Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

post.japanpost.jp

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 459 posts

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#271

Post by nluken »

bigyabai wrote: post #266
ericmay wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Closing these de minimus exemptions is making it harder for discerning consumers to buy higher quality goods than are currently available in the US right now. Everything has a trade-off. On the other hand, it also prevents companies from dumping artificially cheap and crappy goods (TEMU) on US markets and making it nearly impossible for others to compete. Unsuspecting consumers buy a super cheap (subsidized) crap p…

> and we wind up with pollution, additional landfill, and relentless consumerism that's harmful to the country But that happens regardless of whether or not you import manufactured goods, doesn't it?

You're not going to get new clothing for TEMU prices without the de minimis exception. In theory, the higher price of these goods will decrease the amount they're purchased and lessen impact of pollution.

As others in this thread point out, though, there are other casualties of this change.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#272

Post by ivape »

bsimpson wrote: post #198

There was chatter about this in one of the NYC subreddits over the weekend. Apparently ending the de minimus exemption is closing the grey market for e.g. sunscreen; places that used to sell Japanese sunscreens on American shelves no longer are. There's a frustratingly long list of goods that the US decided to put requirements on in previous generations, and then stopped maintaining. Sunscreen is one; other countries…

Americans don't fully understand what a pain in the ass it is for people in other countries to buy whatever they want. They are always paying some additional amount, if it's even available.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#274

Post by ViewTrick1002 »

Scoundreller wrote: post #163
franze wrote: post #52

Austria, too. I know somebody working there in mid-management. They say the don't care about high or low taxes on the parcels they transport, but they need a straight forward way to execute, and there just is none.

This is the issue for postal systems. In every country in the world, you could send a package by post and the receiving country’s customs will assess duty/taxes/admin fees and charge the recipient as the default procedure. As of later this week, the US will not do that procedure (or allegedly charge some absurd flat rate, like $50-$200 on even a $1 package). Sending postal systems don’t want to deal with the aftermat…

In the EU a flat fee was introduced to deal with the workload and a system to send predeclared items.

The difference is that it was communicated well in advance without any uncertainty.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_One-Stop_Shop

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#275

Post by stefan_ »

bsimpson wrote: post #198

There was chatter about this in one of the NYC subreddits over the weekend. Apparently ending the de minimus exemption is closing the grey market for e.g. sunscreen; places that used to sell Japanese sunscreens on American shelves no longer are. There's a frustratingly long list of goods that the US decided to put requirements on in previous generations, and then stopped maintaining. Sunscreen is one; other countries…

De minimis makes no sense and the EU doesn't have it either - in fact they recently managed to even make the Chinese properly fill out the tax forms and in most cases prepay it.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#276

Post by arghwhat »

Retric wrote: post #149
arghwhat wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tariffs like this is a market regulation that the people pays for. It doesn't "benefit the wealthy" because it's not progressive, it benefits the wealthy that have investments in the tariffed industry by distorting the market to their advantage instead of having to be competitive on a level playing field. The rest of the wealthy are equally annoyed by the tariffs as everyone else, possibly more so as they see their i…

It benefits the wealthy by applying to a smaller percentage of their spending. You can easily avoid all tariffs on a 100 million dollar yacht built outside the US, and you don’t pay it for a personal chef etc.

Most wealthy people are not billionaire wealthy.

Billionaire wealthy pretty much manage to avoid all taxation, progressive or not, so the comparison is moot. They just trample on everyone else.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#277

Post by oaiey »

georgeplusplus wrote: post #142
paxys wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all tax is the same. The left prefers progressive taxation (if you make more income you pay more tax), the right prefers regressive (if you buy or use goods or services you pay tax on them). Sales taxes and tariffs are in the latter category.

It’s disingenuous to consider one’s total income when weighing the fairness of a tax like sales tax. The thought that a sales tax is somehow benefiting one group over the other is ridiculous far left extreme thinking. You pay for a service and that service has a rate. To think that the only good kind of taxation are those that are progressive is the dumbest thing I ever heard.

With great power comes great responsibility. Is as simple as that.

Is true when you are a strong man, is true when you are a family father and is true when you are a rich person.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#278

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

pessimizer wrote: post #239
cheema33 wrote: post #34

This needs to be repeated. Tariffs are a tax on ordinary citizens. Unlike regular taxes, tariffs are not progressive and therefore benefit the wealthy. These are the sort of things the poor and middle class voted for. To make the rich, richer. And then turn around and complain that rich are getting richer and they are getting poorer.

> This needs to be repeated. Tariffs are a tax on ordinary citizens. Unlike regular taxes, tariffs are not progressive and therefore benefit the wealthy. No, people need to stop repeating it, because it's an extremely stupid anti-tax argument. Tariffs are meant to onshore production and raise wages. Telling half the story is simply lying. You might as well complain about buying food because it costs money. You might…

> Tariffs are meant to onshore production and raise wages.

Both of which would still lead to higher prices on the consumer.

> One of the only things Trump is doing unbelievably well on is trade. Tariffs haven't been damaging at all.

I don't know whether to laugh at the absurdity of this statement or to cry because someone could actually say it with a straight face.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#279

Post by schmookeeg »

bsimpson wrote: post #263
schmookeeg wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring the massive political elephant that exists in all of this stuff -- isn't this a good trigger, as demand for the "updated standards" products will force these companies (or resellers of these products) to either validate their products for sale in the US or force the US to recognize these EU standards? I suppose an immediate counterpoint is that the US Consumer seems unwilling to clamor for high-quality produ…

If motorcyclists had the power to demand common sense policy improvements, filtering would be legal everywhere, and cities would start adding PTW (powered two-wheels: motorbikes and e-bikes) lanes alongside the current acoustic bike lanes. It's a relatively small constituency. Most politicians don't want to upset the status quo to advocate for them. A lot of non-riders have enough negative experience (hearing scary s…

Yeah, after I posted (and disappointed a few people apparently) I was thinking about just how sticky this stuff really is, and how our political system is a "broad brush" system. It seems to muddle a lot of the smaller sensible details.

Thought-provoking for sure. I'm glad I ride in a filtering-legal state :)

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#280

Post by Scoundreller »

solardev wrote: post #254
Scoundreller wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny thing about MIPS is that it makes the same helmet safer, but it might have been a garbage helmet to begin with. Throwing away your non-MIPS helmet and replacing it with a MIPS may be a safety- reducing decision, unless you’re buying the exact same model.

For anyone who wants more data, Virginia Tech runs a helmet impact testing lab and publishes results and rankings: https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/bicycle-helmet-ratings.html

If we used a similar methodology for testing cars, we’d be blasting watermelon heads from a cannon against windshields and sacks of potatoes against steering wheels.

We’d benefit from more realistic models. But I guess our helmets would then cost $500.

Post reply on HN