Black Friday online sales on track to hit record high: What are people buying?
aire images/Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — People haven’t only been filling their plates this Thanksgiving weekend — it also seems they’ve been filling their online shopping carts.
Black Friday online shopping this year is on pace to break a record with between $10.7 billion and $11 billion in sales, according to Adobe Analytics, which tracks U.S. e-commerce data.
As of Friday evening, spending on online shopping was up more than 8% compared to last year, according to Adobe.
The record pace of Black Friday buying follows record-setting online shopping on Thanksgiving itself, the analytics firm said. Consumers spent a record $6.1 billion online on Turkey Day — up nearly 9% compared to a year ago, according to Adobe.
What are people buying this Black Friday?
Adobe said deep discounts are likely fueling the online spending spree, including discounts on toys of more than 27% off the listed price. Toys have seen a 178% boost in online Black Friday sales so far, compared to an average day in October.
Other popular items on Black Friday include makeup and skin care sets, LEGO sets, “Wicked” toys, Bluetooth speakers, TVs, patio heaters and air fryers, according to Adobe.
Increasingly, online shopping is happening on smaller screens. More than half of all online sales on Black Friday — 57.6% — were on mobile screens, according to Adobe. That’s up from 55.5% last year.
(NEW YORK) — President-elect Donald Trump this week vowed to block the purchase of U.S. Steel by Japanese steelmaker Nippon Steel Corp., promising to bolster the domestic steel industry with tariffs.
“I am totally against the once great and powerful U.S. Steel being bought by a foreign company, Trump said in a post on Truth Social, pledging to make U.S. Steel “Strong and Great Again, and it will happen FAST!”
Trump has proposed a tax as high as 20% on every product imported from all U.S. trading partners, as well as a tax of between 60% and 100% on all goods from China, the world’s leading steel producer.
Those policies could modestly improve the outlook for domestic steelmakers by hiking prices, boosting revenue and increasing employment, though the benefits would not lift the sector to the heights attained in its heyday, experts told ABC News.
The experts warned, however, that a potential rekindling of consumer price increases as a result of the wide-ranging tariffs could damage the steel industry as part of a wider economic slowdown.
The policies also risk harming the nation’s manufacturing sector as a whole, since the tariffs would hike costs for factories that rely on raw steel as an input, making those firms less competitive with their international counterparts, the experts said.
“We have tried to help the steel industry many, many times before,” Kyle Handley, a professor of economics at the University of California, San Diego, told ABC News, pointing to steel tariffs established during Trump’s first term and retained under President Joe Biden.
“Yet, here we are and the industry still needs more help,” Handley added.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Trump transition team touted the tariffs imposed during his first term in office.
“In his first term, President Trump instituted tariffs against China that created jobs, spurred investment, and resulted in no inflation. President Trump will work quickly to fix and restore an economy that puts American workers [first] by re-shoring American jobs, lowering inflation, raising real wages, lowering taxes, cutting regulations, and unshackling American energy,” Trump transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.
Tariffs remain popular with steel industry leaders. The Steel Manufacturers Association, or SMA, the largest U.S. trade association representing steelmakers, has urged the incoming Trump administration to strengthen steel tariffs.
“We are under constant threat from nonmarket economies who evade our trade laws to dump cheap, heavily subsidized, high-emissions steel and other products into the American market, making it hard for domestic manufacturers to compete,” SMA President Philip Bell said in a statement on Tuesday.
“Fortunately, President-elect Trump has vowed to use every tool he can to end unfair trade while stimulating growth in jobs and productivity,” Bell added.
In 2018, Trump slapped tariffs on aluminum and steel from a host of countries, including Mexico, Canada and the European Union.
Over the ensuing years, U.S. steel prices soared and output climbed.
The average price of a ton of hot-rolled steel — a common metric used for steel prices — soared from about $700 to $1,850 between 2017 and 2021, according to a study last year by the United States International Trade Commission, a government agency.
However, prices also spiked in non-U.S. steel markets over that period amid a global rise in demand, leaving only a modest impact from the tariffs, the study found. Steel production showed a similarly incremental advance, ticking upward by nearly 2% per year on average due to the tariffs, the study showed.
“It was a good thing for the steel industries because they were getting higher prices for steel and producing more,” Handley said.
The tariffs did not cause a sustained increase in employment for the steel industry, however, according to some data. Nationwide employment at steel and iron mills stood at 80,600 in 2017 — and registered the exact same number of workers last year, government data showed.
Technological advances in steel production have made the work less labor intensive, reducing the need for employees, Katheryn Russ, an economics professor at the University of California, Davis, told ABC News.
The proposed across-the-board tariffs could amplify the benefits for the steel industry that resulted from tariffs initiated during Trump’s first term, Russ said. But, she added, “It is unclear how it would affect employment in steel plants.”
Trump’s proposals would also intensify the negative effects that resulted from the first round of tariffs, including cost increases for a range of manufacturers that use raw steel as inputs, experts said. Those higher costs would hurt the competitiveness of such U.S. producers, risking lost revenue and potential layoffs, they added.
“Everybody who buys steel would now have higher costs,” Handley said. “We can have a debate about who should win or lose from that, but you can’t have everybody win.”
Economists widely forecast that tariffs of the magnitude proposed by Trump would also increase prices paid by U.S. shoppers, since importers typically pass along a share of the cost of those higher taxes to consumers.
A potential price spike risks slashing consumer purchases and slowing the economy, which would hurt a wide swath of businesses, including steel producers, Gordon Johnson, whose firm, GLJ Research, analyzes the steel industry, told ABC News.
“People will buy less of everything,” Johnson said. “That would be very bad for all U.S. businesses — steel companies as well.”
Still, Johnson said he understands the enduring cultural resonance of the steel industry, citing the phenomenon as a reason for why the sector receives attention from policymakers.
“When you say ‘steelworkers,’ you think of some guy who gets up at 6 a.m., gets McDonald’s coffee, puts on overalls and a big flannel and goes to work in the mill,” Johnson said. “He’s a hard worker and a quintessential U.S. citizen.”
He added, “Steel was a historic and traditional American staple. That’s why people care so much.”
(WASHINGTON) — Tariff threats voiced by President-elect Donald Trump this week rippled through global stocks and triggered warnings from U.S. retail executives about the risk of higher prices.
Former President George W. Bush, who congratulated Trump a day after the election, has not commented on Trump’s remarks, in keeping with a low public profile. As recently as 2021, however, Bush criticized trade barriers, lamenting the GOP under Trump as “isolationist, protectionist.”
Trump’s support for tariffs and skepticism toward global trade departs from previous Republican presidents spanning the past four decades.
Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and his father, George H.W. Bush, each venerated free trade, though in some cases they put forward policies similar to Trump’s protectionist proposals.
“Trump is not talking about free trade,” John Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University and a former senior economist on the Council of Economic Advisers under Reagan. “Trump’s rhetoric is completely different.”
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Trump transition team said his tariff plans would boost the U.S. economy.
“In his first term, President Trump instituted tariffs against China that created jobs, spurred investment, and resulted in no inflation. President Trump will work quickly to fix and restore an economy that puts American workers by re-shoring American jobs, lowering inflation, raising real wages, lowering taxes, cutting regulations, and unshackling American energy,” Trump transition spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said.
Trump late Monday said he would charge Mexico and Canada with a 25% tariff on all products coming into the United States until action is taken by those countries to stem illegal immigration and the overflow of drugs across the border.
For China, Trump said that he’d impose an additional 10% tariff on products coming to the U.S.
The declarations of trade hostility echoed vows made by Trump on the campaign trail.
Speaking at the Economic Club of Chicago in October, Trump called “tariff” the “most most beautiful word in the dictionary.”
Tariffs as high as 2,000% would safeguard key U.S. industries, such as auto manufacturing, Trump said. In the absence of tariffs, Trump added, it’s “going to be the end of Michigan.”
The favorable tone toward protectionist policies contrasts with rhetoric voiced by Trump’s Republican predecessors.
