The One Big Beautiful Bill might’ve made it across the finish line but tariffs still remain the dominant focus of President Donald Trump’s economic agenda. This is especially true as the US Labor Department announced recently that consumer prices rose 2.7% in June, the highest spike since February, and a report from CNBC found that prices at Walmart, one of the largest retailers in the US, have steadily gone up since Trump’s tariffs entered the conversation.

After unleashing market chaos on April 2 («Liberation Day») when he unveiled a laundry list of heavy tariffs for countries around the world, they were paused for 90 days after the stock market dramatically tumbled. That 90-day pause was supposed to end earlier this month but have been been extended again through Aug. 1. More recently, the administration hiked tariffs against Canada to 35% and threatened Brazil with a 50% rate.

Amid the uncertainties and upheavals, Trump has barreled forward with his plans, including doubling the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and announcing a new plan to increase the rate for China to 55%. He also hyped up a trade deal on July 2 that leaves Vietnam’s import tax rate at a historically high 20%. The sweeping tariff initiative will likely affect your cost of living, which we know from our surveys is something you’re worried about.

That all came after Trump’s push hit its biggest roadblock yet, when the US Court of International Trade ruled late last month that Trump had overstepped his authority when he imposed tariffs. That ruling was stayed, but the fight is likely to head to the Supreme Court. All the while, major US companies like Apple and Walmart have butted heads with the administration over the tariffs and their bluntness about how tariffs will make affording things harder for consumers.

Amid all this noise, you might still be wondering: What exactly are tariffs, and what will they mean for me?

The short answer: Expect to pay more for at least some goods and services. For the long answer, keep reading, and for more, check out CNET’s price tracker for 11 popular and tariff-vulnerable products.

What are tariffs?

Put simply, a tariff is a tax on the cost of importing or exporting goods by a particular country. So, for example, a 60% tariff on Chinese imports would be a 60% tax on the price of importing, say, computer components from China.

Trump has been fixated on imports as the centerpiece of his economic plans, often claiming that the money collected from taxes on imported goods would help finance other parts of his agenda. The US imports $3 trillion worth of goods from other countries annually. 

The president has also shown a fixation on trade deficits, claiming that the US having a trade deficit with any country means that country is ripping the US off. This is a flawed understanding of the matter, many economists have said, since deficits are often a simple case of resource realities: Wealthy nations like the US buy specific things from nations that have them, while those nations in turn may not be wealthy enough to buy much of anything from the US.

While Trump deployed tariffs in his first term, notably against China, he ramped up his plans more significantly for the 2024 campaign, promising 60% tariffs against China and a universal 20% tariff on all imports into the US. 

«Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented,» Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan last year. At one point, he called himself «Tariff Man» in a post on Truth Social. 

Who pays the cost of tariffs?

Trump repeatedly claimed, before and immediately after returning to the White House, that the country of origin for an imported good pays the cost of the tariffs and that Americans would not see any price increases from them. However, as economists and fact-checkers stressed, this is not the case.

The companies importing the tariffed goods — American companies or organizations in this case — pay the higher costs. To compensate, companies can raise their prices or absorb the additional costs themselves.

So, who ends up paying the price for tariffs? In the end, usually you, the consumer. For instance, a universal tariff on goods from Canada would increase Canadian lumber prices, which would have the knock-on effect of making construction and home renovations more expensive for US consumers. While it is possible for a company to absorb the costs of tariffs without increasing prices, this is not at all likely, at least for now.

Speaking with CNET, Ryan Reith, vice president of International Data Corporation’s worldwide mobile device tracking programs, explained that price hikes from tariffs, especially on technology and hardware, are inevitable in the short term. He estimated that the full amount imposed on imports by Trump’s tariffs would be passed on to consumers, which he called the «cost pass-through.» Any potential efforts for companies to absorb the new costs themselves would come in the future, once they have a better understanding of the tariffs, if at all.

Which Trump tariffs have gone into effect?

