TOMORROW: Expert panel discussion, plus @SenWhitehouse joins us for a fireside chat with @KClausing on the US debt & deficit outlook, the policy challenges ahead, & the implications of persistent fiscal imbalances. Watch it here: piie.com/events/2026/grappli…

Trump’s tariffs are so unpopular that they are being described as huge political vulnerabilities in *MICHIGAN AND OHIO.

Overall, the poor polling of tax cuts here (One Big Beautiful Bill tax cuts, $5k rebates) and the good polling on health care should make policymakers consider whether they should squander progressive tax revenue (which polls well here!) on middle-class tax cuts or health care.

Couple of major-media polls asking about tariffs this week in different ways: NYT/Siena connects tariff policy to Trump personally, gets 58% 'disapprove' of Trump handling of tariffs, v. 38% 'approve'.

In 1930 Congress gave the president Section 338 tariff authorities. Trump has abused them. In 1962 Congress gave the president Section 232 tariff authorities. Trump has abused them. In 1974 Congress gave the president Section 122 and Section 301 tariff authorities. Trump has abused both of them. In 1977 Congress gave the president IEEPA tariff authorities. Trump has abused them. Congress just voted to give Trump Section 113 tariff authorities, ignoring our warnings that he would abuse them. We don’t know when, but you don’t need a crystal ball to know what is likely to happen next.

The Russia sanctions bill does nothing to truly punish Russia. Instead, it would give Trump more power to put tariffs in place unilaterally. Reckless tariffs hurt small businesses & our economy while raising prices on families. Trump already has the authority to put more sanctions on Russia but refuses to. This bill won’t change that. I’m voting against this bill to stop the president from causing more chaos. We should be focused on legislation that actually holds Russia accountable for Putin’s war in Ukraine.

W/@AlfredCObregon and Eli DeLuca: Why Is Congress Going to Authorize President Trump to Raise Taxes by Potentially Hundreds of Billions of Dollars This Week? cato.org/blog/why-congress-g… via @CatoInstitute

FDR in 1945: presidency.ucsb.edu/document…

Happy to be a part of this. These forced labor tariffs make no sense unless understood for what they are: an attempt to take authority that belongs to Congress. The tariffs bear no relation to possible underlying harms; they merely create a distortionary and regressive tax.

This is the interview Trump’s FCC doesn’t want you to see. We’re not just going up against the most corrupt politician in Texas. We’re going up against this entire corrupt system.

“I think one feature of the US-Canada trade war so far has been that the rhetoric has been larger than the impact,” @KClausing says. “So far, the damage has been limited, but it’s still real. I think even the rhetoric around this trade war has really diminished Canadian interest in doing business with the US." time.com/article/2026/09/09/…

It's very hard to find an economist who is not critical of the tariffs! The IMF chooses instead someone who was "a less vocal critic".

America isn’t Europe, we have significant flows of positively-selected immigrants who are big wins for the economy and the federal budget, and Trump wants to wreck that as part of generalized hostility to all immigration. slowboring.com/p/trumps-terr…

I organized an economist amicus brief in support of affirmance of the Court of International Trade's ruling in Oregon v. Trump and Burlap and Barrel v. Donald J. Trump that the administration exceeded its authority when it imposed 10 percent worldwide tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. In the brief, we argue that "large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits," which the tariffs purportedly address, are impossible in today's system of floating exchange rates. We explain what such deficits looked like in the context of fixed exchange rates policymakers found themselves in until the 1970s, and that the government conflates balance-of-payments deficits with negative intermediate balances on the accounting statement known as the Balance of Payments. With floating exchange rates, no balance-of-payments imbalance can be “large and serious" in the sense of Section 122. Separately, we argue the United States does not face the "fundamental international payments problems" the statute requires as a threshold condition for authorizing (or in fact, mandating) the tariffs. The government's interpretation of the statutes and the economic concepts in it would grant it unconstrained authority to impose worldwide tariffs that, as we have seen, have vast economic and political significance. You can read the full brief here: aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2….

In 1937, Stalin's census found the famine had killed millions.⁣ ⁣ His government suppressed the report and shot the statisticians who made it.⁣ ⁣ Three weeks ago, that kind of suppression was illegal in America. Now it isn't.⁣ ⁣ newsletter.platypuseconomics…

“Lake Ontario is not suffering, it’s a lake.” Jean Chrétien truly one of the best to ever do it.

Graeme Blair, David Hausman, and I organized an amicus brief in Genalo v . G.M., a case the Supreme Court will hear in October. The case revolves around the question of whether due process requires bond hearings for those subject to prolonged immigration detention under Section 1226(c).

So happy to be part of this effort on climate coalitions, spearheaded by Catherine Wolfram. See also our recent piece in Science that discusses these ideas. science.org/doi/10.1126/scie…

From @TheEconomist @YouGov (9/1): I think these are the most lopsided tariff polls yet? Respondents oppose tariffs on Canadian goods by 58%-26%, and generally 68% believe tariffs so far have "hurt average Americans", as against 14% thinking they've "helped".

New podcast! Glad to be on Odd Lots again from Jackson Hole. Spoke with @TheStalwart and @tracyalloway about * The Fed and its new Chair, US inflation, Treasuries, AI impact on the macroeconomy, AI impact on economists, and central bank communications... @Bloomberg and @PIIE podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas…