Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Tariffs

Trump Says America Would Be 'Destroyed' if Americans Don't Pay His Tariffs

The administration says the country faces complete destruction if it's forced to pay back money it hasn't yet received.

Joe Lancaster | 9.2.2025 1:00 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
President Donald Trump seems to scowl as he waits outside the White House to receive a visiting dignitary. | Sipa USA/Newscom
(Sipa USA/Newscom)

In the latest defeat for President Donald Trump's protectionist trade agenda, a federal appeals court ruled that the tariffs he placed on imports from other countries were improperly instituted. Trump and his administration responded by saying tariffs were necessary not only to bring in federal revenue but for the country's very survival.

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld lower courts' rulings that Trump overstepped his authority when he unilaterally imposed double-digit tariffs on nearly every other country.

Trump had justified the move under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). That 1977 law allowed presidents, upon the declaration of a national emergency, to take certain actions, like issuing sanctions, without involving Congress.

But invoking the IEEPA to impose tariffs on any nation, much less on the entire planet, was a novel interpretation of the law, which the court noted. "The court's majority was deeply skeptical of the government's claim to broad powers that are not spelled out in the IEEPA law, which notably does not contain the word 'tariff,'" Reason's Eric Boehm wrote Friday. "If the government's interpretation of the IEEPA statute is correct, the court ruled, that would create 'a functionally limitless delegation of Congressional taxation authority.' Elsewhere in the ruling, the court said that such a delegation of taxation power would be unconstitutional, even if that were what Congress intended to do."

While the majority also removed a lower court's injunction against the tariffs' implementation, the decision is a positive step, hopefully bringing us one step closer to a world where the president cannot unilaterally raise or lower tariff rates on a whim.

For months, Trump has claimed the tariffs are not only necessary but that they're working: Ahead of Labor Day, the White House wrote on X, "President Trump's protectionist trade policies have helped drive more than $8 trillion in new U.S. investment, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs." But even under the rosiest possible projections, that number is nowhere close to reality. 

Of course, that puts the government in an awkward position, when all that mostly fictional money suddenly goes away. Indeed, the Trump administration described the court's ruling in downright apocalyptic terms.

"If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country" and "would make us financially weak," Trump posted on Truth Social.

"Without Tariffs, and all of the TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS we have already taken in, our Country would be completely destroyed, and our military power would be instantly obliterated," he added, in a post the White House shared with the caption, "Trust in Trump."

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro agreed, telling Fox News that "if we lose the case, President Trump is right, it will be the end of the United States."

This argument has formed part of the administration's argument since the case began. "The President believes that our country would not be able to pay back the trillions of dollars that other countries have already committed to pay, which could lead to financial ruin," U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer and Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate wrote last month in a letter to the court. "One year ago, the United States was a dead country, and now, because of the trillions of dollars being paid by countries that have so badly abused us, America is a strong, financially viable, and respected country again."

"If the United States were forced to pay back the trillions of dollars committed to us, America could go from strength to failure the moment such an incorrect decision took effect," they warned. "In such a scenario, people would be forced from their homes, millions of jobs would be eliminated, hard-working Americans would lose their savings, and even Social Security and Medicare could be threatened. In short, the economic consequences would be ruinous, instead of unprecedented success."

Sauer and Shumate are probably correct that Trump "believes" this. But everything else they wrote is complete fantasy.

The U.S. was not "a dead country" a year ago—at least, no more than it is today. The economy is growing while inflation remains steady, but imports are down and job numbers are anemic.

And it's certainly not the case that America's fortunes have completely turned around in 12 months because of cash flowing in from other countries.

Revenue from Trump's tariffs so far total $159 billion—double what was taken in the year before, but well-short of the "trillions of dollars" Sauer and Shumate promised. Just a sentence later, they acknowledged the money was not yet collected but merely "committed to us," though they still hold that not collecting all that theoretical cash would somehow have devastating consequences.

Of course, no discussion of Trump's tariffs is complete without mentioning that no matter how many millions, billions, or trillions of dollars are taken in, that money is paid by Americans, not by malign foreign countries that have been brought to heel. Tariffs are collected at ports of entry by Customs and Border Protection; the companies importing the products then either eat the extra cost or, in the more likely scenario, pass the cost on to the consumer.

