More tariffs questions

[Bad Santa]

Re: Your Canada neighbors.
I wonder if the border crossing can tell the difference between a "new" drone and one that's a little dirty.
*wink wink*

 

[msinger]

I'm a US citizen. The imposition of across-the-board tariffs on all imports from almost every nation on Earth, including our two neighbors and trade partners, seems senseless. I'm certainly willing to surrender that view if provided with facts and explanations that don't defy simple reason while hiding the cost of the tariffs.

As another US citizen, I agree with all of that.

I think what we're missing is the actual strategy that will go along with any tariffs that are here to stay long-term. If history has taught us anything, it's quite obvious that tariffs aren't imposed by themselves. Because on their own, they'd do nothing but harm nearly everyone involved.

Meanwhile, many people from other countries (lots of interest here) and other US citizens are dead focused on just making prices low for themselves. While I don't understand the plan since it has never been shared, I'm willing to let things play out until the point where all of the details are revealed to the public and they truly don't make sense. And by that revealing, I’m not talking about whatever foreign tariff experts assume or what the mainstream media pushes daily.

I was seriously considering buying a Mavic 4 Pro before the president made it clear that it was going to cost me almost 2.5 times what DJI is willing to sell it for

Same! But we still haven't seen any official pricing or a confirmed release date. DJI already pushed back the release date according to the previous leaks, so maybe they are holding off until things are "back to normal".

Tariffs of 145% (or more) aren't something the average US citizen can realistically absorb on drones (or any products) coming from China. So the idea that these tariffs will be imposed and everything will simply go on as usual doesn't seem like a possible outcome. There has to be more going on behind the scenes. And no, I'm not referring to things like waiting around for a new DJI competitor to arrive and take over in five years (an odd, but popular storyline these days).

 

[Mrktn]

As another US citizen, I agree with all of that.

I think what we're missing is the actual strategy that will go along with any tariffs that are here to stay long-term. If history has taught us anything, it's quite obvious that tariffs aren't imposed by themselves. Because on their own, they'd do nothing but harm nearly everyone involved.

Meanwhile, many people from other countries (lots of interest here) and other US citizens are dead focused on just making prices low for themselves. While I don't understand the plan since it has never been shared, I'm willing to let things play out until the point where all of the details are revealed to the public and they truly don't make sense. And by that revealing, I’m not talking about whatever foreign tariff experts assume or what the mainstream media pushes daily.



Same! But we still haven't seen any official pricing or a confirmed release date. DJI already pushed back the release date according to the previous leaks, so maybe they are holding off until things are "back to normal".

Tariffs of 145% (or more) aren't something the average US citizen can realistically absorb on drones (or any products) coming from China. So the idea that these tariffs will be imposed and everything will simply go on as usual doesn't seem like a possible outcome. There has to be more going on behind the scenes. And no, I'm not referring to things like waiting around for a new DJI competitor to arrive and take over in five years (an odd, but popular storyline these days).

Have to say this is well put. The next few days and weeks will be critical. This of course doesn’t just affect drones..

I wonder if @vicmoss has had any form of communication back from President Trump, about his argument on imposing tariffs on drones to the USA.

 

[Zbip57]

My point was that your usual schtick is to claim all tariffs (except Canada’s tariffs) hurt everyone.

Tariffs certainly do hurt everyone, including Canada's tariffs.

My point was that targeted tariffs, aimed specifically at certain commodities, are useful to protect a domestic industry. For example steel production. Canada and the USA both produce steel. If China starts dumping cheap steel into your country, it risks collapsing your own steel industry if everyone instead starts buying the cheaper Chinese steel.

But it still hurts, because your consumers are denied the opportunity to purchase a less expensive product, forced instead to continue buying your own more expensive steel. Ideally, your own domestic producers should find a way to produce similarly less expensive steel. But it generally comes down to the fact that North American workers expect to earn a higher wage than Chinese workers.

Without tariffs to discourage purchasing the cheaper Chinese steel, your domestic steel production will collapse, forcing many into unemployment which has further detrimental effects on your country's economy when those unemployed stop paying taxes. So tariffs used to artificially protect an existing industry might be a better solution than allowing your economy to suffer, even if it means you're paying more for that steel than you should be.

The USA imposed 25% tariffs, contrary to the existing USMCA Free Trade Agreement, on Canadian imports based on an entirely invented "emergency", a presumed threat to the USA's National Security, of Canada supposedly flooding your country with fentanyl and illegal immigrants (emptying our prisons and insane asylums...). Canada retaliated by imposing targeted tariffs of our own. Both countries are suffering as a result.

Just because you can't explain another country's reasoning, or it doesn't personally make sense to you, doesn't mean it's senseless.

Tariffs make sense in limited cases. A blanket 10% tariff imposed by the USA on EVERY country in the world, including an island inhabited only by penguins, makes ZERO sense. Additional tariffs calculated solely on the balance of US trade deficit/surplus makes ZERO sense. Imposing such tariffs on countries with which the USA actually enjoys a trade surplus makes ZERO sense. Announcing those tariffs as "Liberation Day", driving the stock markets into the toilet, only to announce the next day the removal or delay of some of those tariffs makes ZERO sense (unless that market manipulation was intentional designed to make your billionaire friends even richer). Claiming the tariffs are only a negotiating tool, part of the "Art of the Deal", to force countries to come begging to the US, "200 deals" so far, makes ZERO sense when the White House won't name a single country that has accepted to make such a deal.

But most of all, it makes absolutely ZERO sense at all that the White House is telling Amazon that, "showing consumers how much tariffs raised prices on certain goods 'is a hostile and political act',.

 

[mavic3usa]

Tariffs certainly do hurt everyone, including Canada's tariffs.

I noticed that you have mostly avoided talking about reciprocal tariffs which is different than ordinary tariffs that you constantly describe.

 

[Zbip57]

I think what we're missing is the actual strategy [...]
I don't understand the plan since it has never been shared, [...]
I'm willing to let things play out until the point where all of the details are revealed to the public [...]

The White House said, showing consumers how much tariffs raised prices on certain goods "is a hostile and political act".

Yet you think the details will ever be revealed to the public?

And by that revealing, I’m not talking about whatever foreign tariff experts assume[...]
There has to be more going on behind the scenes.

I hope you don't think that I'm pretending to be a "foreign tariff expert". I'm certainly no such thing. But anyone with any brains at all can look up for themselves on Google, "How do tariffs work?" It's quite obvious that it isn't China who pays that %145 tariff.

The reason the stock markets are tanking and your economy is crashing is because NOBODY understands the actual strategy, the plan, the details, of whatever more is going on behind the scenes, because none of it makes any sense.

 

[Zbip57]

I noticed that you have mostly avoided talking about reciprocal tariffs which is different than ordinary tariffs that you constantly describe.

Google, "How do reciprocal tariffs work?"

Start with the AI Overview right at the top, click the "show more" and you'll see:

"Impact:
These tariffs can lead to increased costs for consumers, potentially putting jobs at risk and impacting the competitiveness of North American businesses."

 

[mavic3usa]

Google, "How do reciprocal tariffs work?"

Start with the AI Overview right at the top, click the "show more" and you'll see:

"Impact:
These tariffs can lead to increased costs for consumers, potentially putting jobs at risk and impacting the competitiveness of North American businesses."

What's the difference between tariffs and reciprocal tariffs?

 

[Zbip57]

What's the difference between tariffs and reciprocal tariffs?

Like I said, I'm definitely not a "foreign tariff expert". Perhaps some of your own domestic experts could chime in here.

I just ask Google, "What's the difference between tariffs and reciprocal tariffs?"

More importantly, what's the difference (if any) between reciprocal tariffs vs retaliatory tariffs?

The USA imposed a 25% tariff on everything coming from Canada, "we don't need their lumber, we don't need their cars, we don't need their oil..."

In retaliation, Canada imposed tariffs on certain targeted items that we import from the USA.

It hurts both countries because it makes those imports more expensive for us to purchase, and it hurts the other country when they can no longer sell those too expensive products to us.

 

[Max Headroom]

What's the difference between tariffs and reciprocal tariffs?

What is 'Reciprocal Tariff'​

Reciprocal Tariff: Definition​

A reciprocal tariff is a tax or trade restriction that one country places on another in response to similar actions taken by that country. The idea behind reciprocal tariffs is to create balance in trade between nations. If one country raises tariffs on goods from another, the affected country might respond by imposing its own tariffs on imports from the first country. This response is meant to protect local businesses, preserve jobs, and fix trade imbalances.

Reciprocal tariffs can lead to a back-and-forth increase in trade barriers, potentially resulting in a trade war that negatively impacts both economies. Such situations can disrupt supply chains, raise prices for consumers, and slow down economic growth. It is important for countries to communicate openly and work together to settle trade issues instead of turning to reciprocal tariffs.
More here - What is Reciprocal Tariff? Definition of Reciprocal Tariff, Reciprocal Tariff Meaning - The Economic Times

 

[hank970]

As another US citizen, I agree with all of that.

I think what we're missing is the actual strategy that will go along with any tariffs that are here to stay long-term. If history has taught us anything, it's quite obvious that tariffs aren't imposed by themselves. Because on their own, they'd do nothing but harm nearly everyone involved.

The strategy is Ready, Fire, Aim, now exemplified by various announcements that we'll be walking back this and that outrageous tariff because our foreign trade partners aren't and won't be buckling in response to what they perceive to be loud bullying. It appears to me that our powers-that-be once again failed to consider the potential ramifications of their sweeping pronouncements. Hence, a new 90-day pause, followed by exemptions for one special interest after another -- most recently relief for domestic automakers who source many components from outside the USA.

I'm not qualified to comment on the veracity of claims about trade inequities but suspect that the so-called rip-offs that prompted and animate this fiasco were exaggerated. It's much easier to make such claims than to substantiate them. That said, if there really are inequities, then a wiser strategy would have been to quietly engage each foreign trade partner in serious discussions about specific concerns on a case-by-case basis before establishing and publicly announcing precisely targeted and calibrated tariffs -- exercises of substance and style. What's apparently lost on this administration is that international trade is a very complex matter, and one size does not fit all, particularly when some of our trade partners control and can withhold strategic materials we desperately need. If you're China, for example, which controls much of the world's supply of rare-earth minerals, and you can buy soybeans from Brazil instead of from farmers in the USA, you're not going to blink. Unlike the USA, which has a notoriously short attention span (two years between congressional elections and only four years between presidential elections), many competing nations take a much longer and nuanced view of their options.