Connect with us

Economics

Monument, gravestone makers deal with tariffs and cremations

Published

on

Strathroy | Istock | Getty Images

For nearly a century, John Dioguardi’s family has been making custom headstones and other memorial markers at Rome Monument in western Pennsylvania. Recently, he’s wondered how much time his business has left.

Dioguardi has been trying to adapt for more than a decade as the rise in cremations has hurt demand for the traditional burial markers his business has become synonymous with. This year, they’ve been dealt another blow: President Donald Trump‘s broad and steep tariffs, which have driven up costs for granite coming to American graveyards from around the world.

“I hope this all works out,” Dioguardi said. “I have no idea if it will.”

Rome Monument is part of a fabric of small, family run companies that make memorialization products facing the dual challenges of levies and cremations. Members of the blue-collar industry are in a fight to survive the social, political and economic shifts throwing their livelihoods into a state of disruption. 

‘A gut punch’

As Dioguardi watched the White House’s trade relationship with China fluctuate in recent months, he shifted two-thirds of his supply chain out of the Asian country. Most of it went to India, which has seen a relatively lower tariff rate for much of the year.

Craftsman working with compressed air at tombstone.

Kzenon | Istock | Getty Images

Dioguardi said bringing production to the U.S. would likely still be more expensive — even with new tariffs — due to higher labor costs. There’s another simple reason to look internationally: Some types of granite, like the multi-colored aurora found in India, come only from certain regions abroad.

“God gave the different parts of the world certain yummies,” Dioguardi said. “We have nothing like that in our country.”

Trump’s levies have altered the bottom lines in the industry, leaving businesses struggling with how to mitigate the additional costs.

In September 2024, Milano Monuments’ Jim Milano paid around 29% custom duties and taxes on a container coming in from China to his Cleveland-based business. A year later, that rate nearly doubled to 59%.

He’s talked with fellow memorial monument suppliers about adding an addendum to large orders telling buyers that the price could be later adjusted depending on if tariff rates move. For now, Milano said he and many peers are covering the tariffs out of pocket. He’s taken a pay cut as a result.

“There’s just so many crazy things that have come up in the last several years,” said Milano, whose business has been around for half of a century. “But this tariff thing has been like a gut punch.”

In recent months, Milano has found himself rushing to communicate with his ordering controller when he sees a headline about higher levies to ensure his containers hit the water before they would take effect.

Milano’s showroom and a memorial made by the business.

Courtesy: Jim Milano

blank stone gravestones and grave slabs in outdoor rural granite workshop.

Krimkate | Istock | Getty Images

But memorial creators said that their smaller margins and lower volumes make it tougher to cover the costs than it would be for large retailers. Because the businesses work with shoppers feeling emotions around death, industry members say they need to be especially sensitive when deciding whether to pass down costs to consumers.

“It’s hard,” Milano said. “We can’t go back to a grieving family and say, ‘You know what, we got to add an additional $1,000 to your family’s memorial to cover the tariffs.'”

A changing business

Even before the tariffs ramped up, the industry was busy reorienting itself for a future with fewer traditional burials.

The U.S.’ five-year cremation rate has surged to more than 60% in 2024, up from under 40% a decade and a half prior, according to the Cremation Association of North America. The organization expects more than two out of every three bodies will be cremated in an average year between 2025 and 2029.

Dioguardi has considered expanding the work radius around his Pennsylvania headquarters to buoy demand for grave site products, a broader trend which he said has prompted a wave of acquisitions within the industry. Dioguardi and his peers have emphasized alternatives like pedestal memorials for people remembering a cremated loved one.

He’s also worked on less conventional monuments: Dioguardi recently helped a cemetery install a “rainbow bridge” memorial that contains the ashes of pets.

“Cremation has changed our business tremendously,” Dioguardi said. “It’s created new opportunities. It has closed some other doors.”

Read more CNBC analysis on culture and the economy

If monument builders need to raise prices to account for tariffs, Milano worries it could push more consumers to opt for cremations. Beyond granite, he said levies on production materials have also taken a bite out of profits.

To be sure, Canada’s monument industry is feeling the heat more intensely with a five-year cremation average expected to surpass 80%. Dioguardi said granite manufacturers he worked with based in America’s northern neighbor haven’t increased prices due to tariffs given the shrinking domestic demand.

Dioguardi said his family operation should be on solid ground for another decade, but he questions if it can exist in its current state beyond that. At the same time, the 75-year-old knows that the fate of the business is married in part to whether people want their loved ones to have any sort of memorialization.

When comparing the pyramids the Egyptians opted for to today’s trend of having ashes spread somewhere without a marker, Dioguardi isn’t exactly confident. Part of the challenge, he and other industry members say, is proving that any sort of memorial product is worth the investment.

“Forget about making the pyramid,” Dioguardi said. “I don’t even know if they want a pebble.”

Get Morning Squawk directly to your inbox

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending