Lynn Good on Tariffs: Implications for Trade, Data Centers, and Life Sciences

In a recent discussion on Bloomberg, Lynn Good, CEO of Duke Energy, offered a strategic perspective on the latest round of proposed tariffs. Rather than viewing them as purely protectionist, Good framed them as a negotiation tool designed to reshape global trade dynamics. Her analysis highlighted the industries that stand to benefit, those that will face headwinds, and the broader implications for economic policy.

Reciprocal Tariffs as a Strategic Lever

Good emphasized that reciprocal tariffs are not merely punitive measures but a means of enforcing trade parity. The premise is straightforward: if a foreign country imposes tariffs on U.S. goods, the U.S. will reciprocate, thereby pressuring trading partners to lower their own barriers.

From a geopolitical standpoint, this approach could be particularly effective with India and the European Union, both of which have historically maintained higher tariffs on U.S. exports. However, Good cautioned that the EU’s history of countermeasures suggests that retaliatory action could escalate, particularly in industries where the U.S. has strong export exposure.

Industry Impact: Winners and Losers

Potential Beneficiaries

• U.S. Manufacturing – Tariff protection could enhance competitiveness for domestic steel, automotive, and pharmaceutical production.
• Energy Infrastructure – Policies favoring domestic supply chains could accelerate investment in renewables, transmission networks, and grid modernization projects.

Challenged Sectors

• Technology & Data Centers – The U.S. remains reliant on imported semiconductors, networking hardware, and storage infrastructure, particularly from China, Taiwan, and India. Tariffs on these components would drive up costs for hyperscalers such as AWS, Google, and Microsoft, potentially increasing cloud computing expenses for enterprise customers.
• Life Sciences & Pharmaceuticals – The biotech and pharmaceutical industries rely heavily on imported active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), many sourced from India and China. Any disruption in these supply chains could lead to higher production costs and delays in drug development.

What’s Next?

As policymakers continue to refine their approach, industry leaders should be prepared for both near-term volatility and long-term structural shifts in global trade. The question remains: will this strategy yield the intended results, or will it provoke countermeasures that ultimately disrupt growth?