Homeownership will be more expensive, and a major cause is President Trump’s new tariffs on building materials. With a 25% tariff on imported steel and aluminum taking effect this month, and potential new tariffs on lumber imports, the cost of new home construction and maintenance will rise. While these policies aim to protect certain American industries, they also threaten to make housing even less affordable for millions of Americans.
This February, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on imported steel and aluminum, and Canadian lumber imports are under consideration, which could lead to further tariffs. These actions are designed to boost U.S. manufacturing but will also increase costs for essential construction materials. Steel and aluminum—necessary for framing, roofing, and siding—will now be significantly more expensive, forcing builders to pass these costs onto homebuyers. Lumber, which Canada supplies in large quantities, could also become costlier if new tariffs are imposed. Other materials, such as nails, pipes, and insulation, may see price hikes due to supply chain disruptions.
These increased costs will put further strain on a housing market already struggling with affordability issues. As material prices rise, the cost of building new homes will increase, making homeownership more difficult, particularly for first-time buyers. At the same time, homeowners will also feel the effects when maintaining or upgrading their properties. Roof replacements, kitchen remodels, and essential repairs will become more expensive, and many homeowners may be forced to delay necessary maintenance, which could lead to long-term structural problems. Those in the lower- and middle-income brackets will be hit hardest, as they often lack the financial flexibility to absorb rising costs.
Beyond individual homeowners, these tariffs will have broader economic consequences. Higher construction and maintenance costs contribute to inflation, which could prompt the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates, making mortgages even less affordable. A slowdown in home sales and new construction would weaken the housing market and could lead to job losses in construction, real estate, and other related industries. The ripple effects will be felt throughout the economy.
Supporters of tariffs argue that they will strengthen domestic industries, create jobs, and reduce reliance on imports. Some economists believe tariffs provide necessary protection for U.S. workers against unfair global competition. Encouraging domestic production could also stabilize material costs in the long run, shielding the economy from fluctuations in international markets. The manufacturing sector contributes trillions of dollars to the U.S. economy, and proponents argue that protecting it is vital for long-term economic security.
However, the economic risks and trade-offs cannot be ignored. There are alternative policy approaches that could achieve similar goals without making housing less affordable. One option is targeted tariff exemptions for key housing materials, a measure the National Association of Home Builders has strongly advocated for. Certain items, such as Canadian softwood lumber, could be exempted to prevent steep price increases. Government subsidies or tax incentives could also support domestic steel, aluminum, and lumber production without imposing broad tariffs. Studies have shown that tax incentives, such as the Domestic Production Activities Deduction, have been effective in encouraging U.S. manufacturing growth. Additionally, increased investment in affordable housing programs could help offset rising costs. Expanding the Housing Choice Voucher program, for example, could provide financial relief to renters and low-income families struggling with higher housing expenses.
Trump’s tariffs on steel, aluminum, and potentially lumber will raise home construction and maintenance costs, worsening an already severe housing affordability crisis. While the goal of supporting domestic industries is understandable, these policies could have unintended consequences, including higher inflation and mortgage rates. A more targeted approach, combining limited tariffs with targeted exemptions and incentives, could better balance economic security with housing affordability. Without such adjustments, homeownership will slip further out of reach for millions of Americans.
Robert Cropf is a professor of political science at Saint Louis University.
A view of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on June 25, 2026. President Donald Trump jolted Republicans during a fiery appearance at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, scrapping a housing bill signing ceremony and clashing behind closed doors with a party rebel who challenged him over the Iran war. Trump had been expected to sign the bipartisan housing.
Only Trump doesn’t care about housing
It was August 15, 2024. Then candidate Donald Trump stepped out of his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club’s columned clubhouse to a gaggle of reporters. He was flanked by tables of groceries and signs showing the rising cost of food. Also on one of the tables was a dollhouse, meant to represent the equally alarming rise in housing prices.
It was a speech about the economy, the single most important issue of the 2024 election cycle, full of promises that went right to the heart of Americans’ anxieties. While former President Joe Biden and then Vice President Kamala Harris were contorting themselves to posture a good economy that just needed more time to recover from the pandemic, Trump was preying on voters’ very real fears of unaffordable gas, groceries, and homes. It was obviously a winning message.
In that speech, Trump promised, “We’re going to open up tracts of federal land for housing construction. We desperately need housing for people who can’t afford what’s going on now.”
As of mid-2023, there had been a housing shortage of nearly four million homes, according to the National Association of Realtors. Americans all over the country were either priced out of buying new homes due to low inventory, trapped in their existing homes by sky-high mortgage rates, or facing exorbitant rent hikes thanks to corporate investors buying up rental properties. Americans needed help, and Trump promised it.
Cut to March of 2026, when Trump reportedly told House Speaker Mike Johnson, “No one gives a sh*t about housing.”
That kind of thinking may explain why Trump this week suddenly announced he was canceling a signing ceremony for the bipartisan “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act,” a housing bill co-sponsored by Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Tim Scott that passed the House 358-32 and was approved in the Senate on Monday.
Trump instead demanded Congress pass the SAVE America Act, his controversial election grievance bill that doesn’t have enough Republican support to get passed in the Senate.
It’s just the latest in a line of policy self-owns where Trump has seemingly intentionally made life more difficult for Republicans hoping to keep their majority. Despite midterm elections occurring in the midst of a blistering economy and an unpopular war, they were surely hoping the housing bill would give them something — anything — to brag about when they returned home to their districts.
And very much to the contrary, Americans do give a sh*t about housing. According to a recent survey by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a whopping 79% say the cost of housing is extremely or very important to them. Eighty-three percent say Congress should take action on the issue — like it just did. Eighty-nine percent say the House and Senate need to work together to pass affordable housing legislation — like they just did. And 63% say they would be more likely to vote for a lawmaker if they helped pass legislation to build more affordable homes and lower housing costs — like they just did.
There aren’t many issues that unite Americans like housing does, and very few bipartisan policy wins Congress can point to, and yet, Trump is holding that bill hostage in order to get his pet project — which doesn’t even have the support of his own party — pushed through.
If you’re trying to make sense of something so nonsensical, as I’m sure many Republican lawmakers are, it’s certainly sad but not actually all that complicated. Trump said what he needed to get reelected and then promptly abandoned his promises in order to pursue his own self-interests, even if those interests are bad for Republicans and bad for voters.
That’s just the kind of guy he is.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.