Free Trade

China Is Paying Less Than 8 Percent of Tariff Costs. Americans Are Paying the Rest.

American consumers are bearing nearly 93 percent of the costs of the tariffs applied to Chinese goods, according to Moody's Investors Service.

|

Former President Donald Trump and his top trade advisers spent years arguing that tariffs applied to imports from China were not being paid by Americans—despite what economic theories and actual reality suggested.

Since taking office, the Biden administration has picked up that same line of argument. U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said during her confirmation hearing in February that she views tariffs as "a legitimate tool" to wield against China—the obvious implication being that tariffs are applying some sort of economic pressure on China that the Biden White House could use for political purposes, in much the same way as Trump sought to do.

Both are wrong.

American consumers are bearing nearly 93 percent of the costs of the tariffs applied to Chinese goods, according to a new report from Moody's Investors Service. Just 7.6 percent of the added costs of the tariffs are being absorbed by China, the investment firm found.

And it gets worse. When China responded to Trump's tariffs by slapping new tariffs on many American goods, American firms paid a significant price. That's because "U.S. exporters, unlike China's exporters, lowered by roughly 50 percent the prices of goods affected by foreign retaliatory tariffs, carrying a much higher cost burden than foreign importers of goods under U.S. tariffs," writes Dima Cvetkova, an associate analyst at Moody's and author of the report.

In other words, American companies ended up on the losing end of the trade war both going and coming. Importers absorbed most of the cost of the Trump tariffs, and American businesses that export to China got hit by the retaliatory tariffs worse than Chinese exporters to the U.S. did.

Prior to 2018, the average American tariff on imports from China was just 3.1 percent, according to data from the Peterson Institute for International Economics. But after Trump hiked tariffs on a wide range of imports covering everything from industrial goods to toys, the average tariff on imports from China is now 19.3 percent. Retaliatory tariffs imposed by China hiked its duties on American-made goods from 8 percent to 20.7 percent.

More than half of the goods traded between the world's two largest economies are now subject to tariffs, according to PIIE data, up from less than 1 percent before the trade war began. The so-called Phase One trade deal inked by the Trump administration and Chinese government in December 2019 (there never was a second phase) barely had any impact on those figures.

The Moody's report only adds to a growing body of evidence showing that Trump-era tariffs have been a loser for the American economy. According to the American Action Forum, a free market think tank, Trump's tariffs (and retaliatory tariffs imposed by other countries) have increased annual American consumer costs by about $57 billion. The Tax Foundation estimates that Trump's tariffs amount to an $80 billion tax increase on U.S. businesses. And researchers from Columbia University, Princeton University, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York concluded that the tariff costs "have been passed on entirely to U.S. importers and consumers."

More than three years after Trump launched his trade war and four months after President Joe Biden inherited it, the consequences of the tariffs should no longer be subject to debate. The evidence is overwhelming and one-sided: American consumers are being hammered.

And that will continue, no matter what wishful thinking emerges from the politicians in charge of trade policy. "If the tariffs remain in place, pressure on US retailers will likely rise, leading to a greater pass-through to consumer prices," Moody's warns.

With consumer prices already rising due to a combination of inflation and a possibly overheating economy as the COVID-19 pandemic fades, Biden could easily offer a bit of relief by cutting the tariffs his predecessor imposed. Continuing to fight a losing trade war is both a choice and a mistake.

NEXT: A City Got Protections From Qualified Immunity After a Cop Killed a Man. SCOTUS Won't Hear the Case.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Double the tariffs. Tomorrow.

    The Communists unleashed a viral pandemic that killed nearly 600,000 Americans. They must pay.

    1. The Republican plan is to let the public infrastructure crumble into dust. Then pay corporate American build a for profit infrastructure system at the tax payers expense.more detail open this link……..MORE DETAIL.

      1. USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its FFF an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

    2. They don’t pay the tariffs…

      1. Then triple them. And cut the funding for these ‘studies’ run by commies.

    3. I thought it was 1 billion Americans?

      1. Wasn’t it 300 billion Americans? If Biden said it, it’s undeniable fact, right?

    4. Geᴛ $192 hᴏurly hrtrtrtrfrom Gᴏᴏgle!…Yes this is Auᴛhentic since I jusᴛ gᴏᴛ my fiᴏst payᴏuᴛ of $24413 ᴀnd this wᴀs ᴊust oᴊ a single ᴡeek… I hᴀve ᴀlsᴏ bᴏughᴛ my Rᴀnge Rᴏver Velar righᴛ ᴀfᴛer ᴛhis pᴀyᴏuᴛ…Iᴛ is reᴀlly cᴏᴏl jᴏb I hᴀve ever had and yᴏu wᴏn’ᴛ fᴏrgive yᴏurself if yᴏu ᴀᴏ nᴏᴛ ᴄheck iᴛ….

      ====================★ Visit Here

    5. YOU pay the tariffs, traitor. Leave us normies alone

  2. Since the purpose of tariffs is to make citizens of the country imposing the tariff stop buying from the target 93% seems like they are not working.

    1. Then we aren’t teriffing hard enough. 100% terrifs on all iPhones from China might be enough to force a change. The change might just be a doubling of the price, but dammit it will feel like a change.

      1. Every liberal is a thief, by definition

    2. Why not? If absolute consumption decreased, then they worked. I find it odd that all the figures are reported as “rates”. Consuming less product from China (or in general) is a good thing.

      1. “And government’s just the thing to impose good choices on individuals”, said the mask mandater, err, tariff supporter!

    3. The purpose of tariffs is also to raise revenue. And as a way of raising revenue, they are better than either sales taxes or income taxes.

  3. >based on a Moody’s report
    Aren’t those the guys that told us all those subprime mortgages were okay?

    1. Not only ok, but great and good for the poor.

  4. No Taxation without Representation! These and every other tariff signed into being by the executive should be repaid personally by that executive. Completely unconstitutional, and should be seen as treasonous to a people whose forefathers fought a revolution over the very idea.

    1. ^^THIS… Along with 99% of what the “Nazi” federal government does. Obama set a lot of UN-Constitutional precedents that need to be acknowledged as such by the Supreme Court – Obamacare being the most significant one.

  5. If Trump was consistently wrong “outside of normal parameters” where would we place Joe Biden on the parameter chart?

  6. This is a nonsense “analysis” cherrypicked from the same “free market” no-thinktanks that have all but advocated stripping the country down to its copper pipes and selling it for parts. Also notice that free market absolutists are always overweight dorks in bow ties and should be ignored on aesthetics alone, but let’s humor them.

    First, imaging believing any economic numbers coming out of China when Philadelphia election returns are more trustworthy. Second, China was over a barrel 2018 – 2019. Obviously the news did their best to cover this up, but there was unrest among the population and within the CCP symptomatic of economic stagnation while Contemporaneous DOD Satellite imagery confirms a slowdown in production. So what did China do? They released a virus into the world to bring everyone else to their level. Why else cover up its origins and mislead the world by for example releasing fake videos in January, 2020 of people falling down in the streets. Neoliberal Western governments were all too happy to go along with the charade because virus hurt orange man. Now, a year later, China looks great and the only numbers better than their ridiculous covid numbers are their economic “numbers”. At the same time, corporate neoliberal elites see an opportunity to consolidate further and ship more jobs overseas, so they can keep importing cheap Chinese-made shit, and you keep consuming product. Thus, shills for woke capital shills circle the wagon and produce bs “analyses” like these based on data they know is bullshit to trick lolberts and free market no-thinktanks into spreading their propaganda.

    1. And this is what the Trump cultists really believe. That Trump was prosecuting the trade war so successfully, that the Chinese government was so desperate, that they decided to deliberately release the COVID virus on the world, correctly predicting exactly what the American response would be to COVID, and all of the other world governments did the same, cratering their own economies, only because they hated Trump. This is QAnon level of fantasy here.

      1. Sad that the CCP isn’t sending their best anymore. We all know the Wuhan Flu came from a lab. Now if the Kung flu was an “accident”, how come China didn’t let the world know earlier and didn’t work with the international community to contain the virus? The decision to obfuscate was intentional. What motivated this? Surely wasn’t related to China crying to the WTO like a bunch of bitchass pussies.

        As for tariffs, the American consumer won precisely because the tariffs pushed American consumers to buy less cheap, Chinese crap. Less lead in products, less poison, etc… This absolute drop in consumption is what hurt China, you mong. Whether American billionaires like the Koch brothers did well in China given retaliatory tariffs is irrelevant. Imagine defending them and other megacorps rights to profit as a literal communist. LOL

        1. There is a difference between “the virus escaped accidentally from the lab”, and “the virus was deliberately released from the lab in retaliation for Trump’s trade war”. It is the latter claim which is the ridiculous conspiracy theory.

