
Trump's 50% copper tariff includes a major exemption. That won't halt price rises
The final order on copper tariffs, which the Trump administration says will boost the domestic copper production industry, applies to semi-finished products such as pipes, rods, sheets and wires. It also impacts copper-intensive items like cables and electrical components. But crucially, it does not include the raw input material copper cathode, copper ores, concentrates or scraps, as had been widely expected.
However, analysts say that may not be enough to avoid prices for a range of consumer goods containing the metal, from cookware to air conditioning units, being pushed higher as a result of the changes.
U.S. copper prices on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) shot to a record high earlier this month, also hitting an all-time premium over the global benchmark London Metal Exchange (LME), following the initial July announcement of a 50% tariff. While importers had already sent refined copper flooding stateside at record levels through the first half of the year in anticipation of new duties, the scale of a blanket 50% rate jolted markets and put severe upward pressure on U.S. prices.
The eventual reveal on Wednesday of a tariff targeting only semi-finished products has provided yet another massive shock. In the minutes after the news, COMEX copper (metals futures contracts on the CME) fell 19% in the biggest intraday fall on record, according to bank ING.
The gap between COMEX above LME prices has been around 30% since the initial July 8 announcement, implying continued uncertainty that the overall tariff rate would end up at 50%.
However, traders were instead considering possible exemptions for countries such as major exporter Chile, or for delays to full implementation of tariffs, Albert Mackenzie, copper analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, told CNBC.
The actual situation is almost a 180-degree pivot from what was expected and what was being priced in to the CME, which was tariffs on refined copper, Mackenzie continued.
The deviation sent the CME price premium plummeting from around $2,637 at the start of Wednesday to just $90 on Thursday morning in Europe, Mackenzie said — a scale of a drop that would look like a mistake were it not for the tariff context, he added.
While traders were taking advantage of a price arbitrage, part of the reason for the huge redirection of copper supply into the U.S. has been that it would take decades for the country to be able to sufficiently increase domestic production of the metal to meet demand. The U.S. currently imports around half its copper, with major exporters including Chile, Canada, Peru and Mexico.
Analysts at Deutsche Bank stressed the "huge shock to the market" this week, noting Thursday that shares of Arizona-based miner Freeport-McMoRan — the copper company most exposed to tariffs on refined copper driving up U.S. prices — closed over 9% lower the previous day.
"Fundamentally, this does not change the copper supply-demand balance (and arguably improves it due to less demand destruction risk), but is likely to put COMEX under heavy pressure," they wrote.
Downward price pressure is likely to follow through onto the LME on a less dramatic scale, they said, in the wake of the massive build-up in refined inventories in the U.S. so far this year. The overhang "could see high shipments from the U.S. back into the global market," they said, where supply has become tight.
Duncan Wanblad, CEO of mining giant Anglo American – which has major copper operations around the world – told CNBC's "Squawk Box Europe" on Thursday that while there was currently a "material dislocation" in the placement of inventories, the demand fundamentals for copper "look great."
"Through a medium- to long- term lens, the fundamentals of copper are really underpinned by the fact that demand is looking to be very strong still in terms of the world's need for an energy transition, for the likes of battery-electric vehicles, for the likes of new energy supply, data centers, AI," he said. Supply on that longer-term outlook remains constrained, he added, amid difficulties obtaining permits and getting product into market.
One policy revealed Wednesday is that the copper tariffs will not stack on top of Trump's new duties on automobile imports, meaning only the latter rate would apply to an impacted product.
However, Benchmark Mineral Intelligence's Mackenzie pointed out that a lower U.S. market price premium does not mean no feed-through into prices for consumer products.
"If you're a manufacturer of fridges or air conditioning units, or even houses, you don't buy copper cathode. You buy wiring and other semi-finished copper products, which are the things being tariffed. So it's reasonable to assume the price increase will be reflected in some end goods," Mackenzie said.
Russ Bukowski, president of manufacturing solutions firm Mastercam, agreed.
"Although there are currently high inventories of copper in the country, the 50% increase on copper tariffs is going to hurt manufacturers in the long run and lead to higher production costs," Bukowski told CNBC.
"To stay afloat, manufacturers may have to pass these costs to consumers, which will likely drive-up prices on various goods."
Michael Reid, senior U.S. economist at RBC Capital Markets, said the impact on consumer prices would be "nuanced" as it appears via an input to other goods.
"The largest sectors that use copper as inputs include motor vehicles, plumbing fixtures and valve fittings, communications wire (i.e., cable and internet providers), and various electrical components. To that end, the manner by which those products are made matters – which is to say, if a car is imported, its copper content won't be tariffed," Reid said by email.
"Where we would expect to see it impact consumer prices the most would be in the housing/construction sector where copper inputs play a big role for electric wiring and plumbing."
"But in the context of the overall cost of a house, the impact is not as harsh as the 50% may sound – assuming the typical cost of plumbing and electric components is $10k then an aggressive full passthrough to the end consumer would mean costs rise to $15k. In the overall cost of a home, that $5k increase would be around 10%," he added.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wall Street's Biggest Showdown -- Donald Trump vs. Jerome Powell -- Has Likely Already Been Decided but Not for the Reason You Might Think
Key Points The S&P 500, Nasdaq Composite, and Dow Jones Industrial Average have endured heightened volatility in 2025, with President Trump's tariff policy whipsawing Wall Street. Trump continues to pressure Fed Chair Jerome Powell to lower interest rates, with some media outlets suggesting the president could "fire" him. However, data from the June inflation report suggests the battle between Trump and Powell has already been decided. 10 stocks we like better than S&P 500 Index › Though volatility is a given when putting your money to work on Wall Street, it's been an exceptionally wild ride for investors through the first seven months of 2025. During the first week of April, uncertainty crescendoed following President Donald Trump's tariff and trade policy announcements. This led the benchmark S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) to its fifth-steepest two-day percentage decline since 1950 and pushed the iconic Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJINDICES: ^DJI) and growth stock-powered Nasdaq Composite (NASDAQINDEX: ^IXIC) into correction territory and a bear market, respectively. However, all three indexes have enjoyed an equally robust three-plus-month rebound in the wake of President Trump pausing higher "reciprocal tariffs" on select countries. For only the sixth time in its storied history, the S&P 500 gained at least 25% in a three-month period. But just because the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite have hit new highs doesn't mean Wall Street's biggest showdown -- Donald Trump vs. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell -- is taking a back seat. While Trump is insistent that the central bank needs to lower interest rates, this ongoing battle between two key figures has, in all likelihood, already been decided -- and it may not be for the reason you're thinking. Can Fed Chair Jerome Powell be fired? Interest rates are at the heart of this Wall Street clash. When U.S. money supply skyrocketed at its fastest pace in history on a year-over-year basis during the COVID-19 pandemic, it sparked the highest prevailing rate of inflation in four decades. In response to rapidly rising prices, the Fed kicked off its most aggressive rate-hiking cycle in decades, with the fed funds rate (the overnight lending rate between U.S. banks) moving up 525 basis points between March 2022 and July 2023. Adjusting the fed funds rate influences everything from lending rates to yields on savings accounts. During tightening cycles, which is where the central bank increases the fed funds rate, the Fed is usually attempting to cool down the prevailing rate of inflation. In comparison, it tends to lower the fed funds rate during shock events and/or economic downturns to encourage borrowing, which can lead to corporate hiring, acquisitions, and innovation -- i.e., catalysts that can drive corporate growth and consumption. Thus far, Fed Chair Jerome Powell has balked at Trump's stern requests to lower the fed funds rate, with some media outlets suggesting the president may "fire" the central bank chief. But can Powell actually be fired? Truth be told, no one knows with 100% certainty, because there's no historical precedent to such an act, nor any legal clarity. Although the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 allows members of its Board of Governors to be "removed for cause by the president," there's no definition of what justifies cause. The assumption would be that Trump's administration would have to prove Powell neglected his duties as Fed Chair or was somehow negligent and caused irreparable harm to the U.S. economy. It's a tall order for which no precedent exists. Furthermore, a ruling from the Supreme Court in May intimates that America's highest court views members of the Board of Governors as having unique protections. Specifically, the Supreme Court ruling noted, "The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical traditional of the First and Second Banks of the United States." Without justifiable cause, it would appear Donald Trump has little chance of removing Powell from office prior to the end of his four-year term as Fed Chair in May 2026. But what if I told you this Wall Street showdown has likely been decided -- and it has absolutely nothing to do with the legality of whether or not Fed Chair Powell can be fired? President Trump's tariff policy has made this battle a moot point While all eyes are on interest rates, the foundation of this rivalry between Donald Trump and Jerome Powell boils down to inflation. The key inflationary measure here is the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), which takes into account more than 200 specific spending categories, each of which has its own unique percentage weighting. These percentage weightings allow the CPI-U to be expressed as a single figure each month, which makes it incredibly easy to decipher if prices are, collectively, rising (inflation) or falling (deflation) on a month-to-month or year-over-year basis. While there's some level of subjectivity introduced by the Fed when making its interest rate decisions, there's more of an impetus to reduce the fed funds rate when the prevailing rate of inflation is declining. Traditionally, the Fed has targeted an arbitrary long-term inflation rate of 2%. Although the prevailing inflation rate has come way down from a peak of 9.1% on a trailing-12-month basis in 2022, it's still above the central bank's long-term target of 2%. More importantly, inflation appears to be reaccelerating due to the implementation of Donald Trump's tariff and trade policy. On April 2, Trump unveiled a 10% base global tariff, as well as introduced aforementioned reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries that have historically run adverse trade imbalances with America. With the president pausing and/or adjusting these reciprocal tariff rates on numerous occasions since his initial announcement, there's been a bit of lag in determining whether or not these tariffs are having an inflationary impact. Following the release of the June inflation report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, it's pretty evident that Trump's tariff and trade policy is providing upward pressure on prices. Between May 2025 and June 2025, the trailing-12-month CPI-U inflation rate jumped by 32 basis points to 2.67%. Core inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy costs, climbed to 2.9%. This represents the fastest uptick in core inflation since February 2025. In other words, Trump's tariff and trade policy looks to be ending this Wall Street face-off before it has a chance to ramp up. The June inflation data strongly suggests there's no immediate catalyst to lower the fed funds rate. The uncertainty created by Trump's tariffs, including the lack of differentiation between input and output tariffs, which threatens to further drive up the prevailing rate of inflation, implies that pricing pressures will persist for the foreseeable future. The narrative investors should be monitoring isn't whether or not the Fed's monetary policy is hindering corporate growth. Rather, it's whether Trump's tariffs will adversely impact corporate hiring, labor productivity, sales, and profits as they did when the president implemented tariffs on China in 2018 to 2019. Last week, the S&P 500 hit its third-priciest valuation during a continuous bull market when back-tested 154 years (based on the Shiller price-to-earnings ratio), which means there's virtually no margin for error on Wall Street. With more businesses alluding to tariff-related uncertainty in their sale and profit forecasts, it's crystal clear that attention needs to be paid to the inflationary impact(s) of Trump's tariff policy on Wall Street's most influential companies. Should you invest $1,000 in S&P 500 Index right now? Before you buy stock in S&P 500 Index, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and S&P 500 Index wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $624,823!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,064,820!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,019% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 178% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 Sean Williams has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Wall Street's Biggest Showdown -- Donald Trump vs. Jerome Powell -- Has Likely Already Been Decided but Not for the Reason You Might Think was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
4 Types of Workers Could Save Big Under Trump's Overtime Tax Break
President Donald Trump's signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) includes a provision that allows employees who work more than 40 hours per week to deduct a portion of their overtime pay from their taxable income. The 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) guarantees pay of at least 1.5 times a worker's regular wages for every hour worked over 40 in a given seven-day period. Traditionally, time-and-a-half pay has been subject to federal income taxes, including those that fund Medicare and Social Security. However, from 2025 through 2028, eligible taxpayers can deduct up to $12,500 in overtime pay, or $25,000 for joint filers, without itemizing, provided they earn less than $150,000, at which point the deduction begins to phase out. However, the FLSA and its numerous subsequent updates have carved out exceptions for executives, administrative and professional employees, those in certain computer and sales occupations and others who are exempt from overtime pay protection. Therefore, many Americans won't benefit from the new rule. This article profiles those who likely will. Check Out: Read Next: Nurses According to the Lore Law Firm, at least 18 states have laws regulating mandatory overtime for nurses. In much of the country, however, these crucial healthcare workers are often required to work more than 40 hours per week, whether they want to or not, to compensate for persistent staffing shortages. As early as 2004, the CDC was reporting on the heavy toll that mandatory overtime was taking on nurses and their patients, citing fatigue, burnout, diminished work performance and increased error rates due to long hours of stressful work. Roughly 20 years later, ShiftMed reported that little had changed. The OBBBA stands to give millions of nonexempt nurses a break — on their taxes, at least, if not at their workplaces. See More: Law Enforcement Like nurses, law enforcement officers play a crucial role in society that often requires them to work overtime. Also like nurses, many seek extra hours voluntarily, but often don't have a choice. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Occupational Outlook Handbook page for police and detectives, 'Paid overtime is common, and shift work is necessary to protect the public at all times.' Tradespeople Overtime is common in many trades occupations. Like police officers and nurses, the nature of their work often makes extra hours an unavoidable part of the job. The following are some of the many circumstances that can keep them working beyond 40 hours per week. Emergency repairs Installations with tight deadlines Frequent calls after regular business hours Spikes in demand during extreme weather events The tradespeople most likely to work overtime — and therefore benefit from the new OBBBA provisions — are: Welders Plumbers Electricians Construction workers HVAC techs Manufacturing Employees According to the BLS, the average manufacturing employee works between 3.6 and 3.7 hours of overtime per week, or roughly 14.6 hours of time-and-a-half pay per month. That's nearly 190 overtime hours per year — much of which will now be tax-deductible. In fact, reliance on overtime is so common in the sector that the industrial staffing firm Traba wrote a report with striking similarities to the ShiftMed report on the nursing crisis. Chronic understaffing as high as 34% in some industries forces manufacturing companies to pay staggering levels of overtime compensation, with some employees racking up 500 overtime hours per year or more. Similarly to nursing, the result is often burnout, diminished performance and preventable accidents, often to the most seasoned and reliable employees. More From GOBankingRates 5 Cities You Need To Consider If You're Retiring in 2025 This article originally appeared on 4 Types of Workers Could Save Big Under Trump's Overtime Tax Break Sign in to access your portfolio


Chicago Tribune
33 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Co-living buildings offer ‘attainable luxury' for Chicago's young professionals, students
Nestled in the heart of the Printer's Row district in the South Loop, Straits Row appears like any other high-rise in downtown Chicago. It has a modern interior design and high-end amenities that are standard for luxury housing in the area. But the building has a feature that separates it from most such high rises in the city: Half of its units are co-living apartments, where tenants rent a single bedroom and share a kitchen and living room with other tenants. Rents at co-living buildings are often 20% to 30% below the market rate for a studio or one-bedroom in the same neighborhood. Straits Row, at 633 S. LaSalle St., began leasing in February. The 18-story building has 132 units and 358 beds, with half the units traditional apartments and half co-living apartments. The bedrooms and living rooms are fully furnished, so residents new to the city can move in without bringing furniture. The building's amenities include a workspace, a gym, a pool and lounges. The city has only a handful of co-living buildings, but the trend has grown in recent years, driven by high housing costs in urban areas, according to a report by market consulting firm Grand View Research. The global market size was $7.8 billion in 2024, and is expected to more than double to just over $16 billion by 2030, according to the report. The model allows students and young professionals to live in popular neighborhoods without the high price tag of a traditional apartment or the headache of finding roommates, said Nick Melrose, founder and CEO of Melrose Ascension Capital. Melrose developed the building alongside Q Investment Partners, a Singapore-based firm that bought the site in 2019. At Straits Row, the rent for a single room in a four-bedroom starts at $1,699. That's well below the average studio apartment rent of $2,186 in Printer's Row, according to 'This gives them the option to live in an apartment that is a nice apartment — it gives a luxurious vibe at a lower cost,' said Madison Kerrigan, the building's property manager. The location made it a great spot for co-living, Melrose said. It caters to students at several college campuses within a short radius, including DePaul University's Loop campus, Columbia College Chicago and Roosevelt University. Multiple transit options nearby offer a quick commute for young professionals working downtown. Three miles north in Lincoln Park, Post Chicago offers a similar setup, with 107 units that are mostly co-living. The building, at 853 W. Blackhawk St., is part of the Big Deahl, a 7-acre project by Structured Development that put up residential buildings on a site previously zoned for industrial buildings. The project also includes a 34-unit affordable condo building and a traditional apartment building. J. Michael Drew, founding principal at Structured Development, said the firm pursued a co-living project to offer an affordable option in a hot neighborhood for young professionals. Beyond the standard amenities, Post Chicago also offers weekly cleaning for co-living tenants. 'Lincoln Park is the most desired neighborhood for incoming graduates who are entering the workforce,' he said. 'But it's one of the more expensive neighborhoods to find housing.' For Manuel Carcamo, co-living was an easy choice as a student and when he was just starting his career. Although he lives in a studio now in Straits Row, Carcamo previously lived in two co-living units. The first was as a student at the University of Indiana's Indianapolis campus, renting a room in a four-bedroom, two-bathroom unit. He wanted to live off campus but couldn't afford to live on his own, so co-living was a convenient option. Having roommates helped build social interactions and helped him explore the new city, he said. 