Trump tariffs set to collide with back-to-school shopping
The worst impacts of President Trump's tariffs could hit just in time for back-to-school shopping.
Whether or not Trump reaches new deals with China and other trading partners, spikes in prices are already affecting clothing, electronics and other classroom essentials, and the deepest cuts could be mere weeks away.
Parents' back-to-school habits are already changing, and businesses are stressing about the effects to their bottom line, with major family retailers including Walmart and Target sending up warning signs to consumers.
Shoppers might try to step up their purchases to avoid an end-of-summer hammer fall, echoing earlier advance work from the stores themselves.
'A lot of retailers tried to get ahead of tariffs and brought product in earlier. They front-loaded to try to protect themselves and consumers,' said Jonathan Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy at the National Retail Federation, adding many retailers also canceled product orders during the period when tariffs for China were over 100 percent.
After Trump's agreement with China for a 90-day pause in the largest tariffs, stores are looking to increase their orders again to get product in during the peace.
But even the nation's biggest retailers say they can't entirely plan around the trade war.
Walmart CEO Doug McMillion said in an earnings call that the company is not 'able to absorb all the pressure,' infuriating Trump.
'Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,' the president wrote on Truth Social. 'Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected.'
'Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, 'EAT THE TARIFFS,' and not charge valued customers ANYTHING,' he added. 'I'll be watching, and so will your customers!!!'
Last year, more than $41 billion was spent on back-to-school shopping, with 56 percent of consumers starting in early July, according to Capitol One Shopping Research.
'One of the things that already started to occur is kind of the lengthening of the season. People are already out there buying items. They're already trying to anticipate what their August purchases might look like in an effort to get ahead of either price increases or product shortages,' said Steve Lamar, president and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association.
'We've been trying to ship back to school for the last month or so. The products have to be on the shelves during the summertime when consumers are shopping, which means they have to arrive before the summer begins, or the early part of the summer, which means they had to be shipping already. So this tariff crisis, this tariff war, is hitting just as back to school shopping is occurring,' Lamar added.
The Hill has reached out the White House and the Commerce Department for comment.
According to Yale University's Budget Lab, the 2025 tariffs will cause a 1.7 percent rise in prices in the short run.
The tariffs will also disproportionately affect clothing and textiles, according to The Budget Lab, with short-run apparel prices going up 14 percent and shoe prices rising 15 percent.
'One of the things that's hard is back to school is a really emotional time for families. It's a time of beginnings. It's often very exciting, and it's going to be hard for people when they feel like they can't do what they want to be able to do for their kids heading into the school year,' said Martha Gimbel, executive director for the Budget Lab.
'The tariffs are hitting items that are really hard for people to plan around,' Gimbel added, noting how much a child will grow over the summer can be hard to predict, leaving parents to have to deal with August prices.
Back-to-school shopping could also be stifled by fears of what is to come as economists are already having discussions about how the Christmas season could also face pitfalls with the tariffs.
'Just a few weeks ago, we were talking about how the Christmas season might get impacted, because companies need to place orders now for what's going to get produced for the Christmas season,' Gimbel said.
'I think in a time of uncertainty, people want to feel like they have control, and they want to feel like there's something they can do to respond optimally to the situation. And, unfortunately, there's not a really clear answer here,' she added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Upturn
26 minutes ago
- Business Upturn
Bitcoin rebounds above $104,700 after initial dip on Trump-Musk fallout
Bitcoin (BTC) staged a smart recovery on Friday, climbing back above the $104,700 mark after an early dip sparked by jitters in the market following the reported fallout between former US President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk. As per latest data, Bitcoin was trading at $104,731.41, up 2.18% over the past 24 hours. The cryptocurrency saw a volatile session, hitting an intraday low of $102,405.29 before bouncing back sharply to test a high of $105,333.00. The market had initially reacted negatively to reports of strained relations between Trump and Musk, which had raised concerns about potential policy shifts or regulatory overhang on digital assets in the US. The development triggered a broad risk-off sentiment across major cryptocurrencies during early trade. However, BTC's resilience was on display as buyers stepped in at lower levels, fueling a strong rebound. The 24-hour trading volume stood robust at 14,435.76 BTC, with $1.5 billion USDT turnover, indicating healthy participation on the bounce. Crypto market analysts noted that despite short-term headlines, underlying bullish momentum in BTC remains intact amid improving institutional interest and optimism around the next leg of mainstream adoption. Traders will be watching closely for further developments on the Trump-Musk front, along with upcoming macroeconomic cues, which could influence BTC's near-term trajectory. Note: $BTC price at the time of writing this article. News desk at
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
an hour ago
Judge says administration can dismantle the Institute of Museum and Library Services
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge on Friday denied a request by the American Library Association to halt the Trump administration's further dismantling of an agency that funds and promotes libraries across the country, saying that recent court decisions suggested his court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon had previously agreed to temporarily block the Republican administration, saying that plaintiffs were likely to show that Trump doesn't have the legal authority to unilaterally shutter the Institute of Museum and Library Services, which was created by Congress. But in Friday's ruling, Leon wrote that as much as the 'Court laments the Executive Branch's efforts to cut off this lifeline for libraries and museums,' recent court decisions suggested that the case should be heard in a separate court dedicated to contractual claims. He cited the Supreme Court's decision allowing the administration to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in teacher-training money despite a lower court order barring the cuts, saying that cases seeking reinstatement of federal grants should be heard in the Court of Federal Claims. The American Library Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees filed a lawsuit to stop the administration from gutting the institute after President Donald Trump signed a March 14 executive order that refers to it and several other federal agencies as 'unnecessary.' The agency's appointed acting director then placed many agency staff members on administrative leave, sent termination notices to most of them, began canceling grants and contracts and fired all members of the National Museum and Library Services Board. The institute has roughly 75 employees and issued more than $266 million in grants last year. However, a Rhode Island judge's order prohibiting the government from shutting down the museum and library services institute in a separate case brought by several states remains in place. The administration is appealing that order as well.
