Serious tariff question

[dbjork6317]

Ok setting aside arguments on whether tariffs are good or bad etc, I’m curious what exactly the tariffs on Canada are trying to get accomplished.

The President says that the tariffs are designed to get the border secured and to stop drugs from coming into the country, and if you take that at its face value then maybe tariffs on Mexico make some sense, but I don’t understand the tariffs on Canada.

What specific actions is the President wanting to see from Canada (and Mexico too) that would lead him to determine that the tariffs can be removed?

The President has talked about tariffs as an effective way to get other countries to do something the US wants them to do, but it’s unclear to me what he’s wanting from Canada, so to me these tariffs feel awfully arbitrary and are creating tensions and a trade war with a country that should be our closest ally and it feels like this will only hurt citizens in both countries.

Looking for serious responses here, please and thank you.

 

[other1]

FWIW, trump put 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico and only 10% on those from China. Does this mean we can refer to him as Peking Don from here on out??

 

[dbjork6317]

FWIW, trump put 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico and only 10% on those from China. Does this mean we can refer to him as Peking Don from here on out??

My understanding was the 10% on china was an additional 10% on the already existing tariffs, but I could be wrong.

 

[dpic73]

Ok setting aside arguments on whether tariffs are good or bad etc, I’m curious what exactly the tariffs on Canada are trying to get accomplished.

The President says that the tariffs are designed to get the border secured and to stop drugs from coming into the country, and if you take that at its face value then maybe tariffs on Mexico make some sense, but I don’t understand the tariffs on Canada.

What specific actions is the President wanting to see from Canada (and Mexico too) that would lead him to determine that the tariffs can be removed?

The President has talked about tariffs as an effective way to get other countries to do something the US wants them to do, but it’s unclear to me what he’s wanting from Canada, so to me these tariffs feel awfully arbitrary and are creating tensions and a trade war with a country that should be our closest ally and it feels like this will only hurt citizens in both countries.

Looking for serious responses here, please and thank you.

All the pundits and experts I've heard are totally gobsmacked by the tariffs we're putting on our closest and friendliest ally. There is nothing that makes sense about it but the concensus seems to be that he's angry about them clapping back at his remarks about incorporating them into America. Though taxing our own people is such a weird flex to get revenge for being mocked.

They are now retaliating with their own tariffs and boycotting our products, including targeted boycotts of products from red states only.

One thing it has done is unite the political parties in Canada who have now joined forces to speak as one voice against these unnecessary attempts to harm them.

 

[dpic73]

My understanding was the 10% on china was an additional 10% on the already existing tariffs, but I could be wrong.

That's correct, the 10% is on top of the tariffs already in place.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[dpic73]

View embedded media

This doesn't address his question on why put tariffs on Canada but economists almost universally agree that replacing income taxes with tariffs is impractical.

Kimberly Clausing, economist and Professor of Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law:

"In general, this is a deeply impractical plan," Clausing, who previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the U.S. Department of the Treasury, told Newsweek.

"First, we already have a Customs and Border Protection office...including officials who collect tariffs. Second, it seems like an odd move for an Administration supposedly focused on efficiency (see DOGE) to suggest a redundant government agency as a solution."

Asked whether there was any way the revenue generated from tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, among others, could make up for the elimination of income tax, Clausing said: "Simply put, no. It wouldn't even be close."

A June report for the Peterson Institute of International Economics, co-authored by Clausing, found that the tax base on incomes vastly outweighed the tax base on traded goods, $3.1 trillion compared to over $20 trillion in 2023, respectively.

Considering this, as well as an anticipated reduction in trade as duties come into effect, Clausing said that "even very high tariffs could only replace a minority of the revenue raised by income taxation, and such high tariffs would cripple the economy."

"Abolishing the IRS makes no sense for a modern country that would like to collect some income tax revenue and have a fair and well-functioning tax system to help fund public services," Clausing told Newsweek when asked about the potential elimination of the agency. "The U.S. is a low tax country, collecting much less revenue as a share of GDP than peer nations."

Could Donald Trump replace the IRS with tariffs? Economists weigh in

Experts believe Trump would struggle to replace tax revenue with income from tariffs, as the president has recently suggested.

www.newsweek.com

 

[fatpiggy]

Ok setting aside arguments on whether tariffs are good or bad etc, I’m curious what exactly the tariffs on Canada are trying to get accomplished.

