After a Turbulent Week, Is Trump Nearer to Achieving His Trade Objectives?

Last week, Donald Trump unveiled an enormous tariff strategy that threatens to shake the foundations of the global economic framework and dismantle long-standing trade alliances with America’s partners.

However, a major section of this plan has been put on hold, as the president announced a 90-day suspension of increased tariffs on most nations while intensifying a trade conflict with China.

Given this partial about-face, is Trump closer to achieving his trade objectives? Below is a summary of five of his primary goals and their current status.

What Trump said: For decades, our country has been exploited and taken advantage of by nations far and near, and by allies as well as adversaries.

Trump’s initial trade strategy made significant waves globally, introducing a sweeping 10% baseline tariff on all nations (even uninhabited territories) and additional “reciprocal” tariffs on the 60 countries deemed the worst offenders.

This approach sent both allies and adversaries into a panic as they braced for the potential economic fallout.

The White House swiftly touted all the global leaders who reached out to the president seeking deals and concessions – “more than 75,” according to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

Although the administration has not made public a comprehensive list of the nations that Trump claimed on Tuesday were “kissing my ass” in a bid to make promises, negotiations are currently underway with South Korea and Japan, among others.

The takeaway: America’s trading partners have 90 days to negotiate an agreement with Trump, and time is of the essence. The engagement in talks signifies a positive potential for the president to achieve favorable results from his initiatives.

What Trump said: Jobs and factories will make a strong comeback in our country…We will revitalize our domestic manufacturing base.

Trump has long maintained that tariffs can effectively rebuild America’s manufacturing sector by insulating it from unfair foreign competition. While some factories may ramp up production in existing facilities, significant transformation requires time. Business leaders are likely waiting for a stable regulatory environment before committing to “reshoring” production and investing in new factories in the US.

However, the president’s inconsistent tariff actions over the past week reflect instability. At this point, it’s uncertain where final tariff levels will settle and which sectors will gain the most protection. Today it might be auto manufacturers and steel producers; tomorrow it may shift to electronics.

The takeaway: When tariffs are altered on the president’s whim, it creates an atmosphere of uncertainty, causing both domestic and foreign companies to hesitate before making major commitments.

What Trump said: I hold President Xi of China and China in high regard, but they have been taking considerable advantage of us.

After Trump’s abrupt tariff shift on Wednesday, numerous White House officials – including Treasury Secretary Bessent – were quick to assert that the real target of Trump’s actions was China.

“They are the primary source of US trade issues,” Bessent remarked to reporters, “and they pose a problem for the global economy as well.

Should Trump desire a battle of resolve with China, testing each party’s capacity for economic and political pain, he certainly has one on his hands – even if he and his advisors appear to be searching for a way out.

On Wednesday, he stated that the current trade dilemma is more about prior US leaders’ decisions than about China itself. The previous day, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt mentioned that the president would be “extremely gracious” if China reaches out for negotiations.

The takeaway: If this confrontation is something Trump wishes for, instigating a conflict with the world’s second-largest economy, equipped with substantial military capabilities, carries significant risks. In the process, America may have distanced itself from the allies it needs most for such a struggle.

What Trump said: Now it’s our turn to prosper, enabling us to use trillions of dollars to lower our taxes and reduce our national debt, and it will all happen very swiftly.

Throughout last year’s presidential campaign, Trump frequently claimed that the tariffs he proposed would generate substantial new revenue for the US, which could then be utilized to decrease the budget deficit, fund tax reductions, and support new government initiatives.

A nonpartisan study conducted by the Tax Foundation last year proposed that a 10% universal tariff – which appears to be what Trump has settled on for the upcoming 90 days – would yield $2 trillion in new revenue over the upcoming decade.

For perspective, the tax cuts Congress recently considered in its non-binding budget framework would cost an estimated $5 trillion over the next ten years, as noted by the Bipartisan Policy Center.

The takeaway: Trump aims to increase tariff revenue, and if he maintains his baseline tariffs, alongside additional charges on certain imports and increased duties on China, he will achieve this – at least until American consumers shift to more domestically produced goods, at which point the influx of tariff revenue could diminish.

What Trump said: Ultimately, boosting domestic production will create stronger competition and lead to lower prices for consumers. This will undoubtedly be the golden age of America.

Experts have proposed various theories regarding Trump’s bold trade decision last week. Was he attempting to lower interest rates, devalue the US dollar, or coax the world into formulating a new global trade agreement? The president himself has mostly avoided discussing such complex schemes.

However, one issue he consistently emphasizes is his intent to lower costs for American consumers, claiming that his trade policies will contribute to this goal. Despite a recent dip in energy prices following the tariff announcement, this could stem from rising concerns that trade wars may spark a global recession.

Economists generally agree that newly implemented tariffs will raise prices for consumers, as the tariffs are added to the cost of imports and, eventually, as competition for US-manufactured goods diminishes. Previously, the Tax Foundation estimated that a 10% universal tariff would increase costs for American households by an average of $1,253 within its first year. Economists also warn that lower-income Americans would feel the most significant impact.

The takeaway: An increase in prices moves in the wrong direction – representing an immense potential risk for both Trump’s political position and his party’s electoral prospects moving forward.