Is Chipotle closing? Panic breaks out over restaurant's unfounded bankruptcy rumor
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Chipotle CEO says it will absorb tariff costs
President Trump's proposed tariffs on major trading partners are affecting the U.S. economy, but Chipotle plans to keep prices stable for their customers.
Cheddar
The rumors about Chipotle filing for bankruptcy and closing restaurants in 2025 are just that: Rumors.
The misinformation spread about the closure of the fast-casual eatery on social media Thursday and Friday appeared to have started after Spanish media outlet Unión Rayo published a report about the closure of Farmesa Fresh Eatery, a spinoff venture Chipotle invested and tested for a few months in 2023.
The story's promotional image previously showed the Chipotle logo, Newsweek reported. Numerous users took to X to express frustration with the alleged closures.
"Chipotle is closing all restaurants & is declaring bankruptcy. The number of businesses declaring bankruptcy is very eerie," an X user posted Thursday morning.
X users were still posting reactions to the rumors days later, wondering how Chipotle could be filing for bankruptcy.
"how chipotle goin bankrupt when i get a bowl with extra chicken and guac everyday?????" another X user wrote.
Chipotle spokesperson Erin Wolford refuted the rumors on Saturday, sharing in a statement that the "false information stemmed from an inaccurate online article confusing Chipotle with a venture it tested in 2023."
Chipotle reached out to international site to correct the story and has since received an apology for the "false article" written last week. Unión Rayo did not immediately respond to USA TODAY's request for comment on Tuesday.
What is Farmesa Fresh Eatery?
Farmesa Fresh Eatery was a restaurant concept tested by Chipotle for a few months in a Santa Monica food hall in 2023.
"Farmesa is a fresh, bold concept featuring delicious proteins, greens, grains and vegetables that are inspired by Chipotle's Food with Integrity standards," Chipotle said in a February 2023 news release.
The "eclectic" menu was curated by Nate Appleman, a James Beard Award-winning Chef who also serves as the Director of Culinary Innovation at Farmesa, and previously led menu innovations for Chipotle in the mid to late 2000s.
Farmesa was slated to serve a variety of bowls complete with a protein, green or grain, two sides, a choice of five sauces, and a topping option that cost between $11.95 to $16.95.
Chipotle not closing, but expanding
Chipotle actually has plans to expand, contrary to the disinformation spread by the rumor mill.
"We anticipate opening between 315 to 345 new restaurants this year with at least 80% including a (digital drive-thru) Chipotlane," Wolford said.
Chipotle posted its fourth quarter and full year financial snapshot last month, revealing to investors in a Feb. 4 earnings call that the company's total revenue for 2024 was $11.3 billion, a 14.6% increase from 2023. The earnings call indicated zero debt and over $2 billion in cash reserves, Wolford said.
"Chipotle had another outstanding year," Scott Boatwright, Chipotle CEO, said in a news release. "I want to make sure that as we continue to scale Chipotle, everything we do is in service of our guests or those who serve our guests."
Chipotle opened 304 company-owned restaurants with 257 locations including a Chipotlane, and three international licensed restaurants in 2024, the company said. Chipotle also recently introduced a new protein option: Honey Chicken.
Contributing: Gabe Hauari, USA TODAY
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
14 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump officials cast a wider net for Powell replacement at Fed
The list suggests officials are aiming to present President Donald Trump with a diverse set of options to replace Powell, whom Trump has relentlessly pressed to lower interest rates, and they aren't ruling out picking a Fed insider for the job. The selection process is especially challenging because whoever fills the seat will have to balance the central bank's inflation-fighting credibility with Trump's expectation that his calls for lower rates will be taken into consideration. The new chair will also lead an institution with thousands of employees tasked with not only setting interest rates, but also regulating banks and overseeing the payments system. Jefferson, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, has been a less visible presence than other recent vice chairs at the Fed but has consistently garnered bipartisan support. He was confirmed by the Senate as the central bank's No. 2 in an 88-10 vote. Many of the people under consideration have publicly said the Fed should cut borrowing costs — Waller and Bowman, both Trump appointees, dissented from a decision to hold rates steady last month — but have also emphasized the importance of the institution's insulation from short-term politics. Bullard said on CNBC on Tuesday that he would accept the job 'if we set it up for success, if we protect the value of the dollar, [to] be the reserve currency — that'll give us lower interest rates over time, if we aim for low and stable inflation, and if we can respect the independence of the institution under the Federal Reserve Act.' Bullard and Sumerlin's candidacies were first reported by the Wall Street Journal, and the new internal Fed candidates were earlier reported by Bloomberg News. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed in a CNBC interview last week that a formal process for choosing Powell's successor has kicked off but did not a provide a timeline for when the choice might be made. In the meantime, Trump has nominated his chief economist, Stephen Miran, to an open position on the Fed, though the term for that slot ends in January. Miran has argued that the central bank should be subject to more political control.
Newsweek
14 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Social Security Warning Issued by Solicitor General
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Department of Justice has warned that overturning tariffs imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) would risk a "1929-style" crisis that could endanger the country's social welfare programs. "In such a scenario, people would be forced from their homes, millions of jobs would be eliminated, hard-working Americans would lose their savings, and even Social Security and Medicare could be threatened," wrote the U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, in a letter submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Monday. Why It Matters The federal appellate court is soon set to decide whether to uphold the Court of International Trade's (CIT) May ruling that President Donald Trump overstepped his executive authority when imposing the majority of his tariffs. While this order invalidating Trump's actions, and another order from the District Court for the District of Columbia, have been temporarily stayed, the outcome of the legal battle, which Trump has called "America's big case," could hold wide-reaching implications for the president's trade agenda and the economy as a whole. What To Know The IEEPA is a federal law granting the president the power to regulate commerce to address "an unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States during national emergencies. In the case of Trump, persistent trade deficits and fentanyl smuggling are among the emergencies invoked for his tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, as well as the "reciprocal" duties placed on dozens of America's trading partners. "The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder," the three-judge panel of the CIT wrote in its May ruling. White House officials accused the CIT of mounting a "judicial coup," and immediately appealed the decision. The federal appeals court granted the White House a stay on May 29. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer testifies during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on February 26, 2025. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer testifies during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on February 26, 2025. Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images The court heard oral arguments in the case earlier this month, and Reuters reports that the 11-judge panel was skeptical about the administration's rationale for using the 1977 law to justify the tariffs. Since late May, the Trump administration has struck deals with a handful of trading partners hoping to bring down their tariff rates. These include agreements with the European Union, Japan and South Korea, and involve investment commitments together totaling well over $1 trillion. In Monday's supplemental letter, rather than the potential legality of the CIT's ruling and the invocation of the IEEPA, the DOJ argued that overturning tariffs would jeopardize these deals and investments. The latter are not direct payments to the U.S., but rather financing for private-sector projects. However, Sauer and Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate said: "The President believes that our country would not be able to pay back the trillions of dollars that other countries have already committed to pay, which could lead to financial ruin." "These deals for trillions of dollars have been reached, and other countries have committed to pay massive sums of money," they added. "If the United States were forced to unwind these historic agreements, the President believes that a forced dissolution of the agreements could lead to a 1929-style result." The argument echoes those recently made by Trump over the "big case." "If a Radical Left Court ruled against us at this late date, in an attempt to bring down or disturb the largest amount of money, wealth creation and influence the U.S.A. has ever seen, it would be impossible to ever recover, or pay back, these massive sums of money and honor," the president posted on Truth Social last week. What People Are Saying Solicitor General D. John Sauer and Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate, in Monday's letter, wrote: "There is no substitute for the tariffs and deals that President Trump has made. One year ago, the United States was a dead country, and now, because of the trillions of dollars being paid by countries that have so badly abused us, America is a strong, financially viable, and respected country again. If the United States were forced to pay back the trillions of dollars committed to us, America could go from strength to failure the moment such an incorrect decision took effect." Scott Lincicome, economist at the Cato Institute, posted on X in response to the letter: "This is a letter signed by the US government's top lawyer and submitted today in federal court (in VOS Selections v Trump). I'm honestly struggling to believe it's real, but here we are." Economist David L. Ortega told Newsweek: "Ending the tariffs would not threaten Social Security or Medicare, which are funded through payroll taxes, not tariff receipts. Historically, high and sustained tariffs have posed greater economic risks than their removal. We saw this with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930. In fact, lifting these tariffs would more likely lower costs for U.S. producers and consumers than trigger a 1929-style collapse." Robert B. Koopman, a senior lecturer in Politics, Governance and Economics at the American University, told Newsweek that the letter was "factually incorrect" and "a pure political statement with no factual basis in economic or political reality." "This set of arguments [regarding Social Security] has no basis in fact or considered economic analysis—pure hyperbole." He added: "More economists are worried that the current set of [trade] agreements are likely to lead to economic slowdown and that U.S. growth would be stronger without them. No one is actually predicting a 1929 result with them or without them." What Happens Next In the letter, Trump's lawyers said that there exist alternative "tariff authorities" beyond the IEEPA that the president could employ depending on the outcome of the case. However, they described them as "short-term" and "not nearly as powerful," and said employing these would "render America captive to the abuses that it has endured from far more aggressive countries." It is unclear when the appellate court will issue its final ruling, but the case could potentially progress to the Supreme Court regardless of the outcome. Last week, former House Speaker Paul Ryan said the court was "more than likely" to strike down the president's use of the IEEPA for the bulk of his tariffs.
Bloomberg
14 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Mocks Goldman, Says Bank Made ‘Bad Prediction' on Tariffs
President Donald Trump assailed David Solomon, the CEO of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. on Tuesday, saying the bank had made a 'bad prediction' about the impact of his sweeping tariff agenda on markets and consumer costs. 'They made a bad prediction a long time ago on both the Market repercussion and the Tariffs themselves, and they were wrong, just like they are wrong about so much else,' Trump said on his social media platform.
