Trump's Tariffs Prove a Lose-Lose Proposition for Americans

Supreme Court rules duties issued under National Emergency Act unconstitutional

Mar. 21, 2026 at 6:33pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A new analysis shows that Trump's tariffs have primarily burdened American consumers with higher prices, while failing to boost manufacturing jobs or reduce trade deficits as promised. The chaotic and arbitrary application of tariffs has disrupted international trade, alienated allies, and created an appearance of crony capitalism and corruption.

Why it matters

Trump's misuse of tariffs as a political tool rather than an economic policy instrument has harmed American families and businesses, undermined U.S. standing globally, and raised concerns about potential insider profiteering. This analysis provides important context as Congress considers limiting the president's tariff powers.

The details

Recent studies by Goldman Sachs and the Federal Reserve have shown that the cost of Trump's tariffs have been borne primarily by the American consumer in the form of price increases, while a small percentage has been absorbed by American businesses. Estimates are that the average family will pay approximately $1,000 extra this year because of Trump's tariffs. Although the trade deficit with China has decreased, the overall goods deficit hit a record high in 2025, as global corporations and Chinese manufacturers have been adept at transferring their products to supply chains outside of China. Small businesses have borne the brunt of tariffs more so than large corporations, with manufacturers losing approximately 108,000 jobs in 2025 despite a slight increase in employment by U.S. steel producers.

  • The Supreme Court ruled the tariffs issued under the National Emergency Act as unconstitutional in 2026.
  • Trump's tariffs have been in effect since 2018.

The players

Donald Trump

The former president who imposed a series of tariffs, claiming they would reduce trade deficits and bring manufacturing jobs back to America, despite evidence showing the tariffs primarily harmed American consumers and businesses.

Goldman Sachs

A financial services firm that conducted a study showing the cost of Trump's tariffs have been borne primarily by American consumers.

Federal Reserve

The central banking system of the United States, which also found that the cost of Trump's tariffs have been passed on to American consumers.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Tariffs are indeed a tax. Recent studies by Goldman Sachs and the Federal Reserve have shown that the cost of Trump's tariffs have been borne primarily by the American consumer in the form of price increases while a small percentage has been absorbed by American businesses.”

— Robert D. Russell, Ph.D.

“Trump's chaotic, capricious application of tariffs provides few economic benefits while disrupting international trade and alienating allies. There is seemingly no overall plan in his application of tariffs beyond his whims and personal aggrandizement.”

— Robert D. Russell, Ph.D.

What’s next

The Supreme Court's ruling that the tariffs issued under the National Emergency Act are unconstitutional may prompt Congress to consider limiting the president's tariff powers going forward.

The takeaway

Trump's misuse of tariffs as a political tool rather than an economic policy instrument has harmed American families and businesses, undermined U.S. standing globally, and raised concerns about potential insider profiteering. This analysis underscores the need for a more strategic and accountable approach to trade policy.