CFR Poll Shows Americans Across Party Lines Tie Tariffs to Affordability  

American households would feel better about the cost of living if tariffs were lowered as part of the affordability policy agenda. 

That was the conclusion from a Council on Foreign Relations opinion poll conducted in January 2026 in partnership with Morning Consult. More than 65 percent of the 2,203 respondents said tariffs had made a range of everyday items less affordable, including food and groceries, health care, housing, and transportation. Importantly, that sentiment was expressed by a plurality of people identifying themselves as Democrats and Republicans. 

The challenge is that the cost of those goods is shaped by numerous factors—tariffs are just one piece of the puzzle. Still, the poll suggests that the high-profile nature of tariffs since President Donald Trump returned to the White House has made them top of mind, and that perception is as much an issue as reality. As a result, other steps to tackle affordability, such as proposed caps on credit card fees and limits on large-scale institutional purchases of homes, may not help sentiment, at least in the near-term, as much as rolling back tariffs on items  Americans say they care about the most. 

Americans View Trade as Impacting Prices

In fact, most Americans believe that tariffs increase the prices they pay for a range of goods, from food and grocery items to childcare and medical expenses. For some categories, including food and groceries as well as technology and electronics, more than 50 percent of Americans see trade policy as having a “major impact” on what they pay. 

Importantly, those views are bipartisan. For example, 80 percent of Democrats and 68 percent of Republicans believe trade impacts the cost of their medical expenses. Similarly, 91 percent of Democrats and 81 percent of Republicans say trade impacts their grocery bills.  

Those views are consistent for each expense category across respondents who supported Kamala Harris or Trump in the 2024 presidential election. For example, 94 percent of Harris voters view trade as impacting food and grocery prices, and 79 percent of Trump voters agree; both well over a majority. Even with the Trump effect (i.e., the increased likelihood of Trump supporters adopting his anti-trade views), Trump voters are clearly making a connection between trade policy and prices.  

The nuance is in the degree. For some categories, Harris voters are more likely to see trade playing a major role. 

Take, for example, technology and electronics: overall, 88 percent of Harris voters and 81 percent of Trump voters responded that trade has an impact on their prices. However, 67 percent of Harris voters described the impact as major, compared to only 43 percent of Trump voters. Similar splits are seen for food and groceries, clothing and footwear, and home and auto maintenance. Beyond those variations, however, the poll illustrates that Americans across parties connect trade to the prices they pay. 

Looking at different income levels, the poll suggests only modest differences in the degree of affordability concerns in most categories, with healthcare-related expenses particularly elevated outside the highest income bracket. 

Tariffs Are Raising Prices in Categories of Concern

Looking in more detail at specific categories where respondents highlighted price increases shows the link between tariffs and inflation over the last year. The average tariff rate has increased from 2.6 percent in January 2025 to 13 percent in December, and economists at the New York Federal Reserve say that U.S. businesses and consumers are bearing the brunt. They estimate that overall U.S. import prices for tariffed goods have risen 11 percent more compared to goods not subject to tariffs.  

Indeed, tariffs have raised prices in almost every household expense category of concern, including childcare, clothing and footwear, food and grocery, housing, medical, technology and electronics, and transportation. That said, tariff rates and their effect on prices have varied significantly, so it is worth examining each category from the poll in turn.  

Food and Groceries

Food and grocery prices routinely top affordability concerns in nationwide surveys. The CFR-Morning Consult survey found that 73 percent of Americans across political parties are worried about being able to pay for groceries.  

North Dakota State University’s Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies found [PDF] that the effective tariff on food imports in December 2025 was 9 percent, down from 15 percent in April 2025. The lower rate partly owes to tariff reductions and exemptions in recent trade agreements and Trump’s November 14 executive order that removed specific agricultural products from reciprocal tariffs.  

Even with those exemptions, Yale Budget Lab estimates that as of January 19, 2026, food prices will likely increase by 1.4 percent in the short run (before consumers and firms make substitutions in response to tariffs) and remain elevated by 1.2 percent in the long run (after substitutions are made). In December 2025, the consumer price index for food items rose 0.7 percent, marking a 3.1 percent increase over the course of 2025 (note, there are gaps in the data for October and November).  

But Jayson Lusk, head of agricultural economics at Purdue University, says that data is less important in the case of food prices than sentiment. He points out that “consumer anxiety is increasingly driven by food prices and tariffs, not inflation as a general economic concept.”  

Medical Expenses

Beyond food and groceries, medical expenses—including doctor visits, medications, and health treatments—were highlighted as a worry by more than 70 percent of respondents. According to the 2025 Milliman Medical Index, an American family of four could expect last year to pay approximately $13,800 in healthcare contributions and out-of-pocket costs if they have insurance through an employer.  

