1Yr·

Trump's new tariffs, rising inflation and a trade war on the horizon?

In this post, I’d like to highlight the new U.S. tariffs and their potential economic consequences. I’ll discuss the background and the possible effects on inflation and businesses, as well as the winners and losers on the stock market.


Again, please note that the stocks mentioned here do not constitute investment advice; they are merely examples of potential beneficiaries or losers as trade restrictions intensify. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns.

__________


In this post:


  • Impact on Inflation
  • New Tariffs Take Effect
  • Countries’ Reactions
  • Consequences for the Global Economy
  • Winners & Losers
  • Investment Opportunities

__________


The topic of “tariffs” is currently not only very prominent in the media, but also in recent earnings calls by S&P 500 companies, where the term “tariffs” was already discussed in the context of a sharp increase, as shown in the following chart [1].

attachment

The chart shows that the discussion about tariffs has intensified over the past few months and is having an increasingly significant impact on the outlook in companies’ earnings reports.


The data is presented as a three-month average and broken down into various sectors, including, for example, industrials, healthcare, consumer goods, information technology, etc. 


I’m curious to see how the stock markets will perform in the coming week. In addition to the ongoing earnings season, the topic of “tariffs” will certainly dominate.

Since the announced heavy tariffs were not immediately enforced after Trump took office—leading to a “slight” sigh of relief—there could now be a new reaction in the markets, as was already seen on Friday evening was on Friday evening when the markets turned around toward the end of the day.


A looming trade conflict could not only affect individual companies but also further fuel inflation in the U.S.: 


💰 Impact on inflation


On January 31, Deutsche Bank already issued a forecast on the potential impact of tariffs on the inflation rate [2]:

attachment

The chart compares the current forecast with the forecast from before the “Trump” era and takes into account various scenarios for the pass-through of tariffs by Canada and Mexico. 


Two scenarios are considered: one with a 50% pass-through of tariffs (additional increase shown in dark green) and one with a 75% pass-through (light green). It becomes clear that, according to this, the inflation rate could rise sharply again this year and then decline again by 2027.


🛃 New Tariffs in Effect & Further Measures Planned 


As of today, February 1, 2025, the U.S. government—specifically Donald Trump—has imposed new import tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China:


  • 25% on imports from Mexico and Canada
  • 10% on imports from China


According to the White House spokesperson, these measures are, among other things, a response to these countries’ failure to stop the influx of fentanyl and illegal immigrants into the U.S. [3]


But that’s just the beginning:


Starting in mid-February, the U.S. will also impose tariffs on strategic goods [4], including:


  • Computer chips 
  • Pharmaceuticals
  • Steel, aluminum, and copper
  • Oil and gas imports (though not until February 18, with reduced 10% tariffs to avoid immediately driving up U.S. gas prices).



🚨 Trump Bets on Escalation—Canada Announces Retaliation


Yesterday, Canadian government officials, including Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly, tried in vain to prevent the tariffs in Washington.


Before departing for Mar-a-Lago, Trump made it clear [5]:


“We have a $200 billion trade deficit with Canada. Why should we subsidize Canada?”


The EU could also soon be targeted, as Trump hinted:


“Absolutely! The European Union has treated us so terribly!”


🔄 Canada’s response:


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that Canada will not back down and will respond with “swift and robust countermeasures.”

The government is planning a three-stage retaliation strategy [5]:


  • 1️⃣ Targeted punitive tariffs on U.S. products originating from Republican states (e.g., orange juice, whiskey, ketchup, peanut butter, and motorcycles).


  • 2️⃣ Tariffs on steel products and machine parts from the U.S.


  • 3️⃣ Escalation: Halting exports of oil, gas, and electricity to the U.S.


This last step, in particular, would be a double-edged sword, however, as Canada is heavily dependent on energy cooperation with the U.S.


Economic experts in the U.S. are already warning of the consequences of a trade war [5]:


  • The new tariffs could increase the cost of living for an average U.S. household by $800 per year.
  • The oil and gas tariffs could raise the price of gasoline in the U.S. by up to 20 cents per liter.


But Trump remains firm:


“There may be disruptions in the short term, but in the long term, the tariffs will make us very rich and very strong.”


🌎 Possible consequences for the global economy


(a) Rising prices in the U.S.


  • Technology & Electronics: Higher chip prices are affecting companies such as Apple $AAPL (+0.79%) , Dell $DELL and HP $HPQ (-4%) , as many of their components come from China.


  • Healthcare Costs: Pharmaceutical companies such as CVS Health $CVS (+0.29%) and Walgreens Boots Alliance $WBA are expected to face higher procurement costs.



(b) Retaliatory measures & new trade wars?




(c) Impact on the Stock Market


  • Volatility is increasing due to uncertainties about the consequences for various industries.


  • Particularly affected: technology and automotive stocks with global supply chains.



🏆 Winners & Losers—Which companies will benefit, and which will suffer?


Potential beneficiaries of the tariffs


U.S. manufacturers of steel, aluminum, and copper


  • Nucor $NUE (+0.72%) , U.S. Steel $X and Freeport-McMoRan $FCX (+1.22%) could benefit, as foreign competitors will become more expensive due to the tariffs.


Domestic pharmaceutical and biotech companies



Energy companies with U.S. production



Semiconductor manufacturers with U.S. production




😥 Companies that could suffer from the tariffs


Chip manufacturers with global supply chains



Automakers with global suppliers



Companies with strong export businesses



U.S. retailers with a high proportion of imports




🧠 Possible investment strategies

Favor defensive sectors:



Capitalize on long-term opportunities in “reshoring”:




Conclusion: Will the trade conflict continue to escalate?


With the new tariffs, Trump is taking a confrontational stance, and Canada, Mexico, and China are preparing retaliatory measures. If further tariffs on European goods follow, the situation could escalate even further.


❓What do you think—which stocks might be most affected? Which companies do you see benefiting?


Thanks for reading! 🤝


__________


Sources:


[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/yahoo-finance-chartbook-44-charts-that-tell-the-story-of-markets-and-the-economy-to-start-2025-105856766.html


[2] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/2-charts-show-why-markets-are-skittish-about-trumps-tariff-policy-144318249.html


[3] https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/usa-unter-trump/trumps-verhaengt-zoelle-gegen-kanada-mexiko-und-china-110269990.html?

[4]

https://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2025-01/64440108-trump-usa-werden-ab-mitte-februar-zoelle-auf-computerchips-stahl-sowie-oel-und-gasimporte-erheben-015.htm


[5] https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/usa-trump-strafzoelle-100.html

64
31 Comments

profile image
Great contribution. Not even 20 minutes to read this time 😁
5
profile image
@DonkeyInvestor thank you 🤩!
Now I feel knighted ⚔️
profile image
@VPT Lucky for you. I usually slay knights
profile image
@DonkeyInvestor then the day can hardly get any better 🍀
1
profile image
Great! That's why I'm here. Many thanks ✌🏻
2
profile image
@Anderle You are welcome to ✌️
profile image
I think if it goes down next week it will be short term and a good opportunity to buy. I try to have as much cash available as possible
2
profile image
@Tobi60 that's how I see it too. 📈
profile image
Thanks for the analysis. I can see the next 4 years are going to be fun. 🫨
1
profile image
@Semos25 the 4 years are getting wild 🙂
profile image
I am very curious to see how the markets will react on Monday, thanks for the article!
1
profile image
2
profile image
profile image
This is getting wild
1
1
profile image
@FinaceSF Thank you! 🤝
profile image
You mentioned Chesapeake Energy $CHK in your list. They have since changed their name to Expand Energy.

