Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Free Trade

How Tariffs Could Cause Shortages in American Stores

A sharp decline in ocean freight from China during April is a sign of the supply chain issues that will begin hitting in May.

Eric Boehm | 4.28.2025 11:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
iconphotosfive627408 | Matthew Pearce/Icon Sportswire 169/Matthew Pearce/Icon Sportswire/Newscom
(Matthew Pearce/Icon Sportswire 169/Matthew Pearce/Icon Sportswire/Newscom)

Tariffs make it more expensive to bring goods into the United States, and one of the primary consequences of artificially inflating the cost of imports is that you get less of them.

Possibly a lot less.

American retailers are bracing for supply chain disruptions that could lead to price hikes and shortages as soon as next month—and might continue for a while, even if the Trump administration backs down from its trade war with China.

Cargo volumes to American ports are expected to "significantly decline because of canceled or delayed orders due to the tariffs," says Jonathan Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy for the National Retail Federation (NRF).

That's particularly true for any business that depends on imports from China. Although the administration has issued exemptions for several items—consumer electronics, computer chips, pharmaceuticals—other Chinese imports are now subject to tariffs as high as 145 percent. In other words: For every $100 of clothes, toys, luggage, sporting goods, or household items that arrive on a container ship, an American company must pay $145 to bring those goods into the country.

When the imports continue, those costs will be passed along to the consumer. But in many cases, the imports might not happen at all, because the tariffs are simply too high.

"While the impacts of lower import levels on retailers and consumers are currently unknown, it will ultimately depend on individual retailers and their specific mitigation strategies," says Gold. "Potential impacts could include less inventory and fewer choices for consumers as well as increased prices, especially at small retailers."

The telltale sign of those coming disruptions is the sharp decline in ocean freight heading for the United States. The Port of Los Angeles, for example, currently expects to receive just 14 foreign vessels in the week of May 4 through May 10. That would be a 36 percent drop from last year. A bigger drop looms: Ocean freight bookings from China to the U.S. are down 60 percent since the tariffs took effect, according to Flexport, a global logistics firm.

Why is that dropoff happening now, when the tariffs have been in place since President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" announcement on April 2? Because of shipping times from China. It takes about 30 days for a container ship from China to reach the West Coast, and the higher tariffs imposed by Trump did not apply to ships that departed China by April 9. Those ships will continue arriving on the West Coast through early May.

"That means that there are no economic effects of what was done on April 10th until about May 10th," wrote Molson Hart—founder and CEO of Viahart, a toy company that imports products from China—in a post on X. He also points out that a sharp drop in freight shipping will have consequences beyond supply chain disruptions: "Warehouses will start doing layoffs because no labor is needed to unload containers and some products will be out of stock, reducing the need for shipping labor."

It takes longer for ships from China to reach other ports—45 days to Houston, nearly two months to New York—which means longer lags before the impact of the tariffs is fully felt.

But it will be felt. The NRF estimates that overall imports to the U.S. will fall by 20 percent in the second half of this year if tariffs are maintained near current levels. Some big retailers, such as Target, have reportedly halted all orders from China.

In response to the huge new tariffs on goods from China, some American businesses might seek new suppliers in other countries. But those changes will take time to establish—and Trump's so-called "reciprocal tariffs" have injected a lot of uncertainty into the economy, even though they have been paused for 90 days. It doesn't make much sense for an American business to reconfigure its supply chains when the tariff playing field might shift again by mid-summer.

"Global supply chains can't change on a dime, or even with a 90-day 'pause,'" says Dan Anthony, president of the Trade Partnership. "Significant price hikes to cover tariff costs, or shortages for certain goods because no other suppliers can fill the gaps quickly, seem likely if the tariffs remain in place."

Once they hit, those problems will continue for a while. That's because of the same lag effect that slowed the impact of the tariffs. As Hart's post explains, even if the Trump administration lifts tariffs as soon as supply chain issues and shortages become impossible to ignore, there will be an inevitable delay as orders must be made, ships loaded, and the month-long journey taken across the Pacific.

"Starting in a couple of weeks, we are just going to start running out of stuff," Sean Stein, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, told NBC, "and if the administration waits to resolve the problem until we have shortages and hoarding, that is just too late."

The Trump administration last week signaled a willingness to reduce some tariffs on imports from China, claiming that negotiations with the Chinese government were underway. China has denied that claim. Also last week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said there would be no unilateral lowering of tariffs by the United States.

Every day and each mixed signal from the Trump administration pushes the economy into a longer period of disruption and uncertainty. Once the consequences fully arrive, consumers might recognize some similarities to the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, when essential items suddenly became scarce.

"The whole situation is a bit like lockdowns," Hart wrote on X. "Once you shut down, it takes a long time to get economic activity back to where it was, if you ever can."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Trump Administration Admits ICE Arrested Mahmoud Khalil Without a Warrant

Eric Boehm is a reporter at Reason.

Free TradeTariffsTrump AdministrationFree MarketsChinaEconomicsImportsEconomyProtectionism
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (153)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

    High prices and shortages are patriotic you leftist cunt. TRUMP 2028!

    1. Don't look at me! (Tariffs are killing the penguin industry!)   2 months ago

      WE MUST HAVE MOAR CHEAP JUNK!

      1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

        That we have no means to pay for.

    2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      Has this happened?

    3. Dillinger   2 months ago

      >>TRUMP 2028!

      which one are you backing there are several

      1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        If the 14A doesn't mean birthright citizenship then why should the 22A mean no third term? The Constitution doesn't mean what it says, it means whatever The Donald says it means, right?

        1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

          Red Caesar skipped right over Julius, Augustus and Tiberius and went straight to Caligula.

          1. Dillinger   2 months ago

            you made me scan a Guardian piece to see if you understood me?

            1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

              You can always safely assume I do not understand you...or anyone...or anything.

              1. Dillinger   2 months ago

                fair enough. you were more fun once lol.

                1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                  I'm missing something here. Maybe I missed a joke or something?

                  1. Dillinger   2 months ago

                    the original intendee above missed the joke. good Liz, too, last Friday.

  2. Jerry B.   2 months ago

    You'd think that China would be shipping as much as possible to beat the date on which the tariffs begin. It's almost like they want bigger impacts from the tariffs, but that'd be silly, right?

    1. Rick James   2 months ago

      They're moving goods through other countries. The logistics of that take time.

    2. JFree   2 months ago

      Well I've already hoarded entire container ships full of toilet paper. Once the shortages hit, the TP/gold ratio will skyrocket.

    3. Nelson   2 months ago

      “ You'd think that China would be shipping as much as possible to beat the date on which the tariffs begin”

      China is WHERE the things are made, not WHO is ordering them. It’s American businesses, not the Chinese government, that is bringing these things into the country.

      You understand that, right? That it’s American businesses that are being taxed and American consumers that will pay that tax. Plus the added cost that a decreased supply with stable demand will cause.

      1. Jerry B.   2 months ago

        "You understand that, right?"

        Yep. But the Chinese should be shipping as much as possible to sell more stuff before the tariffs slow down American purchases.

  3. AT   2 months ago

    Lord, enough already Chicken Little.

    None of your doomsaying and prophecy has come even a little bit true. What is wrong with you? Between the TDS and WMV and the Bluesky poisoning, how are you even still alive?

    1. MollyGodiva   2 months ago

      The massive reduction on imports from China don't concern you? Who is going to produce those goods?

      1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

        The US will have to learn to EARN / create what they want for once.
        As-if that's some kind of non-childish demand.

        1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

          Economic concepts like comparative advantage and opportunity cost are leftist.

          1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

            0% foreign good tax + subsidized shipping and 85% domestic goods tax + $800M EU charges (today's article).

            The only economics you know how to do is Gun (Gov-Gun) economics which distorts real economics.

            Sorry leftards. Your "Gimmie a ?free? pony ride" con-artist 'Guns' =/= economics.

            1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

              The only economics you know how to do is Gun (Gov-Gun) economics which distorts real economics.

              Riiiiiight. Says the guy who attacks anyone who opposes the federal government distorting the economy with import taxes.

              1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

                Says the guy who has never complained about regulatory costs or advantages and won't even admit to slave labor in China.

              2. TJJ2000   2 months ago

                Says the guy who attacks Tariffs-Only and never mentions domestic tax-cuts nor mentions the subsidized shipping or the EU charges on imports.

                UR not against federal government distortion.

                UR against a cherry-picked single-goose to promote your party-partisan driven Trump hatred.

        2. Alberto Balsalm   2 months ago

          The US will have to learn to EARN / create what they want for once. As-if that's some kind of non-childish demand.

          At what price? The concern is that the price of making everything in this country will require depression levels of pain before manufacturing labor is valued again, if it ever was. Time will tell.

          1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

            At what price did you say the US Debt was?
            Price is price. Shoveling it off on a CC doesn't make it disappear.

            1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

              Government debt and trade deficits have no relationship to each other at all.

              1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

                Cite?

                1. The Average Dude (Who's Smarter Than You)   2 months ago

                  Cite? Try turning on your phone, opening your laptop, pull up Google, and search.

                  1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

                    It's not on me to look for it, Sarc. The onus is on you as you claim it.

              2. JFree   2 months ago

                They are directly related for the reserve currency.

                1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

                  Which has nothing to do with government debt.

                  The trade "deficit" is the aggregate difference in value between imports and exports.

                  Government budget deficit is the difference between what it spends and what it takes in taxes.

                  The trade "deficit" does not effect government debt. The government's budget deficit does.

                  People like TJ see the word "deficit" and assume all those things are related. They're not. Some people are willing to learn that fact that they're unrelated. TJ is proud of the fact that he is unwilling to learn a damn thing.

                  1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

                    If we didn't have the world's reserve currency and we're on a gold standard, what would 30 years of negative trade deficits do buddy?

                    You're basically arguing for inflation policy as the baseline lol.

                  2. JFree   2 months ago

                    For the US, the trade/current deficit is the direct means by which US dollars are transferred to the rest of the world to serve as reserve currency. The cumulative total of dollars serving as reserve currency is $7-9 trillion which is exactly the cumulative trade/current deficit by the US where the parties didn't sell the dollars involved in that trade. Those dollars (called eurodollars) are held by foreign banks as reserve - specifically in the form of very short-term highly liquid deep reserves that can be used by those foreign banks to initiate/settle/finance third party trades with other foreign banks - eg a trade between Thailand and Saudi for oil where neither party has/wants the Thai/Saudi currency.

