Tariffs

[Supposn]

Tariffs:

A nation’s government levies tariffs for one or more of these purposes:

(1) To defend jobs or enterprises of the tariff imposing nation.

(2) to increase the government’s tax revenues.

(3) To reduce the trade deficits between one or more foreign nation’s with regard to types of goods. (Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation’s GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs).

(4) To economically and possibly politically harm or retaliate against one or more other nations or political opponents both within and/or beyond the nation’s borders.

(It’s also conceivable that the government’s purpose may be to assist or placate one or more other nations or political allies both within and/or beyond the nation’s borders).


Tariffs introduction into a nation’s economy is analogous to poisons that are of the introduced within prescribed medications. They must be applied in very judicious manners. Both if appropriate remedies are not introduced, or if they are not judiciously introduced, the consequences could be economically serious.

I did not post this thread for the purpose of discussing tariffs, but rather as a common reference point within threads specifically discussing or touching particular international trade topics.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

(Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation’s GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs).

No they aren't.

 

[The Purge]

US steel industry booming after Trump's tariffs....

U.S. steel mills have seen almost a 5 percent jump in shipments so far this year, a sign that it's benefiting from stiff 25 percent tariffs on imports the Trump administration imposed last year.

The American Iron and Steel Institute reported Monday that U.S. mills shipped 8.1 million tons in October, up 4.6 percent from the previous month and up 6 percent from the same period last year. So far this year, the industry has shipped 79.6 million net tons, 4.6 percent more than it had by this point last year.

AISI spokesman Jake Murphy told the Washington Examiner that domestic steel use has increased 1.4 percent so far in 2018, and that "Section 232 has played a crucial role as well," referring to section of trade law used by the Trump administration to justify the tariffs

Read more at washingtonexaminer.com

 

[edthecynic]

A nation’s government levies tariffs for one or more of these purposes:

(3) To reduce the trade deficits between one or more foreign nation’s with regard to types of goods.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
U.S. Trade Gap Widens Most Since 2015; Record China Deficit
The U.S. trade deficit widened in July by the most in three years and the gap with China hit a record as the Trump administration imposed tariffs on a range of Chinese goods, prompting retaliatory levies from Beijing.

The gap increased 9.5 percent to $50.1 billion, the biggest since February, from a revised $45.7 billion in the prior month, Commerce Department data showed Wednesday. Exports fell 1 percent, driven by steep drops in shipments of aircraft and soybeans, while imports rose 0.9 percent in a broad-based gain.

 

[Supposn]

Trump's uneconomic Trade Taxes are hurting manufacturing, according to the Fed's Beige Book. It will get worse if Trump imposes Trade Taxes on $200 billion of Chinese goods.

• Manufacturers are complaining about tariffs.


Manufacturers in all Districts expressed concern about tariffs and in many Districts reported higher prices and supply disruptions that they attributed to the new trade policies.

Here are a couple of Beige Book examples. ...

Toro, I wasn’t aware of the Federal Reserve’s Beige Book. Thank you for referring to it.


Collection of federal taxes or fees or tariffs with considerations of where imported products were produced or shipped from will eventually be economically and/or politically more problematic. ... Tariffs upon imported steel and aluminum that are not also levied upon products containing steel and aluminum is foolish. We may increase USA sales of structural steel and railroad tracks, but we intend to reduce USA’s production and sales and of finished products containing steel? If a choice had to be made, first levy tariffs on the finished products rather than the materials. ...

EdTheCynic, excerpted from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-05/u-s-trade-gap-widens-most-since-2015-china-deficit-hits-record : “U.S. Trade Gap Widens Most Since 2015; Record China Deficit”.

Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation’s GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs. I’m a proponent of the policy described within Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article.

The substantially more market rather than government driven trade policy would be of some benefit to any USA producer that competes with foreign goods anywhere in the world. It’s not applied to specifically listed scarce or precious mineral materials integral to globally traded goods and doesn’t discriminate among foreign nations or types of goods. It treats the goods of all industries, (e.g. agriculture, fishing, or manufacturing in the same equitable manner). Import Certificate policy’s superior to USA’s existing and all other proposed policies for international trade.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Trump's uneconomic Trade Taxes are hurting manufacturing, according to the Fed's Beige Book. It will get worse if Trump imposes Trade Taxes on $200 billion of Chinese goods.

• Manufacturers are complaining about tariffs.


Manufacturers in all Districts expressed concern about tariffs and in many Districts reported higher prices and supply disruptions that they attributed to the new trade policies.

Here are a couple of Beige Book examples. ...

Toro, I wasn’t aware of the Federal Reserve’s Beige Book. Thank you for referring to it.


Collection of federal taxes or fees or tariffs with considerations of where imported products were produced or shipped from will eventually be economically and/or politically more problematic. ... Tariffs upon imported steel and aluminum that are not also levied upon products containing steel and aluminum is foolish. We may increase USA sales of structural steel and railroad tracks, but we intend to reduce USA’s production and sales and of finished products containing steel? If a choice had to be made, first levy tariffs on the finished products rather than the materials. ...

EdTheCynic, excerpted from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-05/u-s-trade-gap-widens-most-since-2015-china-deficit-hits-record : “U.S. Trade Gap Widens Most Since 2015; Record China Deficit”.

Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation’s GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs. I’m a proponent of the policy described within Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article.

The substantially more market rather than government driven trade policy would be of some benefit to any USA producer that competes with foreign goods anywhere in the world. It’s not applied to specifically listed scarce or precious mineral materials integral to globally traded goods and doesn’t discriminate among foreign nations or types of goods. It treats the goods of all industries, (e.g. agriculture, fishing, or manufacturing in the same equitable manner). Import Certificate policy’s superior to USA’s existing and all other proposed policies for international trade.

Respectfully, Supposn

Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation’s GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

Wrong.

 

[The Purge]

Automakers rise on report of China moving to cut U.S. car tariffs

China is moving to cut import tariffs on American-made cars to 15 percent from the current 40 percent, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday citing people familiar with the matter.

The step hasn’t been finalized and could still change, according to the report.

Shares of U.S. automakers including General Motors Co (GM.N) and Ford Motor Co (F.N) rose about 2 percent in premarket trading on hopes that the move could revitalize sales that took a hit when China ramped up levies on U.S.-made cars.

Read more at reuters.com ...