Danone’s CEO told CNBC that inflationary pressures from the Iran war may force the company to consider price hikes as the outlook for conflict in the Middle East remains highly uncertain.

When asked if the company would be raising prices, CEO Antoine de Saint-Affrique said, “we are not there yet.”

“Nobody knows when [the war] is going to stop, and depending how the next two to four weeks are going to evolve, the outcome from a macroeconomic standpoint, is going to be very, very different,” he told CNBC’s Charlotte Reed.

“If it lasts for long enough, it will have an impact,” he added.

His comments come as companies increasingly take stock of how the war may impact their operations and cost base. 

The conflict in the Middle East has now entered its sixth week, with U.S. President Donald Trump turning up the tone on Iran over the weekend to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. 

The president on Monday said Iran has until 8 p.m. Eastern time to reopen the strategically important strait where normally a fifth of global oil supply passes through.  

The effective closure of the narrow passage has caused not only surging energy prices but also soaring fertilizer and shipping costs. 

The Head of the International Monetary Fund Kristalina Georgieva warned Monday that even if the conflict resolves soon, the Iran war will inevitably lead to higher inflation and weaker growth.

Earlier this month, Britain’s Food and Drink Federation (FDF) forecasted food inflation of at least 9% by the end of the year, revised upwards from an estimated 3.2% previously. That would be the highest annual food and non-alcoholic drink inflation since 2023. 

“Given the fast-changing nature of the situation, this revision is based on assumptions that the Strait of Hormuz opens to cargo traffic within the next two-three weeks and the majority of key facilities, such as oil, gas and fertiliser sites, return to normal within a year,” the FDF said on April 1. 

“If it lasts for long enough, it will have an impact,” de Saint-Affrique said. 

Danone reported a roughly 2.1% overall price increase in the fourth quarter, while volume-led growth stood at 2.5%. 

The company is betting it can capitalize on its healthy brands to remain relevant as food brands also face increasing competition from cheaper private labels that offer grocers higher margins. In March, it announced it would buy protein shake maker Huel for an undisclosed sum to optimize its position in the fast-growing nutrition space. 

Retailers have also warned that they can only absorb increased costs for so long before passing them on to their customers.

British retailer Next said late last month that it had accounted for £15 million ($20 million) of additional costs likely to arise from the Middle East conflict, such as fuel and air freight, assuming the disruption lasts for three months.

“Beyond the next three months, if we see these costs persist, then we will begin to pass costs through as higher pricing,” Next said.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday threatened to destroy Iran’s bridges and power plants, saying the “New Regime leadership knows what has to be done, and has to be done, FAST!” in a Truth Social post.

Trump did not elaborate on what needed to be “done,” but said the U.S. “hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran.”

Hours later, Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency reportedly claimed that a U.S. F-35 fighter jet was shot down over central Iran. Images of the jet were posted on Telegram, with one photo that appeared to show the words “U.S. Air Forces in Europe” on what appeared to be the tail section of a plane.

The U.S. Central Command, which oversees the region, and Iranian authorities did not respond to a request for comment at the time of publication.

Trump’s latest threat came a day after a nationwide address in which he said the U.S. military would hit Iran “extremely hard” for the next two or three weeks. He added that the U.S. would “bring them back to the Stone Ages where they belong.”

Hours after his speech, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi struck a defiant tone on X, saying that “there was no oil or gas being pumped in the Middle East back then,” referring to Trump’s stone age remarks.

“Are POTUS and Americans who put him in office sure that they want to turn back the clock?” Araghchi said.

Iran has effectively shut tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global oil route, after the U.S. and Israel attacked the country on Feb. 28.

Trump has repeatedly threatened to send Iran back to the “stone age” as the war entered its second month and the U.S. military build-up in the Middle East showed no signs of slowing.

Despite reports of overtures from the U.S., including ceasefires and a 15-point peace plan to end the war, Iran has publicly contradicted multiple reports about negotiations with the Trump administration on numerous occasions.

Tehran had described the 15-point proposal as “extremely maximalist and unreasonable,” according to an Al Jazeera report on March 25, citing a high-ranking diplomatic source.

Trump said Wednesday that Iran’s “New Regime President” had asked Washington for a ceasefire, a claim that Tehran has denied. Trump has not specified who the “President” is.

“We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!,” he wrote.

Attacks on power plants could constitute a war crime and violate international law, legal experts said.

In a letter dated Thursday and signed by over 100 law experts, the group said international law prohibits attacks on “objects indispensable to the survival of civilians, and the attacks threatened by Trump, if implemented, could entail war crimes.”

Trump had also earlier said that he could target water desalination plants in Iran.

The Gulf Cooperation Council on Thursday called on the United Nations Security Council to take “all necessary measures to ensure the immediate cessation of Iranian aggressions against the Council states.”

The six countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — have come under attack from Iranian missiles and drones as the war entered its second month.

The Kuwait Petroleum Corporation said that its Mina al-Ahmadi refinery was hit by drones early on Friday.

Jassim Albudaiwi, Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council, said that while the bloc does not seek war, Iran had “exceeded all red lines” and described Tehran’s attacks as “treacherous.”

Bahrain, the current rotating president of the Security Council, has led an effort to pass a U.N. resolution to ​authorize “all necessary means” to protect commercial shipping in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

But the proposal reportedly stalled after veto-wielding Security Council members China, Russia and France objected to the draft resolution, which would have authorized military action against Iran.

The fallout from the Iran war is likely to expedite the shift away from fossil fuels and make countries think differently about the role renewables can play in shoring up energy security, analysts told CNBC.

The Middle East crisis has severely disrupted oil exports through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, which typically carries about a fifth of the world’s oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) and represents a key choke point for fertilizer trade.

It has shone a light on the extent to which the world remains deeply reliant on fragile fossil fuel trade routes, while surging oil and gas prices have rattled energy markets and triggered widespread inflation fears.

Asia’s reliance on imported energy means it now sits at the forefront of the global fossil fuel crisis, but supply disruptions are also hitting hard in Europe and Africa, where countries are responding to rising fuel costs and a considerable threat to food security.

The head of the International Energy Agency said the energy transition was moving “very strongly” before the Iran war began — but the fallout from the resulting energy shock means countries will likely direct even more investment toward clean energy sources.

“I expect one of the responses to this crisis will be [an] acceleration of renewables. Not only because they are helping to reduce the emissions but also, they are [a] homegrown domestic energy source,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said at the National Press Club in Australia’s capital on Monday.

Clean energy sources dominated new power installations last year, for example, with renewables accounting for 85% of all new global power capacity, Birol said, citing solar as a primary driver of this trend.

“It is amazing. Ten years ago, solar was a romantic story — but now solar is a business,” Birol said.

Fossil fuels, however, such as coal, oil and gas, continue to dominate the global energy mix, meeting around 80% of worldwide demand in 2023, according to the IEA.

“The Iran crisis accelerates the shift to renewables and electrification. High fossil prices drive switching, making already cheap electrotech even more competitive,” Sam Butler-Sloss, research manager at global energy think tank Ember, told CNBC by email.

“In the old fossil fuel world, energy security meant diversifying fuel supply. With electrotech, nations now have the tools to increasingly eliminate imported fuels altogether.”

Electrotech, which refers to solar, wind, batteries and electrified transport, heating and industry, became the world’s dominant engine of global energy growth last year, Ember found in an analysis published in December. This was led by China’s emergence as the world’s first so-called “electrostate.”

Butler-Sloss said electric vehicle adoption had already been rising fast across the world, particularly in Asia, and this crisis adds a further tailwind to that trend. He estimated that scaling up EVs could save importers more than $600 billion a year in oil imports, describing the switch as a “security superlever.”

“This is Asia’s Ukraine moment. In the same way Ukraine compelled Europe to cut gas dependency, Hormuz will push Asia to cut oil dependency – but with even cheaper technology available,” Butler-Sloss said.

Ana Maria Jaller-Makarewicz, lead energy analyst for the Europe team at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), described the Iran war energy shock as “a wake-up call” for the European Union.

Spain serves as a prime example of how countries have been able to limit their exposure to fossil fuel price volatility, Jaller-Makarewicz said.

She noted that Spain’s government had come under heavy criticism following a catastrophic blackout last year, which some policymakers blamed on renewables, but that the country was now reaping the rewards from its investment in wind and solar technologies.

Private sector output in the euro zone sank to a 10-month low in March, amid mounting evidence of the impact the Iran conflict is having on the global economy.

The closely-watched S&P Global flash purchasing managers’ index (PMI) for the euro zone fell to 50.5 in March, marking a steep decline from the 51.9 reported in February.

Economists polled by Reuters had expected a shallower dip to 51.0. The 50.0 threshold separates expansion from contraction territory.

The reading prompted fresh warnings that the region is facing the specter of looming stagflation — a toxic combination of high inflation and unemployment, and stalling growth.

“The flash Eurozone PMI is ringing stagflation alarm bells as the war in the Middle East drives prices sharply higher while stifling growth,” Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, commented Tuesday.

“Firms’ costs are rising at the fastest rate for over three years amid the surge in energy prices and choking of supply chains resulting from the war. Supplier delays have jumped to their highest since mid-2022, largely linked to shipping issues.”

Euro zone companies surveyed by S&P Global scaled back hiring marginally during March, as bosses lowered output expectations for the year when compared with February forecasts, according to S&P Global economists.

“Stagflation” is often seen as a “worse case scenario” for economies and poses a dilemma for central banks because the tools they’d usually use to combat high inflation — higher interest rates — can stifle growth and employment, while lowering rates can boost growth but increase demand and inflation.

The euro zone is not alone in seeing private sector activity slow due to the Iran war, with PMI data from India earlier on Tuesday also showing output growth slowed to its lowest level since October 2022.

In revised forecasts released last week, the European Central Bank now expects economic growth of 0.9% in 2026, and headline inflation to average 2.6% this year.

That outlook could be optimistic, however, with S&P Global’s Williamson noting that the PMI survey’s price gauge was indicative of inflation accelerating close to 3%, “with cost pressure likely to add still further to selling price inflation in the coming months.”

“The outlook depends on the duration of the war and any potential lasting impact on energy and supply chains, but the flash PMI data underscore how the European Central Bank is no longer in a ‘good place’ with respect to growth and inflation,” Williamson said.

The March PMIs show the conflict in Iran is already having a significant impact on the euro area economy, J.P. Morgan’s Raphael Brun-Aguerre noted Tuesday.

“Overall, the survey points to a large near-term inflation impact from higher energy that could feed into core prices … The energy price shock could hit business profitability and has already damaged demand conditions and output more broadly in the region. Business sentiment is being hit significantly. European Commission data [out Monday] already showed a large hit to consumer confidence in March,” he noted in emailed analysis.

Early Tuesday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said it was time for negotiations with Iran, given the “critical” nature of the global energy crisis.

“The situation is critical for the energy supply allies worldwide. We all feel the knock-on effects on gas and oil prices, our businesses and our societies, but it is of utmost importance that we come to a solution that is negotiated, and this puts an end to the hostilities that we see in the Middle East.”

Chicago Federal Reserve President Austan Goolsbee said Monday that he’s more worried about inflation now than he is unemployment, even with apparent progress made on the war with Iran.

In a CNBC interview, the central banker said policymaking is difficult in the current environment. He spoke shortly after President Donald Trump announced that progress had been made in negotiations with Iran and that further attacks on energy infrastructure would be halted for five days as talks continue.

“The most important thing is to figure out the through line of what is happening,” Goolsbee said in a “Squawk Box” interview. “What makes this a fraught but intense moment is nobody can tell us what is going to happen on the ground in the conflict in the Middle East, and how long that lasts.”

Goolsbee had dissented on a rate cut in December and said he agreed with the majority to hold short-term rates steady at the January and March meetings of the Federal Open Market Committee. He is not an FOMC voter this year but will vote again next year.

Following Monday’s war news, traders, in volatile market action, upped bets of a rate hike by the end of the year but still expect a cut in 2027. Stocks spiked higher and oil prices plunged.

FOMC officials last week indicated a majority still expect a cut this year and another the next. However, Goolsbee said that his inclination will depend on the progress of inflation, and he cautioned against “a repeat of the team-transitory mistake” where the Fed underestimated the severity of inflation in 2021.

“I remain fairly optimistic that by the end of ’26 rates could go down, but I wanted to see proof that we’re back on an inflation headed to 2%. This [war] definitely throws a wrench into the plans. We do need to see progress,” he said.

The Strait of Hormuz shutdown caused by the war in Iran is jacking up fertilizer prices, hitting farmers in their pocketbooks and threatening to raise food prices.