          1. A difference you clearly cannot denote in China’s response.

            Nobody would care if it was a lab leak. China has dealt with other coronaviruses before. If they were merely testing for cures, who cares?

            The issue is their bio-engineered form leaked and it severely damaged the global economy and killed over 3 million people. Their unwillingness to admit their culpability proves that darker forces are at play. Innocent people don’t destroy evidence. It was suspicious when Hillary did it and it’s still suspicious when China does it.

            It may be a conspiracy theory to say China intentionally designed a bioweapon to retaliate against the US, but it’s a factual conspiracy that China has covered up and continues to cover up the truth about Covid. It’s also a well established logical syllogism that parties who destroy evidence are guilty of some form of wrongdoing that they do not wish to become public.

            Was it a bioweapon? Maybe lax procedures that would make China culpable and liable to international reparations? Whatever it was, something bad happened and they don’t want us to know what that was, no matter the cost.

          2. You have no idea what we think, you little turd. You’re just a subnormal leftist twat.

            Not a molecule of libertarianism in you.

        2. And I couldn’t care less about any corporation’s profit margin. The argument against tariffs isn’t because some corporation makes more or less money. The argument against tariffs is that it harms *individual consumers*.

          the tariffs pushed American consumers to buy less cheap, Chinese crap.

          So it’s okay if Top Men in government direct the economic choices of individual consumers, just as long as they are wearing a MAGA hat instead of wearing a Che T-shirt?

          1. >So it’s okay if Top Men in government direct the economic choices of individual consumers, just as long as they are wearing a MAGA hat instead of wearing a Che T-shirt?
            Yes. Though I’d prefer my leaders wear a crown or military uniform. Better aesthetics.

            1. Got it. And what again are you doing at a libertarian site?

              1. ‘Whoosh!

        3. You know what annoys me? When people like Boehm (and others) look at tariffs in one dimension: trade. Tariffs are a tool of foreign policy. That is something much different than just a trade tool. Given Peking’s proven perfidy, why should we not use every tool at our disposal to punish them.

          Communist China is an existential threat to the United States. It is that simple.

          1. “Punish them” until what?

          2. How do you punish China by raising the cost of living for Americans?

            1. If China’s markets are closed, what will their people do? The bottom line is they need our markets more than we need Communist products.

              1. So, embargo? How will you force people not to trade with anyone in China?

                1. You’re sealioning again. This a part of why you are universally hated here, and probably everywhere.

              2. Trade with China has nothing to do with products. Products are the tail not the dog. US trade is driven by the need to export – DOLLARS. Lose the demand for dollars overseas – the reserve currency – and interest rates can no longer be subsidized here.

                What happens to house prices with 6-8% mortgage rates?

                What happens to federal spending when interest rates on T bills goes from less than 1% to 4%?

                There is also a cost to others if the dollar ceases to be reserve currency. There is no substitute – so international trade would drop by roughly 70% or so. That would affect Germany and Japan more than China. And smaller economies like Taiwan, Netherlands, Italy, SKorea, Thailand, Ireland, Singapore, Russia, etc.

        4. Now if the Kung flu was an “accident”, how come China didn’t let the world know earlier and didn’t work with the international community to contain the virus? The decision to obfuscate was intentional.

          Personally JAS, I think the Chinese were embarrassed and did not want to lose face and face worldwide condemnation and humiliation. This was the third time they had an ‘accident’ in just 10 years. Then, once they realized how serious it was, they moved to ‘contain’ the problem. The obfuscation was intentional.

          The WHO can investigate all they want. They will find nothing. Any incriminating records are long gone.

          1. Or they considered it to be a happy accident.

        5. “pushed American consumers to buy less cheap, Chinese crap”

          So, screw low-income Americans. Who needs affordable clothes, consumer goods. Their kids don’t need toys, they can play with lumps of coal.

          1. Gthey were already getting screwed. This was a measure to get the Chinese to stop the screwing. Do you really not understand that?

        6. That is the usual pattern for China. They try to minimize or cover up an infectious outbreak until they can’t.

          We may never know for certain where the virus came from. The disease was unknown at first. Clinically it mimics the flu and there was an outbreak of influenza at the time.

          We do know it infects some animals and we also know there was dangerous virology work going on at the time so take your pick.

      2. you know, if the lab leak were still a conspiracy theory, you may have been more convincing. Unfortunately, the bat is out of the bag lol.

  7. Looks like the Biden admin doesn’t care. Tears.

  8. Brilliant. Let’s go back to the pre-Trump low tariff policies which enabled the trade deficit with China to grow from around 10B in 1990 to around 350B in 2015.

