Lessons from Trump’s Tariff Wars, Russia’s Sanctions and Implications for Australia

OPINION

Regardless of whether you are a Trump supporter or not, given the stock market turmoil and what can only be interpreted as personal attacks on global trading partners, Trump is quickly becoming one of the most globally polarising presidential figures in US history.

The trade war threatens global economic stability and reverses 80 years of globalisation. Geopolitics shape the global financial landscape, resulting in trade wars, wars, and sanctions, forcing nations to rethink their economic strategies.

Expect significant volatility to continue because we are in for a bumpy and uncertain ride during the remaining term of Trump’s presidency; diversification across lowly correlated asset classes has never been more critical.

Trumpenomics might be the most crucial economic experiment in modern history, and if you think this has no impact on Australians, think again.

FROM A US PERSPECTIVE, PERHAPS THE COUNTRY HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO DO SOMETHING DRASTIC

The US economy is the world’s largest consumer of products, and its trade deficit is running at US$147.9 billion per month. This is certainly not sustainable.

Federal debt stands at an all-time high of US$36.4 trillion, equating to 123% of GDP. This has been built up over decades because of the American consumer’s voracious appetite for cheap products delivered to them through globalisation.

However, the music has to stop one day to avoid continuing to fall into the inevitable debt spiral.

Trump argues that the fall in manufacturing in the US from 15.8% to 10.1% of GDP in the past 25 years has resulted in the single most significant deterioration in the living standards of the middle class, with the wealth being transferred to manufacturing economies such as China and Japan.

Despite Trump’s bizarre public interpretation of tariffs, they essentially tax US citizens’ consumption. Trump is infatuated by the Gilded Age in the US (1870 – 1900), when there was no personal income tax and governments raised most of their income through tariffs.

DEGLOBALISATION

Over the past 80 years, globalisation has been a powerful growth engine, lifting billions out of poverty, lowering consumer prices, and fostering unprecedented economic interdependence.

For the US economy, globalisation enabled access to vast export markets, cheap imports, and global capital flows, keeping inflation in check and sustaining consumer demand.

Globalisation has delivered extraordinary prosperity to the US, with the complex, interconnected global supply network we enjoy today.

The benefits of this network have been built over decades, with many US firms opening complex international supply chains to extract maximum global competitiveness. We do not know how they will be impacted, what the unintended consequences of these companies needing to trade under the new world order will be, and how this will affect both US and global markets.

Before the Global Financial Crisis, global trade exceeded 60% of world GDP. Since then, geopolitical fragmentation, supply chain vulnerabilities, and rising protectionism have ushered in an era of deglobalisation. The peak of globalisation is widely considered to have occurred in the mid-2000s.

A deglobalisation trend gathered pace during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting countries’ vulnerabilities and sovereignty in severe crises. It is important to note that from an economic standpoint, we have reached a pivotal point where the benefits of globalisation have been fully absorbed by our current Western economies.

Therefore, the current costs of global trade outweigh the benefits and a growing group of economists such as Dani Rodrik, Richard Baldwin and Nouriel Roubini firmly support deglobalisation.

The irony of Trump’s intentions regarding tariffs is that they have a sound fundamental economic basis when applied evenly, fairly, and measuredly. They are not an attack on trading partners, but a tax placed on consumers.

However, when tariffs are intentionally imposed to harforeign countries, we enter a different geopolitical game, resulting in trade wars, shifting alliances, increased global tensions, conflicts, and the risk of wars.

1https://www.economist.com/international/2009/02/19/turning-their-backs-on-the-world

LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM HISTORY

Two historical case studies provide glimpses of rational thinking that supports tariffs: the US-China trade war initiated by Trump in his first term in office, and Russia’s economic resilience under Western sanctions, offer valuable lessons for Australia.

While distinct in their circumstances, both examples underscore the importance of self-sufficiency, local manufacturing, and strategic economic policies to withstand external pressures.

UNDERSTANDING TRUMP’S TARIFF WARS

During Trump’s first presidency, he launched a tariff war, primarily targeting China, to reduce the US trade deficit and encourage domestic manufacturing. His administration imposed tariffs on billions of dollars’ worth of Chinese imports, arguing that unfair trade practices and intellectual property theft had disadvantaged American businesses.

The strategy was designed to make imported goods more expensive, incentivising firms and consumers to buy domestically produced alternatives.

