Futures tied to the Dow Jones industrial average rose 128 points, or 0.25%. S&P 500 futures were up 0.38%, and Nasdaq futures added 0.35%.

But energy markets were still a little spooked as the mere threat of continued fighting around the Strait of Hormuz threatens the nascent recovery in ship traffic through the vital chokepoint.

U.S. oil futures climbed 0.33% to $69.46 a barrel, while Brent crude was flat at 1.1% to $71.97.

Sources told Axios that both sides agreed to halt attacks on each other and meet in Qatar on Tuesday to resolve differences over the Strait of Hormuz.

Earlier on Sunday, Iran launched new attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, while threatening a “complete halt” to peace talks. It continuined a tit-for-tat cycle of retaliation after U.S. airstrikes punished the regime for targeting commercial ships with drones.

The renewed skirmishes came as Iran seeks to shut down an alternate route through the strait that’s protected by the U.S. and bypasses a Tehran-backed channel meant to normalize its control over the narrow waterway.

President Donald Trump accused Iran of violating the two-week-old ceasefire deal and lobbed more of his signature apocalyptic threats, though he has also signaled reluctance to restart all-out war.

“There may come a point when we are no longer able to be reasonable, and will be forced to militarily complete the job that we very successfully started,” he wrote on Truth Social. “If that happens, the Islamic Republic of Iran will no longer exist!”

For now, the U.S. Navy appears to be making of a point of showing that the alternate route is still safe, as Gulf traffic data Sunday revealed a convoy of tankers heading through the strait under escort with their transponders turned on.

But Iran observers noted the regime was forcing the U.S. into an escalation trap over the Strait of Hormuz that could lead to more war.

“For the US, the fact that the Oman route might be blocked presents it with a big ultimatum: either the US escalates or gives IRGC control of the Strait of Hormuz. Logic says there’s no way that would happen, so escalation will continue,” HFI Research posted on X.

For its part, Tehran isn’t budging from its position that control over the strait rests with Iran. Earlier this month, it created the Persian Gulf Strait Authority and suggested ships would have to pay fees to cross Hormuz.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claimed on Sunday that the memorandum of understanding the U.S. and Iran signed gives the regime the exclusive right to manage traffic.

“The management and full restoration of maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz is Iran’s responsibility,” he said, according to state media. “No other country or entity has any responsibility or authority in this matter.”

Meanwhile, investors are looking for rebound in a holiday-shortened week after tech stocks led a deep selloff last week.

With the U.S. observing Independence Day on Friday July 3, the Labor Department’s monthly jobs report will come on Thursday, a day earlier than usual.

Wall Street expects June payrolls to increase by 118,000, down from May’s gain of 172,000, and for the unemployment rate to remain steady at 4.3%.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

The two groups are expected to unveil the package when their leaders present the plans at the presidential office on Monday, the newspaper said without saying where it obtained the information.

Samsung Electronics Co. and SK Hynix Inc. are each expected to build four to five semiconductor fabs in the Gwangju area, the newspaper said. Samsung is also expected to build chip packaging plants in South Chungcheong province while SK Hynix will expand NAND plants in North Chungcheong province, the newspaper added. 

President Lee will introduce the “Three Mega Projects for the Great Leap Forward” initiative at a 2 p.m. event, South Korea’s presidential office said on Sunday. Presidential spokesperson Kang Yu-jung said officials from the industry, science, climate and land ministries will outline the government’s policy measures before Samsung and SK present their investment plans.

Read more: S. Korea to Unveil ‘Three Mega Projects’ With Samsung, SK Group

The latest report pointed to a combined investment commitment of as much as 2,000 trillion won over 10 years, exceeding an earlier Maeil Business Newspaper report that said Samsung alone was expected to announce more than 1,000 trillion won ($646 billion) in spending.

Presidential policy chief Kim Yong-beom said in a YouTube interview Friday that “very unusual” figures would be unveiled on June 29, when Lee hosts the meeting with major companies. The plans are expected to focus on sectors including semiconductors, AI data centers and physical AI.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

After a near-record debut for an animated movie, “Toy Story 5” remained No. 1 at the box office with $70 million in domestic ticket sales and another $89.1 million overseas, according to studio estimates Sunday. The Walt Disney Co. release has in two weeks quickly amassed $585 million globally, making it one of the biggest hits of the year.

