In an April 9, 2025 interview with The Philadelphia Inquirer, University of Utah economics professor Elena Patel shared her expert insights on the sweeping tariffs proposed by the Trump administration. Speaking with journalist Jake Blumgart, Patel drew on her experience in federal economic policy to analyze the significant challenges these tariffs pose to the U.S. economy and the federal workforce.

The Hidden Costs of Tariffs

Implementing broad tariffs may seem like a straightforward approach to reshaping trade policy, but according to Patel, the reality is far more complex. With her experience as a former Treasury Department official and senior economist on the White House Council of Economic Advisers, Patel offers an insider’s perspective on the immense challenges posed by the Trump administration’s sweeping tariff proposals.

“These are alarmingly high, broad tariff rates that we don’t have any experience with in recent American history,” Patel notes.

The proposed 10% tariff on all imports, alongside additional levies targeting allies and competitors alike, marks a dramatic escalation in U.S. trade policy. Beyond the economic impact, Patel highlights the enormous administrative effort required to implement such tariffs.

“It will take a heroic effort to lift this up and administer it,” she says, pointing out the strain on an already diminished federal workforce. “We weren’t set up to do this even when we were at full fighting strength in the federal government. Now, the disconnect between personnel reductions and the demands being placed on federal workers is enormous.”

This logistical challenge raises questions about how quickly the tariffs can be implemented and their potential long-term effects on industries and consumers.

Everyone Will be Affected

Patel emphasizes that these tariffs will be felt widely and immediately.

“They are going to make imports more expensive, and that is going to affect every single industry and consumer in different ways,” she explains.

Industries like automotive manufacturing are particularly vulnerable: “There’s no way to quickly onshore car production, for example. Cars are being produced where they’re produced. In the short run, all that will happen is the price of everything will go up,” she says.

Patel also points to the economic instability these policies create, particularly for businesses relying on long-term planning.

“Uncertainty is toxic for the economy, especially for capital markets and investment,” she warns. “What businesses want is stability.”

This instability is compounded by the executive branch’s broad authority over trade policy, which allows tariffs to shift dramatically with changes in administration, something Patel likens to a “whiplash” effect. Businesses may hesitate to invest in U.S.-based supply chains if they anticipate policy reversals in the near future.

The Bigger Picture

While the tariffs might be part of a broader negotiation strategy, Patel remains skeptical about their efficacy.

“It’s not obvious to me whether the juice is worth the squeeze, given the loss in wealth in the markets that has come from the volatility,” she says.

She adds that the geopolitical stakes, particularly in U.S.-China relations, further complicate matters.

“China and U.S. relations are part of a much bigger geopolitical conversation than a particular tariff on a particular good,” Patel observes.

As Patel puts it, the U.S. is now navigating “uncharted territory.” From administrative challenges to economic uncertainty, the costs of these tariffs extend far beyond their immediate financial impact. Patel’s analysis underscores the importance of considering both the logistical and long-term implications of sweeping policy changes.

“What businesses and consumers need most is predictability,” she concludes. Without it, the ripple effects of these tariffs may prove to be as disruptive as they are far-reaching.