'I moved to Indianapolis from Chicago having known nobody there,' he said. 'So moving into a four-bedroom apartment with three strangers, that was kind of daunting, but it did also work out for me, in terms of connecting me with some of my best friends.' Those bonds Carcamo made have remained. This October, he said, he's officiating the wedding of one of his college roommates. After college, Carcamo moved to Columbus, Ohio, and co-living was again a cheaper, convenient way to secure housing. This time, he lived in a two-bedroom, two-bathroom co-living apartment with one roommate. 'I think it's a great opportunity for people that are really looking to put their head down, get their start in their career, and try to figure out the city,' Carcamo said. Now, Carcamo said, he prefers the privacy of a studio apartment. He works from home and having the comfort of his own space is the main reason he chose to live in a studio when he came back to Chicago. But he said he wouldn't rule out co-living again. Melrose has three other buildings in development: A $90 million, 19-story building at 626 S. Wabash Ave. that has some co-living units, and two buildings in Fulton Market that are traditional apartments. Melrose said he wants to ensure all his buildings offer 'attainable luxury,' catering to a middle demographic that would have a hard time renting in much of downtown Chicago. 'We have opened up a demographic that would love to live here that couldn't otherwise afford to do it, until we built something like this,' Melrose said. 'That feels better to me than catering to some lawyer or doctor. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just that's not what drives me.' For developers and building owners, co-living can generate more income than a traditional building with the same number of units. Renting by the room allows developers to charge more per square foot than they could with a usual two- or four-bedroom apartment. According to a 2020 report by Cushman & Wakefield, co-living can increase net operating income by an average of 15% because of the higher density, while offering lower rents. Co-living buildings have slightly higher operating costs than traditional apartments, the report said. They often have shorter lease terms and more turnover, and Drew said having the right management is important to take advantage of those returns. 'As long as you're operating it efficiently and effectively, yes, the returns can be, and are proving to be, better than a conventional' property, he said. But securing financing on a co-living project can be difficult. Straits Row was initially planned as an all-co-living building, and Melrose said there was some hesitancy from institutional lenders to finance the project, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic rocked the housing market. That led the developers to change the building to half co-living and half traditional. 'There's a market for 500 (co-living) beds, but with lenders, especially, who are the most conservative folks in our industry, it was the path of least resistance,' he said of the decision to put fewer co-living units in Straits Row. 'So that got lenders a lot more interested.' Drew said at Post Chicago, there was less hesitancy from lenders about the co-living model. He said the rising rent environment means lenders understand the demand for lower-cost alternatives. 'The attraction to a lender is that they recognize the ability to push rents and to be able to take advantage of a market when you're in a rising rent environment,' he said. Co-living has seen significant growth in the last decade, especially in high-cost cities such as New York and San Francisco. According to the Cushman & Wakefield report, there were fewer than 100 co-living beds available in 2014 in North America. That grew to more than 7,000 by the end of 2019. Gail Lissner, an appraiser and managing director for Integra Realty Resources, said some of the earliest co-living buildings in Chicago were smaller apartment buildings that were repurposed. One example was a three-flat in Lincoln Park that was turned into a 12-bedroom co-living building. As the model gained traction, interest from developers and lenders led to larger, new-construction buildings such as Straits Row and Post Chicago that looked more like luxury housing. Now, renters can find large, modern co-living buildings in Pilsen, the South Loop, the Near West Side, Lincoln Park and elsewhere. Co-living isn't likely to take over the Chicago housing scene, but experts said it's an underserved market that is likely to remain strong as rents continue to rise. Lissner said co-living buildings operate best near big employers and universities. 'I think they belong in certain locations,' she said. 'They belong in the downtown market where you have the employment. They work well where you have universities. So we tend to see them clustered a little bit more there.' Part of the challenge of operating a complex with co-living apartments is making sure renters know about it, Melrose said. It's easier to recruit students, who are used to dorm-style living, but Melrose said he thinks the renter base of young professionals will grow as they become more accustomed to that style of living. Kerrigan, the building's property manager, is active in Chicago housing Facebook groups and online forums to pitch Straits Row to people looking for an affordable option downtown. The complex also partners with universities and corporations to market itself to prospective city residents. 'A lot of it is building partnerships and just making sure that Straits Row is known as the newest co-living spot,' Kerrigan said. 'We do sometimes have to explain what co-living is, but once we explain that, people seem to really like it.'