A series of milestone events in coming days will determine the course of the trade war.

Why it matters: That in turn will decide the fate of not only the U.S. economy, but the world's.

This is what you need to know about the days ahead.

What are the major tariff deadlines?

What to watch: There are key legal and diplomatic deadlines in coming weeks.

• June 4: The U.S. expects best and final offers from trade partners, reports say.
• June 5: The plaintiffs in the case that led to tariffs being struck down by the Court of International Trade have to file their papers with a federal appellate court, explaining why they oppose a motion to stay the trade court's ruling.
• June 9: The government has to file a reply to those papers, after which time the appellate court could rule on issuing a stay or not.
• End of June: President Trump has flagged the end of this month as possible timing for new tariffs that would affect cell phone makers like Apple and Samsung.
• July 8: For most nations, this is the end of the 90-day pause on the sweeping global reciprocal tariffs that Trump imposed in early April, and then froze a week later.
• July 9: The end of that pause for the European Union.
• July 14: The EU will impose retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods "if negotiations are not satisfactory," the bloc's top official said.
• August 12: The end of a 90-day pause on retaliatory tariffs against China.
• August 31: The end of an extension on long-standing exclusions for certain products from China tariffs.

What tariffs are in place now?

Zoom out: For now, all of the tariffs Trump previously imposed are still in effect, including a 10% global baseline tariff and additional levies on certain countries and sectors.

• The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily stayed the Court of International Trade's ruling throwing out the tariffs Trump imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.
• That ruling did not affect tariffs previously imposed on sectors like steel and aluminum, which were implemented under a different authority.

Can Trump impose tariffs in other ways?

Zoom in: If the trade court's ruling striking down the IEEPA tariffs ends up standing, the administration has a variety of other levers it can pull to impose tariffs, though some are more time-consuming than what Trump has done thus far.

• Section 232 tariffs are sectoral levies imposed in the interests of national security; they require studies first to determine impacts.
• Section 301 tariffs are designed to respond to the unfair practices of foreign governments that put burdens on U.S. commerce. These also require an assessment process.
• Section 338 tariffs date to 1930s-era trade law and give the president wide latitude to impose levies on other countries, with fewer restrictions or preliminary requirements.

What they're saying: "We're very, very confident that Plan A is all we're ever going to need," National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett told ABC last weekend, referring to the IEEPA tariffs.

• But failing that, he said administration officials have been working on alternatives since 2017.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to correct the expected date of best and final trade offers to June 4 (not June 3).

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development slashed its U.S. growth forecasts Tuesday and took global expectations down as well, citing the pervasive impacts of tariffs.

Why it matters: If the group's last outlook three months ago was cautious, then Tuesday's forecast was downright gloomy.

What they're saying: "Substantial increases in trade barriers, tighter financial conditions, weakened business and consumer confidence, and elevated policy uncertainty all pose significant risks to growth," the OECD's report said.

• "If these trends continue, they could substantially dampen economic prospects."

By the numbers: The group lowered its global GDP growth forecast to 2.9% for 2025 from the 3.1% it projected in March, and to 2.9% from 3% for 2026.

• For the U.S., it now forecasts growth of 1.6% this year and 1.5% next year, from 2.2% and 1.6% previously.

Between the lines: Among other risks, the group also flagged a heightened risk of persistent inflation.

• OECD-wide inflation for the group's 38 member countries is now expected to be 4.2% this year, a half-point higher than the outlook just six months ago.

Yes, but: The forecast hinges on perhaps the most uncertain question in global politics today — whether tariffs stick around, and at their current rates.

• "[A]n early reversal of recent trade barriers could boost economic growth and help ease inflationary pressures," the report notes.

Of note: Despite the dour overall mood, the new OECD report still projects every member country's economy growing at least slightly this year, except for Austria — and all, including Austria, growing in 2026.

President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are likely to talk this week about the ongoing trade negotiations between the world's largest economies, National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett said Sunday,

Why it matters: It would mark a major advance in the increasingly turbulent trade relationship between the countries, and is a step that U.S. officials have suggested was necessary for progress.

Catch up quick: On Friday President Trump said on Truth Social that China had "totally violated" the tariff pause agreement the two countries reached in mid-May, raising fears the detente could be all but dead.

• Later that evening, he doubled steel tariffs.

Between the lines: That pause deal with China contributed directly to a rebound in consumer confidence, CEO confidence and the stock market.

What they're saying: "President Trump, we expect, is going to have a wonderful conversation about the trade negotiations this week with President Xi, that's our expectation," Hassett said on ABC's This Week.

• Hassett said nothing was firmly scheduled yet, but the expectation was the call would happen.
• The Chinese Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.
• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in an interview on CBS's Face the Nation, would not go quite as far as Hassett, but he said "I believe we will see something very soon."

The intrigue: Bessent said the Chinese were withholding exports for some products that were part of the May trade deal.

• "Maybe it's a glitch in the Chinese system, maybe it's intentional, we'll see after the president speaks with the party chairman," he said.
• Axios' Marc Caputo reported Saturday that a State Department plan to cancel Chinese students' visas was a reaction to China withholding exports of rare earth minerals crucial to high-tech manufacturing.
• Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, in a Fox News Sunday appearance, said "the right way to say it is they're just slow-rolling the deal."

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional comments.

President Trump on Friday blasted China and accused it of violating the trade truce the two countries signed earlier this month.

Why it matters: Just as courts hollow out Trump's tariff campaign, he's re-escalating on other fronts.

Catch up quick: On May 12 the U.S. and China, following talks in Switzerland, announced a 90-day deal to lower tariffs on each other while they negotiated on trade.

• The pact lowered U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30% — essentially moving from a full trade embargo to a painful levy.

Driving the news: In recent days there have been reports the detente was not going well, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent describing talks as "a bit stalled" Thursday night.

• Trump blew it all up Friday morning.

What they're saying: "Because of this deal, everything quickly stabilized and China got back to business as usual. Everybody was happy! That is the good news!!!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.

• "The bad news is that China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, HAS TOTALLY VIOLATED ITS AGREEMENT WITH US. So much for being Mr. NICE GUY!"

By the numbers: The stock market immediately dropped on Trump's post.

• The S&P 500, which had been flat in pre-market trade before the post, was down about 0.3% by late morning.
• The index is up almost 5% since the China deal was struck, continuing a rally that started after Trump paused most other tariffs in April.

The other side: The Chinese embassy in Washington, in response to Trump's post, said it has raised concerns of late with the U.S. government over chip sector export controls, among other issues.

• "China once again urges the US to immediately correct its erroneous actions, cease discriminatory restrictions against China and jointly uphold the consensus reached at the high-level talks in Geneva," embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu said in a statement.

What to watch: It's not clear what action Trump could take against China next.

• The tariff reduction is supposed to last until August 12.
• In the meantime, a federal court ruled the tariffs Trump imposed on China were illegal anyway, a ruling that's been stayed for now.

Dave Lawler contributed.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with comments from the Chinese embassy.

A federal appellate court on Thursday temporarily stayed a ruling that effectively wiped out most of President Trump's tariffs.

Why it matters: The intervention will deepen the chaos around the Court of International Trade's Wednesday order, which threatens to upend global commerce.

Catch up quick: The trade court ruled that Trump did not have the authority under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose sweeping reciprocal and retaliatory tariffs.

• The administration immediately appealed, and suggested Thursday it could go straight to the Supreme Court to seek relief if other courts did not act quickly.

Driving the news: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order Thursday staying the trade court's ruling while it considers motions from both sides.

• It ordered the plaintiffs in the case to file a response by June 5, and the government to reply by June 9.

What they're saying: "The ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade is so wrong, and so political! Hopefully, the Supreme Court will reverse this horrible, Country threatening decision, QUICKLY and DECISIVELY," Trump said in a Truth Social post on Thursday evening.

The other side: "The administrative stay issued today simply gives the Court of Appeals more time to consider the important issues presented in our case," said Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield (D), whose office is leading the states' suit, in a statement posted to X.

• "It is not a ruling on the merits."

Go deeper: What to know about the court that paused Trump's tariffs

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment from President Trump and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield.

An obscure federal court blew up the cornerstone of President Trump's economic agenda last night, unleashing more chaos on the global economy and all but wiping out his negotiating leverage with trading partners.

Why it matters: At least for now, it turns out the legal system — not the bond market, nor weak economic indicators — is the biggest restraint on Trump's trade agenda.

Zoom in: A three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade — Reagan, Obama and Trump appointees — ruled that Trump does not have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs under 1970s-era emergency legislation.

