Covfefe Chronicles

In a development that’s equal parts hilarious and tragic, a pair of economists at the conservative American Enterprise Institute have announced that the Trump administration’s beloved tariff formula—crafted to project economic dominance—was actually the result of a mathematical faceplant so large it might require its own GDP correction.

Turns out, the equation used to justify slapping massive tariffs on countries like Vietnam was basically the economic equivalent of writing “2 + 2 = bald eagle.” According to AEI’s Kevin Corinth and Stan Veuger, the administration multiplied the wrong variables, cancelled out the ones that mattered, and fundamentally misunderstood how prices work. So... just another Wednesday in the Trump White House.

Catch Up Quick:

• The Trump administration introduced a “reciprocal tariff formula” that looked complicated enough to fool cable news.
• It was allegedly developed with help from the Council of Economic Advisers, which is now being rebranded as the Council of Economic Vibes.
• Unfortunately, this formula was built on the wrong numbers. Like, very wrong.

AEI discovered that the key elasticity value used was based on retail prices (what a product costs after import and distribution), rather than import prices (what it costs to get it into the country in the first place). The two are not the same, unless you’re the kind of person who thinks “airport tuna sandwich” and “sustainable seafood policy” are interchangeable.

Because of this mix-up, tariffs calculated using the Trump formula were four times higher than they should’ve been. So instead of Vietnam getting a 12.2% tariff, they got hit with a scorching 46%—because economic policy, like hair dye, was applied way too thick.

Elasticity? More Like Embarrass-city

Let’s break this down in plain English: the administration wanted to prove it could economically bully other nations, so it cooked up a math stew full of fake complexity and real confusion. And when economists finally untangled the numbers, they realized the administration had pulled a textbook move called “multiplying nonsense by arrogance.”

Even Harvard Business School’s Alberto Cavallo, whose research was cited to justify the whole mess, stepped in to say: “Uh... I don’t think they used my paper the right way?” Which is academic for “my name’s on this and I hate that.”

The White House, Shockingly Quiet

In classic style, the White House did not respond to the AEI findings. Presumably because their calculator’s still in rice after they tried to tariff it.

“The formula has no foundation in either economic theory or trade law.” — AEI, probably drinking heavily now

AEI, usually the home of polite, bowtie-level conservatism, is now basically begging for basic numerical literacy in the West Wing.

The Bottom Line

Trump’s team built a core piece of trade policy using a formula that could’ve been pulled from a LinkedIn hustle thread written by an energy drink. Even conservative economists are now pleading for the return of math, reason, and calculators not covered in cheeseburger grease.

Math: still real. Tariffs: still painful. America: still deeply unserious.