Trump administration plans April 2 ‘tariff wall’

The Trump administration continues to lay the groundwork for the largest disruption to the U.S.’s trade relationships in nearly a century.

Portions of the administration’s planned actions could result in preemptive negotiations, or quickly resolve in handshake trade agreements. But much of the rhetoric from President Donald Trump and senior administration officials appears to signal an aggressive restructuring of the U.S. economy towards fewer imports — or at least, greater cost to them.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent termed the anticipated April 2 rollout of a number of new tariffs and possible nontariff actions around international commerce as a “tariff wall” during a televised interview on March 18. While Bessent characterized the announcement more leverage for negotiations, reports since his remarks indicate some differences in opinion within the Trump administration over what the final shape of tariffs will be — and whether they’re meant to be lifted quickly after talks or stay in place to advance broader onshoring goals, as well as subsidize domestic tax policy.

“On April 2, we are going to produce a list of other countries tariffs, and we are going to go to them and say, ‘Look, here’s where we think the tariff levels are, non-tariff barriers, currency manipulation, unfair funding, labor suppression,’” said Bessent, nodding at the broad array of issues the president’s Feb. 13 memo on reciprocal trade and tariffs raises to be addressed through more executive action on trade. “And if you stop this, we will not put up the tariff wall,” Bessent continued.

What that “tariff wall” will look like remains to be seen. The administration has aspirations for country- and possibly product-specific tariffs and nontariff action. Bessent said in his interview that each country would receive a number and that new tariffs could be “stacked” onto existing duties. According to a Wall Street Journal report, members of the administration considered simplifying the April 2 rollout by placing countries in three response categories to simplify the implementation of tariffs and any other potential measures that could be put in place, like Sec. 891 taxes. While the situation remains fluid, it appears that the simplified approach has been ruled out in favor of the original individualized approaches to each country — or in the European Union’s case, trade bloc. However, complications around implementation could affect that aim. The U.S. Trade Representative, which helps administer tariffs, is one of the smallest federal agencies, with about 200 employees. Country-specific tariffs could take months to roll out, potentially stifling the administration’s ambitious timeline to erect its “tariff wall” on April 2.

In a preview of that implementation challenge, Trump suspended the $800 de minimis exception on Chinese products in his first 10% increase on import duties from the country, effective Feb. 1. But he paused that suspension days later to allow the Commerce Department, Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Postal Service more time to work out a system to track and collect tariffs on the large volume of previously exempted imports. Language in updated executive orders for Mexico and Canada tariffs also would end de minimis treatment of imports from those countries, again increasing the volume of processing federal agencies will need to do before taking into consideration the additional enforcement necessary around new tariffs for products from many of the countries the U.S. trades with.

Those practical concerns, as well as possible ideological differences between members of the cabinet and senior advisers — though seemingly less than during the first Trump administration — help explain why the “tariff wall” picture remains cloudy. This, in turn, affects the significant income tax changes congressional Republicans plan to move forward through a complex budgetary process. Though the legislation is unlikely to include tariffs itself, Republicans want to indirectly use revenue from the import duties to help offset the revenue lost from maintaining lower rates or cutting taxes further.  But they do not yet know how much revenue Trump’s tariff actions could raise (or how the economy will react).  

Though Bessent has supported the aggressive trade stances taken by Trump in both congressional testimony and interviews, he sounded a slightly more dovish tone from other senior administration officials in voicing some hope for dealmaking prior to April 2 tariffs going into place. 

“I’m optimistic that once April 2, some of the tariffs may not have to go on because a deal is pre-negotiated, or that once countries receive their reciprocal tariff number, that right after that, they will come to us and want to negotiate it down,” said Bessent.

For more information on the Trump administration’s tariffs, and how businesses can prepare, see also our report: A new tariff paradigm.

Contact: