What Americans Really Think About Trade and Tariffs

The rollout of the tariffs, however, has been bumpy, and once in place, they have been subject to sporadic modification. This has not only increased uncertainty for U.S. trading partners and businesses, but also for American consumers concerned about affordability.

A year into this tectonic policy shift, the Council on Foreign Relations’ Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies set out to better understand U.S. public opinion on tariffs and trade policy. Surveying the public on a variety of issues, including trade policy priorities, national security, and the impact of tariffs, revealed some notable nuances in public opinion that could inform future policymaking. Three major themes emerged from the data:

The CFR-Morning Consult survey, which was conducted online between January 7–8, 2026, among a nationally representative sample of 2,203 adults, suggested ten takeaways. 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.

Respondents were first asked about the role of trade and trade policy. When asked about the primary goal of trade, a majority of Americans (68 percent) agreed that trade enables both buying and selling things. Essentially, trade is not just about selling American products abroad, but also purchasing products from other countries. This view is shared across parties.

Traditionally, trade policy aims to reduce barriers to trade. The survey asked respondents what U.S. officials should focus on when negotiating a trade deal with another country. A strong majority (66 percent) of Americans agreed that negotiations should focus on both sides reducing trade barriers. In contrast, 13 percent thought that the United States should not negotiate trade agreements, and only 11 percent were in favor of solely reducing the foreign country’s trade barriers. Americans thus see trade as a reciprocal exchange, and there is little support for one-sided deals.

However, responses vary by age. Older adults are more likely to view the goal of trade policy as more reciprocal, with both sides reducing some barriers. In contrast, a smaller majority of younger adults (52 percent) agree. Generally, younger adults are more skeptical of trade agreements (19 percent).

To support the exchange of goods and services, countries have negotiated rules to prevent arbitrary discrimination against products based on their origin. Many of those rules are embedded in international agreements, such as the treaties that make up the World Trade Organization. Rules are the basic infrastructure for a fair system and allow countries to peacefully settle disputes. That fair system provides a degree of stability and predictability in day-to-day exchanges.

The survey asked respondents what they think “fair trade” means in terms of how the rules are applied: to everyone, most countries, or varied by country. That question was to assess whether respondents believed some countries, such as the United States, were above the rules. Nearly half of American adults think that fair trade means that all countries are bound by the same rules, and 23 percent think that the rules should vary from country to country.

Views on fair trade differ by cohort. For example, Americans with higher education appear more likely to view fair trade as all countries being bound by the same rules: sixty-five percent of Americans with postgraduate degrees view fair trade as all countries bound by the same rules, and 50 percent of Americans with bachelor’s degrees agree, while only 45 percent of those with less than a college degree view fair trade the same way.

Young people are also more skeptical of fair trade meaning the same rules apply to all countries. Just 40 percent of Americans between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four understand fair trade this way. One-quarter of those adults see fairness as other countries bound by the same rules, but the United States as exempt. This contrasts sharply with the views of nearly every other age group.

Similar proportions of Democrats and Republicans see fair trade as all countries bound by the same rules. More than a quarter of Republicans, however, see fair trade as variation in the rules by country, compared to just 20 percent of Democrats.

Trade is not a topic that Americans typically think or care much about. President Trump’s second-term focus on tariffs has, however, brought the issue front of mind. In fact, when asked how knowledgeable they were about tariffs compared to the average American, approximately 60 percent of respondents said they were somewhat or very knowledgeable.

Tariffs have had a particularly noticeable effect on Americans’ perceptions of the cost of food. The CFR-Morning Consult survey asked Americans how concerned they are about affording a range of everyday expenses. Across the board, a majority of Americans are concerned about their ability to afford day-to-day items.

Further, Americans understand the difference between tradable and non-tradable goods, and clearly identify the prices of food and grocery items, technology and electronics, and clothing and footwear as the most impacted by trade. This finding is generally consistent with Morning Consult’s monthly tariff sentiment survey, which shows food and grocery prices are a leading concern for Americans.

Tariffs are President Trump’s primary trade policy tool, and average tariff rates have reached historic highs in his second term. Who ultimately pays the cost of the tariffs has been the subject of substantial debate. Trump has repeatedly claimed that tariffs are a fee paid by other countries, not Americans. However, a December 2025 report by economists Gita Gopinath and Brent Neiman found [PDF] that nearly 100 percent of tariffs had been passed through to U.S. import prices. Recent research by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Columbia University similarly showed that the brunt of the tariff costs—90 percent—fell on U.S. businesses and consumers.

The survey asked respondents what they think a tariff is. Nearly half of U.S. adults believe that a tariff is a tax on foreign products that Americans buy. Just two-in-five adults see tariffs as a fee paid by foreigners. This view varies across parties, with 59 percent of Democrats seeing tariffs as a tax and 51 percent of Republicans seeing them as a fee foreigners pay. Independents are split, though they include a higher percentage of respondents that simply do not know. This could be reflective of diverse partisan messaging.

