
Trump says high tariffs may have prevented Great Depression, history says different
by Naharnet Newsdesk 08 April 2025, 14:26
In the early days of the Great Depression, Rep. Willis Hawley, a Republican from Oregon, and Utah Republican Sen. Reed Smoot thought they had landed on a way to protect American farmers and manufacturers from foreign competition: tariffs.
President Herbert Hoover signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930, even as many economists warned that the levies would prompt retaliatory tariffs from other countries, which is precisely what happened. The U.S. economy plunged deeper into a devastating financial crisis that it would not pull out of until World War II.
Most historians look back on Smoot-Hawley as a mistake that made a bad economic climate much worse. But tariffs have a new champion in President Donald Trump.
Like Trump, Hoover was elected largely because of his business acumen. An international mining engineer, financier and humanitarian, he took office in 1929 like an energetic CEO, eager to promote public-private partnerships and use the levers of government to promote economic growth.
"Anyone not only can be rich, but ought to be rich," he declared in his inaugural address before convening a special session of Congress to better protect U.S. farmers with "limited changes of the tariff."
Instead, the 31st president got the Great Depression.
Trump, now championing his own sweeping tariffs that have sent global markets into a tailspin, argues that the U.S. was founded on steep import taxes on goods from abroad.
But the country began abandoning them when it created a federal income tax in 1913, the president says. Then, "in 1929, it all came to a very abrupt end with the Great Depression. And it would have never happened if they had stayed with the tariff policy," Trump said in announcing his tariff plan last week.
Referring to Smoot-Hawley, he added, "They tried to bring back tariffs to save our country, but it was gone. It was gone. It was too late. Nothing could have been done — took years and years to get out of that depression."
America's history of high tariffs actually continued well after 1913, however, and Trump's take on what sparked the Great Depression — and Hoover-era Washington's response to it — don't reflect what actually happened.
Gary Richardson, an economics professor at the University of California, Irvine, said the U.S. long maintaining high tariffs "helped to shift industry here. But we've gotten rid of them because, as the country at the cutting edge of technology, we didn't think they were useful."
"When we were at our most powerful, right after World War II, we forced a low tariff regime on most of the world because we thought it was to our benefit," said Richardson, also a former Federal Reserve System historian. "Now, we're going back to something else."
Tariffs date to 1789
George Washington signed the Tariff Act of 1789, the first major legislation approved by Congress, which imposed a 5% tax on many goods imported into the U.S. With no federal income tax, the policy was about finding sources of revenue for the government while also protecting American producers from foreign competition.
After the War of 1812 disrupted U.S. trade with Great Britain, the U.S. approved more tariffs in 1817 meant to shield domestic manufacturing from potentially cheaper imports, especially textiles.
High tariffs remained for decades, particularly as the government looked to increase its revenue and pay down debt incurred during the Civil War.
The Tariff Act of 1890 raised taxes to 49.5% on 1,500-plus items. Championing the move was the "Napoleon of Protectionism," William McKinley, an Ohio Republican congressman who would be elected president in 1896 and one of Trump's heroes.
But that move caused prices to rise and the U.S. economy to fall. It worsened after the Panic of 1893, when unemployment reached 25%. Historians referred to the period as the "great depression" until it was superseded by the actual Great Depression.
An income tax replaces tariffs
A national income tax didn't become permanent until Congress passed the 16th Amendment in 1909, and it was ratified four years later. Despite what Trump suggests, what followed was continued economic growth — fueled by technological advances like the telephone and increased consumer spending after World War I.
A construction boom, and increased manufacturing output — particularly for consumer goods that included the automobile — helped spark the "Roaring 20s." The Dow Jones Industrial Average increased six-fold — climbing from 63 points in August of 1921 to nearly 400 in September of 1929.
It was the Prohibition era and the jazz age, a period of urbanization even as farming remained a key economic driver. Working conditions were often poor, but the standard of living climbed for the middle class, which enjoyed innovations like broadcast radio and washing machines.
