Tariff impact on grocery prices muted so far, Circana reports
This story was originally published on Grocery Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Grocery Dive newsletter.
Tariffs have yet to make a noticeable impact on retail grocery prices this year, with inflation in the sector in 2025 driven primarily by supply constraints unrelated to levies on imports, according to a May 30 report from Circana.
Food and beverage prices were up 2.9% on a year-over-year basis as of the end of the week of May 18, Circana reported. Prices were up 1.7% in 2024.
Price increases this year have mostly stemmed from tight supplies of eggs, meat, coffee and cocoa, with coffee costs still going up even as prices for the other categories have stabilized, Circana said.
The Trump administration announced a broad array of tariffs shortly after taking office, but temporarily paused many of the levies. U.S. officials have indicated that they intend to reinstate tariffs on imports from countries the government is unable to hammer out trade deals with during the pause.
The United States Court of International Trade last month issued an injunction blocking many of the executive orders that authorized the tariffs, but the ruling was put on hold by a federal appeals court.
While tariffs have not played a meaningful role in pushing up food and beverage prices in recent months, Circana noted that certain categories, including seafood, produce, alcohol and baking ingredients, are more susceptible to potential cost increases than others due to their high reliance on imports. By contrast, items such as dairy products, most meats, shelf-stable breakfast foods and frozen meals depend more heavily on domestic supply chains, making them less susceptible to potential tariff-related impacts, Circana noted.
Food and beverage volumes were off by about half a percent in May after growing slightly during the first quarter and the final three months of 2024, Circana said, attributing the decline to cooler weather, relatively weak consumer sentiment and reduced demand following strong Easter sales. Circana said it expects volumes for the sector to grow slightly as 2025 continues.
Recommended Reading
Grocers need to do a better job of explaining prices, shoppers say
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ditched by Trump's EEOC, job applicant advances bias lawsuit against Sheetz
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. A Black job applicant who alleged that gas station chain Sheetz disproportionately screened out Black, Native American, Alaskan Native and multiracial applicants moved to continue his case June 5 after the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission abandoned it. EEOC filed a class-action lawsuit in April 2024 alleging that Sheetz maintained a longstanding practice of screening all job applicants for past criminal convictions and rejected those with such records. This practice violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, EEOC said in a press release, because it had a disparate impact on applicants of certain racial backgrounds. However, the agency moved to have the case dismissed last week because it determined that the disparate-impact claims would conflict with President Donald Trump's April 23 executive order directing agencies to cease enforcement of such claims. EEOC asked the court to defer dismissal of its claims by 60 days to allow the commission to notify class members so that they could obtain private representation. The legality of Trump's executive order on disparate-impact claims proved contentious, with one of EEOC's own administrative judges calling the order 'highly illegal.' But the June 5 filing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania is one of the first examples in which the order has been put into practice. Trump said the end of disparate-impact liability enforcement was necessary because it inhibited businesses from hiring applicants on the basis of merit and skill. He also said that disparate-impact liability is unconstitutional and 'threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream.' The push to end disparate-impact liability is one of the goals stated by the conservative Heritage Foundation in its 'Project 2025' presidential transition document. The organization wrote that the concept should be thrown out because under disparate-impact theory, 'discriminatory motive or intent is irrelevant; the outcome is what matters. But all workplaces have disparities.' That logic has been met with resistance by former Democratic officials of the U.S. Department of Labor and EEOC, who said in May that disparate-impact liability is explicitly outlawed under Title VII and has been upheld by U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The former officials cautioned employers that they should avoid following Trump's executive order so they do not violate federal laws. 'Disparate impact liability is a necessary element of advancing equal opportunity for all, consistent with America's national commitment to equal justice,' the officials wrote. In a press release, plaintiff-side firm Outten & Golden, which is partly representing the job applicant in the Sheetz case, said EEOC had spent nearly a decade investigating the claims at issue and had found a basis to allege evidence of systemic discrimination. 'Our client has a right to be judged on his qualifications, and not to be denied a livelihood by policies that exclude people with stale convictions that are unrelated to the job,' said Ben Geffen, senior attorney at the Public Interest Law Center and a co-representative for the plaintiff, said in the press release. 'When the government steps back, we step in. We will not allow political interference to wipe out hard-won legal protections.' A similar dynamic played out following EEOC's abandonment of several lawsuits it filed on behalf of transgender workers alleging discrimination following an executive order from Trump. Advocacy groups have since filed to intervene on behalf of plaintiffs in those cases. Recommended Reading Shell Oil did not discriminate in hiring decision, 5th Cir. says