Following Trump’s «Liberation Day» announcements on April 2 and subsequent shifting by the president, the following tariffs are in effect:

• A 50% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports, doubled from 25% as of June 4.
• A 30% tariff on all Chinese imports until the new deal touted by Trump takes effect, after which it will purportedly go up to 55%. China being a major focus of Trump’s trade agenda, it has faced a rate notably higher than other countries, peaking at 145% before trade talks commenced.
• 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and 35% on those from Canada. This applies only to goods from each country that are not covered under the 2018 USMCA trade agreement brokered during Trump’s first term. The deal covers roughly half of all imports from Canada and about a third of those from Mexico, so the rest are subject to the new tariffs. Energy imports not covered by USMCA will be taxed at only 10%.
• A 25% tariff on all foreign-made cars and auto parts.
• A sweeping overall 10% tariff on all imported goods.

For certain countries that Trump said were more responsible for the US trade deficit, Trump imposed what he called «reciprocal» tariffs that exceed the 10% level: 20% for the 27 nations that make up the European Union, 26% for India, 24% for Japan and so on. These were meant to take effect on April 9 but were delayed by 90 days due to historic stock market volatility, and then delayed again to Aug. 1. These rates are subject to change until that new effective date, and some have already been altered: the rate against Japan was upped to 25%, the same as the rate against South Korea; Trump has also threatened a 50% rate against Brazil. Another deal announced on July 23 lowered Japan’s rate to 15%.

Trump’s claim that these reciprocal tariffs are based on high tariffs imposed against the US by the targeted countries has drawn intense pushback from experts and economists, who have argued that some of these numbers are false or potentially inflated. For example, the above chart says a 39% tariff from the EU, despite its average tariff for US goods being around 3%. Some of the tariffs are against places that are not countries but tiny territories of other nations. The Heard and McDonald Islands, for example, are uninhabited. We’ll dig into the confusion around these calculations below.

Notably, that minimum 10% tariff will not be on top of those steel, aluminum and auto tariffs. Canada and Mexico were also spared from the 10% minimum additional tariff imposed on all countries the US trades with.

On April 11, the administration said smartphones, laptops and other consumer electronics, along with flat panel displays, memory chips and semiconductors, were exempt from reciprocal tariffs. But it wasn’t clear whether that would remain the case or whether such products might face different fees later.

How were the Trump reciprocal tariffs calculated?

The numbers released by the Trump administration for its barrage of «reciprocal» tariffs led to widespread confusion among experts. Trump’s own claim that these new rates were derived by halving the tariffs already imposed against the US by certain countries was widely disputed, with critics noting that some of the numbers listed for certain countries were much higher than the actual rates and some countries had tariff rates listed despite not specifically having tariffs against the US at all.

In a post to X that spread fast across social media, finance journalist James Surowiecki said that the new reciprocal rates appeared to have been reached by taking the trade deficit the US has with each country and dividing it by the amount the country exports to the US. This, he explained, consistently produced the reciprocal tariff percentages revealed by the White House across the board.

«What extraordinary nonsense this is,» Surowiecki wrote about the finding.

The White House later attempted to debunk this idea, releasing what it claimed was the real formula, though it was quickly determined that this formula was arguably just a more complex version of the one Surowiecki deduced.

What will the Trump tariffs do to prices?

In short: Prices are almost certainly going up, if not now, then eventually. That is, if the products even make it to US shelves at all, as some tariffs will simply be too high for companies to bother dealing with.

While the effects of a lot of tariffs might not be felt straight away, some potential real-world examples have already emerged. Microsoft has increased prices across the board for its Xbox gaming brand, with its flagship Xbox Series X console jumping 20% from $500 to $600. Kent International, one of the main suppliers of bicycles to Walmart, announced that it would be stopping imports from China, which account for 90% of its stock.

Speaking about Trump’s tariff plans just before they were announced, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that they would generate $6 trillion in revenue over the next decade. Given that tariffs are most often paid by consumers, CNN characterized this as potentially «the largest tax hike in US history.» Estimates from the Yale Budget Lab, cited by Axios, predict that Trump’s new tariffs will cause a 2.3% increase in inflation throughout 2025. This translates to about a $3,800 increase in expenses for the average American household.

Reith, the IDC analyst, told CNET that Chinese-based tech companies, like PC makers Acer, Asus and Lenovo, have «100% exposure» to these import taxes, with products like phones and computers the most likely to take a hit. He also said that the companies best positioned to weather the tariff impacts are those that have moved some of their operations out of China to places like India, Thailand and Vietnam, singling out the likes of Apple, Dell and HP. Samsung, based in South Korea, is also likely to avoid the full force of Trump’s tariffs. 

