News related to
risk

Oil prices shot up by around 3% Thursday, driven by fresh US sanctions on Russia’s top oil producers and signs that major buyers are rethinking their purchases. Brent crude futures rose to approximately $64.53 per barrel, while US West Texas Intermediate climbed to about $60.39.

The sanctions, targeting Rosneft and Lukoil, mark a marked escalation by the US in response to Russia’s war-time exports. The measures were accompanied by a US warning that further action could follow unless Moscow commits to a cease-fire.

A key knock-on effect: Indian refiners, including state-owned entities, have begun reviewing trade documents to ensure they are not sourcing crude directly from the sanctioned suppliers. With India having become one of the largest importers of discounted Russian oil following Western withdrawals, the scale of this review is significant.

The sanctions underscore a new risk premium in the oil market. Unlike previous rounds of sanctions—which largely constrained financing, insurance and shipping without substantially affecting physical oil flows—this move seeks to directly curtail output from Russia’s two largest producers. Rosneft and Lukoil collectively account for a large share of Russian crude exports and fuel the Kremlin’s budget.

Analysts caution, however, that while the immediate reaction has been sharp, structural supply disruption is not guaranteed. Russia retains significant production capacity and a sophisticated network of intermediaries and a “shadow fleet” of tankers that have helped maintain exports despite earlier sanctions. Nevertheless, the combination of curtailed Russian supply and potential reductions in purchases by major refiners sets the scene for tighter market conditions.

In India, refiners such as Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation are scrutinising bills of lading and cargo origins to ensure compliance. India imported roughly 1.7 million barrels per day of Russian crude in the first nine months of the year, predominantly via intermediaries rather than directly from Rosneft or Lukoil. The new sanctions give insurers, banks and traders until 21 November to wind down transactions involving the sanctioned firms.

The US move also dovetails with other sanctions developments: the EU approved a 19th package targeting Russia’s energy exports, including a ban on Russian liquefied natural gas imports and restrictions on shadow-fleet tankers. The combined effect is to intensify pressure on Russia’s energy supply chains.

From a market-demand vantage point, the worry is whether alternative sources can swiftly fill any gap. OPEC+ producers have some spare capacity but not enough to instantly offset a major Russian shortfall. Meanwhile, the US inventory situation added fuel to the rally: US crude stockpiles declined unexpectedly, reinforcing supply-tightness perceptions.

Energy-market specialists say the key factors to watch include India’s crude-import strategy, China’s stock-building trends and how aggressive Russia’s response will be—whether via production cuts or leveraging its ties with China and others. One observer noted the sanctions could be “a knee-jerk reaction” rather than a structural pivot, given Russia’s past ability to maintain volumes despite sanctions.

Purchasers of Russian crude face a growing compliance burden. Firms must navigate insurance exclusions, shifting shipping patterns and potential secondary sanctions from the US. Some refiners may opt to ramp up purchases from the US Gulf and other non-Russian sources, which could reorient trade flows and raise Atlantic-coast pricing.

By Nantoo Banerjee     There is nothing to be particularly shocked about Tata Capital stocks declining 2.4 percent below the company’s IPO issue price of Rs. 326 per share a day after its debut in intraday trade on the Bombay Stock Exchange. Tata Capital, a Tata Sons subsidiary, made a flat debut on Dalal Street on […]

The article SEBI Fails To Prevent Aggressive IPO Pricing To Protect Investors appeared first on Latest India news, analysis and reports on Newspack by India Press Agency).

The government of British Columbia has introduced legislation that would permanently ban new crypto-mining operations from connecting to the provincial grid via BC Hydro, and impose formal limits on power access for AI and data-centre operators. The bill, known as the Energy Statutes Amendment Act, aims to steer the province’s clean-electricity supply toward mining, LNG and natural-resource industries viewed as higher-priority than the high-load crypto sector.

Under the new framework, BC Hydro will no longer approve fresh power-grid connections for crypto-mining facilities. The moratorium first established in 2022 is now set to become law. In parallel, beginning in late 2025 the province will introduce an allocation process for electricity demanded by AI and data-centres: only a capped amount of power will be available to those sectors, and they must compete for it under stricter criteria.

