Hyundai is recalling more than 47,000 Kona SUVs in the U.S. after discovering a defect with the rear center seat belt buckle that could increase the risk of injury in a crash.

The recall covers 47,749 vehicles, including certain 2025 Hyundai Kona Electric and 2026 Hyundai Kona models, according to documents posted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

The rear center seat belt buckle may fail to properly restrain an occupant during a crash, the automaker said.

HYUNDAI MOTOR BRINGS BOSTON DYNAMICS’ ATLAS HUMANOID ROBOT TO FIFA WORLD CUP IN GROUNDBREAKING ACTIVATION

A Hyundai City Store, a company operated outlet, in Karachi, Pakistan, Feb. 8, 2022.  (REUTERS/Akhtar Soomro / Reuters Photos)

“A seat belt buckle that fails to properly restrain an occupant in a crash increases the risk of injury,” NHTSA said in its recall notice.

Hyundai is advising owners not to use the rear center seating position until the recall repair has been completed.

The recall affects 47,733 model-year 2026 Kona SUVs and 16 model-year 2025 Kona Electric vehicles.

HYUNDAI RECALLS MORE THAN 54,000 ELANTRA HYBRIDS OVER POTENTIAL FIRE RISK

A Hyundai dealership in Indianapolis on May 15, 2016. Hyundai is a South Korean automaker. (iStock / iStock)

According to recall documents, Hyundai’s supplier, Joyson Safety Systems, notified the automaker in February that testing identified a potential problem with the rear center seat belt buckle used in the Kona.

Joyson determined the issue may have resulted from inadequate inspection controls that allowed metal stamping dies used to manufacture the buckles to remain in service beyond their intended lifespan, leading to excessive wear.

Although there have been no confirmed crashes, injuries, fires or other incidents related to the issue, Hyundai said it decided to conduct the recall “out of an abundance of caution.”

Dealers will replace the rear center seat belt buckle assembly free of charge. Hyundai also said it will reimburse owners who previously paid out of pocket to repair the issue.

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed Sept. 11. Owners with questions can contact Hyundai customer service at 1-855-371-9460 and reference recall number 306. The NHTSA recall number is 26V452000. Vehicle identification numbers became searchable on NHTSA.gov beginning July 15.

A representative for Hyundai did not immediately respond to FOX Business’ request for comment.

Earlier this week, bosses at Tilray stressed that the brand was not for sale and planned to reject Watt’s takeover efforts.

A spokesman added: “Tilray Brands did not acquire Equity for Punk shareholder data as part of its acquisition of the BrewDog brand and assets; that records system remains under the control of BrewDog plc (in administration).

“Tilray acquired only a customer CRM database comprising individuals who explicitly opted in to BrewDog communications.

“For the avoidance of doubt, Tilray Brands (trading as BrewDog) and its current management team have no involvement in, affiliation with, or responsibility for James Watt’s business activities, including Second Best.”

The spokesman added that Tilray Brands did not “authorise, facilitate, or participate in the communications reportedly sent to former Equity for Punks investors and did not authorise the use of any acquired data for such purposes”.

“We take data privacy with the utmost seriousness and can categorically confirm that no data held by Tilray Brands has been shared with external entities or former directors,” he said.

Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Airlines are warning that changes to existing practices around Daylight Saving Time (DST) would have a major impact on the industry and that changes would need to be implemented over time to account for challenges it would create for scheduling.

Airlines for America (A4A), a trade group that represents leading air carriers in the U.S., released a statement this week which warned that changes to DST “would have considerable implications for aviation, including passenger disruption, crew and aircraft positioning, and domestic and international connectivity issues.”

“Airlines operate expansive interconnected domestic and global networks that are reliant on stability and predictability. Any changes would need an implementation timeline that reflects these global complications,” the group said.

The warning came as the House on Tuesday advanced the Sunshine Protection Act, which would allow states to voluntarily observe DST throughout the year and end the twice-annual clock changes, on a bipartisan 308-117 vote that sent the legislation to the Senate.

HOUSE PASSES DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME REFORM AS TRUMP SIGNALS SUPPORT FOR ENDING CLOCK CHANGE

Airlines warned that reforming current practices around daylight saving time would create challenges that need an implementation timeline for the industry to address. (Reuters)

The bill faces uncertainty in the Senate, though President Donald Trump is expected to sign the bill into law if it reaches his desk, as the White House has urged lawmakers to support the legislation.

Most states currently follow the practice of “springing forward” in March by moving the clock forward an hour into Daylight Time, and then “falling back” by an hour in November into Standard Time.

Arizona and Hawaii are the only two states who don’t participate in that practice, while 20 states have approved legislation that would see them remain on DST permanently if authorized to do so by Congress.

DAYLIGHT SAVINGS: IT’S ABOUT THE SUNLIGHT

President Donald Trump has backed the bill to give states the option of permanent daylight saving time. (Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

Proponents of permanent daylight saving time argue it would eliminate the disruptions caused by switching clocks twice per year and boost tourism and outdoor activities with more sunlight in winter evenings.

Critics have argued that the earlier sunrises and sunsets of permanent standard time would better align with circadian rhythms, and would prevent situations when the sun may rise after 9 a.m. in the winter.

TRUMP CHAMPIONS BID TO NIX CLOCK CHANGES BY ADOPTING PERMANENT DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME

A House-passed bill to give states the option of permanent daylight savings time is under consideration in the Senate. (J. David Ake/Getty Images)

The American public remains broadly opposed to the current practice of changing the clock twice a year, as an AP-NORC survey released in December found just 12% of respondents were in favor of the current system, while nearly half were opposed. The remaining 40% had no opinion.

The survey also asked about possible reforms and found that 56% of Americans would prefer to make daylight saving time permanent with more light in the evenings and less in the morning, while about 4 in 10 would rather make standard time permanent to have more light in the morning and less in the evening.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

Fox News Digital’s Adam Pack contributed to this report.

Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Chinese AI start-up Moonshot has unveiled a massive new artificial intelligence model it says can rival top American firms.

The company launched Kimi K3, containing 2.8 trillion parameters, which serves as a measure of an AI’s scale and processing power.

Kimi K3’s full capabilities – coding, knowledge work, and reasoning – will be known when it is released as an open-source model on 27 July.

The sudden breakthrough suggests that China’s tech prowess is rapidly narrowing the capabilities gap, upending long-held assumptions in the West that Chinese developers trail their American peers.

Its arrival later this month will make it the world’s first open-source model in the three-trillion-parameter class that can be freely downloaded, run and customised by outside developers.

The release comes at a highly sensitive moment for the global technology sector, just weeks after the US government abruptly forced American developer Anthropic to temporarily withdraw its flagship Fable and Mythos models due to severe cybersecurity concerns.

While Washington has since lifted those restrictions, the initial move highlights how the US government now views advanced AI software as critical national infrastructure, labelling frontier models as vital national security assets subject to strict export controls.

However, the rapid arrival of Kimi K3 suggests Chinese firms are successfully bypassing these regulatory barriers and advancing independently despite US restrictions on hardware sales.

Heavily backed by domestic tech giants Alibaba and Tencent, Moonshot has quickly risen to the forefront of China’s generative AI ecosystem.

In a statement the company said that K3 stands as Moonshot AI’s “most capable flagship model to date”.

Unlike closed, proprietary American systems from OpenAI or Anthropic, Kimi K3’s open nature allows global users to modify the system for advanced reasoning and complex software development.

Moonshot AI noted that the system is uniquely built to operate with “minimal human supervision” to sustain tasks such as engineering and coding.

Third-party evaluations from Artificial Analysis and Arena.ai show the model performing on a par with leading models in the US, such as OpenAI’s GPT and Anthropic’s Claude.

In these independent benchmarks, external, Kimi K3 ranked first in web interface engineering, outperforming Anthropic’s Fable system, external in blind human-preference tests.

While the system’s massive size means running it locally requires significant computing equipment, making it open-source could heavily disrupt Silicon Valley’s commercial models.

The announcement had an immediate impact on shares in Moonshot’s domestic competitors Zhipu and MiniMax, which tumbled sharply in Hong Kong by about 27% and 16% respectively.

For all Londoners gripe about the city’s rainy weather, we learnt last week that the alternative is far worse. In a city famously averse to air conditioning, sustained temperatures above 35°C are tough to endure.

And so, speculation that Thames Water is considering a hosepipe ban is particularly unwelcome. Faced with “exceptionally high demand”, the supplier is already cautioning the capital’s residents to use water “wisely”.

The summer’s heatwave raises a thorny question that has been left unaddressed for far too long: what to do with Thames Water, London’s ageing water infrastructure, and the nearly £20 billion debt burden the company finds itself under?

The deceptively easy answer is nationalisation, and it’s one that’s attracted support from figures across the political spectrum. But advocates have not accounted for the astronomical cost nationalisation would impose on the British taxpayer.

For starters, even temporary nationalisation under a Special Administrative Regime, in which the government appoints an administrator to take control, will cost at least £4 billion, a figure likely to balloon significantly higher.

And that’s not to mention the enormous investment the company needs, amounting to at least £20 billion over the next five years just for critical infrastructure upgrades.

Add to this the multibillion-pound cost of compensating Thames Water’s creditors should full nationalisation go ahead, and the government is looking at an 11-figure black hole that will pull funds away from other vital public services, such as healthcare and defence.

These funds also need to be found quickly. Between treatment works, pumping stations and trunk mains, London’s water infrastructure is reliant on single points of failure. Without immediate investment, it is only a matter of time until large parts of the capital are faced with severe disruption to water supplies. In this heat, the government could find itself with a severe public health crisis on its hands.

Anyone questioning whether the government can find the sums needed to invest in Thames Water should look to the seven-year Hammersmith Bridge saga for the answer. Just last week, Hammersmith and Fulham Council confirmed that plans to reopen the bridge to motor traffic have been indefinitely stalled since there is “no financial option available that would allow its full restoration“.

Hammersmith Bridge’s restoration is estimated to cost £300 million – small fry compared to the £20 billion-plus Thames Water needs. The idea the government can source the funds required to fix London’s water system is, quite simply, fantastical.

And then there’s the question of the environment. For a city of London’s stature, it’s an outrage that raw sewage continues to be dumped into our waterways. The Oxford and Cambridge boat race two years ago, nearly derailed due to E. coli exposure which left several crew members vomiting, was a visceral reminder of the appalling state Britain’s waterways have been left in.

But a nationalised Thames Water would fare no better. The same ageing infrastructure, the same overflows; the only difference, the government would now be liable for the hefty environmental fines. It would, of course, be political suicide to levy these funds from the customer or the taxpayer, and so the result would likely be even laxer standards under government control.

The answer is abundantly clear: Thames Water needs investment the government cannot afford. The only feasible solution currently is London & Valley Water’s proposal, tabled by a group of creditors that has spent more than a year in discussions with regulators and the government.

The consortium has offered a substantial restructuring package that would write off approximately £9.4 billion of Thames Water’s debt, inject £3.35 billion in new equity, and provide a further £6.55 billion in financing. It has committed not to pay dividends until 2035, allowing investment to be prioritised over shareholder returns.

L&VW has also pledged to pay all Ofwat and Environmental Agency fines for non-compliance in full, protecting the public from any costs associated with fines or poor performance.

Nationalisation offers the promise of a quick fix which is impossible to deliver. It’s easy, therefore, to see why the issue is so seductive to politicians across the political spectrum.

But London doesn’t need more ideologically driven decision-making, and it most certainly does not want its water bills raised even higher – a likely result of the government shouldering Thames Water’s significant debt obligations and investment requirements.

The government must stop entertaining the nationalisation fantasy and start being honest with Londoners. A private sector solution is the only way to secure the urgent investment London needs to fix our water infrastructure.