
Tariffs on Brazil could leave coffee drinkers with a headache
President Donald Trump's plan to impose a 50% tariff on all imports from Brazil starting next month would drive up the price of coffee, whether it's served in cafes or brewed in the kitchen.
Such a tariff would put more pressure on the coffee industry as prices have peaked globally this year. Droughts in Brazil and Vietnam, two of the biggest coffee exporters to the United States, have resulted in smaller harvests in recent seasons, driving up prices.
Consumers are already paying more at the grocery store. At the end of May, the average price of 1 pound of ground roast coffee in the U.S. was $7.93, up from $5.99 at the same time last year, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Trump's pledge to place tariffs on imports from Brazil is partly in retaliation for what he considers a 'witch hunt' against his political ally, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing trial for attempting a coup.
More than 99% of the coffee Americans consume is imported from South America, Africa, and Asia. Last year, the United States imported 1.6 million metric tons of both unroasted and roasted coffee, according to the Agriculture Department.
Brazil accounted last year for more than 8.1 million bags, each with 60 kilograms of coffee, that came into the United States. Any sudden shift would be a 'lose-lose situation,' said Guilherme Morya, a coffee analyst for Rabobank based in São Paulo.
Brazilian suppliers, he said, are holding tight and waiting to see if any negotiations will save them from needing to find buyers in other countries.
Should the new 50% tariffs take effect, 'we're going to see a reshaping in the coffee flow in the world,' Morya said. 'Especially Brazil to other regions.'
If wholesale costs — what restaurant chains or grocery stores pay — for coffee rise by 50%, that could translate to an increase of 25 cents a cup within three months, said Ryan Cummings, the chief of staff for the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
It would take about three months after the tariff goes into effect for consumers to see higher prices at stores, he said.
Large coffee buyers, like Starbucks, source their coffee from all over the world, and often sign contracts months or years in advance for beans, somewhat insulating them from immediate price shocks. Still, some analysts said, there could be a scramble as some customers try to shift their supply chains to avoid the tariffs on coffee from Brazil.
'With Trump doing this Whac-a-Mole tariff strategy, it's going to cause you, as a coffee manufacturer, a lot of uncertainty,' Cummings said.
But even changing suppliers comes with issues. Should manufacturers pivot more of their buying to Vietnam, another large coffee producer, they would be reliant on a smaller output.
In addition to a possible disruption in quantity, the quality of the coffee coming into the United States could change. Much of the coffee produced in Brazil is arabica, a higher quality than the more bitter robusta mostly produced in Vietnam and the rest of Asia.
Other suppliers would be unlikely to match Brazil's robust output, including Vietnam, which has seen a recent decline in its coffee production. The country would not be able, in the short- or medium term, 'to stem the flow,' said David Gantz, an economist at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy.
In Brazil, 'some of the exports will probably cease entirely,' Gantz added. 'Others will continue, but the consumer will end up paying a higher price.'
(BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM.)
Coffee must be grown under the right conditions. It grows best at higher altitudes, in places with tropical temperatures and heavy rainfall. In the United States and its territories, that's limited to Hawaii and Puerto Rico.
The United States last year produced a small fraction of the coffee consumed by Americans — 11,462 metric tons — and nearly all of it in Hawaii. Hawaii's coffee is mostly a specialty product, and costs two or three times more than even high-quality imported beans.
Labor costs are much higher in Hawaii, as are commodities like water and energy, so there is little chance the state can meaningfully produce more coffee for the American market, even if tariffs drive up the costs of its competitors.
'We can't grow enough coffee,' said Shawn Steiman, the owner of Coffea Consulting in Honolulu. 'The Hawaiian coffee market isn't tied to the global industry.'
Some consumers — especially those who view coffee not as a luxury but a daily necessity — may just pay a higher price, while others may trade down to cheaper coffee products or to other caffeine products like tea or energy drinks.
Consumers do notice when the price of coffee drinks rises. Starbucks recently began charging a flat fee of 80 cents if customers added one or more pumps of flavored syrups to their beverages. Starbucks played down the change, saying it was done simply to standardize pricing across its stores and on its app.
'They sure did raise prices,' said Brandon Taylor, a video producer in Orlando, Florida, who was unhappy when his regular order of a tall iced coffee with cream and caramel syrup jumped to $5.35 because of the new 80-cent charge for the syrup. He canceled his order. 'I don't plan on going back.'
The tariffs could also threaten another morning staple. About 90% of the fresh orange juice and 55% of the frozen orange juice that the United States imports come from Brazil, according to Agriculture Department data.
Brazil also exports large quantities of concentrated orange pulp, which is then turned into orange juice. And Florida, a major domestic producer of the fruit, has faced recent growing difficulties partly because of a citrus disease.
'There would be a huge impact on people who drink orange juice because Florida can't possibly make up the slack,' Gantz said.
This article originally appeared in
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Observer
6 hours ago
- Observer
India reels from US tariff hike threat
Mumbai - Indian exporters are scrambling for options to mitigate the fallout of US President Donald Trump's threatened tariff salvo against the world's most populous nation. Many warn of dire job losses after Trump said he would double new import tariffs from 25 percent to 50 percent if India continues to buy Russian oil, in a bid to strip Moscow of revenue for its military offensive in Ukraine. "At a 50 percent tariff, no product from India can stand any competitive edge," said economist Garima Kapoor from Elara Securities. India, one of the world's largest crude oil importers, has until August 27 to find alternatives to replace around a third of its current oil supply from abroad. While New Delhi is not a major export powerhouse, it shipped goods worth approximately $87 billion to the United States in 2024. That 50 percent levy now threatens to upend low-margin, labour-intensive industries ranging from gems and jewellery to textiles and seafood. The Global Trade Research Initiative estimates a potential 60 percent drop in US sales in 2025 in sectors such as the garment industry. Exporters say they are racing to fulfil orders before the deadline. "Whatever we can ship before August 27, we are shipping," said Vijay Kumar Agarwal, chairman of Creative Group. The Mumbai-based textile and garment exporter has a nearly 80 percent exposure to the US market. But Agarwal warned that it is merely triage. Shipping goods before the deadline "doesn't solve" the problem, he said. "If it doesn't get resolved, there will be chaos," he said, adding that he's worried for the future of his 15,000 to 16,000 employees. "It is a very gloomy situation... it will be an immense loss of business." - Shifting production abroad - Talks to resolve the matter hinge on geopolitics, far from the reach of business. Trump is set to meet Vladimir Putin on Friday, the first face-to-face meeting between the two countries' presidents since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. New Delhi, with longstanding ties with Moscow, is in a delicate situation. Since Trump's tariff threats, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has spoken to both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, urging a "peaceful resolution" to the conflict. Meanwhile, the US tariff impact is already being felt in India. Businesses say fresh orders from some US buyers have begun drying up -- threatening millions of dollars in future business and the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands in the world's fifth biggest economy. Among India's biggest apparel makers with global manufacturing operations, some are looking to move their US orders elsewhere. Top exporter Pearl Global Industries has told Indian media that some of its US customers asked that orders be produced in lower-duty countries such as Vietnam or Bangladesh, where the company also has manufacturing facilities. Major apparel maker Gokaldas Exports told Bloomberg it may boost production in Ethiopia and Kenya, which have a 10 percent tariff. Moody's recently warned that for India, the "much wider tariff gap" may "even reverse some of the gains made in recent years in attracting related investments". India's gems and jewellery industry exported goods worth more than $10 billion last year and employs hundreds of thousands of people. "Nothing is happening now, everything is at a standstill, new orders have been put on hold," Ajesh Mehta from D. Navinchandra Exports told AFP. "We expect up to 150,000 to 200,000 workers to be impacted." Gems and other expensive non-essential items are vulnerable. "A 10 percent tariff was absorbable -- 25 percent is not, let alone this 50 percent," Mehta added. "At the end of the day, we deal in luxury products. When the cost goes up beyond a point, customers will cut back." Seafood exporters, who have been told by some US buyers to hold shipments, are hoping for new customers. "We are looking to diversify our markets," says Alex Ninan, who is a partner at the Baby Marine Group. "The United States is out right now. We will have to push our products to alternative markets, such as China, Japan... Russia is another market we are looking into." Ninan, however, warns that it is far from simple. "You can't create a market all of a sudden," he said.