Answers also vary by education and occupational background. Though over half of respondents with a postgraduate (52 percent) or bachelor’s (56 percent) degree see tariffs as a tax, only 40 percent of respondents with no college education think the same. Furthermore, respondents that self-identified as white-collar families are more likely to see tariffs as a tax than blue-collar families, which are roughly split on the question.

Opinion slightly differs regionally on whether tariffs are a tax or a fee, with Americans in the northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont) and the West (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming) more likely to view tariffs as a tax.

The survey asked respondents what they think is tariffs’ main impact, explaining that tariffs act as a tax on products that U.S. consumers and businesses purchase from abroad. Although a plurality of Americans (42 percent) views the main impact of tariffs as increasing prices, perspectives vary by party. In fact, while 55 percent of Democrats see tariffs as raising prices, just 26 percent of Republicans feel the same. Instead, Republicans are more likely to view tariffs as protecting U.S. manufacturing jobs (41 percent).

This divide is even starker based on the 2024 presidential vote, with 61 percent of Kamala Harris voters viewing tariffs as raising prices, as opposed to just 27 percent of Trump voters. In contrast, 42 percent of Trump voters and just 14 percent of Harris voters see tariffs as protecting U.S. manufacturing jobs. This reveals a strong correlation between Trump voters and overall Republican views on tariffs, suggesting a response based on elite messaging.

The nexus between trade and national security has grown in importance over the last decade. Trade is often discussed in securitized terms, such as the common refrain (which first appeared as a core pillar of Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy) that “economic security is national security.” The bulk of Trump’s second term tariffs have been levied using emergency powers or national security laws. However, the definition of national security has also been stretched to encompass many issues not traditionally covered in the past, from economic competition and innovation to climate change.

The survey asked respondents about their thoughts on the blurring line between trade and security to see whether they define products that are “critical to national security” in narrow or broad terms. The results suggest that Americans have nuanced views on the subject.

A plurality of Americans considers products with a military use or application to be “critical to national security,” regardless of party. A majority of adults sixty-five and over (68 percent) are likely to have this view (half of those aged forty-five to sixty-four years and 40 percent of those aged thirty-five to forty-four years agree), while just 33 percent of Americans between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four do.

Those between ages eighteen and thirty-four show strongest support for products that help the United States compete economically in emerging and high-tech industries (37 percent) or products that are necessary for public health (34 percent) as critical to national security.

Notably, the two categories with the least support as critical for national security across the board are products that support U.S. manufacturing and those that help fight climate change.

The survey also asked respondents whether some products should be made in the United States so that the country is not as reliant on importing them, suggesting that national security could be a reason for wanting things made in the United States. A majority of respondents believe that medicine and energy should be made in the United States.

Nearly half of respondents also favor domestic automobile manufacturing. The ranking of automobiles notably varies by region, with a majority (54 percent) of Americans from the Midwest saying that they should absolutely be made in the United States, while just 38 percent of Americans from Western states agreeing. This variation is likely due to the higher concentration of auto jobs in the Midwest.

Fewer respondents support other products being made in the United States for national security reasons, such as clothing, computers, semiconductors, and steel. Previous surveys by Morning Consult show that Americans are sensitive to price signals when asked whether they would buy American versus similar foreign products. Price could therefore color views on reshoring to some extent.

Though Trump’s approach to trade has treated friends and foes alike, Americans are more comfortable importing products deemed essential to national security from certain countries, particularly NATO allies. The survey asked respondents their views about select trading partners and found that Canada, France, Germany, and Mexico are considered friends or allies. In contrast, China and Russia are broadly seen as either rivals or enemies, with Russia holding more negative views. Those results hold across party, education, and previous presidential vote choices.

Views on China are largely shaped by age, with younger Americans less inclined to see China as an enemy or rival than older Americans. In fact, 38 percent of those aged eighteen to thirty-four and 28 percent of those aged thirty-five to forty-four see China as a friend or ally, compared to 23 percent of those aged forty-five to sixty-four and 11 percent of those sixty-five and older.

Americans’ views of those countries also account for whether they are willing to rely on them for products essential to national security in the event of a shortage in the United States. Again, unsurprisingly, a strong majority of Americans (75 percent) would feel comfortable relying on Canada for such products. Majorities of Americans are also willing to trust France, Germany, and Mexico. Notably, Americans are more reluctant to import essential national security items from Russia than from China. There is broad agreement across education and party identification. Again, younger Americans view China differently. Fifty-six percent of Americans aged eighteen to thirty-four said they would definitely or probably be okay with importing essential national security products from China, whereas just 22 percent of those aged sixty-five and older did.  Generational gaps also appear in other surveys, with younger generations showing less concern about relations with China overall.

Although the trade war with China began in Trump’s first term, he significantly escalated his tariff threats in his second term. At their peak in April 2025, tariffs on China hit a record 135 percent, but they have since come down to an effective tariff rate of 24 percent as of January 2026, according to the Yale Budget Lab. The survey asked respondents what they thought about the tariffs on China, and who is most impacted by them.

