As the impact of President Trump’s tariffs comes into focus during the coming months, hundreds of thousands of workers could stand to lose their jobs. Economists have warned that the tariffs could drive up the unemployment rate, and many experts fear they could spark a recession.
This upheaval could place additional stress on the current unemployment insurance program, which already fails to adequately support laid-off employees and other Americans struggling to find work.While unemployment benefits continue to be a key resource for workersoffering relief to one in six U.S. adults when unemployment surged during the pandemica new report from the National Employment Law Project (NELP) illustrates that they fall short of offering the level of support that workers say they need.
The limits of unemployment benefits
Of the nearly 1,500 workers surveyed, about one in five said they found that unemployment benefits were “not adequate to meet their financial needs,” though this figure varied by state. Since unemployment benefits vary from state to state, the average percentage of wage replacement could be anywhere from 29% in Alabama to 49% in Washington, according to NELP. In states where coverage was less generous, workers were more likely to express that their benefits were inadequate.
Barriers to accessing benefits
But the system also seems to be riddled with inefficiencies that make it difficult for people to receive the benefits to which they are entitled. Many respondents said they faced challenges when trying to navigate unemployment benefits, between tech issues and delayed payments.
This was exacerbated during the pandemic but continued afterward, per the NELP survey. While fewer applicants had issues with payments overall, they continued to experience underpayment and delays receiving checks, not to mention being denied benefits outright. (In fact, the share of applicants who were incorrectly denied benefits doubled from 9% to 18% in the aftermath of the pandemic.)
How employers can help
Employers, too, can play a significant role in how people navigate these benefits. Nearly a third of workers said their employer had a hand in how they approached unemployment benefitsand 19% claimed an employer actively discouraged them from applying for benefits.
On the other hand, employers were more likely to encourage highly paid and educated workers to seek out unemployment benefits. There was also some correlation with location, with workers receiving more assistance from employers in states like New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.
The study indicates that Americans are in need of more generous unemployment benefits and expanded eligibility, in addition to basic improvements to how they access those benefits. At the same time, it reaffirms that any access to those benefits can be a crucial source of support for people facing unemployment, mitigating food insecurity and helping families manage the steep cost of medical bills and mortgage payments. With the looming threat of job losses, more workers may come to rely on those benefits to make ends meet.
The higher education community is pushing back against the Trump administration’s treatment of colleges and universities. On Tuesday, the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), a global membership organization, published a joint statement condemning the administration’s ongoing threats to withhold federal funding from colleges and universities.“We speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education,” the letter reads. “We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight. However, we must oppose undue government intrusion,” it said, adding: “We must reject the coercive use of public research funding.”
More than 170 university, college, and scholarly society presidents signed the letter, including those from the Ivy League institutions of Harvard, Brown, and Princeton, as well as heads of liberal arts schools and community colleges.The statement comes as tensions between higher education institutions and the current administration have been heating up in recent weeks. On Monday, Harvard University said it filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging Trump’s decision to freeze $2.2 billion in funding was unlawful.
“Today, we stand for the values that have made American higher education a beacon for the world,” Harvard President Alan Garber said in a statement announcing the suit. “We stand for the truth that colleges and universities across the country can embrace and honor their legal obligations and best fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion.”
In its complaint, Harvard accused the government of failing to follow procedures set by federal civil rights laws and said the government was attempting to “coerce and control” the university by denying necessary funding.
The federal funding freeze came after Harvard refused to bend to the administration’s demands, which included giving the administration information on students who may be participating in political activism it disagrees with; banning masks on campus; and ending diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
The gravy train of federal assistance to institutions like Harvard, which enrich their grossly overpaid bureaucrats with tax dollars from struggling American families is coming to an end, White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields said in a statement on Monday, per CNN. Taxpayer funds are a privilege, and Harvard fails to meet the basic conditions required to access that privilege.
As the Trump administration has revoked student visas and detained students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations on campuses, which the administration has called antisemitic, the reaction from colleges and universities has differed broadly from school to school. While some institutions have stood fiercely behind their detained students, others have seemed to bow to Trump’s demands. Columbia University has expelled, suspended, and revoked the degrees of some students who had participated in political protests.