The President says that the tariffs are designed to get the border secured and to stop drugs from coming into the country, and if you take that at its face value then maybe tariffs on Mexico make some sense, but I don’t understand the tariffs on Canada.

What specific actions is the President wanting to see from Canada (and Mexico too) that would lead him to determine that the tariffs can be removed?

The President has talked about tariffs as an effective way to get other countries to do something the US wants them to do, but it’s unclear to me what he’s wanting from Canada, so to me these tariffs feel awfully arbitrary and are creating tensions and a trade war with a country that should be our closest ally and it feels like this will only hurt citizens in both countries.

Looking for serious responses here, please and thank you.

I'll make an attempt.

First, i agree with you. The tariffs, on Canada at least, seem to be arbitrary and unclear. Trump has stated that it is due to the fentanyl and drug crises and that could be partially true. Fentanyl is a major problem in the US and I do commend him for trying to get it under control.

However, One can't help but notice that Trump keeps mentioning Canada being the 51st state. People dismissed him as shit talking, but perhaps he is making his intentions more serious. Perhaps he is using it to drive home the point that the US is being taken advantage of in international trade and that includes Canada.

The ultimate point of the Canada Tariffs, as with all Trump tariffs, is to reclaim the status of American economic greatness. Countries have been taking advantage of the dollars reserve status for too long and the US has been getting ripped off. If trump implements them under the guise of defeating fentanyl, while knowingly having an ulterior motive, i am fine with that.

I dont even know if ulterior motive is correct. Hell, he came out and stated he wants Canada to be the 51st state. I guess its just straight negotiating tactic.

 

[dpic73]

 

[fatpiggy]

 

[dpic73]

View embedded media

There shouldn't be a battle, especially with our great friends to the North and they are now looking to source their goods from other countries, since we can't be trusted. That is not a win for us.

 

[yoshi121374]

View embedded media

Agreed, but why start a war anyway? Just dumb.

 

[dbjork6317]

I'll make an attempt.

First, i agree with you. The tariffs, on Canada at least, seem to be arbitrary and unclear. Trump has stated that it is due to the fentanyl and drug crises and that could be partially true. Fentanyl is a major problem in the US and I do commend him for trying to get it under control.

However, One can't help but notice that Trump keeps mentioning Canada being the 51st state. People dismissed him as shit talking, but perhaps he is making his intentions more serious. Perhaps he is using it to drive home the point that the US is being taken advantage of in international trade and that includes Canada.

The ultimate point of the Canada Tariffs, as with all Trump tariffs, is to reclaim the status of American economic greatness. Countries have been taking advantage of the dollars reserve status for too long and the US has been getting ripped off. If trump implements them under the guise of defeating fentanyl, while knowingly having an ulterior motive, i am fine with that.

I dont even know if ulterior motive is correct. Hell, he came out and stated he wants Canada to be the 51st state. I guess its just straight negotiating tactic.

I kind of can’t imagine that anyone is even remotely serious about annexing Canada. Skipping over most of the litany of reasons that that would be an absolutely insane thing to pursue, Canada would immediately be the largest state in the US, would have the most electoral votes, and would have the most seats in the house. Given that Canada would most certainly be a blue state, bringing in Canada would significantly hinder Republican power. So I can’t really believe that anyone close to Trump wants that to happen.

I also can’t really see how tariffs on Canada do anything to improve our economy, given that many states and businesses throughout the country rely heavily on trade with Canada. If the President wishes to pursue economic isolationism, it will require a very large overhaul of our economy which will be very painful for many people. IMO most of the challenges with our economy lie within our borders and there’s a lot more that can be done to work on the US economy that doesn’t involve other countries.

On Fentanyl, I agree with the President that we obviously have a major opioid epidemic that we need to find solutions for. But again, I think most of the solutions exist within our borders. It’s also absolutely maddening when Conservatives talk about the fentanyl crisis but make fun of the transgender woman in the Biden admin who played an absolutely crucial role in saving countless lives from opioid overdoses with policies she implemented in Pennsylvania.

I wish the President would clearly outline what the stipulations are for removing the tariffs. If X Y and Z occur then the tariffs will be removed, that would at least give everyone a lot more clarity on this and make it seem like less of an arbitrary move primarily motivated by a desire to create destabilization.

 

[other1]

I'll make an attempt.

First, i agree with you. The tariffs, on Canada at least, seem to be arbitrary and unclear. Trump has stated that it is due to the fentanyl and drug crises and that could be partially true. Fentanyl is a major problem in the US and I do commend him for trying to get it under control.

However, One can't help but notice that Trump keeps mentioning Canada being the 51st state. People dismissed him as shit talking, but perhaps he is making his intentions more serious. Perhaps he is using it to drive home the point that the US is being taken advantage of in international trade and that includes Canada.

The ultimate point of the Canada Tariffs, as with all Trump tariffs, is to reclaim the status of American economic greatness. Countries have been taking advantage of the dollars reserve status for too long and the US has been getting ripped off. If trump implements them under the guise of defeating fentanyl, while knowingly having an ulterior motive, i am fine with that.

I dont even know if ulterior motive is correct. Hell, he came out and stated he wants Canada to be the 51st state. I guess its just straight negotiating tactic.

What's there to negotiate?? Canada ain't going to buy into that 51st statehood BS. trump sees Putin annexing land in Ukraine and he feels the need to do the same.

 

[willydee1]

View embedded media

He’s right, they won’t. But neither will we. Nobody wins trade wars. Ever.

 

[SGTiger]

There shouldn't be a battle, especially with our great friends to the North and they are now looking to source their goods from other countries, since we can't be trusted. That is not a win for us.

A friend who has habitually taken advantage of you for a very long, is not a very good friend.

 

[Dungeon09]

Had beers with a guy who works in finance for a company that has major manufacturing ops in South Carolina. Said they’ve spent the last week running models on what this particular course of tariffs is going to mean for their business and it’s not good.

It’s very telling that Trump is openly stating that “it’s going to be painful but worth it” and his proxies at Fox News are now telling us this weekend that higher grocery prices are our patriotic duty.

Buckle up, things are about to get unnecessarily stupid.

 

[fatpiggy]

Kinda a quirky dude, but good commentary.

 

[Dungeon09]

I'll make an attempt.

First, i agree with you. The tariffs, on Canada at least, seem to be arbitrary and unclear. Trump has stated that it is due to the fentanyl and drug crises and that could be partially true. Fentanyl is a major problem in the US and I do commend him for trying to get it under control.

However, One can't help but notice that Trump keeps mentioning Canada being the 51st state. People dismissed him as shit talking, but perhaps he is making his intentions more serious. Perhaps he is using it to drive home the point that the US is being taken advantage of in international trade and that includes Canada.

The ultimate point of the Canada Tariffs, as with all Trump tariffs, is to reclaim the status of American economic greatness. Countries have been taking advantage of the dollars reserve status for too long and the US has been getting ripped off. If trump implements them under the guise of defeating fentanyl, while knowingly having an ulterior motive, i am fine with that.

I dont even know if ulterior motive is correct. Hell, he came out and stated he wants Canada to be the 51st state. I guess it’s just straight negotiating tactic.

Less than 1% of fentanyl enters the US via the Canadian border.

I think you misunderstand the nature of the dollar’s reserve status. Countries dont “take advantage of it”, its the entire basis of our geopolitical power and the reason why we are able to defy economic gravity at times when it comes to monetary policy.

 

[dbjork6317]

Had beers with a guy who works in finance for a company that has major manufacturing ops in South Carolina. Said they’ve spent the last week running models on what this particular course of tariffs is going to mean for their business and it’s not good.

It’s very telling that Trump is openly stating that “it’s going to be painful but worth it” and his proxies at Fox News are now telling us this weekend that higher grocery prices are our patriotic duty.

Buckle up, things are about to get unnecessarily stupid.

I’m very much looking forward to gold medal mental gymnastics we’re going to see from Trump supporters who have spent the last 4 years talking about the cost of groceries absolutely not mind at all when grocery costs go up under this administration.

 

[Dungeon09]

I’m very much looking forward to gold medal mental gymnastics we’re going to see from Trump supporters who have spent the last 4 years talking about the cost of groceries absolutely not mind at all when grocery costs go up under this administration.

The only eggs in the case at Publix earlier were $9/dozen.

 

[fatpiggy]

Agreed, but why start a war anyway? Just dumb.

Trump, and apparently many others, feel that we are being taken advantage of.

I think the term is disruption. It happens all the time in private business and it’s now happening in governments.

Not to sound like a broken record, but the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. He is not doing anything that he did not campaign on. There is no bait and switch. So, to answer your question, because the people wanted him to.

 

[fatpiggy]

Had beers with a guy who works in finance for a company that has major manufacturing ops in South Carolina. Said they’ve spent the last week running models on what this particular course of tariffs is going to mean for their business and it’s not good.

It’s very telling that Trump is openly stating that “it’s going to be painful but worth it” and his proxies at Fox News are now telling us this weekend that higher grocery prices are our patriotic duty.

Buckle up, things are about to get unnecessarily stupid.

Supply chains will be disrupted. It may be temporarily painful, but disruption doesn’t happen without pain.

 

[yoshi121374]

Trump, and apparently many others, feel that we are being taken advantage of.

I think the term is disruption. It happens all the time in private business and it’s now happening in governments.

Not to sound like a broken record, but the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. He is not doing anything that he did not campaign on. There is no bait and switch. So, to answer your question, because the people wanted him to.

Honestly, I don't think most of his voters understood how Tariffs would effect them, or thought that he'd actually do it.

Massive tariffs are gonna drive prices up for the most vulnerable of our people.

 

[dpic73]

A friend who has habitually taken advantage of you for a very long, is not a very good friend.

I don't believe taking advantage of us is the right way to frame it especially since we have a trade agreement with them, that was negotiated in Trump's first term (USMCA). We've now reneged on the agreement and they're now boycotting tourism and our products while looking for new sources for importing and exporting goods. But if you feel they are taking advantage, this is not the way you treat a good friend, you sit down and talk first.

 

[fatpiggy]

Honestly, I don't think most of his voters understood how Tariffs would effect them, or thought that he'd actually do it.

Massive tariffs are gonna drive prices up for the most vulnerable of our people.

Nah, they really won’t. And they didn’t during trumps first term.

Last, how would that be any different than a democratic admin? Joe just had the worst inflation in years, so their way didn’t work. Let’s try Trumps way.

 

[dpic73]

Nah, they really won’t. And they didn’t during trumps first term.

Last, how would that be any different than a democratic admin? Joe just had the worst inflation in years, so their way didn’t work. Let’s try Trumps way.

Trump made a promise that inflation would start coming down immediately, so "Trump's way" is not what he promised to the majority of voters, whose main issue was the economy.

 

[dpic73]

Had beers with a guy who works in finance for a company that has major manufacturing ops in South Carolina. Said they’ve spent the last week running models on what this particular course of tariffs is going to mean for their business and it’s not good.

It’s very telling that Trump is openly stating that “it’s going to be painful but worth it” and his proxies at Fox News are now telling us this weekend that higher grocery prices are our patriotic duty.

Buckle up, things are about to get unnecessarily stupid.

 

[willydee1]

Trump, and apparently many others, feel that we are being taken advantage of.

I think the term is disruption. It happens all the time in private business and it’s now happening in governments.

Not to sound like a broken record, but the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. He is not doing anything that he did not campaign on. There is no bait and switch. So, to answer your question, because the people wanted him to.

Tariffs are not popular at all. In fact, it would seem they are overwhelmingly unpopular. President Trump is not overwhelmingly popular either.

People can’t make the mistake of thinking that President Trumps election was an approval of his policies….honestly, it might be more of a rejection of Democrats than anything.

While 1-2% inflation might not seem bad on the surface, we are a nation that has been dealing with inflation for 6 years. I doubt there is a lot of stomach for it and I worry that this could be a major political mistake.

 

[yoshi121374]

Nah, they really won’t. And they didn’t during trumps first term.

Last, how would that be any different than a democratic admin? Joe just had the worst inflation in years, so their way didn’t work. Let’s try Trumps way.

Can't resist "what about" can you? Inflation came down tremendously during Bidens Administration vs where Trump left it. We all know that's not a clear picture, but that's literally the case your team tried to make against Democrats.

The reality is that no economists think tariffs won't raise inflation and prices. Companies all know what is coming, mine has sent out memos and made people aware that we are probably going to have to raise prices.