Trump Extends Deadline for TikTok to Get US Buyer by 75 Days

Oluchi Chibuzor with agency report

President Donald Trump yesterday granted TikTok another reprieve by announcing that he would extend the deadline for when the popular app had to make a deal to be separated from its Chinese owner, ByteDance, or face a ban in the United States.

TikTok, which had been facing a Saturday deadline for a deal, now has another 75 days to find a new owner to comply with a federal law that requires it to change its structure to resolve national security concerns. That puts the new deadline for a deal in mid-June.

The delay was President Trump’s second for TikTok this year, according to the New York Times.

He had first paused enforcement of the law in January, even after it was unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court.

“The Deal requires more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed,” Mr. Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Friday, adding that “we do not want TikTok to ‘go dark.’”

He added that he looked forward to “working with TikTok and China” to close the deal and suggested he would consider using the app as a negotiating chip with China on tariffs.

Trump’s latest action highlights the intractable nature of the dilemma with TikTok, which has endured years of scrutiny in the United States over its Chinese ties. Even as lawmakers and U.S. officials repeatedly raised questions about whether TikTok was secure, the app cemented its role as a cultural juggernaut, with more than 170 million users in the country who use it to make memes and share videos.

The delay also renewed questions about Trump’s willingness to put his presidential power ahead of the rule of law. The federal law that aimed to change TikTok’s ownership or have the app be banned was passed last year with wide bipartisan support and took effect in January. But Trump effectively overrode the law when he paused enforcement of it that month.

For now, one thing is certain: TikTok will continue to operate in the United States for the foreseeable future. In January, the app briefly went dark around the time the federal law took effect, before flickering back to life.

TikTok did not immediately return a request for comment.

The delay came after tense, last-minute negotiations and a great deal of interest from potential buyers. Vice President JD Vance, whom Mr. Trump tapped to help oversee the deal talks, said as recently as Thursday that a deal was imminent. Amazon submitted a bid, and the private equity giant Blackstone also weighed taking a stake in TikTok.

Much of the speculation in recent weeks centred around an option that stopped short of a full sale of the app. Instead, people close to the talks have described a deal in which existing U.S. investors in ByteDance would roll over their stakes into a new independent global TikTok company.

Additional U.S. investors would be brought on to reduce the proportion of Chinese investors, they said, because the law calls for no more than 20 per cent of TikTok or its parent company to be owned by people or corporations in so-called foreign adversary countries, a list that includes China.

It isn’t clear whether that kind of arrangement would satisfy the law, or the policymakers who pushed for it.

“There isn’t a ton that Congress can do,” said Alan Rozenshtein, a former national security adviser to the Justice Department and an associate professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. “If Republicans and Democrats cared, they could make this a legislative priority and do hearings about this, but my sense is they don’t have much influence nor much appetite.”

The concerns about TikTok’s Chinese ownership have been brewing for years. Intelligence officials and lawmakers have argued that ByteDance could hand over sensitive U.S. user data to Beijing, like location information, based on laws that allow the Chinese government to secretly demand data from Chinese companies and citizens for intelligence-gathering operations. They have also claimed that China could use TikTok’s content recommendations to fuel misinformation, a concern that escalated in the United States after the start of the Israel-Hamas war and during the presidential election.

TikTok has long pushed back on Washington’s concerns and sought to address them without a sale. It has said it has never misused data or spread propaganda at the behest of Beijing in the United States. But despite a multi billion Dollar security effort that sought to give the American government unique oversight of TikTok’s operations, the company could not win the trust of Washington.

​  

  • Related Posts

    WHY PRESIDENTS AND VPS SHOULD RARELY TRAVEL TOGETHER

    WHY PRESIDENTS AND VPS SHOULD RARELY TRAVEL TOGETHER

     The simultaneous absence of a country’s president and vice president from national territory is risky, argues KABIR ADAMU

    In the theatre of statecraft, symbolism and prudence often carry as much weight as written law. One such matter of high symbolic and practical consequence—yet often overlooked—is the simultaneous absence of a country’s President and Vice President from national territory. While few constitutions outright prohibit this occurrence, political wisdom and national security imperatives argue strongly against it.

    At a time when global volatility, transnational threats, and domestic uncertainties are constant companions, the need for leadership continuity has never been more critical. When both the President and Vice President—or their equivalents—are out of the country at the same time, it sends a troubling signal: that the cockpit of the state is temporarily unmanned.

     The most immediate concern is the risk of a leadership vacuum in the event of an emergency. Natural disasters, civil unrest, military crises, or even economic shocks do not wait for leaders to return from international engagements. If both the President and Vice President are abroad—especially without formally transferring power to another official—critical decision-making can be delayed or mired in constitutional ambiguity.

    In countries where the line of succession is unclear or politically contested, this scenario could spiral into a crisis of legitimacy. Even where succession plans are well established, the optics of absentee leadership during a national emergency can erode public trust.

    National security is another central concern. In unstable environments, or regions experiencing rising terrorism, insurgency, or geopolitical tension, the simultaneous absence of the top two leaders may be interpreted by hostile actors as a window of opportunity. The risk is not merely theoretical: history is replete with moments when opportunistic moves by adversaries were timed with perceived political or institutional weakness.

    Even in more stable democracies, security protocols often dictate that the President and Vice President avoid traveling on the same aircraft—just in case. It is a principle of continuity of government that has long guided policy in countries like the United States. Such prudence should be universal.

     There are also political costs. In democracies especially, perception is policy. When citizens face hardship—whether economic, social, or security-related—the image of both leaders abroad can be politically tone-deaf. Opposition figures are quick to pounce, spinning absence into apathy. At worst, it fosters a dangerous sense of neglect among the governed.

    Indeed, travel diplomacy has its place, and leaders must engage the world. But leadership also requires presence—not just in policy, but in geography. Where one is physically present often says more than what is written in any communique.

    The fact that many constitutions are silent on this issue does not make it insignificant. In practice, many nations observe informal but well-respected traditions: ensuring that either the President or Vice President remains in the country at all times. These norms are born not of legal necessity but of hard-earned political experience. They reflect an understanding that in governance, continuity is not merely a bureaucratic formality—it is the bedrock of stability.

    Nigeria, for instance, does not constitutionally forbid simultaneous travel by its top leaders. But the practice is avoided more often than not, precisely because it risks undermining institutional confidence in a country already grappling with complex security and governance challenges. Likewise, in Kenya, the President and Deputy President typically stagger their travel schedules. In France and India, careful coordination between heads of state and government ensures constant presence at the helm.

    In an era of rising political uncertainty and asymmetric threats, countries would do well to move from informal convention to formalized protocol. Whether through executive guidelines, legislative frameworks, or constitutional amendments, a clear rule that ensures leadership presence on home soil at all times would strengthen governance and bolster national resilience.

    Ultimately, the question is not simply about where a leader travels—but about the architecture of trust between the state and its people. In governance, presence is power. And in times of uncertainty, even symbolic absence can be a dangerous luxury.

    Dr Adamu is CEO of Beacon Security and Intelligence Limited, an Abuja based Security Risk Management and Intelligence firm with presence in several African countries

    ​  

     The simultaneous absence of a country’s president and vice president from national territory is risky, argues KABIR ADAMU In the theatre of statecraft, symbolism and prudence often carry as much weight as written law. One

    AKINBORO AND SUBSERVIENT FEDERALISM

    AKINBORO AND SUBSERVIENT FEDERALISM

    The National Assembly should act in the best interest of the Federation by resolving conflicting constitutional issues on federalism, writes EKPA STANLEY EKPA

    Section 1 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria refers Nigeria as a Federal Republic. A federal system, as K.C Wheare posits, reflects a constitutional arrangement where people are prepared to give up only limited powers while retaining other limited powers; both sets of powers being exercised by coordinate authorities. With the exception of Major-General J.T.U Ironsi who made a proclamation for a unitary government, all other military governments, often prone to suspending and modifying the constitution by their fiat through decrees, surprisingly never attempted to modify the constitutional arrangement of federalism in Nigeria, thereby referring to their governments as the “Federal Military Government”. This leaves constitutional scholars with the curiosity of the significance of the phenomenon of federalism to Nigeria’s productivity and shared prosperity, particularly with the “unitary-federalism” currently being practiced in Nigeria. Perhaps, it is on this background that lawyers gathered last week, as the Eastern Bar Forum held its colloquium on “federalism and state legislative powers” in Abakaliki. The colloquium reviewed concurrent legislative matters from a sub-national perspective. 

    The colloquium consensus was that the constitution’s role in outlining the areas of intersection between different strata, as well as areas where one stratum takes precedence over the other, must constantly be a “process of bringing about a dynamic equilibrium between centrifugal and centripetal forces in a society”, as Akande observed. I find Aare Olumuyiwa Akinboro SAN’s points of law on the imbalances of Nigeria’s federalism and his recommendations thereof quite pragmatic in solving our constitutional crisis on federalism. Perhaps, influenced by his decades as a prolific lawyer, Akinboro’s focus on Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution gives a legal leaning for restructuring Nigeria. He contends that while the ‘inconsistency clause’ in the constitution, as reflected by section 4(5) to the extent that “if any Law enacted by the House of Assembly of a State is inconsistent with any law validly made by the National Assembly, the law made by the National Assembly shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void”, may seem good for constitutional certainty and operational hierarchy, it fails the original intendment of the essence of federalism, which according to section 4(7) of the 1999 Constitution, seeks to balance the constitutional power sharing system, by ensuring that the State House of Assembly “have power to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the State or any part thereof”. 

    The federal dominance and legislative conflict arising from the imbalance in the constitutional power sharing system, Akinboro opined, is further complicated by the decision of the court in Niwa & Ors v. Laswa & Ors, where the court held that where both the National Assembly and a State House of Assembly enacts laws on the same subject, federal legislation must take precedence, and states are bound to comply. Clearly, this legal principle limits the autonomy of state governments, and should the fabrics of our federalism allow states to be subservient to the federal government, then our version of federalism runs contrary to the ideals of federalism as espoused by the Supreme Court of the United States of America in Indian Motorcycle Co. v. US, that in a federation, “neither state nor central government may exercise its power in such a manner as, without constitutional sanction, to interfere with or to impair unduly the exercise by the other of its authority.” 

    In the face of prevailing power play and exercise of constitutional powers between the federal government and some federating states, particularly in Rivers State, the current constitutional amendment committees of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, must bear in mind Professor Ben Nwabueze’s outlined characteristics of federalism, as “an association between governments rather than between geographical entities comprising different people; each level of government should enjoy a separate and independent existence in which one is not subject to the control of the other, that is, autonomy; there should be safeguards that ensure mutual non-interference in the exercise of allotted powers; each regional or state government should have equal powers in its relations to the central government..”. 

    As recommended by the Life Bencher, Olumuyiwa Akinboro, to achieve a “truly functional federal system, Nigeria must implement key legal and constitutional reforms that strengthen state autonomy; we must reevaluate fiscal federalism to empower states with increased authority over their internally generated revenue and resources management, thereby alleviating their excessive dependence on federal allocations.” To foster a more effective and equitable federal structure, the learned Silk’s conclusion and call to constitutionally “clarify the delineation of legislative authority, and empower states to take lead in security and other critical development initiatives”, will clearly help create a constitutional balance where federal and state governments are coordinating partners in “ensuring that federalism in Nigeria transcends constitutional rhetoric and manifests as a functional reality.” 

