In a recent NBC4 Columbus special examining economic pressure on the middle class, CPM attorney Jordan Butler observed that broad price declines are unlikely. The more realistic expectation is that incomes must adjust to higher price levels over time. His comments came during the station’s “Shrinking Middle” segment, available at NBC4 Columbus 2.0, which explored housing costs, taxation, food prices, and economic inequality in central Ohio.
That framing moves the discussion away from political rhetoric and toward legal structure. Affordability is shaped not only by markets but by statutory authority, tax design, valuation frameworks, and regulatory enforcement. When those structures shift, households and businesses feel it quickly.
Property Valuation and Escalating Assessments
One of the clearest pressure points is property taxation. Butler described a familiar scenario: if comparable homes in a neighborhood sell at sharply higher prices, the assessed values follow suit. A homeowner who purchased years earlier may face a significant increase in property tax liability even without refinancing or relocating.
Ohio’s property tax system ties assessments to market value. In stable markets, that mechanism operates predictably. During rapid appreciation cycles, it can put strain on the market. Retirees and long-term homeowners with fixed incomes may experience rising tax burdens disconnected from current cash flow.
From a legal standpoint, that dynamic affects valuation challenges, estate planning adjustments, and transfer strategies. Appreciated real estate can materially alter estate composition and liquidity planning for heirs.
Layered Consumption Taxes
Sales tax adds another structural layer. In Franklin County, the combined rate is 7.5 percent. The rate applies uniformly, but the economic impact is not uniform.
When inflation pushes the base price of goods higher, sales tax applies to the increased amount. The statutory rate does not change, yet total tax paid increases automatically. For middle-income households, that compounding effect can be more visible than changes in marginal income tax brackets.
Legal advisors increasingly encounter clients asking not how to eliminate taxes, but how to plan within a system where consumption taxes rise in tandem with inflation.
Tariffs and the Boundaries of Executive Power
Trade policy introduces another variable. Tariffs imposed on imported goods generally work their way through supply chains and into retail prices. As Butler noted during the segment, when the cost of goods rises because of tariffs, consumers often absorb that increase.
Recent developments in federal law underscore that tariff authority is not unlimited. In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the President to impose tariffs under that statute. The decision addressed statutory interpretation rather than broader trade policy, but its practical implications are significant.
Following the ruling, the administration issued an executive order titled “Ending Certain Tariff Actions” to terminate certain IEEPA-based tariffs. Shortly thereafter, a Presidential Proclamation titled “Imposing a Temporary Import Surcharge to Address Fundamental International Payments Problems” imposed a temporary 10 percent import surcharge under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
This sequence illustrates how economic policy operates within statutory boundaries. Courts define the limits of delegated authority. Policymakers respond through alternative statutory mechanisms. For businesses, that means pricing, sourcing, and contractual risk allocation may require adjustment. For consumers, it can translate into continued volatility in goods ranging from building materials to consumer products.
The legal question is not simply whether tariffs raise prices. It is how and under what statutory authority they may be imposed or withdrawn. When those foundations shift, markets recalibrate.
Interest Rates, Inflation and Planning
Affordability also intersects with monetary policy. Butler cautioned against expecting systemic price declines. Economists generally view sustained deflation as destabilizing. The prevailing objective is moderated inflation paired with income growth.
High interest rates restrain borrowing and transaction activity. Lower rates stimulate demand but may accelerate price pressure. Both environments carry planning consequences.
In higher-rate periods, refinancing strategies, covenant compliance, and capital structure decisions become central. In lower-rate periods, acquisition pacing and valuation assumptions shift. Prevailing rate conditions influence estate planning and business succession structures.
Legal strategy cannot dictate macroeconomic direction. It can, however, adapt to the legal and regulatory framework that shapes those conditions.
Competition and Market Structure
The NBC4 segment also addressed concerns about algorithmic pricing and data-driven tools that may affect competition. When pricing systems rely on shared datasets or coordinated methodologies, regulators may examine whether competitive forces are being reduced.
Affordability debates often focus on visible price increases. The underlying drivers are structural. Tax architecture, property valuation rules, trade authority, interest-rate policy, and competition enforcement operate within defined legal systems.
When those systems move, the effects compound.
The middle class tends to experience those shifts first. Property assessments rise. Consumption taxes are layered on top of higher base prices. Interest rates influence mobility. Trade decisions alter supply costs.
Economic pressure rarely originates from a single source. It reflects the interaction of legal authority and market response. The recent Supreme Court decision underscores that economic policy rests on statutory foundations. When courts revisit those foundations, the implications extend beyond Washington and into everyday financial planning.
Affordability is therefore not solely an economic issue. It is also a legal one, and the structure of that legal framework matters.
0 Comments