The recent statement by , which suggests following the example of countries like Brazil and India in imposing high tariffs, ignores a crucial point: tariffs do not bring prosperity. They are born from the lobbying of inefficient sectors, penalize consumers and trigger a global cycle of barriers that impoverishes everyone, undermining economic efficiency and reducing the variety and quality of available products.
In the case of Brazil, the import substitution mentality has shaped industrial policy for decades. High taxes and complex barriers were used to protect sectors considered strategic. The result was not what was expected: few segments actually grew sustainably. On the contrary, consumers paid more for national and imported products. The national industry, often subsidized, did not gain the necessary dynamism to compete. By isolating itself from the world, it did not develop the capacity to innovate and add value. Meanwhile, global progress advanced, expanding horizons and opportunities.
The discourse of the American right, today led by Trump, also embraces protectionist narratives. Under the justification of containing and defending the West, tariff policy becomes an instrument of power. However, this strategy does not naturally strengthen the domestic production chain. Instead, it creates perverse incentives: domestic prices rise, inefficient sectors become complacent, and the country loses agility. In this dynamic, those who suffer are the common citizen, deprived of the diversity of goods at more affordable costs.
Commercial openness expands choices, exposes companies to competition and encourages the search for efficiency. Countries that reduced barriers and integrated into global chains gained in productivity, innovation and well-being. Brazil itself, when it tried to open up a little more, experienced price reductions and stimulus to investment. Even so, pressure from groups that fear losing privileges is strong. And the fear of deindustrialization, very common in the local debate, has been exploited to maintain the status quo.
The long-standing Brazilian example illustrates what could happen if protectionist rhetoric prevails. By aligning itself with economies that depend on tariffs to survive, the United States risks compromising its reputation for leadership in global trade. Worse, they abandon a history of agendas focused on economic integration, weakening the very system of multilateral rules that they helped to build.
Two-thirds of Americans believe Donald Trump’s tariff plans will only raise prices if implemented. In Brazil, there was a strong reaction when the government decided to tax low-value international orders. Citizens instinctively know that artificial protection results in high prices, less variety and less quality. But unfortunately, while sectoral lobbies manage to form themselves to plead for protectionism, consumers have no one to represent them in favor of lower tariffs.
Maintaining a closed system is ignoring the public interest in favor of a restricted group of producers accustomed to operating without real competition. Thus, contrary to what
Trump suggests, high tariffs do not create genuine prosperity. They build commercial walls, undermine external credibility, and penalize society. Defending openness does not mean submitting without criteria, but seeking integration with balance and planning. The winners are the consumer, the most efficient sectors of the economy and the country itself, which is consolidating itself as an active and competitive participant in the global economy.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.