During a recent announcement regarding the White House’s new trade policy, President Donald Trump showcased a large cardboard sign that read “Reciprocal Tariffs.” His declaration included a sweeping 10 percent tax on all imports to the United States, even those from uninhabited territories, alongside exorbitant tariffs for certain nations, allegedly determined by “tariffs charged to the USA.” However, these figures did not align with various other estimates and led to widespread confusion. Financial markets have taken a hit, with consumers bracing for steep increases in prices across numerous products.
The origins of these figures appear to stem from a simplistic calculation recommended by several prominent AI chatbots.
Economist James Surowiecki managed to decode the rationale behind the tariff calculations. By dividing a specific country’s trade deficit with the U.S. by its total exports to the United States, one could recreate the administration’s figures. The method involves halving this outcome to yield what could be labeled a “discounted reciprocal tariff.” The White House disputed this interpretation and issued its formula, yet as noted by Politico, this appears rather similar to Surowiecki’s description.
Surowiecki has criticized this method as “extraordinary nonsense.” The motivation behind Trump’s decision to adopt it seems to echo a familiar scenario of procrastination, reminiscent of students discovering their assignments are due imminently.
Numerous users on X have reported that when seeking an “easy” solution to trade deficits, they consistently receive a similar formula across multiple AI chatbots including ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or Grok. Technology News replicated inquiries similar to those discussed in social media posts, as well as framing questions aligned with governmental terminology, leading to uniform responses from all four platforms suggesting the same core approach.
While there were variations in the suggestions, such as Grok and Claude advocating for halving the proposed tariff to derive a “reasonable” figure, the recommendations from the chatbots showed more similarities than differences.
The AI systems also included caveats regarding potential trade-offs and complexities. Gemini was particularly extensive in outlining how this oversimplified strategy could yield negative repercussions, emphasizing that many economists view tariffs as ineffective in addressing trade deficits.
While the extent of AI influence on Trump’s trade policy is uncertain, the path through which these tariffs were formulated remains ambiguous. Regardless, global attention will focus on the implementation of these tariffs starting April 5th, and the subsequent implications of this unconventional mathematical approach on international trade.
