Author

admin

Browsing

The ServiceNow stock price has declined significantly over the past few months, dropping from a high of $1,196 in January to its current level of $772. It has dropped by over 35% from its highest level this year, meaning that it is now in a bear market. This article explains what to expect ahead of its financial results next week.

ServiceNow’s business is thriving

ServiceNow is one of the top technology companies in the United States. It provides a cloud-based platform that provides IT Service Management (ITSM) services. Its main business is to manage and automate workflows for IT services, customer services, and low-code development.

The company provides its services to thousands of companies in the US and other countries. Some of the other clients are firms like Accenture, Adidas, Amazon, Walmart, Apple, and Vodafone Group.

ServiceNow’s business has done well over time as the needs for its solutions rose. Its annual revenue has jumped from $4.5 billion in 2020 to over $10.98 billion in 2024. Also, the company’s profits have been rising in the past few years.

NOW earnings ahead

The next key catalyst for the ServiceNow stock price will be its financial results, which will come out next week. 

According to Yahoo Finance, analysts expect its results to show that its revenue rose by 18.5% to $3.09 billion. The average earnings-per-share estimate is expected to be $3.83, higher than the previous estimate of $3.41.

ServiceNow has a long history of beating analysts’ estimates. For example, its EPS was higher than estimates by $0.01 in the last earnings and by $0.27 a quarter earlier. 

While the initial earnings often move stocks, the forward estimate is usually a bigger catalyst. The average estimate by analysts is that its current quarter’s revenue will be $3.11 billion, while its annual revenue will be $13.02 billion. If these numbers are accurate, it means that its full-year figure will be 18.5%.

Valuation concerns remain

One of the top concerns about ServiceNow has always been its valuation. Data shows that its price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio stood at 112.8, down from last year’s high of 179. 

Its forward P/E ratio stood at 95.7, much higher than the sector median of 23.2. The non-GAAP P/E ratio is 48.7, also higher than the median of 18.

These numbers are huge, especially when compared with other SaaS companies like Adobe, Microsoft, and Salesforce. Adobe has a forward P/E multiple of 21, while Microsoft and Salesforce have multiples of 28 and 22, respectively. 

For a SaaS company like ServiceNow, the best approach to value it is the rule-of-40 metric, which compares its growth and margins.

ServiceNow’s revenue growth is about 21%, while its net profit margin is 16%, giving it a rule-of-40 metric of 38%. That is a sign that the stock is a bit overvalued. However, adding its revenue growth and its FCF margin of 37% shows that it is not all that overvalued.

Read more: ServiceNow stock price analysis as a dangerous pattern forms

ServiceNow stock price analysis 

The daily chart shows that the NOW share price has crashed from a high of $1,196 in January to the current $722. It formed a double-top point at that point, which marked its turnaround. The stock has dropped below the ascending trendline that connects the lowest swings since May 5.

ServiceNow stock price has also formed a death cross after the 200-day and 50-day moving averages crossed each other. This is one of the most popular bearish crossover patterns.

Therefore, it will likely continue falling after earnings, with the initial target being at $680. A move above the ascending trendline will point to more gains.

The post Is ServiceNow stock a buy or a sell ahead of earnings? appeared first on Invezz

The S&P 500 index has declined significantly over the past few months, forming a death cross pattern for the first time since 2022. It ended the week at $5,282, down by 14.2% from its highest level this year. 

The S&P 500 index will be in focus next week as investors watch any new developments on trade. Also, it will react to the upcoming corporate earnings, which will provide more information about how companies did ahead of Trump’s tariffs.

Tesla (TSLA)

Tesla’s stock price has crashed in the past few months. After peaking at $488 in January, the stock has declined by 50% to its current price of $240. It has shed billions of dollars in value in this period.

Analysts expect that Tesla will publish weak financial results on Tuesday as its deliveries in Europe and China tumbled. The average estimate is that Tesla’s revenues will be $21.54 billion, a 1.12% increase from the same period last year. 

For the year, analysts expect that Tesla’s revenues will be $106.9 billion, a 9.45% annual increase, its slowest rate in years. 

Alphabet (GOOG)

Alphabet, the parent company of Google and YouTube, has also pulled back in the past few months. It has dropped from a high of $208 in January to $153. 