Times of Oman
7 hours ago
- Times of Oman
India "a bit recalcitrant", says US Treasury Secretary on trade talks amid Trump's tariff concerns
Washington DC: US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Tuesday stated that India has been headstrong in their trade negotiations with the US, noting that New Delhi has been "a bit recalcitrant", days after US President Donald Trump announced an additional 25 per cent tariff, citing the country's oil purchase from Russia. Speaking to Fox Business Network's "Kudlow", Bessent also stated that there were still some "big trade deals" yet to be done or agreed upon, including Switzerland and India, acknowledging the possibility of concluding tariff negotiations by October. "There are big trade deals that aren't done and aren't agreed. Switzerland is still around; India has been a bit recalcitrant. I think we have agreed on substantial terms with all the substantial countries," the US Treasury Secretary stated. "That's aspirational. I think we're in a good position," he added when asked about the possibility of concluding tariff negotiations by October. On August 6, Trump signed an Executive Order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on imports from India in response to New Delhi's purchase of Russian oil, taking the total tariff on India to 50 per cent. According to the order issued by the White House, Trump cited matters of national security and foreign policy concerns, as well as other relevant trade laws, for the increase, claiming that India's imports of Russian oil, directly or indirectly, pose an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States. The additional tariffs will take effect on August 27. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has slammed the US's move to impose additional tariffs, calling it "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable", and further noted that New Delhi will take "all actions necessary to protect its national interests". The announcement came days after he announced the 25 per cent reciprocal tariff on India, which came into effect on August 7. Meanwhile, Trump had earlier stated that there would be no trade negotiations with India until a dispute over tariffs is resolved. When pressed by ANI at the Oval Office on whether he expected talks to resume in light of the new 50 per cent tariff, he stated, "No, not until we get it resolved."


Observer
19 hours ago
- Observer
Climate security is energy security
For all the uncertainties generated by Donald Trump's administration over the past six months, one thing is clear: 'climate' technologies are out and 'energy' technologies are in. But while going along with this rhetorical shift may appease some, it should be recognised for what it is: a change in wording. The fundamental economic and technological forces that are pushing the world away from oil, coal and gas and towards low-carbon, high-efficiency technologies have not abated. Over the past two decades, climate change has been a leading item on the global agenda, driving efforts to deploy technologies that will reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Those efforts are now facing headwinds and not just in the United States. Geopolitical developments elsewhere, like Russia's war in Ukraine, have called attention to the importance of energy affordability and security over other considerations. Policymakers in the US, Europe and elsewhere initially responded to the war by doubling down on the shift from fossil fuels and for good reason. Oil, coal and gas are commodities whose prices will always be linked to geopolitical vagaries (that goes for not only global oil markets but also regional gas markets, which are increasingly linked by trade in liquefied natural gas). As a case in point, the summer of 2022 brought massive inflation, largely driven by fossil-fuel price spikes. Europe's gas prices peaked at ten times their long-term average and US gas prices at around triple their long-term average. While the US Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 is widely considered a misnomer, history will judge the name kindly: The only permanent way to address such bouts with 'fossilflation' is to stop using fossil fuels. Though the blowback against climate policies has been particularly strong at the federal level in the US, Europe, too, has undergone a retrenchment. This is somewhat understandable, even if it is shortsighted. Germany, Europe's largest economy, has been in a recession for more than two years, with high energy prices a chief culprit. Climate technologies that are already commercially viable could help, of course. But taking full advantage of the lower prices of solar, wind and (increasingly) batteries requires a willingness to reform power markets and pass these savings to households and industrial consumers. It also calls for more upfront public investment, an area where climate priorities compete with other priorities like national security that are often perceived to be more immediate. In grappling with these tradeoffs, the European Union delivered the kinds of efficiency measures that Trump's 'Department of Government Efficiency' (DOGE) had promised but failed to achieve. For example, Europe dialed back its carbon border adjustment mechanism by requiring 90 per cent fewer companies to comply. On the surface, this seems like a decisive blow to the goal of establishing a carbon tariff for imports, commensurate with Trump's DOGE hatchet. But unlike Trump and Elon Musk, the EU ensured that the remaining 10 per cent of importers still accounted for over 90 per cent of emissions. This outcome is far from ideal when viewed solely through a climate lens. But viewed from a broader climate-economic perspective, it is exactly the kind of surgical intervention that DOGE promised but never delivered. The summer of 2022 brought massive inflation, largely driven by fossil-fuel price spikes. Still, fiddling at the climate-policy margins ignores the bigger picture. While Europe and America are taking steps back, China is leaping forward. It alone accounted for over 40 per cent of the record $2.1 trillion of global investment in the energy transition last year — more than the EU, the United Kingdom and the US combined. The balance is even more lopsided for specific clean-energy technologies. China produces around 75 per cent of the world's solar panels and 80 per cent of its lithium-ion batteries. That dominance is the result of a concerted green industrial policy, in which innovation plays a key role. The claim that China only manufactures and assembles is woefully outdated. China's electric vehicles, for example, are second to none. BYD, the country's leading carmaker, recently unveiled a groundbreaking charging system capable of adding 470 km of range in just five minutes, putting the company in a league of its own globally. China's dominance extends to technologies that are not yet competitive without price support. LONGi, one of the world's top solar manufacturers, formed LONGi Hydrogen in 2021 to pursue green hydrogen production. It now leads the world in electrolyser manufacturing capacity. These are not isolated examples. China's ambitious industrial policy has helped lift five other Chinese hydrogen companies into the global top ten. Have Europe and the US already lost this race for the future? While the US now seems hellbent on turning itself into a petrostate, the EU has a chance to revive its clean-energy fortunes. It is even starting with a significant policy advantage: a CO2 price hovering around $100 per metric tonne means that most low-carbon technologies — from clean electrons and electrification to clean molecules like biofuels — are already economically viable. Others, like green hydrogen, will need further support to help climb the learning curve and slide down the cost curve. According to Bernd Heid, a senior partner at McKinsey & Company who leads its Platform for Climate Technologies, around 90 per cent of climate technologies will be in the money by 2030 with a $100 carbon price. While China dominates with six top-ten global players, three of the others are European. The Swedish startup Stegra is building the world's first low-carbon steel plant using electrolysers made by ThyssenKrupp Nucera, in which the German steelmaker has a majority stake. Despite recent political developments, the US, too, has shown that rapid change is possible. Although breaking China's solar manufacturing dominance will be difficult, the US has made significant inroads just over the past three years. Earlier this year, it exceeded 50 gigawatts of panel manufacturing capacity, a fivefold increase since 2022. These 50 GW in panel supply roughly matched US demand. True, onshoring the solar supply chain comes with costs that can be justified only by priorities other than the climate, such as national security or promoting domestic manufacturing. But that is the point. If political conditions require stronger emphasis on technologies like geothermal and nuclear; and if technologies formerly known as 'climate tech' must be relabelled as more neutral-sounding 'energy tech', so be it. The larger forces propelling us towards decarbonisation remain the same. @Project Syndicate, 2025