WASHINGTON (AP) — American businesses and consumers soon will have a better idea of how President Donald Trump’s foreign trade agenda might affect them now that the United States has imposed higher tariffs on products from dozens of countries.

It’s been nearly 100 years since the nation had an overall import tax rate as high as the one set Thursday. But the individual impact on business costs and consumer prices could vary as much as the tariffs applied to goods of nearly 70 U.S. trading partners, from complicated economies like the European Union to the small African nation of Lesotho.

Exports from a majority of them are getting taxed at 15%. For a handful of countries in Asia, the rate is 19%. Products from the rest are subject to taxes of 20% to 50%. Meanwhile, a 55% tariff on Chinese-made goods is scheduled to take effect next week if a U.S.-China trade deal is not agreed on before then.

Businesses in the U.S. and abroad have been dealing in various ways since February with Trump’s fluctuating tariffs on specific products and countries. Many automakers appeared to have absorbed the costs for now. But recent government data indicated that retail prices for groceries, furniture and appliances started creeping up in June.

Because tariffs are a tax on imports, economists have expected U.S. consumers to foot at least part of the bill eventually.

The country-specific round enforced Thursday, together with the president’s earlier tariffs on specific sectors such as automobiles and steel, will increase prices 1.8% in the short term, the Budget Lab at Yale estimated. That’s the equivalent of a $2,400 loss of income per U.S. household, according to the non-partisan policy research center

The projections were based on an analysis of duties implemented this year through Wednesday, as well as a doubling of the levy on items made in India that Trump said would be implemented near the end of August.

“Retailers have been able to hold the line on pricing so far, but the new increased tariffs will significantly raise costs for U.S. retailers, manufacturers and consumers,” Jon Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy at the National Retail Federation trade group, said in an emailed statement to The Associated Press.

Here’s what to know about the tariffs and where U.S. consumers are most likely to notice effects:

How we got here

Trump unveiled sweeping import taxes on goods coming into the U.S. from 66 countries, the European Union, Taiwan and the Falkland Islands in April. He said the “reciprocal” tariffs were meant to boost domestic manufacturing and restore fairness to global trade.

The president paused the country-specific tariffs a week later but applied a 10% tax to most imports. In early July, he began notifying countries that their exports would be subject to higher tariffs on Aug. 1 unless they reached trade deals. A week ago, he pushed the start date to Thursday.

In the meantime, Trump announced a 35% tariff on imports from Canada, but delayed action on Mexico while negotiations continued. However, a free trade agreement reached with Mexico and Canada during Trump’s first term shields most of those countries’ products from punishing duties.

The president also ordered a 50% tariff on goods from Brazil. This week, he signed an executive order to take India’s tariff rate from 25% to 50% for its purchases of Russian oil. The timing gives India and Russia a chance to negotiate with the Trump administration.

Other duties not specific to countries remain in place, such as a 50% tariff on imported aluminum and steel announced in June. Trump also threatened 100% tariffs on computer chips that aren’t made in the U.S. The administration has said tariffs are still coming on imported pharmaceutical drugs.

Tariffs are already impacting prices

The U.S. Commerce Department reported on July 31 that prices rose 2.6% in June, up from an annual pace of 2.4% in May. Earlier in July, the government reported that its primary inflation measure, the Consumer Price Index, also ticked higher in June as the cost of furniture, toys and other frequently imported items increased.

Shoppers should be prepared to pay more for clothes and shoes because the combined tariffs “disproportionately affect clothing and textiles,” according to the Budget Lab at Yale. It estimates that shoe prices will go up 39% temporarily and stay 19% above where they are now. For apparel, the Budget Lab put the comparable figures at 37% and 18%.

Overall, Americans face an average tax of 18.6% for imported products, the highest rate since 1933, the research center said.

Food and drink prices will climb

The tariffs will almost certainly result in higher food prices, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. The U.S. simply doesn’t make enough of some products, like bananas or coffee, to satisfy demand. Fish, beer and liquor are also likely to get more expensive, the foundation said.

The U.S. Wine Trade Alliance and other alcohol industry trade groups sent a letter to Trump that warned a 15% tariff on European wines and spirits could result in more than 25,000 American job losses and cost the industry nearly $2 billion in lost sales.

“Mr. President, we need toasts, not tariffs, as we head into the most important season for our industry,” read the letter dated Wednesday.

Wine distributors and retailers avoided price increases before now by accelerating shipments from France and other EU countries earlier in the year. But with the EU’s tariff rate raised to 15% on Thursday, customers may see European wines costing 30% more in September, U.S. Wine Trade Alliance President Ben Aneff said.

Car prices hold steady — so far

Some automakers already raised prices to counteract tariffs. Luxury sports car maker Ferrari said last week it was waiting for more details of Trump’s trade deal with the EU before scaling back a 10% surcharge it put on most vehicles in the U.S.

For the most part, automakers waited for details instead of passing on tariff costs to consumers. But that could change.

General Motors said on July 22 that the impact of the tariffs could get more pronounced in the third quarter of the year. GM has estimated the tariffs will cost it $4 billion to $5 billion this year.

Toyota reported Thursday a 37% drop in profits in the April-June quarter, cutting its full-year earnings forecasts largely because of Trump’s tariffs.

Still a clouded picture

Even with so many new tariffs kicking in, the tariff situation remains fluid. Trump’s use of an emergency powers law to implement tariffs is being challenged in the courts. The case is expected to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Moreover, the tariffs on goods from China haven’t been finalized. Consumers may start seeing more effects when the administration ends a tax exemption for small parcels sent from other countries.

Trump last week signed an order to suspend the “de minimis” exemption that has allowed shipments valued at $800 or less to enter the U.S. duty-free. International e-commerce companies have widely used the rule to avoid paying customs charges.

Trump withdrew the exemption in early April for goods shipped from China and Hong Kong tariff-free. It is now set to be eliminated for low-value packages from every country on Aug. 29.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Most Americans get more than half their calories from ultra-processed foods, those super-tasty, energy-dense foods typically full of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats, according to a new federal report.

Nutrition research has shown for years that ultra-processed foods make up a big chunk of the U.S. diet, especially for kids and teens.

For the first time, however, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed those high levels of consumption, using dietary data collected from August 2021 to August 2023.

The report comes amid growing scrutiny of such foods by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who blames them for causing chronic disease.

“We are poisoning ourselves and it’s coming principally from these ultra-processed foods,” Kennedy told Fox News earlier this year.

Overall, about 55% of total calories consumed by Americans age 1 and older came from ultra-processed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultra-processed foods made up about 53% of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62%.

The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks.

Young children consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultra-processed foods than those with higher incomes.

The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert.

What was surprising was that consumption of ultra-processed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56% in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66% for kids in 2017-2018.

Williams said she couldn’t speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased.

But Andrea Deierlein, a nutrition expert at New York University who was not involved in the research, suggested that there may be greater awareness of the potential harms of ultra-processed foods.

“People are trying, at least in some populations, to decrease their intakes of these foods,” she said.

Concern over ultra-processed foods’ health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven’t been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems.

One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fiber and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultra-processed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods.

Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods — such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables — than ultra-processed foods, even those matched for nutrition components and considered healthy, such as ready-to-heat frozen meals, protein bars and shakes.

Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods.

The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be “hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fiber and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats,” the CDC report said.

U.S. health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions “accurately capture” the range of foods that may affect health. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods for products in the U.S. food supply.

In the meantime, Americans should try to reduce ultra-processed foods in their daily diets, Deierlein said. For instance, instead of instant oatmeal that may contain added sugar, sodium, artificial colors and preservatives, use plain oats sweetened with honey or maple syrup. Read food packages and nutrition information, she suggested.

“I do think that there are less-processed options available for many foods,” she said.

BRISTOL (AP) — Ever since the NFL announced it was looking to sell NFL Network and other media assets, ESPN had been seen as one of the favorites to make a deal.

Nearly five years later, a framework is finally in place.

The NFL announced Tuesday night that it has entered into a nonbinding agreement with ESPN. Under the terms, ESPN will acquire NFL Network, NFL Fantasy and the rights to distribute the RedZone channel to cable and satellite operators and the league will get a 10% equity stake in ESPN.

The league and ESPN still have to negotiate a final agreement and get approval from NFL owners. The agreement will also have to undergo regulatory approvals.

“Sometimes great things take a long time to get to the point where it’s right. And we both feel that it is at this stage,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in a call with The Associated Press.