The stock has dropped in line with the performance of other Magnificent 7 companies. As I wrote recently, there are concerns that its business is being disrupted by AI bots like Grok and Claude.

Analysts still expect that its business continued doing well in the first quarter as its revenues rose by 10.7% to $89.18 billion. Its annual revenue forecast is $387 billion, which wlll then jump to $429 billion in 2026. The average Google stock forecast by analysts is $201, higher than the current $153. 

IBM (IBM)

IBM is another S&P 500 stock to watch next week as it publishes its numbers on Wednesday. These numbers will come as its stock remains 10.50% below its highest point this year.

IBM’s business has slowed as competition from other top companies in the tech industry, like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft has intensified. Also, IBM may lose some contracts with the US government, as Accenture and other consulting firms have done. A key bright spot for the company is that its artificial intelligence is growing modestly.

Analysts anticipate that IBM’s revenues will be $14.39 billion, a 0.39% decline from the same period last year. Its earnings per share will be $1.43, a drop from the $1.68 a year earlier. IBM has done better than expected in the past few quarters.

Boeing (BA)

Boeing stock price has crashed by about 40% from its highest level in 2023 as it moved from one crisis to another. It made headlines this year when Beijing instructed its companies to halt new orders and deliveries.

Therefore, Boeing’s earnings, which will come out on Thursday, will provide more information about its business. They will also provide more hints about how Trump’s tariffs will hit its business, and how its turnaround efforts are going on.

Other top S&P 500 stocks to watch

There are other top S&P 500 index companies to watch next week. For example, Intel will publish its financial results on Thursday, providing more information about its business as concerns remain. 

The other top companies to watch will be popular names like Philip Morris International, Thermo Fisher, Texas Instruments, NextEra Energy, Chipotle, PepsiCo, Verizon, and Lockheed Martin.

The post S&P 500 index stocks to watch: Google, Tesla, IBM, Intel, AT&T, Boeing, Chipotle appeared first on Invezz

The Trump administration announced sanctions against the International Bank of Yemen Y.S.C. (IBY) on Thursday for its financial support of Houthi terrorists.

Along with the bank, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is sanctioning key leaders of IBY, like its Chairman of the Board of Directors Kamal Hussain Al Jebry; Executive General Manager Ahmed Thabit Noman Al-Absi and Deputy General Manager Abdulkader Ali Bazara. By sanctioning IBY, the U.S. hopes to stop Houthi attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea.

‘Financial institutions like IBY are critical to the Houthis’ efforts to access the international financial system and threaten both the region and international commerce,’ Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Michael Faulkender said. ‘Treasury remains committed to working with the internationally recognized government of Yemen to disrupt the Houthis’ ability to secure funds and procure key components for their destabilizing attacks.’

Based in Sana’a, Yemen, the IBY is controlled by the Iran-backed Houthis and provides the group with access to the bank’s Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) network to make international financial transactions, the Treasury said.

The IBY, for instance, has allegedly aided Houthi businesses and officials to pursue oil on the SWIFT network, while also facilitating attempts by the terrorist group to evade sanctions oversight.

Under Thursday’s sanctions, all property and interests in property of the leaders named, that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked.

OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within, or transiting, the United States that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons. 

U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce spoke about the sanctions during a press briefing Thursday, sending a message to anyone who supports foreign terrorist organizations like the Houthis.

‘The United States is committed to disrupting the Houthi financial networks and banking access as part of our whole-of-government approach to eliminating Iran’s threat network,’ she said. ‘Moreover, we can confirm the reporting that Chang Guang Satellite Technology Company Limited (CGSTL) is directly supporting Iran-backed Houthi terrorist attacks on U.S. Interests. Their actions and Beijing’s support of the company, even after our private engagements with them, is yet another example of China’s empty claims to support peace.

She continued, urging partners of the U.S. to judge the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese companies on their actions, and not just their words.

‘Restoring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea is a priority to President Trump,’ Bruce said. ‘Beijing should take this priority seriously when considering any future support of CGSTL. The United States will not tolerate anyone providing support to foreign terrorist organizations such as the Houthis.’ 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Shareholders of LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton voted on Thursday to allow Bernard Arnault to remain at the helm of the company until the age of 85, extending the reign of the man who built the world’s most valuable luxury goods empire.

The move, approved with more than 99% support, raises the maximum age limit for the group’s chairman and chief executive from 80 to 85.

This marks the second such amendment in recent years.

In 2022, LVMH lifted the retirement threshold from 75 to 80.

With Thursday’s vote, the board has further solidified Arnault’s position at the top, even as investors grow increasingly uneasy over the absence of a clearly communicated succession plan.

A meticulously constructed empire

Bernard Arnault, 76, has led LVMH since 1989, steering it through decades of aggressive expansion, blockbuster acquisitions, and surging demand for luxury goods.

From the takeover of Christian Dior and Louis Vuitton to the $16 billion acquisition of Tiffany & Co in 2021, Arnault has crafted a 75-brand empire that spans fashion, jewellery, wine, spirits, hospitality, and more.

His hands-on leadership style—inspecting store layouts, micromanaging deals, and ensuring consistent brand storytelling—has helped deliver exceptional shareholder returns.

According to LSEG data, LVMH has generated an average total return of 13% per year under its leadership, far outpacing the 3% return of the STOXX 600 over the same period.

Yet the very qualities that have made LVMH a success are now sources of concern.

Investors worry that Arnault’s immense influence means that his sudden departure could trigger a sharp decline in LVMH’s share price.

At the same time, the company’s heavy reliance on a single individual introduces significant long-term risk.

The family behind the façade

All five of Arnault’s children are now deeply embedded in the group’s leadership structure.

Delphine Arnault, 50, serves as CEO of Christian Dior and is widely seen as a leading candidate.

Antoine Arnault, 47, oversees communications, image, and sustainability, and chairs Loro Piana.

The younger siblings—Alexandre, 33, Frédéric, 30, and Jean, 26—hold key roles at Tiffany & Co, TAG Heuer, and the watches division, respectively.

Each child holds a senior position, and four of them sit on LVMH’s board. But despite their prominence, Arnault has offered no public indication of who will eventually take over.

The family’s involvement gives the appearance of a tightly managed succession-in-training, yet no formal plan has been communicated.

“The market has long priced in the ‘Arnault premium,’” said a Paris-based luxury analyst.

“But that also means there’s enormous key-man risk. Investors want to know what LVMH looks like in a post-Arnault world.”

Opaque planning fuels uncertainty

Some shareholders have begun to question the group’s lack of transparency.

Two investors told Reuters Breakingviews that they are unaware of any formal emergency or long-term succession plan.

LVMH’s most recent governance report only briefly references a “review of succession planning,” offering no further detail.

In 2022, changes were made to LVMH’s controlling structure to ensure long-term family control.

Arnault restructured the family holding company, Agache SCA, stipulating that the five children would share equal ownership through Agache Commandité.

The shares cannot be sold or transferred for 30 years, nor can they pass outside the family or their direct descendants.

This arrangement effectively guarantees that LVMH will remain under family control for the foreseeable future, but it does not answer the central question of who will lead.

Key decisions in Agache now require unanimous agreement from all five siblings—a setup that could prove cumbersome or fractious in time.

Lessons from luxury rivals

LVMH’s opaque approach to succession contrasts with other family-led luxury firms.

François Pinault, founder of rival group Kering, passed his holding company to his three children in 2001.

In 2005, his son François-Henri Pinault formally took charge as CEO at age 42, providing clear continuity for investors and the business alike.

By comparison, LVMH has opted for incremental changes that extend Bernard Arnault’s grip on the company without offering the market a clear view of what comes next.

“Succession isn’t just about naming a CEO,” said Irina Curbelo, co-founder of Percheron Advisory. “It’s about preserving the essence of the brand empire, and ensuring that family governance doesn’t turn into a bottleneck.”

No imminent change, but longer-term risks remain

Despite growing concerns, few doubt Arnault’s ability to continue leading LVMH in the short term.

He remains mentally sharp, fully engaged, and evidently trusted by the board and shareholders.

But with the latest age-limit amendment pushing any handover potentially another decade away, governance questions are unlikely to fade.

As the luxury industry becomes more competitive and globally complex, the stakes of an unclear succession only grow.

The question facing LVMH now is not just who will succeed Bernard Arnault, but when, how, and whether the group will be prepared when the moment inevitably arrives.

The post As LVMH extends Arnault’s reign, succession concerns still linger: here’s why investors worry appeared first on Invezz

President Donald Trump said Thursday that China has been reaching out ‘a lot’ ever since he nearly tripled U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports, and he suggested to reporters that the two nations could reach a deal in as soon as three to four weeks. 

During a gaggle with reporters after signing executive orders related to deregulating the seafood industry, Trump was asked about his ongoing negotiations with Chinese officials and, in particular, whether he has yet spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping about the ongoing trade battle.

‘They have reached out a number of times,’ Trump said, referring to high-level Chinese officials. When asked how frequently they’ve been in touch since last week – after Trump tripled his Chinese tariff increase from 54% to 145% – the president responded, ‘A lot.’

His comments come amid media reports that Trump has indicated he is unwilling to reach out to China first amid the ongoing trade war. According to sources close to Trump, U.S. officials have been urging the Chinese to initiate a call between Xi and Trump, but so far they have not.    

When asked if he had spoken to Xi yet, Trump would not confirm one way or the other.

‘I’ve never said whether or not [it’s] happened, but I have a very good relationship with President Xi, and I think it’s going to continue. They have reached out a number of times,’ Trump told reporters. 

The press then quickly pounced on Trump’s response, requesting the president to clarify if he was referring to Xi or other Chinese officials when he said, ‘They have reached out a number of times.’

‘I view it very similar,’ Trump responded. ‘It would be top levels of China, and if you knew [Xi], you would know that if they reached out, he knew exactly – he knew everything about it. He runs it very tight, very strong, very smart. And, yeah, we’re talking to China.’

The president said that while some have urged him to fast-track his negotiations, he believes there is ‘plenty’ of time left to make a deal with China and expects it will eventually come to fruition.

 

‘I would think over the next three or four weeks, I think maybe the whole thing could be concluded,’ Trump told reporters Thursday. 

The president added that if a deal cannot be reached, things will ‘be fine.’

‘At a certain point, if we don’t make a deal, we’ll just set a limit. We’ll set a tariff. We’ll set some parameters, and we’ll say, ‘Come in and shop,” Trump said. ‘They always have a right not to do it, so they can say, ‘Well, we don’t want it, so we’re not going to shop there, we’re not going to shop in the store of America.’ We have something that nobody else has, and that’s the American consumer.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A federal judge in Baltimore issued a preliminary injunction Thursday restricting the Department of Government Efficiency’s access to Social Security data. 

U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, an Obama appointee, said DOGE-affiliated staffers must purge any of the non-anonymized Social Security data that they have received since Jan. 20. They are also barred from making any changes to the computer code or software used by the Social Security Administration, must remove any software or code they might have already installed, and are forbidden from disclosing any of that code to others.

The injunction does allow DOGE staffers to access data that’s been redacted or stripped of anything personally identifiable, if they undergo training and background checks. 

‘The objective to address fraud, waste, mismanagement, and bloat is laudable, and one that the American public presumably applauds and supports,’ Hollander wrote in the ruling issued late Thursday night. ‘Indeed, the taxpayers have every right to expect their government to make sure that their hard earned money is not squandered.’

But that’s not the issue, Hollander said — the issue is with how DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, wants to do the work.

‘For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records. This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation,’ the judge wrote.

The case was brought by a group of labor unions and retirees who allege DOGE’s recent actions violate privacy laws and present massive information security risks. 

During a federal court hearing Tuesday in Baltimore, Hollander repeatedly asked the government’s attorneys why DOGE needs ‘seemingly unfettered access’ to the agency’s troves of sensitive personal information to uncover Social Security fraud.

‘What is it we’re doing that needs all of that information?’ Hollander said, questioning whether most of the data could be anonymized.

Attorneys for the Trump administration said changing the process would slow down their efforts.

‘While anonymization is possible, it is extremely burdensome,’ Justice Department attorney Bradley Humphreys told the court. He argued the DOGE access doesn’t deviate significantly from normal practices inside the agency, where employees and auditors are routinely allowed to search its databases.

But attorneys for the plaintiffs called it ‘a sea change’ in terms of how the agency handles sensitive information.

