Walmart CEO has a harsh warning for customers
While many retailers across the country are seeing their sales take a dip as consumers tighten their spending, Walmart () , the largest retailer in the U.S., has managed to keep its sales afloat.
In its first-quarter earnings report for fiscal year 2026, Walmart revealed that its U.S. comparable sales increased by 4.5% year-over-year, while the average number of transactions and amount of money shoppers spent per purchase spiked.
💵💰Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter 💰💵
This increase in sales contributed to Walmart generating $5.7 billion in its U.S. operating income, which is 7% higher than what it earned during the same quarter last year.During an earnings call on May 15, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said the increased sales 'were not driven by inflation,' but higher transactions. He also said that despite increased sales in health and grocery categories, the company has noticed customers are pulling back their spending in other areas.
'Health and wellness sales increased high teens, reflecting higher prescription volumes and over-the-counter sales, while general merchandise sales declined slightly with softness in electronics, home products, and sporting goods,' said McMillon.
As Walmart faces increased momentum from consumers, McMillon has issued a major warning about the future of the company's prices amid President Donald Trump's ever-changing tariff policy (tariffs are taxes companies pay to import goods from overseas).
On April 2, Trump announced a 10% "baseline" tariff on all countries importing goods to the U.S., with roughly 60 countries seeing higher tariff rates. Then, on April 9, he enforced a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs on all countries (except China), dropping them to a universal rate of 10%. He also hiked tariffs on China to a whopping 145%.
However, earlier this week, Trump agreed to lower tariffs on China from 145% to 30% after recent negotiations.
McMillon said that despite Trump's recent efforts to lower tariffs, Walmart still won't be able to fully absorb all of the extra costs it will face to import goods.'We will do our best to keep our prices as low as possible,' said McMillon. 'But given the magnitude of the tariffs, even at the reduced levels announced this week, we aren't able to absorb all the pressure given the reality of narrow retail margins. In retail, managing inventory is always important. In this situation, it's even more important and even more challenging.'
Walmart U.S. CEO John Rainey emphasized during the call that customers will see higher prices for goods as a result of tariffs.
'We're very pleased and appreciative of the progress that's been made by the administration to bring tariffs down to this level…' said Rainey. 'But let me emphasize, we still think that's too high. There are certain items, certain categories of merchandise that we're dependent upon to import from other countries. And prices of those things are likely going to go up, and that's not good for consumers.'
However, McMillon said keeping food prices low is one of Walmart's top priorities.
'We want to keep our food and consumables prices as low as we can. Food prices in the U.S. have gone up in recent years, and our customers have been feeling that all along,' he said. 'We won't let tariff-related cost pressure on some general-merchandise items put pressure on food prices. But as it relates to food, tariffs on countries like Costa Rica, Peru, and Colombia are pressuring imported items like bananas, avocados, coffee, and roses.'
The warning from Walmart comes after its executives met with Trump on April 21 to discuss his tariff policy.
'We had a productive meeting with President Trump and his team and appreciated the opportunity to share our insights,' said a Walmart spokesperson last month in a statement to TheStreet.
More Retail:
Costco quietly plans to offer a convenient service for customers
T-Mobile pulls the plug on generous offer, angering customers
Kellogg sounds alarm on unexpected shift in customer behavior
It is no surprise that Walmart is growing concerned about the impact tariffs could have on its business, as many consumers are already changing the way they shop in order to save money.
According to a recent survey from market research company Numerator, 83% of Americans are changing their shopping habits to prepare for the higher prices Trump's tariffs could bring. Some of these changes include scavenging for sales and coupons, delaying purchases, and buying fewer imported goods.
Amid this trend, Walmart's foot traffic in stores during the first few months of the year declined by 2.4% year-over-year, according to recent data from Placer.ai.
In February specifically, Walmart visits shrank by 5.9% year-over-year, and in March, visits fell by 4%. However, visits shot back up by 4.5% in April, aligning with the Easter holiday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The latest GOP push to cut waste and spending: Work requirements
The Trump administration and congressional Republicans are increasingly turning to work requirements as part of a wide-ranging effort to slash spending on welfare benefits - extending GOP messaging around waste and fraud to argue that many people who get federal aid don't deserve it. In late May, the House passed a sweeping tax and budget bill that would impose new work requirements as part of a plan to cut Medicaid. The Agriculture Department is poised to broaden work requirements that already condition access to the nation's largest food assistance program. And the Department of Housing and Urban Development sees work requirements as an 'absolute priority' for rental assistance programs - possibly within President Donald Trump's first year in office - according to an official briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that aren't finalized. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. Specific policies could change as the bill heads to the Senate, where multiple Republicans have expressed concerns over work requirements for Medicaid. Yet the proposals reflect a shifting view among Republicans in Washington about who should receive federal benefits. In a New York Times op-ed last month, four top Trump officials overseeing housing, health and food programs wrote that welfare programs were created to help the neediest but have 'deviated from their original mission both by drift and by design.' Even able-bodied adults should look to welfare as a 'short-term hand-up, not a lifetime handout,' wrote Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner. Meanwhile, Republican House leaders are also linking work requirements to broader efforts to root out fraud and abuse, and prevent undocumented immigrants from accessing public benefits. 'There are vulnerable citizens of this country who depend on the safety net,' House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) told The Washington Post last month. 'The safety net is weakened and is less sustainable when you are allowing these monies to go to people or to stakeholders … and used in other ways outside of supporting those who need it, depend on it and qualify for it.' The proposals have drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and left-leaning economists, who argue that work requirements are the wrong tool for this economy. They say the policies risk dropping some of the most vulnerable benefits recipients - such as people who work inconsistent hours, go through bouts of unemployment, struggle with health issues that don't qualify as disabilities or do unpaid work caring for relatives. 'We have never required a 64-year-old single widow who's taking care of her grandchild to work in order to be able to receive SNAP benefits,' said Lauren Bauer, a fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, referring to the food assistance program for low-income families. 'And I guess that's going to change.' Work requirements for benefits programs have been pushed at various times over decades. President Bill Clinton campaigned on a promise to 'end welfare as we know it' and in 1996 worked with the Republican-controlled Congress to overhaul benefits in a landmark law. The measure ended Aid to Families with Dependent Children - which effectively entitled the poorest Americans to federal help - and introduced Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, known more commonly as TANF. The number of people receiving federal welfare payments fell by half in four years, to 6.3 million in 2000. And the past few decades have given rise to debates over whether the changes worked, especially since measures of poverty fluctuate with recessions and other economic forces. The new policies under consideration could be even more far-reaching. Under the Affordable Care Act, adults with low incomes and no children or disabilities qualified for Medicaid for the first time, marking a significant expansion of the safety net insurance program. The new Republican plan would require beneficiaries to spend at least 80 hours a month working, training for a job, in school or volunteering to qualify for Medicaid. In May, Kennedy, the health and human services secretary, told the Senate that the changes would primarily affect people fraudulently receiving benefits and 'able-bodied male workers, males, who refuse to get a job.' Work requirements are meant to reduce the number of people on the program: Roughly a third of the $800 billion in health-care savings in the GOP's sweeping tax bill would come from the work rules, which would result in 4.8 million people becoming uninsured, according to an estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported by The Washington Post's Fact Checker. SNAP, the nation's largest food assistance program, already carries work requirements. Able-bodied adults between 18 and 54 who don't have dependents must work at least 80 hours a month to be eligible. Those who don't qualify can only receive food assistance for three months in a three-year period. People can be exempt because of homelessness, being in foster care or for other reasons, or states can apply for waivers if there aren't enough jobs in a region. Research is split on whether SNAP's existing work requirements have the intended effects. Bauer, the Brookings fellow, cited a 2021 study of Virginia food stamp recipients that found work requirements caused a large decline in SNAP participation without a corresponding boost in employment. The food stamp benefits 'are not binding disincentives against labor force participation for a population that overwhelmingly has no income,' the researchers wrote. Republicans have said current policies allow states to exempt too many people from work requirements. The GOP bill would alter the rules, raising the cutoff age to 64. It also newly subjects parents with dependent children ages 7 or older to work requirements, though a spouse in a two-parent household can still be exempt. The bill would also restrict place-based waivers to counties with an unemployment rate of over 10 percent: a bar many areas receiving waivers would not meet. A CBO analysis estimates the changes would reduce direct spending for SNAP by $92 billion over 10 years and push 3.2 million people out of the program. Work requirements are the 'right policy at the right time' for those in need and will stop able-bodied adults from being 'idle and disengaged,' Rollins, the agriculture secretary, said in a statement. The path for shifting housing policies is less clear. Most of the nation's 3,600 public housing agencies do not have work requirements. But about 140 are part of a narrow program called Moving to Work that gives local authorities room to test a range of rules that are not usually permitted, including those to boost self-sufficiency. Housing authorities, nonprofit groups, property managers and tenants are eager for details on whether work requirements will be mandatory, how many hours of work would be required and who would be exempt. The HUD official briefed on the matter told The Post that 'everything is on the table' and noted that the White House's proposal for a new two-year cap on rental assistance was another way of preventing long-term dependency. In 2024, nearly half of non-elderly, nondisabled households receiving HUD assistance did not include anyone who worked, said the official, citing internal data. Other research differs. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that based on 2022 data, 60 percent of working-age, nondisabled households receiving HUD rental assistance in 2022 included at least one worker. The HUD official said the administration also supports policies that shift power to local authorities and lets them decide which approaches are best. Within the Moving to Work cohort, the official said around 40 public housing agencies already have work requirements, are implementing them or plan to soon, and that such requirements often improve household incomes and employment. Opponents say an increase in work requirements would fall heavily on people who already have a harder time getting work, keeping steady housing or accessing health care. And they say the loss of benefits would be even more extensive given planned cuts to major services. For example, the White House budget proposal would significantly cut rental assistance programs for the fiscal year beginning in October, in part to shift more power to the states. It is unclear whether those cuts would be achieved through work requirements, since HUD's plans are still in flux. That could amount to millions of people losing aid whether they work or not, since many states won't be able to cover those losses. 'What this indicates is that the driver behind this policy isn't this goal of helping people to advance economically,' said Will Fischer, senior fellow and director of housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 'The driver is they're trying to cut what they are spending on these programs.' A large share of welfare recipients have jobs. About 32 million people who worked in 2023 got health coverage through Medicaid or food assistance through SNAP, according to a CBPP analysis of census data. In theory, new work requirements shouldn't jeopardize benefits for these recipients. But advocates and left-leaning economists say such requirements do sometimes have that effect - in part because enforcing the rules means enough new administrative burdens that people fall through the cracks. In Georgia, for example, just 12,000 of nearly 250,000 newly eligible recipients received Medicaid after the state implemented work requirements. That was in part because people who worked had a tough time proving it to state officials or their work didn't meet certain qualifications. Finally, those against the policies say even people with jobs sometimes need help making ends meet - so pushing recipients to work wouldn't necessarily solve their household budget problems. Homelessness is worsening among the employed, and inflation often falls hardest on poorer people. At Los Angeles's Downtown Women's Center, which works to end homelessness, regular job training programs are some of the most popular offerings, chief executive Amy Turk said. But even those with jobs need help. A report found that in 2022, nearly 30 percent of homeless women in Los Angeles County were working for pay. Monthly incomes averaged $1,186. In Los Angeles County, though, the average rent is more than $2,000. Analysts at left-leaning think tanks, and some researchers who have studied work requirements, say supporters of the policy have it backward: Health insurance, stable housing and access to food make it possible for people to find work and remain employed. They point to Arkansas, the first state to enact work requirements for Medicaid, as a key example. In 2018, the state implemented its work mandate, which led to 18,000 people losing insurance before a judge in 2019 struck down the requirements in a lawsuit brought by three nonprofits on behalf of some Medicaid recipients. One 40-year-old man lost health coverage after incorrectly reporting the details of his employment and could no longer afford his medication. He suffered complications from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lost his job and struggled to find work again. Others worked odd jobs that did not always allow them to meet the 80-hour-a-month requirement, like a landscaper who struggled to get work in rainy months. 'You cannot conclude that work makes people healthier,' said MaryBeth Musumeci, an associate professor of health policy and management at George Washington University's Milken Institute School of Public Health. 'You need to be physically and mentally healthy enough to work, and particularly for poor people, the types of jobs they are doing can create health problems.' Leaders of Opportunity Arkansas, a conservative policy group, said the state's data shows that most people who lost insurance did so because their incomes rose - exactly the goal of requiring work. 'If Congress is serious about restoring Medicaid as a safety net for the truly needy - not a long-term program for able-bodied adults - then policies that encourage work and self-sufficiency, like the one Arkansas implemented, need to be part of the conversation,' J. Robertson, the organization's public affairs director, said in an email. - - - Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Black Democrats fume over 2024 while 'searching for a leader' in 2028 Joy, tension collide as WorldPride arrives in Trump's Washington Kari Lake won awards for overseas reporting. Now she has the job of cutting it.
Fox News
16 minutes ago
- Fox News
CNN polling expert marvels at collapse of Democratic advantage with middle class in Trump era
CNN senior political data reporter Harry Enten Monday marveled at how Democrats continue to face a stark lack of confidence from voters on the economy and middle class issues. Voter dissatisfaction with former President Biden's management of the economy was one of the major issues that led to President Donald Trump's return to the White House. While Trump may have stirred controversy with his tariff and immigration policy shakeups since then, the economy appears to be one key area where he retains voters' trust. CNN host Kate Bolduan observed as she spoke to Enten that, according to CNN's own polling, Republicans are actually gaining ground in terms of being trusted to help America's struggling middle class. "Yeah, you know, historically speaking, 'Which is the party of the middle class?' has been a huge advantage for Democrats," Enten said, referring to one question from the polling. He said Democrats had a 23-point advantage on this question in 1989 and a 17-point advantage in 2016, "But by this decade, we already started seeing declines back in 2022, where you saw that Democrats led, but only by four points, well within the margin of error." Now it's tied. "This, I think, speaks to Democratic ills more than anything else," he argued. "They have traditionally been the party of the middle class. No more! Donald Trump and the Republican Party have taken that mantle away, and now a key advantage for Democrats historically has gone 'adios, amigos,' and now there is no party that is the party of the middle class. Republicans have completely closed the gap, Kate." Enten also said while one might think Trump's rocky experimentation with tariffs might shake voters' faith in Republicans and make them consider the opposition, but, "It ain't so. It ain't so!" The data reporter noted that in November 2023, Republicans had an 11-point advantage as "the party that is closest to your economic views." He noted, "Now it's still within that range, still within that margin of error, plus eight point advantage for the Republican Party. How is that possible, Democrats?" Enten continued to break down the numbers, wondering, "How is it possible after all the recession fears? After the stock market's been doing all of this, after all the tariffs that Americans are against, and Republicans still hold an eight-point lead on the economy? Are you kidding me?" He argued that CNN's poll was echoed by similar findings from Reuters/Ipsos, showing that confidence in Republicans to handle the economy has risen. "And again, this is after months of supposed economic uncertainty in which the stock market's been going bonkers, in which tariff wars that Americans are against have been going on. And yet, despite all of that, the Democrats are down by 12 points on the economy," he said. "This speaks to Democratic problems on the economy better than basically anything that you could possibly look at," Enten continued, arguing that even if approval ratings are slightly lower than they once were, Republicans maintain a clear advantage with public opinion on their management of the economy.
Hamilton Spectator
17 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Republican push for proof of citizenship to vote proves a tough sell in the states
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have made it a priority this year to require people to prove citizenship before they can register to vote. Turning that aspiration into reality has proved difficult. Trump's executive order directing a documentary, proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections has been blocked by a judge, while federal legislation to accomplish it doesn't appear to have the votes to pass in the Senate. At the same time, state-level efforts have found little success, even in places where Republicans control the legislature and governor's office. The most recent state effort to falter is in Texas, where a Senate bill failed to gain full legislative approval before lawmakers adjourned on Monday. The Texas bill was one of the nation's most sweeping proof-of-citizenship proposals because it would have applied not only to new registrants but also to the state's roughly 18.6 million registered voters. 'The bill authors failed spectacularly to explain how this bill would be implemented and how it would be able to be implemented without inconveniencing a ton of voters,' said Anthony Gutierrez, director of the voting rights group Common Cause Texas. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal and punishable as a felony, potentially leading to deportation, but Trump and his allies have pressed for a proof-of-citizenship mandate by arguing it would improve public confidence in elections. Before his win last year, Trump falsely claimed noncitizens might vote in large enough numbers to sway the outcome . Although noncitizen voting does occur, research and reviews of state cases has shown it to be rare and more often a mistake. Voting rights groups say the various proposals seeking to require proof-of-citizenship are overly burdensome and threaten to disenfranchise millions of Americans. Many do not have easy access to their birth certificates, have not gotten a U.S. passport or have a name that no longer matches the one on their birth certificate — such as women who changed their last name when they married. The number of states considering bills related to proof of citizenship for voting tripled from 2023 to this year, said Liz Avore, senior policy adviser with the Voting Rights Lab, an advocacy group that tracks election legislation in the states. That hasn't resulted in many new laws, at least so far. Republicans in Wyoming passed their own proof-of-citizenship legislation, but similar measures have stalled or failed in multiple GOP-led states, including Florida, Missouri, Texas and Utah. A proposal remains active in Ohio, although Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, has said he doesn't want to sign any more bills that make it harder to vote. In Texas, the legislation swiftly passed the state Senate after it was introduced in March but never made it to a floor vote in the House. It was unclear why legislation that was such a priority for Senate Republicans – every one of them co-authored the bill — ended up faltering. 'I just think people realized, as flawed as this playbook has been in other states, Texas didn't need to make this mistake,' said Rep. John Bucy, a Democrat who serves as vice chair of the House elections committee. Bucy pointed to specific concerns about married women who changed their last name. This surfaced in local elections earlier this year in New Hampshire , which passed a proof-of-citizenship requirement last year. Other states that previously sought to add such a requirement have faced lawsuits and complications when trying to implement it. In Arizona, a state audit found that problems with the way data was handled had affected the tracking and verification of residents' citizenship status. It came after officials had identified some 200,000 voters who were thought to have provided proof of their citizenship but had not. A proof-of-citizenship requirement was in effect for three years in Kansas before it was overturned by federal courts. The state's own expert estimated that almost all of the roughly 30,000 people who were prevented from registering to vote while it was in effect were U.S. citizens who otherwise had been eligible. In Missouri, legislation seeking to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement cleared a Senate committee but never came to a vote in the Republican-led chamber. Republican state Sen. Ben Brown had promoted the legislation as a follow-up to a constitutional amendment stating that only U.S. citizens can vote, which Missouri voters overwhelmingly approved last November. He said there were several factors that led to the bill not advancing this year. Due to the session's limited schedule, he chose to prioritize another elections bill banning foreign contributions in state ballot measure campaigns. 'Our legislative session ending mid-May means a lot of things die at the finish line because you simply run out of time,' Brown said, noting he also took time to research concerns raised by local election officials and plans to reintroduce the proof-of-citizenship bill next year. The Republican-controlled Legislature in Utah also prioritized other election changes, adding voter ID requirements and requiring people to opt in to receive their ballots in the mail. Before Gov. Spencer Cox signed the bill into law, Utah was the only Republican-controlled state that allowed all elections to be conducted by mail without a need to opt in. Under the Florida bill that has failed to advance, voter registration applications wouldn't be considered valid until state officials had verified citizenship, either by confirming a previous voting history, checking the applicant's status in state and federal databases, or verifying documents they provided. The bill would have required voters to prove their citizenship even when updating their registration to change their address or party affiliation. Its sponsor, Republican state Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka, said it was meant to follow through on Trump's executive order: 'This bill fully answers the president's call,' she said. ___ Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Mead Gruver in Cheyenne, Wyoming; David A. Lieb in Jefferson City, Missouri; Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida; Hannah Schoenbaum in Salt Lake City; Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio; and Isabella Volmert in Lansing, Michigan, contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
