back to article Trump continues on the warpath: Now US tariffs cover nearly everything arriving from China

After a short-lived cease fire, the glorious leader of the United States has announced yet another round of tariffs on Chinese imports, due to be imposed in September. President Donald Trump said there would be a further 10 per cent levy on another $300bn worth of Chinese imports, in the fourth round of tariff increases by the …

  1. idoxde

    Orange Fool

    The Orange Fool is trying to do his best to make it difficult for people.

    1. Bearshark

      Re: Orange Fool

      He's just poking and twisting a 'hot iron' into this so called "New World Order" which does absolutely nothing for humanity other than offer misery on a cold plate.

    2. Reg Reader 1

      Re: Orange Fool

      I disagree with Trump on almost everything except import taxes, although I'll bet our reasons are somewhat different. This whole problem falls squarely onto the way Globalization has been setup and that no country can trust another country to play fair. The developed economies have largely given up our ability to manufacture important products and to safely extract the resources to make those products. A big part of this issue is that for us plebs salaries/pay hasn't kept up with tech advancements and the real cost manufacturing/farming. This has been enabled by pushing resource extraction to developing economies where safety and environmental regulation is near or nonexistent and farming being heavily subsidized and artificially enhanced (at significant environmental cost) to keep prices low. I do find it hard to argue with subsidizing food prices though.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Orange Fool

        The US heavily subsidizes agriculture. Mexico, for example is heavily dependant on american agricultural exports

      2. Graham 25

        Re: Orange Fool

        The way globalisation is set up ?

        Nobody sets up globalisation. It is the natural state of play that as economies develop, they cast off the lower value creation to lower cost economies for them to develop, while the mature economies develop higher value add capabilities. There's nobody setting these things - its a natural feature.

        Developed economies dont want to make small plastic widgets because they cannot afford to pay a developed economy salary to a worked producing $0.01 items.

        Trump has it right on getting China to respect IPR and to stop companies being forced to work with Chinese thieves, sorry, partners.

        On everything esle he is 100% wrong.

    3. Boo Radley

      Re: Orange Fool

      I'm really hoping that the fools who elected him realize that he's the reason everything they buy is getting much more expensive. And vote his fat fucking ass out. But the his base consists of idiots, so I'm afraid we're stuck with him for five more years :-(

      1. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Meh

        Re: Orange Fool

        "But the his base consists of idiots"

        No, it's actually the DEMO[N,C]RAT base that consists of idiots.

        Why? because they actually SUPPORT "Quatro Perra" aka 'The Gang of Four' and their horrific socialist agenda, along with Pocahontas, Harris, Bernie, "Beto", and the rest of 'em. Biden actually looks MODERATE compared to "them". And yet, WHOM do the base support? That's right, the WACKOS.

        Now as for Republo-crats that vote in RINOs, I might consider your opinion.

        1. deadlockvictim Silver badge

          Agent Orange

          His base voted him in order to throw a spanner in the works of the U.S. Government (which, is, anyway, a BAD THING) and he is doing as they hoped.

          And while he may need a second term to fully wreck the U.S. economy, he is off to a promising start.

          What I don't really understand is why Fox News and The President are bringing such publicity to the Gang of Four. It's almost as if they want Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez to be president in 2024. Because once the backlash to Trump occurs, the U.S. voting public will go for the diametric opposite of Trump and she is being greatly publicised at the moment.

    4. mhenriday
      Thumb Down

      Re: Orange Fool

      If only it were just a matter of Mr Trump and his unsavoury entourage ! Alas, at the federal level, the so-called «Democrats» are just as hot on the China-bashing trail as Mr Trump and the so-called «Republicans», cf Charles Ellis Schumer's tweet to Trump to «Hang tough on China». The fond dream of global hegemony embraced by the US elite at least since WW II is crashing about their eyes ; this is their reaction. How important this struggle is evident from the fact that despite the opposition of entities like the US Chamber of Commerce, which usually have a great deal to say on US policy to the tariffs and bans, they are not being withdrawn, but extended....

      Henri

    5. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: Orange Fool

      you just don't like Trump. Your "feeling" (not thinking) on this matter is obvious.

      Your opinion has been noted, and subsequently ignored.

      If Trump cured cancer, paid everyone's taxes worldwide out of his own pocket, and did whatever every other nation and critic wanted him to do, you would STILL hate him.

      It's like this, kinda (to a feminist): If a man says something, and there's no woman around to hear him, is he still "wrong" ?

      1. sabroni Silver badge

        Re: paid everyone's taxes worldwide out of his own pocket

        Just paying any tax would be a start.....

  2. cornetman Bronze badge

    I wonder how long the trade war would continue if China decided to ban all exports to the US.

    Who would blink first?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Once it becomes economically viable to do so (probably now), the US market alone is large enough to justify manufacturers shifting production or new rivals starting production in developing economies outside of China.

      Cui bono? Not China, not Trump-voting Americans. Other developing countries with growth ambition stand to gain.

    2. DougS Silver badge

      Trump has no choice but to blink first

      He has an election coming up in a year, China's president was recently made "president for life". Even if it hits China harder (whether it will or not is debatable) Xi Jinping can afford to wait and watch Trump's poll numbers go even lower if the economy turns sour.

      Sure, some US companies will shift production to Vietnam etc. if they can - many were already thinking about it since China isn't as cheap as it was when they moved production there 10-20 years ago.

      But China is doing the same thing - they've signed new contracts for farm products from other countries all over the world. When the trade war is over, China will never order as much from American farmers as they have in the past. Trump's ham fisted scorched earth "negotiation" style is going to permanently damage the livelihood of some of his strongest supporters.

      He will blink, claim he "won big over China" and his idiot supporters will believe him. Just like they believe he's building many miles of new wall, and that the USMCA that is slated to replace NAFTA is a major change, rather than a few tweaks around the edges.

      1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

        Re: Trump has no choice but to blink first

        Yes, when China gets new suppliers, the old ones will have to dance a fandango to get them back. Soybeans are pouring into China from Brasil and Canada. When the US farmers wrung out their flooded land, burn or bury last year's soybean crop, adn try again, they will have to sell close to cose to beat their new rivals and China still might not come back, having been burned once.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Trump has no choice but to blink first

          I don't know. They could just turn to the ethanol markets and allow more corn to return to the food supply.

    3. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      Let's find out. China, just go ahead and ban ALL export to the USA. G'head. Do it.

      1. deadlockvictim Silver badge

        Hmmmm...

        Is this how World Wars start?

        1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

          Re: Hmmmm...

          Is this how World Wars start?

          Hopefully, the relevent military chiefs will realise that neither can beat the other on their own home territory - even if nuclear weapons are involved (in which case, no-one wins).

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    restriction on exports of rare earth materials

    Didn't they try this before, with the (predictable) result that previously uneconomic mines became economic, and there was a glut of REMs ?

    I know Worstall covered it in these very pages .....

    1. Duncan Macdonald Silver badge

      Re: restriction on exports of rare earth materials

      The correct thing to do is to restrict the exports of rare earth minerals until the US mines are nearly operational - then allow the supply to resume. This would cost the US miners a lot of money and make them very reluctant to compete with China in future.

      As far as blacklisting goes - a simple one - make it known to airlines that the 737 Max 8 will not be permitted to fly over China (and possibly its allies) until a full aircraft certification has been done by China (no grandfathered certificates from previous 737's and no trust in any FAA certification). (Russia might go along with China in this action which would make the 737 Max 8 unusable by many airlines.)

      1. DougS Silver badge

        Re: restriction on exports of rare earth materials

        A couple US rare earth mines are kept in a "near readiness" state, via indirect support from the DoD, and were never fully closed. Some of these materials are critical to US defense, and they know a cutoff of supplies would be one of the first things to happen if there's ever a war.

        So this isn't really a problem, just headline fodder for people who think "rare earths" means they are actually "rare" rather than being common but just difficult/dirty to refine.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: restriction on exports of rare earth materials

          "A couple US rare earth mines are kept in a "near readiness" state, via indirect support from the DoD, and were never fully closed. Some of these materials are critical to US defense, and they know a cutoff of supplies would be one of the first things to happen if there's ever a war."

