• After a monthlong delay, Trump said he'll place new tariffs on Canada and Mexico on Tuesday.
• Trump already placed a 10% tariff on China, and more could be coming.
• Here are the goods imported into the US the most from these three countries.

When evaluating how President Donald Trump's new tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China could impact Americans, start by looking at the goods imported most from those countries.

The biggest categories are oil, electronics, and vehicles.

Trump reached a deal with the leaders of both Canada and Mexico to delay tariffs by a month in early February, and with the delay coming to an end, new tariffs are set to go into effect on Tuesday. It's unclear if Trump will stick with the 25% level, his commerce secretary Howard Lutnick said on Fox News on Sunday.

"There are going to be tariffs on Tuesday on Mexico and Canada," Lutnick said. "Exactly what they are, we're going to leave that for the president and his team to negotiate."

The president has already hit China with a 10% tariff, and Lutnick confirmed that more is coming unless the country cracks down on its drug policies, particularly to stop the flow of fentanyl into the US.

While details surrounding the implementation of the tariffs are still unclear, the proposed tariffs could affect a wide variety of goods Americans use daily. The Census Bureau reported that in 2024, the US imported over $1.3 trillion in goods from China, Mexico, and Canada combined.

From Canada, the top 2024 imports included over $98 billion worth of crude oil and about $28 billion in passenger cars.

The US imported nearly $67 billion worth of car parts from Mexico in 2024, along with $43 billion in computers, $14 billion in medicinal equipment, and $12 billion in crude oil.

China, meanwhile, is a major supplier of electronics to the US. The census data showed that in 2024, the US imported $64 billion in cell phones and other household goods from China, $34 billion in computers, and about $31 billion in games, toys, and sporting goods.

Some companies have already been preparing to increase prices as a result of Trump's tariff plans on the campaign trail. Real estate consultants previously told BI that Trump's trade plans, particularly his 25% tariffs on steel, are set to make rent and condo prices more expensive.

Walmart CFO John David Rainey also told CNBC on November 19 that price hikes are likely on the horizon if Trump implements his tariffs: "We never want to raise prices. Our model is everyday low prices. But there probably will be cases where prices will go up for consumers."

Additionally, Trump's plans could amplify economic strains between the US and its trading partners. Both Canada and Mexico threatened retaliatory tariffs in early February to push back against Trump's tariffs. Trudeau said in a statement at the time that if Trump "wants to usher in a new golden age for the United States, the better path is to partner with Canada, not to punish us."

Companies and economists have said that Trump's tariff plans would increase consumer prices. BI previously reported that Trump's broad tariff proposals were likely to increase prices across the board, from clothes and footwear to computers and video games.

Trump has previously denied that would be the case. "I am going to put tariffs on other countries coming into our country, and that has nothing to do with taxes to us. That is a tax on another country," Trump said in an August speech. However, he told reporters in early February that Americans will experience "some pain" as a result of the tariffs, but he said they will overall be beneficial for the country.

The tariffs implemented during Trump's first term did not significantly influence inflation, but his recently announced tariffs are broader and could have a larger impact on prices.

At this point, however, Trump's proposals could still change. During his first term in 2019, Trump announced new tariffs on Mexico with the aim of strengthening the border, but following criticism from lawmakers — including some Republicans — he withdrew the plan.

• Celebrities flocked to the Vanity Fair Oscar party in Los Angeles on Sunday.
• The red carpet had plenty of high-fashion looks, but some stars didn't wear their best outfits.
• Kim Kardashian's gown looked out of place, and Megan Thee Stallion's dress was a little too daring.

The 2025 Academy Awards came and went on Sunday, and A-list stars closed out the night at Vanity Fair's annual Oscar after-party in Los Angeles.

Celebrities arrived at the event in red-carpet attire, and many Oscars attendees changed into second looks for the evening.

There were plenty of stylish outfits at the event, but there were also stars who didn't nail their looks, from poorly tailored outfits to dresses that didn't suit the occasion.

Take a look at the outfits that missed the mark at the Vanity Fair after-party.

Kim Kardashian

Kardashian went bridal for the Vanity Fair Oscar Party in a custom Balenciaga gown. The white, strapless look had a corset bodice, a full skirt, and ruching from top to bottom.

That said, it looked far more like a wedding dress than a fun, after-party frock. The same gown in a different color could have been more interesting, and accessorizing with statement jewels would have been fun.

John Legend

Legend sported an all-black ensemble consisting of baggy trousers, a thick skirt, and a high-necked, long-sleeved poncho.

Unfortunately, the outfit wore him — it was too oversized and overwhelming in shape.

Zoe Saldaña

Saint Laurent designed the Oscar winner's after-party look. It featured a black long-sleeved top that Saldana wore without a bra, a peach high-low skirt with thick ruffles and a train, and sheer black tights.

Though the color combination looked sharp on Saldaña, the top half of the outfit was too casual for the Oscars-related event. A black halter top or strapless bodice would have been a better match.

Jeremy Pope

Jeremy Pope looked dapper at the Oscars in a simple black Balmain suit decorated with bowties. His after-party look, however, wasn't as strong.

He arrived wearing a wide-legged leather catsuit and platform boots. Though the bottom half of his outfit had potential, its bodice only covered half of Pope's chest before extending into a scarf that covered his mouth. The outfit was ultimately more odd than fashionable.

Taraji P. Henson

Henson was one of the few stars to wear a minidress after the Oscars.

But the asymmetrical piece looked more messy than daring. Its sparkling embellishment attached at the dress' waistline looked especially out of place.

Julianne Hough

From the front, Hough's black-and-white gown was eye-catching. It had a leotard-like top with sheer panels showing her arms and waist, and a ruched, cream-colored skirt that added elegance.

It was the other side of the gown, however, that ruined the look. Its backless design extended so low — all the way to Hough's backside — that it was more distracting than interesting.

Matt Bomer

Bomer's Valentino tuxedo had a classic silhouette, and his relaxed tie and decorative brooch paired well with the look.

However, his patterned scarf was distracting, particularly because he wore it tucked under the tuxedo jacket. The look would have been better if Bomer ditched the superfluous accessory.

Lily-Rose Depp

Depp took a unique approach to Chanel, wearing two pieces that were more daring than usual for the fashion house.

Her bralette-style top was sheer and had a sequined bow pattern, and her low-waisted skirt was pleated and made from green tulle. But because the garments sat so far apart on Depp's body, it looked like she was missing a chunk of her outfit.

Megan Thee Stallion

Stallion isn't a stranger to taking risks on the red carpet, but the green gown she wore to the after-party was a bit too daring for the setting.

The green, mermaid-style dress hugged her figure, and feathers on the bodice floated out from the dress like a peacock's plume. The neckline was so low that the rapper's chest was completely exposed, with only green nipple pasties providing her with coverage.

The dress would have been great if the neckline was a bit higher or if Meg had worn a statement bralette with the garment instead of pasties.

Michael Urie

While it was fun that Urie didn't just wear a traditional suit, there was too much going on in his sheer, lace-embellished set. The beading and lace on his jacket and pants were so intricate that they were hard to look at when they overlapped, and the wide leg of his pants didn't help.

Urie may have had a more balanced look if he paired the statement jacket with simpler pants.

Sarah Paulson

You couldn't miss Paulson's Marc Jacobs dress, both because of the red color and the massive bubbles of fabric that adorned the hem, backside, and neckline of the dress.

The play on volume could have been fun, but the bubbles were so big that not even Paulson's simple black clutch or heels could detract from them. Slightly less fabric would have made the look stronger.

Anna Kendrick

The black cocktail dress Kendrick wore from Ashi Studio was pretty — its fabric had a fun sheen and a bubble skirt hit above her knee.

However, flower-shaped sequin embroidery on the hemline and one sleeve took the dress from sleek to clunky. The look would have stood out more if it didn't have so many embellishments.

Ice Spice

Ice Spice wore a floor-length mustard skirt and coordinating cardigan, without a shirt.

The cardigan made the whole look feel casual for the red carpet, though, and Ice may have looked more red-carpet-ready if she paired the skirt with a formal top.

Laverne Cox

Cox's black dress looked more like a costume than a red-carpet outfit, particularly because of the way it was styled.

