Live
Updates from the Madrid Open as Jack Draper looks to reach the semi-finals and overtake Novak Djokovic in world rankings; British No 1 takes on Italy’s Matteo Arnaldi in the quarter-finals; watch live on Sky Sports Tennis.
Microsoft Drops Simpson Thacher & Bartlett Law Firm
When big law firms attacked by President Trump decided to make a deal with him rather than fight, many did so because their leaders feared that clients would abandon a firm caught on the administration’s bad side.
Now that logic may be getting less compelling. A major company, Microsoft, has dropped a law firm that settled with the administration in favor of one that is fighting it.
Large companies like Microsoft often farm out legal work to dozens or even hundreds of firms and may move business depending on circumstances, like pricing, expertise or potential conflicts. Microsoft declined to comment on why it changed law firms in a significant case last week, but the switch suggests that a firm that chose to fight the Trump administration could still attract an important client.
On April 22, several attorneys at the law firm Simpson Thacher & Bartlett informed the Delaware Court of Chancery that they would no longer be representing Microsoft in a case related to the company’s 2023 acquisition of the video game giant Activision Blizzard, according to court filings.
Simpson Thacher reached a deal with the White House last month in which the firm committed to perform $125 million in free legal work for causes acceptable to the Trump administration. In a joint statement with other firms making similar agreements, Simpson Thacher said the pro bono work would be on behalf of “a wide range of underserved populations.”
On the same day that the Simpson Thacher lawyers filed paperwork withdrawing from the Microsoft case, at least three partners at the firm Jenner & Block informed the court that they would be representing Microsoft in the case. Jenner is fighting in court to permanently block a Trump administration executive order targeting its business.
Jenner declined to comment on the change, and Simpson Thacher did not respond to a request for comment.
Since the Trump administration started pressuring big law firms with executive orders and inquiries into their hiring and diversity practices, law firm leaders have cited the risk of losing clients in their decisions to seek deals. They worried that fighting the White House would scare off clients even if the fights were ultimately successful.
Many lawyers have argued that Mr. Trump’s executive orders, which have restricted the law firms’ contact with federal agencies and officials, are unconstitutional, and courts appear to be receptive to that argument so far.
The Microsoft case in Delaware is an early indication that there may be a risk in the opposite direction.
In some cases, a client may worry that a law firm that has reached a deal with the White House has a conflict of interest that prevents it from aggressively representing the client. For example, the client may be a defendant in a lawsuit brought by the federal government and worry that a settling law firm would be reluctant to stand up to the administration.
Other clients may have broader concerns. A senior partner at another firm that does not have an agreement with the White House said his firm was beginning to attract clients from firms that had settled with the administration. The partner, who was not authorized to discuss client matters publicly, said prospective clients had indicated that they had lost confidence in settling firms for not standing up to an attack on the rule of law.
Some firms challenging the administration have sought to capitalize on this frustration, suggesting that their pushback reflects a commitment to fight on behalf of their clients as well.
On a website set up to publicize its case against the president’s executive order, Jenner wrote that making a deal with the administration “would mean compromising our ability to zealously advocate for all of our clients.”
Other firms challenging executive orders, like WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey, have set up websites or web pages communicating similar messages.
The Microsoft case, which does not directly involve the federal government, arose from a lawsuit by an institutional shareholder of Activision that objected to how the company’s board had approved the merger. The shareholder argued that the merger approval process had broken the law, and a Delaware court largely denied the company’s efforts to dismiss the lawsuit in a ruling last year.
Over the past few decades, Microsoft has built strong relationships with government officials of both parties, and the company has generally avoided overt partisan allegiances or overtly political statements. While Microsoft donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural fund, like some of its tech peers, its chief executive, Satya Nadella, did not attend the swearing-in and has generally kept a low profile in his interactions with the Trump administration. The company also donated to President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s inaugural committee.
Karen Weise and Michael S. Schmidt contributed reporting. Susan C. Beachy contributed research.
Tesla Chair Denies That Board Sought to Replace Elon Musk
The chair of Tesla’s board of directors denied a report that the company had begun to look for a replacement for Elon Musk, the chief executive who has been spending much of his time working for President Trump while the automaker’s sales and profits plummet.
Robyn Denholm, who has led the board for more than six years, said on X that the report in The Wall Street Journal was “absolutely false.”
“The CEO of Tesla is Elon Musk and the board is highly confident in his ability to continue executing on the exciting growth plan ahead,” Ms. Denholm said on Tesla’s account on X, the social media firm owned by Mr. Musk.
The Journal reported late Wednesday that, about a month ago, the Tesla board had contacted executive search firms to help look for Mr. Musk’s replacement, citing “people familiar with the matter.”
After the company reported a 71 percent drop in quarterly profit last week, Mr. Musk promised to spend more time at Tesla and less time in Washington. He said that he would spend one or two days a week on administration work.
Mr. Musk’s absence from Tesla while he oversaw Mr. Trump’s efforts to slash government spending and cut federal government jobs has become a sore point with investors. Mr. Musk’s involvement with the administration and with right-wing causes in Europe has prompted protests at Tesla dealerships and is partly responsible for a steep drop in sales. Electric vehicle buyers tend to be liberals or centrists.
Tesla’s revenue fell 9 percent in the first quarter of the year, to $19.3 billion, the company reported last week.
The automaker has lost market share in the United States, China and Europe as competitors like BYD, General Motors, Volkswagen and other companies introduce dozens of electric models. Analysts have faulted Tesla for failing to expand its lineup beyond two main cars.
The Model Y sport utility vehicle and the Model 3 sedan account for a vast majority of Tesla’s sales. The Cybertruck, Tesla’s newest vehicle, has not sold as well as Mr. Musk said it would.
Rory McIlroy and Investment Giant TPG Team Up for Sports Venture
Fresh off finally securing a career grand slam with a thrilling win at the Masters, Rory McIlroy, the world’s second-ranked golfer, is rounding out another corner of his life: investing.
Mr. McIlroy’s investment firm, Symphony Ventures, is teaming up with the private equity firm TPG to start TPG Sports, an investment fund that will place bets on businesses across the sports industry.
Mr. McIlroy started Symphony Ventures with his business partner, Sean O’Flaherty, in 2019. Both men will serve as operating partners for TPG Sports.
“We were talking about what’s the next step for us,” Mr. McIlroy said in an interview. “The timing was right.”
Mr. McIlroy’s increasing immersion in business is not uncommon among golf’s greats; Tiger Woods, Greg Norman and Jack Nicklaus have all built big business portfolios around golf and beyond. But his partnership with TPG comes as record dollars are flowing into sports. Competition by media companies over premium live content has driven up valuations of traditional teams and created demand for new ones.
“Sports is undergoing a big transformation,” Mr. McIlroy said. “There is a lot of investment going into the sports world and trying to make it more professional — and trying to bring it into the 21st century.”
Mr. McIlroy has been taking advantage of those opportunities. Investments by Symphony Ventures include Golf Genius, a golf tournament software platform, and Puttery, an immersive mini-golf experience. In 2022, Mr. McIlroy also co-founded a company that helped create TGL, a team-based high-tech golf league that has drawn investors like Arthur Blank, a co-founder of Home Depot and the owner of the Atlanta Falcons, and Steven Cohen, the owner of the New York Mets.
Mr. McIlroy’s investment focus led him to TPG. The firm brought him on as an investor in some of its prior deals, like its stake in Troon, the golf course management company, in 2021.
TPG is making its official foray into sports as investors face a volatile landscape, with President Trump’s tariffs rattling the stock market and analysts saying a recession is becoming more likely.
“Probably the best opportunities that we’ve seen and invested in over the past 30 years have also come at moments of uncertainty,” Todd Sisitsky, the president of TPG, said. TPG is launching TPG Sports with a secured investment commitment from Lunate, an investment fund based in Abu Dhabi. TPG did not disclose the size of that investment.
TPG manages more than $200 billion in assets and has extensive experience in the media industry, which is increasingly entwined with sports. Among those deals are DirecTV and Creative Artists Agency.
Mr. McIlroy brings a different sort of experience. As a former member of the influential PGA Tour Policy Board, he was briefly on the front lines of deal talks between the PGA Tour and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund. (The talks have since stalled.) He stepped down in 2023 to focus on golf, his family — and his growing investing portfolio.
“I just felt like something had to give,” Mr. McIlroy said at the time.