Almost half of U.S. adults believe that the tariffs on China are too high. About a quarter see tariffs on China as “about right,” and just 6 percent consider them to be too low. Opinion varies notably by ideology and party. Seventy-one percent of those identifying as liberal see the China tariffs as too high, compared to 52 percent of moderates and 31 percent of conservatives.

Among Democrats, 67 percent think the tariffs are too high, 18 percent see them as just right, and just 3 percent see them as too low. Among Republicans, 46 percent view the tariffs on China as about right, 30 percent as too high, and just 9 percent as too low. Republicans are therefore more comfortable with the China tariffs than Democrats. Those findings are consistent across age and education, and with other surveys.

When asked about the impact of a possible 10 percent tariff increase on China (a modest amount compared to actual increases over the last year), three-fifths of Americans agree that such a tariff increase would hurt consumers, the middle class, small businesses, their own household finances, and the larger economy. Results show that respondents are fairly split on whether politicians, the government, or coastal elites are hurt or helped by tariffs.

Again, those views differ by party. Democrats think that the economy as a whole (49 percent), consumers (49 percent), farmers (46 percent), and the middle class (44 percent) are hurt a lot by a tariff increase.

Republican views vary. Although 29 percent think that a tariff increase on China would help manufacturing workers and the government (28 percent), there is no clear plurality view on tariff benefits. Meanwhile, Republicans see the middle class (31 percent), household finances (31 percent), and consumers (31 percent), as hurt somewhat by increased tariffs. Republicans are most torn on how tariffs affect the economy, with 25 percent viewing a tariff increase as helping some, and 26 percent seeing them as hurting some.

Many Americans are concerned that tariffs on China are too high and hurting core groups in the United States, but that does not necessarily mean that they favor increasing trade with China. The survey asked respondents what they thought about current U.S.-China trade relations, and whether the United States should trade more or less with China. The results suggest that while Americans have strong opinions about tariffs, they are undecided on the future of the U.S.-China trade relationship. In fact, Americans are split on more or less trade with China, and over a quarter of Americans do not have an opinion. Smaller shares of Americans hold views on the extreme ends of this question.

Despite the ambivalence on U.S.-China trade, Americans favor working with China on a range of different issues, such as reducing global poverty, strengthening and modernizing manufacturing for mutual economic growth, and collaborating on global health research. This could be because Americans consistently favor easing tensions with China. A national tracking poll by Morning Consult shows that 75 percent of Americans would like the United States and China to reduce military tensions and work toward reducing their economic tensions.

President Trump’s broad use of tariffs is an unprecedented break with U.S. trade policy since World War II. He is the first president to use the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to levy tariffs. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing those actions. Though their ruling will settle some constitutional questions surrounding the president’s use of IEEPA, the president can raise tariffs in many other ways without congressional involvement. The survey asked respondents what they thought about the president’s trade authority, specifically, whether the president should be allowed to impose tariffs without congressional approval, even if the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate trade and levy duties and taxes.

A plurality of Americans believe that the president should not have the power to impose tariffs without approval from Congress, and 16 percent support some guardrails, such as a one-year time limit. Under a quarter of Americans think that the president should be allowed to impose tariffs without Congress for any reason.

Those views are strongly shaped by party, however: 66 percent of Democrats, 39 percent of Independents, and 23 percent of Republicans think the president should not be allowed to impose tariffs without Congress.

The order is reversed for those who think the president should be allowed to impose tariffs for any reason without congressional approval, with 39 percent of Republicans, 19 percent of Independents, and 15 percent of Democrats in support.

A similar partisan trend appears for those who support a time limit on tariffs, without congressional approval, with 25 percent of Republicans, 15 percent of Independents, and 10 percent of Democrats agreeing.

Those splits are most stark when looking at respondents’ 2020 presidential votes: voters who supported Joe Biden strongly oppose the president using tariffs without congressional approval.

In fact, on the question of tariffs, Trump is likely mediating voter opinion on whether or not guardrails should exist. The survey tested this partisan effect by asking respondents whether the president should be able to raise tariffs on a range of products, randomly assigning respondents to one of three groups: those who received a prompt where the president was identified as a Democrat or Republican, and those who received a neutral prompt (where the president’s political affiliation was not specified). The results revealed that when faced with a president from the opposing party, Democrats and Republicans are less willing to give that president leeway to impose tariffs. This effect is stronger for Democrats, suggesting that Democrats have likely not shifted to becoming more pro-trade, and are more likely reacting to Trump imposing tariffs. Republicans are generally more comfortable with giving the president discretion to impose tariffs.

Interestingly, younger respondents are noticeably less likely to oppose the president’s ability to impose tariffs without Congress than older respondents; 36 percent of respondents aged eighteen to thirty-four say the president should not impose tariffs without Congress, compared to 53 percent of respondents aged sixty-five and older.

Those views also differ by region. A majority (52 percent) of respondents from the West and a plurality (47 percent) of respondents from the Northeast oppose the president imposing tariffs without Congress, while only 39 percent of respondents from the Midwest share that view.

The authors would like to thank Morning Consult for their support in designing and fielding this survey, and Milan Chander for his excellent research assistance. All errors remain our own.