Areas of Common Ground
Despite partisan divides, most Americans agree on these key points:
- âFair trade mattersâagreements should be honored and enforced
- âChina's industrial policy, IP theft, and market access barriers warrant a serious response
- âAmerican manufacturing capability matters for national security and good jobs
+ 5 more areas of agreement below
What's the Challenge?
Since January 2025 the Trump administration has used tariffs more aggressively than any U.S. government in nearly a century: broad-based tariffs on most imports, sharply higher tariffs on China, targeted tariffs on steel, aluminum, autos, and other sectors, and the threat of new tariffs as a negotiating tool with allies like Canada, Mexico, and the EU. Supporters argue tariffs are needed to revive American manufacturing, reduce dependence on China, and force trading partners to negotiate fairer terms. Critics argue tariffs are taxes paid largely by U.S. importers and consumers, raise costs across the supply chain, invite retaliation, and have not historically restored lost manufacturing jobs. Court challenges to the administration's use of emergency powers to impose tariffs are ongoing. Americans broadly agree trade should be fair and that manufacturing mattersâbut disagree sharply on whether tariffs are the right tool.
Where Most Americans Agree
Fair trade mattersâagreements should be honored and enforced
China's industrial policy, IP theft, and market access barriers warrant a serious response
American manufacturing capability matters for national security and good jobs
Workers and communities hurt by past trade liberalization deserve real support
Supply chains for critical goods (medicines, semiconductors, defense) shouldn't be dangerously concentrated
Trade policy should consider impact on consumers, workers, and farmersânot just one constituency
Long-running trade deficits with strategic rivals deserve scrutiny
Sudden, unpredictable policy changes are hard on businesses and farmers
Source: Chicago Council on Global Affairs Surveys 2024-2025, Pew Research Center
Current Perspectives from Both Sides
Understanding the full debate requires hearing what each side actually arguesânot caricatures or strawmen.
Progressive Perspective
- â˘Tariffs are largely paid by U.S. importers and passed on to consumers, acting as a regressive tax on working families
- â˘Targeting allies with tariffs damages relationships America needs to counter China
- â˘Decades of evidence shows tariffs alone don't revive manufacturingâinvestment, training, and industrial policy do
- â˘Farmers and exporters bear the cost of retaliation while bailouts paper over the harm
- â˘Using emergency powers to set tariff policy bypasses Congress's constitutional authority over trade
- â˘Workers deserve adjustment assistance, training, and worker-power policiesânot just tariff walls
Conservative Perspective
- â˘Decades of free trade hollowed out American manufacturing and devastated working-class communities
- â˘China's mercantilist practices require leverage, not lecturesâtariffs are leverage
- â˘Tariff threats have already produced new trade concessions and onshoring announcements
- â˘National security depends on producing essential goods domestically
- â˘The cost of cheap imports has been paid by American workers for forty years; rebalancing has trade-offs but is overdue
- â˘America has the largest consumer market in the world and should use that leverage in negotiations
These represent current talking points from each side of the political spectrum. Understanding both perspectives is essential for productive dialogue.
Evidence-Based Facts
Economic studies of the 2018-2019 tariffs found the cost was paid largely by U.S. importers and consumers, with limited evidence of foreign exporters absorbing the increase
Source: Peer-reviewed research summarized by the National Bureau of Economic Research
The Tax Foundation estimates that the 2025 tariff measures, if sustained, would reduce U.S. GDP by roughly 0.8% and household after-tax income by about $1,200 on average
Source: Tax Foundation tariff tracker
The U.S. goods trade deficit with China narrowed from its peak but remains large; manufacturing employment has been roughly flat-to-slightly-down since 2019
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; Bureau of Labor Statistics
Federal court challenges to the administration's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) for broad tariffs are pending; lower court rulings have been mixed
Source: Congressional Research Service
The federal government provided multi-billion-dollar payments to farmers harmed by retaliatory tariffs during the 2018-2019 trade war
Source: USDA, GAO reports
Learn More
Peterson Institute for International Economics â Trade
Non-partisan economic research on trade, tariffs, and globalization
Peterson Institute
Tax Foundation Tariff Tracker
Ongoing estimates of the economic impact of U.S. tariff policy
Tax Foundation
U.S. International Trade Commission
Official data on U.S. trade flows, tariff schedules, and industry impact
USITC
Cato Institute â Trade Policy
Free-market perspective on trade and tariffs
Cato Institute
Questions for Thoughtful Debate
Can tariffs actually rebuild U.S. manufacturing, or do they mainly raise prices for consumers?
Should Congress reclaim its constitutional authority over trade, or are emergency tariff powers appropriate?
How should the U.S. respond to China's industrial policy without harming American workers and farmers?
What's the right balance between protecting strategic industries and avoiding broad consumer price increases?
Are bilateral tariff deals more effective than multilateral trade agreements?
How should the government help workers and communities hit by either trade or trade restrictions?