标签： Oceania

One of Australia’s largest utility providers, Origin Energy, has confirmed a major cybersecurity incident that has put the personal information of millions of its customers at risk, prompting urgent warnings for heightened scam awareness across the country. The unfolding breach, which was first flagged to the public last Wednesday, took a serious turn on Thursday when company executives confirmed that unauthorized actors had successfully accessed internal systems and stolen sensitive customer data.

Initial media reports from *The Australian*, citing correspondence with the alleged perpetrator, claimed that roughly two million customer accounts had been compromised. To date, Origin Energy has not issued a confirmed number of affected accounts, out of its total 4.8 million residential and commercial customer base. According to the company’s official disclosure, the compromised data can include full names, residential addresses, dates of birth, contact telephone numbers, detailed account information, partial credit card numbers (only the final four digits), and partial bank account details (only the final three digits). Company officials have stressed that the incomplete financial information stolen cannot be used directly to make unauthorized purchases or access customer bank accounts, but that does not eliminate the long-term risk posed by the breach.

Cybersecurity experts warn that the stolen data creates a perfect breeding ground for sophisticated targeted scams. Tyler McGee, head of Asia-Pacific operations for global cybersecurity firm McAfee, who himself received a breach warning from Origin, noted that scammers routinely leverage high-profile data breaches to exploit consumer trust. “Until there is full clarity around the scope of the breach, it is impossible to know exactly how exposed impacted consumers are, but the core fact remains: any stolen personal information allows scammers to craft more convincing targeted scams, either for their own use or to sell on to other criminal actors,” McGee explained. Stolen personal details let scammers create messages that reference specific personal information, making fraudulent communications appear legitimate, as if they came from Origin or another trusted business the customer interacts with regularly. For criminal groups, McGee added, this is a numbers game: even if only a tiny fraction of targets fall for the scam, the operation turns a profit.

New details that emerged on Friday paint a clearer picture of the alleged perpetrator. *The Australian* reported that the hacker, who uses the online alias Edison Walhour, claims to be an Australian former Origin employee. The individual reportedly used a valid former employee login to access Origin’s customer management system, which is provided by third-party vendor Kraken. In a surprising development, the hacker has reportedly backed away from their initial threat to auction the full stolen dataset on public dark web marketplaces. It remains unclear what prompted this change of plans.

In response to the incident, McGee has outlined clear steps Origin customers can take to protect themselves from subsequent scams. First, he advised all potentially impacted customers to update their online account passwords immediately and enable two-factor authentication wherever possible to block unauthorized access. Second, customers should exercise extreme caution around any unsolicited emails, text messages, or phone calls that ask them to click links, share personal information, or make payments. “Consumers need to maintain a heightened state of awareness for the foreseeable future, and anyone looking for extra protection should consider investing in commercial scam protection tools,” McGee added. He also noted that once personal data is leaked by criminals, it remains in circulation permanently, creating ongoing risk for affected individuals.

McGee also pointed out that Australian companies are disproportionately targeted by hackers for two key structural reasons. Historically, Australian corporations have been more willing to pay large ransom demands to end breaches quickly, making them attractive targets. Additionally, Australian law enforcement has far limited capacity to pursue hackers based outside of the country, unlike jurisdictions such as the United States, which routinely works with international partners to extradite cybercriminals for prosecution.

Origin Energy chief executive Frank Calabria has issued a formal apology to customers affected by the incident. “I am sorry this has happened. Customers trust Origin with their personal information, and I apologize for the stress and impact this may cause,” Calabria said. The company is currently working alongside independent cybersecurity experts and law enforcement authorities to investigate the breach, secure its systems, and mitigate further risk to customers.

As the investigation continues, authorities and cybersecurity professionals are urging all 4.8 million Origin customers to remain alert to scam activity in the coming months, regardless of whether they have been formally notified that their data was compromised.

A fresh round of United States tariffs targeting 60 global trading partners entered into force on Friday, marking the Trump administration’s latest step to rebuild the sweeping import duty regime that was upended by a Supreme Court ruling earlier this year. This new measure replaces the temporary 10-percent tariff that expired the same day, after lasting just 150 days. The levies are set at two tiers, ranging from 10 percent to 12.5 percent, and impact most major global economies including China, India, and the European Union, covering the vast majority of U.S. trade volume.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer defended the new tariffs, framing them as a push for global adoption of forced labor import bans. “The United States has had a forced labor import ban for nearly a century, and rigorously enforces it; it’s well past time for our trading partners to do the same,” Greer stated. The tiered structure is designed to reward trading partners that have already adopted or committed to enforce similar forced labor prohibitions: those economies, including Canada, the European Union, India, and the United Kingdom, face the lower 10-percent rate, while China, Japan, South Korea and more than 30 other nations are assigned the higher 12.5 percent levy. A small group of economies including the EU, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Switzerland receive partial exemptions under existing bilateral trade agreements with the U.S.