High tariff policy also persisted, with Congress approving the Fordney-McCumber Act of 1922, which raised levies to their highest in U.S. history on many imported goods in an effort to further bolster domestic manufacturing. That prompted retaliatory tariffs from key U.S. trading partners — mirroring the reactions of contemporary China and other countries to Trump's new levies.
'Black Tuesday' and The Great Depression
The economy began slowing when the Fed raised interest rates in 1928 and the following year.
The idea was mostly to ease a stock market bubble by reducing lending to brokers or firms buying stocks. But that triggered higher interest rates in Britain and Germany, which helped slow global consumer spending and production, and began a U.S. recession in the summer of 1929.
The Great Depression began with "Black Tuesday" on Oct. 29, 1929, when a panic selloff triggered a stock market collapse, wiping out thousands of investors who had borrowed heavily. As consumer demand declined, manufacturing firms laid off workers and idled factories.
In subsequent years, the U.S. unemployment rate reached 25%, while economic output plunged nearly 30%. There were thousands of bank failures and widespread business closures, while millions of Americans lost their homes.
Smoot-Hawley
With self-made wealth and global sympathies, Hoover cut a very different figure than Trump.
Hoover was orphaned at 9 and led World War I-humanitarian food relief efforts while living in London. He also served as commerce secretary before running for president. He could be dynamic with small groups but reserved in public.
"There's no theater to Herbert Hoover," said David Hamilton, a history professor at the University of Kentucky.
Trying to keep his campaign promise to protect farmers, Hoover pushed Congress for higher agricultural tariffs. But a chief goal was encouraging farmers to produce new types of crops, and Hoover didn't view steeper U.S. tariffs as incompatible with global trade, Hamilton said.
"He's not weaponizing trade in the way we see today," said Hamilton, author of "From New Day to New Deal: American Farm Policy from Hoover to Roosevelt, 1928-1933."
Hawley, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, originally sought farming protections. But the finished bill went much farther, using high tariffs to protect manufacturing. It passed the House in May 1929.
Smoot, who chaired the Senate finance committee, helped oversee passage there in March 1930. Reconciled legislation that became the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act finally cleared Congress that June.
Hoover was conflicted, especially after more than 1,000 U.S. economists signed a letter urging a veto. But he signed the act, saying in a statement, "No tariff bill has ever been enacted, or ever will be enacted, under the present system that will be perfect."
That's all a departure from another businessman-turned-president, Trump, who grew up wealthy and was a real estate mogul and reality TV star who had never served in government before first winning the presidency in 2016.
Trump has long championed tariffs as a way to protect the U.S. economy and manufacturing at the expense of its global trading partners. And he bypassed Congress potentially modifying the scope of his policy aims by declaring an "economic emergency" to institute tariffs unilaterally.
Smoot-Hawley raised import tariffs by an average of 20% on thousands of goods, causing many top U.S. trading partners to retaliate. International cooperation on non-trade issues also declined, including on defense matters, helping clear the way for the rise of Hitler, Richardson said.
"There were some industries where they made profits," Richardson said of Smoot-Hawley. "But overall, people in the U.S. and people around the world were losers."
U.S. manufacturers saw foreign markets for their goods evaporate and output and consumer spending sank still further. Hawley lost the 1932 Oregon Republican primary in his district, and Smoot was defeated in November, as Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt trounced Hoover for the presidency.
Smoot, Hawley and Hoover largely kept defending their tariff policies in subsequent years, blaming international trade policies and external monetary forces — as well as Democrats — for America's economic woes. The economy wouldn't begin its recovery until the outbreak of World War II increased demand for factory production in 1939.
"Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement," Hoover said in December 1930. "Economic wounds must be healed by the action of the cells of the economic body -- the producers and consumers themselves.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


LBCI
7 hours ago
- LBCI
Strike talk as leverage: What's driving Israel's messaging on Iran?
Report by Amal Shehadeh, English adaptation by Mariella Succar Despite an agreement with Washington not to strike Iran, Israel continues to promote the need for such an attack, particularly amid Tehran's insistence on continuing uranium enrichment. Israeli concerns will be discussed in Washington by Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and Mossad Director David Barnea, who are set to meet with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff ahead of the sixth round of talks with the Iranians, scheduled for Sunday. Despite security and military officials expecting the Israeli delegation to fail in persuading Donald Trump of the need to launch a strike on Iran, sources familiar with the phone call between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the two leaders are aligned — each for his reasons — in promoting the possibility of such an attack. Trump continues to signal the potential for military action, hoping Iran will back down from its demands and move negotiations forward. Netanyahu, meanwhile, amplifies threats of a strike to serve domestic political purposes, aiming to prevent the collapse of his government. In both cases, all reports indicate that Israel cannot carry out such an attack without U.S. approval. An Israeli report reveals that any strike on Iran would require reaching facilities buried dozens of meters deep in solid rock, while the weaponry currently available to Tel Aviv can only achieve minimal damage — whether in terms of bomb effectiveness or aircraft capability. This has made the reality of the threat increasingly transparent, amid two possible scenarios: If Netanyahu's government falls following a potential Knesset collapse — should ultra-Orthodox parties succeed in their political battle — Israel's priorities, already shifting toward early elections, could be reshaped. If Netanyahu survives the vote, securing his political standing, the Iranian file may recede from the top of his agenda.


Ya Libnan
10 hours ago
- Ya Libnan
Growing fears of massive strikes on Iran as nuclear negotiations sputter
If the U.S.-Iranian talks fail, and strikes on Iran occur, the ramifications could be very far-reaching. U.S. President Donald Trump has been presented with a broad array of potential military options against Iran should ongoing nuclear negotiations with that country fail. Israel is already reportedly moving ever closer to at least being in a position to launch its own strikes on Iranian nuclear sites . The direct and indirect blowback from any such operations against Iran could be immense. Fears that U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks are on the verge of collapse have been steadily growing in the past week or so amid statements from both sides outlining potentially intractable positions. Iran's ability to continue domestic enrichment of nuclear material that could be used to produce nuclear weapons has emerged as a key stumbling block to reaching a deal. 'If the President directed [it], is CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command] prepared to respond with overwhelming force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran?' Congressman Mike Rogers, an Alabama Republican, asked U.S. Army Gen. Michael 'Erik' Kurilla at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee today. Kurilla is currently head of CENTCOM, making him the top officer overseeing operations across the Middle East. 'I have provided the Secretary of Defense [Pete Hegseth] and the President [Trump] a wide range of options,' Kurilla said in response. 'I take that as a yes?' Rogers, the present chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, asked in return, appearing to refer to the specific wording of his question, to include the possible use of 'overwhelming force.' 'Yes,' Kurrila said. Top U.S. military commander in the Middle East General Kurilla confirms that he has presented military options on Iran to President Trump & SecDef Hegseth in House Armed Services Committee this morning. It is important to note here that U.S. presidents and defense secretaries regularly ask to be briefed on potential military options in light of crises or heightened risks of one erupting. Being presented with a full range of operational possibilities, including large-scale strikes or other significant direct action, does not mean the United States is automatically committed to pursuing any specific course of action, something we will come back to later on. Publicly, Trump has consistently advocated for reaching a deal with Iran to avoid any need to take military action, though he has also raised the possibility of military action in the event talks reach a dead end. He has separately said that he has pressed his Israeli counterpart, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to hold off on striking Iranian targets while negotiations are ongoing. There have been reports of significant friction between the two leaders , as well. Amid all this, the U.S. president is said to be facing increasingly intense pressure from a faction of domestic political allies to acquiesce to and/or join in on Israeli attacks on Iran, according to a new report just today from Politico . TWZ


MTV Lebanon
10 hours ago
- MTV Lebanon
Troops in LA can detain individuals, military official says, as protests spread across US
