Who Pays for Tariffs? You Do.

[WillowTree]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

Good economics, half-witted geopolitics. China's wholesale, at least attempted, theft of intellectual property is an NPV loss of capital claimed to be in the trillions.

I can’t disagree, except perhaps the amount.

But this thread is about who is paying for the tariffs. It ain’t businesses or foreign firms. It’s US consumers.

What about Canadian tariffs?who pays for them?

 

[Toro]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

 

[martybegan]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

 

[Toro]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

Good economics, half-witted geopolitics. China's wholesale, at least attempted, theft of intellectual property is an NPV loss of capital claimed to be in the trillions.

I can’t disagree, except perhaps the amount.

But this thread is about who is paying for the tariffs. It ain’t businesses or foreign firms. It’s US consumers.

What about Canadian tariffs?who pays for them?

Generally, consumers.

Are you arguing for higher taxes? Sure sounds like it.

 

[Toro]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

Yes, I know. But it depends on the elasticity of supply and demand curves. (That’s Economics 201, so Rickey Retardo won’t get it.)

The more inelastic the curve, the more the price can be passed on to the consumer. The more elastic the curve, the more the cost is borne by the producer. Generally, consumer demand curve elasticity is more variable than producer supply curves.

Empirical evidence suggests that the costs of corporate taxes are about evenly split between consumers and producers. Or at least they were.

 

[martybegan]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

Yes, I know. But it depends on the elasticity of supply and demand curves. (That’s Economics 201, so Rickey Retardo won’t get it.)

The more inelastic the curve, the more the price can be passed on to the consumer. The more elastic the curve, the more the cost is borne by the producer. Generally, consumer demand curve elasticity is more variable than producer supply curves.

Empirical evidence suggests that the costs of corporate taxes are about evenly split between consumers and producers. Or at least they were.

As an Engineer I have always seen Economics more a science than applied technology. I guess it's just my intrinsic bias for things that have to be concrete and workable.

To me, isn't the real impact of any cost in business how much or how little the owner is willing to take as profit to keep performing the service or providing the product?

If say you increase corporate taxes, you have to get the $$ from somewhere, either by raising the cost of the product/service, increases in efficiency in producing the product/service, or taking less profit at the end of the process.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

Yes, I know. But it depends on the elasticity of supply and demand curves. (That’s Economics 201, so Rickey Retardo won’t get it.)

The more inelastic the curve, the more the price can be passed on to the consumer. The more elastic the curve, the more the cost is borne by the producer. Generally, consumer demand curve elasticity is more variable than producer supply curves.

Empirical evidence suggests that the costs of corporate taxes are about evenly split between consumers and producers. Or at least they were.

Steel tariffs are to encourage domestic steel production, and it's working.

 

[WillowTree]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

Good economics, half-witted geopolitics. China's wholesale, at least attempted, theft of intellectual property is an NPV loss of capital claimed to be in the trillions.

I can’t disagree, except perhaps the amount.

But this thread is about who is paying for the tariffs. It ain’t businesses or foreign firms. It’s US consumers.

What about Canadian tariffs?who pays for them?

Generally, consumers.

Are you arguing for higher taxes? Sure sounds like it.

Nope! I am. Saying as long as other countries charge tariffs on American goods we should do likewise to theirs! You agree?

 

[gtopa1]

The answer is obvious: buy American....and Australian.

Greg

 

[Toro]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

Yes, I know. But it depends on the elasticity of supply and demand curves. (That’s Economics 201, so Rickey Retardo won’t get it.)

The more inelastic the curve, the more the price can be passed on to the consumer. The more elastic the curve, the more the cost is borne by the producer. Generally, consumer demand curve elasticity is more variable than producer supply curves.

Empirical evidence suggests that the costs of corporate taxes are about evenly split between consumers and producers. Or at least they were.

As an Engineer I have always seen Economics more a science than applied technology. I guess it's just my intrinsic bias for things that have to be concrete and workable.

To me, isn't the real impact of any cost in business how much or how little the owner is willing to take as profit to keep performing the service or providing the product?

If say you increase corporate taxes, you have to get the $$ from somewhere, either by raising the cost of the product/service, increases in efficiency in producing the product/service, or taking less profit at the end of the process.

Or, the company goes out of business.

 

[martybegan]

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

Yes, I know. But it depends on the elasticity of supply and demand curves. (That’s Economics 201, so Rickey Retardo won’t get it.)

The more inelastic the curve, the more the price can be passed on to the consumer. The more elastic the curve, the more the cost is borne by the producer. Generally, consumer demand curve elasticity is more variable than producer supply curves.

Empirical evidence suggests that the costs of corporate taxes are about evenly split between consumers and producers. Or at least they were.

As an Engineer I have always seen Economics more a science than applied technology. I guess it's just my intrinsic bias for things that have to be concrete and workable.

To me, isn't the real impact of any cost in business how much or how little the owner is willing to take as profit to keep performing the service or providing the product?

If say you increase corporate taxes, you have to get the $$ from somewhere, either by raising the cost of the product/service, increases in efficiency in producing the product/service, or taking less profit at the end of the process.

Or, the company goes out of business.

Forgot that one, thanks.

 

[Toro]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

How is that any different from Corporate Taxes?

Different effects.

I think corporate taxes should be low.

Unlike the retarded Laffer Curve, there is empirical evidence that lower corporate taxes raise revenues.

It's still a cost that has to be paid, and costs are applied to the value, and thus cost of whatever product or service you are offering.

Yes, I know. But it depends on the elasticity of supply and demand curves. (That’s Economics 201, so Rickey Retardo won’t get it.)

The more inelastic the curve, the more the price can be passed on to the consumer. The more elastic the curve, the more the cost is borne by the producer. Generally, consumer demand curve elasticity is more variable than producer supply curves.

Empirical evidence suggests that the costs of corporate taxes are about evenly split between consumers and producers. Or at least they were.

Steel tariffs are to encourage domestic steel production, and it's working.

And the prices of everything using steel is going up.

So taxes are good now?

 

[Toro]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

Good economics, half-witted geopolitics. China's wholesale, at least attempted, theft of intellectual property is an NPV loss of capital claimed to be in the trillions.

I can’t disagree, except perhaps the amount.

But this thread is about who is paying for the tariffs. It ain’t businesses or foreign firms. It’s US consumers.

What about Canadian tariffs?who pays for them?

Generally, consumers.

Are you arguing for higher taxes? Sure sounds like it.

Nope! I am. Saying as long as other countries charge tariffs on American goods we should do likewise to theirs! You agree?

The US slapped tariffs on Canadian products first. Canada retaliated.

Tariffs make both countries poorer. Everyone loses.

 

[Jitss617]

I’m a proud American and will to take the heat until China stops its oppressive tariffs on US goods, if you aren’t will to with you should move out

China’s tariffs are 5%, about the same as America’s.

View attachment 249117

Moderate Chinese Retaliation – But Keeping The Powder Dry | Action Forex

First, Trump started with $19.8 trillion of debt, from which Obama increased the debt by over 80% from all 43 previous presidents combined.

Next, Obama left us with a depleted military, at its weakest levels since WWII, so Trump had to expand the budget for over $700 billion per year. To do that, he had to approve additional tens of billions in spending for the dems to go along with that.

In Trumps first two years, the budget deficit was about $1.6 trillion, while in Obama's first two years, about $2.7 trillion.

 

[william the wie]

I think the major problem with current economic models is that computing power particularly in regards to multiply iterative logistics models is changing how supply and demand works. Getting @8E shoes used to be a real hassle for me now I can either get 9/8E or even 3D printed shoes without the hassle. And I am pretty certain that almost all members of the board can tell a similar story about some product. But that is not how econometric models are taught.

