PepsiCo cuts annual profit forecast amid trade war turmoil
April 24 (Reuters) - PepsiCo (PEP.O), opens new tab cut its annual core profit forecast on Thursday, as the soda and snacks giant grapples with the uncertainty fueled by President Donald Trump's erratic trade policy and disruptions to its supply chain.
The company now expects fiscal 2025 core earnings per share to decline 3%, compared with its previous forecast of a low-single-digit increase.
here.
"As we look ahead, we expect more volatility and uncertainty, particularly related to global trade developments, which we expect will increase our supply chain costs. At the same time, consumer conditions in many markets remain subdued and similarly have an uncertain outlook," said CEO Ramon Laguarta said in a statement.
Laguarta said the company plans mitigation actions to address the higher supply chain costs where possible, without going into the details.
Organic volumes declined 3% in the first quarter in its convenient foods segment, the company said, as promotions on snacks take longer to boost demand.
Shares of the Frito Lay maker fell 2% in premarket trading.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Elon Musk turns on Trump and blasts ‘outrageous, pork-filled' spending bill
Elon Musk has turned on President Donald Trump by blasting his 'big beautiful bill' as an 'outrageous, pork-filled, disgusting abomination.' The denunciation comes just days after the mogul exited the White House. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk posted on X Tuesday. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' The billionaire took a significantly stronger tone than his previous criticism of the spending bill now he has left Washington, D.C. He previously said the bill 'undermines' the Department of Government Efficiency. 'I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, doesn't decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,' Musk said over the weekend.
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Lindsey Graham, Trump's Ukraine weathervane, finally turns east on Russia sanctions
Has Lindsey Graham been playing the long game with Donald Trump? Graham, who has calibrated his pro-Ukraine support since the inauguration to stay in the US president's orbit, has said he expects this week that the Senate will begin moving his Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, a bill that he says would impose 'bone-breaking sanctions' on Vladimir Putin and a 500% tariff on goods imported from countries that buy Russian oil and other goods, potentially targeting China and India. The fate of the bill still depends on whether Trump gives the go-ahead, according to congressional insiders. But Trump's growing frustration with Putin has emboldened some in the GOP to begin speaking out on the conflict again – with the famously flexible Graham leading the charge for tougher sanctions on the Kremlin. Is it nearing a critical mass moment in Congress – a body that has largely abdicated its role in foreign policy since Trump's inauguration? 'I hope so, because it is the right action to take,' said Don Bacon, a Republican House representative who has criticised the White House on its Ukraine policy. 'But it is risky to speak for others. I know where I stand. The Senate has an overwhelming majority in support of sanctions and we should move out. It is in our national security interests that Russia fails here and it should be obvious that Putin doesn't want peace, but wants dominance over Ukraine.' Trump's shift on Russia has come as his efforts to negotiate a speedy ceasefire have failed. Talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul on Monday led to little progress, and continued outreach from his personal envoy Steve Witkoff to the Kremlin has not brought concessions from Vladimir Putin. A leaked draft of Russia's demands at the negotiations depicted a capitulation: withdrawal from Ukrainian territory claimed by Russia, no Nato membership for Ukraine, caps on the size of the country's military. Yet it has specifically been the bombardment of cities that has upset Trump, proving once again that Putin has managed to be his own worse enemy when it comes to negotiations. 'I've always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him,' Trump said last week, repeating part of the comments in public. 'He has gone absolutely CRAZY! He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I'm not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever.' As the White House looks for means to increase pressure on Russia and its enablers like China, the bill backed by Graham and Democratic senator Richard Blumenthal has become a convenient tool to do just that. One person in GOP circles said that the White House was considering letting Republicans 'vote their conscience' – effectively allowing Congress to support the bill without facing blowback from the Trump administration. But that would involve a final decision by the White House, and Trump has still not openly backed new sanctions as more than just a contingency. 'Despite support of 82 or so Senators, the bill can't move without support in the House, and the Speaker of the House won't move it without the President's support,' said Kori Schake of the American Enterprise Institute. 'And it's not clear the President has really decided Putin's the impediment to a cease fire. Additionally, the Senate will be consumed with passing the reconciliation bill for the next few weeks.' But as of Tuesday, the leadership appeared ready to move forward. The weathervane for Trump's gusty foreign policy on Ukraine has been Graham, a veteran political survivor who has built a strong relationship with the president through relentless flattery and has tailored his views to match Trump's when convenient. On Ukraine, he has been so bendable that he could not be broken. 'They play a very careful game because they don't want to upset their relationship with the big guy,' said one person knowledgable about discussions amongst congressional Republicans. 