Trump's tariffs: ‘It feels like Covid 2.0. So many things are getting disrupted'
'In a lot of ways it feels like Covid 2.0. So many things are getting disrupted so quickly.' Like so many businesses across Donald Trump's America, Matt Katase's craft brewery, Brew Gentlemen, is having to contend with a bafflingly uncertain trading environment.
The brewery's chief operating officer, Alaina Webber, says: 'For the first time, as a company in operation going on 15 years, we've started to get explicit emails that say: 'On this existing order, you are now going to see a 30%, then to a 130% increase.''
The brewery is based in Braddock, in the Allegheny valley, in the eastern suburbs of Pittsburgh, where the Scots-born industrialist Andrew Carnegie opened his first steel mill about 150 years ago, founding an industry that underpinned the industrialisation of America.
Today, the vast mill is still in operation, but the tariffs Trump claims will restore the glory of rust-belt towns such as this have inflicted chaos on thousands of firms across the region.
Anything imported carries a 10% levy; steel and aluminium, 25%; Chinese products, 145%. And much higher 'reciprocal' tariffs on many other countries hang in the balance.
For Brew Gentlemen, the tariffs even threaten a consignment of bespoke Chinese-made beer tap handles, which are waiting at the docks while it negotiates the price with their supplier. 'Those are now sitting in customs and they'll sit there for quite a while,' says Webber.
The brewery had to transform rapidly during the Covid pandemic, switching from selling beer to locals in its taproom to focusing 100% on manufacturing.
Now, just as it hoped for a 'normal' year, the cost of many of the inputs to the brewing process is in flux.
'You can't instantly start growing New Zealand hops in America,' says Katase, its co-founder. 'We use a lot of American hops, but then we have beers that use Australian or New Zealand hops and we have malt that comes from Canada. If you're trying to make a traditional German lager, yeah, you kind of need German malt.'
At the other end of town, outside the vast Edgar Thomson steel mill, workers gathered in a union social hall are reluctant to chat.
One man says he and his mates are divided about the merits of the long-running takeover battle for the plant's owner US Steel, by Japan's Nippon Steel. 'That's a tricky subject,' he says.
But he holds out hope that Trump's tariffs will bring change to towns like this, where shops are shuttered and many of the clapboard houses have broken windows. 'I think they might work, because we have been taking a beating lately,' the steelworker says. 'America's been robbed and abused and I think it's time that we start taking care of our own, and they start taking care of theirs.'
The international president of the Pittsburgh-based United Steelworkers union, David McCall, has praised Trump's tariffs, calling them 'a crucial means of reining in bad actors who view access to the US market as a right, not a privilege.'
At the nearby headquarters of the Steel Valley Authority, which has been supporting businesses in this region for decades, its veteran executive director Tom Croft is more sceptical.
'What we're hearing is there's just a lot of uncertainty. The prices are the big thing, and the supply chain of products,' he says. 'Right now, it's too early to tell, but people are thinking it's very much like the Covid shutdown.'
He doesn't object to the idea of targeted tariffs as part of a wider industrial policy, but he says: 'The way they're going about it has made a lot of the smaller manufacturers and managers wonder what the hell they're going to do.'
Joe Biden maintained the tariffs on China that Trump imposed in his first term, and was preparing to intervene to block the Nippon deal. Trump backed the takeover during the campaign but recently suggested he didn't want US Steel to 'go to Japan'.
Debate is raging in the once mighty industrial city of Pittsburgh, which has transformed itself in recent decades to specialise in 'eds and meds' – education and medicine.
Outside La Prima Espresso Company in the city's Strip District, where warehouses are slowly being transformed into swanky flats, a row breaks out among the older men gathered to play cards when they are asked about Trump's policies.
One gestures to his head, suggesting the president is 'not good on the second floor', while another storms off.
Nick Kirk, who owns a local trucking firm and wears a red tie to show his support for Trump, says: 'Everybody thinks it has to be done like this,' clicking his fingers. 'In your own personal life, nothing gets done that fast.'
Not far away, Joy Lu, the manager of an Asian supermarket, Lotus Food, is struggling to keep up with the price hikes on Chinese imports.
'For example, fresh noodles, they already increased in price,' she says. 'Before we sell for $6.99 and then they increased to $7.99 and now it's $8.49.'
She says her suppliers have so far been able to forestall price rises on some products, by stocking up in advance. 'Dry goods, they have a lot of inventory, maybe they have like six months' inventory. Their price doesn't go up so fast.'
Asked about the possibility of shortages as the tariffs continue to bite, she says one supplier has already started limiting orders. 'It's five cases per customer, not like before when we can order as many as we want.'
Along the street at Pennsylvania Macaroni Company, a venerable Italian deli, the owner Bill Sunseri is more phlegmatic. He concedes he has had to put up the price of some biscuits, because of the 10% across-the-board tariff; and if the EU faces the 20% 'reciprocal' rate when Trump's 90-day 'pause' ends in July, there could be more to come.
He says he had had emails from his Italian suppliers the day before the pause, saying they were already anticipating the increase. 'They were increasing their inventory cost price.'
However, he insists he's not worried. 'I don't think it's gonna happen. I think it's all negotiating tactics,' he says. 'It's the art of the deal. I believe in Donald Trump.'
Even for businesses that seem a world away from Pittsburgh's mom and pop stores and the craft brewers, aspects of Trump's policies are giving pause for thought.
Astrobotic is the kind of hi-tech private-sector business that symbolises the Steel City's hopes for the future. It builds lunar landers, and is preparing for a planned mission by the end of the year.
Its founder and chief executive, John Thornton, says the tariffs will barely affect it, as the cost of the tech on the complex vehicles far outweighs the price of materials. Yet he is still having to keep an eye on the Trump administration's pronouncements because Nasa is his biggest customer.
'We're watching very closely what the policy is around space. We saw in the confirmation hearing of Jared Isaacman, who's going to be the next Nasa boss, that they're talking about the moon and Mars still, which is good,' he says.
But he adds that much of its funding comes out of the science budget – parts of which Elon Musk's 'department of government efficiency' appears determined to cut.
'Our primary programme, called Commercial Lunar Payload Services, comes out of the science programme. So if there is a significant cut there, that could be a problem for us.'
On Carnegie Mellon University's leafy campus, Lee Branstetter, a professor of economics , says the jarring uncertainty facing every business owner is a powerful force pressing down on the economy, and wonders what impact Trump's deep cuts to research budgets will have on his students' future.
'I think it's hard to avoid the conclusion that at the apex of the federal government, we have a bunch of people who have no idea what they're doing,' he says. He points out steel employs about 31,000 people in Pennsylvania, while health and education account for 1.3m jobs.
'As a business, how do you decide how to invest? When you don't know if the tariffs facing the products that you're planning to import from a particular country are going to be 60% or 10% or 5%,' he says. 'I think the answer is you try not to make a decision for as long as you can.
'The consequence, of course, of deferring decisions as long as possible means that the pace of investment dramatically slows.'
These firms will also pause hiring plans, he suggests – while anxious consumers tighten their belts. 'It seems like simply as a consequence of this spike in policy uncertainty, we're likely to see a significant macroeconomic slowdown in the US and perhaps beyond.'
There is little sign as yet of that uncertainty being resolved. Trump's Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, has repeatedly claimed a string of trade deals are close, but the president did not seem to be in negotiating mood last week when he described the US economy as a 'giant, beautiful store' in which 'I set the prices'.
