Many sellers on Amazon count on China for manufacturing and assembly due to lower costs and established infrastructure – up to 70% of goods on Amazon come from China, according to Wedbush Securities. With nearly all imports from China being taxed a staggering 145% under the latest tariffs, Amazon sellers are having to decide whether to raise prices or absorb the vastly increased cost of importing their goods.
Amazon CEO Andy Jassy on Thursday told CNBC that its vast network of third-party sellers will likely “pass the cost on” to consumers. He added that Amazon has done some “strategic forward inventory buys” and looked to renegotiate terms on some purchase orders to keep prices low.
Although Trump temporarily lowered tariffs on most countries to 10% on Wednesday, he doubled down on the huge tariffs on goods from China. Before the pause, average tariff rates under Trump were at the highest level since the Great Depression. The “reciprocal tariffs” were far steeper in regions like Southeast Asia. Tariffs also hit U.S. allies at unusual rates, including 20% on the European Union and previously announced 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada.
Josianne Boisvert of Canadian-based Portable Winch Co. said she “was in a state of shock” when the tariffs were announced. For 20 years, the company has driven its products an hour to the U.S. border for duty-free shipping to American customers.
“We are questioning ourselves if we just move our focus to Europe,” Boisvert said.
CNBC talked to several Amazon sellers to find out how the new tariffs are having an impact on their decisions about prices and where to manufacture.
Price hikes
In a small warehouse in San Rafael, California, Dusty Kenney showed CNBC hundreds of boxes filled with her PrimaStella brand baby spoons, bento boxes and other kids products. Most of them arrived by sea from China before tariffs went into effect. Paying the added tariffs could put her out of business if they continue, she said.
“I will hold my prices for as long as I can and just absorb those tariffs because I’m already competing against those Chinese sellers that are undercutting me,” Kenney said. Although tariffs will also impact her Chinese-based competitors, the cost of doing business in the U.S. is far higher than in China.
“The administration would like people to think that this is a China problem, and that this is only hurting Chinese-based businesses and helping U.S.-based businesses. But I am a U.S.-based business, let’s be clear,” Kenney said. “Everything’s warehoused here, designed here, photographed here. All the income that comes from that stays here.”
Several sellers said they are considering raising prices if Trump’s tariffs stick around.
The vast majority of products on Amazon are sold by third-parties, but tariffs will also impact the company’s first-party brands.
That includes Amazon Basics-branded batteries, which compete against the likes of Duracell and Energizer by retailing at lower prices, said Jason Goldberg of the Publicis Groupe.
If Amazon has to raise the price of its own batteries, he said, “consumers are likely to have a preference for that well-known, familiar brand.”
The Seattle-based tech company is likely to wait at least six months before passing the tariff costs on to consumers, said Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities.
“The last thing they want to do is right away just pass it to the consumer, because you don’t know how transitory this is,” said Ives, adding that Amazon likely got “well ahead of this” by diversifying its supply chain outside of China.
That’s a strategy many Amazon sellers are also trying.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Reviving U.S. manufacturing?
Some categories, like toys, have a long history of being manufactured in China and have thus far been exempt from tariffs. Jay Foreman started his career at a toy factory in Brooklyn, New York, about 40 years ago.
Manufacturing migrated to China more than 30 years ago because of, “not only a tremendous workforce, but they’ve invested in the infrastructure to create a toy manufacturing supply chain,” said Foreman, CEO of Basic Fun, which makes popular toys like Tonka Trucks, Care Bears, Lincoln Logs, Tinker Toys, and Lite-Brite.
“Whether you’re making a Tonka Truck in China or an Apple iPhone, they figured it out. They’re making quality product there and it’s tough to replicate elsewhere,” Foreman said.
Workers making Care Bears at a factory in Ankang, China.
CNBC
A lot of toy manufacturing moved to Vietnam, Mexico and India in the last five years because of China tariffs during Trump’s first term, Foreman said. But many of the toy factories there are also owned by Chinese companies, he said.
“So you’re sort of not escaping doing business with the Chinese,” Foreman said.
Other product categories, like teas, can’t easily be grown in the U.S. because of the climate.
“You need high humidity. Usually you need to be at a very high altitude. And those things only come together in certain parts of the world, ” said James Fayal, who runs high-energy tea brand Zest. With its green tea grown in coastal China and black tea in India, Fayal said he’ll have to pass the cost on to consumers because he doesn’t have a U.S. option.
For the brands that do manufacture in the U.S., the tariffs are creating a competitive advantage, those companies said.
“Put our products side by side to a competitor’s that is getting it overseas and it’s a night and day difference,” said Dayne Rusch of Vyper Industrial.
Vyper’s American-made stools and other shop equipment range in price from $350 to $650 while foreign-made alternatives can sell for less than $40, Rusch said.
At the National Hardware Show in March, Rusch said he was approached by many vendors asking if Vyper would consider manufacturing their products.
“There’s a huge opportunity for OEM manufacturers to start taking on more work from these people that were purchasing overseas and start making it here in the United States,” Rusch said.
The other sells that spoke to CNBC said it’s not financially feasible to relocate manufacturing to the U.S., even though it would allow them to avoid tariffs.
Some, like William Su, are moving manufacturing completely out of China, but staying overseas. Su set up a factory for his Teamson brand in Vietnam in reaction to China tariffs during Trump’s first term. He’s now in talks to manufacture in India. Trump hit both countries with significant tariffs last week, although they’re temporarily on hold.
Surrounded by her colorful baby products in California, Kenney told CNBC she considered opening her own manufacturing site.
“But that’s way over my head and out of my budget,” she said. “I would love to be able to manufacture in the U.S., but the truth is that the infrastructure is not there.”
With fewer factories in the U.S. than in China, Kenney said the cost to make her products domestically would be double or triple what she pays now.
“The people in China are hungry for the work,” she said. “They’ll get back to you right away. They make sure you get your shipments right away. They’re on it.”
Ending ‘de minimis’
There is one tariff announcement Trump made that’s a boon for U.S-based sellers like Kenney: closing the loophole known as “de minimis.”
This exemption allowed orders under $800 to avoid paying duties and taxes, and it’s what made absurdly low prices possible on direct-from-China sites like Temu, Alibaba and Shein. U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it processed more than 1.3 billion de minimis shipments in 2024, up from over 1 billion shipments in 2023.
Chinese sellers send small orders directly to U.S. customers to keep shipments under the $800 limit. U.S. sellers like Kenney don’t often qualify for de minimis because they ship in large quantities by the pallet, bringing products to their warehouses for quality checks instead of shipping straight to customers from Chinese factories.
Kenney used to sell her most popular product, a set of six silicone baby spoons, for $9.99 on Amazon. She’s reduced the price to $7.99 to compete with knockoffs that sell for as low as $3 on Temu.
“I’ve even had them rip off all of my photos and content that I’ve created and use it to sell their knockoff products,” Kenney said.
Dusty Kenney showed CNBC some of her PrimaStella brand kids feeding products she sells on Amazon, at her warehouse in San Rafael, California, on March 25, 2025.
Katie tarasov
Trump briefly put de minimis on hold in February. Days later, he temporarily reinstated the loophole because huge numbers of Chinese packages started piling up at U.S. post offices and customs offices ill-equipped to collect duties at such a fast pace.
The president on April 2 again announced that he was ending de minimis, effective May 2.
The White House said “adequate systems” are now in place to collect tariffs. It added that the loophole is being closed to target “deceptive” Chinese-based shippers who “hide illicit substances, including synthetic opioids, in low-value packages to exploit the de minimis exemption.”
Foreman of Basic Fun said his Tonka Truck goes through many layers of inspection before landing on Amazon.
“Anything that comes in on de minimis is not going through that safety scrutiny at all,” Foreman said. “Small packets that might have included a dress or some kind of tchotchke might have been stuffed with illegal drugs or things like that, might be counterfeit, might be bootlegs or knockoffs.”
Some Amazon sellers were benefiting from de minimis, particularly on its separate direct-from-China site Amazon Haul, which launched in November to compete with Temu. But killing de minimis will be a net positive for Amazon because it will hurt competitors like Temu, said Ives at Wedbush Securities.
De minimis is a “loophole that’s been tugging at Amazon really for the last 18 months,” Ives said.
What remains to be seen is how Trump’s tariffs will shift in coming weeks and what tariffs other countries will impose on U.S. goods. Those pose a risk for Amazon and its U.S. merchants that sell to foreign customers.
“It just has a cascading impact across the entire economy,” Goldberg of Publicis Groupe said. “Uncertainty is really bad for business, regardless of who wins or loses on any specific tariff.”
A jury in Miami has determined that Tesla should be held partly liable for a fatal 2019 Autopilot crash, and must compensate the family of the deceased and an injured survivor a portion of $329 million in damages.
Tesla’s payout is based on $129 million in compensatory damages, and $200 million in punitive damages against the company.
