@#3 ... So...per Trump's own plan, the tariffs are largely offsetting. ....

Two questions...

1) How are tariffs "largely offsetting? Even the number you present, $300 billion, is less than a tenth of the estimated deficit caused by the tax bill.

2) Tariffs are paid by Americans, not the exporting country. Are tariffs a regressive tax on consumers?

@#3 ... And Trump's tariffs are targeted, not random. They're aimed at pressuring specific industries to reshore production and rebuild US manufacturing.

That strategy is showing results. ...

Wait, what?

If that reshoring strategy is working, then the tariffs will eventually not be "largely offsetting" as you have stated.

So, which is it?

Are the tariffs a permanent thing that will be "largely offsetting" to the $3trillion deficit that Pres trump is dumping upon future generations?

Or are the tariffs a transient thing that will go away once manufacturing is reshored?

@#8 ... "tariffs a transient thing that will go away once manufacturing is reshored?"

I guess. ...

OK, lemme explain ....

Tariffs are paid by Americans upon imported goods.

If Pres Trump moves manufacturing to America, as you have said is occurring (I may disagree to the extent of that, but that's a different thread), then there are no imported goods. No imported goods = no tariffs.

So, I'll ask once again ... are the tariffs a transient thing that will go away once manufacturing is reshored?

If Pres Trump's reshoring is as successful as you assert, wouldn't that reduce or eliminate the revenue from tariffs in the future?

@#9 ... 300 is Yale's est of additional tariff cost for this year. That think tank of liberals is way higher than jp Morgan est of 82..

When you look back at est tariffs cost over last few years, the 82 is more believable. ...

So, JP Morgan's estimate of $82 billion in tariff revenue is significantly less than Yale's estimate of $300 billion.

So, take a step back ...

If $300 billion was not "largely offsetting" of the $3 trillion deficit of Pres Trump's tax bill, doesn't only $82 billion look to be even less "offsetting?"

@#11 ... 82 expense offsets the estimated 75 to 95 range in revenue ...

What is the "82 expense?"

Please explain.

thx.

@#16 ... Jp Morgan estimated additional tariff expense since Jan this year 82 billion.

Yale est 300b additional tariff exp which is ridiculous for same period. ...

Thanks for the reply.

OK, so, the tariff expense, a.k.a. revenue for the US that US citizens have to pay, is $82 billion.

So, how does that $82 billion offset the $3 trillion that the tax bill creates?

@#17 ... I looked at what total tariff expense for previous years was and Yales estimate for this year doesn't appear "reasonable" ...

OK, taking a step back from whether the Yale estimate or the JP Morgan estimate is more apropos ...

Let's go, for the nonce, with the Yale estimate, as it seems to be more beneficial to your viewpoint ...

OK, let's say that there is a $300 billion revenue increase because of tariffs.

Going back to your #3 comment ...

... Let's talk facts, not fear. ...
Since January this year, the US has brought in estimated $75 to $95 billion in additional tariff revenue. Meanwhile, estimates of the additional tariff cost vary from Yale's liberal think tank claims over $300 billion (yeah right), while JP Morgan, a bit more grounded, puts it at around $82 billion. ...

So, allow me to ask once again, in the realm of facts, not fear .... how do you reconcile the numbers you cite with the $3 trillion estimate of the debt credits by Pres Trump's tax bill?

thx.

@#22 ... The increase in tariff revenue wasn't intended to offset a $3 trillion projection over 10 years. ...