China has intensified its use of exit bans, preventing both Chinese citizens and foreign nationals from leaving the country amid heightened tensions with the United States.

Recent incidents include a U.S. Commerce Department employee and a Wells Fargo banker reportedly being barred from boarding outbound flights.

Business groups and legal experts say the growing use of opaque restrictions is fueling anxiety among foreign investors and travelers.

Official data shows nearly fifty-three thousand court-ordered exit bans were issued in China in the past year, largely related to civil or commercial disputes.

A representative from the European Chamber of Commerce in China stated that such measures are damaging confidence at a time when Beijing is seeking to attract more foreign investment.

Affected individuals have described the bans as abrupt, unclear, and psychologically distressing.

Legal analysts have noted that exit bans in China can be imposed without formal charges and are often difficult to contest.

These practices have been widely criticized by human rights groups and business leaders, who warn they may deter international engagement and cross-border cooperation.

The International Monetary Fund has raised its global growth forecast to three percent for 2025 and three point one percent for 2026, citing support from a weaker U.S. dollar and less-than-expected economic disruption from U.S. tariffs.

The IMF upgraded its projection for the United States to one point nine percent in 2025 and two percent in 2026.

China’s growth was revised to four point eight percent, while India remains the fastest-growing major economy at six point four percent.

The updated outlook follows stronger-than-expected trade and production data, with companies globally stockpiling ahead of expected tariff hikes.

The softer dollar has also eased debt pressure for emerging markets with high exposure to U.S.-denominated borrowing.

The IMF noted that while the short-term effects of tariff actions were less severe than anticipated, risks remain for medium-term stability as pre-tariff inventory buildups unwind.

The United Kingdom was forecast to be the third-fastest-growing G7 economy over the next year, following the United States and Canada.

Procter & Gamble has announced plans to raise prices on roughly a quarter of its U.S. product portfolio starting in August, citing an estimated one‑billion‑dollar increase in costs stemming from new tariffs imposed by the Trump administration .

The price increases—described as mid‑single‑digit adjustments—are intended to begin in August and will be coordinated with major retailers like Walmart and Target .

Chief Financial Officer Andre Schulten projected the annual tariff hit at between one and one and a half billion dollars, primarily driven by duties on imports of raw materials and packaging from China, Canada and other markets .

Schulten told investors the company would first pursue productivity gains and supply‑chain adjustments, but said incremental price increases would be required where internal savings fall short .

Procter & Gamble also lowered its full‑year forecasts for fiscal 2025 sales and earnings, citing weaker consumer demand amid economic uncertainty and rising input costs .

The firm reported fourth‑quarter net income of approximately three point six two billion dollars, or one point forty‑eight dollars per share, on sales of twenty point eight nine billion dollars—surpassing quarterly estimates .

A leadership transition was announced: Shailesh Jejurikar, currently COO, will succeed CEO Jon Moeller effective January first, two thousand twenty‑six, with Moeller becoming executive chairman .

P&G also unveiled a restructuring plan to eliminate seven thousand non‑manufacturing roles over two years to boost efficiency amid pressure from tariffs and softening demand .

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have introduced legislation to strip funding from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the Paris-based economic forum.

The bill, passed by the House appropriations committee, would halt U.S. contributions to the OECD, which currently account for approximately eighteen percent of the organization’s operating budget.

The initiative stems from Republican objections to the OECD’s role in designing global tax frameworks, including proposals for a global minimum corporate tax and digital services tax rules.

GOP lawmakers argue that the OECD is structurally designed to benefit European economies by steering more global tax revenue toward Europe.

They contend that the organization’s tax policies disproportionately target U.S. and Asian companies, and undermine national fiscal sovereignty by pressuring countries to align with rules that serve European economic interests.

Last month, a G7 agreement at Washington’s request secured exemptions for American firms from key elements of the OECD-backed global tax plan.

In exchange, the administration withdrew a retaliatory tax measure included in President Trump’s fiscal legislation.

The bill now advances to the full House and Senate.

Because it involves reallocating international funding, it would require support from at least seven Democratic senators to pass procedural hurdles in the upper chamber.

The proposal is part of a broader push by the administration to reevaluate U.S. participation in multilateral institutions viewed as misaligned with national priorities.

Since returning to office, President Trump has withdrawn the United States from several international bodies, including the World Health Organization, the UN Human Rights Council, UNESCO, and the Paris climate agreement.

A report from the Secretary of State, due in early August, will review U.S. involvement in a range of global organizations.

House Republicans backing the measure have criticized the OECD’s advocacy of tax harmonization and digital levies, calling them incompatible with U.S. economic and legislative interests.

Despite Republican majorities in both chambers, securing cross-party support in the Senate remains a key obstacle for the bill’s passage.