“Supergirl,” however, failed to lift off. It opened with $38 million in U.S. and Canadian theaters. It added $30 million in overseas markets.

Craig Gillespie’s superhero spinoff is the second big-screen release from James Gunn and Peter Safran, who were tapped to lead DC Studios in late 2022. Their first release, 2025’s “Superman,” grossed $618 million worldwide, a strong-enough start for Gunn and Safran.

But “Supergirl” flopped with both critics and moviegoers. Reportedly trimmed significantly after test screenings, Gillespie’s film landed poor reviews (56% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) and a “B-” CinemaScore from audiences.

The poor opening weekend for “Supergirl” puts it behind the disappointing debuts of DC busts like “The Flash” ($55 million in 2023) and “The Green Lantern” ($53 million in 2011), and only barely ahead of “Joker: Folie à Deux” ($37.7 million in 2024).

David A. Gross, who runs the movie consulting firm FranchiseRe, noted superhero movies no longer drive the box office like they did pre-pandemic. There are fewer yearly releases, and the box office in the genre is down approximately $3.5 billion annually from its highs in 2017-2019.

After huge successes like “Wonder Woman” ($822 million in 2017) and “Captain Marvel” ($1.13 billion in 2019), female-fronted superhero movies have also taken a downturn.

“You’ll hear general explanations like ‘the audience lost interest.’ Yes, they did,” said Gross. “But no one has been able to explain why it happened so suddenly and so completely. Why female superheroes in particular, after their sensational starts? We don’t understand it either.”

The stumble for “Supergirl,” which cost $170 million to make, comes as Warner Bros. Discovery, the film studio’s parent company, is preparing to be acquired by Paramount Skydance. David Ellison, Paramount chief executive, recently met with Gunn and Safran.

The next DC release is “Clayface,” a body horror take on the DC character, to be released in October. Gunn’s “Superman” follow-up, “Man of Tomorrow,” is currently in production. It’s dated for July 2027.

Gunn, who serves as a producer on “Supergirl,” handed directing duties to Gillespie, the filmmaker of “I, Tonya” and “Cruella.” Milly Alcock, who briefly appeared in “Superman,” stars as Supergirl, or Lara Zor-El, a younger cousin to Superman who’s more of a party girl than a world saver.

Paramount Pictures’ “Jackass: Best and Last” was the weekend’s other new wide release. The latest stunt compilation from Johnny Knoxville and company opened with a modest $8.4 million from 2,855 North American theaters. While that’s a good result for a movie that cost just $10 million to make, the 2022 installment, “Jackass Forever,” debuted with $23 million before ultimately grossing $80 million worldwide.

Olivia Wilde’s dinner party comedy “The Invite” notched one of the best per-screen averages of the year. Opening on seven screens in New York and Los Angeles, it debuted with $379,104, good for a per-screen average of $54,158.

Wilde’s third film as director stars herself, Seth Rogen, Penélope Cruz and Edward Norton as a pair of San Francisco couples who meet for an impromptu night together. A24 acquired the film after its buzzy Sundance Film Festival premiere. The indie distributor is hoping “The Invite,” which will expand next week and go nationwide on July 10, can revive the largely dormant summer comedy.

The micro-budget horror phenomenon “Obsession” continued to hold unusually strong. It took third place on the weekend with $9.8 million in its seventh weekend of release. Curry Barker’s film, made for less than $1 million, has now collected $233.9 million domestically for Focus Features, plus $108.9 million internationally.

Such legs, however, haven’t materialized for Steven Spielberg’s sci-fi thriller “Disclosure Day.” In the Universal Pictures’ third weekend of release, it slipped to fifth place with $8.1 million in domestic theaters. Spielberg’s UFO tale has grossed $193.7 million globally in three weeks.

Top 10 movies by domestic box office

With final domestic figures being released Monday, this list factors in the estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at U.S. and Canadian theaters, according to Rentrak:

1. “Toy Story 5,” $70 million.

