Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Taiwan has just agreed to drop ALL tariffs on the United States, joining India, Israel, Vietnam, and Cambodia, who also intend to zero out their tariffs.
Per WH

(04-07-2025, 01:19 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Taiwan has just agreed to drop ALL tariffs on the United States, joining India, Israel, Vietnam, and Cambodia, who also intend to zero out their tariffs.
Per WH

Positive signs unless China is looking to use it's neighbors to trans ship product to the US. Hopefully the agreement allows for that to be verified. The EU wants zero to zero tariffs, but want to keep the 20% extra they currently charge. lol

(04-07-2025, 04:06 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-07-2025, 01:19 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Taiwan has just agreed to drop ALL tariffs on the United States, joining India, Israel, Vietnam, and Cambodia, who also intend to zero out their tariffs.
Per WH

Positive signs unless China is looking to use it's neighbors to trans ship product to the US. Hopefully the agreement allows for that to be verified.  The EU wants zero to zero tariffs, but want to keep the 20% extra they currently charge. lol

I did not believe this when I first read it, cuz in my world you are the only one saying this. 
But I looked into it and you're mostly right.  The VAT on its face is just a multi-level sales tax that applies to anything, foreign or domestic.  Doesn't sound at all like a tariff.  But the Europeans, and some others, do exempt or refund the VAT on exports.  
If a factory takes steel and aluminum and makes car parts, the VAT is charged on their revenue minus their cost of goods.  They sell those car parts to a car manufacturer, and then when the car is assembled a VAT would be charged on the revenue minus cost of goods for the car manufacturer,
UNLESS
The car is exported to another market.  
That's definitely a subsidy on exports, and it's totally fair to respond to that with tariffs until they fix it.  Our labor costs are higher in part because our workers pay higher total income, sales, and property taxes, because we have no VAT.
Even though a 20% VAT with an export exemption causes less distortion than a 20% tariff, it's still an impact and it is fair to retaliate.
All that said, in the US we have pretty huge subsidies on certain exports, especially agriculture, and many other countries have tolerated that for a long time even though they hate it. That may change.

Circling this date for obvious reasons ...

That aside take a look at post #81.  Actually 20% is on the low end. Most are 22-25% depending on the country.  If they will not lower best thing to do is roll up a cost of what the VAT covers and charge that. So zero to zero plus a US VAT is fair.

The funny thing is I remember Lee Iacocca screaming about this when they formed the EU. Also, many Dems have discussed it as unfair including Schumer, Obama, Clinton, Pelosi. None actually did anything about it though.

(04-07-2025, 09:46 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-07-2025, 04:06 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Positive signs unless China is looking to use it's neighbors to trans ship product to the US. Hopefully the agreement allows for that to be verified.  The EU wants zero to zero tariffs, but want to keep the 20% extra they currently charge. lol

I did not believe this when I first read it, cuz in my world you are the only one saying this. 
But I looked into it and you're mostly right.  The VAT on its face is just a multi-level sales tax that applies to anything, foreign or domestic.  Doesn't sound at all like a tariff.  But the Europeans, and some others, do exempt or refund the VAT on exports.  
If a factory takes steel and aluminum and makes car parts, the VAT is charged on their revenue minus their cost of goods.  They sell those car parts to a car manufacturer, and then when the car is assembled a VAT would be charged on the revenue minus cost of goods for the car manufacturer,
UNLESS
The car is exported to another market.  
That's definitely a subsidy on exports, and it's totally fair to respond to that with tariffs until they fix it.  Our labor costs are higher in part because our workers pay higher total income, sales, and property taxes, because we have no VAT.
Even though a 20% VAT with an export exemption causes less distortion than a 20% tariff, it's still an impact and it is fair to retaliate.
All that said, in the US we have pretty huge subsidies on certain exports, especially agriculture, and many other countries have tolerated that for a long time even though they hate it. That may change.

Of course, cnn isn't reporting it.

Suddenly, the same people who can't repay their student loans are experts about tariffs.

(04-08-2025, 08:01 AM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Suddenly, the same people who can't repay their student loans are experts about tariffs.

Well...yes. Many college educated people are experts on tarrifs and are in crippling debt from obtaining that expertise. You perfectly summed up the broken university system in out country. The powers that be want you either uneducated or crippled by debt, why are you playing along?

I find it pretty hilarious the Democrat's new tactic is asking the Republicans "Don't you care about the Stock Market ?" Don't they know the vast majority of the stock is owned by those oligarchs they just attacked publicly on their tour ?

(04-07-2025, 10:01 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Circling this date for obvious reasons ...

That aside take a look at post #81.  Actually 20% is on the low end. Most are 22-25% depending on the country.  If they will not lower best thing to do is roll up a cost of what the VAT covers and charge that. So zero to zero plus a US VAT is fair.

The funny thing is  I remember Lee Iacocca screaming about this when they formed the EU.  Also, many Dems have discussed it as unfair including  Schumer, Obama, Clinton, Pelosi. None actually did anything about it though.

Again, you're mostly right. 
Clinton for his part saw that other countries exempting exports from their VAT would be a problem, as we lowered our tariffs. 
He tried to convince Congress to implement a VAT early in his first term, but it went nowhere, and he proceeded to lower tariffs anyway.
But as I said before, if we really want to relitigate these issues from the '90s, other countries are going to want to discuss our farm subsidies, loan guarantees, public-private partnerships, targeted tax incentives and many other games we play to make our exports more competitive. I don't know what cards they will want to play, but they do have cards.
Overall, the simple fact is we have a higher standard of living and an even higher cost of living, and both of those things make our exports less competitive. Trying to tariff our way out of that problem is going to be pushing against string. We have to find ways to bring our cost of living down, while maintaining our standard of living. Mostly, this means building enough homes to transition from a housing shortage to a housing surplus, because the growth of housing prices accounts for most of the growth in cost of living, since the '90s.
Our main continuing advantage is that our country is the easiest place to introduce innovations in most sectors. However just like all other countries we have rent seekers in all corners who would love nothing more than to lock up their market and take away any incentives or opportunities for newcomers to innovate.  We have to keep a lid on that tendency.  FTC and DoL rules on overtime and anti-merger and other topics need to be aggressively updated and aggressively enforced.  That's where I think we've been falling short ever since the Reagan administration. Biden tried to make some moves in that direction, but only half-heartedly and only late in his term.  I have some hope that Trump may do some good things in this area during his second term, with the FTC type rules, but he's already let Biden's efforts to increase the number of employees who are eligible for overtime pay die on the vine.

(04-08-2025, 08:29 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-07-2025, 10:01 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Circling this date for obvious reasons ...

That aside take a look at post #81.  Actually 20% is on the low end. Most are 22-25% depending on the country.  If they will not lower best thing to do is roll up a cost of what the VAT covers and charge that. So zero to zero plus a US VAT is fair.

The funny thing is  I remember Lee Iacocca screaming about this when they formed the EU.  Also, many Dems have discussed it as unfair including  Schumer, Obama, Clinton, Pelosi. None actually did anything about it though.

Again, you're mostly right. 
Clinton for his part saw that other countries exempting exports from their VAT would be a problem, as we lowered our tariffs. 
He tried to convince Congress to implement a VAT early in his first term, but it went nowhere, and he proceeded to lower tariffs anyway.
But as I said before, if we really want to reitigate these issues from the '90s, other countries are going to want to discuss our farm subsidies, loan guarantees, public-private partnerships, targeted tax incentives and many other games we play to make our exports more competitive. I don't know what cards they will want to play, but they do have cards.
Overall, the simple fact is we have a higher standard of living and an even higher cost of living, and both of those things make our exports less competitive. Trying to tariff our way out of that problem is going to be pushing against string. We have to find ways to bring our cost of living down, while maintaining our standard of living. Mostly, this means building enough homes to transition from a housing shortage to a housing surplus.
Our main continuing advantage is that our country is the easiest place to introduce innovations in most sectors. However just like all other countries we have rent seekers in all corners who would love nothing more than to lock up their market and take away any incentives or opportunities for newcomers to innovate.  We have to keep a lid on that tendency.  FTC and DoL rules on overtime and anti-merger and other topics need to be aggressively updated and enforced.  That's where I think we've been falling short ever since the Reagan administration. Biden tried to make some moves in that direction, but only half-heartedly and only late in his term.  I have some hope that Trump may do some good things in this area during his second term, with the FTC type rules, but he's already let Biden's efforts to increase the number of employees who are eligible for overtime pay die on the vine.

