Wednesday, August 20, 2025

Home Depot to Raise Prices Because of Tariffs

Home Depot said Tuesday that some of its prices could be going up because of the cost of tariffs.

Posted by jpw at 08:33 AM | 32 COMMENTS | permalink

More

Home Depot and Lowe's earnings face housing slowdown, tariffs test reut.rs/41OInc7

[image or embed]

-- Reuters (@reuters.com) Aug 18, 2025 at 6:35 AM

Comments

Haha who was the idiot that claimed the tariffs weren't raising prices because Home Depot wasn't raising their prices?

#1 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-19 12:51 PM

Re 1

Probably the same guy who declared we don't need the Weather Service anymore because we have the Weather Channel.

Yes. That actually happened.

#2 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-08-19 12:56 PM

... CFO Richard McPhail said Home Depot would have to implement some price increases as a result of the Trump administration's taxes on imports. ...

When a Bloomberg reporter talked with him, the reporter said he mentioned that, so far, Home Depot has been working mostly from pre-tariff inventory, but he expects that to change in the second half of the year.

#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-08-19 01:04 PM

Taco will simply tell his simps that prices are going down and the simps will eat it up.

#4 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-08-19 01:21 PM

Home Depot falls short of Q2 estimates
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pedo 47 did that.

#5 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2025-08-19 02:39 PM

Facts:

The dollar is worth less than it was before Trump stole the presidency.

Everything is more expensive than it was before Trump stole the presidency.

America is worse off than it was before Trump stole the presidency.

Billionaires are wealthier than they were before Trump stole the presidency.

The average American is worse off than they were before Trump stole the presidency.

Huzzah!!!

#6 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-19 03:17 PM

And there you are, sitting in your ass pounding hot wings and crap beer.

#7 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-19 10:00 PM

Princes?

FFS

SHWA

#8 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-19 10:23 PM

Another "are going to, will have to" story. Buy american and it won't be an issue.

#9 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-08-20 11:54 AM

#6 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-19 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

And there you are, sitting in your ass pounding hot wings and crap beer.

#7 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-19 10:00 PM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Trans fight? Which one of you can slap and kick harder?

#10 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-08-20 11:55 AM

So Trump's strategy is working then, which is awesome to hear. Companies in America will see it's lucrative again to produce goods long since left behind because it wasn't worth producing given imports were cheaper. Thus, more people hired in America. Thus, more money being made and spent by those being employed. Thus inflation cools. Considering Reps are much better with logic than Dems and the 1-2 year blip that is needed to make the tariff strategy actually work was already part of the plan, all this article is doing is validating the strategy is working. We need to go through Trump's whole term to determine if the strategy works. And Reps can't blame Dems for trying to block everything, Reps do the same to Dems. It's just part of the fight both sides have to go through.

Oh, and it gives every company a finger to point when their companies lose money because of their own incompetence. But liberals are defending them now when they used to vilify the rich. That was an unintended and not predicted aspect of the tariff increases, though.

#11 | Posted by humtake at 2025-08-20 12:08 PM

So Trump's strategy is working then, which is awesome to hear. Companies in America will see it's lucrative again to produce goods long since left behind because it wasn't worth producing given imports were cheaper.
#11 | Posted by humtake

Those tariffs will come down faster than industrial production can get stood up.

If you ever worked at a company that makes a product, you'd know that.

Thus, companies won't see it's "lucrative." Companies will see a loss.

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-20 12:21 PM

Buy american and it won't be an issue.

#9 | Posted by fishpaw

You. Are. Stupid.

#13 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-20 12:21 PM

#11 | Posted by humtake

LOL you should change your name to kool aid man.

Because holy s*&^ is that post a giant steaming pile of wishful thinking s(*&.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-20 12:24 PM

"So Trump's strategy is working then, which is awesome to hear. Companies in America will see it's lucrative again to produce goods long since left behind because it wasn't worth producing given imports were cheaper. Thus, more people hired in America. Thus, more money being made and spent by those being employed. Thus inflation cools. Considering Reps are much better with logic than Dems and the 1-2 year blip that is needed to make the tariff strategy actually work was already part of the plan, all this article is doing is validating the strategy is working. We need to go through Trump's whole term to determine if the strategy works. And Reps can't blame Dems for trying to block everything, Reps do the same to Dems. It's just part of the fight both sides have to go through."

Hopefully HUMTAKE didn't plagiarize Fox Newa for thAT PILE OF BULLS**T! pAY Pay for what you steal!

#15 | Posted by danni at 2025-08-20 12:30 PM

"So Trump's strategy is working then, which is awesome to hear. Companies in America will see it's lucrative again to produce goods long since left behind because it wasn't worth producing given imports were cheaper."

