The escalating trade war between the United States and its trading partners, particularly China and Canada, is poised to hit American communities hard—especially those in rural areas and counties that voted for President Donald Trump. According to a new analysis by the Brookings Institution, more than 5 million Americans work in industries targeted by retaliatory tariffs, with the agricultural, manufacturing, and energy sectors facing the most significant risks.
The Midwest and South: Ground Zero for Tariff Fallout
The Midwest, often referred to as America’s breadbasket, is particularly vulnerable to Chinese tariffs on agricultural goods. Soybeans, meat, and grains—some of the United States’ most important exports to China—are now subject to tariffs of up to 15 percent. This directly impacts the livelihoods of approximately 1.3 million Americans employed in food production.
Meanwhile, the South, with its strong manufacturing base, could feel the pinch of Canadian tariffs. Canada has imposed a 25 percent tax on goods from U.S. manufacturing and agricultural sectors, affecting industries that employ 4.8 million Americans. These tariffs are not just economic tools; they are politically calculated. For example, Kentucky bourbon and Florida oranges—symbols of influential Republican lawmakers—are among the targeted goods.
See also: Trump’s Tariffs on Canada & Mexico Could Escalate US Housing Crisis, Democrats Warn
Rural Communities at Greatest Risk
Rural America is disproportionately affected by the trade war. In counties like Sargent County, North Dakota, more than 60 percent of employment is tied to industries threatened by retaliatory tariffs. Rural areas are more than twice as likely to have at least one in six workers employed in targeted sectors, compared to urban areas.
The farming industry is caught in a double bind. Not only do Chinese and Canadian tariffs reduce access to foreign markets, but a 10 percent U.S. tariff on Canadian fertilizer increases production costs. This comes at a time when cuts to USAID, a major buyer of surplus crops, have further strained farmers’ ability to stay afloat.
See also: VIDEO: New Canada’s Prime Minister Slams Trump Over Tariffs in Fiery Speech
Trump Counties in the Crosshairs
The political implications of the trade war are hard to ignore. Counties that voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 election are three times as likely to be heavily impacted by retaliatory tariffs. Roughly 3 million workers in Trump-voting counties are employed in targeted industries, compared to 2 million in counties that supported Vice President Kamala Harris.
“There’s definitely a bias towards Republican-voting areas,” said Robert Maxim, a fellow at Brookings Metro who conducted the analysis. “I don’t think that’s a coincidence. China and Canada know what they’re doing.”
See also: Trade Tensions Between the U.S. and Canada Just Got Worse—The U.S. Tariff Hike on Steel
Long-Term Economic Uncertainty
Even if tariffs are lifted, the damage may already be done. Scott Lincicome, vice president for general economics and trade at the Cato Institute, warns that the uncertainty introduced by the trade war could stifle investment and economic growth.
“Protectionism is so seductive because you don’t actually see the investments not made,” Lincicome said. “You don’t see the people not hired.”
He pointed to the first Trump administration’s trade wars, which led to a decline in investment by tens of billions of dollars due to heightened policy uncertainty.
See also: Trump Suspends Mexico Tariffs for One Month Amid Trade Uncertainty
What’s Next for Affected Communities?
The communities most reliant on agriculture, manufacturing, and energy face an uncertain future. Rural areas, already struggling with economic stagnation, could see further job losses and reduced investment. Meanwhile, the political fallout in Trump strongholds could reshape the narrative around trade policy.
For now, the ripple effects of retaliatory tariffs are a stark reminder of how interconnected the global economy is—and how local communities often pay the price for geopolitical conflicts.
Graphics credit: The Washington Post
