Trump’s Policies and Global Market Impact ― Protests, Economy, and Korea’s Outlook

✅ This article is not intended to endorse or criticize any political party or individual.

✅ The focus is on explaining objectively how the policies and actions of the Trump administration affect the U.S. and global economy and financial markets.

---

📌 The Trump Era in America — Protests, Policies, and Their Impact on the Korean Economy

---

Introduction ― Why Trump, and Why Now?

As of 2025, the United States once again finds itself in heated debate with President Donald Trump at the center of both politics and the economy. During his first term (2017–2021), Trump had already pushed a strong “America First” agenda, emphasizing tariffs, tax cuts, and stricter immigration rules. After losing the 2021 election, he attempted a political comeback and ultimately returned to the White House in the 2024 election. This made him one of the very few figures in U.S. history to serve two non-consecutive presidential terms.

Since his return, Trump’s policy direction has been less about small economic tweaks and more about a sweeping, controversial experiment to reshape the broader trajectory of American society. In early 2025, he announced his flagship “universal tariff policy,” drawing global attention. Specifically, his administration proposed imposing a baseline 10% tariff on all imported goods, with additional tariffs ranging from 15–25% on imports from certain regions such as China and the European Union. This unprecedented step runs counter to the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and immediately drew backlash from U.S. allies and trading partners.

Alongside tariffs, the Trump administration has pursued three major policy pillars: stricter immigration enforcement, deregulation, and expanded energy development.

Immigration enforcement has included strengthening border barriers, expanding deportations of undocumented immigrants, and restricting new visa issuances. Supporters frame this as a matter of “protecting jobs and national security,” while opponents warn of “labor shortages and human rights violations.”

Deregulation aims to loosen restrictions in finance, labor, and environmental protection to encourage corporate activity. This has been welcomed by energy companies and manufacturers but criticized by academics and international bodies concerned with climate change.

Energy development expansion allows broader oil and gas exploration and pipeline construction. While this may stabilize domestic energy prices and create jobs in the short term, critics argue it slows down the global transition to clean energy.

In this sense, Trump’s policy package is interpreted in two very different ways: on one side as “stimulating growth and protecting domestic industries,” and on the other as “fuelling inflation and heightening international conflicts.” The result has been a deepening divide in U.S. society, with political tensions spilling into the streets.

Indeed, in October 2025, large-scale anti-Trump protests broke out simultaneously across the United States, under the slogan “No Kings.” This phrase captured the public’s concern that Trump was placing personal leadership above democratic institutions, and emphasized the need to defend constitutional checks and balances. Protesters accused his administration of “abuse of executive power,” “erosion of democracy,” and “worsening inequality.” Notably, immigrant communities, university students, and progressive groups played a prominent role.

What is striking is that these protests were not simply about political dislike of Trump. Instead, they reflected deep economic anxieties. Tariffs and immigration policies have direct consequences for household expenses, business costs, and labor markets. The central question for many Americans is less “Trump is back in office” and more “What will his policies mean for my wallet, my job, and the global economy?”

Thus, today’s controversy over Trump is not merely partisan bickering. It reflects a broader struggle between political authority and economic consequences. His policies may boost growth and corporate earnings in the short term, but in the longer run they risk adding pressure to inflation, public finances, and international relations. And these dynamics are not limited to the United States — they extend outward, directly or indirectly shaping economies in Korea and across the globe.

---

Part 1. Anti-Trump Protests and Political Controversy

1) Why Did the Protests Erupt?

In October 2025, tens of thousands of citizens filled the streets of major American cities to demonstrate against Trump’s government. The core slogan of the protests was “No Kings,” a phrase symbolizing resistance to the perception of one person exercising unchecked power. It also reflected widespread concern over the erosion of democratic institutions and the system of checks and balances.

Several issues were at the heart of the protests:

Executive overreach

Trump was criticized for pushing policies through a string of executive orders without sufficient consultation with Congress. His sweeping tariff measures and aggressive immigration enforcement were both rolled out rapidly with limited legislative oversight. Supporters praised these actions as “decisive leadership in the national interest,” but critics viewed them as “dangerous disregard for institutional balance.”

Stricter immigration enforcement

The administration expanded mass deportations and detention measures for undocumented immigrants. This raised human rights concerns, particularly around family separations and long-term detention. Key industries such as agriculture, construction, and services also worried about labor shortages. Supporters countered that immigration controls were necessary for “protecting American workers and reducing crime,” underscoring how immigration became a polarizing economic and social issue.

Concerns about authoritarian tendencies

Advocacy groups and academics voiced alarm over Trump’s confrontations with the judiciary and his hostile rhetoric toward the media. To them, these were signs of prioritizing personal authority over democratic governance. His supporters, however, argued that “existing institutions are inefficient and require strong leadership.” Thus, debates over authoritarianism became a deeper value clash between “efficient governance” versus “democratic procedure.”

These protests went beyond simple approval or disapproval of one leader. They represented a nationwide debate about the legitimacy of economic and political power. Demonstrations spread not only across New York, Washington, and Chicago but also into smaller cities, reflecting how the controversy cut across different communities nationwide.

---

2) The Impeachment Attempt and Current Status

Political tensions reached a peak in June 2025 when Democrats introduced a House resolution for impeachment. They accused Trump of bypassing Congress and abusing constitutional powers. The resolution was quickly tabled in a Republican-controlled House, effectively blocking any progress.

This episode carried two key implications:

A political signal: Even though the measure was unlikely to pass, its introduction served as a strong message of resistance and a rallying point for Democratic supporters.

A structural limitation: With Republicans holding a majority in the House, the impeachment had little chance of advancing. It was more symbolic than practical, leaving the broader power balance unchanged.

As of late 2025, Trump remains in office with no impeachment proceedings underway. However, the episode underscored the deep polarization in U.S. politics. The two parties remain locked in sharp conflict not only over policies and values but over the president’s governing style itself. This division clouds the prospects for future legislation, budget deals, and foreign policy coordination.

In summary, the protests and impeachment debate highlight that the U.S. is grappling not just with one leader’s actions, but with a fundamental struggle over the balance between democratic procedure and executive authority. This struggle has implications not only for political stability but also for the credibility of economic policy — and by extension, the global financial system.

---

Part 2. Trump’s Economic Policies — Praise and Criticism Within the U.S.

Since returning to power, Trump’s economic policies have drawn both strong praise and equally sharp criticism. Corporate leaders and investors have applauded certain measures, while academics, opposition groups, and consumer advocates have warned of risks.

1) Policies Praised in the U.S.

Tax Cuts — Corporate relief and higher earnings

Trump extended and revised the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), keeping the corporate tax rate at 21%, down from 35% under the Obama era. This boosted corporate profitability. According to FactSet, S&P 500 companies posted 8% higher profits year-over-year in Q2 2025. Wall Street interpreted this as a positive sign of sustained competitiveness, supporting stock buybacks and capital investment.

Deregulation — Reviving energy and construction

By rolling back restrictions in environmental, labor, and safety regulations, the administration lowered barriers for new projects. Oil and gas exploration in Alaska and federal lands, as well as approvals for new pipelines, revived the U.S. energy industry. As a result, energy companies saw average stock gains of 15% in the first half of 2025. Construction firms also benefitted from faster permitting processes. Supporters hail this as job creation and enhanced energy self-sufficiency.

Pro-business image — Positive on Wall Street

Trump’s overall business-friendly stance reassured many investors. Despite tariff risks, reports from major banks like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs suggested that corporate earnings improvements and short-term stimulus outweighed trade concerns. Thus, many on Wall Street see the Trump era as “politically unstable, but financially favorable.”

---

2) Policies Criticized in the U.S.

Universal Tariffs — Household burden

The blanket 10% tariff on all imports was the most controversial measure. The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) estimated that this would cost the average American household $1,700 per year. Consumer groups denounced it as an indirect tax falling hardest on lower-income families.

Weaker growth potential — Side effects of immigration limits

Stricter deportations and reduced visa availability may hurt long-term growth. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that GDP growth could be 0.3 percentage points lower annually through 2030 due to shrinking labor supply, particularly in immigrant-dependent industries.

Fiscal deterioration — Twin pressures from tax cuts and tariffs

Lower tax revenues combined with reduced trade flows are expected to worsen the federal deficit. In 2025 alone, the U.S. deficit is projected to exceed $1 trillion. Over time, this raises concerns over higher national debt and bond yields.

Inflationary pressure — Undermining price stability

Tariffs increase import costs, pushing up consumer prices. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) showed essential goods rising over 4% year-over-year in 2025. This threatens to keep inflation stuck above 3%, complicating the Federal Reserve’s 2% target.

---

Summary: Trump’s policies have created a dual perception inside the U.S. — short-term benefits for corporations and markets versus long-term risks for households, fiscal health, and growth potential.

---

Part 3. Impact on Stock Markets, Korea, and the Global Economy

1) U.S. Stock Market — Diverging fortunes

Trump’s policies have created winners and losers in the market:

Beneficiaries: Energy (oil and gas), infrastructure and construction, defense, reshoring manufacturers.

Pressured sectors: Tech and consumer firms reliant on global supply chains, retail and consumer goods with high import shares.

By 2025, the Nasdaq gained 12% year-to-date thanks to semiconductor strength, but retail and consumer stocks averaged 5% declines under tariff pressures. Investors face a sharply bifurcated market where selective sector strategies are essential.

---

2) Korea’s Economy and Stock Market — Both risks and opportunities

Automotive and steel hit hardest

With over 20% of exports to the U.S. at risk, Korean automakers and steel producers face real pressure. In H1 2025, Hyundai and Kia saw U.S. sales fall 7% year-over-year.

Semiconductors and biotech resilient

Benefiting from global AI demand, Korean chipmakers like SK hynix and Samsung Electronics gained 20% in stock value year-to-date. Biotech also enjoys structural demand growth.

Tariff negotiations as a swing factor

Recent Korea-U.S. talks floated tariff reductions to 15% or exemptions for select goods. A deal could trigger a short-term rebound in the Korean stock market, while delays or failure may deepen pressure on autos and steel.

---

3) Broader Global Implications

World trade contraction

The IMF warned that universal tariffs could cut global trade volumes by 2–3%. Emerging economies reliant on exports would be especially vulnerable.

Stronger dollar, emerging market stress

Protectionist policies tend to strengthen the dollar. In 2025, emerging market currencies such as Argentina’s peso and Turkey’s lira weakened 10–15%, amplifying debt burdens and financial instability.

Commodity volatility

Expanded U.S. drilling has stabilized oil prices in part, but geopolitical risks in the Middle East (Iran, Saudi Arabia tensions) and retaliatory trade moves have kept oil and metals markets volatile. Copper and lithium have seen sharp swings tied to trade uncertainty.

---

4) Checklist for Korean Investors

Tariff risk monitoring: Track earnings impacts in auto, steel, and chemical companies with high U.S. exposure.

Localization advantage: Battery and EV part suppliers with U.S. production facilities hold long-term advantages.

Global themes: AI semiconductors, defense, energy security are sectors with relative resilience under Trump-era policies.

Currency vigilance: Dollar strength aids exporters but raises import costs for resource-heavy firms.

---

Conclusion ― Why Trump’s Moves Matter

Trump’s policies are not confined to the U.S. alone. As the world’s largest economy, American decisions ripple across global trade, exchange rates, commodities, and investment flows. His agenda embodies a stark duality: short-term corporate profits versus long-term uncertainty in the trade system.

For investors, the Trump era presents both risks and opportunities. Selective strategies — across sectors, regions, and asset classes — are essential.

Ultimately, markets respond less to rhetoric and more to the tangible outcomes of policies and corporate earnings. That is why investors in Korea and worldwide must track every decision by the Trump administration — tariffs, immigration enforcement, fiscal policies — with close attention. Trump’s actions can reshape not only the U.S. economy but the trajectory of global markets and individual portfolios.

---

✅ This article is not intended to endorse or criticize any political party or figure.

✅ The purpose is to explain, based on official sources, how Trump’s policies influence the economy and financial markets in the U.S. and globally.

✅ All content is grounded in credible data and reporting (U.S. Congressional Budget Office, U.S. International Trade Commission, FactSet, and major media as of October 2025).

✅ For informational purposes only — not financial advice or stock recommendations.