    That will help the Koch brothers so it must be good.

    1. “NOOOO U MUST CONSOOM CHEAP PRODUCT SO WOKE CAPITAL CAN KEEP THEIR POWER” – lolberts and communists like chemjeff (whose HRT treatments aren’t going the way he hoped).

      1. Consume whatever you want from whatever source you want, and the government should mostly get out of the way of those decisions. That is the libertarian approach to things. It’s the central planners from both the left and the right who fundamentally disagree with individuals having the choice to decide where to shop and what to buy.

        “You don’t need 23 types of deodorant cheap crap from China!”

        1. Do you not understand that isn’t what would happen? China is a command economy run by an authoritarian regime. So no matter what goes through your tubby little head, there is no real ‘free trade’ with China.

          So quit playing this game as if you are in any way an actual libertarian.

    2. Why is a trade deficit bad? Are there no offsetting benefits?

      1. Apparently, we are still mercantilist.

        1. Concern over the US-China trade imbalance isn’t based in mercantilism, it’s based in the fact that US government policy favors consumer spending and massive public and private debt while transferring capital goods and production to China.

          If the US stopped borrowing and stopped encouraging consumer spending, the US-China trade deficit would disappear without tariffs.

          1. ^^^THIS – Someone should bring up all the US taxpayer “subsidies” being given to China Importers. Seems Reason all but forgot how to be reasonable.

          2. Obama gave GM tens of billions of dollars that they only partially repaid. In return, GM closed plants here and opened new factories in China.

            Jeffy would call that a win, just like he does when pedophiles form other countries sneak into the US illegally and rape our children.

      2. A trade deficit isn’t necessarily bad; it depends on what goods you are buying and how you are paying for them.

        If we bought capital goods from China and paid for it with savings, that would be a good thing.

        But the US largely buys useless consumer goods from China and pays for it through issuing debt, selling capital assets, capital goods, and shares in corporations, and intellectual property.

        That is very bad, in particular given that the US is already deep in debt.

  9. This is a surprise to no one but the diehard Trump supporters. And it’s not much of a surprise to them either.

    Tariffs are a tax on imports. Imports TO America. So of course American importers are paying! The only question is whether it reduces the importation enough to favor domestic producers. And regardless of whether it does, it’s the American consumer who ends up paying more.

    But the American consumer doesn’t have a voice in Congress or the ear of the president. So who cares about them?

    1. Tariffs are a tax on imports. Imports TO America. So of course American importers are paying!

      Yes, and what’s wrong with that? It’s a sales tax. If you’re going to have taxes at all, sales taxes are probably among the best taxes from a libertarian point of view. And it’s not just any sales tax, it’s a sales tax that specifically discourages imports from an inhumane, hostile, totalitarian regime.

      If we could finance the entire federal government just with taxes on Chinese imports, that would be a great thing. But every dollar we can raise that way helps.

      1. This argument would work if the tariffs had REPLACED other taxes. But they didn’t, so the argument fails.

        1. You are wrong. The revenue from tariffs is, in fact, replacing other taxes

          Specifically, it is replacing the taxes that the US government will need to raise in the future to pay off the debt that we are currently incurring.

  10. When a country blockades another country’s ports it’s an act of war, but when they effectively do it to themselves with tariffs it’s somehow different.

    1. Hitting the booze early today?

  11. When the american consumer buys a product made in China, they are paying 100% to China. The american consumer pays for China’s military expansion; for imprisonment of labor, etc. To entice production in other countries we need to raise the tariffs and make them permanent. America needs to stop funding China’s global expansion.

    1. You are free not to buy goods made in China if you wish.
      What you’re asking is to force everyone else to obey your wishes. Not very libertarian.

      1. You are either lying or incapable of understanding the situation. Probably both.

    2. Why does China bother spending the money on stuff to sell to us to get the money to build a military to take over the world?

      Why not just spend that money on the military and cut out the round trip thru the US?

      1. China’s attack on the West isn’t just a military attack, it’s an economic attack, propaganda, and corruption. China needs dollars to buy foreign technologies, foreign corporations, foreign governments, gold, oil, and other resources.

        1. So it is everywhere else. All of free market economics is based on greed and self interest. That is true on a national macro sense and on an individual level.

          You want a level playing field but tariffs and trade restrictions have the opposite effect.

          From the libertarian point of view it is just the government exercising more control. It is more restriction in the individual right to buy and sell goods and services.

          China is a bad actor in many ways but they are hardly unique in that. You are not going to get them to change behavior with a trade war. The opposite has happened with the Xi government backpedaling on reforms.

          1. So it is everywhere else. All of free market economics is based on greed and self interest. That is true on a national macro sense and on an individual level.

            In a “national macro sense”, China is not participating in a free market; no totalitarian regime that is gearing up for war is.

            From the libertarian point of view it is just the government exercising more control. It is more restriction in the individual right to buy and sell goods and services.

            Government control is exercised through spending; once the money is spent, it has to be raised somehow and someone will get hurt. Relatively to other forms of raising revenue, tariffs are the least intrusive

            Your reasoning amounts to arguing that taking on more debt, raising capital gains, and raising income taxes is “more libertarian” than tariffs, and that is just absurd.

            1. France is not participating in a free market. The US is not participating in a free market.

              “Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.”
              ― Milton Friedman

              Libertarians have a fundamental objection to government as we know it. It is a radical rethinking of the function and scope of government itself.

              I am not arguing for more debt, raising taxes, or anything. Tariffs are just more money to an ever expanding government. You and I pay it. They don’t reduce taxes and expenditures they get from one source. They just spend more.

      2. “Why does China bother spending the money on stuff to sell to us to get the money to build a military to take over the world?”

        If they did that, they would have less money to work with.

      3. China wants to dominate the world economically and use their military as a stick to ensure compliance with any potential dissenters. They’re not literally going to invade the rest of the world and have troops stationed on every block. That’s inferasible.

  12. I’m against the tariffs, but … thats kinda the point. The point of tariffs is to raise costs for American consumers to induce Americans to buy American goods. All this shows is that its working as intended.

    Of course, I dont like what they are intended to do, but I digress.

  13. In fact, in my opinion, the trade war is not good. Both lose out. It is the general public who ultimately bears the cost. Only when the two countries cooperate can maximize profits.
    https://www.orologilusso.eu/

  14. China Is Paying Less Than 8 Percent of Tariff Costs. Americans Are Paying the Rest.
    American consumers are bearing nearly 93 percent of the costs of the tariffs applied to Chinese goods, according to Moody’s Investors Service.

    Government needs to be paid somehow. If we only pay 93% of the tariffs, that’s better than income or sales tax, taxes that Americans pay 100%. Furthermore, limiting our dependence on China is a good thing in itself.

  15. This is should not be a surprise. The PRC may be a socialist dictatorship, but regarding tariffs, it can be considered as just another large company. As such, it does what any business does when “costs” go up, it passes them along to consumers. A tariff is just another cost, who did Trump think was going to pay?

    1. Just like his business dealings. It doesn’t matter when it is someone else’s money.

      1. Well, that’s the common attitude of “libertarians” around here as well: “open borders, no tariffs, legalize drugs, consequences be damned; it doesn’t matter when it’s someone else’s money”.

        These “libertarians” are so dense and ignorant that they don’t even recognize that they are liberally spending other people’s money.

    2. It depresses their sales. That is what he thought it would do, and he was correct.

  16. Putting a tax on International goods to fund an International Governing body!!!!! Oh, the horror………….

    Call me when ‘tarriff’ taxes is up to 80% of what domestic taxes are and then I’ll start caring. So far; all my domestic taxes are going to “subsidize” international trade.

  17. Whichever team is in power they seem to love tariffs and why not? It is a crony scheme to reward certain manufacturers and industries at the expense of consumers and other industries. The politicians are paid off either way.

    People forget that China is a huge growing market. American companies want that so at some point it becomes more profitable to just make stuff there as Tesla has done

    1. “People forget that China is a huge growing market. American companies want that so at some point it becomes more profitable to just make stuff there as Tesla has done”

      Of course it is more profitable to make stuff there, because the only way into the Chinese market is to manufacture in China. Then, you also are penalized if you want to move your profits from China. And, don’t bother to worry about your patents. Anything you manufacture in China is going to be stolen outright. So, soon you will have subsidized the manufacture of your own product, for far cheaper, will lose your business, and China wins.

      1. If a business wants to take those risks then it is not the function of government to prevent them from doing so. Tesla is making cars there for the same reasons Subaru is making cars in Indiana. To increase profits and market share.

        China is not alone in IP theft. The State Department report in 2019 listed China alongside Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India and a long list of others.

