US President Donald Trump’s import tariffs have triggered a wave of retaliatory measures, setting off a trade war with key partners and raising fears of a global downturn. But while Trump’s protectionism and erratic policy shifts could have far-reaching implications, the greatest victim is likely to be the United States itself.
ITHACA, NEW YORK – US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has been accompanied by dramatic economic-policy shifts, setting countries around the world on edge. The new administration has imposed sweeping tariffs on Chinese, Mexican, and Canadian imports – pausing, reinstating, and later granting temporary exemptions for goods compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). In response, both Canada and Mexico have announced retaliatory tariffs on key US industries, while Trump has vowed to impose “reciprocal” tariffs on “everybody across the board.”
Since no other country wields as much influence over the world economy as the United States, these abrupt and unpredictable policy shifts have fueled fears of a global slowdown, triggering a stock-market selloff – starting in the US itself. In fact, Trump’s trade policies may inflict even greater damage at home than abroad. While some of his moves – especially his administration’s efforts to boost domestic semiconductor manufacturing – could prove beneficial, his erratic policy shifts jeopardize America’s economic stability, undermining its competitiveness and long-term growth.
Trump has long been frustrated by the fact that the US runs trade deficits with many countries. During his recent meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, he specifically raised concerns about America’s $45.6 billion trade deficit with India. In response, Modi pledged to increase energy imports from the US.
But not every trade relationship needs to be perfectly balanced. Trade imbalances are a natural part of global commerce, enabling economies of scale that ultimately benefit all countries.
Consider everyday transactions between individuals. Adam buys groceries from a neighborhood store owned by Eve, who spends that money at various other stores and online platforms. Now imagine that one day, a furious Adam barges into Eve’s store and declares, “I keep buying from you, and you buy nothing from me!” He then demands to “balance” their business relationship. If everyone insisted on such terms, commerce would grind to a halt, effectively dragging society back to the barter system.
Although striving for balanced trade with every country is uncalled for, America’s overall trade deficit does raise legitimate concerns. At the start of this year, the deficit reached an all-time high of $131.4 billion. What that means is that other countries are selling goods to the US and retaining a portion of the dollars earned, planning to use them for future purchases.
At a time of escalating global turmoil, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided.
Subscribe to Digital or Digital Plus now to secure your discount.
Subscribe Now
But it is important to recognize that this is the price of having a currency the world trusts and depends on. No one would willingly sell goods to North Korea and stockpile North Korean won for future use. The US dollar, on the other hand, serves as a global reserve currency precisely because of the world’s confidence in its stability. Trump’s tariffs now threaten to undermine the dollar’s global role.
Pointing to the high tariffs some countries impose on US goods, Trump has repeatedly threatened to retaliate with “reciprocal tariffs,” that is, matching those countries’ tariffs product by product. While such an approach may appeal to him and to rallygoers on the campaign trail, its effectiveness is questionable.
Trade, after all, is fundamentally driven by comparative advantage, which means that the goods a country exports to one trading partner are typically different from those it imports from that partner. For example, one country might export pharmaceuticals while importing airplanes. Thus, matching another country’s import tariffs on a specific good would be futile, especially if the US does not import that good in significant quantities to begin with.
But let’s set aside these nuances. We already know what will happen if the US were to apply this policy “across the board,” as Trump suggests. Canada and Mexico will raise tariffs on US goods, leading the US to retaliate, creating a vicious cycle.
This dynamic is already playing out between the US and Canada. In February, Trump announced 25% tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. In response, Ontario levied a 25% tax on electricity exports to the US, prompting Trump to declare a national emergency and double his steel and aluminum tariffs to 50%. Within hours, Ontario Premier Doug Ford suspended the surcharge after the US rescinded the tariff hike and agreed to negotiate.
The same retaliatory cycle would likely unfold with the European Union, China, Brazil, and many other trading partners. As a result, the US, which relies heavily on imports, will find itself behind a tariff wall – a strategy once favored by many developing countries, often with disastrous consequences. Trump’s tariff wall will drive up domestic inflation and increase US production costs, thereby making American goods less competitive and enabling Europe and China to outpace the US in key markets.
Notably, Trump’s tariffs have already sparked intense discussions among other countries about strengthening economic collaboration. India and the EU, for example, are close to finalizing a new trade agreement. There is also talk of deepening business and trade among Mexico, Canada, and China. In the short term, Trump’s trade policies will undoubtedly cause economic hardship worldwide. But in the long run, the greatest damage may be inflicted on the US itself. Ironically, by trying to promote his MAGA agenda, Trump could end up driving a global shift that makes other countries great again.
To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe
US President Donald Trump’s import tariffs have triggered a wave of retaliatory measures, setting off a trade war with key partners and raising fears of a global downturn. But while Trump’s protectionism and erratic policy shifts could have far-reaching implications, the greatest victim is likely to be the United States itself.
warns that the new administration’s protectionism resembles the strategy many developing countries once tried.
