A PYMNTS Company

Mexican Regulator Warns Emergency Decree To Control Gas Prices Is Illegal

 |  July 29, 2021

An emergency directive published by the federal government that seeks to set a maximum price for liquid propane (LP) gas is illegal, according to Mexico’s antitrust regulator.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    The Energy Ministry (Sener) published a document on Tuesday, July 27, directing the Energy Regulatory Commission (CRE) to develop a methodology within three days under which LP gas prices can be fixed for a period of six months. The CRE is scheduled to meet on Thursday afternoon to consider the petition.

    But the Federal Economic Competition Commission (Cofece) stated the government’s directive is unlawful because the Hydrocarbons Law (LH) establishes that the market will determine gas prices.

    “Specifically, article 82 of the LH mentions that the prices … of LP gas will be determined according to market conditions,” Cofece said in a statement.

    The regulator stated that maximum prices should only be set if there is a lack of competition in the market. Setting maximum  prices in a market in which competition does exist could cause shortages, Cofece stated.

    Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.

    Intel Warns of Risk Factors From US Stake While Trump Hints at More Deals to Come Intel Warns of Risk Factors From US Stake While Trump Hints at More Deals to Come

    Intel Warns of Risk Factors From US Stake While Trump Hints at More Deals to Come

     |  August 25, 2025

    In the wake of the U.S. government’s assumption of a 10% equity stake in Intel, the chipmaker warned investors in a regulatory filing Monday that the arrangement could pose several new risk factors for its business. Chief among those, it said, is the risk that the deal could negatively affect the tech company’s international business.

      Get the Full Story

      Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

      yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

      By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

      “Sales outside the US accounted for 76% of the Company’s revenue for the fiscal year ended December 28, 2024,” the 8-K filing said. “Having the US Government as a significant stockholder of the Company could subject the Company to additional regulations, obligations or restrictions, such as foreign subsidy laws or otherwise, in other countries.”

      Other risk factors listed include the transaction’s dilutive impact on existing shareholders, and a reduction in other shareholders’ voting influence with respect to the selection of company directors and other matters that come before shareholders for approval.

      Under the terms of the deal, the government will convert $8.9 billion in grants made to Intel under the Chips and Science Act and the Secure Enclave passed during the Biden administration into a 9.9% equity stake, making the U.S. the chipmaker’s largest single shareholder. The government will not have a seat on the board, and must vote its shares in accordance with the board’s recommendations. The U.S. acquired the shares at a $4.00 per share discount to the stock’s closing price on Friday.

      In a video posted on the Commerce Department website, Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan said, “I don’t need the grant, but I really look forward to having the U.S. government be my shareholder.”

      The Trump administration is trumpeting the deal and suggested it could be a blueprint for other government investments in U.S. companies.

       “I will make deals like that for our Country all day long,” Trump said in a Truth Social post on Monday. “I will also help those companies that make such lucrative deals with the United States.”

      Related: President Trump Announces US to Take Nearly 10% Stake in Intel

      In an interview on CNBC, National Economic Council head Kevin Hassett said others in the semiconductor sector are among those the administration is eyeing.  “I’m sure that at some point there’ll be more transactions” in the semiconductor industry, he said.

      Some business leaders and analysts are expressing concern over the administration’s plans, however.

      “We’re moving from a pure capitalistic economy to a much more state-engaged economy, Bill George, former Medtronic CEO and executive education fellow at Harvard Business School, told Reuters. “That’s a huge change for America and over where we’ve been. I’ve never seen an era like this.”

      Prior to the Intel investment, the White House intervened to complete the purchase of U.S. Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel in June, taking what Trump called a “golden share” that gives the government say over its operations. It also took a stake in the rare-earths miner MP Materials in July.

      Per Reuters, ValueEdge Advisors chair Nell Minow warned, “Companies that are nationalized in whole or in part don’t do as well, because they’re restricted from making the kinds of strategic decisions that would be solely market-based.”

      In its filing, Intel acknowledged sailing into uncharted waters, adding to the potential risks for investors.

      “Given the scarcity of recent US precedents for transactions such as those contemplated by the Purchase Agreement and of the US Government becoming a significant stockholder of a company like the Company, it is difficult to foresee all the potential consequences,” the filing said. “Among other things, there could be adverse reactions, immediately or over time, from investors, employees, customers, suppliers, other business or commercial partners, foreign governments or competitors.”