logo
Climate change is making coffee more expensive. Tariffs likely will too

Climate change is making coffee more expensive. Tariffs likely will too

ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — With her purple-and-pink hair swaying, Reneé Colón stands on a stepladder in the rented corner of a warehouse, pouring Brazilian coffee beans into her groaning old roasting machine.
The beans are precious because they survived severe drought in a year when environmental conditions depressed coffee production globally, doubling the price of raw beans in just months.
'Unfortunately, coffee is going to become more scarce,' said Colón, founder and roaster at Fuego Coffee Roasters. 'Seeing that dramatic loss of the Brazilian crop is a perfect example.'
___
EDITOR'S NOTE: This story is a collaboration between Rochester Institute of Technology and The Associated Press.
___
Losses from heat and drought have cut production forecasts in Brazil and Vietnam, the world's largest coffee growers. Global production is still expected to increase, but not as much as commodity market investors had expected. That's sent coffee prices up, largely because of continued high demand in Europe, the U.S., and China.
Prices peaked in February but have remained high, forcing roasters like Colón to weigh how much of that cost to absorb and how much to pass on to consumers.
The beans Colón was roasting cost her $5.50 per pound in early March, more than double what they cost in September. And that was for mixed, midrange beans. Specialty coffees — grown in delicate climates to slow growth and add flavor — can cost even more.
President Donald Trump's current 10% tariffs cover most coffee-producing countries, including Brazil, Ethiopia and Colombia, and are expected to drive up costs for Americans. Amid his chaotic tariff pronouncements — at one point he threatened 46% tariffs on Vietnam imports and 32% on Indonesia imports before pausing them — American coffee roasters are rethinking their supply chains.
'With all these changes in coffee maybe we should open our own damn farm,' Colón muses.
Rural New York isn't an option, of course. The world's best coffee thrives near the equator, where seasons are long, and in high altitudes, where slow growing allows beans to gather flavor. But Puerto Rico, where Colón and her husband have roots, isn't a serious option, either — labor costs are too high and she worries about the increasing risk of crop-damaging hurricanes.
She shrugs off buying coffee from Hawaii and California, which she says is either poor quality, overpriced or both.
In February, global coffee green exports were down 14.2% from a year earlier, according to the International Coffee Organization's market report. The shortage led to the highest price ever for raw coffee in February, breaking the record set in 1977 when severe frost wiped out 70% of Brazil's coffee plants.
Climate isn't the only thing driving up prices, said Daria Whalen, a buyer for San Francisco-based Ritual Coffee Roasters. Inflation is driving up the cost of labor, fertilizers, and borrowing, she said.
She described being in Mexico in April seeking to finalize contracts between Trump's fits and starts on tariffs. It reminded her of being in Colombia a month earlier as Trump threatened and then backed away from tariffs that would have affected coffee prices.
'It was kind of like roller coaster day, because at the end of the day it didn't exist,' Whalen said.
Some of the recent rise in coffee prices may be from importers buying extra in anticipation of the tariffs. Colón believes prices will go still higher as import taxes begin being paid. And with consumer confidence hitting a 12-year low, Colón could see a decrease in demand for her premium coffee.
'It is tough on our end because it drives the price up, tough on the consumer end because they have to pay more and tough on the farmers' end because they may be experiencing really significant losses,' Colón said.
Yet she's committed to expanding.
In December, she and her husband took out a $50,000 loan to buy a custom coffee roaster from Turkey that will triple capacity. They're trying to increase sales by adding new wholesale clients like coffee shops, and selling directly to homes via a beans-of-the-month-style subscription service.
The Colóns have raised the wholesale price on a pound of roasted beans by 25 cents. They're considering doing the same for pour-overs and espresso drinks at their two retail locations.
At one of those, called Melo, one couple said they don't look at the coffee's price on the receipt. For them, it's a treat.
'We know we could go find coffee cheaper somewhere else,' said Rob Newell, a high school biology teacher, as he held a cooing infant daughter alongside his wife, who is also a teacher. 'Maybe it's just because we're new parents, but you get, like, cabin fever staying in the house all day.'
Colón is also seeking to cut costs.
The warehouse where she roasts has some extra space, so she's weighing stacking up more bags of raw beans there to save as much as $500 on monthly storage costs in port cities.
She's tried to cultivate relationships with farmers to minimize price spikes and control bean quality. She described working with a farmer in Colombia as coffee prices were spiking in February to lock in a one-year contract that avoided the worst of the increase.
And like many small business owners, she's had to get used to the complexity of tariffs.
In January, she turned down a pitch from a Montreal coffee importer who suggested the U.S. dollar's strength in Canada would allow her to save money by importing through their warehouse. She feared that tariffs on Canada could increase prices. Plus, the coffee would have to cross an extra border, risking delays. And the value of the dollar has been up and down.
'I want things to be less complicated instead of more," she said.
___
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

I'm a psychologist who coaches day traders. Here's why many fail and what I tell them to do instead
I'm a psychologist who coaches day traders. Here's why many fail and what I tell them to do instead

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

I'm a psychologist who coaches day traders. Here's why many fail and what I tell them to do instead

Andrew Menaker is a psychologist who now coaches day traders on and off Wall Street. Menaker thinks many traders struggle for a common set of reasons, like having too big an ego. A day trader himself, he has a few tips for people — literally — trying to get in on the trade. This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Andrew Menaker, a psychologist and a day trading coach based in San Francisco. It has been edited for length and clarity. First of all, I had never, ever planned on becoming a trading psychology coach. In fact, many years ago, I never knew anything about markets. I think I had one econ class in undergrad. That was it. I actually started my career at the US Navy as an independent psychological consultant. My job was to work with agencies like the NCIS, the FBI, and the Secret Service and to help with things like threat assessments and hostage negotiations. I felt like an impostor, coming right out of grad school, but I seemed to be a natural for it. I got very lucky. Wells Fargo heard about my reputation in the Navy, and, after a post-doc internship with them, I was hired as a psychological consultant on their trading desk. Again, I felt like an impostor — no background in finance, brand new Ph.D. Here I am, green behind the ears. But the people at Wells Fargo saw something in me. My very first clients were institutional desk traders who were moving hundreds of millions of dollars at the push of a button. It was the first time I had been exposed to trading. After several years of consulting on Wall Street, I started trading on my own. It was the '90s in San Francisco during the dot-com bubble. Stocks were starting to race up. The market bug bit, and I thought, "Oh my gosh, this is something for me. I've got to do this for myself." Back in those days, all stocks were going up, so it was kind of easy. My brokerage account went from $25,000 to $150,000 over a six-month period, and I was featured in a book about my trading success. I still trade today. Now, I run my own coaching practice, where I work with traders of all sorts — Wall Street traders, prop traders, and even retail traders, some of whom are aiming to go full-time. People usually come to me with some kind of trading issue: "I can't follow my plan." "I'm having a hard time accepting losses." "I'm over-trading." What many people don't realize is that they're not just trading in a vacuum, whether they're on a bank desk or in a hedge fund or trading their own money. Your whole life comes with you into every trade, whether you consciously realize it or not. My job is to help people understand that. I call it trading your "inner market." It's comprised of biological influences — your sleep, your hormone levels — as well as your emotions — your thoughts, your memories, your experiences in life, how people see you, and how you want to be seen by others. When a trader understands how their inner market operates, they start to see the market on the screen differently. By default, I end up becoming a life coach for many of my clients. I'm helping them, not just with their trading, but with marriages, divorces, having children, all kinds of stuff. Here are some of the most common issues I see hold traders back — and what I recommend traders do instead. Big ego When I was featured in a book about my trading success, I was one of 16 top traders that was featured. That really puffed up my ego. But within weeks of that book coming out, my trading went downhill. I had the biggest drawdown of my career. I talk about this often with my clients. I call it the recognition trap. The fame and the pressure that comes with it can smell trouble for your performance, and that certainly happened to me. Some of my clients might know that their ego is too big. But it often requires somebody else — someone credible that they trust — to actually point it out to them. Too aggressive Around 70%-80% of my retail clients are too aggressive in taking risks. They tend to put on too many trades. They tend to be impulsive. They can't wait for the moment when their plan says they should be getting into the market. And, when they lose money, they want to make it back as quickly as possible. So they start revenge trading, which usually makes things worse. Too scared There are some clients who are very frozen-deer-in-the-headlights. I see this often when I work with traders who are software engineers. Their background is all about precision, black and white, right or wrong. Unless it's perfect, they're not going to want to pull the trigger. Well, markets are never perfect. They're kind of messy. So people who tend to be more on the risk-averse side, they tend to be the under-traders. Solutions Journaling. All traders should be keeping what I call a real-time emotion journal. Ask yourself questions while you're engaged with the market. What am I feeling right now? Why am I feeling this way? When I feel this way, what do I typically do? Write that out and answer it. Many traders get pulled into the market. They're staring at the screen and feel that they have no choice but to execute the trade. But you always have a choice. This type of reflection can help people recognize when they're under pressure. They don't have to hit the button so automatically. Regulate your nervous system. When you're feeling anxious, the limbic system will generate the flight, fight, or freeze response. We all have it. But that instinct often translates into hitting the button on your keyboard at the wrong time. If you can relax, the response won't be quite as extreme. You can downregulate your nervous system by tracking heart rate variability with a monitor. If you don't have that, you can simply take slow, long breaths when you're under pressure. Be aware of your health. When I take on a new client, I explore their physiology with them. What's your diet like? What's your exercise routine? How much sleep are you getting? All of that filters into how we see the market and how we interact with it. If you didn't sleep much last night, be really careful about putting on trades. I've seen it with myself and my clients. There's a correlation between sleep deprivation and sloppy trading. Are you a day trader and want to share your story? Reach out to this reporter at jsor@ Read the original article on Business Insider

GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs
GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs

The Hill

time29 minutes ago

  • The Hill

GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs

General Motors, a cornerstone of American industry, is suffering the consequences of President Trump's unconstitutional 25 percent tariffs on imported vehicles and auto parts. In the second quarter of 2025, GM suffered a $1.1 billion tariff blow to its operating income, slashing the company's profit margin from a healthy 9 percent to just 6.1 percent. Net income plunged by 36.1 percent from the prior quarter and by a staggering 40.7 percent compared to a year ago. Although the estimated tariff impact for the full year of $4 billion to $5 billion is less than 3 percent of GM's overall revenue, that cost represents more than half of the typical annual income for the company over the past decade. The consequences extend far beyond GM's balance sheet. Tariffs, paid by importers to the federal government, are partly absorbed by companies and partly passed to consumers. We've especially seen this in import-sensitive sectors including furnishings, appliances, clothes and toys. Men's shirts and sweaters, for instance, rose 4.9 percent in June alone. When businesses 'eat' the cost, as GM tried to do last quarter, the fallout is no less severe. Diminished earnings mean less capital for investment in better technology or expanded operations, slowing broader economic growth, fewer resources for pay raises or new jobs — hardly the boon for workers that tariff advocates promise. The data confirms this. Nationwide, 14,000 manufacturing jobs disappeared in the past two months, erasing all gains in 2025. In June, real average weekly earnings dropped by 0.4 percent, an annualized loss of nearly 5 percent. Shareholders are also feeling the pinch. Stock valuations track a company's expected future earnings. Since 2012, GM's stock price increased by more than 200 percent. GM's price-to-earnings ratio today stands at 6.83, almost identical to 2012 levels. Stock prices increased alongside earnings. A sustained $5 billion annual hit, wiping out over half of GM's annual net income, could erase more than $20 billion in market capitalization if valuations adjust. With tariffs eroding profits, is it any wonder that GM's stock has slid 8 percent since its post-2024 election peak and now languishes 13 percent off its 2021 highs? This affects millions of middle-class Americans and retirees with pensions and savings invested. More broadly, lower dividends and diminished returns discourage investment, starving companies of the capital needed to expand. The result: slower growth, fewer jobs and weaker wage gains. GM, to its credit, is fighting to offset 30 percent of this burden by boosting U.S. production, cutting costs and increasing domestic content to comply with the USMCA trade agreement's labyrinthine rules. Yet even if successful, the net impact of $2.8 billion to $3.5 billion will devour a significant slice of GM's already thin margins. Profit margins at GM — as in most other sectors — are far less than conventional wisdom. GM's net profit margin over the past decade has averaged less than 5 percent. In other words, a $30,000 vehicle yields less than $1,500 in profit. GM's plans to shift some production to U.S. plants and rework supply chains is a testament to private enterprise's resilience. But make no mistake: These shifts sacrifice efficiency for compliance. Restructuring operations in a free market in pursuit of efficiency yields more profit, consumer benefit and economic growth. Doing so under duress to escape arbitrary tariffs may result in survival, but without these benefits. Resources that could have fueled innovation or lowered prices are now squandered on navigating artificial trade barriers. As an important sidenote, roughly half the tariff's cost stems from GM's South Korean operations, a stark reminder of the folly of taxing trade with allies. Rather than strengthening ties with democratic partners through bold free-trade agreements, these tariffs risk pushing nations like South Korea toward China, America's chief adversary. Far from economic strategy, it is geopolitical shortsightedness. Politicians sometimes prefer tariffs to other forms of taxation because they are less visible than taxes on income or sales. This makes it easier to dodge accountability by blaming 'greedy' corporations. For this reason, Trump called Jeff Bezos to deter Amazon from listing tariff costs on purchases. The White House press secretary labeled this a 'hostile and political act by Amazon.' Regardless, protectionism is not cost-free. Sustained tariffs will raise prices, shrink profits, erode real wages and slow economic growth. GM's quarterly results are a warning.

Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee
Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee

The Hill

timean hour 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.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store