Colorado artist affected by tariffs, costs are pricing out her customers
A small business in Colorado is closing its doors for good as some Chinese companies are pulling out of American markets due to tariffs.
At her home studio in Longmont, Kyra Coates has a vision, and sometimes that vision goes beyond the canvas.
"I never had dreams of becoming a fashion designer. It was one of those things I fell into and found out I was really good at it," said Coates. "I begin with the painting first, and then it ends up as an outfit."
CBS
That's the idea that's kept Coates' small business running for the last decade and brought it to the Denver Fashion Week runway last year. But that's all about to change. Following the implementation of tariffs from the White House, her main supplier from China said they'd be closing down.
Kyra Coates
"So, this dress, I sell retail for $105. Now, covering the costs and markup and everything, if I manufactured this in the United States, this would easily be a $250 dress," said Coates.
CBS
The cost is pricing out her customers, so last week, Coates decided to sell what she has left and close up shop for good.
"It's really very heartbreaking for me," Coates said tearfully. "This has been a labor of love that I've been doing for a decade, and to have to walk away from it. I had investors and I had people that were supporting me and things were looking up, and this just killed it."
The uncertainty on tariffs is not just impacting Coates' business, but those throughout Colorado, getting the governor's attention last week.
"It's, frankly, an emergency for businesses because of the tariffs," said Colorado Gov. Jared Polis.
"The high-level view of having everything manufactured in the United States is a beautiful vision, but the reality of actually making that happen is devastating," Coates said. "It's devastating to small businesses like mine."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
31 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump wants a manufacturing boom. The industry is buckling.
President Donald Trump is vowing to spark a manufacturing boom with tariffs to protect American workers and industry. So far, it's manufacturers that have borne the brunt of the pain. The president's surprise decision to raise tariffs on imported steel and aluminum to 50 percent will hit domestic manufacturing just as a new report shows the industry is already contracting. Uncertainty about where tariff rates will ultimately land — or where they'll be applied — has forced businesses to make hard decisions that could cut into both profits and hiring. And a leading trade group on Thursday called on Trump to give the companies a break on the tariffs. 'For a president who is intent on building U.S. manufacturing, the tariff strategy he's laid out is remarkably short-sighted,' said Gordon Hanson, a Harvard Kennedy School professor whose groundbreaking 2016 research work, 'The China Shock,' was among the first to sound the alarm about the threat to American industry. 'It fails to recognize what modern supply chains look like.' 'Even if you're intent on reshoring parts of manufacturing, you can't do it all,' he said. 'Steel and aluminum are part of that.' If Trump's tariffs fail to result in a manufacturing renaissance — a central focus of his presidential campaign — it could weaken the prospects of a GOP coalition that's increasingly reliant on working-class voters who supported his protectionist trade policies. But as unanticipated tariffs continue to drive up input costs for companies that need steel and aluminum for production, the warning signs emanating from manufacturers are getting louder. An index published this week by the Institute for Supply Management, which tracks manufacturing, slipped for the third straight month in May as companies made plans to scale back production. A quarterly survey conducted by the National Association of Manufacturers reported the steepest drop in optimism since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, with trade uncertainty and raw material costs cited as top concerns. Federal Reserve data this month reported weaker manufacturing output. The manufacturers' association on Thursday urged Trump to develop a 'speed pass' that would allow companies to avoid costly new duties on imported raw materials and components that are essential to U.S. producers. 'The steel and aluminum tariffs are almost custom-made to hurt American manufacturing,' said Ernie Tedeschi, a former top Biden administration economist who's now with the Yale Budget Lab. Trump and top administration officials argue that tariffs will encourage investment in domestic manufacturers, which should lead to better-paying jobs, a more resilient economy and more secure supply chains. Exports climbed in April as the president's tariffs took hold, which contributed to an eye-popping decline in the U.S. trade deficit. Indeed, the overall economy remains solid, and businesses are continuing to hire, according to Friday's jobs report for May. Despite the trade headwinds, employment in the manufacturing sector has remained steady since Trump took office. 'As the president says, if you don't make steel, you can't fight a war. He's protecting that industry and bringing it back,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Senate lawmakers this week. 