Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Palantir’s claim that opposition to its NHS contract is driven by ideology was rebuked by Chi Onwurah, the Labour MP who chairs Parliament’s science, innovation and technology select committee. Onwurah said it is appropriate for ministers to explore a break‑clause option in the deal, underscoring the seriousness of the concerns raised. Louis Mosley, Palantir’s UK executive vice‑chair, had urged the government not to succumb to “ideologically motivated campaigners” as officials weighed a way out of a £330 million contract to deliver the Federated Data Platform (FDP) for NHS England. Ministers have now asked for advice on triggering the contract’s break clause amid growing scrutiny of Palantir’s expanding role in the public sector. The FDP is an AI‑enabled platform designed to integrate disparate health information across the NHS. Palantir already holds contracts with the Ministry of Defence, several police forces and the UK’s financial watchdog, the FCA. Onwurah’s cross‑party committee is set to publish its report in the coming weeks, covering the digital reorganisation of government services and the role of AI after a series of hearings that included experts, NHS leaders and representatives from companies such as Palantir. She identified three core issues: the manner in which the contract was awarded, the handling of patient data and the resulting trust deficit within the NHS, and the involvement of Peter Mandelson through his firm Global Counsel. “These are not fringe ideological concerns,” Onwurah told the Guardian. “They relate to contract transparency, vendor lock‑in, value for money and data security – matters that should concern everyone pushing the NHS towards digital transformation.” She added that the NHS’s post‑COVID fatigue and austerity‑driven burnout make any additional trust‑related resentment a significant barrier to progress. Onwurah noted that Palantir secured the contract after providing services to the NHS at a nominal cost – a tactic often used by large tech firms to position themselves as the most attractive government supplier. “It is right for the government to explore all options, including breaking the contract, given ongoing concerns about FDP uptake while Palantir remains at the helm,” she said. Liberal Democrat MP Martin Wrigley, also on the committee, urged the government to commission a new consortium of UK‑based tech experts to build a home‑grown NHS platform. During a previous committee appearance, Mosley accused British doctors of placing “ideology over patient interest” after they challenged the data‑processing contract. Speaking to the Times, Mosley warned that removing Palantir could jeopardise patient care and stall solutions to the NHS’s biggest challenges, arguing that the campaign against the firm would do more harm than good.

America faces an unprecedented concentration of wealth: the richest 1% now control more assets than the bottom 93% of households, and a single individual, Elon Musk, with a net worth of $805 billion, holds more wealth than the lower‑half of the population combined.Recent tax policies have amplified this gap. In the year following the largest tax cut in U.S. history, 938 billionaires added $1.5 trillion to their fortunes, while President Trump and his family saw a modest increase of $4 billion. Four Wall Street giants—BlackRock, Vanguard, Fidelity and State Street—own stakes in more than 95 % of publicly traded companies, cementing corporate dominance across the economy.Political influence mirrors financial power: by the 2026 midterms, just 50 billionaires had poured over $433 million into campaign activities, shaping policy to protect their interests.Meanwhile, the average American worker is earning roughly $20 per week less than in 1973 after inflation adjustment, despite decades of productivity gains. The Rand Corporation estimates that $79 trillion has shifted from the bottom 90 % to the top 1 % over the past half‑century.Economic hardship is widespread: 60 % of households live paycheck to paycheck, nearly half of older workers lack retirement savings, and over 20 % of seniors survive on less than $15,000 annually. Health‑care insecurity affects 85 million Americans, with more than 500,000 filing for bankruptcy each year due to medical debt.At the heart of the problem is a tax code engineered by the affluent. Billionaires now pay lower effective rates than typical workers. For example, Musk’s tax rate sits below 3.3 % compared with an 8.4 % rate for a truck driver; Jeff Bezos paid under 1 % versus 8.7 % for a firefighter; Michael Bloomberg’s rate was 1.3 % against 13.3 % for a registered nurse; and Warren Buffett’s rate was a mere 0.1 % while a schoolteacher paid nearly 10 %.Corporate tax avoidance compounds the issue. After a $900 billion corporate tax break, major firms such as Tesla, SpaceX, Palantir, Ticketmaster and the parent of Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC reported zero federal income tax despite generating over $17 billion in profit.Public sentiment is shifting. In California, voters favor a billionaire tax by a two‑to‑one margin, and in New York City, 62 % back a 2 % surtax on the ultra‑wealthy. Nationwide, more than six in ten Americans believe the wealthy and large corporations pay too little.In response, Senator Sanders introduced legislation to impose a 5 % wealth tax on the 938 billionaires whose combined net worth exceeds $8.2 trillion. Over a decade, the measure would generate roughly $4.4 trillion.The first‑year rollout would deliver a $3,000 direct payment to every household earning $150,000 or less—equating to $12,000 for a typical family of four. Additional provisions include constructing 7 million affordable housing units, expanding Medicare to cover dental, vision and hearing, providing universal childcare, raising the minimum teacher salary to $60,000, and guaranteeing Medicaid‑funded home health care for seniors and people with disabilities.Crucially, the plan would reverse recent health‑care cuts that stripped coverage from 15 million Americans, ensuring no additional loss of insurance.Even if the tax were applied retroactively, the impact on the ultra‑rich would be modest relative to their fortunes: Elon Musk would owe an extra $42 billion, Mark Zuckerberg an additional $11 billion, and Jeff Bezos another $11 billion—figures that would barely dent their net worths.As Justice Louis Brandeis warned in 1933, “We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.” Senator Sanders argues the choice is clear: a democratic economy that serves the many, not a plutocratic system that serves the 1 %.The wealthiest Americans must begin contributing their fair share.

