Trump Reverses Tariffs to Tame Inflation, Sparking Political and Industry Pushback

Generated by AI AgentCoin WorldReviewed byRodder Shi
Saturday, Nov 15, 2025 11:48 am ET2min read
Speaker 1
Speaker 2
AI Podcast:Your News, Now Playing
Aime RobotAime Summary

- Trump reversed food tariffs on beef, coffee, and bananas to curb soaring grocery prices and public cost concerns.

- The policy shift followed Democratic election gains and economic warnings about inflation from high duties on imports.

- Cattle ranchers criticized the move as conflicting with "America First" rhetoric, while Australia and Brazil welcomed tariff cuts.

- Economists debate long-term impacts, with some predicting higher prices as supply chains adjust post-tariff reductions.

Donald Trump has reversed a cornerstone of his trade policy, slashing tariffs on beef, coffee, bananas, and other food imports in a bid to curb surging grocery prices and ease public frustration over living costs. The executive order, effective retroactively from November 13, removes levies on over 100 food products, including staples like beef, coffee, and tropical fruits,

. The move follows mounting political pressure after Democrats secured key victories in November elections, where affordability emerged as a central voter concern .

The decision reflects a pragmatic recalibration of Trump's trade agenda. Initially, the administration defended tariffs as tools to "supercharge U.S. investment and production," but economists and industry leaders have long warned that duties on food imports-such as 50% on Brazilian coffee and 10% base tariffs on global imports-had

. Beef prices, for instance, surged 12.9% year-over-year in September, driven by tariffs on imports and domestic production challenges .
"Tariffs are artificially keeping prices high here," said Karim Azzaoui, a food industry executive, noting that olive oil and other imported goods have become unaffordable for lower-income shoppers .

The White House attributed the reversal to "substantial progress" in trade negotiations with Argentina, Ecuador, Guatemala, and El Salvador, which granted U.S. companies expanded market access in exchange for tariff cuts

. However, internal disputes within the administration and Republican Party underscored the complexity of the shift. While Trump framed the move as a victory for consumers, cattle ranchers criticized the policy for contradicting his "America First" rhetoric. Some ranchers argued that increased beef imports would depress domestic prices, despite Trump's insistence that tariffs had initially boosted their profits .

International reactions were mixed. Australia, a major beef exporter, welcomed the removal of 10% tariffs on its agricultural products, with trade officials calling the levies "an act of economic self-harm"

. Meanwhile, U.S. trade partners like Brazil and Uruguay-hit by some of the highest duties-may see a temporary reprieve as global demand for their goods rebounds .

Economists remain divided on the long-term impact. While the Tax Foundation estimated that 74% of U.S. food imports faced tariffs before the cuts

, many businesses had previously absorbed costs rather than passing them to consumers. Now, with inflation ticking upward and supply chains adjusting, analysts predict prices for tariff-affected goods could rise further. "Lowering tariffs lowers prices-so what does raising them do?" tweeted Erica York of the Tax Foundation, highlighting the administration's contradictory stance .

The move also reignited debates over Trump's broader tariff strategy. While the president pledged to use tariff revenue for $2,000 rebate checks

, critics argue the policy has exacerbated inflation without delivering promised economic gains. House Democrats' Richard Neal accused the administration of "putting out a fire they started," noting that manufacturing contraction and rising prices have undermined Trump's claims .

As the administration navigates these challenges, the food tariff rollback signals a broader acknowledgment that trade policies can both raise and lower costs-a reality economists have long emphasized

. With the 2026 midterms looming, the White House's ability to balance domestic producer interests with consumer demands will test the durability of this policy shift.

Comments



Add a public comment...
No comments

No comments yet