However, Tuesday’s letter might be a sign of whats to come, as it is the largest collective effort among university and college heads to push back against the administration thus far.
UnitedHealth Group spent nearly $1.7 million on security for its top executives in 2024, the healthcare conglomerate disclosed on Monday, months after the fatal shooting of senior executive Brian Thompson outside a Manhattan hotel in December.
The company also paid $207,931 on behalf of certain family members of the executives to provide them with personal and home security services, it said.
The security spending disclosures, absent from UnitedHealth’s previous annual filings, underscore how the December shooting is prompting companies to reassess the risk of targeted violence against top management.
U.S. drugmakers Johnson & Johnson and Eli Lilly also increased spending on security for their top executives in 2024, regulatory filings showed last month.
“We believe that these security services are appropriate and necessary given the risks associated with executive officer positions at the company,” UnitedHealth said in the filing.
Brian Thompson, the former CEO of UnitedHealth Group’s insurance unit UnitedHealthcare, was shot dead on December 4 outside a Midtown Manhattan hotel where the company was holding an investor conference.
The filing also showed UnitedHealth CEO Andrew Witty’s total compensation for 2024 was $26.3 million, compared with $23.5 million a year ago.
The conglomerate spent $150,951 towards Witty’s security, while $926,989 was paid for Heather Cianfrocco, the CEO of the company’s health services unit Optum.
Following Thompson’s murder, health insurers removed pictures of their executives from corporate websites. In January, organizers at a major San Francisco healthcare meeting increased security for attendees inside and outside the venue.
In past years, healthcare and pharmaceutical companies have typically covered the use of private jets and provided limited security-related compensation, according to earlier filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Sriparna Roy, Reuters
The hits keep coming for the worlds richest man, Elon Musk. Tesla reported another weak quarter of performance as car buyers around the world increasingly opt for other brands. That wasnt entirely surprising as analysts had forecast dismal first-quarter results, though the carmaker reported revenue and earnings that were significantly worse than the consensus of analysts estimates.
The Austin-based carmaker reported that revenue fell 9.2% to $19.34 billion during the three months ended March 31, while the decline in the companys automotive revenue was even worse, falling 20% from the first quarter of 2024. Adjusted earnings per share for the quarter came in at 27 cents.
The company cited issues stemming from policy to politics for its performance.
Uncertainty in the automotive and energy markets continues to increase as rapidly evolving trade policy adversely impacts the global supply chain and cost structure of Tesla and our peers, the company said in the report. This dynamic, along with changing political sentiment, could have a meaningful impact on demand for our products in the near term.
An update from Elon Musk
In an effort to revitalize the beleaguered carmaker, investors are hopeful that CEO Elon Musk will make a newsworthy announcement in a live company update following the release of the quarterly results, scheduled to begin at 5:30 p.m. ET.
Investors have been looking for any silver linings amid a 50% crash in the stocks price since its all-time high in December.
One long-awaited update that Musk could offer investors is regarding plans for a more affordable electric vehicle model. That said, three sources exclusively told Reuters last week that the launch of such a vehicle has been delayed by at least several months.
Likewise, theres been speculation on Wall Street that Musk might use the conference call to update investors about the planned debut of robotaxisdriverless ride-hailing services in Austin in June and in California later this year. Theres also been speculation that Musk might announce the timing of his departure from the Trump administration.
Tesla shares fell nearly 1% in after-hours trading, after posting a 4.6% gain Tuesday alongside a broader rally in the U.S. stock market.
Disdain reigns supreme
Analysts and investors alike were bracing for what was widely expected to be a disastrous earnings report that coincides with Musk assuming a heavy-handed role as a senior advisor in President Donald Trumps second administration. Musk has become one of the most polarizing figures in the new administration, and theres palpable disdain for the man and the brand: About half of Americans have a negative view of both Musk and Tesla, according to the results of a CNBC survey released Tuesday.
Tesla has become arguably the most scrutinized company in the world, Matt Britzman, senior equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, told the Associated Press ahead of the earnings results. In addition to being the target of protests and vandalism, Tesla was recently dealt a blow by regulators, who issued a recall of nearly all Cybertrucks last month.
A fork in the road for Tesla
Once a darling of Wall Street, Teslas performance has hit more than a few bumps in the road this year. Not only has vehicle production slowed, so too has delivery of these vehicles.
In a report released earlier this month, the company reported 336,681 vehicle deliveries in the first quarter, a 13% decline from the same period a year ago. This missed the mark of various analysts’ estimates, which expected deliveries to number as much as nearly 378,000, according to the average estimate of select estimates that Teslas investor relations team sent to select analysts.
That report highlighted a particular weakness for Tesla: Delivery of models other than the Model 3 and Model Y, the most popular in its fleet, slumped more than 24% to less than 13,000 vehicles, compared with 17,027 in 2024. This group of vehicles includes the much-hypedthough increasingly much-malignedCybertruck model that debuted in 2023.
Following the release of that report, Dan Ives, an analyst with Wedbush Securities, posted on X that the numbers were a disaster on every metric and represented a fork in the road moment for the carmaker.
U.S. health officials said they plan to phase out eight petroleum-based artificial colors from the nation’s food supply, triggering an overhaul of scores of brightly hued products on American store shelves.
Details of the plan are expected to be announced Tuesday afternoon by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary, who have advocated the change as part of Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again agenda.
The officials are expected to spell out a regulatory path for removing the color additives, a process that typically requires public notice and agency review. It would be a sweeping change for U.S. food producers, who would likely replace the dyes with natural substitutes.
Health advocates have long called for the removal of artificial dyes from foods, citing mixed studies indicating they can cause neurobehavioral problems, including hyperactivity and attention issues, in some children. The FDA has maintained that the approved dyes are safe and that the totality of scientific evidence shows that most children have no adverse effects when consuming foods containing color additives.
The FDA currently allows 36 food color additives, including eight synthetic dyes. In January, the agency announced that the dye known as Red 3 used in candies, cakes and some medications would be banned by 2028 because it caused cancer in laboratory rats.
The dyes Kennedy wants to remove are used widely in the U.S. foods. In Canada and in Europe where artificial colors are required to carry warning labels manufacturers use natural substitutes.
Some U.S. states, such as California and West Virginia, recently enacted laws that ban artificial colors and other additives from school meals, and in some cases, the broader food supply.
___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institutes Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Jonel Aleccia and Matthew Perrone, Associated Press
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Tuesday signaled support for the religious rights of parents in Maryland who want to remove their children from elementary school classes using storybooks with LGBTQ characters.
The court seemed likely to find that the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, could not require elementary school children to sit through lessons involving the books if parents expressed religious objections to the material.
The case is the latest dispute involving religion to come before the court. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years.
I’m surprised this is the hill to die on in terms of not respecting religious liberty, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said, citing the county’s diverse population and Maryland’s history as a haven for Catholics.
The county school board introduced the storybooks as part of an effort to better reflect the district’s diversity.
Parents sued after the school system stopped allowing them to pull their kids from lessons that included the books. The parents argue that public schools cannot force kids to participate in instruction that violates their faith, and they pointed to the opt-out provisions in sex education classes.
The schools said allowing children to opt out of the lessons had become disruptive. Lower courts backed the schools, prompting the parents’ appeal to the Supreme Court.
Five books are at issue in the high court case, touching on the same themes found in classic stories that include Snow White, Cinderella and Peter Pan, the school system’s lawyers wrote.
In Prince and Knight, two men fall in love after they rescue the kingdom, and each other. In Uncle Bobbys Wedding, a niece worries that her uncle will not have as much time for her after he gets married. His partner is a man.
Love, Violet deals with a girls anxiety about giving a valentine to another girl. Born Ready is the story of a transgender boys decision to share his gender identity with his family and the world. Intersection Allies describes nine characters of varying backgrounds, including one who is gender-fluid.
Billy Moges, a board member of the Kids First parents’ group that sued over the books, said the content is sexual, confusing and inappropriate for young schoolchildren.
The writers’ group Pen America said in a court filing what the parents want is a constitutionally suspect book ban by another name. Pen America reported more than 10,000 books were banned in the last school year.
A decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor is expected by early summer.
Mark Sherman, Associated Press
Few moments in Pope Francis‘ papacy better exemplify his understanding of climate change and the need to address it than the rain-soaked Mass he celebrated in Tacloban, Philippines, in 2015.
Wearing one of the cheap plastic yellow ponchos that were handed out to the faithful, Francis experienced first-hand the type of freak, extreme storms that scientists blame on global warming and are increasingly striking vulnerable, low-lying islands.
He had traveled to Tacloban, on the island of Leyte, to comfort survivors of one of the strongest recorded tropical cyclones, Typhoon Haiyan. The 2013 storm killed more than 7,300 people, flattened villages and displaced about 5 million residents.
But with another storm approaching Tacloban two years later, Francis had to cut short his visit to get off the island.
So many of you have lost everything. I dont know what to tell you, Francis told the crowd in Taclobans muddy airport field as the wind nearly toppled candlesticks on the altar.
Francis, who died Monday at 88, was moved to silence that day by the survivors pain and the devastation he saw. But he would channel it a few months later when he published his landmark encyclical, Praised Be, which cast care for the planet as an urgent and existential moral concern.
The first ecological encyclical
The document, written to inspire global negotiators at the 2015 Paris climate talks, accused the structurally perverse, profit-driven economy of the global north of ravaging Earth and turning it into a pile of filth. The poor, Indigenous peoples and islanders like those in Tacloban suffered the most, he argued, bearing the brunt of increasing droughts, extreme storms, deforestation and pollution.
It was the first ecological encyclical, and it affirmed the Argentine Jesuit, who in his youth studied to be a chemist, as an authoritative voice in the environmental movement. Later cited by presidents and scientists, the document inspired a global faith-based coalition to try to save Gods creation before it was too late.
I think he understood from the beginning that there are three relationships that had to be regenerated: Our relationship with God, our relationship with the created world and our relationship with our fellow creatures, said papal biographer Austen Ivereigh.
It wasnt always so.
A conversion in 2007 in Brazil
Francis had a steep learning curve on the environment, just as he did with clergy sexual abuse, which he initially dismissed as overblown. He himself pointed to a 2007 meeting of Latin American and Caribbean bishops in Aparecida, Brazil, as the moment of his ecological awakening.
There, the then-Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio had been elected to draft the conferences final document, and was under pressure to include calls from Brazilian bishops to highlight the plight of the Amazon.
Bergoglio, the dour-faced archbishop of urbane Buenos Aires, didnt get what all the fuss was about.
At first I was a bit annoyed, Francis wrote in the 2020 book Let Us Dream. It struck me as excessive.
By the end of the meeting, Bergoglio was converted and convinced.
The final Aparecida document devoted several sections to the environment: It denounced multinational extraction companies that plundered the regions resources at the expense of the poor. It warned of melting glaciers and the effects of lost biodiversity. It cast the ravaging of the planet as an assault on Gods divine plan that violated the biblical imperative to cultivate and care for creation.
Those same issues would later find prominence in Praised Be, which took its name from the repeated first line of the Canticle of the Creatures, one of the best-known poetic songs of the pontiffs nature-loving namesake, St. Francis of Assisi.
They also would be highlighted in the Amazon Synod that Francis called at the Vatican in 2019, a meeting of bishops and Indigenous peoples specifically to address how the Catholic Church could and should respond to the plight of the Amazon and its impoverished people.
I think the popes most important contribution was to insist on the ethical aspect of the debate about climate justice, said Giuseppe Onofrio, head of Greenpeace Italy, that the poor were those who contributed the least to pollution and the climate crisis, but were paying the highest price.
How the environment affects all other ills
In many ways, those same issues would also come to define much of Francis papacy. He came to view the environmental cause as encapsulating nearly all the other ills afflicting humanity in the 21st century: poverty, social and economic injustice, migration and what he called the throwaway culture a melting pot of problems that he was convinced could only be addressed holistically.
Some of Francis’ strongest calls to protect the environment would come on or around Earth Day, celebrated April 22.
For some time now, we have been becoming more aware that nature deserves to be protected, even if only because human interaction with Gods biodiversity must take care with utmost care and respect, Francis said in a video message released on Earth Day in 2021.
Cardinal Michael Czerny, the Canadian Jesuit whom Francis would later entrust with the ecological dossier, said the 2007 meeting in Brazil had a big impact on Francis.
