How Trump’s return affects business: Elon Musk, tariffs and more

Donald Trump’s return to the White House after winning the November 5 US presidential election may reshape American business. Much depends on whom he appoints as deputies and cabinet members, including the role of Tesla CEO Elon Musk, and what tariffs he enacts. Following are some major issues and sectors to watch:

After some nudging from the world’s wealthiest person, Trump has said he would tap Tesla CEO Elon Musk to lead a new government efficiency commission. Musk has said at least $2 trillion could be cut from the $6.75 trillion federal budget. How that works could be a key to the next Trump administration.

Does efficiency mean fewer rules and regulators? Musk has been a vocal critic, for instance, of federal review of his SpaceX rocket business. That could mean less oversight of self-driving cars (a Tesla business) or rocket launches and much more.

The two men are not completely in sync: Trump has said he won’t let California require all vehicles in the state go electric in a decade, but Musk runs the world’s most valuable EV company.

“A rising tide raises all boats. So to the extent that Elon is able to hamper the vilification of EVs by a potential Trump administration, all the better,” said James Chen, former head of policy for Rivian and Tesla. How Musk would address conflicts of interest between his interests in autos, space, health, construction and artificial intelligence is not clear.

Trump has pledged to be a “crypto president”, a plan that may start with replacing industry opponent Gary Gensler, the Securities and Exchange Commission chair who has sued most of the industry – including Coinbase, Binance and Kraken. Gensler’s replacement is expected to review – and potentially tear up – accounting guidance and create industry exemptions from SEC rules. Musk, too is a crypto supporter, as is Silicon Valley Trump supporter Marc Andreessen and incoming Vice President J.D. Vance.

Musk is also a big proponent of carbon-free energy, with Tesla being a major supplier of solar systems and batteries. Trump has promised to kill the offshore wind industry and rescind all unspent funds under the Inflation Reduction Act – Biden’s signature climate law. But Trump faces dissent in his ranks: Republican lawmakers, oil companies and others see massive red state gains from the law. Musk has played into that, building his second US. electric vehicle factory in Texas, for instance.

Trump has proposed a 10 percent tariff on all US imports and 60 percent on Chinese-made products, which if enacted would affect the whole economy by pushing consumer prices higher. The Tax Foundation, a non-partisan think tank, calculated Trump tariffs would hike taxes by $524 billion annually, shrink GDP by at least 0.8 percent, and cut employment by 684,000 full-time equivalent jobs potentially impacting retail workers, the largest private sector employer. He also suggested he might impose a 25 percent tariff on all imports from Mexico.

Trump’s tariff proposals could reduce American consumers’ spending power between $46 billion and $78 billion each year, according to a National Retail Federation study.

Apparel, toys, furniture, household appliances and footwear would be the most affected categories, the study said. Retailers would shift operations outside of China to countries including Bangladesh, India, and Vietnam. Big-box stores like Walmart and Target would face higher supply chain costs, while supermarkets like Kroger, Albertsons, and Publix, which minimally source from China, could benefit. Shipping and transportation experts say sweeping tariffs could initially bolster their business before depressing trade.

Tariffs loom over tech as well. In recent weeks, Trump has also heavily criticised the US CHIPS and Science Act that has sought to partially subsidise companies building factories in the United States. Instead, he said the country should impose tariffs on chips coming into the country, especially from Taiwan’s TSMC.

Tariffs also would sharply raise costs for the renewable energy industries in the US, which rely heavily on Chinese components. “Trump actions without Congressional backing could include import tariffs of 10-20 percent (ex China), 60 percent -200 percent on Chinese imports which could impact the cost of renewable projects, particularly solar and storage projects,” according to an October research note from Bernstein.

And then there is the question of China’s retaliation. It is the world’s biggest soy importer and pork consumer, but it has diversified its food supply base since Trump’s tariffs in his first administration. Moreover, China failed to fully comply with an agreement to buy more US agricultural goods that it signed with Trump in January 2020. Trump has vowed in his second term to impose 60 percent duties on imports from China, raising concerns that Beijing will retaliate by reducing imports of US farm products.

The United States is already the world’s biggest oil and gas producer, but Trump wants to clear away remaining obstacles. He’ll lift a freeze on new liquefied natural gas export permits, expand federal drilling auctions, speed up new pipeline permitting and try to reverse or weaken regulations aimed at cutting power plant and auto emissions.

