U.S. media says tariff dividend plan illogical

A Wall Street Journal opinion piece questioned the rationale for compensating Americans for higher prices imposed by tariffs, noting that if tariffs were genuinely beneficial, taxpayers should welcome them without a rebate.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President Donald Trump has pledged to distribute a 2,000-dollar dividend to middle- and lower-income Americans using revenue generated from tariffs, a plan that has drawn scrutiny from U.S. media for its logic and economic rationale.

"People that are against tariffs are FOOLS! We are now the richest, most respected country in the world, with almost no inflation and a record stock market price," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday. "A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high-income people!) will be paid to everyone."

The president further asserted that his economic agenda is spurring "record investment" in manufacturing plants and factories, and claimed that the United States will soon begin "paying down our ENORMOUS DEBT," currently estimated just above 38 trillion by the Treasury Department.

A Wall Street Journal opinion piece published on Sunday described Trump's plan as "a teaching moment for a high school logic class."

"Start with the contradiction that Mr. Trump can both pay a tariff rebate and pay down the national debt. The annual federal budget deficit is roughly $1.8 trillion even with tariff revenue, so paying a rebate would add to the national debt, not reduce it," the piece wrote.

It questioned the rationale for compensating Americans for higher prices imposed by tariffs, noting that if tariffs were genuinely beneficial, taxpayers should welcome them without a rebate.

Economists argue that the costs of tariffs are largely borne by U.S. consumers. According to a Goldman Sachs analysis in October, half a year into Trump's tariff policy, U.S. consumers are already bearing as much as 55 percent of the resulting costs.

Trump's announcement comes amid renewed legal challenges to his trade policies. The Supreme Court last week began hearing arguments on whether Trump has authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs and whether those actions violate the Constitution's separation of powers.

The U.S. Court of International Trade in New York ruled on May 28 that the Trump administration's tariffs were illegal and ordered their revocation implemented under the Act. A U.S. appeals court on Aug. 29 upheld the ruling of the lower court's decision in a 7-4 vote.

It remains unclear when the Supreme Court will release its ruling. Should the court strike down the tariffs, the Trump administration has indicated that it may need to refund tens of billions of dollars already collected.■