 

[Ricky LIbtardo]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

Whenever someone uses the term "Economics 101" we automatically know the depth of their analysis is ankle deep and it's used to be condescending in order to repel any challenge of the previously stated analysis. Tell China the tariffs they have imposed on other countries has hurt their economy and they will laugh their ass off. Every economy has different dynamics and every country has different needs to sustain their economies and security.

Wisdom is contained in whiskey older than the 8 year old shit you've been drinking of late. Get some.

I have a degree in economics, specializing in trade.

You?

So does Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

 

[expat_panama]

... the prices of everything using steel is going up...

that's what they say in the world of politics. In the world where steel & steel products are bought & sold the prices are still lower than what they were in 2012. In fact, the prices had been returning up from a 2016 dip but that stopped when the tariffs went into affect and now they're going down again.

Yeah, maybe we don't know for sure why the prices are doing what they're doing, but only and idiot makes things up when the facts are available to all.

 

[WillowTree]

Good economics, half-witted geopolitics. China's wholesale, at least attempted, theft of intellectual property is an NPV loss of capital claimed to be in the trillions.

I can’t disagree, except perhaps the amount.

But this thread is about who is paying for the tariffs. It ain’t businesses or foreign firms. It’s US consumers.

What about Canadian tariffs?who pays for them?

Generally, consumers.

Are you arguing for higher taxes? Sure sounds like it.

Nope! I am. Saying as long as other countries charge tariffs on American goods we should do likewise to theirs! You agree?

The US slapped tariffs on Canadian products first. Canada retaliated.

Tariffs make both countries poorer. Everyone loses.

Show me!

 

[Andylusion]

Why must you educate us?

Yes, it is passed onto the consumer but you know I feel doing business with China is bad business for the U.S. and Canada.

I would prefer the U.S. and Canada move away from China and build up trade partners with Mexico, Central America, and South America.

Sure in the short period it will hurt but in the long run it will better for the U.S. and Canada...

How is all of us being poorer, somehow good for the US and Canada?

Because wars are expensive. But when you defeat the enemy, comes times of prosperity.

You do like winning wars and being prosperous, don't you?

My question was in the context of the post I was responding to. Obviously, being bombed into oblivion would be worse than being poor. No one is arguing against that.

But if you are referring to a 'trade war'.... No country has ever 'won' a trade war. Trade itself, is not a war. Either both sides benefit, or they don't engage in trade. Trade itself is mutually beneficial, or people would not engage in it.

So making everyone in this country poorer, will not win anything, and not have any positive effects. All it will do... is make us poorer. That's it. How is making me poorer, going to make me prosperous? That's nonsensical.

 

[Andylusion]

Tariffs are taxes. When tariffs go up, prices go up as businesses pass on the increases to you. Trump’s trade taxes have cost the American consumer $69 billion thus far.

Businesses have captured most of that, but as any Economics 101 student knows, there is a deadweight loss to the economy. This is why 99.99999% of economists oppose tariffs.

That deadweight loss to the US economy has been about $7 billion.

U.S. Consumers Hit Hardest by Trade Tariffs, Studies Find

Good economics, half-witted geopolitics. China's wholesale, at least attempted, theft of intellectual property is an NPV loss of capital claimed to be in the trillions.

I can’t disagree, except perhaps the amount.

But this thread is about who is paying for the tariffs. It ain’t businesses or foreign firms. It’s US consumers.

What about Canadian tariffs?who pays for them?

The citizens of any country, pays the tariffs that their country imposes. Canadians are the ones paying Canadian tariffs. Mexicans are the ones paying Mexican tariffs. The Americans, are paying American tariffs.

Tariffs always harm the country that implements them. Protectionism always harms the country that engages in it.

There is no example of any country in all human history (that I have read about at least), that protected, and tariff-ed itself into prosperity.