tariffs – Our Story Insight

Trump tariffs fall, but trade war impacts linger

admin — Mon, 06 Apr 2026 00:00:52 +0000

A year after President Donald Trump declared his “liberation day” and imposed sweeping tariffs on imports, kicking off a wave of economic and political uncertainty, some companies are still feeling the effects.

While some industries have emerged largely unscathed — having weathered twists and turns of several tariff iterations — others, such as retail, automotive, consumer packaged goods and pharmaceuticals, are navigating a new reality in global supply chains.

“Leadership at U.S. corporations really had to think about where we buy from versus whether we can import or not,” said Venky Ramesh, a supply chain expert with AlixPartners. “Around 80% to 85% of the costs were absorbed domestically, meaning either the U.S. corporations had to take the hit, or they passed it on to the customers, or a mix of both.”

On April 2, 2025, in the White House’s Rose Garden, Trump announced broad country-by-country tariffs, as well as a 10% baseline levy on countries that weren’t specifically listed in that declaration. Those tariff policies fluctuated wildly over the following months as Trump made deals and walked back some of the most extreme duties.

With ever-changing trade and tariff policies, companies have been forced to be more flexible and diversify their supply chains over the past year. Moving operations out of countries such as China, Vietnam or Mexico meant import cost savings, but for many industries, it was a tall task.

Ramesh said he saw clients in the first few months making “aggressive” changes to get ahead of the tariff costs, but because those policies kept shifting, companies begin to move slower and invest resources into scenario modeling.

“Moving supplier bases cannot happen overnight,” Ramesh said. “I think what companies are doing is they’re taking it gradually, so they want to make sure that they are well-diversified.”

On Feb. 20, the Supreme Court ruled that the country-specific “reciprocal” tariffs Trump imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, or IEEPA, were unconstitutional. But hours after the ruling, Trump announced a new “global tariff” rate of 10% under a separate statute, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, for a period of 150 days. He later said he would increase global tariffs to 15%.

Meanwhile, those imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 — intended to target specific imports that threaten national security — remain in place. Section 232 tariffs largely affected imports of steel, semiconductors, aluminum and other products.

Still, Ramesh said, overall imports into the U.S. in 2025 were actually higher than in the previous year, especially as companies pulled forward inventory in the first few months of the year.

Ultimately, he said, he believes the past year of tariffs has culturally shifted the way U.S. companies operate.

“The things that would stick are supply chain being a very, very critical component of any company. I think that has really changed over the last year,” he said. “Corporations are not going to make the rash decisions. They’re not as susceptible to these changes as they were a year ago. They’ve stabilized more.”

As the U.S. enters its second year of Trump-imposed tariffs, here’s how some of the consumer-facing sectors have fared.

Retail

One year into Trump’s trade war, the retail industry has been disproportionately affected by tariffs. Mega-retailers such as Walmart, which have a range of different revenue streams and deep negotiating power, have emerged relatively unscathed, while smaller businesses have been crushed.

Several retailers said that although they initially estimated they would see significant hits to revenue and profitability after the new tariffs were imposed, they’ve since taken a new approach, aiming to not rely too heavily on any single country for imports or manufacturing. And, for the most part, they’ve managed to avoid the massive impact that many projected at the start of the trade war.

Home Depot‘s chief financial officer, CFO Richard McPhail, told CNBC in late February that the company is pressing ahead with its goal of limiting any one country outside the U.S. to 10% of the company’s purchases. More than half of what Home Depot sells is sourced in the U.S.

The retail supply chain has been forced to become more nimble in the past year, according to Max Kahn, the president of Coresight Research.

“One of the things that really started back with the pandemic is that retailers have become much better at building flexibility in their supply chains, and that got accelerated a lot last year with tariffs,” Kahn said. “Shocks to the system or unexpected events are a little bit more business as usual now.”

Tariffs have also meant higher costs for shoppers. Retailers such as Walmart, Best Buy and Macy’s have raised prices of some items, while also looking for ways to defray costs.

But as retailers reported quarterly earnings over the past few months, executives were hesitant to declare victory in the tariff back-and-forth.

While the Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year was largely a boon, especially for apparel companies that rely primarily on supply chains throughout East Asia, there’s still a lot of uncertainty, and companies were mixed on whether, and how, to size up the potential tariff impact.

Abercrombie & Fitch in March decided to explicitly incorporate the latest 15% tariff assumption into its outlook, becoming one of the first retailers to provide clarity on the new guidelines. However, the company did not predict or quantify any potential tariff refunds that it may receive after the IEEPA tariffs were struck down.

On the other hand, American Eagle Outfitters said in March that its guidance for the first quarter and full year was based on tariffs imposed under the IEEPA guidelines and did not take into account the recent Supreme Court ruling.

Gap also didn’t factor recent changes to tariffs into its 2026 outlook, but it could issue stronger guidance in the upcoming quarter because the newly enacted tariff rate is slightly below the previous rates for many countries.

Dollar Tree, too, isn’t betting on significant savings. CFO Stewart Glendinning said last month that the company already paid tariffs on its current inventory before the Supreme Court ruling.

“While there may be some upside, we remain cautious because of the potential for further near-term changes and because of the potential for negative freight and other costs related to the conflict in the Middle East,” Glendinning said.

His comment underscores a new reality for retailers: The Trump administration’s aggressive tariff policies are now a constant on the long list of factors that make the year ahead hard to predict.

Autos

The automotive industry has been, and continues to be, one of those most affected by Trump’s trade and tariff policies.

Both foreign and domestic automakers have faced billions of dollars in additional costs due to the levies. Toyota, for example, forecast a 1.4 trillion yen ($9.5 billion) impact from U.S. tariffs during its fiscal year. And the changes cost Detroit automakers General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler parent Stellantis a combined total of $6 billion last year, according to the companies.

Autos have been most affected by Section 232 tariffs, but the impact hasn’t been as bad as initially expected. The Trump administration last year decided to give some reprieve by “de-stacking” tariffs that were piling up on the automotive industry, so companies wouldn’t be paying overlapping duties for parts and vehicles.

“We should end up at a position where our net tariffs are actually lower in 2026 than they were in 2025,” GM CFO Paul Jacobson said Jan. 27, during the company’s most recent quarterly earnings call.

U.S. tariffs cost GM $3.1 billion in 2025, below the company’s previous expectations of between $3.5 billion and $4.5 billion, Jacobson said.

Companies including GM have said they have taken varying actions to offset the additional expenses, including redirecting and resourcing supply chains to better meet U.S. standards.

GM’s chief rival, Ford, told CNBC in February that it is continuing to work with the Trump administration on policies that “promote a strong and globally competitive U.S. auto sector.”

International companies such as Toyota — the world’s largest automaker — and its Japanese peers Nissan Motor and Honda Motor have announced plans to increase domestic manufacturing and export vehicles from the U.S. to Japan to appease the Trump administration.

Consumer packaged goods

President Donald Trump speaks about his new tariff plan at the White House, in Washington, D.C., on April 2, 2025.

