Walmart's Stock Price Is Up Despite New Transshipment Tariffs

Forbes

05-08-2025

Walmart prides itself on its everyday low prices. Being a low-cost retailer has been a key contributor to Walmart's status as the world's largest retailer. A key reason for Walmart's 'everyday low prices' is the procurement of goods from low-wage, low-cost nations, such as China or India. In 2023, goods from China accounted for 60% of product sales. India is the second largest source of imports. Between January and August 2023, 25% of Walmart's U.S. imports originated in India.
Higher tariffs, of course, threaten the EDLP strategy. But the new tariffs on transshipments are even more painful for retailers relying on low-cost foreign imports. The New York Times points out that ever since President Trump began raising tariffs on goods from China during his first term, Chinese companies have raced to set up warehouses in Southeast Asia and Mexico to bypass US tariffs through the use of indirect shipments.
On July 31st, Trump signed an executive order targeting transshipments. Goods deemed by the Customs and Border Patrol to have been transshipped to evade applicable country of origin duties are now subject to an additional 40% import tax on top of the applicable country of origin tariff rates. These rates will take effect on August 7th.
The legal definition of transshipment is a good that did not undergo a 'substantial transformation' in the country through which it passed. For example, the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement requires that at least 75% of cars be manufactured in North America based on North American-sourced components to qualify for duty-free treatment. So, for example, goods that flow to Mexico from China, where final consumer packaging is done, would be a light form of value-add. These goods would almost certainly be considered transhipped products. The executive order did not go into detail on the exact amount of value-add needed to avoid the 'transshipment' designation.
Surprisingly, the new transshipment tariffs have not led to a decline in Walmart's stock price. On July 31st, when the new rules were announced, Walmart's stock closed at $97.98. Today, the stock opened at $99.67.
Walmart's ability to pass these higher tariff costs on to consumers may be somewhat constrained. In May, Walmart said that it planned to increase prices, possibly by June, to pass along the higher tariff costs. 'We have always worked to keep our prices as low as possible, and we won't stop. We'll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can, given the reality of small retail margins,' a Walmart spokesperson explained.
Trump strongly disagreed with that idea. He wrote on Truth Social that Walmart needs to stop using tariffs as an excuse for increasing prices across its stores. And said that with Walmart having seen enormous profits last year, Walmart should absorb the costs associated with tariffs, instead of passing them on to customers.
Walmart has worked to get its foreign suppliers to absorb some of the higher costs. Walmart asked several Chinese apparel and kitchenware suppliers to cut prices by up to 10% per tariff round. For many of these suppliers, Walmart is by far their largest customer and thus has substantial negotiating leverage. But these price decrease requests are much larger than what suppliers are used to.
Further, the Chinese government is pushing back. According to The Wall Street Journal, Chinese officials summoned Walmart executives following complaints from suppliers. Authorities criticized the retailer's demands as unfair, warning that forcing suppliers to absorb tariff costs could breach contracts and disrupt market stability. Legal consequences were reportedly mentioned during the discussions.
China can help exporters by devaluing its currency, which lowers the price of exports. They're also giving tax breaks and other incentives to their exporters, trying to keep them afloat. These tactics are something they have done in the past. But these things have been roundly criticized by the US and other Western nations.
Experts on retailing say that, despite the President's call for retailers to 'eat the tariffs,' retailers will not be willing to absorb all of those increased prices. 'This idea that the president says, 'Listen, retailers, eat the tariffs.' That's not going to happen,' Kevin O'Leary of Shark Tank explained. Suppliers, retailers, and customers will all absorb some of the higher costs driven by tariffs.
Even before the transshipment announcement, Walmart was struggling to forecast results. The retail giant did not release a profit outlook for the first quarter of the year due to the uncertainty surrounding the economy and tariff-related costs. Walmart on Thursday shared that its profits slipped in the first quarter of the year to $4.45 billion.
It's difficult to understand why Walmart's stock price did not slump. Was it because many don't fully understand the potential impact of the transshipment tariffs? Or is it because Walmart has a strong history of growth despite headwinds? Or do some believe this transshipment rule will be difficult to enforce?
How could US Customs and Border Patrol detect transshipments? If we take Walmart as an example, and assume they wanted to avoid transshipment tariffs (which I do not assume), the CBP would look for changing patterns in shipment origins.
Walmart operates 20 distribution centers in Mexico. These warehouses are advertised as supporting the Mexican market. If shipments from these DCs started flowing across the border to the US, that would be evidence that Walmart is looking to avoid transshipment tariffs.
What would be more challenging for the CPB to detect is a shift from FOB at origin to FOB at destination. FOB stands for "freight on board." The term is used to describe the point in a transaction where a product being shipped becomes the property of the buyer. In an FOB Origin shipping arrangement, the buyer is the owner of the product as soon as it leaves the point of origin. In an FOB Destination shipping arrangement, the shipment becomes the property of the buyer when it reaches a specified destination in the shipping process.
In general, in an FOB destination contract, the seller of products plans all the logistics. In FOB origin arrangement, the buyers often designate which shipping company to use and even which lane a shipment should move on. Large companies frequently believe that by taking responsibility for logistics, they can save money. But a shift to FOB at origin contracts could allow suppliers to more easily evade transshipment duties by adding an extra port to the end-to-end shipment and thus sell prices to a retailer at a lower price.