Palantir’s senior UK representative has warned ministers against yielding to ideologically motivated campaigners as they explore the possibility of terminating a £330 million NHS contract for the company’s Federated Data Platform (FDP).The FDP, an AI‑enabled system intended to unify patient information across the health service, is part of a broader portfolio that includes contracts with the Ministry of Defence, several police forces and the UK’s financial regulator.Louis Mosley, executive vice‑chair of Palantir UK, told The Times that abandoning the deal would jeopardise patient care and hinder progress on the NHS’s most pressing challenges. He highlighted that the platform is projected to generate £150 million in benefits by the end of the decade, delivering a £5 return for every pound spent.According to the Financial Times, senior officials have begun informal discussions about activating a break clause that would allow the FDP’s operation to be transferred to an alternative provider once the system becomes fully operational next year.Palantir, a US‑based data‑analytics firm with ties to the Israeli and US militaries and former U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement contracts, has faced sustained opposition from the British Medical Association, which has long criticised the use of its technology in patient‑care settings.Health officials acknowledge the reputational risk, noting that the controversy now extends beyond traditional Labour‑left and Green Party critics. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson emphasised that the FDP is designed to improve care coordination, accelerate cancer diagnoses and increase treatment capacity, while maintaining strict data‑security safeguards.Health Secretary Wes Streeting, speaking on the Guardian Politics Weekly podcast, recognised public unease about Palantir’s political affiliations, referencing founder Peter Thiel’s right‑wing connections. He reassured listeners that Palantir does not have direct access to patient data, stating, "The platform is operated by us; Palantir never sees the data."Adoption of Palantir’s technology within the NHS has risen from 118 to 151 organisations since June, though it remains short of the government’s target of 240 organisations by year‑end. Labour backbencher Clive Lewis noted that the issue is becoming a visible concern for voters, reflecting broader anxieties about AI and foreign‑owned infrastructure in critical public services.

New York City's public hospital system has announced that it will not be renewing its contract with Palantir, a data analytics and AI firm, amid growing controversy over its government contracts in the UK. The decision comes as health officials in the UK express concerns over data privacy issues related to Palantir's £330m agreement with the National Health Service (NHS).The contract between NYC Health + Hospitals and Palantir, which focused on recovering money for insurance claims, was set to expire in October. According to documents shared with the Guardian, Palantir has paid nearly $4m to the hospital system since November 2023. The contract allowed Palantir to review patient health notes and help the hospital claim more money in public benefits through programs like Medicaid.Despite assurances from NYC Health + Hospitals that there was an 'absolute firewall' preventing Palantir from sharing information with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), activists and data privacy experts have raised concerns over the potential risks of Palantir accessing de-identified patient data for purposes other than research.As New York City prepares to part ways with Palantir, the company is expanding its influence in the UK, despite backlash from activists and lawmakers. Palantir has contracts with the British government's Ministry of Defence and is seeking access to sensitive national financial regulation data through a contract with the Financial Conduct Authority.Medact, a health justice charity, has raised concerns that Palantir's software could enable 'data-driven state abuses of power', including US-style ICE raids. In response, Palantir has denied that its data could be used in this way, citing that it would be illegal and a breach of contract.The decision by NYC Health + Hospitals to drop Palantir has been hailed as a victory by activists, who are now calling on the NHS to follow suit and terminate its £330m contract with the company. The 'Purge Palantir' campaign, which involves nurses, pro-Palestinian activists, and social and climate justice groups, aims to stop Palantir from contracting with government agencies, universities, and corporations.

