Energy Intelligence Software
Sourcing Guide & Market Intelligence

Tariffs to negatively impact the building and construction machinery sector

• The Trump Administration’s reciprocal tariffs, which apply general tariff rate increases to most countries the United States trades with, are set to take effect on August 7, after the administration finalized the national rates on August 1. As a result, leading sources of imported construction machinery face significantly higher tariff rates, including Japan (15.0%), Mexico (25.0%), South Korea (15.0%), the European Union (15.0%), the United Kingdom (10.0%), China (54.0%), and Canada (35.0%).
• The increase in tariffs on building and construction machinery imported from tariff-impacted countries will add to the price of imports, which are typically passed on to buyers in the form of higher prices. According to The Budget Lab at Yale, the additional tariffs on imports will increase overall prices for machinery and equipment by 13.3%.
• Additionally, the administration has already implemented 50.0% tariffs on all aluminum and steel imported into the United States, with the sole exception of imports from the United Kingdom. These tariffs will increase input costs even for construction machinery suppliers with domestic manufacturing operations.
• According to an April 2025 survey from Construction Equipment Magazine, around half of the respondents reported that the higher tariffs will increase operating costs by up to 15.0%, and more than half said they plan to pass those increases along to buyers.
• As many building and construction machinery brands source parts and components such as steel, engines, and electronics from foreign countries, higher tariff rates will put upward pressure on prices and lead to greater rental rates as manufacturers and dealers pass on costs. In addition, suppliers that source parts from tariff-affected regions may see supply chain disruptions as they seek alternative suppliers to mitigate tariff impacts.

GSA memo asks agencies to review consulting contracts

• The General Services Administration (GSA) recently issued a memorandum asking government agencies to review their consulting contracts with the ten highest-paid firms. The ten firms are Accenture PLC (Accenture Federal Services), Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., CGI Group Inc. (CGI Federal), Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (Deloitte Consulting), General Dynamics Corporation (General Dynamics IT), Guidehouse Inc., Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. (HII Mission Technologies), International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), Leidos Holdings, Inc., and Science Applications International Corporation, Inc. (SAIC).
• The memo states that agencies are strongly encouraged to cut non-essential consulting contracts, providing a list of those intended to be terminated by March 7, 2025. By April 19, 2025, agencies must submit their reviews of non-GSA consulting service contracts.
• According to the GSA, the ten consulting firms identified are set to receive $65.0 billion in fees in 2025. The Department of Defense (DoD) has stated its intention to terminate or descope contracts non-essential to the DoD’s purposes; some of the largest market players with high-value DoD contracts include Booz Allen Hamilton, Deloitte, and Accenture.
• According to the Government Accountability Office, in the fiscal year 2023, government agencies spent $478.0 billion on services, with the DoD accounting for $230.0 billion and non-defense agencies accounting for the rest. The DoD spent $21.3 billion on support, professional, and engineering and technical services, while non-defense agencies spent $21.4 billion on professional services, which includes consulting, training, and support services.
• The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initially cancelled 875 contracts (amounting to around $2.0 billion) but has currently paused efforts. However, contract terminations across most agencies are expected to continue.

The DOJ proposes Google breakup in latest tech antitrust action

• In August, Google was found guilty of operating as a monopoly and engaging in anti-competitive practices through the operation of its search engine business.
• In response to this ruling the Department of Justice (DOJ) has stated it will seek a breakup of Google’s business segments, among other similarly harsh penalties. While the actual penalty Google receives must be approved by the judge, the DOJ’s proposed penalties signal a zero-tolerance policy toward tech monopolies.
• During the last few years, the Federal government has significantly increased its enforcement actions against major technology companies in an effort to contest the high level of market share concentration in this sector.
• These actions include high-profile anti-trust lawsuits against Amazon, Apple, and Meta, in addition to the case against Google. Consequently, the results of these lawsuits could significantly affect the structure of a wide range of tech markets.