                    That is roughly a $13 trillion market with $50-$200 billion in daily transactions. How do those banks get actual US dollars if they ever decide to settle those eurodollars and eliminate them from their bank balance sheet? Answer - they participate in the NY Fed Operations as primary-dealer - where T-bills are issued and rolled over and serve as the grease for that market.

                    That demand for reserve currency liquidity/etc is the source of demand for short-term Treasury debt. The rest of the yield curve is the consequence of the different tranches of demand of every Treasury auction at the NYFed -- short-term demand (by foreigners), 10 year demand (for mortgages), etc. That demand is what determines the price the US has to pay for debt.

                    1. JFree   2 months ago

                      There is a real problem with the reserve currency being a national currency. This was the source of the argument at Bretton Woods between Keynes (who argued for a 'bancor' as reserve) and Dexter White (who argued for a US dollar convertible by central banks into gold). The US 'won' even though Keynes understood the Americans didn't know shit about what they were doing. Or the long-term consequences of being the reserve currency (turning from a surplus country that can occasionally cycle from export-led to import-led) into a deficit country (fueled by debt and financialization and bubbles). Which had also happened to Britain before. Robert Triffin outlined the dilemma a decade or so later.

                      Fortunately - we Americans have learned absolutely nothing in the last 80 years re this. Since Trump and his minions - and every fucking economist who signed that 'tariffs pledge' - is also blissfully clueless as what this whole shebang is about. It ain't about tariffs. It is about the US dollar as reserve currency.

                    2. sarcasmic   2 months ago

                      I appreciate your thoughtful response, but I still don't see how it has anything to do with budget deficits and federal debt.

                      Trade deficits do not affect either of those things.

                      Yes I see how they affect who holds the debt (a trade deficit for us is a capital surplus for them, and that capital surplus can be used to buy bonds), but trade deficits have nothing to do with the creation of the debt.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 months ago

                      On the subject of dollars abroad. Stuff flows into America and dollars flow out. Foreigners can't pay their taxes with dollars. So what are they going to do with them? Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I see it they can sit on them, buy stuff from America, or invest in America. If they convert them to another currency then that just means someone else has the same problem. If they sit on them then so what. If they buy American stuff then yay. And foreign investment is good too. So it seems like an all around win-win.

                      What am I missing?

                    4. JFree   2 months ago

                      Those reserve dollars determine the demand for Tbills and hence price of debt.

                      Can't really see the effect unless you imagine a counterfactual. Eg In Oct 22, Liz Truss proposed a £45 billion unfunded tax cut.
                      Because the pound is not a reserve currency, foreigners decided they wouldn't fund it with short term debt. The currency and yield curve gets smoked. The UK govt falls.

                      The US doesn't have bond vigilantes who tell us what interest rate they demand for debt. We don't have to be responsible. So we're not.

                    5. sarcasmic   2 months ago

                      Once again, how is that connected to the creation of the budget deficit and resulting debt?

                      You're talking about the price of the debt.

                      I'm talking about people getting confused when they see "trade deficit" and "budget deficit" and "government debt" and think we need to eliminate the "trade deficit" because it's putting the country into debt.

                    6. JFree   2 months ago

                      Once again, how is that connected to the creation of the budget deficit and resulting debt?

                      Financing spending via taxes or deficits are simply different options with different costs to different people. Easy to see that with taxes - income taxes are paid by the people who declared income that year, etc - but the same applies to deficit spending.

                      If all deficits were financed by issuing 10 year debt, then that spending would be financed by new mortgage borrowers that year. Foreigners (reserve holders), monetary policy, currency/exchange rate manipulation, and hyperinflation/money printing all compete in a 'short-term borrowing' bucket. Treasury's job is to spread the borrowing manure as thin as possible along the entire yield curve so the impact is less visible than something like dumping everything on new homeowners.

                      I can't explain it any better than that. But pricing/demand for that debt along the yield curve has a huge impact on whether spending CAN be financed via deficits - or whether it must be paid for via taxes.

          2. AT   2 months ago

            The concern is that the price of making everything in this country will require depression levels of pain

            What's your point? That we should be spared that? That we shouldn't go through it to learn to revalue what we gain from it?

            The school of hard knocks is a tough taskmaster. I saw this guy today:

            https://x.com/5149jamesli/status/1916677603299414361

            Like, what a wakeup call to that which he's blindly followed for so long. And he had a very difficult, painful lesson to learn there (and I'm not even 100% convinced he learned the correct one).

            Lessons not learned painfully are often the first ones forgotten. America is long overdue for one.

            1. Alberto Balsalm   2 months ago

              I feel sorry for any children you might have. What the fuck can be learned from massive economic collapse? Not to elect another dipshit president? That's all I can come up with

              1. AT   2 months ago

                You didn't answer the question. You just virtue signaled. And, worse, it was a virtue you don't even care about in the first place. Meaning we've got Toxic Empathy going on here.

