U.S. consumers bearing more than half the cost of tariffs so far, Goldman Sachs says
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Oct. 13, 2025, 10:32 AM EDT / Updated Oct. 13, 2025, 11:26 AM EDTBy Rob Wile
Six months into President Donald Trump's unprecedented gambit to impose sizable tariffs on imports, U.S. consumers are already shouldering as much as 55% of their costs, according to a new report from Goldman Sachs analysts.
And with new tariffs most likely on the way, the cost burden could rise even higher, they said.
The findings, released Sunday, suggest U.S. consumers will continue to struggle with high prices — which Trump had promised to address in the run-up to his re-election. While inflation rates have come down from the post-Covid peak, they have remained stuck above levels economists consider healthy, causing consumers and businesses alike to continue to report feeling burdened by price increases.
Over the past six months, Trump has imposed tariffs on copper, steel, aluminum and some automobiles and auto parts. He has also levied country-specific tariff rates of as much as 28% on China and 16% on much of the rest of the world, according to the Yale Budget Lab.
Partly as a result, consumer prices tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics have increased every month since April, when Trump made his "Liberation Day" speech announcing the new duties. As of August, the BLS' benchmark Consumer Price Index stood at 2.93%. September data has been delayed because of the government shutdown, now in its 13th day, and it is scheduled to be released later this month.
A separate inflation measure preferred by the Federal Reserve has likewise continued to climb, rising to 2.7% for August — above the central bank's 2% target.
In August, Trump assailed an initial Goldman Sachs estimate that said consumers could bear as much as 67% of the cost of tariffs.
In a statement, White House spokesman Kush Desai said: "The President and Administration's position has always been clear: While Americans may face a transition period from tariffs upending a broken status quo that has put America Last, the cost of tariffs will ultimately be borne by foreign exporters. Companies are already shifting and diversifying their supply chains in response to tariffs, including by onshoring production to the United States. Americans can rest assured that the Administration will continue to deliver economic relief from Joe Biden's inflation crisis while laying the groundwork for a long-term restoration of American Greatness."
The administration has also pointed to the billions in revenue the duties have brought in to continue to justify their existence. In September, tariff revenues totaled more than $31 billion, bringing the year-to-date haul to about $215 billion. Trump has floated various proposals for how to use the funds, including sending out rebate checks to U.S. households and subsidizing U.S. farmers and manufacturers. Last week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt indicated the administration would use some tariff revenues to pay for Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children food subsidies that have been affected by the shutdown.
The Goldman analysts arrived at their estimate of the tariffs' burden on consumers by comparing how much consumer prices for tariffed products have deviated from previous trends. The burden is actually less than the estimated pass-through that occurred during the trade war Trump set off during his first term in 2018. In that period, evidence suggests, foreign exporters did not bear any significant share of the tariff costs, meaning consumers were shouldering even more of a burden.
This time, exporters are bearing some cost, along with U.S. businesses, who may actually be sparing consumers even worse price increases for the moment. American companies may be waiting to see how the Supreme Court rules on tariffs, the Goldman analysts said. Businesses also might have accumulated inventory in advance of the tariffs' setting in, allowing them to hold off on raising their retail prices more significantly. The nation's highest court is set to hear opening arguments in the tariff case Nov. 5.
Still, the analysts estimate tariffs have added 0.44% to the Fed's preferred inflation measure. That could rise to as much as 0.6% if Trump makes good on recent threats to impose tariffs on products such as furniture and kitchen cabinets. Those were set to take effect Tuesday. In this scenario, the tariffs' cost burden borne by consumers could rise to 70%.
The analysts' latest estimate does not take into account Trump's threat Friday to double the tariffs on China. On Monday, Trump administration officials sought to reassure markets that they did not seek to reignite tensions with America's largest overseas trading partner
If those tariffs were to take effect, the impact would be significant, the analysts said.
"We are not assuming any changes to tariff rates on imports from China, but events in recent days suggest large risks," they wrote.
Tags
Who is online
119 visitors
So what are the actual costs of the tariffs? Goldman Sachs isn't telling us very much more than consumers might be paying for as much as 67% of an unknown amount. If we go by revenue generated ($215 billion) then consumers have paid $144 billion which doesn't seem odious compared to the size of the economy. The rather unspecific mention of CPI-U fails to note that the increase has been rather small at 0.1 to 0.2 percent per month.
Seems as though the tariffs have spread the tax burden across the economy (perhaps not uniformly but more equitably). The inflationary pressures have not been odious. And the tariffs certainly haven't increased the risk of recession. The government shutdown (and layoffs) may prove to be far more harmful than tariffs.
So you're okay with an increase in taxes for no other reason than a mentally deficient president who still thinks that foreign countries pay the tariffs has decided to impose them on a personal whim?
I can't tell if people are upset because a Republican raised taxes or because Democrats didn't think of doing this.
Do I have a problem with a President unilaterally increasing taxes? Yeah, it's not the ideal way to run government. But it's really no different than a President unilaterally shutting down coal-fired power plants on a whim or a President unilaterally granting amnesty to illegal immigrants or a President unilaterally forgiving college debt.
The tariffs spread the burden of taxation across the economy. And the taxes are easy to avoid, just don't buy imports.
The spread is limited. Wealthy corporations just charge the consumers more so the corporations don't have to be burdened themselves with additional taxes.
I'm considering buying a new television. Can you advise a quality AMERICAN one?
LG & Visio are American made Tvs, but don't buy a Visio. Since Walmart bought them out the quality has gone down and they serve Walmart ads. LG tvs are good. While Sony isn't a US brand they manufacture the Bravia TVs in the US for the US market and are at the top of the quality spectrum... with top pricing too.
EDIT: I don't know where all the parts are made for these US Tvs. They may or may not be importing parts like LCD panels from Asian manufacturers.
What do you think wealthy corporations did when the 15% Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (CAMT) was included in the Inflation Reduction Act?
Wealthy corporations don't burden themselves with any taxes since those taxes are passed on to consumers. Corporations don't have a magic money tree; the money has to come from consumers to pay for everything. Democrats have been taxing the poor with corporate taxes and sales taxes for decades.
Parts are purchased and shipped to America. Best you can say is they are some that are at least partially "assembled" in the US.
According to Google AI:
LG TVs sold in the United States are not made in America; they are assembled in Mexico, though key components like display panels are manufactured in South Korea and China.
Vizio TVs are not American-made; they are designed and headquartered in the United States but are manufactured in Mexico and China.
Same thing, roll costs down to consumers.
Yup. Remember when Trump 1.0 had a press conference in WI saying that he negotiated the Foxconn deal that was supposed to manufacture screens and employ 13,000 jobs? Yeah... that never really happened. Now Microsoft is in the process of redeveloping the site as a data center.
So no American made TV for me then...
Christine Lagarde was on CNBC this morning and said their analysis showed that the US/European tariffs were being split evenly between exporters, retailers and consumers. Exporters and retailers were experiencing shrinking margins while consumers were paying higher prices.
Obviously that doesn't speak to China, India or other economies.
Pretty long way from decreasing prices on 'EVERYTHING" on day one, no ?
The American consumer is getting the shaft, as usual, when the R's are in charge. Trump was handed the best economy after Covidin the world, and he fckd that up in a mere few months, plus, has many of our trading partners not trusting US, because of the scammin shyster in chief, cause good fckn grief Charlie Brown, How Many Times is Lucy(Trump) gonna pull that football out from Charlie Brown(US Citizens) B 4 they wake the FCK UP in the White Power House of panes, is insanes, and so are a good number of his supporters for not seeing what has been in front of them A hole time
Guess we better impeach Trump for failing to keep a campaign promise. Of course, that could set a precedent for Presidents.
How about we set the frckn precedent on this pussy grabbin president...?Asz the pos grabbed him a whle lotta GOP PUssy's
What does "pussy grabbin" [sic] have to do with tariffs or promises to lower prices?
What does a convicted(civilly) and accused over twenty some times by other women, 34 times convicted for LYING about his pay to play with pornstars and playmates at $135,000.00 a pop and accused best bud of pedophile Jeffry Epstein and Maxwell who claims women just allow him to grab em buy the pussy have to do with the GOP G roup O le P hucks, or G rabbed O ur P ussies= GOP have allowed nthis lawless POS POTUS to run rampant over any and all, including the damn LAW. That is WHY he needs impeached, but the Grabbed Pussy's are just that PUSSY's. H e Cdoesn't have the authority to play GAMES with tarriffs that will impact US Al for decades after requiring decades to produce fair trading agreements.
He is a complete moral and ethical failure, but go right ahead, and defend what he does, no matter how UNCONSTITUTIONAL !
happens whenever he shakes one of his house and senate supporter's hands ...
The democrats would love to see the US economy go into the tank. Anything to regain power.
versus anything to keep a 34x convicted felon, corrupt POS, and suspected pedophile in office ...
Do you actually think about what you say? Nobody wants the economy to go into the tank. Not you, not me, not the manufacturers, not the purchasers. But apparently to partisans it is all about party, whether it really is or not.
I firmly believe the democrats do.
You might claim to firmly believe it, but it's complete and utter nonsense.
Trump absolutely wants to weaken if not destroy the economy. That's how autocrats take power, when civil society is in chaos. He's counting on it and his supporters are fully behind him.
That is blind partisan thinking. The view that others would actually seek such harm ... our economy tanking ... because of partisanship.
Putting affiliation with any political party over the good of the nation, the rule of law, the CotUS, civility, morality, etc. is irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic.
Trump supporters should reevaluate their priorities.
The other countries dont pay the tariffs Americans do. Once the importer business feels it is hurting their bottom line too much they will pass the costs on to the consumer.
Not only that, but for every thing that becomes more expensive due to tariffs, ten more things use that excuse to become more expensive even when they aren’t subject to the tariffs. You see it every day in the grocery store. It’s supply chain 2.0.