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.

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."
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.
Please
to post comments
High prices and shortages are patriotic you leftist cunt. TRUMP 2028!
WE MUST HAVE MOAR CHEAP JUNK!
That we have no means to pay for.
Has this happened?
>>TRUMP 2028!
which one are you backing there are several
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?
Red Caesar skipped right over Julius, Augustus and Tiberius and went straight to Caligula.
you made me scan a Guardian piece to see if you understood me?
You can always safely assume I do not understand you...or anyone...or anything.
fair enough. you were more fun once lol.
I'm missing something here. Maybe I missed a joke or something?
the original intendee above missed the joke. good Liz, too, last Friday.
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?
They're moving goods through other countries. The logistics of that take time.
Well I've already hoarded entire container ships full of toilet paper. Once the shortages hit, the TP/gold ratio will skyrocket.
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?
The massive reduction on imports from China don't concern you? Who is going to produce those goods?
The US will have to learn to EARN / create what they want for once.
As-if that's some kind of non-childish demand.
Economic concepts like comparative advantage and opportunity cost are leftist.
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.
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.
Says the guy who has never complained about regulatory costs or advantages and won't even admit to slave labor in China.
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.
At what price did you say the US Debt was?
Price is price. Shoveling it off on a CC doesn't make it disappear.
Government debt and trade deficits have no relationship to each other at all.
Cite?
They are directly related for the reserve currency.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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?
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.
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.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
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.
Slave labor helps. Democrats love slavery, so they are stalwart defenders of the CCP.
How reliance on foreign manufacturers did cause shortages on store shelves during covid.
Yeah but tarrifs and MAGA and stuff. Mommy!!
Wait... what's causing the shortages now?!! Whole sections of my grocery store looks like the picture above and have since 2020.
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.
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.
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.
I've only seen empty shelves at places like Target. Grocery stores here have everything stocked.
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.
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.
China's biggest export to date was covid.
And Trump is trying to raise the cost!
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.
You'll be woken by the screams from Boehm finally having a prediction hit.
A more honest headline would be "existing shortages could get worse".
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.
do you ever take Sikha out to lunch and discuss when your graft is boring but somehow you still get paid?
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.
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.
Only Trump tariffs have any effect on anything.
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%
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.
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.
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.
China has the whole rest of the world to sell stuff to. We can only buy Chinese stuff from China.
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.
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.
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?
That's why all the other southern Asian countries are making deals with the US??
Do you ever not speak from ignorance?
Do you ever not speak from ignorance?
He wouldn’t be Sarcasmic if he didn’t speak from ignorance.
What is Chinese stuff?
No, you dumb bitch, they can’t replace our market in the near future. It will take years, if ever.
So just shut up.
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.
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.
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.
There will be a deal. May not be 0% reciprocal but there will be a deal. Nothing lasts forever and certainly not tariffs.
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.
No it doesn't. Look at the 50s optimal tariff theory. Proven by quite a few economists and even in economics books.
No he didn't alberto. Provide the quote.
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.
Trump's "reciprocal tariffs" were based upon trade deficits, not tariffs on American goods.
I don't really care Margaret.
Gee wonder if the shortages and price gouging still being experienced ftom the "pandemic" has any ties to China? What to do?
Anyone who uses the term "price gouging" has revealed themselves to be someone who knows absolutely nothing about economics.
Democrats and leftists over and over and over again ..... "price gouging".
I don't use the term except to show that the person using it is economically ignorant like you.
You are hardly one to talk about anyone not understanding a term, dipshit.
You sure repeat it. All the time in opposition to tariffs.
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.
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.
Live webcams confirm that Port of Seattle is empty and Port of LA is almost empty. This is real.
Cite?
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.
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).
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.
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?
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."
"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) 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.
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?
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
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.
I was for disrupting the illegal alien supply chain. Not so much other supply chains.
Was there a disruption during and after covid? Because it already happened due to globalism.
2022: BIDENFLATION IS KILLING AMERICA!!!!
2025: Higher prices are patriotic!!!!
Reminder. Sarc and shrike ignored or defended bidenflation calling the economy great.
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.