Tariffs. We didn't vote for it, but we got it any way.
Welcome back to our Tax the Rich email series where we’re exploring how taxes can prop up or tackle the ever growing gap between the ultra wealthy and everyone else.
If you missed the previous emails, you can view them here.
In Part 3, we covered the Fair Tax Act, a bill sitting in Congress that would eliminate the federal income tax entirely and replace it with a 30% national sales tax on virtually everything, including groceries, healthcare, and rent.
We covered why it's regressive by design: a flat consumption tax always hits lower income households harder because they spend a higher share of their income on goods and services. The wealthy save and invest a large chunk of theirs, which wouldn't be taxed at all.
The Fair Tax Act isn't law. But here's the thing.
We already have a national consumption tax. It's called tariffs. And unlike the Fair Tax Act, nobody voted on it.
What Is a Tariff Actually
A tariff is a tax on imported goods. When a U.S. company imports a product from another country, the government charges a fee on that product when it enters the country.
The administration has consistently framed tariffs as a tax on foreign countries, a way to make China, Canada, and Mexico "pay their fair share." This is not how tariffs work, and it doesn't take a lot of common sense to see why.
Shockingly (sarcasm), most of our President's supporters DO believe that foreign nations pay the tariffs. This video is a great anecdotal example.
Because most costs are passed on to consumers, experts say the majority of tariff costs are paid by those consumers, not by foreign countries, manufacturers, importers, or other intermediaries in the supply chain.
The Budget Lab at Yale
Say it with me: the end consumer pays the tariff. We pay the tariff.
A Bit of Aside
It's funny to me that conservatives often talk about indoctrination on college campuses because the only bias I remember in college was from my economics professor. We got a big chunk of extra credit for reading a book which had the sole goal of convincing us that free trade globally was the only way. Capitalism. Yay. Ironically, that presumably conservative professor would hat Trump's tarriffs.
A Quick Timeline of How We Got Here
In April 2025, the Trump administration announced sweeping "Liberation Day" tariffs including broad import duties on trading partners across the globe, including allies.
I can feel the freedom every time I tap my apple pay. 🙃
The legal authority used was something called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.
Then something interesting happened.
On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs, striking down both the Liberation Day reciprocal tariffs.
Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, noted that the power to impose tariffs is clearly a branch of the taxing power, one reserved for Congress under the Constitution. Not the President.
Within hours, Trump signed a new executive order imposing a 10% global tariff under a different law, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, effective February 24. He then announced plans to raise it to 15%.
The Supreme Court said "you can't do that." He found a different legal hook and did it anyway on the same day.
What It's Costing You
The nonpartisan Tax Foundation estimates Trump's tariffs amounted to an average tax increase of $1,000 per U.S. household in 2025. With the IEEPA tariffs now struck down, that figure drops to an estimated $600–$700 per household in 2026 under the current tariff regime.
The cost of leather goods and shoes are up roughly 18%, apparel up 17%, electrical equipment up 10%, with grocery staples like rice up around 10% and fresh produce up about 4%.
The Regressive Problem
The Yale Budget Lab, a nonpartisan policy research center, finds that the tariff burden on the lowest income households is about three times that of the highest income households, measured as a share of income.
In dollar terms, lower income households pay less in absolute dollars. But as a percentage of what they actually bring home, the hit is dramatically larger. A family spending nearly every dollar they earn on necessities like groceries, clothing, and transportation feels a price increase on all of those things. A wealthy household spending a fraction of their income on consumable goods barely notices.
Thus the impact of these tariffs on everyday Americans is the same as it'd be under the Fair Tax Act.
The Part That Should Bother Everyone
The Fair Tax Act, whatever you think of it, is a proposal sitting in committee. It's been debated publicly. You can read the bill. Your representatives voted on whether to introduce it. That's how the process is supposed to work.
Tariffs were imposed by executive order, using emergency powers that the Supreme Court ultimately said weren't meant for this purpose. The cost landed on American households immediately, without a congressional vote, without public debate, and were described to the public as something foreign countries were paying.
You don't have to be against tariffs in principle to find that process troubling. Policy that functions as a tax probably shouldn't be imposed by one person without any of the checks that normally apply to tax policy.
What's Next
We've now covered four tax policies in this series:
a local wealth tax on empty luxury apartments,
the fundamentals of progressive vs. regressive taxation,
a proposed national sales tax, and
tariffs as a de facto consumption tax already in effect.
Next up I want to get into the recently passed "One Big Beautiful Bill." It touches almost everything we've covered in this series. It's a big one that's prepared to fuck us all.
Stay tuned.
Best,
Braden
