A Smarter Alternative to Tariffs: Investing in Non-Addictive Painkillers to Undermine the Fentanyl Trade

Tariffs on Mexico and Canada are being discussed as a way to pressure their governments into taking stronger action against fentanyl smuggling. While this approach may seem like a tough stance, it could have unintended consequences—crippling legitimate economies, reducing enforcement funding, and even pushing more people into the drug trade out of desperation.

Instead of tariffs, why not invest heavily in developing a non-addictive opioid replacement?

A painkiller that matches the efficacy of opioids but lacks addictive properties would fundamentally change the equation. While it could still be abused, its impact on society would be negligible compared to opioids. More importantly, it would undermine the global drug trade at its core—a trade fueled not just by supply but by the sheer chemical grip of addiction.

The High Cost of Doing Nothing

A 2022 analysis by the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee estimated that the opioid crisis cost the U.S. nearly $1.5 trillion in 2020 alone. That’s a staggering sum, yet research into a true opioid alternative receives only a fraction of the funding it deserves.

The roadblocks?

Market and regulatory barriers – Developing an effective, non-addictive opioid replacement is scientifically difficult and commercially uncertain.

Pharmaceutical resistance – Pain management is already a profitable industry. Disrupting it with a superior alternative isn’t in the financial interest of major drug manufacturers.

Lack of direct government investment – The NIH’s HEAL Initiative funds pain research broadly, but only a fraction is focused on true opioid replacements.

A Long-Term Fix vs. A Short-Term Gamble

Tariffs may seem like immediate action, but they could ultimately weaken enforcement efforts by draining financial resources. They could also push people further into the illicit economy. Meanwhile, a breakthrough in non-addictive pain management would cut off demand for illicit opioids at the source, making trafficking far less profitable and sustainable.

If the U.S. truly wants to win the fight against fentanyl, it’s time to invest in solutions that actually solve the problem—not just shift the burden elsewhere.

We need serious federal investment in opioid replacements, not just enforcement. Research funding should match the scale of the crisis. If we invested even a fraction of the $1.5 trillion cost of the opioid crisis into real alternatives, we could end the demand for illicit fentanyl for good.