Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 602

100 years of tariff lessons

  •   Anna Wu
  •   12 March 2025
  • 2
  •      
  •   

The global economy is entering a new era of protectionism, with President Trump’s second-term tariffs sparking renewed volatility in global trade. The US has announced a 25% tariff on imports from both Canada and Mexico (with some exemptions) and doubled the existing tariffs on all Chinese imports to 20%. Further, America enacted a sweeping 25% duty on steel and aluminium this week.

As expected, these moves triggered retaliatory responses from the targeted countries, with China imposing 10-15% tariffs on US agricultural products, Canada taking aim with 25% tariffs across more than US$100 billion worth of US imports and Mexico also threatening countermeasures.

However, uncertainty reigns in this tit-for-tat trade war as negotiations continue and the details about tariffs remain in flux. 

A tale of tariffs

Throughout history, tariffs have been a wildcard for equities, driving market volatility and reshaping investment dynamics. While the outcome of the current trade war remains unknown, we can look to the past for insights. Below we explore three historical scenarios, each set in different growth environments, to see how equities have responded to trade tensions. We also examine the performance ‘quality’ companies – those with high return on equity, earnings stability and low financial leverage.

US-China trade war (2018–2019)

In the most recent tariff war, the Trump administration imposed 10-25% tariffs on US$250 billion worth of Chinese goods in the technology, machinery, and industrial sectors. In response, China retaliated with US$110 billion worth of tariffs on agriculture, automobiles, and energy goods from the US. A trade deal, known as the ‘Phase One Deal’, was entered in early 2020, leading to tariff reductions, but the broader impact of the trade tensions took some time to unwind.

Impact on equities in a resilient growth environment: The US was cushioned by a strong growth backdrop, with US Real GDP growing by 2.5% and 3% in 2018 and 2019. Developed markets were also in good shape, and while international equities sold off at the start, they ultimately rebounded with positive gains at the end of the period. China’s economy, meanwhile, experienced a noticeable slowdown over this period, and equities declined nearly 30% peak-to-trough. The market started to recover mid-way through the trade war but ended the period with a moderate loss. Notably, quality companies in developed markets demonstrated greater resilience compared to the benchmark, showing a smaller drawdown and faster recovery.

Chart 1: Global equities during US-China trade war

Source: VanEck, Bloomberg. Quality represented by the MSCI World Quality Index. VIX represented by CBOE Volatility Index. from July 2017 to July 2020. Main tariff impacted period from January 2018 to January 2020. You cannot invest in an index. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Bush steel tariffs (2002–2003)

In 2002, President Bush imposed a 30% tariff on steel imports to protect domestic producers. The initiative backfired, resulting in higher steel prices that hurt US-based manufacturers and automakers, with an estimated 200,000 jobs lost, according to the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition (CITAC).

Impact on equities in sluggish growth environment: Bush’s tariffs were introduced in a highly turbulent environment, as markets were still reeling from the dot-com bubble. This created a far weaker backdrop for equities compared to the US-China tariff war in 2018-2019. Global equities saw a significant ~26% drawdown in Q4 2002, driven by rising costs, margin pressure, and deteriorating sentiment. Steel exporters, including Japan, China, faced sharp selloffs as reduced demand and margin pressure weighed on earnings. Quality companies, while following the broader trend, saw smaller drawdowns, reinforcing their defensive edge in uncertain markets.

Chart 2: Maximum drawdowns in impacted ex-US markets

Source: VanEck, Bloomberg. Quality represented by the MSCI World Quality Index. VIX represented by CBOE Volatility Index. Data from March 2002 to December 2003. You cannot invest in an index. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Chart 3: Global equities amid Bush Steel Tariffs

Source: VanEck, Bloomberg. Data from March 2002 to December 2003. You cannot invest in an index. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

The Smoot-Hawley agricultural tariffs (1930s)

President Hoover’s tariffs on agricultural products and related goods were introduced to protect farmers from foreign competition. The tariffs imposed by the Hoover administration triggered a global trade war, with major trade partners enforcing retaliatory tariffs, leading to a 66%1 collapse in world trade. The tariffs had a devastating effect on the US economy, deepening the global economic downturn known as the Great Depression.

Impact on equities in a deep recession: The S&P 500 index lost more than half of its value, while the Dow Jones, heavily weighted in industrials, collapsed. While we see this as an extreme scenario and consider a full replay in the Trump 2.0 era unlikely, it offers valuable lessons on the disruptive impact of an uncontrolled global trade war.

Taking a quality approach

Unlike expansionary markets where sentiment often takes the lead, we believe a tariff-driven environment calls for a sharper focus on company quality and diversification. As Trump unveils his broader trade strategy, prudent investors should be prepared for further market volatility and downside risk in the event of escalating trade tensions.

When sentiment-driven trades unravel, we believe corporate fundamentals matter most. Quality companies - those with strong ROE, earnings stability, and self-sufficiency - have historically shown greater resilience against downturns and times of uncertainty – reinforcing their defensive characteristics. In the chart below, the dark blue line represents international quality companies. When this line rises, it indicates that quality stocks are outperforming the market benchmark.

Chart 4: Quality has outperformed in times of volatility

Source: VanEck, Bloomberg. Data from January 2001 to February 2025. Past performance is not indicative of future results. You cannot invest in an index. index performance is not illustrative of fund performance.

Source
1U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff and the Great Depression. U.S. Department of State. Web. 27 Feb. 2025. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/protectionism.

 

Anna Wu is a Senior Associate, Cross-Asset Investment Research at VanEck, a sponsor of Firstlinks.

The VanEck MSCI International Quality ETF (QUAL) tracks the MSCI World ex Australia Quality Index and invests in around 300 of the world’s highest quality companies. A hedged version of QUAL is also available for investors.

This is general information only and does not take into account any person’s financial objectives, situation or needs. Any views expressed are opinions of the author at the time of writing and is not a recommendation to act.

For more articles and papers from VanEck, please click here.

 

  •   12 March 2025
  • 2
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Clime time: Tariffs are a smokescreen to Trump's real endgame

REITs: a haven in a Trumpian world?

Is the Paris Agreement on climate change dead?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

How to minimise tax with a will

Inheritance tax implications in Australia may surprise some, as poor estate planning without proper wills or trusts can lead to costly tax bills and delays for beneficiaries.

Testamentary trusts post-budget: Estate planning, tax reform and the ‘death tax’ debate

Proposed Budget changes to taxation are casting new uncertainty over testamentary trusts, prompting closer scrutiny of estate planning structures and the real implications of reforms still taking shape.

Meg on SMSFs: The CGT changes don’t impact super but what about Div 296 tax decisions?

New CGT rules could tip the scales in the super vs non-super debate. For those facing the Division 296 tax, the case for withdrawing has gotten more complex. A "comparison rate" tool may help assess decisions.

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

The strange effect of the 30% minimum capital gains tax

The 30% minimum tax on capital gains sits at the heart of the budget's proposed reforms. Yet the mechanics reveal anomalies that introduce unexpected distortions that raise questions about its design.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 667 with weekend update

The downfall of the giant and three lessons for investors.

  • 18 June 2026

Latest Updates

Latest from Morningstar

Ranking three common retirement strategies

The defining challenge of retirement isn't just about building wealth, it's about converting your lifetime savings into sustainable income. A holistic understanding of different strategies can improve long-term outcomes.

Economy

Was life really better in the good old days?

Are we worse off than previous generations? Lately, there seems to be a heightened level of angst that economic conditions are getting harder and that the two-party political system (and maybe democracy too) is failing voters.

Retirement

Australia has saved $4.5 trillion for retirement. Here's what matters more

Most Australians approaching retirement can tell you the exact dollar value of their super account. But success depends on more than a sizeable balance. Here's four key questions to ask yourself at the start of the financial year. 

Who gains in an AI-supercharged economy?

AI is already reshaping the economy, but companies building transformative technologies rarely capture the greatest long-term value. Instead, those benefits accrue to the users. We may well see this pattern reproduced. 

Taxation

Div 296's million-dollar reset worth $25,000

The 'cost base reset' for the new super tax is being sold as protection for pre-July gains. A worked example shows $1M of protection is worth about $25,000, and the real deadline has not passed.

Latest from Morningstar

The forecasting fix that Wall Street missed

Asking whether markets are overpriced may be the wrong question. New research suggests that traditional valuation metrics used to forecast returns may have been misread. Here are five takeaways for investors.

Investment strategies

Should a fund manager invest their own money differently?

Investors often like the idea that fund managers should invest client money exactly as they invest their own. But reality is more complicated. Unique circumstances make a different approach rational and, at times, beneficial.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.