Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tariffs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Economists and business groups tell Assembly tariffs would raise costs, threaten New Jersey exporters and ports
Summary
A panel including a Rutgers economics professor, NJBIA and manufacturing experts told the Assembly Oversight, Reform and Federal Regulations Committee that proposed federal tariffs would function as a tax, raise costs for New Jersey firms and consumers, and could prompt retaliatory measures that damage exports and port-related jobs.
A panel of economists and business representatives told the Assembly Oversight, Reform and Federal Regulations Committee on Friday that proposed federal tariffs would operate like a tax and could harm New Jersey companies, workers and ports.
"A tariff is a tax on imported goods," said Tom Pruscher, a Rutgers University economics professor. "Tariffs are paid by US firms and individuals." Pruscher warned that previous tariff measures led to large retaliatory levies that hit U.S. exports and that similar actions now could reduce trade volumes and slow manufacturing growth over time.
Why it matters: New Jersey exports tens of billions of dollars in manufactured goods and agricultural products, and the state’s economy is tightly integrated into North American supply chains. Pruscher told the committee that Canada and Mexico account for nearly 30% of New Jersey exports, and that dislocating those trade links would force firms to find new intermediate inputs, raising production costs.
Panelists said the Port of Newark is especially exposed. Pruscher noted importers were "front loading" shipments ahead of possible tariffs and cautioned that once tariffs are imposed trade volumes could fall and take years to recover, threatening related jobs across the logistics chain.
Business perspective: Chris Emmaholtz of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association reiterated those concerns and urged state preparedness. "If Canada wants to do anything to retaliate on New Jersey, that's a lot of jobs in New Jersey that are tied to our exports," he said, arguing that tariffs would add to inflationary pressures already cited by businesses in the state.
Emmaholtz recommended the state map likely tariff impacts, consider targeted grants through the Economic Development Authority to help affected industries, improve outreach about federal trade programs and ask New Jersey’s congressional delegation to pursue narrowly targeted federal measures in lieu of broad tariffs.
Manufacturing viewpoint: Peter Conley, CEO of the New Jersey Manufacturing Extension Program, emphasized the role of imported energy and parts in state production and said disruption to Canadian and Mexican trade flows would affect agricultural, pharmaceutical and defense supply chains.
What the testimony did not decide: Panelists discussed scenarios and potential state responses but did not ask the committee to adopt any binding state policy. Much of the discussion centered on the economic logic of tariffs and recommended state-level mitigation steps rather than immediate legislative action.
What comes next: Committee members thanked the panel and said the testimony would inform future consideration of state preparedness measures and outreach to the federal delegation.
