Rick Scott (R-FL)
Trade Deficit Elimination Act of 2026
A Republican bill with 2 Republican cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Trade Deficit Elimination Act of 2026 aims to impose additional duties on goods imported into the United States to eliminate the deficit in trade in goods. Under this bill, the Trade Representative will identify "trade deficit economies" by determining which trading partners have a bilateral deficit in trade in goods. The Trade Representative, following the direction of the President, can then modify duties on articles from these economies to reduce the deficit. The bill also allows for the possibility of entering into bilateral trade agreements to achieve these reductions. To prevent shortages, certain exemptions may be granted for specific articles.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +2
Would union members be better off under this?
Protectionist trade policies often benefit domestic labor and unionized industrial sectors.
- Scored +2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill expands the authority of the Trade Representative and President regarding import duties.
- Scored +2
Is this likely to grow the economy?
The bill seeks to protect national economic interests through strategic trade controls.
The opposite· 3 of 8
- Scored -3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Increased costs of imported goods may disproportionately impact low-income consumers.
- Scored -3
Is this likely to slow the rise in prices?
Increased duties on imported goods can lead to higher consumer prices and inflationary pressure.
- Scored -2
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
Higher prices for imported goods could reduce middle-class purchasing power.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of National Security and Economic Interests: The bill's findings suggest that addressing bilateral trade deficits can help protect the national security, foreign policy, and economic interests of the United States (Section 2).
-
Supply Chain Stability: The bill provides for potential exemptions from additional duties to prevent the unavailability of raw materials or material disruptions to the availability of critical goods, essential raw materials, and articles necessary for national defense (Section 5(b)(1)).
-
Consumer Accessibility: Exemptions may be granted for articles that cannot be grown or produced in sufficient quantities or at reasonable prices within the United States, or those that cannot be obtained from sources other than a trade deficit economy (Section 5(b)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Increased Costs through Additional Duties: The Trade Representative may impose or increase duties on articles imported from trade deficit economies, and these duties would be in addition to any other duties already imposed by law (Section 5(a) and Section 5(d)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would union members be better off under this? — Protectionist trade policies often benefit domestic labor and unionized industrial sectors. Would business owners be better off under this? — Domestic manufacturers may benefit from protection against foreign competition via duties. Would farmers be better off under this? — Increased duties on imports could potentially benefit domestic producers and farmers. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural, agriculture-based economies may benefit from increased domestic production incentives. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Increased costs of imported goods may disproportionately impact low-income consumers. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Higher prices for imported goods could reduce middle-class purchasing power. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban areas often rely more heavily on imported goods, making them sensitive to duty increases. Would retired people be better off under this? — Increased costs of living due to import duties may impact those on fixed incomes.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands the authority of the Trade Representative and President regarding import duties. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires the Trade Representative to publish lists of economies and deficit values in the Federal Register.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill seeks to protect national economic interests through strategic trade controls. Is this likely to create jobs? — By reducing trade deficits, the bill aims to bolster domestic economic interests and production. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Increased duties on imported goods can lead to higher consumer prices and inflationary pressure. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Increased duties may result in higher costs for consumers on various imported goods.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this favour talking over confrontation abroad? — The bill encourages bilateral trade negotiations to address deficits. Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Increased duties create more barriers to global trade movement. Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — Imposing unilateral duties can strain relationships with major trading partners.
- 8/6/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
Kevin CramerRepublican · North Dakota
Tim SheehyRepublican · Montana