President Donald Trump’s proposal to distribute stimulus checks of $2,000 per person has given hope to millions of Americans, who could use a couple of thousand extra bucks to pay for important things that would otherwise leave a hole in their pockets.
The initiative, introduced in late 2025, still lacks a concrete bill to support it within the federal legislative process. Its fate is intertwined with debates over its funding, disputes over the executive authority to implement it, and a timeline that has undergone numerous changes.
Trump’s stimulus checks: Will they finally arrive or not?
The central idea was publicly disseminated by Trump through his social media platform, Truth Social. He described it as a “tariff dividend,” suggesting (or rather, almost stating) that the funds would come from revenues raised by trade tariffs imposed during his administration.
This announcement established the fundamental premise of the plan, but did not include specific administrative or legal details that would definitively indicate where the funding would come from.
The timeframe for the potential distribution of these funds has varied. Initially, a tentative target of mid-2026 was mentioned. However, in subsequent statements made in early January 2026, Trump himself adjusted that expectation, indicating that the process could extend “toward the end of the year.” This lack of a definitive date contributes to the uncertainty surrounding the proposal.
The Obstacles the Government Must Overcome to Send New Stimulus Checks
There is a fundamental disagreement about the necessary steps to make these payments. On one hand, the former president has expressed his view that executive action could be sufficient, stating on one occasion that he “doesn’t think it needs” congressional approval. This position suggests a broad interpretation of presidential powers regarding taxation and trade.
On the other hand, economic advisors and constitutional law experts have challenged that perspective. Figures like Kevin Hassett, Trump’s former economic advisor, have made clear that any significant disbursement of federal funds of this nature requires congressional approval.
This requirement is rooted in the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause, which grants the legislative branch the power to authorize expenditures.
In the legislative arena, a similar but distinct proposal has been made. Republican Senator Josh Hawley previously introduced the “American Workers Rebate Act of 2025.” This standalone bill envisioned tariff-funded rebates, but its progress is stalled in committee, with no visible advance toward the Senate floor or the House of Representatives.
The Government Plans to Finance Stimulus Payments in a Creative Way
The financial viability of the proposal is at the heart of the debate between those who see it as feasible and those who do not. Its proposed financing mechanism is relatively simple, suggesting the use of revenue generated from import tariffs. However, there is a substantial discrepancy between publicly reported figures and official revenue data.
In speeches and statements, amounts have been mentioned that reach “trillions” of dollars, or, in a more concrete estimate, “more than 600 billion” from these import tariffs. These figures represent the total volume of trade affected, not the net revenue received by the Treasury.
Federal agencies report different numbers. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) documented revenues of over $200 billion throughout 2025. Meanwhile, the U.S. Treasury Department recorded tariff revenues of approximately $195 billion for fiscal year 2025. This gap between reported figures and official records is significant.
Will the $2,000 payments arrive then?
It remains to be seen whether the president and his administration can either bypass the obstacles and do it directly, or garner enough support in Congress to distribute millions of checks or bank deposits by the end of the year, as he claims he will do.
