• The Chinese foreign ministry says Vice President Han Zheng will attend Donald Trump's inauguration.
• The Trump team said in December that it had invited Chinese leader Xi Jinping, but Xi will not attend.
• Foreign heads of state do not usually attend US presidential inaugurations.

China's foreign ministry says it is sending Vice President Han Zheng to attend President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration on January 20.

The Trump transition team said last month that it had invited China President Xi Jinping to the event. The move came as a surprise given that foreign heads of state usually do not attend US presidential inaugurations.

"China follows the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation in viewing and growing its relationship with the United States," the Chinese foreign ministry said in a statement on Friday morning local time announcing Han's attendance.

"We stand ready to work with the new US government to enhance dialogue and communication, properly manage differences, expand mutually beneficial cooperation, jointly pursue a stable, healthy and sustainable China-US relationship and find the right way for the two countries to get along with each other," the statement added.

The White House, Trump's transition team, the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, and the Chinese foreign ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

US-China relations have long remained tenuous ever since Trump's first term. Both the Trump and Biden administrations had imposed crippling tariffs on China.

In May, President Joe Biden announced an increase in tariffs on Chinese exported steel, aluminium, medical products and electric vehicles.

Those tariffs could be ratcheted up even further when Trump takes office. The president-elect said during his campaign that he plans to impose tariffs of more than 60% on Chinese goods entering the US.

In November, Trump said he plans to impose an additional 10% import tariff on Chinese goods unless China does more to curb the inflow of fentanyl into the US.

In January, Trump said in an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that his representatives have been speaking to Xi's staff.

"I had a great relationship with President Xi. It was very solid, very strong, very friendly. He's a strong man, a powerful man," Trump told Hewitt in an interview that aired on January 6.

"He's certainly revered in China, but they are having problems and I think we will probably get along very well, I predict, but you know it's got to be a two-way street," Trump added.

• Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos exchanged friendly tweets after rocket launches on Thursday.
• The billionaires have had a long-standing rivalry over space ambitions and more.
• Their recent interactions suggest a possible end to their long public feud.

Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos may no longer be enemies. In fact, a friendship may be budding between the two billionaires, judging by tweets they recently posted on X.

Both tech founders own rocket companies that launched missions on Thursday, with mixed results.

SpaceX's huge Starship spaceship exploded, although its Super Heavy rocket booster successfully returned to a platform on Earth.

"@elonmusk Kudos to you and the whole SpaceX team on the flawless booster catch! Very impressive." Bezos wrote on X.

Earlier in the day, Bezos' Blue Origin launched its 32-story-tall New Glenn rocket into orbit. It lost its booster during the test flight.

"Well done, @JeffBezos, and the Blue Origin team!" Musk wrote.

Is their long feud over?

Followers on X — formerly Twitter — were quick to notice the sea change in the relationship between the billionaires.

Musk and Bezos have been embroiled in a years-long feud.

They've argued over their space ambitions at SpaceX and Blue Origin as they've repeatedly leapfrogged each other for the title of the world's richest person. That's a title Musk currently holds by a massive margin: With Bloomberg estimating his net worth at $439 billion, he's by far the richest person in the world. Bezos is second, with an estimated net worth of $240 billion.

Musk has said Blue Origin has tried to poach talent from SpaceX, and he's taunted Bezos repeatedly about the status of their respective businesses.

In 2015, when SpaceX landed its Falcon 9 spacecraft, Bezos needled Musk on Twitter by suggesting Blue Origin had already accomplished a similar feat.

Bezos has also subtly criticized Musk's mission to colonize Mars over the years. When NASA picked SpaceX for a major contract in 2021, Blue Origin was furious and protested the decision. 

Less than two months ago, they were at it again. In an X post, Musk said Bezos had told people to dump their shares in his companies because Donald Trump was bound to lose the presidential election.

Hours later, Bezos said the claim was "100% not true."

Billionaire "Step Brothers"

This history is what has made Thursday's friendly repartee between the billionaires so jarring.

Musk posted a gif on X from the movie "Step Brothers," with the main characters saying, "Did we just become best friends? Yep!"

"Step Brothers is the perfect meme for @JeffBezos & me," Musk wrote. 

He posted another clip from the same movie, implying his relationship with Bezos was now harmonious. 

Of course, all of this is unfolding on social media, which has its limitations. But one thing is for sure: No matter what's happening behind the scenes or offline, Thursday's exchanges mark a change in Bezos and Musk's online rapport.

• China's economy grew 5% in 2024, meeting its growth target.
• Analysts expected China's GDP growth to be 4.9%, close to the 5% target.
• China faces challenges like property crisis, youth unemployment, and deflation.

China reported its economy grew 5% in 2024, meeting its target of around 5%.

Analysts polled by Reuters had expected China's full-year GDP growth to come in at 4.9%, just shy of the official target of around 5% — which analysts had said was ambitious.

China's economy grew 5.4% in the fourth quarter from a year ago — better than the 5% analysts had expected.

China's National Bureau of Statistics said in its economic growth announcement that the economy is "generally stable with steady progress."

China's economy has been struggling to stage a convincing post-pandemic recovery. It's dogged by numerous challenges, including a property crisis, high youth unemployment, and deflation.

The Chinese government made efforts to stimulate its economy throughout 2024, with measures getting more aggressive in September.

The growth China recorded in its fourth quarter is likely due to early signs of stronger domestic demand, Vishnu Varathan, Nomura's head of macro research for Asia excluding Japan, wrote in a note on Friday ahead of China's GDP data release.

"But the irony is that even as growth hopes may be inspired, its deflation concerns may be far harder to put to bed," Varathan wrote. "This underscores the dissonance between private sector confidence deficit and state-driven ramp up in industrial momentum amid heightened geoeconomic uncertainties."

Consumer confidence in China remains weak even though strong exports supported growth. Last year, China's trade surplus reached a record 7.06 trillion Chinese yuan, or $990 billion.

China's strong exports could come under threat after US President-elect Donald Trump takes office next week. The American leader has threatened 60% on all Chinese imports.

• SpaceX's Starship rocket exploded during a test Thursday.
• The Federal Aviation Administration issued a warning after the explosion, calling the area "dangerous."
• After the explosion, some flights near Turks and Caicos were diverted, per Flightradar24.

Flights near the Turks and Caicos islands were spotted diverting to avoid debris after SpaceX's Starship exploded on Thursday.

SpaceX was conducting its seventh test flight of its unmanned Starship mega-rocket from its Starbase launch site near Brownsville, Texas. The launch occurred around 5:30 p.m. ET.

The Starship's Super Heavy Booster, which boosts the Starship spacecraft, successfully touched down back to the launchpad, marking another milestone in SpaceX's goal to create reusable boosters.

However, the upper stage of the system, Starship, was lost in what the company called a "rapid unscheduled disassembly."

Videos on social media appeared to show debris light up the sky near Turks and Caicos as it fell back to Earth.

Dean Olson, who captured footage of the Starship debris while in the area, told Business Insider that he heard the sound of constant "thunder" for about a minute after witnessing the explosion.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said in an X post on Thursday night that the rocket "had an oxygen/fuel leak in the cavity above the ship engine firewall."

Musk wrote that the leak "was large enough to build pressure in excess of the vent capacity."

"Apart from obviously double-checking for leaks, we will add fire suppression to that volume and probably increase vent area. Nothing so far suggests pushing next launch past next month," he added.

The Federal Aviation Administration issued a warning after the explosion, calling the area "dangerous" and warning of "falling debris of rocket Starship."

"The FAA briefly slowed and diverted aircraft around the area where space vehicle debris was falling," an FAA spokesperson said. "Normal operations have resumed."

Flight data from Flightradar24 showed several aircraft near the Turks and Caicos Islands diverting from destination routes.

One flight was an Airbus A320-232, operated by JetBlue, headed to San Juan, Puerto Rico, from Fort Lauderdale, according to the website. The flight was diverted back to Fort Lauderdale International.

JetBlue and SpaceX did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

SpaceX's Starship mega-rocket has exploded in two of its previous tests.

In November 2023, the Super Heavy booster exploded as it returned to Earth while the Starship continued to climb toward space.

• For her 16th birthday, my daughter wanted to host a co-ed sleepover. I was not on board.
• We eventually compromised and I agreed to let boys stay until 11 p.m., but later relented.
• Despite my initial concerns, the sleepover was uneventful and my daughter got her birthday wish.

Teenage co-ed sleepovers are not my thing. And though this wasn't our first co-ed party, I'm not sure I was emotionally prepared for this one. Our first took place when my daughter was two. Any display of affection came in the form of messy check kisses, with arms clasped tightly around another toddler's waist, as they tried to wriggle away. But it seems that today's teens also like having co-ed birthday parties and don't shy away from asking their parents for those parties to be sleepovers — something I never dreamed of asking my own parents at that age.

We agreed on a compromise

My daughter bugged me for weeks about her upcoming 16th birthday. She wanted ten of her friends there, a mix of a few boys, but mostly girls. She pointed out that I let her go to weekend get-togethers, where she sometimes ended up sleeping over in places with her guy friends there, which was fine with me. After all, I knew they stayed up most of the night watching movies. But this felt different. Now she wanted everyone to sleep at my house. Being a sober, single mom made me nervous about these things. So we agreed she could invite the boys for the evening, but they'd have to leave by 11:00.

The day before the party, with all her teen excitement tagging along with us, we made a trip to a local party store. We left with a bag of party supplies, plus a back seat full of helium balloons, bobbing around, which my daughter kept batting as they lurched towards the front seat. We dropped the balloons and other party stuff at home, then headed to the grocery store to retrieve the cake and a cart full of snack food that occupies the bottom row of the teen food pyramid.

The next day, after decorating the house with the streamers and balloons, her friends started to arrive around 5 p.m., far too early for my menopausal nervous system to handle. They came in dribs and drabs for the next hour or so, and my blood pressure surged when the last car pulled up with the boys and their adolescent hormones.

After taking jumps on the trampoline, the group settled in the family room, surrounded by bowls of chips, peanut M&M's, and popcorn. Between fits of laughter, they decided on what movies they'd watch during the night.

The kids eventually wore us down

The party remained fairly calm, a noticeable difference from last year's all-girl group. I bolstered myself and my nerves by inviting a couple other mom friends to join me at various stages throughout the evening, helping me to remain somewhat chill for most of the night.

When I finally settled into a novel, along with my ever increasing fatigue, my daughter detected my vulnerability and popped the question one last time. "Mom, can the guys please stay over. Ple-e-ease! It's the only 16^th birthday I'll ever have."

Little did I know, one of the boy's father had already arrived to pick them up, and another crew of kids were working on him out on the porch. After over an hour of wearing us down with their-junk-food-energy-fueled-persuasion, we gave in and I had my first co-ed sleepover.

Honestly, it wasn't that bad

After all my fretting, it was quite innocuous. I told the boys they had to sleep in the guest room without any girls, although I did find out there was some making out going on after I went to bed.

The next morning, I was exhausted, as were the kids, but we made it through the night just fine.

I imagine when my daughter gets her license and her own car, and is driving around late at night without my supervision, this co-ed sleepover will look like nothing much. I still don't think I'll be volunteering to host another one of these anytime soon though.

• Claire Volkman got divorced and spent the following year traveling to 20 countries.
• Some of the dates during her trips across Asia, South America, and Australia led to more heartbreak.
• Volkman, now 39, met her second husband on a dating app after she returned to the US.

It was a hot afternoon in Ho Chi Minh City. I was sitting on the edge of the hotel bed, scrolling through Instagram, about to go ham on a piping hot bowl of phở when I got a buzz. A text from my then-husband flashing six words nobody wants to read: "I think we need to talk."

On that September day in 2016, when I realized my marriage was over, I had no time to grieve. I was in Vietnam, about to embark on an eight-day reporting assignment. I called my parents and asked if they could meet me in Charleston after the trip.

My parents and best friend helped me move out of the house I had shared with my husband for almost 10 years. It took two days to box up nine years of memories. With no place to live and no grasp on the person I was anymore, I did the only thing I could think of: I ran.

I traveled to Myanmar, Colombia, and 20 other countries in 12 months. What I thought would be a year of escapism turned into a transformative adventure.

Finding my feet in Myanmar and South America

Two days after I moved out, I was on a flight to Myanmar for a two-week hiking, biking, and rafting trip. Alongside five strangers who quickly felt like family, my journey to finding myself again began. I found solace in the golden glow of Shwedagon Pagoda at sunset. I laughed while sipping cheap beers in small village restaurants during our bike ride from Mandalay to Meiktila.

I was too tired every night to think, dwell, or feel much of anything. Every morning I woke up, I felt a little more like myself.

During the two weeks I spent back home for Thanksgiving, reliving the divorce by having to tell my entire family what happened, I found myself jumping into the online dating scene.

I met one man online, based in the US, and we stayed in touch after I left to travel around South America. We talked for hours on Facetime as I sat in airports awaiting flights.

After a day of trekking through the jungles of Colombia, I would re-read his text messages before bed, getting butterflies every time. After four days of sweltering heat, mosquito bites, and blisters, I felt something I hadn't felt in years: pride.

I stood atop the ancient ruins of Ciudad Perdida, soaked in sweat but glowing with triumph. And the first person I called after a much-needed shower and change out of dirty hiking clothes was him.

Being alone helped me heal

I was too naive to know it wouldn't last. I had such hope that we'd survive the crash into real life, with him juggling his schedule working at a hospital and me traveling from country to country without an address.

Sadly, it didn't work, and our relationship ended as quickly as it started. Following the break-up, I went on a cruise through the Middle East. I felt alone throughout the trip. I'd walk the streets of Muscat — weaving through bustling markets, looking for ways to feel alive again. I rode camels in the desert of Doha, smiling for what felt like the first time in weeks.

On the next leg of my journey, I started to find some of my spunk again. I traveled to Australia and spent days wine tasting in Yarra Valley and bar-hopping all night in Melbourne. I was laughing again. I let myself have a one-night stand with a chef I just met — and enjoyed every second of it.

From there, I hopped from Melbourne to LA to Hong Kong, where I found myself with multiple dinner reservations and not a single person to dine with. To avoid another night alone, I found a match on Bumble. Eager to enjoy a free meal at a 4-star Michelin restaurant in Hong Kong, he joined for another whirlwind date.

He was charming, an expat from England who helped fill the void of being alone. It was the first and only time I "Bumbled abroad." After this, I met an Australian during a trip across Bali and Lombok. At the end of the trip, we were determined to make it work and said our tearful goodbyes. It didn't last.

I realized that I needed to focus on myself. Why was I so scared of being alone? As a writer living paycheck to paycheck without health insurance, I couldn't afford therapy. Instead, I hopped on another plane. This time to Iceland.

Finding my fearlessness in Greenland

On an expedition cruise through Greenland, I was inspired by some of the older writers I met. They weren't just accomplished journalists, either; they were strong, powerful, and single women whose worth was based on their careers and accomplishments.

Their wisdom, coupled with the landscapes of Greenland and Norway, showed me how resilient I could be. I was determined to focus on my goals and my worth outside a relationship.

After that trip, I sold stories to outlets I had always dreamed of writing for and found myself with more back-to-back adventures to finish off the year.

Back in Indiana, I gave it another shot and scrolled through matches on the dating app Coffee Meets Bagel, until one guy caught my eye. The photos were cute: riding a camel in Morocco, drinking tea in Jordan, and adventuring through Japan. I thought one date couldn't hurt, so we met up in Chicago, on my way to China for work.

It was the start of the end for me — the end of singledom.

What I Learned

I learned that heartbreak doesn't just crack you open — it splits you wide enough to let something new and better take root. That year of travel taught me to trust myself, to say yes more, and to embrace the messiness of life.

And now, years later, as I sit beside my husband and our 6-year-old and look back on that whirlwind year, I can't help but smile and yearn a little for the freedom I felt. Sometimes, you have to lose yourself to truly find your way.

Got a personal essay about lessons learned during travel that you want to share? Get in touch with the editor: [email protected].

• Justin Baldoni has sued Blake Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds.
• The suit makes claims, including that Lively hadn't read "It Ends With Us" well into production.
• It also appears to reference Lively's close friend and confidant Taylor Swift.

Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively's legal brawl deepened Thursday, as Baldoni and a group of plaintiffs sued his former "It Ends With Us" costar for $400 million.

The suit claims Lively falsely accused Baldoni of sexual harassment in order to hijack the film's creative direction and promotion. The lawsuit also names Lively's husband, Ryan Reynolds, and PR rep, Leslie Sloane, as defendants.

While some of the lawsuit rehashes allegations that appeared in an earlier suit against The New York Times, there are fresh claims in Baldoni's latest action — including an apparent nod to Taylor Swift.

"This latest lawsuit from Justin Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, and its associates is another chapter in the abuser playbook," Lively's legal team said in a statement. "A woman speaks up with concrete evidence of sexual harassment and retaliation and the abuser attempts to turn the tables on the victim."

"They are trying to shift the narrative to Ms. Lively by falsely claiming that she seized creative control and alienated the cast from Mr. Baldoni," the statement continued. "The strategy of attacking the woman is desperate, it does not refute the evidence in Ms. Lively's complaint, and it will fail."

"Ms. Lively will never again be allowed to continue to exploit actual victims of real harassment solely for her personal reputation gain at the expense of those without power," Baldoni's lawyer, Bryan Freedman, told BI in a statement.

Here are 6 takeaways from the latest chapter in the legal saga.

The suit claims that, well into production, Lively had not read the book 'It Ends With Us'

The suit says that "even well into production, Lively had not even read the book" that the movie was based on.

"She even tried to 'Google' the color of her character's hair rather than pick up the book," a footnote in the suit says.

Baldoni wrote to his business partner, Jamey Heath, in a text message — a screenshot of which is included in the lawsuit — that he understood Lively's reasons for not wanting to read it. The suit does not say the reason, however.

The suit says that Lively did at some point claim to have read "It Ends With Us."

The suit claims Lively served her sexual harassment complaint amid evacuation orders

Baldoni claims Lively's sexual harassment suit was served to Los Angeles-based defendants in the midst of wildfire evacuation orders.

The suit says: "On a day when Defendants were gathering their kids and pets, preparing 'go bags' and monitoring evacuation orders while fearing for their homes, Lively — from the safety of her penthouse in New York — deployed process servers in the midst of these troubling times."

The suit says Ryan Reynolds called Justin Baldoni a 'sexual predator'

Reynolds is mentioned several times in the suit, which claims the actor referred to Baldoni as a "sexual predator" to a WME agent during the "Deadpool & Wolverine" premiere.

The suit says Reynolds later demanded that the agent drop Baldoni as a client. A WME spokesperson previously denied that Lively or Reynolds pressured the company to drop Baldoni.

The suit also suggests Lively's attempt to seize control of "It Ends With Us" echoed a previous incident involving her husband. Reynolds is "widely reported to have insisted on taking so much control over the film 'Deadpool 2' that the director, Tim Miller, left the production," the suit claims, citing a Men's Health article from 2019.

A rep for Reynolds did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

The suit seems to reference Taylor Swift

The suit describes a conflict in which Baldoni felt hesitant after Lively re-wrote a key scene in the film.

The suit says that after a meeting at Lively's penthouse — which was attended by Reynolds and a "megacelebrity friend" — Baldoni felt he was being pressured to concede to the rewrites.

