Health Is Wealth When Tariffs Are Denting Profit Forecasts

President Donald Trump’s imposition of tariffs on trading partners have moved analysts to reduce forecasts for U.S. companies. Many stocks look vulnerable to declines, while some seem relatively immune.

Since the start of the year, analysts’ expectations for aggregate first-quarter sales of S&P 500 component companies have dropped about 0.4%, according to FactSet. The hundreds of billions of dollars worth of imports from China, Mexico, and Canada the Trump administration is placing tariffs on, including metals and basic materials for retail and food sellers, will raise costs for U.S. companies. That will force them to lift prices, reducing the number of goods and services they’ll sell to consumers and businesses.

This outlook has pressured first-quarter earnings estimates by 3.8%. Companies will cut back on marketing and perhaps labour, but many have substantial fixed expenses that can’t easily be reduced, such as depreciation and interest to lenders. Profit margins will drop in the face of lower revenue, thus weighing on profit estimates. The estimates dropped mildly in January, and then picked up steam in February, just after the initial tariff announcements.

“We are starting to see the first instances of analysts cutting numbers on tariff impacts,” writes Citi strategist Scott Chronert.

The reductions aren’t concentrated in one sector; they’re widespread, a concrete indication that the downward revisions are partly related to tariffs, which affect many sectors. The percentage of all analyst earnings-estimate revisions in March for S&P 500 companies that have been downward this year has been 60.1%, according to Citi, worse than the historical average of 53.5% for March.

The consumer-discretionary sector has seen just over 62% of March revisions to be lower, almost 10 percentage points worse than the historical average. The aggregate first-quarter earnings expectation for all consumer-discretionary companies in the S&P 500 has dropped 11% since the start of the year.

That could hurt the stocks going forward, even though the Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR exchange-traded fund has already dropped 11% for the year. The declines have been led by Tesla and Amazon.com , which account for trillions of dollars of market value and comprise a large portion of the fund. The average name in the fund is down about 4% this year, so there could easily be more downside.

That’s especially true because another slew of downward earnings revisions look likely. Analysts have barely changed their full-year 2025 sales projections for the consumer-discretionary sector, and have lowered full-year earnings by only 2%, even though they’ve more dramatically reduced first-quarter forecasts. The current expectation calls for a sharp increase in quarterly sales and earnings from the first quarter through the rest of the year, but that’s unrealistic, assuming tariffs remain in place for the rest of the year.

“The relative estimate achievability of the consumer discretionary earnings are below average,” Trivariate Research’s Adam Parker wrote in a report.

That makes these stocks look still too expensive—and vulnerable to declines. The consumer-discretionary ETF trades at 21.2 times expected earnings for this year, but if those expectations tumble as much as they have for the first quarter, then the fund’s current price/earnings multiple looks closer to 25 times. That’s too high, given that it’s where the multiple was before markets began reflecting ongoing risk to earnings from tariffs and any continued economic consequences. So, another drop in earnings estimates would drag these consumer stocks down even further.

Industrials are in a similar position. Many of them make equipment and machines that would become more costly to import. The sector has seen about two thirds of March earnings revisions move downward, about 13 percentage points worse that the historical average. Analysts have lowered first-quarter-earnings estimates by 6%, but only 3% for the full year, suggesting that more tariff-related downward revisions are likely for the rest of the year.

That would weigh on the stocks. The Industrial Select Sector SPDR ETF is about flat for the year but would look more expensive than it is today if earnings estimates drop more. The stocks face a high probability of downside from here.

The stocks to own are the “defensive” ones, those that are unlikely to see much tariff-related earnings impact, namely healthcare. Demand for drugs and insurance is much sturdier versus less essential goods and services when consumers have less money to spend. The Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF has produced a 6% gain this year.

That’s supported by earnings trends that are just fine. First-quarter earnings estimates have even ticked slightly higher this year. These stocks should remain relatively strong as long as analysts continue to forecast stable, albeit mild, sales and earnings growth for the coming few years.

“This leads us to recommend healthcare and disfavour consumer discretionary,” Parker writes.

For many Australians, the 2026 Federal Budget initially felt like a direct challenge to the way wealth is created, held and transferred between generations.

The headlines were immediate: changes to capital gains tax, reforms to discretionary trusts, restrictions on negative gearing and increased scrutiny of investment structures. Unsurprisingly, affluent families, business owners and investors began asking the same question:

Is the way we hold our wealth still fit for purpose?

In recent days, the government has announced several significant amendments following industry consultation and public feedback, including exempting testamentary trusts from the proposed 30 per cent minimum tax and expanding capital gains tax concessions for small businesses.

The backdown is welcome. But it also highlights something much bigger.

This Budget has accelerated a conversation that many Australian families have been postponing for years.

The conversation is not really about tax. It is about wealth stewardship.

For decades, Australians have built wealth through businesses, property, investments and careful long-term planning. Yet many families have not revisited the legal structures surrounding those assets in years, sometimes decades.

We often see clients who have spent years building significant wealth, only to discover their legal arrangements no longer reflect their current circumstances.

Their children are now adults. They may own multiple properties.

They may have sold a business, entered a second marriage, become grandparents or accumulated digital assets that did not exist when their original estate plans were prepared.

The trust that distributes income may need to be reconsidered. The bucket company may no longer be so attractive.

The Budget has simply exposed a reality that already existed: wealth structures cannot remain static while life continues to evolve.

Importantly, trusts themselves are not the issue.

Trusts are legitimate planning tools that provide flexibility, protection and continuity. When used appropriately, they allow families to adapt to changing circumstances over time.

And neither is tax the issue, really. Getting the fundamentals right is more important for long-term, sustainable wealth than a few favourable tax treatments around the edges.

The real issue is complacency.

Too often, families create structures and assume the job is done. It isn’t.

Estate planning is no longer a document you sign once and file away in a drawer. It is an ongoing process that should evolve alongside your life.

We are also seeing a broader shift in how Australians define wealth itself. It is no longer just the family home and an investment portfolio.

Modern wealth includes businesses, digital assets, cryptocurrency, intellectual property, frequent flyer points and increasingly complex family arrangements.

At the same time, Australians are living longer than ever before, meaning wealth may need to support multiple generations simultaneously. This creates new responsibilities and new risks.

How do you help your children enter the property market without exposing family wealth to relationship breakdowns?

How do you structure wealth so that it remains a source of opportunity rather than future conflict?

These are the questions families should be asking now.

The recent debate surrounding testamentary trusts also serves as an important reminder that policy decisions can have unintended consequences for vulnerable Australians. It is encouraging that the government has listened to feedback and clarified its position.

But the lesson remains: the wealth landscape is changing.

Increasingly, governments, regulators and tax authorities are paying closer attention to how wealth is held and transferred. That means families cannot afford to adopt a “set-and-forget” approach to their structures.

The families who will be best placed for the future are not necessarily those with the greatest wealth.

They are the families with the greatest clarity. Clarity around ownership, succession and governance. And clarity around how wealth will transition from one generation to the next.

Ultimately, preserving wealth is not about avoiding change.

It is about preparing for it.

Because the greatest risk is not change itself.

It is losing the ability to respond to it.

Anthony Hunt is Co-Founder of Wealth Lawyers and former COO of Westpac Private Bank. He advises business owners, investors and affluent Australian families on wealth protection, succession planning and intergenerational wealth transfer

Health Is Wealth When Tariffs Are Denting Profit Forecasts

The Federal Budget may have softened some of its proposed tax reforms, but it has exposed a bigger issue: too many families are relying on wealth structures that no longer reflect the realities of modern life.