Trump’s threat to impose a 25% tariff on Apple iPhones unless they’re manufactured in the US is a move that’s sparked considerable debate and controversy. The sheer audacity of singling out a specific company for such a punitive measure raises serious questions about the fairness and legality of the action. This isn’t just about trade policy; it smells strongly of extortion, a blatant attempt to leverage a company’s economic success for personal or political gain.
The logistical nightmare of shifting iPhone production to the US is staggering. It wouldn’t just involve building new factories; it would necessitate a complete overhaul of the intricate global supply chain that has taken decades to establish.… Continue reading
Mike Pence publicly criticized Donald Trump’s recent tariff policies, calling them the largest peacetime tax increase in U.S. history and a “massive policy misstep.” Pence, contrasting the current approach with their first term’s use of tariffs as negotiation leverage, highlighted the resulting market downturn and potential harm to American jobs and consumers. He argues that these tariffs, unlike Trump’s claims, ultimately burden American businesses and consumers through higher prices. This marks a significant public split between the former running mates on economic policy, with Pence advocating for free trade agreements that isolate China.
Read More
Trump says Walmart should stop blaming tariffs for higher prices. It’s a straightforward statement, yet it reveals a complex interplay of economic realities, political maneuvering, and corporate responsibility. The core of the issue lies in the undeniable fact that tariffs, by their very nature, increase the cost of imported goods. This is fundamental economics; it’s not a matter of opinion or political spin. To suggest otherwise is akin to saying the water isn’t wet.
Walmart, a company known for its meticulous cost management and profit maximization, is perfectly within its right to pass these increased costs onto consumers. This is standard business practice; it’s how companies remain profitable while navigating fluctuating input costs.… Continue reading
Ruhle’s commentary highlights President Trump’s inconsistent stance on tariffs, exposing a potential supply chain crisis looming within three weeks if the situation isn’t reversed. Trump’s wavering, from initially refusing to lower tariffs to suggesting significant reductions, is interpreted as a search for a convenient exit strategy from his strong trade policies. This inconsistency, coupled with dwindling cargo shipments, points toward a severe economic disruption mirroring the COVID-19 supply chain crisis.
Read More
The Trump administration and China reached a temporary agreement to reduce tariffs, scaling back levies imposed during a trade war. The U.S. will lower its tariff rate on Chinese goods from 145 percent to 30 percent, while China will reduce its rates from 125 percent to 10 percent, also suspending some retaliatory measures. This follows a period of escalating tensions and economic uncertainty, with the U.S. facing potential recession and rising inflation. Despite claims of economic success by the Trump administration, the agreement suggests a partial retreat in the face of negative economic consequences.
Read More
President Trump’s aluminum tariffs, intended to boost domestic production, have instead driven up costs for American consumers and led to smelter closures. The tariffs have increased regional delivery premiums, making aluminum significantly more expensive in the U.S. compared to Europe. This cost increase is passed on to downstream users, resulting in price hikes for products like car cargo boxes. High energy costs, exacerbated by competition from the tech sector, are the primary obstacle to reviving U.S. aluminum smelting.
Read More
Democrats are proposing a bill that would mandate retailers to clearly display the portion of a product’s price attributable to Trump-era tariffs. This initiative aims to provide consumers with greater transparency regarding the impact of these tariffs on their purchasing power. The idea is to make it undeniably clear how much more consumers are paying due to these specific trade policies.
The proposed legislation seeks to shift the burden of demonstrating the tariff’s effect directly onto retailers, forcing them to actively showcase this information on product labels or in other prominent locations. This, in theory, would make it far harder for retailers to simply absorb the added tariff cost and quietly raise their overall prices without being held accountable for the increase.… Continue reading
President Trump’s tariff policies are predicted to negatively impact the US economy, potentially causing a recession. His comments suggest an expectation of fewer, more expensive imported goods. Trump downplayed the economic consequences, using the example of children receiving fewer toys as a trivial impact. This perspective ignores the broader implications of increased prices on consumer goods and overall economic stability.
Read More
This article is protected by copyright © 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. Its use is governed by Fortune’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The FORTUNE trademark is registered in the U.S. and other countries. The site may contain affiliate links, and offers are subject to change.
Read More
Temu, a Chinese online marketplace, will cease directly selling goods from China to US customers, instead utilizing “locally based sellers” for order fulfillment within the US. This shift follows the closure of a duty-free rule for low-value packages, previously exploited by Temu and Shein to offer ultra-low prices. The decision aims to support American businesses and combat the smuggling of illegal goods, a concern raised by both the Trump and Biden administrations. This change is expected to result in price adjustments for consumers, mirroring similar actions taken or considered in the UK and European Union.
Read More
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker