logo
Trump Tariff Revenue Soars in May

Trump Tariff Revenue Soars in May

Newsweek2 days ago

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
President Donald Trump's aggressive tariff policy has triggered widespread economic disruption, from rising prices for American consumers to retaliatory measures from key trading partners. Yet despite the global fallout, the administration's tariff push is delivering a surprising result at home.
As of May 30, the U.S. is on pace to set a new monthly record in tariff revenue—nearly $23 billion, about three times the amount collected in May 2024. That record-breaking pace contributes to a total of $68.23 billion collected so far in 2025, a 78 percent jump from the same point last year, according to Treasury Department data analyzed by the Penn Wharton Budget Model.
Why It Matters
Trump has defended his tariff policy as a means to restore American manufacturing as well as a way to fund the government without relying on income taxes. His administration argues that tariffs will make it possible to eventually abolish the federal income tax altogether.
The White House continues to radiate optimism that negotiated deals with other countries will occur despite Trump's claims that he will set his own deals and a lack of clarity about how the process goes forward.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the Memorial Day wreath-laying ceremony at the Memorial Amphitheater in Arlington National Cemetery on May 26, 2025 in Arlington, Virginia. Memorial Day is observed on the last Monday in...
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the Memorial Day wreath-laying ceremony at the Memorial Amphitheater in Arlington National Cemetery on May 26, 2025 in Arlington, Virginia. Memorial Day is observed on the last Monday in May each year to honor and mourn U.S. military personnel who died while serving in the United States Armed Forces. More
Photo byWhat To Know
The revenue increase is driven by steep duties imposed on imports, particularly from China, where tariff rates have climbed as high as 145 percent. The Penn Wharton analysis shows a significant monthly spike in revenue of $6.8 billion at the end of April, highlighting the impact of new levies or preemptive stockpiling by businesses ahead of expected rate hikes.
While such figures bolster the administration's argument that tariffs can serve as a major funding source, the underlying mechanism of who pays is less direct. Tariffs are a tax on imports, meaning they are initially paid by U.S. companies at the border, but economic research shows these costs are ultimately passed on to American consumers through higher prices.
The Budget Lab at Yale University projects that the full suite of tariffs enacted in 2025—if kept in place—would raise $2.7 trillion over the next decade. However, the same analysis estimates a corresponding $394 billion reduction in other tax revenue due to negative effects on economic output. It calls the current average effective tariff rate of 17.8 percent the highest since 1934.
The Budget Lab warns that tariffs work like a regressive tax, hurting low-income families the most. It estimates that households in the second income decile would lose about $1,300 a year from higher prices, while those in the top decile would lose around $6,100. Overall, consumer costs would rise by 1.7 percent in the short term—roughly a $2,800 hit per household.
Clothing and textiles are especially impacted: prices for shoes have climbed 15 percent, and apparel is up 14 percent in the short term. The long-run impact keeps prices 19 percent and 16 percent higher, respectively.
The Tax Foundation, an international research think tank based in Washington D.C., echoes those concerns, warning that the projected $2.1 trillion in tariff revenue through 2034 will come at a significant cost: a 0.8 percent long-run reduction in U.S. economic output and 685,000 fewer full-time jobs.
Their analysis underscores the fragility of relying on tariffs to offset other costs—particularly Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill," which extends and expands tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act at an estimated $4.5 trillion cost over the same period, or more than double the Tax Foundation's optimistic estimate for tariff revenues.
What People Are Saying
Joseph Foudy, professor at NYU's Stern School of Business, told Newsweek: "We're essentially picking fights with every major country in the world. Even if we end up cutting deals, the level of acrimony and the signal that the U.S. is no longer a reliable long-term partner weakens our position."
Todd Belt of George Washington University's Graduate School of Political Management told Newsweek: "The industrial landscape in the U.S. has completely changed. Most heavy industry has left the country, along with many well-paying, middle-class, union jobs. That's created a lot of resentment. Trump is promising to bring those jobs back—though I don't think that's realistic—and tariffs are his way of doing it".
Scott Bessent, Treasury Secretary, in an interview with Fox News: "We were on track for a financial crash. Government spending was out of control. It felt like 1998 or 2007. We've pulled off that path and set up long-term growth instead."
What Happens Next
The revenue numbers come as the legal foundation of Trump's tariff strategy isremains wobbly. A federal court ruled that the president's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose some tariffs was unlawful. However, an appeals court has allowed the reciprocal tariffs to remain in place while the case winds through the appeal process. It could end up at the Supreme Court.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Aides Insist That Tariffs Will Remain, Even After Court Ruling
Trump Aides Insist That Tariffs Will Remain, Even After Court Ruling

New York Times

time12 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Trump Aides Insist That Tariffs Will Remain, Even After Court Ruling

President Trump's top economic advisers stressed on Sunday that they would not be deterred by a recent court decision that declared many of the administration's tariffs to be illegal, as they pointed out a variety of additional authorities that the White House could invoke as it looks to pressure China and others into negotiations. They also signaled that Mr. Trump had no plans to extend an original 90-day pause on some of his steepest tariff rates, raising the odds that those duties — the mere announcement of which had roiled markets — could take effect as planned in July. 'Rest assured, tariffs are not going away,' Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said during an appearance on 'Fox News Sunday.' Asked about the future of the president's so-called reciprocal tariffs, first announced and quickly suspended in April, Mr. Lutnick added, 'I don't see today that an extension is coming.' The president's tariff strategy entered uncharted political and legal territory last week after a federal trade court ruled that Mr. Trump had misused an emergency economic powers law in trying to wage a global trade war. The decision would have put a quick halt to those duties, which form the centerpiece of the president's strategy of pressuring other countries into trade talks. But an appeals court soon granted the government a brief administrative pause to sort out arguments in the case, which is expected to reach the Supreme Court. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Why Did The U.S. Air Force Cancel The F-22 Raptor?
Why Did The U.S. Air Force Cancel The F-22 Raptor?