In an effort to minimize its tariff vulnerability, Apple has begun to move the production of goods for the US market from China to India.

Will tariffs affect prices immediately?

In the short term — the first days or weeks after a tariff takes effect — maybe not. There are still a lot of products in the US imported pre-tariffs and on store shelves, meaning the businesses don’t need a price hike to recoup import taxes. Once new products need to be brought in from overseas, that’s when you’ll see prices start to climb because of tariffs or you’ll see them become unavailable. 

That uncertainty has made consumers anxious. CNET’s survey revealed that about 38% of shoppers feel pressured to make certain purchases before tariffs make them more expensive. About 10% say they have already made certain purchases in hopes of getting them in before the price hikes, while 27% said they have delayed purchases for products that cost more than $500. Generally, this worry is the most acute concerning smartphones, laptops and home appliances.

Mark Cuban, the billionaire businessman and Trump critic, voiced concerns about when to buy certain things in a post on Bluesky just after Trump’s «Liberation Day» announcements. In it, he suggested that consumers might want to stock up on certain items before tariff inflation hits.

«It’s not a bad idea to go to the local Walmart or big box retailer and buy lots of consumables now,» Cuban wrote. «From toothpaste to soap, anything you can find storage space for, buy before they have to replenish inventory. Even if it’s made in the USA, they will jack up the price and blame it on tariffs.»

CNET’s Money team recommends that before you make any purchase, especially a high-ticket item, be sure that the expenditure fits within your budget and your spending plans. Buying something you can’t afford now because it might be less affordable later can be burdensome, to say the least.

What is the goal of the White House tariff plan?

The typical goal behind tariffs is to discourage consumers and businesses from buying the tariffed, foreign-sourced goods and encourage them to buy domestically produced goods instead. When implemented in the right way, tariffs are generally seen as a useful way to protect domestic industries. 

One of the stated intentions for Trump’s tariffs is along those lines: to restore American manufacturing and production. However, the White House also says it’s negotiating with numerous countries looking for tariff exemptions, and some officials have also floated the idea that the tariffs will help finance Trump’s tax cuts.

Those things are often contradictory: If manufacturing moves to the US or if a bunch of countries are exempt from tariffs, then tariffs aren’t actually being collected and can’t be used to finance anything. This and many other points have led a lot of economists to allege that Trump’s plans are misguided. 

As for returning — or «reshoring» — manufacturing in the US, tariffs are a better tool for protecting industries that already exist because importers can fall back on them right away. Building up the factories and plants needed for this in the US could take years, leaving Americans to suffer under higher prices in the interim. 

That problem is worsened by the fact that the materials needed to build those factories will also be tariffed, making the costs of «reshoring» production in the US too heavy for companies to stomach. These issues, and the general instability of American economic policies under Trump, are part of why experts warn that Trump’s tariffs could have the opposite effect: keeping manufacturing out of the US and leaving consumers stuck with inflated prices. Any factories that do get built in the US because of tariffs also have a high chance of being automated, canceling out a lot of job creation potential. To give you one real-world example of this: When warning customers of future price hikes, toy maker Mattel also noted that it had no plans to move manufacturing to the US.

Trump has reportedly been fixated on the notion that Apple’s iPhone — the most popular smartphone in the US market — can be manufactured entirely in the US. This has been broadly dismissed by experts, for a lot of the same reasons mentioned above, but also because an American-made iPhone could cost upward of $3,500. One report from 404 Media dubbed the idea «a pure fantasy.» The overall sophistication and breadth of China’s manufacturing sector have also been cited, with CEO Tim Cook stating in 2017 that the US lacks the number of tooling engineers to make its products.

For more, see how tariffs might raise the prices of Apple products and find some expert tips for saving money.

Some of Dexcom’s continuous glucose monitoring receivers have been recalled due to speaker malfunctions, which can cause you to miss alerts or alarms for dangerous blood sugar levels. According to the Class I recall, there have been 112 complaints globally, with 56 reported injuries, since May 2025.

Missing an alert from your continuous glucose monitor may result in health consequences like vomiting, seizures, loss of consciousness and hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic symptoms. 