Skye Perryman, President and CEO of the legal services group Democracy Forward, which is behind the lawsuit, said the ruling has brought ‘significant relief for the millions of people who depend on the Social Security Administration to safeguard their most personal and sensitive information.’ 

Hollander made clear that her order didn’t apply to SSA workers who aren’t affiliated with DOGE, so they can still access any data they use in the course of ordinary work. But DOGE staffers who want access to the anonymized data must first undergo the typical training and background checks required of other Social Security Administration staffers, she said.

Hollander, 75, is the latest judge to consider a DOGE-related case. Many of her inquiries Tuesday focused on whether the Social Security case differs significantly from another Maryland case challenging DOGE’s access to data at three other agencies: the Education Department, the Treasury Department and the Office of Personnel Management. In that case, an appeals court recently blocked a preliminary injunction and cleared the way for DOGE to once again access people’s private data.

Hollander’s injunction could also be appealed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the Trump administration in other cases, including allowing DOGE access to the U.S. Agency for International Development and letting executive orders against diversity, equity and inclusion move forward.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Why are President Donald Trump and his national security team focused on Panama and Greenland? 

Donald Trump understands that modern threats – China’s predatory mercantilism and its massive military buildup, including the ability to destroy our reconnaissance satellites in orbit – requires an urgent reinvigoration of the 200-year-old Monroe Doctrine.

The Monroe Doctrine, America’s fundamental national security imperative, seeks to exclude outside powers from the Western Hemisphere. It is key to protecting the U.S. and our neighbors from China’s malicious designs. 

Trump understands that Greenland and Panama aren’t merely the key in any potential conflict with China, they are key to deterring China from conflict in the first place.

During WWII and the Cold War, prior to the advent of near-global real-time overhead satellite coverage, America maintained forward bases in a string from Hawaii to Alaska to Canada to Greenland to Puerto Rico to Panama. These bases hosted naval assets, electronic listening posts, early warning radars and airfields for patrol aircraft. 

The forward presence not only protected the American heartland, but it also served to guard the sea lanes needed for trade and to support our allies in Europe and Asia. 

Trump recognizes the shifting geopolitical landscape, with China’s rise posing a new challenge to U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere – and a secure homeland. In 2019, he expressed interest in purchasing Greenland from Denmark, citing its vast natural resources and strategic Arctic location. This is more relevant than ever, with the Northwest Passage becoming increasingly accessible due in part to Russia and China’s rapidly growing heavy icebreaker fleet. 

Similarly, Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are taking significant steps to secure the Panama Canal – with full cooperation from the Panamanian government. 

The Panama Canal is a vital artery for global trade and military logistics. But in 1997, just before Britain handed over Hong Kong to China, Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong-based shipping and logistics firm, bought the concession that privatized operations of the Panama Canal. 

When, in 2020, China ended the ‘one country, two systems’ model with Hong Kong, it meant for all intents and purposes that Hutchison Whampoa (now known as CK Hutchison) must do the Chinese Communist Party’s bidding. This greatly increases the risk to the Panama Canal – and it’s why the firm, reacting to pressure from Panama and the U.S., agreed to sell its global assets to an American holding company. That proposed sale was quickly threatened by the Chinese Communist Party, which instituted an ‘antitrust review.’

Just to be sure, the Trump White House directed the U.S. military to develop options for increasing troop presence in Panama to ensure ‘unfettered’ access to the canal, reflecting concerns about ongoing Chinese threats to the canal’s operation. 

Strategic Importance in a Conflict with China

The strategic importance of Greenland and Panama is heightened in the context of a potential conflict with China, particularly if America’s extensive network of reconnaissance and nuclear missile early warning satellites are destroyed by China in its opening attack. Modern warfare relies heavily on satellite technology for communication, navigation and intelligence gathering. 

If these assets are compromised, the U.S. would need to rely on traditional methods, such as long-range patrol aircraft and naval vessels, operating from forward bases. Greenland, with its airfields and ports, provides an ideal location for staging operations in the Arctic, deploying assets like the P-8 Poseidon to monitor submarine activity and secure shipping routes. 

The Panama Canal, meanwhile, ensures rapid deployment of naval forces between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, maintaining flexibility in military operations.

This focus on forward bases aligns with the need to defend the homeland and secure vital shipping lanes critical for global trade and military logistics despite enemy efforts. China’s growing naval capabilities, including advanced submarines and aircraft carriers, necessitate robust strategic positioning to deter potential threats and maintain maritime routes.

Historical Parallels: WWII and Cold War Operations

Historical precedents underscore the importance of forward bases in national defense. During WWII, the U.S. established the Caribbean Defense Command – forerunner to today’s U.S. Southern Command – to protect the Panama Canal and monitor German U-boat activity in the Atlantic. Bases in Trinidad, Brazil and Puerto Rico were instrumental in anti-submarine warfare, ensuring the flow of supplies to Europe and preventing Axis powers from gaining a foothold in the Americas. 

During the Cold War, the U.S. maintained a significant military presence in Latin America to counter Soviet influence. Today, in Cuba, what’s old is new again, as China has occupied and upgraded the massive Cold War-era Soviet eavesdropping base at Lourdes. From that perch, China can listen to every cellphone conversation in the American Southeast. 

The Broader Challenge

Beyond Greenland and Panama, China’s activities in the Western Hemisphere, such as its Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure projects – some serving as replenishment ports for its navy – pose a direct challenge to U.S. interests and regional security. Along with the malevolent presence of Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, and hostile regimes such as Maduro’s Venezuela, Trump’s team has a big task to clean up decades of neglect in the Western Hemisphere. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is probing ‘a major pediatric teaching hospital’ over the alleged firing of a nurse who sought a religious exemption to avoid administering puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children.

‘The Department will robustly enforce federal laws protecting these courageous whistleblowers, including laws that protect healthcare professionals from being forced to violate their religious beliefs or moral convictions,’ Acting HHS OCR Director Anthony Archeval said in a statement.

While HHS has not confirmed the hospital’s identity, it is believed to be Texas Children’s Hospital (TCH) — the largest children’s hospital in the U.S. — as the investigation follows whistleblower nurse Vanessa Sivadge’s testimony on Capitol Hill. Sivadge first came forward publicly in June 2024 and was later fired in August 2024.

Sivadge told lawmakers that she had witnessed ‘disturbing trends and concerning practices’ relating to the treatment of children diagnosed with gender dysphoria. She also said that she ‘observed the powerful and irreversible effects’ of treatments that patients were told were ‘lifesaving.’ 

‘I witnessed firsthand how doctors emotionally blackmailed parents by telling them that if they did not affirm their child’s false identity, their child would harm themselves. In particular, I was saddened to see young girls suffering from profound mental health struggles like depression and anxiety, many of whom had also suffered sexual abuse or trauma, persuaded by doctors at Texas Children’s that a hormone would resolve their gender confusion,’ Sivadge told lawmakers.

Dr. Eithan Haim, who was accused of violating HIPAA while in surgical training at Baylor College of Medicine, which is affiliated with TCH, also blew the whistle on the hospital for ‘lying about the existence of its transgender program.’ The Biden DOJ brought charges against Haim for the alleged HIPAA violations, but the case was ultimately dropped under the Trump administration.

Haim claimed the hospital was engaging in fraudulent billing practices to hide the fact that it was carrying out transgender procedures on minors even though it was against Texas law. This included recording mastectomies as ‘breast reduction’ surgeries and billing testosterone prescribed to a teen girl under a male diagnosis.

In her testimony, Sivadge said that federal agents came to her home when investigating the whistleblower, now known to be Haim, because of her objections to transgender medicine. She described the interaction as intimidating and said that one of the special agents ‘effectively asked me to compromise my Christian beliefs and made veiled threats regarding my career and safety if I didn’t comply with their demands.’

Sivadge’s attorney filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on April 11, alleging that she ‘observed TCH doctors, after very little deliberation or critical analysis, embarking children on dangerous and often irreversible courses of ‘gender-affirming’ treatment.’

According to the complaint, TCH ‘temporarily’ paused ‘gender-affirming services’ for minors after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in February 2022 that such treatments could constitute child abuse. The treatments were banned in the state following the passage of a bill in May 2023, which went into effect in September 2023. According to Sivadge’s attorney, she asked to be transferred back to cardiology in May 2024, citing her religious beliefs. 

