Companies are telling their investors how President Donald Trump’s plan to radically remake the US government poses new risks to their businesses

Companies are informing their investors about how President Donald Trump’s sweeping plans to reshape the U.S. government are introducing new risks to their businesses.

In recent weeks, Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. has flagged potential tariffs on avocados and limes. Johnson & Johnson has raised concerns that FDA budget cuts could slow medicine approvals. And American Airlines Group Inc. has warned shareholders about possible added costs for aircraft and parts imported from outside the U.S.

Many of these disclosures are subtly embedded within the extensive “risk factor” sections of annual regulatory filings—often contrasting with the optimistic public messaging some executives present regarding their engagement with the White House.

For instance, CVS Health Corp. CEO David Joyner told analysts during a Feb. 12 earnings call that he was “encouraged by the constructive dialogue with the new administration” on Medicare payment rates, a crucial issue for the company.

Yet that same day, CVS’s annual report included new language about “uncertainty” surrounding shifting healthcare policies, cautioning that federal reform efforts and spending reductions could limit funding for government programs that the company relies on.

Following Trump’s election, business and consumer confidence surged, fueled by expectations of deregulation, tax cuts, and economic expansion. However, that optimism is now fading—uncertainty is rising—as the administration pivots toward imposing tariffs instead. This shift is poised to increase costs for industries ranging from homebuilding to manufacturing to everyday households, just as inflation shows signs of easing.

Trump, along with billionaire Elon Musk, is rapidly working to shrink the federal workforce, tighten restrictions on trade and immigration, and assert greater White House control over government agencies. These moves have left companies scrambling to assess their exposure to policy changes and tariff risks—and how to communicate those concerns to investors.

“What qualifies as material risk is often a gray area,” said Yaron Nili, a corporate law professor at Duke University School of Law. “Especially this early in the administration, companies are still figuring out the extent of the impact.”

Annual reports required by the Securities and Exchange Commission routinely list a range of potential risks, from cyberattacks to natural disasters to regulatory shifts. The evolving disclosures offer a glimpse into how companies are adjusting to political and economic uncertainties.

For investors, these filings add another layer of complexity when trying to gauge the impact of Trump’s policies. Companies such as General Motors Co. and Walmart Inc. have issued earnings guidance without factoring in the effects of impending tariffs.

Every U.S. president shapes the business landscape. Under the Biden administration, companies contended with increased regulatory scrutiny and stricter antitrust enforcement.

What makes Trump’s policy changes particularly challenging for businesses, according to Jill Fisch, a business law professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, is the scope and speed of the shifts. “A lot of the proposed or discussed regulatory changes are quite broad, and they’re often happening quite rapidly,” she said.

Earlier this month, PepsiCo Inc. highlighted the risk of reputational damage if its products were labeled “ultra-processed,” a term invoked by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in his assertions that food companies “mass poison American children.”

Given the wide-ranging risks, some companies are taking a broad approach in their disclosures.

Centene Corp., a health insurer that derives most of its revenue from government programs, warned that policy changes “due to executive orders or other regulatory actions from the current political administration” could reduce enrollment and delay or cut payments. Drugmaker Eli Lilly & Co. cautioned investors about potential risks from “insufficient staffing levels, expertise, or resources” at the FDA.

Brokerage firm Marsh & McLennan Cos. took an even broader stance, noting that “shifts in regulatory priorities, policy approaches, or interpretations of existing laws by federal, state, or local governments occur following changes in U.S. presidential administrations.”