More stories

  • in

    E.l.f. Beauty stock tanks after retailer cuts guidance, citing ‘soft’ January amid TikTok saga and LA wildfires

    E.l.f. Beauty cut its guidance after seeing soft sales trends in January and mixed holiday results.
    CEO Tarang Amin told CNBC the category slowed due in part to a hangover from holiday discounting and changes in the way people were posting online amid the potential TikTok ban.
    The cosmetics company reported holiday sales that were higher than expected but profits that narrowly missed estimates.

    Elf complexion sponges arranged in Germantown, New York, on July 17, 2023.
    Gabby Jones | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    E.l.f. Beauty on Thursday cut its full-year guidance after seeing a 36% drop in profits and “softer than expected” sales trends in January, marking a rare downturn for one of beauty’s hottest brands. 
    The cosmetics company reported holiday sales that were higher than expected but profits that narrowly missed estimates, another rare miss for the retailer. 

    Shares of E.l.f. fell more than 20% in extended trading Thursday.
    Here’s how E.l.f. did in its fiscal third quarter compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

    Earnings per share: 74 cents adjusted vs. 75 cents expected
    Revenue: $355 million vs. $330 million expected

    The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended Dec. 31 was $17.3 million, or 30 cents per share, compared with $26.9 million, or 46 cents per share, a year earlier. Excluding one-time items, including stock-based compensation and expenses associated with its acquisition of Naturium, E.l.f. posted adjusted earnings of 74 cents per share. 
    Sales rose to $355 million, up about 31% from $271 million a year earlier.
    For the company’s full fiscal year, which only has one quarter remaining, E.l.f. issued guidance that came in below Wall Street expectations. The retailer is now expecting sales of between $1.3 billion and $1.31 billion, below estimates of $1.34 billion, according to StreetAccount. It had previously expected sales to be between $1.32 billion and $1.34 billion. 

    E.l.f. is also now expecting adjusted earnings per share of between $3.27 and $3.32, far below StreetAccount estimates of $3.54. E.l.f. had previously expected full-year earnings of between $3.47 and $3.53. 
    The company’s implied guidance for its current quarter looks even more rough. Based on its full-year outlook and actual figures from the first three quarters, E.l.f. could see earnings per share of between 66 cents and 71 cents during its current quarter, far below expectations of 97 cents, according to a CNBC analysis and estimates from LSEG. 
    In an interview with CNBC, CEO Tarang Amin shrugged off concerns that there were larger issues at the company and instead pointed to an overall slowdown in the beauty category, tough prior-year comparisons and recent product launches that did not perform as well as previous new items. 
    When it comes to the overall category, Amin said mass cosmetics declined 5% in January and the company suspects that was driven by two factors: a hangover from holiday discounting and a slowdown in “social commentary,” or fewer people talking about beauty online, which can drive cosmetics sales. 
    “One, [with] the LA wildfires, people I think didn’t want to be tone deaf with posting a lot of things while that devastation went on. The second is, there was a lot of uncertainty around TikTok. I feel like the only things people were posting on TikTok was whether it was going to stay open or shut down,” said Amin. “Whatever the reason may be, that social commentary was way down.”
    Amin also weighed in on new tariffs against China and how the company is preparing. About 80% of its supply chain is in the region.
    Amin said it is too early to say whether E.l.f. will raise prices to offset the effect to profits, but the new 10% duties are better than what the company was bracing for.
    Over the past couple of years, E.l.f. has been one of the fastest-growing brands in beauty, winning over shoppers young and old with its viral marketing, low prices and ability to offer high-quality, more-affordable “dupes” of prestige products.
    While the brand is still growing and says it is still outpacing the overall category, that pace of growth is starting to slow down and recent product launches have not boosted sales in the same way they did in the past. 
    Amin said the company prefers to take a “prudent” approach to guidance and still considers it a win that E.l.f. is outperforming the overall category.
    He said the company is using the profits it generates to invest in improvements to inventory management programs, infrastructure and international expansion.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • in

    Denver Broncos President Damani Leech praises NFL’s diversity commitment as corporate America, government roll back DEI

    Denver Broncos President Damani Leech said he viewed diversity as a “weapon” to get “the best talent in the room.”
    Earlier this week, National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell defended the NFL’s diversity-fostering hiring practices.
    Leech spoke Thursday with CNBC Sport from Radio Row in New Orleans.

    Denver Broncos President Damani Leech praised the National Football League’s commitment to diversity amid corporate and government efforts to reduce diversity, equity and inclusion hiring practices.
    Leech is one of four African American presidents of NFL teams.

    “I think we’ve all been hired in the last three to four years,” Leech told CNBC Sport from Radio Row in New Orleans ahead of Super Bowl 59. “So I think the progress that the league has made there is pretty tremendous.”

    The Denver Broncos held a press conference to introduce team president Damani Leech in the team auditorium of UCHealth Training Center in Centennial, Colorado, on Aug. 29, 2022.
    Rj Sangosti | MediaNews | The Denver Post | Getty Images

    Earlier this week, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell backed the league’s inclusive hiring practices, such as the Rooney Rule, a policy instituted in 2003 that requires teams to interview minority candidates for certain coaching and executive positions.
    “I think we’ve proven to ourselves that it does make the NFL better,” Goodell said this week. “We’re not in this because it’s a trend to get into it or a trend to get out of it. Our efforts are fundamental in trying to attract the best possible talent into the National Football League both on and off the field.”
    Leech echoed the commissioner’s viewpoints. He joined the Broncos after spending three years as chief operating officer of NFL International from 2019 to 2022.
    “I view diversity as a weapon,” said Leech. “I think you’re trying to get the best talent in the room, whether that’s on the field or off the field. And folks who don’t do that, I think they’ll do it at their expense. I think for us, we try to get the best talent we can, regardless of where you’re from. I think that our differences make us better. That’s both at a club level and at a league level.”
    Leech’s comments come as a range of major corporations roll back their DEI hiring practices. Last month, the Trump administration also directed all federal DEI staff be put on paid leave before many lose their jobs. More

  • in

    NCAA bars transgender women from competing in women’s sports

    The National Collegiate Athletic Association updated its student-athlete policy to bar transgender women from competing in women’s sports.
    The change follows President Donald Trump’s executive order that also banned trans women from women’s sports.
    The NCAA previously deferred to sport governing bodies for trans athlete eligibility.

    General signage before practice for the first round of the 2024 NCAA Tournament at PPG Paints Arena.
    Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports

    The National Collegiate Athletic Association on Thursday updated its transgender student-athlete policy to prohibit trans women from competing in women’s sports, one day after President Donald Trump signed an executive order stating the federal government would defund schools that allow trans women to do so.
    The new policy says students assigned male at birth may practice with women’s teams and receive related benefits such as medical care, but they are not allowed to engage in formal competition. All students, regardless of gender or sex, may compete on men’s teams, though athletes taking testosterone must complete a medical exemption process. Students assigned female at birth who are taking testosterone or engaging in hormone therapy are also banned from women’s teams.

    The NCAA previously followed Olympic standards in deferring to sports’ national governing bodies in determining eligibility for trans athletes. The organization adopted that policy in January 2022.
    “The NCAA is an organization made up of 1,100 colleges and universities in all 50 states that collectively enroll more than 530,000 student-athletes. We strongly believe that clear, consistent, and uniform eligibility standards would best serve today’s student-athletes instead of a patchwork of conflicting state laws and court decisions. To that end, President Trump’s order provides a clear, national standard,” NCAA President Charlie Baker said in a news release.
    Baker told a Senate panel in December that he was aware of fewer than 10 current trans NCAA athletes.
    Trump’s latest action builds on his previous executive order declaring that there are only two sexes and demanding federal agencies stop promoting “gender ideology,” which the White House said “replaces the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity.” He also signed an executive order banning transgender people from openly serving in the military.
    In an Instagram video, transgender triathlete and trans rights advocate Chris Mosier said the policy’s focus on athletes’ assigned sexes at birth presents gender solely as a binary concept.