• In fact, the judges said an injunction wasn't enough — they issued a summary judgment invalidating and blocking almost all of Trump's trade levies to date.
• Those levies were vast, from a 10% global baseline tariff, to fentanyl-related tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico, to (paused) reciprocal tariffs on dozens of other countries.
• They effectively raised U.S. tariff rates to their highest levels since the 1930s, and threatened to cost American households thousands of dollars in higher goods costs.

The big picture: Tens of thousands of containers full of goods enter the United States every day.

• Whether or even what levies to assess on their contents today, versus yesterday, is a mess that could snarl commerce across the country for days to come.

Follow the money: The levies, while causing huge economic strain, were also generating significant revenue for the government — almost $23 billion so far this month.

• They were meant to be a cornerstone of the administration's fiscal plans — trade adviser Peter Navarro wrote in an op-ed Wednesday that tariffs would generate up to $3.3 trillion in revenue over the next decade.
• Not all the income will disappear, though; tariffs imposed under a different legal authority called Section 232 — including on imports of autos, steel and aluminum — are unaffected by the ruling.

What they're saying: "This really *is* Liberation Day: The court's decision striking down Trump's mass tariffs as unlawful is a tremendous triumph for the rule of law, human freedom, and prosperity, and a deserved rebuke for arbitrary one-man rule over our livelihoods," Walter Olsen, senior fellow at the Cato Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, said of the ruling.

For the record: "It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency," White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement.

• "President Trump pledged to put America First, and the Administration is committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness."
• The administration filed a notice of appeal just minutes after the ruling.
• "The judicial coup is out of control," White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller posted to X.

The bottom line: Trump previously declared the U.S. was like a department store, and he set the prices.

• Three little-known judges just put him out of business, and upended global commerce in the process.

A federal court on Wednesday ruled President Trump does not have the authority under economic emergency legislation to impose sweeping global tariffs.

Why it matters: The U.S. Court of International Trade's ruling could bring the administration's trade war to a screeching halt.

• By blocking entirely most categories of tariffs, the court effectively wiped out most of the regime Trump put in place since taking office.

Driving the news: The court, ruling in two separate cases, issued a summary judgment throwing out all the tariffs Trump imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

• Trump used the 1977 law, which had never before been invoked in a tariff situation, to unilaterally impose sweeping trade levies worldwide.
• The two groups of plaintiffs — businesses and states — sued on the grounds that the president's orders violated the Constitution's grant of authority over import duties to Congress.
• The administration filed a notice of appeal soon after the ruling.

Zoom in: "The question in the two cases before the court is whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 ("IEEPA") delegates these powers to the President in the form of authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world," the three-judge panel wrote.

• "The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder."
• Tariffs imposed under a different legal authority called Section 232 — including on imports of autos, steel and aluminum — are unaffected by the ruling.

For the record: The court, which gets relatively little attention compared to most other federal courts, has jurisdiction over civil cases arising from trade disputes.

• The three judges who heard the case were Reagan, Obama and Trump appointees.

What they're saying: "It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency," White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement in response to the ruling.

• "President Trump pledged to put America First, and the Administration is committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness."
• White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller said on X, "The judicial coup is out of control."

The other side: Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield (D), whose office is leading the states' suit, in a statement said they brought the case "because the Constitution doesn't give any president unchecked authority to upend the economy."

• The ruling "reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim," he added.
• New York Attorney General Letitia James, who joined the suit, said in a statement the law makes clear that "no president has the power to single-handedly raise taxes" whenever they like.
• "These tariffs are a massive tax hike on working families and American businesses that would have led to more inflation, economic damage to businesses of all sizes, and job losses across the country if allowed to continue," she said.

The intrigue: The court skipped over the plaintiffs' motions for an injunction and went directly to issuing a judgment, saying IEEPA did not authorize any of the "Worldwide, Retaliatory or Trafficking" orders.

• "The challenged Tariff Orders will be vacated and their operation permanently enjoined," the court wrote.

What to watch: With tariffed goods arriving at U.S. ports every day, the confusion over what's in force and what to charge could throw imports into chaos.

• Markets, and businesses, will likely be paying rapt attention in coming days to how the administration responds and whether higher courts intervene.
• "[It] gives foreign governments — once compelled to negotiate new terms of the trade agreements the Trump administration broke — significant new leverage in ongoing trade talks," said Scott Lincicome, vice president of the Cato Institute's Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies, in a statement.

