According to CCTV News reported on October 7, on October 6, local time, US President Trump issued an article on his social platform "Real Social" stating that starting from November 1, 2025, all imports from other countries and regions to the United States will be subject to a 25% tariff on medium and heavy trucks.
In the first week of October 2025, the American political arena was like a lake thrown into multiple boulders, causing layers of shocks. On the one hand, Trump suddenly increased tariff barriers on social platforms and expanded the scope of the taxation plan for imported trucks; On the one hand, the two parties on Capitol Hill continued to see-saw, and the federal government's "shutdown" entered the seventh day, and 750,000 employees were forced to take unpaid vacation; Domestically, a lawsuit in Illinois took the president to court, accusing him of abusing power; Overseas, Brazilian President Lula's tariff protest phone call highlights the enemies made on all sides of trade policy. This multiple crisis, which combines political division, economic pain and power game, is reflecting the deep cracks in the American governance system.
1. The tariff stick is waved again: domestic companies are under pressure, and the global industrial chain is shaking
On October 6, local time, Trump’s message on “real social” once again stirred the global trade market – – from November 1, all imported medium-sized and heavy-duty trucks will be charged a 25% tariff. This is the second increase in just ten days, on September 25, he announced an equal percentage tariff on imported heavy-duty trucks, now extended to medium-sized models, covering major suppliers such as Mexico, Canada and Germany.
This "tariff punch" first hit American companies. The experience of Cleveland furniture company Naturepedic is representative. Its planned high-end headboards was forced to shelve project decisions due to soaring raw material tariff costs. Jonathan Gold, vice president of the American Retail Federation, bluntly stated that such policies are making housing in the "American Dream" more expensive and the stability of the supply chain continues to be undermined. On the other side of the world, the German auto industry has been hit hard: the share prices of Daimler Trucks, Volkswagen Traton and other companies fell in response, and Bosch Group announced that it would lay off 13,000 people within five years, becoming the epitome of the 55,000 layoffs in the German auto industry.
It is worth noting that this logic of "promoting return with tariffs" is failing. Mary Lovley, a researcher at Peterson Institute for International Economics, hit the nail on the head and pointed out that the defense of linking cabinets, furniture and other industries with "national security" is unconvincing, but exposes the simplicity and rudest policy. Barry Appleton, an expert at new york Law School, even warned that the tariff policy lacking the support of local production capacity will only push up prices and make American consumers pay the bill.
2. Government shutdown tug-of-war: 750,000 employees are "on leave", and the economy is losing blood every day
Simultaneously with the tariff policy, the federal government’s “stagnation crisis” was fermented.On October 6, the Senate vetoed the Democratic allocation bill with 45 votes in favour and 50 votes against, and the Republican version subsequently failed to overtake, which began on October 1, the shutdown has entered its seventh day, becoming the first federal government shutdown in seven years.
About 750,000 federal employees are forced to suspend paid leave, with 90 percent of the Securities and Exchange Commission employees leaving their jobs and only 393 people dealing with emergency affairs; 11,000 Federal Aviation Administration employees are forced to leave, 13,000 vacancy workers are forced to “unpaid work”, air travel is at risk of delay. For ordinary people, Washington Monument, Free Clock and other attractions shut down turmoil, passport handling, food ticket issuance and other services are delayed, low-income families first.
Economic losses were more intuitive.The Annual Accounting firm estimated that the government would lose $7 billion per week of shutdowns and the tourism industry would lose more than $77 million per day. The worst was the data breakout crisis: the Bureau of Labor Statistics suspended monthly employment data release and inflation data in mid-October would be delayed, putting the U.S. economy, which is struggling with “employment weakness and inflation stubborn,” into a “blind flight” as Annual chief economist Gregory Dako calls.
State power against federation: Chicago deployment disputes spark justice war
The rift in domestic governance widened further on October 6-when Illinois joined the city of Chicago to sue the Trump administration against its decision to deploy 300 National Guard troops to Chicago. The lawsuit documents pointed out that this move was "punishing political enemies" and seriously infringing on state sovereignty and autonomy.
The conflict originated from the announcement by the White House on October 4 that Jackson said the deployment was aimed at addressing local “continuing violent riots” and protecting federal assets. But the Illinois counterattack broke this claim: as a traditional blue state, the state’s policy differences with the Trump administration have long been, the lawsuit is essentially a power game under the U.S. federal system. From a historical dimension, the deployment of the National Guard has always required a request from the state government, and the unilateral actions of the Trump administration have been interpreted as a challenge to local autonomy.
At present, although the case has not been held in court, it has caused heated public opinion. Some constitutional scholars pointed out that this lawsuit may become a key case to clarify the boundary between federal and state powers, and its result will affect the scale of intervention of the federal government in the field of public security in the future.
Diplomatic closure: Lula claims 40% debt tariffs, negotiation prospects are unlikely
On the international stage, the Trump administration's tariff policy has also encountered resistance. On October 6, Brazilian President Lula took the initiative to call Trump and explicitly requested the cancellation of the 40% tariff on Brazilian products. The tariff began in July, when Trump added it on the grounds of "opposing political persecution of former President Bolsonaro", triggering strong protests in Brazil.
While the call reached a consensus on “meeting face-to-face as soon as possible” and the location was originally set for Malaysia, the core claims remained unresolved. Trump only appointed Secretary of State Rubio to continue negotiations with Brazilian Vice President Arquimedes, without giving a clear timetable.
For Brazil, the 40% tariff has affected core export industries such as agricultural products and manufacturing; for the United States, losing Brazil as a South American ally could weaken its influence in Latin America. Analysts believe that if the negotiations fail, Brazil or Argentina and other countries will initiate a WTO lawsuit, further exacerbating tensions between the United States and Pakistan.
5. Conclusion: Governance myths behind multiple crises
From the domestic shutdown crisis to state rights confrontation, from corporate panic caused by tariff barriers to passive response on the diplomatic stage, the triple dilemma encountered by the Trump administration in early October is essentially the inevitable result of "unilateralist governance." They try to protect local industries with tariffs, but ignore the relevance of the global industrial chain; they want to use tough means to control local areas, but touch the bottom line of the federal system; they use pressure to handle diplomatic relations, but lose their own international credibility.
At present, there is no final conclusion when the government shutdown will end, the negative impact of tariff policies is continuing to ferment, and negotiations between state rights litigation and Brazil have entered a critical stage. The solution to these problems not only requires compromise between the two parties, but also requires breaking out of the "zero-sum game" mindset. Otherwise, this October storm may be only the beginning, not the end, of the U.S. governance crisis.