Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses China United States Technology

US To Hike Tariffs on $200 Billion Worth of Chinese Imports (reuters.com) 377

The United States will raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports to 25 percent from 10 percent effective on Friday, according to a notice posted to the Federal Register on Wednesday. From a report: The U.S. Trade Representative's office will establish a process to seek exclusions for certain products from additional tariffs, the Federal Register notice said. U.S. President Donald Trump said in a tweet that he would be "very happy with over $100 Billion a year in Tariffs filling U.S. coffers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US To Hike Tariffs on $200 Billion Worth of Chinese Imports

Comments Filter:
  • by JoeyRox ( 2711699 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @09:56AM (#58557664)
    That's great except it's the US consumer who will be paying the $100 Billion, and instead of filling U.S. coffers it will be filling the coffers of U.S. multinationals, and the coffers are held overseas.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Archtech ( 159117 )

      That's great except it's the US consumer who will be paying the $100 Billion, and instead of filling U.S. coffers it will be filling the coffers of U.S. multinationals, and the coffers are held overseas.

      But President Trump will be very happy about it. Like the rest of the Swamp, he doesn't have to worry about grocery bills, children's clothes and shoes, mortgage payments, health insurance, taxes and healthy food.

      This is NOT why so many Americans voted for him. Still, the ol' shell game continues to fool the marks. And Charlie Brown goes on trying to kick the football.

      • by TomGreenhaw ( 929233 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @10:44AM (#58558092)
        >Like the rest of the Swamp
        Please stop insulting the term swamp, also known as a wetland.

        The swamp was drained and replaced with an open sewer.
    • the untrainable fool. a tariff is a tax at import, which is paid by the importer and ultimately the end customers.

      • I think you are correct, but wonder if sustained tariffs against PRC would ultimately lead to production being moved elsewhere- like Vietnam or Thailand. I don't think moves back to US are more likely, but another low-labor-cost/low-regulated nation may fill the gap. The US market is big enough that it might drive such a shift, or accelerate what is already happening (I read that costs have been increasing for production in PRC anyway).
        • Vietnam is getting so much new investment that factory owners are shutting down their old low margin businesses because they're at full capacity.

          Thailand has 100% tariffs outside of the Special Economic Zones, and inside the zones it is 0% as long as you export the products. So the growth is pretty much limited to the existing zones.

          I expect a lot more growth in Vietnam, Singapore, and Indonesia than in Thailand, because Thailand doesn't really want to be like China; they don't long for major changes to the

      • What if that isn't actually a deep observation, but an obvious fact?

        What if the goal is to raise the prices that the buyers pay, without raising the revenue that the sellers receive? What then, Spanky?!

        This is how stupid the average person is: If they disagree with the policy, they can't comprehend that somebody else supports the policy! That is actually how stupid most people are.

        If they had to choose between chocolate and strawberry, they'd refuse to believe that anybody could support the Other Side! If t

    • by TomGreenhaw ( 929233 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @10:41AM (#58558074)
      I agree and disagree.

      The tariffs are a consumption tax that either US companies or consumers will pay. This money will go into the US Treasury to help pay for the big tax cut that the super rich got last year. It won't go directly to overseas multinationals, it will go indirectly to the wealthy political donors.
      • by lgw ( 121541 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @11:21AM (#58558360) Journal

        Is this opposite day? The wealthy political donors are all globalists! They benefit vastly from the ability to ship production to countries with with no worker protection and no environmental protection. Much cheaper that way.

        The very wealthy don't keep their wealth in a Scrooge McDuck vault, you know. They own the very industries benefiting from cheap foreign production. Globalists want 2 things to make themselves richer: the ability to move manufacturing to the cheapest place in the world, and unbounded immigration to drives labor costs here as low as possible.

        Moderate tarrifs remove some of the economic incentive to abuse workers and the environment. That's fine. Some of the cost is always passed on to the consumers, so it's a real trade-off without an easy answer. In cases where local production is only a bit more expensive than foreign production, it's a real win, as production will shift back home. But when there's a big gap in costs, a tariff is effectively just another corporate income tax, and those almost always get paid by the consumer.

        • Is this opposite day? The wealthy political donors are all globalists! They benefit vastly from the ability to ship production to countries with with no worker protection and no environmental protection. Much cheaper that way.

          The very wealthy don't keep their wealth in a Scrooge McDuck vault, you know. They own the very industries benefiting from cheap foreign production......

          You might be right in what you say, but the very rich still also want their tax cuts too, and they now have the man to give it to them. At the expense of the average American. And the average Chinese.

          • Pretty much everyone got a Federal income tax cut, unless (like me) you're well paid and live in a State with a high income tax (like California) where you used to be able to deduct all your State income tax. No more. Yeah, it sucks, but it sure is much more fair, as we're not getting our taxes artificially cut because the thieves in Sacramento can't keep their hands off our wallets, and States that are more frugal didn't get to give their citizens the same kinds of tax cuts...
            • Yeah, it sucks, but it sure is much more fair

              In a nation where the general idea is the citizens are the ones who grant power to the government, a tax cut that was demonstrability more favorable to large private companies versus aforementioned citizens, I'm curious as to your definition of "fair". I'm not outright calling you incorrect here, I'm just interested in what the material of bedrock is behind that statement of "fair".

      • This money will go into the US Treasury to help pay for the big tax cut that the super rich got last year.

        I make only maybe upper middle class money, and I got a really NICE boost on my tax savings from the tax cut.

        Anyone with a small incorporated business did...

        There are a lot of contractors out there that have the 'pass through' business set ups with corporations of only 1-2 people, and this really helped a LOT.

        • Interesting. I too have a small S Corp business and I thought our tax savings was negligible. We do a fair amount for non-profits and that business has been negatively impacted by he new tax law. I guess its a mixed bag.
    • I wonder if the Walmarts and Dollar Generals of the world who depend on cheap Chinese goods will now turn on Trump and become Joe Biden supporters. They can be pretty confident that he's willing to play ball with the status quo, much like Obama was.

    • People have been saying this all along but we've had quite a few in effect for some time now and it hasn't happened. The US economy has grown and we do have record low unemployment though.

      So to those who still think these tariffs will doom us all contrary to the facts, I have to ask. Why do you think that? What is your reasoning?

  • by dryriver ( 1010635 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @09:57AM (#58557674)
    While products made in China are nice to own, the money we spend on them makes the Chinese Communist Party wealthier and wealthier, and said Communist party then denies hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens their most basic democratic rights. For the sake of owning a nice laptop or smartphone, we send money to one of the most repressive and also most powerful regimes in the world. China really should clean up their act. You can't manufacture sexy products for the "free world", then put the money made from this into running and maintaining what can only be described as the "unfree world". So these tariffs are not a bad thing IMHO. If I owned a tech company, I'd have my products manufactured where labor is cheap but NOT being repressed by a horrible regime.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by AlanObject ( 3603453 )

      You might not think of yourself as a libertarian but this is typical libertarian thinking.

      According to you the consumers, the majority of whom are on the lower end scale, are supposed to take a "short term loss" in exchange for a "long term gain" for everybody. Sorry I don't buy it.

      First of all this policy causes economic suffering by those who can afford it the least. You claim to be not supportive of "repressive regimes" so your solution is to try to take the oppressed people's jobs away. Then th

    • Perhaps if some of the US-owned multi-nationals paid all of their taxes, then the mighty US Government would become wealthier and wealthier, too. Charity begins at home.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      China's economic growth has vastly improved the lives of the vast majority of Chinese people living there. In the space of 40 years they have gone from widespread poverty to almost eliminating it.

      During that time the CCP has been slowly opening up. It's still a horrible regime, no doubt, but it's also been affected by pressure from the new middle classes and increased scrutiny from the rest of the world.

      At the very least, it is better to engage with China and use the economic carrot to lead it where we want

    • Not *all* the money goes to the top, some goes to the middle class which expanded. Guess who is doing most of the unsuccessful revolt ? famished paysant. Guess who overthrow and do revolution most successfully ? Middle class and intellectuals driving it. If you are so disgusted by the China power structure, then it is in your interrest to make their middle class increase until the top get stuffed by it.
    • Cuban's are no freer then the Chinese and a heck of a lot poorer. Tariffs and embargo's do not bring freedom only poverty
    • If the average American knew what happened to the members of the Falun Gong (where did they "disappear" to? It isn't unknown, people just don't like to talk about it!) we would probably have a full embargo, we'd have the same trade policy for China that we have for Iran.

    • During the Cold War, the U.S. tried two approaches to fighting Communism.
      • Opposition. Mainly the Soviet Union, but the economic boycott of Cuba was another good example. The idea being that if you cut them off, the inefficiency of their own economic system will sink them.
      • Corruption. This is what we did with China - opened up trade with them to tempt them with the fruits of Capitalism. The idea being that once their people got a taste of what life could be under a capitalist economy, they wouldn't want
  • by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @10:04AM (#58557742) Journal

    Guess who ends up paying tariffs? You do, the consumer.

    If a company pays more due to a tariff, that cost is almost always passed on to the buyer. The country the goods come from does not pay anything towards the tariff unless they reduce the cost of their product, and that almost never happens.

    In the end, Joe and Jane Consumer pay- and that's you. Simple-minded people don't understand this complex concept.

    In addition, the country that has a tariff put on it usually retaliates by placing tariffs of their own on products coming from the country that put tariffs on them, and so that country sells less of its products, another loss to the selling country.

    In the end no one wins and the consumer loses. Everyone loses.

    Someone should explain this to Trump.

    • by BringsApples ( 3418089 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @10:10AM (#58557790)

      Google:
      - - A tariff is a tax on imports or exports between sovereign states. It is a form of regulation of foreign trade and a policy that taxes foreign products to encourage or safeguard domestic industry. The tariff is historically used to protect infant industries and to allow import substitution industrialization.

      The idea is to entice the local economy to provide for itself.

      • by gtall ( 79522 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @10:19AM (#58557892)

        "The idea is to entice the local economy to provide for itself." You mean as opposed to production shifting to Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, S. Korea, Malaysia, Thailand, India, etc. Hooo boy, the production is going to start coming back to the U.S. now. I cannot wait to welcome them...errr....just as soon as we extract it from these other countries where it will have gone in the meantime. And then there will be the Chinese shell companies owning the production in those other countries.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          If the jobs are moved back to the US most of them will be automated anyway. Or the prices will have to go up to cover the higher wages.

          The way to create manufacturing jobs in developed nations is to compete on quality and by being local.

          Germany is a great example of this. Germany exports more by value than China does. It's manufacturing base is massive. And it's mostly good quality stuff. Not just the luxury cars, even the stuff you can buy in discount supermarkets like Lidl and Aldi is often made in German

        • Shifting production to areas (countries) with lower costs is how capitalism equalizes economic inequality. You're just upset about it because all this time you assumed you were one of the downtrodden masses. When in fact you're part of the (global) economic elite, and "take from the rich to help the poor" means taking from you to help poor people in developing countries.

          That production will eventually come back - once the rest of the world's economies have modernized so labor costs are more equal throu
      • "historically used to protect infant industries"
        Most of these are not infant industries.
        Now China isn't really the good guys here. However American Companies should had been smarter to not deal with China knowing China doesn't play by the same rules in IP.

      • Google: - - A tariff is a tax on imports or exports between sovereign states. It is a form of regulation of foreign trade and a policy that taxes foreign products to encourage or safeguard domestic industry. The tariff is historically used to protect infant industries and to allow import substitution industrialization.

