In an unexpected and dramatic twist, a world-renowned economist whose academic research was cited by President Donald Trump to justify sweeping new tariffs has come forward to denounce the administration’s interpretation of his work. The economist, stunned to discover how his findings were repurposed, warns that the misuse of his data could lead to catastrophic economic consequences—including a full-blown recession.
This development comes as global markets react with volatility to Trump’s aggressive “Liberation Day” tariff policy. As the political world grapples with the fallout, economists, investors, and business leaders alike are bracing for what could be one of the most dangerous financial miscalculations in recent U.S. history.
This article explores the origins of the research, how it was misapplied, and why experts now believe the U.S. economy could be heading into dangerous territory. If you’re following the latest on Trump’s tariffs, U.S. recession warnings, and the economic impact of policy missteps, read on.
The Economist Behind the Research
The economist at the heart of the storm is a respected authority in international trade economics, whose peer-reviewed studies have shaped policy discussions for over two decades. His work originally aimed to explore the nuanced impact of strategic tariffs in specific trade imbalances—an academic exercise with strict caveats and context.
But it appears the Trump administration took these findings and applied them as blanket justification for the wide-ranging tariffs announced in March 2025. These policies, dubbed “Liberation Day” tariffs, were marketed as a bold stand against global economic exploitation and a measure to reassert U.S. manufacturing power.
According to the economist, the research was “cherry-picked” and used out of context. “It was meant to show theoretical outcomes under certain conditions, not to support broad, retaliatory economic warfare,” he stated in a recent interview. “I was shocked to see it turned into a political weapon.”
This incident underscores a broader issue in policymaking—how complex economic theories can be misunderstood, oversimplified, or even weaponized in political discourse.
Trump’s Tariff Policy Explained
President Trump’s new tariff policy, announced on what he branded as “Liberation Day,” introduces sweeping import taxes across key goods and materials from dozens of nations. Ranging from electronics and steel to agricultural products and pharmaceuticals, the tariffs aim to penalize countries perceived to be exploiting U.S. trade laws.
Supporters of the policy argue that these tariffs are long overdue, necessary to level the playing field, and intended to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. Critics, however, point out that such measures historically backfire—raising prices for consumers, straining trade relationships, and ultimately slowing economic growth.
What makes these tariffs even more controversial is the timing. Inflation remains a pressing issue, and supply chains are still recovering post-pandemic. Economists worry that these new trade barriers could push up costs, limit goods availability, and choke off investment—especially in vulnerable sectors like tech, auto, and healthcare.
The political optics may appeal to populist sentiments, but the underlying economic mechanics, as many experts now warn, are far more perilous.
Misinterpretation of Economic Research
The economist who authored the now-politicized research has laid out in detail how his work was misrepresented. His study examined the potential effects of temporary, highly targeted tariffs under very specific economic conditions, including strong domestic demand and synchronized global growth.
None of those conditions apply to the current U.S. economy.
By misinterpreting the data as a carte blanche to launch widespread protectionist measures, the Trump administration ignored critical limitations and the broader macroeconomic context. The economist stressed that his conclusions were never intended as a justification for long-term or retaliatory tariffs.
“This is a textbook case of selective reading,” he said. “They took one chapter out of a much larger book and ignored the warnings printed in bold.”
Such misuse is more than academic malpractice—it can lead to real-world economic fallout. The repercussions are already being felt, and if current trends continue, the damage could be severe.
The Economist’s Public Response
In an effort to correct the record and warn of what’s to come, the economist has issued public statements, joined press interviews, and released a detailed open letter explaining the risks of Trump’s approach. He paints a grim picture of what lies ahead if these tariffs remain in place.
His forecast is sobering: a contraction of the U.S. economy, significant job losses, and inflationary pressure that could spiral out of control. He also fears the possibility of stagflation—a dangerous combination of stagnant growth and high inflation that plagued the U.S. during the 1970s and is notoriously difficult to escape.
“I did not intend for my research to be used this way,” he said. “And now that it has, I feel an obligation to speak out. The consequences could be devastating—not just economically, but socially and politically as well.”
As the economist’s warnings gain traction, pressure is mounting on the administration to clarify its economic roadmap—or risk leading the nation into a preventable downturn.
