by Richard Rollins
Vote this November to guard your pocketbook, our democracy and our children’s future!
Across America, people are not just deeply divided politically. Many are also quite understandably confused about the current and future impacts of President Trump’s priorities and economic policies on their livelihoods. While the super-rich are more conspicuously wealthy than ever, many households are struggling.
We are told that tariffs will lower prices and create jobs, that ending environmental protections will supercharge the economy, and that the United States is winning its war against Iran. We are barraged by promises, threats, and sound bites — but reliable information is hard to come by. Meanwhile, average Americans are feeling it where it hurts — their wallets — at the grocery store, the gas pump, in their health care costs, mortgage rates, and more. Many rightfully fear that down the road, ever more burdensome taxes and interest rates will be necessary to pay for federal policy actions of today.
In this article we cut through the election cycle noise to help people decide for themselves whether the Trump administration’s economic policies are improving their lives. We delve into eight examples of initiatives that the Administration claims will benefit American households. We find that instead, these policies will significantly add to typical households’ financial burdens — possibly totaling as much as $20,000 per U.S. household annually, and $400,000 per household over the next 30 years.
The following chart shows the annual and 30-year impact of these eight Trump era policies averaged over the nation’s approximately 133 million households.
So, what can regular people do? One of the most important things we can do is to educate ourselves on the economic realities, talk with our friends and families about the issues, and VOTE!
Although the president is not on the ballot this November, these midterm elections are critically important for our future. Why? Because The Constitution gives Congress the “power of the purse,” including the authority to levy taxes, borrow money, and approve spending for the federal government. The current Congress has largely abdicated that responsibility to the executive branch — that is, to Trump and his appointees. But through our votes, we can hold Congress accountable, and demand they push back against Trump’s harmful policies. Check your Senator’s and Representative’s voting records. Know who is supporting Trump’s executive and judicial nominees.
Keep your eye on the money, on your members of Congress, and make your vote in November count. Talk with your friends and neighbors, share this information.
Vote by November 3rd!
In order to pull back the curtain on these hidden costs, some rough estimates are necessary. To make this simple, we looked broadly at average household costs and impacts over the next 30 years. Data and analyses were gathered from established online sources, and present value calculations were used to determine the current worth of future costs and taxes. Depending on the source data, a modest 2 or 3 percent discount rate was used to provide estimates of first year hidden costs or the projected present value of household cumulative financial burden over the next 30 years.
The following overview of eight of the most impactful and controversial Trump era initiatives highlights the importance of the upcoming midterm elections to choose the right representatives to protect your household’s financial interests. Examples are summarized in the above Table in no particular order of importance. These costs arise as taxes, indirect cost increases, and canceled benefits due to Trump era policies or legislation. The values are based on or derived from data included in the named published sources. Brief explanations and source links are provided below.
1. Repeal of the Endangerment Finding: Impact on vehicle operating costs. Hidden cost: $68/household per year or a total of $1,353 through 2055
President Trump’s Day One Executive Order 14154 “Unleashing American Energy” tasked the EPA with submitting recommendations on the legality and continuing applicability of the 2009 Endangerment Finding. The repeal of the Endangerment Finding was touted as the single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. When the Endangerment Finding and corresponding vehicle GHG mandates were repealed, federal EV incentives and regulatory pressures evaporated. Without federal programs and policies favoring electric vehicles, automakers pivoted back to producing a much higher volume of traditional, internal-combustion powered vehicles, thus locking in increased operating costs for years to come.
According to NRDC, “The EPA’s own numbers [Table A-1 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis] show that there will be a total of $1,470 billion [$1.47 trillion] in additional costs for fuel, maintenance, insurance, noise, etc. through 2055. As a result, eliminating the clean car standards would cost the public a net [present value] of $180 billion, and that does not include the health and climate impacts, which the EPA didn’t even calculate at all.“ See item 2 below for the Health and Climate costs.
2. Repeal of the Endangerment Finding: Impact on Health and Climate. Hidden cost $1,910/household per year or a total of $37,432 through 2055
Based on a 2024 cost/benefit analysis by the Environmental Protection Network (EPN) of 16 different air quality regulations, EPN concluded that “the rules Zeldin plans to roll back [31 critical clean air and water regulations] were projected to deliver at least $254 billion in annual economic benefits, primarily by reducing healthcare costs, preventing illnesses and avoiding premature deaths.”
The loss of benefits provided by earlier EPA rules is just another way that the Trump administration is eroding health and climate protections while simultaneously passing the cost on to working Americans. The Union of Concerned Scientists summarized as follows: “Zeldin’s unprecedented assault on the EPA’s ability to deliver on its mission is entirely designed to prop up big polluters, including fossil fuel interests—while the rest of us pay the price.…And the cost? For every dollar saved by corporate polluters, it would create six dollars of cost to the public from things like health care bills and the loss of a longer, healthier life—and that doesn’t even capture many known but difficult to quantify impacts.”
