
How will Trump's tariffs affect grocery store prices? We explain.
How will Trump's tariffs affect grocery store prices? We explain.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
How to save money on groceries
Save money buying groceries with these budget-friendly tips.
ProblemSolved, USA TODAY
How are current tariffs – and the threat of higher tariffs – going to affect grocery prices in the U.S?
It depends, those in the food industry say. The United States produces and manufactures a lot of its food domestically, but also relies a lot on imported goods.
"The short answer is yes, prices are going to go up," said David Ortega, a food economist and professor at Michigan State University. "They may not skyrocket for all imported products, but they will go up. Tariffs are a tax on imports, so by definition they are inflationary."
And while higher tariffs could still be coming after a 90-day-pause, the baseline 10% tariff on all goods, plus higher duties on Chinese products already in effect are a big increase in food costs for American's budgets, said Thomas Gremillion, director of food policy at The Consumer Federation of America.
"The 10% 'default' tariffs alone represent a truly historic federal tax increase, maybe the largest in my lifetime, with a highly regressive impact," Gremillion said.
Tariffs imposed at the border
The tariff only applies to the value of the product at the border, said Ortega. Then there's additional costs to the product, which are accrued domestically, like transporting the goods to the store, distribution, wholesale costs and retail markups. Those things are not subject to the tariff, said Ortega.
So that doesn't mean that the price of a particular product will go up by 10% or whatever the tariff is, said Ortega.
Tariffs will cause price increases and uncertainty
Overall, 15% of the U.S. food supply is imported, including 32% of fresh vegetables, 55% of fresh fruit, and 94% of seafood, according to the Consumer Federation of America, citing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Some products, like coffee and bananas, are almost exclusively grown abroad.
Tariffs are causing uncertainty, for families checking off their grocery lists to companies importing food, he said.
"For consumers, this can mean added difficulties in managing a food budget. For food companies, this means havoc on supply chains that could lead to more food waste and more food safety risk," Gremillion said.
Seafood prices could see tariff impact
One category that could be especially hit is seafood, said Swanson. It remains to be seen how that will be tariffed, especially with the trade war going on with China.
"A lot of seafood is caught here and then taken to China, where the labor is much more available and is a lower price to debone, to skin, to devein and then repackage, frozen and brought back to the United States," he said. The question is will that be tariffed.
"Will it be tariffed going in (to China), tariffed coming out and then it will become uneconomical for everybody?" Swanson asked.
Consumers have year-round demand for produce, fruits
Fresh produce will also likely cost more.
"Consumers will feel these price hikes at the grocery store, especially for products where we rely on imports to meet year-round consumer demand,'' Ortega told USA TODAY.
Shoppers' demand for fresh fruits twelve months a year is part of the reason why the United States imports many of them, said Ortega.
"We rely on international trade and imports for agricultural products in order to meet year round consumer demand for a lot of these items," Ortega said.
The U.S. can't grow some of the products domestically, such as bananas, or can only produce them seasonally, said Ortega. In many cases, it's cheaper to import food than to grow it domestically, largely due to labor cost differences, he said.
Similarly, though a small amount of coffee is grown in Hawaii, "we don't grow enough coffee domestically to be able to meet consumer demand," he said.
"So those things that are facing 10% tariffs, you will see the price go up," Ortega said.
He added that: "low-income households are affected the most, since they spend a higher portion of their disposable income on food."
Prices for some food products could go up, even without tariffs
Some retailers may still increase the price of a product, even if the product itself wasn't subject to a tariff, said Chris Costagli, vice president and food insights lead for NielsenIQ.
Manufacturers have something called "industry price gap management," which is the comparison of the price of their product versus their competitor, said Costagli. Even if you're a completely U.S.-based food product, "if all your competitors' prices are going up because they're affected by a tariff... you may raise your price, he said.
Additionally, a food product may have been made in the United States, so doesn't have a tariff levied on it, but the packaging or other ingredients to make the food may be imported, Costagli told USA TODAY. That could lead to a price hike.
Consumers are confused about tariffs
In a NielsenIQ study in March, 81% of consumers surveyed said they were somewhat familiar with the effect of tariffs on grocery prices and 73% believed the tariffs would impact the price of groceries. The survey was conducted when tariff discussion was only surrounding Canada and Mexico and before the reciprocal tariffs were announced, then paused and the hefty tariffs on China were implemented.
