In late August, the federal government inflicted a major and needless price rise on Americans. Its decision was not broadcast in a presidential address or announced in a White House statement. Rather, the Bureau of Industry and Security slipped it out in a list of product codes incomprehensible to non-specialists.

The schedule contained 407 new categories of goods that would, from Aug. 18, be subject to the 50% tariffs previously declared on steel and aluminum.

Recommended Stories

• If Israel cures paralysis, will its haters boycott the cure?
• The 2028 Republican presidential ticket is already a foregone conclusion. Probably
• The difference with Washington

Unlike most of the tariff policies announced by President Donald Trump over the past six months, this extension has received little attention. But its effect will be painful and immediate. The range of goods covered is vast: baby strollers, tableware, motorcycles, and spray deodorant. Even dairy products, if they come in metal containers, will have tariffs levied on them.

Who came up with such a bizarre list? Well, the Commerce Department specifically invited domestic producers to suggest items for inclusion. One of the things that never ceases to astonish me is the way protectionists get away with portraying themselves as defenders of honest workers against corporate suits. In fact, they are the ultimate lobbyists, running a racket that explicitly privileges politically connected interest groups at the expense of the general population.

The legal basis of the new tariffs is the national security provision of a 1962 law known as “Section 232.” No, I don’t know what baby strollers have to do with national security either, but the courts have so far been more willing to countenance Section 232 as a way of avoiding Congress than the various other ruses Trump has tried.

Until now, I have cautioned against hysteria over Trump’s protectionism. Trade matters more, proportionately, to smaller countries. The larger your GDP, the higher the percentage of your economy that is wholly domestic. Because the United States has the biggest economy in the world, a harmful trade policy can be more than offset by domestic deregulation, tax cuts, and energy abundance.

Still, we know how expensive steel and aluminum tariffs can be, because we saw their impact in 2018. Yes, those tariffs subsidized the 140,000 steelworkers in the U.S. by raising the price of steel. But, for the same reason, they hurt the 12 million workers who use steel, including 2 million in industries in which steel is a major input, such as cars, farm machinery, and household appliances. Overall, the tariffs destroyed 750,000 net jobs.

To put it another way, a study by the Peterson Institute found that each job they propped up came at a cost of $900,000 a year. It would have been much cheaper simply to give steelworkers a cash handout.

Those tariffs, destructive as they were, applied only to steel or aluminum. These new ones will cover $328 billion worth of goods, more than three times more than in 2018. Even worse is their complexity. Many companies will now need to chase suppliers for details on where their aluminum was smelted, how much it weighed, and so on.

Whenever I make the case against protectionism, some readers tell me that I am arguing for foreign interests. Yes, they say, we can see why you Brits don’t like these tariffs, but we are interested in what’s good for our own country. The vocabulary of winners and losers, offense and defense, obscures the beautiful truth of free trade, namely that it benefits both sides, especially the side that lowers its tariffs furthest.

For what it’s worth, though, Britain is the only country exempted from the 50% tariff, instead paying 25%. Still, even that rate will be disastrous for many British companies.

Take JCB, a family firm in Staffordshire that makes construction machines. One of JCB’s biggest customers in the U.S. is the Defense Department, and long before the “Liberation Day” tariffs, the company had started building a major plant in San Antonio, Texas — exactly what Trump says he wants. Every machine JCB sells will now be hit by these tariffs, so that instead of paying the $4.5 million a year it had budgeted for after the original steel and aluminum announcement, it now expects to pay $178 million a year, making much of its U.S. trade unviable.

TRUMP IS MORE PRO-BRITAIN THAN THE BRITISH

Who loses? Everyone. On Aug. 15, JCB signed a $45 million contract to deliver diggers to the U.S. Marine Corps, which may soon find itself paying higher prices for inferior products.

And, yes, international friendships matter. Britain has been an unswerving supporter of the U.S. and does not even run one of those trade surpluses that Trump finds problematic. Alliances trashed, business lost, consumers impoverished. All for no compensating gain.