Prescription drugs for this family of four are about 12 percent of the total amount spent on their healthcare costs. Although President Trump has floated higher tariffs on pharmaceuticals (as high as 100 percent), those tariffs have so far remained just threats. However, a Section 232 investigation is pending for a number of U.S. pharmaceutical imports, including drugs and active pharmaceutical ingredients.  

Meanwhile, as of December 2025, nine major pharmaceutical companies received tariff exemptions as part of a deal with the Trump administration. Additionally, many of the reciprocal trade agreements have carveouts for pharmaceuticals, and the United States and the United Kingdom have an Agreement in Principle on Pharmaceutical Pricing that will exempt certain UK medical technologies and pharmaceutical goods and ingredients from future Section 232 and 301 tariffs.  

Tariff threats led to a surge of pharmaceutical imports in October 2025 as companies rushed to stockpile goods before anticipated tariff increases. However, without major changes to date in pharmaceutical tariffs, price increases for basic pharmaceutical products have remained relatively low, at 0.4 percent in the short run and 0.5 percent in the long run.   

Technology and Electronics

Unlike pharmaceuticals, technology and electronics, such as computers and smartphones, have been hit harder by tariffs. Those goods are a major household expense, with 96 percent of Americans owning at least one computer and 91 percent owning a smartphone. The CFR - Morning Consult survey found that 61 percent of Americans are concerned about being able to afford those goods.   

The top exporters of computers and smartphones to the United States are China, India, and Vietnam, all countries that initially faced high reciprocal tariff rates in April 2025. Shortly after April 2, President Trump issued an executive order exempting some electronic goods, such as smartphones and computers, from reciprocal tariffs.  

Despite the exemptions, many tariffs are still in place for derivatives and inputs, including but not limited to 25 percent tariffs on semiconductors (note, a January 14, 2026, Presidential Proclamation narrowed the scope of those tariffs based on the technical parameters and intended use of products) and 50 percent tariffs on semifinished copper products and derivatives, as well as 50 percent tariffs on  aluminum and steel derivatives (although the administration recently said it was considering removing some of those tariffs because they are hurting consumers).  

Yale Budget Lab estimates that the price of consumer electronics will increase 18 percent in the short run and 5 percent in the long run. 

Clothing and Footwear

A majority of Americans across the political spectrum are also worried about clothing and footwear prices, according to the survey. Sixty-eight percent of Democrats, 57 percent of Independents, and 53 percent of Republicans are concerned about the prices of those goods.  

The United States imports around 89 percent of its apparel and leather goods. Bangladesh, China, India, and Vietnam are among the top exporters of apparel to the United States. As of November 2025, the weighted average tariff rate for the top-ten importers for apparel and footwear was 36 percent. As with other goods, some of Trump’s reciprocal trade agreements exempted textiles and other apparel-related goods from reciprocal tariffs on certain countries, including Bangladesh, Cambodia, El Salvador, and Guatemala.  

High tariff rates and trade disruptions for apparel, footwear, and leather goods are causing concern in the fashion industry. According to a poll by the Business of Fashion and McKinsey & Company in November 2025, a majority of fashion executives said that tariffs will cause industry prices to rise further in 2026, with 41 percent of executives predicting a 1–5 percent increase and 38 percent a 6–10 percent increase.  

Separately, Yale Budget Lab found that consumers will face particularly high inflation for apparel and leather products, such as shoes and handbags. The research group estimates leather good prices will increase by 23 percent in the short term and 7 percent in the long term, while apparel prices will increase 21 percent in the short term and 6 percent in the long term.  

Housing

The lack of affordable housing is another pressure point for many Americans. In a December 2025 Politico poll [Excel], 38 percent of Americans identified housing as one of the most challenging items to afford. Building affordable housing requires materials such as copper, lumber, and steel, all three of which face Section 232 tariffs.  

Canada supplies approximately 80 percent of U.S. softwood lumber imports, a major construction input for building new houses. Canadian softwood faces a 45 percent effective tariff rate, which is comprised of a 10 percent global Section 232 tariff on soft lumber imposed in October 2025 and an additional 35 percent antidumping and countervailing duty imposed since May 2017.  

The Producer Price Index for net inputs to residential construction goods showed an approximately 3 percent increase over the course of 2025. In early January 2026, lumber futures climbed to a three-month high of $600 per thousand board feet, a result of supply pressures that include lower lumber harvests, mill curtailments, and tariffs on Canada.  

