In other words, they are a regressive tax --- pure and simple.
That works when those countries are selectively tariffed while others are let off. Blindly applying tariffs to whatever satisfies the mood is not the way.
> or alternatively to apply pressure to a sector to bring it on shore.
For this to work, the cost of onshore production must be lower than the tariffed price. The inputs must be made cheaper and not tariffed. Again the US administration is not doing any of these strategically.
Stupid is as stupid does.
You may chose not to buy any products or goods that requires you to pay tariffs.
Which is the primarily goal to begin with. Influence consumer behaviour.
I realize that for some products and goods there may not be a an alternative choice of products or goods that do have tariffs.
In theory, over time, these will be increasingly replaced by products and services that have the competitive advantage of not having to tariffs applied to them.
Once tariffs are in place for a year or two it is possible that, domestic producers have expand capacity, have created jobs have caused supply chains shift and new production is based on the tariff based price structure
This however takes time. And to what extent it happens is not easy to predict.
Some may think that the next president will remove all tariffs the moment he or she takes office, so it is a short term problem. The problem with removing them all, is if the above has happened, and removing them will destroy American jobs.
This is what a tariff is.
A factor in this that is not mentioned is that companies selling goods to the US may have made an effort to lower prices, altering production to lessen tariffs or in other way tried to offset the extra amount US consumers have to pay.
An estimate of that would be quite interesting.
Isn't that the 10% in the article? That's the mechanism by which "China pays the tariffs".
The reality is that's a fundamental misunderstanding of what a tariff is.
There is a reason you will find tariffs drop off after the great depression. They make everything more expensive for businesses and in turn, the end consumer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tariffs_in_the_Unit...
"Fighting" China with tariffs is like fighting your neighbor who's dog keeps peeing in your yard by lighting your own couch on fire.
Maybe it’s because of propaganda, mis information, social media, education or because they’re too busy and tired trying to make ends meet so they don’t have time to research issues for themselves.
It feels like it will be very difficult to course correct when so much money and power wants it this way.
Alternatively: You don't need tariffs when you're the only industrial nation not bombed into oblivion.
>They make everything more expensive for businesses and in turn, the end consumer.
Agreed
Tariffs are technically paid by the importer who sells a product. It's their responsibility to pay it.
The importer could technically eat that cost, and the consumer doesn't see a difference on their price tag.
But what happens in practice, the vast majority of the time, is the importer passes that extra cost on to the consumer by raising the price they're selling it for. This is technically a business decision made by every importer individually.
The people saying tariffs are paid by the importer, or tariffs are paid by the consumer, are both right, but within different perspectives and depending on how each importer chooses to handle their tariffs.
The runaway deficit is a massive problem now given the age of 0 interest rates is over.
So what's astonishing is, whether you like him or not, the Orange man actually got the American public to accept what is defacto the largest tax increase in decades.
Unfortunately, they immediately spent that money too on the promise of persistently high growth in the world's richest economy. I find that unlikely over time, but time will tell.
Seems every large Western country is currently hell bent on finding out what level of deficit spending results in societal collapse.
What does it mean "got the public to accept it?" The public had no say and these are probably illegal. On top of that, he probably literally does not know that these are effectively taxes on consumers (i.e. he believe his own bullshit).
No credit is due here whatsoever.
Yes, I'm sure he believes his own bullshit, but ironically, its bullshit that the US actually needed to pull (tax increases). Modern democracy has proven totally incapable of not stealing the future from its children.
Regardless of what the thinks, believes, or understands, he doesn't CARE because, being he's in the top 0.1%, he's disportionately unaffected by the rise in the cost of goods compared to the average US consumer.
What has this done on the global and national scale? Nothing; except create a untenable situation for the global market.
...for the wealthy. Tariffs are use taxes and overwhelmingly affect the 99%.
American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis
That is to say there is no 200% tariff on cups.
[1] - https://www.fedex.com/en-us/ancillary-clearance-service.html
Tariff can hardly to connected to tax
In Chinese , tariff = 关 税 = port tax
mraniki•1h ago