U.S. markets face a potential triple hit as inflation risks, tariff threats, and flawed fiscal policy converge, setting the stage for a brutal asset-wide selloff.
Sharp Selloff Across US Assets Likely, Schiff Warns of Economic Fallout
A looming resurgence of trade tensions and inflationary risks could trigger renewed volatility in U.S. markets, pressuring equities, bonds, and the dollar simultaneously. Economist and gold advocate Peter Schiff warned on July 5 through a series of posts on social media platform X that a new wave of tariffs is likely to jolt markets. Schiff urged investors to brace for impact:
Get ready for a repeat of the sharp selloff in the U.S. dollar, Treasuries, and stocks as investors realize that the ‘reciprocal’ tariffs are coming back.
“They may not be as high as when first imposed, but they’ll be much higher than what dip buyers in stocks and bonds expected,” he added. The gold bug indicated that the market has failed to fully incorporate the effects of renewed trade restrictions, echoing concerns seen during earlier tariff escalations.
He also challenged the narrative surrounding President Donald Trump’s recent claims about a trade agreement with Vietnam. Trump stated the deal would impose tariffs of 20%–40% on Vietnamese goods. Schiff refuted that logic, explaining: “Vietnam won’t pay us anything. Americans will pay the U.S. government 20%–40% if they buy goods made in Vietnam, while the Vietnamese will pay their government nothing to buy goods from us.” His remarks spotlight the economic burden on U.S. consumers, not foreign exporters.
On fiscal policy, Schiff argued that Trump’s tax cuts are structurally flawed, as they do not address the supply side of the economy. The economist warned that such measures will ultimately strain the economy:
Instead they’ll result in higher long-term interest rates and inflation.
Schiff emphasized that sustainable growth requires incentives for savings and capital investment, not merely short-term consumer stimulus. His perspective diverges from those who advocate for demand-side interventions, but it underscores a deepening divide in views over how to navigate economic headwinds.
