Consumer News: Consumer sentiment sinks as Americans grow more worried about prices

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.

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.

Vitamins and minerals lead the list, while older adults are the most likely to use supplements

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Nearly eight in 10 U.S. adults say they currently take at least one supplement for their health, according to a Pew Research Center survey.

• Vitamins and minerals are the most common, and supplement use is especially widespread among older adults.

• Most people who take supplements consider them important to their health, though the survey did not test whether the products improve health.

Supplements have become a routine part of health care for many Americans. In a Pew Research Center survey, 78% of U.S. adults said they currently take at least one supplement for their health.

Vitamins and minerals were the clear favorites: 67% of adults said they take them. Protein supplements came next at 31%, followed by omega oils at 25% and herbal supplements at 19%. Another 35% reported taking a supplement outside those four categories, such as melatonin or probiotics. Respondents could report taking more than one type.

Supplement use rose with age. Among adults 65 and older, 85% said they take at least one, compared with 67% of adults under 30. The gap was particularly large for vitamins and minerals: 81% of older adults take them, versus 48% of the youngest adults surveyed.

Protein supplements followed the opposite pattern. They were used by 37% of adults ages 18 to 29 and 35% of those ages 30 to 49, compared with 23% of adults 65 and older. Women were also somewhat more likely than men to report taking any supplement, 82% versus 74%.

Many users see supplements as important

Pew also asked people who take each type of supplement how important they consider it to their health. Among vitamin and mineral users, 62% said those products were extremely or very important, while another 33% called them somewhat important. Among omega oil users, 63% rated the products extremely or very important. The corresponding figures were 51% for herbal supplement users and 44% for protein supplement users.

Those answers describe peoples views, not the medical benefits of the products. The National Institutes of Health says some supplements can help people get nutrients they need, but supplements cannot replace a varied diet. Their benefits differ by product and by a persons health needs.

There are safety considerations, too. Unlike medications, dietary supplements do not receive FDA approval for safety and effectiveness before they are marketed. Some can interact with prescription drugs. NIH advises consumers to tell their health care providers about every supplement they take, including the dose.

Pew surveyed 3,554 U.S. adults July 612, 2026. It defined supplements broadly to include products such as vitamins, minerals, herbs, protein powders, melatonin and probiotics, while excluding prescription and over-the-counter drugs.