Brendan Smialowski | Afp | Getty Images

Most consumer packaged goods companies manufacture their products in the U.S. but import key commodities, such as the pulp found in diapers and toilet paper and the aluminum used for soda and beer cans. Supply chain diversions aren’t an option for those resources, like they are for the retail or auto industries.

While the tariffs broadly resulted in higher costs for these manufacturers, some companies found themselves under unique pressure.

For example, spice maker McCormick initially warned investors that tariffs could cost $70 million in fiscal 2025 as prices for black pepper, cinnamon and vanilla were projected to rise. However, it managed to mitigate the impact of the import duties to just $20 million by cutting expenses, raising prices and sourcing alternatives from lower-tariffed countries when possible.

Consumer packaged goods company Procter & Gamble said in July that it had to raise prices on 25% of its products due in part to a $1 billion total annual tariff impact. Beer maker Constellation Brands said in July that it estimated a $20 million hit to its fiscal 2026 earnings due to tariffs on aluminum, a crucial material for its cans.

“At these rates, tariffs alone are a 5-point headwind to core EPS growth in fiscal 2026,” Procter & Gamble CFO Andre Schulten said on a July earnings call, referring to earnings per share. “We will look for every opportunity to mitigate these impacts, including sourcing flexibility, productivity improvements, and pricing with innovation in affected categories and markets.”

But not all consumer companies chose to pass on higher costs to consumers.

J.M. Smucker, which owns Folgers and Cafe Bustelo, originally planned to hike prices on its packaged coffee in response to the tariffs — the third increase for that fiscal year after a tough harvest. But the company reversed those plans and instead absorbed the $75 million hit to its margins.

Smucker executives cited an executive order that excluded green coffee and other agricultural products as one reason for the decision.

Pharmaceuticals

The pharmaceutical industry has fared better than some industries, thanks to recent drug pricing agreements with Trump.

Since November, more than a dozen major drugmakers have signed landmark deals with Trump to lower the prices of new and existing medicines. The drugmakers include several U.S.-based companies such as Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Merck, Gilead and Bristol Myers Squibb, as well as companies based abroad, including Novo Nordisk, GSK and Novartis.

On Thursday, the Trump administration said 13 companies have already signed those deals, and negotiations are progressing with four others.

Those agreements are part of the president’s so-called “most favored nation” policy, which ties U.S. drug prices to cheaper ones abroad. In exchange for the price cuts, Trump awarded the companies a three-year exemption from pharmaceutical tariffs, as long as they invest further in U.S. manufacturing.

The president on Thursday imposed new tariffs on branded drugs from drugmakers that did not strike deals with the administration, but that long-awaited move will likely affect only a small number of companies.

Patented medications and their active ingredients would be hit with a 100% tariff, but there are pathways for exemptions. The administration will impose a 20% tariff on companies that plan to onshore production, increasing to 100% four years from now, it said this week.

Months before the deals with Trump, tariff threats — and efforts to get into the president’s good graces — fueled a new wave of U.S. manufacturing investments from the pharmaceutical industry after years of domestic drug manufacturing shrinking.

AbbVie, for example, said last April that it will put more than $10 billion into U.S. manufacturing and other capabilities over the next decade, including building four new plants. Johnson & Johnson in March 2025 said it will spend more than $55 billion to build four plants in the U.S.

— CNBC’s Gabrielle Fonrouge, Melissa Repko, Michael Wayland, Amelia Lucas and Annika Kim Constantino contributed to this report.

Choose CNBC as your preferred source on Google and never miss a moment from the most trusted name in business news.

The post Trump tariffs fall, but trade war impacts linger appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Menstrual products prices skyrocketing from inflation, tariffs

admin — Sun, 22 Mar 2026 22:54:33 +0000

Always products are displayed on a shelf in a supermarket in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina October 29, 2024.

Dado Ruvic | Reuters

Rising inflation and ever-changing tariff policies have led to higher prices across store shelves over the past few years, squeezing consumers’ budgets.

An often overlooked example: menstrual products.

The average price of menstrual products, including sanitary pads and tampons, has risen nearly 40% since 2020, from roughly $5.37 per unit to $7.43 per unit, according to February data from Chicago-based market research firm Circana.

Dollar sales from menstrual products have grown by nearly 30% over that same period, according to Circana.

But at the same time, sales of menstrual products — which broadly includes pads, tampons, liners and more — have seen a roughly 6% decrease since 2022, falling incrementally each year, according to data from NielsenIQ.

The data analytics company noted that items across the store have seen average unit price increases, with the dollar volume of consumer packaged goods at large rising 2.7% year-to-date. Those price increases are in line with climbing inflation, with the latest consumer price index in February showing a 2.4% annual rise.

The latest CPI data found that inflation in personal care products in the U.S. has jumped dramatically, up 22.1% in February from January 2020.

But because menstrual products are a necessity for a large portion of the population, those costs may be hurting consumers.

“I do think that we’re at a point where consumers in general are having to choose whether they can buy food for their family, or buy prescriptions for their family. Some things that we do typically define as a necessity, people are finding alternatives for or going without,” said Sarah Broyd, a partner with consultancy firm Clarkston Consulting.

Broyd said the gap between higher prices and declining sales shows consumers may be searching for alternatives out of necessity.

Menstrual products haven’t just been hit by inflation, either. According to government data, the U.S. collected $115 million through tariffs on menstrual products containing cotton in 2025, compared with just $42 million in 2020.

The U.S. imported the majority of its menstrual products from Canada, China and Mexico in 2024, according to the World Bank. President Donald Trump has imposed tariffs on all three of those countries at varying levels over the past year.

Those added costs come on top of the so-called “pink tax,” where some states place a sales tax on menstrual products. According to 2025 data from Statista, Tennessee, Mississippi and Indiana have the highest sales tax on menstrual products at 7%. Products that are deemed “medical devices” are often excluded from sales taxes.

‘A subscription service to be a woman’

For 30-year-old Dafna Diamant, the rising price of menstrual products has become noticeable at the cash register and a drag on her monthly expenses.

The New York resident said she’s noticed her usual pack of roughly 18 tampons rise to somewhere around $25, especially over the past year.

“It’s crazy, and it just feels like as a woman, you have to pay sometimes $50 every couple months,” Diamant told CNBC. “And for some people, it takes a toll on the income.”

Diamant said she feels particularly frustrated because it’s not a monthly expense she can go without. She often buys store-brand period products at retailers like CVS and Walgreens, yet she said she’s still shocked by the sticker price.

“It still feels like a subscription service to be a woman,” Diamant told CNBC. “You have to pay every month to be fertile.”

Even larger companies have felt the effects. Procter & Gamble, the parent company of menstrual product brand Always, said in July that it was raising prices on 25% of its personal care and household products due to a $1 billion total annual tariff impact. It manufactures its Always products across facilities in Maine, Utah and Canada, according to the company.

P&G declined to comment for this story.