But keeping track of tariffs is confusing, especially as the tariff policies have changed.
Currently, there is a 25% tariff on goods from Mexico and Canada, unless they are products covered under an agreement called the United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement (USMCA) and a 10% baseline tariff on all imported goods from other countries. There is a 145% tariff on goods imported from China.
When Trump first announced the tariffs, he said all goods, including those coming from Mexico and China and covered under the USMCA agreement, would be subject to the extra fees. But then the president backed off that decision, saying the USCMCA-covered goods would not be tariffed. Additionally, there was a 90-day pause on any reciprocal tariffs beyond the 10%.
Some agricultural and food products are covered under the USMCA, but it is difficult to distinguish which products are currently coming in with or without tariffs because there's an extra cost and hassle for importers to verify themselves under the USMCA, so some may just pay the tariff, said Ortega.
And many are having to wait and see what other tariffs might happen.
"I think a lot of people just have no idea what is what is tariffed and what isn't tariffed," said Costagli.
U.S. produces a lot of our own food, so prices could come down
The United States grows and produces a lot of food products and is a huge net surplus producer, which means "we need to take that product out to the global markets. We just produce too much of it," said Michael Swanson, Chief Agricultural Economist Wells Fargo Agri-Food Institute.
We export about 15% of our poultry overseas and about 20% of our pork overseas, said Swanson.
"If we lost some of those markets, that would have to stay in the domestic market and could actually depress prices," he said. "So we might actually see pork and poultry prices come down as the market has to sell it in America first before they can reduce the supply on an ongoing basis," he said.
To save, look for substitions
Consumers can try to save money by sticking to foods that are grown, produced or manufactured in the United States – and there's a lot of them, said Swanson.
There will still be some things that they will have to pay more for, if there is no substitution or if they're not willing to trade for a different product, he said. For instance, champagne from the Champagne region of France or Parmesan cheese that only comes from Parma, Italy.
But there are growers of parmesan cheese in Wisconsin and that product is cheaper than the Parma, Italy version.
Consumers may consider other substitutions like trying bourbon from Kentucky instead of scotch from Scotland, which could increase in price due to tariffs, Swanson said.
Study: Consumers worried about tariffs are pulling back on spending
Some products could see price increases
Here's some food products that could see price increases, due to tariffs, according to Ortega:
Bananas: nearly all bananas consumed in the U.S. are imported (from countries like Guatemala, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Colombia, etc).
Coffee: outside of Hawaii and Puerto Rico, the U.S. does not grow much coffee. Tariffs would hit virtually the entire supply – we import coffee from Brazil, Colombia, Vietnam and other countries.
Olive oil: the vast majority of olive oil consumed in the U.S. is imported, with a lot of it coming from Europe. There is some production in California, but that is relatively negligible when you look at the full supply.
Tips to save on food costs
Gremillion, with The Consumer Federation of America, offers these tips to save on food costs with potential tariff increases:
Watch out for big price swings. With so much seafood imported, fish prices seem likely to rise, but other impacts may come as a surprise. For example, prices for chicken breasts and thighs may go up due to Chinese retaliatory tariffs on frozen chicken feet, which threaten to cut off a $1.1 billion source of revenue for U.S. poultry processors.
Make a list and stick to it. Food manufacturers in the U.S. spend an estimated $50 billion in placement and promotional fees to grocery chains, all with the intention of swaying your purchasing decisions.
Beware of shrinkflation. Wary of driving away customers with higher prices, many manufacturers have taken to shrinking package contents. Look at the per-unit cost.
Check out frozen, dried, and canned goods. 'Healthy' foods include more than just fresh produce.
Consider generic or 'store' brands. These foods, also referred to as 'private-label brands,' are often produced in the same manufacturing facilities, with the same ingredients, as more heavily marketed national brands.
Sales aren't always good deals. Sometimes sales can lure you into buying an item you don't need or paying a price that is too high.
Betty Lin-Fisher is a consumer reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at blinfisher@USATODAY.com or follow her on X, Facebook or Instagram @blinfisher and @blinfisher.bsky.social on Bluesky. Sign up for our free The Daily Money newsletter, which will include consumer news on Fridays, here.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This Kansas town doesn't hate immigrants enough. So the Trump administration plots vengeance.
