Congress may soon take up Senator Lindsey O. Graham’s Russia Sanctions Act of 2026. This bill serves as a stark reminder of how out of touch Washington seems with the everyday American. It’s yet another attempt to hold Russia accountable for its ongoing war against Ukraine, which has lasted five years now. But let’s not get sidetracked by concerns for Ukraine. Ultimately, this bill feels like a knee-jerk reaction driven by frustration—frustration that Putin’s actions could negatively impact American families and interests, rather than actually changing his conduct.
If this legislation is enacted, it could turn into the largest tax hike ever endorsed by a Republican Congress—an estimated $5 trillion burden on Americans. The proposal would slap a staggering 500 percent tariff on all trade between the U.S. and Russia. Plus, it would give the president the power to impose tariffs of up to 100 percent on goods imported from Russia’s top crude oil and natural gas suppliers and any nations helping Russia evade existing sanctions.
Countries like China, India, Japan, Azerbaijan, France, Hungary, Belgium, and Slovakia—along with Russia—make up almost 40 percent of the global population. Some nations might be exempted if they agree to cut back on imports of Russian energy, but that list could be updated every six months. Allies like Turkey, Brazil, South Korea, and the European Union, which still rely on Russian oil and gas, might find themselves facing tariffs as well.
Typically, this tax would mainly affect American companies importing from those nations. So, when tariffs hit products from China, it’s everyday shoppers at places like Walmart who really see those costs—which again, is confusing when you think about it. Refund requests since the Supreme Court curtailed emergency tariffs show that big companies like Walmart and General Motors could receive billions back. But, here’s the catch: China doesn’t pay customs duties. Instead, it’s U.S. importers and retailers who shoulder the burden, passing those expenses directly to consumers.
Even if Vice President Vance might look sideways at Milton Friedman’s work, Friedman has some insightful points. He observes that tariffs are often touted as protective measures, but really just end up shielding consumers from lower prices.
If tariffs become severe enough to hamper trade with these nations, we could face an economic downturn worse than what the Smoot-Hawley tariffs brought about during the Great Depression. Smoot-Hawley raised tariffs by an average of 20 percent, which is a small fry compared to what’s on the horizon with the Graham proposal.
China and India are crucial trade partners for the U.S. In 2025, America imported over $308 billion worth of goods from China and more than $103 billion from India. Lower- and middle-income families really benefit from increased purchasing power for basic necessities. Slapping 100 percent tariffs on imports from these countries feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face. What message does that send to a minimum wage worker needing to buy car parts for a job commute or a parent scrambling for school shoes? Prices could double for essentials like diapers, creating real hardships.
Perhaps those pushing for policies that hike prices in an election year—when many Americans are worried about their cost of living—aren’t thinking clearly.
Furthermore, it remains uncertain how to levy tariffs on EU states like Slovakia and Hungary, since the EU typically functions as a single trade entity. In 2025, trade between the U.S. and the EU surpassed $1 trillion. Targeting individual EU countries could trigger a unified retaliatory response that could prove disastrous for American families.
The legislation would also introduce even more sanctions against Russian officials and companies. With over 26,000 sanctions already in place, there’s scant evidence to suggest any change in Russia’s actions. Additionally, this bill would prohibit U.S. citizens from engaging in business or investments in Russia and empower the president to sanction foreign individuals viewed as undermining Ukraine.
However, what does that actually entail? For example, Poland recently clashed diplomatically with Ukraine after Ukraine’s President Zelenskiy honored a controversial military unit involved in tragic events during World War II. Would this mean Poland is undermining Ukraine? Is Congress really prepared to grant the president authority to sanction some of our closest allies?
Moreover, while the bill allows Congress to block the president from lifting tariffs and sanctions, it doesn’t grant Congress any ability to remove them on its own. This could lead to long-term ramifications beyond President Trump, creating uncertainty for future administrations.
It would be naive to think that Russia, suffering severe losses, would budge just because the U.S. imposes tariffs on third-party countries. In fact, it’s possible that Russia would welcome America’s economic self-harm, especially as it risks straining relationships with nations like India, which could align itself with the U.S. against China instead.
Ultimately, Congress should discard this misguided bill. It won’t foster peace in Ukraine; instead, it will inflate prices for consumers, decrease the dollar’s value, and damage international relations for the U.S.