Some of his business bets may take years to blossom. For now, Mr. McIlroy is looking for a win at this month’s P.G.A. Championship.
Man City latest: 'Real and Bayern interested in City target Wirtz'
Man City latest: 'Real and Bayern interested in City target Wirtz'
Source link
In an Uncertain Economy, McDonald’s Sees Spending Decline
Even value meals aren’t enough to get anxious consumers to spend. Despite efforts to entice customers to its restaurants, McDonald’s saw its sales slip in the first three months of the year.
Global same-store sales dipped 1 percent for the quarter ending March 30, driven by a 3.6 percent decline in the United States, McDonald’s reported early Thursday. That’s a big change from a year ago, when U.S. same-store sales rose 2.5 percent.
The restaurant giant said revenue fell 3 percent to $6 billion in the quarter. Net income also declined 3 percent to $1.9 billion.
McDonald’s is a closely watched barometer for consumer spending and sentiment, especially among lower-income consumers, and the company’s financial results pointed to jittery customers.
“Consumers today are grappling with uncertainty,” McDonald’s chief executive, Chris Kempczinski, said in a news release, adding that he believed McDonald’s had the ability to navigate “even the toughest of market conditions and gain market share.”
Investors and Wall Street analysts have also been closely monitoring consumer-oriented companies with a significant presence in international markets for any signs of anti-American sentiment amid some of President Trump’s policies, including tariffs.
McDonald’s, which is one of the most recognized American brands, said its international operated markets segment, which includes Canada and much of Europe, saw same-store sales decline by 1 percent from a year earlier. Last year, that segment grew 2.7 percent in the quarter. McDonald’s said the slide in sales was mostly driven by negative sales in Britain.
In other international markets, including China, Japan and the Middle East, McDonald’s reported a 3.5 percent rise from year-ago levels, largely because of improved sales in the Middle East and Japan, the company said.
How to Save Time and Money at the Airport
From long lines to overpriced food and scarce seating, airports are rife with pitfalls.
For some people, said Katy Nastro, a travel expert at Going, an app for cheap flights, “airports are like travel purgatory: You’re neither here nor there.”
But technology, advance planning and a few creative strategies can help you parry airport problems.
Calculate your transit time
Your airport journey can begin as early as 24 hours before departure, when you should check in, pay checked bags fees, which will expedite bag drop, and sign up for flight notifications by text to keep up with scheduling.
Next, determine when you should leave for the airport. The rule of thumb is to arrive two hours before departure for domestic flights (three for international), allowing yourself plenty of time to check bags, get through security (especially if you don’t have expedited clearance) and board.
“The biggest challenge with airports is the variability in how long it may take to get there, and to get from curb to gate,” said Gary Leff, the author of the aviation blog View from the Wing.
Use a map app to get a sense of travel time to the airport a week or a few days before departure. Airline websites commonly include security wait times.
If you’re checking a bag, you may need to do so no less than 45 minutes before domestic departures (check your carrier for cutoff times). Add this to your transit time, along with a comfortable cushion.
Expedite security clearance
The quickest way through security is to sign up for expedited clearance.
Travelers enrolled in TSA PreCheck usually wait 10 minutes or less at security, according to the Transportation Security Administration. Membership, which costs between $76.75 and $85, depending on the enrollment provider, is good for five years.
Global Entry, which speeds travelers through customs screening when they return to the United States, includes enrollment in TSA PreCheck. It costs $120 and is good for five years.
CLEAR allows members to use its lanes in 59 airports around the country to get to the front of the security lines ($199 a year).
Fly standby on an earlier flight
If you do breeze through traffic and security, try to fly standby on an earlier flight, recommends Brian Sumers, who writes the newsletter The Airline Observer.
“Since the pandemic, free standby is back,” Mr. Sumers said, noting that even Southwest Airlines, which previously prohibited the practice, offers standby if space is available.
Bring your own food
Airports are notorious for inflated food prices. A sandwich that might cost $5 at a grocery store can easily run twice that at the airport.
So bring your own meals and snacks. Just make sure they can clear security (for instance, yogurt is considered a liquid, and containers over three ounces can be confiscated.) Also, bring an empty water bottle to refill after clearing security.
If you can’t B.Y.O., Harriet Baskas, a Seattle-based author who writes the travel blog Stuck at the Airport, recommends browsing food courts and ordering appetizers or kid-size portions to keep costs down.
Pack your electrical needs
Many airports have vastly expanded the availability of electrical outlets to charge devices. But nabbing one can be competitive, and sometimes the outlets don’t work.
“I’ve merrily worked away while believing my laptop or phone was charging only to discover that the entire bank of powered chairs was unplugged,” Ms. Baskas said. “I’ve learned to check first before settling in.”
She recommends taking a multi-outlet cord so you can share a plug with other travelers.
Get around the issue with your own external battery. George Hobica, who founded the flight search engine Airfarewatchdog, takes one powerful enough to charge several devices at once.
Get some exercise
Use wait time to stretch your legs. Exercise delivers both physical and mental benefits, and long airport concourses offer convenient walking tracks.
Colleen Lanin, who writes the travel blog Colleen Travels Between and has been covering family travel for 16 years, suggests tiring the kids out with exercise before boarding.
“When my children were young, I paid them a small amount of money for each lap they ran around our backyard before we headed out, and they could spend their earnings on an item at the airport gift shop,” she said.
During layovers, she encourages parents to find a quiet area and play a game of Red Light Green Light or Simon Says.
Wait at an uncrowded gate
As long as you are monitoring the flight boarding call on an app, there’s no reason to be at a crowded gate where seats are scarce. Find a convenient unoccupied gate and wait there.
Use airport resources
Airport websites will help you find yoga rooms (San Francisco), art exhibits (Philadelphia), live music schedules (Austin-Bergstrom), outdoor terraces (Denver) or a butterfly garden (Singapore Changi).
Or ask an airport employee for recommendations.
“The folks at the information booths are usually happy to share favorite spots, and you don’t need to be a kid to ask them for crayons and a coloring book or a collectible airport trading card,” said Ms. Baskas.
Be your own rebooking agent
When a flight is delayed or canceled, passengers inevitably start lining up to talk to the gate agent. But log in while you’re waiting. With the airline’s app; you can usually get information more efficiently.
“Typically, customers will have the same access to seats on the app as agents at the desk can see,” Mr. Sumers said.
With storms or cascading delays, seat availability can be fluid.
“If you’re vigilant on the app, you may find seats that weren’t available just one minute before,” Mr. Sumers added.
Have an escape plan
You may not be able to escape an airport, especially during a delay, but you can treat yourself to a break.
Ms. Baskas keeps $30 in her wallet to buy a treat like a special dessert or a hardcover book.
“That makes me feel better at the moment and won’t show up on the credit card bill later to remind me of a stressful time,” she said.
Apple Would Be Worth Half as Much If It Stopped Manufacturing in China
Several years before Donald J. Trump entered politics, Apple and its partners built massive factories across China to assemble iPhones. Mr. Trump first campaigned for president by promising his supporters that he would force Apple to make those products in America.
Nearly a decade later, little has changed. Instead of bringing its manufacturing home, Apple shifted some production from China to India, Vietnam and Thailand. Almost nothing is made in America, and an estimated 80 percent of iPhones are still made in China.
Despite years of pressure, Apple’s business is still so dependent on China that the tech giant can’t operate without it. Moves by the Trump administration to change Apple’s behavior risk damaging the world’s most valuable publicly traded company. And any serious effort to move Apple’s production to the United States — if that is even possible — would take a titanic effort by both the company and the federal government.
In the four days after President Trump announced taxes on Chinese exports of 145 percent last month, Apple lost $770 billion in market capitalization. It regained some of those losses after Mr. Trump gave consumer electronics manufacturers in China a temporary reprieve.
On Thursday, Wall Street analysts expect Apple to report that sales increased 4 percent in the most recent quarter, partly because people rushed to buy iPhones before the tariffs kicked in. The report offers Wall Street analysts an opportunity to grill Apple’s chief executive, Tim Cook, about the risk of future tariffs, price increases and the company’s future in China and the United States.
An Apple spokesman declined to make any company executives available for this article. The company said this year that it would invest $500 billion in the United States over the next four years and begin making artificial intelligence servers in Houston in 2026.
David Yoffie, a professor at Harvard Business School who has written case studies on Apple, said the scrutiny was warranted because “they’re the company most at risk in a complete breakdown of the United States and China.”
Gene Munster, a managing partner at Deepwater Asset Management, which invests in emerging technology companies, estimates that a complete breakdown between the United States and China would cut the value of Apple in half or more. It would drop to being a $1.6 trillion company from a $3.2 trillion company because about a third of its sales are tied to products made in China, even if it shifts some production to other countries. And the value could drop to $1.2 trillion if it also lost its sales to Chinese customers, as its rival Samsung did after a dispute between South Korea’s and China’s governments. Beijing has already discouraged iPhone purchases by government employees.
A major drop in Apple’s value would ripple through the stock market. The company accounts for about 6 percent of the S&P 500 index. That means for each dollar invested in the fund, about 6 cents goes to Apple stock. Investors, and most 401(k) owners, would see that stake cut in half.
Apple’s roots in China run deep. Decades ago, the company worked with Beijing to set up manufacturing in China without creating a joint venture with a Chinese company, as required of many U.S. businesses. It then perfected the art of assembling devices inexpensively in China and selling products to the country’s growing middle class. The combination has earned it more than 80 percent of global smartphone profits and generated $67 billion in annual Chinese sales.
Over time, the company’s ties to China have strengthened. Today, not only does it make most iPhones in China, but its Chinese suppliers also assemble parts for devices made in India and manufacture components and AirPods in Vietnam.
Apple’s dependency on China has made its supply chain something of a Rorschach test for the Trump administration, which wants to bring more electronics manufacturing to the United States. Apple has more power than any other electronics company to deliver on the administration’s goal. It makes more smartphones than anyone else and spends more money on components than rivals, giving it tremendous sway over where its suppliers operate.
The Trump administration wants Apple to begin that process. In an April television interview, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said that “the army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little, little screws to make iPhones — that kind of thing is going to come to America.”
But pressuring Apple to leave China could backfire. The new tariffs could force Apple to raise iPhone prices or accept smaller smartphone profits. Samsung phones, which are made in Vietnam and not subject to Chinese tariffs, could be cheaper by comparison. Apple could become less competitive at home — a red line that Mr. Trump seldom wants to cross.
Apple has resisted making iPhones and other devices in the United States because the company’s operations team has determined that it would be impossible, said two people familiar with the analysis who spoke on the condition of anonymity. A decade ago, it had a bad experience sourcing screws and finding reliable workers to assemble a Mac computer in Texas.
In China, Apple’s suppliers are able to bring together 200,000 people. They work at factories supervised by thousands of engineers with years of manufacturing experience. Most live in dormitories near the iPhone plant, where displays and other components move down assembly lines longer than a football field.
Finding that many employees and experienced engineers would be impossible in most American cities, said Wayne Lam, an analyst with TechInsights, a market research firm. He said Apple would need to develop more automated processes with robots to make up for the smaller population in the United States.
Mr. Lam estimates that if Apple did set up operations in the United States, it would need to charge $2,000 for an iPhone — up from about $1,000 now — to keep its current profits. The price could drop to $1,500 in future years as the company reduced the costs of training employees and making components.
“In the short term, it’s not economically feasible,” Mr. Lam said. He added that it also made little sense to relocate production of a device that was nearly 20 years old and could be disrupted by a new gadget that caught on with consumers.
Apple has shown a willingness to move its supply chain when there are incentives. In 2017, it began a process to make iPhones in India because the country had high taxes on imports that would have made prices increase to a point where Apple could not have claimed a slice of the world’s fastest-growing smartphone market.
Today, Apple makes about 20 percent of its iPhones sold around the world in India. It also makes some components there, including the metal frame. But it relies on Chinese companies to assemble the displays and other complex parts.
Matthew Moore, who spent nine years as a manufacturing design manager at Apple, said India had another advantage that America didn’t: “Engineers, everywhere.”
To lure Apple and electronics companies to the United States, Mr. Moore believes, the Trump administration will need to invest in education for degrees in science, technology, engineering and math. He also thinks that the country should encourage loans for new manufacturing facilities, much as it does for housing with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Last month, Apple bought itself a temporary break. Mr. Cook, who personally donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inauguration, lobbied the Trump administration for the exemption it gave to iPhones and other electronics from the 145 percent tax on Chinese exports. It’s temporary, though. The administration has said it plans to issue more targeted tariffs on tech products.