'You're going to see more steel and aluminum furnaces and mills in the history of this country get built over the next three years.' The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Trump welcomed the monthly jobs report, posting on Truth Social: 'AMERICA IS HOT! SIX MONTHS AGO IT WAS COLD AS ICE! BORDER IS CLOSED, PRICES ARE DOWN. WAGES ARE UP!' Still, domestic manufacturers who rely on international supply chains for critical steel and aluminum inputs will face tough choices if they want to maintain their profits while keeping output steady. 'Higher costs are expected. Higher input prices. The question is, what do you do with those costs? How much can you pass along to the consumer? How much can you negotiate with your suppliers?' said Andrew Siciliano, a partner at KPMG who leads the consulting firm's trade and customs practice. The challenges posed by the increase in steel and aluminum tariffs are particularly acute because it's far from clear whether domestic suppliers will be able to meet the demands of domestic manufacturers. Almost half the aluminum used in the U.S. last year came from foreign sources, according to federal data, and roughly a quarter of all steel is imported. Either way, 'input costs are going to be higher,' Siciliano said. 'If they pass it on, it could affect demand. If they don't pass it on, it could affect profitability.' That isn't to say manufacturers won't benefit from tariffs in the long term. To the extent that Trump's overall tariff regime limits imports, U.S.-based industrial production could expand to address unmet demand. The Budget Lab's analysis of Trump's tariff regime — which includes the 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum — projects that manufacturing output could grow by 1.3 percent over the next five years if existing import duties are left in place. But Tedeschi cautioned that growth may exclude segments like electronic and semiconductor production — which tend to generate higher incomes for workers. Meanwhile, output in other sectors like construction or agriculture would likely contract. Julia Coronado, founder of MacroPolicy Perspectives, also said the flurry of new import duties may prompt some manufacturers to actually move their manufacturing facilities offshore rather than subject their supply chains and production processes to multiple tariffs. 'If I have to assemble a bunch of parts and inputs, why don't I just don't do that on the Canadian or Mexican side of the border and then pay the tariff on the final good?' she said. An even bigger challenge may involve finding and training workers who can staff up any facilities that reshore. Most Americans work in the service sector and, to the extent tariffs lead to reshoring, those facilities will likely rely heavily on automation, according to economists at the Bank of America Institute. Finding qualified workers in the U.S. is either too difficult or too expensive. 'Whatever manufacturing production comes back to the U.S. will require far fewer jobs than 30 or 40 years ago,' Hanson said. 'It's just the way the world has gone.'
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Who are the United States Supreme Court Justices?
Politics in the United States in recent years have surrounded the position of the president. But that has not changed the American political system. It's still all about checks and balances in the United States, which includes the judicial branch and Supreme Court. That arm of the U.S. government has nine justices seated on the bench, all of which were appointment by presidents at one point or another. Their jobs are for life and the group of nine is led by one chief justice. As of 2025, here is the full list of the nine justices in the United States Supreme Court. Date appointed: Sept. 29, 2005. Appointed by: President George W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 23 1991. Appointed by: President George H. W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Jan. 31, 2006. Appointed by: President George W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Aug. 8, 2009. Appointed by: President Barack Obama. Political affiliation: Democrat. Date appointed: Aug. 7, 2010. Appointed by: President Barack Obama. Political affiliation: Democrat. Date appointed: April 10, 2017. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 6, 2018. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 27, 2020. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: June 30, 2022. Appointed by: President Joe Biden. Political affiliation: Democrat. This article originally appeared on The List Wire: List of United States Supreme Court Justices
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Prominent lawyers join press freedom fight to thwart Paramount settlement with Trump