Certain Dexcom G6, G7, One and One Plus receivers are included in this recall. The One and One Plus receivers are available outside of the US.

Dexcom is one of the most popular continuous glucose monitor brands, and many people with diabetes use Dexcom devices to track their glucose levels in real time.

According to Dexcom’s update, even without the audio output from the speaker, your receiver will still alert you through vibration and visual prompts. However, that’s only so helpful when many people keep their receivers in their pockets or bags. People who use the mobile app for glucose values, alerts and alarms will still be able to do so without interruption.

If you own a Dexcom continuous glucose monitor, here’s what you should do right now

A continuous glucose monitoring system has three parts: the glucose sensor you wear, a transmitter and the small receiver you keep for alerts. The receiver is being recalled, not the sensor you wear, so you shouldn’t expect the readings you get from your device to be inaccurate.

If you use a Dexcom continuous glucose monitor, check the complete list of affected devices for the model and serial number. You can also go to Dexcom’s website to see if your device is affected. These numbers are on the back of your receiver.

If your device is affected, contact Dexcom immediately for a free replacement. Continuous glucose monitors aren’t something you can just stop using, so it’s essential to get in your replacement order as soon as possible. Remember, while you wait, that there’s a chance your receiver speaker isn’t working correctly and you will not be alerted with a sound to spikes or drops in your blood sugar.

You should regularly test the speakers each time you charge your receiver. When you plug the receiver in, the Speaker Test screen will appear for a few seconds. To test your sound, follow the directions on the screen. If it doesn’t beep, then it’s time to contact Dexcom. Remember that it’s important to continue testing your speaker over time. Checking it once doesn’t mean it can’t fail in the future. Even if your device isn’t under recall, this is a good habit to have.

You can also test your receiver’s speaker at any time through the device’s menu. For support during this recall, contact Dexcom technical support at 1-844-478-1600.

T-Mobile’s new T-Satellite service commercially launched this week. It uses the Starlink satellite network to let you send and receive text messages from space. For $10 a month (or included in the cost of the company’s Experience Beyond plan), the service can be a communications lifeline when you’re out of cellular coverage.

But that’s the thing: To test it out, I had to find a cellular dead zone. T-Mobile estimates there are 500,000 square miles in the US with no cell coverage, so I left my home in Seattle to find one. After three hours of driving to the wooded North Cascades, I got my chance to see if satellite texting is as easy as everyday cellular texting, and how T-Satellite differs from other satellite services.

How T-Satellite differs from other satellite services

Satellite texting is now a big deal: the wireless providers and phone-makers including Apple are betting satellite connectivity is the answer for travelers and people who live in remote areas (and even those impacted by emergencies such as the massive flooding in Texas).

It also isn’t new. Apple started offering SOS communication backed by Globalstar on the iPhone 14. And later, that allowed emergency texting when you’re outside coverage areas — a literal lifesaver for people injured, lost or stranded in remote areas. The feature also allowed you to share you location via satellite in the Find My app. Apple then expanded the service to include any texting using the Messages app, as well as calling for roadside assistance. CNET’s David Lumb used Messages via satellite on his iPhone 15 Pro to text friends and share his thoughts when he summited Mount Haleakalā’s peak in Hawaii.

Google has a similar feature in its Pixel 9 phones, except the Pixel 9A, which works with satellite provider Skylo. Samsung Galaxy phones, like the recently released Galaxy Z Fold 7 and Z Flip 7, can use Verizon for satellite texting and to contact emergency services through Skylo, too.

However, that communication involves a few steps to activate the feature. You need to be outdoors with a clear view of the sky — no trees or buildings — and point your phone at a passing satellite, keeping it steady to maintain the connection.

With T-Satellite, the experience is quite different. Texting is almost indistinguishable from when you’re within cellular coverage. On a Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra with a T-Mobile plan, opening the Messages app showed the phone already connected to satellite, with a banner reading «You’re messaging by satellite.» A small satellite icon appears in the menu bar with radiating curves to indicate the status of the connection.

This is due in part to the fact that there are now more than 650 Starlink satellites overhead providing wider coverage, but also because they use a frequency band compatible with most phones sold in the last four years.You don’t need a specific phone model that has satellite messaging hardware, such as the Motorola Razr Ultra.

