Shop at Ross? Retailer says tariffs could increase prices
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Trump tells Walmart to 'eat the tariffs' instead of raising prices
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday that Walmart should "eat the tariffs" instead of blaming duties imposed by his administration on imported goods for the retailer's increased prices.
Reuters
Add Ross Stores to the retailers expecting to raise some prices due to tariffs.
Ross Stores, which operates Ross Dress for Less and DD's Discounts, may be forced to raise prices on some products, executives said during the company's first quarter earnings call on May 22.
The retailer reported flat sales for the 13-week period ending May 3, compared to the same period a year ago. Net income of $479 million dipped nearly 2% from a year ago, but met expectations of analysts polled by S&P Global Market Intelligence.
Sales increased each month during the quarter, but the effects of inflation and tariffs and inflation loom over the coming weeks, CEO Jim Conroy said in comments in the earnings release. 'Heightened macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainty persists, most notably prolonged inflation and evolving trade policies," he said.
National Hamburger Day 2025: Free food at Burger King, deals at Wendy's, Dairy Queen, more
Ross Stores: 'Don't want to be the first one to raise prices'
Trade policies continue to shift. Earlier this month, President Donald Trump reached a U.S.-China agreement to lower tariff rates on trade for 90 days – cutting the tariffs on Chinese imports from 145% on most goods to 30% tariff, while China reduced tariffs on U.S. goods from 125% to 10%.
While Trump called on Walmart to "eat the tariffs," Ross Stores is among retailers including Walmart, Amazon, and Best Buy preparing customers for higher prices on some products. Half of the goods sold at its stores originate from China, Conroy said. "As such, we expect pressure on our profitability if tariffs remain at elevated levels," he said.
Like other retailers, Ross Stores is trying multiple strategies to "mitigate the cost" of tariffs, but expects consumers to begin feeling their impact in late June and early July, chief operating officer Michael Hartshorn told analysts during the earnings call, according to a transcript from S&P Global Market Intelligence.
In addition to finding products made in other countries, Ross Stores is working with suppliers to "get better costing, which we've done at this point, even in the second quarter," he said.
Lastly, the retailer can increase the price charged for products, "but we want to be very careful with price increases," Hartshorn said. "We don't want to be the first one to raise prices, and we want to make sure that we keep our value or pricing umbrella versus mainstream retail."
In the months ahead, this dilemma will be felt by consumers and retailers – many of which rely on goods from China, Conroy said. "At the end of the day, there's a lot of product, particularly over the next 6 months, that is going to be imported from China for us and for every other retailer and every other off-price company," he said.
Ross Stores projected flat to 3% sales during the current 13-week period ending Aug. 2, compared to a 4% increase a year ago.
Contributing: Kinsey Crowley, Margie Cullen, Kathryn Palmer
Mike Snider is a reporter on USA TODAY's Trending team. You can follow him on Threads, Bluesky, X and email him at mikegsnider & @mikegsnider.bsky.social & @mikesnider & msnider@usatoday.com
What's everyone talking about? Sign up for our trending newsletter to get the latest news of the day
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trade Partners Grow Restless Waiting for Trump's Tariff Breaks
(Bloomberg) -- UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer declared at a Jaguar Land Rover factory in May that his world-leading trade deal with President Donald Trump included a cut in US tariffs on British steel to zero. More than three months later, steel lobbyist Peter Brennan was still waiting for that relief to become reality. The US-Canadian Road Safety Gap Is Getting Wider Festivals and Parades Are Canceled Amid US Immigration Anxiety A Photographer's Pipe Dream: Capturing New York's Vast Water System Princeton Plans New Budget Cuts as Pressure From Trump Builds A London Apartment Tower With Echoes of Victorian Rail and Ancient Rome Brennan, director of trade and economic policy at industry body UK Steel, said most members had seen US orders fall because of the uncertainty over America's 25% import tax. One producer that makes particularly price-competitive products said they'd be out of business by year-end if tariffs aren't reduced to zero, he added. 'Concern is growing that finalizing the deal on steel has fallen down the priority list both for the UK and US governments,' Brennan said last week. 'The will to close the deal may well be faltering on both sides.' Frustration and economic losses like those in the UK are growing in Japan, the European Union and South Korea. Those three made similar announcements over the past month: that Washington granted them leniency on auto exports in the haggling over the level of Trump's across-the-board tariffs that took effect Aug. 7. But for the trio of car export powerhouses, which unlike the UK face a 50% duty on their steel and aluminum, the wait for Trump's concession continues while an American levy justified on national security grounds on imported Toyotas, BMWs, Hyundais and others remains at a crippling 25%. 