President Trump Blinks for Now, But Tariffs Remain High

Originally posted 10 April 2025 – President Trump Blinks for Now, But Tariffs Remain High

We see significant implications for U.S. and global growth and inflation.

On 9 April, President Donald Trump announced a 90-day pause on the higher “add-on” reciprocal tariffs on 50-plus countries that had been announced the previous week, precipitating a historic equity market rally and showing that there was seemingly a limit to how far he would go to move forward with his trade agenda.

While the worst-case scenario has likely been avoided, meaningful tariffs remain, which are likely to have implications for U.S. and global growth as well as inflation. They include:

• A 10% universal tariff on all countries, effective April 5. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated 10% would likely be the floor for tariffs going forward, and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett suggested that it would be a very “high bar” for countries to secure a deal below that 10% level.
• A 145% tariff on Chinese goods. Trump has indicated there could be a deal with China that could lower tariffs from the punitive 145% rate, but we expect tariffs on China to remain elevated, regardless.
• A 25% tariff on non-United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA)-compliant goods from Mexico and Canada, effective March 4. Compliant goods from Canada and Mexico are estimated at about 50% of all goods (and have a 0% tariff under USMCA). Thus, we expect more Mexican and Canadian exporters will seek compliance for their non-USMCA compliant goods, which are now subject to tariffs.
• A 25% tariff on goods imported from any country that imports Venezuelan oil, effective 2 April.
• A 25% tariff on aluminum and steel, effective 11 March.
• A 25% tariff on autos (effective 3 April) and auto parts. Similar product tariffs are expected shortly on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.

These tariffs could represent an increase in the average effective tariff rate of up to about 23% on U.S. imports, certainly not as significant as the approximately 30%-plus the market had expected, but much higher than the average 3% effective tariff rate on imports pre-Trump 2.0. (Note, the effective tariff rate could decline if imports from China collapse, but that would likely entail significant economic friction in and of itself.)  

Tariffs and economic growth

The 10% universal tariff rate represents a possible headwind to U.S. growth of up to 1 percentage point and a similar possible impact on inflation (depending on foreign exchange adjustments, among other factors). See my colleague Tiffany Wilding’s piece, “The U.S. Economy’s Trajectory Amid Higher Tariffs.”

The market had been looking for a signal that Trump would blink from the most draconian actions taken last week, and this was certainly it – and it came as a surprise to many in the administration. Indeed, Trump’s Trade Representative, Jamieson Greer, was testifying before the House Committee on Ways and Means and seemingly did not know the announcement was coming. Trump said that the temporary relief had to do in part with the bond market, “where people were getting a little queasy,” and that people on the Hill were getting “yippy” and “afraid.” At the same time, he still reinforced how committed he is to rebalancing trade and how tariffs are overall a very effective tool.

The long-term effects of tariff policies

Over the next 90 days, we should expect to see the White House announce several deals with various countries (India, Australia, Argentina, the U.K., and possibly Japan seem like the low-hanging fruit). While we could see still higher add-on tariffs (in addition to the 10% tariff roll-on after 90 days for countries that do not secure deals), our expectation is that any add-on tariffs would be significantly less draconian than those announced last week. Nonetheless, we should not underestimate Trump’s ideological commitment to this issue, so while the worst may have been avoided, trade policy uncertainty – and significantly higher tariffs and its attendant growth effects – should be priced-in going forward.

Our baseline scenario for the ultimate destination had been a 10% universal tariff on all countries, higher tariffs on China (though lower than 145%), and specific product tariffs (autos, steel, pharma, etc.). But we thought it would take longer, and include more pain, to get there (see my 7 April piece, “Tariff Turbulence: What to Watch, Including Possible Constraints.“ While we could see additional, targeted tariffs increase in 90 days, we think Trump and his advisors have touched the hot stove and backed away from the most draconian approach, although tariff threats and uncertainty on countries with the biggest trade deficits are likely to continue (the EU and Vietnam still seem more vulnerable).   

With that said, tariff levels, even after Wednesday’s “blink” could have significant implications for growth and inflation. Yet irrespective of those effects, we think there is a stickiness behind the 10% baseline tariff, sector tariffs, and elevated China tariffs for the longer-term (i.e., they are not likely to be rolled-off).