US President Donald Trump has ordered a pause in attacks on Iran's power infrastructure for five days. The move comes after Trump issued a 48-hour ultimatum to Iran to reopen the critical shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz or risk US attacks on its power plants.Iran's Response to US Ultimatum: Iran threatened to attack power plants in Israel and the Gulf if its own power plants were targeted. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) stated that it would hit power plants in Israel as well as any supplying electricity to military bases hosting US troops and assets in the region.Potential Targets: Iran could target Israeli power plants, including Orot Rabin north of Tel Aviv, with a capacity of around 3,900 megawatts, and Rutenberg in Ashkelon, with a capacity of around 2,250 megawatts. Iran also mentioned that it would target financial entities that finance US military assets, including US Treasury bonds.Energy Infrastructure: Iran's attacks on energy infrastructure in the Gulf have already had significant impacts. Qatar's state-run energy firm, QatarEnergy, halted LNG production following Iranian attacks on its operational facilities, causing an estimated $20bn in lost annual revenue. Saudi Arabia also shut down operations at the Ras Tanura plant, its biggest domestic oil refinery.Financial and Corporate Entities: Iran could target large US companies with Israeli links, including Google, Microsoft, Palantir, IBM, Nvidia, and Oracle. Iranian officials also mentioned that they would target US Treasury bonds and entities that finance US military assets.Other Critical Infrastructure: Iran's foreign minister accused the US of striking a desalination plant on Qeshm Island off the coast of Iran, cutting off the water supply to 30 villages. Bahrain also reported that an Iranian drone caused material damage to one of its desalination plants.

UK MPs have called on the government to halt a contract with Palantir, a US-based spy-tech company, after it was revealed that the firm will gain access to a vast trove of highly sensitive UK financial regulation data. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the watchdog overseeing thousands of financial bodies, has hired Palantir to apply its AI systems to two years' worth of internal intelligence data to help tackle financial crime. However, the Liberal Democrats and Green party have raised concerns over Palantir's ties to Donald Trump and the potential risks to national and economic security. The Liberal Democrats have called for a government investigation into the contract, citing concerns that it could be "a huge error of judgment". Palantir, founded by Peter Thiel, a billionaire supporter of Trump, has built up over £500m in contracts in the UK, including with the NHS, police, and Ministry of Defence. The company supports the US and Israeli militaries and the ICE immigration crackdown. Insiders at the FCA have questioned whether there are sufficient safeguards in place to prevent the data from being exploited. There are concerns about the potential for data about sensitive FCA investigations into high-profile figures to be accessed during Palantir's work. The FCA has insisted that Palantir will be a "data processor", not a "data controller", meaning it can only act on instruction from the regulator. The FCA will retain exclusive control over the encryption keys for the most sensitive files, and the data will be hosted and stored solely in the UK. Despite these assurances, MPs have expressed concerns over the risks associated with the contract. Daisy Cooper, the Liberal Democrats' Treasury spokesperson, called for an investigation into the FCA's Palantir contract, citing concerns over Palantir's ties to Trump. The Green party MP Siân Berry has called for the government to "step in immediately and protect our national and economic security by blocking this contract award". Palantir has denied claims that it may "use customer data for our own purposes", stating that this is "something that we have no business interest in, and that we are legally and contractually prevented from doing".

