmate’

When you’re running a charitable organisation, your primary focus is, understandably, on the impact you’re making. You put your energy into organising fundraising events, collecting donations, and delivering meaningful change. But what often gets overlooked is what happens after the fundraiser ends, which includes how you engage with donors and use their data.

Without continued engagement, donors may forget about your organisation or feel disconnected from the impact of their contributions. And when the next fundraising event rolls around, they might not be motivated to give again.

Many growing charities are doing the best they can with limited time and resources. But it’s easy to get caught up in the day-to-day work and forget about the very people funding it.

In this article, we’ll explore some common gaps in donor engagement and data use and share simple, actionable steps your charity can take to use donor data more effectively and build lasting relationships.

Relying on Spreadsheets for Far Too Long

Many small charities start with a single spreadsheet to track donations and supporter details. It works well at first, but can become cumbersome over time due to certain limitations inherent in spreadsheets. They don’t alert you when details are outdated or help segment donors so that you can personalise your appreciation messages to them.

However, there are some free CRM for not for profits available that can help your organisation move from spreadsheets to a more advanced system that will also help with communications.

Treating All Donors the Same

Every donor is motivated by a different story, and every supporter wants different kinds of updates. Many charities make the mistake of sending a standard emailer to all their donors, forgetting that donor relationships are a two-way street. When you don’t personalise your communications using names or referencing something about your shared past, people start to feel like just another number on a mailing list.

That’s why donor segmentation is so important for charitable organisations. A CRM system can help you craft those personalised messages that make your supporters feel valued and connected!

Forgetting to Clean and Validate the Data

It’s easy for data errors to pile up, like misspelt names, duplicate records, or outdated addresses. These small issues can lead to big problems, such as thank-you letters being sent to the wrong place or incorrect Gift Aid claims.

That’s why regular data validation and cleaning should be part of your routine. While some CRM systems can flag errors automatically, it’s still up to your team to review and fix them. Clean, accurate data leads to more effective communication and smoother fundraising efforts.

Focusing Too Much on Numbers

We know it’s tempting to create an email that highlights the impressive numbers showcasing the impact of your charity. While those statistics are important, they don’t always create an emotional connection with your donors. People want to help those in need and support the greater good.

That’s why it’s so powerful to share personal stories, like those of one family or one child, rather than just focusing on the big data. When you highlight individual experiences, you’re more likely to inspire donors to give again. So remember, balancing your impactful data with heartfelt stories can really make a difference!.

Communication Updates

Let’s say there was a past donor who no longer wishes to donate and has unsubscribed from your mailing list. Imagine their frustration when they continue to receive communications from you, even after unsubscribing years ago. They are also more likely to discourage people in their circle from donating towards your cause because of this.

While it’s always tough losing a donor, it’s still important to respect their preferences. It creates a bond of trust with the donor because they know you’re listening.

Using Data Without an Approach

Donor data shouldn’t just sit in a system waiting for someone to look at it. If you’re not using it to understand trends, spot lapsed donors, or evaluate which campaigns are working best, then you’re missing out on huge opportunities. This data should help you make fundraising decisions.

You can find answers to questions like ‘what is the average time before people disengage?’ and ‘what’s the best time of the year to ask for support?’ simply by analysing the data.

Summing It Up

Managing donor data is probably not one of your top priorities when you’re running a charitable organisation because all your efforts are directed towards helping real people. That said, using your donor data wisely doesn’t need to divert your attention from your core mission.

When you make these small changes to the way you handle donor data, you’ll form stronger donor relationships and carry out more impactful fundraising. Initially, it might feel like a lot of effort, but you’re building towards a more sustainable relationship with your donors.

Read more:
What Growing Charities Get Wrong About Donor Data