Was Trump's Tariff Plan Written By AI? Shocking Claims Surface After Executive Order Scandal

The rumour mill is in overdrive: Did artificial intelligence have a hand in drafting Donald Trump's tariff plan? As outrage over his latest executive order erupts, fresh allegations are swirling—raising serious questions about its true origins and intent.

Legal experts argue that Trump's reliance on AI may explain the often 'slipshod' wording in his flurry of executive orders. Economist Robert Reich took to X to claim that 16 of Trump's first-day orders were lifted directly from the right-wing Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 blueprint—adding fuel to the fire.

Trump insisted throughout his campaign that he did not know about Project 2025. People watching closely have observed that Trump's orders are often unclear and contain mistakes and stiff language, which might concern Trump in legal disputes, given that many are likely to be contested.

Notably, Trump's tariff rates calculate the trade deficit between the US and another country, divide that by the total worth of imported goods, and then cut that number in half. Reports from Cointelegraph suggest that an AI chatbot may have generated the confusing measures.

A Tariff Formula Emerges

Observers quickly found that chatbots such as OpenAI's ChatGPT tended to repeat that calculation, suggesting that busy administration staff may have used the technology to create the plan.

'What would be an easy way to calculate the tariffs that should be imposed on other countries so that the US is on even playing fields when it comes to trade deficit. Set a minimum of ten percent,' crypto trader Jordan "Cobie" Fish asked ChatGPT.

The AI tool promptly delivered a remarkably close equation, figuring out the tariff rate by dividing the trade gap by the total number of imported goods. The chatbot itself, however, advised that this method didn't make much sense.

'This method ignores the intricate dynamics of international trade — such as elasticities, retaliatory measures, and supply chain nuances — but it provides a blunt, proportional rule to 'level the playing field,' ChatGPT explained.

Decoding The Orders

'Confirmed, ChatGPT...,' Journal of Public Economics editor Wojtek Kopczuk tweeted. 'Exactly what the dumbest kid in the class would do, without edits.' X user Wojtek Kopczuk wrote. An analysis of which countries faced heavy tariffs and which were unaffected reveals that the new tariff rates mostly disregard the broader international trade landscape.

'I suspect his is also why countries like Iran, which we basically do not trade with, gets off so easily,' another X user replied. 'No trade = no trade deficit!'

Grok And Claude Join The Chorus

ChatGPT isn't alone. Elon Musk's AI chatbot Grok also gave a comparable response to the same request, suggesting tariff rates be changed 'based on deficit size.' Grok, too, cautioned that this plan was largely illogical and potentially counterproductive.

Grok wrote: 'This method assumes tariffs directly reduce imports by raising prices, but in reality, factors like demand elasticity, currency exchange rates, and global supply chains complicate the outcome. For a truly "even playing field," you'd need to consider production costs, subsidies, and labor standards abroad — data that's harder to quantify simply.'

Anthropic's Claude AI chatbot offered a similar suggestion with the same warnings. Is this pattern just a coincidence? Perhaps. However, the White House has already faced accusations of using AI to create poorly worded executive orders, which showed signs of AI tools like ChatGPT.

White House And AI's Growing Relationship

The administration has widely promoted its use of AI in government operations, with the Musk-led DOGE highlighting its employment of the technology and the General Services Administration introducing a chatbot last month to assist agency staff.

Whether AI was used or not, economists caution that the tariffs are misguided and will likely ruin the global economy. This morning, the stock market is already seeing a harsh downturn. 'There is no economic rationale for doing this, and it will cost the global economy dearly,' London School of Economics professor Thomas Sampson told the BBC.