Trump and the economic war against quarterly transparency

On his social network, Trump asked US companies to abandon the obligation to publicize balance sheets every three months

United States President Donald Trump has again stirred the debate on how large American corporations account for the financial market. In a publication on Monday (15) on its social network, Truth Social, Trump argued that the companies listed on the stock market abandon the practice of publicizing results every three months, proposing that accountability will only occur twice a year.

According to him, the current model imposes unnecessary costs and diverts the attention of executives from what really matters: the management of their companies.

“Subject to SEC approval, companies and corporations should no longer be forced to ‘report’ quarterly… but rather to report on a ‘base of six (6) months,” said Trump.

“This will save money and allow managers to focus on the proper management of their companies.”

Read too: Microsoft starts countdown 30 days to the end of Windows 10

Criticism of the American “short-faith”

In the same message, Trump compared the American model to China, a country that, according to him, adopts a long-term strategic vision.

“You have heard the statement that China has a 50 to 100 year view of a company management, while we run our companies quarterly ??? is not good !!!”

The provocation reflects an old debate on Wall Street: To what extent the quarterly reports encourage short -term practices, pressuring executives to prioritize immediate gains rather than structural investments.

What is at stake

Currently, US legislation obliges companies listed to deliver to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) two types of reports: the quarterly, called 10-Qand the annual, known as 10-K. These disclosures include unused financial information, operational data, and often revelations on investigations and legal processes that may affect business.

This level of transparency is considered vital by investors, as it allows us to closely monitor companies’ performance and evaluate the direction of the American economy as a whole. Even profit reports provide clues about public policy impacts – as happened recently, when investors managed to measure the effects of Trump’s own trade tariffs.

The international scenario

Although the practice of quarterly reports is consolidated in the United States, other markets have already flexed this requirement. The European Union and Singapore, for example, dismissed companies from this obligation, allowing the accountability to be done in a semiannual manner.

The impact on Wall Street

In the US, each season of results is accompanied with magnifying glass by analysts, investors and specialized journalists. More than numbers, the teleconferences performed after the disclosure of the balance sheets have become a ritual: in them, executives are asked about strategies, risks and plans for the future.

In the last round of results, referring to the second quarter of this year, the performance was considered solid for most of the companies that make up the index S&P 500the main thermometer of the American stock market.

This quarterly routine, however, is precisely what Trump questions. For him, the frequency of disclosures not only generates additional costs, but also stifles the ability to plan in the long run.

Controversial proposal

The idea of ​​abandoning quarterly reports certainly divides opinions. For advocates, change could reduce pressure from immediate results, stimulating long -term investments and reducing bureaucracy spending. Critics warn that reducing the frequency of information would increase the opacity of the market, making it difficult to make decision -making by investors and even expand the risk of manipulation.

Still, Trump’s proposal replaces the theme at the center of the debate on corporate transparency and global competitiveness. If the SEC takes the suggestion forward, the US can go the way from other international markets – but that would also mean a deep transformation in the way Wall Street and millions of investors around the world accompany the largest companies on the planet.

USA removes tariffs on Brazilian pulp and iron

While Donald Trump rekindles the debate on changes in the form of accountability of American companies, another front of economic relations between Brazil and the United States recorded significant news. On the last day 5, the US government published the Executive Order No. 14,346that exempts from additional tariffs most of the Brazilian exports of pulp and iron to the US market.

The measure represents an immediate relief for strategic sectors of Brazilian industry, as it eliminates the incidence of both 10% announced in April as well as 40% surcharge applied on July 30 about this group of products.

In 2024, Brazil exported approximately US $ 1.84 billion in cellulose and iron-iron for the United States, the equivalent of 4.6% of all Brazilian sales to the American market. The largest slice of this amount came from cellulose, especially the non -conic wood chemical pastes, which added $ 1.55 billion.

With the new exclusion, 25.1% of Brazilian exports to the USA They are free from the overcrowders previously imposed by the US government.

The vice president and Minister of Development, Industry, Commerce and Services (MDIC), Geraldo Alckmincelebrated the decision, but stressed that there is still room for advances:

“The government is still committed to reducing the incidence of US tariffs on Brazilian products. The latest US executive order represents an advance mainly for Brazil’s pulp sector. But there is still much to be done and we continue to work for it.”

O Weight in rates

Despite the good news, the latest MDIC data, released on the 11th, show that the overall scenario still requires caution. Of the total of US $ 40 billion exported by Brazil to the United Statesdistribution in the face of additional rates remains challenging:

• 34,9% (US $ 14.1 billion) are subject to extra 10% and 40% extra rates;
• 16,7% (US $ 6.8 billion) face the rate of 10%;
• 25,1% (US $ 10.1 billion) were free from surcharge after the new measure;
• 23,3% (US $ 9.4 billion) are under specific tariffs, applied equally to all countries.

Strategic relevance

The removal of strokes on cellulose and iron-nickel reinforces the importance of these products in the trade scale between Brazil and the United States. Cellulose, in particular, is one of the forces of the Brazilian exporting agenda, supplying the paper industry, packaging and other segments in the international market.

The movement also signals a flexibility of the US government in relation to tariff barriers, a sensitive theme that often generates friction between the two countries. For Brazil, it represents an opportunity to expand competitiveness in the largest consumer market in the world, while maintaining diplomatic pressure so that other products are also benefited.

With information from Financial Teams and News Agencies*