The new tariffs were first proposed in June, developed after months of targeted investigation, and crafted specifically to withstand potential legal challenges. This careful legal structuring comes in direct response to a February Supreme Court ruling that struck down a large portion of Trump’s earlier tariff regime, stripping the White House of its ability to impose steep duties unchecked. Several categories of imports are carved out of the new measures: goods already subject to sector-specific tariffs such as steel and aluminum are not affected, along with certain energy products, fertilizers, and all goods covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

The announcement drew immediate pushback from affected economies. Japan issued a formal statement saying it “regrets” the new duties, while Australia’s trade minister labeled the measures “unjustified.”

Beyond this broad tariff rollout, the Trump administration is currently conducting separate investigations into excess industrial capacity in 16 other economies, which could lead to additional targeted duties down the line. Trade experts note the structure of the new regime creates strategic leverage for Washington. By imposing a baseline tariff while keeping the threat of further increases on the table, the White House incentivizes trading partners to comply with existing trade commitments, according to Greta Peisch, a trade lawyer and former general counsel for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, now a partner at Wiley Rein. Peisch added that the months-long investigation process was intentional, designed to create a legally robust tariff regime that can survive court challenges.

This legal robustness makes it far more likely the tariffs will remain in place for the rest of Trump’s term, signaling a permanent shift toward a more protectionist stance from the world’s largest economy, explained Josh Lipsky, senior analyst at the Atlantic Council. Lipsky also noted that the new tariffs will deliver an added benefit to the federal government by boosting overall revenue.

Former U.S. trade official Ryan Majerus, now a partner at King & Spalding, noted that the Trump administration has actively been searching for legal frameworks that allow it to aggressively deploy tariffs. The current duties are authorized under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which Majerus said offers far more flexibility for adjusting rates and terms than many observers recognize, allowing officials to modify the measures as geopolitical and trade conditions shift.

The latest broad tariff salvo comes on the heels of two other recent protectionist moves from the Trump administration: just weeks ago, a 25-percent tariff on a range of Brazilian goods went into effect, following accusations of unfair trade practices from Washington. This week, Trump also ordered a new 50-percent tariff on a wide swathe of Canadian products, citing Ottawa’s “discriminatory treatment” of U.S. alcohol, automobile, and dairy products. That Canadian tariff, set to take effect in one month, relies on an untested legal provision, demonstrating that the White House holds additional tools to quickly impose new trade measures if it chooses. Lipsky said this flurry of activity signals that existing U.S. trade agreements remain “fragile” in the current policy environment. Despite the uncertainty, the European Union — which has a existing trade pact with Washington — reaffirmed its expectation that the U.S. will honor the commitments laid out in the EU-U.S. Joint Statement.

Fresh official labor data released this week has laid bare the deepening economic underperformance of Victoria, Australia’s second-most populous state, which is now dragging down national employment metrics and amplifying fears of additional interest rate hikes that could further strain household budgets across the country.

Data published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) on Thursday showed Australia’s overall unemployment rate held steady at 4.4% for the second consecutive month, defying forecasts of a small uptick. But beneath this stable national headline, Victoria’s labor market tells a far grimmer story: the state’s unemployment rate currently sits at 5.1%, a full 0.7 percentage points above the national average. To make the disparity starker, nearly one-third of all unemployed Australians – a total of 200,000 people – now reside in Victoria.

Independent veteran economist Saul Eslake explained that Victoria’s drag on the national economy has been building for decades, a trend that predates recent state Labor governments but has worsened significantly under current leadership. “If you strip out the boost to headline gross domestic product growth that comes from Victoria’s faster population growth, the state has underperformed the rest of Australia for a long time,” Eslake told Sky News. “Over the past 20 years, Victoria has slipped from being one of Australia’s wealthiest states to now ranking as either the second or third poorest, depending on the metric you use.”

Eslake added that per capita household disposable income in Victoria is now lower than the figure recorded in Tasmania, with only South Australia recording a lower income level across the country. He also noted the state has become increasingly reliant on federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) redistribution revenue to prop up its ailing public finances and sluggish growth.

The weak jobs numbers have reignited political pressure on Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan, just three months out from the state’s November 28 election. Unconfirmed public rumors have circulated that Allan could face an internal leadership challenge as early as next week, when the state parliament reconvenes for its final sitting before the poll.

Beyond the state-level political and economic impacts, the uneven labor data has reinforced market and analyst expectations that the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) will move to raise interest rates further to combat persistent inflation, with some experts warning the hikes could hit Victoria harder than any other state.

Warren Hogan, managing director of EQ Economics, warned that Victoria and New South Wales are the two most vulnerable state economies to additional monetary tightening, due to their high concentrations of mortgage holders and elevated household debt levels. Hogan projects that the RBA could implement up to three more rate hikes, adding a total of 75 basis points to the official cash rate and pushing it back above 5%.

“Victoria already has a soft economy, and the state government’s massive and expanding footprint is impacting every sector,” Hogan said. “If we see multiple rate hikes, this state will get hit extremely hard.” He added that ongoing high government spending across Australia has added to inflationary pressures: national government spending has grown at roughly 3% annually, outpacing the economy’s potential growth rate of around 2%, eliminating a key potential source of relief for inflation.

Over the past two years alone, Victoria’s unemployment rate has climbed by almost two percentage points, rising from a low of around 3.25% to its current level above 5%, Hogan noted.