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cybertruck Sales Are So Bad That We Gasped
There's little left for us to say that can further embarrass the Tesla Cybertruck, a vehicle that was supposed to be the culmination of Elon Musk's genius. And maybe this is what Musk's genius looks like. The luckless EV has faced eight recalls so far, and its trademark stainless steel panels, when they aren't flying off, have demonstrated that they're better at serving as a shiny canvas for spray paint than as the armor of an "apocalypse-proof" tank. But somehow, its already dire sales are now even worse than expected. In the entire first quarter of 2025, Tesla has managed to sell just 7,100 Cybertrucks in the US, according to registration data from S&P Global Mobility cited by the Wall Street Journal. It's an astounding and rapid plummet, when in the fourth quarter of 2024, Tesla sold close to double that amount, with roughly 13,000 Cybertrucks. A lot changed between those two quarters — like Musk embarking on a spectacular speedrun to destroy his and Tesla's image, mainly by leading the Trump administration's charge to gut the federal government. These actions, and Musk's personal espousing of far-right politics, sparked worldwide protests against him and his automaker. It has yet to recover, with Tesla's total sales in the US dropping nine percent in the first three months of this year. There are other factors at play, too, like the success of its Chinese competitors and its aging vehicle lineup, but the imploded brand reputation looms largest. And more than any other of its vehicles, the Cybertruck for one reason or another has embodied the public's souring sentiment on Musk, becoming prime targets for vandalism. They're also notoriously unreliable, sold for nothing less than $100,000 before cheaper $70,000 versions were desperately rolled out, and launched with a range over 150 miles shorter than what Musk promised. In all of 2024, the company sold fewer than 40,000 Cybertrucks. The most recent quarter's tally makes Musk previous boast that the automaker would sell up to half a million Cybertrucks per year even more ridiculous. Is it any wonder that buyers are staying away? So few people want to buy these things that in May Electrek reported that Tesla was sitting on an inventory worth $800 million of 10,000 unsold Cybertrucks — an embarrassment as much as it is a logistical headache. Dealerships have resorted to dumping their glut of the unorthodox pickup trucks in deserted parking lots. The pain isn't likely to stop anytime soon. Trump's tariffs, which factored into Musk's fallout with the president, will drive up the costs of car parts. The administration also plans to axe tax credits for purchasing EVs, demolishing a huge incentive for American consumers to buy from automakers like Tesla. More on Tesla: Terrifying Footage Shows Self-Driving Tesla Get Confused by the Sun, Mow Down Innocent Grandmother Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Utah lawmakers oppose AI regulation in Trump's ‘Big, beautiful bill'
SALT LAKE CITY () — Utah Lawmakers have signed a letter opposing specific measures related to artificial intelligence in President Donald Trump's In a letter addressed to Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Senator John Curtis (R-Utah), state lawmakers say they are 'concerned with the proposed ten-year moratorium on state-level artificial intelligence regulation.' According to , initially the bill was and block dozens of states from enforcing preexisting AI regulations and oversight structures in any way. But on June 5, the Senate Commerce Committee altered the text on the bill. The new version would only require states not to regulate AI if they want access to federal broadband funding. The bill allocates $500 million over the next 10 years to modernize government systems with the help of AI and automation technologies. In a letter signed by nearly 50 lawmakers including House Speaker Mike Schultz (R-Hooper) and Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore (R-Draper), they claim the provision would hinder Utah's nationally recognized efforts 'to strike the right balance between innovation and consumer protection.' They add that since Utah to establish an Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy, followed by the launch of an AI learning Lab, Lawmakers say these initiatives 'allow Utah to encourage responsible AI development, empower industry leaders and shield consumers from real-world harms, all without stifling innovation.' According to , a centerpiece of the legislation is making the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent — which nonpartisan scorers and think tanks estimate would cost trillions of dollars over the next decade. Utah taxpayers may take a hit if 2017 cuts expire The bill also includes a proposal that would raise the cap for the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, which would allow taxpayers — especially those in higher-tax blue states — to deduct more of their regional taxes from their federal tax bill. The bill also has major reforms to Medicaid, estimated to lead to millions of people losing coverage by 2034. Trump is pushing Congress, where Republicans have majority control, to send the final product to his desk to become law by the Fourth of July. RSL hoping to make a run in second half of season Utah lawmakers oppose AI regulation in Trump's 'Big, beautiful bill' 'Somebody has to stop it:' Gov. Cox defends Trump's decision to deploy troops to LA 'We're living in the dumbest timeline' — Gov. Cox comments on SLC Sego pride flags Calif. governor asks court to block Trump administration from using troops in immigration raids Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
