Connect with us

Business

Fear of Trump’s Tariffs Ripples Through France’s Champagne Region

Published

on

Fear of Trump’s Tariffs Ripples Through France’s Champagne Region

French Champagne producers do nearly a billion dollars’ worth of business with the United States every year. But on Friday in Épernay, the world capital of sparkling wine, the only number on anybody’s lips was 200.

That was the percent tariff that President Trump has threatened to impose on Champagne and other European wines and spirits exported to the United States, in a trade war that exploded this past week after the European Union countered Mr. Trump’s penalties on steel and aluminum with its own duties on American products.

The triple-digit menace landed like a thunderbolt in Épernay, rattling workers in nearby fields, producers in small villages and the venerable houses that line the Avenue de Champagne, Épernay’s central boulevard and a UNESCO Heritage site that oozes tasteful wealth.

“A 200 percent tariff is designed to make sure that no Champagne will be shipped to the United States,” said Calvin Boucher, a manager at Michel Gonet, a 225-year-old Champagne house on the avenue. With 20 to 30 percent of the 200,000 bottles it makes yearly exported to American wine merchants and restaurants, “that business would be crushed,” he said, adding that the price of a $125 Champagne would more than triple overnight.

Épernay sits in the heart of a region that produces the world’s finest bubbly. The United States is its biggest foreign market, with 27 million bottles shipped there in 2023, valued at around 810 million euros ($885 million).

Advertisement

Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Meunier grapes blanket the rolling hills and deep valleys of Champagne, which covers more than 130 square miles, from the city of Reims to the Aube river. The area is under France’s strict Appellation d’Origine system, which ensures that only the sparkling wine made here, using specific methods, can legally be called Champagne.

With more than 4,000 independent winemakers and 360 Champagne houses, the region produces around 300 million bottles annually, with one billion more resting in cellars. The biggest houses — including Dom Pérignon, Veuve Clicquot and Moët & Chandon, owned by the luxury conglomerate LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton — dominate production and exports and account for a third of total sales.

But such figures were of little comfort in the wake of Mr. Trump’s threat. Just off the Avenue de Champagne, Nathalie Doucet, the president of Besserat de Bellefon, a specialty Champagne house that exports 10 percent of its premium production to the United States, said that the trade war made her anxious.

“We are waiting to see what happens, but it’s not good news,” said Ms. Doucet, whose Champagne is made with a laborious low-pressure process that gives it a crisp acidity and fine effervescence.

Champagne already had a tough year with bad weather that had reduced the harvest. Consumption has declined as young people shifted habits and switched to cocktails and artisanal beer. Champagne sales have thinned since the pandemic, falling 9 percent last year.

Advertisement

At the same time, she said, Europe was grappling with wars in Ukraine and Gaza. And now the trade war with the United States, one of France’s traditional allies, over issues that have nothing to do with Champagne, has made her feel like collateral damage.

“It seems like a deliberate punishment,” said Cyril Depart, the owner of the Salvatori wine shop, just off the avenue, which offers a wide variety of artisanal Champagnes. His wife was an export manager for one of the big Champagne houses and had already been crunching numbers on the potential impact.

Leah Razzouki, an Épernay resident whose family has worked in the Champagne business for generations, said she was infuriated. “Many of our friends are small producers and they would be hit very hard,” she said.

The damage of a trade war would spread far beyond Champagne’s regal houses, hitting American importers and distributors and putting numerous small businesses at risk.

Michael Reiss, the president of Vineyard Road, a small distributor in Framingham, Mass., that imports Champagne and wines from Europe and distributes them in New England, said that small businesses like his, including restaurants and retail shops, would be “very hurt.” The unpredictable trade environment could force businesses to cancel planned investments, he added.

Advertisement

Adding to the pain, tariffs applied at the beginning of the supply chain can multiply, as each business handling the product marks it up accordingly, Mr. Reiss said. “So even a 25 percent tariff can easily lead to a 40 to 60 percent increase in prices,” he said.

A 200 percent tariff “would eliminate the possibility of people buying things that bring them joy in their lives,” he added.

Even inside the Champagne Museum bordering the avenue in Épernay, the chatter strayed to Mr. Trump’s tariffs. Sacha Raynaud, whose family owns a small Champagne house, had brought a friend to learn the history of Champagne, which first appeared in the 17th century on the tables of royalty, giving the drink its nickname, “the king of wines.”

“French people are waking up to what’s happening in the United States, and starting to speak about boycotting American products,” she said.

Similar worries circulated in the fields. Working in a buttery morning light, a dozen field hands secured knotted brown vines to wires ahead of the spring growing season on freshly plowed earth in the shadow of the Champagne-producing town of Reuil, just west of Épernay.

Advertisement

Even these jobs were at risk, said Patrick Andrade, who runs a small company that helps maintain Champagne vineyards. The 12 hectare (30 acre) plot belonged to a small house that exports to the United States, he said.

Should sales fall, wine producers would need fewer field hands, and there would be less work for tractor operators, cork makers and bottle makers. In the worst case, he added, it could force Champagne producers to consider ripping out vines.

On Friday, France’s finance minister, Eric Lombard, called the trade war “idiotic” and said he would travel to Washington soon. “We need to talk to the Americans to bring the tension back down,” he told French television.

France’s biggest Champagne houses have stayed conspicuously silent, declining to say anything while waiting to see how Mr. Trump’s threat would play out — and whether European officials could get him to back off.

Among them was LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, which sells nearly 35 percent of its wines and spirits in the United States. The company did not respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

Outside of LVMH’s Moët & Chandon mansion on the Avenue de Champagne, a group of Americans snapped selfies in front of a statue of Dom Pérignon, the monk who invented Champagne. Inside the stately building, no staff members wanted to talk tariffs.

Even so, locals whispered rumors that the big houses were upset by the tariff threat, but expected that it could quite possibly blow over.

After all, some said, Bernard Arnault, France’s richest man and the head of the LVMH empire, which dominates much of Champagne’s production, has a longstanding relationship with the U.S. president and was invited by Mr. Trump to his inauguration. Perhaps Mr. Arnault’s friendship would prevail at the end of the day, they said.

But for now, that is all just speculation. The reality is that nothing is certain — and uncertainty is bad for business.

Back at the Michel Gonet Champagne house, Mr. Boucher pointed to a display of cuvées that were popular among customers in the United States.

Advertisement

“It’s just a stressful situation because we don’t know if the tariffs will even happen,” he said. “It’s not good for anybody.”

Aurelien Breeden and Ségolène Le Stradic contributed reporting.

Business

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

Published

on

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

In mapping out Elon Musk’s wealth, our investigation found that Mr. Musk is behind more than 90 companies in Texas. Kirsten Grind, a New York Times Investigations reporter, explains what her team found.

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Published

on

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.

If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.

All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.

But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.

That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.

Advertisement

The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.

— Katie Martin, Financial Times

Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.

Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.

Advertisement

Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.

But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.

Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.

That hasn’t been the case for months.

”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”

Advertisement

Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.

Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.

It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.

Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”

Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”

Advertisement

Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.

Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.

“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”

I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.

To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.

Advertisement

Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.

The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.

It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.

That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.

Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Published

on

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.

The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.

Advertisement

What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.

But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.

Advertisement

The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.

Advertisement

How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments

To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.

Advertisement

The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.

In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.

In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.

Advertisement

Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.

Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.

Advertisement

Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.

Advertisement

How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies

With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.

Advertisement

The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.

The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.

Advertisement

The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.

One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.

Advertisement

Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.

And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Methodology

Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending