zlacker

> Let’s do the math: Take a kid’s bike that retails at a big box store for $ 150. Let’s assume that bike costs $ 30 to make. The rest of the cost is shipping to the U.S., warehousing, transport to the store, marketing, admin costs, customer service, warranty, retailer profits, etc. Whether the bike is made in China, Vietnam or Cambodia, the new 34-38% tariffs will increase the cost by ‘only’ $ 10-12. (The old tariffs are already part of the pricing.) Add overhead and capital costs on those $ 10-12 (financing and insuring the higher purchase price, etc.). Now the price goes up by $ 15-20, or about 10-13% of the final price of the bike.

That's a great explanation of the direct impact of tarriffs for a business like this.

>>whynot+(OP)
And consumers will pay the $12. It won’t make it viable to make the bike in the US for < $40.

>>whynot+(OP)
It's astonishning that we are discussing a price hike of asian made mass-market products (effectively your entire Amazon or Wal-Mart inventory from floor to ceiling) of 10% or more, and that's "just 10-13%" now? As if that alone wouldn't be felt more than the 2008 financial crisis in the pockets of Americans.

>>whynot+(OP)
This is also assuming no one along the supply chain will take advantage of the situation to put some more money in their pocket above the tariff (be it out of greed or uncertainty)

>>yzydse+v
These blanket tariffs are less about protecting/encouraging domestic manufacturing and more about renegotiating trade. At this current framing ("reciprocal tariffs") there is an implication that they are short term. The negotiations with Canada and Mexico demonstrate a tic-for-tat game theory in effect.

Without introducing the tariffs as a long term position businesses will be less inclined to do the capital expenditure to manufacture in the US, even for businesses within the margin (mostly manufacturing with high energy inputs and low supply chain requirements) where it would be economical.

>>alkona+C5
Or the inflation worries with 8% inflation

>>alkona+C5
The problem is less that we’ll feel a 10% or even 15% price hike on foreign goods, but that we are so reliant on foreign manufacturing to begin with.

>>hx8+QA
Like I hope you’re right, but what are you basing this on?

Just based on the words that Trump actually says and writes, I find it difficult to come to any conclusion other than Trump strongly believes that trade imbalances are unfair, that tariffs will reshore manufacturing, and that reshoring manufacturing will make America “wealthier.”

But if Trump is bluffing, it’s not clear there’s anything these other countries could give that would satisfy Trump. Vietnam could remove all tariffs against the US and in all likelihood not even make a dent in their trade surplus. It’s very hard for a small, developing country like Vietnam to import lots of stuff from a rich, expensive country like the US. Many of the countries whacked with massive tariffs by the administration already have very open trade policies with the US. What is there to negotiate?

>>tourma+fF
Why is that a problem? For some critical goods (Food, Medicines, Defense) it's a security risk to not have a supply. But for flip flops and umbrellas, no country is somehow better off by having thousands of factories, instead of doing what the US does: selling high value goods and services and importing the low value goods.

In fact, it's the opposite. Those industries are much more polluting per dollar GDP created, and that externality is something you are happy to not have on your own soil.

>>hx8+QA
While the framing has been reciprocal tariffs, the WH has published the formula and it’s essentially based on reciprocal trade surpluses, not tariffs. If one country sells more to the US than the US sells back then that’s seen as bad. Even if the other country has no tariff.

>>whynot+(OP)
Note two limitations to the maths (I'll admit that I haven't read the OP in detail).

1. That's assuming that shipping, warehousing, transport, etc. do not rely upon foreign imports, including services. Chances are that more than one link in the supply chain will be hit either by the US tariffs or by the actual reciprocal tariffs from the other end [1].

2. That's also assuming that the tariffs will not have an impact on the sales of the company, which might adapt either by decreasing its margin (to increase sales) or by increasing it (either to try and compensate for lost sales or because it feels like the right time to hike prices).

[1] We shouldn't let ourselves be fooled by the word "reciprocal tariffs" used by Donald Trump. All these numbers are bogus. In January, EU tariffs on US goods were about 2-3%, not 39%, just as US tariffs on most EU goods.