The archival Manfred Thierry Mugler dress formed a scalloped, halter neckline that looked like a spiderweb. Cox paired the dress with black gloves, and her dramatic hair and makeup included a short, black hairstyle, no eyebrows, and red lips.

The outfit would have been perfect for a chic Halloween party or themed event, but it didn't quite work for the after-party.

• The Nissan Rogue Rock Creek is a new, off-road-focused version of the brand's popular compact SUV.
• I was impressed by the Rogue Rock Creek's peppy engine, comfortable cabin, and fun off-road looks.
• I was disappointed by the lack of skid plates and powertrain to back up the rugged looks.

The Rogue compact SUV has been Nissan's best-selling model in the US over the past decade.

I drove a well-equipped Nissan Rogue SL last year and was impressed by its peppy performance, comfortable cabin, and good fuel economy.

This year, Nissan introduced a new off-road-focused variant called the Rogue Rock Creek, comparable to Toyota's RAV4 Woodland Edition and Subaru's Forester Wilderness. It's the second Nissan model to receive the Rock Creek treatment, following the larger, midsize Pathfinder Rock Creek.

Even though it doesn't quite have the off-road hardware and beefed-up drivetrain to back up the rugged looks, the Rogue Rock Creek remains a capable compact crossover.

I recently spent a week behind the wheel of a 2025 Nissan Rogue Rock Creek.

The base front-wheel-drive 2025 Rogue S starts at $29,230, while the fully-loaded all-wheel-drive Rogue Platinum starts at $40,920.

The middle-level Rock Creek trim starts at $35,420, but premium paint, luxury options, and freight fees push the as-tested price to $38,025.

The Rock Creek edition comes with special styling that sets the trim apart.

The Rock Creek trim comes with a black front grille with Lava Red accents and triple air vents that evoke Nissan's rugged Hardbody pickup trucks of the late 1980s and 1990s.

The Rock Creek also includes special extras like 17-inch all-terrain tires and a heavy-duty roof rack.

Frustratingly, the Rock Creek edition has the same 8.2 inches of ground clearance as all other Rogues. It's also missing the underbody skid plates needed for rough terrain, like those found on Nissan's off-roading-focused PRO4X trim Frontier pickup.

Unlike the Pathfinder Rock Creek, which received a brawnier V6, the Rogue Rock Creek is powered by the same 3-cylinder engine found across all trims.

Nissan's KR15DDT turbocharged variable compression engine produces a solid 201 horsepower and 225 lb-ft of torque. The gutsy three-cylinder engine also emits a surprisingly robust sound.

The three-cylinder engine is equipped with Nissan's unique variable compression technology, which can vary the compression ratio for hard acceleration or more efficient operation while cruising.

The transmision remains the weak point in the Rogue's drivetrain and doesn't fully exploit the punchy turbocharged engine's performance. The transmission feels inconsistent, and its artificial shift points feel a bit rubbery.

My test car boasted EPA fuel economy figures of 27 miles-per-gallon city, 32 highway, and 29 combined. The Rock Creek, with its bulky all-terrain tires, gets two miles per gallon less than other all-wheel-drive Rogues.

The Rock Creek is the only trim that comes standard with all-wheel-drive.

My test car came with the same five different drive modes (Eco, Snow, Sport, and Off-road) as all AWD-equipped Rogues. However, the Rock Creek edition is the only trim to get Hill Descent Control, which helps maintain traction down steep slopes.

The Rogue delivers peppy performance with a soft, comfortable ride.

Just like the Rogue SL I drove a few months ago, the Rock Creek delivers a friendly and pleasant driving experience. The chunky all-terrain tires have not hindered the Rogue's on-road performance or contributed to any appreciable road noise. In fact, its more substantial sidewalls contribute to a softer, more comfortable ride.

The Rogue's turbocharged engine produces strong power throughout the rev range, and it remains remarkably quiet and smooth even under the strain of hard acceleration.

The Rock Creek's cabin is attractive and logically designed

The cabin's ergonomics and build quality are excellent. All of the controls and buttons are intuitively placed, making button hunting minimal. There are also plenty of storage nooks and a variety of USB, 12V, and wireless charging options.