                Whatever. Let's get back to the point:

                "Depression levels of pain."

                Your terms are accepted.

                Now, where are you going to go with that and why? Or was this just a TDS flareup because of your mindless despising of a dipshit (Language!) president?

              2. TJJ2000   2 months ago

                "Not to elect another dipshit president?"
                Like FDR, Obama, Biden .... who keep selling their 'Guns' can make ?free? sh*t?

                That would definitely be a start.
                However; The left self-projects so much they just keep blame-shifting all their "economic collapses" onto the wrong president.

      2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

        No.

        Would also help stop shit like this.

        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13531297/Boeing-Airbus-planes-constructed-fake-Chinese-titanium-cause-jets-break-apart-mid-air-FAA-fears.html

      3. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        You don't get it. We're better off without cheap Chinese crap. We should be buying expensive American crap. That way consumers are better off because they're able to buy less stuff, and workers are better off because they're working at a comparative disadvantage and creating opportunity cost. See how everyone is better off?

        1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

          So, let me ask you this Sarc, would we be better off buying Chinese stuff where the production takes place over there, without environmental controls, with low wages, that an American might be able to buy while working a McJob; or better off buying American stuff that we haven’t environmental controls on, without higher wages, that an American with that job can buy?

        2. TJJ2000   2 months ago

          What rule in economics says shipping something 1/2 way around the world is inherently cheaper than creating and buying it next door?

          The rule of Gov-Gun THEFT distortion perhaps?
          ZERO-Tax on imports, 85% tax on next-door.

          1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

            What rule in economics says shipping something 1/2 way around the world is inherently cheaper than creating and buying it next door?

            Comparative advantage. I'd ask you to look it up, but you've already declared that your ignorance gives you strength.

            1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

              You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

            2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

              You don't understand the theory at all. Comparative advantage breaks down as soon as you add subsidies or regulatory delta.

              You keep citing a bumper sticker understanding of a theory built on idealistic assumptions.

              You think it simply means cheaper. In your understanding of things, an authoritarian country using slave labor provides an advantage. Cost isn't the only concern of comparative advantage.

            3. TJJ2000   2 months ago

              LMAO.... Is that's what's wrong with your brain? You keep shipping it around the world and back to yourself in order to get it cheaper?

              1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

                If it was cheaper to produce here, greedy businessmen would be investing in doing it here.

                What we produce is services. A good 80% of our economy is services.

                Here's a question. I want you to think about it. Don't react. Think.

                Do services have value?

                1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

                  Tax-Cuts and De-Regulation
                  ........ ARE ALL ABOUT "If it was cheaper to produce here".

                  Yes; Service has value but that value is volatile (non-asset) value. Service by itself without product is useless. Even psychologists require a human subject (physical asset) to service.

                  Your own mental handicap is your constant insistence that nothing can relate to anything else. You spout the line of BS all over the place.
                  - Tariffs can't be this and that. It has to be this or that.
                  - A budget can't be a trade deficit and a gov debt. It has to be trade deficit or gov debt.

                  Your never going to figure anything out when you can't figure out why stepping on a hoe 'relates' to you getting smacked in the head.

          2. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

            Slave labor helps. Democrats love slavery, so they are stalwart defenders of the CCP.

            1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

              ?FREE? ponies everywhere!!!

          3. Nelson   2 months ago

            “ What rule in economics says shipping something 1/2 way around the world is inherently cheaper than creating and buying it next door?”

            It’s called “landed cost”. Google it.

            You compare landed cost with domestic production cost and pick the lower number. US production is invariably higher. Labor costs here are astronomical.

            1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

              1. US production is invariably higher.
              2. Labor costs here are astronomical.

              BOTH Gov-Gun induced problem spots.

              Democrats have regulated and taxed domestic business right out the door and still managed to run a staggering debt.

              Trump is De-Regulating, Cutting domestic taxes and paying for the debt by balancing taxes on 'importers' and 'domestic'.

              You address the issue well.

              You just have a problem addressing it as the issue being addressed but instead accept its "just the way it is" which does nothing to correct it.

      4. AT   2 months ago

        No. Why, are you concerned? If so, why?

  4. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

    How reliance on foreign manufacturers did cause shortages on store shelves during covid.

    1. Truthteller1   2 months ago

      Yeah but tarrifs and MAGA and stuff. Mommy!!

  5. Rick James   2 months ago

    Wait... what's causing the shortages now?!! Whole sections of my grocery store looks like the picture above and have since 2020.

    1. Doug Heffernan   2 months ago

      The photo is of empty bread shelves at a Kroger owned store.

      We'll probably be okay with bread availability. It's still mostly made in the US of US produced base ingredients. Although, in the southwest US it is not uncommon for bread and cereal products (that are made in the US in the rest of the country) to be made in Mexico. It is just too tough for US bread brands not to take advantage of Mexican labor when it is so close to the southwest states.

      1. Rick James   2 months ago

        The photo is a stock photo and largely irrelevant to my question. My question is, my store shelves have been wracked with shortages for coming up on 5 years now. It's such a normal state of affairs, I almost don't even notice it. Various staples and goods are often sparsely stocked or not stocked at all (from time to time). Various sections of shelves have products spaced out to make the shelves look not so empty-- much like a Soviet shopping experience in the 1980s.

        It's not all products, but certain products seem to suffer more than others-- very hit and miss. Plus, I'm in the IT business, and to this day, post COVID, various electronics still have long order lead times or are still unavailable, forcing us to look to alternatives.

        Be cautious about allowing abnormal things to become 'normal' through desensitization.

        1. Doug Heffernan   2 months ago

          Do you mean grocery items? I've seen sparsely stocked shelves for eggs, but supermarkets and big box stores near me have been thoroughly stocked for at least a few years now.

          I have seen entire the entire inventory of various chinese sellers of electronics on amazon marketplace be completely deleted (all product pages gone) in just that past couple of weeks. Before that there was plenty of stuff.

          However it is in some locale or product segment now, it is likely to get worse soon unless trump flips fast.

        2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

          I've only seen empty shelves at places like Target. Grocery stores here have everything stocked.

        3. Rockstevo   2 months ago

          Two words, curbside pickup. I had assumed when this started up they would be pulling items off the shelves in the warehouse area in back…boy was I wrong. They are pulling the items off the same shelves we all shop from. So if you don’t get there first thing in the morning all the items have been pulled and the shelves are bare.

      2. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

        Spokane has tons of bread on hand. We also have several large bakeries locally. But according to the JeffSarc plan, all those jobs must go away to get cheap bread from China.

  6. Z Crazy   2 months ago

    China's biggest export to date was covid.

    1. Rick James   2 months ago

      And Trump is trying to raise the cost!

  7. Gearpin   2 months ago

    Wake me please Eric when you change the word in the headline from "could" to "have". In the meantime I'll be over here NOT living in constant fear.

    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      You'll be woken by the screams from Boehm finally having a prediction hit.

    2. Rick James   2 months ago

      A more honest headline would be "existing shortages could get worse".

      1. BYODB   2 months ago

        Yeah, if COVID should have taught people one thing it's that relying on international trade to the point where your own manufacturing cannot support your own population is unwise.

        Just like after Carters gas shortages people realized that maybe producing our own gas made sense.

        Of course, neither of those lessons actually stuck.

  8. Dillinger   2 months ago

    do you ever take Sikha out to lunch and discuss when your graft is boring but somehow you still get paid?

  9. sarcasmic   2 months ago

    When Democrats raise taxes on businesses, Republicans understand that the costs get passed to the consumers in the form of higher prices or shortages.

    When Trump raises taxes on businesses, Republicans attack anyone who says the costs will get passed to the consumers in the form of higher prices or shortages.

    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      Do you think it is a 1:1 cost like Eric? Can you show us in the data?

      Why did you not complain about the 5T in regulations under Biden? Those are much higher than the proposed tariffs.

      1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

        Only Trump tariffs have any effect on anything.

    2. TJJ2000   2 months ago

      Trump didn't "raises taxes on businesses"
      HELLO. Trumps Tax-Cuts and Jobs Act ring a bill.

      1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        We've been here before. You daft?

        Tariffs are import taxes paid by importers.

        Importers are American businesses.

        Thus tariffs are taxes paid by American businesses.

        And like all taxes on businesses, we consumers pay them.

        Hello?

        1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

          Attacking your own deceitful imagination again I see.
          Excuse me.... DOMESTIC businesses NOT foreign 'imports'.
          because ............. You can't cut taxes below ZERO.

  10. I, Woodchipper   2 months ago

    in this case, these tariffs are probably hurting china more than they are hurting US consumers. I expect china to fold soon and negotiate for reciprocal tariffs of 0%

    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      They've been meeting at treasury already. But China painted themselves into a hole by declaring they'd never negotiate to their citizens. This despite many warehouses and shein production centers already shutting down.

      1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

        China doesn’t have much choice. Their economy is in the shitter currently and the only thing propping them up are exports. And there is absolutely no way they can come close to replacing our market in the maybe six months they have left before things get really bad for them, and Xi is likely on the chopping block if that happens.

        Maybe literally.

        1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

          They are also now not working with the other south eastern Asian countries, isolating themselves even more since those countries are working with the US.

    2. sarcasmic   2 months ago

      China has the whole rest of the world to sell stuff to. We can only buy Chinese stuff from China.

      1. I, Woodchipper   2 months ago

        Yes, there are other consumers on this planet and they buy stuff. I'm glad you figured that out.

        Now do the math on who is buying the chinese goods that are produced.

        1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

          They are actively positioning themselves to not need us. They're diversifying their trading partners, moving into Southeast Asia, South America, and even Africa, in an effort to survive economically if trade between our two countries were to cease. Whereas all our government is doing is making stuff more expensive for us. If trade was cut off, they would weather it better than us. And they know it.

          1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

            Sarc, can they buy enough to make up for what we’re not buying? We already know the rest of the West buys from China, as does Russia and Latin America. Who else is going to pick up that slack, that production, Sarc?

          2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

            That's why all the other southern Asian countries are making deals with the US??

            Do you ever not speak from ignorance?

            1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

              Do you ever not speak from ignorance?

              He wouldn’t be Sarcasmic if he didn’t speak from ignorance.

      2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

        What is Chinese stuff?

