The new sweeping tariffs introduced by President Donald Trump on nearly all U.S. imports represent the most significant protectionist move in the past hundred years. The base tariff rate is set at 10%, and for several countries, so-called “mirror tariffs” have been introduced, calculated based on the size of the bilateral trade deficit. These measures have sparked intense debate in global media, frightened markets, and pose the potential for billions of dollars in losses for major companies. Some analysts warn that the consequences could be severe: destabilization of global supply chains, acceleration of inflation in leading economies, and even the onset of stagflation or recession in the U.S.
CNN described the move as “the beginning of a global trade war,” which could severely impact American consumers and weaken the U.S. economy. Politico highlighted that such a scale of protectionism hasn’t been seen since the 1930s, when tariffs on thousands of goods worsened the Great Depression. The publication also noted that if Trump maintains the current rates, he will effectively overturn the entire system of international trade that the United States has helped shape since World War II.
The White House justified these radical measures by citing an “emergency” caused by a record $1.2 trillion trade deficit, which allegedly weakens U.S. manufacturing capacity and defense base. However, opponents of the tariffs have emerged as well: Senator Rand Paul called them potentially “politically destructive,” especially in the event of a recession.
The highest rate (49%) applies to imports from Cambodia, with Vietnamese goods subject to 46%. Chinese goods face a 34% tariff, and imports from the EU are taxed at 20%. In total, 184 countries are listed. Russia is not included, as it is already under strict sanctions, and no tariffs are planned for Belarusian goods. Nonetheless, Trump even extended the new tariffs to uninhabited territories like Heard and McDonald Islands. The base 10% tariff comes into effect on April 5, and mirror tariffs follow on April 9.
According to the Financial Times, the president officially claims to have based the rates on a combination of customs duties, subsidies, and currency manipulation. However, the newspaper suggests that the main factor was simply the size of the U.S. trade deficit with each country.
The mirror tariffs are roughly half the total tariff barriers those countries impose on American goods. For example, Trump asserts that China effectively imposes a 67% tariff on U.S. imports, the EU 39%, India 52%, and Vietnam 90%. The White House’s policy “mirrors” these figures but at about half the level. Importantly, the new tariffs are layered on top of existing ones. Thus, the final rate for Chinese imports could reach up to 54%.
In February, the U.S. introduced additional tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China. Chinese tariffs increased from 10% to 20%, and those on Canadian and Mexican goods rose to 25% (except for Canadian energy, which remains at 10%). Later, some of the new rates for Canada and Mexico were temporarily delayed.
The largest U.S. trade partners in 2024 remained the EU, Mexico, Canada, and China, with total trade volumes in the hundreds of billions of dollars. In all cases, imports from these regions exceeded U.S. exports, fueling the White House’s dissatisfaction. Major import categories include mineral products (including petroleum), machinery and equipment, electronics, transportation, and aircraft.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the new tariffs could increase the U.S. budget deficit by nearly $5 trillion over the next decade. However, the White House estimates that the base 10% tariff will generate $1.9 trillion for the economy over the same period. Already in Q1, U.S. GDP is likely to show near-zero growth, and additional protectionist measures may exacerbate this trend in Q2.
Price increases in the U.S. are almost inevitable, economists warn. The Consumer Price Index could rise by 1 to 1.5 percentage points this year and next, effectively ruling out interest rate cuts. Moreover, higher costs for producers and consumers could slow economic growth, worsen employment, and make inflation more persistent. With recession expectations rising, some believe the U.S. could face a combination of economic stagnation and inflationary pressure.
In the long run, the tariffs may prompt partner countries to retaliate, further complicating U.S. exports. High import prices and risks to global supply chains may lead to stagflation. Experts remind that such a combination of weak growth and rising inflation can be especially damaging to the economy.
The international community criticizes U.S. protectionism, fearing a domino effect. Europe, China, Canada, and Mexico are particularly vulnerable, as they rely heavily on the American market. If trade becomes more difficult, it could destabilize the U.S. economy itself and reduce the dollar’s influence in global trade.
Some analysts believe this trade war could worsen inflation and impact global economic growth. As supply chains break down and market access becomes more difficult, companies will seek to reorganize logistics, and the U.S. could lose part of its position in the global financial system. Affected countries will either need to find alternatives to the U.S. market or rely more on domestic demand.
There is an opinion that Mexico and Canada will be among the hardest hit, given their close economic ties with the U.S. China is likely to respond with mirror measures, possibly restricting critical mineral exports, while continuing to boost domestic consumption. European and Asian countries with more balanced trade relations with the U.S. may try to negotiate tariff relief.
Overall, rising protectionism is fueling fears that the global economy may enter a period of fragmentation, with increased costs for producers and consumers. Tariffs inevitably reduce U.S. partners’ exports, lowering global demand and business revenues — a “double blow”: goods become more expensive in the U.S., while foreign export earnings shrink. This increases uncertainty, hinders investment, and undermines consumer confidence — factors that could lead to major negative consequences for the global economy as a whole.