Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Don’t Count on Tariff Revenue to Cover the “One Big Beautiful Bill”

by May 27, 2025
May 27, 2025
Don’t Count on Tariff Revenue to Cover the “One Big Beautiful Bill”

Scott Lincicome

In the May 26 Washington Post, I provide six reasons why—contra the White House spin—Republicans can’t and shouldn’t count on President Donald Trump’s new tariffs to provide a steady stream of federal revenue to offset the 10-year cost of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” that just passed the House of Representatives:

Because all the tariffs were implemented via executive action, the next president could reduce or eliminate them as quickly as Trump imposed them, just as President Joe Biden did to some of the tariffs Trump imposed unilaterally during his first term.
Because the largest tariffs were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on dubious legal grounds, an adverse court ruling in one of the several pending lawsuits would mean trillions less in revenue, and it could come in as little as 18 months. (For more on these legal challenges, check out today’s Cato event on the same subject.)
Trump himself will likely change the tariffs’ scope and application, as he has already done in recent trade deals with the UK and China and other deals during his first term. As long as tariffs are a bargaining chip, they can’t be considered reliable government revenue.
The administration also will likely exclude various products from the tariffs, as it’s already done for goods that qualify for the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement and consumer electronics (and also during Trump 1.0).
As almost all economists agree, the tariffs will reduce economic growth and thus offset much, if not all, of the increase in GDP caused by the OBBB’s tax cuts. Just as tax cuts can stimulate economic activity and boost future government revenue, Trump’s tariffs will have the exact opposite effect.
High and variable tariffs will encourage private parties to reduce or evade these taxes by rearranging their supply chains, exploiting legal loopholes, or smuggling. Various estimates show that these actions reduced US tariff revenue by billions of dollars during Trump’s first term, and economists expect even larger losses this time around. (Indeed, it’s already happening.)

Congress should pursue tax reform, but it should do so honestly by closing loopholes and cutting federal spending. My Cato colleagues Adam Michel, Romina Boccia, and others have provided several excellent ideas in this regard. For good reason, however, none of those ideas involve tariffs.

You can read the entire Washington Post piece here.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
What Is Copy Trading and How T4Trade Makes It Work for You
next post
FBI reopening investigation into cocaine found at Biden White House

You may also like

The Downsides of Ban-the-Box Laws

July 29, 2024

Sorry Unions, China Isn’t Responsible for US Shipbuilding...

March 18, 2024

Understanding SALT

June 22, 2023

Only 48 Percent of Employment-Based Green Cards Went...

November 25, 2024

Will Brazil’s Government Shut Down X for 20...

August 29, 2024

New York’s Right-to-Die Bill Affirms Bodily Autonomy

June 10, 2025

Friday Feature: Radiant Collective

May 3, 2024

The Senate’s Big Beautiful Blunder Could Increase the...

July 2, 2025

NEW POLL: WI, PA, & MI Voters Believe...

September 9, 2024

FDA Finally Allows OTC Access to One Brand...

July 13, 2023

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Why I Signed the Economists’ Amicus Brief Challenging Trump’s Emergency Tariffs

      July 30, 2025
    • How Low Will UK Interest Rates Go and What Does it Mean for Investors?

      July 30, 2025
    • Schumer says century-old law forces Trump DOJ, FBI to release Jeffrey Epstein files by August deadline

      July 30, 2025
    • Agent’s alleged attempt to smuggle wife on Trump’s Scotland trip being probed in latest Secret Service fiasco

      July 30, 2025
    • Grassley rebukes Trump’s pressure to ‘have the courage’ to speed up nominations

      July 30, 2025
    • Who is Steve Ricchetti, the longtime Biden confidante questioned in Comer’s cover-up probe?

      July 30, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,619)
    • Investing (2,159)
    • Politics (16,246)
    • Stocks (3,228)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved