Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
Sen. Lindsey Graham Dies at 71, Leaving a Complex Political Legacy

Sen. Lindsey Graham Dies at 71, Leaving a Complex Political Legacy

Protesters gather at the Wisconsin State Capitol, holding signs.

Trump's Water Policies Put America's Drinking Water at Risk

6 US Cities that Show America What Independent Leadership Looks Like

6 US Cities that Show America What Independent Leadership Looks Like

Bruce Springsteen In Concert, facing his audience.

Springsteen’s October D.C. Festival Pushes Music Into Democracy Fight

“A Huge Grab of Power”: Trump Is Defying Congress on Foreign Aid

“A Huge Grab of Power”: Trump Is Defying Congress on Foreign Aid

Did the Trump tariffs increase U.S. manufacturing jobs?

Cargo ships designed to look like Chinese and U.S. flags
Yaorusheng/Getty Images
Gabriel Vinocur
By Gabriel VinocurNov 14, 2024
Gabriel Vinocur
Gabriel Vinocur, EconoFact is a contributor for The Fulcrum, a nonpartisan publication dedicated to strengthening democracy by fostering informed civic engagement and elevating diverse perspectives.
See More Writings by author

This fact brief was originally published by EconoFact. Read the original here. Fact briefs are published by newsrooms in the Gigafact network, and republished by The Fulcrum. Visit Gigafact to learn more.

Did the Trump tariffs increase U.S. manufacturing jobs?

No.

The tariffs Donald Trump imposed on Chinese goods in 2018 had a net negative effect on manufacturing jobs as well as overall U.S. employment.

The Federal Reserve Board found that the tariffs caused a reduction in manufacturing employment of 1.4%. Modest gains (0.3%) achieved by shielding domestic producers from foreign competition were “more than offset” by rising production costs for manufacturers who used steel as an input (-1.1%) and retaliatory tariffs (-0.7%).

Federal Reserve data recorded approximately 12.4 million manufacturing jobs when Trump became president in January 2017 and 12.2 million when he left in January 2021. There were 12.9 million manufacturing jobs in September 2024, although job creation in the manufacturing sector and manufacturing's share of total employment are lower than pre-tariff rates.

Economy-wide, Oxford Economics estimated in 2021 that the tariffs and resulting trade war cost 245,000 jobs and 0.5% of GDP while reducing real incomes by $675 per household.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

Federal Reserve Board Disentangling the Effects of the 2018-2019 Tariffs on a Globally Connected U.S. Manufacturing Sector

FRED (Federal Reserve Bank Of St. Louis) All Employees, Manufacturing (MANEMP)

Progressive Policy Institute Trade Fact of the Week: Trump-era tariffs raised prices but did not ‘bring manufacturing back’

Oxford Economics The US-China Economic Relationship


Latest news

A War We Cannot Win — And a Lesson America Should Have Learned Long Ago
Ethics & Leadership

A War We Cannot Win — And a Lesson America Should Have Learned Long Ago

Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection
Rule of Law

Only Collective Action Can Turn Outrage Into Accountability and Protect the Rule of Law

stethoscope and us dollar bills on blue-colored background.
Health

When Health Care Becomes a Choice, Something Is Broken

Read More

Presidential powers: Corporate abuses big concern after SCOTUS move

An oil production operation is shown in North Dakota. With the U.S. Supreme Court granting more presidential powers to the executive branch, environmental groups warned key agencies will have a harder time going after polluters.

(Adobe Stock)

Presidential powers: Corporate abuses big concern after SCOTUS move

A U.S. Supreme Court opinion issued last month expands presidential power over independent federal agencies, prompting warnings from environmental advocates about potential implications for states such as North Dakota.

The court’s conservative majority said President Donald Trump had the authority to fire a former Federal Trade Commission member without cause. Legal observers countered the opinion nullifies longstanding precedent involving the role of Congress in insulating certain federal agency officials from direct presidential control.

Keep ReadingShow less
Private Prisons and ICE Exploit Loopholes, Harm Communities

Delaney Hall Detention Facility, Newark, New Jersey.

(Photo by Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images)

Private Prisons and ICE Exploit Loopholes, Harm Communities

While Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) terrorizes Black and brown communities with racial profiling, kidnappings, inhumane treatment, fatal abuse, and killings, private prison investors are asking how ICE can detain more people to increase their profits. Private prison corporations have long profited from immigration enforcement, but they are expecting a financial windfall under the current administration. These corporations are politically and financially situated to rapidly increase detention capacity and cash in on the president’s goal of deporting one million people per year. Stopping these corporations from lining politicians’ campaign coffers is a necessary first step in ensuring that our government is accountable to the people it serves, rather than the corporations it contracts with.

ICE and private prison corporations have long had a symbiotic relationship. Ninety percent of ICE's detainees were already being held in facilities owned or operated by private prison corporations before President Trump began his second term. CoreCivic and GEO Group, two of the largest private prison corporations that lead the multi-billion dollar industry, have been contracting with immigration enforcement for decades. By 2023, ICE contracts accounted for 43 percent of CoreCivic’s revenue and 30 percent of GEO Group’s revenue. The majority of each corporation’s lobbyists have held government positions, and GEO Group’s board of directors “has extensive links with ICE.” The relationship between private prisons and ICE is the embodiment of the “'revolving door’ between the federal government and the private sector.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Federal Register Reports being printed out of a large machine.

Congress should strengthen the administrative state by writing clearer laws, limiting delegated authority, and requiring periodic reauthorization of agency powers.

Photo courtesy of Luka Jacobi-Krohn

Putting the Guardrails Back on Delegations of Power

Congress needs to write better laws instead of dismantling the administrative state.

Debates over the administrative state focus on whether these agencies have accrued too much power. Some argue that the solution is to severely weaken or, in extreme scenarios, dismantle these federal agencies. However, the issue is not the existence of these agencies but actually how Congress writes its laws. When statutes are drafted with vague language, agencies are left to interpret the scope, and courts are forced to set the boundaries. This results in constant litigation and generally regulatory instability. If Congress actually wants a more durable and accountable regulatory system, they need to start with themselves by writing clearer laws.

Keep ReadingShow less
Businesspeople walking in line across world map, painted on asphalt

America's immigration debate reflects a deeper question: Does America still believe in itself? A historical look at immigration, assimilation, and American identity.

Klaus Vedfelt / Getty Images

What Immigration Debates Reveal About National Confidence

America has spent 250 years arguing about immigrants.

But beneath the arguments about visas, walls, asylum claims, deportations, and border security lies a more uncomfortable question:

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026