President Donald Trump’s pledge to cut $2,000 checks for Americans using tariff revenue is getting the cold shoulder from Republican senators. But conservatives worried about the national debt are going a step further in their disapproval.
Budget hawks scoff at the notion of using import taxes from foreign goods for anything other than paying down the deficit that’s projected to top $1.8 trillion for 2025. Tariff revenue this year is predicted to reach $300 billion, only half of the $600 billion needed to dish out the checks.
TRUMP PROMISES $2,000 TARIFF DIVIDEND CHECKS: HOW THE REBATE PAYMENTS COULD WORK
“I’m not crazy about it,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), a close Trump ally, told the Washington Examiner. “How about we start paying down the deficit rather than coming up with a new expense?”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), a libertarian who’s no stranger to being at odds with the president, called tariff rebates a “really, really, really, really bad idea.”
“How do you give any money if you don’t have any money?” Paul asked. “We’re going to be $2 trillion in the hole. That’d be like, ‘Hmm, let’s borrow another $300 billion so we’ll be $2.3 trillion in the hole and then give it back to people.’”
Many among the Senate GOP leadership also appear uninterested, echoing a position staked out by Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) that the preferred use for tariff funds would be to slow the growth of the nation’s $38 trillion in debt.
The resistance marks the latest illustration of Republican fears that Trump and their majorities in Congress are wasting opportunities to combat the deficit. It’s also the starkest indicator that the president’s pledge, while likely more popular with voters than his trade policies, is unlikely to receive the congressional approval it needs to become a reality.
Thune declined to say if he’d be willing to consider legislation to approve tariff rebates before year’s end, as Treasury Secretary Scott Besset has urged. Trump said this week that Americans “of moderate income [and] middle income,” should expect to receive $2,000 checks “later on, somewhere prior to, probably the middle of next year.”
“I think the amount of revenue coming in from the tariffs is considered to be substantial, at this point, and hopefully can be put to a useful purpose,” Thune said. “Again, in my view, one of which would be repaying the debt.”
Meanwhile, the White House is in search of a workaround to allow the administration to greenlight the rebates without Congress.
There is also an election component to Trump’s promise, with some Senate candidates, such as Republican Mike Rogers in the battleground state of Michigan, endorsing the proposal on the campaign trail. Others like Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who’s locked in a brutal three-way primary challenge, declined to embrace the plan.
“I know free money is very popular,” Cornyn told the Washington Examiner. “I’d like to know a little more about how it fits into our overall fiscal condition.”
Trump officials have pointed to forecasts showing trillions in tariff revenue over the next decade to bolster their case, but several wild-card factors could significantly diminish or wipe out those predictions entirely.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates $3.3 trillion in tariff revenue over the next 10 years, but only if higher rates persist, which Trump has fluctuated on widely during his first year. The Supreme Court could also render his tariffs moot if they’re struck down as unconstitutional without approval from Congress in a pending case before the high court.
In addition to the rebate checks, Trump has also pledged to use tariff revenue for things like debt reduction, tax cuts in his One Big Beautiful Bill Act, bailouts for farmers hurt by tariffs, and paying troops during the recent government shutdown. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says rebates, as described by Trump, would cost $6 trillion over a decade, or “roughly twice as much as President Trump’s tariffs are estimated to raise over the same time period.”
“I think whatever revenue we get from whatever source ought to go to probably bring down those deficits,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), citing the national debt and annual deficit.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) is an outlier among the chamber’s budget hawks. His bill, the American Worker Rebate Act, would divvy out pandemic-style direct payments of at least $600 per adult and dependent child using tariff money. He scolded his colleagues for opposing the proposed checks rather than “Wall Street goodies” and closing costly tax loopholes, or pressing for higher taxes on the rich.
“I’m concerned about the deficit as much as anybody, but I don’t understand why it is that every time there’s something that would benefit working people on the table, it’s always like, ‘Oh, no, we can’t do that [because of] [t]he deficit,’” Hawley told the Washington Examiner. “But if we want to preserve the carried interest loophole, or we want to give tax breaks to Wall Street banks, then we have to do it. Then it’s, ‘Oh, it’s vital, vital, vital.’ That stuff costs hundreds of billions of dollars.”
WHITE HOUSE FLOATS CIRCUMVENTING CONGRESS ON $2,000 TARIFF REBATE CHECKS DESPITE HEFTY COST ESTIMATE
Still, voting for tariff rebates would effectively undercut the philosophy of budget hawks, most of whom have rebuffed Democratic efforts to roll back certain Trump tariffs based in large part on promises from the administration to pay down debt.
And the chances for any Democratic crossovers are slim to none, at least in the Senate. The Democrat most frequently to side with Republicans this year, Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), cited a “significant concern” the rebates would have on inflation.