The Latest Interpretation of a Key Trump Advisor’s Speech: The True Nature of America’s “Reciprocal Tariffs”
On April 7, 2025, the official White House website published a speech delivered by Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, Stefen Miran, at an event hosted by the Hudson Institute.
In his remarks, Miran clearly stated that the U.S. financial system and military apparatus serve as key trust anchors in global economic prosperity. He emphasized that all international trade relies on the U.S. dollar system, but that maintaining and operating this system comes at a cost. Therefore, the United States needs to improve the global burden-sharing mechanism.“By improving burden-sharing,” Miran noted,“we can enhance our resilience and uphold global security and the trade system for decades to come.”
In simpler terms:If other countries wish to benefit from the U.S. geopolitical and financial security umbrella, then they must take on their fair share of responsibility — which includes paying the costs they owe.
Those costs should not fall solely on ordinary American citizens, who have already borne a significant burden.
Clearly, this line of thinking reflects the U.S. government’s rationale for implementing the “reciprocal tariff” policy.
Here are Stefen Miran’s original words from the speech:
What forms can burden-sharing take? There are many options. Here are some ideas:
First, other countries can accept tariffs on their exports to the United States without retaliation. This would provide revenue to the U.S. Treasury to fund the provision of global public goods. The key point is that retaliation only worsens, rather than improves, the state of burden-sharing, making it harder for us to afford global public goods.
Second, they can stop unfair and harmful trade practices by opening their markets and increasing imports from the United States.
Third, they can increase defense spending and purchase more U.S. products, buying more American-made goods, easing the burden on our soldiers, and creating jobs in the U.S.
Fourth, they can invest in the United States and build factories here. If they produce products in the U.S., they will not face tariffs.
Fifth, they can make direct payments to the U.S. Treasury to help us fund global public goods.
Stefen Miran’s five points perfectly match the recent policy directions taken by Trump in the past few days:
Global-level tariff increases
Demanding other countries not to retaliate with tariffs, which essentially means unilateral opening of their markets
Forcing the increase of jobs in U.S. manufacturing
Demanding foreign companies to build factories in the U.S., such as Trump’s recent strong push for TSMC to set up production in the U.S.
In-Depth Interpretation of Stefen Miran’s Speech
From Stefen Miran’s remarks, it’s not hard to see that the underlying motivation behind Trump’s “reciprocal tariff” policy is to:reduce the fiscal deficit, lower U.S. Treasury yields, bring manufacturing back to the U.S., reduce mortgage and consumer credit rates, and pressure the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates.
This entire policy package is aimed at reviving the U.S. economy and strengthening domestic industrial competitiveness.
Here are several key takeaways on the U.S. reciprocal tariff policy based on Miran’s speech:
- From “Fair Trade” to a Strategic Lever
The original intent of the “reciprocal tariff” policy was to promote Fair Trade, not Free Trade. The Trump administration believes that the long-standing U.S.-led free trade framework has not yielded true reciprocity, but instead turned the U.S. into a net buyer — a sacrificial lamb for export-heavy economies.
Miran’s speech takes it a step further, suggesting that reciprocal tariffs are not just an economic tool, but also a part of national security strategy.While the U.S. provides global public goods — such as military protection, the stability of the U.S. dollar, and the security of international shipping lanes — its domestic manufacturing base and fiscal health are being eroded by long-term trade deficits and profit extraction by foreign capital.
Thus, reciprocal tariffs have evolved from a tool for correcting trade imbalances into a diplomatic weapon for restructuring global burden-sharing.They are not only meant to fix distorted pricing systems, but to force other countries to “pay” — whether through trade, investment, or military contributions — for the order and security the U.S. provides.
- The Asymmetric Relationship Between the Dollar and Global Demand
A key theme in Miran’s speech is a re-examination of the dollar’s role as a global reserve currency.While the dollar has indeed made global finance more efficient, it has also forced the U.S. to export capital, creating structural trade deficits.Other countries accumulate dollar-denominated assets, but maintain trade surpluses through undervalued exchange rates and export-driven policies, leading to the hollowing out of U.S. manufacturing.
Reciprocal tariffs are intended to disrupt this global structural asymmetry.By imposing tariffs on imports, the U.S. can address trade imbalances, reduce capital outflows, bring manufacturing jobs back home, and alleviate the pressure on the “lost middle class.”
This logic also has subtle implications for the crypto market.Under the traditional dollar system, the U.S. must preserve dollar credibility. But with the rise of Web3 and decentralized finance, America’s anxiety over controlling money and trade has only grown.Tariffs have thus become a more “realist” instrument in that context.
- Is the U.S. Leveraging Its Market Size to Force One-Sided Concessions?
One of the biggest concerns surrounding the reciprocal tariff policy is whether the U.S. is leveraging its vast market to force unilateral concessions.
Miran’s response to this was:“This is not a demand — it’s a public offer.”
He added:“We welcome all countries to negotiate. If you don’t want to be hit with tariffs, then propose an alternative:Either open your markets, invest in the U.S., or increase your contributions to the global security system.”
This essentially introduces a new framework for multilateral bargaining:The U.S. will no longer unconditionally provide security, dollar liquidity, and market access.Instead, these benefits will be distributed based on each country’s level of commitment.
In other words, reciprocal tariffs do not necessarily imply isolationism.Rather, they represent an opportunity to reshape the rules — but the critical questions remain:Who will write these rules? And by what standards will they be enforced?These will be the key issues in future diplomatic negotiations and global trade governance.
It’s also worth noting that Miran acknowledged internal disagreements within the Trump administration on tariff policy.He argued that such differences reflect a healthy policy debate, helping avoid groupthink, and that the final decisions rest with the President.This underscores how, in a complex international trade landscape, policy-making requires careful balancing of interests and viewpoints.
Note: The above views are interpretations based on Stefen Miran’s speech and do not represent the official position of SuperEx.
Conclusion
Miran’s speech reveals the strategic calculations behind Trump’s global trade policy.However, in execution, the U.S. government appears to have underestimated the volatility and autonomy of financial and trade markets.Things quickly spun out of control. Although Trump swiftly suspended parts of the reciprocal tariff policy, tensions with China and the EU remain high.
We’ll be watching closely to see how this unfolds.