More from Axios:

• Trump pauses threatened EU tariffs until July
• Consumer sentiment jumps after U.S.-China trade truce
• Walmart, Subaru, Mattel: These are the brands raising prices due to Trump's tariffs

Editor's note: This article has been updated with new details throughout.

More than 70% of U.S. small and mid-sized businesses say tariffs have already increased their operating costs — but almost all still expect to be able to grow internationally in the coming years, per a new HSBC survey shared exclusively with Axios.

Why it matters: In an increasingly volatile and uncertain environment, corporate leaders are staying optimistic, even while they concede that it's getting more expensive to do business.

Details: HSBC's Trade Pulse survey gathered responses from more than 5,700 companies in 13 countries between April 30 and May 12, including about 1,000 U.S. businesses.

• Respondents all had international operations, and annual revenue between $50 million and $2 billion.

By the numbers: 72% of U.S. companies said tariffs have already increased their costs, and 77% expect those costs to rise further by the end of the year.

• HSBC executives say two things are driving the pressure: companies that haven't had to pay duties before are suddenly being subject to them; and competition is rising for suppliers in lower-cost environments.

Yes, but: That's not stopping companies from growing, they say.

• While more than 70% said they're trying to increase domestic reliance in the face of trade pressure, more than 90% said they still expect to be able to grow internationally in the next two years.
• That's something HSBC found broadly in U.S. companies, but much less so internationally.
• "This optimism, and the fact they are really looking to see how creatively they can grow and pivot, is really unique, and this is something unique in the data," Marissa Adams, HSBC's Americas and Europe head of global trade solutions, tells Axios.

The intrigue: The responses also indicate that businesses are moving to do two things the Trump administration wants to see happening — adopting new technologies (like AI) and re-shoring.

• 44% say they're looking at moving production domestically, while 64% are adopting new digital technologies or platforms.

The bottom line: It's still early in the tariff game, and no one's making major long-term decisions just yet, Adams says — but they are thinking about things like the structure and efficiency of their supply chains.

• "A lot of companies are still on a wait and watch," she said.
• "They're taking a look again, even those companies that perhaps are cash rich."

President Trump on Tuesday pledged the government would continue its guarantees for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, even as it moves toward possibly giving up control of the companies.

Why it matters: Trump's promise may soothe long-standing nerves about what might happen to mortgage rates in a world where Fannie and Freddie no longer had government backstops.

Between the lines: Before being taken into conservatorship in 2008, Fannie and Freddie had what was known as an "implicit guarantee" — the market's assumption that if something went wrong, the government would step in to save them.

• That's what ultimately happened in 2008.

Catch up quick: Last week, Trump floated the idea of returning the companies to public control, almost 17 years after they were rescued during the financial crisis. On Tuesday, he went a step further.

What they're saying: "I want to be clear, the U.S. Government will keep its implicit GUARANTEES, and I will stay strong in my position on overseeing them as President," Trump wrote on Truth Social Tuesday evening.

• He again referred to taking the companies public, though they're already publicly traded, albeit with the government holding most of the shares.

What to watch: Trump's post may answer the existential question of a guarantee, but not the mechanics of how it would operate.

• The Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements that serve as the vehicle for Treasury's support to the mortgage agencies are complicated and contentious arrangements.
• Unwinding them will require, as NYU's Furman Center wrote last month, "significant and controversial decisions."

Two days after threatening to impose a 50% tariff on imports from the European Union, President Trump on Sunday paused the levies until July and said talks would start "rapidly."

Why it matters: The threat of such a large tariff, on more than $600 billion of goods, sent a chill through markets that feared a sudden re-escalation of the trade war.

Catch up quick: On Friday, Trump posted to Truth Social that the EU had been "very difficult to deal with" and that talks were "going nowhere!"

• He said he'd recommend a tariff starting June 1 that was more than double what he'd imposed on "Liberation Day" in early April (but paused a week later).

Yes, but: On Sunday evening, Trump said he'd received a call from Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, requesting a pause until July 9.

• "[It] was my privilege to do so," he said on Truth Social.
• In a post to X, Von der Leyen said the EU was "ready to advance talks swiftly and decisively."

The intrigue: The Financial Times reported on Friday the U.S. was preparing to reject an approach on trade from the EU, demanding instead that the Europeans make unilateral tariff cuts first.

• Trump later said in the Oval Office he was "not looking for a deal" with Europe.

What to watch: The EU is in the midst of a public review on a proposed list of tariffs on about $100 billion in U.S. goods.

• The fate of that review, and any other counter-tariffs, are up in the air for now in light of Sunday's developments.

President Trump on Friday warned Apple that it needed to build U.S.-sold iPhones in the United States or face a 25% tariff.

Why it matters: Apple already committed to a $500 billion U.S. expansion, but now Trump wants more.

• It's a dramatic escalation with the tech giant, which was reportedly planning to move production from China to India.

What they're saying: "I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone's [sic] that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else," Trump posted to Truth Social.

• "If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the U.S.," he added.

The intrigue: Later Friday, Trump suggested the tariff would actually affect all cellphone companies that import into the U.S., as soon as next month.

• "It would be more, it would be also Samsung and anybody that makes that product, otherwise it wouldn't be fair," he told reporters in the Oval Office. "So anybody that makes that product and that'll start on, I guess, the end of June it'll come out."
• Trump also claimed he had "an understanding" with Cook that Apple could not sell India-made iPhones in the U.S. without tariffs.
• White House spokespeople did not immediately return emails for comment.
• Apple did not return a request for comment.

By the numbers: Analysts have said a U.S.-manufactured iPhone would be prohibitively expensive.

• "For US consumers, the reality of a $1000 iPhone being one of the best-made consumer products on the planet would disappear," Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives wrote recently.
• He suggested making iPhones in "New Jersey, or Texas, or another state" would boost their price tag to $3500.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional comments.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick says he's convinced of two things: The U.S. will make a long list of trade deals by mid-summer, and the tariffs forcing those deals won't raise retail prices.

Why it matters: Investors, business leaders and consumers are praying he's right.

Driving the news: Lutnick, a billionaire Wall Street CEO before entering government, was nothing but optimistic in an interview with Axios' Mike Allen at the Building the Future event in Washington.

• Asked how many of the U.S.'s 18 key trading partners would have a deal by the time a tariff pause ends July 8, he said, "I think most countries, we'll have an idea of what we want to do with them."

The big picture: Lutnick is at the forefront of the Trump administration's sweeping efforts to rewrite the rules of global trade, a campaign that has disrupted the U.S. and international economies and created deep uncertainty for businesses and consumers.

• The president's argument: The U.S. has been treated unfairly by the world for decades, at the cost of valuable American jobs — a situation that can only be fixed by a more aggressive approach.

Between the lines: Over the last few days, the single most important question about the tariffs has been what they'll do to the American consumer.

• Lutnick recently decried "silly arguments" that tariffs raise prices. A few days later, Walmart said they'd do exactly that, and a number of other companies have hinted at the same since.
• The commerce secretary didn't flinch, though. "The president has to stand strong, and you can't fix things in a day, and that's still going, but I would expect that prices in America will be unaffected."

Reality check: Notwithstanding Lutnick's certainty, retail executives expect cost pressures to build week by week, with price increases getting much more noticeable by late June or early July. 

The intrigue: While U.S. trade relations work through their biggest disruption in nearly a century, Lutnick and Trump are pushing a different incentive for foreign business leaders: a $5 million "gold card" that would confer permanent U.S. residency.

• The website, trumpcard.gov, will launch within a week
• "Everyone I meet who's not an American is going to want to buy the card if they have the fiscal capacity," he said.
• "This is for people who can help America pay off its debt. Why wouldn't you want a Plan B that says, God forbid something bad happens, you come to the airport in America and the person in immigration says, 'Welcome home.'"

Prices are going up, that's clear now — but the nation's biggest retailers are taking very different approaches to what they say on the impact of tariffs publicly.

Why it matters: President Trump's trade war is stirring echoes of the inflation that took hold of the economy just three years ago.

• Unlike the COVID era, the increase in prices was entirely foreseeable this time.

The big picture: Over the last week, the warning lights have started to flash.

• Walmart, the world's largest retailer, said last week it couldn't hold the line anymore and would have to raise some prices.
• Target said it would "offset the vast majority" of tariff impacts to consumers and remain "price competitive."
• Home Depot doesn't plan to increase prices "broadly" because of tariffs, but said some items might disappear from store shelves.
• Those comments came after the CEOs of all three met with Trump in April and warned the president that tariffs would soon lead to empty shelves, higher prices and shortages.

State of play: Trump has, for years, steadfastly insisted that Americans don't pay for tariffs — the costs, somehow, are absorbed overseas.

• But over the weekend, he demanded Walmart "eat the tariffs," which Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent acknowledged the company could only do for so long.
• It was, in its way, a concession of the reality that almost all of the tariff cost is borne domestically. (A reality backed up by the government's own data, per a recent Apricitas Economics note.)

Zoom in: Target and Home Depot both spoke about pricing this week, notably after Trump came down on Walmart.

• We don't see broad-based price increases for our customers at all going forward," Billy Bastek, Home Depot's executive vice president of merchandising, said Tuesday.
• Target was less certain: "We have many levers to use in mitigating the impact of tariffs and price is the very last resort," CEO Brian Cornell said Wednesday.

Between the lines: Zacks Investment Research analyst Sheraz Mian told Axios Twin Cities' Nick Halter he doubts Target will be able to fully absorb the tariffs.

• "They don't want to publicly acknowledge it and get into the unfavorable kind of political limelight by speaking the truth," Mian said.

The intrigue: Americans seem to only have a vague grasp of the mechanics of tariffs, even if they get the ultimate impact.

• A new report from consumer insights platform Zappi finds just 22% of people fully understand how tariffs affect the prices of goods — and only 20% think their household is ready to absorb those higher prices.
• But one way or another, they get something is coming — the latest University of Michigan consumer sentiment survey found year-ahead inflation expectations surging to 7.3%, the highest since the early 1980s.
• "If these pre-tariff strategies have run their course, we're about to see some changes in prices, and then we're going to learn how consumers are going to respond to that," Atlanta Fed president Raphael Bostic told reporters at a conference this week.

The bottom line: Customers may see certain items exiled from store shelves if they're impacted too much by tariffs.

• "There'll be some things that don't make sense that just end up going away," Home Depot's Bastek said.

The "gold card" website allowing people to buy U.S. permanent residency for $5 million will launch within a week, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Wednesday at an Axios Building the Future event in Washington.

Why it matters: President Trump has suggested the U.S. could sell 1 million of the cards — enough to retire the national debt.

Catch up quick: Trump announced the gold card in late February, offering permanent U.S. residency to anyone who shelled out the $5 million fee.

• It was meant to replace the EB-5 investor visa, which gives out green cards in return for a much smaller investment in the U.S. economy.
• Other countries have tried similar so-called golden visa programs, but wound them down after limited interest.

What they're saying: Lutnick told Axios' Mike Allen the site, trumpcard.gov, would initially allow people to register their interest in buying one of the cards.

• "All that will come over a matter of the next weeks — not month, weeks," he said.

Between the lines: Lutnick positioned the card as a safety option that also helped the U.S. fund its growing debt obligations.

• "Everyone I meet who's not an American is going to want to buy the card if they have the fiscal capacity," he said.
• "This is for people who can help America pay off its debt. Why wouldn't you want a Plan B that says. God forbid something bad happens, you come to the airport in America and the person in immigration says, 'Welcome home.'"

Editor's note: This story has been updated with comments by Lutnick.

The Trump administration conceded this weekend what economists, CEOs and consumers already knew: Americans pay for tariffs.

Why it matters: Nearly a decade of Trump trade arguments held that foreign countries, not Americans, paid the ultimate cost of a trade war.

• But the president and his economic team now acknowledge that tariffs are raising prices for everyone, from industrial ports to retail storefronts.

The big picture: Trump's sweeping global tariffs, effectively the highest in nearly a century, are expected to cost the average household more than $2,300 a year, according to the Yale Budget Lab.

• Even companies that once promised to hold the line on those costs, like Walmart, now say they have no choice but to pass them along.
• Inflation may be benign for now, but experts are increasingly convinced that higher prices are only a matter of time.

Catch up quick: After Walmart said this week it would raise prices, a furious Trump insisted on Truth Social that the company "eat the tariffs" — a concession, of sorts, that someone this side of the border had to pay something, somehow.

• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent then went on the Sunday TV shows and said that while Walmart would eat some of the tariffs, consumers would have to pay, too.

The intrigue: It was only May 11 that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick insisted people had to drop the "silly arguments" that consumers would pay the costs of trade levies.

• Four days later, the country's largest retailer said that's exactly what they'd have to do.

For the record: "The Administration has consistently maintained that the United States, the world's best and biggest market economy, has the leverage to make our trading partners ultimately bear the cost of tariffs," White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement.

• "The data backs us up: we've now had three months of below-expectation inflation reports after enacting tariffs, especially on China. Low inflation, robust jobs reports, and trillions in historic investment commitments prove that President Trump's agenda of tariffs, rapid deregulation, tax cuts, and domestic energy production is laying the groundwork to restore American Greatness."

Between the lines: Bessent said Sunday that while consumer prices may rise due to tariffs, people will see even bigger benefits from the falling price of gasoline.

• He argued it was effectively a tax cut for consumers, and would help keep inflation in line.

Reality check: With the average American vehicle using a little under 500 gallons of gas a year, and gas prices per gallon being a little over 40 cents cheaper today than a year ago, the average driver is looking at an annual savings of around $200 per car.

• That's a fraction of what Yale and other budget experts estimate tariffs will cost households.

What to watch: Multiple tariff clocks are ticking — a pause on sweeping reciprocal tariffs ends in early July, and a mutual lowering of duties with China ends in early August, unless deals can be struck between now and then.

• But even if deals are struck later this year, it may be too late to avoid at least some short-term price pain.
• "If Walmart is raising prices, it certainly means that other retailers are going to be raising prices as well," Gabelli Funds analyst Justin McAuliffe wrote last week.

Some consumer prices will likely rise due to tariffs, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent acknowledged on Sunday, even after the White House publicly warned retailers against it.

Why it matters: A week after the president's economic team insisted tariffs would not increase consumer prices, there's a different message: They will, but inflation's in check and other costs are coming down.

The big picture: Consumers' expectations for inflation are through the roof, and retailers are starting to make clear there's nothing they can do to hold prices down in the face of historic tariff rates.

• As public opinion of President Trump's economic performance sinks, his team is trying to balance what consumers see at stores with what officials argue are offsetting benefits, like lower gas and grocery prices.
• They are also fighting the same "vibes" problem the Biden administration had — inflation's getting better, but everyone's feeling worse about it.

Driving the news: Earlier this week, Walmart, the country's largest retailer, said it could no longer hold the line and would have to raise prices on some products in the coming weeks.

• On Saturday, Trump warned Walmart against it, demanding in a Truth Social post that the company "eat the tariffs."
• That followed a furious reaction from the White House in late April, after a report Amazon might show customers the impact of tariffs on some prices (which the company later denied).

What they're saying: Bessent, in Sunday show interviews, acknowledged what was coming.

• "Walmart will be absorbing some of the tariffs, some may get passed on to consumers," he told CNN's "State of the Union."

Yes, but: Bessent said he spoke to Walmart CEO Doug McMillon on Saturday and came away with the view that the company's customers were benefitting economically, more than anything else, as a result of lower gas prices.

• "So, overall, I would expect inflation to remain in line," he said.
• He later described the falling gas prices to NBC's "Meet the Press" as "a direct tax cut for consumers."
• The national average retail price for regular grades of gasoline is about 12% lower today than it was a year ago, per AAA.

The intrigue: Republicans are starting to speak out more forcefully about the impact of tariffs.

• Sen. John Curtis (R-Ut.) told CNN he was concerned about the impact of tariffs on small businesses in particular.
• Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told ABC's "This Week" on Sunday "there will be higher prices" as a result of tariffs, and he criticized the argument that trade deficits were in and of themselves problematic.

What to watch: Walmart said prices should start to rise in the next couple of weeks — and other retailers may follow soon behind them.

Avery Lotz contributed.

The U.S. may impose some tariffs by region rather than on individual countries, as time runs out to negotiate a laundry list of trade deals globally, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday.

Why it matters: The administration is quickly curtailing its 90-deals-in-90-days ambition, acknowledging the practical realities of trying to negotiate complex trade agreements with dozens of countries simultaneously.

Catch up quick: Earlier this week, President Trump told Middle Eastern business leaders that Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick would start to unilaterally advise some countries of their tariff rates in the next two to three weeks.

• "But it's not possible to meet the number of people that want to see us," Trump said.

What they're saying: Bessent, in an interview on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday, said the U.S. was focused primarily on making deals with a short list of key partners.

• "My other sense is that we will do a lot of regional deals — this is the rate for Central America, this is the rate for this part of Africa — but what we are focused on for right now is the 18 important trading relationships," Bessent said.

Flashback: On April 2, Trump unveiled a sweeping 10% global baseline tariff, plus higher reciprocal tariffs on dozens of other countries.