While the immediate effects included increased costs for US consumers and retaliatory tariffs from China, the broader goal was to shift supply chains, encourage domestic production, and reduce reliance on foreign economies. Some industries benefited—such as steel and aluminium manufacturing—while others, such as agriculture, suffered from reduced exports due to retaliatory measures.

The long-term impact remains debated, but the lesson is clear: economic policy tools, such as tariffs, can strategically reorient an economy toward self-reliance.

RUSSIA’S ECONOMIC RESILIENCE UNDER SANCTIONS

A parallel case is Russia, which, despite facing heavy sanctions from Western nations, after its 2014 annexation of Crimea and, more significantly, after its 2022 invasion of Ukraine managed to sustain and even grow its economy.

Sanctions aimed to cripple key industries, limit access to global financial markets, and pressure the government into compliance. However, Russia’s response was instructive. The country aggressively pivoted toward self-sufficiency, particularly in food and energy production.

Russia mitigated the impact of sanctions by increasing local manufacturing and shifting trade to non-Western partners such as China and India. The Ruble remained relatively stable due to strict capital controls and alternative trade agreements.

This demonstrated how a nation can adapt when forced into economic isolation by fostering domestic industries and securing alternative markets.

TRUMP’S THE ART OF THE DEAL

Perhaps it is worthwhile to delve into Trump’s psychology, which has been formed throughout his career, a businessman deeply rooted in high-stakes negotiation, underpinned by access to immense financial resources and brand capital.

Inheriting a real estate business from his father, Trump expanded the empire into Manhattan’s luxury property market, leveraging aggressive deal-making and media-savvy self-promotion.

Trump consistently positioned himself as a power negotiator, unafraid of risk or confrontation. This negotiating style, as erratic and aggressive, comes from a position of power and wealth, which has paid off all his life and is all that he knows.

Now, as President, he is applying the same leadership style while in charge of the largest economy in the world, as he has done throughout his life. Regarding the position on tariffs, do not expect any consistency; he will pivot and change his position as frequently as he changes his underwear, leaving everyone consistently guessing.

Meanwhile, Trump-esque logic and rationale will always justify his actions with gusto and unquivering confidence.

Perhaps this is where the high-risk strategy evolves. There is no doubt he is going for broke, and it is anyone’s guess as to where this will end. There may be global recessions with markets overwhelmingly turning pessimistic.

Alternatively, he will end up with low interest rates so that government debt is more manageable, thereby reducing income tax and regaining local popularity by reorienting the economy in record time as world leaders cave into Trump’s outrageous demands and hurt the Chinese economy. It is also plausible that straight base 10% tariffs are applied, with the exception of China; only time will tell.

LESSONS FOR AUSTRALIA AND INVESTORS

Despite Trump’s overall strategy with tariffs in these unprecedented times, any politician, economy, asset class, or equity fund manager can go from hero to villain back, and then back to hero overnight.

Investors should take note and ensure they do not make decisions based on pure emotion and be led by animal spirits (the collective mood of the market).

Many economists and politicians have been calling for an emergency rate cut. This is highly unlikely, despite these recent events damaging consumer and business confidence. There are endless permutations on how this may impact our economy.

Our Reserve Bank Governor has on many occasions said that they make decisions based on data. There is still inflationary pressure that could be placed on our economy from the shifting nature of trade and geopolitics, and there is no need to rush to a decision that could be made in haste.

Whether Trump plays the long or short-term game, tariffs will accelerate the deglobalisation trend. Australia must focus on reducing import dependence, strengthening local manufacturing, and diversifying trade partnerships.

From an investment perspective, there has never been a more critical time to ensure the right diversification in one’s investment portfolio.

Despite the best research conducted by large fund managers regarding the correct composition of shares, fixed interest, alternative assets, and private funds within the portfolio, there is often a lack of understanding of how these types of, either black swan events or long structural changes to the economy, can set back one’s portfolio so considerably.

As a private credit fund manager, we can only see increased investor demand in Australia as there continues to be growing uncertainty and volatility in the equity markets.

Paul Miron has more than 20 years of experience in banking and commercial finance. After rising to senior positions for various Big Four banks, he started his own financial services business in 2004.

MSQ Capital

msquaredcapital.com.au

The Australian sharemarket rose during four of five sessions in the week ending 30 October, but the headline gain concealed a sharp divide between recovering miners, rate-sensitive property stocks and retailers hit by inflation and weaker trading updates.

The Australian sharemarket finished October with a positive week, although the route higher was anything but uniform.

The S&P/ASX 200 closed Friday 30 October at 8,908.1, gaining 112.9 points, or 1.28 per cent, from the previous Friday’s close of 8,795.2.

