25%
305%
no data
shading = trade openness (exports + imports as a share of GDP)
—
—1Set the shock
Tariffs ✓ backtested at +2.3pp
—
a tax on everything imported
Capital leaving ◖ observed
—
investment relocating abroad
Migration cap ◖ observed
—
arrivals blocked at the border
each dial moves on its own · 0 = nothing changes
only the tariff reaches other countries ·
capital and migration change the origin’s own outcomes
targeting one partner lets the other suppliers GAIN:
a share of the abandoned demand re-routes to them instead of vanishing —
the 2018–19 Vietnam effect. Allocated pro-rata (a stated, assumed rule).
2Outcomes at this severity
2What the origin stops buying
origin
—
3Most affected
Biggest winners — untargeted suppliers picking up the diverted demand
Least affected — among the 30 largest economies
Country detail
Click any country on the map for its full outcome set.
Universal-closure scenario, first-order spillover
accounting — not general equilibrium. Trade-diversion gains are not modelled
under universal closure: every supplier faces the same wall, so no untaxed alternative exists
(target one partner to see diversion). Goods trade only; services and remittance exposure are flagged, not counted.
Rankings sample the imputed inputs — the “holds top-3 in N% of input draws” figure is
that test, and only that test: it resamples inputs with the model’s structure held
fixed, so the omissions listed above contribute nothing to it. The least-affected list
carries no such figure; it is an argmax over a restricted set where hits cluster near
zero, and is the more fragile of the two rankings.
where the loss comes from
distortion
costlier inputs
lost export value
forgone investment
lost labour