Lessons from Trump’s Tariff Wars, Russia’s Sanctions and Implications for Australia
MSQ Capital’s Paul Miron says Trump’s return could reshape global trade and fast-track deglobalisation — with major consequences for Australia.
6 min
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.
A record-breaking $11 million sale at The Centennial Collection has set a new benchmark for luxury apartment living in Bondi Junction.
As interest rates, inflation and market sentiment fluctuate, investors are being urged to focus on data, not panic.
The Federal Budget may have softened some of its proposed tax reforms, but it has exposed a bigger issue: too many families are relying on wealth structures that no longer reflect the realities of modern life.
3 min
For many Australians, the 2026 Federal Budget initially felt like a direct challenge to the way wealth is created, held and transferred between generations.
The headlines were immediate: changes to capital gains tax, reforms to discretionary trusts, restrictions on negative gearing and increased scrutiny of investment structures. Unsurprisingly, affluent families, business owners and investors began asking the same question:
Is the way we hold our wealth still fit for purpose?
In recent days, the government has announced several significant amendments following industry consultation and public feedback, including exempting testamentary trusts from the proposed 30 per cent minimum tax and expanding capital gains tax concessions for small businesses.
The backdown is welcome. But it also highlights something much bigger.
This Budget has accelerated a conversation that many Australian families have been postponing for years.
The conversation is not really about tax. It is about wealth stewardship.
For decades, Australians have built wealth through businesses, property, investments and careful long-term planning. Yet many families have not revisited the legal structures surrounding those assets in years, sometimes decades.
We often see clients who have spent years building significant wealth, only to discover their legal arrangements no longer reflect their current circumstances.
Their children are now adults. They may own multiple properties.
They may have sold a business, entered a second marriage, become grandparents or accumulated digital assets that did not exist when their original estate plans were prepared.
The trust that distributes income may need to be reconsidered. The bucket company may no longer be so attractive.
The Budget has simply exposed a reality that already existed: wealth structures cannot remain static while life continues to evolve.
Importantly, trusts themselves are not the issue.
Trusts are legitimate planning tools that provide flexibility, protection and continuity. When used appropriately, they allow families to adapt to changing circumstances over time.
And neither is tax the issue, really. Getting the fundamentals right is more important for long-term, sustainable wealth than a few favourable tax treatments around the edges.
The real issue is complacency.
Too often, families create structures and assume the job is done. It isn’t.
Estate planning is no longer a document you sign once and file away in a drawer. It is an ongoing process that should evolve alongside your life.
We are also seeing a broader shift in how Australians define wealth itself. It is no longer just the family home and an investment portfolio.
Modern wealth includes businesses, digital assets, cryptocurrency, intellectual property, frequent flyer points and increasingly complex family arrangements.
At the same time, Australians are living longer than ever before, meaning wealth may need to support multiple generations simultaneously. This creates new responsibilities and new risks.
How do you help your children enter the property market without exposing family wealth to relationship breakdowns?
How do you structure wealth so that it remains a source of opportunity rather than future conflict?
These are the questions families should be asking now.
The recent debate surrounding testamentary trusts also serves as an important reminder that policy decisions can have unintended consequences for vulnerable Australians. It is encouraging that the government has listened to feedback and clarified its position.
But the lesson remains: the wealth landscape is changing.
Increasingly, governments, regulators and tax authorities are paying closer attention to how wealth is held and transferred. That means families cannot afford to adopt a “set-and-forget” approach to their structures.
The families who will be best placed for the future are not necessarily those with the greatest wealth.
They are the families with the greatest clarity. Clarity around ownership, succession and governance. And clarity around how wealth will transition from one generation to the next.
Ultimately, preserving wealth is not about avoiding change.
It is about preparing for it.
Because the greatest risk is not change itself.
It is losing the ability to respond to it.
Anthony Hunt is Co-Founder of Wealth Lawyers and former COO of Westpac Private Bank. He advises business owners, investors and affluent Australian families on wealth protection, succession planning and intergenerational wealth transfer
A resurgence in high-end travel to Egypt is being driven by museum openings, private river journeys and renewed long-term investment along the Nile.
High-end homeowners are choosing to upgrade rather than relocate, investing in bespoke design, premium finishes and long-term lifestyle value.