Government officials say the shift reflects a need to address surging grid-demand from emerging industries and to ensure that public electricity resources deliver broad economic and employment benefits. Premier David Eby said the move will help the province “move faster” on major transmission infrastructure and support industrial growth in a planned megaproject in the northwest. Energy and Climate Solutions Minister Adrian Dix added: “Our new allocation framework will prioritise vital growth in sectors like mining, natural gas and lowest-emission LNG, while ensuring our clean energy is directed to projects that deliver the greatest benefit to British Columbians.”

The backdrop encompasses the looming construction of the North Coast Transmission Line, a roughly $6 billion project designed to bring new clean-electricity capacity to the province’s sparsely-electrified northwest. That infrastructure is central to the government’s strategy of prioritising industrial connections over speculative, high-load users such as crypto-mining farms.

Industry analysts have mixed reactions. Supporters say the policy reflects sound planning in a jurisdiction dependent on hydroelectric power and facing increasing pressure from multiple large-scale electricity users. They note that the high energy-intensity of crypto-mining—with relatively modest job creation and economic multiplier effects—makes it a less compelling candidate compared with mining, LNG, hydrogen and industrial AI. On the other hand, critics warn that the framework gives the government wide discretionary power, potentially reducing transparency and favouring incumbents. As one Green-party MLA noted: “With no detail on this framework or the criteria for decision-making in Bill 31, we are concerned that the minister will be the one making these consequential determinations under the influence of friends or lobbyists.”

The government has indicated that data-centres and AI firms will still be eligible for power, but will face competition under the new mechanism: for example, BC Hydro reportedly will allocate only about 300 megawatts for AI and 100 megawatts for data-centre use every two years. Those thresholds will represent a major scaling down in open-access grid connections for such technology users and signal a shift away from first-come, first-served power allocations.

For prospective crypto-miners, the measure marks a turning point. Major mining projects that had anticipated low-cost Canadian hydro power will face altered calculus: either repurpose for non-crypto uses, or relocate to jurisdictions with more open grid access. This may induce capital flight or slow the growth of a nascent mining industry in the province. Conversely, proponents of the policy argue it will preserve affordability for households and existing industrial users by preventing unmanaged load growth.

The government’s timing is also notable. The bill not only formalises the ban on new crypto-mining connections, but synchronises with the broader policy shift to accelerate the NCTL and re-shape grid access rules. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2026 and extend into the early 2030s. For the grid, this means a period of constrained supply allocation while demand from resource-intensive projects expands.

Community and Indigenous groups have been emphasising that increased industrial electrification must occur in consultation and benefit-sharing with First Nations. The legislation allows for First Nations co-ownership of the transmission line and signals a broader reconciliation dimension to the infrastructure strategy.

In the crypto-community the reaction is sharp. Firms and investors note that BC’s abundant hydro power was a major attraction to set up mining operations at scale. With the ban in place, developers will need to evaluate stranded-asset risk or shift to other Canadian provinces or international venues. Some warn that innovation in GPU- and AI-mining overlap may find itself constrained as power availability tightens.

From a global lens, British Columbia joins a growing cohort of jurisdictions imposing stricter controls on high-energy crypto-activities and re-examining how emerging tech intersects with energy policy. The regulation underscores the tension between rapid tech growth and public-utility responsibilities in regions reliant on renewables and constrained transmission.

Merchandise exports rose to USD 220.12 billion in the six-month period ending September, an uptick of 3.02 per cent compared with the equivalent span of the prior year, while imports climbed by 4.53 per cent to USD 375.11 billion, resulting in a trade deficit of USD 154.99 billion.

A key facet of this performance is that exports to 24 nations recorded growth, underscoring a push by Indian exporters to diversify markets beyond traditional strongholds. These countries span regions from the Middle East and Southeast Asia to Africa and Latin America, and collectively accounted for USD 129.3 billion, or 59 per cent of the country’s total exports in the period.

Despite this diversification, exports to the United States — one of the largest destination markets — slipped in September as tariffs imposed by Washington weighed on certain sectors. For the month, shipments to the US declined by 11.93 per cent to USD 5.46 billion.

Those opposing movements such as exporters point to the 50 per cent tariff introduced by the US on Indian goods from late August. The exports community says that while growth is evident in alternative geographies including Africa, Latin America and the Middle East, the US tariff climate remains a drag.

Within the group of 24 countries that posted export growth are the UAE, Germany, Vietnam, Mexico, Russia, Kenya, Nigeria, Canada, Poland, Sri Lanka, Oman, Thailand, Bangladesh, Brazil, Belgium, Italy and Tanzania, among others.

At the same time, exports to 16 other countries recorded negative growth, representing roughly USD 60.3 billion or about 27 per cent of total exports in the period. This reveals that while diversification is under way, certain destination markets continue to deliver weak outcomes.

Industry observers suggest that the strategic reorientation of markets has been accelerated by external pressures such as protectionist measures in key markets and supply-chain disruptions across sectors. One exporter noted: “The trend will continue in the coming months as well.”

Meanwhile, the Government of India is engaging on multiple fronts to sustain export momentum. Officials from the commerce ministry signalled that structural steps will be needed to strengthen manufacturing competitiveness and integrate India more deeply into global value chains. They pointed to raw‐material bottlenecks and high logistics costs among the constraints.

In parallel, trade discussions with the US are underway, aimed at reducing friction caused by duties and exploring possibilities for energy-and-goods cooperation. For instance, US officials have raised concerns over Indian imports of Russian oil and bilateral trade.

Another trend shaping export performance is the push into manufacturing sectors aligned with global demand shifts. The electronics and mobile-phone export segment, for example, has delivered strong growth: exports in certain months surged by as much as 39-60 per cent in year-on-year terms, signalling India’s growing role as a manufacturing hub for global brands.

On the import side, the widening of the trade deficit is partly explained by rising inbound shipments of gold, silver and crude oil, ahead of domestic demand spikes and festival season pickup. These pressure points reflect larger global cost dynamics rather than domestic export weakness per se.

Export diversification is also being viewed as a risk-mitigation strategy. The weakening of certain traditional markets combined with tariff exposure in the US has underscored the importance of broadening the destination base. Africa, Latin America and Southeast Asia are emerging as focal regions.

Manufacturers and trade bodies emphasise that sustaining this diversification will require improving logistics efficiency, deepening downstream processing, upgrading product quality and securing better access via trade agreements and export-promotion schemes.

For exporters that achieved growth in the 24-country set, end-markets include consumer goods, engineering exports, pharmaceuticals, agro-products and electronics. Their performance demonstrates the incremental success of strategic investment and policy alignment.

Still, the fact that over a quarter of export value was derived from countries with declining shipments signals a dual challenge. Growth pockets exist, but structural weaknesses and external dependencies remain persistent obstacles.

Tokyo’s financial regulator is advancing a proposal that would permit domestic banks to directly invest in cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and operate crypto exchanges, marking a significant shift from earlier restrictions. The Financial Services Agency is set to present its plans to the Financial System Council—an advisory body to the prime minister—later this month.

Under the existing regime promulgated in 2020, Japanese banks have been effectively barred from acquiring and holding digital assets for investment purposes, owing to concerns about volatility and financial-stability risk. The new regulatory blueprint would align crypto asset holdings by banks with traditional financial instruments such as stocks and government bonds, while introducing capital and risk-management requirements tailored to the asset class.

According to data cited by the FSA, Japan’s crypto account holdings have climbed past 12 million as of February 2025—a roughly 3.5-fold increase over five years. The surge in retail interest is growing pressure on regulators to provide greater clarity and institutional-grade infrastructure. Amid this backdrop, the proposed reforms aim to usher in a more integrated digital-asset ecosystem under the purview of regulated financial institutions.

The FSA’s initiative encompasses three key pillars: Firstly, banks would be authorised to purchase and hold unbacked crypto assets for trading or investment, subject to strict internal controls and exposure limits.  Secondly, bank groups may register as licensed “cryptocurrency exchange operators,” effectively allowing them to offer trading and custody services in-house rather than relying solely on third-party platforms.  Thirdly, the FSA plans to shift oversight of digital assets from the current Payment Services Act regime into the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act framework, thereby affording crypto the same legal mould as securities.

