The Urethane Blog
July 28, 2025
Adnoc contests EU findings as €12b Covestro deal faces deeper scrutiny
EU investigates foreign subsidies of Adnoc’s Covestro deal; decision due by December 2
Last updated: July 28, 2025 | 14:45
Justin Varghese, Your Money Editor
2 MIN READ
European Union flags flap in the wind outside EU headquarters in Brussels, Friday, February 21, 2020AP
Dubai: The European Commission launched an in-depth investigation into Abu Dhabi National Oil Company’s (Adnoc) proposed €12 billion (Dh47.8 billion) acquisition of German chemicals firm Covestro.
The probe is part of a newly enforced EU regulation aimed at addressing the competitive impact of foreign state subsidies.
In its official statement, the European Commission said it had “preliminary concerns that foreign subsidies granted by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) could distort the EU internal market.”
Among the subsidies under scrutiny are an “unlimited guarantee” from the UAE government and a potential capital injection from Adnoc into Covestro—both of which may have given Adnoc an edge over any competing bidders.
The Commission argues these benefits might have allowed Adnoc to offer a purchase price and terms that wouldn’t typically be viable for unsubsidised investors, raising fears of unfair competition within the bloc.
ADNOC contests EU findings
In a statement, ADNOC said it “respects the European Commission’s process” but disagrees with the regulator’s initial concerns over its proposed acquisition. The company added it is confident the deal will ultimately be cleared.
“ADNOC has a proven track record in value creation and driving opportunities for growth built on long-term and mutually beneficial partnerships,” the statement said.
”While we respect the European Commission’s process, we contest the preliminary findings of the Commission and are confident that when the facts are fully examined, there will be no reason to hold up clearance of a transaction that will add great value for all stakeholders and stimulate European industry.”
Gulf investments in Europe
While the deal had earlier passed the EU’s traditional merger control process, the new investigation under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) reflects rising European caution toward major acquisitions by state-backed companies from the Gulf and beyond.
If the Commission concludes that the deal breaches the regulation, it could force Adnoc to offer significant concessions—or even block the acquisition entirely. A final decision is expected by December 2, 2025.
This isn’t the first time EU regulators have taken issue with UAE state-linked funding. In 2023, Emirates Telecommunications (e&) had to alter terms of its €2.2 billion deal for PPF Telecom assets by dropping an unlimited state guarantee to receive EU approval.
Why this matters now
The EU’s Foreign Subsidies Regulation came into force just over a year ago and has since been used mainly to investigate Chinese investments in rail and clean energy sectors.
For UAE-based firms eyeing strategic assets in Europe, the Covestro case could serve as a landmark moment, shaping how future cross-border deals are structured and scrutinised.
Adnoc, as the UAE’s largest oil producer, has been seeking to diversify globally through downstream and specialty chemicals investments, with the Covestro deal seen as a strategic entry into high-performance polymers used in everything from smartphones to electric vehicles.
If approved, the acquisition would hand Adnoc control of Covestro’s operations across Europe and beyond, with over 18,000 employees worldwide and major customers in auto, electronics, and construction sectors.
July 27, 2025
Is Private Equity A Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing?
by Tyler Durden
Friday, Jul 25, 2025 – 03:45 PM
Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvce.com,
In July 2007, just before the financial crisis erupted, Citigroup CEO Chuck Prince summed up Wall Street’s dangerous exuberance:
“When the music stops, in terms of liquidity, things will be complicated. But as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance. We’re still dancing.”
Eighteen years later, Wall Street is dancing again, and the rhythm feels disturbingly familiar.
Private equity (PE), once a niche strategy reserved for sophisticated endowments and mega-pensions, is being aggressively marketed to everyday investors. It’s creeping into 401(k)s, target-date funds, and retirement accounts under the seductive promise of higher returns and diversification. But for investors who’ve forgotten history, or worse, were never taught it, the risks are mounting.
What Is Private Equity & How We Got Here
Private equity refers to investments in companies not publicly traded on a stock exchange. Instead of buying shares of companies like Apple or Microsoft, private equity firms purchase entire companies, or large stakes in them, using a mix of their own capital and large amounts of borrowed money (leverage).
Once they take control, they often restructure the company, cut costs, increase debt, and aim to “flip” it for a profit within a few years. This can be done by selling it to another company, a PE firm, or publicizing it via an IPO.
The pitch? Higher returns.
The reality? Higher risk and lower transparency.
PE’s ascent began after the 2008 financial crisis when near-zero interest rates pushed institutional investors out of traditional bonds and into “alternatives.” As I’ve written, institutional FOMO (fear of missing out) drove billions into private markets with questionable due diligence. So they turned to alternatives: private equity, private credit, hedge funds, and real estate.
In 2019, Ben Meng, then-CIO of CalPERS (California’s massive public pension fund), epitomized the mentality when he said, “We need private equity, we need more of it, and we need it now.”
And Wall Street delivered.
The results were predictable. With cheap credit abundant, deal volume exploded, topping $3.1 trillion globally in 2021. Valuations were detached from reality. According to McKinsey, buyout multiples surged from 6.5x EBITDA in 2009 to 12x in 2022, nearly doubling in just over a decade. But this boom was built on artificially low interest rates and easy liquidity.
That means PE firms paid twice as much for companies as a decade ago. The reason is simple: They could borrow more cheaply and charge investors higher fees.
However, with rates normalized and liquidity tightening, private equity’s structural weaknesses are surfacing. Therefore, as sophisticated investors become more risk-averse to the deals they take on, Wall Street is turning to a new source of capital: unsophisticated retail investors.
What Makes Private Equity Risky for You
Let’s break down some key concerns the average investor should understand before allocating capital—directly or indirectly—to private equity.
1. Illiquidity Is a Feature, Not a Bug
PE funds lock up investor capital for 7-10 years, sometimes longer, depending on extensions and follow-on investments. This means that investors lose the fundamental flexibility that public markets provide, namely, the ability to liquidate assets in response to life events, market downturns, or better opportunities. For example, if you invested in PE through the COVID-19 market shock, you couldn’t reallocate capital even as public markets sharply corrected and rebounded. This rigid illiquidity is especially dangerous for retirees or individuals who may require access to funds unexpectedly.
2. Opacity Masks Risk
In public markets, pricing is determined every second by the forces of supply and demand, providing price discovery and transparency. However, private equity relies on subjective valuation models that are updated quarterly or less frequently. This allows PE funds to “smooth returns,” creating the illusion of low volatility. For instance, during market sell-offs like 2022, many PE funds reported negligible markdowns while public equities fell double digits. This masks the true underlying risk, potentially misleading investors about the health of their portfolios and delaying the recognition of losses until forced asset sales or fund closures
3. Fees Are Devastatingly High
PE funds follow a “2 and 20” fee structure: a 2% annual management fee plus 20% of profits above a specific hurdle rate. Over a decade-long lock-up, even in mediocre-performing funds, fees can erode a substantial portion of gross returns. For example, on a hypothetical $100,000 investment, you could pay $20,000 in management fees over ten years, excluding performance fees. Compared to passive investment vehicles like S&P 500 ETFs costing 0.03%-0.10% annually, the fee drag in PE is enormous. Academic studies, such as those by Ludovic Phalippou at Oxford, have consistently shown that net returns after fees in PE barely exceed, and often underperform, simple public index strategies.
4. Leverage Amplifies Fragility
Leverage is a double-edged sword in private equity. While it can amplify returns in bull markets, it dramatically increases financial fragility during downturns. PE buyouts frequently involve debt levels of 5-7 times EBITDA, far exceeding leverage ratios typical of public companies. This dependence on cheap debt made sense in a zero-rate world, but is becoming a liability as borrowing costs rise. For instance, companies acquired at peak valuations in 2020-2021 face refinancing risks as interest coverage ratios deteriorate. Reports of loan covenant breaches and distressed sales are already emerging across sectors like healthcare, retail, and infrastructure, previously touted as “safe” plays in the PE world.
But while these issues are important, there are seven “red flags” that signal trouble ahead.
Seven Red Flags That Signal Trouble Ahead
The CFA Institute recently highlighted seven red flags signaling serious trouble brewing in private markets—risks magnified for retirement savers who lack the tools and resources to properly evaluate these risks. For retail investors, each of these red flags represents a significant warning that could impact long-term financial outcomes, especially when embedded within retirement plans like 401(k)s and target-date funds.
1. Declining Deal Quality
With record amounts of capital flowing into private equity, more money is chasing fewer high-quality investment opportunities. This leads to PE firms lowering their standards and investing in weaker companies or more speculative ventures. For retail investors, this means exposure to riskier businesses with less predictable cash flows. For example, during the 2021 SPAC boom, many companies that would have traditionally struggled to access public markets instead found their way into private portfolios, leading to high-profile failures post-acquisition.
The chart below from S&P Global shows the number of private transactions terminated between 2020-2023.
2. Inflated Valuations
PE managers often base valuations on future projections rather than tangible market transactions. As a result, portfolios can appear healthy on paper even when underlying fundamentals are deteriorating. For retail investors, this creates the illusion of stability, where portfolio statements show steady or appreciating values while the true market value could be significantly lower. A prime example occurred during 2022, when public tech stocks corrected sharply, but many PE tech holdings barely adjusted, delaying loss recognition and masking portfolio risk.
To that point, you should realize that most private equity investments (65%) either fail or return the initial investment at best.
Yes, private equity can be very lucrative. Depending on the deal you invest in, it can also be very harmful.
3. Fee Pressures = Riskier Deals
Institutional investors are increasingly pushing back on high fees, which puts pressure on PE firms to maintain profitability. This can lead to riskier behavior, such as over-leveraging or engaging in more aggressive cost-cutting at portfolio companies to boost short-term returns. For retail investors, this translates into an even worse alignment of interests: high fees remain in place, while portfolio risk quietly increases. Worse, retail channels often lack the negotiating power to secure fee reductions, leaving them exposed to premium costs for subpar investments.
4. Frozen Exit Markets
An essential part of private equity returns depends on the ability to sell portfolio companies at a profit. However, the current environment of rising interest rates and lower public market valuations has led to a sharp decline in IPOs and M&A activity. This creates a backlog of unsold assets, commonly referred to as an “exit overhang.” For retail investors, this means delayed distributions, longer-than-expected lock-up periods, and an increased likelihood of forced sales at discounted prices. Recent data from secondary market platforms show private equity interests trading at significant discounts, clear evidence of deteriorating liquidity.
5. Discounted Secondaries
When existing investors seek to exit PE investments early, they often turn to secondary markets. Today, these interests are commonly trading at 20-40% discounts to their stated net asset values (NAVs). This is a stark warning sign: even sophisticated investors are willing to accept steep losses to exit PE positions early. Retail investors, who often lack access to these secondary markets or the liquidity to exit early, are particularly vulnerable to being locked into declining assets with no realistic way out.
6. Rising Borrowing Costs
The foundation of many PE deals is built on cheap debt. With interest rates at multi-decade highs, borrowing costs have surged, eroding profitability across PE portfolios. Companies acquired during 2020-2021 at high multiples are now facing refinancing cliffs, where new debt comes at significantly higher rates. For retail investors, this increases the risk of portfolio companies defaulting or entering distressed restructurings, outcomes that can wipe out equity holders while still rewarding debt financiers higher in the capital structure.
7. Dry Powder FOMO
Private equity firms are sitting on record amounts of unallocated capital, or “dry powder.” While that may sound reassuring, it creates pressure to deploy capital quickly, often leading to questionable investment decisions and inflated deal pricing. For retail investors, this means being funneled into PE funds at the tail-end of a market cycle when managers are most desperate to deploy funds and least disciplined in underwriting. Historically, vintages raised during peak fundraising years, such as 2007 or 2021, have produced the worst returns.
When you see multiple red flags flashing across a sector, it’s time to reassess.
What the Average Investor Should Do
As discussed in “Why Am I So Lucky,” individuals hear tales of how high-net-worth investors (the smart money) own private equity in their allocations. As shown in the chart below from Long Angle, roughly 17% of their allocations are to private equities. These reports don’t generally tell you that their allocation to “private equity” often tends to be their personal businesses. Nonetheless, individual investors frequently see this type of analysis and think they should be replicating that process. But should they?
Before investing in private equity, significant differences must be considered between the vast majority of retail investors and high-net-worth individuals. The underlying risks of private equity investments can define these differences. However, with the right knowledge and proactive steps, investors can avoid the most common pitfalls and protect their long-term financial security.
1. Know What You Own
Start by reviewing your retirement plan allocations, especially if you are invested in a target-date fund or managed account solution. Many of these funds now include allocations to private equity or private credit, often buried deep within the prospectus. Request a detailed holdings report if necessary. For example, some widely used TDFs from major asset managers have added “private market” sleeves that investors are unaware of, effectively exposing them to higher fees and illiquidity.
2. Prioritize Liquidity
Liquidity provides optionality, especially during volatile markets or personal financial emergencies. If your retirement funds are locked up for years, you lose the ability to rebalance, take advantage of market dislocations, or fund unexpected needs. Favor investment options that allow for daily liquidity, such as low-cost index funds and ETFs. Remember, having access to your capital is a risk management tool in itself.
3. Focus on Transparency and Fees
Insist on clear, net-of-fee performance reporting. Avoid products with opaque valuation methodologies or excessive fee layers. As a rule of thumb, compare fees: if a private investment costs 2-3% annually versus 0.10% for an S&P 500 index fund, it must deliver dramatically higher returns to compensate, which few consistently achieve.
4. Stay Simple, Stay Diversified
Decades of evidence show that a well-diversified portfolio of simple, liquid public investments outperforms most complex alternatives after fees and taxes. Don’t be lured by “fancy” strategies with marketing sizzle but structural drawbacks.
Final Thoughts: Don’t Dance Just Because the Music Is Playing
Private equity may have its place in a diversified, institutional portfolio, but even then, it demands scrutiny. For the average investor, the risks are magnified by a lack of transparency, long lock-ups, and a fee structure that often benefits managers more than investors.
Wall Street has a long history of selling the newest shiny object to Main Street just as the trade begins to sour. If the music stops at this private equity party, you don’t want to be the last one still dancing.
When in doubt, stick to the core investing principles: transparency, liquidity, low costs, and discipline. Complex products are often designed to enrich the seller, not the buyer. Safeguard your financial future by keeping your portfolio simple, transparent, and aligned with your long-term goals.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/private-equity-wolf-sheeps-clothing
July 24, 2025
US Economy Expands at Fastest Pace This Year, But Factories Slide Into Contraction
The economy entered the third quarter with solid momentum, though a pullback in factory activity signals fresh challenges ahead.
Reporter
7/24/2025|Updated: 7/24/2025
0:00
4:22
The U.S. economy accelerated in July at its fastest pace so far in 2025, according to a closely watched purchasing managers’ survey released on July 24, which showed surging demand for services—even as factory activity slipped back into contraction.
S&P Global’s flash U.S. Composite PMI Output Index climbed to 54.6 from 52.9 in June, signaling the strongest overall growth in seven months and extending a 30‑month run of expansion.
The services sector led the gains, with its business activity index jumping to 55.2, hitting a seven-month high.
Factory activity faltered, however, with the manufacturing PMI dropping to 49.5 in July. This was the first reading below 50 this year, indicating a renewed downturn for the manufacturing sector, which President Donald Trump has been trying to revitalize with tariffs and other policies meant to rebuild the nation’s eroded industrial base.