Without government investments, Apple and smaller manufacturers will continue making things in China because it has excess equipment and engineers, said Mr. Moore, who started Cruz, a company that makes hardware products like blenders.
“I don’t think the ship has sailed, but it’s absurd to think in four years we’re going to make iPhones here,” Mr. Moore said. “It would take 10 years.”
Musk Is Less Confident About DOGE Goals, 100 Days Into Trump Presidency
Seated at the head of a large conference table inside the West Wing’s Roosevelt Room on Wednesday afternoon, Elon Musk, dressed in his signature T-shirt and blazer, ducked the question of whether his Department of Government Efficiency would meet his pledge of slashing $1 trillion from the federal budget.
“I think it’s possible to do that, but it’s a long road to go, and, you know, it’s really difficult,” he said of the trillion-dollar goal. “It’s sort of, how much pain is, you know, are the cabinet and is Congress willing to take? Because it can be done, but it requires dealing with a lot of complaints.”
His caginess contrasted with his chest-thumping confidence just a few months ago about what he would accomplish in government. Standing onstage at a Trump rally at Madison Square Garden in October, Mr. Musk told a roaring crowd that he could cut “at least two trillion” in federal spending. He later halved that figure.
Now, Mr. Musk, who never previously served in government, has been forced to revise his expectations even further, though he still insists his goals remain technically possible. His 101 days in government have been stormy, and his series of interviews this week — including Wednesday’s session with reporters from major newspapers and television networks — appeared to be an effort to wrest back control of the messaging.
He has clashed with cabinet secretaries and fielded complaints from lawmakers whose constituents’ services and jobs were threatened by cuts from his Department of Government Efficiency. He has argued with the president over tariffs and faced protests from federal employees, including over his decision to dismantle entire agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
He has also run into a math problem that budget experts from both parties warned about: There is no way to slash a trillion dollars without tackling the most politically sensitive parts of the budget, social safety net programs and military spending.
The billionaire says he is proud of the cuts DOGE has made. He says he plans to return to spending most of his time working on his companies, which include Tesla, X and SpaceX, but expects to devote around two days a week to government work, visiting Washington every other week.
DOGE was originally intended to operate only until July 4, 2026, but Mr. Musk said he could imagine the effort running through the entire four years of the Trump administration. He said it would be up to President Trump to decide how long he wanted him to keep working on the initiative. Mr. Musk is allowed to serve just 130 days as a “special government employee,” but if he reduces his hours to part time, he could extend by months his time working for the Trump administration.
Mr. Musk insisted that DOGE would do well in his absence. But he was evasive, resorting to jokes, when asked who would fill his place.
“DOGE is a way of life. Like Buddhism,” Mr. Musk said.
Pressed again, he said: “Is Buddha needed for Buddhism?”
In Mr. Musk’s telling, he has given DOGE, which he compared to a “start-up,” the intensive burst of his attention it required to get it off the ground. Mr. Musk claims to have saved taxpayers $160 billion so far.
But DOGE’s online “wall of receipts” does not account for 64 percent of that total. The group has only itemized $58 billion of its savings by linking them to specific canceled contracts, grants and leases. The other $102 billion is not explained. And even the $58 million in savings that DOGE has itemized is significantly inflated, by including outright errors and guesses about the future.
Mr. Musk said that it was still “absolutely” possible to find $1 trillion in savings to confront the problem of the ballooning national debt, but that it remained to be seen whether there was “sufficient political will in Congress and elsewhere to actually do that.”
“And we may not succeed,” he said.
Mr. Trump has made clear to Mr. Musk that some of the most sizable portions of the federal government are off limits for serious reform. The president has ruled out making any changes to Social Security and Medicare, which account for more than a third of federal spending. And Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said he wants the Pentagon budget to be increased to $1 trillion.
At the White House on Wednesday, Mr. Musk reiterated that there were billions more to be saved from cutting waste and that his team had found clear-cut evidence of fraud.
Reflecting on his time in Washington, Mr. Musk shared an unusual amount of detail about his life with Mr. Trump.