In that light, it's not only ridiculous but insulting for the administration to insist dark times for the nation are ahead if we don't extract trillions of dollars from Americans.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: The Weird Law That Keeps the NFL Off (Most) Friday Nights

Joe Lancaster is an assistant editor at Reason.

TariffsCommerceInternational EconomicsDonald TrumpTrump AdministrationEconomicsFederal government
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (67)

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.

  1. Use the Schwartz   12 hours ago

    To tariffs; the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems...

    Log in to Reply
    1. BigT   8 hours ago

      Beer would like a word...

      Log in to Reply
    2. freedomwriter   4 hours ago

      No no, that is immigrants
      or civil war statues,
      or DEI
      or Democrats
      or crime

      Log in to Reply
      1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 hours ago

        Pfffft. All that stuff is so under control nobody even thinks about it. And covid came from a wet market, and Brandon is sharp as a tack.

        Haha. Idiot.

        Log in to Reply
  2. Incunabulum   12 hours ago

    But Americans haven't been paying the tariffs.

    Log in to Reply
    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   12 hours ago

      Shhh. We only do analysis by could, maybe, might here. Ignore all those Fed Bank studies from 2016 to 2020 that say the same thing. We only do economics from bad assumptions, not from data here.

      Log in to Reply
      1. The Average Dude (Who's Smarter Than You)   8 hours ago

        Why are you quoting from the MAGA handbook?

        Log in to Reply
        1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   7 hours ago

          Poor sarc. Had to put in his handle he was smart because he is too dumb to realize he isnt. It's okay AWR. Nobody here cares what you think.

          Even your comment is retarded. Sorry that those small words still confuse you.

          Log in to Reply
          1. Chumby   6 hours ago

            He’s blissful from being ignorant and because it is the beginning of a month and EBT recharged.

            Log in to Reply
    2. Quicktown Brix   11 hours ago

      Yes we have.

      Companies including Hormel Foods, J.M. Smucker and Ace Hardware said this week they would raise prices for reasons ranging from higher meat costs to tariffs. Large retailers like Walmart, Target and Best Buy said some tariff-related price increases are already in place. More are on the way.

      Just this week, packaged food giant J.M. Smucker (SJM), home to such brands as Folgers, Dunkin', and Café Bustelo, warned of more price hikes after US coffee profits plunged 22% under tariffs.

      Log in to Reply
      1. Incunabulum   11 hours ago

        Now - will they lower prices because no tariffs?

        Or were they lying the whole time?

        Log in to Reply
        1. The Average Dude (Who's Smarter Than You)   8 hours ago

          Now - will they lower prices because no tariffs?

          Yes - when taxes are lowered/eliminated and market forces (competition) are not stymied in any way, prices will reflexively come down. A 1-year old that can't speak yet would understand this.

          Or were they lying the whole time?

          Will you ever try to run your own business some day? Managing inventory, planning purchases, balancing the books, etc. - it's the only way unimaginative people like yourself will ever learn anything.

          Log in to Reply
          1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   7 hours ago

            And here AWR believes supply/demand curves solely are tax based. Yet we have direct evidence in data from just this year.

            Let's give an example AWR won't understand.

            During the first phase the same retards AWR follows believed the price of Canadian goods like maple syrup would sky rocket. They did not. Looking at the actual data, it turns out the Canadian money fell in value to the American dollar, more than the cost of tariffs. Yet the price of maple syrup had not dropped prior to the tariffs, they had actually gone slightly up despite the trade basis of lower monetary value decreasing.

            You see in AWRs world, maple syrup should change when Canadian dollar to American dollar changes. It doesn't, because consumers had accepted a cost and were willing to pay that cost.

            Poor AWRs model of simplistic freshman level analysis is wrong when looking at actual data due yo market complexities he is too fucking dumb to understand. This is why AWR will always be wrong.

            Log in to Reply
            1. freedomwriter   4 hours ago

              What a sad life you have.

              Log in to Reply
              1. Chumby   4 hours ago

                True. Jeffsarc was busy today dropping strawmen and now you show up. If he were a leftist, he’d need a safe space to prepare his grievance for reparations.

                Log in to Reply
        2. spec24   8 hours ago

          God you people are stupid.

          Log in to Reply
          1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   7 hours ago

            Another one who took one simple intro class and thinks they are an expert even when data disagrees lol.

            Log in to Reply
    3. sarcasmic   10 hours ago

      Great point. When Democrats slap taxes on businesses they get passed to the consumer. But when Trump does it it's magic. Money just appears.

      Log in to Reply
      1. spec24   8 hours ago

        You need to tell this to the Left. They seem to suddenly understand taxes when it comes to tariffs, but turn into retards when it's not Trump.

        Log in to Reply
        1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   7 hours ago

          I mention reports just above. There is no measurable correlation between inflation and tariffs for the last few decades. They tried proving the cost increases for trumps first term and the best the Atl Fed could measure was a 0.4% cost increase, stating over 80% of tariffs were paid by importers or foreign suppliers. Youre free to look at the fucking data.

          Then when you do, after realizing your beliefs are likely invalid, look at the 5T on regulations under Biden and understand that tariffs aren't even measurable against a much higher cost.

          Log in to Reply
        2. sarcasmic   6 hours ago

          It's ok because Democrats did it first?

          Log in to Reply
          1. Mother's Lament   5 hours ago

            That's certainly what you think. It's okay when the Democrats do it.

            Log in to Reply
      2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   7 hours ago

        And sarc is back to claiming prices are increasing again. Despite having to retreat to corporations have less margin just weeks ago.

        Please show the data dumdum.

        Log in to Reply
  3. Incunabulum   12 hours ago

    >The U.S. was not "a dead country" a year ago—at least, no more than it is today. The economy is growing while inflation remains steady, but imports are down and job numbers are anemic.

    But that is not what the economy was a year ago.

    Log in to Reply
    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   12 hours ago

      Job numbers are laughably not even anemic, showing Joe doesn't do any sort of analysis below the top headlines.

      In the last year total job numbers are flat... but the actual metrics show:

      Increase of 1.5M jobs to citizens.
      Decrease of 1.2M jobs to non citizens.
      Reduction of 300k for government jobs.

      These are actually good numbers unlike Biden which had:

      0 jobs to citizens.
      3M jobs to non citizens
      Around 400k increase in government jobs.

      The latter is a fictitious good job number. Unsustainable in the long run.

      Shit like this is why Reason gets so much shit in regards to the economic analysis they push.

      Log in to Reply
      1. MollyGodiva   11 hours ago

        Wow. Your numbers are completely made up.

        Log in to Reply
        1. InsaneTrollLogic (smarter than The Average Dude)   11 hours ago

          Cite?

          Log in to Reply
        2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   10 hours ago

          Do you just say retarded shit for fun doc retard?

          Log in to Reply
      2. Sam Bankman-Fried   7 hours ago

        We had record number of apartment units and hotel rooms delivered in 2023 and 24…that greatly benefits Americans while the jobs no longer exist. Derp derp derp…Americans want to work at a hotel registration desk…not in 100 degree Austin summer building the hotel!

        Log in to Reply
    2. Zeb   10 hours ago

      Perhaps not. But dead things don't come back to life (with perhaps one or more exceptions depending on who you ask).

      Log in to Reply
  4. VinniUSMC   12 hours ago

    They didn't say America would have to pay back tariffs. They said America would be worse off if we have to pay back (or lose) the money companies have spent on-shoring and investing in new American infrastructure that they wouldn't have otherwise.

    Don't be stup... oh, slow Joe. Nevermind.

    Log in to Reply
    1. EdG   8 hours ago

      Committed doesn't mean delivered.

      Log in to Reply
  5. sarcasmic   12 hours ago

    Trump supporters are marching on Washington chanting "What do we want? Tax! Es! When do we want them? Now!"

    Log in to Reply
    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   12 hours ago

      You demanded 4T in raised income taxes.

      You have zero principles.

      You continue to ignore that Americans are seeing very little of the increases from tariffs. Because youre just a retarded leftist at this point.