But in a text message to Lively included in the complaint, he appeared to express a more positive view of Lively's contributions: "Makes it so much more fun and interesting. (And I would have felt that way without Ryan and Taylor)."

Lively is known to be close friends with Taylor Swift and they are often photographed attending events, such as the Super Bowl, together.

In response, per a text in the suit, Lively described Reynolds and the megacelebrity friend as "my most trusted partners and the people I go to first with anything creative I touch," likening them to her "dragons" from the series "Game Of Thrones."

Elsewhere, the suit seems to allude to Swift, saying that Lively's decision to unfollow Baldoni on social media may have been strategic.

"Lively was leaving what she had earlier referred to as 'crumbs,'" the suit reads, "a social media strategy she had learned from a close celebrity friend: to give fans just enough to allow them to come to their own conclusions, thereby launching an army of detectives that, on information and belief, Lively hoped would turn against Baldoni."

A representative for Swift did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

The suit includes photos of Baldoni's basement celebration during the movie premiere

Baldoni alleges he was permitted to attend the film's premiere so long as he wouldn't interact with Lively. When she arrived at the premiere, Baldoni claims he and his guests were escorted to the building's basement by security.

"There, they were confined to a makeshift holding area surrounded by concession stand stock, with only fold-out tables and chairs arranged in a square," the suit reads. "The irony of being held in a basement on what was arguably one of the most important nights of Baldoni's career thus far, was not lost on anyone."

Baldoni counters Lively's claims of sexual harassment

Throughout the suit, Baldoni counters some of Lively's previous allegations of sexual harassment, including saying that her characterization of being "mostly nude" during a birthing scene was "dishonest." The suit says she was wearing black briefs, a pregnancy suit, and a hospital gown.

The suit also claims Lively mocked his appearance, joking that he needed a nose job. And while Lively had previously claimed Baldoni had improvised kissing during filming, Baldoni's complaint says Lively had done the same.

"It is clear Lively was initiating unchoreographed kissing: In one take, she pulled Baldoni in and kissed him once; in another twice, and the number of kisses, entirely initiated by Lively, changed at her whim," the suit says. "Lively demonstrated, again and again, that this was a normal and acceptable part of filming romantic scenes."

• Justin Baldoni's new lawsuit against Blake Lively references Ryan Reynolds' "Deadpool" franchise.
• The suit compares reported creative differences on "Deadpool 2" to Lively's battles with Baldoni on "It Ends with Us."
• Baldoni also recently claimed that the "Deadpool & Wolverine" character Nicepool was created to mock him.

Not even Deadpool is safe from being named in the continuing legal battle between Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively.

A new lawsuit filed Thursday by Baldoni, his associates at Wayfarer Studios, and his publicists against his "In Ends With Us" costar Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and her publicist Leslie Sloane uses the "Deadpool" movies as an example while making the claim that Lively seized control of the production of "It Ends With Us" and usurped Baldoni, the film's director.

The lawsuit also comes after Baldoni accused Reynolds of mocking him through the "Deadpool & Wolverine" character Nicepool.

Here's what to know about how the Marvel antihero got embroiled in the Baldoni-Lively feud.

Justin Baldoni and his team claim Ryan Reynolds used the Nicepool character to mock him

In "Deadpool & Wolverine," Deadpool (Reynolds) and Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) encounter a variant of Deadpool named Nicepool in a wasteland called The Void.

Unlike Deadpool, Nicepool is agreeable and friendly because "it costs nothing to be kind." The character also styles his hair in a man bun, has a four-legged companion named Dogpool, and speaks about being a feminist.

"Oh my goodness, wait until you see Ladypool," he tells Deadpool and Wolverine in one scene, referring to a female variant played by Lively. "She is gorgeous. She just had a baby too and [you] can't even tell."

In response, Deadpool says, "I don't think you're supposed to say that."

"That's OK," Nicepool replies, putting his hand over his heart. "I identify as a feminist."

Nicepool returns later in the movie when more variants fight Deadpool and Wolverine. In the battle, Reynolds' character uses Nicepool as a human shield against Ladypool's bullets. Nicepool dies shortly after.

In an interview on "The Megyn Kelly Show" in early January, Bryan Freeman, Baldoni's lawyer, said it's "pretty obvious" that Nicepool is a riff on Baldoni.

"If your wife is sexually harassed, you don't make fun of Justin Baldoni," Freedman said. "You don't make fun of the situation. You take it very seriously. You file HR complaints. You raise the issue and you follow a legal process. What you don't do is mock the person and turn it into a joke. There's no question it relates to Justin."

Around the time of the "Megyn Kelly Show" interview, Freedman reportedly sent a litigation hold letter to Marvel president Kevin Feige, Disney CEO Bob Iger, and "Deadpool" director Tim Miller in regards to Baldoni's "anticipated claims" and Reynolds, Lively, and others.

Variety, who viewed the litigation letter, reported that Baldoni felt that Reynolds intentionally made fun of him through the Nicepool character.

Baldoni has previously given a TED Talk and wrote an essay for Romper about why he's a feminist. Discussions about Lively's post-baby weight were also mentioned in Lively's California Civil Rights Department complaint and a federal complaint against Baldoni. According to Lively, Baldoni criticized her body and weight.

The letter asked Marvel and Disney, who produced and distributed "Deadpool & Wolverine," to preserve "any and all documents relating to or reflecting a deliberate attempt to mock, harass, ridicule, intimidate, or bully Baldoni through the character of 'Nicepool.'"

Baldoni's latest lawsuit references 'Deadpool' director Tim Miller's departure from the 2018 sequel

Baldoni's latest lawsuit accuses Lively of hijacking creative control of "It Ends With Us" and lists her possible motivations for doing so. Among the potential reasons is one related to her husband's work with the "Deadpool" franchise.

"Lively may have felt driven to match her star husband Ryan Reynolds, who is widely reported to have insisted on taking so much control over the film "Deadpool 2" that the director, Tim Miller, left the production," the lawsuit reads. "Seeing the fame and success that Reynolds commanded, she may have adopted his oft-repeated pattern wholesale to seize her own power and control."

Miller directed the first "Deadpool" movie, which was released in 2016. He was reportedly set to direct the sequel but left due to creative differences with Reynolds, who stars in and executive produces the films.

In a 2016 interview with GQ, Reynolds said that he had a clear vision for the character and the first movie.

He called Miller "a visual-effects wizard," but said he felt like the expert on the project's character and tone.

"I've also been with this thing the longest out of anybody, aside from the guys that wrote the comics," Reynolds said. "Eleven years I've been trying to get this Sisyphus rock up the hill, and it kept rolling back on top of me. So I'm gonna be all the fuck over it from the moment it starts to the moment it finishes."

Miller opened up about his departure during an appearance on KRCW's "The Business" podcast in 2019.

"I don't mind having a debate, but if I can't win, I don't want to play," Miller said. "And I don't think you can negotiate every creative decision, there's too many to make. So Ryan's the face of the franchise, and he was the most important component of that, by far. So if he decides he wants to control it, then he's going to control it."

Reps for Lively, Reynolds, Miller, Marvel, and Disney didn't immediately respond to Business Insider's requests for comment.

• SpaceX launched its Starship mega-rocket for the seventh time on Thursday.
• It performed an epic booster catch for the second time but the Starship exploded shortly after.
• The launch marked the first flight of a new-generation Starship.

SpaceX Starship mega-rocket has stumbled on the road to commercial use, unexpectedly dropping out of communications and exploding as it screamed toward space for its seventh flight on Thursday.

The mishap occurred on the same day SpaceX rival Blue Origin, owned by billionaire Jeff Bezos, successfully launched its New Glenn rocket into orbit.

What happened to the Starship

After liftoff, the rocket's Super Heavy booster heaved the Starship spaceship toward space, separated itself, and fell back toward Earth. As the falling booster approached SpaceX's Texas facilities, it nailed a complex maneuver that's only happened once before.

The booster fired its engines to lower itself to a catch tower, where a pair of giant "chopstick" arms closed around its trunk and caught it.

This technological feat is key to reaching SpaceX's goal of building a fleet of rapidly, fully reusable rockets to help slash spaceflight costs, advance the company's business model, and ultimately build a city of people on Mars.

However, shortly after the epic booster catch, SpaceX said the upper stage of the system, Starship itself, was lost and later confirmed on X that it had suffered a rapid unscheduled disassembly, which is another way of saying it exploded.

"We were just coming up to the end of that ascent burn for the ship when we started to lose a couple of the engines," Dan Huot, one of the hosts of SpaceX's livestream of the launch, said in the broadcast.

Then the ship dropped out of communications, meaning there was some kind of anomaly and Starship was lost, Huot said.

"This was a brand new vehicle essentially," he added. "With that, there's a lot of things you're upgrading, but there's a lot of things you're going to learn as all those systems are now interacting with each other for the first time."

Dean Olson, who captured footage of the Starship debris while he was in Turks and Caicos, told Business Insider that he heard the sound of constant "thunder" for about a minute after witnessing the explosion.

"I'm just walking out of the restaurant holding a cocktail, and I just looked up," Olson said. "Everyone's breath is kind of just taken away."

"Nobody knew what was going on," he added. "There was a lot of people panicking, to be honest with you."

Musk later said in an X post on Thursday night that preliminary indicators suggest Starship "had an oxygen/fuel leak in the cavity above the ship engine firewall that was large enough to build pressure in excess of the vent capacity."

"Apart from obviously double-checking for leaks, we will add fire suppression to that volume and probably increase vent area. Nothing so far suggests pushing next launch past next month," Musk added.

Elon Musk, SpaceX's founder and CEO, posted on X shortly after Starship's explosion that "improved versions of the ship & booster already waiting for launch."

Blue Origin coincidentally lost New Glenn's booster during Thursday morning's test flight.

"Kudos to you and the whole SpaceX team on the flawless booster catch! Very impressive," Bezos posted on X in response to Musk.

SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

SpaceX's Starship flight 7 didn't achieve all it set out to

For the first time, SpaceX flew Starship with a reused Raptor rocket engine.

The Super Heavy booster runs on 33 Raptor engines. For the entire rocket to be reusable, as Musk has said he intends, then those engines must be recycled and reused too.

Aboard Thursday's flight, one of those engines was the same one that SpaceX flew on its October flight.

Also flying for the first time was SpaceX's new generation second-stage Starship. This new generation comes with significant upgrades designed for "bringing major improvements to reliability and performance," the company wrote on its website.

For example, the flaps on this upgraded Starship are smaller and reoriented so they're not exposed to as much heat upon reentry. These flaps are designed to eventually help Starship fly back and touch down on land, making it reusable.

However, SpaceX has not yet recovered a Starship from spaceflight. So far, every Starship that has flown to space has sunk into the Indian Ocean. The ship on Thursday's flight was slated for the same fate before it was lost shortly after launch.

Starship was scheduled to deploy a set of 10 Starlink simulators, or dummies. They were about the same size and weight as SpaceX's next-generation V3 Starlink satellites. Deploying them was practice for eventually the real thing, which is a key part of SpaceX's business plan.

Starship is set to make other SpaceX rockets obsolete

In its final form, Starship should be able to release up to 100 second-generation Starlink satellites at a time, increasing SpaceX's internet coverage and a core pillar of its income.

Once Starship is operational, its sheer power will likely make it the cornerstone of SpaceX's business, which has long hinged on the comparatively wimpy Falcon 9 and its hefty counterpart, Falcon Heavy.

"Starship obsoletes Falcon 9 and the Dragon capsule," SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell said at the Baron Investment Conference in November, according to Ars Technica.

"We'll be flying that for six to eight more years," she added, "but ultimately, people are going to want to fly on Starship. It's bigger. It's more comfortable. It will be less expensive. And we will have flown it so many more times."

• Pam Bondi owned $3.9 million in Truth Social stock as of mid-December, per financial documents.
• She also earned more than $1 million last year from lobbying.
• Her total net worth in December was more than $12.1 million.

President-Elect Donald Trump's nominee to be the next attorney general of the United States, Pam Bondi, disclosed owning more than $3.9 million in stock in Trump's "Truth Social" platform in December.

Bondi disclosed the holdings in a statement of net worth she submitted on December 16 as part of her Senate confirmation process. Business Insider obtained a copy of that document, along a more detailed financial disclosure, on Thursday.

The former Florida Attorney General disclosed a total net worth of $12.1 million between her and her husband. Since Bondi's tenure ended in 2019, she has worked as a lobbyist and a consultant.

Bondi's financial disclosure, which covers all major financial activity from last year, lists a $1,067,000 salary from the lobbying firm Ballard Partners, along with $520,000 in consulting fees from the America First Policy Institute and $203,738 in legal fees from a law firm in Fort Lauderdale.

She also earned $27,600 in contributor fees from the conservative network Newsmax. Bondi's lobbying clients, according to the disclosure, include Alden Torch Financial, multiple sheriff's associations, and a refrigerant manufacturer called iGas USA. She also provided legal services to the pharmaceutical company Pfizer.

According to the disclosure, Bondi acquired the shares of Truth Social stock as compensation for consulting work when the company completed its SPAC merger and went public last March.

Bondi received $2,969,563 worth of shares at the time, according to the document. That means she earned almost $1 million from the investment in the subsequent nine months.

It's not clear whether Bondi would be required to divest from those holdings if confirmed to her job. Those details would be contained in Bondi's ethics agreement, a copy of which had not been made public as of publication on Thursday.

The Trump-Vance transition did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Many of Trump's nominees, in consultation with ethics officials in the executive branch, have agreed to divest from some of their assets in order to avoid conflicts of interest.

Bondi was nominated by Trump to lead the Department of Justice after former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida withdrew from consideration.

Her confirmation hearings began on Wednesday, and she is widely expected to be successfully confirmed by the Senate.

• A TikTok ban could happen as early as January 19.
• A ban could mean the migration of users — and billions of ad dollars — to competitors.
• Meta could gain up to $3.38 billion solely through freed up ad revenue, eMarketer estimated.

If TikTok is booted from US app stores, Meta could stand to be one of the largest beneficiaries, analysts say.

TikTok, the video platform owned by China's Bytedance, faces an impending ban if the US Supreme Court upholds a law that forces the parent company to divest from TikTok's US version or be forced to shut the app down by January 19.

The legal action would most likely bar people in the US from downloading TikTok for the first time from app stores or from installing updates, eventually making the platform unusable. The app could also go dark, blocking existing users from seeing videos.

In any case, a TikTok ban would hobble one of the largest social media companies in the US, leaving the time users spent on the app and billions of dollars of ad revenue up for grabs, according to an analysis from Business Insider's sister company EMARKETER.

"Our latest forecast estimates that TikTok generated $12.34 billion in US ad revenues in 2024," the analysis said. "Assuming TikTok could lose between 50% and 70% of ad revenues due to a ban, $6.17 billion to $8.64 billion of ad spending could need a new home."

And one social media giant's loss could be another social media giant's gain.

The analysis estimated that Meta, owner of Instagram and Facebook, could reap anywhere between $2.46 billion to $3.38 billion in ad revenue with a TikTok ban.

Spokespeople for Tiktok and Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Similarly, Morgan Stanley analysts say that Meta will be the "largest fundamental winner of any TikTok ban" in part due to its existing user base and data set.

The ban could add 5 to 9 percent in Meta's earnings per share for the 2026 fiscal year, Morgan Stanley analysts wrote.

Instagram scrolling is also poised to replace some of the time US users spent on TikTok, analysts say.

EMARKETER estimates that TikTok users in the US spent nearly an hour of their day on the app in 2024 and nearly three quarters of those users were also on Instagram.

"That leaves close to an hour of their daily media time up for grabs," eMarketer analysts wrote.

Morgan Stanley analysts say that Meta would gain around $.30 to $.60 to their 2026 earnings per share estimates for every 10% of TikTok's US time Meta captures.

The upside of a TikTok ban won't be concentrated to Meta.

Alphabet's YouTube and Snapchat may also see some benefits with TikTok out of the way.

For advertisers, a looming TikTok ban should serve as a prescient reminder that no platform, however large, is invincible.

"Although it's difficult to say if the TikTok ban will go ahead, as it's possible TikTok could sell at the last minute, this should serve as a warning not to put all your content eggs in one basket," Danielle Dullaghan, social strategy director, at the marketing agency Iris, told Business Insider.

James Poulter, head of AI and innovation at London-based ad agency House 337, told BI that the brands and creators who will succeed are those diversified across platforms and focused on "owned assets like websites and email lists."

"The brands and creators who thrive in uncertain times are those who prepare for the unexpected, ensuring their stories can be told regardless of the platform," he said.

• Biden announced an additional $600 million in student-loan forgiveness.
• The relief impacts defrauded borrowers and borrowers on income-based repayment plans.
• This marks Biden's final student-loan forgiveness action before he leaves the White House.

Student-loan forgiveness under President Joe Biden has officially reached the end of the road.

On Thursday, Biden's Education Department announced over $600 million in debt cancellation for 4,550 borrowers on income-based repayment plans and 4,100 borrowers who the department found were defrauded by DeVry University.

This latest announcement marks the final student-loan forgiveness action under the Biden administration.

"Four years ago, President Biden made a promise to fix a broken student loan system," Education Sec. Miguel Cardona said in a statement.

"We rolled up our sleeves and, together, we fixed existing programs that had failed to deliver the relief they promised, took bold action on behalf of borrowers who had been cheated by their institutions, and brought financial breathing room to hardworking Americans—including public servants and borrowers with disabilities," Cardona said.

Thursday's announcement brings total student debt relief under Biden to $188.8 billion for 5.3 million borrowers. It follows a series of debt relief actions earlier this week, including $4.5 billion in relief on January 15 for defrauded borrowers and $4.2 billion in relief on January 13 for additional defrauded borrowers, along with government and nonprofit workers and those with total and permanent disabilities.

The Education Department also announced on Thursday that it had completed the account adjustments for borrowers on income-driven repayment plans, which corrected borrowers' payment counts and ensured their progress toward forgiveness was up-to-date. The department said that borrowers who recently transitioned to different servicers might see an additional one or two months of payments credited in the coming weeks.

With Biden's final actions on student-loan forgiveness, a key chapter for millions of borrowers is closed. President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to prioritize broad student-loan forgiveness — he previously criticized Biden's efforts — meaning borrowers will likely continue their payments without expanded avenues for relief.

Meanwhile, the 9 million borrowers enrolled in Biden's SAVE plan, which he introduced in 2023 in an effort to make payments more affordable, are awaiting a final court decision on the plan, and they remain in forbearance in the meantime.

"For decades, the federal government promised to help people who couldn't afford their student loans because they were in public service, had disabilities, were cheated by their college, or who had completed decades of payments," Under Secretary of Education James Kvaal said in a statement. "But it rarely kept those promises until now."

• Michelin Guide expanded to Texas for the first time in 2024, awarding stars to four barbecue spots.
• La Barbecue, InterStellar BBQ, LeRoy and Lewis Barbecue, and Corkscrew BBQ got Michelin stars.
• I ordered food at all four spots and found Corkscrew BBQ was my favorite.

Live in Texas long enough, and you'll inevitably become fluent in barbecue. After all, barbecue joints here feel as numerous as Starbucks locations.

So, it's perhaps no surprise that the Michelin Guide awarded stars to four barbecue spots in Texas when it expanded to the state for the first time in 2024.