The jury determined Tesla should be held 33% responsible for the fatal crash. That means the automaker would be responsible for about $42.5 million in compensatory damages. In cases like these, punitive damages are typically capped at three times compensatory damages.
The plaintiffs’ attorneys told CNBC on Friday that because punitive damages were only assessed against Tesla, they expect the automaker to pay the full $200 million, bringing total payments to around $242.5 million.
Tesla said it plans to appeal the decision.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs had asked the jury to award damages based on $345 million in total damages. The trial in the Southern District of Florida started on July 14.
The suit centered around who shouldered the blame for the deadly crash in Key Largo, Florida. A Tesla owner named George McGee was driving his Model S electric sedan while using the company’s Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system.
While driving, McGee dropped his mobile phone that he was using and scrambled to pick it up. He said during the trial that he believed Enhanced Autopilot would brake if an obstacle was in the way. His Model S accelerated through an intersection at just over 60 miles per hour, hitting a nearby empty parked car and its owners, who were standing on the other side of their vehicle.
Naibel Benavides, who was 22, died on the scene from injuries sustained in the crash. Her body was discovered about 75 feet away from the point of impact. Her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, survived but suffered multiple broken bones, a traumatic brain injury and psychological effects.
“Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans,” Brett Schreiber, counsel for the plaintiffs, said in an e-mailed statement on Friday. “Tesla’s lies turned our roads into test tracks for their fundamentally flawed technology, putting everyday Americans like Naibel Benavides and Dillon Angulo in harm’s way.”
Following the verdict, the plaintiffs’ families hugged each other and their lawyers, and Angulo was “visibly emotional” as he embraced his mother, according to NBC.
Here is Tesla’s response to CNBC:
“Today’s verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla’s and the entire industry’s efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology. We plan to appeal given the substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.
Even though this jury found that the driver was overwhelmingly responsible for this tragic accident in 2019, the evidence has always shown that this driver was solely at fault because he was speeding, with his foot on the accelerator – which overrode Autopilot – as he rummaged for his dropped phone without his eyes on the road. To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash.
This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs’ lawyers blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.”
The verdict comes as Musk, Tesla’s CEO, is trying to persuade investors that his company can pivot into a leader in autonomous vehicles, and that its self-driving systems are safe enough to operate fleets of robotaxis on public roads in the U.S.
Tesla shares dipped 1.8% on Friday and are now down 25% for the year, the biggest drop among tech’s megacap companies.
The verdict could set a precedent for Autopilot-related suits against Tesla. About a dozen active cases are underway focused on similar claims involving incidents where Autopilot or Tesla’s FSD— Full Self-Driving (Supervised) — had been in use just before a fatal or injurious crash.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration initiated a probe in 2021 into possible safety defects in Tesla’s Autopilot systems. During the course of that investigation, Tesla made changes, including a number of over-the-air software updates.
The agency then opened a second probe, which is ongoing, evaluating whether Tesla’s “recall remedy” to resolve issues with the behavior of its Autopilot, especially around stationary first responder vehicles, had been effective.
The NHTSA has also warned Tesla that its social media posts may mislead drivers into thinking its cars are capable of functioning as robotaxis, even though owners manuals say the cars require hands-on steering and a driver attentive to steering and braking at all times.
A site that tracks Tesla-involved collisions, TeslaDeaths.com, has reported at least 58 deaths resulting from incidents where Tesla drivers had Autopilot engaged just before impact.
A screen showing the price of various cryptocurrencies against the US dollar displayed at a Crypto Panda cryptocurrency store in Hong Kong, China, on Monday, Feb. 3, 2025.
Lam Yik | Bloomberg | Getty Images
The crypto market slid Friday after President Donald Trump unveiled his modified “reciprocal” tariffs on dozens of countries.
The price of bitcoin showed relative strength, hovering at the flat line while ether, XRP and Binance Coin fell 2% each. Overnight, bitcoin dropped to a low of $114,110.73.
The descent triggered a wave of long liquidations, which forces traders to sell their assets at market price to settle their debts, pushing prices lower. Bitcoin saw $172 million in liquidations across centralized exchanges in the past 24 hours, according to CoinGlass, and ether saw $210 million.
Crypto-linked stocks suffered deeper losses. Coinbase led the way, down 15% following its disappointing second-quarter earnings report. Circle fell 4%, Galaxy Digital lost 2%, and ether treasury company Bitmine Immersion was down 8%. Bitcoin proxy MicroStrategy was down by 5%.
Stock Chart IconStock chart icon
Bitcoin falls below $115,000
The stock moves came amid a new wave of risk off sentiment after President Trump issued new tariffs ranging between 10% and 41%, triggering worries about increasing inflation and the Federal Reserve’s ability to cut interest rates. In periods of broad based derisking, crypto tends to get hit as investors pull out of the most speculative and volatile assets. Technical resilience and institutional demand for bitcoin and ether are helping support their prices.
“After running red hot in July, this is a healthy strategic cooldown. Markets aren’t reacting to a crisis, they’re responding to the lack of one,” said Ben Kurland, CEO at crypto research platform DYOR. “With no new macro catalyst on the horizon, capital is rotating out of speculative assets and into safer ground … it’s a calculated pause.”
Crypto is coming off a winning month but could soon hit the brakes amid the new macro uncertainty, and in a month usually characterized by lower trading volumes and increased volatility. Bitcoin gained 8% in July, according to Coin Metrics, while ether surged more than 49%.
Ether ETFs saw more than $5 billion in inflows in July alone (with just a single day of outflows of $1.8 million on July 2), bringing it’s total cumulative inflows to $9.64 to date. Bitcoin ETFs saw $114 million in outflows in the final trading session of July, bringing its monthly inflows to about $6 billion out of a cumulative $55 billion.
Don’t miss these cryptocurrency insights from CNBC Pro:
Google CEO Sundar Pichai gestures to the crowd during Google’s annual I/O developers conference in Mountain View, California, on May 20, 2025.
David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Google has purged more than 50 organizations related to diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, from a list of organizations that the tech company provides funding to, according to a new report.
The company has removed a total of 214 groups from its funding list while adding 101, according to a new report from tech watchdog organization The Tech Transparency Project. The watchdog group cites the most recent public list of organizations that receive the most substantial contributions from Google’s U.S. Government Affairs and Public Policy team.
The largest category of purged groups were DEI-related, with a total of 58 groups removed from Google’s funding list, TTP found. The dropped groups had mission statements that included the words “diversity, “equity,” “inclusion,” or “race,” “activism,” and “women.” Those are also terms the Trump administration officials have reportedly told federal agencies to limit or avoid.
In response to the report, Google spokesperson José Castañeda told CNBC that the list reflects contributions made in 2024 and that it does not reflect all contributions made by other teams within the company.
“We contribute to hundreds of groups from across the political spectrum that advocate for pro-innovation policies, and those groups change from year to year based on where our contributions will have the most impact,” Castañeda said in an email.
Organizations that were removed from Google’s list include the African American Community Service Agency, which seeks to “empower all Black and historically excluded communities”; the Latino Leadership Alliance, which is dedicated to “race equity affecting the Latino community”; and Enroot, which creates out-of-school experiences for immigrant kids.
The organization funding purge is the latest to come as Google began backtracking some of its commitments to DEI over the last couple of years. That pull back came due to cost cutting to prioritize investments into artificial intelligence technology as well as the changing political and legal landscape amid increasing national anti-DEI policies.
Over the past decade, Silicon Valley and other industries used DEI programs to root out bias in hiring, promote fairness in the workplace and advance the careers of women and people of color — demographics that have historically been overlooked in the workplace.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to end affirmative action at colleges led to additional backlash against DEI programs in conservative circles.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order upon taking office in January to end the government’s DEI programs and directed federal agencies to combat what the administration considers “illegal” private-sector DEI mandates, policies and programs. Shortly after, Google’s Chief People Officer Fiona Cicconi told employees that the company would end DEI-related hiring “aspirational goals” due to new federal requirements and Google’s categorization as a federal contractor.
Despite DEI becoming such a divisive term, many companies are continuing the work but using different language or rolling the efforts under less-charged terminology, like “learning” or “hiring.”
Even Google CEO Sundar Pichai maintained the importance diversity plays in its workforce at an all-hands meeting in March.
“We’re a global company, we have users around the world, and we think the best way to serve them well is by having a workforce that represents that diversity,” Pichai said at the time.
One of the groups dropped from Google’s contributions list is the National Network to End Domestic Violence, which provides training, assistance, and public awareness campaigns on the issue of violence against women, the TTP report found. The group had been on Google’s list of funded organizations for at least nine years and continues to name the company as one of its corporate partners.
Google said it still gave $75,000 to the National Network to End Domestic Violence in 2024 but did not say why the group was removed from the public contributions list.