      3. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

        No, you dumb bitch, they can’t replace our market in the near future. It will take years, if ever.

        So just shut up.

    3. Alberto Balsalm   2 months ago

      I expect china to fold soon and negotiate for reciprocal tariffs of 0%

      That would be great but is that what Trump really wants? He has said that the only way to get 0% tarrifs is to manufacture your product in the USA. The only way to do that is to maintain tariffs on China. It's a catch 22 that gullible fools believe.

      1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        Trump has stated three mutually exclusive goals for tariffs. First goal is zero tariffs. Second goal is using tariffs for revenue. Third goal is using tariffs for protectionism. Each one of those negates the other two. Yet his defenders feel he can to all three at the same time.

        1. Alberto Balsalm   2 months ago

          Indeed. As his lack of vision or any meaningful negotiation becomes reality it could shock the market further. I don't think he will ever make any type of deal with China. I hope I'm wrong.

          1. I, Woodchipper   2 months ago

            There will be a deal. May not be 0% reciprocal but there will be a deal. Nothing lasts forever and certainly not tariffs.

            1. Nelson   2 months ago

              In order to reshore production back to America, the tariffs would have to last forever. As soon as they disappeared, production would move offshore again.

          2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

            I hope you sold everything. Or did you buy the dip despite believing the economy is crashing? You keep making claims that are in opposition. Lol.

            1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

              It’s a primary democrat tactic called ‘lying’.

        2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

          No it doesn't. Look at the 50s optimal tariff theory. Proven by quite a few economists and even in economics books.

          1. Nelson   2 months ago

            Again, your economic ignorance rears its all-too-commonly-seen head.

            https://chicagopolicyreview.org/2015/01/15/rethinking-the-optimal-tariff-theory/

            “ The optimal tariff theory argues that a country that is a large importer of a particular commodity can shift the economic burden of an import tariff from domestic consumers to foreign suppliers if the country has monopsony power in the market”

            The important parts are “particular commodity (which commodity are you talking about?) and monopsony (a market situation in which the product or service of several sellers is sought by only one buyer).

            There is no commercial product or service that is only sought by the US. So your obscure theory applies to exactly zero products that the US imports.

            Unless you would like to tell everyone which product only the US imports that is produced by multiple sellers?

            You keep switching arguments, but you don’t understand any of them so you are always wrong.

            1. Alberto Balsalm   2 months ago

              Additionally, in optimal tariff theory, the concept is to use tariffs to lower demand forcing the price of imported goods lower. Goods from China are already priced low. Jesse is an idiot.

            2. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

              No fag, that would be you. So just stop.

      2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

        No he didn't alberto. Provide the quote.

        1. Alberto Balsalm   2 months ago

          Since you're either too stupid to use google yourself or you didn't watch the opening salvo of the trade war, from 'Liberation Day' the musical :

          To any company that objects to our common sense reciprocal tariffs. Again, reciprocal back and forth, back and forth. And we were—I call this kind reciprocal. This is not full reciprocal. This is kind reciprocal. But what we do is we cut it in half.

          We charge them. My answer is very simple. If they complain, if you want your tariff rate to be zero, then you build your product right here in America because there is no tariff if you build your plant, your product in America. And we’ve seen companies coming in like we’ve never seen before.

          Likewise, to all of the foreign presidents, prime ministers, kings, queens, ambassadors, and everyone else who will soon be calling to ask for exemptions from these tariffs.

          I say, terminate your own tariffs, drop your barriers, don’t manipulate your currencies. They manipulate their currencies like nobody can even believe, which is a bad, bad thing and very devastating to us, and start buying tens of billions of dollars of American goods.

    4. charliehall   2 months ago

      Trump slapped tariffs on Singapore, which doesn't have tariffs on, well, anyone or anything.

      He also slapped tariffs on Israel right after Netanyahu kowtowed and ended tariffs on all imports from the US to Israel.

      The world is learning that there is no point in trying to appease Trump; he will just demand more.

      1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        Trump's "reciprocal tariffs" were based upon trade deficits, not tariffs on American goods.

  11. Truthteller1   2 months ago

    I don't really care Margaret.

  12. Truthteller1   2 months ago

    Gee wonder if the shortages and price gouging still being experienced ftom the "pandemic" has any ties to China? What to do?

    1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

      Anyone who uses the term "price gouging" has revealed themselves to be someone who knows absolutely nothing about economics.

      1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

        Democrats and leftists over and over and over again ..... "price gouging".

        1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

          I don't use the term except to show that the person using it is economically ignorant like you.

          1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

            You are hardly one to talk about anyone not understanding a term, dipshit.

            1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

              It’s hilarious because he’s so fucking drunk and stupid. He’s probably what Otis Campbell would have been like if he were a retarded communist.

          2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

            You sure repeat it. All the time in opposition to tariffs.

          3. TJJ2000   2 months ago

            'You' are pretty ignorant alright.
            And you have used the term a lot as JesseAz points out.

            You are just like any other con-artist criminal. One in a half ways to sidetrack, shift blame, lie, distort and play dumb about having to earn anything.

            1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

              Learn some basic economics. Please. Find some source you trust and ask them. Learn something. Please.

              Please.

