Latest in the escalating number of companies declaring bankruptcy under Trump's economic incompetence

[RockyRoadTravel]

You'd have expected that after Hooters went bankrupt in the Spring, that the Incompetent-in-Chief would have reconsidered his attacks on the USA economy.  Major companies are belly up due to his either ignorance, incompetence or just not giving a shit.  23andMe. Forever21. SAKS Global.  The more commonly known national brands.  But every town in the USA has some business owner paying the price for the MAGA economy of by, for and about Tech billionaires.  

Who's gone bankrupt in your town because of the Mad King in the White House?

[stevenkesslar]

7 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

Who's gone bankrupt in your town because of the Mad King in the White House?

 

How would we even know?

We can't afford to shop at them.

[RockyRoadTravel]

12 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

 

How would we even know?

We can't afford to shop at them.

The stupid  aluminum tariffs driving up the costs of aluminum for USA manufacturers was one of the nails in Del Monte Foods bankruptcy.  

[bucknaway]

has del Monte foods closed

 

**No, Del Monte Foods has not closed entirely.** The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in July 2025 and is actively restructuring through a court-supervised sale process, with operations continuing normally thanks to debtor-in-possession financing.[1][2][3]

 

## Recent financial status

Del Monte Foods secured $912.5 million in DIP financing to maintain day-to-day operations during bankruptcy, including paying employees, suppliers, and fulfilling customer orders without interruption.[2][3]

Creditors and the parent company reached a mediated settlement in December 2025, advancing plans for a sale of its assets to resolve over $1.2 billion in debt.[4][1]

 

## Plant closures and impacts

The company has closed several specific facilities as part of cost-cutting, including plants in Toppenish, WA (April 2024), Hanford, CA (late March 2026), Yakima, WA (2025), and others, affecting hundreds of jobs.[5][6][7]

These closures align with reduced consumer demand post-COVID and a shift to an "asset-light" strategy, but the core business—canned fruits, vegetables, and related products—remains operational across remaining U.S. and Mexico plants.[5][6]

 

## Outlook

As of early 2026, Del Monte is proceeding with a sale auction under bankruptcy court oversight, positioning for new ownership and long-term viability rather than liquidation.[4][2]

 

Citations:

[1] Del Monte Foods, the Canned Goods Giant, Files for Bankruptcy https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/02/business/del-monte-bankruptcy.html

[2] Del Monte Foods Chapter 11: $1B Bankruptcy & Supply Chain Sale https://tanktransport.com/2025/08/del-monte-foods-chapter-11/

[3] Del Monte Foods - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_Monte_Foods

[4] Del Monte Foods Parent, Creditors Reach Bankruptcy Settlement https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptcy-law/del-monte-foods-parent-creditors-reach-bankruptcy-settlement

[5] Del Monte to close two more plants | Food Business News https://www.foodbusinessnews.net/articles/25667-del-monte-to-close-two-more-plants

[6] Del Monte Shuts Down Hanford Plant Amid Debt Restructuring Efforts https://www.sierradailynews.com/state/del-monte-shuts-down-hanford-plant-amid-debt-restructuring-efforts/

[7] Fruit Producer Del Monte Closes Yakima Processing Plant https://www.foodmanufacturing.com/facility/news/22943185/fruit-producer-del-monte-closes-yakima-processing-plant

[8] Del Monte Foods bankruptcy leaves California peach farmers in limbo https://kmph.com/news/local/del-monte-foods-bankruptcy-leaves-california-peach-farmers-in-limbo

[9] Del Monte trims stake in Indian food firm Sundrop Brands, raises $15M https://insiderph.com/del-monte-trims-stake-in-indian-food-firm-sundrop-brands-raises-15m

[10] Del Monte to Close 2 Canning Plants - Powder & Bulk Solids https://www.powderbulksolids.com/food-beverage/del-monte-

to-close-2-canning-plants

[bucknaway]

Several factors are driving companies to leave California, and it’s usually a mix rather than one single reason. The most commonly cited ones are:

 

High costs

California has some of the highest business costs in the U.S. That includes commercial rent, utilities, workers’ compensation, and especially housing, which affects wages and employee retention.

 

Taxes

The state has high corporate taxes and the highest top marginal personal income tax rate in the country. For owners and executives, that can make a big difference compared to states with no income tax.

 

Regulatory burden

Environmental rules, labor laws, and compliance requirements are stricter than in most states. Many companies say the rules are complex, slow to navigate, and expensive to comply with, especially for manufacturing, logistics, and energy-intensive operations.

 

Labor laws and liability

Rules around overtime, independent contractors, scheduling, and employee classification are tougher than elsewhere. Businesses also point to higher exposure to lawsuits and penalties.

 

Remote work changed the math

Once companies proved they could operate with remote or distributed teams, the advantage of being physically located in California became less compelling. That made relocation easier.

 

Incentives elsewhere

States like Texas, Florida, Arizona, Tennessee, and North Carolina actively recruit companies with tax incentives, faster permitting, and lower ongoing costs.

 

Quality-of-life concerns (for some regions)

Issues like traffic, homelessness, crime in certain cities, and long commute times can affect both employees and executives, influencing relocation decisions.

