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

American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

kielinstitut.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 814 posts

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#641

Post by skippyboxedhero »

malfist wrote: post #426
skippyboxedhero wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are multiple research papers that indicate that this result (in terms of what you think the paper says) is not obvious. Indeed, to think this is the case, you need an extremely superficial understanding of economics based around "rules" that only exist in theory. And, if you read the paper, you will find that evidence. How these work depends on initial conditions that vary and exporters will not react in a cons…

Can you name some of those peer reviewed publications say that tariffs wouldn't be paid by the consumer?

There was a paper, that i am not going to dig out, on the first set of China tariffs by Trump that found that exporters reduced margins. You don't have to look far, you just need to look a few years ago. For some reason, the claims made earlier last year were apocalyptic despite there being clear evidence from the very recent past that this wasn't the case (making money in equities last year was terribly easy).

Btw, you can find papers where tariffs are paid by consumer, where they aren't, where there is no effect. The thing that is being measured is completely different to the actual tariffs. The impact, like everything in economics, depends on the context in which the tool is used. That context is typically hard to model, so we end up with a lot of shitty papers claiming that it is about the tariff when it is about the context/implementation/etc.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#642

Post by jaredklewis »

superb_dev wrote: post #625
jaredklewis wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is basically no overlap between the things that economists generally say are good (free trade, carbon taxes, cap-and-trade, immigration, land value taxes, organ trade, congestion pricing, etc…) and the things that populists of either the left or right say are good (rent control, price controls, tariffs, wealth taxes, debt relief, minimum parking requirements, etc…). Why would you (or anyone) be surprised that e…

Because the economy doesn’t work for the average citizen, the economy works to make the numbers bigger

Well, those numbers economists are working to make bigger are often things that help the average citizen, like the median household income income, the median life expectancy, or the literacy rate. Sometimes economists are studying how to make numbers lower as well, like the median cost of housing or inflation.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#643

Post by groundzeros2015 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #588
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dumbest person supporting a policy is not the reason for supporting it.

The claim above is > Almost all the comments acting like this is some truth bombshell, like people in trumpistan all thought raising tariffs magically made the us economy better. This is a straw man, no? This is a person who is deeply involved in the mechanics of writing legislation supported by GOP legislators. I do not believe that she is uniquely dumb amongst right wingers who have access to the levers of power.

would explaining that Tarrifs are supposed to create comparative competition rather than get other countries pay fees dramatically change her world view?

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#644

Post by NetMageSCW »

ellisv wrote: post #301
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The argument is whether Congress abdicated their power here and whether that’s something they can do in the first place. It would seem that as elected representatives of the people (we are literally their boss), they can't do that without asking us first. The whole point of them existing is to give us power and limit the executive's power, not the opposite.

It's called the nondelegation doctrine, which forbids one branch of government from authorizing another branch of government to exercise its functions. Because Article One vests "all legislative powers" to Congress, they cannot delegate legislative powers to the Executive and Judicial branches (because then not all legislative powers would be vested with Congress).

How does that not prohibit delegation of Federal regulations to the Executive Branch?

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#645

Post by grumio »

koolba wrote: post #612
ezst wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> And Trump did what, exactly, make something already illegal even more illegal? That’s the best part! There’s no new laws necessary. We’re simply enforcing the laws on the books and means of enforcement that we as a nation have already agreed upon! > And now that you are ruled by a de facto fascist with the rule of law only applicable to his enemies, how is the payoff? On the upside, illegal immigration is no longer…

They're not simply enforcing laws on the books. They're breaking them.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/lawyers-allege-dept-homeland-secur...

DHS denying legal council to detainees.

https://www.propublica.org/article/videos-ice-dhs-immigratio...

ICE using chokeholds in defiance of DOJ standards for use of force.

> after more than an hour, agents held down Zapata Rivera’s arms. One, who Zapata Rivera’s lawyer says wore a baseball cap reading “Ne Quis Effugiat” — Latin for “So That None Will Escape” — pressed his thumbs into the arteries on Zapata Rivera’s neck. The young man then appeared to pass out as bystanders screamed.

> The technique is known as a carotid restraint. The two carotid arteries carry 70% of the brain’s blood flow; block them, and a person can quickly lose consciousness. The tactic can cause strokes, seizures, brain damage — and death.

> In a bystander video of Zapata Rivera’s arrest, his eyes roll back in his head and he suffers an apparent seizure, convulsing so violently that his daughter, seated in his lap, shakes with him.

> In a social media post after the incident and in its statement to ProPublica, DHS did not cite a deadly threat. Instead, it referenced the charges against Zapata Rivera’s wife and suggested he had only pretended to have a medical crisis while refusing help from paramedics. “Imagine FAKING a seizure to help a criminal escape justice,” the post said.

Is this new information to you, koolba? Or do you believe this is enforcement of laws on the books?

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#646

Post by skippyboxedhero »

atcon wrote: post #614
skippyboxedhero wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are multiple research papers that indicate that this result (in terms of what you think the paper says) is not obvious. Indeed, to think this is the case, you need an extremely superficial understanding of economics based around "rules" that only exist in theory. And, if you read the paper, you will find that evidence. How these work depends on initial conditions that vary and exporters will not react in a cons…

The authors ask “who bears the cost of these tariffs?” and use S&P Panijiva data from Jan 2024 to Nov 2025 for their 96% pass through rate to conclude tariffs function “as a consumption tax on Americans.” However, Panjiva is limited to FOIA requests for bill of lading data for 22 countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico) and excludes major US trading partners, such as the EU, UK, and Canada[1]. The limitations of the…

I would argue tariffs are inherently easier to deal with than NTBs. I will never understand the absolute hate that is leveled at countries that use tariffs vs. the very noisy, tariff-hating countries that use NTBs.

EU is, obviously, one of the worst offenders here. Tariffs are a great evil...there are still massive barriers to trade within the EU. Let me repeat: WITHIN the EU, a bloc of countries that share a supra-national political system. Like Wymoing putting up a barrier to trade with Iowa (which, btw, do exist in the US too...but are significantly lower than in the EU where there isn't harmonization in even basic products like financial services due to the problems with competition in so many European countries).

The discussions on trade are insane.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#647

Post by ModernMech »

nathan_compton wrote: post #167
BanAntiVaxxers wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I don't buy this - Harris had a big bump in the polls as soon as she entered the race and I think she could have won if she had offered voters anything . This bullshit that American's won't vote for a woman is just an excuse not to run women and to deflect blame towards a culture war issue and away from the fact that the democrats don't actually have popular policies. I voted for Harris, I even canvased for her, but…

> Harris had a big bump in the polls as soon as she entered the race

The election was always going to be 50/50 come election day no matter who the candidates were. The consternation about polling over the summer was especially frustrating for this reason, because 50/50 is exactly how it played out despite whatever temporary polling boosts she got. If she hadn't replaced Biden, his poor polling also would have reverted to the 50/50 by November.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#648

Post by ModernMech »

nathan_compton wrote: post #247
BanAntiVaxxers wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She’s known to own firearms. I wonder what would happen if one of these Democrat candidates released a video like “A girl and her Glock: Kamala goes John Wick”. Similarly, AOC should visit the south, eat some grits, volunteer with some Black churches, and do a little skeet shooting with some good ole boys.

It would be perceived as pandering bullshit from either of them. What the democrats need is an aggressive economic policy that actually will manifestly improve regular people's lives. If they cannot articulate such a thing and credibly convince the voter that they will fucking fight for it, they will never win.

> If they cannot articulate such a thing and credibly convince the voter that they will fucking fight for it, they will never win.

People say this but Democrats lost by like 1% in 2024. If that had gone the other way by 1%, people would be talking about what political geniuses they are (as has happened in the past). Winning in this environment just means playing long enough that the noise goes your way eventually, and then everyone talks about what a political mastermind you are. Or if it goes against you then you're forever lost in the political wilderness. Until the next election when it eventually, randomly goes your way again.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#649

Post by tgtweak »

carlosjobim wrote: post #406
tgtweak wrote: post #76

Few thoughts/observations on Tariff impacts now that we have a decent amount of time/data to look at: Suppliers in China are dropping prices to offset the tariff impact - this is what I see in my direct industry and also in many adjacent ones. This is benefitting other countries that don't have Tariffs on Chinese goods since they can buy cheaper as well. I suspect this is a significant factor in the GBP/EUR strengthe…

> This is benefitting other countries that don't have Tariffs on Chinese goods since they can buy cheaper as well. What countries are those? As far as I know, most important markets have great tariffs on Chinese goods.

Most have low/no duties on most goods categories from China - aside from a few specific goods categories in developed markets - most goods flow out of China to export countries without tariff/duties. ASEAN markets and most of Africa have zero tariffs. I don't think there are any developed markets (which are China's main export destinations) with double-digit tariff averages except India. Using Germany as an example... Electronics (hs code 85) is 0-6% tariffs on Chinese origin goods (averages out under 2%), and has been that way for a while. US on the other hand is now 7.5-27.5% where it was previously 0-4%. While they aren't "no tariffs", an average ~2% tariff across all imported goods is very small compared to what is shelved in the US. ASEAN is almost entirely no tariff.

So when the US is high teens/low 20's average tariff and the rest of the developed world is 0-5%, that's essentially zero as far as market pressure is concerned.

Chinese imports to the US is down to 8% in October 2025, compared to >13% prior to recent trade policy changes. In the same period, EU imports from China have grown 5%. My point remains that US exerting import pressure on China is benefitting the rest of the world's buying power with China, at it's expense.

Re: American importers and consumers bear the cost of 2025 tariffs: analysis

#650

Post by tgtweak »

ASinclair wrote: post #307
tgtweak wrote: post #76

Few thoughts/observations on Tariff impacts now that we have a decent amount of time/data to look at: Suppliers in China are dropping prices to offset the tariff impact - this is what I see in my direct industry and also in many adjacent ones. This is benefitting other countries that don't have Tariffs on Chinese goods since they can buy cheaper as well. I suspect this is a significant factor in the GBP/EUR strengthe…

There are tariffs on every country, not just China. This isn’t like his first term in office. Can you speak to the impacts of those tariffs?

Looking purely at import volumes, most of those other countries haven't experienced drop-offs like China. Canada exports about the same amount of goods to the US today as they did in early 2024. Mexico is in a similar trend. What I see is that when Chinese buying dipped due to exorbitant tariffs, Canada and Mexico spiked until they were also hit with tariffs, returning to their previous levels.
Post reply on HN