Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Tariffs Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter BubbaOtis
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 121K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
Here's the precise amount of rare earth mineral that China will be willing to export: enough to discourage other countries from opening rare earth mines, but not enough to impede China's technical superiority.

Anyone can figure that out. Even Scott Bessent.
Click to expand...
One person can’t figure it out. Unfortunately he is our king so there isn’t anything we can do until the GOP grows some balls.
 
Analysis shows Trump's tariffs would cost US employers $82.3 billion

www.wral.com

Analysis shows Trump's tariffs would cost US employers $82.3 billion

WASHINGTON (AP) — An analysis finds that a critical group of U.S. employers would face a direct cost of $82.3 billion from President Donald Trump’s current tariff plans, a sum that could be potentially managed through price hikes, layoffs, hiring freezes or lower profit margins.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
 
nycfan said:
IMG_7764.jpeg
IMG_7765.jpeg

[Not clear of anything is signed]
Click to expand...
Vietnam is not a giant market in any event, and the cost of U.S. goods and services may be prohibitive even with no tariffs, but there is room to grow the market in niches where we actually produce items Vietnam imports below cost (or availability) of similar imports from the region:

IMG_7766.jpeg

Meanwhile, even if the USA magically took over the entire Chinese business with Vietnam, the US would still have a trade deficit with Vietnam.


IMG_7767.jpeg

In other words, opening U.S. opportunities in Vietnam could help a limited number of U.S. businesses, but won’t resolve the trade imbalance. Meanwhile, now the U.S. will pay 20% tariffs on imports from Vietnam (and 40% for imports that are being trade washed through Vietnam).

PS — dropping the tariff rate on U.S. imports to zero is virtually meaningless except for a handful of products — the average tariff rate charged by Vietnam on U.S. imports was already only a little over 1%.
 
US runs a pretty big deficit with Vietnam. Slapping a tariff on Vietnam imports is pretty dumb and only passes the buck to the American consumer. Fighting for better access to their market should be the priority.

I always thought Japan was the country that never gets addressed when talking about deficits. They use all sorts of tricks to limit access to their markets: they have staunchly defended their agricultural sector. This is a bilateral negotiation that was overdue. But sure slap tariffs on 170 countries instead.
 
CRHeel94 said:
Fighting for better access to their market should be the priority.
Click to expand...
We already have access to their market. US firms don't want to import into Vietnam.

All the SE Asian countries have high tariff rates, especially on textiles. Those aren't to protect their economies from the US, who isn't a player. It's to protect against other countries.

IIRC -- and there's a real chance that it isn't correct, as the memory is hazy -- in the last round of GATT negotiations, the US delegation didn't even bother participating in the negotiations among less and least developed countries. It simply doesn't matter.
 
I'll preface this by saying I haven't looked at US-Vietnam trade agreements in detail. Broadly speaking, the Asian markets, like any other country, use tariffs to protect certain industries. But the Asians in general are experts in using non tariff barriers to restrict. So even if you have access in theory, in practice it becomes much more difficult.

I'm pretty sure there are US companies that would love to knock out some of those protective tariffs and barriers. Looking at the 2024 US Trade Rep comments on Vietnam there are still concerns about protection in agricultural goods, pharma, banking, telecom and energy among others.
 
Aren't we overthinking this?

2025 Vietnam : 2025 US :: 1770 American colonies : 1770 England.

Trump tariffs on Vietnam :: Townshend Acts
 
CRHeel94 said:
I'll preface this by saying I haven't looked at US-Vietnam trade agreements in detail. Broadly speaking, the Asian markets, like any other country, use tariffs to protect certain industries. But the Asians in general are experts in using non tariff barriers to restrict. So even if you have access in theory, in practice it becomes much more difficult.

I'm pretty sure there are US companies that would love to knock out some of those protective tariffs and barriers. Looking at the 2024 US Trade Rep comments on Vietnam there are still concerns about protection in agricultural goods, pharma, banking, telecom and energy among others.
Click to expand...
I doubt there are US - Vietnam trade agreements. The vast majority of trade relationships are determined by the GATT. CAFTA and NAFTA are exceptions, even in today's world of increasing regional trade pacts.

I also doubt there are significant NTBs. Vietnam has relied heavily on US (and other western) capital, to a much greater extent than Japan or China ever did. While NTBs are not exactly related, I would imagine that the foreign capital would frown on NTBs because they potentially inhibit national competitiveness and foreign capital would be looking for fewer NTBs. And Vietnam is a price taker in foreign capital negotiations -- as this "deal" illustrates.

The Asian countries that are "experts in NTBs" are China, Japan and Korea. They are richer and not such small economies to be price-takers. SE Asia generally does not, unless one counts Indonesia. I mean, there are some NTBs but the US has more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top