By DAMIAN J. TROISE, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — Uncertainty over tariffs and an unpredictable trade war is weighing heavily on companies as they report their latest financial results and try to give investors financial forecasts.

Related Articles

Bessent assails IMF and World Bank and says there’s an ‘opportunity for a big deal’ with China

The startup behind Shark Tank’s seaweed-based bacon

Home buyers may face surprise credit hit from student loans

The world’s biggest companies have caused $28 trillion in climate damage, a new study estimates

EVs, tariffs in the spotlight as Chinese automakers take leading role at Shanghai auto show

Some tariffs remain in place against key U.S. trading partners, but others have been postponed to give nations time to negotiate. The tariff and trade picture has been shifting for months, sometimes changing drastically on a daily basis. Those shifts make it difficult for companies and investors to make a reliable assessment of any impact to costs and sales.

On Tuesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he expects a “de-escalation” in the trade war between the U.S. and China, but cautioned that talks between the two sides had yet to formally start.

Here’s how several big companies are dealing with the tariff confusion:

Tesla

Tesla is in a better position than most car companies to deal with tariffs because it makes most of its U.S. cars domestically. But it still sources materials from other nations and will face import taxes.

The bigger impact will be seen in the company’s energy business. The company said the impact will be “outsized” because it sources LFP battery cells from China.

The broader trade war could also hurt the company as China, the world’s largest electric vehicle market, retaliates against the U.S. Tesla was forced earlier this month to stop taking orders from mainland customers for two models, its Model S and Model X. It makes the Model Y and Model 3 for the Chinese market at its factory in Shanghai.

CEO Elon Musk, an adviser to President Donald Trump, on Tuesday reiterated that he believes “lower tariffs are generally a good idea for prosperity.” But he added that ultimately the president decides on what tariffs to impose.

Akzo Nobel

The Amsterdam-based maker of paints and coatings for industrial and commercial use said the big risk from tariffs could come in the form of lower demand for its products.

The company said almost all sales of finished goods in the U.S. were locally produced, with the majority of raw materials locally sourced.

“Over the years, we deliberately localized both our procurement and production in the U.S.,” said CEO Gregoire Poux-Guillaume, in a conference call with analysts. “We also largely run China for China and use the rest of Asia instead as an export base.”

The company’s products range from paints and coatings for the automotive industry to the do-it-yourself homeowner. Broader tariffs could squeeze consumers and businesses and hurt sales.

Boston Scientific

The medical device maker said it expects most of the effecs of tariffs to hit the company during the second half of the year, but that it can absorb the impact.

The company raised its earnings and revenue forecasts for the year, despite the tariffs. It estimates a $200 million impact from tariffs in 2025, but said it can offset that through higher sales and reductions in discretionary spending.

The company said it has a long-standing supply chain around the globe and has made significant investments in the U.S.

Boeing

Boeing said much of its supply chain is in the U.S. and many of its imports from Canada and Mexico are exempt from tariffs under an existing trade agreement.

The company does have suppliers in Japan and Italy, but it expects to recover those tariff costs. The net annual cost of higher tariffs on the supply chain is less than $500 million.

A bigger concern is the potential for retaliatory tariffs, which could impact its ability to deliver aircraft. China, a key target for U.S. tariffs, has retaliated in part by no longer accepting deliveries of Boeing aircraft.

AT&T

AT&T, like its peers in the telecommunications sector, faces higher costs for cellphones and other equipment.

The company said it believes it can manage anticipated higher costs, based on the current pause in some tariffs and its supply chain.

“The magnitude of any increase will depend on a variety of factors, including how much of the tariffs the vendors pass on, the impact that the tariffs have on consumer and business demand,” said CEO John Stankey, on a conference call with analysts.

By CHRISTINA A. CASSIDY

ATLANTA (AP) — Florida’s “hanging chads” ballot controversy riveted the nation during the 2000 presidential contest and later prompted Congress to create an independent commission to help states update their voting equipment.

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has operated in relative anonymity since, but is now central to President Donald Trump’sexecutive order seeking to overhaul elections. One of the commission’s boards will meet Thursday in North Carolina, the first commission-related meeting since the directives were announced.

