In a last-minute move aimed at bolstering Republican Senator Susan Collins’s re-election bid in Maine’s upcoming midterm elections, former President Donald Trump adjusted the United States’ tariff structure. Last week, Trump removed import tariffs on certain industrial inputs, including paper, plywood, and specific machinery, while simultaneously imposing tariffs on canoes and coffins. The shift was part of a broader effort to influence voter sentiment ahead of next week’s vote.

Collins, often criticized for aligning closely with Trump’s agenda despite her moderate Republican image, had previously secured an exemption from tariffs on road salt, an action met with skepticism by her Democratic opponent. Despite these targeted tariff adjustments, analysts suggest the changes are unlikely to significantly sway voter preferences. The relief affects a narrow range of imports and is too limited to meaningfully impact overall inflation or consumer prices.

Tariffs remain a contentious issue in U.S. political discourse, frequently cited by Democrats as a point of criticism against the Republican party and Trump’s trade policies. While public opinion polls indicate growing dissatisfaction with tariffs over the past year, the direct influence of tariffs on voter behavior appears weak. Some voter groups most affected by tariffs, such as farmers, have continued to support Trump despite the economic pressures.

Research from The Budget Lab at Yale University estimates that tariffs have increased consumer prices by approximately 0.7% in the medium term after accounting for consumer substitution toward cheaper goods. The relative cost of tariffs corresponds to roughly 0.7% of median household post-tax income. However, price increases vary significantly by sector; for example, tariffs have raised automobile prices by 2.8% and clothing and footwear prices by 3.3%. Food prices, which hold high importance for voters, have been less affected, with a 0.7% increase linked to tariffs. In contrast, fuel price hikes are attributed more to geopolitical developments, including Trump’s policies toward Iran.

The broader political context underscores how presidents are often held responsible for inflation regardless of underlying causes. During the Biden administration, for instance, a sharp rise in egg prices around 2022 was driven chiefly by supply disruptions from avian flu rather than fiscal policy, yet the public frequently attributed such price pressures to the sitting president. Similarly, Trump’s campaign rhetoric promised to reverse increases in grocery prices, a pledge that was difficult to fulfill given economic realities.

Historical examples highlight that tariff policy alone does not determine electoral outcomes. In Ohio, Senator Sherrod Brown’s 2006 victory followed widespread dissatisfaction with President George W. Bush over issues unrelated to trade, including the Iraq war. Subsequently, in 2010, Republican Rob Portman won the seat, advocating for trade agreements despite Brown’s opposition.

While tariffs may cost Republicans votes in the midterms, the issue is intertwined with broader voter attitudes toward Trump. Despite their unpopularity, tariffs are unlikely to disappear soon from U.S. trade policy, underscored by Trump’s recent actions and persistent price pressures in products like coffins.