ReportWire

Tag: Tariffs

  • Small businesses face their own affordability crunch because of tariffs and health insurance costs

    [ad_1]

    Some small business owners say they are facing their own affordability crisis because of higher tariff, health insurance and energy costs.

    Shirley Modlin, who owns 3D Design and Manufacturing in Powhatan, Virginia, told CBS News that rising operational expenses are making it tough for her to offer raises and health insurance for her 10 workers. 

    Modlin, whose company makes metal parts for the automotive, pharmaceutical, beverage and other industries, said uncertainty over where U.S. tariff rates will settle makes it hard to forecast her costs. 

    “It’s the end of the year and my employees are expecting some kind of raise, but I don’t know how much I can give them because I don’t know what kind of impact the tariffs are going to continue to have on me,” Modlin told CBS News.  

    “I feel like I am in a balancing act, and if I don’t raise prices and my costs are going up, that squeezes my margins harder,” she added.

    U.S. importers currently face an average effective tariff rate of 16.8%, the highest level since the 1930s, according to the Yale Budget Lab, a nonpartisan policy research center. 

    Small business importers paid roughly $25,000 more per month on average due to the Trump administration’s tariffs between April and September, compared to the same period in 2024, according to a new analysis from the Center for American Progress (CAP), a nonpartisan policy research institute.

    “What should be a season of giving has become a season of paying for America’s 36 million small businesses,” Sen. Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, said at a press conference on Tuesday held by the U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. “They are paying more for affordable health care, more for electricity and more for just about everything, thanks to Trump’s tariffs.”

    The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the legality of Mr. Trump’s country-based tariffs soon. If they are struck down, however, he has other tools he can employ to implement similar levies, according to legal experts. 

    Who’s to blame?

    A spokesperson for the Republican members of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship blamed small businesses’ challenges on Democrats.

    “Four years of Democrat control of Washington created a historic affordability crisis for small businesses as inflation soared and an unprecedented $1.8 trillion in new regulations were created,” the spokesperson told CBS News. “In just 11 months, Republicans have begun to undo the damage by passing the largest tax cut in history to complement the $907 billion regulatory rollback being undertaken by the Trump administration. 

    “The results speak for themselves as we just witnessed a record number of holiday shoppers, core inflation fell to the lowest level in five years, and hardworking Americans’ real wages will increase by $1,000,” the spokesperson added. 

    Spokespersons for the White House and Small Business Administration didn’t respond to a request for comment on the affordability concerns cited by some small businesses. 

    Shirley and David Modlin, the owners of 3D Design and Manufacturing of Powhatan, Virginia, said their costs have jumped because of tariffs and other factors. 

    Courtesy of Shirley Modlin


    Another major concern for Modlin and her workers is that enhanced tax credits for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are set to expire at the end of 2025, which experts have said would sharply drive up premiums for more than 20 million Americans. 

    An October CAP analysis found that 4.4 million small business owners and self-employed Americans will see their health insurance costs rise by an average of $1,500 if the ACA subsidies are allowed to expire. 

    In 2024, Modlin offered employees a $350 monthly stipend to help offset health plan costs. Now, she said she’s trying to decide whether to increase that monthly payment or offer raises. She can’t afford to do both, said Modlin, expressing concern about losing some of her machinists to larger competitors. 

    “I’ve interviewed job candidates who have said they need a better health insurance benefit,” she said. “The rest of our benefits are good, but I just can’t keep up with the cost of insurance.”

    Julie Robbins, CEO of Earthquaker Devices, an Akron, Ohio-based maker of guitar pedals and other musical effects products, said the 35-person company’s costs have soared about 30% this year because of the sharply higher U.S. tariffs on imports.

    d63-0862.jpg

    Jamie Stillman and Julie Robbins, owners of Earthquaker Devices, said they are raising prices for the Akron, Ohio, company’s guitar pedals next year because of higher tariff costs.

    Dan Price


    She and her husband, with whom she runs the business, purchase thousands of components sourced from more than a dozen countries to manufacture pedals in Ohio. The company has paid an additional $60,000 in tariffs this year, a figure that could rise to at least $180,000 in 2026, Robbins said at the Senate small business event held earlier this week.

    Robbins said Earthquaker plans to modestly hike its prices starting in January, noting that the company’s suppliers have lifted their own prices. She acknowledges that such increases could scare away some customers. 

    “You can’t calculate how demand will suffer from a price rise, so we try to avoid that whenever possible,” Robbins told CBS News. 

    In November, 34% of small businesses raised their average selling prices, an unusually sharp jump from previous months, according to Bank of America analysts, citing recent data from the National Federation of Independent Business. 

    “This suggests businesses are passing on tariff and inflation-related costs” to consumers, Bank of America said in a report. 

    Edited by

    Alain Sherter

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Deep Dive: Investors cautiously confident on China outlook amid trade war 2.0

    [ad_1]

    Deep Dive- Investors cautiously confident on China outlook amid trade war 2.0

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Year of the Lies: Trump’s statements about tariffs

    [ad_1]

    In November, all of Randy Richards’ soybeans remained in storage on the land he farms just outside of Hope, North Dakota.

    In 2024 and 2023 and many years before, that was not the case. Richards would have sold at least half of his soybeans to a local grain elevator and then, his crop might have ended up transported by train to the Pacific northwest and shipped to China, along with at least half of North Dakota’s soybeans.

    What was typical for Richards and other farmers blew up in 2025 with Trump’s tariff strategy and subsequent trade war.

    Richards, one of the family members who runs Richards & Judisch Farms, rents land to grow soybeans, corn and other crops. A third-generation, 71-year-old farmer, Richards has worked the land since he was a young child.

    Randy Richards, right, and his grandson. (Photo courtesy of Richards family)

    In January, when Trump took office, soybean prices in the Northern Plains, which includes North Dakota, stood at $9.50 per bushel, said Shawn Arita, a North Dakota State University agribusiness expert and former U.S. Department of Agriculture economist. After Trump levied tariffs on China — the largest market for U.S. soybeans — soybean prices tanked, crashing below $8.50 per bushel in the Northern Plains in early September. 

    Today, soybean prices are $10.10 per bushel, Arita said. It costs U.S. farmers more than $12 per bushel, on average, to grow them.

    China retaliated against Trump’s tariffs and bought soybeans from Argentina and Brazil instead. That was particularly painful because farmers have long relied on international trade: Roughly 20% of all U.S. agricultural production is exported.

    “Those sales are often what make the difference between profit and loss at the farm level,” Faith Parum, an American Farm Bureau Federation economist, wrote in October. Parum wrote that soybean markets became “the clearest signal of stress in U.S. agricultural trade.”

    Soybean farmers across the Midwest found themselves in limbo. 

    As of November, “Most all of my neighbors that I know of in my area here in Hope, their soybeans are in their bins,” Richards said. “Nobody sold any because the price isn’t very good.”

    Ian Sheldon, an Ohio State University agricultural trade expert, said when China stopped importing U.S. soybeans in May, it put downward pressure on U.S. soybean prices. 

    Trump has falsely said tariffs are paid by foreign countries, including in his inaugural speech, when he said the U.S. will “tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens” and “massive amounts of money (will pour) into our treasury coming from foreign sources.”

    His insistence that foreign governments are paying the tariffs is not how it works. U.S. businesses pay import taxes to the federal government. In the past, foreign companies sometimes lowered their prices to absorb some of the tariffs. But studies showed that during the first Trump administration, tariffs “were passed almost entirely through to US firms or final consumers,” the Tax Foundation concluded. 

    We asked the White House for evidence that foreign countries are paying the tariffs rather than U.S. importers.

    Spokesperson Kush Desai said, “The Administration has consistently maintained that the cost of tariffs will ultimately be borne by the foreign exporters who rely on access to the American economy, the world’s biggest and best consumer market. If Americans were solely paying the price of tariffs, foreign countries would not have rushed to the table to strike trade deals to reduce their tariff rates and industry titans would not have committed to investing trillions in American manufacturing.”

    In the lead-up to April 2 — what Trump called “Liberation Day,” when he rolled out “reciprocal” tariffs with countries that have trade imbalances with the U.S. — Trump appealed directly to U.S. farmers.

    “To the Great Farmers of the United States: Get ready to start making a lot of agricultural product to be sold INSIDE of the United States,” he wrote March 3 on Truth Social. “Tariffs will go on external product on April 2nd. Have fun!” 

    The next day, Caleb Ragland, American Soybean Association president and a Kentucky soy farmer, said, “Tariffs are not something to take lightly and ‘have fun’ with.” Ragland said he voted for Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024.

    Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in April on CNBC that because of the tariffs, “I expect most countries to start to really examine their trade policy towards the United States of America, and stop picking on us.” 

    Instead, China stopped purchasing U.S. soybeans in May and didn’t resume until October.

    A few days after “Liberation Day,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said on CNN, “We are unleashing a new golden age, and we will see an economy that will benefit not just every corner of America, but our farmers and our ranchers and the people that have been left behind for far too long by both Republicans and Democrats.”

    Farm groups didn’t see it that way. They pleaded with Trump to secure a trade deal with China and with congressional leaders to “educate the White House on production agriculture.” 

    American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall said on “Liberation Day” that Trump’s tariffs would drive up supply costs, and retaliatory tariffs from other nations would put American farmers at a disadvantage in the global market. He said tariffs threaten farmers’ competitiveness in the short term and also could cause long-term losses in market share. 

    Trump’s tariffs are not solely responsible for farmers’ challenges. In recent years, they have faced rising costs for essential items such as fertilizer. And in North Dakota, where Richards farms, June storms significantly damaged crops and farm buildings.

    As his soybeans sit in storage, Richards said he and other farmers are “waiting and hoping and praying” that agreements Trump said have been negotiated will improve the outlook.

    Richards farms land less than a mile from the city of Hope, home to about 300 people. Sometimes in tough times, he said he tells people, “I live just beyond Hope.” 

    “There is always hope in Hope. It’s really being strained now.”

    Economists: U.S. companies and consumers pay first

    Besides the soybean price crash, Richards has felt the tariff pinch in other ways.

    Every purchase this year was more expensive, he said. The bearing for his combine used to harvest crops. The steel shovels for his digger. The new tire for a tractor.

    Other farmers are feeling the strain. Farm production expenses are expected to rise by $12 billion this year compared with last year, the American Soybean Association wrote in December.

    “Farmers are facing elevated prices for land, machinery, seeds, pesticides and fertilizers,” the association wrote.

    Virtually all economists, citing years of data, say much of the cost of tariffs is passed on to consumers through higher prices.

    According to the Budget Lab at Yale, the effect of this year’s U.S. tariffs and foreign retaliation placed a 16.8% overall average effective tariff rate on consumers, the highest in 90 years.

    The tariffs represent a $1,700 loss for the average U.S. household, the lab said. Researchers arrived at the figure based on a projected 1.2% increase in consumer prices from tariffs and assuming that it is passed on to consumers. 

    Uncertainty looms for farmers

    Farmers paid close attention in October, when Trump said he had struck a trade deal with China. 

    The White House said China would suspend retaliatory tariffs. China also agreed to purchase at least 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans during the last two months of 2025 and at least 25 million metric tons in each of 2026, 2027 and 2028. CNBC News reported Dec. 9, citing NBC News analysis, that China’s purchases have fallen well short of the 2025 goal. 

    Before the 2018 trade war, Arita said, China purchased 30 to 36 million metric tons a year.

    After Trump’s announcement, soybean futures climbed above $11.50 per bushel — the highest level in more than a year — reflecting improved export prospects, Arita said. Futures prices are not a guarantee that farmers will receive that amount, though. 

    “Our Farmers will be very happy!” Trump wrote. “In fact, as I said once before during my first Administration, Farmers should immediately go out and buy more land and larger tractors.”

    The president’s comments, Richards said, are “as far from the truth as you can get.” 

    Many farmers are struggling with cash flow, based on land rent payments and rising input costs. 

    A November survey of agricultural economists by the publication Farm Journal found that 41% said farmers are delaying decisions because of uncertainty. 

    Jackson Takach, chief economist for Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, known as Farmer Mac, told Farm Journal the economic stress is highest in parts of the country where soybeans are farmers’ No. 1 crop.

    When the Trump administration said Dec. 8 it will provide $12 billion in relief funding to farmers, officials blamed former President Joe Biden and not the current administration’s tariffs.

    Rollins told reporters, “There is almost zero evidence, if any evidence” that farms’ economic challenges have “anything to do with these trade renegotiations.”

    Scott Lincicome, a Cato Institute international trade expert, said Rollins is “totally wrong.”

    “Chinese purchases of soybeans effectively stopped when Trump’s trade wars started,” he said. The combination of lower U.S. crop prices as a result of tariffs and increased costs to farmers from tariffs on things they purchase caused what Lincicome called a “government-grown” crisis.

    The federal relief will cover only a fraction of the losses. North Dakota State University’s Agricultural Risk Policy Center estimated crop losses at $44 billion.

    The U.S. government said it expects to pay farmers by the end of February. 

    Richards wishes it wasn’t necessary.

    “Do I want a government check?” Richards said. “Hell no. I want my money to come from the market, coming from somebody giving me a fair price for my product.”

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this article.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Unsure Whether Impact of Economic Policies Will be Felt in Time for Midterms

    [ad_1]

    U.S. President Donald Trump expressed uncertainty about whether Republicans would keep control of the House of Representatives in next year’s midterm elections because some of his economic policies have yet to take full effect, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday.

    Trump, in an interview conducted on Friday, told the Journal, “I can’t tell you. I don’t know when all of this money is going to kick in,” when asked about the whether Republicans would lose the House in November.

    The White House did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment.

    The president has argued that his economic policies, including his imposition of widespread tariffs on imports, are creating jobs, boosting the stock market and attracting increased investment into the United States.

    After campaigning last year on promises to tame inflation, Trump has in recent weeks alternated between dismissing affordability problems as a hoax, blaming President Joe Biden for them, and promising his economic policies will benefit Americans next year.

    “I think by the time we have to talk about the election, which is in another few months, I think our prices are in good shape,” Trump said in the interview.

    Last month the president rolled back tariffs on more than 200 food products in the face of growing angst among American consumers about the high cost of groceries.

    The president did not say whether he would lower tariffs on additional goods, the Journal reported.

    Trump’s overall approval rating edged up to 41 percent in a new Reuters/Ipsos poll but the approval rating on his performance on the cost of living was just 31 percent.

    Democrats have won a string of victories in state and local elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York City, where growing voter concerns about affordability, including high food prices, were a key topic.

    Officials have said Trump will hit the road in the new year to campaign for Republican candidates and emphasize his economic policy successes. Trump has said his tax cuts and tariffs on foreign goods will put more money in the pockets of American families.

    Reporting by Anusha Shah in Bengaluru; Editing by Christopher Cushing

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • As Trump’s tariffs face legal challenge, here are some of his other trade policy options

    [ad_1]

    The Trump administration could pursue alternative pathways for imposing tariffs after a federal court this week struck down its use of emergency powers to enact broad levies on U.S. trading partners, according to experts.

    At risk is much of Mr. Trump’s trade agenda, which relies on tariffs as a way to secure better terms of trade, boost the U.S. manufacturing sector and generate what he claims could be trillions in new federal revenue. For now, Mr. Trump’s tariffs remain in place after a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., on Thursday temporarily halted the decision, reinstating the levies.

    If the trade court’s ruling is ultimately upheld, Mr. Trump has other tools for pursuing his trade agenda, although they don’t provide the broader authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which he tapped to authorize trade duties on almost every foreign nation.

    “He would have a couple other authorities. However, they are not nearly as broad and aggressive as the IEEPA tariffs,” said Clark Packard, a research fellow in the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, a nonpartisan public policy institute. “There are so many checks and administrative aspects to them that they are slower.”

    Mr. Trump announced his tariffs on April 2 in an initiative he referred to as “Liberation Day.” At the time, the president described trade deficits with other nations as “a national emergency,” which he said gave him the authority to impose tariffs under IEEPA. 

    But a lawsuit filed by five U.S.-based companies and a group of 12 states challenged the president’s use of the emergency powers law, and on Wednesday the Court of International Trade blocked the tariffs.

    President will use “tools at his disposal”

    As the legal process plays out, Trump administration officials say the president is considering using other tools at his disposal to advance his trade policies. 

    “The Trump administration remains committed to addressing our country’s national emergencies of drug trafficking and historic trade deficits with every legal authority conferred to the President in the Constitution and by Congress,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement to CBS News on Thursday.

    Desai added, “Regardless of the developments of this litigation, the President will continue to use all tools at his disposal to advance trade policy that works for all Americans.”

    Here are the other options Mr. Trump could turn to, and how he could use them, according to policy experts.

    Section 232 tariffs of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962

    Experts say Mr. Trump could turn to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows the U.S. president to restrict imports in the name of national security. Mr. Trump already has tariffs in place on steel, aluminum and auto imports based on this regulation.

    There’s a catch, though. The statute requires the Department of Commerce, in consultation with the Department of Defense, to investigate and confirm that imports “threaten to impair” U.S. national security before the president can invoke Section 232. An investigation can take up to 270 days, which could slow down Mr. Trump’s timeline for imposing tariffs. 

    “It has to withstand legal scrutiny, it can’t just be done over the weekend,” Packard said. 

    Additionally, under Section 232, tariffs can only be applied to specific sectors if the trade around those imports threaten national security, rather than the broad approach that Mr. Trump used with IEEPA. 

    “Once the report is issued, the president has wide discretion, but he has to target individual sectors of product, like steel and aluminum,” Packard said. “They can’t be blanket, across-the-board tariffs.” 

    Some experts think Mr. Trump is likely to turn to this statute to further his tariff agenda. 

    “In our view, the administration will prepare the groundwork for a more surgical increase in tariffs beginning this summer following Section 232 trade investigations into strategic industries like pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, lumber, copper and semiconductors,” Kurt Reiman, head of fixed income Americas at UBS Global Wealth Management, said in a research note.

    He added, “These sectors were initially excluded from the 10% baseline tariff because President Trump had intended to levy separate tariffs to reduce the U.S.’s reliance on foreign producers of these products by encouraging domestic production.” 

    Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 

    Mr. Trump could also draw on the Trade Act of 1974 to impose new tariffs. Section 301 of that law allows the U.S. president to apply country-based tariffs at a rate of his choosing if the U.S. Trade Representative determines that another country is engaging in unfair foreign trade practices.

    There are limitations, however. The law can’t be applied universally to all imports from foreign nations.

    “There has to be justification for it, so President Trump can’t unilaterally decide to impose broad-based tariffs on the entire world,” Angela Santos, a partner and customs practice leader at law firm ArentFox Schiff told CBS MoneyWatch. 

    Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 

    Additionally, Mr. Trump could use Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which is designed to address large trade deficits with other nations, to impose tariffs of up to 15% for a maximum of 150 days.

    “I could see this being employed very easily,” Santos said. “It seems like the easiest way to impose tariffs, particularly because most trade partners have large deficits with the U.S.”

    Applying tariffs under Section 122 wouldn’t require an investigation, meaning Mr. Trump could quickly use it to assess a broad-based import duty. 

    “The administration could quickly replace the 10% across-the-board tariff with a similar tariff of up to 15% under Sec. 122,” Goldman Sachs analysts wrote in a report this week. 

    The tariffs could be in effect “within days if deemed necessary,” Goldman Sachs said. 

    Congressional action would be needed to extend the tariffs after 150 days. 

    Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 

    Under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, the president can impose tariffs of up to 50% on imports from countries that discriminate against the U.S. The law defines discrimination as when a trading partner’s laws, import duties, regulations or other restrictions place the U.S. at a disadvantage.

    These tariffs differ from Section 301 levies in that the tariff rate is capped at 50%. Additionally, no formal investigation is required. The authority has never been used, according to experts. 

    Edited by

    Aimee Picchi

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Will Trump Torpedo North American Trade?

    [ad_1]

    The negotiations that remade the North American Free Trade Agreement were, as one participant put it, a series of “near-death” experiences. For more than a year, starting in 2017, envoys from the United States, Canada, and Mexico met to determine the future of a trade alliance worth trillions of dollars. They clashed over everything from labor laws to the minutiae of duty-free imports, while repeatedly deflecting President Donald Trump’s threats to withdraw from the agreement. In the fall of 2018, they were finally prepared to sign what came to be known as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. First, though, they needed to decide how long the accord should last.

    NAFTA was what is called a “forever deal”—as with all of America’s major trade agreements, its terms were permanently fixed. This frustrated Trump’s trade czar, Robert Lighthizer, who believed that NAFTA had resulted in thousands of job losses and a ballooning trade deficit. Lighthizer wanted the U.S.M.C.A. to have an escape hatch: a review mechanism, or perhaps a fixed term. So he proposed that the agreement expire after four years.

    In his book, “No Trade Is Free,” Lighthizer described his offer as “an aggressive opening bid.” Mexican and Canadian officials thought that it was insane: no business would expose its investments to a deal that could end so quickly. Even prominent Republicans expressed opposition. But Lighthizer found an ally in Jared Kushner, Trump’s key adviser on Mexico. Kushner had come to see trade negotiations as a game of mutual bluffing; the key to success, in his view, was getting your counterparts to “believe you are going to jump off a cliff.”

    On August 25, 2018, Kushner invited Mexico’s foreign minister, Luis Videgaray, to his home in the upscale Washington, D.C., neighborhood of Kalorama. As he recalled in his own memoir, “Breaking History,” negotiators were scheduled to meet the next morning, and both sides were short on time: the Americans were eager to send the agreement to Congress before the midterm elections, and the Mexicans needed to reach a deal before a new President came into office.

    Kushner made a proposal that he had cleared with Lighthizer. The agreement would remain in place for sixteen years, but, after six years, the countries would convene for a review. “If the parties agreed to an extension,” Kushner suggested, “the term of the agreement would reset for another sixteen years.” If they disagreed, “a ten-year termination clock would start to tick.” Videgaray left after midnight, having agreed to consult with the Mexican President, Enrique Peña Nieto.

    In the morning, everyone gathered in Lighthizer’s office, across from the White House. “Let me share a proposal,” Kushner began—a theatrical gesture, since Trump and Peña Nieto had already been briefed on the plan. By the meeting’s end, negotiators had agreed to include a review mechanism, ending more than a year of gruelling talks. Soon, Trump stood in the Rose Garden, hailing the U.S.M.C.A. as “the most modern, up-to-date, and balanced trade agreement in the history of our country.”

    For Mexican officials, one of the keys to accepting the deal was that the review would be triggered after six years rather than four: they predicted that Trump would serve two consecutive terms and leave office before the deadline came. In the meantime, they reasoned, the treaty would shield their nation’s economy from a hostile Administration. They turned out to be wrong. Trump returned to the White House four years later than expected, and the review of the U.S.M.C.A. is scheduled for next July, just seven months away. In Trump’s second term, his protectionist agenda has been even more aggressive and erratic than before. Most indications suggest that what will take place between now and the summer is less a review of America’s crucial trade relationships than a wholesale renegotiation.

    In the years since the U.S.M.C.A was signed, Mexico and Canada have become America’s top trading partners. Millions of jobs depend on this economic alliance, which exceeds $1.8 trillion in trade. Officials are already shuttling between their various capitals for conversations about what the parties might get from it.

    As the talks got under way, I sat down with Ildefonso Guajardo Villareal, a former secretary of the economy who led Mexico’s negotiations of the U.S.M.C.A. during his term. A short, dapper man of sixty-eight, Guajardo has been involved in every major trade accord that Mexico has signed since NAFTA. He built a reputation as a fearsome negotiator, once praised by Kushner for his ability to spin “technical issues into unsolvable deal-breakers.” Now he seemed pleased to be out of the fight. “I’ve got a trip coming up to Palm Beach,” he told me, in an airy cafeteria in Mexico City.

    [ad_2]

    Stephania Taladrid

    Source link

  • Why tariffs might make real Christmas trees more attractive this holiday season

    [ad_1]

    Manton, Michigan — At Dutchman Tree Farms in northern Michigan, it’s all hands on deck as Americans prepare to deck the halls. 

    More than 1,500 workers cut and wrap row after row of pines. This year, they’ll ship out over 500,000 real Christmas trees.

    Scott Powell helps run the over 9,000-acre family farm. 

    “Our desire is for folks to put a real live North American-grown Christmas tree in their home,” Powell told CBS News. “Tariff-free, that’s grown by families.” 

    While Powell’s tree prices haven’t gone up, the price of imported plastic trees is up. The majority of those are made in Asia and subject to tariffs introduced by President Trump earlier this year.

    Chris Butler, CEO of the National Tree Company — a company that sells artificial Christmas trees and other holiday-themed products — says tariffs on those items “basically went from zero” to between 20% and 30%, “depending on the country of origin.”

    Butler said his company has had to pass along some costs to consumers. He estimated that 85% of Americans still choose artificial Christmas trees over real ones, and said he’s actively lobbying lawmakers to push for tariff relief. He says the price of an approximately $100 artificial tree has risen about $10 to $15 due to tariffs. 

    “We want to be treated the same as bananas, coffee, mangoes, etc.,” Butler said, in reference to an executive order signed by Mr. Trump earlier this month that exempts products including beef, coffee, tea, bananas, mangoes, avocados, cocoa and certain spices from the new tariffs. “Those things are not grown in the U.S. We know that those are now being exempted. Our raw materials are not available in the U.S. And so we think we should be treated in the same way.”

    Meanwhile, for the Pena family, it’s tradition that drove them to handpick an 8-foot-tall Fraser pine at Dutchman Tree Farms as their Christmas tree.

    “The smell triggers those memories growing up, and I just want to provide that for my family,” David Pena said. 

    It’s a scent that farmers like Powell are banking on to boost sales.

    “It’s the smell and the joy of bringing that real tree into their home,” Powell said. “That’s what we’re really selling.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Exclusive-Trump Team Negotiating Trade Deal With Taiwan That Could Help Train US Workers, Sources Say

    [ad_1]

    By Trevor Hunnicutt, Ben Blanchard and Yimou Lee

    WASHINGTON/TAIPEI (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration is negotiating a deal that could commit Taiwan to fresh investment and training of U.S. workers in semiconductor manufacturing and other advanced industries, according to five people familiar with the matter.

    Under the arrangement, Taiwanese companies including TSMC, the world’s largest contract chipmaker, would send new capital and workers to expand their U.S. operations and train U.S. workers.

    Taiwan’s exports to the United States are currently subject to a 20% tariff, and Taipei has been in talks to reduce that figure as part of an overarching deal with Washington. Semiconductors, vital for all kinds of high-tech products, are currently exempt from tariffs while the U.S builds domestic capacity.

    One of the people said the total U.S. investment to be pledged by Taiwan would be smaller than that of its main regional economic rivals, and would include support to help Washington build science park infrastructure drawing on Taiwanese know-how. The person and others spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

    South Korea and Japan have pledged a total of $350 billion and $550 billion in investment in the U.S., respectively, under deals to trim U.S. tariffs on most of their goods to 15% from 25%.

    It was unclear when the Taiwan deal would close or what specifics would make it into the final agreement, according to the people. They cautioned that any deal terms could change until they were finalized in negotiations. The workforce training aspect of the deal has not previously been reported.

    “Until announced by President Trump, reporting about potential trade deals is speculation,” said White House spokesman Kush Desai. The U.S. trade representative’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

    Trump has previously said some skilled foreign workers may be necessary to train Americans in state-of-the-art factories.

    TAIWAN LOOKS TO REPLICATE ITS MODEL

    TSMC, which declined to comment on the trade talks, has struggled to find the right workers for its U.S. projects.

    CEO and Chairman C.C. Wei said in January building the new factory in Arizona has taken at least twice as long as in Taiwan, citing a shortage of skilled workers and gaps in the supply chain. TSMC, for example, brought half of the construction workers from Texas to Arizona, increasing costs due to relocation and accommodation, he said.

    Taiwan’s Office of Trade Negotiations said in a statement that its team was continuing to discuss supply chain cooperation with the United States under a “Taiwan model.”

    Taiwan began developing its science parks, where the bulk of its semiconductor manufacturing takes place, in the 1980s, building up a whole supply chain for seamless production.

    Speaking to reporters in Taipei on Wednesday, Taiwan Premier Cho Jung-tai said the two sides are at the stage of exchanging documents to firm up certain details.

    “It is very difficult for other countries to do this kind of work, because only we have this concept, practice, and track record of service parks, which allows us to undertake this kind of initiative in the United States,” he added.

    Last month, Taiwan Vice Premier Cheng Li-chiun, who is leading talks aimed at reducing Trump’s tariffs on Taiwanese exports, said she was hopeful both sides could reach a consensus on expanding investment in the United States.

    While Taipei has been keen to show its commitment to Trump’s call to boost U.S. manufacturing, it has also said the most advanced semiconductor technologies and research will remain on Taiwan.

    Last week, Trump acknowledged criticism of programs that welcome skilled foreign workers but said doing so was necessary to dominate in key industries. In a speech at a U.S.-Saudi investment forum, Trump referenced opening up “a big plant with your friend from Taiwan, where we’re going to have 40 or 50% of the computer chip business.”

    He added: “Our people have to be taught. This is something they’ve never done, and we’re not going to be successful if we don’t allow people that invest billions of dollars in plant and equipment to bring a lot of their people from their country to get that plant open, operating and working.”

    Young Liu, chairman of Taiwan’s Foxconn, Nvidia’s largest server maker, said last week the company was looking to work with the U.S. and other countries to build science parks, adding that he hoped this could help trade negotiations.

    RISING TRUMP TARIFFS PROMPTED TALKS

    Taiwan’s representative to the APEC summit, Lin Hsin-i, said this month that he and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had discussed supply chains and semiconductors during a meeting on the sidelines of the event in South Korea. 

    Lin said Bessent had been keen to hear about Taiwan’s experience in building up its semiconductor clusters.

    Trump said in August the U.S. would impose a tariff of about 100% on imports of semiconductors but exempted companies that are manufacturing in the U.S. or have committed to do so, which includes TSMC, though U.S. officials are privately saying that they might not levy them soon, Reuters reported this month.

    TSMC, whose business is surging on strong demand for artificial intelligence applications, is investing $165 billion to build chip factories in Arizona, though the bulk of its production will remain in Taiwan.

    Other Taiwanese companies have announced new plans for investment in the United States, including silicon wafer manufacturer GlobalWafers.

    Any agreement with Taiwan could rile Beijing. Chinese President Xi Jinping told Trump in a call on Monday that Taiwan’s “return to China” was an important matter for the country. The White House has not commented on that element of the call.

    The United States is Chinese-claimed Taiwan’s most important international backer and the ultimate guarantor of its security, despite the lack of formal diplomatic ties. 

    (Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt, Ben Blanchard and Yimou Lee; Additional reporting by Jeanny Kao in Taipei and Andrea Shalal in Washington)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • ‘Dr. Doom’ Nouriel Roubini breaks with the crowd on the AI bubble, saying the U.S. is headed for a ‘growth recession’ and not a market crash | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    For nearly two decades, esteemed economist Nouriel Roubini has worn the nickname “Dr. Doom” with honor. He earned it in the mid-2000s for warning of a housing crash that Wall Street dismissed, until he was proven catastrophically right. 

    Since then, the NYU Stern School of Business professor emeritus has become one of the most recognizable bears in global finance, regularly sounding alarms about debt spirals, geopolitical shocks, pandemics, AI disruptions, and what he once called “the mother of all crises.”

    So it’s perhaps surprising, even disorienting, that in the midst of investors teetering on the edge of a bear market, Roubini is breaking with his cohort — including fellow 2008-financial-crisis-prophet Michael Burry — to dismiss their pessimism about the U.S. economy as misplaced.

    In a new essay for the Financial Times, the economist argues that the conventional view – that America’s “Liberation Day” tariffs would trigger stagflation, tank the stock market, kneecap the dollar, and end U.S. exceptionalism — is simply wrong. Instead, he sees something close to the opposite: a short period of cooling growth, followed by a powerful rebound led by technology and capital spending that keeps the U.S. firmly in the top spot.

    “The now common view that the U.S. stock market is in a massive bubble and bound to crash is incorrect over the medium term,” he wrote. On the other hand, what he predicted isn’t necessarily the rosiest. The near-term picture looks like a “growth recession,’ he said, meaning slower, below-potential GDP. It’s not the hard landing or 1970s-style stagflation many have predicted, and it isn’t a bubble popping, but it’s a lopsided economy, as many Wall Street analysts have also noticed.

    Tariffs won’t topple the recovery

    Roubini, who once warned of a “mega-threatened age” – the era where AI, aging populations and global instability threatened our prosperity — now argues the most extreme fears about tariffs and policy missteps haven’t materialized. That’s partly because, he says, this administration is responsive to market reactions. When asset prices slumped immediately after the tariff announcement, the administration “blinked,” softening policy and opening the door to more conventional trade negotiations.

    By next year, he says, growth will reaccelerate. The Fed is undergoing a period of monetary easing, fiscal stimulus is still flowing, and—critically—AI-related capital expenditure continues to surge.

    Roubini’s arguments align closely with two of Wall Street’s top analysts: Torsten Slok from Apollo Global Management and Mike Wilson from Morgan Stanley. Slok, known for his “Daily Spark,” combining insightful charts with brevity, argued on November 20 that the economy is “likely to reaccelerate in 2026.” Just days earlier, he had warned of inequality, saying “it is a K-shaped economy for U.S. consumers.” He has also flagged extreme concentration and valuations in the stock market, with the Magnificent 7 running far ahead of the rest of the market. 

    Wilson, chief equity strategist for Morgan Stanley, has been predicting a “rolling recession” for years, arguing that different sectors of the economy shrank at different times, resulting in something that felt like a recession, but unevenly distributed. This changed in April 2022, when a “rolling recovery” set in, he has argued since then, forecasting an economic boom ahead. Wilson has argued for the possibility of a correction in stocks but, like Roubini, does not see a crash as imminent. 

    Tech > tariffs

    The core of Roubini’s argument rests on a simple hierarchy: tariffs and policy noise are temporary, but technological leadership that results in innovation compounding over decades is not.

    “Tech trumps tariffs,” he writes.

    He estimates U.S. potential growth could double from 2% to 4% by the end of the decade, powered by innovation in AI and machine learning, robotics, quantum computing, commercial space, and defense technology. While this agrees with many Wall Street predictions (Goldman Sachs sees real potential growth reaching 2.3% in the early 2030s, for instance), the prediction of 4% blows most others out of the water. 

    However, those industries, Roubini argues, will continue to deliver the “exceptionalism” that has set the U.S. apart for the past 20 years, to the extent to which productivity will boost the economy out double-digits. 

    If potential growth rises, he says, equity returns should, too. When growth averaged only 2% over the last two decades, annual returns still hovered in the double digits. Faster growth means even faster earnings expansion, and valuations that look elevated today may be supported rather than speculative.

    Roubini has been striking a more positive tone for about a year now — in August 2024, while everyone feared a downturn was coming and frustrated that the Fed wouldn’t ease, he calmed market fears again. 

    Debt—and the dollar—look less dangerous than feared

    One of the most persistent fears around AI-driven spending is debt sustainability. But Roubini argues that this math would change if growth rises even modestly.

    The Congressional Budget Office projects debt-to-GDP soaring under 1.6% real growth assumptions. But if growth averages 2.3% or higher, the ratio stabilizes. At 3% or more, it falls, meaning that we could potentially grow ourselves out of debt; an argument President Donald Trump has also used.

    A tech-driven “supply shock”could also push inflation lower over time as production costs drop while productivity booms, meaning higher real rates may not translate into higher nominal yields.Even external liabilities look manageable, he argues, because rising tech investment tends to attract foreign equity inflows, similar to how “emerging-market” economies finance growth during a resource boom.

    Roubini also dismisses the widely discussed decline of the dollar, since he believes that the U.S. will accelerate while Europe stagnates, and thus the dollar will ultimately strengthen. 

    Notably, “Dr. Doom” admitted that the U.S.’s top adversary, China, is at least on par with the U.S. in innovating in the “most important industries of the future,” such as AI and robotics. However, he doesn’t seem too concerned with the AI arms race. 

    “The US economy and markets are best positioned among advanced economies,” Roubini wrote. “They will continue to benefit from the US being the most innovative advanced country.”

    [ad_2]

    Eva Roytburg, Nick Lichtenberg

    Source link

  • Bessent Says Very Good Chance Trump Will Announce New Fed Chair Before Christmas

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Tuesday there was a very good chance President Donald Trump would announce a new chairman of the Federal Reserve before Christmas.

    “So we’re going to have the last interview in the second round today. Andrew, we got five very strong candidates,” Bessent said in an interview with CNBC. Jerome Powell’s term as Fed chair ends in May.

    (Reporting by Susan Heavey and Doina Chiacu; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Trump embraces Mamdani socialism as ‘practical’

    [ad_1]

    This week, editors Peter Suderman, Katherine Mangu-Ward, and Nick Gillespie are joined by Reason senior editor Robby Soave to discuss President Donald Trump’s unexpectedly warm White House meeting with New York mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani and why he now describes the socialist’s agenda as “practical.” They examine what this moment suggests about Trump’s shifting political instincts, how it fits with his recent comments on tariffs and the state of the economy, and what the disbanding of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) signals about his governing approach.

    The group then looks at Trump’s attempt to influence the pending Warner Bros. merger and the broader media landscape, including worries about misinformation and new reporting that major MAGA influencer accounts on X are operating from overseas. The panel also considers the implications of six Democrats telling service members they do not have to obey illegal orders and the ensuing backlash. A listener asks how to reconcile consumer benefits from intense market competition with the need to preserve incentives for long-term innovation and investment.

     

    0:00—DOGE disbands

    4:02—Trump meets Mamdani in the oval office

    14:50—White House seeks influence over Warner Bros. merger

    27:58—Red Scare, Oliva Nuzzi, and cancel culture

    38:46—Listener question on preserving incentives in a market economy

    51:29—Democrats encourage military not to follow illegal orders

    57:49—Weekly cultural recommendations

     

    “Republican Socialism,” by Eric Boehm

    “To the Socialists of All Parties,” by Katherine Mangu-Ward

    “A Dirge for DOGE,” by Christian Britschgi

    “How I Found Out: Part 1,” by Ryan Lizza

    “FDR’s War Against the Press,” by David T. Beito

    “Mamdani Understands Something About Trump That European Leaders Don’t,” by Matthew Petti

     

    Reason Versus debate: Big Tech Does More Good Than Harm, December 10

    [ad_2]

    Peter Suderman

    Source link

  • China’s Premier Pitches to German Chancellor Closer Collaboration in Strategic Industries

    [ad_1]

    BEIJING (Reuters) -China’s Premier Li Qiang pitched closer collaboration to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in new energy, smart manufacturing, biomedicine and intelligent driving during a meeting on Sunday on the sidelines of the G20 summit, Xinhua reported.

    Relations between the world’s second- and third-largest economies have improved significantly over the past month, after Chinese export curbs on chips and rare earths caused major disruptions for German firms and German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul to cancel a visit to Beijing last month due to China rejecting all but one of his meetings.

    German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil made the first official visit of Merz’s premiership last week, stabilising ties by meeting China’s top economic official Vice Premier He Lifeng, as U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs weigh on the two major exporters.

    Merz is also expected to visit China soon.

    Li said he “hoped Germany would maintain a rational and pragmatic policy toward China, eliminate interference and pressure, focus on shared interests, and consolidate the foundation for cooperation,” a state media readout released late on Sunday quoted China’s second-ranking official as saying.

    For all the friction over Beijing’s support for Russia and its actions in the Indo-Pacific, and Berlin’s vocal criticism of China’s human rights record and state-subsidised industrial policy, the two countries remain bound by a vast and mutually advantageous commercial relationship.

    “China is willing to work with Germany to seize future development opportunities … in emerging fields such as new energy, smart manufacturing, biomedicine, hydrogen energy technology, and intelligent driving, Li said in Johannesburg, South Africa, which is hosting the first G20 summit on the continent.

    China bought $95 billion worth of German goods last year, around 12% of which were cars, Chinese data shows, putting it among the $19 trillion economy’s top 10 trading partners. Germany purchased $107 billion of Chinese goods, mostly chips and other electronic components.

    But Berlin stands out for China as an investment partner, having injected $6.6 billion in fresh capital in 2024, according to data from the Mercator Institute for China Studies, accounting for 45% of all foreign direct investment into China from the European Union and the United Kingdom.

    For Germany, China represents a practically irreplaceable auto market, and is responsible for almost a third of German automakers’ sales. German chemicals and pharmaceuticals firms also have a large presence in the country, although they are facing increasing pressure from domestic competitors.

    (Reporting by Joe Cash; Editing by Richard Chang)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Tea Tariffs Once Sparked a Revolution. Now They Are Creating Angst

    [ad_1]

    A tax on tea once sparked rebellion. This time, it’s just causing headaches.

    Importers of the prized leaves have watched costs climb, orders stall and margins shrink under the weight of President Donald Trump’s tariffs. Now, even after Trump has given them a reprieve, tea traders say it won’t immediately undo the damage.

    “It took a while to work its way through the system, these tariffs, and it will take a while for it to work its way out of the system,” says Bruce Richardson, a celebrated tea master, tea historian and purveyor of teas at his shop, Elmwood Inn Fine Teas, in Danville, Kentucky. “That tariffed tea is still working its way out of our warehouses.”

    While a handful of bigger firms are behind the biggest supermarket brands, the premium tea market is largely the work of smaller businesses, from family farms to specialty importers to a web of little tea shops, tea rooms and tea cafes across the U.S. Amid an onslaught of tariffs, they have become showcases for the levies’ effects.

    On their shelves, selection has narrowed, with some teas now missing because they’re no longer viable products to stock with steep levies on top. In their warehouses, managers are consumed with uncertainty and operational headaches, including calculating what a blend really costs, with ingredients from multiple countries on a roller coaster of tariffs. And in backrooms where the wafting scent of fresh tea permeates, owners have been forced to put off job postings, raises, advertising and other investments so they can have cash available to pay duties when their containers arrive at U.S. ports.

    “If I were to add up all the money I’ve spent on tariffs that weren’t there a year ago, it could equal a new employee,” says Hartley Johnson, who owns the Mark T. Wendell Tea Company in Acton, Massachusetts.

    Johnson’s prices used to stay static for a year or longer. He ate the tariff costs before being forced to respond. His most popular tea, a smoky Taiwanese one called Hu-Kwa, has steadily risen from $26 to $46 a pound.

    He knows some customers are reconsidering.

    “Where is that tipping point?” Johnson asks. “I’m kind of finding that tipping point is happening now.”

    Though Trump backed off some tariffs on agricultural products last week, many in the tea trade are wary of celebrating too soon and caution tea drinkers shouldn’t either. Much of next year’s supply has already been imported and tariffed and the full impact of those duties may not have fully spilled downhill.

    Meantime, other tariff-driven price hikes persist. All sorts of other products tea businesses import, from teapots to infusers, remain subject to levies, and costs for some American-made items, like tins for packaging, have spiked because they rely on foreign materials.

    “The canisters, the bamboo boxes, the matcha whisks, everything that we import, everything that we sell has been affected by tariffs,” says Gilbert Tsang, owner of MEM Tea Imports in Wakefield, Massachusetts.

    Though globally, tea reigns supreme, imbibed more than anything but water, it has long been overshadowed by coffee in the U.S. Still, tea is entwined in American history from the very beginning, even before colonists angry with tariffs dumped tons of it in Boston Harbor.

    Boston may run on Dunkin’ today, but it was born on tea.

    The 1773 revolt that became known as the Boston Tea Party rose out of the British Parliament’s implementation of tea tariffs on colonists, who rejected taxation without representation in government. After an independent United States was born, one of the new government’s first major acts, the Tariff Act of 1789, ironically set in law import taxes on a range of products including tea. In time, though, trade policy came to include carve-outs for many products Americans rely on but don’t produce.

    For more than 150 years, most tea has passed through U.S. ports with little to no duties.

    That began to change in Trump’s first term with his hardline approach to China. But nothing compared to what came with his return to the White House.

    In July, the most recent month for which the U.S. International Trade Commission has tallied tariff numbers, tea was taxed at an average rate of over 12 percent, a huge increase from a year earlier when it was just under one-tenth of a percent. In that single month, American businesses and consumers paid more than $6 million in tea import taxes, amassing in just 31 days more tariffs than any previous full year on record.

    “All over again, taxation without representation,” says Richardson, an adviser to the Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum. “Our wants and needs and our voices are not being represented because Congress is avoiding the issue by simply allowing the president to act like George III.”

    All told, tea importers paid about $19.6 million in tariffs in the first seven months of 2025, nearly seven times as much as the same period last year.

    It’s all been confounding to those steeped in the world of tea, on which the U.S. depends on foreign countries for nearly all of the billions of pounds Americans brew each year. Though a number of small tea farms exist in the U.S., they can’t fill Americans’ cups for more than a few hours of the year.

    “We don’t have an industry and we can’t produce one overnight,” says Angela McDonald, president of the United States League of Tea Growers.

    Trump’s suspension of tea tariffs came too late for some businesses, including Los Angeles-based International Tea Importers Inc., for which tariffs created an untenable cash-flow crunch.

    “We just became over-leveraged financing not just the inventory, but also the tariffs,” says the company’s CEO, Brendan Shah.

    Tariffs weren’t the only thing the 35-year-old business was facing, but without them, Shah says it may have survived.

    “Unpredictable tariff policies,” he wrote to customers in announcing the company’s closure, “have created the final, insurmountable barrier.”

    Copyright 2025. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s former president, arrested days before starting decades-long prison sentence

    [ad_1]

    Brazil’s federal police arrested former President Jair Bolsonaro preemptively on Saturday, days before he was set to begin his 27-year prison sentence for leading a coup attempt, officials said.

    A close aide said the embattled former leader was taken to the police force headquarters in the capital, Brasilia, from his house arrest.

    The force said in a short statement, which did not name Bolsonaro, that it acted on the request of Brazil’s Supreme Court.

    Neither Brazil’s federal police nor the Supreme Court provided more details.

    Bolsonaro’s aide Andriely Cirino confirmed to The Associated Press that the arrest took place around 6 a.m. on Saturday.

    The 70-year-old former president was taken from his house in a gated community in the upscale Jardim Botanico neighborhood to the federal police headquarters, Cirino said.

    Bolsonaro was placed under house arrest in early August, weeks before he was convicted in his coup trial. His lawyers were pleading with Brazil’s Supreme Court to keep him at home to serve his sentence, citing his poor health.

    Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro waves from his home in Brazil on Sept. 11, 2025.

    SERGIO LIMA/AFP via Getty Images


    Like most of his colleagues, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who oversaw the coup case, rarely carries out decisions on Saturdays, unless there are security risks involved.

    Local media reported that Bolsonaro, who was Brazil’s president from 2019 to 2022, was expected to begin serving his sentence sometime next week after the far-right leader exhausted all appeals of his conviction for leading a coup attempt.

    Saturday’s preemptive arrest does not mean Bolsonaro will remain at the federal police headquarters to serve his sentence. Brazilian law requires that all convicts start their sentences in prison.

    One of the former president’s sons, Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro, has been egging on supporters to take to the streets in defense of his father since Thursday.

    Some of Bolsonaro’s supporters, who claim he is being politically persecuted, are expected to rally outside the federal police headquarters throughout the weekend.

    The former president and several of his allies were convicted by a panel of Supreme Court justices for attempting to overthrow Brazil’s democracy following his 2022 election loss to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Prosecutors said the coup plot included plans to kill Lula and to encourage an insurrection in early 2023.

    Bolsonaro was also found guilty on charges of leading an armed criminal organization and attempting the violent abolition of the democratic rule of law. Bolsonaro has denied wrongdoing.

    He remains a key figure in Brazilian politics, despite being ineligible to run again at least until 2030, after a separate ruling by Brazil’s top electoral court. Polls show he would be a strong candidate in next year’s vote if allowed to run.

    Bolsonaro is an ally of President Trump, who has called his trial a “witch hunt.” Bolsonaro was mentioned in a July threat by the U.S. administration to raise tariffs on several Brazilian exports by 50%. In late July, Mr. Trump followed through on that threat, raising tariffs by 40%, writing in a July 30 executive order that “Members of the Government of Brazil are also politically persecuting a former President of Brazil.”

    However, on Thursday, Mr. Trump signed an executive order removing tariffs on Brazilian beef, coffee and other goods. 

    Mr. Trump cited “various officials” whom he said advised him that “certain agricultural imports from Brazil should no longer be subject” to the 40% tariff, in part because of progress the U.S. has made in its trade negotiations with Brazil.    

    The order applies to Brazilian imports to the U.S. on or after Nov. 13, according to the order.   

    Megan Cerullo

    contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Keeping Thanksgiving costs down with some help from AI

    [ad_1]

    Thanksgiving costs are down from last year, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation, but budgets remain tight for many this season. “CBS Saturday Morning” has some ways to save on your feast this year, including how to use AI to cut costs.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House cuts tariffs on more goods from Brazil

    [ad_1]


    President Trump on Thursday signed an executive order removing tariffs on Brazilian beef, coffee and other goods that were previously subject to a 40% levy which Mr. Trump announced in July. 

    Mr. Trump cited “various officials” whom he said advised him that “certain agricultural imports from Brazil should no longer be subject” to the 40% tariff, in part because of progress the U.S. has made in its trade negotiations with Brazil.  

    The order applies to Brazilian imports to the U.S. on or after Nov. 13, according to the order. Refunds could be owed to businesses that paid the duties, Mr. Trump noted. 

    Mr. Trump last week cut tariffs on beef, coffee, bananas and other agricultural imports as Americans grapple with high prices at the grocery store. 

    That tariff relief came a day after Mr. Trump announced reciprocal trade agreements with Argentina, Guatemala, El Salvador and Ecuador. At the time, senior administration officials said the agreement frameworks were largely focused on allowing those foreign markets to accept more U.S. goods. 

    Food prices rose 3.1% in September compared to one year ago, while roasted coffee had risen nearly 19% over the same period, according to federal data. 

    Edited by

    Faris Tanyos

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trade War Announcements Triggered Price Hikes From Retailers Months Before US Tariffs Took Effect

    [ad_1]

    New research reveals retailers raised prices five times faster during the 2025 trade war period than under regular market conditions


    VILNIUS, LT, November 20, 2025 (Newswire.com)
    –
    A new research report from IPRoyal has revealed that reciprocal tariffs during the 2025 US-China trade war triggered price rises. This included a 1.8% rise on average, with some categories reaching 2.04% (compared to a 0.39% baseline), weeks before any tariffed goods could reach store shelves.

    The research conducted a comprehensive analysis of 1,900 consumer products and tracked prices across 19 product categories (100 products per category) from September 2024 to August 2025. The findings challenge conventional assumptions about how tariffs affect consumer prices.

    The key findings from the research included:

    • During Liberation Day (April 2nd, 2025) and the subsequent trade war period (until May 12th, 2025), prices increased at a rate of up to 2.04% per two-week period, more than five times the baseline rate of 0.39%.

    • Nearly 43% of all tracked products showed price increases during the trade war period.

    • Unilateral tariffs had a minimal impact, with an average increase of only 0.44%.

    • Actual supply chain disruptions from Red Sea shipping attacks produced no measurable price effects.

    • 21% of product categories that experienced the April price spikes later reverted to below-baseline prices.

    “It is clear from the research conducted that trade war policy announcements may have a previously underappreciated effect on prices,” said Justas Vitaitis, the project’s Lead Researcher. “While a corporate greed narrative may seem enticing, our findings are just as important to policymakers.

    “Over the six weeks of the 2025 trade war, U.S. consumers paid elevated prices on goods already purchased at pre-tariff costs. Yet, putting the entire blame on retailers would be akin to blaming investors for selling stocks during periods of financial uncertainty. There were other market forces at play, and policymakers should adapt accordingly.”

    The research also found that the manner of tariff announcement, such as the unprecedented scope, high visibility, and explicit “trade war” framing of Liberation Day, created conditions where widespread price increases faced minimal competitive pressure.

    “For consumers, the implications were significant: during the six-week trade war period, shoppers paid elevated prices on pre-tariff inventory, transferring wealth to retailers as windfall profits rather than to governments as intended tax revenue.

    “Overall, it is clear that high-profile, politically charged tariff announcements produce bigger and faster price hikes than quietly implemented policies. The way trade policies are announced may harm consumer welfare more than tariffs themselves, and should be considered in the future”, concluded Vitaitis.

    Read the full research: https://iproyal.com/trade-wars-and-price-hikes.pdf

    ABOUT THE RESEARCH

    The study analyzed pricing data from Keepa, tracking 100 products in each of 19 randomly selected Amazon categories. Researchers have no affiliation with Keepa.

    Media Contacts: 

    Benjamin Hart / Sasha Arion
    Spreckley
    Tel: (0)207 388 9988
    Email: iproyal@spreckley.co.uk

    Source: IPRoyal

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Exclusive-Trump’s Semiconductor Tariff Plan Likely Delayed, Officials Say

    [ad_1]

    By Laurie Chen, Trevor Hunnicutt and Jeffrey Dastin

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. officials are privately saying that they might not levy long-promised semiconductor tariffs soon, potentially delaying a centerpiece of President Donald Trump’s economic agenda.

    Officials relayed these messages over the last several days to stakeholders in government and private industry, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter and a third person briefed on the conversations. A fourth person following the matter also said the administration was taking a more cautious approach to avoid provoking China. The discussions have not been previously reported.

    Trump aides are taking their time on chip tariffs as they work to avoid a rupture with Beijing over trade issues, which would risk a return to a tit-for-tat trade war and disruption of the flow of critical rare earth minerals, according to two of the people.

    Those people cautioned that no decision is final until the administration signs off on it, and also said that triple-digit tariffs could be imposed at any time. The sources spoke anonymously in order to recount private conversations about policy deliberations.

    Trump said in August that the United States would impose a tariff of about 100% on imports of semiconductors but exempted companies that are manufacturing in the U.S. or have committed to do so. Privately, over the last several months, Washington officials had told people that the administration would roll out the tariffs soon. That guidance has now changed as the administration has continued to debate the timing and other details.

    A White House official and a Commerce Department official, asked about the discussions, disputed that the administration had adjusted its posture. 

    “That is not true,” the White House official said, without specifying what was incorrect. “The administration remains committed to reshoring manufacturing that’s critical to our national and economic security.” The Commerce official said, “There is no change in department policy regarding semiconductor 232 tariffs.” Neither one specified how soon tariffs that have been threatened since the early days of the Trump administration would be finalized, nor did they offer any other details.

    TRUMP FACES PRESSURE ON CONSUMER PRICES

    Any decision by the administration to slow down or narrow the scope of chip tariffs would come at a sensitive time for Trump. The Republican president is facing growing consumer angst over prices heading into the holiday shopping season.

    Hiking taxes on imported semiconductors could raise consumer costs on the gadgets they power, from refrigerators to smartphones. Reuters reported in September that the Trump administration was looking at a plan that would also tax foreign electronic devices based on the number of chips in each one. 

    Trump rolled back tariffs on more than 200 food products last week, but he has also said that his import taxes have made no significant contribution to inflation. The U.S. government shutdown has delayed recent data on consumer prices, but inflation has been running above the Federal Reserve’s target since former President Joe Biden held office.

    Trump is also trying to maintain a delicate trade truce with China, a top manufacturer of both semiconductors and devices powered by them. Last month, Trump met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Busan, South Korea, and reached an agreement to set aside their trade issues, for now.

    During those conversations in Korea, U.S. officials nonetheless warned their Chinese counterparts that they could take national security steps in the coming months that Beijing might find objectionable, according to two people familiar with those conversations. Trump has bet that tariffs can revive domestic factory jobs lost over decades to countries including China.

    In April, the Trump administration announced investigations into imports of pharmaceuticals and semiconductors as part of a bid to impose tariffs on them, arguing that extensive reliance on their foreign production poses a national security threat.

    (Reporting by Laurie Chen in Beijing, Trevor Hunnicutt in Washington and Jeffrey Dastin in San Francisco; Additional reporting by Alexandra Alper in Washington; Editing by Chris Sanders and Matthew Lewis)

    Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • KYG’s AI Assistant “Kay” Passed the October 2025 U.S. Customs Brokers License Exam (CBLE), a Breakthrough in Automated Trade Compliance

    [ad_1]

    AI-native tariff compliance software demonstrates expert-level mastery of trade regulations.


    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., November 19, 2025 (Newswire.com)
    –
    KYG Trade™ (www.kygtrade.com) today announced that its AI trade compliance assistant, Kay, passed the October 2025 CBLE-a rigorous, highly technical assessment widely considered one of the most challenging in the global trade industry. Kay scored 93%-higher than the required 75% score to pass the exam. In a comparison test, one of the top general-purpose commercial LLMs failed the exam with a score of only 60%. According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) website, the average pass rate for the three exams prior to the October ’25 exam was 22.3%.

    The CBLE requires advanced reasoning across Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS), as well as various U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) directives and guidelines. Tested across six major categories-broker compliance, tariff classification, quota, valuation, entry/entry summary, and a complex practical exercise, the exam is designed to measure deep subject-matter expertise rather than generic knowledge retrieval.

    AI Purpose-Built for Trade and Tariff Compliance

    Kay’s impressive performance underscores the importance of AI systems engineered specifically for global trade and tariff compliance. Unlike general-purpose language models, Kay is optimized for the complex interpretive reasoning needed in customs compliance, including multi-source regulatory rule reconciliation and real-world export import shipping document analysis.

    Executive Commentary

    “As a licensed customs broker and former Big 4 trade and customs partner, I know firsthand how complex this exam is,” said Todd R. Smith, Founder CEO of KYG Trade. “Today, I uploaded the CBLE PDF into our platform, and Kay completed the entire 80 question 4.5-hour exam in under five minutes.” Smith emphasized Kay’s advanced capabilities in processing unstructured documents, “The HTS classification and practical exercise were the most impressive. Kay extracted and interpreted information from a full-page of facts referencing an air waybill, commercial invoice, and broker invoice. Kay didn’t just answer correctly-she proved robust OCR and ETL capabilities, essential for the administratively cumbersome document ridden trade and tariff landscape. This milestone reflects exactly why we built an AI-native global trade and tariff compliance platform: to enable our trade compliance customers to work faster and smarter without compromising sensitive data.”

    “We’re proud to have developed one of the ‘smartest’ global trade and tariff management (GTM) solutions available today.”

    Addressing Industry Skepticism

    Some industry observers have questioned whether AI’s high performance on multiple-choice exams is meaningful. KYG Trade maintains that CBLE success requires more than pattern matching.

    “Each question often involves cross-referencing multiple regulations, interpreting nuanced language, and ruling out competing statutory frameworks under time pressure,” said Aaron Ansel, a trade attorney and KYG’s Cofounder Chief AI Officer. “The complexity lies in the reasoning needed to achieve the correct answer. Basic retrieval augment generation (RAG) alone doesn’t cut it.”

    Commitment to Security and Trust

    KYG Trade also reaffirmed its commitment to data protection. The company is ISO 27001 certified, and all customer data processed through Kay is never stored, never retained, and never used to train its AI.

    “Compliance is built on trust,” said Anand Raghavendran, a licensed customs broker and KYG’s Chief Product & Innovation Officer. “We designed our platform so organizations can safely leverage AI without exposing sensitive trade secrets to general-purpose LLMs.”

    Rewarding Achievement. Empowering Trade Intelligence.

    If you sat for the October 2025 CBLE and scored at least 50%, KYG is celebrating Kay’s accomplishment by providing you with a free subscription to its AI tariff and trade research tools. Get more information at discover@kyg.ai or https://www.kygtrade.com/contact-us.

    Contact Information

    Leslie Levy August
    Chief Marketing Officer
    leslie@kyg.ai
    650-391-7759

    Source: KYG Trade, Inc.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • If Your Employees Are Taking On Second Jobs, Here’s How to Handle It

    [ad_1]

    Taking a second job is nothing particularly new, but having to take on extra duties when you’re already working a full time role is no easy task. Yet that’s exactly what three in 10 of the full-time workers surveyed by Seattle-based Resume Templates said they planned to do this year to help cover the extra expenses that the holiday season brings (perhaps worsened this year by tariffs and inflation). And over a third of workers already working full-time said that they’re already working other gigs to earn extra income. 

    In essence, this means a majority of the 1,000 full-time workers in the survey were concerned enough about living costs at the end of 2025 that they’re taking on extra work. 

    Of these people, about half are raising more money by taking on extra hours at their existing employer. Other workers have taken on work at delivery services, joined ride-share companies, taken up seasonal jobs in stores, or were freelancing HRDive notes. Others took traditional “pocket money” roles like pet sitting and babysitting, while others tried earning income from social media.

    The report notes that more people say it’s going to be harder to afford holiday expenses this year than last year, with some 61 percent feeling this way, and about a third of people are planning to spend less on gifts, holiday decorations and travel this year than in 2024. About three in 10 people say that the loss of government benefits like SNAP or assistance with insurance are partly to blame for their financial issues. 

    So far you may be thinking that this data merely supports evidence that the economy and the job market are in trouble, but that there’s not much relevance for your company. But there’s one piece of data in the report that will give you concern: over a third of people taking on more work, 39 percent in fact, say that this necessity already has or probably will damage their productivity on their existing full time role. While this makes sense (everybody only has so much energy and time to give, and a full time job is already demanding) this has immediate knock-on effects for their employers who could see a trickle-down impact on the company productivity and profitability. 

    In the report Julia Toothacre, chief career strategist at Resume Templates, writes that workers who take on extra duties “need to stay mindful of their energy and mental health” because “overworking can quickly lead to burnout, fatigue, and declining performance in both their main job and side work.” Toothacre also suggests that workers may need to scale back productivity to “a sustainable level,” and that “doing ‘enough’ to meet expectations, rather than constantly overperforming, might be the healthiest choice.” This advice, while sensible from an overworked, underpaid frontline employee point of view is clearly not going to please employers who may be relying on their workers being fired up and ready to tackle, say, a busy retail season.

    Earlier this year a report said that a growing share of the workforce was “secretly” working second jobs, with perhaps up to 5 percent of the tech workforce pulling off this feat. The new report, meanwhile, backs up a study from June this year that said a similar shockingly high percentage of workers were going to seek additional duties to make ends meet — with economic woes tied to uncertainty, uncommunicative employers, and unhappiness in the workplace playing a role.

    What can you do about this in your company?

    It depends on your official stance on second jobs: banning workers from taking on extra work means that if they find themselves forced into an economic corner because the income they earn from you isn’t enough, they may simply quit for better paying roles elsewhere. If you tolerate workers taking on second roles, then a savvy leader may boost opportunities like flexible working schedules: the data suggests that workers are going to be taking on second jobs anyway, so if you’re their primary employer doing the most you can to ensure they’re not burned out seems smart, since it may protect their productivity. 

    [ad_2]

    Kit Eaton

    Source link