        The idea is to entice the local economy to provide for itself.

        It does not work. The only thing tariffs do is to make completely unprofitable US industries artificially profitable/competitive and rob these industries of any incentive they previously had to compete with the Chinese. In essence US industry has discovered that getting 'Tariff Man' to artificially raise prices with tariffs and making the US consumer pay for it is easier than competing with the Chinese (and no, I'm not being snarky, Trump literally tweeted that moniker himself: https://twitter.com/realdonal [twitter.com]

    • Surely, by your logic, if the Chinese Govt retaliates and increases tariffs on US goods, then the increase is passed on to the Chinese consumer?
    • a family of four will pay $10 a month more because of these taxes.... they don't matter

    • Tariffs are idiotic regardless of the situation. It just means that countries wind up engaging in economic activity that is less efficient than other use of that labor rather than buying from those who can produce those goods or services more cheaply.

      Some people like to argue that we should do it in retaliation for Chinese companies engaging in dumping or similar practices, but I disagree there as well. If China and its citizens want to subsidize solar panels (or whatever else may be the specific case) f
      • It just means that countries wind up engaging in economic activity that is less efficient than other use of that labor rather than buying from those who can produce those goods or services more cheaply.

        Doesn't that assume quite a bit about the level playing field that the competition is supposed to operate on?

        If the Chinese government is bankrolling an industry (REM and solar to name a few) to corner the market it doesn't matter how cheaply you make a product if a Chinese company can take a loss until you are out of business.

      • It just means that countries wind up engaging in economic activity that is less efficient...

        Do you know what another word for "economic inefficiency" is? Jobs

    • by Higaran ( 835598 )
      Hers the thing, his tariffs are already hurting the economy, I'm in trucking and I see it like crazy, it horribly slow compared to this time last year. Companies knew the tariffs were coming and stocked up before they hit, not almost nothing is coming over from china at the same rate it was before. US manufacturing has not picked up the slack yet, because it hasn't become necessary yet. The only effect this will have is killing the economy for the next few years until someone new comes in and gets rid o
    • >Someone should explain this to Trump.

      He understands but does not care.
      • He understands but does not care.

        I'm not convinced he understands.

        Remember, Trump is the guy who says windmills cause cancer and that you need picture ID to buy groceries.

        Do you really think he understands global supply chain economics?

        • >Do you really think he understands global supply chain economics?

          Maybe not, but Lighthiser and Ross kinda do. They know full well what they are doing. I hope the SEC is on the lookout for insider trading.
          • Maybe not, but Lighthiser and Ross kinda do. They know full well what they are doing

            Yes, and that's what I'm afraid of.

            Incompetent crooks are bad enough, the intelligent, competent ones are what we really have to watch out for. Most of Trump's picks for high-level positions are clumsy grifters who step on their own dicks in short order, but some of them are genuinely dangerous.

      • How much do you charge to read minds with your crystal ball?

        • Nothing, that service is free. You get what you pay for :-)

          But I don't have to read his mind. The president's actions and tweets make his intentions clear.

          He is keeping his campaign promise to his base to protect US jobs. This will be important for his reelection effort.

          From his perspective its win-win; he can claim to be populist while the long term objective will benefit wealthy donors.
    • by t0qer ( 230538 )

      Guess who ends up paying tariffs? You do, the consumer.

      That's not how free markets work, and it's not China's economic strategy. Let's use a television as an example:

      A US built TV costs $200
      A Chinese TV costs $200 + $40 tariff.

      Both have equal craftsmanship, equal features. Consumer has a choice between a $240 TV and a $200 TV. All things being equal, they buy the $200 TV. China begins to lose sales.

      So what do they do?

      Drop the price by $50 so they can sell the same TV at $190. Chinese producers historic

      • Let's use a television as an example:

        A US built TV costs $200
        A Chinese TV costs $200 + $40 tariff.

        1) There are 6 or 7 American TV manufacturers as opposed to hundreds of Chinese, Taiwanese, Korean, and other foreign TV manufacturers.

        2) No one thinks that American TVs are better or even as good.

        3) American TVs use parts that come from....wait for it....China and Taiwan and Korea. Will the cost of getting those parts to use here in America go up or down?

        All things being equal, they buy the $200 TV. China begins to lose sales. .... The real question to be asked though is how long could a Chinese manufacturer keep running at a loss?

        The Chinese can afford to drop their prices as low as they need to in order to remain competitive as long as they need to. In some cases they're even stat

    • Guess who ends up paying tariffs? You do, the consumer.

      If you're an old guy, haven't you had time in your life to learn this shit already?

      Consumer prices don't work like that. They're not percentage markups from the cost of production. The prices are whatever people are willing to pay.

      For manufactured fungible items that are similar to commodities, where there is no price premium, there is no markup; economic theory has the price eventually stabilizing at or slightly below the cost of production. There is no money in generic widgets; you have to make premium wi

      • So no, consumer prices do not go up. The consumer does not pay the tariff. The middle-man pays the tariff. Prices don't change.

        LOL, oh sweet summer child. Your ignorance is truly adorable.

    • I agree with you that is the normal effect of tariffs, which are generally a bad thing. Here you have to realize however, that for decades China has been engaging in unfair market practices, primarily currency manipulation, that make their products cheaper than many other foreign and domestic producers. Further, all other strategies tried to date have failed.

      So, while on the face the tariffs are a negative, it is also a possible (perhaps likely) outcome this will force China's hand to address some of t
  • by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @10:16AM (#58557854)

    Chicken and pork products, raised in the US, sent to China for "processing" then shipped back to the US for consumption.

    Goodbye $.79 a pound chicken thighs and $.99 a pound pork shoulders

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Mmmm... Mechanically recovered head meat. Delicious.

    • Chicken thighs are basically a waste product; you're not paying markup based on cost of production, you're paying below the cost of production and the price is based on how low it has to be to get people to buy chicken thighs instead of some other cheap food.

      They kill a huge number of chickens to produce chicken breasts that are a popular product that is profitable. Now they have that many sets of thighs and wings, and they'll try hard to sell them instead of having to spend a bunch of money disposing of th

  • by Seven Spirals ( 4924941 ) on Wednesday May 08, 2019 @01:15PM (#58559408)
    So, listening to the "tariffs are always stupid" crowd you'd think that there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop Chinese abuse. According to them, the Chinese would either evade the tariffs by using another country as a sock puppet or they "wouldn't feel it" (yeah, right). According to them "tariffs never work" and all we have to do is look back at the 1930's at Smoot-Hawley. They don't tell you that the effects of Smoot-Hawley are not universally agreed on by anyone except folks who already want a global government and globally linked trade and markets. Academics don't always agree [nber.org] but if you listen to talking heads it's like there is an 11th commandment against tariffs. They also fail to mention that even if the trade went to another country the benefits of the profits of the trade would not. China is our enemy the sooner these modern Neville Chamberlain appeasers STFU and stand down the sooner we might have some fair trade (because FUCK free trade). We can also prevent their forced-tech transfers and their IP theft if we tried harder. Fine the living shit out of Chinese companies that do that (fine them out of existence as far as I'm concerned and run them out of the country). I'm tired of the victim attitudes saying we can either "Learn to Code" or do nothing because we are oh-so-powerless. Bullshit. You can hurt China and hurt them badly by reducing the profits they take OUT of our country. My vote will say "do it - do it hard" to any candidate who sounds the most angry and serious. Before any one asks, NO I don't give a fuck if cheap flip-flops and xmas lights get more expensive at Wal-Mart (China Mart).

It is contrary to reasoning to say that there is a vacuum or space in which there is absolutely nothing. -- Descartes

Working...