"Trying to absorb costs instead risks putting pressure on jobs.

Although a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper finds that Trump's trade war in 2018 to 2019 had little impact on jobs in protected sectors, retaliatory tariffs did have a clear negative effect.

This time, however, his tariff agenda and the potential for a backlash on US exporters is significantly stronger. Then again, his plan would certainly free up time for American diplomats, as allies stop returning their calls.

As for paying for income and corporate tax cuts, another PIIE estimate suggests that even a 50 per cent tariff on all imports would not be enough to cover their estimated $5.8tn cost.

Indeed, high tariffs encourage importers to shift to alternate suppliers, and exporters to divert to other markets.

But Trump likes the idea of an "all tariff policy" that eliminates the need for income taxes.

That is a concept more befitting of the mercantilist global economy of several centuries past, when trade was less established and states were smaller.

The upshot?

Trump's plan would raise the deficit and inflation. So much for cheaper groceries."

.

more at the link, including the "Tinbergen Rule"