Never mistake quiet for consent.
Although he has the loud and vocal support of his MAGA base, US president Donald Trump’s decision to impose sweeping tariffs on Canada and Mexico have drawn firm, if quiet, criticism from home-grown political leaders and industry groups who warn the move will drive up costs for American consumers and fail to achieve their almost implausible — and impossible — economic goals.
The Wall Street Journal called it the ‘dumbest trade war in history’, outlining desperate attempts in its Tuesday edition from US auto manufacturers and home builders to gain exemptions ahead of yesterday’s 30-day pause on Canada.
No less an authority than Le Monde called the tariff drama a carefully choreographed “bluff” from a tried and true Trump playbook, in its own American edition.
“No one knows how this blackmail will end. What is certain is that by adopting the methods he once used in real estate development, Trump risks creating chronic instability that is dangerous for the economy,” it said.
“The US's trade relations now hang on the whim of one man who subjectively assesses, on a fragile legal basis, what is and isn't good for his country.”
As an economic tool, tariffs proved ineffective during Trump's first term. Instead of shrinking the trade deficit, it only widened — along with the US budget deficit — it added.
The tariffs are ostensibly intended to curb illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking, according to the administration.
However, even sympathetic politicians allies are warning they are actually a tax on American businesses and families.
“Tariffs are simply taxes,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a longtime critic of protectionist trade policies, said in a statement posted to Twitter (“X”). “Taxing trade will mean less trade and higher prices.”
Industry groups are also pushing back, warning that the tariffs could have far-reaching consequences, especially for oil and gas.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) stressed that energy markets are highly integrated, and restricting free trade could jeopardize access to affordable fuel. “Free and fair trade across our borders is critical for delivering affordable, reliable energy to U.S. consumers,” said API CEO Mike Sommers.
Manufacturers have also raised alarms. The National Association of Manufacturers estimated that a 25% tariff could add $144 billion annually to production costs, disrupting supply chains and disproportionately impacting small and medium-sized businesses.
“These businesses employing millions of American workers will face significant disruptions,” said Jay Timmons, the association’s president and CEO. “Ultimately, manufacturers will bear the brunt of these tariffs, undermining our ability to sell our products at a competitive price and putting American jobs at risk.”
Despite those concerns, Trump has defended the tariffs by arguing they are necessary to address longstanding trade imbalances and economic security threats, namely illegal immigration and drug trafficking.
But an analysis from the Peterson Institute for International Economics on Tuesday argued the collateral damage from unilaterally ripping up trade agreements, like the USMCA deal Trump negotiated in his first term, outweighs any economic or political benefit and would eventually drive both Canada and Mexico into China’s orbit.
“Even if these tariffs are avoided, the US has damaged itself reputationally, and its partners may look to diversify their trade and investment away from the US. The US will have ripped itself off,” it argued.
Added Mary Lovely, a senior fellow with the institute: “There's no reason, no welfare implication of us having a trade deficit with Canada or with any other country, for that matter.”
“So there's no reason, for example, that the grocery store should buy as much for me as I buy from it. There's no reason why Canada, which is rich in natural resources, shouldn't sell to us, and our companies then use those resources to produce things to sell to the rest of the world.”
