Hassett Publicly Rebukes New York Fed Study on Tariff Burden
Public confrontation — A top economic adviser leveled strong public criticism at work produced by the New York Fed, calling the analysis unsound and suggesting personnel consequences. The remarks landed in a televised interview and immediately drew attention across policy and financial media. That pushback took aim at a key quantitative claim: the study estimated that roughly 90% of the tariff burden fell on domestic buyers and companies.
Methodology debate — The adviser’s chief technical gripe centered on how the paper handled price effects versus trade volumes, saying the approach missed crucial dynamics. Authors of the research, however, used a measure tying monthly tariff receipts to import values and explicitly examined shifts in supply chains and volumes. Independent readers will note that both price pass-through and changes in import quantities matter for incidence calculations.
Broader context and stakes — The clash is not isolated: it arrives while the administration is actively contesting aspects of central-bank governance and advocating for new leadership. The critique amplifies questions about the independence of regional Fed research groups and whether political actors will seek to influence or discipline analysts. Market participants and policymakers will watch for second-order effects on research transparency, publication choices, and the willingness of economists inside the system to tackle politically sensitive topics.
Read Our Expert Analysis
Create an account or login for free to unlock our expert analysis and key takeaways for this development.
By continuing, you agree to receive marketing communications and our weekly newsletter. You can opt-out at any time.
Recommended for you
New York Fed: Americans bore nearly 90% of 2025 reciprocal-tariff bill
A New York Fed analysis finds roughly 90% of the cost of the 2025 reciprocal tariffs was passed through to U.S. households and firms during Jan–Nov 2025. State-level impacts concentrated about $199 billion of exposure through November, and negotiated caps and private-sector adjustments softened — but did not eliminate — the immediate domestic burden.
Warren Presses Fed Nominees to Pledge Protection for Regional Research
Sen. Elizabeth Warren is demanding that incoming Federal Reserve nominees commit to protecting the independence of research produced at regional Reserve Banks after a White House economic official publicly assailed a New York Fed paper. The dispute — amplified by warnings from regional Fed leaders, a Justice Department inquiry and tense Senate testimony from Treasury officials — raises the odds of a contentious confirmation fight and could deepen pressures that chill politically sensitive Fed studies.
Kashkari: Political Pressure Risks Eroding Fed Research Independence
Minneapolis Fed chief Neel Kashkari warned that coordinated public attacks on regional Fed research — highlighted by a televised rebuke of a New York Fed tariff paper — risk chilling independent analysis. The dispute now overlaps with a Justice Department inquiry, a tense Senate exchange involving Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent about a potential Kevin Warsh nomination, and early market moves that pushed back expectations for near‑term rate cuts.
ECB’s Panetta: Tariffs Have Hit the US Hardest
ECB Governing Council member Fabio Panetta says recent U.S. tariffs shifted most of the economic cost onto American shoulders — with foreign exporters absorbing a small share (~10%) and consumers and firms shouldering the bulk — a pattern that raises near‑term inflationary pressure in some places while depressing demand in others, complicating central-bank trade‑offs.
Itsunori Onodera Criticizes US Tariff Hike
Japan’s LDP tax chief publicly condemned the sudden US tariff increases after a Supreme Court ruling voided prior tariffs, elevating political pressure on Tokyo–Washington trade ties. The move risks near-term supply-chain cost shocks, pushes trade diplomacy onto an urgent timetable, and raises the odds of targeted Japanese industry disruption.
Trump-era tariff shock reshaped global trade — what comes next
A recent court decision removed one statutory route the White House used to impose targeted emergency tariffs, trimming a subset of the additional levies that followed 2024 policy moves. But sizeable remaining duties, large fiscal receipts and unresolved legal and operational questions mean higher-than-normal import costs and continued trade volatility for businesses and partners.
Senators Say U.S. Tariff Exemptions Favor Firms With White House Ties
Two senior Senate Democrats have demanded answers after alleging the administration carved out tariff relief behind closed doors for companies with political access. They ask trade and commerce officials to explain how exemptions are decided and how small businesses will be protected.
Scott Bessent’s Deficit Drive Undercut by Tariff Ruling and War
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s plan to narrow the federal deficit is strained after a Supreme Court decision stripped one statutory route for emergency tariffs that helped generate roughly $30 billion in recent monthly receipts (about $124 billion fiscal‑year‑to‑date). Coupled with higher conflict-related security spending and rising interest costs, the twin shocks tighten near‑term fiscal headroom, force Treasury cash‑management and issuance adjustments, and increase pressure for legislative or market-driven fixes.