The Princeton School of Public and International Affairs (Princeton SPIA) has released new faculty reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest trade policies, which include tariffs on key imports. As the administration moves forward with these measures, Princeton SPIA scholars are weighing in on the economic consequences, potential risks to international trade relationships, and broader geopolitical impacts. Faculty comments address concerns about rising costs for American consumers, potential retaliation from trading partners, and the long-term effects on global markets.

Alan Blinder, Gordon S. Rentschler Memorial Professor of Economics and Public Affairs:

“Trade wars are neither good nor easy to win. Generally, every nation loses, but the 800-pound gorilla (us) can inflict more pain on ‘the enemy’ than it, itself, endures. The question is: Why is Canada the enemy?”

Gene Grossman, Jacob Viner Professor of International Economics; Professor of Economics and International Affairs; Director, International Economics Section:

“The rules-based trading system that the United States crafted and nurtured over five decades has served the country’s interests extremely well. The Trump tariffs are an own goal. They fly in the face of common sense and will prove costly to U.S. consumers and businesses alike.”

Layna Mosley, Professor of Politics and International Affairs; Associate Chair of the Department of Politics:

“Trump’s actions on trade erode further the rules-based system of governance (for instance, WTO, USMCA). This system generated economic benefits for the U.S., as well as globally. Threatening, imposing, and then modifying tariffs — often all in the same week — also generates increased uncertainty for firms, workers, and financial markets. While there certainly are reasons to worry about the domestic distributional consequences of trade — that is, not every worker or firm benefits, even if there are overall gains — unilateral policy changes are not the right fix.”
 

Amb. Juan Carlos Pinzón, John L. Weinberg/Goldman Sachs & Co. Visiting Professor and Lecturer:

“No war ends without victims. Diplomacy-based agreements that promote stability and progress are always preferable. However, states often have domestic political agendas that demand action. In this context, tariffs serve as a policy tool to address short-term priorities but can have long-term consequences that undermine their initial goal of balancing trade flows — potentially harming trading partners and even the domestic population they aim to protect.

“Tariffs are typically implemented to boost domestic industrial production, create jobs, or pressure trading partners for better trade conditions to reduce large trade deficits. While these intentions may seem appealing, tariffs can trigger unintended consequences. First, they increase prices on imported goods, fueling inflation for domestic consumers. Second, trading partners may retaliate with tariffs of their own, limiting export access. Third, unilateral actions erode trust and may discourage cooperation on unrelated agreements. Finally, escalating trade tensions can lead to closed markets and borders, ultimately harming businesses and consumers.”

SPIA Reacts is an ongoing series of faculty members’ analyses of current events. The views they express are their own.