2. “Supergirl,” $38 million.

3. “Obsession,” $9.8 million.

4. “Jackass: Best and Last,” $8.4 million.

5. “Disclosure Day,” $8.1 million.

6. “Backrooms,” $4.3 million.

7. “Scary Movie,” $3 million.

8. “Masters of the Universe,” $2.2 million.

9. “Bleach: Thousand-Year Blood War – The Calamity,” $2 million.

10. “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” $1.6 million.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

“Those numbers are too high,” Barkin said Sunday in an interview with Bloomberg on the sidelines of the Aspen Ideas Festival in Aspen, Colorado.

A report released Thursday showed the personal consumption expenditures index — the Fed’s preferred metric — rose 4.1% in the year through May, the most since April 2023. While the war in Iran drove up the price of oil and other goods, the increase in price pressures has been more widespread. 

“It’s hard to have confidence that you’re headed back to 2% without any more influence from the fed funds rate or the labor market or some other feature that creates disinflation the other way,” Barkin added. 

The Richmond Fed chief was heartened by a rapid decline in gasoline prices in his district as the price of oil fell following a recent ceasefire agreement between the US and Iran. But he sees other forces contributing to inflation, including the build-out of artificial intelligence infrastructure. He said he’ll need to see how the economy evolves over the coming months to determine the right path for policy.

Fed officials left their benchmark federal funds rate unchanged at a meeting earlier this month. An increasing number of policymakers have warned the Fed may need to raise rates this year to reverse a pickup in inflation.

Some of Barkin’s colleagues have been particularly worried by rising prices for services, a part of the economy where inflation tends to be stickier. There’s also concern that after more than five years of inflation being above the Fed’s 2% target — and a topic of national conversation — consumer expectations for inflation could be affected, making the Fed’s job of returning price stability more difficult.

Read More: Kashkari Says Fed May Need Rate Hike Amid Broad Inflation

Price pressure from tariffs and the oil shock should now be waning, helping inflation cool, Barkin said. But at the same time, neither of those factors appeared to dent Americans’ spending, which remained strong over the past year. In an economy that’s driven by consumption, that could pose a headwind to bringing inflation all the way to the Fed’s 2% target.

Barkin also expressed concern about how businesses are behaving in the current inflationary environment.

“Businesses, when they set prices, take today’s inflation as a factor, and so I think there’s some persistence to inflation,” Barkin said. “I do worry about that, and that’s part of why I think being modestly restrictive is a reasonable place to be.”

He said companies are facing higher input costs, but they’re also seeing consumers resist higher prices, and that’s keeping a lid on how much of their higher costs firms can pass on. 

In a recent trip to western Virginia, company leaders told Barkin they’re still undecided about how much they’ll raise employee compensation next year. When gas prices rose, they thought they might have to do larger-than-usual raises, but now that those prices have moderated a bit, they may no longer need to, he said.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

The clock is ticking and getting louder. New projections this month showed that the Social Security trust fund will run out of money sooner than previously thought, meaning benefits would face a 22% cut by 2032 unless adjustments are enacted.

For years, revenue from payroll taxes has been insufficient to fund current benefits, and the trust fund covered the gap. But once it runs out, Social Security will only be able to distribute what comes in.

With the insolvency cliff just six years away, senators elected in this year’s midterm races will likely cast votes on a solution. Already, some proposals have emerged.

Raising more revenue

Sens. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., recently touted their plan to raise more revenue via payroll taxes in a New York Times op-ed.

Right now, annual pay up to $184,500 is subject to Social Security taxes. But above that threshold, any additional income avoids the tax.

But the senators pointed out that the vast majority of Americans make less than that, meaning Social Security taxes apply to 100% of their income while top earners only pay on a fraction of theirs.

“Why should a middle-class nurse pay a larger share of her paycheck than a wealthy corporate lawyer?” they wrote. “This is doubly unfair in an economy in which top earners’ wages, over time, have pulled far ahead of those of the average worker.”

Moreno and Warren proposed removing the tax cap, citing a report from the Peter G. Peterson Foundation that estimated such a change would generate about $3 trillion for the program over 10 years.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., and Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., have also offered a plan to raise more revenue. Rather than eliminate the cap, however, it would lift the payroll tax income threshold to $400,000 and also subject investment earnings to the levy.

Of course, attempts to get more revenue out of taxpayers would carry political risks, but voters have been open to squeezing the wealthy. Still, Congress has trended in the opposite direction, with last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act showering new tax cuts on workers and Social Security recipients.

Betting on stocks with massive debt

Another proposal by Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., would maintain current benefits and continue avoiding any pain for recipients or taxpayers by instead relying on the stock market—along with a mountain of fresh debt.

Their idea is for the federal government to borrow $1.5 trillion for an investment fund that would be loaded with stocks and other risk assets, which would accumulate gains for 75 years and offer better returns than Treasury bonds would.

At the same time, the Cassidy-Kaine plan would require another $25.1 trillion in borrowing to cover the gap between Social Security’s revenue and benefits during those 75 years. Returns from the investment fund would then pay down the $26.6 trillion in new total borrowing.

But Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research ran some simulations recently and found that the senators’ plan is unlikely to work.

While the historical average of stock returns could deliver more than enough revenue—assuming they continue that way over the next several decades—the market doesn’t go in a straight line.

“After incorporating the volatility in equity returns, however, the results show that the gamble does not always pay off,” authors Anqi Chen, Alicia Munnell, Jean-Pierre Aubry wrote in a report last month.

Cutting benefits

On the other side of the ledger is lowering what Social Security pays out. This could be an even dicier option politically as seniors are a reliable bloc of voters and wield outsized influence in elections.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has proposed a fix that targets couples receiving Social Security benefits of $100,000 or more. The plan, dubbed the “Six-Figure Limit,” would set a maximum of $100,000 for couples who are now receiving the top benefits. 

The lid would be adjusted for marital status and age of collection. For example, a single person wouldn’t receive more than $50,000, and a husband and wife retiring at 62 would see their payments capped at $70,000. 

During a Senate hearing in March, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., sounded sympathetic to the idea of capping benefits for those receiving the biggest payouts.

“There was a time in my life where that Social Security check really, really mattered,” he said, referring to Social Security survivor benefits after his parents passed away. “Now, there’s the time in my life where I could probably get by with less, and if that’s what it takes to save Social Security, count me in.” 

Trump accounts?

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, suggested last month that so-called Trump accounts for American children are part of an effort to revamp Social Security.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act allowed parents and other authorized individuals to open tax-advantaged savings accounts for any child under 18 with a Social Security number. 

During a panel discussion at the Milken Institute’s Global Summit, he said U.S. conservatives have been trying to mimic Australia’s superannuation program, which requires employers to pay into an employee’s investment fund to be accessed upon retirement as a way to reduce reliance on public pensions. 

Cruz added that as parents see their kids’ Trump accounts surge, they will become more open to changing how their own payroll taxes are spent.

“Wouldn’t you like to be able to keep a portion of your tax payments that you’re paying already, and instead of sending it to Uncle Sam, wouldn’t you like to have a Trump account just like your kid does?” he explained. “And my prediction is within five years, that is going to have a really compelling constituency because people will have seen it, and that is I think powerful and transformational.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Following the revolution in 1979, Iran became one of the most sanctioned nations on Earth over its nuclear program and support for regional militias. But the White House is now orchestrating a stunning reversal as part of a broader deal to open the Strait of Hormuz, lower global energy prices and end its unpopular war.

It’s hardly been a linear process. On Friday, President Donald Trump accused Iran of violating a fragile ceasefire and US Central Command launched fresh strikes on Iranian targets. There’s also continuing disagreements that could unravel the deal. 

Still, the pace and scale of the effort has stunned longtime sanctions observers. The US has already authorized the sale of Iranian oil and fuels and pledged to unlock billions in frozen funds. 

The 14-point memorandum of understanding signed by Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on June 17 includes the removal of all US sanctions on Iran on “an agreed upon schedule.” It also directs the Treasury Department to issue waivers for existing sanctions for 60 days as technical negotiations unfold.