The experience of setting up T-Satellite on my iPhone 16 Pro was generally the same. One unique thing about T-Satellite is that T-Mobile is offering the service to anyone, even if they use another carrier for cellular service. In my case, I set up the T-Satellite beta using the second eSIM slot on my phone, and turned off the primary service (AT&T) in order to test just T-Mobile’s feature. A solid black satellite icon appears in the menu bar.

I should note that I performed this testing a couple days before T-Satellite went live, so it was technically during the T-Satellite beta period, and using a beta version of the Messages app on Android.

Plus, I didn’t attempt to make an emergency call, either, which on the T-Satellite service would mean dialing 911 in the phone app, versus initiating an SOS text communication using Apple’s service.

Texting, but sometimes slower

Mostly, texting via satellite is just like texting via cellular. The data pipe between the phone and a satellite flying overhead at 17,000 miles per hour is small, so occasionally texts would take several seconds to go through. But sometimes a conversation would happen without any extended lag. By comparison, when CNET’s Patrick Holland tested Apple’s Messages via satellite feature, he noted that «most sends were nearly instantaneous, others took 15 to 20 seconds with one taking over a minute.»

One feature going live today for Android is the ability to send images, videos and audio files using Multimedia Messaging Service over the satellite network. On the Galaxy S25 Ultra, I snapped a photo of the lake and sent it using Messages as I normally would. The only difference over satellite is that it took around two and a half minutes to send.

However, MMS is currently only supported on Android; iOS support is coming later. Also arriving in the future — October, specifically — is the ability for apps to send and receive data over the satellite connection. T-Mobile has cited AllTrails as an example of apps that’ll be compatible with the service.

This would be a great use of data for other mapping tools. Although I was never lost on this trip —I pulled into a well-marked scenic overlook to test with a stunning view — I also made a point of downloading an offline map of the area using Apple Maps while I was still within cellular range. 

Lingering questions and challenges

Not every message went through, and after my limited testing, there are a few areas where more clarity would help.

For example, on Android, it wasn’t always obvious when I’d lost satellite connection. In theory, with many Starlink satellites overhead, you shouldn’t have to worry about pointing at a specific patch of sky to maintain a connection. But at one point after sending a message, some text below it said the app was waiting to connect. Only then did I notice the tiny satellite icon was showing thin gray bars instead of thin black bars.

Compare that to Apple’s implementation, which uses Dynamic Island to show an impossible-to-miss green status button to indicate a solid connection to a satellite. Or Google’s Satellite SOS service, with its full-screen visual prompts that help you stay connected to a satellite or connect to a new one if needed.

I also ran into some confusion with my iPhone 16 Pro running T-Satellite as a secondary eSIM. When attempting to text a friend who came along with me and was using Apple’s method on his iPhone, I got a message that he was connected via satellite and was given the option to tap Send via Satellite. What I didn’t realize at the time was that the connection dropped as I was typing the text. On further research, I discovered that an active third-party satellite connection shows «SAT» in the menu bar. When SAT is replaced by a black satellite icon, it means T-Satellite is no longer connected, but that Apple’s satellite option is available; I thought it meant that I was still connected.

Look up, and ahead

Will satellite services cover the remaining dead zones and allow easy communication even in remote areas? Based on my experience, the potential is definitely there. It’s been less than two years since Apple first launched Emergency SOS via satellite on the iPhone and it’s impressive how satellite connectivity has expanded so quickly with the ability to support texting. I appreciate that the T-Satellite implementation is similar to the way millions of people communicate every day via text. Removing friction is key to adopting technologies like this.

As companies build up the capacity and performance of satellite services, it’s easy to see a near future where you don’t have to think about how you’re getting data, just as we currently don’t ever think about which cellular tower is relaying our data.

As someone who lives in cellular-saturated Seattle, I probably won’t need to rely on satellite data. But the North Cascades is where I’ve gone camping for years, so I can see it being occasionally useful, especially if there’s ever an emergency situation.

As I was juggling my phones and pestering my friends and family with texts, a couple approached to ask what I was doing. They were visiting the area from a small town in northern Idaho near the Canadian border, where cellular coverage is a rarity. After talking for a few minutes, I realized that being able to connect wirelessly via satellite could be a real boon for them, especially in emergencies, but also everyday annoyances when other forms of communication aren’t available, like during power outages.