Trump's tariffs still risk inflation and recession amid China trade war, experts say

ABC News - Apr 10th, 2025

President Donald Trump's decision to pause reciprocal tariffs for most countries led to a historic stock market rally, but his simultaneous increase of duties on Chinese goods to 145% heightened trade tensions. This escalation in the trade war between the U.S. and China, the world's two largest economies, caused stock markets to tumble the following day. The high tariffs on China are expected to raise prices on various consumer goods, including smartphones and video game systems. Experts warn these price hikes, coupled with policy uncertainty, could lead to a potential economic downturn.

Despite the temporary relief from some tariffs, the average effective tariff rate in the U.S. remains at its highest since 1909, posing risks of recession and consumer spending slowdown. The White House maintains tariffs on foreign autos, aluminum, and steel, and additional costs are anticipated to impact U.S. households significantly. Experts remain cautious, noting that while the economy shows strong indicators like low unemployment and controlled inflation, the likelihood of a recession persists due to ongoing trade tensions and elevated tariffs.

Donald Trump China Tariffs Stock Market U.S. Economy Economic Impact Trade War Recession Consumer Prices

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of President Trump's tariff policies and their potential economic impacts. It is well-researched, drawing on credible sources and expert opinions, which bolsters its accuracy and reliability. The story is timely and relevant, addressing a significant issue with broad public interest and potential impact on the economy. However, it could benefit from a more balanced presentation by including perspectives that support the tariffs. Additionally, greater transparency regarding the methodologies behind the economic projections would enhance the article's credibility. Overall, the article effectively informs readers about the complex interplay between trade policies and economic outcomes, while maintaining clarity and engagement.

Accuracy

The story provides a detailed account of President Trump's tariff policies and their potential effects on the economy. Many claims in the article are supported by expert opinions and data from credible sources, such as the Yale Budget Lab and economists like Mark Zandi. However, the accuracy of specific tariff percentages and their impacts requires verification. For example, the claim that tariffs on Chinese goods increased to 145% needs confirmation. Additionally, the projected price increases and the potential economic impact on households are based on estimates that should be cross-verified with the sources cited.

Balance

The article presents multiple perspectives, primarily focusing on the negative impacts of the tariffs. It includes opinions from economists and financial institutions, which provide a critical view of the tariff policies. However, the article could improve balance by including perspectives or statements from government officials or supporters of the tariffs to provide a more comprehensive view of the policy's intentions and potential benefits. The absence of these viewpoints may suggest a slight bias against the tariffs.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and uses clear language to convey complex economic concepts. It logically presents the sequence of events and their potential impacts, making it accessible to readers without a deep understanding of economics. The use of specific examples, such as the impact on smartphone prices, helps to illustrate the broader economic implications of the tariffs.

Source quality

The article cites credible sources such as the Yale Budget Lab, Morningstar, and experts from New York University and Moody's Analytics. These sources are reputable and provide a strong basis for the claims made in the article. However, the article relies heavily on expert opinions without providing direct access to the original data or reports, which could enhance the reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The article provides a clear explanation of the basis for its claims, citing expert opinions and data reports. However, it lacks transparency in terms of methodology, as it does not detail how the projections and estimates were calculated. Providing more information on the methodologies used by the experts and institutions cited would improve transparency and help readers understand the basis for the conclusions drawn.