Trump Advisors Struggle To Defend, or Even Explain, His Tariff Strategy
Members of the administration spent the weekend presenting contradictory defenses of Trump's economic policies.

President Donald Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs went into effect over the weekend, imposing a 10 percent tax on imports from nearly every nation on the planet. (Additional higher tariffs on a subset of countries will go into effect Wednesday.) The U.S. stock market then plunged, seeing its worst week since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the worst two-day drop in history, with the market losing $6.6 trillion in value. Asian markets similarly saw precipitous declines when they opened this week.
As Trump's advisors took to the Sunday morning talk shows to defend their boss' plan, one thing became clear: There was no plan.
"Are these tariffs permanent? Or are they a negotiating tactic?" Kristen Welker asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Meet the Press. "Some administration officials have said they're permanent. President Trump himself has said he's open to negotiating."
Bessent hedged that this would be Trump's decision, but he added that the president had "created maximum leverage for himself, and more than 50 countries have approached the administration" about renegotiating.
Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, agreed. He told ABC, "I got a report from the [Office of the U.S. Trade Representative] last night that more than 50 countries have reached out to the president to begin a negotiation."
But that wasn't the message every advisor was offering.
"This is not a negotiation," White House trade advisor Peter Navarro told Fox News. "This is a national emergency based on a trade deficit that's gotten out of control because of cheating."
"There is no postponing" the tariffs, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CBS. "They are definitely going to stay in place for days and weeks." When asked about the other advisors' claims that 50 countries had offered to negotiate, Lutnick replied, "The tariffs are coming. He announced it, and he wasn't kidding."
If Trump's advisors aren't sure what the policy is, that may be because Trump himself hasn't kept his story straight. On Thursday, Trump told reporters that the new trade barriers "give us great power to negotiate." The following morning, on the other hand, he posted on Truth Social that "MY POLICIES WILL NEVER CHANGE." And on Monday, after China retaliated with new tariffs against us, the president responded that "all talks with China concerning their requested meetings with us will be terminated" and "negotiations with other countries…will begin taking place immediately."
When he announced the tariffs last week, Trump said they were necessary to correct a trade imbalance between the U.S. and the rest of the world that he sees as predatory. "For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped, and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike," he said at the time. "Now it's our turn to prosper."
"Large and persistent annual U.S. goods trade deficits have led to the hollowing out of our manufacturing base," the White House claimed in a fact sheet released to coincide with the announcement. "These tariffs will remain in effect until such a time as President Trump determines that the threat posed by the trade deficit and underlying nonreciprocal treatment is satisfied, resolved, or mitigated."
This wasn't the argument offered in an earlier order, where Trump placed a tariff on Canada and Mexico "to combat the extraordinary threat to U.S. national security, including our public health posed by unchecked drug trafficking." Trump himself added, "This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country!"
And last week, Navarro said Trump's tariffs would "raise about $600 billion a year, about $6 trillion over a 10-year period"—which would certainly imply that he expects them to be in place that long.
So tariffs are a negotiating tactic, or they're a punishment to use until countries act the way we want, or they're a permanent policy for generating revenue. Got it?
Trump has always been inconsistent on tariffs, presenting them both as a short-term negotiating maneuver and as a long-term source of government revenue. And he remains convinced, despite all evidence to the contrary, that trade deficits mean America is getting "ripped off."
Over the weekend, Trump advisors also struggled to defend the financial havoc their boss' policies had wrought.
Kristen Welker asked Bessent if the market disruption, including more than $6 trillion in lost wealth, was "part of the plan."
"What I've been very impressed with is the market infrastructure, that we had record volume on Friday and everything is working very smoothly," Bessent replied. "So, the American people, they can be very—take great comfort in that." (Indeed, Friday did see trade volume at an all-time high—"indicative of a market in complete panic, with trading volumes going haywire," in the words of Sherwood News.)
"Trillions of dollars of factories are going to be built in America," Lutnick said. "The army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little screws to make iPhones, that kind of thing is going to come to America."
That's also unlikely: As The New York Times reported in 2019, during Trump's first term and amid an earlier trade war with China, Apple already tried to shift some of its production to the U.S. but "struggled to find enough screws" to meet its demand. "In China, Apple relied on factories that can produce vast quantities of custom screws on short notice….Apple has found that no country—and certainly not the United States—can match China's combination of scale, skills, infrastructure and cost."
As Trump's advisors would struggle to defend these tariffs, one thing is clear: The confusion comes from the very top.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What this idiot really means: “I can’t understand it!”
