Markets aren’t just repricing risk—they’re repricing reality. The sudden sweep of Trump’s tariff regime has thrown global trade, corporate planning, and monetary policy into chaos. Unlike his first-term approach, this round targets nearly all U.S. trading partners with blanket duties, pushing effective rates past 50% for top exporters. The problem isn’t just the cost—it’s the chaos. With no clear objectives, phased rollout, or exit strategy, the administration’s silence suggests an ideological shift, not a calculated negotiation.
‍

This uncertainty is toxic. As with Brexit, shifting trade rules freeze investment and sap business confidence. U.S. companies are already pivoting from growth to crisis management—rerouting supply chains, modeling tariff exposure, and scrambling for clarity. The absence of a coherent framework—whether focused on revenue, re-shoring, or retaliation—only deepens the confusion. In some cases, tariffs have even been misapplied to irrelevant trade zones, raising concerns about basic policy execution.
‍

The structural risks are enormous. Tariffs designed to force re-shoring may backfire by creating the very instability that deters it. If firms don’t believe policy will hold long enough to justify major investments, they won’t move. And if tariffs are folded into federal budgeting as permanent revenue streams—essentially functioning as a consumption tax—they could embed inflation and limit flexibility in future negotiations.
‍

Meanwhile, the global backdrop is just as fragile. The EU faces a lose-lose choice: retaliate and worsen inflation, or hold back and appear weak. Canada has already acted, and others are lining up. Across the board, allies feel misled and shut out. This isn’t a traditional tariff skirmish—it’s a broad unraveling of the postwar trade system, driven by mistrust, poor coordination, and an overt embrace of economic nationalism.

‍

‍