Trump clears TikTok deal 'in concept', ByteDance seeks $60 bn in valuation

TikTok to give $5 billion to fund the education of American youths; ban delayed till September 27

US President Donald Trump has announced a proposed deal on TikTok involving two American companies — Oracle and Walmart —that would allow the US operations of the Chinese video-sharing application, which was placed on a ban list due to security concerns.

The deal mandates the creation of a new American company TikTok Global —incorporated in Texas — and the prospect of 25,000 new jobs. Further, TikTok will give $5 billion to fund the education of American youths. 

The US on Friday issued orders to ban popular Chinese social media apps — TikTok and WeChat — from Sunday to safeguard national security. The ban on downloading TikTok, originally scheduled to take effect on Sunday, was postponed to September 27, according to the US Department of Commerce.

Last month, Trump signed an executive order to ban TikTok and WeChat by September 15 unless the ownership of the two Chinese companies changed to American.

“TikTok is moving along. We're dealing with Oracle, which you know of, in combination with Walmart, another great American company. The security will be 100 per cent. They'll be using separate clouds (data) and a lot of very, very powerful security,” Trump said. “They’ll (TikTok) be making about a $5-billion contribution towards education. We're going to be setting up a very large fund for the education of American youths, and that will be great. I've been asking for this (education fund),” Trump said.

Judge halts Trump admin order banning WeChat from app stores

 A US judge in California halted the Trump administration’s ban on downloads of the Chinese-owned app WeChat early Sunday. The move blocks the Commerce Department from forcing Apple and Alphabet’s Google to remove Tencent Holding’s WeChat for downloads by Sunday evening. US Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler in California said in an order that WeChat users who filed a lawsuit “have shown serious questions going to the merits of the First Amendment claim, the balance of hardships tips in the plaintiffs favour.“