Reagan, who served in the latter years of the Cold War in the 1980s, invoked free trade as a weapon in the fight against authoritarian adversaries abroad and perceived demagogues at home.
“Our peaceful trading partners are not our enemies; they are our allies,” then-President Ronald Reagan said in 1988, after signing a free trade agreement with Canada.
“We should beware of the demagogues who are ready to declare a trade war against our friends — weakening our economy, our national security, and the entire free world — all while cynically waving the American flag,” Reagan added.
The elder Bush, who had served as Reagan’s vice president, adopted a similar posture toward trade.
As president, George H.W. Bush sought to improve trade ties with China, and he helped establish the World Trade Organization, an international body that aims to facilitate global trade through a shared set of regulations.
In the early 1990s, Bush negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, a trade pact between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
“Free trade throughout the Americas is an idea whose time has come,” Bush said at a ceremony promoting NAFTA in December 1992.
“This century’s epic struggle between totalitarianism and democracy is over. It’s dead. Democracy has prevailed,” he added. “Today, we see unfolding around the world a revolution of hope and courage, propelled by the aspiration of ordinary people for freedom and a better life.”
The deal was ratified under Bush’s successor, President Bill Clinton, a Democrat.
During his first presidential campaign in 2016, Trump sharply criticized NAFTA, which had drawn criticism for allowing manufacturers to relocate plants abroad and lay off U.S. workers.
Weeks before the 2016 presidential election, Trump described NAFTA as “the single worst trade deal ever approved in this country.”
Like Reagan and his father, George W. Bush voiced support for free trade while in office. Since then, he has continued to back global commerce and oppose trade barriers.
“Since World War II, America has encouraged and benefited from the global advance of free markets, from the strength of democratic alliances, and from the advance of free societies,” George W. Bush said in 2017.
“Free nations are less likely to threaten and fight each other. And free trade helped make America into a global economic power,” George W. Bush added.
Despite their rhetoric, Trump’s predecessors within the Republican Party put forward some policies that resembled his proposals this week.
Reagan slapped 45% tariffs on Japanese motorcycles, and 100% tariffs on some Japanese electronics, seeking to counter that nation’s economic rise and bolster domestic industry. Reagan also placed an annual quota on the allowable number of imported Japanese cars.
“There was a huge gap between rhetoric and reality,” Hanke, the former Reagan administration economist, told ABC News.
For his part, George W. Bush attempted to protect the U.S. steel industry by placing tariffs on some steel imports. Facing pushback from the World Trade Organization and threats of retaliation from other countries, he removed the tariffs after 18 months.
(WASHINGTON) — Social media platform TikTok is hurtling toward a U.S. ban that could upend its business and frustrate more than 150 million American users — unless President-elect Donald Trump finds a way to reverse the policy.
Trump, who boasts 14 million followers on TikTok, voiced opposition to the ban earlier this year. The policy, which orders TikTok to find a U.S. parent company or face a ban, is set to take effect on Jan. 19, a day before Trump’s inauguration.
An effort to eliminate the ban may present formidable political challenges and legal hurdles, experts told ABC News. The outcome could depend on support from an array of major institutions ranging from Congress and the Supreme Court to tech giants like Google and Oracle, they added.
The China-owned app has faced growing scrutiny from government officials over fears that user data could fall into the possession of the Chinese government and the app could be weaponized by China to spread misinformation.
There is little evidence that TikTok has shared U.S. user data with the Chinese government or that the Chinese government has asked the app to do so, cybersecurity experts previously told ABC News.
TikTok did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment. Neither did Trump’s transition team.
The president is expected to try to stop the ban of TikTok after he takes office, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday, citing people familiar with his views on the matter.
Here’s what to know about the different ways that Trump could try to stop the TikTok ban, according to experts:
Push Congress to repeal the TikTok ban
The most straightforward way to reverse the policy would be a repeal of the law that enacted the ban in the first place, experts told ABC News.
A repeal would require passage in both houses of Congress, landing the measure on Trump’s desk for his signature.
