Trump’s Import-Tariff Proposal Would Cut 0.7% From US GDP, Study Says

[GMDino]

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/trump-s-import-tariff-proposal-would-cut-0-7-from-us-gdp-study-says-1.1964380

Quote:(Bloomberg) -- Former President Donald Trump’s proposal to institute a 10% tariff on almost all imports would cost American consumers $300 billion a year, result in the loss of 550,000 US jobs, and cut growth by 0.7%, according to a new analysis from the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.



If other countries retaliate by imposing tariffs on US goods, the economic damage could be even greater. The Tax Foundation said the resulting trade war from retaliatory tariffs would further reduce growth by 0.4% and eliminate another 322,000 jobs.


Trump, who is seeking the 2024 presidential nomination, told Fox Business this month that he would impose the 10% tariff “automatically” for all countries. “I think we should have a ring around the collar,” he said, proposing what advisers call a “universal baseline tariff.” 


“When companies come in and they dump their products in the United States, they should pay, automatically, let’s say a 10% tax,” Trump told Fox Business’s Larry Kudlow, a former Trump economic adviser.


The tariffs would be an expansion of the levies on steel, aluminum and other goods Trump imposed during his presidency and that President Joe Biden has largely kept in place. 

The Tax Foundation, a Washington think tank that generally supports lower taxes, warned that the price tag on Trump’s tariffs would amount to “a tax increase rivaling the ones proposed by President Biden.”


But the Trump campaign pushed back, saying tariffs imposed during the Trump administration resulted in “effectively no inflation throughout his entire presidency.”


“This is an economically illiterate statement put forward by a globalist Washington think tank funded by multinational corporate interests that are totally opposed to President Trump’s pro-worker, pro-American trade agenda,” said Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung.

[*pally*]

Now, you know that is wrong....China pays for the tarriffs not the American consumer  

[SunsetBengal]

That's a bit short sighted. Sure, there may initially be a reduction in GDP, but over time the price increase would make American producers more likely to claim a bigger market share, thus resulting in bigger GDP growth. Gotta see the forest through the trees..

[*Nately120*]

(08-29-2023, 09:11 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That's a bit short sighted.  Sure, there may initially be a reduction in GDP, but over time the price increase would make American producers more likely to claim a bigger market share, thus resulting in bigger GDP growth.  Gotta see the forest through the trees..

Maybe, but the plan may be to kick the growth down the road long enough that the minor players run out of money and drop out of the market so the biggest fish get a bigger slice of the pie.  Do fish eat pie?  That's not an ideal comparison.

[GMDino]

(08-29-2023, 09:11 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That's a bit short sighted.  Sure, there may initially be a reduction in GDP, but over time the price increase would make American producers more likely to claim a bigger market share, thus resulting in bigger GDP growth.  Gotta see the forest through the trees..

The article also says that if other countries retaliate it could be worse. 

Gotta look for trees too so you don't Sonny Bono yourself.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(08-30-2023, 09:00 AM)GMDino Wrote: The article also says that if other countries retaliate it could be worse. 

Gotta look for trees too so you don't Sonny Bono yourself.

Let them.
American's buying products from companies that employ Americans...  Weird concept i know.

[GMDino]

(08-30-2023, 09:31 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Let them.
American's buying products from companies that employ Americans...  Weird concept i know.

I don't disagree.  In fact I acknowledge that to approach the problem of companies moving overseas there will be pain involved.

I do worry that that pain will be on you and me and not on those companies though and that the plan doesn't address the cause of the matter but rather the symptom.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(08-30-2023, 09:42 AM)GMDino Wrote: I don't disagree.  In fact I acknowledge that to approach the problem of companies moving overseas there will be pain involved.

I do worry that that pain will be on you and me and not on those companies though and that the plan doesn't address the cause of the matter but rather the symptom.

There's rarely ever 1 answer to solving the on-going problems. Everything is dynamic, tweak here, twerk there and hope that it eventually shakes out positively.

[hollodero]

(08-30-2023, 09:31 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Let them.
American's buying products from companies that employ Americans...  Weird concept i know.

I wonder whether that's realistic, given the US' foreign trade deficit. People are used to cheap stuff from overseas. If all these products were domestically made and hence more expensive, living costs would go through the roof and increasing wages could not compensate that. If they could, US products would stand no chance against global competition and the trade deficit would not go away (even more so since other countries would certainly retaliate for tariffs), all while US citizens find way less stuff to purchase. I might see that one wrong for sure, but that seems like a logical consequence to me.