The split points to an uneven recovery, with households and businesses continuing to spend on services in July, while factories reported falling new orders for the first time this year, along with leaner inventories after manufacturers rushed to build up stockpiles in May and June ahead of Trump’s anticipated tariffs.
“Growth was worryingly uneven and overly reliant on the services economy as manufacturing business conditions deteriorated for the first time this year, the latter linked to a fading boost from tariff front-running,” Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said in a statement.
Overall, the PMI data suggests that the U.S. economy grew at a sharply faster rate at the start of the third quarter—consistent with a 2.3 percent annualized pace of growth—compared to the 1.3 percent that earlier S&P Global PMI surveys signaled for the second quarter, Williamson said.
Official government data for the second-quarter gross domestic product (GDP) is not set to be released until July 30. The most recent Philadelphia Federal Reserve survey of professional forecasters estimated a 1.4 percent pace of growth in the April to June quarter. The economy shrank by 0.5 percent in the first quarter, driven by sluggish spending and a tariff-driven spike in imports, which subtracted from GDP calculations.
The PMI report comes as other forecasts also point to firmer growth. The New York Fed’s GDP Nowcast pegs third-quarter growth at roughly 2.4 percent, which would mark a sharp rebound from the first quarter’s contraction and ease recession fears that roiled markets earlier this year following Trump’s unveiling of reciprocal tariff plans.
Meanwhile, inflationary pressures jumped in July, with the PMI survey flagging the second-sharpest increases in prices for goods and services in the past three years. Nearly two-thirds of manufacturers who reported higher input costs linked them to tariffs, while just under half of all respondents attributed increased selling prices to the administration’s trade policies.
“The rise in selling prices for goods and services in July, which was one of the largest seen over the past three years, suggests that consumer price inflation will rise further above the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target in the coming months as these price hikes feed through to households,” Williamson predicted.
The Fed, which raised rates aggressively in 2022 and 2023 to tame inflation, cut them three times late last year and has since paused to assess the impact of Trump’s trade and fiscal policies. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell told lawmakers in June that the full effects of the latest tariffs might not become clear until mid‑summer.
Business sentiment grew more cautious despite stronger headline growth. The PMI survey found confidence about the year ahead slipping to one of its lowest levels in more than two years, reflecting uncertainty over federal spending cuts and the durability of the services boom.
“Even in manufacturing, any protectionist benefits of import tariffs were often outweighed by concerns over higher prices and rising costs,” the PMI survey states.
Still, other recent data show that recession fears have subsided and that the inflation outlook has stabilized at pre-tariff levels, while June saw a marked improvement in consumer spending.
July 24, 2025
Dow Inc. (DOW) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Transcript
Jul. 24, 2025 10:33 AM ETDow Inc. (DOW) StockDOW
Dow Inc. (NYSE:DOW) Q2 2025 Earnings Conference Call July 24, 2025 8:00 AM ET
Company Participants
Andrew Riker – Vice President of Investor Relations
James R. Fitterling – Chairman & CEO
Jeffrey L. Tate – Chief Financial Officer
Karen S. Carter – Chief Operating Officer
James R. Fitterling
Thank you, Andrew. Beginning on Slide 3. The prolonged down cycle our industry has been experiencing was further amplified this quarter by heightened trade and geopolitical uncertainties, which have strained profitability across our industry. In this environment, it is critical that we successfully navigate the near-term, protect Dow’s financial flexibility and advance our near-term growth initiatives to support higher earnings as the industry recovers.
Additionally, growing signs of oversupply from newer market entrants being exported to other regions and anticompetitive economics requires an aggressive industry response and regulatory action to restore competitive dynamics. Given these challenges, we remain focused on driving operational discipline in everything we do.
In the second quarter, net sales were $10.1 billion, down 7% versus the year ago period, reflecting declines in all operating segments. Sequentially, net sales decreased 3% as seasonally higher demand in Performance Materials & Coatings was more than offset by declines in our other operating segments.
EBITDA was $703 million, which is also lower than the same period last year. Following a significant analysis and consideration, we announced this morning that Dow would implement a 50% dividend reduction effective in the third quarter of this year. This decision was not taken lightly as we understand the importance our shareholders place on the dividend and we carefully considered this on top of the financial impacts that we model. The dividend is a key element of our investment thesis, and that is not changing. We remain committed to targeting a competitive dividend across the economic cycle. However, given the current lower for longer earnings environment and the lack of a clear line of sight to a recovery for our industry, this is the most prudent way to maintain financial flexibility and maximize long-term value for our shareholders.
Also in the second quarter, we progressed several near-term cash support levers. The close of our strategic infrastructure asset partnership named Diamond Infrastructure Solutions delivered $2.4 billion of cash for Dow in the second quarter and has already captured growth opportunities with new customers. We also expect to receive cash proceeds from the NOVA judgment this year,
and consistent with our best owner mindset, we recently announced 2 noncore product line divestitures totaling approximately $250 million at attractive EBITDA multiples of around 10x. These divestitures are additive to our announcement that we will shut down 3 upstream assets in Europe to address structural challenges in that region.
We are confident that these actions paired with the completion of our near-term incremental growth projects will support long-term value creation. Additionally, we are accelerating progress on our $1 billion in cost savings actions, where we now expect to deliver approximately $400 million this year. We are committed to continuing Dow’s track record of operational and financial discipline, executing near-term actions to maximize shareholder value and navigating the current environment all to better position the company for profitable growth and higher shareholder returns as the industry recovers.
Karen S. Carter
Thank you, Jim. In the second quarter, our teams continued to focus on price management to restore margins as we prioritize volume in attractive end markets. As we have done for the past several quarters, we are closely monitoring the macros across the markets we serve, pulling all levers to help mitigate the current lower for longer earnings environment as well as the impact brought on by recent trade and tariff uncertainties.
Next, turning to our Industrial Intermediates & Infrastructure segment on Slide 5. Net sales declined both year-over-year and sequentially, as market conditions across the segment remains challenging, particularly in our polyurethanes and Construction Chemicals business, which has high exposure to durables and building and construction end markets. Volume declined 2% compared to the year ago period. Lower polyurethanes and construction chemicals volumes and EMEAI where we continue to see increasing import activity from competitors in China were partially offset by higher industrial solutions volumes across data center cooling and gas treating applications.
Sequentially, a decline in demand for deicing fluid following the winter month was only partially offset by a modest seasonal uplift in building and construction applications, which was lower than expected in a typical year. Operating EBIT for the segment decreased versus the year ago period as well as sequentially, primarily driven by lower prices and higher planned maintenance activity. This included activities related to the start-up of our new alkoxylation unit in Seadrift, Texas.
The new capacity representing the completion of one of our near-term growth investments will support earnings growth beginning in the third quarter and beyond. We also recently finalized a long-term agreement with a major consumer brand owner to supply millions of pounds of low-carbon solutions, demonstrating our ability to capitalize on innovation, that are meeting the needs of our customers and their sustainability commitments to consumers.
Jeffrey L. Tate
In the Industrial Intermediates & Infrastructure segment, we expect third quarter EBITDA to be approximately $85 million higher than the second quarter. This expected earnings uplift reflects our expectations for higher volumes from the start-up of our new alkoxylation facility.
In Polyurethanes, we anticipate higher volumes in both MDI and polyols although margins remained under pressure sequentially, driven by fierce price competition with Chinese exports into both Europe and Latin America. Following the heavy turnaround schedule in second quarter, II&I would have a sizable tailwind in the third quarter, in addition to the ramp and cost reductions. This segment will also experience headwinds from lower equity earnings at Sadara.
In May, we finalized our strategic partnership with Macquarie Asset Management for the sale of a minority equity stake in select U.S. Gulf Coast infrastructure assets, receiving approximately $2.4 billion in initial cash proceeds from the transaction. The new entity, Diamond Infrastructure Solutions recently announced the deal with a Climate Tech company named Again to build a first-of-its-kind plant to recycle waste CO2 emissions from an on-site tenant in our Texas City Industrial Park. This agreement is one of many growth opportunities, the Diamond Infrastructure Solutions business model is set up to enable with both new and existing customers.
And as a reminder, Macquarie has the option to increase their stake to 49% within 6 months of closing, which would occur no later than November. This would increase total cash proceeds from this new partnership to approximately $3 billion per Dow this year.
Looking into the second half of the year, we also expect to receive cash proceeds of approximately $1.2 billion from the resolution for damages related to the jointly owned ethylene assets with NOVA Chemicals. So in total, we expect these actions to provide more than $6 billion in near-term cash support. And building on this, Karen will now cover the work we’re doing to drive execution, ensure strong operational performance and enable higher near-term returns.
Patrick Duffy Fischer
Two questions. One, Jim, can you just talk about on the anticompetitive stuff which product chains are being most impacted there? And then where has legal actions been taken already? And where should we expect it going forward? And then could you just clarify how much of the July price increase is actually baked into your Q3 guide?
James R. Fitterling
Yes. I’ll take the first part, and I’ll ask Karen to take the second part. Polyurethanes, you’ve seen a lot of that activity, Duffy. And of course, there’s a lot of overcapacity that’s been built there. And so there’s been a lot of move there. And it’s a low demand environment. So that’s created that kind of pressure. Although it’s not a particular area for us, you see it in chlorine, aromatics. If you spots like that, you see that same kind of an impact.
We’re starting to see a bit of it in polyethylene. So we’ve seen Brazil take action, so Latin America. We’re starting to see a little bit of that potentially in Europe, although I don’t think it’s been as prevalent in Europe on the plastic side. We’re eyes wide open in all areas for that. And then I think you — obviously, you’ve seen it in electric vehicles in Europe. That was one of the early cases where there was a lot of pressure in Europe on EVs. So it’s not just a chemical industry, but in the chemical industry, there’s a significant activity.
Karen, do you want to talk about pricing and how much is in that testament?
Karen S. Carter
So all of our July price increase that we have on the table is incorporated into our results. And again, we fully expect to achieve that. We are pushing to achieve that because, again, the current integrated margins are not only low, but they’re unsustainable. So we are fully baking in integrated margin expansion as we get into third quarter.
John Ezekiel E. Roberts
Do you think the duration of the overcapacity in polyethylene, siloxanes and polyurethanes are all in sync? Or do you see one or another of these chains actually improving before the others?
James R. Fitterling
That’s a good question, John. I think isocyanate is in relatively decent shape within the polyurethane portfolio PO will take longer. We’ve got probably the biggest adjustment in PO coming end of the year with a reduction of a train here in the U.S. Gulf Coast.
the demand that’s out there and the size of the market will recover quicker.
July 23, 2025
EU antitrust regulators resume foreign aid probe into ADNOC’s Covestro deal
By Reuters
July 3, 20251:24 PM EDTUpdated July 3, 2025
- Companies
Covestro AGBRUSSELS, July 3 (Reuters) – EU antitrust regulators have resumed scrutiny of Abu Dhabi state oil giant ADNOC’s 14.7-billion euro ($17.3 billion) acquisition of German chemicals company Covestro (1COVG.DE)
,after the companies provided the information they requested, according to an update on the European Commission website.
The EU competition enforcer, which had temporarily halted its review on May 28, set a new deadline of July 28 for its decision.
The EU’s Foreign Subsidies Regulation takes aim at unfair foreign aid for companies which may have to provide concessions to offset the state support in return for clearance of their deals.
ADNOC had in May secured EU approval for the acquisition under EU merger rules.
($1 = 0.8511 euros)
Everchem Updates Archive 
Sign Up for Email Updates