Benchmark indices Nifty and Sensex pared early morning losses to end the day higher on Friday, February 6 as the Indian rupee logged its best week in over 3 years. The Reserve Bank of India left its policy repo rates unchanged at 5.25%. The decision to keep interest rates on hold was also taken “unanimously.” The MPC also left the policy stance as “neutral.”

The BSE Sensex rose 266 points or 0.32% to close the week at 83,580 while the Nifty 50 gained 51 points or 0.20% to end the day at 25,693.

In his address, RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra said the central bank’s inflation outlook remains comfortable, with CPI inflation for FY26 projected at 2.1%, according to Monetary Policy Committee. The central bank expects price pressures to stay broadly contained, reflecting stable domestic conditions and manageable demand trends.

In today’s session, cigarette makers including ITC, Godfrey Phillips and VST Industries surged up to 13% after reports indicated companies had raised prices following the recent tax hike, passing on higher costs to consumers. The rally was also supported by value buying at lower levels after a sharp correction triggered by the cigarette taxation overhaul announced on December 31, which came into effect from February.

The broader market, represented by the Nifty Midcap and Smallcap 100 indices, ended 0.2% and 0.3% lower, respectively.

Expert views

Indian equity markets traded with a cautious, range-bound bias today as investors digested the central bank’s decision to keep interest rates unchanged, reinforcing its preference for stability amid improving global trade visibility following recent U.S. tariff adjustments. Sentiment, however, drew support from regulatory clarity after the RBI indicated that banks would be permitted to lend to REITs, enhancing long-term funding visibility for the real estate and credit ecosystem. On the domestic front, support also came from a slight recovery in the Indian rupee, aided by moderated corporate dollar demand, which helped ease near-term currency concerns, Ponmudi R, CEO of Enrich Money said.

Global Markets

Global markets retreated on Friday as a Wall Street selloff spilled across regions, with volatility hitting precious metals and cryptocurrencies while AI-related concerns weighed on equities. The MSCI All-Country World Index recovered from intraday lows to trade near flat, but it still remained on track for its worst weekly performance since mid-November, down about 1.6%.European markets also opened lower as a busy earnings week drew to a close. The pan-European Stoxx 600 slipped 0.37% in early trade, with most major indices and sectors in negative territory. Share price movements this week were largely driven by corporate updates from major names including LVMH, Novo Nordisk, Shell and several large banking groups, while Friday’s earnings calendar appeared relatively light.

In Asia, equities weakened, with MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan falling 0.7% and heading for a second consecutive day of losses. Japanese markets bucked the trend, with the Nikkei 225 rising 0.8% ahead of the upcoming election, offering some support amid broader regional caution.

Crude impact

U.S. crude futures extended losses on Friday and were headed for their first weekly decline in several weeks, as easing concerns over Middle-east supply disruptions shifted investor focus to the outcome of U.S.-Iran nuclear talks scheduled in Oman later in the day. Brent crude futures fell 50 cents, or 0.74%, to $67.05 per barrel at 0102 GMT after settling 2.75% lower in the previous session.

Meanwhile, U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude slipped 52 cents, or 0.82%, to $62.77 per barrel, following a 2.84% drop on Thursday. The continued decline reflects cautious market sentiment as traders assess potential developments from the negotiations and their impact on global oil supply.

Rupee vs Dollar

The Indian rupee closed 0.33% lower at 90.6550 per U.S. dollar, compared with the previous close of 90.3550.

The Indian rupee advanced 1.4% for the week, marking its strongest weekly gain since January 2023.

(With inputs from agencies)

A proposed tax targeting California’s wealthiest residents is drawing strong support from likely voters, but critics warn it would discourage investment and trigger an exodus of high-income earners and businesses from the state.

“I think it’s a really economically disastrous idea,” Adam Michel, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, told Fox News Digital. “It is both diagnosing the problem incorrectly and also won’t fix the problem that is being diagnosed.”

The “2026 California Billionaire Tax Act” would impose a one-time tax equal to 5% on the net worth on individuals making above $1 billion, according to California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO). Covered assets would include businesses, securities, art, collectibles and intellectual property.

The measure would not count real estate someone owns in their own name (or through a revocable trust), but real estate held through a company they own could still factor into the tax because it can raise the value of that business.

TAX FIGHT PUTS CALIFORNIA ON COLLISION COURSE AS BILLIONAIRES LEAVE FOR RED STATES

Supporters — including SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW) — say the measure is an emergency response to save the state’s healthcare system from “collapse” due to potential federal cuts.

According to the LAO analysis, “90 percent of the money would have to be spent on health care services for the public” while the remainder would go toward administrative costs, education and food assistance.

However, Michel says that wealth taxes don’t work in practice, arguing they weaken incentives to build businesses, create complicated administrative headaches and have generated disappointing revenue in countries that have tried them. 

He also says they rest on a flawed “fixed pie” view of the economy that assumes wealth can simply be redistributed through taxation, but in actuality results in slower growth and a worse outcome for everyone.

WASHINGTON POST ARGUES THERE’S ‘LITTLE TO GAIN BY RAISING TAXES ON THE RICH,’ RATES ALREADY HIGH ENOUGH

Michel also said a wealth tax differs from an income tax because it is assessed on accumulated assets rather than annual earnings and can translate to a much higher burden on business owners.

If a business earns anything less than a 5% return, every single dollar of profit is taxed, he explained, translating into an income-tax rate at or above 100%, leaving no incentive for an entrepreneur to grow and maintain that asset.

Michel noted the proposal has even drawn opposition from Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“He’s very aware of the fact that this proposal will actually lead to an exodus of the California tax base,” he said.

CALIFORNIA IS BROKE, BUT IT’S NOT TOO LATE FOR THE REST OF US

Michel cautioned the damage wouldn’t be limited to the roughly 200 billionaires targeted by the initiative. Because most wealth is held in “productive assets” like stock in companies, real estate, and machinery, he warned the tax would penalize the investments that drive the broader economy.

“We will get less housing, we will get less investment in machinery and equipment, we’ll get less investment in new companies,” Michel said. “That ultimately makes everyone worse off.”

California already has the most progressive tax system in the industrialized world, according to the Fraser Institute.

Wealth taxes have been tried around the world and failed, he pointed out, and only a few OECD countries still use them since their peak in the 1990s. In Spain, what was proposed as a temporary one-time levy eventually became a permanent tax on the wealthy. The same thing could happen in California, he warned.

“States like California have an insatiable hunger for taking other people’s money,” he told Fox News Digital. “And if they’re successful this time, there’s nothing stopping them from renewing this tax in future years.”

CALIFORNIA WILL REGRET BILLIONAIRE EXODUS, WASHINGTON POST WARNS

Michel added that the threat alone of it returning would encourage high-income residents to leave the state.

The bill’s sponsors at the SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West say it is about making billionaires pay their “fair share.”

“California’s billionaires pay much lower tax rates than what working families pay out of every paycheck. And soon, massive federal healthcare funding cuts will collapse key parts of the California healthcare system,” Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff at SEIU-UHW, told Fox News Digital.

She warned “local hospitals and emergency rooms will shut their doors forever” unless voters approve the Billionaire Tax so “billionaires pay their fair share” through a “one-time emergency 5% tax.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE

She rejected “sensationalized claims” from “a handful of billionaires and their highly-paid consultants” that there’s been an exodus from California before the Jan. 1, 2026, residency deadline. Citing “a lack of public reports or confirmations,” she says it “does not appear to be true,” and that “the overwhelming majority” of roughly 200 billionaires “appear to have opted to remain.”

Jimenez said nurses, healthcare workers, teachers, and firefighters “pay taxes on nearly every dollar they earn,” and argues that without the measure, “higher healthcare costs and higher taxes will be shifted onto millions of Californians” already facing “skyrocketing healthcare and prescription costs.”

She called the debate a “convenient distraction” while her union’s “120,000 healthcare workers” stay focused on keeping hospitals and ERs open for “California’s 40 million residents.”

“While these outlandish claims are a convenient distraction for a small number of billionaires, the 120,000 healthcare workers of our union remain focused on keeping California’s hospitals and ERs open for California’s 40 million residents who rely on them,” she added.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Even though the proposal is still in the signature-gathering phase to qualify for the November ballot, it’s drawn strong support from likely voters, according to new polling. A February 2026 Nestpoint survey found 60% of likely voters back the wealth tax, even as a majority of those same respondents say the move would spark a business exodus and cost local jobs.

Fox News’ Kristen Altus contributed to this report.

The Hartlepool firm’s ‘strategic overview’ has led to the planned of disposal of the regional pubs

Four North pubs have been placed on the market by their owner following a strategic assessment of its UK portfolio. Hartlepool brewing and hospitality operator Camerons Brewery has owned and operated the highly successful Head of Steam brand since purchasing it in 2013.

Throughout the years, the brand has expanded to bring its proven concept across the nation, growing it into a collection of 16 locations in major towns and cities. From modest origins in Newcastle the traditional pub company – initially established by Tony and Carolyn Brookes in 1995 – now operates in cities including Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Hull and Liverpool.

However, specialist commercial property consultant Christie and Co has now been appointed to market four pubs on behalf of Camerons Brewery following an evaluation of its estate. The properties available are The Wheelhouse in Washington, which carries a freehold guide price of £275,000, The Mitre in Bishop Auckland, County Durham, which carries a freehold guide price of £350,000, and the Head of Steam in Newcastle city centre, which is offered for sale and leaseback with a guide price of £450,000.

The list is rounded off by the Head of Steam in Hull, which has a freehold asking price of £475,000. The Head of Steam in Neville Street will continue under the renowned brand, with incoming tenants positioned to develop it further.

The decision follows Camerons Brewery’s sale of 26 pubs to FB Taverns for £8.25m two years ago. The business, which produces lagers and beers including Strongarm and Röad Crew, offloaded the freehold tenanted pubs to the London firm to concentrate on its brewery operations and managed pubs, including the Head of Steam chain, reports Chronicle Live.

John Foots, finance director for Camerons, said: “We have undertaken a strategic overview of the estate and identified these four sites for disposal.

“As is well-publicised, we sold our leased and tenanted estate in 2024. The Mitre and The Wheelhouse are amongst the last of our community pubs operating under franchise, and it makes sense for us to explore a sale.

“The Head of Steam in Hull is a great site but is now somewhat of an outlier when you look across the wider Head of Steam brand, which we are very keen on expanding after our recent success in Manchester.

“The Head of Steam on Neville Street is one of our oldest sites operating under that brand and it has helped shape the rest of the estate in many ways, so we are keen to stay in there. We’re massively confident we can continue to trade well and so a sale and leaseback works brilliantly for us.”

David Cash, regional director – Pubs and Restaurants at Christie and Co, commented: “We have worked with Camerons on a number of sites over the years, and in 2025 brokered sales of Sanctuary in Scarborough and The Rattler in South Shields on their behalf. We expect these new opportunities to be well-received in the market and encourage interested parties to get in touch.”

Mr Cash is additionally representing the proprietor of Tokyo Bar in Newcastle, which was likewise placed on the market this week carrying a £1.25m asking price.

Like this story? For more news from the commercial property scene around the regions, visit our dedicated section here for the latest news and analysis within the sector.

The Governor of the Bank of England has said he was “shocked” by revelations that Lord Mandelson leaked sensitive government information to Jeffrey Epstein during the 2008 financial crisis, saying it was right that the matter is now being investigated by the police.

Andrew Bailey made the comments as he paid tribute to the late former chancellor Alistair Darling, drawing a sharp contrast between Darling’s conduct during the crisis and the alleged actions of the former business secretary.

Asked whether sufficient safeguards exist to prevent those in positions of power from misusing market-sensitive information, Bailey said there was a “very clear” legal framework for dealing with potential breaches and that it was appropriate for the Mandelson allegations to be handled by law enforcement.

He also stressed that the focus should remain on Epstein’s victims, asking: “How is it that we live in a society that this happened and was allowed to happen?”

Bailey appeared visibly emotional as he reflected on images showing Mandelson alongside Darling during the crisis period. He described Darling as someone who acted with “honesty and decency” while helping to steer the UK through one of the most severe financial shocks in modern history.

“Alistair Darling was doing all the right things,” Bailey said. “He was doing them with a thorough sense of integrity, and he can’t speak for himself today, sadly.”

Darling died in November 2023 aged 70.

The comments follow reports that Mandelson kept Epstein informed about the Labour government’s decision to cap bankers’ bonuses in the aftermath of the financial crash and that he had sought to persuade the Treasury to abandon the policy. The disclosures have triggered a police investigation.

Bailey said he was “shocked by what we heard about that period”, reiterating that the priority must be the harm suffered by Epstein’s victims rather than the reputations of those implicated.

The Bank of England governor has previously been drawn into scrutiny surrounding Epstein due to his role as head of the Financial Conduct Authority when the regulator investigated Jes Staley, the former Barclays chief executive, over his relationship with the disgraced financier.

Staley unsuccessfully challenged the FCA’s decision to ban him from senior financial services roles, with the court upholding the regulator’s finding that he had acted with a lack of integrity by misleading it about the nature of his links to Epstein. While the ban was maintained, the court reduced a financial penalty imposed on Staley.

That case centred on a cache of emails between Staley and Epstein, some of which later became public and added to wider concerns about accountability and conduct at the highest levels of finance and government.

---