Trump’s Tariff Threat: Western New York Caught in the Crossfire
President Trump’s announcement of 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada, set to take effect February 1, 2025, has sent shockwaves through communities reliant on cross-border trade—and Western New York is squarely in the crosshairs. With its proximity to Canada and billions of dollars in cross-border commerce, the region bears the brunt of this economic conflict. Canada, New York State’s largest trading partner, is a lifeline for local businesses and consumers. Still, Trump’s tariffs threaten to sever that connection, driving up costs for everything from groceries and gas to consumer electronics and everyday staples.
The impact on Western New Yorkers could be severe. Analysts estimate that Trump’s tariff tax could increase the average American family’s costs by $2,600 a year. For a region already grappling with economic challenges, this added financial burden could be devastating.eel the pinch at the grocery store, the gas pump, and beyond Families will f as prices rise on both imported goods and domestic products reliant on cross-border supply chains.
What’s more, the silence from Western New York’s Republican representatives is deafening. Congressmen Nicholas Langworthy (R-NY23) and Claudia Tenney (R-NY24), both staunch Trump allies, have yet to speak out against the tariffs despite the significant impact on their districts. Tenney’s NY24 district, which includes all the counties bordering Lake Ontario and shares hundreds of miles of border with Canada via Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River, is particularly vulnerable. The region’s economy is deeply intertwined with Canada, from agriculture and manufacturing to tourism and energy. Yet, Tenney and Langworthy remain silent, leaving their constituents to wonder if their loyalty to Trump outweighs their duty to protect local interests.
The tariffs are framed as a negotiating tactic, but everyday Americans will bear the actual cost. While Trump claims the tariffs are a tax on foreign countries, they are actually a tax on American consumers. Prices will rise, businesses will struggle, and communities dependent on cross-border trade will suffer.
Western New York’s economic vitality hinges on its relationship with Canada, and Trump’s tariffs threaten to disrupt that delicate balance. As the February 2025 deadline looms, the question remains: Will Langworthy and Tenney stand up for their constituents, or will they continue prioritizing political allegiance over the needs of the people they were elected to serve?
In the meantime, Western New Yorkers are left to brace for the impact of Trump’s tariff tax. This policy could reshape the region’s economy and deepen the financial struggles of families living on the edge.
Langworthy’s district, NY-23, may have less direct border with Canada compared to Tenney’s, but it’s far from immune to the ripple effects of Trump’s tariffs. The district encompasses all the counties bordering Lake Erie, a vital waterway that serves as both an economic and cultural bridge between the U.S. and Canada. From Buffalo to Chautauqua County, communities along Lake Erie rely heavily on cross-border trade, tourism, and shared resources. The lake itself is a hub for commerce, with goods and services flowing freely across the border—until now.
Trump’s Tariff Strategy
For communities like Buffalo and Plattsburgh in New York, cross-border trade with Canada and Mexico isn’t just a convenience—it’s the lifeblood of their economies. These regions, already grappling with economic challenges, could face even greater hardships if former President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexican and Canadian goods go into effect. Buffalo, the third poorest city in the United States, and the rural, economically strained areas of northern New York depend heavily on trade with their neighbors. Tariffs threaten to disrupt this delicate balance, driving up costs for consumers and businesses alike.
The ripple effects of tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico—two of the largest importers of U.S. goods—would be far-reaching. Once Trump’s tariff “tax” kicks in, the price of Canadian and Mexican imports would spike for American consumers. In response, both countries would likely retaliate with their own tariffs on U.S. exports, making American goods more expensive abroad. This trade war wouldn’t just strain international relations—it would hit certain regions of the United States disproportionately hard, leaving already vulnerable communities to bear the brunt of the economic fallout.
Red States Most Affected
Ironically, the areas hardest hit by Trump’s tariffs would be many of the “red” states that form his political base. States in the Midwest and South, including Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Michigan, rely heavily on imports and exports. These regions, already grappling with economic challenges, would bear the brunt of higher costs and reduced trade opportunities. For communities in these states, the tariffs could mean higher prices for everyday goods, lost jobs, and a slowdown in economic activity—all while undermining the very industries Trump claims to protect.
The Trump Tariff Tax
Contrary to Trump’s claims, tariffs are not a tax on the country they target. Instead, the costs are passed on to consumers through higher prices. Historically, tariffs have been used to protect American industries from unfair competition, such as dumping (selling goods below cost), or to safeguard industries critical to national security. However, Trump’s latest tariff push is less about protecting U.S. interests and more about leveraging trade as a negotiating tool.