 

One important nuance: California still creates a lot of new businesses and remains a major hub for tech, entertainment, agriculture, and biotech. Many companies don’t leave entirely. They keep a presence in California while expanding or relocating headquarters, manufacturing, or distribution to lower-cost states.

 

If you want, I can break this down by industry (tech, manufacturing, logistics, finance) or compare California directly to a specific state companies are moving to.

[bucknaway]

Oil refineries are leaving California for a few very specific, structural reasons. This isn’t about one regulation or one company decision. It’s the combined economics of operating a refinery in the state.

 

Tight environmental regulations

California has the most stringent air-quality, emissions, and fuel regulations in the country. Refineries must meet standards that don’t apply elsewhere, which drives up compliance and capital costs. Even routine maintenance or upgrades often require long permitting timelines.

 

Cap-and-trade costs

Refineries must buy emissions allowances under California’s cap-and-trade program. As allowances become scarcer and more expensive, operating costs rise every year. These costs are much higher than in refinery-heavy states like Texas or Louisiana.

 

Special fuel requirements

California uses a unique gasoline blend. That means refineries must be configured specifically for the state’s market and can’t easily import fuel from elsewhere when production drops. It also means upgrades are more complex and expensive.

 

Aging facilities and high upgrade costs

Many California refineries are decades old. Keeping them compliant requires major capital investments, sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars. Companies increasingly decide those investments don’t make sense given shrinking demand and regulatory risk.

 

Declining long-term demand

State policy strongly pushes electric vehicles, fuel efficiency, and reduced fossil fuel use. From a business standpoint, that signals lower gasoline demand over time, making long-term refinery investments harder to justify.

 

Legal and policy uncertainty

Refiners face uncertainty around future regulations, potential new taxes, price-gouging rules, and litigation. Even if a refinery is profitable today, companies worry about sudden policy changes that could erase margins.

 

Better economics elsewhere

Other states offer lower taxes, fewer regulatory layers, faster permitting, and proximity to crude supplies. Refineries in the Gulf Coast can also export fuel globally, which California refineries generally can’t do as easily.

 

Consolidation, not just relocation

Some refineries aren’t moving at all. They’re being shut down or converted to renewable diesel facilities because that aligns better with California’s incentives and climate policies.

 

The result is fewer refineries operating in the state, which can increase gasoline price volatility because California has limited backup supply when something goes offline.

 

If you want, I can also explain how this affects gas prices specifically, or why refinery exits tend to cause sharp price spikes in California but not in other states.

[RockyRoadTravel]

34 minutes ago, bucknaway said:

Oil refineries are leaving California for a few very specific, structural reasons. This isn’t about one regulation or one company decision. It’s the combined economics of operating a refinery in the state.

 

Tight environmental regulations

California has the most stringent air-quality, emissions, and fuel regulations in the country. Refineries must meet standards that don’t apply elsewhere, which drives up compliance and capital costs. Even routine maintenance or upgrades often require long permitting timelines.

 

Cap-and-trade costs

Refineries must buy emissions allowances under California’s cap-and-trade program. As allowances become scarcer and more expensive, operating costs rise every year. These costs are much higher than in refinery-heavy states like Texas or Louisiana.

 

Special fuel requirements

California uses a unique gasoline blend. That means refineries must be configured specifically for the state’s market and can’t easily import fuel from elsewhere when production drops. It also means upgrades are more complex and expensive.

 

Aging facilities and high upgrade costs

Many California refineries are decades old. Keeping them compliant requires major capital investments, sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars. Companies increasingly decide those investments don’t make sense given shrinking demand and regulatory risk.

 

Declining long-term demand

State policy strongly pushes electric vehicles, fuel efficiency, and reduced fossil fuel use. From a business standpoint, that signals lower gasoline demand over time, making long-term refinery investments harder to justify.

 

Legal and policy uncertainty

Refiners face uncertainty around future regulations, potential new taxes, price-gouging rules, and litigation. Even if a refinery is profitable today, companies worry about sudden policy changes that could erase margins.

 

Better economics elsewhere

Other states offer lower taxes, fewer regulatory layers, faster permitting, and proximity to crude supplies. Refineries in the Gulf Coast can also export fuel globally, which California refineries generally can’t do as easily.

 

Consolidation, not just relocation

Some refineries aren’t moving at all. They’re being shut down or converted to renewable diesel facilities because that aligns better with California’s incentives and climate policies.

 

The result is fewer refineries operating in the state, which can increase gasoline price volatility because California has limited backup supply when something goes offline.

 

If you want, I can also explain how this affects gas prices specifically, or why refinery exits tend to cause sharp price spikes in California but not in other states.

GO Chat GPT GO.  Look at you girl, getting all AI on us.  

[bucknaway]

There isn’t a single reason companies leave “blue” states, but a mix of cost-related and policy-related factors motivates many of these moves. The trend has shown up in several high-profile relocations out of states like California and New York to places including Texas, Florida, and other lower-tax states. 

 

Here’s what business leaders and data point to as the main drivers:

 

1. Lower taxes and operating costs

Companies often pay lower corporate income taxes, lower personal income taxes for executives, and generally lower costs of doing business in states like Texas, Florida, Tennessee, and others. That can boost profitability, especially for firms with thin margins. 

 

2. Cost of living and cost of labor

High living costs in blue states can translate to higher wages and benefits firms need to offer to attract workers. In contrast, many firms see savings in states where housing and wages are relatively lower. 

 

3. Regulation and legal environment

Heavier regulatory requirements around employment, environment, land use, and corporate governance can make planning and expansion more complex or expensive. Some executives explicitly cite this as a factor in relocation decisions. 

 

4. Quality-of-life and workforce recruitment

Firms also consider where they can recruit and retain employees who want affordable housing, less congestion, or different lifestyle options. In some cases, companies leave expensive urban hubs because employees choose jobs in places with a lower cost of living. 

 

5. Competitive incentives from other states

States trying to attract business will sometimes offer tax breaks, grants, or other support that makes relocation financially appealing. 

 

6. Broader migration trends

Businesses don’t make decisions in a vacuum. When workers and families relocate to other states for cost reasons, companies may follow to stay close to customers and talent pools. Demographic shifts show strong inbound migration to many Sun Belt and Mountain West states. 

 

7. Specific legal trends in incorporation law

Separate from state migration, even states known as corporate havens, like Delaware, have seen firms reincorporate in other states because of changes in corporate litigation and governance environments. 

 

There’s debate about how much of this reflects policy choices versus broader economic shifts, and many firms still operate successfully in traditional hubs. But for a significant number of relocations, reducing costs and finding a policy environment that fits their long-term strategy are core reasons.

[bucknaway]

27 minutes ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

GO Chat GPT GO.  Look at you girl, getting all AI on us.  

Enjoy me while I last. Come Monday it's back to work and back to reality 😇

[RockyRoadTravel]

50 minutes ago, bucknaway said:

Enjoy me while I last. Come Monday it's back to work and back to reality 😇

Biggest surprise of the year so far.  

[stevenkesslar]

Yes, Del Monte Foods has significantly cut employees through plant closures and layoffs, particularly around 2019-2020 (affecting nearly 900 workers) and again in 2024-2025, as part of restructuring efforts and due to economic pressures leading to a July 2025 bankruptcy filing for a court-supervised sale, impacting hundreds more across various U.S. and Canadian locations as they consolidate operations and face declining demand for canned goods. 

 

That's AI for ya.

Bonus question for the barking dog who wants so very badly to be smart, as well as true and loyal and good.

Well, at least he is true and loyal and good.

"How many new manufacturing jobs are there in the US since Trump was inaugurated in January 2025?"

[stevenkesslar]

Quote

3 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:

"How many new manufacturing jobs are there in the US since Trump was inaugurated in January 2025?"

And the answer is, thanks to AI

Since Donald Trump's inauguration in January 2025, U.S. manufacturing employment has generally declined, with reports showing losses of tens of thousands of jobs by late 2025, contradicting pre-election promises of growth, as policies like tariffs are linked to increased costs and slower hiring, though some initial upticks were reported early in the year. Specific figures vary by report, but a consensus among analyses from groups like the Center for American Progress and Rethink Trade indicates net losses in manufacturing jobs through late 2025. 

 

FUCK!

ARE WE GONNA HAVE TO DEPORT AI NOW????!!!!

MAYBE WE CAN SEND THIS SHIT TO CANADA OR MEXICO

[RockyRoadTravel]

40 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:

Yes, Del Monte Foods has significantly cut employees through plant closures and layoffs, particularly around 2019-2020 (affecting nearly 900 workers) and again in 2024-2025, as part of restructuring efforts and due to economic pressures leading to a July 2025 bankruptcy filing for a court-supervised sale, impacting hundreds more across various U.S. and Canadian locations as they consolidate operations and face declining demand for canned goods. 

 

That's AI for ya.

Bonus question for the barking dog who wants so very badly to be smart, as well as true and loyal and good.

Well, at least he is true and loyal and good.

"How many new manufacturing jobs are there in the US since Trump was inaugurated in January 2025?"

Wait. Wait.  Can I answer that one?  (You know how shy Bucknaway can be around facts.)  Is it less than zero?  Is the answer the decline of manufacturing jobs has accelerated under the Mad King? 

What do I win?  

[stevenkesslar]

6 minutes ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

What do I win?  

Duh!

You win Venezuela.

If you can't handle it, at least you have a smart PM who knows how to talk.  If he can cozy up to oil guys in Alberta, he can probably figure out Venezuela, too.

[Suckrates]

2 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

Biggest surprise of the year so far.  

Did someone break Tik Tok and drive Bucky to Chat GPT ?     

[bucknaway]

[RockyRoadTravel]

3 hours ago, Suckrates said:

Did someone break Tik Tok and drive Bucky to Chat GPT ?     

That wasn't the surprising part of the message. It was the work thing.

[RockyRoadTravel]

Under the last four terms of a Republican president (Trump and Bush Jr) 1 million net jobs created.  Under the last five terms of a Democratic president 80 million net jobs created.  It's not even math.  it's arithmetic.