Along with the sale of NFL Network, the NFL and ESPN will have a second nonbinding agreement where the NFL will license to ESPN certain NFL content and other intellectual property that can be used by NFL Network and other assets that have been purchased.

“We have been talking about it in earnest for the last few years. But interestingly enough, we started talking about this over a decade ago but nothing really ended up happening. And we got back at it when I came back to Disney after my retirement,” Disney CEO Bob Iger said in a call with the AP.

What ESPN gets

ESPN is expected to launch its direct-to-consumer service before the end of September. The service would give cord-cutters access to all ESPN programs and networks for $29.99 per month. The addition of more NFL programming increases the value.

Many viewers will receive the service for free as part of their subscription to cable, satellite and most streaming services.

“When I came back to Disney and assessed essentially the future of ESPN, it became clear that ESPN had to launch a bigger and more robust and digital or direct-to-consumer product, not only for the sake of ESPN’s business, but for the sports fan,” Iger said. “And obviously, when you start thinking about high-quality sports content, your eyes immediately head in the direction of the NFL because there’s really nothing more valuable and more popular than that.”

NFL Network — which has nearly 50 million subscribers — would be owned and operated by ESPN and would be included in ESPN’s direct-to-consumer product.

The NFL RedZone channel would be distributed by ESPN to cable and satellite operators. However, the NFL will continue to own, operate and produce the channel as well as retain the rights to distribute the channel digitally. ESPN would also get rights to the RedZone brand, meaning RedZone channels for college football and basketball or other sports could be coming in the future.

NFL Fantasy Football would merge with ESPN Fantasy Football, giving ESPN the official fantasy football game of the league.

NFL Network will still air seven games per season. Four of ESPN’s games, including some that are in overlapping windows on Monday nights, would move to NFL Network. ESPN will license three additional games that will be carried on NFL Network.

What the NFL receives (and retains)

The league gets a 10% equity stake in ESPN. Aidan O’Connor, a senior vice president at the Prosek Partners marketing firm, estimates the value of that would be $2.2 billion to $2.5 billion.

ESPN is currently 80% owned by ABC Inc. as an indirect subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company. The other 20% is owned by Hearst. Once the deal is official and approved, the breakdown of ESPN will be 72% ABC Inc., 18% Hearst and 10% NFL.

This isn’t the first time the league has had an equity stake in a digital or communications business. It had that in the past with Sirius Satellite Radio and SportsLine. The NFL could also have equity in the newly formed “Paramount Skydance Corporation,” which owns CBS, due to the league’s partnership with Skydance.

“This is new as far as a partner now operating a business that we built, ran and grew,” said Hans Schroeder, the NFL’s executive vice president of media distribution. “It’ll also be a little bit new again with some of the dynamics here, but we’ll continue to balance that in a really arm’s length way where we’ll think about how we manage and work across to all our partners.”

The league will continue to own and operate NFL Films, NFL+, NFL.com, the official websites of the 32 teams, the NFL Podcast Network and the NFL FAST Channel (a free ad-supported streaming channel).

“The moves align with the NFL’s longstanding ambition to reach $25 billion in annual revenue by 2027 — a target first set in 2010, when league revenue stood at approximately $8.5 billion,” O’Connor said. “Financially, the move also signals to investors that ESPN is doubling down on differentiation and content stickiness by offering a scarce and premium product in a crowded marketplace. Intentionally ceding equity to the NFL transforms ESPN from a media licensee into a true platform partner — with few properties rivaling the league in terms of cultural significance, appointment viewing, audience reach, and monetization efficiency.”

No major changes yet

Viewers will likely not see any immediate impacts until next year once everything is approved.

Besides ESPN, the biggest winner in this could be NFL Network, which had seen reductions in original programming the past couple years. “Total Access,” the network’s flagship show since its launch in 2003, ended in May 2024 amid a series of layoffs and cost-cutting moves. “Good Morning Football” also moved from New York, where it had been since its start in 2016, to Southern California last year.

NFL Network moved to a broadcast facility across the street from SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, California, in 2021.

“The thing that’s exciting for us is that we have put a lot into the network. I think it’s been very effective for fans. We know it’s in good hands,” Goodell said. “They’re innovative, they recognize great production and know how to produce it. They will do a fantastic job of operating the network and taking it to another level.”