'We're continuing to see damage — the bleeding hasn't stopped,' Japan's chief trade negotiator Ryosei Akazawa said Friday in a reference to the country's car industry. 'We want the US to sign the executive order as soon as possible.' Spokesmen for the White House, the US Trade Representative's office and the Commerce Department didn't reply to requests for comment. 'Forever Negotiations' It was three weeks ago that EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen shook hands with Trump in Scotland over what she called an 'all-inclusive' tariff of 15% that officials in Brussels later understood to be a ceiling that would also apply to cars. VDA, which represents Germany's car industry, is pressing for fast implementation to alleviate a 'considerable burden' on manufacturers and their suppliers. 'The deal between the EU and the US has not yet brought any clarity or improvement for the German automotive industry,' VDA President Hildegard Müller said in a statement to Bloomberg News on Thursday. 'The costs incurred run into the billions and continue to rise.' Cecilia Malmström, the former European commissioner for trade who's now a nonresident fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, cautioned that any delays may be purely administrative. But 'if nothing happens, there will be huge pressure on the European Commission to retaliate or to act in some way, especially from carmakers in Germany, Italy, France, Sweden and others,' she said. 'There are so many other things that are vague in the EU-US deal — and in the others as well — so it is likely we will see forever negotiations and a lot of filibustering.' At a press briefing on Aug. 14, European Commission spokesperson Olof Gill said Washington and Brussels are finalizing a joint statement. 'The US has made political commitments to us in this respect and we look forward to them being implemented,' he said. Japan's Uncertainty Less than a week before the EU's announcement, the US and Japan clinched a surprise deal on July 22 that lowered across-the-board tariffs and car levies to 15%. So far the broader duties have been implemented but the added tax on autos remains at 25%. Officials in Asia's No. 2 economy are waiting for an executive order from Trump to bring down the car levies, as well as an official directive — like the EU already received — to clarify that the universal tariffs don't stack on top of existing duties. Akazawa has mentioned how a Japanese carmaker is losing ¥100 million ($680,000) every hour due to the tariffs. Last month Nissan Motor Corp. said it foresaw a ¥300 billion hit from the lower tariff rate, down from a previous estimate of ¥450 billion. But Chief Executive Officer Ivan Espinosa has warned of the difficulties in giving an accurate forecast as long as it's unclear when the tariffs will take effect and in what way. Akazawa flew to the US earlier this month to confirm that the US will be adjusting its executive order soon to remove the stacking, and pay back overcharges on tariffs. Neither has yet to materialize. Hyundai, Kia Facing similar questions is South Korea, which announced a trade agreement with Washington on July 31. That pact would impose a 15% tariff on imports to the US, including autos, alongside a $350 billion Korean investment pledge focused on shipbuilding, and $100 billion in energy purchases. The 15% universal tariff took effect earlier this month under Trump's order, but like Japan, the sectoral auto tariff remain at 25%. While South Korea's exports overall have stayed resilient in the first half of the year, thanks to front-loading by companies anticipating higher US tariffs, the value of car shipments to the US fell nearly 17%, and steel exports dropped more than 11%, trade data showed. South Korea's top automaker Hyundai Motor Co. and affiliate Kia Corp. could face as much as $5 billion in additional costs this year even under the new 15% auto tariff, according to Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Joanna Chen. While avoiding a 25% levy will save more than $3 billion, the duty squeezes margins amid softer demand and tighter subsidies, intensifying competition with Japanese automakers, Chen said. Korean President Lee Jae Myung's planned summit with Trump on Aug. 25 — their first meeting since Lee took office in June — will test the durability of the $350 billion investment pledge, as well as their alliance over sensitive issues like defense spending, US troop levels and North Korea policy. 'Just Overwhelmed' For Starmer and the UK, most aspects of the pact have now come into force, including a 10% so-called reciprocal rate that's the lowest among all US trading partners. Yet Trump's 25% tax on British steel still chafes amid the delays in cutting it. Among the issues to resolve is the US's insistence that steel should be melted and poured in the UK in order to qualify. That's a requirement which Tata Steel UK, one of the country's biggest producers, is no longer able to fulfill after closing down its blast furnace last year. Its new electric arc furnace is not due to be ready until late 2027. People familiar with the government's thinking are cautiously optimistic they might be able to secure exemptions to the melt-and-pour rule, whereby steel imported from certain European countries before being further processed in the UK is allowed to qualify as British. 'It's not for lack of trying by the UK government,' said Tim Rutter, director of public affairs at Tata Steel. 'We hear that US departments are just overwhelmed.' A spokesperson for the UK Department for Business and Trade said officials will continue to work with Washington to implement the deal as soon as possible. Late on Friday in Washington, the US Customs and Border Protection agency issued new inclusions to steel and aluminum product lists for tariffs that take effect Monday, with some of the guidance affecting imports from the UK. Japan's Akazawa acknowledged that even with the UK, actual implementation of key parts of their deal took 54 days. As a result, he's said that it's 'not bad' if an executive order from the US comes by around mid-September. 'It's just further confirmation that negotiations never really end,' especially with more US tariffs coming for sectors including pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, said Sam Lowe, a partner at Flint Global in London and head of its trade and market access practice. --With assistance from Nick Heubeck, Max Ramsay, Stefan Nicola, Sakura Murakami, Soo-Hyang Choi and Josh Wingrove. What Declining Cardboard Box Sales Tell Us About the US Economy Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates Living With 12 Strangers to Ease a Housing Crunch Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan How Syrian Immigrants Are Boosting Germany's Economy ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's How This Forgotten Healthcare Stock Could Generate Life-Changing Returns
Key Points CRISPR Therapeutics' first approved therapy, Casgevy, was a breakthrough. One of Casgevy's biggest achievements may be demonstrating the viability of CRISPR Therapeutics' strategy. The biotech company could soar if it can follow up that win with more clinical and regulatory milestones. 10 stocks we like better than CRISPR Therapeutics › Over the past few years, the market hasn't been kind to somewhat speculative, unprofitable stocks. CRISPR Therapeutics (NASDAQ: CRSP), a mid-cap biotech, fits that description. The company's shares are down by 24% since mid-2022. The S&P 500 is up 50% over the same period. Despite this terrible performance, there are reasons to believe that CRISPR Therapeutics could still generate life-changing returns for investors willing to be patient. Here's how the biotech could pull it off. CRISPR Therapeutics' first success CRISPR Therapeutics' first approval was for Casgevy, a treatment for sickle cell disease (SCD) and transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia (TDT), which it developed in collaboration with Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Before Casgevy, no CRISPR-based gene-editing medicine had been approved. While it became the first, it still faces some challenges. Ex vivo gene-editing therapies require a complex manufacturing and administration process that can only be performed in authorized treatment centers (ATCs). Moreover, they're expensive. Casgevy costs $2.2 million in the U.S. Getting third-party payers on board for that is no easy feat. Still, CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals are making steady progress. As of the second quarter, CRISPR Therapeutics had achieved its goal of activating 75 ATCs. It had also secured reimbursement for eligible patients in 10 countries. The two companies estimate there are roughly 60,000 eligible SCD and TDT patients in the regions they have targeted. Let's say they continue to strike reimbursement deals and can count on third-party coverage for 70% of this target population (42,000 people), then go on to treat another 30% of that group in the next decade (12,600 patients). Assuming they could extend that $2.2 million price tag to those countries, Casgevy could generate more than $27.7 billion over this period. Based on its agreement with Vertex, 40% would go to CRISPR Therapeutics, or roughly $11.1 billion over a decade. That's not bad, but it's not that impressive either. So, while Casgevy could contribute meaningfully to CRISPR Therapeutics' results -- and may even reach blockbuster status at some point -- the medicine may primarily serve as a proof of concept to demonstrate that the biotech's approach can be effective. Substantial progress with its first commercialized product will help the stock price. But the company's performance will depend even more on future clinical and regulatory milestones, especially as it shows with Casgevy that it can manage the intricacies and complexities of marketing gene-editing medicines. Can the pipeline deliver? CRISPR Therapeutics has six candidates in clinical trials, which isn't bad at all for a mid-cap biotech company. One of its leading programs is CTX310, a potential therapy designed to help reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients with certain conditions. CTX310 is already producing encouraging clinical trial results. Additionally, it's an in vivo medicine, meaning it bypasses the need to harvest patients' cells to manufacture therapies; in vivo gene-editing treatments are easier to handle than their ex vivo counterparts. The company's path to creating life-changing returns hinges on its ability to deliver consistent clinical and regulatory wins over the next few years for CTX310 and other important candidates. If CRISPR Therapeutics can successfully launch several new products in the next five to seven years, its shares are likely to skyrocket. In the meantime, under this scenario, the company would succeed in making gene-editing medicines more mainstream. This would encourage third-party payers to get on board -- and healthcare institutions, and perhaps even governments, to help push for more ATCs, since there'd be a greater need to accommodate these treatments. Can CRISPR Therapeutics achieve this? In my view, the biotech stock is on the riskier side, but does carry significant upside potential. There's a (small) chance the gene-editing specialist will deliver life-changing returns in the next decade, but investors need to hedge their bets. It's best to start by initiating a small position in the stock, then progressively add more if CRISPR Therapeutics lands more wins. Should you invest $1,000 in CRISPR Therapeutics right now? Before you buy stock in CRISPR Therapeutics, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and CRISPR Therapeutics wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,155!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,106,071!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,070% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 184% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Prosper Junior Bakiny has positions in Vertex Pharmaceuticals. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Here's How This Forgotten Healthcare Stock Could Generate Life-Changing Returns was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
The Hill
34 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee
President Trump's pick to lead the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is breaking the mold of his predecessors and causing alarm among economists of all stripes Commissioners of the BLS are usually academics or career civil servants with decades of experience in statistics and economics. But EJ Antoni, who Trump nominated to lead the agency after firing former BLS chief Erika McEntarfer on the heels of a disappointing jobs report earlier this month, has more bona fides as a pundit and conservative advocate than he does as a statistician. The choice of Antoni to lead a statistical division whose data is scrutinized by businesses and governments all over the world is getting major backlash from the economics profession and sparking concerns about the politicization of bedrock-level economic data. 'E.J. Antoni is completely unqualified to be BLS Commissioner,' Harvard University economist Jason Furman, who worked for the Obama administration, wrote on social media. 'He is an extreme partisan and does not have any relevant experience.' Stan Veuger, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, echoed Furman's words. 'He's utterly unqualified and as partisan as it gets,' he told the Washington Post. Who is EJ Antoni? Antoni has been the chief economist of the Heritage Foundation's center on the federal budget for the past four months. The Heritage Foundation is a right-wing think tank that produced the wide-ranging Project 2025 policy agenda. Project 2025 took aim at the 'permanent political class' in Washington, and many of its budget-cutting recommendations have been carried out by the Trump administration. He held two research fellowships at Heritage prior to his current position and two other fellowships at the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, a conservative advocacy group led by billionaire Steve Forbes. Antoni submitted his doctoral dissertation in 2020, in which he defends positions associated with 'supply-side economics,' a conservative policy doctrine that became popular in the 1980s. Besides stints as an adjunct at a community college and as an instructor at his alma mater of Northern Illinois University, he's held no other academic posts. By comparison, McEntarfer worked for 20 years as an economist with the Census Bureau. Her predecessor William Beach was the chief economist for the Senate Budget Committee, and his predecessor Erica Groshen spent 20 years as an economist at the New York Federal Reserve and referees for about a dozen academic journals. Antoni is a frequent guest on a number of conservative media outlets. While BLS makes it a point to produce — rather than interpret — economic data, Antoni has been hitting talking points on recent BLS releases in media appearances, a stark contrast with the agency's typical cut-and-dry communications. Discussing the dismal July jobs report, he emphasized job growth among native-born Americans on former Trump adviser Steven Bannon's internet podcast. 'There was some good news in the report, too, that we should definitely highlight,' he said. 'All of the net job growth over the last 12 months has gone to native-born Americans.' The Heritage Foundation did not respond to a request for an interview with Antoni. Backlash from economists Economists aren't mincing their words about Antoni's credentials. One economist at the University of Wisconsin refuted one of Antoni's recent papers, showing it contained basic statistical mistakes and finding that it wasn't possible to replicate its results — an academic kiss of death. Alan Cole, an economist with the conservative Tax Foundation think tank, described the errors in the paper as 'stunning.' 'Stunning errors in a tweet are bad, but worse to do it in long form, where there's more time and effort involved,' he wrote on social media. Conservative economists have also been blasting the firing of McEntarfer after the July jobs report showed that a meager 106,000 jobs have been added to the economy since May. Trump accused the agency — without any evidence — of producing 'rigged' data, which many economists have said is poppycock. 'The totally groundless firing of Dr. Erika McEntarfer … sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the statistical mission of the Bureau,' William Beach, a Trump appointee who preceded McEntarfer as head of the BLS, wrote online. Warnings to senators Antoni is expected to be easily confirmed by the GOP-controlled Senate after he appears before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which will also need to approve his nomination. Antoni's critics are waging a long-shot effort to turn GOP members of the committee against the nominee ahead of his likely confirmation. Friends of the BLS, a group that advocates for the agency and that's chaired by Beach and his predecessor Erica Groshen, called out Antoni in a statement Wednesday, describing the debate about his nomination as 'contentious.' 'BLS now … faces the additional challenge of a contentious debate over the nominee for the next Commissioner, Dr. EJ Antoni,' they said. Groshen told The Hill they hope the nomination process will be 'very thorough.' 'The responsibility of the Senate HELP committee … is particularly important at this time,' she added. The Hill reached out to all Republican members of the committee about Antoni's qualifications, most of whom didn't respond. A representative for Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she wouldn't be commenting on the nomination prior to the hearing. What would politicized labor data look like? Antoni has already floated some massive changes to BLS data releases, including canceling regular monthly reports in favor of quarterly releases — a change that would alter the entire cadence of economic data output and affect nearly every private and public sector model of the U.S. economy. He told Fox News before his nomination that 'the BLS should suspend issuing the monthly jobs reports, but keep publishing more accurate, though less timely, quarterly data,' since BLS data is often subject to revision. Former BLS chiefs told The Hill they're keeping an eye on a regulatory standard known as OMB Directive No. 3, which governs the rules of BLS releases, for any sign that agency data could become politicized. 'Violations of that would be very unusual, and therefore indicative of something unusual underneath it,' Groshen said. Antoni has delivered some conflicting remarks on BLS data revisions, attributing them to 'incompetent' leadership under McEntarfer during his appearance on Bannon's podcast and then noting later that the problems pre-dated her time as agency commissioner. 'I think that's part of the reason why we continue to have all of these different data problems,' he said before adding that 'this is not a problem unique to the Trump administration.' Real problems with BLS data In fact, the downward revisions in the July jobs report that prompted Trump's firing of McEntarfer were due to the late reporting of educational employment figures by state and local governments, along with the more pronounced seasonal effects in that sector since teachers don't work in the summer. That's fairly typical for the agency, current and former employees of the BLS told The Hill. Political narratives aside, the BLS has seen a substantial drop in survey response rates in the aftermath of the pandemic, a decline that has made the data less reliable, but that has affected statistical agencies in a number of countries beyond the U.S. 'This is not a failure of the BLS … This is a phenomenon that is worldwide,' Erica Groshen told The Hill. 'This is a slow-moving train wreck,' she added, exhorting CEOs across the economy to make a priority of the surveys. 'There is no silver bullet. Believe me – people have been looking for it for a long time.' Economists have been lamenting the survey response rates for years. 'Like Orwellian newspeak, [the U.S. employment report] can often mean the reverse of what it says it means. The household and establishment surveys portray contrasting pictures of employment (and both have shocking response rates),' UBS economist Paul Donovan wrote earlier this month, having noted declines since 2023.