“The easiest way is to ask Congress to reverse the ban,” Anupam Chander, a professor of law and technology at Georgetown University, told ABC News. But, he added, it isn’t as easy as it sounds.
Congress voted in favor of the ban only seven months ago. In the House of Representatives, the ban passed by an overwhelming margin of 352-65. In the Senate, 79 members voted in favor of the measure, while 18 opposed and 3 abstained.
A repeal effort carries political risks for Trump, since it could be perceived as conciliatory toward China, in contrast with the adversarial tone voiced by Trump on the campaign trail, James Lewis, a data security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told ABC News.
“It’s a political problem,” Lewis said, noting that Trump could soften potential backlash by seeking a reform of the law rather than an outright repeal.
Trump may not need Congress to repeal the ban. A lawsuit against the ban brought by TikTok on First Amendment grounds currently stands before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Experts who spoke to ABC News said they expect the court to rule against TikTok, but the company could then appeal, potentially sending the case to the Supreme Court before the ban takes effect. The Supreme Court may determine that the legal challenge holds sufficient merit to delay implementation of the ban, leading ultimately to a rejection of the law.
“The Supreme Court may want a crack at this,” Alan Rozenshtein, a law professor at the University of Minnesota who focuses on the First Amendment, told ABC News.
Refuse to enforce the TikTok ban
Instead of repealing the law or counting on court intervention, Trump could try to prevent the Justice Department from enforcing the measure, experts said.
The law orders distributors like Apple and Google to stop offering the social media platform in their app stores, and it requires cloud service providers like Oracle to withhold the infrastructure necessary for TikTok to operate.
Companies that violate the law risk a penalty of $5,000 for each user who accesses TikTok. “That adds up,” Rozenshtein said.
In theory, Trump’s Justice Department could opt against enforcement of the law, reassuring the likes of Apple and Oracle that the companies would not face prosecution in the event of a violation, experts said.
Along similar lines, the Trump administration could take up an interpretation of the ban that affords it wide latitude in finding that TikTok has complied with a requirement that it divest from parent company ByteDance, experts said.
In other words, even if TikTok has made little effort to comply with the law, the Trump administration could attempt a reading of the measure that finds the company has met the threshold necessary to avoid a ban, Rozenshtein said.
If Trump opts against enforcement, the move could still prove insufficient. Companies like Apple and Oracle may decide to comply with the ban anyway, since they could face legal risk if the Trump administration reverses its approach, Rozenshtein added.
“Trump is mercurial,” Rozenshtein said. “If you are Apple’s general counsel, do you really want this hanging over you?”
Help TikTok find a U.S. buyer
Finally, Trump could try to find a U.S. buyer for TikTok, allowing the platform to avoid a ban. This approach may appeal to Trump’s self-image as a business dealmaker, but time is running short for such a significant business transaction and TikTok has shown little appetite for it, experts said.
The law allows for a 90-day extension of the deadline for a TikTok sale, as long as the company is advancing toward an agreement. Under such a scenario, the deadline would move back to April, providing Trump with additional time.
“It’s possible that he’ll try to force TikTok to come to some kind of deal with American buyers,” Lewis said. “It’s not likely. TikTok will hold out as long as they can.”
China has signaled opposition to the sale of TikTok to a U.S. company, The Wall Street Journal reported in March.
Alternatively, Trump could seek a compromise measure in Congress that affords him additional time and wider latitude to establish a U.S.-based operation for TikTok, experts said. Or the Trump administration could offer up an interpretation of the law that gives it space to strike a compromise with TikTok.
TikTok previously proposed a solution called “Project Texas,” in which the company would keep all data on U.S. users within the country through a partnership with Oracle. When TikTok CEO Shou Chew testified before Congress last year, several members raised concern about a potential lack of third-party oversight in such an arrangement.
Trump could seek to assuage the concerns of members of Congress while reaching terms satisfactory to TikTok, Chander said.
“Trump may be able to do things that reassure the American people that the app is safe, and that it is bringing a lot of the programming here to U.S. soil,” Chander said.