Cameron McCormack, senior portfolio manager at global investment firm VanEck, echoed the expectation for more rate hikes, forecasting at least one additional increase before the end of 2024, with a significant chance of two hikes. He explained that the resilience of the national labor market is keeping wage and inflation pressures elevated, removing the RBA’s incentive to pause rate hikes.

“Australia’s labor market is refusing to cool, which means it isn’t giving the RBA the breathing room it needs to hold rates steady,” McCormack said. “With the labor market remaining close to full employment for a second straight month, the RBA has clear room to focus squarely on taming inflation.”

He pointed to two key additional inflationary pressures: the 4.75% increase in minimum award wages that took effect this month, and the recent sharp rise in global oil prices. Labor-intensive service sectors such as hospitality and restaurants are already starting to pass higher wage costs through to consumers, McCormack said, and if energy and wage pressures begin to feed more broadly into core inflation, the RBA could pull forward its next rate increase.

Looking at the fine print of Thursday’s jobs report, national employment actually rose by 76,000 positions in June, though 47,000 of those new roles were part-time positions, while 13,000 full-time jobs were lost. The unemployment rate held steady rather than falling only because the labor force participation rate – a measure of how many working-age people are active in the labor market – rose 0.3 percentage points to 67%, expanding the pool of people counted as unemployed.

The United States announced Thursday a sweeping set of new tariffs targeting 60 global trading partners, framed around forced labor compliance concerns, that will replace an expiring temporary import duty first rolled out earlier this year by the Trump administration. The new levies, set to enter into force Friday, carry tiered rates between 10 and 12.5 percent and cover major world economies including China, India, and the European Union.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated in the official unveiling that Washington has enforced a national ban on forced labor imports for nearly a century, and argued it is long past due for all U.S. trading partners to adopt similarly rigorous rules.

The move marks the administration’s latest step to rebuild President Trump’s signature tariff regime, after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a sweeping set of his earlier tariffs in February. That ruling severely limited the president’s ability to impose steep duties without explicit congressional authorization, delivering a major legal setback to his trade agenda.

Following the court decision, the Trump administration used alternative executive authority to reimpose a temporary 10 percent baseline tariff on most qualifying imports, but that measure carried a 150-day expiration that falls on Friday. The new round of duties, first proposed in June following a months-long regulatory investigation, replaces the expiring measure and has been structured to withstand future legal challenges far better than the earlier temporary tariffs, administration officials and trade experts note.

Under the new tiered structure, trading partners that have already enacted their own formal forced labor import bans face the lower 10 percent rate; this group includes Canada, the European Union, and the United Kingdom. Nations deemed not to meet the compliance standard face the higher 12.5 percent levy, with major economies like China and Japan falling into this higher-tariff bracket, a senior U.S. official confirmed to reporters.

Notably, goods already covered by sector-specific Trump-era tariffs on steel and aluminum are excluded from the new measures, and all imports qualifying for duty-free access under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) also remain exempt.

Beyond the new forced labor-linked tariffs, Washington is currently conducting separate investigations into 16 global economies over allegations of excess industrial capacity, probes that could result in additional targeted duties down the line. Much like the original pre-ruling tariff framework, these future measures could carry varying rates tailored to individual countries.

Trade experts say the strategy of imposing a baseline tariff while retaining the threat of additional future levies is intentional, designed to preserve U.S. negotiating leverage with trading partners. Greta Peisch, a trade lawyer and former USTR general counsel now serving as a partner at Wiley Rein, told Agence France-Presse that the structure creates clear incentives for countries to adhere to existing trade agreements they have signed with Washington. Peisch added that by investing months in formal investigations ahead of imposing the new duties, administration officials have sought to build robust legal protections against future court challenges.

Josh Lipsky, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank, said the new framework makes it far more likely that the tariffs will remain in place for the rest of Trump’s term, signaling that the world’s largest economy is shifting toward a significantly more protectionist trade posture going forward.

Former U.S. trade official Ryan Majerus, now a partner at King & Spalding, noted that the administration has actively been searching for legal pathways to continue aggressive tariff deployment. He added that Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act – the authority USTR Greer used to impose the latest duties – provides more policy flexibility than many observers recognize, allowing officials to adjust tariff rates over time in response to new developments.

The new tariff announcement comes on the heels of two other recent aggressive trade actions by the Trump administration: just weeks ago, a 25 percent tariff on a range of Brazilian goods went into effect, following a year-long investigation that found Brazil engaged in unfair trade practices. Earlier this week, Trump also ordered a 50 percent tariff on dozens of Canadian products, citing what the administration calls Ottawa’s discriminatory treatment of American alcohol, automobile, and dairy exports. That Canadian tariff is set to take effect in one month and relies on an untested new legal provision, which Lipsky says demonstrates the administration still has a range of untapped trade tools at its disposal.

Lipsky added that the flurry of new tariff actions signals that existing U.S. trade agreements remain fragile, despite past negotiations. Even so, the European Union – which signed a new trade pact with Washington in recent months – says it expects the U.S. to uphold all commitments laid out in the EU-U.S. joint statement.