Transportation

The most common mode of transportation for Americans is the automobile. Around 86 percent [PDF] of Americans drive at least once a week and 78 percent of Americans rely on a vehicle to get to work. But a survey of car shoppers conducted by CarEdge in November/December 2025 showed that 82 percent of car buyers believe cars are less affordable than a year ago, an 8 percent increase from October 2025.  

In March 2025, the Trump administration announced a 25 percent tariff on automobiles and auto parts, 51 percent of which come from Canada and Mexico. Though there are many exemptions for Canada and Mexico (including reductions based on the value of the American content), the lack of available information makes it difficult for experts to calculate the effective tariff rate on those goods, which some estimate to be around 17 to 18 percent.  

Tariffs are expected to increase new motor vehicle prices by 12 percent in the short run (or roughly $6,200) and 5 percent in the long run ($2,600). Vehicle and parts purchases are not the only transportation-related expenses projected to increase. According to Insurify, a company that compares auto insurance prices, once increased repair costs (as a result of increased prices) for auto parts are passed through, drivers will likely see higher insurance premiums as well. Although Insurify projects a 1 percent increase in insurance premiums by the end of 2026, if tariff costs are passed through, that projection could jump to 4 percent.  

Childcare Expenses

Families with children have additional household costs including childcare payments, babysitting fees, and supplies. Sixty-two percent of American parents with school-aged children are concerned about affording childcare expenses, according to the CFR-Morning Consult poll.  

Some significant childcare costs are services, such as babysitting fees and payments for daycare, but parents also need to buy goods for their young children, such as baby clothes, cribs, diapers, monitors, strollers, and toys. ImportGenius, a global trade data tracker, finds that the United States has 93–100 percent import dependence on China for baby carriages and strollers, beds, car seats, coloring books, cribs, play yards, and swings. The weighted effective tariff rate for many of those goods is 26 percent (as of December 2025), according to the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. Games, toys, and other related goods face a weighted tariff rate of 37 percent.  

A report by the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee Minority released in June 2025 found [PDF] that five typical baby goods had increased in price by 24 percent between April 1 and June 9, 2025. In July 2025, Lisa Trofe, executive director of the Baby Safety Alliance, estimated that critical baby and child product prices could increase around 30 percent.  

Pulling Back Tariffs

Pulling those different categories together, it is no surprise that tariffs and trade policy have significantly contributed to the perception of rising affordability challenges across party lines and income levels. Yale Budget Lab’s research suggests the cost to consumers is sizable. In a January 2026 report, it estimated that the current tariff policy would raise the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index by 1.2 percent, costing the average household $1,681 in real income.  

Reversing those costs may not prove as easy as policymakers would like; tariffs are only one factor influencing prices. Goods such as food and grocery staples often behave like commodities, with prices impacted by global demand and supply shocks, adverse weather conditions, supply chain shortages, and other variables largely uncorrelated with tariffs.  

Even if levies on such goods are removed, there is no guarantee that their prices will fall. The average price of ground roast coffee across U.S. cities, for example, increased 34 percent in 2025. Despite the Trump administration’s November 2025 tariff rollbacks following framework trade agreements with several Latin American partners, analysts estimate that it could take at least nine months for prices to go down for consumers, owing to roasting times and price negotiations.  

Other experts point to the fact that inventories purchased under higher tariffs could still be sitting in warehouses and distribution centers, so prices could remain higher for longer as retailers try to recoup costs for expensive products they have held for months.  

Historical examples, however, suggest that tariff reductions could help consumers in at least some areas. In 2018, the first Trump administration imposed tariffs ranging from 16 percent to 50 percent on finished washing machines. During the tariff period, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that the cost of laundry equipment rose by 34 percent, while the price of all appliances on average rose by 23 percent. After the tariffs expired in 2023, the cost of laundry equipment fell by 11 percent, while that for all appliances decreased by 5.1 percent.  

More recent data, though incomplete, is promising as well. Although the average price of ground roast coffee across the United States increased for ten straight months in 2025, prices fell 2.2 percent in December after tariffs on major coffee exporters were removed.  

The lack of clarity on factors influencing prices is further complicated by consumers’ expectations of higher prices due to tariffs. As consumers are primed to pay more for certain goods, firms have the ability to charge more and maintain higher profit margins even if tariffs are rolled back.  

Such was the case with laundry equipment during Trump’s first term. Tariffs at the time applied to washing machines but not other laundry equipment such as dryers. Yet a University of Chicago study found [PDF] that the price of washers and dryers both increased by the same amount, around 11 percent. In this case, firms were able to charge more for dryers as consumers were already prepared to pay more for laundry equipment in general.  

Overall, removing tariffs is likely to alleviate some of the price pressures consumers are facing, though the speed and scale of price decreases is uncertain. For goods such as bananas and coffee, tariffs are just one part of the picture, as consumers are often at the mercy of global demand, supply, and other factors. Even if costs do not come down right away, cutting tariffs could boost public sentiment, which would be welcomed by politicians facing tight races in the midterm elections.   

Affordability and the Administration

As recently as early December 2025, President Trump appeared skeptical of cost-of-living issues, proclaiming that affordability was a “hoax” and that prices were “misinterpreted.” The administration seems to have reversed course in the new year, and has made several efforts, both substantive and symbolic, to address growing concerns about day-to-day costs nationwide. In particular, the administration has focused on three pain points for consumers: credit-card payments, home prices, and healthcare costs.  

On January 9, President Trump called for a one-year cap on credit card interest rates of 10 percent, citing excessively high rates that were “ripping off the American public.” Indeed, credit card rates have risen sharply in recent years: according to the Federal Reserve, the average interest rate on credit cards was 22.3 percent in November 2025, up from 16.3 percent five years earlier and 13.7 percent a decade prior.  

Research shows that a 10 percent cap could help Americans save a lot. Analysis from the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator estimates $100 billion of savings, though countered by a $27 billion reduction in rewards for consumers with credit scores below 760. However, large banks have warned that a cap could do more harm than good by reducing access to credit. It is also still unclear how such a cap would be implemented. Legislation would require congressional approval, and several bank interest groups and key members of Congress have opposed such a measure.  

The Trump administration has also targeted housing costs. On January 8, 2026, Trump directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage-backed securities to help reduce mortgage rates. Nearly two weeks later, the White House issued an executive order banning large institutional investors from purchasing single family homes.  

Even though home prices have risen significantly in recent years—almost 55 percent from 2020 to Q3 2025, according to the National Association of Homebuilders—some experts caution that this is not the right fix. Institutions only own 3.4 percent of all rental homes nationwide (though this number is higher for some fast-growing metros), meaning that a ban on sales may not address a lack of housing supply as efficiently as, say, zoning and permitting reforms that actually make it easier to build houses (something being debated currently in Congress). Nevertheless, the measure is likely to resonate with voters. An early GrayHouse poll found that 59 percent of respondents supported the ban on institutional buyers.  

The third leg of Trump’s affordability push addresses healthcare costs by calling on Congress to enact his so-called Great Healthcare Plan. The plan seeks to reduce drug prices by matching the lowest prices paid for certain drugs by other developed countries, reduce insurance premiums by cutting subsidies to large insurers, and fund a program to lower out-of-pocket costs for patients. Finally, it mandates that healthcare providers list their actual prices to improve transparency.  

Reactions to the plan have been mixed, with some experts questioning if those proposals, several of which were previously introduced in Congress and failed to pass, would significantly alter drug prices and insurance premiums. Indeed, while 16 major drug companies have signed most-favored nation deals with the Trump administration to lower drug prices since September 2025, drug companies (including the 16) have raised the prices of 927 drugs in January alone.  

Although the Trump administration has made a concrete effort to address affordability in major areas, it has simultaneously pursued policies that increase consumer costs. It has maintained a 25 percent tariff on furniture and kitchen cabinets, 10 percent on lumber, and has raised the possibility of higher duties pending further trade negotiations, all of which directly influence homebuilding and housing costs. Trump also hiked tariffs on South Korea in late January 2026 for not “living up” to the terms of their trade deal, impacting auto, pharma, and lumber prices, among others, and he has threatened additional duties on Canada and other countries. Persistent uncertainty around trade policy seems likely to feed into household affordability concerns, while also leaving businesses unclear about adjusting their prices in the near future. 

Affordability remains a priority for voters across party lines and income levels, and CFR-Morning Consult’s poll shows that trade policy is exacerbating that concern. The emerging consensus is that Washington should address affordability ahead of the midterms; indeed, Republicans appear to be at risk of losing seats in Congress without doing more to bring down costs.  

Despite the Trump administration’s policy proposals to tackle the crisis—including a cap on credit card interest rates, regulations on home purchases, and pharmaceutical deals—tariff reductions could be a simpler path to lower prices and better public perception.   

The CFR-Morning Consult survey was conducted online between January 7–8, 2026, among a nationally representative sample of 2,203 American adults. The data was weighted to approximate a target sample of adults based on age, gender, race, educational attainment, region, gender by age, and race by educational attainment. Results from the full survey have a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points. A full report of the survey results is forthcoming in a CFR report.