Sivadge publicly blew the whistle on TCH on June 18, 2024, and was asked not to report to work the next day, according to the complaint. Just days later, on June 21, she was placed on administrative leave and was officially terminated in August 2024. TCH alleged that the termination of her employment was due to improper access to medical records.

On Jan. 28, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the ‘Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation’ order, which prevents minors from undergoing transgender treatments. In accordance with this order, HHS has issued guidelines for prospective whistleblowers.

Fox News has reached out to TCH and HHS for comment.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Target CEO Brian Cornell will meet with the Rev. Al Sharpton this week in New York as the retailer faces calls for a boycott and a slowdown in foot traffic that began after it walked back key diversity, equity and inclusion programs, the civil rights leader told CNBC Wednesday.

The meeting, which Target asked for, comes after some civil rights groups urged consumers not to shop at Target in response to the retailer’s decision to cut back on DEI. While Sharpton has not yet called for a boycott of Target, he has supported efforts from others to stop shopping at the retailer’s stores.

“You can’t have an election come and all of a sudden, change your old positions,” said Sharpton. “If an election determines your commitment to fairness then fine, you have a right to withdraw from us, but then we have a right to withdraw from you.”

The civil rights leader said he would consider calling for a Target boycott if the company doesn’t confirm its commitment to the Black community and pledge to work with and invest in Black-owned businesses.

“I said, ‘If [Cornell] wants to have a candid meeting, we’ll meet,’” Sharpton said of the phone call Target made to his office. “I want to first hear what he has to say.”

A Target spokesman confirmed to CNBC that the company reached out to Sharpton for a meeting and that Cornell will talk to him in New York this week. The company declined further comment.

In January, Target said it would end its three-year DEI goals, no longer share company reports with external diversity-focused groups like the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equity Index and end specific efforts to get more products from Black- and minority-owned businesses on its shelves. 

Just days after the announcement, foot traffic at Target stores started to slow down. Since the week of Jan. 27, Target’s foot traffic has declined for 10 straight weeks compared to the year-ago period, according to Placer.ai, an analytics firm that uses anonymized data from mobile devices to estimate overall visits to locations. Target traffic had been up weekly year over year before the week of Jan. 27.

The metric, which tallies visits to brick-and-mortar locations, does not capture sales in stores or online, but can indicate which retailers are drawing steadier business. While Target has been struggling to grow its sales for months as shoppers watch their spending, the stretch of declining visits came as some civil rights groups and social media users criticized the DEI decision and urged shoppers to spend their money elsewhere.

Target declined to comment on the figures, saying it doesn’t discuss third-party data.

At the convention earlier this month for his civil rights organization, the National Action Network, Sharpton said the group would call for a boycott of PepsiCo if the company didn’t agree to meet with the organization within 21 days. In February, the food and beverage company behind brands like Doritos and Mountain Dew announced it would end its DEI workforce representation goals and transition its chief DEI officer role into another position, among other changes.

This week, leaders from Pepsi met with Sharpton and his team. He did not confirm whether Pepsi made any commitments, but did say it was encouraging that Pepsi’s CEO Ramon Laguarta attended. He added that the two will continue their discussions.

Sharpton’s meetings with companies including PepsiCo and Target — and his openness to boycotts — mark one of the first meaningful efforts to push back against the war conservative activists like Robby Starbuck have waged on DEI. Starbuck, a movie director-turned-activist, has urged companies to drop DEI policies in part by sharing what he considers unflattering information about their initiatives with his social media followers. He has successfully pressured a wide range of corporate giants to rethink their programs.

With its decision to roll back DEI efforts, the cheap chic retailer Target joined Walmart, McDonald’s, Tractor Supply and a slew of others that scrapped at least some DEI initiatives as they grew concerned that the programs could alienate some customers or land them in the crosshairs of President Donald Trump, who has vowed to end every DEI program across the federal government.

Target’s decision contrasted with Costco, which shook off pressure from conservative activists to maintain its DEI programs. Shareholders of the membership-based wholesale club soundly rejected a proposal in late January that requested a report on the risks of DEI initiatives.

NAN has called for so-called “buy-cotts” at Costco, and has brought people to stores in Tennessee, New York and New Jersey. It gave them gift cards to shop with at the warehouse club.

