Donald Trump was elected President of the United States largely on the strength of his campaign slogan: “Make America Great Again” (MAGA)—a promise that ignited high expectations among the American public. Now, Trump finds himself under growing pressure to deliver, especially as the U.S. grapples with a challenging economic landscape: slowing growth, rising household debt, and the looming risk of a sharp downturn in economic activity. To maintain credibility and popularity, he needs a quick fix to this economic mess.

Trump appears to believe that tariff imposition is the magic bullet. He has announced a baseline tariff of 10% on all imports, effective April 5, 2025. Additionally, on April 9, 2025, a reciprocal, country-specific tariff—targeting nations with which the U.S. has significant trade deficits—will be imposed. These reciprocal tariffs vary widely, including 24% on Malaysia and 49% on Cambodia.

Multilateralism thrown under the bus

By unilaterally announcing these tariffs, Trump has shown disregard for the principles of multilateralism and World Trade Organization (WTO) rules—principles that were painstakingly agreed upon by global consensus over decades.

In this sense, Trump can be rightly criticized for adopting a self-centered, unilateral approach to global trade, reflecting a lack of responsibility toward the international community.

Still, Trump has made no secret of his "America First" stance, even if it means harming long-standing allies.

While Trump’s tariff move didn’t catch many by surprise—he had hinted at it repeatedly—the steepness of the tariffs has nonetheless shocked much of the world.

When explaining the tariffs imposed on India, Trump said, “India charges 52%,” implying that his 27% tariff on Indian goods is fair and measured. He also remarked that the decision was difficult for him, given that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a personal friend.

Reactions from other countries

Most countries have responded to Trump’s tariff offensive with measured restraint and a degree of understanding, recognizing his domestic political compulsions. However, they are also exploring countermeasures. Countries like Canada, for example, may impose retaliatory tariffs on U.S. products.

As a massive consumer market, the U.S. holds enormous appeal for global exporters. Trump seems to believe that by making imported goods more expensive, domestic production will rise to fill the gap. But a crucial question remains: Can domestic production of all these goods be ramped up in the short or even long term?

Role of anti-dumping duties

Before Trump’s presidency, the U.S. had already implemented several anti-dumping duties targeting countries like China. These were designed to protect domestic industries from unfair competition.

What Trump has now done, in essence, is expand this strategy to all products, under a different label. It’s unclear, however, whether the new tariffs will be stacked on top of existing anti-dumping duties for the same product

The reality is that many imports into the U.S. consist of low-tech or labor-intensive goods, or items with environmental or safety concerns that make domestic production less viable. These imports have often been a matter of economic pragmatism, not compulsion.

No one forced the U.S. to import such goods—it chose to, out of necessity. Those needs will persist, tariffs or not.

Risk of reciprocal tariffs

When the dust settles, Trump may find that most imports continue unabated—only now, U.S. consumers are paying more. Yes, the higher tariffs could marginally boost government revenues, but the burden will ultimately fall on the American public. And there’s more: once other countries respond with reciprocal tariffs on U.S. exports, American producers will struggle in overseas markets. Competing against countries like China—who often leverage non-transparent pricing and generous credit terms—will become even tougher.

To realize his MAGA promise, Trump must ensure a substantial boost in domestic production—a goal that appears far-fetched in the near term. For many products, increasing production in the U.S. is not economically viable, due to technological, labor, or cost constraints.

So, are Trump’s tariff actions tantamount to cutting off the nose to spite the face?

(The author is the founder-director of Nandini Consultancy Centre, Chennai, and a commentator on current affairs. Views are personal. He can be contacted at nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com)