      Log in to Reply
      1. Sam Bankman-Fried   7 hours ago

        The wealthy have the banking system to get more capital for projects…Trump’s tax cuts just inflate home prices for upper middle class while creating more generational wealth for the wealthy. What’s funny is Trump’s supporters said Trump didn’t care about money because he was already wealthy…no president has cared more about their own wealth than Trump!

        Log in to Reply
        1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   19 minutes ago

          Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair, Sammy.

          Haha.

          Log in to Reply
  6. Chumby   12 hours ago

    Expect sarcles the diminutive to be by with a ladyboner shortly. Oh look, already arrived.

    Log in to Reply
    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   12 hours ago

      Sarcbot is consistent.

      Log in to Reply
      1. freedomwriter   4 hours ago

        What a sad life. Sarc live in yoru head rent free 24/7.

        Log in to Reply
        1. Chumby   4 hours ago

          Sarc demanded that someone dox Jesse for him. Sarc also posted how he believes that Jesse is tall, well-groomed, and looks like a cop in perhaps the most pathologically homoerotic post the comments have ever seen. It is quite the opposite.

          Log in to Reply
    2. Sam Bankman-Fried   7 hours ago

      What about my ladyboner?? Me me me meeeee!!!

      Log in to Reply
      1. Chumby   6 hours ago

        What happened to your original account? Did you forget the password?

        Log in to Reply
  7. Fat Rush Limpcock (King of the Conservatives)   12 hours ago

    Slapping tariffs on products Americans buy from overseas is the conservative way.

    It is for the common good.

    #Limpcock-approved.

    Log in to Reply
  8. MollyGodiva   11 hours ago

    One should ask why any administration would impose tariffs that they know are likely illegal if there would be massive economic devastation if the tariffs go away. That is not good governance.

    Log in to Reply
    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   10 hours ago

      So far judges above the inferior activist judges have disagreed with your illegal assessment doc retard.

      Log in to Reply
    2. JohannesDinkle   10 hours ago

      So the tariffs on clothing imposed by Obama are different in some existential way?

      Log in to Reply
  9. sadhak   11 hours ago

    It is best if just let the man play it out. Just publish articles like 'Trump's tariff masterstroke rakes in many gazitrillion dollars'
    'Trump to get economics Nobel prize'

    Give the man his fame and he might move on to some other issue.

    Log in to Reply
  10. Sometimes a Great Notion   10 hours ago

    "President Trump's protectionist trade policies have helped drive more than $8 trillion in new U.S. investment, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs."

    Did anyone tell the White Hoise, these tarrifs are just for negioating new and improved trade deals and aren't protectionist?

    Log in to Reply
  11. JohannesDinkle   10 hours ago

    If you have been paying attention rather than losing their biggest market entirely exporters have taken smaller profits and, therefore, been paying at least some of the tariffs themselves. Imagine a Chinese toaster that sold for $30. With tariffs that will increase to $34.50, but instead they are selling for $31.50. The government gets the tariff but, because of the smaller margin, US buyers don't pay for it all.
    Of course, the story is probably different for Lamborghinis and Prada.

    Log in to Reply
    1. windycityattorney   9 hours ago

      Or maybe different for importers who buy toasters by the shipping container load.

      How many toasters fit in a shipping container? Beats me. But if I was paying 4bucks more per toaster simply because President T is obsessed with tariffs I would question whether to keep buying shipping containers of them.

      And I don't think most people believe the hype of the loss of trillions in investments if tariffs go away. Some of the supposed financier countries that have allegedly agreed to spending hundreds of billions of dollars in America are confused about what their obligations actually are. I do expect some to do so at some scale; but Trump is famous for wild puffery and exaggeration. So I take any numbers he spits out on any subject to be inaccurate. I imagine most anybody does...including our trading partners.

      Log in to Reply
      1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   7 hours ago

        You do know supply chain prices get renegotiated all the time right dumdum?

        Log in to Reply
      2. Incunabulum   7 hours ago

        But you're not paying 4 bucks more per toaster. You're not paying any more.

        So the foreign seller or the importer are paying the tariff.

