Whirlpool CEO Marc Bitzer said President Donald Trump’s tariff policies have created a “level playing field” for expanding U.S. manufacturing and incentivizing companies to invest in domestic production.
“What the tariff policy does [is] it makes a business case, an economic business case, just much more attractive,” Bitzer told Fox News in an Oct. 15 interview.
His remarks came as Whirlpool announced a $300 million investment in its U.S. laundry manufacturing facilities, a move the company described as “one in a series of strategic commitments to grow its American manufacturing footprint.”
Bitzer told Fox News that without Trump’s tariff measures, the company might have reduced, delayed, or possibly reconsidered the investment. But now, he said, Whirlpool views the policy landscape as stable enough to justify long-term commitments.
“Any investment is a bet for the future,” Bitzer said. “So, yes, our bet is that these tariff policies stay, it creates a level playing field and, therefore, these economic investments generate profitable returns.”
Whirlpool’s Oct. 15 announcement covers planned upgrades at its manufacturing plants in Clyde and Marion, Ohio, expected to create 400 to 600 new direct jobs and support up to 5,000 additional positions along the supply chain. The Marion dryer factory celebrated its 70th anniversary in September, while the Clyde facility—operating since 1952—remains the largest washing machine plant in the world.
“This $300 million investment in our Clyde and Marion facilities underscores our dedication to creating jobs, fostering innovation, and delivering high-quality, American-made appliances to U.S. consumers,” Bitzer said in a statement, highlighting Whirlpool’s “commitment to American manufacturing.”
Over the past decade, Whirlpool has invested $6 billion in U.S. capital expenditures, R&D, and product development, out of $23 billion spent on its domestic operations, logistics, and workforce. The company employs roughly 20,000 people in the United States, including more than 14,000 across 10 manufacturing facilities.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has made tariffs a central component of his agenda to boost federal revenue and foster a revival of domestic manufacturing.
His tariffs face a legal challenge, however, with the Supreme Court set to hear oral arguments on Nov. 5 in two consolidated lawsuits against the president’s reciprocal tariffs, a case that could redefine the scope of presidential authority over trade. Beyond legal precedent, the decision could carry major economic implications, as the United States logged around $30 billion in monthly tariff revenue in August under Trump’s trade policy, with $165 billion collected fiscal year-to-date, according to Treasury data.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in September that a ruling against the administration could force the government to refund roughly half of all tariffs collected—a result he called “terrible for the Treasury.” He noted that tariff revenue has become a crucial offset amid large federal deficits.
Even so, Bessent said the administration has “other avenues” to impose duties if needed, though he declined to specify them. He expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would ultimately uphold Trump’s policy.
Meanwhile, economists have been debating the impact of Trump’s tariffs on businesses and consumer prices since he outlined his trade agenda in April. A recent Goldman Sachs analysis projected that U.S. consumers would absorb 55 percent of tariff-related costs, with American businesses and foreign exporters bearing 22 percent and 18 percent, respectively.
“At the moment, however, U.S. businesses are likely bearing a larger share of the costs because some tariffs have just gone into effect and it takes time to raise prices on consumers and negotiate lower import prices with foreign suppliers,” the report reads.
That hesitation is reflected in the Federal Reserve’s latest Beige Book, released on Oct. 15, which noted that firms across several sectors were contending with higher input costs, particularly from imports and services such as health care, insurance, and technology. Still, many companies were reluctant to pass those costs to consumers.
Andrew Moran contributed to this report.
