
‘Everything costs more': How the aluminum tariffs are affecting a Nashville craft brewery
Perhaps there's no better example of where the newly applied 25% tariffs on aluminum and steel will be felt than craft brewers, an industry that uses both materials in all facets of production and sales.
And for Wesley Keegan, owner and founder of Nashville-based TailGate Brewery, the implementation of the tariffs will have swift effects on his business. 'Everything costs more,' he told CNN. 'We get a price increase letter just immediately from every supplier.'
On Wednesday, President Donald Trump enacted a new round of tariffs on the raw metals. Since much of it comes from abroad, US companies — small and large — that rely on steel and aluminum may have to pass on the cost of those tariffs to consumers.
But specifically how much more Keegan's customers will pay for a 6-pack of his brewery's ciders, stouts and lagers isn't clear just yet. He admits that businesses like TailGate have to be 'willing to take the haircut' in terms of profits.
'The hard piece is juggling the reality that you can't be in business if you're not making money,' he said. 'But then you also have to continue to take those price changes on the chin because the consumer is only willing to give you so much.'
Keegan said that TailGate tries to 'absorb' as much as it can, but beyond tariffs 'there is not a single input in our industry that hasn't increased prices every single year for the last five years.'
It's been a difficult several few years for craft brewers.
The pandemic sapped the lifeblood — taproom sales — from many operations, forcing them to lean more heavily on to-go vessels such as cans and bottles. Then, global supply chain challenges caused shortages and drastic price hikes of key inputs, including cans, which already were getting more expensive following the 2018 tariffs.
Plus, the breweries that are still standing were then stung by a shift in consumers' and retailers' palates for beverages beyond beer.
All of those were lessons for how Keegan operates TailGate, a 10-year-old company that has gradually expanded to nine taprooms across Tennessee.
One aspect of his business that changed post Covid-19 was the sourcing of aluminum. Before 2020, the primary source was Canada, but he has since diversified to additional places, including China, the US and even Jordan.
And now, the aluminum industry is undergoing a wave of consolidation, with some companies shifting to only working with major brewers such as Anheuser-Busch InBev or being bought by other manufacturers, resulting in a decline in smaller brewers to work with third-party companies that hunt and source aluminum on a global scale.
'One of the functions of the last round of tariffs, plus Covid-19, has been that it's introduced a third party to the equation where we're frankly just too small,' Keegan said. 'Even though we buy a lot of cans and we're a pretty sizable brewery, they don't want to talk to us … we're so small, it's just annoying for them.'
Taprooms have evolved into a 'third place' for communities, and naturally a place where the day's topics are discussed — like tariffs. Operating in Tennessee, which overwhelmingly voted for Trump and his policies, can be difficult for a small business that is constantly battling constantly changing regulations that could hurt places like TailGate, but Keegan keeps politics out of it.
'This state voted for this administration, and if they see the headlines, and the tariffs and things like that, they still don't want to feel the effects of something like an aluminum increase,' he said. 'It doesn't change what they're rooting for, but it does mean they don't want to be paying any more either.'
TailGate, as well as 9,000 other small and independent brewers, are part of the Brewers Association, which has been more vocal in its displeasure with tariffs. The group said in a statement to CNN that the tariffs 'could place a significant financial burden on brewers, many of whom rely on imported materials, ingredients, and equipment.'
'These proposed tariffs could have far-reaching implications for brewers, consumers, and local economies, as they're likely to further increase the cost of craft beer, erode brewer margins, or a combination of both,' a BA spokesperson said.
CNN's Alicia Wallace contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NASCAR rumors: Insider reveals Denny Hamlin's future with Joe Gibbs Racing
Denny Hamlin is near the front of the NASCAR starting grid for Nashville, but he might not race on Sunday as his first son is due to be born. With his family poised to grow even larger, there's even more incentive for the 44-year-old to sign a new Cup Series contract. Jordan Bianchi of The Athletic writes that while Hamlin is in a contract year with Joe Gibbs Racing and is eligible for NASCAR free agency, there's a 'high probability' that he re-signs to drive the No. 11 car for the 2026 season. 'Working on it. Should be something done somewhat soon.' Denny Hamlin on contract talks with Joe Gibbs Racing Advertisement Related: Denny Hamlin credits Kyle Busch for huge development in his career Denny Hamlin stats 2025 ( 390 points, 2 wins, 6 top 10s, 5 top 5s, 2 DNFs, 371 laps led, 12.357 average starting position, 15.231 average finishing position in 13 races Hamlin, who will turn 45 years old ahead of the 2026 season, has spent his entire Cup Series career with Joe Gibbs Racing. While the No. 11 car lost its long-time partnership with FedEx after last season, the void was filled by a one-year deal with Progress Insurance. A number of the top upcoming free agents in the NASCAR Cup Series have already signed new deals. Hendrick Motorsports signed William Byron to a contract extension and Richard Childress Racing confirmed Kyle Busch will be driving the No. 8 car next season. Related: NASCAR free agents after this season, including Denny Hamlin It leaves the biggest teams – Joe Gibbs Racing, Team Penske, Hendrick Motorsports and 23XI Racing – without any full-time openings for next season. As for some of the top NASCAR prospects, Connor Zilisch may spend another year in the Xfinity Series, while Corey Heim's timeline to become a full-time Cup Series driver seems further away. Advertisement With Hamlin all but confirmed to drive the No. 11 car for JGR next season, he'll have a great chance to achieve his long-standing goal of becoming one of the 10 winningest drivers in Cup Series history. Heading into the Cracker Barrel 400, Hamlin is four wins shy of tying Kevin Harvick for 10th all-time. Related: NASCAR standings, see where Denny Hamlin sit in the points race Related Headlines


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Warnock dodges question on whether Biden should've dropped out in 2024: ‘It's over'
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) sidestepped a question on whether former President Biden should have dropped out of the 2024 presidential race sooner, saying in a Sunday interview that the election is 'over.' 'Kristen, here is what we absolutely know about last year's election: It's over. And I'm going to spend all of my energy focused on the task in front of us,' he told NBC News's Kristen Welker on 'Meet the Press' on Sunday, before railing against the GOP tax and spending bill, which the Senate is poised to take up this week. 'We are headed into a very critical week,' the senator continued. 'The Republicans are trying to push forward this big ugly bill that's going to literally cut as many as 7 million Americans off of their health care. It is a drag not only on their health care, it is a drag on the American economy.' 'This is an unfunded mandate at a time when Donald Trump's tariff tax is literally raising the cost of groceries. And so I've got my sleeves rolled up and in front of me is the American people, the people of Georgia. I'm doing everything I can to save them from Trump's big ugly bill,' he added. Warnock's comments come in response to Welker's question about a quote from David Plouffe, a senior campaign adviser to former Vice President Harris, reported in the recent book by CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios's Alex Thompson. 'If Biden had decided in 2023 to drop out, we would have had a robust primary. Whitmer, Pritzker, Newsom, Buttigieg, Harris, and Klobuchar would have run. Warnock and Shapiro would have kicked the tires. Maybe Mark Cuban or a businessperson of some sort. Twenty percent of governors and 30 percent of senators would have thought about it. We would have been eminently stronger,' Plouffe said in the quote, which Welker read to Warnock in the interview. After Warnock gave his response, Welker noted that she 'didn't hear a direct answer to the question there,' but tried to move on. Warnock interrupted the anchor and again focused on the GOP legislative package that passed the House late last month. 'Well, I take very seriously my job. The people of Georgia hired me to stand up for them. And this really is a critical week,' Warnock said, continued to talk about the bill. The interview comes as high-profile Democrats have been asked to reckon with new reporting alleging Biden's mental and physical decline in the final couple of years of his term was more severe than what had previously been disclosed to the American public.


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Discrimination cases unravel as Trump scraps core civil rights tenet
The Justice Department now is reviewing its entire docket and has already dismissed or terminated 'many' cases that were 'legally unsupportable' and a product of 'weaponization' under the Biden administration, said Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We will fully enforce civil rights laws in a way that satisfies the ends of justice, not politicization,' she said in a statement to The Washington Post. Advertisement The review includes cases and reform agreements forged after years-long investigations that the administration says lacked justification. Civil rights experts estimate that dozens of discrimination cases involving banks, landlords, private employers, and school districts could face similar action. 'What we're seeing is an attempt by the Trump administration to really dismantle a lot of the core tools that we use to ensure equality in the country,' said Amalea Smirniotopoulos, senior policy counsel and comanager of the Equal Protection Initiative at the Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit that has long advocated for the civil rights of Black Americans and other minorities. Advertisement At the center of this effort is 'disparate impact analysis,' which holds that neutral policies can have discriminatory outcomes even if there was no intent to discriminate. The legal standard stems from Griggs v. Duke Power, the landmark 1971 Supreme Court decision that became a staple of civil rights litigation. In that case, attorneys relied on statistical evidence to show how standardized testing prevented Black employees in North Carolina from advancing at the energy company. The legal theory has been consistently recognized by the Supreme Court, written into federal regulations and enshrined into employment law by Congress. But President Trump declared it unconstitutional in April, issuing an executive order that kicked off an intense review of civil rights regulations, enforcement actions, and settled cases. Now, government agreements and orders that relied on disparate impact in pursuing sex, race, and disability discrimination cases are being undone. On May 23, for example, the Justice Department terminated an agreement with Patriot Bank, a Tennessee-based lender accused of failing to lend in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods in Memphis, from 2015 to 2020. Prosecutors used statistical evidence to show disparities in the bank's lending practices alongside evidence of intentional discrimination, such as targeting most of its advertising in majority-white neighborhoods. A three-year agreement to reform its lending practices had been in place for a little over a year before Trump's Justice Department moved to end it, noting the bank was in compliance with the reform agreement. Patriot declined to comment. Civil rights advocates worry about the future of similar enforcement. Advertisement Disparate impact has long been anathema to conservatives, who say it can result in quotas and deny equal opportunity to white people. But past Republican administrations opted not to take this issue on, partly because of Supreme Court precedent and partly because it might prove politically unpopular. 'What changed is just political will,' said Kenneth L. Marcus, who headed the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights during both George W. Bush's administration and Trump's first term. 'The second Trump administration is more willing to take on potentially contentious civil rights issues than any Republican administration this century.' Trump issued a slew of executive orders to eradicate diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs - calling them 'illegal and immoral' days after he returned to the White House in January - and ordered the government to close diversity offices and fire staff. His administration has since launched investigations into corporations, law firms and colleges over their diversity initiatives, while going to battle with Harvard University for its refusal to comply with a set of demands to alter its governance, admissions, and hiring practices. When Trump set his sights on disparate impact in April, he called it a 'pernicious movement' that ignores 'individual strengths, effort or achievement.' He ordered federal agencies to review any cases and reform agreements that rely on the theory - and terminate them as they see fit. The actions are long overdue, said Dan Morenoff, executive director at the American Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit law firm that opposes the use of disparate impact and diversity initiatives. He contends that the government's use of disparate impact has been, in many cases, legally dubious, adding that its assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Advertisement 'The people who most appreciate disparate impact appear, usually, to be deeply wed to the idea that any discrepancies are best explained by discrimination,' he said. The Supreme Court most recently upheld the use of disparate impact analysis in a 2015 housing case. But that decision was decided on a 5-4 vote in an opinion written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, now retired. Some conservatives believe the court's current conservative supermajority might give them their wished-for outcome. 'It's clear what the Trump administration is aiming for is to get this question to the Supreme Court in hopes the Supreme Court will take that tool away,' said Smirniotopoulos of the Legal Defense Fund. The rollbacks are already underway. In 2023, the Justice Department alleged that Atlanta-based Ameris Bank avoided providing home loans to Black and Latino home buyers in Jacksonville, Florida, in a practice known as redlining. The bank almost exclusively advertised in majority-White neighborhoods and made little effort to do business in majority Black and Latino neighborhoods, according to its lawsuit. Only 2.7 percent of Ameris's mortgages went to borrowers in Black and Latino communities from 2016 to 2021, the complaint said, while its competitors issued more than three times as many loans during that window. Ameris knew about the disparities but failed to correct them, the government alleged. Though it admitted no wrongdoing, Ameris quickly settled the case, agreeing to a set of measures whose progress would be monitored by the court. Then, on May 19, the Justice Department moved to unwind the settlement, saying that the bank has 'demonstrated a commitment to remediation' while freeing it from its legal obligations to implement the reforms. The bank did not object to the move. Prosecutors did note that Ameris had disbursed the entirety of a $7.5 million loan subsidy fund for borrowers in Black and Latino neighborhoods. Advertisement A judge granted the request a day later. Ameris declined to comment. The government moved to terminate cases involving two banks in Alabama and Tennessee that had agreed to court-monitored reforms tied to allegations of discriminatory lending practices. It also moved to dismiss a case in Kinloch, Mo., against property managers accused of refusing to rent to prospective Black tenants at disproportionate rates. There are at least eight other housing and lending cases across seven states that are similarly candidates for dismissal, according to a review. While the administration blamed the Biden administration for mishandling these cases, it has also dismissed cases going back decades. It did not directly concern disparate impact, but the Justice Department in April dismissed a 1966 consent order with a Louisiana school district concerning its desegregation efforts.