Blog

President Donald Trump has agreed to a deal in which Oracle and Walmart will take a minority stake in a U.S.-headquartered company called TikTok Global. ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, says it will have an 80% stake.Nicolas Economou | NurPhoto | Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden signed an executive order on Wednesday that sets criteria for the government to evaluate the risk of apps connected to foreign-adversaries, a move with implications for Chinese-owned apps like TikTok and WeChat.Biden revoked and replaced the three executive orders by former President Donald Trump which sought to ban transactions with TikTok and WeChat by American businesses. One of the orders also sough to ban TikTok, resulting in a prolonged court battle. TikTok remains available and popular in the U.S.Biden’s new order will direct the Commerce Department to review apps tied to foreign adversaries and lays out what it should consider an “unacceptable risk,” according to a White House fact sheet. That includes criteria for evaluating transactions with software apps tied to a foreign adversary, which typically falls under the Committee for Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS). The order would consider transactions to involve a “heightened risk” when they involve apps owned, controlled or managed by people supporting foreign adversary military or intelligence or when the apps collect sensitive personal data, for example.The order also directs the Commerce Department to work with other agencies to come up with recommendations to protect U.S. consumer data from foreign adversaries. It requires the Commerce Department to recommend further executive actions and legislation to address the risks.Under the previous administration, TikTok remained in a precarious position as Trump sought to ban the app unless it sold to an American company. The stand-off prompted Walmart and Microsoft to team up and court TikTok, though the company ultimately went with Oracle as its “trusted technology provider,” which fell far short of a full sale.Biden’s ascendance to the White House threw a wrench in the deal and ongoing legal proceedings between TikTok and the government, however. In February, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Oracle deal has been “shelved indefinitely,” according to sources. The Biden administration had asked the court to postpone action around the government dispute with TikTok over the ban as it reviewed the situation. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said at the time that a CFIUS review of TikTok was ongoing.Representatives for TikTok and WeChat owner Tencent did not immediately respond to a request for comment.This story is developing. Check back for updates.Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.WATCH: The TikTok and WeChat download bans, explained: CNBC After Hours

Facebook is setting its sights on the creator economy, hoping to allow millions of people to make a living off its family of apps.But the company wants to promote offline transactions between creators and companies in order to avoid Apple’s 30% cut of in-app purchases, Instagram head Adam Mosseri said Wednesday.”When there are digital transactions that happen on iOS, Apple insists that they take 30% of that. There’s a very few number of exceptions. For transactions that happen in iOS, we’re going to have to abide by their rules… but in general we’re going to look for other ways to help creators make a living and facilitating transactions that happen in other places,” Mosseri told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.””So, for instance, if we could help brands and creators vet each other and find each other, they could make those transactions happen offline. For affiliate marketing, it’s real goods, not digital goods. So we’re going to try and lean in to the places creators can actually make a stable living,” he added.Apple generally takes a 30% rake from purchases of software or digital goods from apps distributed through the App Store. That would mean creators would eventually have to split revenue from goods sold within the app between themselves, Facebook and Apple. (Facebook hasn’t said how much of a cut it will take, but did say it will be less than 30%.)In order to skirt around that, Instagram could push for creators to connect offline with brands or other people, in an effort to make money off the iOS operating system. It’ll be a key issue for the company, which has spent the past several years feuding with the Apple.The fight for creators is heating up, with social media companies courting creators to spend more time on their platforms in order to bring in more advertising revenue. But the creators currently have the say in where they want to spend their time, so social media companies are increasingly trying to woo influencers in a way that could eventually be beneficial to both.Companies are introducing things like earning commissions on marketing, direct tipping and subscription content.”If we’re going to be the best home for creators online, we’re going to have to offer a suite of these types of monetization products because there’s a lot of competition and it’s heating up fast,” Mosseri said.Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Calls for a digital dollar have been on the rise.Gustavo Rezende Dos Santos | EyeEm | Getty ImagesOn Wednesday morning, the Senate Banking Committee Economic Policy Subcommittee under Senators Warren and Kennedy will hold a hearing on the challenges and opportunities of a Digital Dollar. The hearing will undoubtedly note the recent speech by Federal Reserve Governor Lael Brainard outlined potential advantages of a U.S. central bank digital currency (CBDC), including with respect to access, inclusion, and efficiency, and next steps in the Fed’s analysis.  It will also note the speech the week before by Sir Jon Cunliffe, deputy governor of the Bank of England, promising a careful and thorough assessment of the need for some form of “Britcoin” to “meet the needs of modern day life.”We agree with the thoughtful and balanced approach of these public sector leaders. That is why we have similarly called for careful exploration of a U.S. CBDC that we termed – perhaps not creatively – a “Digital Dollar.” And while as former regulators we believe in the prudence of considering what could go wrong with a CBDC, we believe now is a time to equally consider what could go right.There are several possible formats for a digital dollar.  We suggest the form of a tokenized U.S. Dollar issued by the Federal Reserve, distributed through the two-tier banking system, and operating beside physical currency and commercial bank money (those funds you hold in electronic form at your bank).  It would mirror many of the properties of physical cash, but in a digital form.Instead of withdrawing paper money from an ATM and putting it in your wallet, you could withdraw a Digital Dollar into a digital wallet on your smartphone. The promise of such innovation is easier access to money, reduced costs, faster transactions, and enhanced monetary functionality and programmability.Some are rightly concerned with risks of a Digital Dollar, Britcoin and other types of CBDCs, including their impact on fractional banking and financial stability, current payment models, global monetary competition and individual privacy.  These concerns are well worth serious study.Yet, for a moment, let’s think about what could go right.First, with respect to financial stability, there is concern that Digital Dollar might decrease money being held in commercial banks. But, what if the opposite happens?  What if more money moves into the financial services sector, especially if previously unbanked or underbanked individuals shift Digital Dollars into financial accounts because of the newfound ease in doing so? Many digitally wired young people and underserved populations hesitate to set foot in a bank branch to move physical cash into a new account. Mobile devices and “bank-lite” digital wallets may well provide attractive on-ramps to banking services offering interest on deposits and government insurance. And knowing one has the ability to easily convert commercial bank money back into Digital Dollars would not only assure convenience, but perhaps make one less likely to do so in a panic.Second, there is some concern that a Digital Dollar could negatively impact current business models for payments.  But what if it decreases payment transaction costs, benefiting consumers and small businesses currently paying higher fees to process electronic payments?  What if such transactions provide instantaneous settlement, reducing cash flow stress that plagues small businesses and consumers facing costly overdraft and other fees? What if the economic benefit of increased activity that CBDCs foster expands economic opportunity, choice and productivity?  Third, some argue that the U.S. dollar’s status of the world’s primary reserve currency is well entrenched and requires no further innovation.  But, what if digitization further enhances them dollar and, indeed, other trusted reserve currencies, with new functionalities and ease of use, while preserving esteemed competitive advantages: stability, the backing of a robust and strong economy, good governance, openness, and rule of law? And to the extent that monetary innovation becomes increasingly demanded by global consumers, is it not better that the preferred instruments be those issued by strong and sturdy democracies?  Finally, many are rightly concerned about privacy and mass surveillance with CBDC.  The trends in surveillance over existing forms of money are already headed in perilous directions as massive, centralized accounts-based systems managed by governments and commercial entities are gaining scale, while physical cash usage is decreasing globally.  But what if CBDCs issued by democratic governments provide an occasion for citizens to insist that traditional free society norms and privacy rights be built into a digital form of public money? And what if constitutional, legal and due process limitations on government access to financial data help better secure individual privacy with a CBDC and futureproof the competitive advantages that leading reserve currencies hold?Prudence, caution, and thoughtfulness are wholly appropriate when considering transformative new technologies. So too, however, is considering what happens if things go right.  There is only one way to find out.  Only real-world pilots can pressure test the upside and assess the downside. The future of money demands no less.Mr. Giancarlo is Senior Counsel at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, former Chairman of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and co-founder of the Digital Dollar Project. Mr. Gorfine is former Chief Innovation Officer of the U.S. CFTC, Adjunct Professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, and co-founder of the Digital Dollar Project.