U.S. troops deployed in Los Angeles are authorized to detain people until police can arrest them, their commanding officer said on Wednesday, as hundreds of Marines prepared to move into the city as it entered a sixth day of protests. Protests over President Donald Trump's immigration raids have spread from California to other U.S. cities, with hundreds of nationwide demonstrations planned for Saturday. Trump's decision to dispatch troops to Los Angeles over the objections of California Governor Gavin Newsom has sparked a national debate about the use of the military on U.S. soil. Newsom's administration has sued the U.S. government over the deployment. The 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard troops that Trump has ordered to Los Angeles do not have arrest authority, U.S. Army Major General Scott Sherman, who is commanding the troops, told reporters. But Sherman said they do have the power to detain individuals temporarily until law enforcement can arrest them, if needed to fulfill their mission of protecting federal personnel or property. The Marines, who have been training at Seal Beach just south of Los Angeles County, will move to the city "soon," but not on Wednesday, Sherman said. They will not carry live ammunition in their rifles, he added. A U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Sherman's comments reflect regular rules of engagement and did not reflect an expansion of authorities. In addition to protecting government buildings and personnel, the Pentagon has said the troops will safeguard Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers during raids. ICE posted photos online on Tuesday of National Guard troops standing guard with weapons in hand as ICE officers handcuffed apparent migrants against the side of a car in Los Angeles. An 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally forbids the U.S. military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement. The troops in California are deployed under a separate federal law that does not override that prohibition, but allows troops to protect federal agents carrying out law enforcement activity. For example, National Guard troops cannot arrest protesters, but they could protect ICE officers who are carrying out arrests. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose office filed the lawsuit challenging Trump's deployment orders, told Reuters on Tuesday that allowing troops to accompany ICE agents into communities could potentially lead to violations of the act, given the thin line between providing protection and engaging in enforcement. Sherman did not give a specific number of raids on which troops had accompanied ICE agents, but told reporters that about 1,000 troops had taken part in operations to protect federal buildings and law enforcement. The Trump administration responded on Wednesday in a court filing to California's lawsuit ahead of a Thursday court hearing, arguing that the president has the discretion to determine whether a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" requires a military response. Trump says the military deployment in Los Angeles prevented violence, which has included some clashes between protesters and police, from raging out of control, an assertion Newsom and other local officials have said was untrue. The protests, which erupted on Friday after federal immigration raids in the city, have been largely peaceful and limited to about five downtown streets. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass imposed a curfew over one square mile of the city's downtown starting on Tuesday night after some businesses were looted. The Los Angeles Police Department said it arrested 225 people on Tuesday, including 203 for failing to disperse and 17 for violating the curfew. Elsewhere, protesters marched in New York, Atlanta and Chicago on Tuesday night, chanting anti-ICE slogans and at times clashing with law enforcement. The governor of Texas, Republican Greg Abbott, said he will deploy the National Guard on Wednesday ahead of planned protests in San Antonio and other parts of the state, making him the first governor to take that step. The protests are set to expand on Saturday, when several activist groups have planned more than 1,800 anti-Trump demonstrations across the country. That day, tanks and other armored vehicles will rumble down the streets of Washington, D.C., in a military parade marking the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary and coinciding with Trump's 79th birthday. A coalition calling itself "No Kings" has planned demonstrations and other events in over 1,800 locations across the U.S. on Saturday. Trump has warned that any protesters at the parade will be met by "very big force." Thousands of agents, officers and specialists are being deployed from law enforcement agencies across the country for the parade. The No Kings coalition includes over 100 civil rights and other groups and says it is planning peaceful protests against Trump and his administration's policies. The standoff in Los Angeles is the most intense flashpoint in the Trump administration's efforts to deport migrants living in the country illegally. The Department of Homeland Security, ICE's parent agency, said on Monday that ICE had arrested 2,000 immigration offenders per day recently, far above the daily average of 311 in fiscal year 2024 under former President Joe Biden. "President Trump promised to carry out the largest mass deportation campaign in American history and left-wing riots will not deter him in that effort," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Wednesday. An immigration raid on Tuesday at a meat production plant in Omaha, Nebraska, was the "largest worksite enforcement operation" in the state during the Trump presidency, DHS said. Republican Congressman Don Bacon told local media that 75 to 80 people were detained. The company, Glenn Valley Foods, said it was surprised by the raid and had followed the rules regarding immigration status.