Lawrence and Douglas County appeared on a Department of Homeland Security list of 'sanctuary jurisdictions.' (Clay Wirestone/Kansas Reflector) The Trump administration has put my town — the place my family and I call home — on its hit list for a thought crime. What horrible thing have the people of Lawrence and wider Douglas County done to deserve this fate? Apparently, we don't sufficiently detest immigrants. Put questions of legal status aside. As we all know, it doesn't matter to the hate-bloated buffoons in Washington, D.C., what papers a person has or doesn't have. They will ship you off to a foreign gulag if you're the wrong color or in the wrong place. Because Lawrence had the unmitigated audacity to care about people who look different, it has been threatened with the full wrath of the federal government. It might be shocking, if so little was shocking these days. The Department of Homeland Security posted a list of 500-plus 'sanctuary jurisdictions' on its website May 29, highlighting cities and counties that supposedly run afoul of its anti-immigrant agenda. Three days later, officials took down the page after an outcry from local law enforcement. Thanks to the Internet Archive, you can still browse the list and read the government's inflammatory rhetoric: 'DHS demands that these jurisdictions immediately review and revise their policies to align with Federal immigration laws and renew their obligation to protect American citizens, not dangerous illegal aliens.' There's a lot to unpack there — immigrants commit fewer crimes than those born in the United States, for one thing — but let's press on. The point is that my town and county landed on the list. Let's try to figure out why. Back in 2020, the city passed an ordinance protecting undocumented folks. Two years later, the Kansas Legislature pushed through a bill banning sanctuary cities, and Lawrence subsequently revised its ordinance. You can read the current city code here. What's important to note is that the current language gives wide berth to state and federal law, making clear that the city won't obstruct or hinder federal immigration enforcement. By the same token, that doesn't mean the city has to pursue a brazenly anti-immigration path. Lawrence can and should represent the will of voters, while following applicable law. And those voters, through their elected representatives, chose to make their city a welcoming one. So how did Lawrence end up on the list? Apparently because it didn't spew enough hatred for the White House's liking. A senior DHS official told NPR that 'designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a sanctuary jurisdiction, noncompliance with federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens.' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem pontificated on Fox News: 'Some of the cities have pushed back. They think because they don't have one law or another on the books that they don't qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.' Note those phrases from the official and Noem: 'Self-identification as a sanctuary jurisdiction.' 'One law or another.' In other words, it doesn't matter what ordinances a city or county has on the books. It doesn't matter what the actual laws may be. It apparently depends on what a city calls itself and how the Trump administration feels about it. No city or county sets out to break the law. They have attorneys on staff or retainer to make sure they don't break myriad legal restrictions. Lawrence followed the law in enacting its original ordinance, and when the law changed, officials followed along. But few want to step out and say such things publicly, given that federal officials have tremendous resources behind them. They could crush any city or county if they wished, through legal bills alone. Thankfully, as mentioned above, sheriffs across the nation pushed back. 'This list was created without any input, criteria of compliance, or a mechanism for how to object to the designation,' said National Sheriffs' Association president Sheriff Kieran Donahue. 'Sheriffs nationwide have no way to know what they must do or not do to avoid this arbitrary label. This decision by DHS could create a vacuum of trust that may take years to overcome.' Douglas County Sheriff Jay Armbrister was similarly outspoken in comments to the Lawrence Journal-World: 'We feel like the goalposts have been moved on us, and this is now merely a subjective process where one person gets to decide our status on this list based on their opinion.' Thanks to the U.S. Constitution and its First Amendment, we are not required to love, like or even respect our government. We are not required to voice support of its goals. We are not required to say anything that we don't want to say about immigration, immigrants or ICE. Republicans understood that full well when Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama were in office. Both faced torrents of criticism on this very subject. Those presidents took the abuse. It was, and is, part of the job. Now President Donald Trump and his anti-immigration minions have to deal with the fact that a different segment of the public vehemently disagrees with their immigration policies. That's OK. That's protected expression. Within the bounds of law, we are also free to define our towns, cities and counties however we want. Accusing local governments of thought crimes desecrates and defames our Constitution. Clay Wirestone is Kansas Reflector opinion editor. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NATO chief Rutte calls for 400% increase in the alliance's air and missile defense
LONDON (AP) — NATO members need to increase their air and missile defenses by 400% to counter the threat from Russia, the head of the military alliance plans to say on Monday. Secretary-General Mark Rutte will say during a visit to London that NATO must take a 'quantum leap in our collective defense' to face growing instability and threats, according to extracts released by NATO before Rutte's speech. Rutte is due to meet U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer at 10 Downing St. ahead of a NATO summit in the Netherlands where the 32-nation alliance is likely to commit to a big hike in military spending. Like other NATO members, the U.K. has been reassessing its defense spending since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Starmer has pledged to increase British defense spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product by 2027 and to 3% by 2034. Rutte has proposed a target of 3.5% of economic output on military spending and another 1.5% on 'defense-related expenditure' such as roads, bridges, airfields and sea ports. He said last week he is confident the alliance will agree to the target at its summit in The Hague on June 24-25. At the moment, 22 of the 32 member countries meet or exceed NATO's current 2% target. The new target would meet a demand by President Donald Trump that member states spend 5% of gross domestic product on defense. Trump has long questioned the value of NATO and complained that the U.S. provides security to European countries that don't contribute enough. Rutte plans to say in a speech at the Chatham House think tank in London that NATO needs thousands more armored vehicles and millions more artillery shells, as well as a 400% increase in air and missile defense. 'We see in Ukraine how Russia delivers terror from above, so we will strengthen the shield that protects our skies,' he plans to say. 'Wishful thinking will not keep us safe. We cannot dream away the danger. Hope is not a strategy. So NATO has to become a stronger, fairer and more lethal alliance.' European NATO members, led by the U.K. and France, have scrambled to coordinate their defense posture as Trump transforms American foreign policy, seemingly sidelining Europe as he looks to end the war in Ukraine. Last week the U.K. government said it would build new nuclear-powered attack submarines, prepare its army to fight a war in Europe and become 'a battle-ready, armor-clad nation.' The plans represent the most sweeping changes to British defenses since the collapse of the Soviet Union more than three decades ago.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iran says to submit own nuclear proposal to US soon
Iran said Monday it will soon present a counter-proposal on a nuclear deal with the United States, after it had described Washington's offer as containing "ambiguities". Tehran and Washington have held five rounds of talks since April to thrash out a new nuclear accord to replace the deal with major powers that US President Donald Trump abandoned during his first term in 2018. The longtime foes have been locked in a diplomatic standoff over Iran's uranium enrichment, with Tehran defending it as a "non-negotiable" right and Washington describing it as a "red line". On May 31, after the fifth round talks, Iran said it had received "elements" of a US proposal, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi saying later the text contained "ambiguities". Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei criticised the US proposal as "lacking elements" reflective of the previous rounds of negotiations, without providing further details. "We will soon submit our own proposed plan to the other side through (mediator) Oman once it is finalised," Baqaei told a weekly press briefing. "It is a proposal that is reasonable, logical, and balanced, and we strongly recommend that the American side value this opportunity." Iran's parliament speaker has said the US proposal failed to include the lifting of sanctions -- a key demand for Tehran, which has been reeling under their weight for years. - 'Strategic mistake' - Trump, who has revived his "maximum pressure" campaign of sanctions on Iran since taking office in January, has repeatedly said it will not be allowed any uranium enrichment under a potential deal. On Wednesday, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the US offer was "100 percent against" notions of independence and self-reliance. He insisted that uranium enrichment was "key" to Iran's nuclear programme and that the US "cannot have a say" on the issue. Iran currently enriches uranium to 60 percent, far above the 3.67-percent limit set in the 2015 deal and close though still short of the 90 percent needed for a nuclear warhead. Western countries, including the United States, have long accused Iran of seeking to acquire atomic weapons, while Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes The United Nations nuclear watchdog will convene a Board of Governors meeting from June 9-13 in Vienna to discuss Iran's nuclear activities. The meeting comes after the International Atomic Energy Agency released a report criticising "less than satisfactory" cooperation from Tehran, particularly in explaining past cases of nuclear material found at undeclared sites. Iran has criticised the IAEA report as unbalanced, saying it relied on "forged documents" provided by its arch foe Israel. Britain, France and Germany, the three European countries who were party to the 2015 deal, are currently weighing whether to trigger the sanctions "snapback" mechanism in the accord. The mechanism would reinstate UN sanctions in response to Iranian non-compliance -- an option that expires in October. On Friday, Araghchi warned European powers against backing a draft resolution at the IAEA accusing Tehran of non-compliance, calling it a "strategic mistake". On Monday, Baqaei said Iran has "prepared and formulated a series of steps and measures" if the resolution passed. "Without a doubt, the response to confrontation will not be more cooperation," he added. rkh-mz/ysm