One in three Singaporeans cuts spending on US products over Trump tariffs

Between July 1 and 8, 2025, over 1,500 Singaporeans and permanent residents were asked about their views on US goods and services. The findings, captured in Blackbox’s SensingSG platform, reveal a notable reorientation: more than one in three is actively cutting back on American brands. At a glance, this might seem like consumer retaliation against former President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Asian goods. But a closer look suggests something more structured is happening beneath the surface. Singaporean households are not merely reacting—they’re recalibrating.

They’re making practical decisions based on geopolitical friction, yes—but also based on value, regional trust, and economic self-assurance. As Singapore becomes increasingly comfortable asserting its consumer independence, the findings underscore not just how people are spending—but what it says about national confidence and household resilience.

The survey headlines were pointed:

• 33% of respondents said they were already reducing purchases of US goods and services.
• 44% said they intend to avoid such purchases in the future.
• 35% now hold a more negative view of US companies and their products.
• 49% say their opinion of Trump has worsened due to the tariffs.

But the real takeaway wasn’t just rejection. It was redirection.

When asked to choose between American and Chinese brands across categories like household appliances, motor vehicles, and lifestyle services, more Singaporeans favored Chinese options. That marks a significant behavioral turn—and reveals the quiet but deliberate way in which economic sentiment is reshaping consumer habits.

It also aligns with the survey’s broader mood: 82% of respondents said they were in good financial shape, and 89% expressed satisfaction with Singapore’s current conditions. Tariff retaliation may have triggered the conversation. But rising confidence in Singapore’s own policy and product landscape appears to be sustaining it.

From a household finance lens, the implications are straightforward but wide-reaching. If American goods—long associated with premium pricing, global branding, and perceived reliability—are being passed over in favor of Chinese or regional products, it means three things are likely happening:

1. Price sensitivity is rising, not because people feel poorer—but because they are planning smarter.
2. Brand loyalty is weakening, as geopolitical friction challenges assumptions about quality, value, and alignment.
3. Domestic and regional trust is strengthening, allowing households to reallocate dollars with less concern over compromise.

When 57% of Singaporeans say they’re financially better off than a year ago, yet still pivot spending away from historically dominant US brands, it’s a sign that discretionary spending is now more principled than aspirational.

In personal finance terms, this marks a shift away from consumer identity spending toward utility-driven allocation. The clearest example? Mid-tier American electronics or appliances losing favor to Chinese equivalents not because of inferior performance—but because of superior support, localized features, and cost flexibility.

Trump’s re-imposition of tariffs on Asian goods is, technically, a government-to-government action. But its ripple effects reach everyday wallets. When tariffs raise the base cost of Asian exports to the US, global supply chains adjust. American firms sourcing from Asia pass those costs onto consumers worldwide—including those in Singapore.

Conversely, consumers in Singapore may interpret those moves as hostile—not just to governments, but to Asian economies as a whole. In this environment, brands become proxies for politics. A US logo on a product becomes a soft signal of alignment with a trade regime many see as unjust.

And that’s where personal finance and international diplomacy intersect. Buying less from US companies becomes not just economically rational—but symbolically coherent. Especially when domestic options are rising in quality and regional brands are closing the trust gap. The quiet emergence of financial nationalism—without the slogans—is beginning to show.

Singaporean preference for Chinese goods, as reported in the survey, has grown most prominently in three sectors:

1. Household appliances
2. Motor vehicles
3. Lifestyle-related services

This isn’t an ideological statement—it’s a value calculus. Chinese brands in these sectors often deliver at lower price points, with service ecosystems embedded across Southeast Asia. The branding may not carry Hollywood sheen, but the total cost of ownership and service velocity often outperform Western peers.

In particular, Chinese electric vehicle (EV) brands, home appliance manufacturers like Midea and Haier, and tech-adjacent service providers are growing their Southeast Asian footprints rapidly. So when 44% of respondents say they plan to avoid US goods in the future, it doesn’t signal sacrifice. It signals confidence in alternatives. This regional realignment isn’t speculative—it’s becoming structural.

Here’s the second half of the story. Despite declining views of Trump and US firms, domestic optimism remains extraordinarily high:

• Nine in ten Singaporeans believe the city-state is headed in the right direction.
• 86% rate the national economic climate positively.
• 57% expect further improvement over the next year.

These are not numbers you see in a fragile economy. They are the hallmarks of a country where macroeconomic management, policy transparency, and social infrastructure are producing visible effects on household stability.

In that context, the rejection of US products isn’t a protest. It’s a reflection of sovereignty—economic, consumer, and cultural. Households don’t feel the need to validate their progress through external symbols. They are choosing what works, what lasts, and what reflects economic dignity over imported prestige. That matters. Especially as younger Singaporeans embrace a more self-determined and globally aware consumer identity.

Singapore’s strong CPF system, inflation-indexed savings vehicles, and stable exchange rate all contribute to the financial comfort many respondents reported.

Even amid volatile global energy prices and shipping costs, Singapore’s inflation remains well-contained compared to OECD peers. And with structured CPF contributions, most households maintain a disciplined long-term savings rhythm. This makes it easier to absorb external shocks—like tariff spillovers—without scrambling. It also reinforces the financial planner’s mantra: control what you can, and build systems that buffer what you can’t.

Singapore’s financial infrastructure enables that. It’s no surprise that in such a context, Singaporeans feel empowered to reexamine brand preferences—and adjust without financial fear.

Let’s contrast with another globally connected but import-reliant economy: the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In UAE, tariff-driven consumer shifts are less visible—not because sentiment is warmer toward the US, but because consumption remains more status-coded. American brands in UAE still signal prestige, particularly in fashion, electronics, and higher-end services.

Additionally, the UAE’s sovereign push toward China partnership in BRI-related infrastructure hasn’t fully permeated household-level brand trust. Chinese appliances, for instance, still lag in perceived reliability. That divergence shows how cultural framing, policy signaling, and financial systems shape consumer response differently—even in similarly globalized economies.

In Singapore, brand reevaluation is backed by domestic policy trust and planning discipline.

In UAE, structural admiration for Western brands coexists with policy-level diversification—without yet translating to household behavior.

For Singaporean households, the main implications are not about US vs China—but about alignment vs misalignment:

• Do your purchases reflect current value—or legacy assumptions?
• Are you exposing your household budget to price volatility via brand loyalty?
• Are local service networks factored into your purchasing decisions?

In a year where confidence at home is strong, and confidence in certain global players is falling, the smart move is to anchor spending in regional relevance, service reliability, and true cost ownership—not advertising nostalgia. This doesn’t mean cutting out US goods entirely. It means understanding the embedded costs and risks behind brand preference.

The data may be about US tariffs. But the movement is about something deeper. Singaporeans aren’t reacting emotionally. They are planning pragmatically. They’re reallocating spending toward brands and regions they believe are stable, supportive, and aligned with their lived experience.

That’s not protest—it’s maturity. As economic power rebalances globally, household behavior becomes one of the clearest, most honest signals of what people actually believe about the future. And in 2025 Singapore, that belief is grounded in domestic strength, regional resilience, and the quiet freedom to choose differently.