Banking groups in Japan are already responding. Three of the country’s largest financial institutions—Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group and Mizuho Financial Group—have announced a joint plan to issue a yen-pegged stablecoin for corporate settlements, signalling a broader shift into digital assets.

Supporters of the reforms argue that allowing regulated banks to engage with crypto assets will bolster investor protections, improve custody and transactional infrastructure, and widen market access. “This reform will treat cryptocurrencies similar to other investible asset classes under bank supervision,” noted one industry analyst. However, sceptics caution that the volatility of cryptocurrencies remains elevated and that exposure must be managed carefully to prevent end-user or systemic risk.

Regulatory design will therefore place a heavy emphasis on limiting banks’ direct holdings of digital assets relative to their capital base, imposing heightened disclosure and governance mandates. One working-group paper recommends that banks maintain separate risk-allocations and stress-testing frameworks for crypto, akin to those used for foreign-exchange or commodity trading desks.

The tax and legal context are also evolving. Japan is preparing to introduce a flat 20 % capital-gains tax on crypto assets as part of its 2025 reforms, and certain tokens are slated to be reclassified as securities under the FIEA. These measures are designed to reduce uncertainty for institutional participants and global investors seeking regulated exposure to digital assets.

Market participants appear cautiously optimistic. Some regional banks are exploring pilot custody services for institutional clients, while fintech firms anticipate greater collaboration with mainstream banks as eligibility expands. On the flip side, legacy concerns persist: past hacks and exchange failures have left regulators and consumers wary of governance failures and inadequate transparency.

The world’s largest cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, vaulted above $111,000 after a steep dip earlier this week, triggering sharp gains across major tokens including Ethereum, XRP and Solana. On-chain metrics signalled accumulating momentum while traditional equity markets in Asia registered fresh highs, boosting risk-assets overall.

Bitcoin climbed to around $111,223, representing a gain of approximately 3.7% within 24 hours, after briefly touching a low near $103,602. Other digital assets followed: Ethereum reached roughly $4,062, XRP $2.47 and Solana approximately $193.33, with 24-hour gains of between 3% and 5%.

Analysts highlight several factors underpinning this recovery. On-chain data show the realised value-to-transaction ratio for Bitcoin has declined — a historical marker of heightened accumulation rather than passive holding. A crypto-analytics firm noted that “strong declines in the RVTS have preceded major bull phases, as they indicate that Bitcoin is being used, accumulated, and transferred — not just held.”

Broader market dynamics provided further tailwinds. In Japan, the Nikkei 225 index soared past 49,000 for the first time, advancing the year-to-date gain to 25%. The move followed media reports indicating that the country’s leading opposition party plans to join coalitions which position its fiscal-dove leader for the prime ministership — one with a policy inclination towards low interest rates and expansionary fiscal measures.

Meanwhile, China’s third-quarter gross domestic product growth of 4.8% year-on-year narrowly exceeded forecasts of 4.7%, providing support for risk assets globally.

Beyond macro-signals, institutional behaviours also deserve attention. A leading publicly listed company with large Bitcoin holdings, Strategy, has signalled fresh crypto purchases — adding a layer of institutional demand to the structural thesis.

Within the crypto space, major platforms tied to tokenisation and stable-coin activity are also part of the narrative. Analysts at Galaxy Digital emphasise three structural drivers: increased AI-capex from tokenised assets, accelerating stable-coin infrastructure, and the migration of real-world assets onto blockchain networks. These are seen as propositions that may sustain momentum beyond short-term price moves.

Yet, market participants remain cautious. Liquidity remains thin and residual risks — such as further macro headwinds, regulatory tightening or a reversal in risk appetite — continue to warrant vigilance. As one analyst put it: “The near-term message is caution — respect thinner liquidity, post-crash psychology and a ‘wall of worry’ mood. The medium-term message is resilience.”

Within altcoins, XRP is gaining renewed focus ahead of potential ETF-related developments, while Solana is benefitting from its association with on-chain tokenisation flows. Market-data platform CoinGecko shows that XRP trades at around $2.46, with volume flows increasing as sentiment rebuilds.