        Since its the same price to you - why do you care which? Or are you suddenly going to go 'we need to protect the domestic importers' all of a sudden?

        Log in to Reply
    2. Sam Bankman-Fried   7 hours ago

      Targeted tariffs would have been better than what happened under Bush/Cheney…but the economy was strong and we were adding manufacturing jobs in 2024. Trump’s tariffs are designed to increase prices while making products crappier which are literally the two things Americans didn’t like about the strong Biden economy!! The difference is Biden inherited the Covid supply chain crisis while Trump is implementing unnecessary tariffs.

      Log in to Reply
    3. Incunabulum   7 hours ago

      Its weird that Reason understands tax incidence when it comes to corporate taxes but not when it comes to tariffs.

      Log in to Reply
  12. CountmontyC   10 hours ago

    So "novel interpretation" of the law is now a bad thing?

    Log in to Reply
  13. car-keynes   9 hours ago

    Trump Tariffs could be a new pilot program for replacing the national debt.

    Log in to Reply
  14. Kungpowderfinger   9 hours ago

    Trump Says America Would Be 'Destroyed' if Americans Don't Pay His Tariffs

    Reason’s incessant misinformation about tariffs leads me to believe that these tariff’s are really damaging in a globalists’ POV.

    Rather like unlimited illegal immigration.

    Log in to Reply
  15. EdG   8 hours ago

    President Trump has solved our trade and budget problems via tariffs. Now he needs to focus on releasing the Epstein Files.

    Log in to Reply
    1. Sam Bankman-Fried   7 hours ago

      Trump also “solved” Afghanistan…by surrendering to the Taliban!! Being president is easy!!!! Lololololol!!

      Log in to Reply
      1. Chumby   3 hours ago

        Why did you surrender your original account?

        Log in to Reply
        1. Vernon Depner   23 minutes ago

          That was a condition of his probation.

          Log in to Reply
  16. jabbermule   7 hours ago

    There's a huge flaw with the premise of this article: Trump has constitutional authority to implement these tariffs without Congressional approval because of the economic circumstances regarding huge trade imbalances and unfair trading practices of other countries (not that the Republican-led Congress wouldn't rubber-stamp them, anyway).

    Log in to Reply
    1. Big Ed's Landing   7 hours ago

      What, exactly, are these unfair trading practices of the other countries that he keeps spouting about? Does he even understand what is going on?

      Log in to Reply
  17. Big Ed's Landing   7 hours ago

    Trump is still peddling the idea that other countries are paying the tariffs! Is he really that stupid, or does he think his supporters are that stupid? Either way, it shows a complete lack of comprehension on his part about how tariffs work. There's something mentally wrong in the White House.

    Log in to Reply
    1. Incunabulum   7 hours ago

      You do not seem to know that there are always three parties that pay.

      Owners - in the form of lower profits.

      Employees - in the form of lower compensation.

      Customers - in the form of higher prices.

      If the prices are not climbing - and they are not - then some combination of owner and employee are paying. And both groups are foreigners, not Americans.

      Log in to Reply
  18. AT   6 hours ago

    if we don't extract trillions of dollars from Americans.

    Well good thing we're not doing that.

    Log in to Reply
  19. TJJ2000   5 hours ago

    Duh... Not as-if the US Debt is/was literally bankrupting the USA.
    Apparently it isn't just: Out of BS-Media out of mind. It literally disappears I guess.

    Log in to Reply

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

The Gun-Free School Zones Act Is Doubly Dubious

Jacob Sullum | 9.3.2025 12:01 AM

The White House Says Trump's Tariffs Have Raised $8 Trillion in Revenue. That's Not Even Close.

Jack Nicastro | 9.2.2025 5:20 PM

An Alaska Man's $95,000 Plane Was Seized Over a 6-Pack of Beer. Now He's Taking His Case to the Supreme Court.

C.J. Ciaramella | 9.2.2025 4:44 PM

GAO Report Finds 'Shrinkflation' Was Fake News

Eric Boehm | 9.2.2025 3:40 PM

The Rationale for the Federal Circuit's 'Radical Left' Tariff Decision Is Fundamentally Conservative

Jacob Sullum | 9.2.2025 1:55 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300