Kimberly-Clark, the maker of menstrual product brand Kotex, said on an earnings call in April that the company incurred a total of $300 million in gross costs from tariffs, with more than half of that related to tariffs on China. The company did not respond to CNBC’s requests for comment.

Broyd, the partner at Clarkston Consulting, said menstrual products have been hit with a “triple whammy” of rising raw material costs, inflation across energy and supply chains, and cross-border friction from tariffs.

“When you think about plastic and pulp and some of the main components of feminine care products, they’re largely probably coming from overseas and then getting hit with that much more of tariffs,” Broyd said.

She added that these tariffs are on top of already alleged higher levies on other women’s products, the subject of Congress’ Pink Tariffs Study Act introduced last year by Democrats to determine whether the U.S. tariff system is “regressive” or has a “gender bias.”

As prices continue to shoot up, Broyd said she believes companies will continue to reevaluate their portfolios and potentially sell off their feminine care segments to focus on businesses with higher margins. In November, Edgewell Personal Care sold its feminine care business to a company in Sweden for $340 million.

“You’re seeing these more niche, more startup type brands that are popping up in stores. … That’s the biggest growth,” Broyd said. “People that have the ability to flex up and buy more organic or products that they trust, they’ll spend that price premium. But for other consumers that don’t have the discretionary income to do that, they’re going to trade down and go private label, or go without.”

The rise of reusables

Diamant said she and her friends are now trying period underwear instead of single-use products to streamline their expenses.

A growing number of people have been trying reusable period products, primarily because they’re environmentally friendly and cheaper.

Major manufacturers have often relied on brand loyalty for their products, which could take a hit if consumers turn to alternatives.

“If you’re in fem care, you’re going to be using Kotex for 40 years. If you’re in Depend, you’re going to be using Depend for 40 years, right?” Kimberly-Clark CEO Michael Hsu said on a November earnings call. “There is long-duration frequency. There’s a lot of expenditure for consumers, and so because of that, they want to have an ongoing relation with us.”

Saalt, a reusable period products company offering cups, discs and underwear, said it estimates that 16% to 20% of U.S. consumers have tried or used reusable menstrual products, consisting of mostly younger consumers.

“Affordability is huge,” CEO Cherie Hoeger told CNBC. “When you look at our product, a cup or disc can last 10 years, and our product is only in the $30 price range. … They’re able to save up to $1,800 on the lifespan of that cup or disc, and that’s on the low end.”

Saalt, which launched in 2018, hit revenues of eight figures in its third year of business, Hoeger said. The company declined to disclose details of its financials, but she said demand has grown year-over-year since it launched.

Among Generation Z, Hoeger said the top reason for switching to reusables is pricing.

“They usually have some affinity toward sustainability and climate change, but it’s never their number one,” Hoeger said.

The rise of reusables may be contributing to the declining sales of single-use period products over the past few years. It also coincides with recent studies indicating that tampons could contain lead or other harmful ingredients. The Food and Drug Administration investigated the presence of metals and determined there was no risk.

Riding that momentum, other companies like Knix, MeLuna, Flex and more have entered the reusables space and garnered growing market share as consumers search for alternatives.

“Affordability is the crux; it’s the root problem,” Hoeger said. “Without affordability for these period products, you have real economic consequences for women to happen.”

Choose CNBC as your preferred source on Google and never miss a moment from the most trusted name in business news.

The post Menstrual products prices skyrocketing from inflation, tariffs appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Here are all the tariffs staying in place after Supreme Court rules against Trump administration

admin — Sat, 21 Feb 2026 16:42:46 +0000

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a crucial batch of President Trump’s tariffs – but there are still plenty of high levies on certain industries that will stay in place.

Tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to crack down on trade imbalances and fentanyl smuggling surpassed Trump’s presidential authority, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision.

The ruling does not, however, discard tariffs enacted by the Trump administration using Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 – a provision meant to protect US national security.

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a massive batch of President Trump’s tariffs. Getty Images

Many of Trump’s so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on foreign nations have been tossed out, though the president has warned there are other ways for him to enforce the import taxes.

Here are all the industries still facing steep tariffs as of Friday.

Automotive

Foreign vehicles and auto parts are still facing 25% tariffs, which Trump slapped on the sector last year in an attempt to push automakers to boost manufacturing in the US.

The White House has reached deals with several foreign nations, including the UK and Japan, to lower these auto tariffs to 10% to 15%. The Trump administration also announced a deal with South Korea, though it is unclear whether rates on the nation have been lowered yet.

Here’s the latest on President Trump’s tariffs following Supreme Court ruling:

In the meantime, automakers based in the US and overseas have reported multi-billion dollar charges as they struggle to swallow the tariffs and rearrange their supply chains.

Mercedes-Benz last week said its 2025 earnings were more than halved on a massive $1.2 billion hit related to the tariffs – and warned that more challenges are on the way.

Foreign vehicles and auto parts are still facing tariffs after Friday’s decision. AP

Ford’s tariff bill last year was about $2 billion, and the company has said it’s expecting to incur similar charges this year.

“We are studying the effects of the Supreme Court’s decision and assessing its implications,” a Ford spokesperson told The Post in a Friday statement.

“We will continue to work with the Administration and Congress on policies that promote a strong and globally competitive US auto sector.”

General Motors reported a $3.1 billion tariff charge in 2025 and said it’s anticipating another $3 billion to $4 billion hit in 2026 – even as it works to ramp up US vehicle production.

Aluminum, often used by soda and beer brands who sell their drinks in cans, is still facing a 50% tariff. REUTERS

Nissan has also increased its domestic production plans, yet it still expects a roughly $2 billion hit to earnings in 2026.

Nissan said it is evaluating the impact of Friday’s decision on its business.

Furniture

Americans are also unlikely to see prices fall on furniture anytime soon.

Trump last year slapped 25% tariffs on upholstered couches, kitchen cabinets and vanities using Section 232. The rate is set to jump to 50% in 2027.

Furniture is one of the most tariff-sensitive sectors, since the bulk of these goods are imported.

Trump also placed a 10% Section 232 tariff on timber and lumber imports.

The pharmaceutical industry could potentially face Section 232 tariffs. AFP via Getty Images

Steel and aluminum

Steel and aluminum imports are still facing 50% tariffs.

That’s bad news for companies selling home appliances and electronics, as well as soda and beer brands that sell their drinks in aluminum cans.

Semiconductors

Trump’s 25% tariff on certain semiconductors and chipmaking equipment will also remain in place.

These tariffs took effect last month.

Pharmaceuticals

Trump has held off on slapping tariffs as high as 250% on pharmaceuticals after reaching deals with several major drugmakers.

If he reverses this decision and places import taxes on foreign drugs, it would be using Section 232 – so these tariffs would remain in place.

In December, nine of the largest pharmaceutical companies – including Merck, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Amgen, Gilead, GSK, Sanofi, Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis – agreed to voluntarily lower drug prices to avoid tariffs for at least three years.

