
Trump's tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China are in effect. Here's what could get pricer — and when.
The 25% tax on imports from Canada and Mexico, plus an additional 10% tax on imports from China, will drive up the costs of an array of consumer goods, from groceries to automobiles, and could cause more financial strain for inflation-weary consumers, experts say.
Because importers pay the tariffs — such as Walmart, which imports goods from China and other nations — U.S. businesses will shoulder the added costs. While some companies may opt to swallow all or part of the expense, some of the costs are likely to be passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices, economists say.
"If there is a significant increase in tariffs ... those costs will likely be passed onto U.S. consumers and businesses," Brian Peck, executive director of University of Southern California's Center for Transnational Law and Business, told CBS Los Angeles.
What will cost more with tariffs?
Products imported directly from Canada, Mexico and China could see price hikes as businesses pass along the tariff costs, either in full or in part, to consumers. But some products that are made in the U.S. but which use imported materials could also see higher prices, such as automobiles that are manufactured domestically but rely on parts imported from Canada, Mexico or China.
Consumers could start seeing higher prices for some products fairly quickly, such as gasoline, with some regions expected to see gas prices jump as much as 40 cents per gallon within days, according to GasBuddy energy analyst Patrick De Haan.
But other goods, such as cars, might not reflect higher prices for several months, experts say.
Vegetables, fruit, beef, beer and spirits
The U.S. imported more than $45 billion worth of agricultural products from Mexico in 2023. Almost three-quarters of such imports consisted of vegetables, fruit, beer, tequila and other drinks and spirits, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
At the same time, the U.S. imported roughly $40 billion worth of Canadian agricultural products, including beef, pork, grains, potatoes and canola oil, the USDA notes.
Subject to 25% tariffs, prices on such products could rise substantially, depending on how much of the cost increase businesses pass along to shoppers.
According to the Atlanta Fed, the tariffs on three key U.S. trading partners would bring up prices on everyday purchases, including food and beverages, by as much as 1.63%, if businesses pass along anywhere from half to all of the added costs to consumers.
Electronics
The tariffs are likely to drive up prices on a range of consumer goods, including laptops and tablets, video game consoles and smartphones, according to an analysis from the Consumer Technology Association (CTA).
That's a reality electronics retailer Best Buy acknowledged last year as Mr. Trump spoke about relying on tariffs to achieve his economic goals.
Any added costs on U.S. imports from the three counties "will be shared by our customers," Best Buy CEO Corie Barry told investors in the company's Nov. 26 earnings call, noting that "there's very little in [the] consumer electronics space that is not imported."
Automobiles
Vehicles are expected to be hit hard by the tariffs, given their complex supply chains which can involve car parts crossing borders multiple times over the course of assembly, exposing them to the same levies more than once.
The sweeping tariffs could drive up car costs by as much as $12,200 for some models, according to a report from Anderson Economic Group (AEG), a Michigan-based economic consultancy.
The price hikes from Mr. Trump's tariffs are likely to be substantial enough that some car buyers might balk at the higher costs, which could dent automobile sales, according to AEG CEO Patrick Anderson.
"Our analysis shows the proposed tariffs would have a very big effect on North American assembled cars by multiple automakers," Anderson told CBS MoneyWatch.
Some automakers could ditch uneconomical product lines as a result of the tariffs. "It would be a huge disruption to the industry," Anderson said.
Gasoline
Fuel prices could quickly reflect the new tariffs, according to De Haan of GasBuddy. Oil, natural gas and electricity imported from Canada will be subject to a 10% levy that could lead to higher prices almost immediately for U.S. motorists.
"Some U.S. regions will see price impacts rather quickly, while others will see a delay of 1-3 weeks," De Haan wrote in a March 4 blog post.
Drivers in the Northeast are likely to see the biggest immediate impact, with gas prices jump by between 20 to 40 cents per gallon by mid-March, he added. "For a typical 15-gallon fill-up, that's an additional $3-$6 every time you visit the pump," he said.
Other regions are also likely to see higher gas prices, with Midwest drivers seeing an increase of 5-20 cents per gallon and Great Lakes motorists likely to pay about 10-25 cents per gallon more due to the new tariffs, he added.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US government in talks to acquire stake in Intel
The Trump administration is engaged in discussions with Intel regarding a potential investment in the chipmaker, Bloomberg reported citing sources familiar with the matter. Details regarding the size of the proposed investment remain unspecified. However; such a deal could provide essential support for Intel's ambitious factory hub project in Ohio, which the company had previously aimed to establish as the largest chip manufacturing facility globally, although this initiative has faced numerous delays. These negotiations come on the heels of President Donald Trump's recent call for the removal of Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, whom he has described as 'highly conflicted' due to concerns over his previous associations with China. The current discussions are said to have originated from a recent meeting between President Trump and Tan. While specifics are still being worked out, one source indicated that the US government would finance the investment. Another source warned that the discussions are still in a preliminary stage and may not result in a formal agreement. In response to the news, Intel's shares rose by as much as 8.9% on 14 August 2025, ultimately closing 7.4% higher at $23.86, giving the company a market capitalisation of approximately $104.4bn, the report added. The stock continued to increase by an additional 4% in after-hours trading. 'Discussion about hypothetical deals should be regarded as speculation unless officially announced by the administration,' Bloomberg quoted White House spokesman Kush Desai as saying. Intel has chosen not to comment on the ongoing discussions. A representative stated that the company is 'deeply committed to supporting President Trump's efforts to strengthen US technology and manufacturing leadership' and expressed a willingness to continue working with the Trump administration on shared goals, while refraining from commenting on speculation. An agreement would provide a financial boost to Intel at a time when the company is implementing cost-cutting measures and workforce reductions. It also suggests that Tan is likely to remain in his role as CEO. This situation represents another instance of the Trump administration's direct involvement in a key industry. Previously, the administration reached an agreement to receive a 15% cut of certain semiconductor sales to China and took a so-called golden share in United States Steel Corp. as part of a deal to facilitate its sale to a Japanese competitor. The discussions regarding Intel also reflect a recent announcement from the Defense Department, which disclosed plans to take a $400m preferred equity stake in US rare-earth producer MP Materials Corp., thereby making the Pentagon the largest shareholder in the company. "US government in talks to acquire stake in Intel" was originally created and published by Verdict, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. 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


USA Today
4 minutes ago
- USA Today
Brand advertising on news sites isn't risky, it's absolutely necessary
News junkies are more likely to show interest in your brands and buy your products. They hold more favorable views of brands, trusting them more and recommending them to others. People who check the news five or more times a day make up a quarter of the American population. They're information hungry, consume media often and tend to have more money and more education. In a political and economic climate where everything is constantly changing, more and more people are checking news websites on their phones. Any sensible marketer would see a no-brainer opportunity there. Yet many brands are completely withdrawn from digital news. Why? An irrational fear of 'brand safety.' But what are brands really missing out on when they don't advertise on news platforms? For one, they're writing off a high-impact audience that makes up a large cross section of the population. Roughly 80.4 million U.S. adults follow the news very closely. News junkies are more likely to show interest in your brands and buy your products. They hold more favorable views of brands, trusting them more and recommending them to others. The average "purchase intent" among news junkies is 66% −16 percentage points higher than the general population − according to Stagwell's Advertising Impact Study, which tested a mix of 20 ads in various formats from 20 brands and major sectors across tech, travel/hospitality, consumer packaged goods, financial services and automotive. (People with purchase intent are defined in the study as those who said they were likely to make a purchase or use services from the brand within the next six months.) Included in this cross section are the vast majority of the world's leaders: 90% of CEOs and board members are news junkies, too. That's not to mention "exclusive news" junkies − the 37 million people (14% of U.S. adults) who follow the news very closely, but do not engage in sports and entertainment in the same way. Best 2025 Super Bowl commercials: Check out all 57 ranked according to USA TODAY Ad Meter By not advertising in news, brands completely forgo 14% of the adult population. This is a group that shows greater post-ad exposure lift than the average American − that is, bigger gains in brand reputation measurement scores like favorability and trust after viewing an ad. These are individuals who are eager for more information and respond better to ads. Also, the number of exclusive news junkies is growing. Just a year ago, they made up 11% of the population. Now, more than 7 million U.S. adults have converted – a nearly 3 point jump in the number of news junkies. Brands safety concerns are overblown Brands that don't invest in news now are missing out on the opportunity to drive real business results. We know why brands aren't investing in news. It's the overblown 'brand safety' movement that turned genuine concern into brand censorship. It's the organized coalitions colluding to demonetize unfavorable content. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media, a now-disbanded advertising coalition that created subjective guidelines dictating what content was suitable for advertising support, is a prime example. It's the outdated blocklists that prevent ads from being placed in articles with chicken 'breasts' and 'shots' and 'Ariana Grande.' That means if 'breasts' is on a blocklist − a list of keywords brands do not want their ads to appear next to − a harmless, otherwise widely read article about the price of poultry goes unadvertised. Now if it's a beverage company around Super Bowl time, that's a huge, missed opportunity to advertise to all the boneless fried chicken fans. However, evidence is growing that these fears really are overblown. Stagwell's News Advertising Study, conducted among 50,000 Americans, found that there is no difference in key brand reputational metrics between ads next to shootings and war versus ads next to business, sports or entertainment stories. The risk, and there's proven to be virtually none, is trivial compared with the reward. 'Fake news' does exist. But Trump is dangerously wrong about where it comes from. | Opinion The time to advertise in news is now. Nearly 60% of news junkies and exclusive news junkies follow the news more closely than they did a year ago. Roughly half of news junkies consume more political, economic and international news today. News junkies have never been a more attractive audience for marketers. Advertising linked to news drives results for businesses Incorporating news into advertising strategies already drives results. Stagwell has seen 2024 campaigns deliver three times the average return on ad spending (ROAS) since beginning news-focused testing in the second half of 2023. News delivers three times higher ROAS than other paid media channels for Stagwell's agency, Assembly. These results mirror what I saw at Microsoft as executive vice president of advertising: News sites were some of the best-performing sites for technology. Refusing to advertise in news over brand safety concerns is like a grocery store that refuses to carry The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal. News is a critical platform for marketers and advertisers. It's a powerful business medium that reaches highly desirable audiences. If you're a chief marketing officer, tell your team you've made the decision to treat news on an equal playing field as sports and entertainment. Run the computer models and try out a minimum media buy. Test and distribute the same ads and see whether they'll work equally well. Your performance metrics will thank you for it. Mark Penn is chairman and CEO of Stagwell Inc. His career spans 40 years in market research, advertising, public relations and politics. A globally recognized strategist, Penn has advised world leaders, including Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, founded companies and written two bestselling books. USA TODAY's parent company, Gannett, is a partner in Stagwell's Future of News initiative.

Business Insider
4 minutes ago
- Business Insider
The rise of the $1 a year AI deal
While AI giants are breaking the bank to fund the future of the technology, two companies are hoping a single dollar fee can help them gain a foothold in Washington. OpenAI and Anthropic are charging the Trump administration just $1 per agency to access their leading AI models for the next year. In another sign of how competitive things remain, OpenAI announced its agreement for ChatGPT Enterprise access on August 6. Less than a week later, Anthropic announced a similar deal for access to Claude for Enterprise and Claude for Government. Government contracts could be quite lucrative for AI companies. Anthropic already has a deal with the Pentagon that could be worth as much as $200 million. "Some of these companies are going public, and if they can say their products are being used by government agencies, that boosts their long-term potential," Darrell M. West, a senior fellow in the Center for Technology Innovation, told Business Insider. West said companies that aren't striking these types of agreements risk getting "squeezed out." "There are a lot of AI companies now, but that is probably going to narrow in the future — some companies will do well and many are not going to make it — so if you are getting government employees to use your products, it increases the odds that you will be one of the survivors," he said. Google might have a similar deal in the offing. Earlier this month, US General Services Administration added the tech giant's Gemini model to a list of approved AI vendors. After that announcement, OpenAI and Anthropic, which were also added to the list, announced their $1 per agency agreements. Elon Musk 's xAi was originally going to strike a similar partnership, but those talks fizzled out after Grok began posting antisemitic content, Wired reported. Federal employees will have other avenues to use popular AI chatbots. On Thursday, the US General Services Administration unveiled USAi, a secure platform where federal employees can experiment with AI models at no cost to them. The platform will initially feature models from Google, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, Anthropic, and OpenAI. A GSA spokesperson told BI that Anthropic and OpenAI's nominal fee agreements "are not the same as the USAi access mechanism." The partnerships follow President Donald Trump's unveiling of his AI action plan, a series of policies designed to keep the US at the forefront of the global AI race. AI companies take maintaining the US's position seriously. Last year, Anduril and Palantir announced their own effort to outfit the government with AI. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman joined Trump in January to announce Stargate, a $500 billion project that would help rebuild the AI giant's moat against Chinese competitors. Anthropic's agreement also applies to all three branches, underlining that the deal extends to congressional employees. Despite repeated efforts, Congress has been unable to pass a sweeping AI law. Most recently, lawmakers dealt some in the industry a setback after they stripped out a provision that would have imposed a decadelong moratorium on state-level AI laws from President Donald Trump's " Big Beautiful Bill." Its initial inclusion sparked bipartisan opposition. OpenAI, Meta, and Alphabet have all opposed previous state-level efforts to regulate the industry. As Business Insider previously reported, some lawmakers remain skeptical of using AI chatbots themselves.