Trump Playing His Own Corporate Game Behind The Acquisition Of Tiktok
The US President Donald Trump had run a campaign through which he had promised that he would run the economy just like his business. And, in the last four years, he has used his presidential power to enter into the corporate affairs and helped some companies in punishing others in line with his inclinations and instincts.
And, his latest target is the Chinese-owned social media app, TikTok. The app is recently under scrutiny for sending out American user data to the Chinese government. After threatening to ban the app from the United States, Trump tried to resolve this by saying that he would allow the app to run in the country if it was bought by an American owner.
On Monday, Trump said at the White House that TikTok would be banned in the US from September 15 unless Microsoft or any other ‘very American’ company bought it. He also mentioned that he had called Microsoft CEO to ‘go ahead’ with the purchase.
While arguing that the US should get some money in return for arranging the deal, Trump said, ‘A very substantial portion of that price is going to have to come into the Treasury of the United States, because we’re making it possible for this deal to happen.’
Trump had the right to ban TikTok giving the reasons for national security threats. However, the events that followed his announcement, was similar to the pattern that he had set early on his presidency that the biggest companies of the world would be at his whims.
An ex-economics adviser to President George W. Bush, Daniel Price commented on Trump’s reversal on TikTok: ‘just another example of the president’s undisciplined and impulsive decision-making style, so bewildering to friend and foe alike.’
Price added, ‘China presents serious security and economic challenges. But Trump’s erratic oscillation from adoration to demonization has certainly harmed U.S. business interests and actually diminished our ability to influence China or rally allies to assist in that effort.’
To all this, Trump said, ‘It’s a little bit like the landlord-tenant. Without a lease, the tenant has nothing. So they pay what’s called key money.’ He further added, ‘The United States should be reimbursed or should be paid a substantial amount of money because, without the United States, they don’t have anything.’
I am Darryl Broadhurst and i give investors an insight into the most recent news hitting the “Technology” sector in Wall Street. I have been an independent financial adviser for over 11 years in the city and in recent years turned my experience in finance and passion for journalism into a full time role. I perform analysis of Companies and publicizes valuable information for shareholder community.
