A legal and business perspective from Thailand
At first glance, Donald Trump’s fondness for tariffs appears familiar, even predictable. Higher import duties, trade disputes, and blunt rhetoric aimed at foreign competitors have long been part of his political brand. But to view tariffs merely as trade weapons misses the larger picture. From a legal and business perspective, tariffs under Trump are not just about punishment or protection. They are about financing power. The more relevant question today is not why Trump raises tariffs, but what those tariffs are ultimately meant to pay for.
Tariffs as cash, not just leverage
In legal terms, tariffs are one of the few forms of taxation a government can impose quickly, centrally, and with minimal domestic political resistance. Unlike income or consumption taxes, tariffs are collected at the border and framed as a cost imposed on “others.” At a time when the United States faces: structural budget deficits, political resistance to raising domestic taxes, and growing concern over the long-term credibility of the US dollar, tariffs have re-emerged as a direct and controllable revenue stream. This matters because the Trump administration has openly embraced a level of military spending that would have been politically unthinkable a decade ago.
The cost of being a superpower
The United States is now discussing defence budgets approaching, and in some projections exceeding, one trillion dollars annually. These are not abstract figures. They fund missile defence systems, naval expansion, hypersonic weapons, cyber warfare capabilities, and the rebuilding of industrial capacity tied to national security. In business terms, this is not consumption. It is capital expenditure on global dominance. The legal question is simple: where does the money come from?
When printing money is no longer an option
For years, the US relied on monetary expansion to absorb the cost of strategic ambition. That option is now constrained. Persistent inflation, political backlash against central banks, and a visibly weakening dollar limit how far monetary policy can be stretched. In this environment, tariffs become something more than trade tools. They become fiscal substitutes a way to raise revenue without formally admitting to tax increases at home. Trump’s repeated claims that tariffs can “pay for” military expansion may sound exaggerated, but they are not legally incoherent. Tariff revenue does not need congressional approval in the same way domestic tax hikes do, particularly when justified under national security provisions.
Minerals, semiconductors, and the legal architecture of control
The expansion of America’s “critical minerals” list now including materials vital to semiconductors, defence systems, and advanced manufacturing is not an accident. It provides the legal foundation for tighter import controls, selective tariffs, and industrial subsidies. Tariffs in this context are not about revenue alone. They are about reshaping supply chains, forcing production onshore or into politically aligned jurisdictions. For businesses, this represents a structural shift away from cost efficiency and toward strategic reliability. For governments, it offers a way to justify higher prices as the price of security.
The view from Thailand
From Thailand and Southeast Asia, the implications are less ideological and more practical. Tariffs imposed in Washington ripple outward into shipping costs, commodity prices, currency volatility, and investment decisions. For regional businesses and expatriates alike, the impact is felt downstream: higher input costs, fragmented trade rules, and a world where economic neutrality is increasingly difficult to maintain. What appears in US politics as a domestic debate about tariffs is, in reality, a reconfiguration of the global economic order.
Trump is not using tariffs simply to pressure trading partners. He is using them to fund and justify the architecture of power military, industrial, and strategic at a time when traditional financial tools are losing credibility. In today’s geopolitical climate, tariffs are no longer just about trade. They are about who pays for the future of global dominance. And for countries like Thailand, and the expatriate communities that live and work here, the cost of that future is already being felt.