    More importantly, if the “bedrock of a federation is in each tier of government being a master in its own domain”, as held by the Supreme Court in Nkwocha v. Governor of Anambra, it suffices that the National Assembly in executing its duties under Section 9 of the Constitution, must act in the best interest of the Federation, and not just the federal government, by resolving our conflicting constitutional issues on federalism, such as resource control, overlapping jurisdictions, security sector and state policing, local government autonomy, general structure of government, among others, through the ongoing constitutional amendment process. While no country has a perfect system of government, we must constantly construct a system that propels us to a more perfect country, towards better humans, and to forge the greatest amount of good for the majority of Nigerians. 

     Ekpa, Executive Director, Call a Lawyer, wrote via ekpastanleyekpa@gmail.com

    ​  

    The National Assembly should act in the best interest of the Federation by resolving conflicting constitutional issues on federalism, writes EKPA STANLEY EKPA Section 1 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Business & Economy

    FG orders federal tertiary institutions to publish financial, student data by May 31 

    TotalEnergies declares N27bn profit for 2024

    TotalEnergies declares N27bn profit for 2024

    JAMB says April 7 not deadline for 2025 Direct Entry registration 

    TotalEnergies reports 140.35% surge in full-year profit as revenue surpasses N1 trillion, recommends N40 final dividend 

    Ogun Govt plans film and entertainment village, begins Olumo Rock, MKO residence renovation 

    Weekly Market Wrap: All-Share Index dips 0.14% as market activity declines, banking sector records modest gains 

    BREAKING: CBN injects $197.71 million into FX market to boost liquidity and stability 

    Trade war: Trump’s 10% baseline tariffs take effect, higher duties to follow 

    Lack of funding major cause of African startups’ shutdowns in 2024 -Report  

    Nigeria’s official exchange rate crashes to N1,600/$1 as Trump tariffs rattle global markets

    Unilever, UK Government and EY, announce grant of £500,000 for five West African Startups, including three in Nigeria 

    Transcorp Hotels announces N7.6bn dividend for shareholders, plans flagship 5-Star property in Ikoyi 

    Input cost inflation cools to 10-month low as PMI hits 54.3 in March – Report 

    NNPC announces new senior management team

    NNPC announces new senior management team

    French aerospace company Dassault Aviation considers setting up MRO facility at Ogun’s Gateway Airport 

    BREAKING: Nigeria’s total public debt hits N144.67 trillion in December 2024 

    Navy destroys illegal refining sites, seizes vessels across states in March operation 

    YouTube increases YouTube Premium service price by 54% in Nigeria 

    Ecobank launches suit to stop Barbican Capital, others from selling shares in FBN Holdings

    Ecobank launches suit to stop Barbican Capital, others from selling shares in FBN Holdings

    Ojulari takes over as new NNPC chief

    Ojulari takes over as new NNPC chief

    Nigerian govt, LNG Arete sign $27 million agreement to develop mini LNG plant

    Nigerian govt, LNG Arete sign $27 million agreement to develop mini LNG plant

    NNPC’s New Board and CBN’s Reserve Truth | Drinks and Mics

    Meningitis: Nigeria receives over 1 million doses of Men5CV vaccine to combat outbreak 

    Gospel artists Nathaniel Bassey, Mercy Chinwo make YouTube’s most streamed Nigerian Acts globally in Q1 2025 

    NGX Lotus Islamic Index emerges as best-performing index in Q1 2025 with a gain of 8.56% 

    Top performing stocks on the NGX in Q1 2025 

    Minister Hails Dangote Cement Over Youth Development in Host Community

    Fraud Fight Now More Urgent, Expert Insists

    Between Power Bikes And Smartphones

    GMW: Access Bank Empowers Teens with Financial Literacy Skills

    Between High Inflation and Your Savings

    FCMB Group’s annual profit drops 21% despite higher revenue

    FCMB Group’s annual profit drops 21% despite higher revenue

    P-CNGi, LNG Arete Ltd. sign $27.3 million agreement to boost CNG infrastructure in Northern Nigeria 

    All-Share holds steady above N66 trillion, slips by 0.01%; UBA and UCAP lead trading volume 

    FCT minister inaugurates solar-powered farmers’ Market in Utako 

    US tariffs may shrink Global Trade by 1% – WTO DG