Trump’s support for the oil and gas industry could also lead him to temper his opposition to the Inflation Reduction Act, since oil companies are receiving some funding from it for carbon-free endeavors like carbon capture and sequestration.

The big oil policy wildcard is how Trump will treat rival exporters, including Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. It is likely that Trump would relieve sanctions on Russian energy, but leave in place those on Iran, said Ed Hirs, an energy fellow at the University of Houston. Jesse Jones, an analyst with consulting firm Energy Aspects, expects even more. “We think that the impact of a Trump administration returning to a maximum pressure campaign on Iran could lead to a million barrel per day decrease in Iranian crude exports,” he said.

Organised labor made great strides under President Joe Biden, who joined a picket line with US auto workers. The UAW wants to expand and in future strikes the federal government could be asked to intervene in a way that undercuts worker bargaining power, something Democrats have so far declined to do.

Republicans have typically been unfriendly to unions, but Trump has played a different game, reaching out to blue-collar workers. Strong support among many union workers may pressure Trump to protect those voters, said Anthony Miyazaki, a marketing professor at Florida International University.

Still, his record of appointing leaders to the National Labor Relations Board resulted in a roll back of workers’ rights to form unions. If this cycle repeats, it could potentially reverse the gains unions have made since the pandemic, including successful organising efforts at Starbucks and Amazon and other fledgling movements at Apple, REI and Trader Joe’s.

Within banking, JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and other lenders will likely enjoy a reprieve from stiff capital hikes, M&A hoop-jumping, and Biden’s “junk fees” crackdown. Trump is expected to quickly install industry-friendly Republicans at the financial regulators. But those gains may be offset if Trump follows through on tax and trade policies that will widen the deficit and fuel inflation, in turn boosting lending rates. That could push existing loans into the red, say analysts.

Trump may walk back the Department of Justice’s bid to break up Alphabet’s Google and prefer settling with companies over competition issues in mergers, rather than new trials, attorneys said. The nation’s tough, top merger cop, Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, is almost certainly headed for the door.

More broadly, Trump’s backers in Silicon Valley, including investors Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen and Tesla chief Elon Musk, want less regulation of new technology, from artificial intelligence to rockets. They have a champion in former venture capitalist Vance.

Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos decided days before the vote that the paper would not endorse anyone for president, describing it as a principled move to regain credibility. Hundreds of thousands of subscribers left, many saying it was political cowardice. USA Today and the LA Times also declined to endorse a candidate.

“The message is pretty clear right now,” said former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. “That is conceding to the tyrant in advance before you’re asked to,” said New York University School of Professional Studies adjunct associate professor Helio Fred Garcia, an author of two books about Trump.

During the campaign, Trump called on the Federal Communications Commission to strip ABC and CBS of their broadcast licenses. FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel has denounced Trump’s calls to revoke licenses for broadcast stations, citing free speech protections.

But the independence of the FCC could be at risk if Trump follows through on a campaign pledge to bring regulatory agencies, such as the FCC, under presidential authority, Wheeler said. The president also could invoke his emergency powers under the Communications Act to exert control over broadcasters, citing “national security” concerns.

Even so, a new Trump presidency will likely give cable TV news networks like CNN, Fox News and MSNBC and news outlets including the New York Times and Washington Post the same big jolt to viewers and audience that his first term generated.

Trump recently said he would let former presidential candidate and anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “go wild” on vaccine and healthcare policy. Kennedy has said that Trump promised him control over the FDA, CDC, HHS, and the USDA. Those jobs could potentially give him control over what vaccines are approved and whether Americans are recommended to receive them.

Trump transition co-chair Howard Lutnick has said Kennedy is not going to be put in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services, but suggested he could advise on vaccines.

Jeremy Levin, CEO of biotech company Ovid Therapeutics and former chairman of biotech lobby group BIO, said he would be alarmed if Kennedy was given oversight over vaccines, and that other executives had also expressed concern.

“Vaccine denialism, which is a central plank of RFK’s, is perhaps as dangerous as anything you can imagine,” he said, adding that President Trump’s previous appointments for the Covid vaccine effort and the FDA suggest to him that more moderate positions will win out. Some executives also were concerned that Kennedy’s influence could harm the US’s reputation and ability to review new drugs.