In the month of March, Target’s store traffic declined 6.5%, while the metric rose 7.5% year over year at Costco, Placer.ai data show.

Target’s challenges run deeper than DEI backlash, and resistance to its policy change only added to its issues. The discounter’s annual revenue has been roughly flat for four years in a row as it’s struggled to drive consistent sales gains.

Margins have been under pressure, as consumers buy more of groceries and necessities and less of more profitable categories like home goods and clothing. And the company has pinned its problems on a laundry list of problems in recent years, including having the wrong inventory; losing money from theft, damaged goods and other types of inventory losses; backlash to its collection for Pride Month and pricier costs from rushing shipments.

Competition has grown fiercer too, as big-box rival Walmart has remodeled stores, launched new private brands and attracted more high-income shoppers.

In February, Target gave weak guidance for the first quarter and said it expected sales to grow 1% for the full year. 

In his meeting with Cornell, Sharpton said he will ask for Target to follow through on pledges it made after police killed George Floyd in the company’s hometown of Minneapolis.

“You made commitments based on the George Floyd movement … what changed?” said Sharpton. “Are you trying to say … everything’s fine now, because the election changed? That’s insulting to us.”

In the wake of Floyd’s murder, Cornell said the event moved him.

“That could have been one of my Target team members,” Cornell said in 2021 at an event hosted by the Economic Club of Chicago, recounting his thoughts as he watched the video of Floyd taking his final breaths.

At the time, he said it motivated him to step up Target’s efforts to fight racial inequities.

“We have to be the role models that drive change and our voice is important,” he said at the event. “We’ve got to make sure that we represent our company principles, our values, our company purpose on the issues that are important to our teams.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

French luxury group Hermès will raise its U.S. prices from the start of May in order to offset the impact of President Donald Trump’s tariffs, the company’s finance chief said Thursday.

The company — which earlier this week overtook rival LVMH as the world’s biggest luxury firm by market capitalization — is best-known for its Birkin and Kelly handbags, along with colorful scarves retailing for hundreds of dollars. Other products include jewelry, watches, shoes, perfume and make-up.

“The price increase that we’re going to implement will be just for the U.S. since it’s aimed at offsetting the tariffs that only apply to the American market, so there won’t be price increases in the other regions,” Eric du Halgouët, Hermès’ executive vice president for finance, said during an analyst call that followed the firm’s first-quarter results release on Thursday.

Hermès said prices will rise from May 1 and aim to “fully offset” the impact of the universal 10% tariff imposed by the White House in early April, rather than the 20% duties the European Union may face unless it can negotiate a new deal during Trump’s 90-day reprieve.

U.S. consumers are expected to contend with higher prices on a host of items, ranging from electronics and clothes to cars and houses, as the impact of tariffs bites.

In its first-quarter results, Hermès reported 11% sales growth in the Americas, which accounted for nearly 17% of its sales revenue in the first three months of the year.

First-quarter revenue growth came in at 7% on a constant currency basis overall, just shy of consensus expectations of an 8% to 9% increase, Deutsche Bank analysts said in a note. It also represented a slowdown from 17.6% growth in the fourth quarter of 2024.

The Deutsche Bank analysts said that the results were nonetheless “robust,” with weakness driven by watches and perfume sales, while Citi described them as “a respectable outcome.”

Hermès shares dipped 1.3% in Thursday morning deals, taking its value to 244.5 billion euros ($278.2 billion) — just shy of LVMH’s 245.7 billion euros — according to a CNBC calculation of LSEG data.

LVMH, controlled by France’s billionaire Arnault family, unsuccesfully tried to acquire Hermès a decade ago. Despite drawing level in market cap, Hermès’ annual revenue is less than a fifth that of sprawling LVMH, which owns luxury brands Louis Vuitton and Dior, alcohol business Moët Hennessy, U.S. jeweler Tiffany and beauty chain Sephora.

LVMH on Tuesday reported an unexpected decline in first quarter sales, flagging a fall in its dominant fashion and leather goods division.

Analysts have predicted the luxury sector will be less impacted by tariffs than other retailers due to their ability to pass on increased import costs to a high-spending clientele. However, they would encounter major headwinds from a broad pullback in consumer spending as a result of weaker global economic growth or recessionary fears.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS