Donald Trump proposed direct payments of $2,000 funded by tariff revenues, an idea that has revived speculation in crypto markets. According to precedent, direct payments tend to increase retail activity in risk assets, and this particularly affects retail investors and crypto market liquidity.
The proposal is presented as a “dividend” for households, and it has been suggested that it could reach around 60% of households — approximately 77 million families — according to indications released by representatives of the Trump initiative. Historically, direct payments during the pandemic showed a measurable effect on crypto markets: studies from the period indicate an increase close to 3.8% in Bitcoin trading volume after the Economic Impact Payments (EIPs), and the recurring case of the alleged return of a $1,200 check that would have grown ~1,700% feeds the collective memory among traders.
Fiscal figures show a significant gap between the proposal and its viability. In August 2025 tariff revenue reached unusual levels, near $30 billion (a jump of 242% compared to a prior period), but the estimated cost of disbursing $2,000 to 60% of households could be around $154 billion for a single round and rise up to $600 billion if replicated in multiple rounds. That fiscal difference calls into question whether tariff revenues would be sufficient without implying borrowing or other budget cuts, according to the same analyses on the proposal.
Obstacles to Trump’s proposal and prospects
Political and legal viability is uncertain: any payment would require Congressional approval and related proposals, such as the “American Worker Rebate Act of 2025” by Senator Josh Hawley, have stalled in committees; simultaneously, a case before the Supreme Court could limit executive authority to impose tariffs as a discretionary source of funds.
The combination of fiscal, legal and macroeconomic obstacles suggests that the effect on cryptocurrencies would probably be temporary and speculative, not sustained. In the short term, political discussion can generate volatility and increases in retail risk appetite. In the medium/long term, insufficient size and legal uncertainty limit any persistent impact on adoption or liquidity.
Macro risk factors like high rates and inflationary pressures reduce the propensity to seek risk assets, offsetting any temporary boost. Governance remains crucial: the need for Congressional approval and a possible Supreme Court ruling are decisive factors for execution.
The next relevant milestone is Congress’s decision on any payment mechanism and a judicial ruling that clarifies tariff authority; without both resolutions, the proposal will remain mainly political rhetoric with the capacity to generate short-term movements, but not a reliable lever for a sustained crypto rally.