Atop the center console is a small eight-inch infotainment touchscreen. Higher trim models get a sleek 12.3-inch unit. The NissanConnect infotainment system is pretty simple and easy to use but feels dated.

Fortunately, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto come standard.

My test car came standard with a 360-degree camera system.

Exclusive to the Rock Creek trim is a special Off-Road View feature that gives the driver a visual of what's immediately in front of and on the side of the vehicle, allowing for more precise tire placement when off-roading.

My test car's front seats came with attractive lava red accent stitching and badging.

The seats, which are upholstered in black leatherette and waterproof nylon, were incredibly comfortable.

The Rogue's second-row split-folding bench seat offers plenty of room for two adults or a fairly cramped experience for three.

Its 38.5 inches of legroom is on par for the segment.

Open the motion-activated rear liftgate, and you'll find 31.6 cubic feet of cargo space.

Fold down the rear seat to expand cargo capacity to 74.1 cubic feet, smaller than competitors like the Hyundai Tucson and Honda CR-V

The Rock Creek comes standard with Nissan ProPilot Assist, which includes intelligent adaptive cruise control and steering assist.

Range-topping models can opt for ProPilot Assist 2.1, which allows for hands-free driving in limited situations, like single-lane highway driving. It worked well on straight roads.

My verdict: See past the rugged styling, and you'll find a thoroughly sensible and capable compact SUV.

Despite the rugged styling, the Nissan Rogue Rock Creek is not a true off-roader, thanks to its funky transmission and the lack of skid plates to prevent damage to the underbody.

Thus, it's neither a pavement princess nor a rock-crawling beast. It lives somewhere in the middle. Perhaps as a helpful tool for the weekend adventurer who needs to drive on dirt roads to reach a campsite.

The reality is that most Rogue Rock Creeks will never leave the pavement and will be destined to spend their lives shuttling about suburbia. And that's OK because, at its core, the Rogue is an excellent compact crossover with a peppy performance, good fuel economy, and a comfortable cabin.

Top Trump administration officials are arguing that it is misleading to include government spending in the quarterly tally of GDP.

• It sets up a clash between the administration and economists over how to calculate the broadest measure of economic activity.

The big picture: GDP statistics are calculated the way they have been for the last eight decades for good reasons — but administration officials are correct that the accounting for government spending isn't ideal.

What they're saying: "You know that governments historically have messed with GDP," Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Sunday on Fox News Channel's "Sunday Morning Futures."

• "They count government spending as part of GDP. So I'm going to separate those two and make it transparent," he said.
• "A more accurate measure of GDP would exclude government spending," Elon Musk wrote on X on Friday. "Otherwise, you can scale GDP artificially high by spending money on things that don't make people's lives better."

State of play: GDP aims to capture the value of all economic output produced in a given time period within U.S. borders. The formula for that tally, which you may recall from introductory economics, is that GDP = consumption + investment + government spending + net exports.

• So why is government spending included in that formula? Because otherwise GDP would not fully capture the value of goods and services produced.
• When the government buys a fighter jet, or builds a road, or educates a child, it reflects the production of goods and services. So if you exclude government spending from GDP, you aren't getting a full picture of U.S. output.

Zoom in: It is true, however, that government spending is counted in GDP by simply adding in the dollars spent, without any real test of how efficiently or productively the money was used.

• "If the government buys a tank, that's GDP," Lutnick said in the TV appearance. "But paying 1,000 people to think about buying a tank is not GDP. That is wasted inefficiency, wasted money. And cutting that, while it shows in GDP, we're going to get rid of that."
• It's true, as Musk and Lutnick suggest, that if the government hired a bunch of people to twiddle their thumbs all day, it would show up as higher GDP while not making anyone better off, save perhaps the thumb-twiddlers.

Of note: The Bureau of Economic Analysis — which Lutnick now oversees — acknowledges these limitations.

• "Difficult conceptual and practical problems arise in measuring the output of governments, primarily because most of this output is not sold in the marketplace," reads the bureau's handbook for GDP and related data.
• "If possible, it would be preferable to measure actual changes in the quantity or volume of the services provided, thus allowing for changes in productivity," the document notes.

Zoom out: More conceptually, it's not the job of economic statistics to make value judgments on what individuals, businesses or governments do with their money. It's just trying to get the math right.

