The seller who imports the product from China (the "importer") is responsible for paying 100% of the tariff.
Already you're mixing things up again.
The importer is
buying the product from China. He's the
buyer, and China is the
seller. The buyer importing the product pays the tariff, not China.
If the importer then chooses to resell the product to someone else, okay, then he becomes the seller and somebody else becomes the consumer who ultimately purchases the product.
Can we at least agree on that? Or are these terms somehow used differently in the USA compared to Canada and the rest of the world?
For example, if I purchase a drone from dji.com and DJI ships it to my home from China, DJI is responsible for covering the full tariff. Whether they choose to pass any of that cost on to me by increasing the product's listed price at dji.com is entirely up to them.
Again, let's be precise here. You could be saying either of two things there.
1) Ordered straight from China to your home:
If you order a $3000 Mavic from DJI.com in China, with it shipped directly to your home, that makes DJI the Chinese exporter and it makes
you the importer.
You are responsible for paying the tariff. Customs will hold the package until
you pay the 145% tariff. Or, if it's being delivered via FedEx/UPS/DHL, they will pay the tariff on your behalf, then hold the package until you refund them that expense
plus whatever additional brokerage fee they charge for handling that process on your behalf. You end up paying the 145% ($4350) tariff fee.
2) Ordered from China, but transferred via a DJI store located in the USA:
You order a $3000 Mavic from DJI.com in China. China ships it to a DJI-America distribution centre. In that case, yes, DJI-America is responsible for paying the entire 145% ($4350) tariff fee for importing the Chinese product into the USA. DJI-America then ships the drone to your door. You already paid your $3000 online to China. How much extra do
YOU think DJI-America will charge you for the delivery?
DJI-America paid a $4350 import tax. They're not going to deliver that drone to you for FREE!
Whether they choose to pass any of that cost on to me by increasing the product's listed price at dji.com is entirely up to them.
Sure. It's entirely up to them. They could choose any of several different options:
- So it's not a shocking surprise for you later on, they could disclose right up front on their Chinese website [as Amazon proposed], that a $3000 Mavic is going to cost you an additional $4350 because of the 145% US import tariff; or
- If it's being imported to you via a DJI-America store, they can surprise you later with an extra $4350 delivery bill before handing over the package at your door; or
- DJI-America can simply "eat" some portion [or even ALL] of that $4350 on every Mavic delivered in the USA. It's up to them to decide how quickly they want to go bankrupt; or
- DJI in China can choose to "eat" that $4350, paying it directly to the US gov't, so you the consumer only need pay the original $3000 with no additional import fees to burden you, because Chinese companies always do business like that out of the goodness of their heart.
If I'm missing any other uniquely American ways of doing business, please let me know.
Once again, you're showing your ignorance for how things work in the US.
You sell your [
really excellent!] Flight Reader program for $79USD. Let's say Canada suddenly imposed a 145% import tariff on any American software products. That would cost me, the importer, and extra $114.55 if I wanted to buy your $79 product.
Would YOU be willing to "eat" that for me? Would you send me $114.55 every time I bought one of your $79 products? Is that really
how things work in the US?
From that same video, here's a comment from someone else stating they are going to absorb 100% of the tariff cost (for other reasons):
View attachment 182245
Oh please!
Where in that comment does it say he's
willing to absorb the tariff cost?!?
He says, "
My customer is locked into a price and I cannot change anything."
He is being
forced to absorb the tariff cost,
unable to pass that cost to the customer because he's
locked into a contracted price.
This idea that sellers (or "importers") aren't willing to absorb any of the tariff cost is totally far-fetched.
It depends entirely on how much of a profit margin the seller is
willing to accept. If he's already making a 100% profit, then absorbing a 10% tariff cost to stay in business might be tolerable.
But if his normal profit is 100%, a 145% tariff is going to kill his business unless he passes that cost on to his customers. If he passes only 45% on to his customers, and "absorbs" the remaining 100% himself, it means he makes ZERO profit and is giving his products away for free.
Right, the seller (or "importer") is always the one who pays 100% of the tariff.
I'm not sure why you feel the need to keep repeating that point. As far as I can tell, no one in this thread is disputing it. Because, well, it's a fact.
Your entire argument centres on what portion of the tariff the American importer is willing to "absorb", versus how much gets passed on to the American consumer. My argument is, in either case it's
Americans who are being forced to pay that 145% tariff fee to your gov't,
not China.
Yet you, and your White House, think that's propaganda?
Now, considering that sellers don't always pass on 100% of the tariff costs, you can probably see why the idea of Amazon or other US retailers listing tariff costs separately is even less straightforward. Unlike sales tax, it's not a simple calculation that can just be plugged into their systems and automatically shown alongside prices.
I'd think retailers could even use that as an advertising incentive! We sometimes see retailers advertising a price-reduced "no tax" day. The consumer benefits from lower costs on that day, but the seller still has to pay the sales tax to the gov't. The are effectively "eating" the cost of the tax themselves to attract more sales.
Amazon makes money by selling large quantities at low profit margins. Small retailers can't compete with that. But because Amazon lives on small margins, there's a finite limit on how much they can afford to "eat". Not even a company as large as Amazon is willing to "absorb" the cost of a 145% tariff.
Amazon just wants to make it perfectly clear that they are not responsible for the sudden price-gouge. If you notice a sudden [
up to] 145% price increase on items imported from China, that's money going straight to your gov't, it's not going to Amazon.