Trump has framed these tariffs to pressure Canada and Mexico to make more substantial commitments to curb illegal migration into the United States. While this rationale might hold some weight for the southern border, it raises serious questions when applied to Canada. The northern border has never been viewed as a significant source of illegal immigration, making the tariff threat seem misplaced. Canada has already responded with its own threats, including raising the price of electricity exported from Quebec—a vital energy source for parts of the northern U.S.
This approach risks alienating a key ally while doing little to address the challenges at the northern border. For Western New York and other border communities, the tariffs could mean higher energy costs, strained trade relationships, and economic uncertainty—all for a policy that seems more about political posturing than practical solutions.
Illegal Immigration or Something Else
The broader question is whether migration is the real reason behind Trump’s tariff strategy. Some analysts suggest that Trump’s fixation on tariffs harkens back to America’s Gilded Age, a period before the federal income tax when tariffs were the primary source of government revenue. During this era, wealth was concentrated in a few’s hands while most Americans struggled to make ends meet. By reviving tariffs, Trump may seek to return to an economic model prioritizing trade protectionism over modern fiscal policies.
Why tariffs?
In normal times, tariffs are used to:
Protect U.S. Industries: Import tariffs protect American industries from unfair competition, such as dumping (selling goods below cost) and intellectual property theft.
Reduce Trade Deficits: Tariffs reduce the U.S. trade deficit by making imports more expensive and encouraging the purchase of domestic goods.
Encourage Domestic Manufacturing: Tariffs encourage domestic manufacturing by making foreign goods more expensive. This incentivizes companies to manufacture products in the U.S., creating jobs and boosting the economy.
Leverage Trade Negotiations: As Trump purports to be doing, tariffs are a negotiating tool to pressure countries into agreeing to more favorable trade terms for the U.S.
Address National Security: Some tariffs, particularly on steel and aluminum, are justified on national security grounds to protect a strong domestic manufacturing base essential for defense.
Langworthy’s Border Security Bill
Meanwhile, concerns about border security are not unfounded. Congressman Nick Langworthy, representing New York’s 23rd District, introduced the Northern Border Security Enhancement and Review Act (H.R. 8734) to address vulnerabilities along the U.S.-Canada border. Langworthy highlights alarming statistics, including a sharp increase in apprehensions of individuals on the Known or Suspected Terrorist list and the seizure of enough fentanyl to kill 270 million Americans. The U. S. needs increased border security, but whether tariffs are the right too lis debatable.
Tariffs might leverage negotiations for stronger immigration controls at the southern border. However, applying the same strategy to Canada seems less justified. The northern border’s challenges are distinct, and a trade war could harm communities on both sides without addressing the root causes of security concerns.
Are the Trump Tariff Taxes Legal?
Like many things Trump does, there is a question about the legality of Trump’s tariff taxes. Trump’s approach to governing is to push the envelope and then loudly complain about the unfairness and corruption of any judge who gives him an adverse ruling.
According to Nobel laureate and columnist Paul Krugman, tariif’s
Tariffs and the New Gilded Age
As Trump’s tariff strategy unfolds, its economic pain on border communities and beyond raises questions about its real purpose. Is it a legitimate effort to secure borders and protect American industries, or is it a throwback to an outdated economic ideology?
Some argue that Trump’s push for tariffs may be rooted in his fascination with America’s Gilded Age—a time before the federal income tax, when tariffs were the government’s primary revenue source. During this era, robber barons like J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie amassed vast fortunes while most Americans lived in poverty. The 16th Amendment, which established the federal income tax in 1913, marked the end of the first Gilded Age
By reviving tariffs, Trump may attempt to return to an economic model that favors wealth concentration and reduces reliance on income taxes – the second Gilded Age. Like the first Gilded Age, this could exacerbate wealth inequality and place an even heavier burden on working-class Americans, particularly in struggling regions like Buffalo and northern New York.
The New Golden Age or the New Gilded Age?
Is Trump’s push for tariffs an attempt to revive this outdated economic model? And if so, what does it mean for the future of working-class Americans and the communities that depend on cross-border trade? Could this be the beginning of a seismic shift in how the federal government funds itself—away from income taxes and back to tariffs? And at what cost to the average American?