THE CALL
Tariffs were never a growth-and-inflation trade. They were a fiscal trade wearing a growth-and-inflation costume, and the desk hedged the costume. Core CPI is 2.60%. Headline is 3.50%. The 90bp between them is not a container ship. It is a barrel, and the barrel is up 31% on the year, with gasoline up 66% and heating oil up 79%. The inflation everyone positioned for arrived roughly on schedule and came out of a completely different pipe.
The actual tariff story, meanwhile, moved to the cash flow statement, where nobody was looking. Customs duties are now a net outflow for the U.S. Treasury: $23.6 billion collected in June against $49.2 billion refunded, a net drain of $25.6 billion, and a $120 billion monthly deficit against a $27 billion surplus in the same month a year earlier. Refunds have reached roughly $100 billion of the $166 billion collected under IEEPA, with $129 billion accepted for processing.
Two positioning errors, one script. Consensus was wrong on the way in, pricing a goods-price shock and a demand shock and getting neither. It is wrong again on the way out, reading the Supreme Court decision as the end of tariffs when the wall was rebuilt in five months on more durable legal ground.
This is not a scolding. It is a process note. The market read the instrument the coverage handed it instead of reading the cash flows. That happens. It is worth naming when it does, because the same reflex is loaded and pointed at the next headline.
THE TAPE
Twos at 4.214, fives at 4.356, tens at 4.647, thirties at 5.201, the whole coupon curve 2 to 3 basis points cheaper this morning. 2s10s at 43.5bp, 5s30s at 84.5bp.
The one-year picture is the tell. The entire coupon curve is 38 to 49 basis points higher than a year ago, with the front leading: twos +49, tens +42, thirties +38. 2s10s is 8bp flatter, 5s30s 20bp flatter, 10s30s 4bp flatter. Only the three-month-anchored spreads steepened, 3m10s +82 and 3m30s +79, and that is the funds rate coming down rather than the curve steepening.
Policy sits at 3.75%. The one-year is 4.03% and twos are 4.21%. Both are through the funds rate. This market is priced for hikes, not cuts. Gold near a seven-week high on easing rate-hike concerns tells you which way the risk has been running.
Credit is not corroborating a tariff recession either. IG broad at 78bp, BBB at 97, HY broad at 273, CCC at 1019. That is a market with no view on a demand shock.
THE WRONG INSTRUMENT
Rewind to 2025. The frame handed to every desk was that tariffs were an inflation shock and a growth shock. Position accordingly: own breakevens, fade cyclicals, own duration for the demand hit. Here is what the tape actually delivered.
The growth shock did not arrive. GDP is running +2.1% year over year and +1.5% on the quarter. Retail sales are +6.7%. Industrial production is positive. There is no demand hole where the models put one.
The inflation arrived from a different direction. Core CPI at 2.60% is not a goods-price catastrophe. It is roughly where a normalizing economy sits. Headline at 3.50% is the number that hurts, and the 90bp gap is energy: WTI +31% year to date, Brent +31%, gasoline +66%, heating oil +79%, CRB +28%. Tariffs took the blame for a print the barrel delivered. If you hedged tariff inflation, you owned the wrong instrument. The same view expressed in energy paid several times over.
And the fiscal line was never priced at all. Not on the way in, when duties were producing enough revenue to visibly compress the deficit, and not on the way out, when the Court reversed $166 billion of it into a single fiscal year. The one place tariffs showed up unambiguously is the one place the positioning never went.
THE REVERSAL
The Supreme Court struck the IEEPA tariffs 6-3 on February 20. Within hours the administration reimposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, a 150-day, rate-capped stopgap. That expired on July 24 and handed off the same morning to a Section 301 forced-labor framework at 10% to 12.5% covering roughly 60 economies and very nearly all imports. The wall was down for about four hours.
What did change is the cash. Per this week's filing at the Court of International Trade: $166 billion collected, $129 billion accepted for processing, roughly $100 billion certified and sent to Treasury for disbursement, across 252,496 refund declarations covering more than 25 million import entries. Roughly $66 billion remains outstanding, and the government has appealed the refund order on the argument that it amounts to an impermissible universal injunction. Treasury is, in effect, long an option on the unpaid balance.
For the funding desk this is a timing problem, not a solvency problem. A $166 billion receipt reversal lands inside FY26 while replacement revenue rebuilds with a lag. It shows up in bill supply and TGA management rather than in the term premium directly, but it lands on top of the AI-capex-driven IG calendar and the coupon-versus-bill mix question into the next refunding. Two quarters running, the line about tariffs paying for the bill has been quietly retired.
THE SECOND OPINION
The asymmetry nobody has priced is that pass-through only runs one way.
Importers raised prices when the duties went on. The duties came off and the prices did not follow. The refunds went to importers, and consumers have begun suing to get them back, with a class action already filed against a national discount retailer over exactly this. Whatever the merits, the litigation exists because the money moved in one direction and the price level moved in the other.
The tariffs were ruled unlawful. The price level they created is still here.
That is an argument for a structurally higher floor under core goods than breakevens currently carry, and it is the precise opposite of the conclusion the market drew when it decided tariffs were transitory. Evaluated pricing will tell you where core goods print. It will not tell you the print has a ratchet in it.
THE WIRE
Refunds hit $100B. CIT filing shows roughly $100B certified and sent to Treasury of $166B collected under IEEPA; $129B accepted for processing across 252,496 declarations. — Sixty percent back, forty to go, and the government is appealing.
Section 301 backfills 122. The Section 122 surcharge expired July 24; USTR forced-labor tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on roughly 60 economies took effect the same moment. — The handoff was seamless. That was the point.
Gold near a seven-week high on easing rate-hike concerns. — Read the noun. Hike.
Dollar firmer into payrolls as markets await Iran headlines. — Two binary events, one session.
Hormuz talks capping crude under $80. A proposed arrangement giving Tehran more control over the strait is holding the barrel down. — The largest single input to the headline CPI print is currently a diplomatic variable.
Consumer class action over refunds. A New York plaintiff has sued a national discount retailer for not passing tariff refunds through. — The pass-through asymmetry, now in a courtroom.
EM equities repricing the AI trade. Reuters flags a hard lesson in tech hype across emerging markets. — The capex story has a second-order funding leg. Watch the IG calendar.
June deficit $120B against a $27B surplus a year prior; FY26 nine-month gap $1.367 trillion. — Almost entirely one line item.
WHAT I'M WATCHING
▪ July Monthly Treasury Statement, around August 12. The refund run-rate, and whether Section 301 receipts have started to show. Cleanest read on whether the fiscal drag is finished or has another month in it. ▪ Payrolls. With the front end priced through the funds rate, the reaction into a strong print is not symmetric. ▪ The CIT appeal. If the government prevails on the universal-injunction argument, a meaningful slice of the remaining $66B never gets paid. A fiscal outcome hiding inside a procedural ruling. ▪ Whether statutory interest accrues on the refunds. If it does, the $166B carries a tail nobody is modeling. Unresolved as of this writing. ▪ Core goods CPI on the next print. Testing the ratchet.
Data: Koyfin, as of 8:13 a.m. ET, August 6, 2026
The Bond Bro Dispatch is published by Positive Carry LLC. All content is general market commentary provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice, a recommendation, an offer, or a solicitation to buy or sell any security. Nothing herein is tailored to the circumstances of any recipient. Data are drawn from sources believed reliable; accuracy and completeness are not guaranteed. [email protected] · © 2026 Positive Carry LLC. All rights reserved.