In November, la Barbecue, InterStellar BBQ, Corkscrew BBQ, and LeRoy and Lewis Barbecue each received a Michelin star. All of them are in Austin except for Corkscrew BBQ, which is located in the tiny town of Spring, just north of Houston.

As a Texas local, I visited all four Michelin-starred barbecue spots to see if they lived up to the hype.

The sweet aroma of smoked brisket greeted me as I arrived at InterStellar BBQ.

InterStellar BBQ opened in 2019 and is located in a strip mall near Cedar Park in Austin.

It had its large smoker in the parking lot near the main entrance, so I could smell delicious smoked meats before I even went inside.

By the time I got to InterStellar, the brisket was sold out.

InterStellar BBQ's menu was quite small, with seven meat selections, six options for sides, and four sandwich choices: pulled lamb, sausage, brisket, or turkey.

When I arrived at 2 p.m. on a Thursday, the restaurant had a sign on its front door listing sold-out items. I was bummed the brisket was gone, but I appreciated the clear communication, which made ordering more efficient.

Had I read the restaurant's online FAQ before I arrived, I would've planned to arrive earlier. Apparently, customers start lining up as early as 10 a.m. on weekdays.

The pork ribs were a standout.

Since I couldn't get brisket, I ordered a smoked pork spare rib and pulled lamb shoulder, the restaurant's spin on pulled pork.

For sides, I chose BBQ beans, beet salad, pickles, bread, and pink onions.

Overall, my meal was tasty. Seasoning can make or break barbecue, but InterStellar had expertly handled its pork rib and pulled lamb.

The rib's dry rub sustained a subtly sweet flavor even after it had cooled, and the lamb's gaminess was expertly balanced out with a blend of flavorful spices.

I enjoyed the sauces and sides of beans, but they didn't stand out much, and the meats were tasty enough on their own.

Austin's la Barbecue seems popular with celebs.

La Barbecue was first established in 2012 as a food trailer, and it moved to a storefront in East Austin in 2021. Over the years, celebrities like Dua Lipa, Prince Harry, and Megan Markle have been photographed visiting the famous eatery.

When I arrived at la Barbecue on a Thursday afternoon, there was already a line out front.

The line moved slowly since the restaurant only lets one group in at a time to order — probably because the space between the main counter and the front door is so small.

After about a 40-minute wait, a server inside la Barbecue waved at me to come inside.

The menu and ordering process felt pretty straightforward.

As I walked in, I saw one employee taking orders, a second preparing the meats, and a third cashing each guest out.

La Barbecue's menu seemed fairly standard with meats like brisket, beef/pork ribs, turkey, pulled pork, and classic sides like pickles, beans, and potato salad.

I also liked that a whole section is dedicated to signature sandwiches, including huge ones topped with Fritos, slaw, and multiple meats.

I had a bit of trouble deciding what to order.

I'm allergic to dairy and eggs, but brisket and pulled pork have always been safe bets for me at the numerous barbecue joints I've visited in Texas.

However, the employees helping me told me the brisket here contained butter. One explained they use butter to keep the brisket moist throughout the day (because if there's one thing Texans don't approve of, it's dry brisket).

Fortunately, though, they said the pulled pork was a safe bet.

I kept my la Barbecue order simple.

I ordered the pulled pork with a side of black beans and house-made garlic pickles.

The pork was cooked quite nicely with a strong pepper seasoning, and the garlic pickles tasted fresh and had a nice kick.

The beans were perfectly fine, but didn't strike me as a side I'd order again. I'd definitely order the pulled pork again, though.

LeRoy and Lewis Barbecue had a large space complete with a full bar.

LeRoy and Lewis Barbecue was a popular food truck for seven years before its first brick-and-mortar opened in South Austin in February.

I loved how large the space felt, from the long order counter to the full bar and ample seating space. I arrived on a Wednesday at 3 p.m. and only had to wait about five minutes to order.

I didn't feel rushed as the staff helped me decide what to get.

LeRoy and Lewis had the largest menu out of all four Michelin-starred restaurants I visited.

I loved seeing unique vegetarian options on the menu, including miso-glazed carrots and cauliflower burnt ends.

Plus, the creative side dishes stood out to me. I'd never seen beef-fat potato chips, pork hash and rice, and chori-papas (a dish with potatoes and chorizo) at a barbecue joint.

I also appreciated that the restaurant had an allergy menu posted inside.

LeRoy and Lewis Barbecue had the best, most unique sauces I tried.

I got pulled pork, brisket, beef-tallow chips, and kimchi, with jalapeños, pickles, and a side of house-made mustard and beet-barbecue sauce.

The meat was enjoyable, but LeRoy and Lewis's creative sides and sauces stole the show. The beef-tallow potato chips were also delicious and crisp, and the kimchi was pleasantly tangy.

Most of the other spots I visited had fairly standard sauces, but the ones here seemed so unique I had to try them. I was impressed — I never anticipated enjoying brisket with savory beet-barbecue sauce quite so much.

My last stop was CorkScrew BBQ.

To get to CorkScrew BBQ, I drove four hours from San Antonio to Spring, Texas.

The downhome barbecue joint has been around since 2011, and when I arrived at 1:30 p.m. on a Thursday, there was already a long line out front.

I was given a menu to look at while waiting in line, which helped speed up my ordering process. I also appreciated that a server asked if I wanted to buy something to drink while I waited.

The menu felt pretty expansive and covered all of the basics.

CorkScrew's menu had all of the barbecue basics: sliced brisket, pulled pork, turkey, pork ribs, and sausage links.

It also had several unique sandwich choices, like the Whole Hog, which is ¼-pound of pulled pork, a ¼-pound sausage, and a pork rib on a bun.

I also appreciated that the eatery had two taco options using corn tortillas from Tortilleria Zacatecas, a fellow Spring establishment.

I was most impressed by CorkScrew's juicy pulled pork.

I ordered brisket, pulled pork, and pit-smoked beans.

Much to my surprise, I enjoyed the pulled pork more than the brisket, though the latter was nice and juicy. In my experience, pulled pork can be a hit or miss — an afterthought on a barbecue menu that requires copious amounts of sauce to make it enjoyable and less dry.

Here, though, the pork wasn't dry at all, and I didn't feel the need to add any sauce to it. I loved how bite lent a subtly sweet aftertaste that enhanced the natural flavor of the meat itself.

The pit-smoked beans were tasty and had a nice smoky flavor, too.

Overall, CorkScrew was my top pick.

After visiting all of these Michelin-starred barbecue joints, CorkScrew was my favorite.

Although it took me a long time to get there, the quality of my order and the excellent service I received made my driving and waiting in line well worth it.

The barbecue I tried was excellent, with every single meat and side so perfectly smoked that my only regret was driving home without ordering more.

Had I been a Michelin inspector, I would have awarded CorkScrew BBQ the star based on its pulled pork alone.

• In a surprise development, Giuliani, Shaye Moss, and Ruby Freeman reached a settlement on Thursday.
• The settlement ends the four-year defamation case "once certain conditions are met."
• Giuliani's lawyer declined to say how a 2023 jury's $148M award to Moss and Freeman will be met.

Rudy Giuliani and the two Georgia election workers he defamed after the 2020 election said Thursday that they have reached a new monetary settlement that satisfies both sides — and which the former New York City mayor said lets him retain "all of my personal belongings."

The surprise settlement "will result in the satisfaction of the Plaintiffs' judgment," Giuliani tweeted minutes after the sides concluded a morning of back-room negotiations at a federal courthouse in Manhattan.

"I am satisfied with and have no grievances relating to the result we have reached," Giuliani's tweet continued. "I have been able to retain my New York coop and Florida Condominium and all of my personal belongings."

As part of the settlement, Giuliani, 80, promised to never again defame the election workers, Wandrea "Shaye" Moss and her mother, Ruby Freeman. The two had testified that they feared for their lives when Giuliani's false 2020 election-fraud accusations led to a barrage of racist death threats.

The former mayor and personal attorney for President-elect Donald Trump had owed the pair $148 million since December of 2023. That's when a jury tallied up the damages from what a judge said were his "extreme and outrageous" fraud accusations.

Giuliani's defamatory accusations included lying that the two were changing votes via flash drives and carting around thousands of fake ballots in rolling suitcases.

Giuliani attorney Joseph Cammarata declined to give further details of the settlement to reporters, saying that the parties had agreed to keep its material terms private.

"I'm not going to answer that question," he said when asked if anyone else had paid the $148 million on Giuliani's behalf, or if a smaller sum had been agreed to.

Cammarata also declined to say if Giuliani would get back the few items that he has so far forfeited, namely a Mercedes convertible once owned by Lauren Bacall, and a handful of luxury watches.

The agreement struck Thursday will be finalized "once certain conditions are met," at which point it "would result in the conclusion of all litigation currently pending between and among the Parties," according to a letter signed by both sides and filed with the court.

That litigation included civil contempt allegations brought by the mother-daughter pair, who'd alleged Giuliani was continuing to defame them.

"The past four years have been a living nightmare," the mother-daughter pair said in a statement.

"We have fought to clear our names, restore our reputations, and prove that we did nothing wrong. Today is a major milestone in our journey. We have reached an agreement and we can now move forward with our lives. We have agreed to allow Mr. Giuliani to retain his property in exchange for compensation and his promise not to ever defame us."

Their attorney, Aaron Nathan declined to speak to reporters.

Under Thursday's agreement, Giuliani, who was not present for the negotiations, will keep his two most valuable possessions. His Palm Beach condo is worth $3.5 million and his Manhattan coop is worth $5.6 million, according to court papers.

Other valuables that were never turned over despite multiple court orders — and which now apparently will not be — included a signed Joe DiMaggio jersey and a cache of other Yankees memorabilia.

Andrew Giuliani was at the courthouse in Lower Manhattan on Thursday and told reporters he will get to keep three World Series rings, originally his father's and valued at $50,000 each.

The question of who gets the rings and the Florida condo had been the subject of a mini-trial originally scheduled for Thursday before the parties instead turned to settlement negotiations.

Thursday's agreement capped three days of negotiations, Cammarata told reporters.

"I'm really proud of my father," the younger Giuliani told reporters outside the courthouse. "He's an American hero, an American icon."

This article is part of "Workforce Innovation," a series exploring the forces shaping enterprise transformation.

2024 was a year of major transformations in the workforce: the surge in AI adoption, shifts in the makeup of the C-suite, and new approaches to worker well-being and DEI initiatives.

For the final roundtable of Business Insider's Workforce Innovation series, Rebecca Knight, a contributing reporter for BI, asked board members to predict the most important changes for the workforce in 2025.

In their predictions, participants highlighted the advancement of AI agents and search results as well as the importance of learning opportunities to help employees keep up with new technology.

They also discussed the trend toward skills-focused hiring and talent management — but they also emphasized the challenges of executing it.

"I think there can be a difference between larger organizations that have been focused on this for a while versus midsize and smaller companies that perhaps are just starting that journey," said Purvi Tailor, the vice president of human resources at Ferring Pharmaceuticals USA.

Jack Azagury, the group chief executive for consulting at Accenture, shared his company's experience implementing skills-based HR during the pandemic, when it had to retrain more than 100,000 employees on cloud technology.

"We've been on the journey for about 10 years on skills-based HR," he said. "It took a while to get it right."

The roundtable participants were:

• Anant Adya, executive vice president, service offering head, and head of Americas delivery, Infosys
• Jack Azagury, group chief executive for consulting, Accenture
• Lucrecia Borgonovo, chief talent and organizational effectiveness officer, Mastercard
• Kenon Chen, executive vice president of strategy and growth, Clear Capital
• Maggie Hulce, chief revenue officer, Indeed
• Shane Koller, senior vice president and chief people officer, Ancestry
• Justina Nixon-Saintil, vice president and chief impact officer, IBM
• Marjorie Powell, chief HR officer and senior vice president, AARP
• Purvi Tailor, vice president of human resources, Ferring Pharmaceuticals USA
• Sharawn Tipton, chief people and culture officer, LiveRamp

The following has been edited for length and clarity.

Rebecca Knight: What do you predict will be the single most important change in the workforce in 2025? And what advice do you have for business leaders to prepare themselves for that change?

AI search, workflows, and ethics

Kenon Chen: I've been thinking about this a lot, and I think it'll have a really large impact, which is the idea of an AI-first search. This is where the search funnel is providing direct answers as opposed to just a ranked set of results. I think of it as summary-before-source results.

There are a number of companies looking at adopting this technology in-house as a way of modernizing the knowledge base and providing employees with direct searchable information to do their jobs.

It really changes the historical barriers to accessing subject-matter expertise within a company. To access someone who used to be the owner of that data or the one who knew the most about that subject, you had to engage their time. In this new world, you can bypass all of that and get an answer. But it might not be the most accurate answer.

If it's leveraged well, I think companies can actually have a really strong competitive advantage, because making data more available to employees can help people have shared goals and derive their value from achieving that shared goal together as opposed to just managing data currency.

Justina Nixon-Saintil: There's been a lot of talk about AI agents. I think there are two areas that companies have to really focus on for 2025. One is how do you balance innovation versus executing some of these AI systems in the most responsible way? And I think both of them are tied to ethical AI and skills building. Focusing on upskilling your employees and making sure you have a skilled talent pipeline in AI will be critical for employers this year.

The second thing is the ethical responsibilities that companies have. When you're providing a prompt for a system to execute something, you really have to consider the implications of that. What are the types of guardrails that you have to put in place to be able to use AI agents effectively and also safeguard your company?

Maggie Hulce: There are incremental projects in particular functions that are using AI to make workflows better. Then there are the reimagination projects of how should this customer journey be radically different if AI can drive all of these steps? And it cuts across many people's ownership lines and teams.

Organizationally, how do you make sure there's a group of people set up and empowered to say, "I can think about problems that would shake up a lot of things with a clean sheet of paper"? I think if we leave it for each function to sort out when it's that loaded across functions, it's too challenging.

Culturally, how do we reward innovation and adaptability and let people embrace change? How do you reward and reinforce a culture that says: "You figured out how we could do this translation thing totally differently. Don't worry that we need to retrain the manual translation team; we will retrain them. Think about what can and should be changed with AI."

Lifelong learning and upskilling

Marjorie Powell: The workforce is continually being driven by the aging of the population and the growing prominence of older workers.

In 2024, you saw more people over 65 choosing to stay in the workforce than ever before, partly because of the rising cost of living and concerns about retirement security. So employers are going to have to adapt by creating age-inclusive workplaces. They're going to have to harness the experience and the skills of older workers.

This is also going to mean that we have to rethink traditional career trajectories and offer flexible work arrangements. We're going to have to invest in lifelong learning opportunities for older workers, keep them engaged, and keep them invested in the workplace.

Shane Koller: This is a key area where the HR function can and should influence companies going forward. What I see in the workforce, even with employees who are relatively tech-savvy, is that it feels like they're stuck right now on what next step they need to take to be along with the ride versus being left behind. This is where we as a function have to really get out of neutral and help the workforce understand what those next steps are.

Nixon-Saintil: Lifelong learning doesn't just end with AI. You have to consider the acceleration of technology. How do we make sure people understand that every new wave of technology will demand new skills and that lifelong learners will thrive? This has to be a complete mindset change for employees and employers from an investment perspective.

The other thing, just with my social-responsibility hat on, is how do we make sure we're investing in populations and providing them with access to free skilling, mentors, and real learning experiences so that they can be prepared? How do we build that talent pipeline?

That's something we are doing through programs like IBM SkillsBuild. But it's overall something that every company needs to consider — not just investing in your employees but looking at universities, K-12 systems, and partnerships with nonprofit organizations that focus on marginalized groups and provide free access to these new skills and technologies.

Skills-based talent management

Anant Adya: I'm a big believer that skills are more important than the four-year college degrees that everybody runs after. We recruit a lot from underrepresented communities and communities in general where we do not look for degrees.

In fact, we are going to announce some sort of target for ourselves where we say that X percentage of our population is going to come from skills and not from four-year degrees.

Sharawn Tipton: I also see skills-based talent management as one of the biggest trends for 2025. We talk a lot about experience and what people have in their tool kits, but it's really about skill and learning agility, because the technology is moving so quickly that you have to work in a different way.

Jack Azagury: Skills-based HR is a very complex area. The first pointer I'd give is to start in one place, not the entire enterprise, and pilot and get the algorithms. It took us years to get the right algorithm to determine what skills somebody had.

The second is to be very transparent about how you're measuring skills. For example, our algorithm says you need to have worked on this type of job for this amount of months, and that job cannot be more than six months old.

The third thing I would say is do not use skills-based HR for cost reduction.

The fourth is employees need to see how you're going to use skills-based HR — how you're going to give people new opportunities, training, and development. They need to see the positive coming out for their careers in your organization.

Lucrecia Borgonovo: The biggest change is definitely going to be around skills-powered organizations. We know that there's not necessarily a playbook and we have to cocreate this playbook together. I think this requires pretty significant change management in addition to tech enablement.

What we say to our leaders at Mastercard is to make sure that you're taking on a much more enterprise-wide versus siloed approach when you think about talent and skills.

From an employee standpoint, we were talking about learning agility as a huge currency. You want to have employees who are curious, open, and adaptable and who could be much more fundable in this incredibly changing workplace.

Chen: The best way to prepare for change and transformation is to ensure your fundamentals are in place. There's a reason sports teams, musicians, and other folks who are trying to master a new skill often go back to make sure their fundamentals are really solid so they have a foundation to build upon for something new.

I've been thinking about that a lot for AI and skills-based HR. If the basics — things like transparency, communication, shared mission, purpose, and culture — aren't in place, it's really difficult to engage in a radical transformation. The speed all this is moving at is so rapid that it's impossible to predict exactly how this might play out. But if the fundamentals are in place, you can weather those unknowns.

• TikTok is set to be banned in the United States on Sunday, one day before Trump becomes president.
• He's pledged to save the app — and some Democrats hope he's able to.
• "You've got to be supportive of anyone trying to keep it alive at this point," one Democrat told BI.

With a TikTok ban appearing imminent, some Democratic lawmakers are suddenly finding themselves on the same page as President-elect Donald Trump.

Trump, despite his efforts to ban the app via executive order during his first administration, has pledged to "save" the app. He's set to take office on Monday, one day after the ban is set to go into effect.

"Like a broken clock is right twice a day, Donald Trump might be right on this one," Rep. Mark Pocan, a Wisconsin Democrat who's long been outspoken against a ban, told BI. "I think you've got to be supportive of anyone trying to keep it alive at this point."

"I would welcome the new administration figuring out a path forward so that TikTok can actually continue," Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia of California, another longtime opponent of a ban, told BI.

Pocan and Garcia were among the 50 House Democrats who voted against a bill last March that required ByteDance, the Chinese company that owns TikTok, to sell the popular video-sharing app or face a ban amid national security concerns.

As Congress began to consider the bill, Trump came out against a ban, arguing that doing so would only benefit Meta. Congress ultimately passed the bill by a wide bipartisan vote and President Joe Biden signed it into law, setting January 19 as the deadline for a sale.

In the meantime, Trump positioned himself as a potential TikTok savior and established a campaign account on the platform. Late last month, Trump asked the Supreme Court to pause the ban until he takes office, though it appears likely that the court will allow it to move forward.

Trump is now considering taking executive action to halt the enforcement of a ban, according to multiple reports, though it's unclear whether such a move would withstand a legal challenge.

"President Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to save Tik Tok, and there's no better deal maker than President Trump," Trump-Vance Transition Spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told BI in a statement.