Among other things, Trump directed the agency to update the national voter registration form to add a proof of citizenship requirement. But whether the president can order an independent agency to act and whether the commission has the authority to do what Trump wants will likely be settled in court.

FILE – Broward County, Fla. canvassing board member Judge Robert Rosenberg uses a magnifying glass to examine a disputed ballot at the Broward County Courthouse in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Nov. 24, 2000. (AP Photo/Alan Diaz, File)

Why was the commission created?

Congress approved the Help America Vote Act in 2002 to help states replace outdated voting systems and improve the voting experience.

It passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support and was signed into law by then-President George W. Bush, a Republican who won the 2000 presidential contest over Democrat Al Gore in a disputed election that went to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The culprit was a method of voting at the time in Florida that relied on so-called punch-card ballots, which required voters to mark their choices using a hand-held stylus. But thousands of voters didn’t punch their ballot choices completely, leaving it to local election workers — some using magnifying glasses — to divine their intent. The resulting chaos in the pivotal swing state and intense national attention turned “hanging” and “pregnant” chads into household terms.

The Supreme Court ultimately stopped the counting, leaving Bush with a 537-vote victory margin that gave him the Electoral Votes he needed to claim the presidency.

The 2002 law was designed to modernize the voting process. Under it, the Election Assistance Commission was given a number of mandates: distribute $2.8 billion in federal money for new voting equipment; create voluntary guidelines for voting systems and establish a federal testing and certification program for them; oversee the national voter registration form; and gather data about federal elections.

The four commissioners who lead the agency are nominated by the president based on recommendations from the majority and minority leaders in the U.S. House and Senate, then confirmed by the Senate. No political party can be represented by more than two commissioners.

At various points, the agency has faced budget cuts, staffing shortages and gridlock caused by vacancies in the commissioner positions. But a consistent budget and a quorum among the commissioners since 2019 has led to increased stability, with election officials praising its efforts in recent years.

FILE – An election worker walks near voting machines at the Fulton County Election Hub and Operation Center, Nov. 5, 2024, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/John Bazemore, File)

Trump wants to put his own stamp on elections

Trump has long been skeptical of how elections are run, making false claims that the 2020 election was “rigged” against him. Multiple reviews of that election confirmed his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

He has continued to criticize voting processes since his win last November, including in his March 25 executive order, which calls for major changes that include a proof-of-citizenship requirement when people register to vote for federal elections.

While Trump directed several federal agencies to act, two of the order’s major provisions were directed at the Election Assistance Commission.

Related Articles

Israeli strike in Gaza kills 23 as Arab mediators seek long-term truce

US Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois says he won’t run for sixth term

Trump administration is still resisting the judge’s orders in Abrego Garcia deportation case

IRS turmoil: Leadership churn, worker exodus and threats to groups’ tax-exempt status roil agency

Law firms fighting Trump to ask judges to permanently block executive orders

It was instructed to “take appropriate action” within 30 days to require documentary proof of citizenship on the national voter registration form. The order outlines acceptable documents as a U.S. passport, a REAL-ID compliant driver’s license or official military ID that “indicates the applicant is a citizen,” or a government-issued photo ID accompanied by proof of citizenship.

It also directed the commission to “take all appropriate action to cease” federal money for any state that fails to use the form that includes the proof-of-citizenship requirement, though a handful of states are exempt under federal law. Trump also wants the commission to revise standards for voting systems.

Election experts have said the changes are unrealistic given the process outlined in federal law, which includes reviews by advisory groups and a period for public comment. The last major update to the voluntary guidelines for voting systems took years and was approved by the commission in 2021.

“It’s practically impossible to demand that commissioners of the EAC create wholly new voting system guidelines based on highly questionable criteria within 180 days,” said David Becker, a former Justice Department lawyer who leads the Center for Election Innovation & Research. “It raises the question as to whether this was designed to create chaos since it cannot be practically and competently completed.”

Lawsuits say the commission is independent and not subject to Trump’s orders

Trump’s executive order has prompted lawsuits by voting rights groups, the Democratic Party and Democratic elected officials in 21 states. They say the president is exceeding his authority under the Constitution.

A lawsuit by 19 Democratic attorneys general argues that the commission was created by Congress to operate independently to protect elections and is required to make decisions “under standards of bipartisanship” and in collaboration with the states.

“The Elections EO seeks to eradicate all those safeguards — aiming to force the Commission to rubberstamp the President’s policy preferences on, among other things, voter registration and voting systems,” lawyers for the states wrote.

Justin Levitt, an expert in constitutional law who served previously as deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s civil rights division, said Congress established the Election Assistance Commission as independent of the president and did not give it any enforcement authority.

“It’s not like most of the other agencies in the federal government, and that makes a big difference in the amount that it can do or will do to further Trump’s agenda,” Levitt said. “Legally, that (order) has as much impact as if I told the EAC what to do or you told the EAC what to do.”

What happens next?

On Thursday, the commission’s Standards Board begins its annual meeting in North Carolina, where it will hear from election officials from across the country, many of whom are likely to have questions about the commission’s role under Trump’s order.

Earlier this month, the commission’s executive director sent a letter to state election officials summarizing the proof-of-citizenship requirement outlined in Trump’s order and asking how states would propose to implement it, if required, and what effect that would have on voter registration.

Chairman Donald Palmer said the agency was following the law, which governs the way any proposed change to the federal form can be made.

“That’s the process that we’ve done in the past, and that’s the process we did this time,” Palmer said. “In my mind, this is really to get information from the states.”

He praised the commission’s ability in recent years to find consensus and noted that the litigation would likely settle questions surrounding the executive order.

“We are in the executive branch, but we are an independent agency. And so those answers will – I’m sure those will be resolved,” he said.

Associated Press writer Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report.

Scott Hildebrand, city administrator in Landfall and Maple Lake, Minn., is adding another city to his roster.

Hildebrand has been hired to be part-time city administrator/clerk of Birchwood Village. Hildebrand will work 20 hours per week; city officials expect he will work at least four hours in the office, on Thursdays, and be available by appointment if requested, according to the hiring letter.

Hildebrand will be paid $36 per hour and not receive any benefits, the letter states.

The Birchwood Village City Council agreed to a six-month contract with Hildebrand; a review of performance and general satisfaction regarding the relationship will be conducted after 90 days and again at the end of the term.

Mayor Jennifer Arsenault said Tuesday that she and the rest of the council are “delighted” to have Hildebrand on board.

The former city administrator, Rebecca Kellen, resigned on Feb. 7. She had been with the city for almost three years.

According to an article in the Maple Lake Messenger, Hildebrand was hired in July 2024 to be city administrator in Maple Lake, population 2,200. His starting salary was reported to be $101,358.

Since January 2024, he also has served as the part-time city administrator / HRA director in Landfall, an 840-resident mobile home park.

Hildebrand previously served as city administrator of Pine City, Minn.; village administrator of Turtle Lake, Wis.; city administrator of Valley Center, Kan.; professional standards manager of Rochester, Minn., and risk manager/assistant city attorney of Lenexa, Kan. He also has worked as a staff attorney for the League of Kansas Municipalities.

Hildebrand has a law degree from Washburn University School of Law and a bachelor’s degree in business administration from Oklahoma State University. He also has a certified public manager certificate from the University of Kansas.

Hildebrand did not immediately return a phone call or email seeking comment.

Related Articles

Arrest warrant issued for man who skipped end of Lake Elmo rape trial

Forest Lake newspaper will now be based in Stillwater

Woodbury duplex destroyed in fire

A Scandia pastor overcame addiction. Now he confronts the stigma in a podcast aimed at faith communities.

World Tai Chi Day event returns to Stillwater on April 26

By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The world’s biggest corporations have caused $28 trillion in climate damage, a new study estimates as part of an effort to make it easier for people and governments to hold companies financially accountable, like the tobacco giants have been.

Related Articles

$50 million prize funded by Musk foundation goes to carbon-removal company that helps Indian farmers

84% of the world’s coral reefs hit by worst bleaching event on record

Book Review: ‘Hope Dies Last’ visits visionaries fighting global warming

Mississippi River deemed most endangered river in U.S., conservation group says

Your clothes are shedding bits of plastic. Here’s what people are doing about it this Earth Day

A Dartmouth College research team came up with the estimated pollution caused by 111 companies, with more than half of the total dollar figure coming from 10 fossil fuel providers: Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, National Iranian Oil Co., Pemex, Coal India and the British Coal Corporation.

For comparison, $28 trillion is a shade less than the sum of all goods and services produced in the United States last year.

At the top of the list, Saudi Aramco and Gazprom have each caused a bit more than $2 trillion in heat damage over the decades, the team calculated in a study published in Wednesday’s journal Nature. The researchers figured that every 1% of greenhouse gas put into the atmosphere since 1990 has caused $502 billion in damage from heat alone, which doesn’t include the costs incurred by other extreme weather such as hurricanes, droughts and floods.

People talk about making polluters pay, and sometimes even take them to court or pass laws meant to rein them in.

The study is an attempt to determine “the causal linkages that underlie many of these theories of accountability,” said its lead author, Christopher Callahan, who did the work at Dartmouth but is now an Earth systems scientist at Stanford University. The research firm Zero Carbon Analytics counts 68 lawsuits filed globally about climate change damage, with more than half of them in the United States.

“Everybody’s asking the same question: What can we actually claim about who has caused this?” said Dartmouth climate scientist Justin Mankin, co-author of the study. “And that really comes down to a thermodynamic question of can we trace climate hazards and/or their damages back to particular emitters?”

The answer is yes, Callahan and Mankin said.

The researchers started with known final emissions of the products — such as gasoline or electricity from coal-fired power plants — produced by the 111 biggest carbon-oriented companies going as far back as 137 years, because that’s as far back as any of the companies’ emissions data go and carbon dioxide stays in the air for much longer than that. They used 1,000 different computer simulations to translate those emissions into changes for Earth’s global average surface temperature by comparing it to a world without that company’s emissions.

Using this approach, they determined that pollution from Chevron, for example, has raised the Earth’s temperature by .045 degrees Fahrenheit (.025 degrees Celsius).

The researchers also calculated how much each company’s pollution contributed to the five hottest days of the year using 80 more computer simulations and then applying a formula that connects extreme heat intensity to changes in economic output.

This system is modeled on the established techniques scientists have been using for more than a decade to attribute extreme weather events, such as the 2021 Pacific Northwest heat wave, to climate change.

Mankin said that in the past, there was an argument of, “Who’s to say that it’s my molecule of CO2 that’s contributed to these damages versus any other one?” He said his study “really laid clear how the veil of plausible deniability doesn’t exist anymore scientifically. We can actually trace harms back to major emitters.”

Shell declined to comment. Aramco, Gazprom, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and BP did not respond to requests for comment.

“All methods they use are quite robust,” said Imperial College London climate scientist Friederike Otto, who heads World Weather Attribution, a collection of scientists who try rapid attribution studies to see if specific extreme weather events are worsened by climate change and, if so, by how much. She didn’t take part in the study.

“It would be good in my view if this approach would be taken up more by different groups. As with event attribution, the more groups do it, the better the science gets and the better we know what makes a difference and what does not,” Otto said. So far, no climate liability lawsuit against a major carbon emitter has been successful, but maybe showing “how overwhelmingly strong the scientific evidence” is can change that, she said.

In the past, damage caused by individual companies were lost in the noise of data, so it couldn’t be calculated, Callahan said.

“We have now reached a point in the climate crisis where the total damages are so immense that the contributions of a single company’s product can amount to tens of billions of dollars a year,” said Chris Field, a Stanford University climate scientist who didn’t take part in the research.

This is a good exercise and proof of concept, but there are so many other climate variables that the numbers that Callahan and Mankin came up with are probably a vast underestimate of the damage the companies have really caused, said Michael Mann, a University of Pennsylvania climate scientist who wasn’t involved in the study.

Follow Seth Borenstein on X at @borenbears. The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.