America first, markets last? Stock market effects of 2025 U.S. tariffs in middle-income countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• U.S. tariffs in April 2025 caused sharp equity declines in middle-income countries • Losses peaked by day three; most markets rebounded within ten days • East Asia & Pacific faced the most persistent and severe negative returns • No evidence links abnormal declines to tariff size, GDP, or trade balance • Economic complexity linked to smaller cumulative losses at longer horizons We examine stock market reactions in middle-income countries to the April 2025 U.S. tariff shock. We find significant short-term declines across all regions, with the steepest losses accumulated by the third trading day. Most markets rebounded within ten days, except East Asia & Pacific. Abnormal returns show no evidence of relationship with tariff magnitude, per capita GDP, or bilateral trade balance with the United States. Only economic complexity suggests a significant link, with more complex economies experiencing comparatively smaller cumulative losses at longer horizons. Overall, results highlight heterogeneous spillovers of U.S. protectionism across middle-income equity markets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".