Four Delta Air Lines flight attendants were injured on Friday after a flight bound for Australia experienced what the airline described as “brief turbulence.”

The flight, carrying 245 passengers and 15 crew members, was headed from Los Angeles, California, to Sydney, Australia, when the turbulence began.

The Airbus A350 was hit by the turbulence as it descended, but Delta said the aircraft landed “safely and normally” at the Sydney airport.

US FLIGHT CANCELLATIONS, GROUND DELAYS SURGE AS MASSIVE MARCH STORM DISRUPTS TRAVEL

Three of the injured flight attendants were sent to the hospital for medical treatment. No passengers reported any injuries.

“Delta flight 41 from Los Angeles encountered brief turbulence upon descent into Sydney, and four flight attendants reported injuries,” an airline spokesperson said in a statement to FOX Business.

“Nothing is more important than the safety of our people and our customers, and our priority is taking care of the impacted crew members,” the statement continued.

The flight landed in Sydney on Friday morning after departing Los Angeles on Wednesday night local time.

NSW Ambulance was alerted at about 6.45 a.m. local time, just minutes before the aircraft landed, according to flight data.

AIRLINES CANCEL FLIGHTS, ISSUE TRAVEL WAIVERS OVER MIDDLE EAST UNREST

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

Emergency responders said they treated five people who sustained minor injuries, according to The Sydney Morning Herald, although it is unclear why their injury total is different from Delta’s.

Mumbai: India’s equity benchmarks slumped more than 3% Thursday – the steepest single-day drop in nearly two years – as attacks on oil and gas infrastructure in West Asia rattled investors and fuelled inflation concerns. The 5%-plus drop in HDFC Bank, the biggest Nifty stock by weighting, after the abrupt exit of its non-executive chairman, Atanu Chakraborty, citing ‘ethical’ concerns further pressured bourses.

The NSE Nifty closed at 23,002.15 – the lowest since February 2025, down 775.65 points or 3.3%. The BSE Sensex ended 3.3% lower at 74,207.24 – the lowest since March 2025, shedding 2,496.89 points. Thursday’s slide wiped out gains from the previous three sessions and punched a ₹13 lakh crore-hole in the total market capitalisation of BSE-listed companies.

“The recent attacks on gas reserves are a serious concern that may have spooked investors and pushed oil prices higher,” said Hitesh Zaveri, head – Listed Equities Alternatives at Axis Mutual Fund. “Till this war is resolved, further declines cannot be ruled out.”

Iran’s strikes caused extensive damage to the world’s largest gas plant in Qatar, targeted a refinery in Saudi Arabia, forced a shutdown of UAE gas facilities, and triggered fires at two Kuwaiti refineries, Reuters reported. The retaliation followed Israel’s attack on Iran’s gas infrastructure.

Market participants do not rule out further downside amid the escalating West Asia tensions.

“There is scope for further downside since oil facilities were hammered, raising concerns that production and transport capabilities in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Iran may be significantly impaired,” said UR Bhat, co-founder & director, Alphaniti. “This has added pressure on the markets while the closure of the Strait of Hormuz remains unaddressed. Consensus expectations for crude moving towards $150 a barrel may not be far-fetched if escalations persist.”

Fear Gauge Rises 21.8%
Across Asia, Japan dropped 3.4%, South Korea fell 2.7%, Hong Kong slid 2%, while Taiwan and China declined 1.9% and 1.4%, respectively.
At home, all NSE sectoral indices ended lower. The Nifty Auto index tumbled 4.3%, while Nifty Realty fell 3.8%. Consumer durables, IT and metal gauges lost more than 3% each. The Bank Nifty fell 3.4%, dragged by HDFC Bank.

Analysts said the sell-off has prompted traders to initiate fresh bearish bets on the Nifty.

“Around 12-18 Nifty heavyweights saw not just unwinding of long positions but formation of short positions as well,” said Ruchit Jain, head of technical research at Motilal Oswal Financial Services.

Jain pegged 22,500 as the near-term support level but said a durable bottom depends on an easing of geopolitical stress.

Foreign portfolio investors sold a net ₹7,558.2 crore worth of shares on Thursday, while domestic institutions bought ₹3,864 crore. In March, global investors sold ₹79,805.7 crore of equities.

The India VIX jumped 21.8% to 22.8 – the sharpest rise since March 4 – signalling heightened near-term volatility. “With the VIX at extremely high levels, the swings are sharp and could continue,” Jain said.

The Nifty Midcap 150 fell 3.1%, and the Smallcap 250 dropped 2.6%. Of the 4,404 shares traded on the BSE, 3,359 declined and 913 advanced. Both indices were down about 3.3% over the past week till Thursday.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the federal government will reduce or eliminate the capital gains tax discount in the forthcoming budget, but it is not clear how it intends to do it.

Until 1985, there was no broad-based capital gains tax In Australia and there was a tax avoidance industry of making income look like capital gains, thereby avoiding income tax. 

The introduction of a capital gains tax by the Hawke-Keating government put an end to that. 

If capital gains are taxed at the same rate as income, there is no point in trying to classify profit as one or the other.

In 1999, the Howard-Costello government introduced a 50 per cent discount to capital gains tax on assets that were held for more than 12 months. 

One of the stated objectives of the discount was to encourage investment in the housing market with the aim of making more houses available for renters.

It is not clear whether it ever achieved that purpose. What it did achieve was an increase in the proportion of houses owned by investors and a reduction in the proportion of houses owned by homeowners.

The concept of a capital gains tax discount for long term investments is a good one because it encourages investment over trading. Some countries have a discount which increases each year an investment is held, which is an even better system because it encourages long term investment.