With new legal muscle, the nonprofit Freedom of the Press Foundation is upping pressure on Paramount Global to abandon efforts to settle President Trump's $20-billion lawsuit targeting CBS and "60 Minutes." Respected Washington litigator Abbe David Lowell this week joined the team representing the New York advocacy group, which has vowed to sue Paramount should it settle with Trump. The group owns Paramount shares. Lowell, who has represented Hunter Biden, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, is working on the case with attorney Norm Eisen, a Trump critic who helped House Democrats with strategy during Trump's first impeachment hearings in 2019. Eisen is a former ambassador to the Czech Republic who served as White House ethics advisor under President Obama. Late Thursday, the two attorneys sent a strongly worded letter to Paramount's chairwoman and controlling shareholder Shari Redstone and other board members arguing that a Trump settlement would cause "catastrophic" harm to the embattled media company. 1st Amendment experts have labeled Trump's lawsuit frivolous. But Paramount leaders are desperate to end the Trump drama and some believe a truce could clear a path for the Federal Communications Commission to approve the company's $8-billion sale to David Ellison's Skydance Media. Paramount needs the FCC to authorize the transfer of the CBS station licenses to the Ellison family. The prospect of a Trump settlement has carved deep divisions within Paramount, which includes CBS News and "60 Minutes." 'Trading away the credibility of CBS's news division to curry favor with the Trump Administration is an improper and reckless act that will irreparably damage the company's brand and destroy shareholder value," Lowell said in a statement late Thursday. "The board is legally and morally obligated to protect the company, not auction off its integrity for regulatory approval," Lowell said. Read more: Why Paramount's efforts to settle Trump's lawsuit have drawn mounting political heat The FCC review of Skydance's proposed takeover of Paramount has become a slog. Skydance and Paramount face an October deadline to finalize the sale or the deal could collapse. Paramount, in a statement, said that it is treating the FCC review and the Trump lawsuit as separate matters. "We will abide by the legal process to defend our case,' a corporate spokesman said. Paramount's lawyers entered mediation with the president's legal team in late April, but no resolution has been reached. Paramount offered $15 million to Trump to end his suit, according to the Wall Street Journal, but the president rejected the overture and asked for more. On Thursday, Redstone disclosed that she has been diagnosed with thyroid cancer and is receiving treatment. Last month, doctors removed her thyroid but cancer cells had spread to her vocal chords. Read more: Paramount chair Shari Redstone has been diagnosed with thyroid cancer In their seven-page letter, Lowell and Eisen told Paramount's leaders that, should they approve a Trump settlement to gain traction at the FCC, they would be violating their fiduciary duty to shareholders and potentially breaking federal anti-bribery statutes. "We believe [a settlement] could violate laws prohibiting bribery of public officials, thereby causing severe and last damage to Paramount and its shareholders," Lowell and Eisen wrote. "To be as clear as possible, you control what happens next," they said. The admonition follows a similar warning from three U.S. senators — Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) In a May 19 letter, the senators wrote that paying money to Trump to help win clearance for the Paramount sale could constitute a bribe. 'It is illegal to corruptly give anything of value to public officials to influence an official act,' the three senators wrote in their letter. Read more: '60 Minutes,' the Associated Press, an Iowa newspaper: Trump's attacks on the media reach new heights In addition, two California Democrats have proposed a state Senate hearing to examine problems with a possible Trump settlement. The senators invited two former CBS News executives — who both left, in large part, because of the controversy — to testify before a yet-unscheduled joint committee hearing in Sacramento. The California lawmakers, in their letter, said a Trump settlement could also violate California's Unfair Competition Law because it could disrupt the playing field for news organizations. Earlier this week, Paramount asked shareholders to increase the size of its board to seven members at the company's annual investor meeting next month. The Freedom of the Press Foundation was created in 2012 to protect and defend public interest journalism. This spring, Lowell left his former major law firm, Winston & Strawn, where he had been a partner for years. He formed his own boutique firm, Lowell & Assoc., with a focus on "public interest representation in matters that defend the integrity of the legal system and protect individuals and institutions from government overreach," according to its website. Read more: Trump, '60 Minutes' and corruption allegations put Paramount on edge with sale less certain Lowell's firm also includes lawyer Brenna Frey, who made a high-profile exit from another prominent law firm, Skadden Arps, after it cut a deal with Trump to avoid becoming a target. That law firm agreed to provide $100 million in free legal services. Last month, Frey appeared on CBS' "60 Minutes" to air her decision to resign from Skadden Arps. 'I was able to tell my story on CBS's '60 Minutes' because of the independence of a courageous news division, which is what's at risk now," Frey said in a statement. Sign up for our Wide Shot newsletter to get the latest entertainment business news, analysis and insights. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