    “It is mirroring the executive orders of the president in trying to legislate away trans and nonbinary identities,” Mosier said.
    Mosier also said the policy affects intersex women and women who practice hormone therapy for medical reasons, such as to treat polycystic ovary syndrome. The NCAA does not mention a medical exception process for athletes to join women’s teams.
    In a statement, LGBTQ+ advocacy group GLAAD said, “This move is deeply disturbing and not informed by any of the medical, scientific, and human rights expertise that has previously guided NCAA policy and keeps all student athletes safe.”
    “It is also premature and purely a response from the inaccurate and incoherent rhetoric from the Trump White House and its attempt to intimidate educational institutions,” GLAAD said. “Students deserve leaders who will look out for their best interests instead of caving to bullies trying to legitimize discrimination and harm.”

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • in

    Shares of Coach parent Tapestry spike 12%, as holiday sales soar after merger collapse

    Tapestry’s shares shot up after the company reported strong holiday sales and raised its full-year outlook.
    Coach’s parent company reported the results less than two months after calling off its merger with fashion accessories competitor Capri.
    Coach remains the top performer, with brands Kate Spade and Stuart Weitzman putting up weaker results.

    The logo of U.S. fashion brand Coach is seen in New York on Nov. 19, 2024.
    Charly Triballeau | AFP | Getty Images

    Shares of Coach parent Tapestry rose about 12% on Thursday after the company beat holiday-quarter sales expectations and boosted its full-year forecast.
    The fashion and accessories company said it now expects full-year revenue of more than $6.85 billion, which would be about 3% higher than the prior year. It expects earnings per share of $4.85 to $4.90. It had previously forecast full-year revenue of more than $6.75 billion and full-year earnings per share of between $4.50 and $4.55.

    Tapestry’s strong results come less than two months after it called off a merger with Capri, after planning to appeal the blocked deal. The agreement, which companies had fought for in court, would have married America’s two largest luxury houses and put six fashion brands under one company: Tapestry’s Coach, Kate Spade and Stuart Weitzman with Capri’s Versace, Jimmy Choo and Michael Kors.
    Tapestry’s results are also in sharp contrast to Capri’s. In Capri’s holiday quarter, which the company reported Wednesday, sales of Versace and Michael Kors tumbled by double digits. CEO John Idol took some of the blame, saying that the company had made missteps — including cutting lower-priced accessories that helped bring in newer customers.
    In a CNBC interview on Thursday, Tapestry CEO Joanne Crevoiserat said consumers are still selective about spending, but Coach has won their business by delivering “innovation, relevance and value.”
    “That’s what our brand-building principles are focused on,” she said. “We have confidence that these brand-building principles and our ability to connect with consumers, regardless of the environment, remains strong.”
    Here is what Tapestry reported for the fiscal second quarter compared with Wall Street’s estimates, according to a survey of analysts by LSEG:

    Earnings per share: $2.00 adjusted vs. $1.75 expected
    Revenue: $2.20 billion vs. $2.11 billion expected

    In the three-month period that ended Dec. 28, Tapestry’s net income decreased to $310.4 million, or $1.38 per share, from $322.3 million, or $1.39 per share, in the year-ago period. The company’s adjusted earnings per share figure excluded some one-time items, including an interest expense and a provision for income taxes.
    Net sales rose to $2.20 billion from $2.08 billion in the year-ago quarter.
    Coach remained the company’s top performer in the holiday quarter, with revenue up 11% year over year. Kate Spade and Stuart Weitzman put up weaker results, with revenue declines of 10% and 15%, respectively.
    On Tapestry’s earnings call Thursday, CFO Scott Roe said the company’s full-year guidance includes the impact an additional 10% tariff on goods imported from China into the U.S. beginning Feb. 4. He said that is not expected to have a material effect on the company’s results, since it has very limited manufacturing in China.
    Tapestry does not have any production in Canada or Mexico, he said. Roe had said on Tapestry’s early November earnings call that less than 10% of the company’s sourcing comes from China.

    Growing on its own

    Tapestry is looking inside of the company to drive growth. In a CNBC interview, Crevoiserat said that Tapestry will hold off on mergers and acquisitions until it makes sure Coach can maintain growth and Kate Spade returns to sustainable growth, too.
    “It’s hard to put a timeline on it, but not in the near term,” she said of when the company would consider another deal.
    Tapestry plans to rev up popular styles at Coach, invest in Kate Spade’s turnaround efforts, and focus on customer acquisition in underpenetrated markets, such as Europe and China.
    Tapestry’s largest market is North America, with nearly 70% of its quarterly sales coming from the region in the holiday quarter. Yet Europe stood out with its gains in the holiday quarter. Revenue in the quarter rose 45% in Europe, 3% in Greater China and 4% in North America compared with the year-ago period. Sales in Japan, on the other hand, declined by 5% year over year in the quarter.
    Crevoiserat said on the company’s earnings call that Tapestry’s “runway for growth is significant” in Europe, since it has lower sales and fewer customers there.
    New and younger shoppers have also lifted Tapestry’s sales. Crevoiserat said on the company’s earnings call that Tapestry attracted about 2.7 million new customers in North America in the quarter and over half of those customers were Gen Z and millennials, she said.
    One of the company’s bestsellers in the quarter, particularly with newer and younger shoppers, was the Tabby, a shoulder bag that Coach had made in different colors and materials, she said. Its newer New York collection of bags has proven popular, too — including the Brooklyn, a shoulder bag that sells for $295, and the Soft Empire Carryall Bag 40, which sells for $695.
    Tapestry has ramped up its focus on Kate Spade, a brand that it’s trying to revive. Eva Erdmann, previously global president of L’Oréal’s Urban Decay Cosmetics, started as Kate Spade’s new CEO in October.
    On the earnings call, Crevoiserat said Tapestry will slash the number of Kate Spade’s handbag styles by more than 15% this fall and “work to build blockbuster handbag families.” She said it’s also focused on using new, compelling items, not discounts, to drive Kate Spade’s sales.
    “Decreasing our level of promotional activity will be a key building block of solidifying our brand and positioning it to scale in a healthy way globally over the long term,” she said.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • in

    Stocks making the biggest moves after hours: Amazon, Pinterest, Expedia and more

    Amazon signage during the 2024 CES event in Las Vegas, Nevada, on Jan. 10, 2024.
    Bridget Bennett | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Check out the companies making headlines in extended trading:
    Amazon — The e-commerce giant fell 2% after issuing weaker-than-expected guidance for the current quarter. Amazon said it forecasts sales in the first quarter between $151 billion and $155.5 billion. Analysts surveyed by LSEG were looking for $158.5 billion. Meanwhile, the company’s fourth-quarter earnings and revenue were above consensus expectations. 

    Take-Two Interactive Software — The video game company jumped nearly 7% despite posting fiscal third-quarter revenue of $1.37 billion. Analysts polled by LSEG had expected $1.39 billion. Take-Two sees its current-quarter revenue, based on net bookings, coming in between $1.48 billion and $1.58 billion versus the estimated $1.54 billion.
    Affirm Holdings — Shares of the payment company jumped more than 9% following a top-line beat for the fiscal second quarter. Affirm reported $866 million in revenues, while analysts expected $807 million, per LSEG. Gross merchandise volume grew 35% year-over-year in the prior quarter.
    Pinterest — Shares of the social media company popped 18%. Revenue for the fourth quarter came in at $1.15 billion, slightly ahead of analysts’ estimates of $1.14 billion, per LSEG. Pinterest also said it expects revenue of $837 million to $852 million in the first quarter, while analysts sought $833 million.
    Expedia — The stock gained 11% after the company’s fourth-quarter results topped Wall Street expectations. Expedia posted adjusted earnings of $2.39 per share on revenue of $3.18 billion. That is more than the $2.04 per share on $3.07 billion in revenue that analysts had penciled in, according to LSEG. The company also reinstated its quarterly dividend at 40 cents per share.
    Bill Holdings — Shares plunged about 32% after the billing software company issued disappointing fiscal third-quarter revenue guidance. Bill Holdings expects for that period to generate revenue between $352.5 million and $357.5 million, below the $360.4 million that analysts surveyed by LSEG were expecting. However, earnings and revenue for the second quarter beat analysts’ expectations.

    Fortinet — The cybersecurity stock rallied 11%. Fortinet posted better-than-expected results for the fourth quarter, in addition to strong guidance for the full year. Fortinet sees full-year revenues falling between $6.65 billion and $6.85 billion, topping the $6.63 billion estimate from analysts, per LSEG. 
    E.l.f. Beauty — The cosmetics company tumbled 23% after slashing its guidance for the full fiscal year. E.l.f now sees sales ranging from $1.3 billion to $1.31 billion, short of consensus estimates of $1.34 billion, per StreetAccount. Adjusted earnings for the third quarter also narrowly missed expectations, coming in at 74 cents per share versus analysts’ forecast for 75 cents a share, per LSEG.
    Monolithic Power Systems — The semiconductor stock soared 16% following strong fourth-quarter results. Monolithic Power Systems reported adjusted earnings of $4.09 per share on revenue of $621.7 million. Analysts surveyed by FactSet had called for earnings of $3.98 per share on $608.1 million in revenue. The company also issued better-than-expected revenue guidance for the current quarter and a $500 million stock repurchase program. Management also increased the quarterly dividend by nearly 25%. — CNBC’s Sean Conlon, Lisa Kailai Han and Darla Mercado contributed reporting. More

  • in

    E.l.f. Beauty CEO says company is ‘relieved’ China tariffs are only 10%

    E.l.f. Beauty relies heavily on China for manufacturing and was “relieved” to learn new duties from President Donald Trump were only 10%.
    “We actually were somewhat relieved when it was only 10 points, because at one time the rhetoric was as high as 60% tariffs,” CEO Tarang Amin told CNBC.
    The company raised prices on a third of its items by $1 during the last round of tariffs, but isn’t sure if it will need to do so this time around.

    The New York Stock Exchange welcomes E.l.f. Beauty on March 18, 2024, to celebrate its 20th anniversary of founding.

    The CEO of E.l.f. Beauty, which manufactures about 80% of its cosmetics in China, told CNBC on Thursday that it was “relieved” the new tariff on Chinese imports is only 10%. The retailer isn’t sure yet if it will need to raise prices. 
    “[It] seems like a weird thing to say, but we actually were somewhat relieved when it was only 10 points because at one time, the rhetoric was as high as 60% tariffs,” Tarang Amin said when discussing his company’s fiscal third-quarter earnings results.

    With regard to raising prices, he said, “we’ll see whether we need to.”
    The comments come just days after President Donald Trump slapped a new 10% tariff on goods imported from China into the U.S., raising concerns about companies such as E.l.f. with significant supply chains in the region.
    While 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada have since been paused for 30 days, Beijing and Washington have yet to come to an agreement, and China has hit the U.S. back with a slew of retaliatory measures, including blacklisting Calvin Klein’s parent company PVH Corp. 
    The uncertainty around whether the new Chinese tariffs are here to stay has led some companies, such as Barbie maker Mattel, to say they will lean on price increases to offset the effect to profits. E.l.f. struck a similar tune in November when 60% tariffs still seemed like a possibility. 
    “We also want to play it out. There’s so much back and forth going on right now. If there was a higher level of tariff, we don’t want to announce our pricing actions until we know kind of where we feel it’s really going to settle out,” he explained. 

    When Trump put new 25% tariffs on China during his first term, Amin said the company raised prices on a third of its items by $1 and saw a “good consumer response,” even with its reputation for offering more affordable “dupes” of prestige cosmetics at drug store prices.
    At the time, E.l.f. was manufacturing nearly 100% of its goods in China. This time around, it is in a better position after reducing its reliance on the region by about 20%. It also has a bigger international business and does more sales outside of the U.S. 
    “The good thing, because we do have a long supply chain … we won’t face it this fiscal year. It won’t be until about, you know, well into our [fiscal year 2026] before we start seeing the value of that higher inventory,” said Amin. “So we have time to really make sure we have the playbook.”

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • in

    How the U.S. has used tariffs throughout history — and why Trump is different, economists say

    The U.S. has used tariffs since its founding in the 18th century.
    They were primarily a way to raise revenue in the nation’s early days. Later, tariffs were largely used to restrict imports or as a bargaining chip to reduce trade barriers.
    President Donald Trump’s use of the import duties has broken with historical norms, economists and historians said.

    Shipping containers are seen at the Port of Montreal in Montreal, Canada, on Feb. 3, 2025. 
    Andrej Ivanov | Afp | Getty Images

    President Donald Trump imposed broad tariffs on China that took effect Tuesday, while his tariff threats hang over other major trading partners: Canada, the European Union and Mexico.
    That may lead some to wonder: How have tariffs been wielded throughout U.S. history, and is Trump’s use of them unusual?

    The ‘three Rs’ of tariffs

    The U.S. has used tariffs since its founding in the 18th century.
    In fact, the Tariff Act of 1789 was among the first bills ever passed by Congress.
    Since then, the U.S. has used tariffs to achieve three broad goals, said Douglas Irwin, an economics professor at Dartmouth College and past president of the Economic History Association.
    Irwin calls them the “three Rs”: revenue; restriction, or import barriers to protect domestic industry; and reciprocity, a bargaining chip to cut deals with other countries.

    Using tariffs for revenue

    Tariffs are taxes on U.S. imports, paid by the entity that’s importing the foreign goods. Those taxes raise revenue to help fund the federal government.

    For roughly the first third of the nation’s history — from its founding until the Civil War — the revenue motivation was “paramount” as a driver to impose import duties, Irwin said. The federal government relied on tariffs for about 90% or more of its revenue during that period, he said.

    But things changed after the Civil War, Irwin said. The U.S. started to impose other taxes, such as excise taxes, that made the nation less reliant on tariffs.
    Tariffs generated about half of federal revenue from about 1860 to 1913, when the income tax was created, Irwin said.
    The scale of the government expanded significantly in the 1930s — with the creation of New Deal programs such as Social Security — and later for defense spending during World War II and the Cold War, said Kris James Mitchener, an economics professor at Santa Clara University who studies economic history and political economy.
    Today, “tariffs simply cannot raise enough revenue to fund government expenditure,” Mitchener said. “There’s no possible way you could support the size of the U.S. military on tariff revenue.”

    Restriction and reciprocity

    From the Civil War to the Great Depression, the U.S. primarily used tariffs as a restrictive measure on imports, to insulate the domestic market from foreign competition, Irwin said.
    The Tariff Act of 1930, popularly known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, levied protective tariffs on about 800 to 900 different types of goods, accounting for about 25% of all goods imported to the U.S., Mitchener said.
    The U.S. also used tariffs as a reciprocal bargaining chip.
    For example, before the U.S. annexed Hawaii, it signed a free-trade agreement with the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1875. The treaty allowed for duty-free imports of Hawaiian sugar and other agricultural products into the U.S. In exchange, the U.S. got exclusive access to the harbor that would later be known as Pearl Harbor.
    The post-Depression, and especially the post-World War II period, became an era of reciprocity, Irwin said.
    The U.S. helped create the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1948, the precursor to the World Trade Organization, which set global rules for trade and ushered in an era of low tariffs.
    More from Personal Finance:What the ‘mother of all trade wars’ can teach us about U.S. tariffsCould Trump’s tariffs replace the income tax?Stockpiling ahead of higher tariffs is a big mistake, experts say

    How the president’s tariff power grew

    U.S. import taxes before the WWII era were pretty high, ranging from 20% to 50%, sometimes even reaching 60%, Irwin said. They have been “very low” since 1950 or so, he said.
    The average duty on goods subject to a tariff was about 2% to 4% in the 2010s before Trump’s first term, Mitchener said.
    “That’s what President Trump is trying to overturn, this sort of low period of tariffs we’ve had since World War II,” Irwin said.

    Before 1934, Congress — not presidents — had power over tariff rates and negotiations, said Andrew Wender Cohen, a history professor at Syracuse University.
    But Democrats — then known as the political party of free trade — had an enormous majority around the New Deal era and passed the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, granting the president the right to negotiate tariffs in certain cases, Cohen said.
    “That’s when the president gains a much more substantial authority,” Cohen said.
    That power accelerated after 1948 during the “transformation of the whole global economic order,” he said.

    Why Trump tariff policy is ‘very unusual,’ economists say

    President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House on Feb. 03, 2025. 
    Anna Moneymaker | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Trump’s use of tariff policy is “very unusual” among modern U.S. presidents, Cohen said.
    For one, Trump “likes all three Rs” — revenue, restriction and reciprocity, Irwin said.
    On the campaign trail, Trump suggested that tariffs could replace the U.S. income tax to fund the government. He said during his campaign that tariffs would create U.S. factory jobs and has threatened to use them to strong-arm Denmark to give up Greenland.
    However, there are trade-offs, Irwin said. Restricting imports somewhat negates tariffs’ ability to raise revenue, because it diminishes the tax base for tariffs, he said. Those additional duties may cause companies to import fewer goods or may push people to buy less, for instance.
    “You can’t really achieve all three objectives at the same time,” he said.
    Additionally, no previous president has tried to link a U.S. drug crisis to trade policy, as Trump did with fentanyl.
    “That’s a novel take,” Mitchener said.

    Many presidents have used tariffs. For example, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon applied tariffs to protect the U.S. steel industry, as Trump did in his first term, Irwin said.
    “What’s unusual about Trump is, he’s not just picking out particular industries that he thinks are of strategic importance, but he’s blocking imports across the board almost with some of these countries,” Irwin said.  
    Trump imposed a 10% additional tariff on all Chinese goods and threatened a 25% tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico.
    “No president in recent memory has really used tariffs across the board or in a broad-brush way to achieve various objectives,” Irwin said. “They’ve sort of adhered to the rule that we belong to the WTO. That means we keep our tariffs low as long as other countries keep their tariffs low.”

    Global trade treaties, such as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which Trump signed in his first term, establish a mechanism for nations to file grievances for alleged unfair trade practices, Cohen said. Nations can generally raise tariffs as a retaliatory measure if trade rules are breached, according to the treaty terms, he said.
    Trump’s recent unilateral tariff announcements are unique in this regard, he said.
    “I can’t think of any precedent for that,” Cohen said.
    “While the executive branch was given much more power since 1934, it’s always been subject to the specific terms of the agreements,” he said. More

  • in

    Bank stocks pop after Fed releases ‘easier’ 2025 stress test, plans to make exam more predictable

    Bank shares rose Thursday after the Federal Reserve released parameters for its annual industry stress test showing smaller hypothetical shocks to the U.S. economy than in previous years.
    While still challenging, with U.S. joblessness jumping to 10% and a 33% drop in home prices, the 2025 exam has smaller spikes in unemployment and smaller declines in stock and real estate values than previous versions, Jason Goldberg of Barclays said Thursday.
    The Fed also said it would soon be taking steps to “reduce the volatility of stress test results and begin to improve model transparency” in the 2025 exam.

    Jane Fraser, CEO of Citi, speaks during the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, California, on May 1, 2023. 
    Patrick T. Fallon | AFP | Getty Images

    Bank shares rose Thursday after the Federal Reserve released parameters for its annual industry stress test showing smaller hypothetical shocks to the U.S. economy than in previous years.
    While still challenging, with U.S. joblessness jumping to 10% and a 33% drop in home prices, the 2025 exam has smaller spikes in unemployment and smaller declines in stock and real estate values than previous versions, Jason Goldberg of Barclays said Thursday in a note titled “2025 Stress Test: Scenarios Easier than Past Two Years.”

    The Fed will soon take steps to “reduce the volatility of stress test results and begin to improve model transparency” in the 2025 exam, the regulator said in a statement released Wednesday after the close of regular trading.
    Shares of Citigroup jumped 2.9% in midday trading, while Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America each rose at least 1.5%. Big banks gained more than smaller lenders, with the KBW Bank Index rising 1.2% compared with the 0.9% gain of the S&P Regional Banking ETF.
    The stress test changes bolster the case made by Wall Street analysts that big U.S. banks will face a friendlier regulatory regime under the Trump administration. Since the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, the biggest U.S. banks have had to undergo annual exams that test their ability to withstand a severe recession while continuing to lend to consumers and businesses.
    Banks have complained for years that the annual stress tests were opaque and unfairly administered, and industry trade groups sued the Fed in December over the exam.
    By making the latest iteration of the test both less challenging and more predictable, banks could hold smaller capital cushions later this year, according to Bank of America analyst Ebrahim Poonawala.

    “The 2025 stress test scenario, broadly better vs last year, increases our confidence that banks should begin to see relief on regulatory capital requirements, given our expectations for a shift to a balanced, transparent, and more predictable regulatory regime,” Poonawala wrote Thursday in a note.
    — CNBC’s Michael Bloom contributed to this report.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More