The All Ordinaries advanced 1.34 per cent to 9,025, while the more concentrated S&P/ASX 20 gained 1.11 per cent.

The benchmark rose during four of the week’s five sessions. It added 0.17 per cent on Monday and 0.46 per cent on Tuesday, before slipping 0.03 per cent on Wednesday. It recovered 0.50 per cent on Thursday and gained another 0.18 per cent on Friday.

The index briefly reached 8,933.3 but again failed to establish itself above the psychologically important 9,000-point mark.

The week’s central tension was between a resources recovery and a less forgiving domestic interest-rate outlook.

Materials gained 4.06 per cent, reclaiming part of the previous week’s heavy fall. Australian real estate investment trusts rose 3.77 per cent, financials gained 1.05 per cent and energy advanced 1.39 per cent.

At the other end of the market, consumer staples fell 5.13 per cent and consumer discretionary shares lost 2.35 per cent. Utilities declined 0.73 per cent and communication services eased 0.68 per cent.

Inflation changes the conversation

Australia’s September inflation data was the week’s pivotal domestic release.

Annual inflation of 4.3 per cent pushed market pricing towards another possible Reserve Bank increase and disrupted Wednesday’s early sharemarket rally.

By Thursday’s close, one widely followed market measure placed the probability of an increase in the cash rate to 4.85 per cent at approximately 80 per cent.

That pricing does not make an increase certain. It does, however, change the framework through which investors assess Australian businesses.

Companies dependent on discretionary household spending face renewed pressure on sales and margins. Property trusts, banks, developers and highly leveraged companies must be considered against the prospect of higher funding costs.

Banks present a more complicated equation. Higher rates can support margins, but they may also slow credit growth and increase arrears.

Miners recover

BHP gained 4.56 per cent across the week to close at $57.56, making a substantial contribution to the benchmark’s rise.

The recovery followed an 8.3 per cent fall during the previous week and helped lift the broader materials sector.

Northern Star Resources added 4.59 per cent, while Goodman Group advanced 6.85 per cent to become the strongest performer in the ASX 20.

The commodities picture was mixed. Gold fell approximately 3.12 per cent on the cited weekly measure, while Brent crude added around 0.68 per cent.

The Australian dollar was little changed at approximately US70.35 cents at the reference point.

Supermarkets and consumer shares retreat

The consumer-staples story was markedly weaker.

Coles fell 11.77 per cent after its first-quarter update, making it one of the largest significant-company declines of the week.

Woolworths lost 3.66 per cent and Wesfarmers fell 4.48 per cent to $76.69 as investors processed company trading commentary against the prospect of another squeeze on household demand.

The moves illustrate how quickly expectations can change when an apparently defensive company disappoints.

Supermarkets still benefit from the recurring need for groceries, but customers can trade down, shift between chains and reduce spending on higher-margin discretionary lines.

Wesfarmers carries exposure to several consumer categories through businesses including Bunnings, Kmart and Officeworks. A renewed rate increase would place more pressure on households already confronting higher prices.

The wider market’s biggest movements

Among companies outside the ASX 20, Mesoblast surged 27.32 per cent, SiteMinder gained 22.74 per cent and Zip rose 22.60 per cent.

The sharpest weekly falls included 4DMedical, down 33.51 per cent; Tuas, down 29.95 per cent; Catalyst Metals, down 17.47 per cent; and Champion Iron, down 13.35 per cent.

Those percentages require context.

The movements in BHP, Commonwealth Bank and other very large companies had substantially more influence on the index than similarly dramatic changes among smaller companies.

A 20 per cent move in a relatively small stock may attract more attention than a two per cent rise in a major bank, but the bank can have the greater effect on the market.

How the ASX 20 moved

The following list uses the S&P/ASX 20 constituents and five-session movements reported at the 30 October close.

Where the component feed did not publish a valid five-day comparison, no figure has been estimated.

BHP Group: Up 4.56 per cent

Commonwealth Bank: Up 1.66 per cent

Rio Tinto: Down 2.20 per cent

National Australia Bank: Up 0.48 per cent

Westpac: Up 0.08 per cent

ANZ Group: Up 1.92 per cent

CSL: Up 2.05 per cent

Macquarie Group: Up 2.19 per cent

Wesfarmers: Down 4.48 per cent

Woodside Energy: Up 1.43 per cent

Goodman Group: Up 6.85 per cent

Telstra: Five-day comparison unavailable from the cited component feed

Woolworths: Down 3.66 per cent

Fortescue: Five-day comparison unavailable from the cited component feed

Transurban: Down 2.40 per cent

QBE Insurance: Down 1.21 per cent

Aristocrat Leisure: Up 0.63 per cent

Northern Star Resources: Up 4.59 per cent

Sigma Healthcare: Down 0.36 per cent

Brambles: Down 1.20 per cent

The companies dominating the conversation

Coles was the week’s standout media-facing company for the wrong reason.