Palantir, a Miami-based company backed by billionaire Peter Thiel, has secured a three-month trial contract with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to analyze a vast amount of sensitive UK financial regulation data. The deal, worth over £30,000 per week, aims to help the FCA tackle financial crimes such as fraud, money laundering, and insider trading.The FCA has awarded Palantir the contract to investigate its internal intelligence data, which includes highly sensitive case intelligence files, information on problem firms, and reports from lenders about proven and suspected frauds. Palantir will apply its AI system, known as Foundry, to huge quantities of information held by the watchdog, including recordings of phone calls, emails, and social media posts.The contract has raised concerns about privacy and the company's ethical reliability. One source expressed concerns that Palantir may share the information it learns from the FCA with other parties. Palantir's technology is used by the Israeli military and in the US president's ICE immigration crackdown, leading to criticism from left-wing MPs.The FCA has stated that it has strict controls in place to ensure data is protected and that Palantir will only act on instruction from the regulator. The data will be hosted and stored solely in the UK, and Palantir will have to destroy the data after completion of the contract.Experts have highlighted the potential benefits of using AI to tackle financial crimes, but also emphasized the need for robust protocols to protect sensitive information. Prof Michael Levi, an expert in money laundering, noted that AI is a potentially valuable technology to tackle financial crimes, but also raised concerns about the ownership and control of the data.

Palantir, a leading AI and data analytics company, has secured a major contract with the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to leverage its AI technology for detecting financial wrongdoing. This deal marks a significant expansion of Palantir's presence in the UK, where it has already embedded its technology in the NHS, police, and military. The contract, valued at over £500m, enables Palantir to access terabytes of data gathered by the FCA, providing it with an unparalleled view of the inner workings of British authorities and the City of London, a global financial hub. Campaign groups have expressed concerns over Palantir's work with public authorities, citing its previous involvement with controversial entities such as the US Department of Homeland Security and the Israel Defense Forces. However, the company continues to secure lucrative contracts in the UK. The FCA aims to utilize Palantir's AI technology to better detect signs of wrongdoing, such as money laundering and fraud, which account for approximately 40% of all crimes in the UK. The regulator's workplan for 2025-26 includes expanding the use of data and intelligence to identify and act on high-risk firms and individuals. However, experts warn that the use of AI in detecting financial wrongdoing may lead to new challenges, such as criminals adapting to evade detection by using techniques like invisible 'white text' in documents to instruct AI systems to ignore incriminating information. Prof Michael Levi, an expert in money laundering at Cardiff University, notes that while there are concerns about data privacy, the use of AI technology can also help target corporate holdings and shell companies used for illicit activities.

Palantir, one of the world's biggest tech companies, has been accused of launching an intimidation campaign against a small Swiss magazine, Republik, after it published an investigative report on the company's activities in Switzerland.The report, which was a collaboration between Republik and the independent Swiss research collective WAV, alleged that Palantir had persistently courted Switzerland but had been rejected. The investigation found that Palantir had pitched itself to Switzerland's chancellor during the Covid-19 pandemic to help with data tracking, approached the Swiss army, and met Switzerland's then finance minister, Ueli Maurer.Palantir was not happy with the report and filed a lawsuit in a Swiss commercial court demanding that Republik print a detailed rebuttal. The company claims that the report paints a false and misleading narrative about Palantir and sets back important discourse on European software modernisation.The journalists behind the report say they had interviewed company executives and sent a full list of questions before publication, but that Palantir demanded they print a detailed rebuttal that went beyond the scope of their investigation. The lawsuit has sparked concerns about Palantir's tactics and the impact on journalism, with the European Federation of Journalists claiming that the legal action is an attempt at intimidation aimed at discouraging critical analysis of Palantir's activities."It does feel like an intimidation campaign," says Marguerite Meyer, a journalist who works with WAV. "However, we adhered to all journalistic standards, and had a thorough factcheck done. They are suing for an absurd list of changes."The investigation, which was published in December, gave an account of Palantir's years-long efforts to try to sell itself to the Swiss government. The journalists found that despite Palantir's efforts, no government contracts had been reported."We tried to find out, is there any kind of government agency that uses this software? I mean, they are in Switzerland, eventually some government official maybe thought they could use this Palantir," says Balz Oertli, who is also with WAV.The lawsuit has raised questions about Palantir's influence and the limits of journalistic scrutiny. Swiss law allows the subjects of a story to request a right of reply, but this has caveats: the right of reply has to be concise and stick to the facts of the story."This lawsuit for a right of reply is not about whether Republik was technically inaccurate or not. It is only about whether Palantir is allowed to place its view of the facts alongside that of Republik and whether Republik must publish it," says Dominique Strebel, an expert in media law and the editor-in-chief of Beobachter, another Swiss magazine.