US President Donald Trump may call Tariff his favorite word in the dictionary. But when it comes to passion, business investment is close.

Till last month, he said that his watch was “practically committed” more than £ 12 trillion (£ 8.8tn). He said, “Nobody has ever seen the number,” he said, the credit for the tariff’s own agenda, tax deduction and the difference with the deregulation.

If true, this figure would be really surprising, the US reported all last year while tripping approximately $ 4TN in gross private investment.

So is Trump’s claim as a sudden business that sets up the platform for a new gold economic age, or is it all theater?

First things first: In Trump’s tenure it is very early that there is clear data to evaluate their claims. The US government publishes data on only trade investment every three months.

January to March, which reflects two months of Trump’s tenure, shows a strong jump in business investment, one that analysts stated that the data in the east by Boeing Strike was due to the diagram data.

Other anecdotes and evidence of the survey indicate that Trump’s impact on investment is far more incremental than claiming.

Nick Bloom, a professor at the University of Stanford, says, “We have hardly any data at this point and we have almost all information that possibly for investment projects that were planned and ordered last year.”

“My guess is that the business investment is slightly low, not on a large scale … mainly because uncertainty is quite high and it will stop it.”

Swiss pharmaceutical firm Rosh, which announced a plan to invest $ 50bn in the US in April in April, is a good example.

Some projects involved in yoga were already in work.

Officials have also warned that some of Trump’s views – especially a proposal to overhala to drug pricing – can affect their plans.

“The pharma industry will need to review its expenses including investment,” the company said.

Trump typically indicates his case to investment promises made by high-profile firms such as Apple and Hyundai.

White house holds one Running tally Among those announcements, but in early June, it placed the total new investments at about $ 5.3tn – less than half cited by Trump.

Even that figure is inflated.

One third of the 62 investments in the list include plans that were at least partially in the functions before Trump assumed. For example:

• In the list for the $ 5BN plan to reopen a factory in Stelantis, Belvidere, Illinois, initially fulfilled that promise in 2023.

• Other commitments include items that are not traditionally considered investment – such as Apple’s pledge to spend $ 500BNWhich includes taxes and salaries paid to workers already in the company.

In fact, as the middle of May, according to the analysis of the Goldman Sachs, the new investment from announcements made some close to something close to $ 134bn.

The amount decreased as $ 30bn, including investment supported by foreign governments, once researchers at risk stated that some projects could be physically failed, or would have occurred anyway.

“Although not economically negligible, such a growth will reduce well in recent headlines,” he wrote.

When the numbers are pressed, the White House spokesman Kush Desai resolved the concerns that the administration’s claims did not match reality.

He said in a statement, “The Trump administration is using a versatile approach to run investments in the United States … and no amount of waste nightpicking and haircutting can deny that it is paying,” he said in a statement, stating that many firms had given clear credibility to Trump and his policies.

The BBC contacted more than two dozen firms with investment in the White House list.

Many people did not respond or referred to the previous statements.

Others admitted that the current administration on some of their projects had been pre-dated.

Exaggeration by politicians and companies is hardly unpredictable.

Says Senior Fellow Martin Chorzampa of Peterson Institute of International Economics, but with tariffs and other changes, the Trump administration’s desire to fundamentally intervene in the economy has given companies the reason for pumping their plans.

“An announcement of an announcement is a way to get some existing benefits, not necessarily for those people [spending pledges] If the situation changes, “he says.” There is a strong incentive for companies to provide a large number of large numbers. ,

This is not to say that Trump policies are not making any difference.

The global lead Stephen Farelli for Pharma and Healthcare in ING says that tariffs for pharmaceutical firms to plan more manufacturing in the US are “certainly a catalyst”.

But, he says, there are limits that can meet the danger.

Pharma investment is determined to appear over time – in some cases a decade – in an area that was ready for development anyway.

And they have come from firms selling branded drugs – not cheap, common medicines that many Americans and who are made in China and India.

Mr. Farelli also warned that the investment of the region could be a long -term risk, given tariffs, drug pricing and uncertainty about the government’s approach to scientific research.

Overall, many analysts hope that investment growth in the US will slow down this year due to policy uncertainty.

Economist at Washington University, German Gutirez, says Trump wants to promote investment in America, but believes that their emphasis on global competition calls the problem wrong.

Their work has been found that the decline in investment is due to industry consolidation. Now some large firms dominate the areas, there is less encouragement to invest to compete.

In addition, types of investment firms are usually cheap items such as software rather than machines and factories.

Tariffs, Professor Gutrez, say, is unlikely to address those issues.

He says, “The way it is being done and the types of equipment they are using are not the best ways to achieve this goal. It actually seems too much to achieve it,” they say.