For the moment, real prices, outside Trump's head, are anything but set – and as firms across the US rethink their supply chains on the hoof, it is far from clear how long the shelves of the 'giant, beautiful store' can remain fully stocked.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Says Musk Wants to Talk After Explosive Public Feud
President Donald Trump said Elon Musk is "the man who has lost his mind," brushing off their high-profile fallout despite headlines suggesting the two may soon speak, per ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl . "Not particularly," Trump said about whether he was interested in a call, claiming Musk was keen to speak. 08:28 AM EDT Russia offers political asylum to Elon Musk over Trump feud Elon Musk looks on during a news conference with US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on May 30, 2025. Elon Musk looks on during a news conference with US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on May 30, 2025. ALLISON ROBBERT/AFP via Getty Images A Russian official said the American billionaire Elon Musk could be offered political asylum in Russia over his fierce dispute with U.S. President Donald Trump. Dmitry Novikov, first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs, commented to Russian state news outlet TASS. "I think that Musk has a completely different game, [so] he will not need any political asylum, although if he did, Russia, of course, could provide it," Novikov said, in remarks translated from Russian. Musk and Trump, ostensibly political allies over cuts to federal spending, publicly clashed on June 5 in a series of social media exchanges and comments to reporters. The dispute's origin is the impact of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill on U.S. public debt. Read the full story by Jordan King and Shane Croucher on Newsweek.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Canada needs a law that gives workers the right to govern their workplace
A major fault line in contemporary society is that while our political lives are governed by democratic principles, our economic lives largely are not. At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, Maple Leaf Foods experienced an outbreak in its Brandon, Man. factory. Not only were workers ordered to keep working in unsafe conditions, they were forced to work overtime. Walmart has long been accused of forbidding its cashiers from sitting down, even during long shifts. At one of its warehouses in Pennsylvania, Amazon allowed the temperature to reach an unbearable 102 F in 2011. When employees pleaded to open the loading doors to let in fresh air, management refused, claiming this would lead to employee theft. Instead, Amazon parked ambulances outside and waited for employees to collapse from heat stroke. Employees who were sent home because of the heat were given demerits for missing work, and fired if they accumulated too many. These examples reflect the fact that, in most workplaces, employees have no say in who manages them or how major decisions are made. Entering the workplace typically means leaving the freedoms of democratic society behind and entering a private domain unilaterally controlled by an employer. For most workers who are not in senior management, the main job of every job is to follow orders. Functionally speaking, workers are servants. In its governance structure, the modern workplace operates as a kind of mini dictatorship. Although workplace discipline isn't enforced with physical violence, supervisors still have the power to discipline or punish those who dissent. But what if there were an actual legal right to workplace democracy? My research scrutinized the pros and cons of such novel legislation by drawing on decades of research comparing conventional, top-down firms with democratic worker co-operatives (where workers collectively own the firm and elect the governing board). In large American firms, the average CEO-to-worker pay ratio is now a jaw-dropping 351 to one. As CEO, Jeff Bezos made roughly 360,000 times more than Amazon's minimum wage workers. This inequality ripples across society with significant consequences. By contrast, most worker co-ops maintain a pay ratio of three to one and only very rarely exceed 10 to one. There's also a stark difference in how workers are treated. While conventional firms lay off workers whenever it's profitable to do so, co-ops do everything in their power to save jobs. Top-down decision-making also breeds degradation and disrespect. A 2016 Oxfam report, for instance, documented how some Tyson Foods employees were prevented from using the bathroom to the point where some urinated themselves and other felt compelled to wear diapers to work. A Gallup survey from 2021 found that across the American economy as a whole, only 20 per cent of workers strongly agreed with the statement that 'my opinions seem to count.' In co-ops, workers are generally treated with more respect and dignity. They typically participate more in decision-making, have higher job satisfaction and have less antagonism with management. In conventional workplaces, many employees hate or fear their boss. Roughly 17 per cent of the workforce opt for self-employment in order to get away from the tyranny of the boss, even though self-employed workers typically earn about 15 per cent less than their salaried counterparts and receive less than half the benefits. Worker co-operatives are typically less dominating than conventional firms because workers elect their managers and can create self-managing teams where workers have more autonomy over matters like scheduling and how tasks are carried out. Though co-ops are far from perfect, with workers often feeling that they aren't able to participate in decision-making as much as they would like. Most workers have no viable alternative to undemocratic work, and so no choice but to suffer its harms. While in theory, workers can quit and rely on welfare or social assistance, in practice, this isn't viable because welfare rates are often too low to live on. Starting a business or becoming self-employed is another theoretical option, but it's too financially risky to be a serious alternative for most. Joining a worker co-operative is the most promising alternative, but there were less than 400 worker co-ops in Canada in 2022, representing less than one per cent of employment. Converting an existing workplace into a co-op faces serious barriers too. Even if the workers desperately want a conversion, if the employer doesn't, they're out of luck; their employer owns the organization and can simply say no. Canada needs a new law to expand democracy by granting workers the legal right to collectively buy into the firms they work for. The process would resemble how unionization works today. It would start after a majority of employees sign a declaration stating their intent to form a worker co-operative. After this threshold is reached, a formal process would be triggered: employers would be required to disclose all relevant financial documents with the workers, and workers would receive education on the managerial, technical and legal requirements of co-ops. Co-op development bankers would provide loans and financing options. Once this is done, workers would hold a final vote. If a simple majority (50 per cent plus one) votes in favour, the employer would be paid the fair market value for the firm and the business would be restructured as a worker co-operative. Importantly, the law would allow this transition even if the employer is opposed, just as collective bargaining legislation allows workers to unionize without employer approval. It would also ensure owners are fairly compensated; owners shouldn't lose their property, but they should lose the right to unilaterally govern other human beings in perpetuity, especially when those others are willing and ready to govern themselves. Of course, this law might bring some economic disruption. It's possible that certain owners might oppose democratic ownership so strongly that they would rather shut down the business altogether than work as equals, but such cases would likely be rare. On the other hand, research shows that worker co-ops are just as productive as conventional firms (if not more so) and they have similar survival rates. This is highly reassuring for the overall well-being of the economy. Moreover, workers would need to invest significant amounts of their own money in order to buy out the firm, so conversions will occur only after serious consideration. The bottom line is that while the costs of this legislation would likely be modest, the benefits to workers and society at large would be substantial: reduced inequality and domination, increased job security and respect. Canada should establish a right to buy-in as soon as possible. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Tom Malleson, Western University Read more: Canada's small businesses could be saved by converting them to co-operatives The key to a vibrant democracy may well lie in your workplace New budget offers Canada a chance to get employee ownership right Tom Malleson has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill could cost Canadians billions
A small, obscure section buried in U.S. President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act could cost Canadians and Canadian companies billions of dollars, CBC News has learned. Moreover, it could hand Prime Minister Mark Carney's government yet another political hot potato from south of the border — forcing it to choose between scrapping Canada's digital services tax (DST) or risk the U.S. imposing a new withholding tax on the income Canadians, Canadian companies and pension plans receive from investments in U.S. securities. While it still has steps to go before becoming law, the provision has Canadian experts worried. "This is building a nuclear option into a tax treaty that has lasted for 80 years between Canada and the U.S," said David Macdonald, senior economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. "Just like the U.S. is totally willing to blow up the international trade order, they're totally willing to blow up international tax rules." The concern centres on Section 899 of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill — more than 1,000 pages of proposed legislation that Trump says will make good on his domestic campaign promises, including tax cuts for Americans. The bill passed the House of Representatives on May 22 by one vote and now has to be approved by the Senate. Section 899, entitled Enforcement of Remedies Against Unfair Foreign Taxes, would increase withholding taxes for non-resident individuals and companies from countries that the U.S. believes have imposed discriminatory or unfair taxes. Experts believe Canada is likely to be one of the countries targeted by the measure because of U.S. government criticism of the DST. The tax applies to all large businesses, foreign and domestic, that earn revenues from certain online business models in Canada. Global minimum tax measures adopted by Canada could also put it in the Trump administration's crosshairs. The timeline for the legislation is in flux and Section 899 could still get dropped from the bill or be amended. If, however, Section 899 becomes law, it could hit Canadians in different ways. For example, the U.S. currently imposes a 15 per cent withholding tax on dividends Canadians receive from U.S. companies. Under tax treaties, however, an equivalent tax credit from the Canadian government generally offsets the withholding tax. If the measure becomes law and the Trump administration designates Canada as a country with discriminatory taxes, a new five per cent withholding tax would go into effect. That tax would increase by five percentage points per year to a maximum of 20 per cent. It is not known if Canada would adjust its tax credits to offset such a tax. Max Reed, a cross-border tax lawyer with Polaris Tax Counsel, said the potential impact could be wide ranging. "It's definitely going to be in the billions, maybe tens of billions," he said. Kim Moody, founder of Moodys Private Client and Moodys Tax, agrees. "Billions, absolutely billions, for sure, would be the impact," he said. "If Canada and the United States allows this to take hold, the result will be chaos. Absolute chaos." Experts say it is not clear exactly how the tax would be applied. For example, would the new withholding tax be imposed on top of existing withholding taxes? Would it also apply to securities held within registered accounts such as RRSPs or only to dividends from shares held directly by Canadians?Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne's office declined an interview request from CBC News. "Analysis of the implications of the U.S. tax reform bill is ongoing and we await the final version of the bill," wrote spokeswoman Audrey Milette. The U.S. embassy also declined to comment on Section 899 or how it would work. "We are unable to comment at this time as the legislation is still pending final approval," responded an embassy official. U.S. Internal Revenue Service figures show that in 2022, the U.S. withheld $2.9 billion US in tax on $108.5 billion US worth of income from a variety of U.S. sources for Canadian residents and companies. The IRS said $261.4 million US was withheld from individual Canadian residents while $1.22 billion was withheld from companies and $1.24 billion US under the category of Canadian "withholding rate pools (general)." Of the sources of U.S. income received by Canadians, the IRS said $31 billion US was from dividends — half of which went to Canadian corporations. David Pierce, vice-president of government relations for the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber began getting worried messages from Canadian businesses once Trump's tax reform bill passed the House of Representatives. "I think the attention and the awareness of it really grew from what was a small subset of companies, now right across the economy — from financial to pensions to, you name it," Pierce said. "They're all very concerned at what this means for average Canadians in your retirement savings and how this would be applied should, of course, it become law." Pierce said the potential cost of Section 899 far outweighs revenue the Canadian government collects from the DST, a tax his group has opposed from the outset. He said the Canadian government should pause the next DST payment scheduled for June 30 and consider getting rid of the tax in negotiations with the U.S. "The concern is that when the U.S. administration makes allegations of Canada's trade practices, they can cite the DST and that's a talking point that rings true not just for Republicans, but also Democrats, in the United States," said Pierce. "That strengthens their hand. It's not strengthening our hand at the bargaining table." Macdonald says the proposed withholding tax would hit hard. "It would have major impacts on Canadian companies, Canadian investors in the U.S — they'd be downright punitive," said Macdonald. "That would probably end up shutting down Canadian businesses in the U.S. and kicking Canadian investors out of the U.S." And the DST isn't the only Canadian tax the U.S. could consider unfair now, or in the future, said Macdonald. "I think this is the tip of the iceberg in terms of threats against Canadian corporate taxation that attempts to level the playing field between American transnationals and Canadian domestic companies that are paying corporate income taxes," he said. Macdonald said the proposed tax could also hit Canadians who don't have direct investments in U.S. securities. "This isn't only for folks with an RRSP," Macdonald said. "I mean, this could extend to the Canada Pension Plan, which is the major means by which people retire in Canada. They could potentially pay dramatically more." The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board declined to comment.