None of these fuckers have ever manufactured anything.
Except Elon, and he doesn't support this.
Shame on you for not sticking with the Narrative. Navarro pointed out that Musk doesn't make cars, he assembles them. Not that Navarro is smart enough to even know the difference.
This is a recurring theme for Lancaster. He can't understand that the messaging on something being negotiated can't be that your own side is eager to back off before it gains concessions. So many of these articles show a failure to understand actual tactics and goals.
I understand everything just fine maybe it's you.
But you can't explain it.
I'm not the explainer.
There aren't enough crayons in the world to explain it to simpletons like yourself.
I see two more idiots have chimed in, pretending to understand the incoherent.
Here's a repeat of some of the incoherencies. Could you explain them to me? Jesse says he already has, but he never even tried, and is afraid to admit Trump fucked up.
* He says tariffs should be high to protect American industry at consumers' expense, yet he also says he wants tariffs to be zero.
* He says tariffs should be high to compensate for foreigners lax labor, environmental, and safety regulations, yet he also says he wants tariffs to be zero.
* He says tariffs should be high to punish other countries for not stopping drug smuggling into the US, admitting the US hasn't been able to stop the same smuggling in 50 years.
* He says tariffs should be high to reduce trade deficits, yet the two are unrelated, and he added tariffs to countries with trade surpluses.
* He says tariffs should be high to replace the income tax, yet they'd have to be so high that they'd reduce revenue.
* He says he wants reciprocal tariffs, yet slaps tariffs on allies and friendly countries which already have zero tariffs on imports from the US.
* He negotiated the USMCA trade treaty with Mexico and Canada in 2020, yet unilaterally abrogated it and at least 14 other trade treaties.
Dude, Jesse did explain it all to you already. He called you a bunch of names, didn't he? That's how he refutes arguments. So you've been completely refuted because you're a poopy head.
the guy you're responding to called two people idiots three words into his post.
Yup, and that makes him wrong. If he called people names in the defense of Trump like Jesse does, then that would be good because Trump. But it wasn't, so he's wrong as a person, which means everything he says is wrong. You of all people should know this.
You really are pretty fucked in the head, Sarc.
I'm so happy to see these new allies. Makes me laugh.
Damn. It's like talking to that uncle no one wants to invite for Thanksgiving Dinner. At least the people around Biden were able to more-or-less hide his dementia until the last year or so. Trump's people are defending this incoherent, demented rambling.
I guess it's OK as long as the Democrats did it first. (And yes, I did complain when Sleepy Joe was in office).
Unless you are a physician who personally examined the former President, your usage of a medical diagnosis - twice - is uncalled for.
So, are you saying both the former and current presidents are (were) totally fit to hold the nuclear keys, even though our lying eyes clear show the opposite?
OMG you don't get it, do you.
Trump's tariffs are magic. That's all you really need to know. They're magic. That's how they're able to simultaneously be zero for true free trade, moderate to collect revenue and replace the income tax, and high to raise the prices of imports so much that people stop buying them and buy American instead. See? Magic.
Anyone who disagrees is a market fundamentalist with TDS.
Just how much straw did you think you could stuff into that comment?
But he is right! Anyone opposing anything Trump does, no matter how stupid the policy, has TDS.
hyperbole isn't just for dinner anymore.
Imagine copying sarc. Pathetic.
Not a consequential political situation, but something to make people smile. Apparently prominent Democrats are still having slap-fights in the mud pit over the Biden election situation.
Fun takeaways for the lulz:
1. George Clooney watches Morning Joe.
1b. The MSNBC producer actually comes off as both a sympathetic and pathetic character.
No, this will be the single biggest relief package in American History and will result in the largest, most significant, modern and balance trade agreement in history... oh wait those were the Cares Act and USMCA.
Yeah, I don't think he cares about the details.
The horse is long dead. Long live the horse.
I think that horse got a few trillion left to beat out of it.
How many fucking articles does Reason need to have on tariffs!?! Article after article, yet nothing on judicial overreach, nothing on the dismantling of USAID and the other money laundering schemes, and nothing on how the threat of tariffs caused other countries to back down.
There’s a reason groups like the United Auto Workers, the Steel Manufacturers Association, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the Southern Shrimp Alliance, and the National Council of Textile Organizations have all praised President Trump’s policy.
- White House Statement
Glad we have a president whose finally listening to the Special Interest Groups that populate the Swamp.
If you don't want to use tariffs to protect good union jobs then you hate America.
When is Trump going to nationalize TikTok agian Lancaster?