In Aparecida, listening to so many different bishops talking about what was deteriorating, but also what the people were suffering, I think really impressed him, said Czerny.
Czernys mandate encapsulated Francis vision of integral ecology, covering the environment, the Vaticans response to the COVID-19 pandemic, its charitable Caritas federation, migration advocacy, economic development and its antinuclear campaign.
The multifaceted approach was intentional, Czerny said, to establish new thinking about ecology that went beyond the politicized concept of green advocacy to something bigger and nonnegotiable: humanitys relationship with God and creation.
Everything is connected, Francis liked to say.
A legacy from Pope Paul VI
He was by no means the first pope to embrace the ecological cause. According to the book The Popes and Ecology, Pope Paul VI was the first pontiff to refer to an ecological catastrophe in a 1970 speech to a U.N. food agency.
St. John Paul II largely ignored the environment, though he did write the first truly ecological manifesto: his 1990 World Day of Peace message, which linked consumer lifestylewith environmental decay.
Pope Benedict XVI was known as the green pope, primarily for having installed solar panels on the Vatican auditorium and starting a tree-planting campaign to offset the greenhouse gas emissions of Vatican City.
Francis issued an update to Praised Be in 2023, just before the U.N. climate conference in Dubai. While consistent with the original text, the update was even more dire and showed Francis had grown more urgent in his alarm.
He became even more willing to point fingers at the worlds biggest emitters of heat-trapping greenhouse gases, especially the U.S. And he called out those, including in the church, who denied the human causes of global warming.
He showed that he had an understanding of what was happening in the world, and he saw the world from the point of view, as he was like to say, of the peripheries, of the margins, said Ivereigh, the papal biographer. He brought the margins into the center.
Nicole Winfield, Associated Press
The Trump administration might be in the process of dismantling the Department of Education, but it still wants a say in what students learn in school. The Washington Post reports that Trump has drafted (but not yet signed) an executive order that would make artificial intelligence part of the school process for children as young as five years old.
The EO, titled Advancing artificial intelligence education for American youth” and reportedly seen by the paper, instructs federal agencies to help train K-12 students in the use of AI and make it part of teaching-related tasks. Private sector AI companies, which are not named but could include Elon Musk’s xAI as well as OpenAI, would also be asked to be part of the program, helping to develop programs to run in schools.
Trump could decide to change or simply not sign the EO but in his three months in office, he has shown a strong backing for the technology. The White House did not immediately respond to Fast Companys request for comment about the report.
Since the start of his administration, Trump has done away with regulations put in place during the Biden administration to create guardrails for AI companies. He also has championed a private sector investment to build AI data centers, worth as much as $500 billion.
The order, as it stands now, reportedly calls for several actions that would benefit AI companies and adjust the educational process for children in all grades of kindergarten, elementary, middle, and high school. Here’s a look at some of the changes mentioned.
Grant adjustments
The task force overseeing the AI integration plans would reportedly be instructed to look at existing federal funding, including grants for AI, which can be prioritized for AI educational spending. Across all areas of the government, federal investment in research and development to support advances in AI has increased by $2.8 billion since 2021, with a budget of $11.2 billion this year (excluding classified programs).
AI partnerships
Public-private partnerships with AI companies are a critical part of the drafted EO. Federal agencies would be told to seek these out in order to teach students foundational AI literacy and critical-thinking skills, the Post reports. Many AI companies already have government contracts with the Department of Defense testing use cases for AI models from Meta, Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Mistral, among others. The Treasury Department, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the National Science Foundation also all have contracts with AI companies.
Teacher training
While the DOE is being eliminated, the draft of the EO reportedly calls for Education Secretary Linda McMahon to adjust federal grant funding, with a new emphasis on training teachers to use AI for everything from teacher training to evaluations. Professional development classes with AI integration are also part of the order, for teachers in all subject areas.
Apprenticeships
Also reportedly in the draft of the order, Trump instructs Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer to put together a collection of registered apprenticeships in occupations in the AI field, presumably for students in higher grades.
“Presidential AI Challenge”
To motivate students, the order reportedly calls for the formation of a “Presidential AI Challenge,” which will be a competition for both students and educators to showcase their AI skills.