Now, Democrats trying to win the U.S. midterm elections in November see another new opportunity to pound the affordability crisis and turn the tide after years of losses in the states that produce crops and livestock.

The Strait of Hormuz is a critical channel for fertilizer, including about 50% of global nitrogen-rich urea fertilizers, according to the Fertilizer Institute, the industry’s trade association. The strait has been effectively impassable since President Donald Trump launched the assault, which is now in its third week with no end in sight.

The closure has spiked fertilizer prices just before planting season, potentially scrambling decision-making for farmers across the U.S. And it comes on top of already low commodity prices that have lingered for years and eaten into farmers’ margins.

“We’re in uncharted territory,” Matt Frostic, a Michigan farmer who sits on the board of the National Corn Growers Association, said in an interview with CNBC. “It’s like a code red.”

Frostic said he purchased nitrogen fertilizer, critical for corn crops, in January for around $350 per ton. That same product, he said, is now closing in on $600 per ton.

The murky farm outlook also comes eight months before the midterm elections that could cost Trump control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Democrats, who are trying to win competitive seats in farm-heavy states such as Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska, are jumping on the high fertilizer prices as a new example of the affordability issue that continues to haunt Trump and Republicans.

“There are tons of people just like me in our district who are like, I don’t get it. I don’t understand. It was already hard, and now they’re making it harder, and nobody knows why,” said Jake Johnson, a public school teacher who is running for Congress in Minnesota’s first District against incumbent Republican Rep. Brad Finstad.

“Our number one job as a campaign and what we want to talk about to every single person we talk to is we need ways to make things cheaper,” Johnson said.

The rural entreaties from Democrats come after years of bleeding support in the country’s rural, agrarian states in the middle of the country. Trump in 2024 won nearly every state in the Midwest, with exceptions in Minnesota and Illinois. He also dominated the county-by-county contest, according to the Center for Politics, winning 2,660 counties compared with former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 451, which were centered in the most populated parts of the U.S.

Turning the tide in rural America has been a longtime goal for Democrats, but has often proved elusive. In Iowa in 2018, Democrats won 3 out of the 4 congressional seats in the state. Now, Republicans control all four. But with Trump’s economic approval plummeting and Democrats leading in the generic ballot, Democrats have high hopes this year.

Johnson said farmers in particular are recoiling from Trump’s tariff campaign, which saw his White House authorize a roughly $12 billion bailout last year. The war now adds a new inflationary wrinkle.

On Thursday, more than 50 agriculture trade groups including the Farm Bureau wrote another letter to Trump, asking him to include farm aid in the forthcoming defense package.

“As the Administration considers what needs to be included in a defense supplemental package in
the coming weeks, we urge you to include much-needed market relief for America’s farmers,” the letter read.

Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., the Senate Agriculture Committee chair, said he’s working with the administration to quickly find a solution to the fertilizer issue.

Wholesale prices rose sharply in February, providing another sign that inflation continues to percolate even aside from rising energy costs.

The producer price index, a measure of pipeline costs that producers receive for their products, increased a seasonally adjusted 0.7% on the month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Wednesday. Excluding volatile food and energy costs, the so-called core PPI increased 0.5%.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for increases of 0.3% for both measures.

For the all-items index, prices rose faster than the 0.5% pace in January. However, the core increase was less than the 0.8% for the prior month.

On a 12-month basis, headline PPI inflation was at 3.4%, the most since February 2025, while core was at 3.9%, according to the BLS. The Federal Reserve targets inflation at 2%.

Stock market futures slipped following the report while Treasury yields were higher. Futures traders pushed out the next Fed interest rate cut until at least December.

The surge in PPI came due in large part to a 0.5% increase in services costs, something the Fed would not welcome. Policymakers have attributed much of the recent run-up in inflation to tariffs, which would not show up as much on the services end. Portfolio management fees, a key driver for services costs within the PPI measurement, were up 1% in February. Similarly, prices for securities brokerage, dealing, investment advice and related services accelerated 4.2%.

Goods prices rose 1.1% on the month.

Food prices rose 2.4% while energy was up 2.3%. Within food, the index for fresh and dry vegetables soared 48.9%.

The report suggests that pipeline inflation pressures remain persistent, particularly on the services side, complicating the Fed’s path as it weighs how long to keep interest rates elevated.

The report comes with inflation worries accelerating amid the fighting in the Middle East. The U.S. and Israel continue to strike at targets in Iran, causing energy prices to surge. Oil has been trading around $100 a barrel, up more than 70% year to date as the conflict has proceeded.

None of the inflation data so far has captured the price increases associated with the war. But it has indicated that even before the attacks, inflation was a problem. A report last week indicated that consumer prices rose at a 2.4% rate in February. Separately, the Commerce Department said its main inflation gauge, which the Fed uses as its forecasting tool, was at 3.1% for core and 2.8% for headline.

Later Wednesday, the Fed will release its latest interest rate decision. Market participants consider it a near certainty that central bankers will vote to keep their benchmark overnight interest rate anchored in a range between 3.5%-3.75%, where it has been since the last cut in December 2025.

American consumers and businesses are taking most of the hit from President Donald Trump’s tariffs, New York Federal Reserve President John Williams said Tuesday in remarks that counter White House claims.

“The tariffs have overwhelmingly been borne domestically — a New York Fed analysis estimates that most of the burden has fallen on U.S. firms and consumers.,” Williams said in remarks for a conference in Washington, D.C. “In addition, the tariffs have already meaningfully increased U.S. prices of imported goods, and the full effects have likely not yet been felt.”

The study Williams cited has generated a fair amount of controversy over the past few weeks.

In a white paper published on the New York Fed’s website, a team of researchers found that as much as 90% of the added cost from tariffs has been passed on to domestic producers and consumers. Trump and other White House officials had insisted that exporters would absorb the costs rather than raise prices.

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett flamed the controversy during a CNBC appearance in which he suggested that the researchers should be “disciplined” for what he termed was “the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system.” Hassett later stepped back the criticism.

Addressing the issue for the first time publicly, Williams said not only were the tariffs being felt at home, but they also were keeping the Fed from reaching its 2% inflation goal.

“My current estimate is that, to date, the increase in tariffs has contributed around one half to three quarters of a percentage point to the current inflation rate of about 3 percent,” he said. “The FOMC defines price stability as 2 percent inflation over the longer run. Owing to the effects of tariffs, progress toward that goal has temporarily stalled.”

On the bright side, Williams said he still expects the tariff impact on inflation to be temporary, and he sees the Fed hitting its target by 2027. He added that the U.S. economy “appears to be on a good footing.”

As for current policy, he said it is “well positioned” for the Fed to hit its dual mandate goal of steady prices and full employment. Should inflation progress lower after the tariff impact fades, “further reductions in the federal funds rate will eventually be warranted to prevent monetary policy from inadvertently becoming more restrictive.”

Markets expect the Fed to resume cutting later this year, possibly in July or September, according to current futures pricing. As New York Fed president, Williams carries extra influence on the Federal Open Market Committee, where he is a permanent voting member.

Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren is calling President Donald Trump’s bluff after he claimed to be “ending” the affordability crisis during his State of the Union address, opening a new front in the battle that could determine November’s midterm elections.

“Your claims are directly at odds with the day-to-day experiences of American households, who are struggling with rising costs of essentials, including food, housing, health care, child care, and electricity,” Warren, D-Mass., wrote in a letter to Trump, which was shared exclusively with CNBC after being sent late Wednesday. 

“Despite your claims, you have not ‘solved’ affordability or ‘defeated’ inflation. Instead, over the past year, prices have skyrocketed for American households,” Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, wrote.

Warren’s letter is the launching point for a frontal assault on Trump and congressional Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterms, which could be decided over affordability. Trump’s approval rating on the economy has plummeted as voters express concern about the high cost of living, a contrast with an economy he said was “roaring” during his State of the Union address. 

Now, Democrats are hoping to seize the opportunity to leverage affordability and kick Republicans out of power in Congress. Warren made clear the letter is only her first foray into knocking the president on affordability, as Democrats race around the country selling their economic message before November. 

“Over the coming weeks, I will be writing to Administration officials, companies, and industry representatives directly about your chaotic tariffs and failed economic policies — seeking answers for the American people who are being forced to pay more on everything from groceries to housing,” Warren said.

Warren late Wednesday also sent a letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy saying the online retailer was tardy in publicly saying that Trump’s tariffs had contributed to price increases on its platform since their enactment. She also asked Amazon to respond to a series of questions about its future plans on price hikes given Trump’s pledge to find ways tariffs in place. 

Trump has at times suggested he is getting serious about addressing affordability concerns. He’s called for a cap on interest on credit cards, which he did not mention in his speech. He’s also called for a ban on institutional investors from buying homes, which he did mention. Both are also priorities of Warren’s and the progressive left.

But in his State of the Union address, Trump laid blame solely on Democrats for affordability and argued his administration has solved the problem, as polls consistently show increased economic concern from voters. 

“You caused that problem,” the president said. “They knew their statements were a dirty, rotten lie. Their policies created the high prices, our policies are rapidly ending them.”

While overall inflation has cooled significantly from recent highs, the cost of many everyday goods remains high, especially compared to before the Covid-19 pandemic. Electricity prices have skyrocketed amid increased demand from data centers, grocery prices remain high and housing costs have remained inflated. Trump’s tariff agenda has also contributed to lingering high prices. 

Trump doubled down on issuing tariffs through other means during his address, after the Supreme Court knocked down the authority he had been using to implement them. 

The tariffs will “remain in place under fully approved and tested alternative legal statutes,” he said. 

To Warren, that only provided ammunition. 

“Rather than providing relief to consumers, you are pursuing additional across-the-board tariffs through other mechanisms — opening the door to yet another wave of price hike,” she said in her letter. 

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a huge chunk of President Donald Trump’s far-reaching tariff agenda, delivering a major rebuke of the president’s key economic policy.

The law that undergirds those import duties “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” the majority ruled 6-3 in the long-awaited decision.

The ruling is a massive loss for Trump, who has made tariffs — and his asserted power to impose them on any country at any time, without congressional input — a central feature of his second presidential term.

Trump’s legal stance “would represent a transformative expansion of the President’s authority over tariff policy,” the majority concluded. And they highlighted that Trump imposed the tariffs without Congress, which has the power to tax under the Constitution.

Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

The decision noted that before Trump, no president had ever used the statute in question “to impose any tariffs, let alone tariffs of this magnitude and scope.”

To justify the “extraordinary” tariff powers, Trump must “point to clear congressional authorization,” the court wrote. “He cannot.”

The ruling was silent on whether tariffs that have been paid under the higher rates will need to be refunded. That sum could total $175 billion, according to a new estimate from the Penn Wharton Budget Model.

Kavanaugh wrote in his dissent that the refund process “is likely to be a ‘mess,'” after predicting that the short-term impact of the court’s tariff ruling “could be substantial.”

Since retaking the White House, Trump has rapidly reshaped America’s long-standing trade relationships by imposing a staggering array of import duties that have touched nearly every country on earth.

Reaction to the ruling quickly poured in, with the loudest voices cheering the demise of the chaotic policy that has been blamed for raising prices and straining long-standing global alliances.

That announcement stoked a sudden market panic, and the tariffs were quickly put on pause. They have since been repeatedly tweaked, delayed and reimposed, adding confusion and further complexity to the administration’s tangled web of trade policies.

Other IEEPA-based tariffs include a set aimed at Mexico, Canada and China related to allegations that those countries have allowed the deadly drug fentanyl to flow into the U.S.

Trump, a fierce critic of America’s recent history of making free trade deals, has repeatedly praised tariffs as both a bountiful source of federal revenue and a key tool in negotiations with foreign partners and adversaries alike.

He has claimed foreign countries bear the cost of his tariffs, and he has downplayed concerns that the taxes lead to higher prices for Americans. His administration, however, has admitted that the duties are paid by U.S. importers.

Trump has claimed the tariff revenue has been so large that the duties may be able to replace the income tax. He has also floated the idea of sending Americans $2,000 tariff dividend checks.

“We have taken in, and will soon be receiving, more than 600 Billion Dollars in Tariffs,” he wrote in a recent Truth Social post.

Other estimates are significantly lower: The Bipartisan Policy Center, for instance, tallied U.S. gross tariff revenue in 2025 at about $289 billion. U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it had collected roughly $200 billion between Jan. 20 and Dec. 15.

For the IEEPA-specific tariffs, the administration said it has collected about $129 billion in revenue as of Dec. 10.

Ahead of the ruling, Trump and his administration talked up the consequences of the high court striking down the tariffs.

“If the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE’RE SCREWED!” Trump wrote on Jan. 12.

U.S. officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, have stated they believed the Supreme Court would not undo the president’s “signature” economic policy.