For almost 35 years, Wyoming commence-up founder Alan Chadwick has run his business importing clothing from China and selling the Western-style gear to stores serving “working cowboys” in the US.

Now, as former President Donald Trump campaigns on a pledge to hit all goods coming into the country with a 10%-20% tariff, or border responsibility, which would rise to 60% for goods from China, Chadwick is having to drastically rethink his way.

The 66-year-ancient has been exploring moving manufacturing of his products, like wool shirts with snaps and canvas jackets, to India or Pakistan – or perhaps closing his Wyoming Traders business, which employs 16 people, and retiring altogether.

Chadwick said tariffs were a “responsibility on the American people” and warned that the outlay for a corporation like his of opening a factory in the US was unrealistic.

But as he prepares to cast his ballot, he expects to swallow his qualms about tariffs in favour of other priorities, such as illegal immigration and opposition to abortion.

“I will vote for Trump even though he’s going to hurt our corporation if he does what he says he’s going to do,” he said.

Chadwick’s readiness to look history Trump’s views on tariffs is a sign of the contradictory impulses shaping American politics.

The Republican’s platform has shifted America – once a global champion of free trade – towards an embrace of policies that are designed to protect US companies and jobs from foreign competition, despite the potential economic drawbacks.

During his first term, Trump hit thousands of items from China with tariffs – measures that President Joe Biden, despite criticising them before entering the White House, kept in place.

This year, the Republican has put plans for sweeping tariffs at the centre of his presidential campaign, calling such duties “the most attractive word in the dictionary”.

He argues his plans – which analysts declare could profit the average fee on imports to the highest level in at least 50 years – will spur job creation, reinvigorate US manufacturing, drive up wages and raise billions of dollars from other countries.

“We’re going to be a tariff country. It’s not going to be a expense to you, it’s going to be a expense to another country,” he has said on the trail.

His claims are rejected by most traditional economists, who declare the policy would do little to expand employment in the US, while raising costs for everyday Americans and slowing growth around the globe.

In the US, the responsibility Foundation predicts the tariffs would reduce overall employment by 684,000 and reduce GDP by 0.8% – and that’s without taking into account the almost sure retaliation from other countries.

For a typical US household, costs would rise by at least $1,700, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, one of the lower estimates out there.

“It’s absurd,” economist Wendy Edelberg, director of the Hamilton assignment and elder fellow at the Brookings Institution, said of Trump’s promises. “This is not the panacea that people are hoping for.”

Despite the warnings, some surveys indicate that Trump’s ideas are resonating: a September poll by Reuters/Ipsos found that 56% of likely voters favoured the Republican’s tariff plans.

Kyle Plesa, a 39-year-ancient Trump voter in Miami, Florida, said he did not ponder tariffs would have precisely the impact the candidate has promised, but the Republican’s focus on the pitfalls of globalisation had touched a nerve.

“People are upset about it and I ponder Trump is at least addressing it,” he said.

“I would probably prefer protecting business and paying a little bit more due to tariffs than I would dealing with the current state of worth rise and raising taxes from the left,” he added.

Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has attacked Trump’s tariff expansion plans as a “national sales responsibility”, pledging a more targeted way.

But Trump has said money brought in from tariffs could allow for large responsibility cuts – sometimes floating the concept of eliminating income responsibility altogether.

Meanwhile, President Joe Biden’s selection to maintain Trump’s China tariffs – and expand them on items such as electric vehicles – has also allowed the Republican to claim a policy win.

Biden has also signed off other protectionist policies, such as on historic government spending to boost manufacturing in sectors such as semiconductors and green vigor.

He and Harris, like Trump, have opposed the takeover of US Steel by a Japanese corporation on national safety grounds, raising chills in the business globe about foreign fund.

Michael Froman, who served as the US trade representative under former President Barack Obama, said Washington’s turn to tools like tariffs and restrictions on foreign fund was “probably here to remain”.

“There certainly is less thrill around pursuing what we might call an affirmative trade agenda in terms of liberalisation, openness, reduction of barriers,” he said. “We just have to recognise that none of these policies are actually free. They all impose some benevolent of compromise.”

Jason Trice, the co-chief executive of Jasco, an Oklahoma-based lighting and electronics corporation that sells to major retailers such as Walmart, said the encounter of his firm shows the damage tariffs can do.

Since 2019, it has paid hundreds of millions of dollars worth of tariffs while transforming its supply chain, moving the bulk of its manufacturing from China to places such as Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines.

He said the changes have made his firm less efficient and raised costs by about 10%-15%, which he has passed on to retailers, ultimately raising prices and contributing to worth rise.

It has all taken a toll on his business, which has seen turnover fall 25% since 2020 and its staff numbers drop, via attrition, from 500 to 350.

“In 50 years in business, the Chinese government has… never done anything nearly as damaging to our business as what the Trump administration has done,” Trice said. “Tariffs have not helped bring jobs back to America. Tariffs have hurt American businesses and reduced employment opportunities.”

Lucerne International, a car parts supplier based in Michigan that has manufactured in China for decades, has also spent the last few years adjusting to the recent climate.

With assist from government incentives, the corporation is now working to open its first factory in its home state in 2026, plans expected to make more than 300 jobs over four years.

But though the assignment might sound like the benevolent of successful “reshoring” politicians in both parties desire to view, chief executive Mary Buchzeiger, a long-period Republican, said it was a mistake for the US to try to “construct walls” against its rivals.

“I don’t ponder tariffs are a long-term answer,” she said.

“All we’re going to do is continue to make ourselves uncompetitive on a global scale.”

Michelle Fleury contributed to this update

• straightforward navigator: How you can get most votes but misplace
• EXPLAINER: The seven states that will decide the election
• GLOBAL: The third election outcome on minds of Moscow
• ON THE GROUND: Democrats receive fight deep into Trump country
• WWE: Why Trump is courting ancient friends from the ring
• POLLS: Who is winning the race for the White House?

North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher makes sense of the race for the White House in his twice weekly US Election Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.