        If we are going to complain about Chinese trade barriers I can’t see how becoming more like them is the solution. This was sold to us as a temporary negotiating tactic. How is that going?

      2. IP and patent disputes are very common. Apple and Samsung just had a huge case over cell phone technology with each side claiming the other was guilty of technology theft.

    2. The point is that China is a command economy run by authoritarian marxists that want to break the US and dominate the world as the sole superpower. Uncoupling our economy from theirs and weakening them as much as possible is just self preservation.

  18. Is anyone surprised at this?

  19. “Former President Donald Trump and his top trade advisers spent years arguing that tariffs applied to imports from China were not being paid by Americans—despite what economic theories and actual reality suggested.

    Since taking office, the Biden administration has picked up that same line of argument.”

    I am shocked, shocked that that two ancient lifelong East Coast Democrats lie too many of the same lies.

    Trading DC swamp rats for NYC sewer rats got us only even more septic rats. Now we’ve got both plagues of rats infesting our Capitol and infecting our lives.

    “The primary reason for a tariff is that it enables the exploitation of the domestic consumer by a process indistinguishable from sheer robbery.” ~ Albert Jay Nock

    1. Ther difference is that Biden isn’t trying to get better deal from Americans. He just wants more revenue. And her cant go to far, as his handlers in Beijing will yank on his leash.

    2. And in other non-lefty-bias news. Trump launched a commission to end the subsidizing of imports…

  20. Not this shit again…

    The point of tariffs is to punish bad actors. They were always an implement of economic warfare and that has not changed one bit. By raising prices via taxation, Chinese companies perform poorly. They are dependent upon our markets and we’re restricting access at a national level because we’re tired of playing “free trade” with an authoritarian regime that has no interest in freedom.

    I wonder what kinds of articles Reason would have published about tariffs levied against Nazi Germany.

    1. Boehm would be denouncing them and writing ‘The Libertarian Case For Nazi Germany’.

  21. Ethnic minorities in China are paying 100% of the cost of the slave labor for products by Nike and others.

    1. Indeed. But according to Jeffy, it’s just people trading with people. Or some such twattery.

  22. I would rather subsidize our corrupt US government is a bit of tariff money on what I buy than subsidize a world domination, military threat dictatorship. Anything that stops helping China is good in my book. You also don’t have to buy Chinese. The whole point of tariffs is to stop the decimation of US industry. China has never been a fair trade partner They have subsidized their industries to sell at under costs, dumping product on the US and destroying our jobs. China is evil. Stopping them is worth a few pennies on a product.

  23. I would rather subsidize our corrupt US government with a bit of tariff money on what I buy than subsidize a world domination, military threat also corrupt dictatorship. Anything that stops helping China is good in my book. You also don’t have to buy Chinese, other Pacific rim countries compete with China.

    The whole point of tariffs is to stop the decimation of US industry. China has never been a fair trade partner. They have subsidized their industries to sell at under costs, dumping product on the US and destroying our jobs. China is evil. Stopping them is worth a few pennies on a product. Either that or start teaching our kids Cantonese and Mandarin in elementary school!

  24. Has anyone in this thread actually imported products from China or anywhere else. This article is a red herring.
    My company manufactured in China, imported from China and South America and Europe.
    If a company pays tariffs, and raised their prices, its because in their negotiations they did not have those costs covered by their source. For example, when importing from South America, part of our deal was that the broker, sent the bill for duties, tariffs, etc to the company we imported from. When they paid, the products were released. Same with China. It was part of our deal.
    If a company decides to cave, and pass these expenses on to consumers, which apparently 80+ percent have, it’s not the tariffs fault. Its the importer’s choice to handle importing that way. So this article is a dishonest representation of the results of tariffs and who is to be responsible for them. If the imported goods AFTER the importer decides to pay tariffs are still less expensive, or if they don’t want to disrupt a supply chain and incure those costs, look the the company importing.
    This seems like another article that justifies, taking away tariffs, importing more goods, putting Americans out of work. And if they are out of work, what does it matter if goods in the store are cheaper? They don’t have money to buy them. So US companies need to step up, lean out manufacturing, and compete. Then their tariff negotiations will go much better. Too many US companies weak sauce. This article puts the blame on the wrong source. And most Americans, including many on this thread, don’t know enough about international business practices, to step up and call this BS out.

  25. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily AS .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily…Visit Here

  26. Politicians don’t understand economics very well. What’s new? A lot of regular people also don’t understand economics very well, and continue to support economic-illiterate politicians.

Please to post comments