From lumber to lighting: How Trump's tariffs drive up home construction costs
By Alex Ford and Jiachuan Wu
July 6, 2025
Lumber from Canada? That will be another $534.
Major appliances from China? Add a cool $445.
New homes in the United States are set to get more expensive thanks to President Donald Trump's tariff agenda, which is expected to raise the costs of a wide variety of materials that go into building houses.
An NBC News analysis of building materials and import data found that the total cost of building a mid-range single-family home could rise by more than $4,000 — an estimate that industry experts who reviewed the analysis called conservative. An April survey from the National Association of Home Builders estimated tariff impacts at $10,900 per home. Neither analysis included labor costs.
Robert Dietz, chief economist at the National Association of Home Builders, said the tariffs have an impact beyond their direct cost as they send uncertainty rippling through the supply chain and leave builders unsure how to plan for the future.
"About three-quarters of home builders right now are having difficulty pricing their homes for buyers because of uncertainty due to construction input costs," Dietz said.
The United States remains in a housing shortage that has driven up costs. The NBC News Home Buyer Index, which measures how difficult a local housing market is, has remained at an extreme difficulty level for more than two years. And conversations about how to encourage building more housing has become a major part of U.S. political discussions, especially among some Democrats.
Trump, meanwhile, has continued to pursue an aggressive tariff agenda while promising that the United States would sign trade deals, most of which have yet to materialize.
Whether tariffs are implemented, paused or reversed, the timeline for cost impacts will vary significantly across suppliers, materials and regions. Dietz said that while some suppliers may initially absorb parts of tariff costs, "generally speaking, in the long run, you would expect consumers to pay most of the tariff."
NBC News modeled the cost of materials for an 1,800 square-foot single-family house and then analyzed import and survey data from the U.S. Trade Commission and the Census Bureau's annual manufacturing survey to determine which countries dominate the home construction supply chain. While some foundational materials like concrete are sourced domestically, others — such as electrical equipment, lighting and fixtures — depend heavily on imports.
Products from China, Mexico and Canada — countries that are currently tariffed at high rates — are responsible for the largest projected cost increases in our model home. We reached this by calculating a weighted tariff rate for each item based on the share of imports from each country and the tariff rate for that country, with the assumption that the full cost of each tariff was passed on to the consumer.
Materials primarily imported from China would add $1,708 to per-home costs, Canadian products would contribute $1,300, and Mexican imports would add $981.
Take lumber, for example. NBC News calculated that a typical 1,800-square-foot home requires about 14,400 board feet of framing lumber, totaling roughly $7,762 at wholesale prices. Almost one-third of the U.S. lumber supply is imported, and Canada supplied nearly 80% of the United States' $14.5 billion in annual imports in 2021. A weighted 23% tariff could increase lumber prices by 7% — adding roughly $534 to home framing costs alone.
Scroll down to see how tariffs could raise prices during each phase of construction.
Model of home
NBC News designed a single-family house model structure for our analysis. Our model is:
1,800 square foot
Three bedrooms
Two bathrooms
A combined living room and kitchen
A laundry room
Foundation and framing
The backbone of U.S. homes is largely dependent on major trading partners that have faced some of Trump's most aggressive tariffs. Canada supplies the majority of U.S. imported material in the first phase of construction, including 24% of framing lumber. Rebar, the long steel bars that help reinforce concrete, faces a 5% price increase thanks to its Canadian and Mexican origins. And there are plenty of smaller pieces crucial to home building, such as anchor bolts and framing nails: Taiwan provides 19% of those, which will cost 8% more.
Building envelope
Many of the materials necessary to seal a home's exterior from water and weather face similarly steep tariffs. Costs for windows and exterior doors from Canada, which supply 2% of U.S. homes, are expected to rise by just 1%. And 20% of door locks and viewers come from China, which will mean a 10% jump. Others face smaller increases.
Utilities
Mexico and China split supply across key categories in the electrical phase: switches/outlets increase 14%, wiring rises 13%, and safety devices increase 11%. Service panels and breakers rise 11%, with 22% of supply from Mexico.
The plumbing system is dominated by Chinese imports, with 4% increases for lines/fittings, 13% increases for toilets and bathroom sinks, and a 9% increase for water heaters.
To regulate indoor temperature, the HVAC system includes a combined heating and cooling unit and ductwork — both sourced primarily from Mexico with a 6% increase — along with a thermostat, up 8%.
Interior finishes
Window blinds increase 12%, with 15% of supply sourced from China (32%). Stone countertops face 8% increases, sourced equally from India and Brazil (8% each). Lighting fixtures and tile both increase 7%. Lighting is dominated by Chinese imports, while tile comes primarily from Italy (9%) and Spain (7%).
Exterior finishes
The build completes with exterior details and landscaping. China supplies the majority of higher-impact items: house numbers (9% increase), exterior lighting (7% increase), and mulch 6% increase). Landscaping materials experience minimal 1% increases, with Canada providing 3% of U.S. imports.
Altogether, the impact of tariffs across the homebuilding process adds $4,405 to the materials cost — raising the total cost of materials from $86,516 to $90,921 for a typical 1,800-square-foot home.
Methodology
As the basis for the analysis, NBC News designed a typical 1,800-square-foot single-family home, cataloged all required construction materials, calculated precise quantities using industry standards and collected current market prices primarily from national vendors. Each material was mapped to its corresponding North American Industry Classification System code to align with the official U.S. Census Bureau trade data.
NBC News calculated import dependency as total imports for a given item category divided by its total domestic supply, using data from the U.S. Trade Commission and the Annual Survey of Manufactures.
For each material category, we calculated a weighted average tariff rate based on the amount the United States imports from each tariffed country, then estimated total price impacts by multiplying import dependency by the weighted tariff rate.
This analysis provides a snapshot of potential cost impacts using national averages and simplified assumptions, but it does not account for long-term market adjustments, regional variations, supply chain adaptations or uneven cost absorption across the supply chain.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
Trump goes to Scotland
Photo byI met my first full-on MAGA type this week. I could tell, because he was wearing a baseball cap with 'TRUMP' written across it. This being Scotland – Edinburgh, to be precise – there might have been a chance of someone flipping it off his head, had he not been around 6'3', seemingly made of bricks and, I soon learned, a veteran of the US Navy. He was probably safe. We fell into conversation, which involved him almost weepily describing what he saw as the US President's astonishing virtues. The economy was flying, immigration was being crushed, and America's enemies were on the run – as were the 'pathetic' Democrats. When I (gently) put the alternative case to him I was dismissed as a bit of a lefty, which doesn't happen to me very often. He was heading back to the States on Friday, just as his hero is expected to arrive in Scotland on a four-day trip. Trump is visiting his golf courses in Ayrshire and Aberdeenshire, and is also due to meet Keir Starmer and John Swinney. 'He'll sort those boys out,' said Mr Maga with a cackle, before heading off into the night. Perhaps. Although, according to the Scottish left, it is Swinney who should be doing the sorting out. The First Minister has been told by activists in his own party that he should put pressure on Trump to withdraw US support for Israel. Nadia El-Nakla, the wife of Swinney's predecessor Humza Yousaf, and who has family in Gaza, said he should demand that Trump 'compel' Israel to step back. Now, in Scottish terms, Swinney is a powerful man, but I'm not sure his leverage extends that far. I certainly wouldn't open with it. A tokenistic mention is probably as much as can be expected. There has been the usual outrage that this most controversial of presidents is even setting foot on Scottish soil. Some are furious that the First Minister is meeting him. Many more are angry that Trump will return later this year for a state visit, when he will meet the King at Windsor. Trump is beyond the pale, a brutal dictator, and the UK should basically restrict any engagement, hunker down and wait for him to leave office, is their argument. But not even the leadership of the SNP – a party not immune to daft foreign policy thinking – believes this is a sensible idea. The man runs the most powerful country in the world, and is doing so with gangsterish swagger – bombing, tariff-ing and ripping up the old order across the planet. Whatever your view of him, he is probably the most consequential US president since Reagan, and must be accommodated. Hence, Ian Murray, the Scottish Secretary, promised a 'warm welcome'. 'The office of the president of the United States and the office of the prime minister are ones that work very, very closely together… We should make sure those relationships are in place because it's important for our defence, our security, our economy,' he added. Quite. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Politics requires a certain level of hypocrisy, and those in power who have little time for Trump will have to paint on a smile, roll out the flattery and show him a good time. That is what Murray is doing – in 2019 he signed a motion in the Commons accusing the president of 'misogynism, racism and xenophobia'. I doubt his view of the man has changed, but he is unlikely to repeat the charge this weekend. There will be protests, of course, and fair enough. Perhaps the most magnificently Scottish protest of all time happened during a previous, pre-presidential Trump visit to the Scottish Parliament in 2012, when a man named Stan Blackley rubbed a balloon on the tycoon's head, making his hair stand on end. 'I just found myself behind Donald Trump with a balloon one day and did what any sane and sensible person would have done,' Blackley explained. No-one will get that close this time – a huge security operation has been launched by Scottish police to prevent disruption. Trump will want to talk to Starmer about trade and Ukraine and the Middle East, no doubt, but he is also expected to make a pitch for Turnberry, his Ayrshire golf course, to host the Open Championship. The course last hosted the event in 2009. Given Trump's obsession with the game, and his fragile ego, it might be wise for both Starmer and Swinney to offer their support for the idea. He is also likely to be asked about drilling in the North Sea, having said ahead of his visit that 'They have so much oil there. They should get rid of the windmills and bring back the oil.' Trump creates headlines wherever he goes. It's Scotland's turn to experience Maga in full effect. [Further reading: The abomination of Obama's nation] Related
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
The polls look bad for Trump – but tyrants don't depend on approval ratings
The fracas over the Jeffrey Epstein files – and declining poll numbers on every issue that won Donald Trump the 2024 election – indicate cracks in the Maga coalition and weakening support for the president's self-proclaimed mandate. But reports of Maga's death are probably exaggerated. Trump has cheated death, both physical and political, many times. And while every tyrant craves the adoration of the people – and claims to have it even when he doesn't – no tyrant worth the title counts on public support to stay in power. Last week, when the administration pulled an about-face on releasing 100,000-odd documents related to Epstein – amid conspiracy theories of deep-state pedophile rings, which Trump promoted – it looked like Trump was on the ropes. 'Trump can't stop MAGA from obsessing about the Epstein files,' reported NBC. 'Trump meets toughest opponent: his own base,' declared Axios. Trump was 'on the defense', NPR said. The Guardian reported on Maga hat burnings. Even after House Republicans blocked Democrats on a resolution to force a vote on releasing the files, even after the speaker, Mike Johnson, withheld from the floor a similar resolution, the far right would not be mollified. 'Dangling bits of red meat no longer satisfies,' the Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene posted on X. 'The People … want the whole steak dinner and will accept nothing less.' Now some of the commentariat are predicting that even if Trump survives, the damage to the GOP is done. In the Hill, Douglas Schoen and Carly Cooperman marshaled polls showing Trump's sliding approval from before to after the Epstein affair and conjectured that it could sink the Republicans in the midterm elections. At the same time, the populace, including Republicans, is changing its mind on Trump's master plans. Six in 10 respondents to a CNN poll oppose the federal budget bill; approval of Trump's handling of the budget is down 11 points since March. On immigration, a Gallup poll showed a steep drop in respondents who favor more restricted admittance, from 55% in 2024 to 30% this June. The most striking change is among Republicans, from 88% who wanted fewer immigrants in 2024 to 48% in June 2025. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who think immigrants are good for America rose to a record 79%. The flood of TikToks showing masked men kidnapping people from the streets and manhandling elected officials has turned many people against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice). Two YouGov polls showed the agency's favorability plummeting from a net positive of 15 points in early February to a deficit of 13 in late June. During Trump's first term, 'Abolish Ice' was the chant at tiny demonstrations by fringe-left organizations. Now more than a third of respondents to a Civiqs survey want to see the agency gone, including an uptick of six points among Republicans since November, to 11% . And as David Gilbert pointed out in Wired, even before the Epstein flap, some of the president's most prominent supporters were defying him. The former Fox News host Tucker Carlson condemned the bombing of Iran. Trump whisperer Laura Loomer dissed his acceptance of a $400m plane from Qatar. Elon Musk defected over the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. And Joe Rogan deemed Ice raids targeting ordinary working migrants too much to bear. But Trump is not backing down. In fact, he's doubling down on every policy. The deportation campaign has grown more vicious by the day. Florida's 'Alligator Alcatraz' is being rightly condemned as a concentration camp. A recent Human Rights Watch investigation of three Miami area Ice facilities found detainees denied food and medicine, held in solitary confinement, and shackled at the wrists and forced to kneel to eat, as one man put it, 'like animals'. The president muscled his budget and rescission package through Congress without regard to the disproportionate harm they augur for red-state residents, much less the deficit, the public health, or the planet's future. His tariffs are barreling ahead, exasperating economists, hitting crucial US economic sectors and tanking entire economies overseas. General Motors reported second-quarter profits down by a third. In the tiny, impoverished nation of Lesotho, 'denim capital of the world', Trump's threatened 50% duties have shut down the garment factories, leaving thousands out of work, hungry and desperate. Trump may feel insulted, which he does most of the time; he may temporarily lose his footing. But he's not relinquishing power without a fight. Tyrants don't need high approval ratings. They intimidate voters, rig elections, or stop holding them altogether; suppress protest and jail, deport or assassinate their critics. The Nazis achieved peak support in 1932, at 37.3%. Of the 1933 plebiscite that ceded all power to Hitler, the German Jewish diarist Victor Klemperer wrote: 'No one will dare not to vote, and no one will respond No in the vote of confidence. Because (1) Nobody believes in the secrecy of the ballot, and (2) A No will be taken as a Yes anyway.' Daria Blinova, of the International Association for Political Science Students, argues that autocrats cultivate approval while consolidating their own power through the 'illusion of substantial improvements', which are actually insubstantial. In 2017, for instance, nine in 10 Saudi youth supported Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman because of such reforms as allowing cinemas to reopen. The Trump administration has begun deploying some similar tactics. The justice department is pressuring state election officials to turn over their voter rolls and give it illegal access to voting machines. The Republican National Committee is training volunteers to 'ensure election integrity' – AKA harassing voters and poll workers. It is trying to banish the opposition press. Homeland security is trying to deport the widely followed Salvadorian journalist Mario Guevera, who has covered Ice raids and protests. Migrants sent home or to third countries can face persecution, torture or death. Still, none of this means that Trump is invincible, even when his administration uses violence to achieve its aims and terrify its critics. First – simplest and most difficult –the resistance must show up. Get bodies into the streets. The second nationwide anti-Trump rallies were bigger than the first; the third, fourth and 10th can be bigger still. Gather bodies at the sites of injustice. Volunteers are swarming to immigration courts, where migrants who show up for mandatory hearings are being released into the clutches of waiting Ice agents. The court-watchers – experienced organizers and first-timers, retirees, students, clergy, elected officials, artists – are distributing 'know your rights' leaflets in many languages, writing down names and contact information to inform families of their loved ones' arrests or to connect arrestees to lawyers later on. Immigrants' rights groups are holding training sessions. Spanish speakers are giving immigration-specific language lessons. This nonviolent gumming-up of the government's criminal machine draws press and social media attention, multiplying participation, amplifying anger and mobilizing greater organization. At every step, people are bearing witness, storing it up for future accountability. The Epstein affair shows that no loyalty is unbreakable. The polls show that discomfort with Trump's policies is growing. Discomfort can mature to rejection of injustice, rejection to resistance, resistance to action. A tyrant does not need majority support to maintain power. But neither does the opposition movement need majority participation to take power back. No tyranny lasts forever. Judith Levine is Brooklyn-based journalist, essayist and author of five books. Her Substack is Today in Fascism
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Exclusive: Democratic lawmakers seek answers from homeland security head about masked Ice agents
Democratic members of Congress are pressing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to reveal information about immigration officers' practice of wearing masks and concealing their identities, according to a letter viewed by the Guardian. The letter marks another step in pushes by US lawmakers to require immigration officials to identify themselves during arrest operations, especially when agents are masked, a practice that has sparked outrage among civil rights groups. Congressman Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the powerful committee on oversight and government reform, along with Representative Summer Lee, wrote to the secretary of the DHS, Kristi Noem, pressing for 'memoranda, directives, guidance, communications' regarding immigration officers' use of masks and unmarked cars for immigration operations. 'For every person within the United States, the Fourth Amendment guarantees protection from unreasonable searches and seizures and the Fifth Amendment guarantees a right to due process under the law,' the pair wrote. 'In direct violation of these principles, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has allowed its agents – primarily from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) – to conceal their identities and use unmarked vehicles while conducting immigration enforcement activities.' In recent months, as the Trump administration has escalated immigration enforcement operations, arrests, detention and deportations, the DHS and Ice have been relentlessly criticized for their agents' use of masks and unmarked cars. The two Democrats mention a number of examples, from the past few months under the Trump administration, in which immigration officials have hidden their identities while conducting immigration arrests and operations. They also mention a recent example, originally reported by the Intercept, in which two immigration judges in New York concealed the identities of government attorneys pushing to deport people. 'This causes a dangerous erosion of public trust, due process, and transparency in law enforcement,' Garcia and Lee wrote. 'These tactics contradict longstanding democratic principles such as the public's right to accountability from those who enforce the law and pave the way for increased crime, making our communities less safe.' As the Guardian previously reported, there have been a rising number of people capitalizing on the anonymity of immigration officials. In a number of cases, criminals have impersonated DHS officers in order to rob or kidnap people or – in one case – sexually assault someone. The use of masks by immigration officials 'makes it nearly impossible for individuals to determine whether they are being detained by legitimate law enforcement agents or unlawfully abducted,' the representatives warn. Garcia and Lee list a number of national examples, including one from Florida from April, in which a woman wore a shirt reading 'Ice' and used a handheld radio 'to kidnap her ex-boyfriend's wife, threatening her until she managed to escape'. In another case, the representatives mention a California instance in which teenagers impersonated Ice officers, approached Hispanic victims in a vehicle, showed them fake badges and robbed them. 'These cases starkly illustrate how the use of masks, unmarked vehicles, and minimal identification by actual Ice agents does not just erode trust – it effectively hands bad actors a roadmap to exploit vulnerable communities,' the representatives wrote. The arrest of Rümeysa Öztürk, a Tufts University doctoral student in Massachusetts, marked an inflection point for these types of arrests and operations under the Trump administration. Video footage showed Öztürk arrested by plainclothes, masked immigration officers, causing widespread alarm at the practice. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Although the practice of Ice officers wearing masks is not particularly new, the practice has escalated under Trump. Immigration officers do not typically wear official uniforms – like local police officers do – unless they are conducting large or potentially dangerous arrests and operations. A number of lawmakers at the local and federal level have called for Ice to require enforcement officers to display visible identification during arrests. Senators Cory Booker and Alex Padilla introduced a bill earlier this month that would require immigration officers to 'display clearly legible identification, including their agency name or initials and either their name or badge number' during operations, and co-wrote a letter to Ice expressing concern with the practice. House members also introduced a similar bill, requiring Ice officers to display clear identification. And an increasing number of states, including California, New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, have also introduced local legislation that would require federal officers to display visible identification, with exceptions for safety or undercover purposes. This month, the head of Ice, Todd Lyons, defended the practice of agents wearing masks, saying: 'If that's a tool that the men and women of Ice to keep themselves and their family safe, then I will allow it.' Lyons said that Ice officers in recent months have faced a rising number of attacks and doxing threats. Experts warn that masked officers may not only erode trust in law enforcement agencies, but can also allow officers to escape accountability. Now that Trump's massive spending bill has passed, the administration is preparing to increase the number of officers and the amount of resources for immigration arrests and deportations, to fulfill its goal of deporting 1 million people each year.
