Target's latest change to its shopping policy is sure to be unpopular
From boycotts to tariffs, it's fair to say Target has had a rough year so far, and now customers may not be happy with this change to a favorite shopping perk.
Starting on July 28, the mega-retailer is altering its price match policy, which for nearly a decade, gave customers a refund if they bought an item at Target and found the identical item for less at either 'Target.com, Amazon, Walmart, or with Target Circle' within two weeks of the purchase. Customers who request and receive the price match get the difference between what they paid and what the item cost elsewhere.
Going forward, the new policy will only apply to the same item bought from another Target store or the Target website, not from a competitor retailer.
How can I request a price match from Target?
To make use of the current price match policy before it ends, or to request a price match with items from other Target stores or the website for in-store purchases, customers must provide proof of the lower price to Guest Services at their local Target store.
For Target.com or Target app purchases, call Guest Services at 1-800-591-3869.
Target by the numbers
As Fast Company reported, after explosive sales growth in 2021 and 2022, the mega-retailer has been flatlining. In 2023, net sales dropped $1.7 billion, or 1.6%, and declined again in 2024, though comparative year-to-year sales were up about 1% (2023 was a 53-week year).
In May, Target reported first quarter earnings, including net sales of $23.8 billion compared with $24.5 billion in 2024. The company cut its annual sales projections and said it expects a low-single-digit decline for 2025, after projecting a 1% increase for sales in March.
Target has a current market capitalization of $48.34 billion.
The super-early-rate deadline for Fast Company's Most Innovative Companies Awards is this Friday, July 25, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply today.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
After successful Big Ten debut, UCLA has designs on something even bigger
It's a chaotic time in college sports, the rules seeming to change daily and some athletes making nearly as much money as their coaches. At UCLA, the revenue-sharing era officially starts Friday. Athletes will undoubtedly keep refreshing their PayPal accounts to check for that first payment from the pot of $20.5 million that will be distributed in the first year. Meanwhile, Bruins athletic director Martin Jarmond will be keeping tabs on another bottom line — following up a successful Big Ten debut with something far bigger. Having tallied 10 conference championships between the Big Ten and Mountain Pacific Sports Federation — more than any other Big Ten school — UCLA could be poised for a breakthrough in its two marquee sports as part of a potentially historic year across the board for its athletic department. The football team landed transfer Nico Iamaleava from Tennessee and the men's basketball team brought in Donovan Dent from New Mexico, giving UCLA perhaps its best quarterback-point guard combination since Josh Rosen and Lonzo Ball nearly a decade ago. 'If you look at our athletic program,' Jarmond, who recently completed his fifth year on the job, told The Times, 'there's an energy and buzz that I feel we haven't had since I've been here, and that's why I'm most positive now.' At a recent player-run practice on campus, Jarmond watched Iamaleava step up in the pocket and fire a 50-yard pass down the sideline to wide receiver Kwazi Gilmer. 'Nico made a play that I don't know how many other guys in the country could make,' Jarmond said, 'and I was like, 'whoa.' Like, that's pretty cool, you know?' There's lots of intrigue to behold in Westwood these days. Fresh off a Final Four run, the women's basketball team bolstered itself with the additions of sharpshooter Gianna Kneepkens, a highly coveted transfer from Utah, and freshman Sienna Betts, the younger sister of All-America center Lauren Betts. Oh, and don't forget that softball slugger Megan Grant will make Pauley Pavilion a second home as part of her bid to become a two-sport standout. Grant will also once again combine with Jordan Woolery as perhaps the nation's top-hitting duo in their bid to help the softball team not only make it back to the Women's College World Series but win the whole thing this time. The baseball team that just made the College World Series is bringing back shortstop Roch Cholowsky, the probable No. 1 pick in the 2026 Major League Baseball draft, and recently learned that high school pitcher Angel Cervantes will play for the Bruins next season instead of the Pittsburgh Pirates after contract negotiations ended with the recent draftee. Jarmond said he was confident the team could continue to play at Jackie Robinson Stadium in 2026 after a judge issued a stay of legal proceedings that threatened to force the Bruins to go elsewhere. The men's water polo team will try to defend its national championship with Ryder Dodd trying to top a season in which the freshman scored a MPSF-record 102 goals. After finishing as runner-up to national champion Oklahoma, the women's gymnastics team will welcome a top recruiting class plus the return of two-time Olympic medalist Jordan Chiles. Jarmond said he appreciates working for a university administration that understands the importance of supporting a strong Olympic sports program, particularly with the 2028 Summer Olympics headed to Los Angeles. 'This is the time to continue to invest in our Olympic sports and make sure that we have the excellence that UCLA is known for,' Jarmond said, 'and we're going to uphold that tradition.' Unlike other schools that have imposed student fees to help offset rising athletic department costs upon the onset of revenue sharing, UCLA officials have not discussed such a move, Jarmond said. The Bruins will instead focus on revenue generation through fundraising, ticket sales, sponsorships and new creative endeavors. The school plans to partner with an outside firm to help its athletes with content creation to boost their social media following, making them more attractive to brands that could hire them for name, image and likeness deals. Jarmond said he's not aware of any NIL deals involving UCLA athletes being rejected by the new College Sports Commission, though there remains a backlog of deals under review. Deals of $600 or more are evaluated by a clearinghouse called NIL Go to ensure they represent fair market value and a legitimate business purpose. The role of collectives in offering additional compensation to athletes beyond revenue sharing continues to evolve as part of a shift away from what was previously considered a hard cap on earnings. 'I'm optimistic that it's going to work out,' Jarmond said of maximizing earnings opportunities for athletes. 'I'm optimistic that we will adapt to whatever situation that presents itself based on hard cap, soft cap, whatever cap.' UCLA is also strengthening the infrastructure of its men's and women's basketball teams with the hiring of an assistant general manager for each sport to help with recruiting and navigating the transfer portal. When it comes to revenue sharing payments, Jarmond said he's leaving it up to coaches to dictate how much each player makes. Football coach DeShaun Foster said he divvied up his team's money based on talent, with general manager Khary Darlington and assistant general manager Steven Price assigning values for each player based on previous NFL front office experience dealing with salary structures. 'They loved that we had people explaining to them how you're getting this money or why you're not getting this money,' Foster said of his players, 'and I think that resonated with them.' Across all sports, the Bruins are seeking a strong encore after an initial Big Ten season that saw the school place fifth in the Learfield Director's Cup standings, its best finish since 2018. UCLA athletes posted what Jarmond called a 'phenomenal' 3.22 grade-point average through winter quarter (the latest for which figures are available) despite the travel challenges presented by playing in a coast-to-coast conference. For UCLA athletics to reach the heights that Jarmond wants, its football and men's basketball teams must win big, and he believes the coaches and influx of talent on each of those teams will give them a chance to do so next season. Iamaleava's arrival has generated heightened excitement about a football team that went 5-7 in Foster's debut season. Jarmond said two recruits he met with on their campus visits mentioned the quarterback as one of the reasons they wanted to come to UCLA. 'You know, we just have more interest and buzz, and it's cool,' Jarmond said. 'I think DeShaun has created that, and Nico and the guys.' What excites Jarmond most is the potential to be on a victory lap that's picking up speed. 'This is a great time for UCLA athletics,' Jarmond said, 'and I feel like it's just the beginning.'