Unlike during his first term, US President Donald Trump no longer seems to care if his policies wreak havoc in financial markets. This time around, Trump seems to be obsessed with his radical approach to institutional deconstruction, which includes targeting the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank.
explains why the US president’s second administration, unlike his first, is targeting all three.
ITHACA, NEW YORK – US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has been accompanied by dramatic economic-policy shifts, setting countries around the world on edge. The new administration has imposed sweeping tariffs on Chinese, Mexican, and Canadian imports – pausing, reinstating, and later granting temporary exemptions for goods compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). In response, both Canada and Mexico have announced retaliatory tariffs on key US industries, while Trump has vowed to impose “reciprocal” tariffs on “everybody across the board.”
Since no other country wields as much influence over the world economy as the United States, these abrupt and unpredictable policy shifts have fueled fears of a global slowdown, triggering a stock-market selloff – starting in the US itself. In fact, Trump’s trade policies may inflict even greater damage at home than abroad. While some of his moves – especially his administration’s efforts to boost domestic semiconductor manufacturing – could prove beneficial, his erratic policy shifts jeopardize America’s economic stability, undermining its competitiveness and long-term growth.
Trump has long been frustrated by the fact that the US runs trade deficits with many countries. During his recent meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, he specifically raised concerns about America’s $45.6 billion trade deficit with India. In response, Modi pledged to increase energy imports from the US.
But not every trade relationship needs to be perfectly balanced. Trade imbalances are a natural part of global commerce, enabling economies of scale that ultimately benefit all countries.
Consider everyday transactions between individuals. Adam buys groceries from a neighborhood store owned by Eve, who spends that money at various other stores and online platforms. Now imagine that one day, a furious Adam barges into Eve’s store and declares, “I keep buying from you, and you buy nothing from me!” He then demands to “balance” their business relationship. If everyone insisted on such terms, commerce would grind to a halt, effectively dragging society back to the barter system.
Although striving for balanced trade with every country is uncalled for, America’s overall trade deficit does raise legitimate concerns. At the start of this year, the deficit reached an all-time high of $131.4 billion. What that means is that other countries are selling goods to the US and retaining a portion of the dollars earned, planning to use them for future purchases.
Winter Sale: Save 40% on a new PS subscription
At a time of escalating global turmoil, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided.
Subscribe to Digital or Digital Plus now to secure your discount.
Subscribe Now
But it is important to recognize that this is the price of having a currency the world trusts and depends on. No one would willingly sell goods to North Korea and stockpile North Korean won for future use. The US dollar, on the other hand, serves as a global reserve currency precisely because of the world’s confidence in its stability. Trump’s tariffs now threaten to undermine the dollar’s global role.
Pointing to the high tariffs some countries impose on US goods, Trump has repeatedly threatened to retaliate with “reciprocal tariffs,” that is, matching those countries’ tariffs product by product. While such an approach may appeal to him and to rallygoers on the campaign trail, its effectiveness is questionable.
Trade, after all, is fundamentally driven by comparative advantage, which means that the goods a country exports to one trading partner are typically different from those it imports from that partner. For example, one country might export pharmaceuticals while importing airplanes. Thus, matching another country’s import tariffs on a specific good would be futile, especially if the US does not import that good in significant quantities to begin with.
But let’s set aside these nuances. We already know what will happen if the US were to apply this policy “across the board,” as Trump suggests. Canada and Mexico will raise tariffs on US goods, leading the US to retaliate, creating a vicious cycle.
This dynamic is already playing out between the US and Canada. In February, Trump announced 25% tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. In response, Ontario levied a 25% tax on electricity exports to the US, prompting Trump to declare a national emergency and double his steel and aluminum tariffs to 50%. Within hours, Ontario Premier Doug Ford suspended the surcharge after the US rescinded the tariff hike and agreed to negotiate.
The same retaliatory cycle would likely unfold with the European Union, China, Brazil, and many other trading partners. As a result, the US, which relies heavily on imports, will find itself behind a tariff wall – a strategy once favored by many developing countries, often with disastrous consequences. Trump’s tariff wall will drive up domestic inflation and increase US production costs, thereby making American goods less competitive and enabling Europe and China to outpace the US in key markets.
Notably, Trump’s tariffs have already sparked intense discussions among other countries about strengthening economic collaboration. India and the EU, for example, are close to finalizing a new trade agreement. There is also talk of deepening business and trade among Mexico, Canada, and China. In the short term, Trump’s trade policies will undoubtedly cause economic hardship worldwide. But in the long run, the greatest damage may be inflicted on the US itself. Ironically, by trying to promote his MAGA agenda, Trump could end up driving a global shift that makes other countries great again.