Politics
California businesses are reeling from Trump's on-again, off-again tariffs
Tariffs haven’t yet hit the supply chain at Anawalt in Malibu, but the hardware store and lumber seller is bracing for steep price hikes in the coming weeks.
The majority of the lumber that the store sells comes from Canada and nearly all of its steel products are made in China, general manager Rieff Anawalt said. Those countries, along with Mexico, have been targeted in sweeping tariffs imposed by President Trump during his second term, sparking a global trade war that intensified this week.
“These tariffs are 100% going to impact us,” Anawalt said. Wholesale reps for the family-run hardware company, which has five locations around Los Angeles County, have warned him to expect prices to go up by April 1 — costs that he said he’ll have to pass on to customers.
“We’re going to see major increases: 15% to 25% across the board in this industry,” he said. “It’ll make COVID prices seem cheap.”
Across California, businesses of all kinds — farmers, automakers, home builders, tech companies and apparel retailers — are reeling from weeks of on-again, off-again tariff chaos as Trump has announced a slew of levies against the country’s top three trading partners, implementing some while modifying, delaying or reversing others.
“It’s a day-by-day soap opera, and just like a soap opera, you get relief, then it heats up again,” said Jonathan D. Aronson, a professor of international communication and international relations at USC.
As a result, business owners “don’t know what’s going to happen,” he said. “They can’t plan. They don’t know how much to produce. They don’t know who their business partners are going to be.”
This month has been particularly tumultuous. On March 4, Trump’s 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico kicked in, with a limit of 10% on Canadian energy; he also doubled the tariff on all Chinese imports to 20%. All three countries vowed to strike back with their own measures.
A lumber yard in British Columbia, Canada, last month. Canada is the largest foreign supplier of lumber to the U.S.
(Bloomberg via Getty Images)
The next day, Trump granted a one-month exemption for U.S. automakers on his new tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico. The day after that, he said he was postponing many of the tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports for a month.
On Monday, in a blow to farmers in California and across the U.S., China imposed retaliatory duties of up to 15% on American agricultural products including chicken, corn, beef, pork, wheat and soybeans. Then on Wednesday, Trump’s 25% tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports went into effect.
To counterbalance the effects of the tariffs on their bottom lines, businesses may have to overhaul their operations, said Jerry Nickelsburg, faculty director of the UCLA Anderson Forecast.
“The way in which firms react to that uncertainty is to not put all their eggs in one basket,” he said. “So they cut back on how much they would order, which means they’re going to produce less and they need fewer people — or if not fewer people, fewer hours for the people they have.”
The latest volley came Thursday morning, when Trump threatened to place a 200% tariff on wine and liquor from the European Union in response to the EU proposing a 50% tariff on American whiskey. About an hour later, he wrote in a follow-up post on Truth Social that the U.S. “doesn’t have Free Trade. We have ‘Stupid Trade.’”
“The Entire World is RIPPING US OFF!!!” he said.
Bolstering the economy was one of Trump’s core promises during the election, and tariffs are key to his strategy. He threatened to slap tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China on his first day back in office, explaining the decision as a way to crack down on illegal immigration and drugs.
But the escalating trade tensions have pummeled Wall Street for three weeks. On Thursday, the S&P 500 closed in correction territory, ending the day down 1.39%; the index is now 10.1% below its record close Feb. 19. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 537.36 points, or 1.3%, closing at 40,813.57.
The fallout for farmers
The prolonged back-and-forth has also unsettled companies, both those that import goods from abroad and those that sell their products to foreign clients. California’s economy could be especially hard hit because of its heavy reliance on trade with China and Mexico, and because of its position as a global agricultural powerhouse.
Farmer Joe Del Bosque holds a raw almond in Firebaugh, Calif.
(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
California farmers grow the largest share of the nation’s food — more than a third of the country’s vegetables and more than three-quarters of its fruits and nuts are grown here — and the state’s fertile ground is a major supplier of produce to countries around the world. Farmers also rely heavily on fertilizer from Canada, which could cost more as the tariffs take hold.
