Instead of immediately passing tariff costs to consumers, US corporations are initially absorbing the shock. They are mitigating the impact by reducing labor costs and accepting lower profitability, which explains the lag between tariff implementation and broad consumer inflation.
To navigate extreme uncertainty like unpredictable tariffs, Walmart's buyers use tangible, seasonal purchasing decisions (e.g., Halloween costumes) as a framework. They run detailed "what-if" scenarios on pricing, sourcing, and consumer behavior to make concrete decisions despite ambiguity.
Brands should be transparent about price increases due to external factors like tariffs. Unlike airlines that permanently added fees, businesses that remove surcharges when costs decrease build long-term trust and avoid commoditization.
While tariffs affect goods prices, immigration controls are reducing the labor supply, particularly in the service sector. This creates upward wage and price pressure on services, a subtle but significant contributor to overall inflation that is difficult to isolate in real-time data.
While the US exports less to Canada by volume, its exports (electronics, pharma) have far higher margins and shareholder value multiples than Canadian exports (lumber, oil). Therefore, for every dollar of trade disrupted by tariffs, the US loses significantly more economic value, making the policy self-defeating.
The inflation market's reaction to tariff news has fundamentally shifted. Unlike in the past, recent tariff threats failed to raise front-end inflation expectations. This indicates investors are now more concerned about the negative impact on economic growth and labor markets than the direct pass-through to consumer prices.
Despite fears from announced tariffs, the actual implemented tariff rate on U.S. imports is only 10.1%, not the computed 17-18%. This is due to exemptions, trade deals, and behavioral changes by companies. This gap between rhetoric and reality explains the unexpectedly strong 2025 performance of emerging markets.
A surge in business technology investment was misinterpreted as an AI-powered economic boom. It more likely reflected companies front-loading purchases of semiconductors and electronics to avoid paying impending 25% tariffs, rather than a fundamental acceleration in AI-related capital expenditure.
The negative economic impact of tariffs was weaker than forecast because key transmission channels failed to materialize. A lack of foreign retaliation, a depreciating dollar that boosted exports, and a surprisingly strong stock market prevented the anticipated tightening of financial conditions.
The Fed expects inflation from tariffs to be a temporary phenomenon, peaking in Q1 before subsiding. This view allows policymakers to "look through" the temporary price spike and focus on what they see as a more pressing risk: a cooling labor market. This trade-off is described as the "cost of providing insurance to the labor market."
Robert Kaplan cautions against dismissing inflation risks. Many businesses are still absorbing tariff costs or working through pre-tariff inventory. He believes the full price impact will be passed on to consumers in 2026, potentially keeping inflation stickier than markets currently expect.