Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill requires the President to impose a 10% ad valorem duty on all imported goods beginning the calendar year after enactment. Each subsequent year the duty is increased by 5 percentage points if the United States ran a trade deficit the prior year, or decreased by 5 percentage points if the United States ran a trade balance or surplus, but not below zero.
Progressives see worker protection potential; conservatives see harmful protectionism
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill specifies a clear, simple rate formula for additional import duties but provides limited supporting detail for implementation, fiscal implications, integration with existing trade law, mitigation of edge cases, or accountability mechanisms.
The bill requires the President to impose a 10% ad valorem duty on all imported goods beginning the calendar year after enactment.
Each subsequent year the duty is increased by 5 percentage points if the United States ran a trade deficit the prior year, or decreased by 5 percentage points if the United States ran a trade balance or surplus, but not below zero.
These duties are explicitly additional to any existing duties imposed by law.
Sweeping, high-impact trade mandate with few compromise features and substantial economic and diplomatic risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill specifies a clear, simple rate formula for additional import duties but provides limited supporting detail for implementation, fiscal implications, integration with existing trade law, mitigation of edge cases, or accountability mechanisms.
Progressives see worker protection potential; conservatives see harmful protectionism
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives see worker protection potential; conservatives see harmful protectionism
Likely generally favorable because the measure aims to protect U.S. manufacturing and workers by raising import costs.
Would be concerned that the bill is a blunt, regressive instrument, lacks direction for revenue, and could provoke retaliation or harm low-income consumers.
Cautious and mixed: recognizes goals of addressing trade deficits and supporting domestic industry, but views the across-the-board, administratively adjustable tariff as economically blunt.
Would want targeted analysis, safeguards, and international coordination before support.
Generally opposed: views the bill as protectionist, inflationary, and an undue expansion of federal power over trade.
Prefers targeted measures against unfair practices, not a universal tariff mechanism tied to the trade balance.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Sweeping, high-impact trade mandate with few compromise features and substantial economic and diplomatic risks.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives see worker protection potential; conservatives see harmful protectionism
Sweeping, high-impact trade mandate with few compromise features and substantial economic and diplomatic risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill specifies a clear, simple rate formula for additional import duties but provides limited supporting detail for implementation, fiscal implications, integration with e…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.