              1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

                It might help if you educated yourself beyond bumper stickers.

      2. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

        Your entire defense against tariffs is price gouging... you claim companies will all raise prices, raise all costs, and set all goods to prices of countries under tariffs.

  13. XM   2 months ago

    If you can’t sell stuff to the United States, your economy is toast. And as much as reason would like to make this about Trump, the prospect of chinese cheap imports has been concern for other countries. Canada put restrictions on $20,000 chineses evs as it would have decimated their auto industry.

    We’re talking about the 1% here. Eventually they’ll just move all their production to Vietnam or Mexico where tariffs are lower or will have reached some deal with Trump. If apple wanted to build iPhones in Korea or Japan, their governments will give them all sorts of sweetheart deals. China is of no value for them if they can’t offer low cost of business.

  14. MollyGodiva   2 months ago

    Live webcams confirm that Port of Seattle is empty and Port of LA is almost empty. This is real.

    1. InsaneTrollLogic (Did the penguin tell you to do this?)   2 months ago

      Cite?

    2. Doug Heffernan   2 months ago

      The ports were teeming with activity during the past few months, so we should have enough chinese junk to hold us over for the rest of spring at least. If inventory dries up before trump caves, it will be bad for everybody. But looking at it from a positive angle, it might be nice to stop packing my house with the latest chinese gadgets and other consumer goods. All of that stuff ends up in the landfill before very long anyway.

      1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

        China has to blink before we do.

    3. jabbermule   2 months ago

      Oh NO...just where is everybody supposed to buy their plastic crap? And how are we going to survive with the subsequent reduction of greenhouse gases because diesel cargo ships won't be storming across the Pacific nearly as much? And what about the reduction in worldwide carbon emissions resulting from the decline in Chinese manufacturing (just in case you weren't aware, China has little-to-no environmental regulations).

    4. TJJ2000   2 months ago

      And the freeways are loaded with shipping trucks?
      And the USA is producing with lots of jobs and wealth?

      OMG!!! Heaven-forbid it's not just a useless dependant baby siphoning off of china-mommies tit!!! /s

  15. Incunabulum   2 months ago

    So . . . you're saying that this high level of dependence on China for basics is a national security vulnerability?

    Cool, let's fix that by becoming less dependent on China.

  16. Incunabulum   2 months ago

    Also, why is it cool that other countries are now also putting up trade barriers to China - to protect their domestic industries - to prevent the Chinese from selling in their countries in response to not being able to sell in the US any more?

  17. Vesicant   2 months ago

    Now do "How a meteorite hitting Earth could cause shortages in American stores," or "How all ships at sea simultaneously sinking could cause shortages in American stores," or "How sharknados hitting every distribution hub in the U.S. could cause shortages in American stores," or "How illegal aliens getting all stabby-stabby in American stores could cause shortages of shoppers."

    1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

      KMW probably likes all your ideas, except the last one.

      Articles like……

      Is Trump’s Israel policy going to result in a giant meteor hitting earth?

      Could Trump tariffs cause large numbers of shipping vessels to sink around the globe?

      Trump is bringing Sharknados to American shipping points.

  18. jabbermule   2 months ago

    "How Tariffs Could Cause Shortages in American Stores"

    Oh no, we might have to start manufacturing again. This could mean the following terrible things:

    1) More jobs for American citizens. Just awful.
    2) A reduction in global carbon emissions because of fewer diesel ships storming across the Pacific to deliver plastic crap and a huge reduction in carbon emissions in China because we actually have environmental regulations here (hint: China doesn't). Of course, leftists don't seem to care about a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gases anymore, based on their lunatic attacks on Musk, Tesla dealerships and Tesla owners.
    3) A handful of Wal-Mart Super Centers might have to temporarily close down in Arkansas and Texas until more American-made goods hit the shelves. Where are they going to buy their plastic crap in the meantime?

    1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

      1) Not going to happen. It takes an average of five years to build a factory. By then Democrats will hold Congress and the White House, and every executive order from Trump will have been rescinded. So no one in their right mind is going to build a factory here.

      2) Possible but meaningless.

      3) See 1.

      1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

        Oh. So they'd just give up 4 years of building?

        You don't realize your own comment explains the risk of offshoring manufacturing, especially of critical components right?

        1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

          Comstructikn jobs are pretty good. And there are plenty of disused factories around the country (thanks to retards like JeffSarc) that could be reopened within months.

      2. jabbermule   2 months ago

        You actually sound like you want the United States to fail. Typical leftist.

        And by the way, you're wrong. This is how long it takes to build a manufacturing facility:
        Small to Medium-Sized Factories: 1-2 years
        Large, Complex Factories: 2-4 years
        Semiconductor Plants: 3-4 years

        1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

          You actually sound like you want the United States to fail.

          Quite the opposite. I support free trade, even if it is unilateral, because it is the best means of wealth creation. That goes all the way back to 1776 when Adam Smith wrote "Wealth of Nations" and basically created the dismal science. If we're good at making A, and another country is better at making B, then we're both better off if we stick to what we're good at and trade. If we're good at making A, and another country is better at making B, using tariffs to prop up people who are shit at making B means they're not making A. As a result we're all worse off. Econ 101.

          Typical leftist.

          Leftists hate free trade. It's one of the many things they have in common with Trump and the people who reflexively defend him.

          And by the way, you're wrong.

          Even if I am wrong about how long it takes to build a factory, it doesn't matter. Anyone who builds a factory under the assumption that they'll be protected by Trump's tariffs beyond 2028 is a fool. Shit, they'd be a fool if they thought he'd be consistent within his term. And the people who make those decisions are not fools. So you're not seeing any new factories. Unless they're subsidized. I could see Trump doing that, and his defenders defending it.

          1. jabbermule   2 months ago

            There is literally no such thing as unilateral free trade. Either your trading partner is operating under the same guidelines and principles as you, or they're not. If we're the only country engaging in "free trade" and everyone else isn't, that's not really free trade, is it?

            Leftist globalists are in favor of free trade for everyone except the United States, where they prefer to see us get ass raped while every other country prospers, including China. And there isn't a single leftist on the planet that has anything in common with the Trump administration, not even leftist populists. Trump is a conservative populist who believes in the sovereignty of the United States, protecting our borders, bringing manufacturing back home, and doing anything to avoid spending blood and treasure on useless wars that do nothing more than drain our treasury and fuck the American taxpayer.

            And yes, you are dead wrong about how long it takes to build a manufacturing facility, and I know this from personal experience having worked for two natural foods startups. In both cases, we were up and running within 6 months and started distributing our products either regionally or nationally immediately afterwards.

            1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

              He absolutely wants America to fail. Especially American business. He wants leftist hegemony, and cheap crap from China. He figures that’s all he needs, along with his democrat provided welfare check.

              As Sarc is a welfare queen.

              1. jabbermule   2 months ago

                100%

      3. AT   2 months ago

        By then Democrats will hold Congress and the White House

        Hahahaha, that's adorable.

  19. Tim V   2 months ago

    I was for disrupting the illegal alien supply chain. Not so much other supply chains.

    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      Was there a disruption during and after covid? Because it already happened due to globalism.

    2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      Okay, but modern business is interlocking directorates, multinational companies to shield income, and supply chains that know not the behind and forward to the parth they play.
      There is no pure legal supply chain.

  20. sarcasmic   2 months ago

    2022: BIDENFLATION IS KILLING AMERICA!!!!

    2025: Higher prices are patriotic!!!!

    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      Reminder. Sarc and shrike ignored or defended bidenflation calling the economy great.

      1. Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze   2 months ago

        He ignores the fact that prices on critical items are dropping.

    2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      you actually make the opposite point !!!!
      NOT all prices are higher, and Bidenfaltion destroyed the most necessary and basic goods

      study by 3 Ph.D. economists at the San Francisco Fed has found that “price markups for goods and services” — aka, price gouging — has “not been a main driver” of recent inflation. Instead, the root causes are “large” federal government “fiscal transfers and increased unemployment benefits” (aka, social spending) and Federal Reserve policies like lowering “the federal funds rate target to essentially zero.”

      The Fed study confirms that the real cause of inflation is the big government spending agenda that Warren, Biden, & Co. supported and enacted.
      =======================
      So will you concede or be a mindless oaf like your hero Biden

  21. Gaear Grimsrud   2 months ago

    Yeah it seems like only 5 years ago that the Covidians lead by... China shut down the world economy. We didn't get three articles a day at Reason complaining about that. In fact we got deep dive defenses of private companies censoring any naysayers and demands for more testing. I worked through the entire horror show in the supply chain with a tiny flatbed trucking business. After a few weeks we had one of our best years ever. Trump is making new trade deals every day. He has news conferences pretty much every day from the oval office. Inflation is below predictions as is unemployment. The markets have recovered. Meanwhile Trump is proposing to pivot from an unsustainable income tax to a consumption tax via tariffs. It's always been a libertarian goal. Yes. It may fail and will absolutely cause disruptions. But Reason these days doesn't look very libertarian on the subject. It looks like it's desperately trying to defend an economic system that has already failed.

    1. AT   2 months ago

      It looks like it's desperately trying to defend a political party and social ideology that has already failed.

  22. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

    Okay, but who didn't know this already.
    It’s Getting WORSE! Empty Containers Pile Up 7 Layers in China’s Ports, 30% of U.S. Goods Canceled

    THAT IS WHAT TARIFF MEANS : Some goods are not coming here.

  23. car-keynes   2 months ago

    Clearly the most proper place of tariffs would be to fund certain types of experts in the goods being traded so that real people can know more about those than they know about what they resemble to an unpaid pedophilic cog.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

The Coming Techlash Could Kill AI Innovation Before It Helps Anyone

Kevin Frazier | 6.29.2025 7:00 AM

Social Security and Medicare Are Racing Toward Drastic Cuts—Yet Lawmakers Refuse To Act

Veronique de Rugy | 6.29.2025 6:30 AM

Comic: Henry Hazlitt in One Lesson

Peter Bagge | From the July 2025 issue

She Got a Permit for Her Chickens. Now the City Is Fining Her $80,000.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 6.28.2025 6:30 AM

'We Can't Let These Sheep Go'

Fiona Harrigan | From the July 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!