“Farmers in California are going to be hurt particularly badly because almonds, soybeans and things like that are huge exports of the United States,” Aronson said.
The state also accounts for about 85% of wines produced in the United States and is home to thousands of grape growers and wineries, many of them small and generations-old. The Wine Institute says the industry supports employment for more than 420,000 Californians and generates $73 billion in economic activity in the state. Canada is the largest market for California wine.
A flurry of activity at the ports
Some L.A.-area companies have been stockpiling inventory to get ahead of expected price hikes tied to the tariffs, said Stephen Cheung, chief executive of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.
“A lot of them were hit pretty hard during the last trade war with China,” he said, “so they knew better than to wait and hope for the best.”
That has been reflected in shipping data from the ports in Long Beach and Los Angeles, which continue to record huge numbers thanks to several months of front-loading cargo ahead of Trump’s inauguration.
The Port of Long Beach moved 765,385 twenty-foot equivalent units, or TEUs, in February, a 13.4% increase from the previous year. January’s year-over-year growth was even larger: 952,733 TEUs — a unit of measurement based on the volume of a standard shipping container — were moved, representing a 41.4% increase.
An aerial view of the Port of Long Beach.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
After Trump launched a trade war with China during his first term, the Port of Long Beach lost about 20% of expected Chinese cargo in 2019, Chief Executive Mario Cordero said. That was supplemented by a 10% increase in imports from countries in Southeast Asia including Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand. He expects the same thing to happen this time around.
In the coming months, Cordero said, the local economy could see supply chain disruptions, similar to what occurred during the pandemic, “if we continue on the path of aggressive and high” tariffs.
The Port of Los Angeles expects a 10% reduction in volume from last year amid Trump’s tariffs against China, Executive Director Gene Seroka said.
It’s a day-by-day soap opera, and just like a soap opera, you get relief, then it heats up again.
— Jonathan D. Aronson, a professor of international communication and international relations at USC
One of the largest seaports in the country, the L.A. port has seen sharp increases in cargo since last summer as businesses stocked up in anticipation of potential Trump tariffs. Just under 10.3 million TEUs, a near record, passed through the port last year.
Those numbers are likely to trend downward as tariffs take hold and the economy adjusts, Seroka said. “Fewer containers mean fewer jobs.”
L.A. businesses try to adjust
Economists say it’s difficult for companies to quickly change suppliers, and some may be loath to upend their supply chains given the ever-changing nature of Trump’s trade policies.
Some are trying anyway.
Francesca Grace, an interior designer and home stager in Los Angeles, said tariffs have already affected the availability and price of items including fabrics, wood and other building materials, and smaller decor pieces.
Supply chain delays have extended her project timelines in some cases to three to six weeks from immediate availability, and she’s contending with “at least a 25% rise” in costs for materials from China. As a result, she’s now trying to source all of her products locally, up from 75%.
“While this shift aligns with our values, it will also cause our pricing to increase,” Grace said. “We are doing everything we can to avoid increasing our pricing too much. The last thing we want is for these changes to negatively impact our business or make our designs inaccessible.”
Other businesses say they have little choice when it comes to where they get their merchandise.
“Lumber prices are what they are. There’s no sourcing it somewhere else, so we’re going to have to deal with it as it comes,” said Anawalt, the general manager at the Malibu hardware store. “It’s so beyond my control, there’s nothing I can do. I was panicked at first, but now I’m just going to wait.”
new video loaded: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
transcript
transcript
Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.
-
“Full pardon or commutation?” “Full pardon.”
By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff
June 4, 2026
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Democrats splintered over a resolution seeking to block the U.S. from assisting Israel’s war against Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed terrorist group, on Thursday.
The measure, offered by progressive Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., would require President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from Lebanon. For months, Israel and Hezbollah, a U.S.-designated terrorist group and Iranian proxy, have been at war in southern Lebanon, but the United States has not joined the conflict.
A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., rejected the measure. Critics argued the resolution could aid Hezbollah and potentially hamstring U.S. military operations in the country.
Tlaib’s resolution failed 92-324, with more than half of House Democrats joining nearly all Republicans to vote it down.
The Lebanon war powers resolution divided Democrats, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., joining Republicans in rejecting the measure. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg)
REP RASHIDA TLAIB MOVES TO BLOCK US OPERATIONS IN LEBANON BUT IGNORES HEZBOLLAH
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., an Israel critic, was the lone Republican to support Tlaib’s measure. Meanwhile, Reps. Derek Tran, D-Calif., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn., voted present.
House Democratic leaders said shortly before the vote they would oppose Tlaib’s resolution and work with the progressive lawmaker on a narrower measure exempting some U.S. military operations in the country. Their statement also denounced Hezbollah as a “violent terrorist organization” and a “sworn enemy of the United States.”
Tlaib, who has accused Israel of committing “ethnic cleansing” in Lebanon, did not mention Hezbollah in her resolution. She and other proponents of the measure also avoided discussing the Iranian proxy force during heated floor debate over the measure.
Republicans highlighted the omission and accused the legislation’s supporters of serving as “proxies for Hezbollah.”
“Apparently they don’t want to see Israel killing Hezbollah, even though it’s Hezbollah that is killing Israeli children, Israeli adults, Israeli elders,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, R-Fla., said Wednesday, referring to his Democratic colleagues.
Tlaib asserted that her resolution would only affect U.S. forces actively engaged in hostilities. Republicans, however, disputed that claim and suggested it would hurt U.S. efforts to counter Hezbollah.
“It doesn’t say anything about [whether] you can keep the Marines that are in the embassy,” Mast said, referring to the U.S. embassy in Beirut. “That’s a pretty big oversight. It doesn’t say anything about whether we can keep United States armed forces that are training missions with the LAF [Lebanese Armed Forces]. Again, pretty big oversight.”
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan, attempted to bar U.S. forces from joining Israel’s war in Lebanon. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg)
RASHIDA TLAIB HIT WITH HOUSE CENSURE THREAT, ACCUSED OF ‘CELEBRATING TERRORISM’ IN PRO-PALESTINIAN SPEECH
The debate turned personal when Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, linked Tlaib to Hezbollah.
“Hezbollah is a terrorist organization … and its members are butchers that you like to hang out with to a certain extent,” the Ohio lawmaker said, referring to Tlaib.
A shouting match between the two then broke out, with Tlaib demanding that Miller’s remarks be stricken from the record.
The presiding chair ultimately complied with her request, but Miller doubled down on his remarks.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Yes, I said it. I own it, and I stand by it,” Mast said on behalf of Miller on the floor.
Tlaib’s failed war powers resolution comes as Iran has sought to tie Israel’s invasion of Lebanon to its ceasefire negotiations with the United States.
Hezbollah, which has long helped Iran project power in the region, rejected a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon’s government Thursday.
WASHINGTON — Initial efforts in the Senate failed Thursday to block the $1.8-billion fund that the Trump administration has sought to establish to pay people who claim the government wronged them, though further attempts were likely to come Thursday afternoon.
Republicans narrowly voted down a Democratic amendment to ban the payout fund and then Democrats killed a Republican amendment, which would have prohibited the use of federal money for the fund but would have sent $1.7 billion to the Justice Department’s fraud division.
It was the second effort in Congress to rebuke President Trump in two days, following the House vote Wednesday to rein in Trump’s war powers in Iran.
The dueling amendments were proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). They were attached to the reconciliation bill that would fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol, a high priority for Republicans.
The votes came as the Senate began a “vote-a-rama,” during which lawmakers were expected to propose a stream of amendments to the immigration bill on various topics.
The Trump administration’s plan for the payment fund — widely seen as a way for Trump to compensate his political allies, including those who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — set off particular ire from some GOP lawmakers.
The plan has fueled growing unrest within parts of Trump’s party over his governance, compounded by the president’s endorsement of primary challengers to Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), as well as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), which angered some Republican senators.
Cassidy, who lost his primary and has since voiced strong opposition to Trump’s $1.8-billion fund, became a key player in the Thursday votes, voting down Schumer’s amendment but supporting Tillis’.
On Wednesday, Cassidy joined with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) to argue in a court filing that the $1.8-billion fund circumvents Congress’ authority and violates the Constitution’s spending and appropriations clauses.
“It is an unconstitutional attempt to spend the People’s money without Congressional approval,” Cassidy and Booker wrote in an amicus brief filed in the federal court case challenging the fund.
The fund was created by the Justice Department to settle a lawsuit brought by Trump against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. Trump and his sons agreed to drop their personal lawsuit against the government in exchange for the creation of the $1.776-billion fund. Critics immediately questioned the plan, and it drew a rare backlash from Republicans.
In late May, GOP senators derailed plans to vote on the immigration bill over their displeasure with the payout fund and with Trump’s desire to use taxpayer funds for his planned White House ballroom. Senate Republicans removed the ballroom funding from the immigration package Wednesday, another setback for Trump.
The Trump administration sought to back away from its plans for the fund this week, following bipartisan outcry and a federal court ruling that temporarily blocked any payouts from the fund. Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said Tuesday the administration would end its plans to move ahead with the concept.
But Trump on Wednesday told reporters he didn’t know whether the fund was dead, calling it “a beautiful thing.”
After Schumer proposed the first amendment to ban the fund Thursday morning, the Senate came to a standstill as three key Republican senators deliberated. Schumer framed his effort to ban the fund Thursday as a way to force a referendum on Trump’s plan.
The amendment “offers Republicans a choice: Do you support Donald Trump’s $2 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund, or do you want to protect the American people and their paychecks?” Schumer said on the Senate floor before the vote.
Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) urged Republicans to reject the amendment, saying Democrats were planning to “play so many games” on Thursday during the marathon session.
“We are going to fund immigration enforcement and border patrol, and I urge my Republican colleagues to stay united on that singular mission,” Moreno said.
The amendment failed after Cassidy voted against it. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio and Dan Sullivan of Alaska voted in favor.
Schumer’s amendment was uniformly supported by Democrats, including California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.
Tillis, who also voted against Schumer’s amendment, immediately proposed his amendment. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) urged Democrats to oppose it, saying that the proposal would create “a new slush fund” by giving the money to the Justice Department.
“We heard over the last 48 hours that the acting attorney general said that this fund’s not moving forward. All this amendment does is codify what I believe the policy of the DOJ is,” Tillis said on the floor before voting began on his amendment. “This [fund] is unpopular, this administration has said they’re not moving forward with it; this is an opportunity for us to put it to bed.”
Responded Merkley: “Taking one slush fund and eliminating it and then creating a new slush fund still under control of the attorney general is not the way to go. The way to go is to get rid of these slush funds altogether.”
Trump has faced a recent string of failures, including the House vote Wednesday, a court ruling to remove his name from the Kennedy Center and a record-low approval rating among Americans as concern rises about economic issues, gas prices and Trump’s war with Iran.
On Wednesday, Trump lashed out against the four Republicans who backed the House war powers resolution, calling it “an unpatriotic thing” to do and calling the vote “meaningless.”
“They’re GRANDSTANDERS! They should be ashamed of themselves. MAGA!!! President DJT,” Trump wrote.
Times staff writer Ana Ceballos, in Washington, contributed to this report.
-
Augusta, GA4 minutes agoGaines endorses Kendrick in Augusta mayoral runoff
-
Washington, D.C11 minutes agoJuvenile injured after gunfire reported in DC’s Michigan Park neighborhood
-
Cleveland, OH14 minutes agoCleveland readies for pre-World Cup soccer match
-
Austin, TX19 minutes agoTexas lawmakers discuss rural hospitals
-
Alabama26 minutes agoAlabama has one of college football’s toughest schedule stretches in 2026
-
Alaska29 minutes agoFormer Alaska corrections officer sentenced to 150 years in prison for killing wife and teen daughter
-
Arizona34 minutes agoDozens charged under Preston’s Law in Arizona
-
Arkansas41 minutes agoStockton rappers plead guilty to possessing machine gun, marijuana in Arkansas traffic stop