Yahoo

time13 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Why Did The U.S. Air Force Cancel The F-22 Raptor?

It is the absolute apex of air-to-air combat. It rules the skies like a bird of prey, from which it takes its name. It's one of the stealthiest fighter jets in the world. The Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor is the pinnacle of what air dominance can be. So ... it was canceled. In 2009, the U.S. Department of Defense decided to end production of the fighter after only 186 planes were produced, significantly less than the original order of 750. What happened? Airpower is supposed to be one of the pillars of America's military strength, so why take its best piece off the board? The answer comes down to the fact that the nature of America's threats change and evolve over time, meaning that an asset that seemed critical in one era seems less so in another. Plus, put simply, the F-22 is wildly expensive, so if it's not an absolute must-have, the cost-benefit analysis just doesn't shake out. Read more: These Are The Worst American Cars Ever Made The F-22 was a revelation when it first flew in 1997. With a top speed of an incredible Mach 2.25 (1,726 miles per hour), supercruise capability (meaning it could fly for extended periods above the speed of sound), and a coat of radar-absorbent material, it was more advanced than any other fighter in the world at the time. It was a spaceship in a world full of paper planes. Ironically enough, that was part of its problem. Because Russia and China had nothing comparable in the first decade of the 21st century, the F-22 almost seemed like overkill. At a massive per-unit cost of $150 million, did America really need something that far beyond any of its competitors? For that matter, America's main adversaries at the time had no airpower at all. With the U.S. embroiled in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq against low-tech insurgent forces, a high-cost air-dominance fighter just didn't fit the country's needs at the time. Since even the Pentagon doesn't have infinite money (though it sure seems like it sometimes), it had to make some tough choices over where to put resources. For the budget-draining War on Terror, the F-22 just didn't have an argument to make. Not helping matters was the fact that Congress restricted use of the F-22 to just the U.S. Air Force. Translation: There would be no sales to foreign allies, which cut off a major revenue stream that could have offset its costs. Of course, since the end of production in 2009, a lot has changed. Russia and particularly China have upped their military capabilities, including in the air. With the benefit of hindsight, should the U.S. have kept the F-22 rolling off the assembly line? Not necessarily. For one thing, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an even newer fighter jet (though it has problems of its own). While slower and less stealthy than the F-22, it has vastly more advanced sensor capabilities. Not only can it gather a huge amount of information about the battlespace, its true party trick is its ability to disseminate that information to other F-35s and to headquarters. Meanwhile, the Air Force has also moved forward by looking backward. The decades-old F-15 airframe has gotten a major update in the form of the F-15EX. For one thing, it's much cheaper than the F-22 (its unit cost is only $94 million), which is appealing as the Pentagon looks to cut overspending. More importantly, the F-15EX can bring a whopping 12 air-to-air missiles to the fray, compared to the F-22's measly eight. The F-15EX was also designed to carry the newest and most advanced ordnance in the Air Force's arsenal, hypersonic missiles. Given all that, you could argue that the F-22 has lost its crown as the best air dominance fighter ... to a much older, and cheaper, plane. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.

People Are Sharing Things They Used To Buy Regularly But Now Never Do
People Are Sharing Things They Used To Buy Regularly But Now Never Do

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

People Are Sharing Things They Used To Buy Regularly But Now Never Do

@marisasav_ asked people on TikTok what's one thing they used to buy regularly that they'll never buy again. @marisasav_/ For her, it was paper towels. "We used to buy paper towels pretty much every week. We used to spend, I don't even know how much on them, and we will never buy paper towels again. We use napkins, we use t-shirt rags, we've created a system to phase paper towels completely out of our lifestyle," she explained. "A six-pack of paper towels at Target costs an average of $20-22. So, that would mean about $3 per roll on paper towels. If the average American household goes through one roll of paper towels of week, you are looking at over $150 on something you literally use once and throw away over and over and over again," she continued. "This was actually one of the first sustainable switches we made in our home." People in the comments are sharing products they've also abandoned, and here's what they had to say: sheets plates drinks coffee paper Related: 17 "Old" Home Design Trends People Desperately Want To See Make A Comeback popcorn 8.K-Cups dressing scent boosters Related: These 14 DIY Fails Are Just So, Sooooo Bad (And I'm Laughing So, Sooooo Hard) candles and menstrual products soap/dish soap bags water creamer water wash softener air fresheners lastly, "After today it's going to be most things*." *That was posted on "LIBERATION DAY." Also in Nifty: "She Just Wanted To Hang A Picture...": 30 Photos Of People Trying To "Help Out Around The House" That Backfired Spectacularly Also in Nifty: "I Saved An Embarrassing Amount Of Money": Frugal People Are Sharing The Habits They Stick To Year-Round Also in Nifty: People Are Sharing "Expensive" Adult Purchases That They'd Actually Recommend, Despite The Price Tag

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store