11/02/2026

WEDNESDAY | FEB 11, 2026

11

Global cost of Trump’s tariff war I N the coming weeks, the US Supreme Court is expected to deliver its ruling on the legality of the Trump administration’s tariff specific economic data points that the administration uses to justify its position.

As we move into 2026, various indicators suggest that the sweeping tariff policies have encountered significant friction. While the administration points to increased federal revenue and a robust stock market, critics and non partisan data highlight several areas where the trade war has backfired or failed to meet its primary objectives. 0 > Widening trade deficit A primary goal of the tariffs was to reduce the US trade deficit. However, 2025 data shows the opposite occurred. In the first three quarters of 2025, the trade deficit rose to nearly US$840 billion (RM3.30 trillion), a 4% increase over the same period in 2024. Much of this was driven by American companies “front-loading” or rushing to import goods before new tariff deadlines took effect. Early 2026 data shows a modest narrowing of the annual goods deficit with Europe, China and Mexico, though the overall take centre stage in the midterm elections. Tariffs are effectively taxes on importers, and evidence suggests that these costs have largely been passed on to consumers. Estimates for 2026 suggest the average US household will face an additional tax burden of roughly US$1,300 due to higher prices. With core consumer goods prices spiking, prices for specific categories have surged. Prices for leather goods – including shoes and handbags – rose by as much as 36%, apparel prices increased by up to 34%, and the average price of a new motor vehicle climbed by about US$5,700. Another concern for the administration is that overall inflation has remained high. Economists estimate that tariffs contributed roughly 0.75 percentage points to the inflation rate that would not have occurred otherwise. 0 Impact on growth and employment Despite the administration’s goal of sparking a manufacturing “miracle”, R T A K E G H E E deficit remains large as trade shifts to other regions, like Asean. Should this trend continue, Democrats will be focusing on this as a primary indicator of the tariff war failure. 0 Consumer price inflation This indicator is likely to

war against the world. The case, centring on whether the president has the authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to bypass Congress and impose sweeping “reciprocal” or “universal” tariffs, will unlikely have any real consequence for US conduct in geopolitics and international relations. Observers note that the justices appeared largely sceptical of the administration’s broad use of IEEPA to levy duties as this is a power typically reserved for Congress. Nonetheless, it is doubtful that the current court – widely viewed as lacking judicial independence – will defy or embarrass Trump by issuing a ruling that undercuts or undermines US policy on international trade and commerce. The Court is currently in winter recess. The next scheduled session is Feb 20, which is a potential These include authorities related to national security, unfair trade practices and balance-of payments considerations, together forming a virtually unbeatable legal arsenal for the administration in any trade dispute. As such, expect little change in US tariff policy, regardless of the nature or source of domestic opposition. The pivotal players are the initiators and architects of this approach – Trump, who has famously described tariffs as “the most beautiful word” that will “make us rich as hell”, and his team, US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Robert Lighthizer. They view tariffs not as a tax but as a primary negotiating tool for geopolitical leverage and domestic manufacturing revival. Costs for the US Tracking the success or cost of the trade war requires monitoring A N O T B Y L I M date for the release of the opinion. Even if the Supreme Court invalidates the IEEPA based tariffs, the Trump administration has signalled it could pursue other legal avenues to maintain elements of its trade policy.

The ripple effects of the Maga tariff policies have significantly strained the economies of developing nations, especially smaller and less ‘leveraged’ ones. – AMIRUL SYAFIQ/THESUN

orders dry up as US importers shift to domestic sources or “friendly” nations with exemptions. 0 Small and medium enterprises (SME) Unlike large multinationals, SME in developing nations lack the capital to pivot to new markets. In sub-Saharan Africa, over 60% of SME have reported supply chain delays and reduced access to the US market, leading to significant job losses. Asean countries have yet to total up the cost of the tariff war. When they do, it is likely that the region’s small producers will be found to have taken the biggest hit. SME typically operate on thinner margins and have less capital so that the prevailing 19% tariff often exceeds their total profit margin. Many SME have had to choose between raising prices (risking lost US contracts) or absorbing the cost and operating at a loss. 0 Consumers While the tariffs are technically US taxes, their impact on global supply chains has generated imported inflation for consumers in developing nations. Many developing countries rely on the US–sourced high-tech components, specialised machinery or agricultural products. Retaliatory measures and global price hikes have made these essential goods more expensive for non-American consumers. 0 Structural damage to the Global South

the broader macroeconomic data suggests a cooling effect. Strong-arm tactics to compel other countries, including key allies, to invest in the US to create manufacturing jobs may work to some extent but this will take years, not months to materialise. Tariff-induced job gains for now remains largely on paper. These “jobs” are likely to disappear once Trump is no longer around or in power. Costs for developing countries The ripple effects of the Maga tariff policies have significantly strained the economies of developing nations, especially smaller and less “leveraged” ones. The adverse effects on these countries can be broken down into various key categories: 0 Producers For many developing nations, the US is the primary destination for their exports. The sudden imposition of high “reciprocal” tariffs has disrupted these vital trade links. Manufacturers in over 70 countries reportedly halted shipments to the US in early 2025 due to prohibitive costs. Specific categories like wool sweaters (169% tariff) and toys (145% tariff) have devastated specialised manufacturing hubs in Southeast Asia and South America. 0 Sector-specific hits Countries reliant on a narrow range of exports – such as textile producers in Bangladesh and Vietnam or steel exporters in South Africa – have seen

Economists at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and the World Bank have warned that fragmentation of the global trading system disproportionately harms the most vulnerable. Estimates suggest that geopolitical trade fragmentation could cost African nations up to 4% of their total GDP over the next decade. Has the US hurt itself most of all? Perhaps the most ironic feature of Trump’s tariff war, apart from its double-edged impact on American consumers, is how a policy designed to isolate China and bolster “America First” has, in several key ways, backfired by pushing other nations closer to Beijing – geopolitically and economically. While the tariffs were initially intended to punish China, the global fallout has created more than a vacuum. When nations, including many staunch US allies, felt the squeeze of American protectionism, they didn’t hunker down; they looked for new economic oxygen, and this is mainly coming from China. Trump may just be the most significant catalyst to a new world economic order in a way he will regret. Lim Teck Ghee’s Another Take is aimed at demystifying social orthodoxy. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

E

H

T

K

E

C

LETTERS letters@thesundaily.com

Dashcam a vital tool for safer roads and accountable drivers ROAD safety experts have called for the wider use of dashcams in e-hailing vehicles, private cars and commercial vehicles to enable more efficient and precise investigations of road accidents and the enforcement of traffic laws. the event of an accident. I have witnessed many motorists and motorcyclists arguing and even fighting over minor collisions. officials make accurate decisions, such as reviewing offside goals or dangerous tackles. Beyond resolving disputes, overtaking dangerously on highways, speeding, overtaking in emergency lanes, running red lights and other violations.

personal tax exemptions for the installation of dashcams in private vehicles. Finally, using dashcam footage in legal proceedings poses no major obstacle, provided the footage is relevant, authentic and credible. Its widespread adoption would not only make roads safer but also foster a culture of accountability among all road users. Samuel Yesuiah Seremban

Motorcyclists, who account for the highest number of traffic fatalities, should also use dashcams due to their vulnerability in accidents. Together with consistent enforcement and effective penalties, dashcams are pivotal for upholding traffic laws. The government could further encourage their use by offering

dashcam footage can serve as strong supporting evidence when filing formal complaints with the authorities. Dashcams are practical safety tools that encourage better behaviour and act as a deterrent against reckless or unruly conduct on the roads. If all vehicles were fitted with dashcams, many traffic offences could be reduced, including heavy vehicles

Often, no one wants to accept responsibility for their mistakes, and both parties will blame each other. This is where dashcam footage can help settle disputes amicably. Dashcams promote driver accountability and enhance credibility in accident investigations. In football, video assistant referee (VAR) footage has similarly helped

Currently, dashcams are used mainly by drivers who install them on their own initiative for liability protection. New cars, however, should come equipped with dashcams as they provide a vital source of evidence in