The disorienting change will be tricky to implement in a way that appeals to risk-averse US financial institutions and other firms, according to former Treasury officials, sanctions attorneys and industry sources monitoring the process.

“You want to be 100% sure that you’re within compliance,” said Adam Smith, a former senior adviser to the director of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which oversees US sanctions. “One-off transactions that close within the 60 days could work but there may be challenges finding banks and other intermediaries willing to process transactions.” 

Amid the uncertainty, some Iran hawks are pushing the administration to shift from cash payments for Iranian oil sales to one requiring funds be placed in an escrow account where US officials can ensure it doesn’t go to proxy groups such as Hezbollah or Hamas, according to people familiar with the matter.

Read more: US Waives Iran Oil Sanctions as Peace Deal Brings Huge Shift

Trump has suggested publicly Iran’s money may go into escrow accounts controlled by the US, or that Tehran can only spend it on US farm goods — ideas that were not in the MOU and which Iran has mocked and rejected.

The idea of using the frozen funds to purchase US agricultural goods was first discussed about a month ago during an Oval Office meeting with Trump, Vice President JD Vance and other advisers on Iran, according to a person familiar with the matter. 

It was seen as a way to insulate the White House from the criticism Republicans leveled at the Obama administration for delivering Iran “pallets of cash,” the person said, adding they believed Iran had little choice but to accept such a mechanism.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Wednesday Iran will invoice its oil sales in US dollars. The comments marked a departure from Washington’s longstanding goal of locking Tehran out of the US financial system.

To make that work, the US would need to enlist some of the biggest US or US-linked banks, which have been hesitant to handle any transactions that risk violating sanctions, according to a former Treasury official.

The first step came Monday when Treasury issued General License X, which allowed oil sales to be conducted in “US dollar-denominated funds.” 

Read more: Bessent Says Iran Talks Feature Shift to Dollar Invoicing

In addition to the license, companies are likely to request clear guidance from Treasury — such as comfort letters or fact sheets that are regularly issued for thorny cases — in order to reassure compliance departments it’s okay to participate in these sorts of transactions, according to a person with knowledge of the assurances the oil industry is planning to seek.

Firms are looking for the kind of guidance issued for Venezuela after the US captured then-president Nicolas Maduro in January, the person said.

“Financial institutions are typically more risk adverse than are their clients when we see sanctions programs unwind,” said Michael Huneke, a trade and national security lawyer at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. “I would expect them to be very cautious here as well.”

Rushing in and risking a possible violation is not an appealing gamble. BNP Paribas paid a nearly $1 billion settlement to the US in 2014 for allegedly violating sanctions on Iran and Sudan. Other banks also paid steep fines.

Successive US administrations, along with Congress, have levied hundreds of sanctions on Iran over the years, creating layers of restrictions designed to be difficult to remove in one fell swoop.

A 2015 law called the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act mandates that Congress review and approve any nuclear agreement reached with Iran. It was passed following the signing of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which was implemented during the administration of then-President Barack Obama — an agreement Trump repeatedly assailed before pulling out of it in 2018.

Some hawkish US lawmakers believe the administration may circumvent the law by saying the Iran MOU is not a nuclear agreement, even though it deals squarely with the issue, according to a person familiar with the matter.

If that happens, they are likely to place additional pressure on banks and companies doing business with Iran, reminding them of their obligations under US law, the person said, requesting anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

The person pointed to a 2012 law called the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act that requires companies that list on US stock exchanges to report certain Iran-related activities to the Securities and Exchange Commission, potentially exposing themselves to future congressional scrutiny should the deal fall apart.

“General License X is unprecedented in the relief it offers Iran,” said Chris Kennedy, economic statecraft lead at Bloomberg Economics. However, relying on waivers rather than new legislation means that “over the longer term, the Trump administration will face an uphill battle delivering on its promise to permanently remove sanctions on Iran.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Ukraine has markedly stepped up its long-range attacks on Russian military industries and energy facilities in recent months, aiming to cut Moscow’s revenue for its invasion — now in its fifth year — and make Russians feel the consequences.

The campaign has choked Russian fuel supplies and military deliveries. According to Western analysts, it has also slowed Moscow’s efforts on the battlefield, heaping pressure on the Kremlin to come to the negotiating table.

“Our ‘long-range sanctions’ reached two oil refineries in Russia,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy wrote on the Telegram messaging app on Sunday. “Each (strike) means a reduction in the resources that fuel the Russian war machine, and another step toward peace.”

Debris from downed Ukrainian drones sparked a blaze at the refinery in Slavyansk-na-Kubani, a town in Russia’s Krasnodar region, east of occupied Crimea, according to Gov. Veniamin Kondratyev. The falling debris killed one person in Slavyansk and wounded another in a nearby village, local authorities said.

The Slavyansk site is one of southern Russia’s major refineries, processing close to 4 million tons of crude per year, according to its operator’s website. It is also a key source of petroleum products intended for export through Russia’s Black Sea ports, including fuel oil, naphtha and marine fuel.

Zelenskyy also claimed that a second Russian refinery, in the Yaroslavl region around 700 kilometers (435 miles) from the Ukrainian border, was hit during the nighttime strikes.

There were no immediate reports from Russian authorities about the strike on the Yaroslavl refinery. Local Gov. Mikhail Evraev reported on Sunday morning that some roads between Moscow and the region’s capital, Yaroslavl, were temporarily closed due to “an enemy attack by Ukrainian drones.”

Yaroslavl’s airport also briefly closed overnight, along with others in southern and western Russia, according to the country’s civil aviation agency.

Fuel shortages in Russia as Putin says plans will be ‘adjusted’

For months, Ukraine has been stepping up attacks on energy facilities deep inside Russia. Despite a raft of Western sanctions, Moscow remains among the world’s top exporters of oil and natural gas.

More recently, Ukraine has attempted to choke off fuel deliveries to Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula illegally annexed by Moscow in early 2014. Last weekend, Kremlin-installed officials in Crimea suspended gasoline sales to civilians, after Kyiv’s targeting of supply routes triggered the worst energy crisis there since the annexation.

Russian President Vladimir Putin commented on Sunday that the country was “going through a difficult period,” but insisted that Moscow would “honor all its social obligations” to citizens. He did not directly reference the Ukrainian strikes or fuel shortages.

“Naturally, we are adjusting certain plans in light of the current situation, but all strategically important (domestic) development programs will undoubtedly be implemented in full,” Putin said at a conference of his ruling United Russia party.

“We will continue to build housing and roads, create new, modern, high-paying jobs, and support domestic businesses,” he said. “We are going through a difficult period, but this has taught us a great deal, and allowed us to grasp the very essence of what it means to be a Russian citizen.”

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said that Moscow was actively reviewing fuel export agreements to avoid compromising domestic needs.

Fuel sales to civilians were also being restricted in Russia’s Irkutsk region in Siberia, thousands of kilometers (miles) from the Ukrainian border, local Gov. Igor Kobzev announced on Sunday.

Drivers will be barred from buying more than 50 liters (13 gallons) of fuel per vehicle per day at state-run Rosneft gas stations in the province, Kobzev said, adding that other gas stations may set lower limits.

At least two private gas station networks in Siberia — KreisNeft in the Irkutsk region and Elke Auto in the Tomsk region farther west — said earlier this month that they were limiting sales due to supply disruptions.

Drones, bombs and missiles target more regions

Also on Sunday, a Russian aerial bomb killed two people in Zaporizhzhia — a city in southern Ukraine — and injured 16 others, including two children, said regional administration head Ivan Fedorov.

In Russia’s border region of Belgorod, Ukrainian drone strikes killed one person and injured another earlier on Sunday, according to acting local Gov. Alexander Shuvayev.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said its forces shot down 213 Ukrainian drones during the night, including over Russia, occupied Crimea and the Black and Azov seas.

Meanwhile, Russia attacked Ukraine with 142 long-range strike drones and eight missiles overnight, according to the Ukrainian air force. Of those, 125 drones and seven missiles were struck down, the air force said.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

But this week’s latest exchange of fire over who controls the Strait of Hormuz threatens to snuff out the deal just weeks after it was signed.

On Sunday, Iran launched new attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, while threatening a “complete halt” to peace talks. It continuined a tit-for-tat cycle of retaliation after U.S. airstrikes punished the regime for targeting commercial ships with drones.

The renewed skirmishes come as Iran seeks to shut down an alternate route through the strait that’s protected by the U.S. and bypasses a Tehran-backed channel meant to normalize its control over the vital energy chokepoint.

Over the weekend, the alternate route, which hugs the Omani coast, was expanded to accommodate both inbound and outbound traffic. That further dilutes Iran’s hold over the strait—its top source of leverage.

President Donald Trump has called Iran’s actions a violation of the ceasefire and threatened devastating consequences. But he has also signaled reluctance to go back to war and hasn’t followed through on similar threats.

“Iran is choking Hormuz, forcing a brutal choice: escalate or surrender control,” University of Chicago political science professor Robert Pape posted on X. “Trump wants out, but Iran is forcing the ‘escalation trap.’ The collision course is set, and worse is yet to come.”

For now, the U.S. Navy appears to be making of a point of showing that the alternate route is still safe, as Gulf traffic data Sunday revealed a convoy of tankers heading through the strait under escort with their transponders turned on.

Other ships have likely switched off their transponders to quietly slip through the waterway undetected. But the mere threat of Iranian attacks could scare away enough ships to effectively shut down the strait.

Pape explained that Iran’s strategic logic is to force the strait to stay mostly closed and cut off oil flows again, requiring the U.S. to draw down its inventories. That would provide Iran more leverage as it tries to drive the U.S. military out of the region.

Commercial shipping companies are also caught in a trap. They could use the alternate route and risk Iranian attacks, or use the regime’s route and face Western sanctions against transacting with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Since many ships have no choice but to use the alternate channel and are transiting under the radar, Iran will have to keep escalating in order to completely halt flows, according to HFI Research.

“For the US, the fact that the Oman route might be blocked presents it with a big ultimatum: either the US escalates or gives IRGC control of the Strait of Hormuz. Logic says there’s no way that would happen, so escalation will continue,” it posted on X.

“Given that Trump has made it obvious that he does not want to escalate, I fear that the IRGC would just keep escalating until they gain control. This issue is far from over.”

University of Oslo professor Francesco Sassi pointed out that Iran’s latest attack on shipping specifically targeted a vital workaround that Gulf oil producers have employed: ship-to-ship transfers of oil at sea that bypass Hormuz.

That sets up an existential test for U.S. deterrence capability to protect regional allies like Bahrain and Kuwait, he wrote on X on Sunday, adding that a return to the pre-conflict status quo is officially dead.

“The war for the Strait of Hormuz has entered a highly dangerous new phase,” Sassi warned. “Following consecutive nights of US retaliatory strikes against IRGC targets, a shadow war is rapidly expanding to the outer rim of the Gulf.”

In fact, Iran has no intention of going back to business as usual in the strait, Noam Raydan, senior fellow at the Washington Institute think tank, wrote in a blog post on Friday.

That’s because returning to prewar conditions would deprive Iran of its strongest remaining source of leverage, she added.

“The question now is not how Iran will facilitate a return to a status quo that does not serve its objectives,” Raydan explained. “Rather, policymakers must prepare for the justifications Tehran will put forward to ensure that it plays a central role in the new maritime system, and the barriers it will put in place to impede any alternative systems.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

These were top of mind as Nike designed its uniform kits for this year’s World Cup, including for football powerhouses France and Brazil as well as the U.S. and Canada in their role as host nations.

In a tournament that has seen storm delays and temperatures hovering around 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32 Celsius) in some locations, the first step was to ensure players’ performance and comfort.

Phil McCartney, chief innovation, design and product officer for Nike, said the company worked with athletes, coaches and football federations to understand how uniforms affect the game.

“We also talk to fans — so what does it mean to wear a Uruguay jersey, what does it mean to represent France, what does it mean to play for Canada?” McCartney told The Associated Press. “We take that and we merge that with all the science and the innovation to make sure that we have beautiful designs.”

Adidas, which designed jerseys for defending champion Argentina, host nation Mexico and Colombia, also unveiled cooling gear for the tournament. Puma designed the kits for Portugal as well as Morocco and Senegal, the two finalists at the most recent African Cup of Nations.

