Tariffs Are Not a 'Panacea' for US Problems
The Trump administration's ideal of employing tariffs as a "panacea" for America's social issues is destined for failure. Instead of providing a solution, tariffs will serve as a poison that exacerbates the existing problems.
TroibNews 
**Editor's note:** Chen Weidong is the deputy dean of the Institute of Foreign Law and Governance at the University of International Business and Economics. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of CN. The piece has been translated from Chinese and edited for brevity and clarity.
On February 1, the White House issued a fact sheet declaring that illegal immigration and drug trafficking, particularly fentanyl, are posing an "extraordinary threat" to the United States, thereby constituting a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In response, the administration has implemented a 25 percent tariff on goods from Canada and Mexico and a 10 percent tariff on imports from China.
However, the issue surrounding fentanyl seems to serve primarily as a justification for the Trump administration's tariff measures. The IEEPA allows the president to impose economic restrictions during a national emergency without needing congressional approval. The president can declare such an emergency and enact related actions without facing specific investigative or procedural steps. Trump has consistently supported tariffs and previously labeled the fentanyl crisis as an "extraordinary threat," setting the stage for his administration to declare a national emergency and utilize tariffs as a tool at their discretion.
Fentanyl addiction is a significant domestic issue in the US, rooted in deeper social and governance failures. Nevertheless, the Trump administration has continued to blame these troubles on foreign nations, promoting tariffs as a "panacea" for American problems. By invoking national security, the administration has managed to employ the emergency declaration to impose tariffs, coercing trading partners into conforming to US demands while evading potential accountability from the World Trade Organization (WTO). Moreover, tariffs can boost government revenue, encourage the return of manufacturing, and support Trump's "Make America Great Again" narrative.
Mexico, Canada, and China are key trading partners for the United States. The Trump administration is leveraging tariffs against these countries in hopes of using trade barriers as a means of negotiating cooperation to address the fentanyl crisis and illegal immigration. Currently, the US has leveraged the temporary suspension of tariffs on Mexico and Canada to obtain certain concessions.
But what outcomes can be expected from this "tariff hammer"? The results are more likely to be counterproductive. The persistent US trade deficit is unlikely to be resolved quickly; it stems from broader economic dynamics, such as national savings rates, government expenditures, and consumption behaviors, rather than directly from the effects of tariffs on imports. During Trump's first term, the extensive Section 301 tariffs imposed on China did not lead to a meaningful reduction in the overall US trade deficit, and additional tariffs on major trading partners now will probably not produce significant changes.
Furthermore, employing the "tariff hammer" against other nations will not effectively prevent illegal immigration or curb fentanyl abuse. According to WTO regulations, countries like China have the right to challenge the Trump administration's tariff actions through the WTO's dispute resolution process, where it is likely that expert panels will rule against the US.
On February 4, China retaliated by announcing tariffs of 10 to 15 percent on select US imports. On the same day, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Commerce reiterated that China would formally address US tariff measures through the WTO dispute settlement mechanism to protect its legitimate rights and interests.
The Trump administration's belief that tariffs can serve as a "panacea" for America's social challenges is destined to falter. Should US tariffs and retaliatory actions from China, Mexico, and Canada further exacerbate domestic inflation, the tariffs will not act as a remedy but rather as a poison that intensifies existing problems.
Alejandro Jose Martinez for TROIB News
On February 1, the White House issued a fact sheet declaring that illegal immigration and drug trafficking, particularly fentanyl, are posing an "extraordinary threat" to the United States, thereby constituting a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In response, the administration has implemented a 25 percent tariff on goods from Canada and Mexico and a 10 percent tariff on imports from China.
However, the issue surrounding fentanyl seems to serve primarily as a justification for the Trump administration's tariff measures. The IEEPA allows the president to impose economic restrictions during a national emergency without needing congressional approval. The president can declare such an emergency and enact related actions without facing specific investigative or procedural steps. Trump has consistently supported tariffs and previously labeled the fentanyl crisis as an "extraordinary threat," setting the stage for his administration to declare a national emergency and utilize tariffs as a tool at their discretion.
Fentanyl addiction is a significant domestic issue in the US, rooted in deeper social and governance failures. Nevertheless, the Trump administration has continued to blame these troubles on foreign nations, promoting tariffs as a "panacea" for American problems. By invoking national security, the administration has managed to employ the emergency declaration to impose tariffs, coercing trading partners into conforming to US demands while evading potential accountability from the World Trade Organization (WTO). Moreover, tariffs can boost government revenue, encourage the return of manufacturing, and support Trump's "Make America Great Again" narrative.
Mexico, Canada, and China are key trading partners for the United States. The Trump administration is leveraging tariffs against these countries in hopes of using trade barriers as a means of negotiating cooperation to address the fentanyl crisis and illegal immigration. Currently, the US has leveraged the temporary suspension of tariffs on Mexico and Canada to obtain certain concessions.
But what outcomes can be expected from this "tariff hammer"? The results are more likely to be counterproductive. The persistent US trade deficit is unlikely to be resolved quickly; it stems from broader economic dynamics, such as national savings rates, government expenditures, and consumption behaviors, rather than directly from the effects of tariffs on imports. During Trump's first term, the extensive Section 301 tariffs imposed on China did not lead to a meaningful reduction in the overall US trade deficit, and additional tariffs on major trading partners now will probably not produce significant changes.
Furthermore, employing the "tariff hammer" against other nations will not effectively prevent illegal immigration or curb fentanyl abuse. According to WTO regulations, countries like China have the right to challenge the Trump administration's tariff actions through the WTO's dispute resolution process, where it is likely that expert panels will rule against the US.
On February 4, China retaliated by announcing tariffs of 10 to 15 percent on select US imports. On the same day, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Commerce reiterated that China would formally address US tariff measures through the WTO dispute settlement mechanism to protect its legitimate rights and interests.
The Trump administration's belief that tariffs can serve as a "panacea" for America's social challenges is destined to falter. Should US tariffs and retaliatory actions from China, Mexico, and Canada further exacerbate domestic inflation, the tariffs will not act as a remedy but rather as a poison that intensifies existing problems.
Alejandro Jose Martinez for TROIB News