“I guess we’re good friends, and we’ll be on Air Force One or Marine One, and he’s like, ‘Hey do you want to stay over?’ And I’m like, ‘Sure,’” Mr. Musk said.
Mr. Musk ended up spending the night in the Lincoln Bedroom on several occasions.
During one of those sleepovers, Mr. Musk said, Mr. Trump called him late at night to tell him to make sure to get some ice cream from the kitchen. The billionaire said he helped himself to a whole container of caramel Häagen-Dazs.
“I was like, this stuff’s amazing,” he said.
David A. Fahrenthold contributed reporting.
U.S. Gas Industry Pushes Back on Trump Shipbuilding Rules
Another rift has opened between the U.S. oil and gas industry and President Trump, this time over new rules designed to encourage domestic shipbuilding and undermine China’s maritime power.
This month, the Trump administration issued rules that require at least 1 percent of the natural gas shipped overseas to be carried on U.S.-built tankers in 2029. The United States is the top global exporter of liquefied natural gas — gas that has been chilled until it becomes a liquid so that it can be transported in large quantities. But it does not build any of the specialized ships that are used to send that fuel abroad.
In a letter to the administration last week, the American Petroleum Institute, the U.S. oil and gas industry’s main trade association, said the industry could not comply with that rule and urged officials to reconsider it.
The requirement “risks counteracting the significant progress the Trump administration has made toward reducing uncertainty and unleashing U.S. L.N.G.,” the trade group said in the letter, which was addressed to Chris Wright, the energy secretary, and Doug Burgum, the interior secretary.
The maritime rules are the latest source of tension between oil and gas executives — many of whom contributed to Mr. Trump’s campaign — and the administration. The industry is aligned with Mr. Trump on an array of key priorities, including exporting more L.N.G.
But when it comes to trade, oil and gas companies generally favor more open arrangements, in contrast to Mr. Trump’s protectionist agenda. His policies have also weakened economic confidence, causing oil prices to fall. Many companies that produce natural gas are also in the oil business.
Oil now sells for about $62 a barrel in the United States, compared with $78 just before Mr. Trump took office. Natural gas prices have also fallen, but remain well above what they were a year ago.
Sean Duffy, the transportation secretary, suggested on Monday that there was room to further negotiate the shipping rules.
“We should hear what oil and gas has as their concerns, listen to them, but find a pathway forward where we can build ships in America to send great American energy around the world,” Mr. Duffy said during a visit to the Hanwha Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia when asked about the industry’s concerns.
Hanwha Systems, a South Korean defense technology company, and Hanwha Ocean, a South Korean shipbuilder, bought the Philadelphia shipyard last year and plan to modernize it. Hanwha Ocean has delivered 200 L.N.G. carriers from its shipyards in South Korea. Such vessels are primarily built in that country, Japan and China.
J. Elizabeth Peace, an Interior Department spokeswoman, declined to comment on the trade group’s letter, which was reported earlier by The Financial Times.
The American Petroleum Institute praised other actions by the Trump administration, including those aimed at enabling more L.N.G. to be exported.
“On balance, we have made significant progress toward ensuring that we have long-term American energy dominance going forward,” Amanda Eversole, the group’s chief advocacy officer, said on Monday.
In addition to requiring the use of U.S.-built L.N.G. ships, the new rules impose fees on Chinese-owned and Chinese-built vessels. The rules originated from a petition requesting a federal investigation into Chinese shipbuilding filed during the Biden administration by labor unions. Shortly before Mr. Trump took office, the Biden administration said its investigation had found that China had used unfair trade practices like subsidies to become dominant in shipbuilding.
The Office of the United States Trade Representative, the agency behind the new rules, softened an earlier proposal after pushback from many industries and trade groups, including the American Petroleum Institute.
But the energy group said the latest version of the rules — which require that 1 percent of L.N.G. exports be carried on U.S.-built vessels in 2029, rising to 15 percent in 2047 — was still too demanding. The industry association estimated that five U.S.-built L.N.G. tankers would be needed in 2029 and said building them was “not feasible,” citing a lack of shipyard capacity and skilled workers, among other concerns.
But the rules appear to include a way for companies to delay the use of U.S.-built L.N.G. transporters for three years if they have ordered and taken delivery of a U.S.-built vessel in that time.