This is what Bernie & co. Have been saying for years.

Problem is, it's not true. Or at least most likely not true. Depending on the tariff rate, US producers would simply match prices to what a comparable imported product would cost. Basically, it's the government forcing US consumers to pay more for a product in order to benefit US-based industry. But here's the rub-the population of the US is around 340 million. The global consumer class is around 3.5 billion. The US government can force USans to pay more, but they can't force consumers in other countries to do the same. When the US implements tariffs against another country, that country responds in kind. Which in this case means that US manufacturers lose as much as 90% of potential market share.

There are other problems as well. Who is going to work in these factories that provide all the goods and services that the US would need to replicate locally in order to meet demand? Robots? Maybe, IDK. But there isn't going to be a sufficient labor force, unless the demand for local labor drives labor costs in manufacturing to the point where skilled workers are choosing to work in factories rather than in their trained profession. This gets into the economic concepts of absolute advantage and comparative advantage. Skilled should and do benefit society in a way that unskilled workers cannot. And when policy compels skilled workers to take jobs that don't require those skills, you lose out on those people being able to contribute at the level they otherwise would have in a free market environment.

#16 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-08-20 02:55 PM

Holy ----, MadBomber got an economics question substantially right. And only invoked the mythological "unskilled labor unicorns" as an aside.

Can we get some Dancing Bananas for this special occasion?

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-20 02:58 PM

Depending on the tariff rate, US producers would simply match prices to what a comparable imported product would cost. Basically, it's the government forcing US consumers to pay more for a product in order to benefit US-based industry.

Bingo.

They'll likely price just below imported product to maximize profit while still being "cheaper" than the imported version.

It's hilarious how clueless righties are on every topic they claim superiority on.

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-20 03:19 PM

"Holy ----, MadBomber got an economics question substantially right. And only invoked the mythological "unskilled labor unicorns" as an aside."

It's not an aside at all. If a teacher or nurse can make more working in a factory then they could working as a nurse or a teacher, they have incentive to do so. Even if their new chosen profession doesn't require the use of their training. Because at the end of the day, they are as fully qualified as unskilled workers as someone who did not train as a teacher or a nurse. This is nothing new. In the 1960s and 1970s, it wasn't uncommon for college grads to take union jobs because they paid more, and offered better working conditions. That paradigm began to erode as European and Asian markets developed and introduced competition to the global marketplace. That happened as the natural result of post-WWII re-development, but Trump appears to want to re-create similar conditions through political policy. The problem is, those Asian and European markets still exist and are quite robust. And they're likely looking forward to capturing those markets that Trump seems willing to cede in an effort to create a globally isolated market in the US.

#19 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-08-20 03:27 PM

"Because at the end of the day, they are as fully qualified as unskilled workers as someone who did not train as a teacher or a nurse."

Show me the job that doesn't require reading, writing, listening, and following directions.

All skills.

If the industrial economy didn't require skilled labor, we would never have rolled out public education in this country.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-20 03:34 PM

I watch the currency markets like a hawk. The devaluation of the dollar has already resulted in a 10% pay cut for me as someone who is paid in US$, but pays bills in EUR. I recently read an article from 2024 regarding Trump's idea to de-value the dollar in order to make US-made goods more attractive to importers. First, it would crush me, but I alone am not a key policy concern, nor is any other expat living on a decreasing income. For people living in the US, I'm not as clear on the impact. In theory, the impact on consumers who would pay higher prices for US goods that were matched to comparable imports. But even then, US exports are not going to be all that attractive if the importing country puts tariffs on them.

Republicans have traditionally looked to how to increase free-market efficiencies. Trump seems to want to take more of a Dennis Kucinich approach.

#21 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-08-20 03:42 PM

"The devaluation of the dollar has already resulted in a 10% pay cut for me as someone who is paid in US$, but pays bills in EUR"

Stagflation is the plan.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-20 03:46 PM

"I recently read an article from 2024 regarding Trump's idea to de-value the dollar in order to make US-made goods more attractive to importers."

Remember how Republicans cried about George Soros and his currency speculation?

Now, Republicans cheer for Trump's currency speculation.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-20 03:47 PM

Show me the job that doesn't require reading, writing, listening, and following directions.
All skills.

Oooohhh boy. You're trying really hard on this one LOL

#24 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-20 04:27 PM

@#9 ... Buy american and it won't be an issue. ...

American coffee (Kona) is ridiculously expensive. I've tasted it, it is excellent tasting coffee. But ridiculously expensive.

And that runs against Pres Trump's promise to bring down coffee prices on Day 1.

Trump promised lower grocery prices on Day One.' Here's what happened
thehill.com

... Campaigning for office a year ago, standing in front of a table loaded up with bags of flour, cartons of eggs and gallons of milk, President Donald Trump told voters, "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on Day One."

Unfortunately for him -- and money-strapped Americans -- it hasn't worked out that way.

Nexstar employees around the country tracked a selection of grocery items over the past six months to see if prices would rise, fall or stay the same after Trump took office in January. Our observations, as well as federal data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), show grocery prices overall have remained stubbornly high and even increased slightly.

The overall cost of food at home has ticked up between 0.2% and 0.4% almost every month since January, according to BLS tracking. One exception was in April 2025, when prices went down 0.1% from the month before. All those tiny increases have added up to a 3% increase in food prices year-over-year. ...






#25 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-08-20 06:45 PM

I already saw higher prices a month ago on the exact items I'd bought a month before.

- Ending inflation on Day 1? NOPE
- Ending the Ukraine War on Day 1? NOPE
- Making America Great (Again LOL) NOPE

Raising inflation? YEP

Making America Worse and America a pariah in the rest of the world? YEP

#26 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2025-08-20 09:58 PM

#26: m.media-amazon.com

#27 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-20 10:00 PM

No worries.

Home Depot will absorb any costs.

And we'll be bringing IN BIG BUCKS to the US GOVT.

OUR COUNTRY IS GETTING SO RICH BECAUSE OF TARIFFS - DJT

#28 | Posted by brass30 at 2025-08-21 02:49 PM

#19.

One small thing... manufacturing is NOTHING like it was in the 70's and 80's. TV's that has discrete components (and solder joints and wire wrap) now are made with a couple IC's. Those jobs ain't coming back. That's only one example. Also "union jobs"? Under Republicants? Seriously?

#29 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-21 07:36 PM

__________
#9 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-08-20 11:54 AM
Another "are going to, will have to" story.

Fantasy. Isn't that exactly what Trump wants you to believe about "Trumponomics"?

Buy american and it won't be an issue.

And buy "two dolls instead of thirty"? Very helpful. Thank you, Comrade Commissar Fishpaw!

But... how then will we get "Trillions of dollars flowing in from tariffs"?

And will it be one-size-fits-all, or be cheaper or better than what we used to buy, so we can choose or have enough money left for groceries and other things that went up in price since Dear Leader's "Liberation Day"?

If you didn't see the movie "Outsourced" (2006) (www.youtube.com), it's funny and "educational."

One scene at ~1h24m has a dialog between a call center in India and an American who lost his job to outsourcing ("whole operation moved to Mexico") when he wanted to buy a catalog item, but started complaining that it wasn't US-made:

|----- Operator: "Sir, don't hang up, I have a solution for you. See, we understand that many Americans are upset about outsourcing, so we have located American-made versions of all our products. If you have a pen, I will give you the website of an American company that makes an eagle statue very similar to ours; same size, same materials, only theirs is made 100 percent in America.

Caller (calmed down): Well, thanks, I appreciate it, but, uh, is the price about the same?

Operator: No, sir, theirs is $212 more.

Caller (silent): ...

Operator: Sir...

Caller (quietly): Yeah, all right, just sell me yours.
-----|

Enjoy the movie. Maybe remember it next time you think up great ideas to "move manufacturing or anything else home" or conjure up other central-planned ways to forklift and manage $30T economy.
__________

#30 | Posted by CutiePie at 2025-08-22 05:35 AM

__________
#11 | Posted by humtake at 2025-08-20 12:08 PM
So Trump's strategy is working then...

Fact. Yes, it's "working" exactly as expected - higher prices/"inflation" caused by higher taxes (on only ~13.5% of GDP which are imports, but many of these are components of other "domestic" products) while at the same time weakening exports which constitute more than 30% of S&P 500 companies revenues - double whammy!

Meanwhile, manufacturing actually losing jobs (-11,000 in July), and Philadelphia Fed Mfg index, which was expected to be only slightly lower, is back in negative territory (-0.3 from 15.9 in June) while all the 73K jobs gained were in health and social services.

Companies in America will see it's lucrative again to produce goods long since left behind because it wasn't worth producing given imports were cheaper.

Fantasy. Artificially increasing prices of imports through taxes (or [effectively] banning imports) is not going to make "companies in America see it's lucrative again to produce [expensive] goods" in the US and invest in the factories in the US. Been tried 'under Trump' and 'under Biden' - it's called 'industrial policy' (incentivized or repressive) - never mind finding "qualified/skilled" people to staff them... and for what purpose? Spending trillions of dollars to recreate what you could buy much cheaper from somewhere else, because Trump discovered he could con economically illiterate with "US trade deficits"?

Maybe try filling real deficit of ~400K people with "necessary skills" to be employed in manufacturing?

Trump's "Trade wars are good and easy to win" is nothing but "Back to the Future" from free-trade capitalism to the wars of failed pre-industrial pre-18th century mercantilism.

upload.democraticunderground.com - full text of Reagan's 1988 speech on free trade:
|------- "... We too often talk about trade while using the vocabulary of war. In war, for one side to win, the other must lose. But commerce is not warfare. Trade is an economic alliance that benefits both countries. There are no losers, only winners. And trade helps strengthen the free world." -------|

"Progressives" used ["targeted"] tariffs to protect unions from competition - how well did that work out? When Trump does it, and on massive scale, MAGA-bots fully buy into right-left populist policies of protectionism (Trump got many union votes), while "progressives" are rethinking:
www.progressivepolicy.org - History Shows Tariffs are Anti-Prosperity - 2025-03-18

.

Thus, more people hired in America. Thus, more money being made and spent by those being employed. Thus inflation cools.

Fantasy. This clearly misstates/reverses the effects on job market and money supply - you are just reciting nonsensical Trump economic talking points here. We've been importing disinflation for 40+ years.

Moving people from one job "organically" created by "the economy" to another, artificially created by the government, doesn't lead to "more people hired" - it creates artificial shortages and inflation.

And with fewer/weaker USDs sent out of the US, who is going to buy growing US debt, especially if rates are low, as "Erdogan" Trump wants Fed to force?
theconversation.com - Turkey's economy is paying the price for years of policy mistakes - 2024-04-03

Higher costs = higher prices = higher "inflation" needing higher money supply growth and interest rates. And it becomes "systemic," not a one-off.
__________

#31 | Posted by CutiePie at 2025-08-22 05:52 AM

__________
#29 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-21 07:36 PM
Also "union jobs"? Under Republicants? Seriously?

Unions lost membership over the years steadily "under" Republicans and Democrats, while the unions leadership have steadily donated overwhelmingly to Democrats: www.opensecrets.org - Labor Sector Summary

Rank-and-file, not so much.

Just one example: www.nytimes.com - Union Leaders Get Tough With Democrats as Members Drift Toward Trump - 2025-08-09

Do you know how Elon Musk (who, during visit at the Oval Office in 2020, called Trump "a f*****g moron" behind his back) got red-pilled and finally went all-in and spent hundreds of $millions helping elect Trump in 2024?

He was pissed that Tesla wasn't invited to the so-called "EV Summit" in August 2021, because he was told that was really a showcase for UAW. Biden administration was keen on emphasizing "good-paying union jobs" every chance they got:

amp.cnn.com - Tesla just got snubbed by Biden's electric vehicle summit - 2021-08-05

|------- ... "Yeah, seems odd that Tesla wasn't invited," the company's CEO Elon Musk said in a tweet overnight.
One potential reason for the apparent snub: The United Auto Workers union will also be at the ceremony. ...

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked about Tesla's absence at her briefing Thursday ahead of the event. ... Asked if Tesla being a nonunion company was the reason it wasn't included Thursday, Psaki replied, "Well, these are the three largest employers of the United Auto Workers, so I'll let you draw your own conclusions."
-------|

Like Trump, Musk knows how to hold a grudge.

www.nbcnews.com - Elon Musk quietly visited the Biden White House in September - 2024-02-21

|------- ... Musk has for years complained that Biden officials ignore him and his companies, and he was still expressing frustration months after the September meeting, tweeting on Christmas Eve last year about perceived snubs. "Let's not forget the White House giving Tesla the cold shoulder, excluding us from the EV summit," he wrote on X, referencing an event from August 2021. -------|

__________

#32 | Posted by CutiePie at 2025-08-22 06:46 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Trump Threatens Chicago with Military (101 comments)

US Open Broadcasters told Not to Air Trump Boos (31 comments)

Mike Johnson Clarifies Comment About Trump Being FBI Informant (29 comments)

Russia Hits Ukraine with Largest Air Attack of the War (19 comments)

South Korea says Deal Reached with US for Release of Detained Workers (19 comments)

Pentagon Plan Prioritizes Homeland over China Threat (19 comments)

Trump Plans Harder Test for US Citizenship (17 comments)

What Trump Posted on Truth Social Should Force Him to Resign (17 comments)

Rosie O'Donnell Slams Trump (14 comments)

Ultra-Processed Foods Bad for Men's Health (13 comments)