IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buspol/v27y2025i3p395-416_4.html

Tariffs and corporate political activity: a survey experiment on US businesses

Author

Listed:
  • Dolan, Lindsay R.
  • Kubinec, Robert M.
  • Nielson, Daniel L.
  • Zhang, Jiakun Jack

Abstract

The trade war with China has cost US producers and consumers hundreds of billions of dollars since 2018. Yet relatively few US businesses took action to oppose it. This study reports the results of an elite survey experiment on business political activity toward trade policy. Researchers presented business managers with information about the input costs of the new tariffs to their bottom line—information that most subjects acknowledged that they lacked—and invited them to take political action to express support or opposition to these tariffs. The results suggest that the novel information on economic costs did not significantly increase managers’ propensity to contact members of Congress, donate to political campaigns, sign petitions, or join social media groups. We also found that the firm’s political culture (liberal or conservative) did not significantly influence the effectiveness of the treatment. However, descriptive analysis showed that firm political culture was strongly related to the company’s support for the trade war, suggesting that these preexisting political beliefs were resistant to new information provided in our experiment even if that information could affect the company’s bottom line.

Suggested Citation

  • Dolan, Lindsay R. & Kubinec, Robert M. & Nielson, Daniel L. & Zhang, Jiakun Jack, 2025. "Tariffs and corporate political activity: a survey experiment on US businesses," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 395-416, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:buspol:v:27:y:2025:i:3:p:395-416_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1469356924000417/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buspol:v:27:y:2025:i:3:p:395-416_4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bap .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.