Some business leaders with ties to Trump, including Elon Musk, have been floated as potential buyers.

"My guess is, he's got a different motive than I do," Pocan said. "Hopefully it's not just to have some friend of his have the opportunity to purchase it or make money."

Democratic Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida told BI that he hopes Trump can somehow prevent a ban, even if it's "obviously not good for us politically if he saves TikTok."

"If Joe Biden was the one to ban TikTok and Donald Trump was the one to save it, unfortunately, there's a lot of young voters out there who that might be more important to them than other issues," Frost said, adding that Trump would also be saving small businesses who rely on the app. "We warned about these things when the bill was being crafted."

"I've had dozens and dozens of creators and small business owners reach out to me and say, 'I'm going to lose my livelihood," Garcia said. "I'm not sure that people understand how dependent some small businesses are on TikTok."

Other Democrats appear to be grappling with the political implications of the looming ban as well.

On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that Democrats supported legislation to give ByteDance more time to sell TikTok.

"The law passed last year was intended to sever TikTok from the influence of the CCP while keeping the app available for Americans," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "It's clear that more time is needed to find an American buyer and not disrupt the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans."

Democratic senators tried to pass a bill to give ByteDance more time on Wednesday night via voice vote. Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas objected, arguing that TikTok is harmful to children's mental health, even aside from concerns about national security.

• WalletHub released a report of the safest states in the US.
• It ranked states based on 52 safety indicators, including work safety and emergency preparedness.
• Vermont was ranked the safest state in the US, followed by New Hampshire and Maine.

With a rise in climate-related disasters — from hurricanes and storms to the recent wildfires in Los Angeles — one thing is clear: Safety is no longer limited to living in a crime-free neighborhood.

These days, safety has taken on a new meaning, encompassing a range of factors from emergency preparedness to financial stability.

Taking into account these evolving priorities, WalletHub released a report in October listing the safest states in the US based on 52 factors in five key areas: personal and residential safety, financial safety, road safety, workplace safety, and emergency preparedness.

Each state was given an overall score out of 100 based on its average rating across the five categories, and all the states were then ranked based on these scores.

The data used in the report was sourced from the US Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, TransUnion, and US Fire Administration, among other sources.

From Vermont and Maine to Utah and Wyoming, here are the 10 safest states in the US, according to WalletHub.

10. Wyoming

Wyoming, which also came 10th in 2023, ranked relatively high (15th) on both personal and residential and financial safety for 2024.

In all other categories — road and workplace safety and emergency preparedness — it ranked 21st. Casper, the second largest city in the state was also named the second safest city in the US in a separate study by WalletHub.

However, the state has the seventh-highest bullying incidence rate and the second-worst fatal occupational injuries per total workers, WalletHub reported.

9. Rhode Island

Rhode Island has also retained its ninth spot on the list.

The state ranked eighth on emergency preparedness scale and 11th on road safety. Its ranking for personal residential safety, though, dropped to 19, compared to eight in 2023.

Still, the state has the fewest fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel, the fourth-fewest assaults per capita, the third-lowest bullying incidence rate, and the fourth-lowest share of uninsured residents, per WalletHub.

The state did not fare as well on the workplace safety ranking, standing 38th, despite having the fewest fatal occupational injuries per total workers.

8. Minnesota

Minnesota, too, has maintained its ranking from 2023, retaining the eighth position.

The Midwestern state scored highly under three categories: financial safety, where it ranked ninth among all states; road safety, where it ranked second; and workplace safety, where it stood sixth.

It also has the third lowest fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel and the fifth-lowest share of uninsured residents and fatal occupational injuries per total workers.

7. Connecticut

Connecticut, which ranked sixth in 2023, has swapped spots with Hawaii, previously ranked seventh.

The Constitution State, has the second best personal and residential safety among all 50 states. It is also the 16th safest in terms of emergency preparedness and 20th in road safety.

In addition to its high rankings, when compared to other states, it has the third-fewest assaults per capita, third-highest percentage of adults with rainy day funds, and, like Rhode Island, the second fewest fatal occupational injuries per total workers.

6. Hawaii

Hawaii moved from seventh in 2023 to the sixth-safest state in the US in 2024.

This improvement is partly due to its strong performance in financial safety, where it ranked sixth, as well as in personal and residential safety and emergency preparedness, both ranking 11th.

The state also stands out for having the fifth-lowest rate of assaults per capita and the highest percentage of adults with rainy-day funds.

5. Utah

Utah, the fourth-safest state in 2023, moved down one spot, ranking fifth in 2024.

The Beehive State ranked No.1 among all states in workplace safety and fourth in emergency preparedness. It also fared well in road safety, ranking seventh overall.

Additionally, the state has the second-lowest per capita losses from climate disasters, which means it suffers relatively low monetary losses from events like hurricanes, floods, or wildfires when calculated per person.

4. Massachusetts

Massachusetts ranked among the top 10 in at least four categories, including third-highest in personal and residential and road safety.

It was also the fourth-best state in the US for financial safety and ranked 10th in emergency preparedness.

It's also the state with the second-fewest fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel, the fifth-lowest bullying incidence rate, the lowest share of uninsured residents, and the fourth-highest percentage of adults with rainy-day funds, per WalletHub's report.

3. Maine

WalletHub ranked Maine as the third-safest state to live in the US because of its high financial, personal and residential safety rankings. The state has one of the lowest unemployment rates and one of the strongest job growth rates in the country.

According to the report, the state also has one of the lowest crime rates in the country, with the second-fewest aggravated assaults and third-fewest thefts per capita. Between June 2022 and June 2024, it also had the second-fewest mass shootings.

In addition to its strong safety ranking, the Pine Tree State also has a very low risk of natural disasters.

2. New Hampshire

The Granite State, known for its natural beauty, ranked second on WalletHub's safety index.

It topped the rankings in personal and residential safety thanks to its low rates of violence, a high number of neighborhood watch groups per capita, and strong financial safety.

New Hampshire also secured second place in financial safety and ranked third overall in emergency preparedness. It has the fewest assaults per capita and the lowest unemployment rate, alongside South Dakota, North Dakota, Vermont, and Hawaii.

However, the state also has the sixth-highest bullying incidence rate in the country.

1. Vermont

Vermont has been the safest state in the US on WalletHub's index for two years in a row.

The Green Mountain State has maintained its top position, in part because it is the No. 1 state in the country for financial safety — WalletHub reported it has one of the country's lowest employment rates and one of the strongest job growth rates.

Vermont also came second in workplace safety and fourth in road safety, with the report chalking this up, in part, to "good driving behavior": The state has the lowest percentage of drivers who've used a phone behind the wheel, per WalletHub.

It was also in the top 10 among the two other categories, ranking sixth in personal and residential safety and ninth in emergency preparedness.

• Providing on-site protection during a fire is a tiny part of what private firefighting companies do, executives told BI.
• Crews for on-site protection cost thousands per day.
• Companies in the space said they mostly contract with the federal government or insurers, not private landowners.

Private firefighters aren't doing what you likely think they are — not exactly.

Reports of wealthy homeowners in the Los Angeles area paying private firefighters thousands of dollars per day have spread on social media in the past week, perpetuating the perception among some that on-site emergency protection for structures is what the industry is all about. Executives at two California-based private firefighting companies told Business Insider that's not the case.

Private firefighting for individual private landowners is niche

Jess Wills, president of Firestorm Wildland Fire Suppression, says his business primarily focuses on contracting with the federal government to suppress wildfires.

Deborah Miley, the executive director of the National Wildfire Suppression Agency, which represents more than 300 private firefighting companies, told BI that private firefighters have been contracting with the federal government since the 1980s, whereas the sliver of the industry that contracts directly with private landowners is "in its infancy." Some private companies also contract directly with insurers, Miley said, a practice that is also relatively new and far more common than working with homeowners directly.

Private firefighting as it's often perceived — with trucks stationed outside an individual's home, dousing it with water as a blaze burns — is not widespread, Wills said. He said that the practice makes up a tiny part of his business.

Private contractors who work for owners of homes or private land comprise less than 1% of the private fire service industry, according to the National Wildfire Suppression Association. Some private firefighting companies contract with insurance carriers to protect properties.

Wills said he first noticed interest in on-site fire suppression from private landowners a little under two decades ago.

"You started seeing high-net-worth folks making phone calls," Wills told BI, saying he doesn't publicly advertise the service. "For us, what happens is, fires kick-off, and then people start just getting online, Googling, searching 'private fire protection,' and somehow we come up."

Joe Torres, the founder of All Risk Shield, said he offers on-site protection as a small portion of his business. All Risk Shield provides three tiers of year-round fire defense services at varying price points, with the most basic costing $2,500 per year. The first tier includes preventive maintenance, and the second adds fire monitoring and further preparatory services. Only tier three, the most expensive, includes an on-site team to protect a property during a blaze. He declined to share how much tier three costs.

All Risk Shield doesn't offer on-site protection outside of the year-round package. Torres, who was a public firefighter for 24 years before founding his company, said he only has "a handful of those clients" who opt for a tier three service in California.

On-site protection can cost thousands per day

Neither Wills nor Torres shared how much it costs to hire a private firefighting crew for on-site emergency protection for an individual landowner. Both said that estimates of around $5,000 per day are consistent with what they believe some competitors charge.

Wills told BI that he charges individuals a very similar rate to the federal government — for a three-person crew in California, he said his contracts with the federal government cost about $4,000 per day. Rates vary based on location, the size of the property, and the number of trucks, he said.

Torres said his primary goal is to make basic fire protection accessible to as many people as possible, particularly through his least expensive, tier-one package. He said he worries that some companies are charging people exorbitant rates in dire situations.

"I've heard some numbers and some stuff, and it doesn't sound good," he said.

