Comment: An ‘impossible trinity’ of goals for Trump’s tariffs

Trump wants revenue, manufacturing and foreign policy wins; he can’t get all three, if any.

By Robert Burgess / Bloomberg Opinion

If you’ve spent hopeless hours searching for coherence in the White House’s trade strategy set to be unveiled April 2 — a date President Donald Trump is calling “Liberation Day” — don’t fret because there is none to be found.

To date, Trump has put forward three primary objectives of the levies. The first is raising tax revenue to help close the federal budget deficit and pay for an extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 that is due to expire at the end of the year. The second is to bring back to the U.S. manufacturing jobs that have migrated overseas, igniting a new “Golden Age” of America. The third is to achieve foreign policy goals.

Each one of those objectives would be hard enough to achieve on their own, but all at the same time as Trump suggests? Inconceivable would be an understatement. “The impossible trinity of tariff objectives” is how the economists at Morgan Stanley put it in a research report. “Tariffs would have to be much higher, and more persistent” than what the White House has floated to be a “significant source” of tax revenue, they concluded. And that’s taking into account the notion that the U.S. tariff rate will rise to an average of somewhere between 10 percent to 15 percent, the highest since the 1940s and up from around 2.2 percent currently.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

Indeed, the Budget Lab at Yale has done extensive work on the impact of tariffs. It estimates that based on what has been proposed, tariffs on imported goods would raise around $3.52 trillion between 2026 and 2035 (paid for by U.S. importers and, ultimately, consumers and not the exporting countries). A big number, but far short of the $4.6 trillion deficit expansion through 2034 that the Congressional Budget Office projected would come from extending the TCJA, Trump’s signature piece of legislation in his first administration. Nor will tariff revenue put a dent in a budget shortfall that was $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2024 alone and which the CBO estimates will total $21.8 trillion through 2035 (and that’s without any changes to prevailing tax laws).

Even if tariffs were set high enough to raise a significant amount of revenue, it would mean failing on the other objectives, according to the Morgan Stanley economists.

For one, broadly higher tariffs would imply higher prices for U.S. consumers and potentially lower profit margins for companies. Neither would be conducive to increased tax revenue, as consumers already weary from an extended period of elevated prices would likely pull back on spending. Here, the Budget Lab estimates that inflation rates would rise by 1.7 percentage points in the short-term if other countries don’t retaliate and by 2.1 percentage points if they do (assuming the Federal Reserve does not respond to the effect of tariffs). The Budget Lab says this is equivalent to $2,700 to $3,400 per household on average in 2024 dollars. And it could be much more. The American Economic Review found that Trump’s tariffs on South Korean and Chinese washing machines in 2018 led to almost as large an increase in the price of washing machines sold in the U.S. In addition, the price of dryers rose even though they weren’t subject to tariffs in a sort of “knock on” effect.

Secondly, companies caught in the middle of a trade war and watching their profits suffer as consumers cut back will have little incentive to onshore manufacturing. And don’t forget that corporate tax revenue is based on profits, which stagnated during Trump’s first term as he waged a tariff war against China, causing the manufacturing industry to fall into a recession as measured by the Institute for Supply Management. And as the Morgan Stanley economists remind, almost all the revenue raised from those tariffs was used to compensate U.S. farmers for lost overseas sales after China retaliated by diverting demand to non-U.S. producers.

So much for objectives 1 and 2. As for the third objective, success in using the threat of tariffs to achieve foreign policy goals such as reducing the flow of migrants or illicit drugs or lowering trade barriers to U.S. products would automatically make raising tax revenue and onshoring production moot. Recall in early February when Trump prepared to impose 25 percent tariffs on goods coming into the U.S. from Mexico and Canada. Here’s what he wrote in a social media post at the time: “MAKE YOUR PRODUCT IN THE USA AND THERE ARE NO TARIFFS! Why should the United States lose TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SUBSIDIZING OTHER COUNTRIES… .”

But then Kevin Hassett, director of the White House’s National Economic Council, said the tariffs weren’t about that at all. “This is not a trade war, this is a drug war,” he told CNBC. Maybe he was right because Mexico and Canada made some token concessions regarding security at their borders with the U.S. and Trump promptly put the tariffs on hold. Talk of tariffs as a revenue generator barely came up in that episode.

Here’s what the Morgan Stanley economists conclude:

“To succeed as a significant source of revenue, tariffs have to fail on almost every other objective listed previously. Relaxing tariffs as part of a successful negotiation reduced revenue. Reducing imports or reshoring production reduces revenue. Creating carve-outs to exempt certain goods reduces revenue. Relief payments to adversely impacted U.S. producers reduce revenue.”

Trump’s trade policies have always been more populist than pragmatic. That may be fine on the campaign trail but are downright reckless when implemented. Economists are already raising the odds of “stagflation,” that pernicious double whammy where economic growth stagnates yet inflation accelerates to elevated levels. Watching the White House attempt to follow through on its tariff threats is like watching the dog that finally caught the bumper; happy to claim victory but not with the consequences.

Robert Burgess is the executive editor of Bloomberg Opinion. Previously, he was the global executive editor in charge of financial markets for Bloomberg News.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

THis is an editorial cartoon by Michael de Adder . Michael de Adder was born in Moncton, New Brunswick. He studied art at Mount Allison University where he received a Bachelor of Fine Arts in drawing and painting. He began his career working for The Coast, a Halifax-based alternative weekly, drawing a popular comic strip called Walterworld which lampooned the then-current mayor of Halifax, Walter Fitzgerald. This led to freelance jobs at The Chronicle-Herald and The Hill Times in Ottawa, Ontario.

 

After freelancing for a few years, de Adder landed his first full time cartooning job at the Halifax Daily News. After the Daily News folded in 2008, he became the full-time freelance cartoonist at New Brunswick Publishing. He was let go for political views expressed through his work including a cartoon depicting U.S. President Donald Trump’s border policies. He now freelances for the Halifax Chronicle Herald, the Toronto Star, Ottawa Hill Times and Counterpoint in the USA. He has over a million readers per day and is considered the most read cartoonist in Canada.

 

Michael de Adder has won numerous awards for his work, including seven Atlantic Journalism Awards plus a Gold Innovation Award for news animation in 2008. He won the Association of Editorial Cartoonists' 2002 Golden Spike Award for best editorial cartoon spiked by an editor and the Association of Canadian Cartoonists 2014 Townsend Award. The National Cartoonists Society for the Reuben Award has shortlisted him in the Editorial Cartooning category. He is a past president of the Association of Canadian Editorial Cartoonists and spent 10 years on the board of the Cartoonists Rights Network.
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, June 11

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer testifies during a budget hearing before a House Appropriations subcommittee on Capitol Hill in Washington on Thursday, May 15, 2025. (Al Drago/The New York Times)
Editorial: Ending Job Corps a short-sighted move by White House

If it’s jobs the Trump administration hopes to bring back to the U.S., it will need workers to fill them.

Marcus Tageant (Courtesy of City of Lake Stevens)
Welch: Marcus Tageant embodied the spirit of Lake Stevens

I served with Marcus on the city council, witnessing an infectious devotion to his community.

Comment: Why Trump’s Guard deployment is threat to democracy

Trump claims rebellion and invasion; there is neither. Policing protests must be left to states.

Comment: Hegseth renaming ships dishonors memory of ‘warriors’

Navy vessels were named for Harvey Milk, Cesar Chavez and others in recognition of their service to country.

Goldberg: Watch carefully; this is what autocracy looks like

Trump, in stepping past state officials, has over-reacted to discourage legitimate protest of his actions.

A rendering of possible configuration for a new multi-purpose stadium in downtown Everett. (DLR Group)
Editorial: Latest ballpark figures drive hope for new stadium

A lower estimate for the project should help persuade city officials to move ahead with plans.

A rendering of the new vessels to be built for Washington State Ferries. (Washington State Ferries)
Editorial: Local shipyard should get shot to build state ferries

If allowed to build at least two ferries, Nichols Brothers can show the value building here offers.

Comment: Reclaim and fly the American flag for ‘No Kings Day’

For those defending the nation’s ideals, there’s no better complement to a protest sign than the flag.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Tuesday, June 10

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Comment: Trump’s tariffs could ground aerospace’s rebound

Just as Boeing and Airbus had worked out most of their supply chain kinks, the threat of tariffs looms.

French: Trump, as he hoped, gets his excuse for conflict

It’s on the slightest of pretenses, but Trump is getting the showdown he desired in California.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.

You're browsing in private mode.
Please sign in or subscribe to continue reading articles in this mode.

The Daily Herald relies on subscription revenue to provide local content for our readers.

Subscribe

Already a subscriber? Please sign in