Trump Advocates Tariff-Based Tax System Over Income Tax for Federal Funding

January 30, 2025

Former President Donald Trump has recently advocated for abolishing the income tax in favor of a tariff-based revenue system for federal funding, reigniting a longstanding debate in U.S. tax policy and stirring various discussions on its feasibility and potential impact. Trump’s proposals align with a broader political move by some Republicans who propose a complete overhaul of the current tax and fiscal structure, aiming to simplify the tax code and reduce taxpayer burdens. At a January 25 event in Las Vegas, Nevada, Trump expressed his belief that reverting to the practices of America’s early years could stimulate economic growth, suggesting that “it worked before, and it’ll work again.” He further described the IRS as a “disaster,” advocating for tariffs to replace income taxes in funding federal operations.

Trump’s Proposal and Historical Context

Trump explicitly argues that reverting to a system reliant on tariffs, as opposed to income taxes, would simplify the tax code, reduce taxpayer burdens, and stimulate economic growth. During a January 25 event in Las Vegas, Nevada, he remarked that the U.S. should return to the practices of its early years, mentioning that “it worked before, and it’ll work again.” He further dubbed the IRS as a “disaster,” postulating that tariffs could adequately replace income taxes in funding federal operations.

The historical context of tariffs in the United States highlights that before the ratification of the 16th Amendment in 1913, which implemented the income tax, tariffs were the government’s primary income source. Trump’s revival of such an approach suggests a simplification of the tax system, which he claims will also protect American industries by promoting fairer competition in international markets. Tariffs, which once constituted a significant revenue stream for the federal government, were phased out in favor of income taxes as the economy and international trade landscape evolved. Advocates for a tariff-based system believe it could offer a more straightforward and transparent mechanism for generating revenue.

Economic Experts’ Skepticism

However, economic experts and critics are skeptical about the practicality of this idea in the modern economy. The U.S. government now relies heavily on income tax revenue, and economists warn that a complete switch to tariff-based revenue would be highly disruptive. The transition would require a complete overhaul of the fiscal framework and likely cause significant economic instability. Critics argue that the modern global economy is far too interconnected for such an approach to function effectively without causing substantial market turbulence.

Furthermore, extensive reliance on tariffs could heighten the risk of trade wars as trading partners might retaliate with tariffs on U.S. goods, leading to increased consumer prices domestically and potential violations of international trade agreements. These concerns highlight the potentially adverse effects on U.S. consumers who may bear the brunt of increased tariffs through higher costs on various products. Such economic disruptions could lead to inflationary pressures, further complicating the nation’s economic landscape.

Political Momentum and Legislative Proposals

Despite these warnings, the idea enjoys some political momentum, reflecting a broader interest in fundamental tax reform among certain Republican circles. In parallel, legislative proposals like the Fair Tax Act, reintroduced by Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA), seek to replace the current tax code with a national consumption tax and eliminate the IRS altogether. Supporters of the Fair Tax Act argue that such changes would streamline tax administration and boost economic growth.

The Fair Tax Act proposes a shift to a simpler tax system that proponents claim is pro-growth and equitable, allowing Americans to retain all their earnings while eliminating the need for IRS involvement. They assert that this approach would encourage savings and investments, fostering economic expansion. By taxing consumption instead of income, proponents believe it will eliminate many loopholes and reduce the administrative burden on both taxpayers and the government.

Criticisms of the Fair Tax Act

Nonetheless, critics of the Fair Tax Act argue that replacing income tax with a consumption tax could disproportionately affect lower-income households, as these families typically spend a larger portion of their income on consumable goods. The regressive nature of a flat consumption tax could thus exacerbate economic inequality and widen the wealth gap. Opponents insist that such a tax system would unfairly burden those who can least afford it, undermining social equity.

Trump’s tariff-focused proposal mingles with the broader political discourse surrounding the future of U.S. tax policy, especially with key provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA, commonly known as the “Trump tax cuts”) set to expire at the end of 2025. These developments create a backdrop of uncertainty and pressing need for lawmakers to address tax policy’s future comprehensively. The expiration of the TCJA provisions could prompt significant changes in tax liabilities for individuals and businesses, leading to potential economic ramifications.

Impact of Executive Orders on Tax Policy

Adding to the complexity, Trump’s administration has issued a range of executive orders impacting various federal processes. For instance, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a memo intending to halt all federal grants and loans effective January 28, 2025. Though not directly related to tax policy, such moves create a ripple effect, influencing numerous federally supported programs and activities. Any disruption in federal funding could have wide-ranging consequences for various sectors, including education, infrastructure, and public health.

The scope of these orders includes temporary suspension of federal aid disbursement, excluding critical benefits such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The potential impact of these actions on the IRS includes a hiring freeze, significant slowing of tax return processing, and potential delays in issuing necessary guidance on recent tax law changes. These shifts in federal administrative processes could lead to inefficiencies and increased taxpayer frustration.

Ongoing Adjustments and Future Considerations

Economic experts and critics question the practicality of relying on tariffs in today’s economy. The U.S. government depends heavily on income tax revenue, and economists warn that shifting entirely to tariffs would be very disruptive. This transition would necessitate a complete fiscal overhaul and likely lead to economic instability. Critics argue that the highly interconnected global economy would suffer substantial market turbulence from such an approach.

Moreover, heavy dependence on tariffs increases the risk of trade wars, as trading partners might retaliate with their own tariffs on U.S. goods. This could lead to higher consumer prices in the U.S. and potentially violate international trade agreements. Such concerns underscore the potential adverse effects on American consumers, who would likely face increased costs on a wide range of products. These economic disruptions could lead to inflationary pressures, further complicating the nation’s financial stability. Therefore, while the idea may seem appealing, its practical implementation poses significant risks and challenges.

Subscribe to our weekly news digest.

Join now and become a part of our fast-growing community.

Invalid Email Address
Thanks for Subscribing!
We'll be sending you our best soon!
Something went wrong, please try again later