• On April 9, he set a 90-day pause for those higher tariffs, while leaving the baseline in place.
• So far during that pause, the U.S. has announced a trade deal with the U.K. and a temporary agreement with China to lower tariffs.

Between the lines: Bessent told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that countries that don't negotiate with the U.S. in good faith will see their tariffs go back to whatever Trump announced last month.

• "And the negotiating leverage that President Trump is talking about here is if you don't want to negotiate, then it will spring back to the April 2nd level," Bessent said.

The bottom line: Almost halfway into the president's tariff pause, the administration is taking a more pragmatic view of trade talks, potentially reducing uncertainty for markets about what comes next.

President Trump on Saturday threatened Walmart over its plan to raise prices in the face of tariffs, demanding it absorb the costs instead.

Why it matters: The White House, facing the risk of looming tariff-driven inflation, has turned to publicly threatening retailers to keep prices in check.

Catch up quick: On Thursday, Walmart said it could no longer hold the line on costs, even with tariffs on China dropping to 30% from 145%, and would have to start raising prices on some items as soon as this month.

• The idea that costs were approaching a point of no longer being easily absorbed wasn't news to the administration, per a source close to the company — it was something the White House had heard from Walmart, and hadn't pushed back on.

What they're saying: Trump took to Truth Social Saturday morning to blast the move.

• "Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain. Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected," Trump wrote.
• "Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, "EAT THE TARIFFS," and not charge valued customers ANYTHING. I'll be watching, and so will your customers!!!"

The intrigue: Walmart's move, and Trump's response, come less than a month after Walmart's CEO and other key retail executives privately warned the president that tariffs would soon lead to empty shelves and higher prices.

• That warning was seen as key in a subsequent softening of the president's tone on trade matters.

Yes, but: Just days later, the White House blasted as "hostile and political" a report that Amazon was considering showing some customers the impact of tariffs on the prices of goods (a plan Amazon denied).

Between the lines: Last weekend, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick ridiculed what he called "silly arguments" that consumers would pay higher prices due to tariffs.

• Only four days later, the nation's largest retailer said that was exactly what they'd do.

What to watch: Walmart didn't say this week precisely when prices would rise, how much or exactly on what, leaving it some wiggle room — though the changes are expected to start showing up in the next couple of weeks.

• "We have always worked to keep our prices as low as possible and we won't stop. We'll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can given the reality of small retail margins," a Walmart spokesperson told Axios.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with background on Walmart's pricing.

Shares in UnitedHealth Group plunged on Thursday, their eighth straight day of declines, after a Wall Street Journal report on a purported criminal probe into alleged Medicare fraud.

Why it matters: The stock, a major Dow component, has now lost more than half its value since last December, when a key executive was shot and killed in broad daylight in New York City.

• Since then the company has been under public pressure amid broader questions about the insurance industry, and this week its CEO stepped down abruptly.

By the numbers: UnitedHealth shares were down $56, or 18%, at $252 in mid-morning trade Thursday.

• The stock traded north of $600 last December, before insurance unit leader Brian Thompson's killing in NYC.

Catch up quick: Late Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported the company was under criminal investigation for possible Medicare fraud.

• UnitedHealth issued a statement calling the report "deeply irresponsible" and saying it had not been notified of the purported investigation.

President Trump on Thursday said he told Apple not to expand iPhone production in India, while also indicating the possibility of a sweeping new trade deal with the country.

Why it matters: Apple was reportedly planning to massively expand phone manufacturing for the U.S. market in India, as a workaround for the ongoing trade war with China.

What they're saying: "I had a little problem with Tim Cook yesterday, I said to him 'Tim you're my friend, I've treated you very good,'" Trump told a news conference in Qatar.

• "I don't want you building in India," Trump said he told Cook.
• "I said to Tim, I said, 'Tim we've treated you really good, we put up with all the plants that you built in China for years ... we're not interested in you building in India, India can take care of themselves," Trump said.

Apple spokespeople were not immediately available for comment early Thursday morning.

• Apple shares were down 1% in early premarket trading.

The intrigue: While speaking about Cook and Apple, Trump also noted that the U.S. was working on a trade deal that would purportedly involve India charging no tariffs on U.S. products.

• That would be a significant change from the status quo, as India has some of the highest levies on U.S. goods now.

Editor's note: This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Go deeper: Trump tariffs shake foundations of Apple's iPhone empire