Who is economist Brent Neiman? Is he behind Donald Trump tariff calculation? Why does he think Trump ‘got it all wrong’?

Brent Neiman, a leading economist and professor at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, has unexpectedly found himself at the heart of a political and economic firestorm surrounding President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff policy. The controversy began when the Trump administration cited a 2021 academic paper Neiman co-authored as the basis for its sweeping new tariffs—tariffs that Neiman says were grossly miscalculated.

Not a Trump ally

Neiman co-authored a 2021 paper on import tariffs titled “Tariff Pass-Through at the Border and at the Store: Evidence from US Trade Policy” alongside Harvard’s Alberto Cavallo, the IMF’s Gita Gopinath, and the Boston Fed’s Jenny Tang. The paper was cited by the US Trade Representative’s office as a methodological basis for the tariffs announced by Trump.

Neiman, however, made it clear that he neither endorses the policy nor the math behind it.

“I disagree fundamentally with the government’s trade policy and approach,” he wrote.

“But even taking it at face value, our findings suggest the calculated tariffs should be dramatically smaller — perhaps one-fourth as large.”

“They got it very wrong”

In a New York Times op-ed, Neiman said he was shocked when the administration unveiled its tariff rates.

“My immediate thought was ‘Gosh, how could those numbers be so high?’”

The next day, it became personal.

“The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative released its methodology and cited an academic paper produced by four economists, including me, seemingly in support of its numbers,” Neiman explained.

“But it got it wrong. Very wrong.”

Misused Math, misread formula

Neiman believes the Trump administration inserted the wrong variable from his study into its tariff model — leading to exaggerated figures.

“I think they grabbed the wrong number from our research,” he said.

“The one that I would use from my own research and plug into their equation is actually four times larger than the number they used, and as a result, the deficits they calculated are four times larger than I think they should have got.”

He added: “Where does 25% come from? Is it related to our work? I don’t know.”

Flawed strategy

Neiman also criticized the Trump administration’s goal of eliminating bilateral trade deficits through reciprocal tariffs, calling it an unrealistic and economically unsound objective.

“Trade imbalances between two countries can emerge for many reasons that have nothing to do with protectionism,” he wrote.

“Americans spend more on clothing made in Sri Lanka than Sri Lankans spend on American pharmaceuticals and gas turbines. So what? That pattern reflects differences in natural resources, comparative advantage and development levels.”

“The deficit numbers don’t suggest, let alone prove, unfair competition.”

Neiman’s final word: Divide by four or scrap it

Neiman believes the administration should “scrap” the tariff policy entirely. Short of that, he recommends a dramatic recalibration.

“The administration should divide its results by four.”

From Academia to Treasury — But not a Trump insider

Neiman is no political novice. He served in the Biden administration as an official in the US Treasury Department and has deep expertise in global trade economics. But he has no connection to Trump’s team.

Tariffs announced tariffs on “Liberation Day”

The tariffs, revealed on what Trump dubbed "Liberation Day," were presented on giant charts in the White House Rose Garden. They include a 10% baseline duty on all imports and even higher rates for specific goods like Italian coffee, Japanese whisky, and Asian sportswear.

Trump claims the move is designed to fight back against foreign trade barriers and boost US manufacturing.

“THIS IS AN ECONOMIC REVOLUTION, AND WE WILL WIN,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

But the move triggered an immediate market rout and bipartisan criticism. Stocks plunged globally, and economists warned of a looming financial storm.