The impacts of Donald Trump’s long-promised pledge to use tariffs as a political cudgel started to come into focus Monday, even as the president cut last-minute deals with some of the country’s closest allies allowing him to back down from his initial threats.
On Saturday, Trump announced that he would slap broad 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico, both U.S. allies, and 10% tariffs on China, a political foe. The move was expected, but it still sparked fears about the rising costs of goods across the U.S. economy.
That concern is particularly potent because Trump campaigned heavily on lowering costs and easing inflation. If they are fully implemented, Trump’s tariff proposals would affect American households’ purchasing power by $1,000 to $1,200 annually, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University.
The first domino to fall came early Monday, when Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced a deal had been reached to delay tariffs on her country by one month, in return for Mexico’s agreeing to beef up its presence at the border with the United States with 10,000 members of its national guard.
It was an effort to placate the Trump administration, which at times has been inconsistent with its messaging about the rationale for tariffs but has consistently said curbing the flow of drug trafficking into the United States is a main focus.
Trump officials quickly took a victory lap after the announcement, even as several steps to avoid a potential heated trade war remain.
“So for literally three days, I heard the far left in this country say that these tariffs would make Americans’ life worse,” Vice President JD Vance said at an event in Ohio in response to a question from NBC News. “And what actually happened is the Mexican government was so afraid of the tariffs that they actually are taking their border enforcement and their anti-cartel activity more seriously.
“That is not a pathway to making Americans worse off,” he added. “That’s a pathway to making Americans better off.”
Trump posted on Truth Social that he had a “very friendly conversation” with Sheinbaum, a quick shift in tone. Over the weekend, she rejected what she called “slander” from Trump for suggesting her government had an alliance with drug traffickers.
The past few days have shown one thing: Trump’s tariff threats were not necessarily hollow campaign rhetoric.
“One thing that is different is that leaders need to realize that Trump is serious,” Heritage Foundation research fellow EJ Antoni said. “If they just think it’s all bluster or campaign promises, nothing will really change, right? They have to know he is serious.”
Antoni predicted continued “de-escalation” as Trump’s threats start to be interpreted as real, because of the size of the U.S. economy and the disproportionate trade relationships with Canada and Mexico. The two allies are America’s largest trading partners, but international trade accounts for a much larger percentage of their overall economies.
“He economically holds all the cards” he said. “He has now made clear this is serious and happening. You can either get on the train, get off the tracks or get run over.”
At times, inconsistent rhetoric has come from the Trump administration about the motivation for tariffs. Trump economic adviser Peter Navarro told reporters in Washington on Monday that the fight is not a trade war but “a drug war,” echoing comments of other advisers.
Trump himself, though, has repeatedly said he is concerned that the targets of the tariffs bully the United States and that the tariffs can be a weapon to end that perceived mistreatment.
For example, hours after the Mexico deal was announced, Trump continued to antagonize Canada, claiming the only thing it could do to avoid tariffs is become the 51st state — which Canada has repeatedly said it would not do.
“What I’d like to see … Canada become our 51st state,” Trump said in an Oval Office meeting with reporters when he was asked what Canada could do to end the pending trade war. “We give them protection, military protection. We don’t need them to build our cars — I’d rather see Detroit or South Carolina … or any one of our states build the cars.”
Trump spoke shortly before he was scheduled to have his second call of the day with outgoing Canadian Prime Minster Justin Trudeau. Unlike from Mexico, little fentanyl comes across the U.S.-Canadian border. Trudeau told reporters Saturday night that it is less than 1% of all the supply in the United States.
A 30-day delay on tariffs on Canada was announced Monday afternoon after that second call. Trudeau said he had a “good call with President Trump,” who has used him as a political bogeyman for months. As part of the deal, Trudeau said the country would spend $1.3 billion on a border security plan and appoint a “fentanyl czar.”
The Canadian government first proposed the border security funding part of the plan last year.
A spokeswoman for the Canadian government did not reply to a request seeking comment about whether the already proposed plan was used as part of the deal with Trump.
The White House did not reply to a request for comment.
Most congressional Republicans have not commented publicly on whether they support Trump’s push for tariffs on historic political and economic allies, with a few exceptions. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, was the first to chime in Monday morning when he took to X to “plead” with Trump to consider tariffs’ impacts on his agriculture-heavy state.
“Biden inflation increase the input cost to farming by 20% incl particularly high prices on fertilizer,” Grassley wrote. “So I plead w President Trump to exempt potash from the tariff because family farmers get most of our potash from Canada.”
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told Newsmax that he shares “the market’s concern” about long-term tariffs.
“It’s going to hurt Americans, American companies, American exporters. It will hurt American consumers long term,” he said.
While Trump brokered 30-day reprieves with Canada and Mexico, it is unclear how the tariff fight will end with them, and the threats against China — by far the largest economy of the three — were not resolved Monday.
China has said it will challenge the tariffs at the World Trade Organization and pursue “countermeasures” in response.
There is little indication that Republican senators will start to speak out in large numbers against Trump’s threats of trade wars, even if there is a prolonged fight on the issue.
“There might be a few,” said a political adviser to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. “But generally, I think there is a sense that Trump holds all the cards here. To the extent there is concern about home state constituencies, I think a lot of that will be expressed quietly and behind the scenes.”
Another veteran Republican familiar with Thune’s thinking said he is unlikely to react in any overtly public or rash way.
“These are U.S. senators. They have egos like everyone else,” the person said. “Sen. Thune approaches things differently. He is more of a read-the-room guy. I’d not expect him to act impulsively on anything, including this.”
The impacts of potential tariffs, for now, have been averted, but the future remains unclear, which leaves uncertainty both in the United States and around the globe. U.S. markets fell early Monday, but they quickly rebounded after the one-month Mexico pause was announced.
Though Trump ran on the promise that tariffs would be good for the nation, in recent days, he has begun to acknowledge that if they are fully implemented there would be some short-term pain. But he now argues that those bumps and bruises would be beneficial to the nation in the long run.
“Will there be some pain? Yes, maybe (and maybe not!),” Trump posted on Truth Social. “But we will make America great again, and it will all be worth the price that must be paid. We are a country that is now being run with common sense — and the results will be spectacular!!!”