3. Proposed delay for implementation of Tier 4 criteria pollutant emissions from vehicles. Hidden health and climate cost: $639/household per year or a total of $14,314/household through 2055
In an action unrelated to repeal of the Endangerment Finding, the EPA is proposing to delay implementation of previously established standards. Under the Clean Air Act, in 2024 the EPA established new, more protective emissions standards for criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases (GHG) for light-duty vehicles and Class 2b and 3 (‘‘medium-duty’’) vehicles that would have phased-in over model years 2027 through 2032. However, on May 14, 2026, the Trump administration’s EPA proposed the first phase of a new, two-part rulemaking. The Part 1 action proposes to adjust the implementation starting time from model year 2027 to MY 2029 for the Tier 4 criteria pollutant standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles.
The Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) summarized the cost impact of the two-year delay in a blog post, indicating “Indeed, the EPA’s own modeling shows that over the lifetime of these regulations, the standards will prevent millions of tons of pollution. These emissions reductions will prevent millions of asthma attacks, thousands of hospitalizations, and hundreds of premature deaths—adding up to $13 billion in annual health benefits, according to the EPA’s own 2024 analysis.” If the delay is extended through 2055, the EPA estimates a total net cost of $240 Billion (using a 2 percent discount rate).
4. Failure to extend tax credit for health insurance premiums. Hidden health insurance cost: $8,404/household per year or a total of $164,722/household through 2055
The Affordable Care Act’s enhanced federal premium tax credits made health insurance more affordable for millions of Americans when it was enacted in 2010. However, after trying and failing to repeal the ACA during his first term, Trump lobbied Congress in 2025 to let the tax credits sunset at the end of the year.
In April of 2025, AARP reported that “Middle-income midlife enrollees will see average annual premium increases of more than $4,000 in 2026.” Later in 2025, KFF (formerly the Kaiser Family Foundation) estimated increased costs for a silver health insurance plan if enhanced premium tax credits were unavailable: the results for a family of four (40- and 38-year-old married parents of two children) were an increase of $1,067 per month ($12,807 per year). Insurance costs have increased over $2,100 per year for a 40-year-old individual as illustrated by the New York Times:
Approximately 20 percent of the U.S. population relies on Medicaid for health care. The 2024 federal budget for Medicaid was nearly $600 billion. Yet Trump’s 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act cut over $1 trillion of future spending for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, eliminating more than 10 million people from the programs by 2034. Who then pays for those who can no longer afford insurance? Perhaps the states, perhaps no one, or perhaps everyone, as healthcare safety net costs are transferred to and hidden from the American taxpayers. Illustration by the New York Times:
5. One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) hidden tax: $7,173/household per year or a total of $140,602/household through 2055
While many of the financial impacts of Trump era initiatives are real but indirect, others have a more direct impact on household taxes. This occurs when Congress approves tax cuts and increased spending so that the U.S. Treasury has to borrow (e.g., sell new Treasury Bonds) to cover the tax revenue shortfall. The U.S. government then incurs interest costs on the new debt with resulting interest costs paid by a growing portion of annual tax revenue; which, in turn, reduces the percentage of tax revenue that can be spent on federal programs, expenses, or infrastructure.
Using the Congressional Budget Office rules of thumb, the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) estimates the additional debt required from OBBBA will add over $700 billion in interest expense to the law’s budgetary effects. Adding the cost of this debt service to the net of OBBBA spending increases, spending cuts, and reduced tax revenue means that—with interest—the act will cost taxpayers more than $4.1 trillion from FY2025-2034. That translates to $3,614/household per year over 10 years for a total present value of $30,827. During this 10-year period deficit spending occurs early, with interest cost rising to $129 billion by 2034. Graphics from the BPC and New York Times:
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated that, as enacted, the OBBBA costs over a 30-year period would add up to as much as $18.7 trillion. That’s a whopping $7,173/household per year through 2055 for a total present value of $140,602. During this 30-year period, deficit spending as a percent of GDP is estimated to increase by 22 percent.
6. Gasoline and Diesel cost increases resulting from the war with Iran: $1,100/household (2026) or a total of $21,560/household through 2055
While the cost of the war’s impact on fuel prices fluctuates daily, the trend leaves little doubt that American households will feel a direct impact at the gas pump and an indirect cost as elevated fuel prices impact the entire economy. In mid-June the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy projected a cumulative fuel cost impact through the end of 2026 of nearly $1,300 for an average U.S. household; by early September the average household’s projected cost had decreased to about $1,100.
