As the list of “derivative” products subject to US steel tariffs grows, critics on both sides of the Atlantic are beginning to question the wisdom of the policy, suggesting it may amount to a form of economic self-harm. By raising costs on a wide range of industrial and consumer goods, the tariffs could ultimately hurt American businesses and households.
While the policy aims to protect US steel and aluminum producers, it does so by penalizing the American companies that use these materials. A US construction firm, for example, may now have to pay more for a European-made crane. A US energy company might face higher costs for a wind turbine. These increased capital expenditures can slow down investment and growth.
Furthermore, the inclusion of consumer goods like kettles and furniture could lead to price inflation for American households, reducing their purchasing power. The tariffs may save some jobs in the metals sector but could cost jobs in retail, logistics, and other industries that depend on imported goods.
The chaos and uncertainty also harm US ports, importers, and businesses that are part of the transatlantic supply chain. The massive administrative burden does not stop at the European shore; it creates significant work and risk for the American counterparts.
This raises the question of whether the policy’s narrow benefits to a specific industry are outweighed by its broad costs to the rest of the US economy. Critics argue that in its zeal to ringfence one sector, Washington may be inflicting a net loss on the nation’s economic health as a whole.