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Congress should eliminate all energy subsidies, not just for renewables
Congress voted to pass a massive budget package that, among other things, drastically cuts clean energy tax credits to reduce federal spending. Claiming victory, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law on July 4. Indeed, taxpayer dollars subsidizing any special industry can play havoc with the intelligence and efficiency of the free market system. That said, the obvious question is this: Why only the renewable subsidies? Why were fossil fuel subsidies not also eliminated? Lowering the tax burden from fossil fuel subsidies would have offered substantial savings to our federal budget. The U.S. government funnels $10 billion to $15 billion per year to the industry through tax breaks, direct spending (federal programs and infrastructure support), and below-market leases on public lands. Such preferential treatment is sometimes called 'corporate welfare.' Taxpayers actually pay twice for these subsidies, because we also foot the bill for rising costs of localized pollution and climate impacts resulting from increased greenhouse emissions. These federal subsidies benefit profitable oil, gas, and coal companies at taxpayer expense. But instead, the budget bill added a new stack of subsidies for the oil and gas industry. For example, it rolled back royalty fees for extraction on public lands to 1920 rates. It added a new tax credit for intangible drilling and development costs. It increased the value of existing tax credits for use of carbon dioxide to boost extraction. It stalled implementation of a pollution fee on wasted methane flared or vented from oil wells. It also added noncompetitive leasing rules that can offer energy companies bargain-basement prices. The bill also gave the coal industry new subsidies, slashing royalty payments on public lands from 12.5 percent to a maximum of 7 percent for all existing and future leases. There is also a new 2.5 percent tax break for extraction of metallurgic coal, which is hard to justify from an 'America First' perspective. Almost all metallurgic coal mined in the U.S., after all, is exported, primarily to China and India, where it is used to manufacture carbon-intensive steel that out-competes cleaner U.S. steel on the global market. Pollution reduction results in healthier communities and fewer health and disaster costs. There is a fundamental contradiction in providing financial support to companies that are not held financially responsible for the damaging consequences of what they produce, even while eliminating support for clean energy sources like solar and wind. A case can be made that all energy subsidies — whether for fossil fuels, nuclear, or renewables—should be eliminated in the U.S. to create a truly competitive, transparent, and market-driven energy sector. Subsidies distort pricing, shield inefficient technologies from natural market pressures, and lead to inefficient allocation of public funds. While initially helpful in developing emerging industries, long-term subsidies can lock in political favoritism, suppress innovation, and over-burden taxpayers. Removal of subsidies forces energy producers to compete on a level playing field, where cost, efficiency, and sustainability — not government handouts — determine success. This approach would not only save billions in federal spending but also encourage more cost-effective energy solutions driven by actual demand and performance. Uneven standards, where government energy subsidies are granted to some, such as fossil fuels, and not to others, such as clean energy, result in higher energy costs for consumers. If we stop subsidizing America's richest energy companies and oldest industries, we could lower the deficit without cutting essential services and free up more funds for public investment. We need smarter policy that results in fairer energy markets and global energy leadership. Eliminating subsidies is often economically rational but politically difficult, but our individual action can play a meaningful role in shifting political momentum, especially when it is sustained and collective. Congress can still, and should, phase out all energy subsidies, not just the current clean energy cuts.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US LNG producers soar as EU agrees to $250 billion in annual purchases
(Reuters) -Shares of U.S. liquefied natural gas developers surged in premarket trading on Monday, after the European Union pledged to purchase $750 billion worth of the super-cooled fuel over the next three years as part of a sweeping trade pact. NextDecade, Venture Global, and Cheniere Energy jumped between 7% and 8.8%, with the deal bolstering the prospects for American LNG exporters as they expand to meet growing demand for cleaner-burning fuels. The EU, seeking to phase out its dependence on Russian gas, committed to buying $250 billion annually in U.S. LNG as part of the framework trade agreement unveiled on Sunday. The U.S. became the world's biggest LNG supplier in 2023, surpassing Australia and Qatar, as surging global prices fed demand for more exports, due in part to supply disruptions and sanctions linked to Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The agreement imposes a 15% U.S. import tariff on most EU goods, a softer blow than markets had feared. "Terms of the EU-U.S. trade deal were at the forefront, with the 15% tariff level better than feared (30% was mooted previously)," said Ashley Kelty, an analyst at Panmure Liberum. "This should see less of a drag on industrial activity between the two." Still, Kelty noted the deal could weigh on gas prices. "The demand for the EU to buy more U.S. energy will see more U.S. LNG imports in the future," Kelty said, signalling a potential supply glut. Shares of U.S. natural gas producers Expand Energy and EQT Corp were up 1.6% and 3%, respectively, before the bell. 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
