Trump’s Tariffs: They’re Taxing Us Twice




Have sharpie, will travel

As a retired financial executive, I’ve spent decades parsing balance sheets, dissecting policy impacts, and watching politicians play shell games with public perception. So when I read headlines like “Trump is bringing in so much revenue from tariffs that it’s seriously reducing the $37 trillion national debt,” I don’t just roll my eyes—I worry about the erosion of honest political dialogue.

Let’s be clear: tariffs are not free money. They’re a tax on American consumers, disguised as a blow against foreign adversaries. The $25 billion collected in July is real, yes—but it came from our own pockets. Businesses pass tariff costs to consumers, and those costs ripple through supply chains, inflate prices, and shrink disposable income. That’s not economic strength—it’s redistribution with a side of inflation.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), a respected bipartisan watchdog, estimates $2.8 trillion in tariff revenue by 2034. But even they admit this is a fraction of the $37 trillion debt. Income and payroll taxes still account for over 75% of federal revenue. Tariffs might slow the debt’s growth, but they won’t reverse it. And they certainly won’t replace the need for structural reform.

Meanwhile, the economic drag from tariffs—lost jobs, disrupted supply chains, reduced competitiveness—will likely shrink the tax base. Lower profits mean lower corporate taxes. Stagnant wages mean lower income taxes. The net effect? Possibly negative. It’s a shell game: take from one pocket, lose from another, and call it a win.

I’m tired of fighting this narrative alone. I may not have the clout of a cable news pundit, but I do have the training to see through fiscal smoke and mirrors. And I believe there’s still room for reasoned voices to push back against economic misinformation.

If you’re reading this and nodding along, share it. If you disagree, let’s debate. But let’s stop pretending that tariffs are a magic bullet. They’re a blunt instrument—and we’re the ones absorbing the blow.

Billions and Billions

Can Finance Ever Be Truly Fascinating?

I’ve been binge-watching Showtime’s in house series, Billions. with Paul Giamatti and Damian Lewis. For my money it’s the best thing on TV. Of course I’m an accounting and finance geek, so there is probably a lot of stuff in it that appeals to me but leaves people who are easily bored with such matters cold.

I know they’re out there. Econophobics. The kind of people who get a headache when conversation turns to interest rate swaps or in-substance defeasance of advance refunding bond issues. In fact, I’m pretty sure our president is one, but he has people for that stuff. (Not that he would ever listen to them.) I can’t say it’s their fault. I mean, really, that’s pretty arcane territory for anyone but a financial savant. Continue reading