Donald Trump Criticizes Goldman Sachs Chief for Predicting Tariff Outcome This title encapsulates the article’s focus on Trump’s critical response to the predictions made by Goldman Sachs regarding tariffs. It avoids speech marks and captures the essence

Trump Attacks Goldman Sachs CEO Over Tariff Predictions, Suggests Return to DJing

New York, NY – Former president Donald Trump launched a scathing attack on Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon Tuesday, criticizing the bank’s economic forecasts regarding his tariff policies and questioning Solomon’s leadership capabilities. The outburst, delivered via a post on Truth Social, is the latest in a series of public rebukes directed at corporate leaders by the former president.

Trump asserted that his tariffs have largely been absorbed by foreign entities, not the U.S. economy as predicted by many financial institutions, including Goldman Sachs. He specifically took issue with the bank’s assessment of the market impact and the tariffs themselves, stating, “They made a bad prediction…on both the market repercussion and the Tariffs themselves.”

In a particularly pointed remark,Trump suggested Solomon should revisit a past hobby.”Maybe David should go out and get himself a new economist,” Trump wrote, adding, “and not bother running a major Financial Institution.” He also alluded to Solomon’s previous career as a DJ, implying a return to music would be a more suitable pursuit.

Goldman Sachs declined to comment on the former president’s statements. The White House has not yet responded to requests for comment.

The criticism comes as a Reuters tracker shows at least 333 companies globally have been impacted by Trump’s tariffs as they were first implemented on February 1st, 2018, targeting imports from Mexico, Canada, and China.

Goldman Sachs, like many of its competitors, has maintained a cautious outlook on the economic effects of Trump’s trade policies. A recent report released Sunday,led by chief economist Jan Hatzius,indicated that U.S. consumers have already absorbed 22% of tariff costs through June, with a potential rise to 67% if the tariffs persist at the current rate. Hatzius has not responded to requests for comment.

The bank previously warned in April that widespread tariffs could hinder global growth and perhaps lead to more aggressive interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve.

Trump’s attacks on corporate leaders are becoming increasingly frequent. Last week, he called for the resignation of Intel’s Lip Bu-Tan over ties to Chinese firms, and has repeatedly criticized Apple CEO Tim Cook for manufacturing iPhones outside the United States. He has also made unsubstantiated claims of discrimination against JP Morgan and Bank of America for allegedly refusing his deposits after leaving office.

According to Reuters’ global tariff tracker, companies have reported a combined financial impact of $13.6 to $15.2 billion for the full year, stemming from Trump’s tariffs, between July 16th and August 8th alone, as second-quarter earnings season continues.

What potential economic consequences did David Solomon predict would result from the proposed tariffs?

Donald Trump Criticizes Goldman Sachs Chief for Predicting Tariff Outcome

Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States, has publicly rebuked David Solomon, the CEO of Goldman Sachs, following Solomon’s assessment of the potential impact of proposed tariffs on the US economy. This clash highlights the ongoing tension between the former president’s economic policies and the perspectives of Wall Street’s leading figures. The core of the dispute revolves around predictions regarding inflation and the effectiveness of tariff strategies.

The Spark: Solomon’s Tariff Forecast

David Solomon, in a recent interview, suggested that the tariffs proposed by a potential second Trump management would likely lead to inflationary pressures.He argued that tariffs, while intended to protect domestic industries, ultimately increase costs for consumers and businesses, contributing to a rise in prices. This assessment directly contradicts Trump’s long-held belief that tariffs are a powerful tool for negotiating favorable trade deals and boosting American manufacturing.

Specifically, Solomon predicted that new tariffs, particularly those targeting China, would disrupt supply chains and force American companies to absorb higher input costs or pass them on to consumers. He emphasized the potential for a ripple effect throughout the economy, impacting various sectors beyond those directly affected by the tariffs.

Trump’s Rebuttal: A Familiar Pattern

Donald Trump responded swiftly and forcefully, dismissing Solomon’s analysis as “wrong” and “biased.” He took to his social media platform, Truth Social, to criticize Solomon and Goldman Sachs, accusing them of benefiting from globalist policies that have harmed American workers. Trump reiterated his stance that tariffs are essential for leveling the playing field and bringing jobs back to the United States.

His statement included several key points:

tariffs as Negotiation Tools: Trump maintained that tariffs are a crucial bargaining chip in trade negotiations, allowing the US to secure better deals with other countries.

Protection of American Industry: He argued that tariffs protect American industries from unfair competition, fostering domestic growth and innovation.

Criticism of Wall Street: Trump frequently criticizes Wall Street institutions, alleging they are out of touch with the concerns of ordinary Americans.

This isn’t the first time Trump has clashed with financial leaders. Throughout his presidency and post-presidency, he has often challenged the conventional wisdom of economists and financial analysts.

Historical Context: Trump’s Tariff policies (2018-2020)

To understand the current dispute, it’s crucial to revisit Trump’s tariff policies during his first term. From 2018 onwards, the Trump administration imposed tariffs on billions of dollars worth of goods from China, as well as from other countries like Canada, Mexico, and the European Union.

Here’s a breakdown of key actions:

1. Section 301 Tariffs on China: these tariffs, justified under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, targeted Chinese imports accused of intellectual property theft and unfair trade practices.
2. Steel and Aluminum Tariffs: Tariffs were imposed on steel and aluminum imports from various countries, citing national security concerns.
3. Retaliatory Tariffs: Other countries responded with retaliatory tariffs on US exports, escalating the trade war.

The impact of these tariffs was widely debated. while some argued they benefited certain domestic industries, others pointed to increased costs for consumers and businesses, as well as disruptions to global trade.

The Economic impact: A Contested Debate

The economic consequences of Trump’s tariffs remain a subject of ongoing debate.Studies have yielded mixed results, with some showing negative impacts on US GDP and employment, while others suggest limited or even positive effects in specific sectors.

Increased Costs: tariffs undeniably increased the cost of imported goods,leading to higher prices for consumers and businesses.

* Supply Chain Disruptions: The trade war disrupted global supply chains, forcing companies to find alternative sources of materials and components