Whether the executive order is signed or not, AI is increasingly becoming a part of the educational process. California recently passed a law requiring AI literacy to be incorporated into K-12 curricula starting in the fall of 2025.
The European Unions AI Act, meanwhile, went into effect on February 5, requiring organizations that use AI in their products to implement AI literacy programs and train applicable staff to have the skills, knowledge, and understanding that allow providers, deployers, and affected persons . . . to make an informed deployment of AI systems, as well as to gain awareness about the opportunities and risks of AI and possible harm it can cause.
Stalking, but with a side of Dr Pepper?
A number of streamers in Japan have recently had run-ins with a mysterious stream sniper known only as the Dr Pepper Guy. As Dexerto first reported, after tracking down streamers in random locations, the unknown figure silently cracks open a can of cold Dr Pepper, hands it over, and disappears without a word.
Stream snipingwhere viewers deliberately join or disrupt a live streamhas become increasingly common as IRL live streaming grows in popularity on Twitch. While it sometimes raises safety concerns, resulting in unwelcome stalking and harassment, other times its a bizarre example of the internet at its weird and wonderful best.
In a clip posted two days ago by Twitch streamer Mizkif, the group is seen enjoying sushi in a private restaurant booth when the door slides open and a hand holding a Dr Pepper appears. Silently, the man places the can on the table and retreats without a word.
I would love to know how he found us, Mizkif says to the camera, confused. We just drove 30 minutes in an Uber away from where we were, at a random omakase on the fourth floor of this building.
That doesnt stop Mizkif from cracking open the can and taking a swig.
While stream sniping is typically discouraged, fans seem more forgiving when refreshing beverages are involved. Youre being stalked, but your stalker drops off a can of Dr Pepper, so its okay, wrote one Redditor.
Once again perfect example of what a snipe should be, respectful, short, and ambiguous, another viewer commented.
Mizkif isnt the only recent target. Streamers Vangard, T10Nat, and Tokyo Sims have all been Dr Peppered in the past couple weeks, with videos of their encounters following a similar format. Some viewers suspect the streamers may be in on the joke, given how easily Dr Pepper Guy seems to find their locationseven at private events.
Others wonder if its all just a clever marketing stunt. I rarely fall for marketing, but man this guy actually got me wanting Dr Pepper, a Redditor commented.
If Dr Pepper hasnt already, they might want to get this guy on payroll.
Stores selling secondhand clothes, shoes and accessories are poised to benefit from President Donald Trump’s trade war even as businesses the world over race to avert potential damage, according to industry experts.
American styles carry international influence, but nearly all of the clothing sold domestically is made elsewhere. The Yale University Budget Lab last week estimated short-term consumer price increases of 65% for clothes and 87% for leather goods, noting U.S. tariffs “disproportionately affect those goods.
Such price hikes may drive cost-conscious shoppers to online resale sites, consignment boutiques and thrift stores in search of bargains or a way to turn their wardrobes into cash. Used items cost less than their new equivalents and only would be subject to tariffs if they come from outside the country.
I think resale is going to grow in a market that is declining, said Kristen Classi-Zummo, an apparel industry analyst at market research firm Circana. What I think is going to continue to win in this chaotic environment are channels that bring value.
The outlook for pre-owned fashion nevertheless comes with unknowns, including whether the president’s tariffs will stay long enough to pinch consumers and change their behavior. It’s also unclear whether secondhand purveyors will increase their own prices, either to mirror the overall market or in response to shopper demand.
A new audience courtesy of sticker shock
Jan Genovese, a retired fashion executive, sells her unwanted designer clothes through customer-to-customer marketplaces like Mercari. If tariffs cause retail prices to rise, she would consider high-end secondhand sites.
Until I see it and really have that sticker shock, I cant say exclusively that Ill be pushed into another direction, Genovese, 75, said. I think that the tariff part of it is that you definitely rethink things. And maybe I will start looking at alternative venues.
The secondhand clothing market already was flourishing before the specter of tariffs bedeviled the U.S. fashion industry. Management consulting firm McKinsey and Co. predicted after the COVID-19 pandemic that global revenue from pre-owned fashion would grow 11 times faster than retail apparel sales by this year as shoppers looked to save money or spend it in a more environmentally conscious way.
While millennials and members of Generation Z were known as the primary buyers of used clothing, data from market research firm Sensor Tower shows the audience may be expanding.
The number of mobile app downloads for nine resale marketplaces the firm tracks eBay, OfferUp, Poshmark, Mercari, Craigslist, Depop, ThredUp, TheRealReal and Vinted increased by 3% between January and the end of March, the first quarterly gain in three years, Sensor Tower said.
The firm estimates downloads of the apps for eBay, Depop, ThredUp and The RealReal also surged compared to a year earlier for the week of March 31, which was when Trump unveiled since-paused punitive tariffs on dozens of countries.
Circanas Classi-Zummo said that while customers used to seek out collectible or unusual vintage pieces to supplement their wardrobes, she has noticed more shoppers turning to secondhand sites to replace regular fashion items.
“It’s still a cheaper option than buying new, even though retailers offer discounts, she said.
A tariff-free gold mine lurking in closets and warehouses
Poshmark, a digital platform where users buy and sell pre-owned clothing, has yet to see sales pick up under the tariff schedule Trump unveiled but is prepared to capitalize on the moment, CEO Manish Chandra said.
Companies operating e-commerce marketplaces upgrade their technology to make it easier to find items. A visual search tool and other improvements to the Poshmark experience will pay long dividends in terms of disruption that happens in the market from the tariffs, Chandra said.
Archive, a San Francisco-based technology company that builds and manages online and in-store resale programs for brands including Dr. Martens, The North Face and Lululemon, has noticed clothing labels expressing more urgency to team up, CEO Emily Gittins said.
“Tapping into all of the inventory that is already sitting in the U.S., either in peoples closets or in warehouses not being used, offers a revenue source while brands limit or suspend orders from foreign manufacturers, she said.
Theres a huge amount of uncertainty, Gittins said. Everyone believes that this is going to be hugely damaging to consumer goods brands that sell in the U.S. So resale is basically where everyones head is going.”
Stock analysts have predicted off-price retailers like TJ Maxx and Burlington Stores will weather tariffs more easily than regular apparel chains and department stores because they carry leftover merchandise in the U.S.
Priced out of the previously owned market
Still, resale vendors aren’t immune from tariff-induced upheavals, said Rachel Kibbe, founder and CEO of Circular Services Group, a firm that advises brands and retailers on reducing the fashion industry’s environmental impact.
U.S. sellers that import secondhand inventory from European Union countries would have to pay a 20% duty if Trump moves forward with instituting reciprocal tariffs on most trading partners and eliminates an import tax exception for parcels worth less than $800, Kibbe said.
A circular fashion coalition she leads is seeking a tariff exemption for used and recycled goods that will be offered for resale, Kibbe said. Trump already ended the duty-free provision for low-value parcels from China, a move that may benefit sellers of secondhand clothing by making low-priced Chinese fashions pricier, she said.
James Reinhart, co-founder and CEO of the online consignment marketplace ThredUp, said the removal of the de minimis provision and the 145% tariff Trump put on products made in China would benefit businesses like his. He doubts creating resale channels would make a big difference for individual brands.
Brands will explore this and they may do more, but I dont see them massively changing their operations, Reinhart said. I think theyre going to be figuring out how to survive. And I dont think resale helps you survive.
Rebag, an online marketplace and retail chain that sells used designer handbags priced from $500 to tens of thousands of dollars, expects tariffs to help drive new customers and plans to open more physical stores, CEO Charles Gorra said.
Gorra said the company would analyze prices for new luxury goods and adjust what Rebag charges accordingly. The two historically rose in tandem, but Rebag could not match Chanel’s 10% price increase last year because of lower resale demand, Gorra said.
That has nothing to do with the tariffs, he said. Consumers are feeling priced out.
Norah Brotman, 22, a senior at the University of Minnesota, buys most of her own clothes on eBay. She also thrifts fashions from the 1990s and early 2000s at Goodwill stores and resells them on Depop.
If tariffs upend the economics of fast fashion and discourage mindless consumption, Brotman would count that as a plus.
I would love if this would steer people in a different direction, she said.
Anne D’Innocenzio, AP retail writer
