May 2025
The uncertainty associated with the Trump administration’s policy initiatives and executive orders, particularly on tariffs and trade, but also on a range of other controversial issues—including immigration, federal grant funding, foreign policy and aid, climate and other environmental and social issues, healthcare, education, the size of the federal workforce, and more—is reshaping the economic, geopolitical, and risk environment. “Indeed, the speed, quantity, and breadth of executive orders and other policy and regulatory changes have been eye-opening, as have the emerging knock-on effects,” noted one speaker during our April 2025 KPMG Board Leadership Conference.
As emphasized during the conference, the level of uncertainty surrounding the administration’s policy agenda is unprecedented and poses a major challenge for boards and management teams. Perhaps not surprisingly, nearly 80 percent of directors surveyed at our conference did not think their management teams had a clear sense of how the new policy agenda will impact their companies.1
The following observations and insights from directors, business leaders, and luminaries attending our annual conference may be helpful as boards calibrate their agendas in the coming months.2
Tariff uncertainty and knock-on effects
For many companies, perhaps the most significant and immediate challenge is tariff uncertainty—both the direct impact of the tariffs on a company’s supply chain, costs, margins, pricing, and employment, as well as the inflationary effect of US tariffs and any retaliatory tariffs on the US and global economies. As measures of economic uncertainty “surpass those of the pandemic,” as one speaker observed, many consumers, large and small businesses, and investors are pausing spending and investment decisions. Amid concerns about inflation, job security, and compressed margins, betting markets have the risk of recession at 39 percent.3
Global growth is projected at 2.8 percent for 2025, a sharp reduction from the International Monetary Fund’s previous January estimate of 3.3 percent. The same report forecasts US GDP growth for the year at 1.8 percent, down from an earlier forecast of 2.7 percent.4 And economists are forecasting US growth to drop from 2 percent to 1.5 percent by the fourth quarter.5 The Federal Reserve was expected to reduce interest rates three times in 2025, but now the expectation is for one rate decrease, if any at all. “There was postelection exuberance and expectations for deregulation, lower interest rates, M&A, and IPOs, but that is gone,” said a conference speaker. As noted in the Federal Reserve’s Beige Book report, “Business leaders indicated recent strategy discussions shifted away from capital investments aimed at innovation and efficiency toward a focus almost entirely on mitigating tariff-related risks.”6
This uncertainty regarding US tariff policy—and possible retaliatory tariffs—leads to a wide range of tariff scenarios. Some tariff increases appear inevitable; however, the extent and the scope of measures remain unclear, and their impact on companies will vary widely depending on a number of factors, including industry, supply chain design, and geographic footprint. In this environment, scenario planning is essential—from factoring in the effective dates of tariffs and potential cost ranges (best- and worst-case scenarios), to short-, medium-, and long-term actions the company can take to mitigate the impacts (e.g., moving facilities, diversifying suppliers, adjusting prices, renegotiating supplier contracts, or offsetting costs elsewhere in the business).
The implications for the nature and frequency of earnings guidance may also need to be considered.
Climate regulation and ESG
Despite the Securities and Exchange Commission’s withdrawal of defense of its climate rule, many companies may need to make disclosures under state laws or international disclosure requirements. Companies must also consider whether customers who may be required to report Scope 3 emissions will require climate disclosure from the company, whether some investors will continue to demand disclosure, and whether climate issues are material to the company. As they determine how to proceed, companies will need to balance competing demands on climate.
Notwithstanding the administration’s pushback against company ESG and DEI initiatives, many directors view these initiatives—which must withstand scrutiny, including as a result of recent Supreme Court decisions, executive orders, and other regulatory actions—as fundamental to the business and critical to long-term value creation. “Most management teams and boards weren’t focused on ESG just because it was politically correct. It made good business sense,” said one conference speaker.
Executive orders and policy initiatives more generally
The number and scope of the administration’s executive orders reflect aggressive policy shifts beyond tariffs, trade, climate, and ESG—and include immigration enforcement, foreign aid, education, healthcare, and more. These executive orders have generated substantial legal challenges, resulting in injunctions and appeals. While these cases work their way through the legal system, corporations face continued uncertainty about how to proceed in the short term and the long term.
While discussions about the uncertainty associated with the administration’s executive orders and policy initiatives may encompass many elements—strategy, risk management, risk appetite, crisis readiness and resilience, etc.—and vary by company, directors and business leaders attending the conference highlighted the following three key areas of board focus as they help guide their companies through the turbulence:
- Scenario planning: Directors highlighted the importance of scenario planning to help companies make informed decisions and prepare for potential disruptions by considering a wide range of tariff outcomes and other scenarios. They emphasized the need for the board to help ensure that the scenario planning process is properly resourced with the right expertise, management’s aperture is wide enough to capture the different scenarios (across multiple time horizons), scenarios are discussed in context (i.e., the business landscape, risk environment, and company’s strategy), the process is iterative, and independent third-party voices are heard. A challenge is “cutting through the noise”—e.g., avoiding information overload, considering too many scenarios, and poor information quality. Data is the starting point for scenario planning, but context and judgment are critical.
Generative artificial intelligence can be an important tool in this process, but management’s judgment is essential.
- Engagement with the government, investors, and stakeholders: Directors also emphasized the need for boards to encourage management to engage with government officials—including members of the current administration and elected representatives on both sides of the aisle—to educate them about how policies will impact the company, the industry, and the economy more generally. One panelist encouraged companies to engage with the administration privately through a carefully designed action plan, and comment on the policy, not the individual. Management also needs to engage with investors and key stakeholders to educate them concerning the potential impact of the administration’s policy initiatives on the company’s strategy and performance.
Companies will also need to reassess the impact of the policy initiatives on earnings guidance, which is becoming more difficult due to economic and geopolitical developments.
- Supporting the CEO: The board should be in a position—drawing on the skills and experiences of its members—to offer guidance and support as the CEO navigates this period of disruption and uncertainty. An important question for many CEOs is whether and when to speak out regarding the administration’s policy positions—particularly controversial positions—that may have a significant impact on the company. As many companies have experienced firsthand, the consequences of speaking out—or remaining silent—can be significant.
Along with navigating the immediate challenges, companies should keep sight of the broader, longer-term implications of major US policy shifts—from the impact on the US dollar’s standing and confidence in the US as a reliable marketplace, to the implications for the labor market, energy transition, and critical infrastructure, as well as the company’s business model and strategy. Boardroom discussions focused on the macro and micro, across multiple time-horizons, will be essential.