The principal objective of these concessions in other countries is to increase long term investment in companies and thereby strengthen their economies. There is less need for this in Australia because we already have a tax-effective mechanism for investing in companies called superannuation.

In Australia, allowing a capital gains tax discount on residential investment properties has contributed to housing unaffordability. It is not the only factor, but it is a significant factor. If investors and would-be homeowners are competing to purchase properties, it follows that prices will be higher than if investors were not in the market.

Consequently, the capital gains tax discount on investment properties has been criticised by economists and housing advocates, and the government is now considering making changes to it.

If the government wants to raise as much revenue as possible, it will make the measure retrospective so that it applies to both past and future capital gains. It can then use the additional revenue to fund income tax cuts, which will advance its social agenda. 

That might be the course it takes. It will be hard on investors, but broadly fair across the tax base.

If the government’s primary objective is to take the strain off the housing market, it should eliminate the discount only for residential properties and leave it in place for other investments, such as shares, businesses and commercial properties. Within this option, it could retain the discount for investment in new apartments because that is a section of the market which is struggling with the costs of land acquisition and construction.

This option would, however, raise less revenue than a complete withdrawal of the discount, but the amount raised would still be substantial.

Then there is the issue of fairness. 

A fair system would remove the discount for new property purchases and leave it in place for existing investment properties. No-one would be disadvantaged and it would still achieve the purpose of taking investors out of the market. 

This option would, however, raise very little money. The government would only get the extra revenue from houses bought under the new system, there will be fewer people buying investment properties after the discount is removed and the tax won’t be payable until those houses are sold years into the future.

A similar measure, which would raise more revenue, would be the removal of the discount for capital gains which occur after the Budget, regardless of when the property was purchased. 

It would not be retrospective and the government would get the extra revenue from all investment property sales going forward.

Each of these options would have a positive effect on housing affordability, but there is a trade-off between fairness and revenue raising. 

As the change will be introduced as part of the Budget, it is likely that the Treasurer will opt for a version that raises a substantial amount of revenue. The opportunity to redistribute the increased capital gains tax revenue as income tax cuts will be very tempting.

The Greens and a number of independents appear to be on board with removing or reducing the discount. 

The Liberal Party has signalled that it will oppose any reduction in the discount on the basis that it would result in higher taxes. This approach is misconceived in a number of ways. 

First, the tax is not being increased, rather a concession is being eliminated. The purpose of tax concessions is to encourage behaviour or to lessen the load on the basis of fairness. 

Neither applies to investors in residential housing. The behaviour that is being incentivised is detrimental to home ownership and the investors are not in need of a handout, so they should be taxed at the full tax rate.

Second, the party of Robert Menzies, the champion of homeownership, should take ownership of the problem it created when it introduced the capital gains tax discount and support its removal.

Third, if the tax revenue from the removal of the discount is redistributed through income tax cuts, the Liberals will look very silly if they oppose the package on the basis of being the “low tax party”. 

They opposed the government’s income tax cut at the last election and look how that worked out.

Finally, there is the issue of intergenerational equity. 

The only segment of society that voted Liberal at the last election was the over 65s. The younger a person is, the less likely they are to vote Liberal. 

If the Liberals want to win more votes from the younger generations who are struggling to become homeowners, they need to support every measure that improves housing affordability.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. I am Maria, your Chorus Call operator. Welcome, and thank you for joining the Titan Group conference call and live webcast to present and discuss the full year 2025 results.

Please note, this call and presentation is intended for analysts and investors only. [Operator Instructions] And the conference is being recorded. [Operator Instructions]

At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Marcel Cobuz, Chair of the Group Executive Committee; and Mr. John Ioannou, Group CFO.

Mr. Cobuz, you may now proceed.

Marcel Cobuz
Executive Director

Good afternoon. Hello, everyone, and welcome. I’m Marcel Cobuz, I’m joined here by John Ioannou, our Group Chief Financial Officer; and by Spyros Kamizoulis, our Investor Relations Head.

John will take you through the financials after my opening remarks, and then the 3 of us look forward to your questions.

Let me start with Titan Forward 2029, the strategic framework for everything we are reporting today. November last year, at our Investor Day in Athens, we discussed, we unveiled Titan Forward 2029, fully endorsed by our Board and our long-term core shareholding family.

Building on our Growth 2026 strategy delivered 1 year ahead of schedule, Titan Forward 2029 has 3 clear priorities: one, above market growth in core cement and aggregates, particularly in the U.S.; second, scaling an integrated global alternative cementitious materials platform; and third, innovating on low-carbon and digital technologies, scaling precast in both Europe and U.S. and advancing

Countries in Asia are implementing various strategies to address potential oil shortages due to global disruptions. Measures include diversifying energy sources, increasing reserves, and enhancing energy efficiency. These actions aim to stabilize economies and ensure energy security in light of uncertain global oil supplies.

---

Amid a global oil shortage, Asian countries are implementing strategic measures to mitigate economic impacts. Governments are exploring alternative energy sources, boosting renewable energy investments like solar and wind, and encouraging energy conservation among citizens. These efforts aim to reduce dependence on imported oil and stabilize domestic markets amidst fluctuating global prices.

In response to the crisis, countries like India and China are negotiating new trade deals to ensure more reliable oil supplies. Additionally, they are enhancing storage capacities to build strategic reserves. These proactive steps are intended to secure energy security and shield economies from further volatility, ensuring that industries and consumers face minimal disruptions.

On a regional level, collaboration is increasing as Asian nations form alliances to share resources, technologies, and strategies. Through joint initiatives, they aim to create a more resilient energy network. This cooperative approach not only strengthens energy security but also fosters sustainable development, preparing the region for future challenges in the global energy landscape.

source

Other People are Reading