The tariff threats are an attempt to get drugmakers to increase US production.

The post Here are all the tariffs staying in place after Supreme Court rules against Trump administration appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Los Angeles small business owner takes wait-and-see approach after Trump’s tariffs are struck down

admin — Sat, 21 Feb 2026 02:41:16 +0000

Small business owners like Melkon Khosrovian, the owner of Greenbar Distillery in Los Angeles, are taking a wait-and-see approach after the Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump’s main tariffs on Friday.

And after a punishing year that saw steep levies dent their bottom line, many aren’t expecting rebate checks yet.

“We’re not that confident we’re going to either get the money back or not have to pay a similar amount of tariffs going forward,” Khosrovian told The Post. “I’m dubious.”

Last year, tariffs jacked up the price of glass bottles from China, exotic spices from India and coffee from Brazil for the spiritmaker, who uses the items to make canned espresso martinis.

He said he didn’t raise prices even though tariffs ate up about 20% of the profit margin at the distillery, which he co-founded in 2004 to sell classic liquors and specialty canned cocktails.

In a bid to contain costs over the long run, Khosrovian ordered $400,000 of equipment to automate hard tasks like bottling so he could eventually let go of three of his 15 employees. The equipment is expected to arrive next week.

Those plans could come to naught after the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s tariffs in a 6-3 ruling, leaving Khosrovian and countless other business owners wondering what’s next.

“The unintended consequence is we have to let go of staff and I’m sure no one wanted that to be the end result of all these tariffs,” he said. “We’re buying equipment from abroad to eliminate jobs in this country. Who wanted that?”

Khosrovian co-founded Greenbar Distillery in 2004 to sell classic liquors and specialty canned cocktails. Greenbar Distillery.

The court’s decision didn’t address the elephant in the room – whether Washington will have to repay the tariff revenue it has collected – and Trump has promised to keep an aggressive tariff regimen in place.

Khosrovian said for now he will continue with his plans to automate certain processes and cut jobs, regardless of the ultimate outcome with the levies.

The post Los Angeles small business owner takes wait-and-see approach after Trump’s tariffs are struck down appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Supreme Court delays ruling on Trump tariffs until at least February

admin — Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:38:18 +0000

The Supreme Court’s lack of a ruling on the legality of President Trump’s sweeping tariff regime on Tuesday means the case won’t get resolved until at least next month.

The closely watched case on whether it’s constitutional for Trump to issue painful tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act remained at a standstill on Tuesday.

With the justices now heading into a four-week recess, the earliest possible date for a ruling is Feb. 20.

The Supreme Court declined on Tuesday to rule on the legality of President Trump’s sweeping tariff regime – pushing back a resolution until at least next month. AFP via Getty Images

The case was fast-tracked after oral arguments on Nov. 5.

Lower courts previously ruled that Trump exceeded his authority by using emergency powers to impose broad tariffs.

Legal analysts say the Supreme Court’s repeated postponements on issuing a decision may reflect internal debate — not just over whether the tariffs are lawful, but over what remedy would apply if the court rules against Trump.

Some court watchers have suggested the justices could seek a middle ground that curbs future tariffs while limiting or avoiding retroactive refunds, which could exceed $130 billion and deal a major blow to the US Treasury.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has publicly played down the risk of a defeat, predicting the court is unlikely to strike down what he has called the president’s “signature economic policy.”

“I believe that it is very unlikely that the Supreme Court will overrule a president’s signature economic policy,” Bessent said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” arguing the justices would be reluctant to create economic chaos.

The high court did not issue a decision on Trump’s tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, according to Bloomberg News. AP

Members of the Trump administration have said the president would immediately replace the duties if the court strikes them down.

The prolonged silence from the court comes as Trump continues to expand his use of tariffs as leverage, including fresh threats against European allies tied to his push to acquire Greenland.

In a social media post Saturday, the president announced new tariffs on Denmark, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and four other European countries as part of his push to annex Greenland.

The 10% levies, which will start Feb. 1 and jump to 25% on June 1, sent shockwaves through global stock markets.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has publicly played down the risk of a defeat, predicting the court is unlikely to strike down what he has called the president’s “signature economic policy.” NBC News

The Trump administration has argued the tariffs are a tool to raise significant tax revenue for the US government and give the nation the upper hand in foreign negotiations.

A study published Monday found Americans are bearing 96% of the cost President Trump’s tariffs – contradicting White House claims that foreign exporters are eating the added costs.

Charlie Gasparino has his finger on the pulse of where business, politics and finance meet

Thanks for signing up!

US customs revenue soared roughly $200 billion in 2025 – but it was “a tax paid almost entirely by Americans,” according to research from the Kiel Institute, a German think-tank, which analyzed $4 trillion worth of shipments from January 2024 through November 2025.

For every $100 collected in tariff revenue, roughly $96 comes out of American pockets and just $4 is coughed up by foreign exporters, according to the study.

Instead of slashing prices to swallow the tariff costs, it appears most foreign exporters are simply reducing their market share in the US – banking on other global markets to make up the difference.

A study published Monday found Americans are paying 96% of President Trump’s tariffs – contradicting White House claims that foreign exporters are eating the added costs. Xinhua/Shutterstock

“The average tariff imposed by America has increased by almost tenfold under President Trump, and inflation has continued to cool from Biden-era highs,” White House spokesman Kush Desai told The Post.

“The Administration has consistently maintained that foreign exporters who depend on access to the American economy, the world’s biggest and best consumer market, will ultimately pay the cost of tariffs, and that’s exactly what’s playing out.”

The post Supreme Court delays ruling on Trump tariffs until at least February appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Furniture retailer stocks rise after Trump issues one-year pause on higher tariffs

admin — Sat, 03 Jan 2026 20:29:53 +0000

Shares in home furnishing retailers jumped Friday after President Trump announced a one-year pause on higher tariffs on upholstered furniture, kitchen cabinets and vanities.

Luxury furniture retailer RH rose 9.5% and online retailer Wayfair jumped 6.3%.

Stock for Williams-Sonoma, which sells kitchenware and home decor, increased 5.3%.

President Trump unveiling his tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act during a press conference in April. The Washington Post via Getty Images

Other American furniture retailers like Ethan Allen and La-Z-Boy rose 1% and 0.4%, respectively.

In a fact sheet shared late Wednesday, the White House said it was keeping tariffs on furniture, kitchen cabinets and vanities at the original 25% rate that Trump set in September.

Rates had been set to rise Thursday, New Year’s Day, to 30% on upholstered furniture and to 50% on kitchen cabinets and vanities.

Economists feared the tariff hikes could result in substantial price increases for customers, since furniture is a particularly tariff-sensitive category – and a large-ticket purchase for many American families.

In November, prices on furniture and bedding were up 3% over the year, according to the Consumer Price Index.

“The United States continues to engage in productive negotiations with trade partners to address trade reciprocity and national security concerns with respect to imports of wood products,” the White House fact sheet stated.

The White House said it was keeping tariffs on furniture, kitchen cabinets and vanities at the original 25% rate that Trump set in September. Paul Martinka

The Trump administration said it was delaying the higher tariffs until Jan. 1, 2027, due to ongoing trade talks, not because it was retreating from its tariff agenda.

It has been awaiting a Supreme Court decision on a vast batch of tariffs implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

If the Supreme Court finds that Trump overstepped his authority and decides overturns the IEEPA tariffs, the US government could be forced to refund as much as $168 billion to businesses, according to a recent analysis cited by CBS News.

Start your day with all you need to know

Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more.

Thanks for signing up!

“Tariffs are an overwhelming benefit to our Nation, as they have been incredible for our National Security and Prosperity (like nobody has ever seen before!),” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Friday.

“Losing our ability to Tariff other countries who treat us unfairly would be a terrible blow to the United States of America.”

Trump is reportedly preparing to unleash a fresh wave of tariffs under alternative trade laws if the Supreme Court strikes down the levies.

Shares in Williams-Sonoma, which sells kitchenware and home decor, rose 5.3%. SRP – stock.adobe.com

The White House has continued to defend its use of tariffs as a national security measure to protect US industries – even as affordability concerns are a top concern for voters ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

The furniture industry saw mixed results last year. Shares in Wayfair surged more than 125% in 2025 as consumers prioritized value and deals.

RH ended the year down more than 50% – with its chief executive going viral for reacting live to the stock tanking.

“Oh s–t,” RH CEO Gary Friedman blurted out during the company’s earnings call in April as the stock plummeted.

“It got hit when, I think, the tariffs came out,” he said. “Everybody can see in our 10-K where we’re sourcing from, so it’s not a secret, and we’re not trying to disguise it by putting everything in an Asia bucket.”

Williams-Sonoma, which owns West Elm and Pottery Barn, dipped more than 3% last year.

The post Furniture retailer stocks rise after Trump issues one-year pause on higher tariffs appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Wall Street deals 2025 under Trump: Tariffs, uncertainty slow M&A

admin — Mon, 22 Dec 2025 06:39:38 +0000

The Wall Street Bull statue covered in snow on Nov. 15, 2018.

Erik Mcgregor | Lightrocket | Getty Images

Wall Street expected U.S. mergers and acquisitions to roar back in 2025. The reality was something closer to fits and starts.

Following the election of President Donald Trump more than a year ago, executives and bankers prepared for a looser regulatory environment and a robust pipeline for mergers and acquisitions. Instead, they were met with tariff uncertainty, high interest rates, and an unpredictable process for winning over the Trump administration and getting deal approval.

While the year saw high-profile megadeals inked — Union Pacific’s proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern for $85 billion; Netflix’s proposed takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery’s streaming and studio assets for $72 billion; the pending take-private of Electronic Arts for roughly $50 billion — generally, U.S. deal volume was down year over year, according to Pitchbook data.

“When you read the headlines they seem to suggest there has never been a better M&A market in the history of the planet. And while that’s true in some ways, when you get underneath the front page headlines and these massive transactions … you see a less active market,” said Benjamin Sibbett, co-head of the Americas M&A practice at Clifford Chance.

Through Dec. 15 this year, there were roughly 13,900 transactions in the U.S., compared with 15,940 deals during the same period in 2024, the last year of the Biden administration, according to Pitchbook data.

Deal value, however, was up, boosted by high-dollar-figure agreements: The 2025 deals tracked by Pitchbook totaled roughly $2.4 trillion in value, compared with roughly $1.83 trillion in 2024. The data represents both corporate M&A and private equity buyout activity and considers both announced and closed transactions.

In particular, middle-market deal volume was low this year with those large M&A transactions padding the stats, according to a S&P Global analysis of deal-making as of November.

“This has been a decade-high level of megadeals, double the number of deals from last year. When you look at the importance of scale, it’s been an all-time record in terms of the premium that the market has given to scale,” said Anu Aiyengar, JPMorgan‘s global head of advisory and M&A, on a recent JPMorgan podcast episode.

Over the last 10 years, 2021 remains the biggest year on record for U.S. deal activity, a reflection of low interest rates at the time. By this point in the year in 2021, there were 19,666 deals recorded with a total valuation of roughly $5.55 trillion, according to Pitchbook.

Executives, lawyers and bankers like Aiyengar note that the sluggishness in deal-making this year took place primarily in the first half of the year as Trump’s rolling tariff announcements roiled the financial markets and industry leaders tried to make sense of the effects.

Uncertain times

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the White House in Washington, D.C., on April 2, 2025.

Brendan Smialowski | Afp | Getty Images

Early in the year, consultants and bankers across sectors agreed that the Trump administration would make for smoother deal-making and a friendlier regulatory environment after a number of big consumer deals were squashed by President Joe Biden’s Federal Trade Commission.

Then came Trump’s trade war and his so-called liberation day tariffs.

Trump’s April announcement of “reciprocal tariffs” on more than 180 countries left executives with an unclear path forward. “Macroeconomic uncertainty” became an often-used phrase in company updates and on investor calls as executives were hesitant to make plans or offer guidance without a clear understanding of how the future with tariffs would play out.

“We knew there was going to be some disruption with tariffs, but probably not to the extent that sort of slowed things down,” KPMG partner and U.S. automotive leader Lenny LaRocca told CNBC of deal-making in that sector. “With all that uncertainty around where things were going to land, I think it just put a big pause on M&A in general.”

In addition to automakers, retail and consumer companies bore the brunt of the uncertainty as they navigated whether and how to pass on undetermined higher costs to already-burdened shoppers.

Overall deal value in the consumer space was 17% lower during the first three quarters of 2025 than the same period a year prior, according to an October report from Boston Consulting Group. Meanwhile transactions by deal value grew in the industrials, energy and health-care sectors, the study found.

Through mid-December, there were 227 U.S. deals in the retail space, compared with 296 in the prior year period, according to Pitchbook. The combined valuation of deals, however, was more than $40 billion year to date, compared with roughly $28.4 billion at the same point in 2024, Pitchbook found.

Add in the rise of artificial intelligence, which has commanded major spending by companies across the board, and still-high Federal Reserve interest rates that make borrowing more expensive, and the deal-making equation was even trickier for much of the year.

“That has felt like a bit of a roller-coaster ride,” said Kevin Foley, JPMorgan’s global head of capital markets, on its recent podcast. “We went through that six-week pause post-liberation day … and then after that, the level of uncertainty, at least the perception of it, started to fade.

“The sentiment became more positive, benefiting from the fact that you’ve got the secular tail winds of what’s happening with AI investments, the anticipation of the Fed being more supportive, along with a pro-business fiscal policy out of this administration,” Foley said. “All of that had a very positive impact on sentiment in both the equity and debt markets.”

Last week the Fed approved its third rate cut this year, but the central bank committee’s vote signaled a tougher road ahead for more reductions.

