Warren Buffett has ruled out adding another railroad to Berkshire Hathaway’s vast portfolio, but he is looking for ways to make America’s freight rail system more efficient through partnerships.

Speaking with CNBC’s Becky Quick on Monday, the legendary investor confirmed that he and Berkshire CEO-designate Greg Abel met earlier this month with CSX CEO Joseph Hinrichs in Omaha, Nebraska, to discuss possible collaboration.

The August 3 meeting, which took place without advisors present, was candid. Buffett and Abel assured Hinrichs they had no intention of making a takeover bid for CSX. Instead, they suggested the two companies could reap many of the same benefits that consolidation might bring through closer cooperation. Buffett explained that coordination between rail operators could unlock efficiencies without the upheaval or costs associated with mergers.

The market responded swiftly, with CSX shares falling about 5% to $32.81 after the news that Buffett was not interested in an outright purchase. Union Pacific dropped about 2%, Norfolk Southern lost more than 2%, and Berkshire Hathaway itself slipped less than 1%. The pullback reflected investors’ recalibration following a period of speculation that Berkshire might seek another transformative railroad acquisition.

That speculation was partly fueled by last month’s shock $85 billion takeover announcement from Union Pacific, which unveiled plans to acquire Norfolk Southern. The deal set off a wave of chatter across the industry, with CSX shares jumping 9% in July on hopes that Berkshire’s BNSF Railway could enter the fray. But Buffett’s latest remarks clarify that his strategy favors collaboration over consolidation.

Back in 2009, at the height of the financial crisis, Buffett stunned markets by spending $26 billion to acquire BNSF in what remains one of his boldest and most successful bets. He hailed the railroad then as an “all-in wager on the American economy.” The purchase gave Berkshire a permanent stake in the backbone of U.S. commerce, with BNSF now ranking among the conglomerate’s crown jewels. But that was a different era.

The shift is already visible in practice. On Friday, BNSF and CSX jointly announced a new coast-to-coast rail service designed to make freight movements more efficient by linking their networks. For Buffett, such a partnership accomplishes much of what a merger would achieve—greater reach, improved service reliability, and streamlined logistics—without Berkshire having to pay a steep acquisition premium.

While Buffett’s cautious approach bucks the wave of merger speculation in the U.S., it mirrors strategies seen among other major global rail operators. In Canada, for instance, Canadian National Railway (CN) and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) have pursued different paths to growth: CN has leaned on selective acquisitions alongside operational discipline, while CPKC completed a historic $31 billion merger to form the first railway linking Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. That deal created sweeping efficiencies for cross-border freight but also came with regulatory scrutiny and integration risks—factors Buffett appears intent on avoiding.

In Europe, freight railroads have often turned to cross-border alliances rather than outright acquisitions to cope with the continent’s fragmented national networks. Operators such as DB Cargo in Germany and SNCF’s rail freight arm in France regularly cooperate on corridor access agreements, intermodal hubs, and technology sharing to keep costs in check while ensuring seamless freight flows across borders. Buffett’s BNSF-CSX partnership bears a resemblance to those European arrangements, where efficiency gains are pursued without the financial and political complications of mergers.

This emphasis on cooperation over consolidation also reflects Buffett’s long-standing investment philosophy: avoid overpaying for assets while focusing on long-term operational performance. Berkshire can expand its influence and achieve coast-to-coast service efficiencies by drawing CSX into BNSF’s orbit through partnerships, even as competitors like Union Pacific chase headline-grabbing acquisitions.

Buffett’s strategy underpins a divergence in the U.S. freight sector. While Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern prepare for a massive integration that could reshape the industry, BNSF and CSX are betting that voluntary collaboration will yield similar network-wide benefits.

President Donald Trump says he is “just getting started” in what he describes as a new era of dealmaking between Washington and America’s biggest companies.

On Monday, the administration confirmed that its agreement to take a roughly 10% stake in Intel is only the beginning of what could evolve into a series of taxpayer-funded ownership deals, effectively laying the groundwork for what Trump has long envisioned: a U.S. sovereign wealth fund.

Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council and a leading contender for the next Federal Reserve chair, made the administration’s intentions clear in an interview with CNBC.

“The president has made it clear all the way back to the campaign, he thinks that in the end, it would be great if the U.S. could start to build up a sovereign wealth fund. So I’m sure that at some point there’ll be more transactions, if not in this industry then other industries,” Hassett said.

The Intel deal is remarkable not only for its size but also for how it came about. Roughly $11 billion in grants pledged under the Biden-era CHIPS Act — a bipartisan policy aimed at boosting domestic semiconductor production — were converted into 433.3 million non-voting Intel shares. Trump has argued repeatedly that his predecessor’s CHIPS subsidies gave away taxpayer money without securing enough value in return. By turning grants into equity, he says, taxpayers now “own a piece” of America’s semiconductor future.

Trump, in his characteristic style, lashed out at skeptics of the agreement. “Why are ‘stupid’ people unhappy with that? I will make deals like that for our Country all day long,” he wrote on Truth Social. “I will also help those companies that make such lucrative deals with the United States. I love seeing their stock price go up, making the USA RICHER, AND RICHER.”

Intel’s stock rose more than 2% in early Monday trading following the announcement, closing at $25.25. The U.S. government purchased its shares at a $4 discount from Friday’s closing price of $24.80.

National Security and Industrial Policy

The White House has defended the intervention as a national security imperative. Intel, once the undisputed leader in chipmaking, has lost ground to foreign rivals like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. Officials argue it is a strategic risk for the U.S. to rely so heavily on overseas suppliers for advanced chips that power smartphones, defense systems, and AI models.

“I said, I think it would be good having the United States as your partner,” Trump told reporters.

This is not the administration’s first corporate intervention. Earlier this year, the White House took a so-called “golden share” in U.S. Steel to secure protections for American workers after approving Japanese-based Nippon Steel’s acquisition of the company. Separately, Trump mandated a 15% remittance on high-end chip sales by Nvidia and AMD to China — a move that followed his decision to halt exports of the firms’ most advanced chips to Beijing.

Divisions Over “Corporate Statism”

Still, not everyone is convinced. The Wall Street Journal editorial board compared the Intel deal to “corporate statism,” likening it to the U.S. government’s controversial 2009 bailout of General Motors, in which taxpayers ultimately lost about $10 billion. Many fear a slippery slope in which the government grows too entangled in private industry, potentially distorting competition.

Intel itself has acknowledged potential risks. In a securities filing, the company warned that a 9.9% government stake could complicate its international business, especially given that 76% of its revenue comes from outside the United States, with China alone accounting for 29%. The filing noted that foreign subsidy laws and restrictions could be triggered by Washington’s new role as a shareholder, potentially straining global sales.

CEO Lip-Bu Tan struck a more conciliatory note, however. In a Commerce Department video posted Monday, he said: “I don’t need the grant. But I really look forward to having the U.S. government be my shareholder.”

However, the Intel agreement is effectively clearing away billions in outstanding CHIPS Act obligations, with the company’s obligations considered discharged “to the maximum extent permissible under applicable law,” except for its Secure Enclave program. But it has also raised the possibility that other government entities may demand to convert existing grants into equity stakes, reshaping how Washington does industrial policy.

That is believed to be precisely the point for Trump. By recasting subsidies as investments, he believes that he is setting the foundation for a sovereign wealth fund that could expand across industries — from steel to semiconductors and potentially beyond.

“We will do a lot more deals like that,” Trump promised.

However, only time will tell whether taxpayers end up richer, as Trump insists, or whether this gamble on corporate equity echoes past interventions where the U.S. public shouldered the downside risk while private companies reaped the rewards.

Young people: follow your TALENT, and not your passion, if you want to have financial independence. Why? No one hires passion or pay for passion. People pay for talent (inborn natural ability) or skill (acquired).