Trump's tariff tally: $34 billion and counting, global companies say
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
President Donald Trump's trade war has cost companies more than $34 billion in lost sales and higher costs, according to a Reuters analysis of corporate disclosures, a toll that is expected to rise as ongoing uncertainty over tariffs paralyzes decision making at some of the world's largest companies.Across the United States, Asia and Europe, companies including Apple, Ford, Porsche and Sony have pulled or slashed their profit forecasts, and an overwhelming majority say the erratic nature of Trump's trade policies has made it impossible to accurately estimate costs. Reuters reviewed company statements, regulatory filings, conference and media call transcripts to pull together for the first time a snapshot of the tariff cost so far for global businesses.The $33 billion is a sum of estimates from 32 companies in the S&P 500, three companies from Europe's STOXX 600 and 21 companies in Japan's Nikkei 225 indices. Economists say the cost to businesses will likely be multiple times what companies have so far disclosed."You can double or triple your tally and we'd still say ... the magnitude is bound to be far greater than most people realize," said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, professor at the Yale School of Management.The ripple effects could be worse, he added, citing the potential for lower spending from consumers and businesses, higher inflation expectations. While a recent pause in Sino-US trade hostilities has offered some relief and Trump has backed down from tariff threats against Europe, it is still not clear what the final trade deals will look like. A U.S. trade court on Wednesday blocked Trump's tariffs from going into effect. In this environment, strategists say companies will look to strengthen supply chains, boost near-shoring efforts, and prioritize new markets - all of which will push up costs. Companies themselves are uncertain about the final cost. As the corporate earnings season draws to a close, Reuters found at least 42 companies have cut their forecasts and 16 have withdrawn or suspended their guidance. For instance, earlier this month, Walmart declined to provide a quarterly profit forecast and said it would raise prices, drawing a rebuke from Trump. Volvo Cars, one of the European automakers most exposed to U.S. tariffs, withdrew its earnings forecast for the next two years and United Airlines gave two different forecasts, saying it was impossible to predict the macro environment this year.Trump has argued that tariffs will cut America's trade deficit and prompt companies to move operations to the country, bringing jobs back home. Tariffs will also force countries including Mexico to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs into the United States, Trump has said."The Administration has consistently maintained that the United States ... has the leverage to make our trading partners ultimately bear the cost of tariffs," said White House spokesperson Kush Desai.TARIFF TALK On earnings conference calls for the January to March quarter, 360 companies, or 72%, in the S&P 500 index mentioned tariffs, up from 150 companies, or 30%, in the previous quarter. Executives at 219 companies listed on the STOXX 600 mentioned tariffs, compared with 161 in the prior quarter. Of the Nikkei 225 companies in Japan, that number was 58, up from 12 earlier. "I don't think corporations have an awful lot of visibility about anything in the future," said Rich Bernstein, CEO of Richard Bernstein Advisors in New York. Referring to withdrawn forecasts, he said, "If you take into account this uncertain world and you can't guide anybody to a number, it's safer not to guide."Wall Street is expecting net profit for companies in the S&P 500 index to grow at an average 5.1% per quarter through April through December, versus a growth rate of 11.7% a year earlier, according to data compiled by LSEG.Automakers, airlines and consumer goods importers have been among the worst hit. Levies on raw material costs and parts including aluminum and electronics have risen, and tariffs on multiple countries are making assembling cars more expensive because of far-flung supply chains. Moving any production to the United States will also raise labor costs. Kleenex tissue maker Kimberly Clark slashed its annual profit forecast last month and said it would incur about $300 million in costs this year as tariffs push up its supply-chain costs. A few days later the company said it would invest $2 billion over five years to expand its manufacturing capacity in the U.S., a number not included in the Reuters tally. Companies including Apple and Eli Lilly have this year announced investments in the United States. Johnnie Walker whiskey and Don Julio tequila maker Diageo said earlier this month it would cut $500 million in costs and make substantial asset disposals by 2028, as a 10% tariff on imports from places like Britain and the European Union is expected to deal a $150 million hit to its operating profit every year."Tariffs could significantly drive up the cost of a nice night out - or even a cozy night in," said Zak Stambor, analyst with eMarketer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
28 minutes ago
- United News of India
Trump files appeal to SC over federal mass firings
Washington, June 3 (UNI) The U.S. Trump administration has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the federal court's injunction that had prevented federal agencies from carrying out large-scale workforce reductions and reorganizations. In the appeal, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer argued that "controlling the personnel of federal agencies lies at the heartland" of the president's authority, and "the Constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing, and the president does not need special permission from Congress to exercise" his core constitutional powers. On May 30, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected the Trump administration's appeal, upholding the temporary injunction issued earlier by Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The injunction barred federal agencies and the Office of Management and Budget from moving forward with broad-scale layoffs and structural reorganizations. The Ninth Circuit held that implementing extensive layoffs and reorganizations would seriously impair many areas, including the national food safety system and veterans' healthcare, and therefore such actions should be suspended while the litigation proceeds. On May 9, Illston issued a two-week temporary injunction requiring federal agencies to halt enforcement of the administrative order signed by President Donald Trump in February, as well as the subsequent memorandum issued by the Office of Management and Budget. She also ordered agencies to rescind any layoff notices issued under the president's order, to reinstate positions for employees placed on administrative leave, and to provide appropriate compensation. In her ruling, Illston stated that the president must obtain congressional approval in order to reform federal agencies. Agencies may not undertake mass reorganizations or layoffs without authorization from Congress. On May 22, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California further ruled to extend the injunction indefinitely. The Department of Justice filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit the following day. UNI XC GNK
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
Kotler vs Sharp Debate: How do brands really grow?
HighlightsPhilip Kotler, regarded as the Father of Modern Marketing, emphasised the importance of understanding customer needs and creating value beyond just price and distribution. Byron Sharp, through his concept of 'mental availability', argues that brands must not only be physically accessible but also easily recalled by consumers in buying situations to drive growth. The article concludes that building customer loyalty requires consistent product quality and emotional connection, alongside strategies for increasing brand penetration. A Toast to the Living Legends of Marketing! In this series, I discuss the work of some of the key marketing thinkers in the context of my own experience of working with love-mark and emergent brands. In the first write-up, I share my 'S.C.H.O.O.L' of thought taking on fundamental insights from Kotler & Sharp and find harmony and progression vs. conflicting ideologies (perhaps because I've been using both for years now)!! The Birth of Modern Marketing For decades, Philip Kotler , now 93 years, has been regarded as the Father of Modern Marketing. He was the Distinguished Professor of Marketing at Kellogg's School of Management, and he wrote over 80 books that contributed to fundamentals of marketing. This famous quote below is perhaps why I found a career in marketing and consumer insights so compelling and rewarding. At the heart of his teachings, Kotler advocated a greater focus on meeting customers' needs and on communicating the benefits received from a product or service beyond just price and distribution. He also broadened the concept of marketing from selling to the art of communication and value creation and how it can be applied to charities, political parties and other non-commercial situations. None of us can potentially dispute these contributions which have stood the test of times. Today, all organizations, decode the sentiments of their 'consumer base', build their policies and market their brands based on these principles. Premium brands like Apple outsell cheaper alternatives by solving for consumer needs around design and functionality but also deeper image and lifestyle desires. A clear case of needs and benefits building over the price and distribution mindset of utilitarian theories of economics, of his time. Why then the outcry and claims that Kolter's theories may not be relevant for the modern world? New Insights based on Empirical Evidence Many of the debates around Kotler's work can often be directly linked to the work of another Marketing thinker of our times, Professor Byron Sharp, who is a Professor of Marketing Science and Director of the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute – the world's largest centre for research into marketing. His book "How Brands Grow: what marketers don't know " has been called one of the most influential marketing books of the past decade (Warc, 2015). In his first book, he made a rather scathing attack on how brands are so often mismanaged using brand voodoo and evidence-free claims that people 'love' brands, are 'loyal' to a brand or want to have 'relationships' with brands (and as intended it received a lot of attention!). In my personal view, the tone and messaging of Part 2 is more balanced and insightful on how to grow brands. Let's discuss 2 foundational frameworks or 'laws' as from Prof Byron. Grow your brand by being available While marketers highlighted awareness' as a first step to brand-building; Byron's work takes the concept further and talks of salience as a mix of physical presence and 'mental availability'. Physical availability is about being easy to buy; wide distribution, easy accessibility, and presence in the right places at the right time. Mental availability on the other hand is the ease with which a brand comes to mind in buying situations. In this concept, Byron pointed out that it's not just enough to build generic awareness—rather building situational salience is key. Your brand must be top of mind in contexts that the consumers think of buying your category (for example soft drinks try to build associations with spicy and fried food or hot weather because of high fitment to consumption in these occasions). Further, the brands assets must be distinctive and help the consumer recall the brand in that moment of decision-making. These could be logos, colours, taglines, jingles. For example, ' kuchh meetha ho jaaye ' helps one think of Cadbury as a choice when thinking of indulging in a sweet. Jingles like ' Amul doodh peeta hain India ' or ' Hamara Bajaj ' are deeply embedded in the consumer psyche or how some brand logos like the Mc Donalds Arch, the Nike Swoosh help consumers remember the brand instantly. These are not just logos or sounds—they're shortcuts to the brand's meaning. These elements do the heavy lifting of memory encoding in buying situations. A good case study from recent times is DOMS that competed with established players like Nataraj, Apsara, Camlin but succeeded by crafting mental availability through its own distinctive branding, fun and user-friendly packaging that made it a favourite with its key target audience – the kids. It also built a strong presence in both local stores and modern retail. The result: a brand that punched above its weight. The insight? Great brands don't just rely on being seen or bought ; they build distinctive brand assets that consumers recall and find easily. Penetration being key to growth One of the most important frameworks by Byron was what he describes as the Law of Double Jeopardy. This law states that brands with less market share have so because they have far fewer buyers (first jeopardy), and these buyers are slightly less brand loyal (second jeopardy). Data Source: How Brands Grow Part 2, Sharp and Romaniuk Start-ups and brand builders love Byron Sharp for providing this clarity on where the focus needs to lie especially in the early stages of brand-building. There is no denying the need to focus on gaining penetration and customers experiencing your brand to 'start' to grow the brand. However, how do brands gain penetration and is it possible just via distinctive assets? A lot of people use Byron's work to jump to the conclusion that performance marketing is the answer to all problems. Indeed, performance marketing is a great tool, especially given the ability to slice and dice audiences and 'acquire customers' from Google or Meta – options that didn't exist in the mass advertisement world of Kotler. However, lets pause to think about today's love marks – not just Apple, Nike, Coke, but even more home-grown brands which have scaled -Boat, Mamaearth, Minimalist, Swiggy, Zomato, Lenskart.... how did they grow? Did they only focus on paid customer acquisition as a strategy to grow penetration? Eventually significant gain in penetration for any brand is only possible by servicing Expanding to newer geographies for solving same set of consumer needs. Growing relevance of existing products to a larger set of consumers by growing relevance to newer occasions or use-cases. Launching product innovations that allow you to address newer cohorts. Sometime back we were consulting a health tech start-up providing diabetes solutions and in our consumer research found that all consumers inundated by multiple 'solutions' (as they would have searched content on diabetes) on and just like we block any calls that look like spam, they had 'mentally blocked' such messages even as they were being physically delivered to the audience. How then can one break-through? In another case, we worked with an ecommerce app which saw growth marketing ROI falling and realized the need to sharpen their understanding of their target audience and their proposition to make these efforts impactful. In both cases, the way to drive 'mental availability' or relevance was built on a thorough understanding of consumer's psyche'; their barriers and motivations, their decision-making context - which in turn helped sharpen both the performance marketing messaging and branding strategy. In his book, Byron references to Category Entry Points, as the means to build mental availability, (which sound exactly like the 6Ws framework we have been using for a long time) and originally attributed to Professor O.C. Ferrell, Professor of Marketing at New Mexico. Love V/s Loyalty Just recently, we were speaking to the marketing director of the leading restaurant chain of India, and how their ability to drive customer loyalty and retarget their customers was one of their key strengths vs competitors, especially in a crowded market where customers are always seeking new experiences. Hence, there is perhaps another way to decode the same data shared by Byron on penetration and frequency: brands that grow meaningfully over time are those that crack both penetration and frequency! Wouldn't it be impossible to drive penetration beyond a certain level without delighting existing customers and providing the best-in-class product experience? For example, a brand like Lays continues to attract new customers and gain repeat consumption in a crowded snacking category in India with many strong brands like Haldiram, Bingo because of its superior taste and consistent quality that consumers experience each time. Retention is of course much harder to drive than acquisition. Loyalty isn't something that can be bought with discounts or fleeting media impressions—it can only be built through consistent product quality, great experiences, emotional resonance and 'rewards' for loyalty. In conclusion, Byron's work builds on the work of giants before him. Especially in the current era of emotionally distracted viewers, inundated with more media clutter and multiple choices, loyalty is harder to build and efforts to build penetration are critical to grow. However, even as per Byron's work: to grow penetration, one must decode the key category entry points and own these key associations. So, in summary, my 'S.C.H.O.O.L' of thought building on the work of these learned gentlemen!!S: Don't just build generic awareness; build situational salience. C: Cut through the clutter with memorable and distinct brand assets.H: Heighten the ROI of customer acquisition by hitting consumer's underlying triggers and barriers.O: Own key contextual associations most hardwired to your category's consumptionO: Don't make the mistake of overlooking existing customer's and your actual product experience.L: Latch-on and reward loyalty when you can find it 😊!
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
US-India trade deal expected 'in not too distant future', says US commerce secretary Lutnick
US Commerce Secretary Lutnick US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick said that a trade deal between New Delhi and Washington could be finalised soon. Addressing the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum in Washington, Lutnick said that US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi's relationship is very strong and very positive, and so it gives an easy path to do the trade negotiations. He said, "Earlier countries get a better deal. That's the way it is. So those who come in, you know, July 4th to July 9th, there's just going to be a pile. I think India is trying hard to be one of the earlier countries, which I appreciate. But these, these kind of deals used to take two or three years, and we're trying to get them done in a month, which is, you know, just not the ordinary DNA of trading relationships between countries. But what I hope to achieve is we would like market access, we would like our businesses to have reasonable access to the markets of India." "I think if you have the right person on the other side, and what happens is, if they put a normal trade minister, it's an endless set of talking and no outcome, because they're used to saying, this kind of deal will take three years, let's get. We'll get this done in two years. And that's not really fun for me. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like One of the Most Successful Investors of All Time, Warren Buffett, Recommends: 5 Books for Turning... Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Click Here Undo So the idea is when they put the right person and India put the right person on the other side of the table, and we've managed, I think, to be in a very, very good place. And you should expect a deal between the United States and India in the not too distant future, because I think we found a place that really works for both countries," he added. He also said that the president is willing to call out things straight away, meaning India is very protectionist with tariffs. At the summit, the US commerce secretary said that the President thinks America first, but Trump does not think America only or America exclusively. "First, he's got to take care of home, so we're big and strong. But then he's going to take care of his allies. He's going to make sure he takes care of India, who he deeply, deeply admires and respects, and we are going to have a great, great relationship together," he said. India-US trade deal talks In the ongoing trade negotiations, India seeks complete relief from the 26 per cent reciprocal duty imposed on its domestic products. India and the US have established a target to finalise the initial phase of the suggested BTA before autumn (September-October) this year. India seeks to negotiate duty reductions in the proposed agreement with America, focusing on sectors that employ a significant workforce, including textiles, gems and jewellery, leather products, garments, plastics, chemicals, shrimp, oil seeds, chemicals, grapes and bananas. The United States, in return, is requesting tariff reductions across various sectors, including industrial products, automobiles (particularly electric vehicles), wines, petrochemical items, dairy products and agricultural goods such as apples, tree nuts and GM (genetically modified) crops. India maintains strict regulatory standards regarding GM crop imports from the US, making their entry unfeasible. However, New Delhi remains receptive to importing non-GM products, including Alpha alpha hay, which serves as cattle feed. The United States maintained its position as India's main trading partner for the fourth straight year in 2024-25, with two-way trade reaching $131.84 billion. The US constitutes approximately 18 per cent of India's overall goods exports, 6.22 per cent in imports, and 10.73 per cent of the nation's total merchandise trade. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