David Torgerson, the CEO of a company that exclusively works with insurers, previously told BI that he never interfaces with homeowners. His company, he said, protects vulnerable structures ahead of fires based on risk, not value.

Aspects of the private firefighting industry could be on the rise

Wills doesn't anticipate that the private firefighting industry will significantly grow in the next few years or that many people will take preventative action to fire-proof their homes. He said people are quick to forget about fires a few months after they happen.

Torres said he has seen an uptick in business since 2018, telling BI that there has been "significant growth" in his company since 2020. Miley, of the National Wildfire Suppression Agency, said she thinks more people will become interested in fire-hardening, or protecting their properties before a blaze comes in.

Fire mitigation strategies can include applying protective gels, removing combustibles, and cleaning gutters, Torgerson previously told BI. Typically, his crews will work on insured properties hours or days before a wildfire is anticipated to pass through.

Customers using private firefighters face criticism

Some of the few Californians that have hired on-site protection for their homes have faced criticism.

Keith Wasserman, cofounder and managing partner of Gelt Venture Partners, a Los Angeles-based real estate investment firm, sparked backlash after posting on social media asking if anyone had access to private firefighters to protect his home in Pacific Palisades, where the average property price is around $3.4 million.

"Does anyone have access to private firefighters to protect our home in the Pacific Palisades?" he asked in a since-deleted X post earlier this month. "Need to act fast here. All neighbors houses burning. Will pay any amount."

Wasserman didn't reply to a request for comment from Business Insider.

It's not the first time celebrities have hired private firefighters to protect their homes. In 2018, Kim Kardashian West and Kanye West, who now goes by the name Ye, hired crews to protect their $60 million home when blazes approached their neighborhood.

That incident also led to backlash.

Wills said he thinks it's the first time many people are learning about the private firefighting industry. Both he and Torres told BI that they don't think most understand the bulk of their business focus, but are well aware of the emerging negative connotations associated with the industry.

"I understand how the perception is on that, of course, but it's like, welcome to the real world," Wills said about the bubbling controversy. "Ask anybody: if you had the money in the bank and you knew somebody that had an engine available, why wouldn't you?"

• Trump is planning executive orders aligned with his "energy dominance" agenda.
• His top priorities are expanding fossil fuel exports and drilling on federal lands and waters.
• Trump may hit roadblocks in Congress and the courts in trying to roll back climate rules.

President-elect Donald Trump is expected to make a big push for fossil fuels on January 20 through a series of executive orders aimed at boosting US oil and gas production and rolling back the Biden administration's climate rules.

On the first day of his second term, Trump could direct federal agencies to approve new terminals to export liquified natural gas (LNG) and start unwinding restrictions on oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters, several fossil fuel industry lobbying groups helping shape Trump's energy agenda said.

"On day one, we're excited about them lifting the LNG pause, which has been so damaging to the American LNG industry and our reliable trade partners overseas," Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, told reporters at an event in Washington, DC on January 14. He added that many executive orders will instruct federal agencies to restore America's focus on "energy dominance."

Other targets include Biden-era regulations that encourage the shift to electric vehicles, including curbs on tailpipe pollution and a federal waiver allowing California to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. Trump may also toss out Biden's executive order from 2021 directing federal agencies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across their buildings, vehicles, and supply chains.

Trump campaigned on a promise to "drill, baby, drill" and "unleash Americans' energy production," even with the US already producing a record amount of oil and gas and being the world's largest exporter. Industry executives, employees, and corporate political action committees donated more than $32 million to Trump's campaign, data tracked by Open Secrets shows.

But many of the industry's priorities can't be accomplished with an executive order alone, either because Congress has to change laws or federal agencies have to undertake lengthy rulemaking processes. Attempts to roll back Biden's climate rules will likely be challenged in court, as well.

"When he takes office, President Trump will make America energy dominant again, protect our energy jobs, and bring down the cost of living for working families," Karoline Leavitt, spokesperson for the Trump transition team, said.

Here's what fossil fuel groups said could happen quickly in the new administration.

Greenlighting new gas terminals

Trump can direct the Energy Department to start approving new permits for LNG terminals immediately via executive order, said Kenny Stein, vice president for policy at the American Energy Alliance, a conservative group advising Trump's energy agenda.

The move would end a temporary pause the Biden administration instituted in January 2024 so the Energy Department could study the impacts of more LNG exports on the economy, national security, and the climate crisis.

The API argued that the pause threatens global energy security and US competitiveness overseas and will cost jobs at home. In December, the Energy Department found that the US is already on track to double LNG exports to 2028 under approved projects, and continuing to approve new projects will increase greenhouse gas emissions fueling the climate crisis.

Environmental groups are expected to challenge new LNG permits in court and could cite the Energy Department's study.

Oil and gas leases on federal land and water

Trump has repeatedly promised to unwind limits that the Biden administration's Interior Department placed on oil and gas drilling in areas like the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska.

Trump is expected to direct the Interior Department to revise a five-year offshore leasing plan finalized by the Biden administration. The plan scheduled three auctions between 2024 and 2029 — a record low compared to the 47 sales proposed during Trump's first term.

In Alaska, the president-elect also wants to further open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the National Petroleum Reserve to fossil fuel development.

Biden in 2023 approved ConocoPhillips' massive Willow oil drilling project in the National Petroleum Reserve, but then made tens of millions of acres of the reserve off-limits to drilling to protect wildlife habitat.

During Trump's first term, Congress also directed the Interior Department to open Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling for the first time. The Biden administration auctioned off 400,000 acres in January, the smallest amount allowed under the law, but it didn't attract a bidder. An auction in the final weeks of the Trump administration also didn't attract interest from any oil majors.

The state of Alaska sued the Biden administration over the sale, arguing that the area's size and additional restrictions made oil drilling economically unviable. The Trump administration could potentially expand the sale.

Targeting EVs

Trump is also expected to direct the EPA and Transportation Department to start reviewing and rewriting regulations that encourage the shift to electric vehicles.

"I will end the electric vehicle mandate on day one," Trump said during a speech at the Republican National Convention in July. "Thereby saving the US auto industry from complete obliteration, which is happening right now, and saving US customers thousands and thousands of dollars per car."

There are no federal EV mandates, however. In March, the EPA finalized tailpipe pollution limits for cars, SUVs, and trucks sold between 2027 and 2032, which are the strictest to date. The Biden administration said this could boost electric vehicles to up to 56% of new car sales, while hybrids could account for about 13% of sales as automakers adjust production to meet the new standards.

Trump is likely to go after California's recent move to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. Under the Clean Air Act, the state can set more stringent limits on tailpipe pollution than the federal government as long as it's granted a waiver from the EPA. The agency in December greenlighted California's plan to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035, which the Trump administration is expected to revoke — similar to a fight with California over the waiver in his first term.

That would likely set up a legal fight with California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has moved to "Trump-proof" the state and vowed to defend the state's EV and climate policies.

• Meta is adopting a more aggressive approach to workforce management.
• This shift marks a departure from Silicon Valley's traditional talent retention strategy.
• Tech firms now prioritize lean teams over retaining talent to prevent competition gains.

Meta is adopting a more performance-focused approach to workforce management, one that Amazon embraced years ago: systematically pushing out under-performers to maintain lean, high-performing teams.

This week, Meta announced internally that it plans to cut 5% of its lowest-performing employees, a first for the social media giant, as part of a border strategy to "raise the bar" according to a memo from CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

This stance mirrors Amazon's longstanding philosophy of maintaining strict annual turnover targets known as unregretted attrition (URA). Amazon managers are expected to regularly shed a set percentage of employees deemed dispensable. Even Andy Jassy, the company's CEO, has had a URA target in the past to replace 6% of his team annually, Business Insider reported.

"The overarching trend is that corporations feel they have more power over their employees," Laszlo Bock, who oversaw the tremendous growth in Google's workforce as the company's head of people operations from 2006 to 2016, told BI. "The current political environment emboldens these CEOs to take drastic actions."

Donald Trump was reelected US President in November and tech companies, which had championed progressive workplace policies and employee-friendly initiatives in 2016, are now taking a markedly different approach, Bock added.

The shift in how Meta manages employees marks a significant departure from Silicon Valley's traditional talent strategy. Leading tech companies notoriously overpaid for talent for years — even those workers who were not fully productive — to keep them away from competitors.

"Their business model thrived on tremendous margins, so they hired freely, knowing that if some employees underperformed, at least they weren't boosting the competition," Bock explained.

That line of thinking seems to have changed.

Weeding out underperformers

At Meta, managers have been instructed to identify under-performers through a tiered rating system, according to a memo from Hillary Champion, Meta's director of people development growth programs seen by BI.

Last week BI reported that Microsoft is also planning to make performance-based job cuts.

"At Microsoft we focus on high performance talent," a spokesperson previously told BI. "We are always working on helping people learn and grow. When people are not performing, we take the appropriate action."

Google, too, had its own version of performance culling under Bock's leadership that the company kept secret.

Every quarter, the company identified the bottom 5% of employees in any group of at least 200 people (such as a division), combining smaller teams until they hit that threshold, a process that was separate from regular performance reviews, Bock told BI.

He said some of these people were still good performers. "If your worst person is better than my best person, you're still going to have a bottom 5%," he said. Google then coached, transferred, or terminated these workers. Google did not respond to a request for comment from BI and Meta declined to comment on this report.

Today's tech CEOs, however, are taking a more direct approach.

"Everyone at these companies still gets performance ratings and goes through the motions," Bock said, "But, I think the CEOs are seeing an opportunity in the marketplace and the political environment and saying 'We're just going to pull the bandaid off.' They feel employees are entitled."

The message is clear: If you're not building the future, you might just be history.

If you're a current or former Meta employee, contact this reporter from a nonwork device securely on Signal at +1-408-905-9124 or email him at [email protected].