> products we couldn’t manufacture ourselves even if we wanted to, since the vendor has well-deserved IP protections
That's something I hadn't though about in the context of tariffs with interesting implications.
Does following IP rules mean that any products and technologies that wont manufacturer in the US but holds IP protections become subject to a permanent tariff? Giving countries a permanent 125% advantage over US businesses when using that IP?
Other countries wouldn't get a permanent 125% advantage over the U.S. They have zero involvement with the tariff because it's the importer who pays it to the U.S. Treasury when the cargo arrives in the U.S. In the case where it's a single-source, IP-protected item, the tariff is largely irrelevant to the country that produces it. People will buy it if it's a necessary item. The tariff doesn't give them a reason to adjust the price up or down or do anything different at all. They sell to their U.S. wholesale customer at the same price, that wholesale customer pays the tariff, and then the wholesale customer either passes the tariff through to the retail customer or charges multiples to maintain the same profit margin percentage.
In the absence of IP protections, it would hurt the countries with the highest tariffs on their products because there would be an incentive to produce an equivalent product domestically or source it from another country whose products are taxed at a lower rate. In practice, it still doesn't work out to impose broad tariffs because no one has a fully domestic supply chain. It really only makes sense to tariff very specific items in new-ish markets where you have a foreign player whose government is subsidizing production, e.g. Chinese EV's, Chinese EV batteries, solar panels, etc.
What do you call necessary? What about non-necessary items? What about IP that improves manufacturing efficiency by 5% in some process? Better battery tech? Better UI? Better chips? Better sensors? In some cases the answer is yes, in some cases the answer is no. If the answer is yes then the US pays 125% more for that item, if the answer is no then the US has worse efficiency, worse prices, worse technologies.
You talk in absolute which makes me feel like you're missing all the nuances at play.
It's the buyers in the other countries who get the "125%" permanent advantage, not the sellers. Sure, it doesn't affect you if you're TCL making flat-panel displays. It affects you if you're buying flat-panel displays to incorporate into your product, by making your product a lot more expensive.
I wouldn't call it logical for the US to lose all the IP protections they benefit from. But I doubt the international community would mind if suddenly American IP became free after the US withdrew itself from international trade.
Based on what? They’re going up and down every day. And the Trump administration is clearly desperate enough for a deal with China to be caught lying about engaging in talks.
As far as the Trump administration goes, there doesn't seem to be a coherent plan. Among themselves they can't even decide if they were or were not already negotiating with China.
I've yet to see someone who is a part of the administration who is clearly educated about trade making an coherent argument about the tariffs.
I watched the UK/US press conference this morning. Lutnick is infuriating. Anything remotely resembling an explanation or justification for 'tariffs' devolves in to obsequeous praise of how great Trump is. It's as if they can't function for an hour or two without overtly proclaiming the wonder of Trump.
"Jamison and I working together couldn't have put this deal together in 3 years, but President Trump was able to pull this off in less than 45 days!" (paraphrasing but IIRC it was pretty close).
I feel like a broken record, but it makes perfect sense if you ask yourself, what would Putin want?
Putin would love the US government destroying large portions of its economy for no discernible gain. I think Putin probably encouraged Trump by telling him all the idiotic things he keeps repeating like how the trade deficit shows the US is getting ripped off. Or that huge tariffs will bring manufacturing back to the US. Or that countries would be lining up to make a deal.
But no actual sane person can explain the end game because anyone with even a basic understanding of economics and trade knows that none of those things are or were ever true.
I think the plan is to consolidate power at any cost. If people are too broke and scared to resist, it's a win for them. The claims that tariffs will help the economy or kidnapping citizens and judges will protect national security, is just a nonsense excuse.
I think this because the right wing think tanks published that Project 2025 plan and it's clearly being followed even though Trump lied and said he wasn't aware of it
If a business in France uses tech X imported from China, and a competing US business uses the same tech X imported from China but has to pay 145% more than the French company, is that not an advantage they have over the US company?
That's something I hadn't though about in the context of tariffs with interesting implications.
Does following IP rules mean that any products and technologies that wont manufacturer in the US but holds IP protections become subject to a permanent tariff? Giving countries a permanent 125% advantage over US businesses when using that IP?
What's the plan here?