The proposal to levy tariffs and then issue rebate checks is economically nonsensical. It creates massive bureaucratic leakage, making it more efficient to simply not have the tariffs. Furthermore, the policy uncertainty paralyzes businesses, creating non-economic costs that are more damaging than the direct financial impact of the tariffs.

Related Insights

The Fed kept interest rates higher for months due to economic uncertainty caused by Donald Trump's tariff policies. This directly increased borrowing costs for consumers on credit cards, car loans, and variable-rate mortgages, creating a tangible financial impact from political actions.

To navigate extreme uncertainty like unpredictable tariffs, Walmart's buyers use tangible, seasonal purchasing decisions (e.g., Halloween costumes) as a framework. They run detailed "what-if" scenarios on pricing, sourcing, and consumer behavior to make concrete decisions despite ambiguity.

Contrary to its goals, the U.S. trade war has resulted in self-isolation. Data shows the U.S. is the only country buying less from China, while U.S. allies and developing nations have increased their trade, leading to a record $1 trillion surplus for China. This highlights a strategic miscalculation in U.S. foreign trade policy.

While the US exports less to Canada by volume, its exports (electronics, pharma) have far higher margins and shareholder value multiples than Canadian exports (lumber, oil). Therefore, for every dollar of trade disrupted by tariffs, the US loses significantly more economic value, making the policy self-defeating.

While large firms like NVIDIA can onshore manufacturing, small hardware startups relying on Chinese production are the primary casualties of tariffs. They lack the scale to move supply chains or secure exemptions, eroding their margins and weakening their negotiating position with investors.

When trade policies force allies like Canada to find new partners, it's not a temporary shift. They build new infrastructure and relationships that won't be abandoned even if the political climate changes. The trust is broken, making the economic damage long-lasting and difficult to repair.

The impending 107% tariff on Italian pasta is based on legally sound anti-dumping laws targeting a specific product. This is distinct from Trump's broader, country-specific tariffs, which were enacted via a national emergency declaration and are more likely to be struck down by the Supreme Court. This signals a key legal risk difference for global businesses.

Despite what is described as "stupid" and "sclerotic" economic policies like tariffs and trade wars, the U.S. economy continues to grow. This resilience is not due to government strategy but to the relentless daily innovation of American businesses, which succeed in spite of, not because of, macro-level decisions.

US policy fetishizes a return to manufacturing, which employs 11% of the workforce. However, protectionist policies like tariffs actively harm the higher-margin, larger tourism industry, which employs 12%. This represents a sclerotic and irrational trade-off that damages a more valuable sector of the economy.

President Trump's proposed $2,000 "tariff dividend" checks had only a 12% chance of passing but still caused the stock market to rebound. This demonstrates that the mere announcement of a pro-market policy can be a powerful tool to influence investor sentiment, achieving an intended effect without ever being enacted into law.