US imposes 17% tariff on Mexican tomatoes, sparking price concerns
However, US businesses that grow tomatoes in Mexico or rely on imports warned that the new duty could drive up grocery bills and disrupt supply chains.In a letter sent last week to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, the Chamber of Commerce and 30 other business groups said US companies employ 50,000 workers and generate $8.3 billion in economic benefits moving tomatoes from Mexico into communities across the country.'We are concerned that withdrawing from the agreement – at a time when the business community is already navigating significant trade uncertainty – could lead to retaliatory actions by our trading partners against other commodities and crops that could create further hardship for U.S. businesses and consumers,' the letter said.Economists say the impact on consumers will be felt quickly. 'Retail prices for tomatoes in the US will likely rise around 8.5% with a 17% duty,' predicted Tim Richards, agribusiness professor at Arizona State University.The new tariff is separate from the broader 30% base tariff on products from Mexico and the European Union that President Donald Trump announced Saturday as part of his wider trade reset agenda.- EndsInputs from Associated PressTune InMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump, Newsom clash in court over National Guard deployment in Los Angeles
The Trump administration and California faced off in court Monday at the start of a three-day trial over President Donald Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard and Marines in Los Angeles. Governor Newsom decried the Trump administration's deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles as politically driven and inflammatory. (Bloomberg/Reuters file) Trump sent the troops to the nation's second-largest metropolitan area in June to address protests against immigration arrests, against the wishes of Governor Gavin Newsom. Most of the troops have been recalled, but a ruling in favor of California could hamstring the president's ability to respond to domestic emergencies, the government argues. Just hours before the trial was set to start, Trump announced that he would deploy the National Guard in Washington, DC to crack down on what he called out-of-control crime. US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco is hearing testimony and legal arguments to determine whether the deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law that strictly limits enforcement of civilian laws by members of the military. Trump deployed about 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, ordering them to the streets under federal control. Trump also sent about 700 active-duty Marines to the city. Lawyers for California presented evidence and questioned witnesses on Monday, including military officials who oversaw the task force of Marines and guardsman. The lawyers displayed social media posts with photos and videos that they said showed soldiers from the task force patrolling the same ground as local law enforcement officers in situations where there was not a clear threat from protesters. Major General Scott Sherman, commander of Task Force 51, said federalized troops were told their responsibility was to defend federal personnel and facilities in the area and that soldiers were authorized to act in defense if members of the public presented a threat. Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats, have argued troops weren't needed and their presence inflamed tensions. Newsom has said the troops were diverted from more important duties, including wildfire suppression and helping battle drug smuggling at the Mexican border. 'The city didn't feel dangerous. But is that a decision for me to make?' Jon Michaels, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said ahead of the trial. 'Is that a decision for Gavin Newsom to make? Is that a decision for Judge Breyer to make? Or is it up to federal officials? Whoever ultimately gets to make that decision dictates how this case comes out.' Earlier this year, Breyer ordered Trump to return the National Guard to Newsom's control, but a federal appeals court in San Francisco put a hold on the order, ruling that Trump had likely acted within the law. In Washington, Trump said Monday that he would take control of the Metropolitan Police Department and deploy 800 National Guard troops. He painted a nightmarish picture of a capital that's been 'overtaken' by 'bloodthirsty criminals' and 'roving mobs of wild youth' that was at direct odds with statistics showing plummeting crime rates. 'Great Significance' Breyer said that over the course of this week's proceedings, he'll be assessing whether federal troops were used illegally for traditional law enforcement activities and, if so, whether there is a risk that it will happen again. 'With President Trump increasingly talking about using troops for law enforcement purposes, this trial has great significance,' Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley, said in an interview. A win for Trump could be seen as a green light for presidents to unilaterally employ the military to police citizens inside the US. The Trump administration has argued that the president has broad, unilateral power to federalize the National Guard when he determines there is a 'rebellion' or 'invasion' or when 'regular forces' are unable to enforce the law. A lawyer for the state has called the prospect that a president can order troops into US cities without court review 'terrifying.' The case may ultimately be decided by the US Supreme Court, long after the troops have left Los Angeles. Nearly all have now been recalled, with just a small contingent left to stand guard at some federal facilities. The case is Newsom v. Trump, 25-cv-04870, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Jennifer Welch Sparks Outrage, Tells Trump Fans To Ditch Ethnic Eats And Head To Cracker Barrel!
Bravo personality Jennifer Welch is facing backlash after launching into an expletive-laden tirade on her I've Had It podcast, where she said Trump supporters should be barred from eating at Mexican, Chinese, and Indian restaurants. Instead, she suggested they stick to places like Cracker Barrel, criticizing those who enjoy global cuisines while supporting Donald Trump's policies. Her remarks sparked immediate outrage online, with critics calling her arrogant, intolerant, and hypocritical accusing her of embodying the very behavior she condemns.
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
'If you want to browbeat...': Jennifer Welch says Trump voters should be banned from Indian, Chinese, Mexican restaurants
Actor Jennifer Welch made a rant against the supporters of President Donald Trump and said they should be banned from all Mexican, Chinese and Indian restaurants in the US and should only eat at Cracker Barrel instead as they target migrants. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now 'I've had it with white people that triple Trumped that have the nerve and the audacity to walk into a Mexican restaurant, a Chinese restaurant, an Indian restaurant, go to a gay hairdresser,' Welch said on her podcast. 'If you want to triple Trump, if you want to brow beat DEI, if you want to brow beat gay people, you want to brow beat black people as you have been doing for hundreds of years… White people that triple Trumped should be boycotted, banned from enjoying the best thing that America has to offer, which is multiculturalism." 'Get your fat a**es out of the Mexican restaurant. Get your fat a**es over at a Cracker Barrel because nobody wants to see your f**king smug a**, teeny weeny pink arm, big gut around.' The meltdown drew flak as social media users called her "unhinged and delusional", though Democrats praised her. 'It's always the most intolerant and hateful pretending to love everyone,' one person commented on the clip. "Jennifer Welch needs a history lesson. Republicans ended slavery and gave citizenship to freed slaves, Democrats voted 0% for both. People of color just helped kick Democrats out of the White House," Rep. Dwayne Yunker said.
