Consumer News: Nearly eight in 10 Americans take supplements, Pew survey finds

The retailer says its new technology will not be used to charge shoppers according to what it thinks they can afford

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Walmart says it will not use a shoppers income, purchase history, or perceived willingness to pay to set a personalized price.

• The pledge also covers its AI shopping assistant and rules out changing prices based on the time of day.

• Rival retailers may face more questions about how they use customer data, though Walmarts decision does not set a rule for the industry.

Walmart is drawing a line around how it uses customer information: It says it will not charge one shopper more than another because of who they are, what they have bought before, or how urgently they need an item.

We price the product, not the person, CEO John Furner wrote in a letter to customers. He said Walmart does not set different prices based on a shoppers identity or the time of day and will not do so in the future.

The statement comes as Walmart expands digital shelf labels, which replace paper price tags and can be updated electronically. Some shoppers have worried that the technology could make it easier to change prices rapidly. Furner said Walmart uses the labels to help shelf prices match checkout prices and to save employees the time spent replacing paper tags.

Walmart's pledge also puts it in line with laws in four states. Maryland, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York have passed or enacted state-level legislation addressing or banning surveillance or personalized pricing.

The pledge extends to Sparky, Walmarts AI shopping assistant. Furner said information customers share with the tool will not be used to raise their prices or hide less expensive products that meet their needs. He said employees will continue to oversee pricing and the company will test its technology against those commitments.

What changes for shoppers?

Walmarts promise does not mean prices will stay fixed. Furner said they can rise when merchandise or transportation costs increase and fall when the company can pass along savings. The distinction is that Walmart says it will not adjust a price for an individual shopper based on personal information or an estimate of what that person might pay.

That gives customers a clearer answer to a question raised by increasingly sophisticated shopping apps and pricing systems: Could sharing more information with a retailer cause them to be charged more? Walmart says the answer at its stores and shopping tools is no.

Shoppers should still compare prices among retailers and check that a shelf price matches the amount charged at checkout. Walmarts commitment addresses how it sets prices; it is not a guarantee that every item will be cheapest there.

Pressure on competitors

Walmarts announcement could put pressure on competing grocers and big-box chains to explain their own pricing practices, particularly as they adopt digital labels and AI shopping tools. That is a potential competitive effect, not an indication that those retailers are using personalized pricing.

The issue is also drawing federal attention. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has proposed an enforcement policy statement warning that businesses could violate consumer protection law if they use personal data to set prices without clearly telling shoppers. The agency says it lacks authority to ban personalized pricing in every circumstance.

For competitors, Walmart has made price transparency part of its pitch to shoppers. Rivals may now have to decide whether to make equally explicit promises or explain why their approach differs.

The 4,600 pounds of chicken were imported from the Republic of Korea

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Sempio Food Services is recalling about 4,600 pounds of ready-to-eat chicken stew imported from South Korea without required U.S. import reinspection.

• The recall covers Sempio Korean Ginseng Chicken Stew in Classic and Rich varieties, with a best-by date of Sept. 29, 2027.

• No illnesses or injuries have been reported, but consumers are being told not to eat the recalled products.

Sempio Food Services Inc. is recalling approximately 4,596 pounds of ready-to-eat chicken stew after federal inspectors determined the products entered the United States without required import reinspection.

The Cerritos, California-based company imported the products from the Republic of Korea, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). The problem was discovered during routine FSIS surveillance.

The recall covers two varieties of Sempio Korean Ginseng Chicken Stew. Both come in 31.75-ounce, or 900-gram, pouches packed in cardboard boxes:

• Sempio Korean Ginseng Chicken Stew Classic

• Sempio Korean Ginseng Chicken Stew Rich

The products were produced March 30, 2026, and carry a best-by date of Sept. 29, 2027. They also bear Korean establishment number GIA15001 and shipping mark MK-2026-0422-01.

Sold in eight states

The recalled chicken stew was shipped to distributors and retailers in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia.