I do not believe they are trying to litigate these issues from the '90s. Everything Trump has said has been forward looking other than chiding past administrations for being hoodwinked. He appears to be ok with zero tariffs if the other hurdles are removed. If the EU charges us a VAT on everything we export to them, we are technically paying to support their government. That is ok as long as they return the favor and we can charge them the same amount and rebate our companies like they do. 

Canada and Mexico are allowing other countries to cross dock product through their country to avoid tariffs and dump. That is is violation of our agreements. They get a modest tariff for the ability. It has to stop. There are many more issues I can go on and on. Actually there is enough evidence to void the agreement.

This whole turn em on, turn em off thing is really starting to feel like an elaborate, repeated pump and dump scheme, to me.

(04-09-2025, 06:09 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]This whole turn em on, turn em off thing is really starting to feel like an elaborate, repeated pump and dump scheme, to me.

It's got a lot of Nations coming to the table because they know that they need us more than we need them...........

(04-09-2025, 06:09 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]This whole turn em on, turn em off thing is really starting to feel like an elaborate, repeated pump and dump scheme, to me.

It does have that air. However, being as this is a 90-day pause, my guess is Trump is finding out which countries are willing to deal or not. Hopefully in 3 months new tariffs will be established globally.

(04-09-2025, 06:41 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2025, 06:09 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]This whole turn em on, turn em off thing is really starting to feel like an elaborate, repeated pump and dump scheme, to me.

It's got a lot of Nations coming to the table because they know that they need us more than we need them...........

I hope you're right, but we won't know until we see a deal.

It may also be that a new 10% tariff on everyone and everything was simply what he wanted all along. If so, the higher rates he talked about for the last 7 days were more of an exercise in price anchoring for the US stock market than any kind of effort to negotiate. Only way to know is if we find out some of his buddies got rich on the shorts on April 7 then bought the bottom this morning.

(04-09-2025, 07:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2025, 06:41 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]It's got a lot of Nations coming to the table because they know that they need us more than we need them...........

I hope you're right, but we won't know until we see a deal.

It may also be that a new 10% tariff on everyone and everything was simply what he wanted all along.  If so, the higher rates he talked about for the last 7 days were more of an exercise in price anchoring for the US stock market than any kind of effort to negotiate. Only way to know is if we find out some of his buddies got rich on the shorts on April 7 then bought the bottom this morning.

He pretty much advertised the opportunity for everyone to buy the dip in one of his Truth Social posts. It does bear some looking into, though.

He tried to begin the reorganization of trade his first term. Everyone (countries) just either ignored him, promised to get around to it, or laughed. This time he is doing it differently. He is on a mission, appear he got their attention now. What comes of this is to be seen.

(04-10-2025, 12:01 AM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]He tried to begin the reorganization of trade his first term. Everyone (countries)  just either ignored him, promised to get around to it, or laughed. This time he is doing it differently. He is on a mission, appear he got their attention now. What comes of this is to be seen.

Time is of the essence. He has two years to get changes enacted with positive results before the midterm elections.

Jasmine Crockett's eyelashes are from China so she is very upset.
Trump literally put a 104% Tariff on Jasmine Crockett's eyelashes.
Thank you, President Trump!

(04-10-2025, 04:08 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Jasmine Crockett's eyelashes are from China so she is very upset.
Trump literally put a 104% Tariff on Jasmine Crockett's eyelashes.
Thank you, President Trump!

Love it!! lolololol