PS: you are welcome to delete my comment
profile image
@7Trader thanks for the tip, that's right, but the abbreviation should still fit. 👍
1
profile image
After all, one could also assume that T is secretly cooperating with the communists and wants/needs to deceive everyone. That would be another theory.
Why destroy your own country?
profile image
@Mark777 Well, Trump is convinced of what he is doing. We will see whether it works with the economy... no more and no less.

I don't believe in any other secret theories
profile image
That definitely doesn't work and has nothing to do with conviction.
He is a businessman who should know that the calculation doesn't work out for the masses.
Deleted User
1Yr
Comment was deleted
profile image
@LarryLindt It's obvious that he's not doing it for everyone... I'm also talking about the companies that he lives from, even if he works for himself, he's dependent on them in an economic sense.
It's just his ego that he wants to polish up.
Deleted User
1Yr
Comment was deleted
@PowerWordChill don't seem to know much about the subject?
1
@PowerWordChill damn you are factually interested, just wanted to troll but: High subsidies for domestic producers can make imports less attractive and increase exports, which can reduce a trade deficit. So understand that Trump intends to subsidize the domestic industry to reduce the trade deficit with Canada
profile image
EDIT: since 2021, the trade deficit is probably actually -244 bn $.

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c1220.html

@stocker_328 @PowerWordChill..

Trump's logic: If the USA imports more from Canada than it exports (trade deficit), then it is indirectly "subsidizing" Canada because Canada benefits more from this trade.

EDIT see above.

USA-Canada trade balance
According to official statistics: the USA has not had a trade deficit of USD 200 billion with Canada in recent years.

In fact, trade between the two countries is relatively balanced:
The US exports approximately USD 300 billion worth of goods and services to Canada each year.

The USA imports a similar amount of goods and services from Canada.

Depending on the method of calculation, there is sometimes a small deficit or a surplus.

It suggests that the USA is being economically "exploited" by Canada.

He used this to justify tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum imports as well as the renegotiation.

In terms of classification:

Trade is not a "subsidy": a trade deficit does not mean that one country is financing the other.

Canada is one of the largest buyers of US products: So punitive tariffs also hurt US companies.

Conclusion:

Trump's statement was a simplification of trade relations with Canada, presumably to underpin his "America First" policy. In reality, trade flows between the US and Canada are balanced and both countries benefit from each other.
1
@VPT sorry, but the source is more than questionable.
profile image
@VPT @stocker_328 better fact check official US government site: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c1220.html
Edit: over the last 4 years you get 200+ billion dollars
2
profile image
@intelligent_invest_99 thanks for the addition. But the export sums are really not insignificant for the USA 🥲
1
profile image
@PowerWordChill I see the whole thing basically like this: Why do I subsidize something or try to protect it with tariffs?
Because it is obviously not competitive on its own. Does eliminating the competition make it more robust?

I always think of the example of American cotton, which was or continues to be subsidized so much (I'm not up to date on this) that it depresses the price of African cotton to such an extent that African producers could/can barely survive from growing it, even though it is/was grown much more sustainably. In the end, this is a completely inefficient approach in which everyone involved loses in the long term.

Or England in the 19th century, which imposed high tariffs on German products and also passed a trademark law which stipulated that products from Germany had to bear the words "Made in Germany" from then on. This was triggered by British producers' concerns about German competition.

We all know the outcome of the story: "Made in Germany" went from being a warning sign to a seal of quality. In the long term, the British domestic market was not strengthened but weakened.

In the end, as in nature, the most innovative and resilient always prevail. I doubt whether I am promoting these characteristics by creating an artificial biotope through relatively high tariffs.
But hey, Donald only has four more years. Until the consequences of his actions are felt in full force, he is no longer POTUS - at least I hope so, otherwise we have completely different problems, I'll just say this much: at the end of last year a movie with Wagner Moura was shown in the cinemas - and can - as usual with him - blame it on others.
3
View all 2 further answers
Join the conversation