While these costs are being borne by U.S. households, oil company profits have been skyrocketing. Chevron’s 2026 Q2 profit set a new record at $12.1 billion, up from $2.2 billion in Q1 and ExxonMobil Profits jumped from $4.2 to $14.5 billion. Q1 to Q2 profits for BP rose from $3.2 to $5.7 billion and Shell’s rose from $6.9 to $9.8 billion.
Following the trendline for 2026, and seeing inflation above 3 percent, we assume a cumulative additional household cost through 2026 of $1,100 with a total estimated impact of roughly $21,560/household of additional cost extending through 2055.
7. U.S. military expenses resulting from the war with Iran: $38/household per year or a total of $752/household through 2055
The Pentagon’s last estimated direct cost for the Iran war was $37.5 billion. However, critics point out that it was not a comprehensive estimate and may have underestimated long term costs. Estimates by others vary from from $40 billion to $1 trillion. It’s pretty clear that no one knows with any degree of certainty what the final cost of the war might be; however we do know, with a high level of certainty, that U.S. taxpayers will end up footing the bill.
To put the range of estimated war costs in context, it is useful to look at Trump’s own proposals. On April 3, 2026 the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released details of the Trump administration’s budget request for the 2027 fiscal year. According to the President’s budget proposal: “The Budget builds upon the historic $1 trillion overall defense topline enacted for 2026 and requests $1.5 trillion in total budgetary resources for 2027. This is a $441 billion or 44-percent increase from the 2026 enacted level in combination with the $151.5 billion in mandatory funding provided through the Working Families Tax Cut Act (WFTC), Public Law 119-21 [signed into law on July 4, 2025].” Of this amount, the Budget includes $1.1 trillion in base discretionary budget authority specifically for DOW in 2027. The Budget also includes a request for $350 billion in additional mandatory resources for critical Administration priorities such as increasing access to critical munitions and further expansion of the defense industrial base.” This proposal will increase military spending to levels not seen since World War II:
In addition to this already outrageous proposal, on June 24, 2026–less than three months after submitting the FY 2027 budget request–the Trump administration submitted a request for urgent supplemental funding that included $67.15 billion specifically to support the Iran war. This proposal for military programs is in addition to the $1 trillion proposed for FY 2026 and the $1.5 trillion proposed for FY 2027.
Recognizing that a final accounting for the Iran war could result in costs significantly higher than the Pentagon’s estimate and, in light of the unprecedented increased military funding request for FY2027, this overview assumes a direct cost of $100 billion, with long term repayment taking up to 30 years. While it is possible the war could end up costing much more or even somewhat less than these estimates, it is clear that a significant cost will be incurred and passed on to American households in the form of future, higher taxes.
8. Initiated tariffs and trade wars: $1,100/household per year or a total of $21,560/household through 2055
The Tax Foundation tracks the impact of Trump’s tariff policy changes–over 50 since January of 2025–and estimates that new tariffs will apply to 54 percent of U.S. imports in 2026. The Trump administration’s continually shifting tariff policy changes and trade disputes with friends and foes alike have impacted nearly all U.S. trading partners, heightening global economic uncertainty. Several organizations have created tariff trackers in an attempt to translate such uncertainty to U.S. household impacts. Late August estimates for total 2026 U.S. household costs have ranged from $840 to $1,100: $840 by the Tax Foundation, $920 by the Tax Policy Center, and $1,100 by the Yale Budget Lab.
The Trump administration’s belief that increasing tariffs would both reduce the U.S. international trade deficit and pay for proposed and adopted tax cuts has decidedly not been realized. The volatile nature of the Administration’s tariff proposals have resulted in numerous court challenges, Supreme Court decisions requiring tariff refunds, retaliatory tariffs by other nations, supply chain disruptions for U.S. manufacturers, and general destabilization of global trade. With no end in sight for such widespread use of tariffs, we’ve used the Yale Budget Lab estimate as a basis for our impact analysis, with the awareness that future tariffs and their fallouts could increase costs for American households even more in the future.
What can be done? This is where you have a choice!
Following the money trail reveals how Trump’s initiatives, with Congress’s support, neglect to cover their own costs in real time and, even worse, how they are causing long-lasting harm to the American people and the global economy. Trump’s initiatives have increased our national debt to a staggering $40 trillion and climbing. If positive policy changes aren’t made soon, each of us could be required to pay tens of thousands of dollars in hidden costs and taxes over the next several years, possibly totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars per household by 2055.
If you don’t like this trend of increasing household costs, it’s time to think hard about your vote in November—and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Remember, Congress alone has the constitutional authority to levy taxes, borrow money, and approve government spending. Look at the voting record of your members of Congress. Look for candidates who will fight for sound economic policies for all Americans, not just the wealthiest.
Vote in November!
P.S. If you think the analysis in this article is helpful, share it widely—with friends, family, and others. Let them know why it’s important and encourage them to read and pass it on to others.