While Trump continues to pressure the Fed to bring rates down further, he’s also exerting his influence in other arenas and keeping industries guessing.

Policy playbook

Ahead of Trump taking office for his second term, automotive industry insiders and onlookers believed the auto supplier industry was ripe for consolidation. The sector was coming off years of turmoil due to parts shortages and an industrywide move toward electrification.

But the end of federal tax credit programs for all-electric vehicles caused many companies to reverse course on EVs and redesign their lineups yet again. Ford Motor on Monday said it would take a $19.5 billion write-down tied to changing plans on electric vehicles.

That policy shift and need for automakers to adjust to tariffs and higher costs slowed transactions in the sector.

There were more than 8,800 deals globally last year involving industrial manufacturing, which includes automotive, totaling $303.7 billion, according to advisory firm KPMG. The number of deals increased 3.1% from the prior year but notably fell during the fourth quarter of last year – a trend that continued into 2025.

Through the third quarter of this year, deals in the automotive industry represented the largest decline by volume of KPMG’s industrial manufacturing sectors, off 19.9% year over year compared with a 3.6% decline in the broader category, which also includes aerospace, transportation and logistics and other manufacturing sectors.

LaRocca said he believes the broad pullback in EVs, as well as slowing industry sales and a need for diversification, will drive an uptick in deals in the coming year following this year’s lull.

“If volumes aren’t growing, you can’t sit still, you’ve got to think about what other deals you can do,” LaRocca said. “Everybody needs to, I think, be thinking very strongly around consolidation to continue to grow.”

In media, it’s a similar story.

Media companies are antsy for consolidation but have faced choppy seas in trying to get deals approved by the Trump administration.

Broadcast stations owner Nexstar Media Group is awaiting federal regulation changes (or substantial waivers) to complete its proposed $6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna. While Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has shown support for removing the decades-old rules, change has been slow to come, and Trump has more recently come out against broadcast tie-ups.

Earlier in the year, Trump’s crusade against diversity, equity and inclusion programs also appeared to play a role in winning regulatory approvals.

Verizon ended its DEI policies to usher through FCC approval of its $20 billion acquisition of broadband provider Frontier Communications.

David Ellison, chairman and chief executive officer of Paramount Skydance Corp., center, outside the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, US, on Monday, Dec. 8, 2025.

Michael Nagle | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The merger of Paramount Skydance closed this summer after nearly a year in limbo. In the official blessing of approval from the FCC, Carr noted that Skydance didn’t have any DEI programs and had agreed not to establish any such initiatives as a new company. Paramount had previously ended its DEI politics due to Trump’s executive order to ban such initiatives.

The Paramount Skydance deal also notably received regulatory approval shortly after Paramount agreed to pay $16 million to Trump after he sued the company’s CBS over the editing of a “60 Minutes” interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris.

Paramount Skydance is now endeavoring another tie-up, this time with Warner Bros. Discovery. Paramount launched a hostile bid for WBD shortly after Netflix announced a deal to buy the legacy media company’s streaming and studio assets after a monthslong bidding war.

Paramount Skydance has argued it has a higher likelihood of receiving regulatory approval from the Trump administration than Netflix. WBD told shareholders to reject the offer this week.

‘The window is open’

In the second half of the year, deal activity picked up and Wall Street leaders appeared to settle into a new normal under the Trump administration.

Even in the biotech and pharmaceutical industry — which spent most of the year reeling from various Trump administration policies, including tariffs and a sweeping upheaval of federal agencies under Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — there was more activity in middle-market transactions into the final months of 2025.

Tim Opler, a managing director in Stifel’s global health-care group, noted more buyouts of smaller biotech firms by large drugmakers. And while activity didn’t reach the frenzied heights of 2021, several factors have driven a resurgence in deal-making. That includes big pharma’s need to fill revenue gaps from expiring drug patents toward the end of the decade, strong company cash reserves and promising innovation.

Many of the “big uncertainties” around geopolitical issues also “seem to be all priced in now to a large extent,” Arda Ural, EY’s Americas life sciences leader, told CNBC.

US Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks in the Oval Office during an event with President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, DC on Nov. 6, 2025.

Andrew Caballero-Reynolds | AFP | Getty Images

Pharmaceutical companies have also shown an increased interest in deals with Chinese biotechs, even as Trump and U.S. policymakers pursue protectionist policies in technology like AI and semiconductors.

Pfizer, for example, struck an up to $6 billion deal with Chinese biotech 3SBio to license its cancer drug.

Meanwhile, pharmaceutical companies are keen to expand in red-hot areas such as obesity, including the drugmakers that already dominate that space. Pfizer recently won a takeover war with Novo Nordisk over the obesity biotech Metsera, whose pipeline includes potential once-monthly treatments.

A busier end to the year is leading many to predict a more active 2026 for M&A across the board. This is particularly true of the banking sector, which showed the most signs of life outside of megadeal activity.

“Clients began the year with cautious optimism, quickly adapting to persistent tariff, macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainties,” said Dorothee Blessing, JPMorgan’s global head of investment banking coverage on a recent podcast. “But as the year progressed, uncertainty became more part of the business-as-usual environment.”

The number of announced deals among banks surged by 88% in the second half of this year, while the total size of transactions nearly quadrupled to $39 billion, according to Stephens banker Frank Sorrentino, who cited S&P Global Market Intelligence data.

A consolidation in regional banks especially has been driven in part by the arrival of activist investors like HoldCo, who this year has taken on lenders with more than $200 billion in combined assets so far, CNBC has reported. The hedge fund pressured Comerica to find a buyer in the weeks before it agreed to sell itself to rival Fifth Third for $10.9 billion in the biggest bank merger of the year.

“There was a lot of enthusiasm at the end of last year that the regulatory environment was finally going to loosen up, and that absolutely happened,” Sorrentino said. “The time it takes to get a deal approval has probably been cut in half; I’ve never seen anything like it.”

The window for healthy deal activity could last another year or two, according to Sorrentino, who said that he expects some banks will even pull off two or three acquisitions over the next 12 months.

“Deals are getting approved at record speed, and the types of deals getting approved now would never have gotten approval under the last administration,” he said.

Investors are now wondering if big banks will announce deals of their own, either to plug holes in their product offerings, or even attempting the combination of two large institutions, said Truist analyst Brian Foran.

“The window is open,” Foran said. “It feels like everyone’s looking at their options right now.”

— CNBC’s Gabrielle Fonrouge, Michael Wayland, Annika Kim Constantino and Hugh Son contributed to this article.

The post Wall Street deals 2025 under Trump: Tariffs, uncertainty slow M&A appeared first on Our Story Insight.

American pasta brands poised for sales boost as tariffs threaten Italian-produced imports

admin — Sat, 22 Nov 2025 16:53:21 +0000

With new tariffs threatening to raise prices on Italian imports, American pasta makers — from century-old brands to modern innovators — are ready to fill the gap with U.S.-made alternatives.

“New U.S. tariffs will raise prices on imported Italian goods, especially pasta, olive oil and cheeses,” said Kyle Taylor, an Atlanta chef and the founder of He Cooks.

“There’s not much margin to begin with, so when costs increase, a ripple effect is created that will be felt [all the way] down to the consumer. Conversely, Italian producers may limit their overseas supply in a proactive response to tariffs, which would also affect prices stateside.”

The products most at risk are the ones tied to strict regional rules and high-quality standards, Taylor told Fox News Digital.

“There’s no replacement for something like Parmigiano Reggiano cheese or slow-dried Italian pasta with lower-cost alternatives without a noticeable drop in quality.”

Fortunately, pastas that use high-quality wheat and traditional techniques can fill the gap.

American pasta brands are ready to step in amid tariffs threatening Italian imports. whitestorm – stock.adobe.com

“A few American brands are doing that well,” Taylor said.

Here are five top American-made pasta brands.

“There’s no replacement for something like Parmigiano Reggiano cheese or slow-dried Italian pasta with lower-cost alternatives without a noticeable drop in quality,” Kyle Taylor, an Atlanta chef and the founder of He Cooks, said. Drazen – stock.adobe.com

“A few American brands are doing that well,” Taylor said about pastas using high-quality wheat and traditional techniques, filling the need for pasta. Whatson – stock.adobe.com

1. Ronzoni

American shoppers should seek out pastas that use durum wheat, bronze molds and slow drying, as well as small-batch domestic sauce and olive oil producers who prioritize quality, Taylor suggested.

Ronzoni, founded in 1915 in New York, according to its website, is one of the most widely recognized durum, or semolina, wheat brands. Made without additives, the brand offers a broad range of shapes and recipes, including elbows, ziti and oven-ready lasagna sheets. It typically goes for around $2 to $2.50 per box.

Ronzoni offers different shapes, including elbows, ziti and oven-ready lasagna sheets. miro – stock.adobe.com

2. Creamette

Creamette is a long-standing American pasta brand with Midwestern roots dating back to the late 1800s, known for practical cooking, good value and being a pantry mainstay.

“Creamette may not be the fanciest brand or have the most elaborate packaging, but what it does have is consistency,” according to a pasta ranking by the Daily Meal.

Many supermarkets list the pasta at just over $1 per box online.

Start your day with all you need to know

Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more.

Thanks for signing up!

3. Banza

Banza was founded in Detroit in 2014 by brothers Brian and Scott Rudolph, who created a high-protein, gluten-free pasta made from chickpeas instead of wheat. It quickly grew into one of the fastest-rising U.S. pasta brands, thanks to its nutritious profile, familiar texture and appeal to health-conscious consumers, according to reports.

“Tariffs will not stop Americans from cooking pasta, but they will push the market toward more domestic craft options and draw a more apparent and expensive distinction between everyday and premium products,” Taylor noted.

Banza makes high-protein, gluten-free pasta with chickpeas instead of wheat. Jammer Gene – stock.adobe.com

4. Mueller’s

Founded in 1867 by German immigrant Christian Mueller in New Jersey, Mueller’s began with homemade egg noodles that he sold door to door and grew to be a local favorite and, eventually, a beloved national brand known as “the original American pasta,” according to Mueller’s website.

It uses North American durum semolina and offers straightforward, familiar pasta shapes and types. It can be found for as low as 56 cents and up to $1.50 per box, according to online grocery retailers.

5. Barilla

Founded in Parma, Italy, in 1877, Barilla is now the world’s largest pasta maker, and its familiar blue box pastas sold in U.S. grocery stores are made domestically in Iowa and New York.

Barilla pasta is made domestically in Iowa and New York. Berit Kessler – stock.adobe.com

Barilla is known for its consistent quality, quick cook time and reliable “al dente” texture, along with non-GMO ingredients and a wide range of whole grain, protein-fortified and gluten-free options for around $1.50 to $2.50 per box.

Fox News Digital reached out to the National Pasta Association and each of the U.S.-based brands for comment.

The post American pasta brands poised for sales boost as tariffs threaten Italian-produced imports appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Trump cuts tariffs in bid to slash consumer prices

admin — Sat, 15 Nov 2025 09:06:15 +0000

U.S. President Donald Trump gestures during an announcement from the State Dining Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., Oct. 23, 2025.

Jonathan Ernst | Reuters

President Donald Trump on Friday exempted key agricultural imports like coffee, cocoa, bananas and certain beef products from his higher tariff rates.

The move comes as Trump faces political blowback for high prices at U.S. grocery stores. Some distributors of beef, coffee, chocolate and other common food items have raised prices as Trump’s tariffs took hold this year, adding to pressure on household budgets created by decades-high inflation in recent years.

Trump’s action Friday also exempts a range of fruits including tomatoes, avocados, coconuts, oranges and pineapples. Along with coffee, the tariff reductions extend to black and green tea, and spices like cinnamon and nutmeg.

The move marks a reversal for Trump, who has insisted tariffs are necessary to protect U.S. businesses and workers. He has contended U.S. consumers will not ultimately pay for the higher duties.

The exemptions come just a day after Trump reached trade framework agreements with four Latin American countries – including 10% tariffs on most goods from Argentina, Guatemala, and El Salvador, and 15% from Ecuador. It also removes duties specifically on products not grown or produced in the U.S. in sufficient quantities, like bananas and coffee.

Rising food prices have hampered U.S. households for several years. Consumer Price Index data show food-at-home prices increased approximately 2.7% year-over-year in September. (More recent data was delayed because of the government shutdown).

The tariff exemptions aim to help moderate these grocery price increases, although experts caution that other factors such as global supply shortages also influence prices, especially for coffee and beef.

Here’s more background on how industries like beef, coffee and cocoa have reacted to tariffs and rising prices.

Beef

A customer shops for meat at a Costco store on Nov. 11, 2025 in Novato, California.

Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

The tariff exemption for beef comes after months of rising prices tied in part to Trump’s own tariff policy.

Over the past year, the U.S. imposed steep duties on major suppliers including Brazil, Australia, New Zealand and Uruguay. Brazil – the world’s second-largest beef producer – has faced effective tariff rates topping 75%, driving down imports into the U.S. just as the cattle herd in the country hit a near 75-year low.

Ranchers have struggled to rebuild herds amid drought, higher feed costs and tariffs on fertilizer, steel and aluminum that have made equipment and repairs more expensive.

The supply squeeze has fueled a spike in prices at the grocery store: uncooked beef products rose 12% to 18% year over year in September, according to the most recent consumer price index report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Producers told CNBC earlier this month that policy whiplash, from changing tariff rates to the recent expansion of Argentina’s beef quota, has further chilled long-term investment, keeping supplies tight and sentiment fragile.

Coffee

Coffee beans are displayed at a grocery store on Nov. 13, 2025 in San Anselmo, California.

Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

Ground roast coffee prices in the U.S. reached $8.41 per pound in July, a record high and a 33% increase from the prior year, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Trump’s 50% tariff on Brazilian coffee – which supplies roughly a third of U.S. imports – drove up costs across the roasting and retail supply chains. Vietnam, Colombia and other major exporters have also been swept up in the administration’s food tariffs.

Roasters and cafés say they have no way around the duties because the U.S. produces none of the beans it consumes, leaving importers exposed to higher costs regardless of origin. The September CPI report found that coffee prices climbed nearly 21% in August from the prior year. That was the largest jump since the 1990s.

Retailers have warned the impact could have spread if tariffs stayed in place. The Tax Foundation estimated in August that 74% of U.S. food imports faced tariffs, already hitting tea, spices and other products that, like coffee, have no domestic supply chain.

Many of those products that have little or no U.S. production were on the list of items Trump exempted from higher tariffs Friday.

Global coffee prices are hovering near a 50-year high reached in February.

Cocoa

Cocoa has faced similar price pressures.

Even after a sharp selloff this fall, futures are still more than double pre-pandemic levels, costing roughly $5,300 today, following tariffs and three years of weather-driven crop failures in the Ivory Coast and Ghana.

In October, Hershey executives said they expected $160 million to $170 million in tariff expenses this year, on top of record-high bean costs that pushed retail chocolate prices nearly 30% higher from the prior year heading into Halloween, according to research firm Circana.

The post Trump cuts tariffs in bid to slash consumer prices appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Chocolate Halloween candy hit by inflation, tariffs, high cocoa prices

admin — Sun, 02 Nov 2025 11:33:03 +0000

A customer shops for Halloween candy at a Walmart Supercenter on October 16, 2024 in Austin, Texas.

Brandon Bell | Getty Images

The scariest thing haunting Halloween this year isn’t a ghost, goblin or ghoul — it’s the price of chocolate.

From Snickers to Reese’s to Twix, one of America’s favorite indulgences is getting more expensive, as tariffs, inflation and high cocoa prices squeeze profit margins and customers’ pocketbooks, possibly leading to fewer chocolate bars landing in trick-or-treat buckets this year.

Chocolate prices have surged nearly 30% since last Halloween and almost 78% in the past five years, according to data from research firm Circana and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. A 100-piece variety bag of candy now costs $16.39, up from $7.20 in 2020, FinanceBuzz found.

That spike is showing up on store shelves. Variety packs from Hershey — maker of Reese’s, KitKats and Heath bars — are up about 22%, while Mars, the company behind M&M’s and Milky Way, raised prices about 12%, according to the Century Foundation, a progressive, independent think tank, and the Groundwork Collaborative.

“The season did get off to a slow start,” Hershey CEO Kirk Tanner told investors on an earnings call Thursday, warning that holiday sales could be softer this year.

About 4 in 5 Americans buy candy for the Halloween holiday, according to YouGov. This time of year makes up about 18% of annual U.S. confectionery sales — second only to Christmas, according to the National Confectioners Association.

But chocolate’s dominance is slipping. Circana found it made up 52% of Halloween candy sales last year, compared with 44% this year, as shoppers shift toward cheaper, trendier sweets.

“Macroeconomic headwinds” are among the culprits, said Sally Wyatt, who works for Circana analyzing global consumer packaged goods and as a food-service industry advisor. “It’s the compounded impact on top of the fact that we’ve outpaced wage growth. So consumers have started to … [make] very specific choices on discretionary items.”

Sector-wide, candy prices are outpacing the national inflation rate, marking a roughly 10% increase compared with last year, according to the Century Foundation. Still, the National Retail Federation said 2025 is expected to be a record year for candy sales in the U.S., with about $3.9 billion spent on Halloween candy alone.

“Even as consumers face higher prices for food, they continue to leave room in their budgets for chocolate and candy, meaning that the category is strong, vibrant and growing,” Carly Schildhaus, a spokesperson for the National Confectioners Association, told CNBC.

Much of the chocolate filling U.S. shelves this fall was made from cocoa beans purchased at record prices last December, when futures peaked above $12,000 per ton, experts said. Prices have since cooled to around $6,000, but that’s still more than double the pre-pandemic average.

A cocktail of rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, drought and crop disease for the past three years has devastated harvests in West Africa, which produces roughly 70% of the world’s cocoa. The result: the largest global cocoa deficit in 60 years, with supply falling half a million tons short of demand.

Prices could stabilize, but not decrease, by next year as crop yields have increased, said David Branch, a sector manager at Wells Fargo Agri-Food Institute.

“It’s not just the cost of manufacturing cocoa and other ingredients,” Branch told CNBC. “It’s also a combination of labor, transportation, fuel, overhead [and] all of those factors, and, given the inflationary rate we’ve been in, those came up and haven’t really come down.”

Hershey said Thursday that tariff expenses will cost the company $160 million to $170 million this year. In July, it also announced a “low double-digit” price hike, though executives said those increases weren’t tied to tariffs or Halloween pricing.

Chocolate makers have lobbied the Trump administration for tariff exemptions on cocoa and other agricultural imports, arguing they have little ability to source those ingredients domestically.

Sweet variety

As chocolate becomes more expensive, fruity, sour and chewy candies have gotten more popular. More than half of shoppers said they planned to prioritize gummy candies for Halloween this year, NielsenIQ found.

On average, the price per pound of chocolate rose nearly 14% in the 12 weeks ending Oct. 5, while sales volumes fell 6%, Circana data show. Non-chocolate Halloween candy such as Jolly Ranchers and Skittles saw sales climb 8.3% in that same period.

Younger adults, especially Gen Z, are also fueling growth in non-chocolate categories — gravitating toward gummies, freeze-dried sweets and TikTok-friendly flavor mashups.

“It’s that experiential [aspect] because you can have it [non-chocolate items] with chewy, with sweet flavors, with hot and sweet, spicy flavors,” Wyatt told CNBC. “Some candies you get this big explosion in your mouth of flavors. We’ve seen it popular with different cohorts.”

Chocolate makers are responding in kind. Hershey has expanded its gummy lineup, including a partnership with Shaquille O’Neal, and rolled out ghost-shaped Twizzlers and mismatched “Trickies” Jolly Rancher gummies.

Mondelez International, maker of Cadbury and Toblerone, said it’s also prioritizing gummies in the U.S. market. CEO Dirk Van de Put said on an earnings call Tuesday, however, that the U.S. market in particular “is slower than we’ve seen in quite a while” and the company’s promotional strategy earlier this year “was not giving us the volume effect that we were hoping for.”

Manufacturers are also experimenting with smaller bars, new fillings and cocoa-free options such as crème or nut-based confections to offset rising ingredient costs, Branch said.

“Companies have got to be very aware of if they can keep their prices in line. They can’t just keep increasing their prices and expect sales to continue to go up,” Branch said. “But customers have not lost their appetite for chocolate. It’s going to remain an indulgence that people will always have and can’t really do without.”

The post Chocolate Halloween candy hit by inflation, tariffs, high cocoa prices appeared first on Our Story Insight.