Pasta shops prep for price hikes as Trump targets European imports
Briefly

Pasta shops prep for price hikes as Trump targets European imports
"Steel: 50%. Copper: 50%. Cars: up to 25%. But an even bigger Trump-era levy looms: 107 % on Italian pasta. Mamma mia. It started with the U.S. Commerce Department launching what it says was a routine antidumping review, based on allegations Italian pasta makers sold product into the US at below-market prices and undercut local competitors. That has led to a threat of 92% duties, which would come on top of the 15% tariff President Donald Trump's administration imposed on European exports generally."
"The news sent shockwaves through Italy, where 13 producers would be subject to the whopping one-two punch. They say sales in their second biggest export market would shrivel if prices to American consumers more than double. And while the measure would hardly prompt pasta shortages, it still has perplexed importers like Sal Auriemma, whose shop in Philadelphia's Italian market, Claudio Specialty Food, has been operating for over 60 years."
"Pasta adds heft to Italy's economy Italy is a nation of avid pasta eaters. Less known is that most of the tortellini, spaghetti and rigatoni its factories churn out gets sent abroad. The U.S. accounts for about 15% of its €4 billion ($4.65 billion) in exports, making it Italy's largest market after Germany, data from farmers' association Coldiretti show."
A U.S. Commerce Department antidumping review triggered proposed duties of 92% on Italian pasta, which would stack with a 15% Europe-wide tariff to reach a combined 107% levy. The measure targets 13 Italian producers and could push American retail prices sharply higher, shrinking sales in a key export market. Importers and Italian officials contend the action lacks clear evidence and unfairly targets a basic food staple rather than luxury goods. Italy exports around €4 billion in pasta, with the U.S. accounting for roughly 15% of that trade, supporting many small and medium-sized producers.
Read at Los Angeles Times
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]