Its trading update produced an outsized repricing and drew attention across the grocery and retail sectors. Woolworths and Wesfarmers were also scrutinised as investors considered how stubborn inflation and another possible rate rise could affect sales volumes.

Bank of Queensland offered a more positive corporate signal.

The bank reported that its FY26 net interest margin had risen six basis points to 1.70 per cent, ahead of the 1.68 per cent expected by the market according to contemporaneous reporting.

Bank of Queensland shares rose 5.8 per cent on Thursday, while the major banks also rallied.

Endeavour Group finished Friday at $3.39, up 4.31 per cent on the day, and released the results of its annual general meeting.

The movement was notable during a week in which investors were highly sensitive to consumer-facing companies. The AGM result should not, however, be presented as the sole cause of the share-price increase without further supporting company guidance.

Mesoblast’s 23.4 per cent Thursday rise and 27.32 per cent weekly gain returned the biotechnology company to the centre of market attention.

For editors, it is important to separate the size of that percentage movement from its influence on the index. Mesoblast was an eye-catching performer, but it did not drive the ASX 200 in the way BHP or Commonwealth Bank did.

Qantas remained part of the broader market conversation as investors watched travel demand and company updates.

However, the primary-source review did not locate a fresh Qantas announcement that justified attributing a major weekly market movement to new company information. The airline should therefore remain on the monitoring list rather than being forced into the week’s causal narrative.

Is Australia’s IPO market reopening?

The official ASX new-listings pipeline remains active but selective.

ASX’s upcoming-floats page included formal applications with offer timetables extending through October and at least one anticipated listing on 30 November.

The exchange notes that its page covers companies for which a formal listing application has been received. It does not represent every company privately exploring a float.

The wider debate concerns whether Australia’s public market is sufficiently competitive when high-growth businesses can pursue capital in the United States or remain privately funded for longer.

ASX has previously raised possible reforms designed to improve the attractiveness of the local market. These include debate about reducing minimum free-float requirements and streamlining aspects of the admissions process.

An enhanced fast-track pathway for qualifying applicants can shorten the review process, reducing the execution risk created when market conditions change during a long IPO timetable.

That does not remove the more fundamental challenge.

New floats still require credible earnings or a convincing growth pathway, sensible pricing and enough genuine free float to support trading after listing.

Investors can already obtain diversified exposure through low-cost exchange-traded funds or buy established, liquid businesses. A float must therefore offer more than novelty.

The current pipeline suggests that the IPO window is open, but it is not indiscriminate.

What investors will watch next

The Reserve Bank’s next decision now sits at the centre of the domestic outlook.

Any change in cash-rate expectations will flow rapidly through banks, retailers, property trusts, listed developers and companies carrying substantial debt.

Investors will also watch whether the materials recovery can continue, whether BHP can hold its rebound and whether consumer companies provide further evidence of slowing demand.

Overseas, technology-sector volatility, commodity prices and the United States interest-rate outlook will continue to shape Australian trading.

The week’s 1.28 per cent headline gain was encouraging, but it was not a broad declaration of confidence.

It was a rotation towards miners, selected financials and property securities—and away from consumer businesses facing a more difficult inflation and interest-rate equation.

Market dashboard

S&P/ASX 200: 8,908.1, up 1.28 per cent for the week

All Ordinaries: 9,025, up 1.34 per cent

S&P/ASX 20: 5,214.7, up 1.11 per cent over five sessions

Best sector: Materials, up 4.06 per cent

Next-best sector: A-REITs, up 3.77 per cent

Weakest sector: Consumer staples, down 5.13 per cent

Major large-cap winner: Goodman Group, up 6.85 per cent

Major large-cap loser: Coles, down 11.77 per cent

AUD/USD: Approximately US70.35 cents at the weekly reference point

Gold: Approximately US$3,885 an ounce, down 3.12 per cent on the cited weekly measure

Brent crude: Approximately US$117.70 a barrel, up 0.68 per cent on the cited weekly measure