Connect with us

Finance

Tariffs may raise much less than White House projects, economists say

Published

on

President Donald Trump speaks before signing executive orders in the Oval Office on March 6, 2025.

Alex Wong | Getty Images

President Donald Trump says that tariffs will make the U.S. “rich.” But those riches will likely be far less than the White House expects, economists said.

The ultimate sum could have big ramifications for the U.S. economy, the nation’s debt and legislative negotiations over a tax-cut package, economists said.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro on Sunday estimated tariffs would raise about $600 billion a year and $6 trillion over a decade. Auto tariffs would add another $100 billion a year, he said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Navarro made the projection as the U.S. plans to announce more tariffs against U.S. trading partners on Wednesday.

Economists expect the Trump administration’s tariff policy would generate a much lower amount of revenue than Navarro claims. Some project the total revenue would be less than half.

Roughly $600 billion to $700 billion a year “is not even in the realm of possibility,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s. “If you get to $100 billion to $200 billion, you’ll be pretty lucky.”

The White House declined to respond to a request for comment from CNBC about tariff revenue.

The ‘mental math’ behind tariff revenue

There are big question marks over the scope of the tariffs, including details like amount, duration, and products and countries affected — all of which have a significant bearing on the revenue total.

The White House is considering a 20% tariff on most imports, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday. President Trump floated this idea on the campaign trail. The Trump administration may ultimately opt for a different policy, like country-by-country tariffs based on each nation’s respective trade and non-trade barriers.

But a 20% tariff rate seems to align with Navarro’s revenue projections, economists said.

The U.S. imported about $3.3 trillion of goods in 2024. Applying a 20% tariff rate to all these imports would yield about $660 billion of annual revenue.

“That is almost certainly the mental math Peter Navarro is doing — and that mental math skips some crucial steps,” said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and former chief economist at the White House Council of Economic Advisers during the Biden administration.

Trade advisor to U.S. President Donald Trump Peter Navarro speaks to press outside of the White House on March 12, 2025 in Washington, DC. 

Kayla Bartkowski | Getty Images

That’s because an accurate revenue estimate must account for the many economic impacts of tariffs in the U.S. and around the world, economists said. Those effects combine to reduce revenue, they said.

A 20% broad tariff would raise about $250 billion a year (or $2.5 trillion over a decade) when taking those effects into account, according to Tedeschi, citing a Yale Budget Lab analysis published Monday.  

There are ways to raise larger sums — but they would involve higher tariff rates, economists said. For example, a 50% across-the-board tariff would raise about $780 billion per year, according to economists at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Even that is an optimistic assessment: It doesn’t account for lower U.S. economic growth due to retaliation or the negative growth effects from the tariffs themselves, they wrote.

Why revenue would be lower than expected

Tariffs generally raise prices for consumers. A 20% broad tariff would cost the average consumer $3,400 to $4,200 a year, according to the Yale Budget Lab.

Consumers would naturally buy fewer imported goods if they cost more, economists said. Lower demand means fewer imports and less tariff revenue from those imports, they said.

Tariffs are also expected to trigger “reduced economic activity,” said Robert McClelland, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

More from Personal Finance:
Economists say ‘value-added taxes’ aren’t a trade barrier
Tariffs are ‘lose-lose’ for U.S. jobs and industry
Why uncertainty makes the stock market go haywire

For example, U.S. companies that don’t pass tariff costs on to consumers via higher prices would likely see profits suffer (and their income taxes fall), economists said. Consumers might pull back on spending, further denting company profits and tax revenues, economists said. Companies that take a financial hit might lay off workers, they said.

Foreign nations are also expected to retaliate with their own tariffs on U.S. products, which would hurt companies that export products abroad. Other nations may experience an economic downturn, further reducing demand for U.S. products.

Tariffs could be a major rewiring of the domestic and global economy, says Mohamed El-Erian

“If you get a 20% tariff rate, you’re going to get a rip-roaring recession, and that will undermine your fiscal situation,” Zandi said.

There’s also likely to be a certain level of non-compliance with tariff policy, and carve-outs for certain countries, industries or products, economists said. For instance, when the White House levied tariffs on China in February, it indefinitely exempted “de minimis” imports valued at $800 or less.

The Trump administration might also funnel some tariff revenue to paying certain parties aggrieved by a trade war, economists said.

President Trump did that in his first term: The government sent $61 billion in “relief” payments to American farmers who faced retaliatory tariffs, which was nearly all (92%) of the tariff revenue on Chinese goods from 2018 to 2020, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The tariffs will also likely have a short life span, diluting their potential revenue impact, economists said. They’re being issued by executive order and could be undone easily, whether by President Trump or a future president, they said.

“There’s zero probability these tariffs will last for 10 years,” Zandi said. “If they last until next year I’d be very surprised.”

Why this matters

The Trump administration has signaled that tariffs “will be one of the top-tier ways they’ll try to offset the cost” of passing a package of tax cuts, Tedeschi said.

Extending a 2017 tax cut law signed by President Trump would cost $4.5 trillion over a decade, according to the Tax Foundation. Trump has also called for other tax breaks like no taxes on tips, overtime pay or Social Security benefits, and a tax deduction for auto loan interest for American made cars.

If tariffs don’t cover the full cost of such a package, then Republican lawmakers would have to find cuts elsewhere or increase the nation’s debt, economists said.

Continue Reading

Finance

Treasury Yields Rise as Fed Cut Expectations Shift

Published

on

Treasury Yields Rise as Fed Cut Expectations Shift

Fixed-income markets recorded significant re-pricing during the week ending July 25, 2026, as a convergence of strong labor market metrics and surging energy costs drove U.S. Treasury yields higher across all maturities. The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield climbed toward 4.70%, reaching its highest point in several months. Institutional bond investors rapidly adjusted portfolio durations as expectations for near-term interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve faded in response to inflation concerns.

The upward shift in sovereign yields reflects a broader fundamental reassessment of global monetary policy. Earlier in the quarter, money markets had priced in a series of rate reductions designed to support economic activity. However, with initial jobless claims falling to 187,000 and crude oil breaching $100 per barrel, fixed-income traders are pricing in a ‘higher-for-longer’ interest rate environment. The inversion between short-term Treasury bills and long-term bonds narrowed, indicating a shift toward term premium expansion.

Rising Treasury yields present both challenges and opportunities for institutional wealth managers. While commercial lenders and mortgage origination volumes face headwinds from elevated borrowing costs, fixed-income investors are locking in attractive real yields on high-quality sovereign and investment-grade corporate bonds. Institutional debt issuers, conversely, are recalibrating their capital structures, opting for shorter-term refinancing instruments or private credit facilities to avoid committing to elevated long-term coupon rates.

Navigating the current bond market landscape demands strict duration management and credit selection. Wealth advisors recommend maintaining flexible fixed-income allocations, combining short-duration Treasuries with inflation-protected securities (TIPS) to shield capital against potential energy-driven inflation spikes while earning dependable nominal income.

Continue Reading

Finance

Private Credit Expansion Transforms Corporate Loans

Published

on

Private Credit Expansion Transforms Corporate Loans

Private credit markets reached a pivotal milestone during the week ending July 25, 2026, as non-bank direct lending consortiums captured a record share of middle-market corporate debt originations. With commercial banks maintaining conservative credit standards and public bond yields remaining elevated, corporate borrowers are increasingly turning to private fund managers for customized capital solutions. This expansion marks a permanent structural shift in enterprise finance, establishing private credit as a primary pillar of institutional corporate liquidity.

The acceleration of private credit deals is driven by speed, deal certainty, and flexible terms. Unlike traditional syndicated bank loans that require lengthy underwriting, credit rating approvals, and public roadshows, private direct lenders can structure tailored financing packages within days. Middle-market firms facing upcoming debt maturities are utilizing private debt facilities to execute recapitalizations, strategic acquisitions, and growth capital deployments without risking execution delay in public markets.

However, financial regulators and central bank supervisors are scrutinizing the sector’s rapid growth. Supervisory agencies are evaluating potential systemic risks associated with non-bank leverage, valuation transparency, and liquidity mismatches during economic downturns. Despite regulatory interest, major pension funds, insurance firms, and sovereign wealth entities continue to expand capital allocations to private credit funds, attracted by reliable floating-rate yields that outperform public fixed-income benchmarks.

As private credit matures into a dominant asset class, corporate chief financial officers must evaluate non-bank lenders alongside traditional banking relationships. Direct lending partnerships provide valuable balance sheet resilience, enabling companies to secure flexible financing terms even during periods of public market turbulence.

Continue Reading

Finance

Tokenized Debt Shifts How Corporate Manage Short Term Liquidity

Published

on

Tokenized Debt Shifts Corporate Liquidity

The landscape of institutional debt markets is undergoing a profound structural shift on July 21, 2026, as major corporate issuers and commercial banks rapidly accelerate the deployment of tokenized debt instruments. Data published by leading capital market consortiums indicates that primary issuances of digital commercial paper and tokenized corporate bonds have reached record volumes this month. By moving legacy debt origination, underwriting, and secondary distribution onto permissioned distributed ledgers, corporate treasurers are unlocking unprecedented operational flexibility and instantaneous cross-border liquidity.

The adoption of tokenized debt is fundamentally altering how enterprise balance sheets manage short-term liquidity needs. Traditional corporate bond settlement cycles historically required multi-day clearing processes involving numerous intermediaries, custodial entities, and clearinghouses. Through programmable smart contracts on distributed ledgers, issuers can now execute atomic settlement—enabling continuous, 24/7 access to institutional capital pools. This instantaneous clearing mechanism drastically reduces counterparty risk, eliminates costly settlement friction, and allows treasury teams to dynamically optimize working capital in real time.

A major catalyst driving this institutional migration is the establishment of comprehensive digital asset regulatory frameworks across major financial hubs. Clear legal guidelines regarding ledger-based securities ownership have provided institutional compliance officers with the regulatory confidence necessary to transition multi-billion-dollar liquidity facilities onto digital platforms. Furthermore, the integration of automated regulatory reporting directly into token smart contracts simplifies ongoing compliance audits, ensuring that secondary market trades automatically enforce investor accreditation limits and tax withholding requirements.

For chief financial officers and institutional portfolio managers, tokenized debt represents a fundamental evolution in fixed-income strategy. Companies that embrace ledger-based debt structures gain direct access to a broader, global base of digital-native institutional investors while substantially reducing borrowing overhead. As ledger interoperability continues to improve across global exchanges, tokenized debt is poised to become the standard infrastructure for global corporate finance.

Continue Reading

Trending