2026-01-07 06:28:06

Latest data shows that the US January CPI is only 2.7%, well below Wall Street's expected 3.1%. This result has led many to reevaluate the actual impact of Trump's tariff policies since April last year.

From an inflation perspective, the situation is somewhat unexpected. Many initially feared that large-scale tariffs would trigger a surge in prices, but the reality has been different. Research from the San Francisco Fed indicates that tariffs have had a greater impact on economic growth and employment, while their role in driving inflation has been less significant.

Looking at tariff revenue, the situation becomes even more interesting. From $34.2 billion in October to $30.2 billion in December, there was a clear month-over-month decline. Economists estimate that the average effective US tariff rate is about 12%, contributing only a 0.9 percentage point increase to the consumer price index.

Treasury Secretary Bostick even admitted that tariff revenues are far below expectations, directly affecting future fiscal planning.

What’s more concerning is the judicial aspect. The US Supreme Court is scheduled to issue a ruling this Friday, which will be the first legal test of Trump's global tariff policies. The court has not disclosed its decision in advance, but given that the case is being expedited, a ruling is highly likely on that day. If the decision does not support Trump, the consequences could be significant—undermining the coherence of his economic policies and possibly representing a political setback.

The focus of this lawsuit is the tariff policy implemented on April 2. At that time, tariffs of 10% to 50% were imposed on most imported goods, and additional measures were taken against Canada and Mexico to prevent fentanyl smuggling.

The current situation is becoming quite interesting. Inflation has not surged significantly, and tariff revenues are shrinking. The market is reflecting on the actual effectiveness of these policies. Will the Supreme Court’s ruling change the direction? Is the continued decline in tariff revenue a real "cooling off" or just data fluctuation? What do you think about this clash between economics and law?

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

TopBuyerForever

· 01-10 06:21

Tariff revenue is plummeting, and that's the most heartbreaking part... What's the use of good-looking data on paper? --- Wait, the reason inflation isn't picking up is probably because consumer purchasing power itself has been suppressed. Looking at it this way, the problem is even bigger. --- I'm really waiting to see the Supreme Court's ruling this Friday. Whether they can overturn it depends on how the judges interpret that anti-Fentanyl clause. --- In plain terms, the tariff policy appears to be playing the economic card on the surface, but in reality, revenue shrinks and employment is also collapsing. This logic simply doesn't hold up. --- I just want to know how many people have been "cut" and are still insisting that these policies are so clever. --- So, who is really footing the bill? Consumers and the middle class—they are the ones who end up the unluckiest. --- The key issue is whether the market will crash once the court's ruling is overturned. That would be the real black swan. --- Data fluctuations? Come on, a drop from 342 to 302 is such a significant decline that it's hardly called fluctuation.

View OriginalReply0

MetadataExplorer

· 01-10 02:33

Damn, are tariff revenues still shrinking? This is really awkward. --- Instead of inflation rising, what does it indicate? Consumers have already been "self-protecting," right? --- Waiting for the Supreme Court's ruling on Friday, I feel that's the real turning point. --- Let me see, from 34.2 billion to 30.2 billion... Can we really trust this data, or is it just another smoke screen? --- It's a bit hard to hold on; the tariff policies that were so aggressive initially are now hitting employment even harder? --- The Treasury Secretary admits that revenue is "far below expectations," how embarrassing is that, haha. --- So, a 0.9 percentage point inflation boost is all? Then what's the point of large-scale tariffs? --- Once the ruling is out this Friday, this game is really going to change. --- Tariffs didn't push up prices but instead cut jobs—doesn't that logic seem reversed? --- Honestly, watching the clash between law and economic reality is kind of satisfying.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseVagabond

· 01-07 06:58

This data is really interesting. Despite inflation not picking up, tariff revenue has actually shrunk. It feels a bit like shooting oneself in the foot. Is this the tariff policy? Using fentanyl as an excuse to tighten measures on Canada and Mexico, resulting in revenue dropping from 34.2 billion to 30.2 billion. Is this what you call economic policy? The Supreme Court will have the final say on Friday. If things go wrong, political coherence could break apart directly. This wave could really impact the overall situation. The document hasn't even been released yet, but the market is already reflecting on it. To be clear, this means the effectiveness of this approach has been compromised. If this trend continues, will the tariff benefits be ruined?

View OriginalReply0

SerumDegen

· 01-07 06:57

ngl the tariff revenue cascade is giving major liquidation vibes... 342 to 302 billion is like watching your portfolio bleed in real time, and we're supposed to believe this isn't the market signaling capitulation? the court decision friday could be the final wick that triggers the sell-off tbh. pure copium if anyone thinks 0.9 basis points of inflation pressure is some kind of flex

Reply0

AirdropHunter

· 01-07 06:52

Wait, CPI is only 2.7%? Doesn't this mean tariffs are actually useless, just harvesting consumers' wallets, and yet inflation hasn't been suppressed? Tariff revenue is still falling, from 342 to 302... How embarrassing is that? The economists' models have been proven wrong again? The Supreme Court is ruling on Friday. I bet five dollars that in the end, they will either overturn or modify the ruling; they definitely won't support it directly.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityWitch

· 01-07 06:42

Laughing to death, the expected 3.1 resulted in 2.7, Wall Street has been slapped in the face again Tariff revenue dropped from 34.2 billion to 30.2 billion, this shrinkage is quite severe, even the finance minister has to admit to underperformance The Supreme Court will reveal its true stance this Friday, it’s really at a critical moment People have really underestimated the market’s self-regulation ability and also underestimated the operational space of arbitrageurs Regarding tariff policies, honestly, it’s a gambler’s mentality—either win or lose at the table However, a 0.9 percentage point increase in prices... the effect isn’t as strong as expected Let’s wait and see how the court rules, this is the real decisive blow

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-c802f0e8

· 01-07 06:28

Tariff revenue dropped from 34.2 billion to 30.2 billion, and the shrinkage is indeed a bit awkward. Wait, CPI is only 2.7%? Doesn't this mean tariffs didn't actually push up prices as much as expected? The Supreme Court will meet this Friday, and it feels like it's going to blow up.

View OriginalReply0