FSIS said there have been no confirmed reports of illness or injury associated with the products. Anyone who believes they may have become ill or been injured after consuming the stew should contact a healthcare provider.

The recall stems from an inspection issue rather than the discovery of a specific contaminant. Imported meat and poultry products are subject to FSIS reinspection when they enter the United States to verify that the shipments meet U.S. food-safety requirements.

Check your pantry

Because the products have a best-by date more than a year away, FSIS said it is concerned that consumers may still have the chicken stew stored in their homes.

Consumers who find one of the recalled packages should not eat it. FSIS recommends throwing it away or returning it to the store where it was purchased. Retailers have also been instructed not to sell the affected products.

FSIS said it will conduct recall effectiveness checks to make sure the company has notified customers and that recalled products are no longer available to consumers. A retail distribution list may be posted by the agency when it becomes available.

Rising fuel costs and inflation concerns are putting additional pressure on household finances

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The University of Michigans Consumer Sentiment Index fell to 48.1 in September, down 7% from August and 12.7% from a year ago.

• Consumers expectations for the economy deteriorated sharply, with the Expectations Index falling 10.1% in a single month.

• Inflation worries intensified, with consumers expecting prices to rise 4.6% over the next year, up from 4% in August.

American consumers became significantly more pessimistic about the economy in September as higher prices, rising fuel costs and concerns about the future weighed on household finances.

The University of Michigans final September Surveys of Consumers showed its closely watched Index of Consumer Sentiment falling to 48.1, down from 51.7 in August and 55.1 in September 2025. That represents a 7% monthly decline and a 12.7% drop from a year earlier.

The final number was slightly better than the preliminary September reading of 47.8, but it still put consumer confidence at its lowest level in four months. Sentiment has fallen about 15% since January.

The biggest deterioration was in consumers' expectations for the future.

The university's Index of Consumer Expectations fell to 46.3, down from 51.5 in August, a 10.1% monthly decline. The Current Economic Conditions Index slipped more modestly, to 50.9 from 51.9.

Household finances are under pressure

Joanne Hsu, director of the Surveys of Consumers, said consumers' assessments of both their current finances and their expected finances over the coming year weakened by about 10% during September.

High prices remain a major concern.

About 55% of consumers said high prices were hurting their personal finances, compared with 53% in August and 44% a year earlier, according to additional survey findings. Mentions of gasoline prices also increased, with 31% of consumers bringing up fuel costs.

Consumers also appear increasingly concerned that the pressure won't disappear soon.

"Consumers do not believe that relief from high gas prices is on the horizon," Hsu said, adding that respondents generally expect gasoline prices to keep rising in both the short and long term.

Trade concerns also resurfaced. The share of consumers spontaneously mentioning tariffs rose from 24% in July to 35% in September. The survey found that worries about elevated fuel prices and renewed trade disputes contributed to a sharp deterioration in expectations for near-term business conditions.

Inflation expectations jump

One of the more significant findings for consumers and potentially for Federal Reserve policymakers was a sharp increase in expected inflation.

Consumers now expect prices to rise 4.6% over the next 12 months, up from 4% in August and the highest reading since June. That compares with 3.4% in February.

Long-term inflation expectations also edged higher. Consumers expect annual inflation of 3.4% over the longer term, up from 3.3%, where the measure had remained for three consecutive months.

Persistent inflation expectations matter because they can affect how consumers behave. Households expecting prices to continue climbing may accelerate some purchases, while cutting back elsewhere as necessities consume more of their budgets.

The survey found some evidence of that behavior. Buying conditions for durable goods actually improved slightly, in part because some consumers believed making purchases now could allow them to avoid even higher prices later.

Why consumer sentiment matters

The University of Michigan survey is closely followed because consumer spending represents a major part of U.S. economic activity. The survey asks households about personal finances, business conditions and whether they believe it is a good time to make major purchases. About 1,000 interviews are conducted each month.

Weak sentiment doesn't necessarily mean consumers will immediately stop spending. But the university's research has historically found that widespread economic pessimism can lead households to postpone purchases and increase their financial reserves.

For consumers, September's survey suggests that the biggest issue remains purchasing power. Even when employment and income remain relatively stable, persistent increases in everyday expenses particularly food, fuel, housing and other necessities can make households feel financially worse off.

Elevated home prices arent affordable at these interest rates

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The typical U.S. renter pays $1,066 less each month than a new homeowner pays for a mortgage, taxes and insurance, according to Zillow.

• That works out to $12,792 a year, and Zillow estimates renters who invest the difference could earn another $322 during the first year.

• Renting is currently cheaper than buying in all 50 of the nations largest metropolitan areas, with some of the biggest gaps occurring in expensive West Coast markets.

For years, Americans have been told that buying a home is one of the surest ways to build wealth. But with mortgage rates and home prices remaining elevated, renters may have a significant financial advantage at least in the short term.

A new Zillow analysis finds that the typical U.S. renter paid $1,948 a month in August, compared with $3,014 for the typical new home buyer's mortgage payment, property taxes and homeowners insurance. That leaves renters with an average monthly advantage of $1,066, or $12,792 over a year.

Zillow's homeownership calculation assumes a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at 6.67% with a 10% down payment on a typical home. It does not include some additional expenses homeowners may face, including maintenance and closing costs.

The gap between renting and buying has also been widening. Zillow said the typical monthly cost for a new buyer increased by $140 over the previous six months, while typical rent increased by just $32.

"The idea that renting is a consolation prize is outdated," Zillow Chief Economist Mischa Fisher said, arguing that renters who save and invest the difference between renting and buying can potentially improve their financial position.

What happens if renters invest the difference?

Of course, renters only receive the full financial benefit if they don't simply spend the money they save.

Zillow calculated what would happen if a renter invested the $1,066 monthly difference at a return equal to the 10-year Treasury yield, which it put at 4.68% as of August.

Under that scenario, the investment would generate an additional $322 during the first year. Assuming rents and homeownership costs remained unchanged, Zillow said the accumulated savings and investment returns could reach about $72,000 after five years.

That calculation is illustrative rather than a guarantee. Rents, home prices, mortgage rates, taxes and investment returns can all change, and homeowners may benefit from rising property values and from building equity as they pay down their mortgages.

Biggest savings are in expensive markets

The rent-versus-buy gap varies considerably depending on where consumers live.

Zillow found renting costs less than buying in every one of the 50 largest U.S. metropolitan areas. The biggest difference was in San Jose, Calif., where the typical renter pays $3,815 a month while Zillow estimates the monthly cost for a new buyer at $11,698.

That's a difference of $7,883 a month, or $94,596 a year. Zillow estimates investing those monthly savings at its assumed rate could generate another $2,381 during the first year.

Other large gaps were found in San Francisco, where renting saves an estimated $5,413 a month; Los Angeles, at $4,441; and San Diego, at $4,235.

But the advantage isn't limited to California. Zillow calculated monthly rent-versus-buy savings of $3,511 in Seattle, $2,829 in Boston, $2,629 in New York and $2,200 in Washington, D.C.

Buying requires considerably more income

The analysis also illustrates how high home prices and mortgage rates have raised the income hurdle for would-be buyers.

Zillow estimates a household needs annual income of about $77,919 to afford the typical U.S. rental. A household purchasing a typical home with 10% down would need income of more than $120,500 to afford the mortgage payment, taxes and insurance a difference of more than $42,000.

That doesn't necessarily mean renting will always be the better financial decision. Homeowners build equity and may benefit from appreciation, while renters can face annual rent increases and don't accumulate ownership in the property.

How long someone expects to remain in a home can also make a major difference. Zillow said its analysis generally favors renting for households expecting to stay in a home for five years or less.

For consumers deciding between the two, the comparison increasingly comes down to more than whether they can scrape together a down payment. With today's mortgage costs, the question is also what a renter could do with the money that isn't being spent on homeownership and whether that money will actually be saved and invested.