Trump's tariffs are costly in many ways

Tariffs are taxes on imports so their main value to government is how much they collect. As of this week, the budget category "gross tariff and certain other excise tax revenue" has brought in about $186 billion in revenue in the fiscal year that began last Oct. 1.

Officials initially projected the take to be $250 billion higher than that. But on Feb. 20, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Donald Trump cannot use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 to impose tariffs, derailing the program and forcing billions in illegal revenue to be returned to payers.

After its big legal fiasco, the administration began basing its tariffs on Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Tariffs remain a unilateral Trump initiative although it's Congress that has the power to levy them.

Americans absorb the tariffs through price increases, especially on electronics and vehicles. Despite Trump's past promises the tariffs aren't sparking a broad-based revival of manufacturing or factory jobs.

For business, tariff uncertainty remains a major concern.

Andrea Englisis, president of Athenee Importers in Hempstead, wrote in a Newsday opinion piece that since February — notwithstanding a refund due to the court decision — her business paid another $80,000 in tariffs. "We have raised prices by an average of 15% to cover the tariffs and account for a weaker U.S. dollar," she wrote.

The unpredictability of how federal policy will continue to raise those expenses erodes business confidence and makes things cost more. 

Doubt hovers over future tariff rates — as it does over Trump's motives in setting them. He announced tariffs on Brazilian imports in retaliation against the current government for prosecuting his friend, the former president. Trump made a similar tariff threat to pressure Denmark into selling Greenland to the United States, then backed off. And he's weaponized tariffs against Canada.

Trump's transactional handling of tariffs to this point raises legitimate concerns about the bipartisan Russia sanctions bill championed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, which passed the Senate and is headed to the House. Effectively, it would give the president a new tariff tool that perhaps he shouldn't be trusted with. It's due to be taken up in the House next month where it should be stopped. 

Tariffs are a type of tax, not a panacea for fiscal and diplomatic problems. They require solid economic and legal preparation and planning, especially as Trump's Iran war drives inflation. Trump should have learned this last year when the first draconian tariffs of his new term crashed markets. It's past time for the White House to get serious, assess the program, and speak candidly to our trading partners — and more importantly, to the American public.