Business

Chipotle missed first-quarter revenue estimates and said same-store sales dropped for the first time since 2020.
CEO Scott Boatwright said the burrito chain saw a “slowdown in consumer spending.”
Chipotle also lowered the top end of its same-store sales outlook for the year.

The Chipotle logo is seen in New York City on July 16, 2024.
Jakub Porzycki | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Chipotle Mexican Grill on Wednesday reported weaker-than-expected quarterly revenue after its same-store sales declined for the first time since 2020.
Executives cited both a slowdown in consumer spending and adverse weather as two of the factors that dampened demand for its burritos and bowls.

The company also lowered the top end of its outlook for full-year same-store sales growth.
Chipotle shares fell more than 2% in extended trading. The stock closed up 3.5% earlier on Wednesday.
Here’s what the company reported compared with what Wall Street was expecting, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

Earnings per share: 29 cents adjusted vs. 28 cents expected
Revenue: $2.88 billion vs. $2.95 billion expected

Net sales rose 6.4% to $2.88 billion.
The chain’s same-store sales fell 0.4% during the quarter, short of the 1.7% growth projected by StreetAccount estimates. Restaurant transactions fell 2.3% and were only partially offset by a 1.9% increase in average check.

Customers started pulling back their spending in February because of economic uncertainty, CEO Scott Boatwright told analysts on the company’s conference call.
“We could see this in our visitation study, where saving money because of concerns around the economy was the overwhelming reason consumers were reducing the frequency of restaurant visits,” he said, adding that the traffic slowdown has continued into April.
The spring months typically kick off what Chipotle calls “burrito season” — the busiest time of the year for the chain, from Easter through May. But the holiday landed several weeks later this year, delaying the usual seasonal increase in demand, although the limited-time launch of its chipotle honey chicken helped sales in March.
Chipotle’s sales usually slow during the summer months as college students return home and many customers travel internationally.
The company does not expect traffic to its restaurants to grow until the second half of the year.
“I am confident that we have a strong plan to return to positive transaction comps by the second half of the year, and during these uncertain times, we will continue to invest in the things that make Chipotle a special brand — our people, culinary, value proposition, innovation and growth,” Boatwright said in a statement.
For the full year, Chipotle is now projecting same-store sales will grow by low single digits. Previously, it was forecasting same-store sales growth in the low- to mid-single-digit range.
“Looking forward, our marketing team has an enhanced plan for this summer and the remainder of the year to make Chipotle more visible, more relevant and more loved,” Boatwright said.
Chipotle is also projecting higher inflation in the second quarter, fueled by the White House’s tariffs on aluminum and a broad 10% import duty. Roughly half the company’s avocado supply comes from outside of Mexico, for example.
Chipotle Chief Financial Officer Adam Rymer estimated that tariffs will add 50 basis points, or 0.5%, to its cost of sales on an ongoing basis. In the second quarter, the tariffs are expected to hit its cost of sales by 20 basis points, or 0.2%, due to the company’s inventory before the duties were implemented.
“These estimates do not include any impact from the tariffs that were postponed, or the 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada since our imports fall under the [U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement] exemption,” Rymer said.
The company reiterated its plans to open between 315 and 345 new restaurants by the end of 2025.
Chipotle reported first-quarter net income of $386.6 million, or 28 cents per share, up from $359.3 million, or 26 cents per share, a year earlier.
Excluding stock-based compensation grants tied to its recent CEO transition, the company earned 29 cents per share.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Southwest Airlines pulled its full-year 2025 and 2026 EBIT guidance, citing “macroeconomic uncertainty.”
The carrier plans to cut its schedule in the second half of the year, following Delta Air Lines and United Airlines.

A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 airplane departs from Harry Reid International Airport as another airplane taxis in Las Vegas, Nevada, on March 15, 2025.
Kevin Carter | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Southwest Airlines said Wednesday that it will reduce its capacity in the second half of the year, as more signs point to weaker domestic bookings this year.
The airline said it expects unit revenue to be flat to down as much as 4% in the second quarter from a year earlier. Southwest said it is not reaffirming its guidance for earnings before interest and taxes for 2025 and 2026.

“Amid the current macroeconomic uncertainty, it is difficult to forecast given recent and short-lived booking trends,” Southwest said in a securities filing.
United Airlines and Delta Air Lines earlier this month announced plans to scale back their domestic capacity in the second half of the year. Delta also pulled its full-year forecast while United provided two forecasts, calling the U.S. economy “impossible” to predict.

Read more CNBC airline news

The carrier’s first-quarter earnings and revenue beat analysts’ expectations.
Here is how Southwest performed in the first quarter compared with Wall Street expectations, according to consensus estimates from LSEG:

Loss per share: 13 cents adjusted vs. loss of 18 cents adjusted
Revenue: $6.43 billion vs. $6.40 billion expected

The carrier has laid out dramatic changes to its more than half-century-old business model over the past year, increasing the channels in which it sells its fares to sites such as Expedia, to launching a plan to end its open-seating model for assigned seats and introducing restrictive basic economy tickets.

Next month, it plans to start charging many travelers to check their luggage, ending its decades-old policy of allowing customers to check two bags for free.
Southwest has been under pressure from activist hedge fund Elliott Investment Management, which took a stake in the airline and won board seats last year, to raise revenue to better compete with rivals that have premium seats, lounges and international networks.
“We are seeing positive results on recently rolled out initiatives,” CEO Bob Jordan said in an earnings release.
In the first quarter, Southwest posted a net loss of $149 million, an improvement from a loss of $231 million a year ago, and revenue of more than $6.4 billion, which was up 1.6% from a year ago. Adjusting for special items, Southwest reported a loss of 13 cents per share for the three months that ended March 31.
Southwest executives will face questions from analysts on a quarterly call at 12:30 p.m. ET on Thursday.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Alaska Airlines said it expects a six-percentage-point hit to revenue in the second quarter.
The carrier, which merged with Hawaiian Airlines last year, said it wouldn’t update its full-year forecast because of “economic uncertainty and volatility,” but that it expects to remain profitable in 2025.

An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 plane sits at a gate at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport on Jan. 6, 2024.
Stephen Brashear| Bloomberg | Getty Images

Alaska Airlines on Wednesday warned that softer travel demand will eat into earnings in the second quarter, the latest in a chorus of carriers seeing weaker-than-expected bookings.
Alaska said bookings have stabilized but forecast a six-percentage-point headwind due to “softer demand.”

The carrier, which merged with Hawaiian Airlines last year, said it expects second-quarter unit revenue to be flat to down as much as 6% over a year ago and anticipates adjusted earnings per share of $1.15 to $1.65, lower than the $2.47 a share Wall Street analysts had forecast.
The airline said it wouldn’t update its full-year guidance, citing “economic uncertainty and volatility,” but said it still expects to be profitable even if revenue is under pressure in the second half of the year.
Alaska’s unit revenue rose 5% in the first quarter from last year, better than larger rivals’ domestic unit sales. Chief Financial Officer Shane Tackett said customers are still booking trips but at lower-than-expected fares.
“The fares aren’t as strong as they were in the fourth quarter of last year and coming into January and first part of February,” he said in an interview Wednesday. “Demand is still quite high for the industry, but it’s just not at the peak that we all anticipated might continue coming into last year.” 
“Alaska is built for times like these with our relentless focus on safety, care and performance,” CEO Ben Minicucci said in an earnings release. “Amid the economic uncertainty, our teams controlled what they can control and delivered results that strengthen our foundation for the long term.”

Here is how Alaska performed in the first quarter compared with Wall Street expectations, according to consensus estimates from LSEG:

Loss per share: 77 cents adjusted vs. an expected loss of 75 cents
Revenue: $3.14 billion vs. $3.17 billion expected

In the first quarter, Alaska posted a net loss of $166 million, down from a loss of $132 million a year ago, and revenue of more than $3.1 billion, which was up 41% from a year ago and shy of analysts’ forecasts.
Adjusting for one-time items, Alaska reported a loss of 77 cents per share for the three months that ended March 31, below analysts’ estimates.
Alaska is scheduled to hold a call with analysts to discuss its results and outlook at 11:30 a.m. ET on Thursday.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

President Donald Trump wants automakers to produce in the U.S., but “moving” massive assembly plants isn’t that easy.
Relocating production lines takes years of planning and construction — and can be costly.
The actual construction of an assembly plant has to be done in conjunction with hiring workers, building infrastructure such as water and energy supplies, and building out a parts supply chain, among other considerations

Ford Motor Company’s electric F-150 Lightning on the production line at its Rouge Electric Vehicle Center in Dearborn, Michigan, on Sept. 8, 2022.
Jeff Kowalsky | AFP | Getty Images

DETROIT – When President Donald Trump hinted last week at a reprieve from 25% auto tariffs, he suggested it would be to allow automakers more time to move or increase U.S. vehicle production and parts.
“They need a little bit of time because they’re going to make them here,” Trump said April 14. “But they need a little bit of time, so I’m talking about things like that.”

While automotive executives and experts agree more time would be helpful, an extension to bolster U.S. manufacturing isn’t so simple.
For one thing, an additional 25% auto parts tariff is scheduled to take effect by May 3, which would raise the cost of a vehicle even if it’s assembled stateside rather than imported.
And for another, automakers and suppliers don’t simply “move” plants, like some politicians have called for. Relocating production lines takes years of planning and construction — and can be costly.
The actual construction of an assembly plant has to be done in conjunction with hiring workers, building infrastructure such as water and energy supplies, and building out a parts supply chain, among other considerations. That’s after site determination, purchasing and any potential changes to zoning.
Such facilities, like a new 16-million-square-foot plant from Hyundai Motor in Georgia, can require thousands of acres of land and include millions of square feet of factory space.

“All of those things have to fall in place,” said Doug Betts, an auto industry veteran who’s president of J.D. Power’s automotive division. “It’s a very, very complicated process.”
Permitting alone for a new plant can take six to 12 months. It can take another 12 months to 18 months, if not more, to build the facility, followed by another year or more in tooling and ramping up production, according to Collin Shaw, president of the MEMA Original Equipment Suppliers association.
The main kind of plants that Trump wants automakers to build in the U.S. are large, multibillion-dollar assembly plants that take years to construct. Full assembly plants employ thousands of workers and are more like manufacturing cities, made up of a body shop, paint plant, stamping and other supporting facilities.
Even smaller supplier plants that may be able to mobilize more quickly could still take years and are often built near larger plants, according to industry executives and experts.

Autoworkers at Nissan’s Smyrna Vehicle Assembly Plant in Tennessee, June 6, 2022. The plant employs thousands of people and produces a variety of vehicles, including the Leaf EV and Rogue crossover.
Michael Wayland / CNBC

“I’m convinced that localization is the way, but localizing new models that are built somewhere else in the world doesn’t happen overnight,” Christian Meunier, chairman of Nissan Americas, told CNBC. “Nissan is very fast, but it’s not going to be a matter of months. It’s a matter of years.”
Meunier said the automaker is aiming to “max out” production at its largest American production plant amid Trump’s tariffs, though he declined to specify a timeline for doing so.
This week six of the top policy groups representing the U.S. automotive industry uncharacteristically joined forces to lobby the Trump administration against implementing the upcoming tariffs on auto parts.
“President Trump has indicated an openness to reconsidering the administration’s 25 percent tariffs on imported automotive parts – similar to the tariff relief recently approved for consumer electronics and semiconductors. That would be a positive development and welcome relief,” the letter read.

New plants

The fastest way to increase U.S. production is to use existing facilities, for which the supply chains have already been established, like Nissan is planning to do.
The more costly option is to construct a new assembly plant, which can take time but comes with a trickle-down effect for the community as suppliers work to localize production of certain parts and components.
Every direct job created in vehicle manufacturing supports an average of 10.5 additional American jobs, according to a 2022 report from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation trade group.

The most recent new automotive assembly plant in the U.S. is Hyundai’s “Metaplant” in Georgia.
The $12.6 billion project, which Trump has touted as a success for American manufacturing, took roughly 2½ years to construct. That’s not including the plant’s ongoing ramp-up in production and an undisclosed length of time for site selection, permitting and other processes.
Hyundai’s time frame was relatively quick given the amount of investment and size of the plant, which has a capacity for 300,000 vehicles annually and expected employment of 8,500 jobs by 2031.
“If you’re building a brand-new one, you’re going lightning fast to get it done in two years, and you have to have everything ready to go. More likely, it’s in the four-year type of range,” said Mark Wakefield, a partner and global automotive market lead at consulting firm AlixPartners.
Jeep parent Stellantis, formerly Fiat Chrysler, took a similar construction time frame of 2½ years and spent $1.6 billion to convert two powertrain plants from 2019 to 2021 into Detroit’s first “new” assembly plant in nearly 30 years.
There are unique instances of automakers figuratively moving mountains and spending billions of dollars to get things done more quickly. An anomalous case outside of the U.S. was Tesla’s plant in China. The facility, with support from Chinese officials, was reportedly constructed in less than a year in 2019.

Quick actions

Short of building out entirely new facilities, there are ways to increase U.S. production far more quickly and for less cost. Specifically, if the product is made at more than one location and the automaker or supplier has additional, unused capacity.
Many automakers, such as General Motors, use multiple plants to produce their highest-volume products. The Detroit automaker produces its light-duty Chevrolet Silverado at plants in Canada, Mexico and the U.S.
The day Trump’s 25% tariffs on imported vehicles went into effect, GM said it would increase production of full-size pickup trucks at its assembly plant near Fort Wayne, Indiana, and hire hundreds of temporary employees. Such a move is essentially low-hanging fruit for a company.
Automakers protect production of their most profitable vehicles as much as possible. In the past, this has meant spending billions of dollars for a plant changeover or even dual production of older and newer models of the same vehicles.
Moving quickly can have its drawbacks. To lose as little production as possible of its Ford Explorer SUV in 2019, Ford spent $1 billion to completely retool its body shop and make other improvements to the sole Illinois facility that produces the vehicle.
The entire process for Ford took an unprecedented 30 days, but the vehicle launch was infamously flawed, costing the company billions in recalls and fixes. At the time, Ford called it “one of the most complex renovations in the company’s history.”

“Being out of production in a segment is devastating,” said Betts, who has worked at Apple as well as Stellantis and other carmakers.
Betts said most companies will do a “daisy chain” in which they build out another plant for a new model, while continuing to produce the old. It allows for an easier transition, but companies need to have the plant space and capital to pull off such a move.
Not to mention, auto companies need certainty that regulations or trade policies won’t change as construction is underway, resulting in billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses.
“It’s not a flip of the switch,” Swamy Kotagiri, CEO of Canada-based auto supplier Magna, said last week during an Automotive Press Association meeting near Detroit. “We have to look at it from a pragmatic perspective. I don’t see how you can just pick up something and move. It sounds easy, but it’s not.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

“The future of Tesla is brighter than ever.” So declared Elon Musk during an earnings call on April 22nd. According to the carmaker’s boss, Tesla remains on course to become the world’s most valuable firm, worth as much as the next five companies combined, as it churns out fleets of autonomous taxis and armies of humanoid robots. More

President Donald Trump’s inaugural committee raised a record $239 million thanks to dozens of mega corporations that contributed to the fund.
When many companies made their donations, the business community was still feeling positive about Trump’s election. Months later, the mood has changed as business leaders digest the impact tariffs will have on their businesses.
CNBC analyzed seven industries that contributed to the fund and broke down which businesses are better or worse off now that Trump is in office.

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the Business Roundtable’s quarterly meeting at the Business Roundtable headquarters on March 11, 2025 in Washington, DC. 
Andrew Harnik | Getty Images

America’s richest and most powerful companies shelled out millions to fund President Donald Trump’s inauguration festivities.
Three months later, some may be asking whether the famously transactional president has their backs. Many of those corporations have had their businesses roiled by Trump’s tariff policy and resulting consumer caution, dampening the optimism much of the business and finance community felt when he was reelected.

Some of the nation’s largest companies, including General Motors, BlackRock and Meta, donated to Trump’s inaugural committee, leading it to raise a record $239 million – more than the previous three inaugural committees took in combined, according to filings released Sunday.
Presidential inaugural committees are set up as charitable organizations, and the money they raise has traditionally funded parades and galas around the president’s formal swearing in. Unlike presidential election campaigns, there is no set limit on how much a corporation or U.S. citizen can give to an inaugural committee. (President Joe Biden did not have traditional inaugural events in 2021 due to the Covid pandemic).
This makes inaugural donations an early opportunity for companies to publicly show support for the incoming president. And in Trump’s case especially, to ensure that the company has a seat at the table as policy decisions are being made.
Inaugural committees must disclose their donors, but they are not required to disclose how they spend the money. After raising hundreds of millions of dollars more than it costs to put on three balls and an indoor parade, the Trump inaugural committee is expected to put the rest toward Trump’s eventual presidential library.
Some of this year’s donors, like Target, McDonald’s and Delta Air Lines, hadn’t contributed to an inaugural committee in more than a decade. Others including Pfizer, Walmart and Visa were regular contributors, as they donated the same amounts in 2025 that they did in 2021 and 2017. 

What just about every donor had in common was they wrote their checks at a time when the business community was still riding high on the president’s victory. Consumer confidence was surging, Trump had promised tax cuts were coming and triple-digit tariffs on critical trading partner China weren’t part of the conversation.
But in the weeks and months since, many of those same corporations have seen their businesses upended by Trump’s economic policies, which have centered on tariffs that economists from across the ideological spectrum have warned could raise costs for consumers and tip the economy into a recession.

Banks that were expecting a resurgence in IPOs and deals are instead contending with skittish capital markets. Some airlines that were excited about deregulation and a government that would be friendlier to businesses are now slashing their guidance, saying consumers won’t travel when they’re uncertain about the future of their wallets. 
“The expectation was because the last administration was very, very difficult for business, very, very difficult to engage and to communicate broadly across all industries, the expectation was that this would be improved,” Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday. “There are certain things that have been put forward from a policy perspective that, you know, that don’t feel in line with the expectation people had.” 
While Trump and key administration officials have given signals they could soon reduce the tariffs on Chinese imports, sending stock markets higher, there’s no guarantee they will strike a deal to do so.
Companies mentioned in this report either did not respond to requests for comment, declined to comment or highlighted their past support for inaugurations for both political parties or policies they consider good for business.
Beyond corporations, many of the individuals who contributed to Trump’s inauguration are now working closely with the White House or shaping policy. 
Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, donated $1 million to the inauguration. He is now working on the Stargate Project, a collaboration between OpenAI and the government to build AI infrastructure in the U.S.  
Jared Isaacman, Trump’s nominee for NASA administrator, donated $2 million to the inauguration. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave $250,000. 
Here’s a closer look at the ways various industries contributed to Trump’s inauguration and how those businesses are faring three months into his administration. 

Tech

The tech industry’s biggest companies — and many of their CEOs — lined up to donate to Trump’s inaugural fund as part of a targeted effort at creating a friendlier relationship with the White House after a tumultuous four years during Trump’s first term.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg was eager to get into the president’s good graces after his platform kicked Trump off in the wake of the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Trump later gave the company founder the nickname “Zuckerschmuck,” and he routinely called Facebook an “enemy of the people.”
Amazon founder and former CEO Jeff Bezos was another frequent Trump target, largely due to his ownership of the Washington Post, and he too has rushed to appease the president this time around.
Meta and Amazon each donated $1 million to the inaugural fund, as did Google and Apple CEO Tim Cook. Microsoft and Adobe kicked in the same amount. So did AI infrastructure players Nvidia and Broadcom. Uber did the same.

Across the industry, companies were hopeful that a second Trump administration would lighten up on regulations following a burdensome era under Biden, when IPOs ground to a halt and big merger efforts were quashed.
The industry is now getting hammered by Wall Street on concern that a combination of higher import costs and reduced business spending will dramatically shrink profit margins. For Meta and Google, the primary issue is the potential for advertising budgets to dwindle, but there are other challenges that permeate the entire industry.
The tech giants have been loading up on Nvidia chips and other hardware to build out their infrastructure for the AI boom. Those products are all subject to various tariffs, particularly goods coming from China and Taiwan. While Trump said there will be an exemption for phones, computers and chips, the administration later indicated that there would be separate tariffs for those products.
And when it comes to regulations, Google and Meta are currently in court for antitrust cases. Trump’s Federal Trade Commission on Monday filed suit against Uber, accusing the ride-hailing and delivery company of deceptive billing and cancellation practices tied to its subscription service.
— Ari Levy

Food and beverage

With a $5 million donation, poultry giant Pilgrim’s Pride was the top contributor to Trump’s inaugural fund. Brazilian meat giant JBS, Pilgrim’s largest stakeholder, is awaiting approval to go public through a dual U.S.-Brazil listing as it faces opposition from environmentalists, U.S. beef producers and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle.
More broadly, the meat industry has been pushing Trump to roll back regulations, which his administration did during his first term.
Beyond big meat, McDonald’s gave to the presidential inauguration for the first time in more than a decade with its $1 million donation. While the fast-food chain is one of Trump’s favorite caterers, McDonald’s could face scrutiny from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has pledged to “Make America Healthy Again.” Kennedy has started by taking aim at artificial food dyes, but fast food could be on the list; he recently praised Steak ‘n Shake for using beef tallow to cook its fries.
The uncertainty of tariffs and growing recession fears could also weigh on McDonald’s sales, if consumers cut back on their Big Macs and McNuggets. Over the last year, the company has already seen U.S. sales struggle as diners cut back on eating out. 

Fat Brands, which owns Fatburger, Johnny Rockets and more than a dozen other restaurant chains, donated $100,000 to the inaugural fund. Last year, the company and its chair Andy Wiederhorn were indicted over what prosecutors called a “sham” loan scheme that netted him $47 million, allegations he and the company deny. 
Trump reportedly personally fired the assistant U.S. attorney leading the case against Fat Brands and Wiederhorn in March. However, Justice Department officials in California told The Oregonian that the prosecution will continue.
On the beverage side, spirits giant Diageo chipped in $125,000 in in-kind donations of beverages. While the Johnnie Walker and Don Julio owner is facing higher tariffs for some of its brands, its Mexican tequila and Canadian whisky are exempt because of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, both regular contributors to presidential inauguration funds, wrote checks this year as well. Both beverage companies are under fire by Kennedy’s MAHA agenda, which is pushing states to seek bans on using federal food assistance to buy soda and junk food. The American Beverage Association, a trade group that counts Keurig Dr Pepper among its members, also chipped in $250,000.
— Amelia Lucas 

Retail 

The retail industry was one of the only sectors that had a dour outlook after Trump was elected because of the acute impact tariffs can have not just on their supply chains, but also on consumer confidence and spending. 
That could be why both the National Retail Federation, the industry’s lobbying arm, and big box giant Target contributed to the inauguration committee for the first time in at least a decade. 
The NRF gave $250,000 to the fund, while Target wrote a check for $1 million.
Since Trump was elected, and even before, the NRF has been sounding the alarm about the impact tariffs will have on consumers and its retail members, calling the duties a tax on American families. 
Target is more exposed to tariffs than its longtime rival, Walmart, because more of its sales come from discretionary goods like clothes and home goods that tend to be manufactured overseas. The discounter’s annual sales have been roughly flat for four years in a row and last month, Target said it expects sales to grow only 1% for this fiscal year.
Target has also felt the heat from conservative groups in recent years, and from shoppers and potential customers who have shown support for the administration and its policies. Earlier this year, Target rolled back its diversity, equity and inclusion efforts soon after Trump vowed to dismantle every DEI initiative across the federal government. 
The retail industry has lobbied the Trump administration to take a common sense approach to tariffs and stressed it will be difficult, if not impossible, to move some manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. Yet it remains unclear if that push will work — especially when the 90-day tariff pause ends in countries outside of China that have become key manufacturing hubs, such as Vietnam.
The best the industry has achieved so far was a meeting at the White House on Monday between Trump and the chief executives of Walmart, Target and Home Depot.
After the meeting wrapped, the three companies issued nearly identical statements.
“We had a productive meeting with President Trump and our retail peers to discuss the path forward on trade,” Target said. “We remain committed to delivering value for American consumers.” 
Walmart contributed $150,000 to the inaugural committee for Trump. But the Arkansas-based retail giant has donated the same amount for the past three inaugurations — including Biden’s in 2021 and Trump’s first in 2017.
— Gabrielle Fonrouge and Melissa Repko 

Health care and pharmaceuticals 

The pharmaceutical industry and some health-care companies shelled out big for Trump this time around. While Trump has maintained his focus on curbing high health-care costs, the pharmaceutical industry was banking on a softer stance on drugmakers, or at least a more open ear to their concerns about Biden-era policies that cracked down on prescription drug costs and aimed to increase industry competition. 
Now, drugmakers are bracing for Trump’s proposed pharmaceutical tariffs and grappling with uncertainty around the sweeping overhaul of federal health agencies under Kennedy, a prominent vaccine skeptic. But Trump offered the industry some reprieve last week: He signed an executive order targeting a law that allows Medicare to negotiate drug prices, proposing changes long sought by pharmaceutical companies. 
PhRMA, the industry’s powerful trade association, and leading drugmakers including Pfizer, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, Gilead and Bayer each gave $1 million, while Eli Lilly contributed $500,000. 
All were first-time donors except for Pfizer, which contributed $1 million to both Biden’s 2021 and Trump’s 2017 inaugurations. 
Vaxcyte, a small clinical-stage vaccine maker, also donated $1 million for the first time. The move may reflect growing concern among vaccine makers over Kennedy’s leadership, which already appears to be impacting U.S. vaccine policy. 

Amgen has a track record of bipartisan support, contributing $500,000 to this year’s inauguration as well as the previous two. Medical device maker Abbott Laboratories also gave $500,000 this year, a notable increase from its contributions in 2021 and 2017.
Outside of the pharmaceutical industry, telehealth company Hims & Hers Health contributed $1 million as it seeks support for its compounded medications, which have faced backlash from weight loss drugmakers like Eli Lilly. 
Health-care companies HCA Healthcare, Molina Healthcare and Blue Cross Blue Shield contributed small amounts for the first time. All three insurers offer Medicare Advantage plans. Insurers in that market have been lobbying Trump to pursue lighter regulations for those privately run government programs.
Centene, which provides government-sponsored health plans, was an outlier, contributing just $50,000 this year. That’s far less than its previous donations of $500,000 to Biden in 2021 and $250,000 to Trump in 2017. 
— Annika Kim Constantino 

Finance

The biggest players in American finance pumped more money into Trump’s coffers this year than they did for previous inaugurations, while lobbying aggressively for sweeping deregulation across traditional and cryptocurrency markets.
JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, the biggest U.S. retail bank and one of the most powerful Wall Street firms, respectively, each gave $1 million to the Trump inauguration, compared with nothing for Biden’s in 2021.
Capital One, which hadn’t donated in the two previous election cycles, gave Trump’s inaugural committee $1 million. The bank at the time was seeking approval for its $35 billion acquisition of Discover Financial, announced in early 2024 and finally greenlit last week. 
The same is true for BlackRock and Blackstone, the twin titans of the asset management universe, which each gave $1 million to the inauguration fund after not donating in the two previous election cycles.

The stakes for banks were high. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon has repeatedly complained about the “regulatory assault” from Biden-era banking regulators that would hit revenue by tens of billions of dollars and add capital requirements for the biggest U.S. banks.
Dimon and others, including bank trade groups, fought back against efforts to increase capital requirements on the industry, dubbed the Basel III Endgame. They also opposed a series of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rules designed to limit overdraft and credit card late fees.
Thanks to the takeover of the CFPB by Trump pick Russell Vought and the nomination of Michelle Bowman as Federal Reserve vice chair for supervision, it appears banks will get much of what they hoped for. Vought has dropped a string of high profile legal cases against banks and other financial firms while attempting to shutter the agency, while Bowman is considered to be friendly to the industry. 
But financial firms have more pressing issues these days. Concerns that Trump’s aggressive trade policies will start a recession have hammered financials in recent weeks, pushing the KBW Bank Index into a bear market decline of 20% from its post-election high.
Shares of Blackstone were hit even more, down about 38% from their November 2024 high, on concerns that tariff uncertainty will make it hard for the private equity industry to sell its portfolio companies.
Crypto players also gave generously. Robinhood contributed $2 million to the inaugural committee after not donating in the two previous elections, while the Coinbase founder and his company gave a combined $2 million.
The industry has already benefited from a loosening of restrictions around cryptocurrency and banking spurred by the Trump administration, and legislation is progressing that will allow more players to offer stablecoins to retail customers.
— Hugh Son 

Airlines and aerospace

Delta and United, which each gave $1 million to the Trump inauguration, are cutting their domestic capacity plans this year due to weaker demand, particularly from the economy cabin. (About $250,000 of United’s contribution was an in-kind donation of flights).
Months earlier, in November, Delta CEO Ed Bastian said that the incoming Trump administration would likely be a “breath of fresh air” in terms of regulation after Biden’s Transportation Department. During Biden’s administration, the DOT issued a host of new rules aimed at protecting consumers from airline fees and ensuring they get refunds if flights are delayed or canceled.
Earlier this month, Bastian took a different tone on the administration when the carrier reported quarterly earnings. In an interview, Bastian called Trump’s tariff policy “the wrong approach” and said it hurt bookings, leading Delta to pull its 2025 earnings forecast.
Boeing, which also gave $1 million to the Trump inauguration, is the nation’s top exporter and is once again caught in trade conflicts, none more pronounced than the tit-for-tat tariffs with China.
Boeing’s CEO Kelly Ortberg said Wednesday that China has stopped taking deliveries of its aircraft amid the trade war. He said the company could hand over some of the airplanes that were destined for Chinese airlines to other customers this year.

While Boeing makes its aircraft in the United States, the company and the manufacturers of large aircraft parts like engines and wings rely on a global supply chain that could be impacted by a broad-based 10% tariffs on much of the world that Trump imposed earlier this month, as well as duties on imported aluminum and steel.
Major aerospace suppliers are also in the crosshairs of the trade war. Even if they produce their exported products in the U.S., companies are reliant on a global supply chain that’s still fragile from the Covid-19 pandemic and could be impacted by tariffs. Foreign companies producing goods in the U.S. are also affected, like Airbus, which assembles some of its narrow-body planes in Alabama, but relies on imports.
GE Aerospace CEO Larry Culp met with Trump and other White House officials this month and said he suggested that the industry be able to go back to the mostly duty-free trade it’s enjoyed under a 45-year-old agreement.
“We have suggested, as the administration works through a myriad of issues, is that they can consider the position of strength that the country enjoys as a result of this tariff-free regime and to consider reestablishing the same,” said Culp.
RTX and GE Aerospace, a defense contractor and commercial aerospace supplier, respectively, estimated Tuesday that higher expenses from tariffs will cost their businesses more than $1 billion combined. GE said it will offset $500 million with corporate cost cuts and price increases.
— Leslie Josephs 

Autos 

American-based automakers such as Ford Motor and General Motors have contributed to inaugurations in the past, but they increased their donations from hundreds of thousands of dollars to $1 million or more, including vehicles, for Trump’s inauguration this year.
GM, Ford and the North American operations for Chrysler parent Stellantis each donated at least $1 million to this year’s inauguration. Ford, as disclosed in Sunday’s filing, also provided roughly $200,000 in vehicle services as in-kind donations. GM provided vehicles as well, but the monetary value was not immediately available.
In addition to the traditional “Detroit automakers,” foreign-based companies Hyundai Motor and Toyota Motor also donated $1 million to the fund through their American operations, after not contributing to the past two inaugurations.
In total, the automotive sector donated roughly $5.3 million to Trump’s inauguration, including $100,000 from Schumacher Automotive, a dealer group based near Mar-a-Lago in West Palm Beach, Florida.Since the inauguration, Trump has caused what some, such as Ford CEO Jim Farley, have described as “chaos” around automotive tariffs and inconsistent messaging around the levies. The industry is currently dealing with 25% tariffs on materials such as steel and aluminum, as well as 25% levies on imported vehicles from outside of the U.S. Tariffs on automotive parts imported into the U.S. are also set to take effect by May 3.
The new levies were introduced and implemented swiftly, making it difficult for the automotive industry to plan, especially for expected increases in the cost of auto parts.
Many smaller suppliers are not equipped to change or move manufacturing operations quickly and may not have the capital to pay for tariffs, potentially causing stoppages in production.
“Most auto suppliers are not capitalized for an abrupt tariff induced disruption. Many are already in distress and will face production stoppages, layoffs and bankruptcy,” six of the top policy groups representing the U.S. automotive industry wrote in a letter to Trump administration officials. “It only takes the failure of one supplier to lead to a shutdown of an automaker’s production line. When this happens, as it did during the pandemic, all suppliers are impacted, and workers will lose their jobs.”
The statement followed Trump saying he may “help” some auto companies who need more time to move production or find new suppliers, but he has not announced any actual plans since then.
— Mike Wayland More

Boeing could hand over some of its aircraft that were destined for Chinese airlines to other carriers after China stopped taking deliveries of its planes amid a trade war with the United States.
CEO Kelly Ortberg said that a few 737 Max planes that were in China set to be delivered to carriers there have been flown back to the U.S.
Trump said Tuesday that he’s open to taking a less confrontational approach to trade talks with China, calling the current 145% tariff on Chinese imports “very high.”

China has ordered its airlines not to take any further deliveries of Boeing Co. jets as part of the tit-for-tat trade war that’s seen US President Donald Trump levy tariffs of as high as 145% on Chinese goods.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Boeing could hand over some of its aircraft that were destined for Chinese airlines to other carriers after China stopped taking deliveries of its planes amid a trade war with the United States.
“They have in fact stopped taking delivery of aircraft due to the tariff environment,” Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg told CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” on Wednesday.

Ortberg said that a few 737 Max planes that were in China set to be delivered to carriers there have been flown back to the U.S.
He said some jets that were intended for Chinese customers, as well as aircraft the company was planning to build for China later this year, could go to other customers.
“There’s plenty of customers out there looking for the Max aircraft,” Ortberg said. “We’re not going to wait too long. I’m not going to let this derail the recovery of our company.”
The CEO’s comments came after Boeing reported a narrower-than-expected loss for the first quarter and cash burn that came in better than analysts feared as airplane deliveries surged in the three months ended March 31.

Kelly Ortberg, CEO of Boeing, speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box on Jan. 28th, 2025.

President Donald Trump earlier this month issued sweeping tariffs on imports to the U.S. While he paused some of the highest rates, the trade war with China has only ramped up.

Trump said Tuesday that he’s open to taking a less confrontational approach to trade talks with China, calling the current 145% tariff on Chinese imports “very high.”
“It won’t be that high. … No, it won’t be anywhere near that high. It’ll come down substantially. But it won’t be zero,” Trump said.

Read more CNBC airline news More

Ford Motor is offering its most premium pickup truck customers a more curated, exclusive experience.
The package, which is for “Platinum Plus” trucks, includes a personal concierge, accessory discounts and a maintenance plan, among other things.
Other automakers have offered more curated, exclusive services, but they have largely been for luxury and premium brands rather than mainstream brands or vehicles like Ford’s F-Series.

Ford is launching a program that aims to give its “Platinum Plus” pickup truck customers a more curated, exclusive experience.
Michael Wayland / CNBC

DEARBORN, Mich. — Ford Motor is launching a program that aims to give its most premium pickup truck customers a more curated, exclusive experience.
The Detroit automaker’s new ownership experience is for its “Platinum Plus” customers. The program ranges from offering a personal concierge and virtual tutorial tours to gifts, accessory discounts and a “Ford Protect Premium Maintenance Plan” for 25,000 miles or two years, whichever comes first.

The “Platinum Plus” package is the highest-end version of Ford’s 2025 F-Series pickup trucks that start around $100,000 for the automaker’s Super Duty vehicles. It replaces “Limited” models as the priciest pickups for Ford.
“We think it’s a competitive advantage, this whole experience. So we’re excited about that potential to grow that into the future,” Brian Rathsburg, marketing manager for Ford F-Series Super Duty, said during an event Tuesday. “When [customers] purchase the top of the lineup for Super Duty, they expect a more premium experience. And we’re excited to kind of start with this concept.”
The new program essentially groups together many services Ford was offering owners individually, while adding a few new ones. Rathsburg said the program will adapt to include whatever experiences customers want.

Interior of Ford’s “Platinum Plus” model for its F-Series Super Duty pickup trucks.

In addition to the new program, the Platinum Plus vehicles feature plush “Smoked Truffle” interiors that include Venetian leather and unique exterior design features such as a satin finish grille with bright chrome inserts.
Rathsburg declined to discuss if President Donald Trump’s 25% auto tariffs will impact the price of its F-Series Super Duty pickups, including the new Platinum Plus offering.

“That’s a very murky, very uncertain, very tenuous space. We’re monitoring it,” Rathsburg said. “Certainly, there’s things down the road that we may not know about, yet we’ll react accordingly.”
Ford last week told dealers it could increase prices on newly built vehicles next month if Trump doesn’t ease tariffs on automotive imports, according to Automotive News. That comes after the company has been offering an employee pricing program to promote its U.S. operations, which are the largest among automakers.
The auto industry has offered more curated, exclusive services in the past, but they have largely been for luxury and premium brands rather than mainstream brands or vehicles like Ford’s F-Series.
The new service package follows Ford betting big on such curated services for its “Pro” fleet customers, including more hands-on assistance as well as logistics and fleet management.
“Everything we see says that this is gonna be a nice improvement for consumers,” Rathsburg said. More