New Trump tariffs bring in less money than illegal tariffs

ONP Summary
Trump's administration announced new tariffs of 10-12.5% on approximately 60 countries, replacing a universal tariff that expired after the Supreme Court rejected its legal basis. The action affects numerous nations including European Union members and is justified as addressing inadequate forced labor protections.
Progressive:Trade war escalation — progressive outlets frame Trump's move as resuming aggressive commercial conflict after a Supreme Court setback, continuing an escalatory campaign.
Conservative:Forced labor enforcement — conservative outlets characterize the tariffs as Trump addressing inadequate labor protections in affected countries.
The White House has found new legal ways to keep tariffs flowing. But it's not enough to fully replace the revenue from the import taxes the Supreme Court struck down.
The intrigue: The administration's replacement tariffs would raise about $105 billion a year — replacing about 60% of the revenue lost when the Supreme Court invalidated the administration's emergency tariff regime, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Why it matters: The administration's new tariffs are narrower and include more carveouts than the emergency duties they replaced, reducing both the potential economic fallout and the revenue they generate.
By the numbers: CRFB estimates that Trump's latest tariff actions — including the new duties on dozens of trading partners that took effect overnight, those on Brazil and the proposed tariffs on Canada — would raise about $950 billion through 2036, compared with $1.7 trillion from the broader emergency tariffs, a gap of roughly $825 billion.
The projections assume the new tariffs survive legal challenges and remain in place. They also don't account for any additional trade actions the administration could announce in the months ahead.
The big picture: The new tariffs generally carry lower rates than the regime enacted under IEEPA, generating substantially less revenue, and are imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
That process allows U.S. trade officials to tailor product coverage — and exclude a range of goods they believe would cause unnecessary economic disruption — after a formal investigation and public comment.
Notably, the exclusions include energy products, limiting the risk that new tariffs amplify the inflationary effects of the Iran-related oil shock.
The other side: The White House rejects the idea that the new tariffs were aimed at replacing the illegal duties.
A senior official said synchronizing them with the expiration of temporary tariffs was intended to provide continuity and predictability for businesses, not necessarily to recreate the earlier regime.
What to watch: The Treasury Department is still unwinding the old tariffs. In June, net customs receipts fell to negative $25.6 billion as refund checks to importers outpaced new tariff collections. ...
이 뉴스, 어떠셨어요?
탭 한 번으로 반응 · 로그인 불필요
같은 사건, 다른 제목
Does Canada have leverage in Trump trade war? What premiers, experts say
Here are the new tariff rates on 60 countries targeted by President Trump
World Leaders Furious Over Trump’s Made-Up Reason for Fresh Tariffs
Trump imposes new tariffs on dozens of countries, including U.S. allies
+14
New Trump tariffs bring in less money than illegal tariffs
New U.S. tariffs linked to claims of foreign forced labor dismay and anger trading partners
Why there are still more Trump tariffs expected — even after this past week’s rollouts
The hidden strategy behind Trump's latest Canada tariffs
+12
Trump Launches New Tariff Regime
Canada-U.S. trade war: A timeline of Trump’s tariffs and Canada’s response
Trump’s manufacturing boom has a serious blind spot
12.5% to 10%: Why Trump admin imposed reduced tariff rate on India & what it means
+4