Sometime tomorrow, the Trump administration is supposed to announce a raft of new tariffs, part of "Liberation Day."

Why it matters: Americans don't seem to be into this tariff stuff. The Trump administration's trade policies are pretty unpopular, per a new poll released yesterday by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

By the numbers: While nearly half of respondents to the survey said they approved of the administration's efforts on immigration, only 38% support Trump's trade negotiations with other countries.

Context: A separate survey from CBS News found 72% of Americans believe tariffs will raise prices in the short term, and 47% said prices would be up for the long term.

The big picture: Americans could really feel these new levies.

• If the White House goes through with a reported policy option of 20% broad-based tariffs, it'll cost the average household between $3,400 to $4,200 in lost purchasing power, per an estimate out yesterday from the Yale Budget Lab.
• The higher estimate takes into account the likelihood that other countries retaliate. Lower-income households will disproportionally bear the brunt, with their income dropping nearly three times as much as those at the top, per the analysis.

Between the lines: President Trump was voted into office on the belief that he would be a better steward of the economy than his predecessor. Immigration and the economy were priorities for voters who supported Trump.

• Still, former President Biden often got worse grades. In 2023, a low of 3 in 10 Americans approved of his handling of the economy.

The bottom line: No one knows exactly what kind of tariffs are on the way, and the suspense isn't sitting well with the public.

Go deeper: How Trump's tariffs are different this time

Tariff uncertainty, combined with recession fears, just drove U.S. stocks to one of their worst quarters in years.

Why it matters: A sharp decline in stocks was once enough to get Trump to change his policy positions, but these are different times.

By the numbers: The S&P 500 ended the first quarter down 4.6%, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq dropped 10.4% and the broad Russell 3000 fell 5%.

• It was the worst performance since 2022 for all three.

The intrigue: U.S. stocks badly underperformed the world to start the year.

• The MSCI World ex USA Index, which tracks all large developed markets other than the U.S., rose 5.5% in the quarter.

It's not just tariffs changing the way America works. Elon Musk also wants to take the federal government private, part of the DOGE-led effort to shrink the bureaucracy.

Why it matters: Pushing more of the federal government's work into the private sector could lead to greater efficiency, but the downsides could cost taxpayers in other ways.

• Because the priorities are different — public interest for the government and profits for businesses — privatization can mean everyday services run differently than people are accustomed to. But it can also mean they cost more and don't work as well.

Zoom out: "We should privatize anything that can reasonably be privatized," Musk said at a recent tech conference.

• Privatization doesn't have to mean completely moving something into private sector hands. It can also mean more work is contracted out.
• Musk himself benefits from this kind of semi-privatization, like NASA's increasing reliance on SpaceX, says Michael Strain, an economist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

Where it stands: So far three entities — long targeted by conservatives — are in the administration's sights: Amtrak, the Postal Service and mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, says Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM.

• There's also been a drumbeat of reports warning that privatization is coming, from various news outlets.

Reality check: Musk's statements are not policy, and until Trump makes a real announcement it's hard to predict what happens next.

• The White House did not respond to a request to talk about privatization.

Zoom in: There are successful examples of government services, like rails and mail, being turned over to private companies in Europe, says Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab.

• "Privatization has been wielded productively," says Tedeschi, who worked in the White House under President Biden.
• But even those sometimes run aground. The U.K. is in the process of renationalizing its rail service, which was privatized in the 1990s. In a recent report, Amtrak pointed to the U.K. as a cautionary tale.

Examples of successful U.S. privatization efforts are harder to come by.

• Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, for instance, were once private sector companies carrying out a vital public service. They wound up in deep trouble in the 2008 financial crisis, and the U.S. government took over.
• The Post Office is already quasi-private, since it's mostly self-funded, only relying on a very small subsidy from the federal government. And Amtrak already runs on tracks owned by the private sector.

The bottom line: The real worry for most critics is corruption.

• Famously, the Russian oligarchy was born in the rush to privatize state-owned firms after the fall of the Soviet Union.