Quick Read
- Tariffs paid by midsize U.S. companies tripled last year, per a JPMorganChase Institute study.
- The study focused on “middle market” businesses employing 48 million people.
- The research indicates U.S. companies, not foreign entities, are bearing the tariff costs.
- Payments to China by these companies decreased by 20% since October 2024.
- The Trump administration dismissed the findings, asserting tariffs benefit the U.S. economy.
WASHINGTON (Azat TV) – Tariffs paid by midsize U.S. businesses tripled over the past year, according to new research published Thursday by the JPMorganChase Institute. This significant increase provides further evidence that President Donald Trump’s policy to impose higher taxes on imports is causing widespread economic disruption, directly impacting companies that collectively employ 48 million Americans. The study counters repeated assertions from the administration that foreign entities, rather than U.S. businesses, bear the cost of these tariffs.
The additional taxes have forced these companies to absorb new expenses through various means, including raising prices for consumers, reducing their workforce, or accepting lower profit margins. “That’s a big change in their cost of doing business,” stated Chi Mac, business research director of the JPMorganChase Institute, highlighting the immediate financial pressure on these firms. The analysis also noted indications that these businesses may be shifting away from transactions with China, potentially towards other regions in Asia, though it remains unclear if this means a true shift in supply chains or merely a re-routing of goods.
JPMorganChase Study Highlights Tariff Burden
The JPMorganChase Institute report specifically focused on ‘middle market’ businesses, defined as those with revenues between $10 million and $1 billion and fewer than 500 employees. These companies often lack the pricing power of large multinational corporations to easily offset tariff costs but are agile enough to potentially adjust their supply chains. The institute used payments data to conduct its analysis, adding to a growing body of economic research that challenges the administration’s narrative.
The study found that payments to China by these midsize companies were 20% below their October 2024 levels, suggesting a potential move away from Chinese manufacturers, a stated goal of the Trump administration. However, the report’s authors emphasized that companies are still adjusting to the tariffs and that further study is planned to fully understand the long-term implications.
Administration Rejects Tariff Findings
The White House swiftly dismissed the JPMorganChase Institute’s findings. White House spokesman Kush Desai called the analysis “pointless” and maintained that it did not “change the fact that President Trump was right.” President Trump himself defended his tariff policies during a visit to Coosa Steel in Georgia on Thursday, reiterating his belief that the taxes were beneficial for U.S. manufacturers. “The tariffs are the greatest thing to happen to this country,” Trump asserted.
This rejection echoes previous responses to similar economic analyses. Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, had previously criticized research by the New York Federal Reserve that indicated nearly 90% of the tariff burden fell on U.S. companies and consumers. Hassett publicly called that paper “an embarrassment” and suggested disciplinary action for its authors.
Broader Economic Context of Trump Tariffs
President Trump imposed a series of tariffs last year with the stated goal of reducing the U.S. trade imbalance. However, trade data published Thursday by the Census Bureau showed that the trade deficit actually climbed last year by $25.5 billion, reaching $1.24 trillion. This contradicts President Trump’s social media post on Wednesday, where he expressed an expectation of a trade surplus “during this year.”
The average tariff rate increased significantly last year, from 2.6% to 13%, according to New York Fed researchers. Many of these tariffs were imposed after President Trump declared an economic emergency in April 2025, bypassing Congress to implement a baseline tax on goods from various countries—an event he termed “Liberation Day.” This move, which provoked initial financial market panic and subsequent trade talks, is now facing legal scrutiny, with the Supreme Court expected to rule soon on whether President Trump exceeded his legal authority.
Despite President Trump’s 2024 campaign promise to tame inflation, these tariffs have contributed to voter frustration over affordability. While inflation has not spiked dramatically during his term, hiring has slowed sharply, and academic economists estimate that consumer prices are approximately 0.8 percentage points higher than they would otherwise have been due to these policies.
The consistent findings from multiple economic analyses, including the latest from the JPMorganChase Institute, underscore a persistent disconnect between the administration’s claims regarding tariff beneficiaries and the observed economic realities for U.S. businesses and consumers.