'At the same time, I do think his heart and his head is in the right place. Just really not quite his own courage.' Graham's interventions have been meaningful. He was instrumental in pushing the minerals deal that Ukraine signed with the US as a way to get Trump's buy-in for its defense. Over a game of golf, he pitched Trump on the 'trillions' in mineral wealth in Ukraine and later showed him a map (Trump said he wanted 'half' according to one account). At the same time, he publicly fumed about Volodymyr Zelenskyy following the disastrous White House meeting of late February when Trump and JD Vance argued with the wartime leader. 'I don't know if we can ever do business with Zelensky again,' Graham said, also suggesting that the Ukrainian leader should resign. (Zelenskyy shot back later that he was ready to offer him citizenship if he wanted to discuss who should lead Ukraine). Graham's latitude has stunned some of his former colleagues. A former colleague who had worked with Graham on Ukraine policy said that his remarks about Zelenskyy had given him 'whiplash'. Asked if Graham had a coherent strategy to influence Trump, the person said: 'Graham's strategy is to put Graham first.' 'I think that he understands the big game,' said another person familiar with discussions over the bill. 'He would like the policy to be sound, which means [putting sanctions] on the Kremlin. But he values his relationship with the President and that that trumps the first calculation. So if he really feels the President's against, he's not going to go for it.' Now, with Trump signaling greater readiness for sanctions, Graham has traveled to Kyiv to meet with Zelenskyy (all smiles) and to Brussels, where he and EU president Ursula von der Leyen discussed potential EU and US sanctions packages to turn up the pressure on Moscow. 'Sen. Graham deserves a lot of credit for making the case for tougher pressure on the Kremlin,' said John Hardie, the Russia program deputy director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a conservative thinktank. 'Carrots clearly haven't worked, so it's time to start using some sticks, including by going after Russia's oil revenue. This economic pressure should be paired with sustained military assistance for Ukraine.' Hardie and others noted that Trump could increase pressure on Russia without the Senate bill. 'If President Trump were to decide to go the pressure route, he already has the tools at his disposal to do so,' said Hardie. 'For example, he could immediately designate the rest of Russia's shadow fleet and other non-Western entities facilitating Russian oil exports and could join with G7 partners in lowering the G7 oil price cap.' And even if the sanctions are passed, they will ultimately rely on Trump's decision to enforce them. 'The Senate is prepared either way,' Graham wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last week. 'I have coordinated with the White House on the Russia sanctions bill since its inception. The bill would put Russia on a trade island, slapping 500% tariffs on any country that buys Moscow's energy products. The consequences of its barbaric invasion must be made real to those that prop it up. If China or India stopped buying cheap oil, Mr. Putin's war machine would grind to a halt.'
The Independent
34 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump privately gripes that his own Supreme Court judge picks aren't standing behind his agenda: report
President Donald Trump has reportedly privately aired grievances about his most recent Supreme Court Justice pick, Amy Coney Barrett, for not sufficiently supporting his agenda. While the president publicly turns to the conservative-heavy court for help in implementing some of his most controversial agenda, in private, he's complained about some of the justices he's nominated, with an emphasis on Barrett, CNN reported. Barrett, the last justice to be nominated and appointed by Trump, has shown herself to be less of a hardline conservative than other justices such as Clarence Thomas or Samuel Alito. In March, she joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the liberal wing of the court in ruling against Trump's attempts to avoid paying $2 billion in USAID funding. Last month, she recused herself from a case on religious charter schools, which left the court deadlocked in a decision. Those decisions came after Barrett joined Roberts and liberal justices in ordering Trump to be sentenced in his New York hush money case, just days before his inauguration. The recent maneuvers have earned the ire of Trump loyalists, with some calling her 'weak,' fueling the president's dissatisfaction with the highest court in the nation, according to CNN. Harrison Fields, a spokesperson for the White House, said in a statement that, 'President Trump will always stand with the U.S. Supreme Court, unlike the Democrat Party, which, if given the opportunity, would pack the court, ultimately undermining its integrity.' 'The President may disagree with the Court and some of its rulings, but he will always respect its foundational role,' Fields continued. Overall, the court, as well as Barrett, has largely handed Trump wins in cases over his administration's policies as well as his personal endeavors. Barrett joined her conservative colleagues last year in awarding Trump broad immunity from criminal prosecution and allowing him on the ballot in several states. But, over the last year, Barrett has also shown herself unafraid of stepping away from the conservative bloc in various cases. Several sources familiar with the matter told CNN that Trump has aired complaints about Barrett as well as Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh – the two other conservative judges he tapped for the court. Although Trump has shared his complaints privately, a source close to the president told CNN he does not want to launch public attacks on individual justices. After Barrett voted against Trump in the USAID case, the president defended her, calling her 'a very good woman.' 'She's a very good woman. She's very smart, and I don't know about people attacking her, I really don't know,' Trump told reporters.
