The U.S. economy would likely perform better under a Kamala Harris presidency than if Donald Trump returned to the White House, economists with Goldman Sachs reportedly wrote in a note Tuesday.

“We estimate that if Trump wins in a sweep or with divided government, the hit to growth from tariffs and tighter immigration policy would outweigh the positive fiscal impulse,” the economists wrote, according to reports. 

Bloomberg and Reuters reported on the note. Spectrum News has requested a copy of the note from Goldman Sachs.

Trump, the former president and Republican nominee this year, has not released a detailed economic plan but has repeatedly vowed to raise tariffs — including to a baseline of at least 10% on all imports and at least 60% on Chinese goods —  extend the 2017 tax cuts, further reduce the corporate tax rate and clamp down on illegal migration. 

The Goldman economists say the increased tariffs on cars from China, Mexico and the European Union would raise core inflation. 

Harris says she wants to increase taxes on Americans earning more than $400,000 a year and corporations, and cut taxes for the middle class.

If she wins and Democrats sweep Congress, “new spending and expanded middle-income tax credits would slightly more than offset lower investment due to higher corporate tax rates, resulting in a very slight boost to GDP investment due to higher corporate tax rates, resulting in a very slight boost to GDP growth on average over 2025-2026,” the analysis said.

The economists predicted a Harris victory would lead to 10,000 more new jobs per month than if Trump is elected in a divided government — and 30,000 more than if Trump wins and the GOP controls the Senate and House.

The Harris campaign said the analysis shows that Trump “is in denial of the fundamental economic facts agreed upon by even conservative experts: His agenda will shrink the economy, crush job growth, raise taxes on the middle class, drive up inflation, and explode the national debt.” 

“Vice President Harris has a positive vision to strengthen the economy by building up the middle class, cutting taxes and lowering costs for working families and small businesses, and creating opportunities for all Americans to get ahead,” Harris spokesperson Joseph Costello said in a statement. “On the economy, the choice could not be any more clear this November.”

Pointing to analyses in 2016 that predicted Trump would be detrimental to the economy, his campaign said Goldman’s assessment is wrong.

“Time warp alert!” senior adviser Brian Hughes said in a statement. “Just like 2016, Wall Street forecasts said that Trump policies would result in lower growth and higher inflation, the media took these forecasts at face value, and the record was never corrected when actual growth and job gains widely outperformed these opinions. In fact, then — as now — Trump policies fuel growth, drive down inflation, inspire American manufacturing, all while protecting the working men and women of our nation from lopsided policies tilted in favor of other countries. These Wall Street elites would be wise to review the record and acknowledge the shortcomings of their past work if they'd like their new forecasts to be seen as credible.”

The Trump campaign also blamed President Joe Biden and Harris for elevated inflation in recent years. 

The Goldman Sachs economists are not alone in their assessment about Trump’s policies. In June, a group of 16 Nobel Prize laureates wrote an open letter saying they are “deeply concerned” about the risks a second Donald Trump presidency would have for the U.S. economy.

They said that Trump returning to the White House would threaten the stability of relationships with other countries and the United States’ global standing. The economists called political certainty one of “the most important determinants of economic success.”

Nonpartisan researchers at several organizations have also predicted Trump would increase inflation if he enacts his agenda.

For example, an analysis by the international financial services company Allainz concluded that Trump’s plans to raise tariffs would hurt the American economy and that cracking down on trade diversion and tariff evasion, as he has promised, would be inflationary.

In addition, another round of large tax cuts funded by increasing the deficit or spending would “re-ignite inflation and heighten concerns about the sustainability of US public finances in bond markets,” the study said. The Federal Reserve would then be forced to more slowly lower interest rates and the stock market would either take a hit or remain relatively flat through 2025, according to Allainz.

And the Tax Foundation last month estimated that if Trump imposes the 10% universal and 60% Chinese tariffs, they would be met “with in-kind retaliation from all trading partners” and “would more than offset the entire benefit of the major tax cuts for economic output and jobs, resulting in a net loss for the US economy.”