While the three companies are behind most of this year’s kits, some teams are sporting uniforms designed by other apparel makers.

Testing facility features thermal chambers and robot mannequins

On a recent morning, McCartney spoke from the sports research lab at Nike’s headquarters just outside Portland, Oregon, where experimentation helped the kits come to life.

The indoor facility includes a 200-meter (219-yard) track, a small football pitch and a basketball court, with hundreds of motion-capture cameras placed throughout. Thermal chambers replicate the effects of heat and humidity on apparel donned by people or robot mannequins.

“We take motion-capture to see how they’re moving in the kit, how the kits are responding,” McCartney said. “We also use the thermal chambers that we have to test the kit’s breathability, to test wicking and moisture management.”

For the World Cup kits, Nike engineered a new fabric that it says is more breathable and made from fully recycled materials. The way the jerseys are knit, with mesh stitching in certain areas allowing more air flow, helps “get that thermal regulation that all the players have been asking for,” McCartney said.

Despite all the testing, the rollout of the kit was still a bit bumpy.

During matches earlier this year, bulges could be seen in the shoulder seams on jerseys for teams including France and Uruguay, the Guardian reported.

When asked by AP, Nike said it was able to identify the issue before the start of the World Cup, and worked with federations “to ensure kits show up as intended.”

Designs incorporate symbols of national pride

While a kit’s physical attributes are important for athletes, its appearance is just as significant for fans who sport the jerseys and want to feel connected to their team.

“We take inspiration from lots of different places, from the past, from art, from music, from culture, so anything that gets us connected to the country we really want to harness,” McCartney said.

France’s away kit, for example, is a light green akin to the Statue of Liberty, which France gifted to the U.S. in the late 19th century. The interior tag features the word “Liberté” inside a silhouette of the monument’s crown.

On the front of the jersey there’s a rooster — an emblem of the national team and the country itself — and two stars representing France’s two previous World Cup victories.

France’s home kit features a collar — as does Uruguay’s. The decision to use collars comes from the federations, Nike said, with France leaning into its history as a fashion capital and Uruguay looking to evoke a more classic football look. In previous decades, many uniforms included collars.

Key national symbols were also considered when designing kits for the U.S. and Canada. The home kit for the U.S. features horizontal red and white stripes reminiscent of a waving American flag, while Canada’s displays a prominent maple leaf.

“Especially in an event like the World Cup, we really play into national pride,” McCartney said.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

In the report released Friday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services suggested the 13% drop in enrollment from 22.1 million people in 2025 to 19.2 million this year could be attributed to a federal crackdown on fraudulent or “phantom” enrollment. But health analysts said it was more likely related to the Jan. 1 expiration of federal subsidies, which caused a surge in plan costs that resulted in many people being unable to pay their premiums.

“We know that real people lost their health insurance coverage,” said Cynthia Cox, a vice president and director of the ACA program at the healthcare research nonprofit KFF, citing survey findings on people who had left their plans. “This coverage loss happened at the same time millions of people faced double or even triple digit increases in their premium payments.”

The new data, compiled in April but showing coverage in February, represents the government’s first official look at how people’s inability to pay their first bills this year affected total enrollment. That is because the figures capture the marketplace after a nonpayment grace period expired.

A federal estimate in January showed that about 800,000 fewer people had signed up for ACA plans compared with the same time last year, marking the first time in the past four years that enrollment had been down from the previous year at that point in the shopping window.

Cox said KFF expects the total number of people in the government healthcare program to continue to decline throughout the year, potentially to a low of about 17.5 million. That would be a significant drop for the government’s flagship subsidized health insurance program for working-age people who do not qualify for Medicaid. In recent years, ACA plans have become a popular choice for gig workers, farmers, ranchers, hairstylists and others without health coverage through an employer.

The ACA subsidies that expired this year were at the center of a bitter fight in Congress last fall, with Democrats and some Republicans calling for their renewal. Sharp increases in health costs across ACA and other health insurance programs come as voters in the approaching November elections say affordability is among their top concerns.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com