• You might not agree that a given government expenditure was worthwhile, but that's true of every line of GDP.

For example, if somebody orders an absurdly priced $2,000 bottle of wine at a restaurant, that counts on line 20 of the GDP report as personal consumption expenditures on food services and accommodations.

• If a movie studio spends $100 million to make a terrible movie, that shows up on line 38 of the report, as fixed investment in entertainment, literary, and artistic originals.

Lutnick suggested the GDP statistics lack transparency about how government spending is incorporated.

• In fact, the data releases make crystal clear how much government contributes to overall GDP — and data-watchers can, and regularly do, exclude government for purposes of analyzing economic trends.

By the numbers: In Q4 of last year, overall U.S. output was an annualized $29.7 trillion, of which $1.9 trillion was federal government consumption and investment spending, and another $3.2 trillion state and local governments.

• Measures of activity that exclude government spending can give a better sense of the underlying trend in the economy than the headline GDP number.
• We're partial, for example, to real final sales to private domestic purchasers, which rose at a 5.4% rate in Q4. You can find it in Table 1, line 41 of the report.

The intrigue: Interestingly, the federal government's share of GDP has been relatively low of late. It was 6.4% last year, roughly the same as during the first Trump administration and well below Cold War levels. It peaked at 18% in 1953.

• Keep in mind that while federal spending on purchases and employee salaries count in these tabulations, transfer payments don't.
• So when the government sends out Social Security checks each month, that expenditure does not count toward GDP but does show up as personal consumption expenditures once recipients spend the money.

The bottom line: There are flaws and limitations in how government GDP statistics account for government spending.

• But they are well-known, transparent and the kinds of things economy-watchers can adjust for as they wish.

• Google's "Ask for me" tool uses AI to call businesses for service details and availability.
• Currently, the tool is limited to nail salons and auto shops and requires users to opt in.
• If the tool expands to medical offices and customer service lines, it could be a game changer.

Google launched its "Ask for me" tool on Search Labs a little over a month ago, and it's good news for those who find picking up the phone to call local businesses daunting or time-consuming.

The experimental tool uses AI to call businesses near you to find out how much a service costs and when it's available. For now, it only works for nail salons and auto shops, and you have to opt in to try it. If Google expands this tool in the future though, it could become an everyday application of agentic AI for consumers.

The experiment is available on desktop and mobile, although I had some trouble getting the tool to work for nail salons on my desktop. The "Ask for me" banner shows up when you search terms like "oil change" or "nail salons near me."

Once the banner shows up, you can click on "get started" to fill out details about the type of service you're looking for. If you're looking for an auto service, it will give you 25 service options. You'll also have the option to enter your car model and year.

For nail salon requests, Google asks about what kind of nail service you want. Then, it provides nine manicure options, including dip powder or nail art, and four for pedicure. It will also ask if you want extra services like a massage, nail extensions, or dip removal. For both categories, it will ask if you want the soonest availability, or if you're looking specifically for a week or weekend slot.

Google will confirm it received your request over text or email, depending on your choice. Then, assuming businesses are open, you'll get a full report on local services offered within about 30 minutes. For those who picked up the call from Google, you'll see details from the conversation, like the pricing and soonest availability. It will also provide a list of businesses that didn't pick up the phone.

I sent multiple requests over the last few weeks to test out the tool's functionality and accuracy. To verify the results, I also contacted the businesses directly to confirm prices, availability, and whether they had actually received a call.

I heard from one of the salon workers that it didn't sound like a human called — and they were left a little confused. Another salon worker asked if the Google call was spam, although they still picked up and provided the information asked.

There are multiple nail salons in my area, so Google was able to get about five businesses on the line in a 30-minute span. However, if you're in a more rural area, you might not get as thorough of a report.

For now, I don't see myself needing to use this service given I rarely go to the nail salon and don't use a car. That said, I would use this on a regular basis if it expanded its capabilities to call medical offices, insurance companies, customer service lines for store brands, and mailing centers.

If the service expands, some form of identity verification may be needed, along with clearer boundaries about what the AI can inquire about. That said, I'm looking forward to a future where I can hopefully spend less time on the phone asking for basic information.