When the Trump administration announced new semiconductor tariffs (taxes on imported computer chips used in everything from phones to cars) on April 2, according to ABC News, it reignited a debate with generational stakes. For students like Joseph Oforkanski, ’27, the move encaptures a paradox. “There’s a security benefit, keeping U.S data infrastructure domestic, but the back could make other nations dislike Americans.” His concern mirrors warnings from Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who, according to Reuters, argued such policies risk “disrupting the global economic order.”
The Biden administration’s push to hike auto tariffs (taxes on imported vehicles) as reported from the AP News, aimed to revive U.S. manufacturing. For young adults entering the workforce, the immediate reality in 2025 is higher costs on everything from cars to clothing, amid already steep housing and rising food costs.
Tariffs are taxes imposed on imported goods, designed to make foreign products more expensive and protect domestic industries. Historically they’ve been used to shield emerging industries, retaliate in trade wars and address national security concerns, but the burden often falls on consumers. Xania Fleming ’28, a frequent Shein, a China-based fast-fashion retailer, shopper is worried these tariffs will impact her more than the industries abroad they are meant to target. “If tariffs hit China, prices will rise,” Fleming said. “It’ll trickle down to people like me.” Economists warn this could exacerbate inflation, the rising cost of goods and services, straining budgets for essentials like groceries.
It’s concerning to see America’s leadership — whether Democrat or Republican — struggle to curb inflation while enacting policies that could further squeeze everyday budgets. Grocery prices have climbed 25% since 2020, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and tariffs risk adding fuel to that fire. The government’s intent to project U.S. jobs is valid, but if the cost is making basic necessities unaffordable, are we really “working for the people?”
Jonah Wells, ’26, said the ambiguity of the tariffs are what’s most troubling.
“Tariffs work best for infant industries (new fragile sectors) in developing nations, not the U.S., where labor costs are already high,” Wells said.
Charlie Gibson, ’25, said stability is what matters most to him.
“You can’t have short-term chaos — like market volatility or job losses — for hypothetical long term gains. People need predictability in needing to pay rent or buy groceries.”
The lack of clarity from these policies is worrying. Are tariffs a bargaining chip or a lasting plan? Either way, the ripple effects — higher prices and strained international relations — could shadow our and the next generation’s financial future. The geopolitical stakes are high. Taiwan produces 80% of the world’s semiconductors.
Fleming said that these tariffs could cause issues for her home in the U.S. Virgin Islands. “Back home, almost everything is shipped in,” Fleming said. “If tariffs raise shipping costs, our already high prices will spike.” The U.S can’t afford to ignore how tariffs destabilize global partners or its own territories. Economic decisions shouldn’t happen in a vacuum.
Tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and steel could raise car prices by 10-15%, according to AP News, increasingly affecting new buyers. While tariffs may create factory jobs, industries reliant on imports can shrink. There are also strong showings of diplomatic ties being hurt with other countries. Allies like Japan warn of supply chain disruptions, according to Reuters. The government’s “America First” approach risks becoming “America Alone.” Inflation is already a crisis, adding tariffs feels like pouring gasoline on a fire.
For students, tariffs symbolize a broader dilemma: Can the U.S. prioritize economic sovereignty without sacrificing affordability or global ties? As Oforkansi puts it, “The world is watching how we handle this. It’s about more than just trade. Leadership means solving problems, if tariffs worsen inflation or isolate the U.S. economically, history won’t remove them as protectionist triumphs, but just as short sighted mistakes.”
Going into the workforce as an applicant searching for jobs, I am worried about the feasibility of immediately getting a job out of college. I will choose to stay present on how tariffs may affect me negatively and how to traverse those different financial spaces. I’m holding out hope that the making of these will eventually lead to better talk between the U.S. and foreign countries about trade, and potentially prevent something like this happening again.