Cambria CEO Secures Tariffs on Quartz Imports
Cambria CEO Marty Davis has successfully asked the U.S. government to put tariffs on quartz.
Objective Facts
Cambria CEO Marty Davis has successfully asked the U.S. government to put tariffs on quartz. The trade commission ruled in favor of Cambria's petition and recommended tariffs of up to 40 percent on imported quartz slabs for a four-year period, as well as quotas on how much can be imported. These taxes are essentially increasing costs for many of Cambria's competitors and other businesses, who rely more on imported materials — and who say they have no choice but to pass these higher prices along to homeowners and consumers. Davis owns and runs Cambria, a private Minnesota company that manufactures the quartz used for kitchen and bathroom countertops. It's a $500 million company that employs roughly 1,800 people. The commission received more than 700 statements against the tariffs, saying the duties would raise quartz prices for those who operate showrooms and who cut, buy and install imported countertops in new homes and renovation projects.
Left-Leaning Perspective
NPR's reporting framed the tariff story critically, using the headline "How a CEO and Trump donor is weaponizing tariffs against his rivals." The article presented the perspective that these tariffs would harm small businesses and consumers. Senator Adam B. Schiff stated in a May 4, 2026 letter to the ITC that the proposed tariff will cause negative repercussions to domestic fabricator businesses, eliminate blue-collar jobs and raise housing prices. U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen urged the ITC not to impose excessive tariffs on quartz imports, warning that the 50% tariff could raise the price of a quartz countertop by $500-$1,036 per kitchen. RealClearEnergy noted that America is experiencing a housing affordability crisis and that one trade case under consideration could drive home costs even higher, with the U.S. International Trade Commission considering whether to recommend steep tariffs and quotas on imported quartz slabs. Left-leaning coverage emphasized job losses at smaller fabrication businesses and the impact on housing affordability. Cambria's competitors claim that Davis is destroying jobs, especially at small businesses, and unfairly raising prices for middle-class homeowners. The Save Quartz Jobs coalition stated that the recommended trade restrictions fail to reflect the realities of today's quartz industry, with over 100,000 U.S. jobs at risk, threatening harm to small-and-medium-sized American companies, while the only benefit would be to exacerbate the profits of a handful of multinational companies. The coalition called for a final decision that prioritizes economic growth, protects jobs and avoids further straining the nation's housing affordability crisis. Left-leaning outlets highlighted the concern that Davis is leveraging his ties to Trump to gain preferential treatment. Cambria's opponents see this business dispute as bigger than quartz, claiming it's another example of "crony capitalism" in a Trump administration that has picked winners and losers. This perspective was less about opposing tariffs generally and more about the appearance that political connections were driving trade decisions that disadvantaged smaller competitors.
Right-Leaning Perspective
While conservative outlets did not generate extensive coverage of this specific story during the searched period, support for Cambria's tariffs crossed party lines in ways that complicated a strict left-right framing. While Davis is well-known as a Trump supporter and donor, support for the measure crosses party lines. U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota, told the trade judges during a February hearing that she has visited Cambria, seen its workers and strongly supports penalizing trade violators. Klobuchar's support indicates that trade protectionism was not exclusively a Republican position. Davis himself made the case for tariffs using language typical of American manufacturing protectionists. In a recent interview with NPR, Davis repeatedly invoked Main Street, American manufacturing jobs, and what he calls "free and fair trade," stating: "Free and fair trade has to prevail, or the American manufacturer will be gone, and these jobs will leave. And they are jobs that really promote a healthy middle class." Davis stated: "We're a family business, and we've gone through peaks and valleys before. But it's damaging when you have to compete with economics that are false and a totally unfair, unlevel playing field." When critics claimed Davis would benefit from his relationship with Trump, Davis called the opposition campaign "orchestrated by overseas importers who stand to make billions by keeping the status quo" and dismissed the claims as "nonsense," saying Trump is too busy to weigh in on countertops. Right-leaning perspectives on tariffs generally support trade protections as a tool to defend domestic manufacturing. According to Scott Lincicome, a trade expert at the libertarian Cato Institute, such tariff requests are pretty common for U.S. manufacturers and have been long before Trump entered politics. American steel and aluminum companies in particular have used this process to seek economic protection from cheaper foreign imports, and this has been "a dirty little secret of U.S. trade policy for decades" designed to "churn out import protection." This framing suggests that tariffs, while controversial, reflect established U.S. trade practice.
Deep Dive
The Cambria tariff case reveals fundamental tensions in U.S. trade policy and reveals how trade law mechanisms originally designed to protect domestic industries from foreign dumping have become tools for companies to seek competitive advantages over other American businesses. Trade expert Scott Lincicome notes that such tariff requests are pretty common for U.S. manufacturers and have been used by American steel and aluminum companies for decades. He calls this "a dirty little secret of U.S. trade policy" and describes the process as "a machine designed to churn out import protection." The case pits a large domestic manufacturer (Cambria) against a broader ecosystem of smaller American businesses—quartz fabricators, installers, retailers, and homebuilders—who depend on imported quartz. The disagreement is not between America and foreign competitors, but between different segments of the American supply chain. Both sides make legitimate arguments. Cambria argues it faces genuinely unfair trade practices from government-subsidized competitors abroad and that tariffs would protect American manufacturing jobs. Cambria partnered with other domestic manufacturers to claim that several Asian countries were "illegally dumping" quartz and flooding the U.S. market with cheap quartz. Opponents argue that the domestic quartz fabricator industry includes more than 10,000 mostly small, hometown American businesses employing about 100,000 workers—more workers than Cambria employs—and that tariffs will force them to either raise prices (harming consumers and homebuilders) or eliminate jobs. The core disagreement is about which American jobs matter more and whether a modest increase in countertop costs is a justified trade-off for preserving domestic manufacturing. Davis argues countertops are less than 1% of home costs, while homebuilders argue that multiplying small cost increases across all building materials adds up to thousands of dollars per home. The political angle matters but should not overshadow the substantive trade policy questions. While Davis is well-known as a Trump supporter, support for the measure crosses party lines, with Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar strongly supporting tariffs on trade violators. The unresolved question is whether Trump will accept the ITC's recommendation for tariffs or impose different terms. The trade commission will send its recommendations to the president, and he gets to decide whether to accept or reject these new tariffs. Scott Lincicome expects the president will apply whatever protection is recommended.