My project is an art intervention, designed to critique the 2025 tariffs introduced by the Trump administration with the pretext of providing economic benefits for the American people. The project aims to question the reasoning behind the decision to implement such tariffs, as well as to reveal the harmful consequences that came along. While the administration promises that higher tariffs would strengthen the U.S. by putting pressure on China and other trade partners, the effect of these policies has proven to be more damaging to the American people and businesses. With the use of a painting, the project seeks to engage viewers and provoke conversation about the costs of tariffs that individuals have to pay, such as rising prices, reduced investments, and the looming threat of a trade war capable of destabilizing global markets.
The leading argument behind the implementation of tariffs used by the Trump administration was that by raising the taxes on imports from countries like China, corporation would increase their investments in American manufacturers, leading to job creation and a stronger national economy. However, this approach fails to consider almost all of the realities behind modern global trade. As the economist Steven Greenhouse accurately pointed out in January 2025, after Trump's inauguration day, “It’s inconceivable that other countries won’t retaliate”( Greenhouse 2025). When nations begin to raise tariffs on their partners, it is only natural that those partners would retaliate against such actions and raise their taxes or stop trading as a response.
Another problem that the administration failed to consider was the ripple effect that tariffs would have on consumers. Although the idea of bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. is a good one, the reality is that the U.S. simply lacks the capabilities that amount of work, and corporations know that it would take a lot of time and money to develop those capabilities. Time and money, which they are not willing to spend. So if they aren't going to move their manufacturing facilities to the U.S., it means that they have to pay higher prices for raw materials and goods, but to protect their profit margins, they simply pass the bill to consumers in the shape of higher prices. Directly contradicts the promise made by the administration of economic relief, instead of making products cheaper and more accessible, they have made them more expensive, creating a larger financial burden on consumers.
Additionally, the legal basis for the tariffs has also been brought into question. As mentioned by Stanford Professor Michael McConnel, “The tariff litigation is shaping up as the biggest separation-of-powers controversy since the steel seizure case in 1952..."(McConle 2025). On November 5, Trump's administration is going to present its arguments in support of the Supreme Court, as mentioned by Prof. McConel in one of the biggest separation of powers controversies. During Apr, the administration invoked the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, which is the successor to the Trading with the Enemy Act, and stated that citizens must stop trading with enemy nations during the time of war, and gave the government permission to seize property and take related action. The act was used by the Carter and Regan administrations to help secure hostages and return frozen Iranian assets. Prof. McConel argues that this is the only purpose for the Act: "That’s the kind of situation IEEPA was meant for: asset freezes and similar measures, not taxation" (McConel 2025). If the Judges strictly stick to the definition of the act, no argument can be made for the tariffs.
In conclusion, my project serves as a critique of the 2025 tariffs introduced by the Trump administration, questioning their economic strategy, revealing their consequences, and discussing their legal justification. While the administration promised a stronger U.S. economy as a result of higher tariffs, lower prices for consumers, and creating more jobs, so far the consequences have been higher prices for consumers, reduced business investments, and the risk of a global trade war. Ultimately, this project highlights why it's important to hold policymakers accountable for the consequences of their actions, and how they affect those who are least capable of bearing with them.
PowerPoint: MIDTERM INTERVENTION 1 In Real Life
References:
Greenhouse, S. (2025, January 31). Economists agree: Trump is wrong on tariffs. The Century Foundation. https://tcf.org/content/commentary/economists-agree-trump-is-wrong-on-tariffs
McCoMcConel, M. (2025, October 13). Professor Michael McConnell Breaks Down the Separation-of-Powers Fight at the Heart of the Trump Tariffs Case | Stanford Law School. Stanford Law School. https://law.stanford.edu/2025/10/13/professor-michael-mcconnell-breaks-down-the-separation-of-powers-fight-at-the-heart-of-the-trump-tariffs-case/
No comments:
Post a Comment