          What about the dirty and polluting processing? Keeping a mine "near ready" is one thing, being able to process the ore is something else. Has the US got processing capability for all the RE it needs (or access elsewhere?)

          1. DougS Silver badge

            Re: restriction on exports of rare earth materials

            That infrastructure remains available as well. Businesses have to deal with EPA regulations which were/are hard to meet when it came to RE processing which is why they shut down rare earths production in the US. If China cut off supplies in a wartime or near-wartime situation the president can declare a state of emergency and override those regulations to allow processing.

        2. Palpy

          Re: "Rare earth" elements -- US readiness

          TL:DR: Crikey this is a long post. I advise skipping it.

          I don't know this subject well, but I understand that there are 16 rare earth elements (henceforth REEs), useful in varying degrees.

          The US mine at Mountain Pass, California, extracts bastnasite-(Ce) ore -- hard rock mining. Right now any ore they dig up is sent for processing to... wait for it... China. I'm not sure what minerals Ucore found at Bokan Mountain, Alaska, but the REE deposits there appear to be hard-rock mining as well. The mine is a long way from production.

          China's largest mines (mostly) extract lateritic ores -- essentially, tropical and sub-tropical soils (or paleo-soils; the climate doesn't have to be tropical today). These soils have been heavily weathered and leached in ways that concentrate REEs in near-surface lenses. Mines in Australia, Brazil, and Madagascar also dig up laterites. (Africa, surely? Dunno.)

          Laterites are relatively easy to dig up, and the REEs they contain are (again, relatively!) easy to separate. Easier than the hard-rock monzanite and bastnasite ores, anyway.

          The ore from Mountain Pass produces primarily cerium, lanthanum, neodymium, and praseodymium, with other REEs together making up only 0.4% of the yield. (USGS publication.)

          Chinese lateritic ores produce substantially more samarium, gadolinium, dysprosium, erbium, ytterbium, and, especially, a large amount (relatively speaking!!) of yttrium. (Ibid.)

          A quick Google doesn't find references to lateritic rare-earth mines inside the US. There is speculation that some paleo-laterites in Georgia may be valuable, but there appear to be no identified exploitable deposits. Let alone any mines ready to go.

          (Sorry, but I think geology is one of the coolest things going. Can't help myself. Found a tiny vein of asbestos in the mountains once, got all excited.)

          The obvious point is, no single country has a full complement of the resources necessary for high technology. Therefore globalization of supply chains is mandatory.

          The Chinese have been playing the trade-war game with sangfroid, IMHO. They have not weaponized the trade in REEs, nor have they directly attacked the US service economy (I think). (The US has long since slipped from a primarily agricultural economy to an industrial one, and gone on to become a service economy -- read, "business solutions", banking, distribution of goods... Microsoft, Amazon, JP Morgan Chase, that kind of thing. I wrote "primarily". Yes, ag and hard industry remain important.)

          The Chinese seem to be holding themselves in reactive mode. Unlike Trump, they seem to be wary of burning bridges.

          Obviously, they are cultivating ties with Russia. Putin is reciprocating. They are lowering trade barriers to countries other than the US. They are pushing hard on the RCEP trade agreement, which, if ratified by all proposed members, would create the largest economic bloc in the world. It would be one which excludes the US.

          These are flanking moves with the potential to alter global economics for a long time.

          The Chinese strategy makes Trump's tactics look ... well, childish. Stupid. It appears that Trump is the way the largest economy in the world enables its own replacement.

          1. Palpy

            Re: "Rare earth" elements -- a bit more research

            A bit more reading on REEs, for those who like rocks.

            Geology for Investors gives a good write-up on REEs and their sources. Geology.com also has a good overview, though they do not mention laterite ore.

            I could be mistaken on the sources of China's REE mining. So far, my limited understanding is that bastnasite and monazite ores provide the most concentrated sources of REEs, while laterite ores -- which are primary sources of aluminum -- can, in some cases, also be further processed to extract REEs.

            As noted higher up in the comments, it's not that China is the only source of REEs. Due to various factors -- environmental aspects of processing, and the available reserves (according to Geology.com, China has twice as much REE ore as Brazil or Vietnam, the next-highest on the list) -- China is currently dominant. If it restricted exports of REEs, there would certainly be a short-term disruption in industry. But Australia and other sources would kick in eventually. "...while a restriction on rare earth exports would have some immediate adverse effects, the US and the rest of the world would adapt in the long run." (Linky: The Verge).

            Mea culpa: it's not monzanite, the close relative of granite, as I wrote earlier. It's monazite, "...a reddish-brown phosphate mineral containing rare-earth metals."> Broody herr. Phirip's garreons ale hele.

            Compared to gold, iron, or aluminum, the processing of REE ores is complex. "Unlike most metals which have very standard processing that varies little between mines, processing of rare earths is considerably more problematic. Companies who develop a new REE deposit have to do extensive research to establish how to process the ore. The details of a deposit’s processing requirements can make or break the economics of a particular reserve." (From the Geology for Investors site.)

            Therefore a lag between initial exploitation of a deposit and production of refined product. The Mountain Pass mine stopped processing in 2002. Environmental concerns included accidental discharge of some 600,000 gallons of radioactive and chemically hazardous waste. The mine was sold in 2008, and re-opened, but shortly afterwards the new owners -- Molycorp -- went bankrupt.

            In short, it's complicated. And I apologize for derailing the thread into matters geological.

            1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

              Re: "Rare earth" elements -- a bit more research

              And I apologize for derailing the thread into matters geological

              Don't - boffinry is always welcome here..

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A Brexit opportunity?

    When/if the UK finally leaves, perhaps it could agree to no tariffs and invite all the big US companies (Apple, etc.) to relocate.

    Would only work if the loss of income / revenue for those companies then paying tariffs to ship to the US was greater than the "China tax" they currently have on their supplies.

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

      When/if the UK finally leaves, perhaps it could agree to no tariffs and invite all the big US companies (Apple, etc.) to relocate.

      No no no.. Needs fact checking. So-

      'Race to the bottom'

      Yes, it is the BBC!-

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/49198825

      In a report earlier this month, however, the European Commission said free ports "pose a risk as regards to counterfeiting".

      It said they allowed counterfeiters to import goods, tamper with them and then re-export them without the intervention of customs officials.

      Funny the EU would say that. Of course that's just more 'Project Fear'. If stuff's being exported to the EU, then the EU's commissars will be free to intervene. UK customs, trading standards, police etc etc would also be free to intervene in UK FTZs because 'free' does not mean lawless. Article also has Labour whining saying it doesn't mean new investment.. Which is neat because FTZs can be created cheaply with a bit of paperwork and some fencing. And if the benefits are there, the investment comes from the businesses setting up inside the freeports, so jobs etc.

      Possible downside is many of the UK's trading ports ended up becoming luxury waterfront living & marinas rather than working ports.

      1. Martin Gregorie Silver badge

        Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

        Possible downside is many of the UK's trading ports ended up becoming luxury waterfront living & marinas rather than working ports.

        That depends where the fencing goes and which bit of land the paperwork applies to, so put the fence round an existing trading port and tweak that port's paperwork. Result: still a working port, not luxury living or a marina. Unless, of course, you extend the wire to make space for a marina and a few casinos within the freeport.

        Not saying this is a good idea, mind, but it would preserve existing jobs.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

          Your free port doesn't have to be a port, or even near the water.

          A big chunk of Luxembourg isn't in Europe - it's officially a tax free port where Russian billionaires can keep their art and cars without paying any duty or risk having it seized

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

            Your free port doesn't have to be a port, or even near the water.

            Yep, I guess it depends on what kind of business(es) you want to attract to your FTZ. Plus the UK's lack of space, and if you can convince the WTO your FTZ isn't taking the pish by being full of nameplates and datacentres. So like you say, Luxembourg managed it to the benefit of all it's SARLs. Doing a Ford-sized FTZ would need more space & logistics, unless it becomes a paperwork exercise to tempt those manufacturers to remain in the UK.

            1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

              Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

              Plus the UK's lack of space

              Depends where you go - the SE of England is pretty crowded but go north a few hundred miles and the population density drops right off. Go even further north into Scotland and there is plenty of space once you get past the Dun Edin/Glasachu axis.

              Of course, a lot of the land is in private hands but palms can always be greased. And (post Brixit) Scotland may well end up independent so you are back into the realm of border tariffs..

          2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

            "A big chunk of Luxembourg isn't in Europe - it's officially a tax free port where Russian billionaires can keep their art and cars without paying any duty or risk having it seized"

            That's pretty much a free port or FTZ in a nutshell. It's just warehousing for "goods in transit".

      2. Hollerithevo Silver badge

        Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

        "luxury waterfront living"? UK ports? You used these in the same sentence? Yes, the idyllic Humber estuary, where hundreds of exceeding rich people will flock to sun-bathe and live their love-island lifestyle. Or possibly Glasgow. Southampton, now there's a treat for the super-rich who'd rather party on down on native soil thn in, say, St Kitts.

        As for me, once I win the lottery, it's Fishguard!!!

        1. Claverhouse Silver badge

          Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

          Indeed, once the height of sophistication for Britain's Super-Rich was to own one's own caravan on Canvey Island...

          Still, over the last decade various councils have been anxious to demolish a 1780 building in Sudbury, Suffolk, not merely in the Establishment Imperative over the 20th century to Destroy The Past, but to on the grounds erect a mighty luxury hotel, in a sophisticated tower-block style to compete with the existing hotels to make Sudbury a high-end destination for the international jetset; who could then spend their millions in the local high street shops still standing.

          Belle Vue 1. 2. 3. Shops in richer times

        2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

          "luxury waterfront living"? UK ports? You used these in the same sentence?

          Although you make an interesting point in a funny way, just looking at the local ports, eg the Tyne, Wear and Tees, there are luxury home developments along each of those rivers replacing the docks and industry that was there in recent memory. Not to mention Londons Docklands and Salford Quays, much of Liverpools docklands, much of Glasgows riverside etc.

        3. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

          Re: A Brexit opportunity? Disaster, surely..

          "luxury waterfront living"? UK ports? You used these in the same sentence?

          In some places - yes. Two examples - the Bristol Harbourside developments and various ex-working ports in London with lots of swanky new highrise developments.

          I very much doubt wether that applies to anywhere north of Birmingham or west of Bristol though.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: A Brexit opportunity?

      Hmmm, no tariffs for US companies post a no-deal Brexit? I think you'll find this is already in progress to a largr extent, especially with regard to the carve up of the NHS for 'investment' by American healthcare companies, along with the mass import of chlorinated chicken and other sub-standard foodstuffs once those pesky EU food regulations are repealed.

      Oh, it's an opportunity alright. One in which quite a few people involved with current government are happily arranging to maximise their own profit potential.

  5. JohnFen Silver badge

    The only thing the tariffs accomplish

    The only thing the tariffs accomplish (other than being a defacto tax increase for the nonwealthy) is to encourage the world to route around the US when it comes to trade. Trump's efforts can only lead to decreased US power and wealth, and increasing the poverty problem.

    1. beep54

      Re: The only thing the tariffs accomplish

      Not merely a poverty problem, but a wealth inequality problem. Related, but not the same.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: The only thing the tariffs accomplish

        >The only thing the tariffs accomplish

        Is a VAT on cheap crap at Walmart to pay for $1Tn in tax cuts for billionaire hedge fund managers

        1. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Mushroom

          Re: The only thing the tariffs accomplish

          thanks for the leading question. the premise you state in the form of a question is WRONG, i.e. that

          a) tariffs are VAT taqxes on cheap crap at walmart

          b) billionaire hedge fund managers are the [only?] recipients of a 1 trillion dollar tax cut

          First, I shall school you on tariffs, what they are, and why they are a good idea in THIS case...

          Traditionally ALL countries (including the UK) charge taxes on things, and imports are no exception. These are called 'tariffs'. They help fund the government, and also help prevent a foreign country from RUINING a particular business within YOUR country through various predatory and unfair practices (such as 'dumping').

          If this were essential items, then MAYBE you'd have a point. but it's not. The end result is that China will lose business to other competing nations and businesses [remember China is STILL COMMUNIST, and really state-owns pretty much EVERYTHING when you boil it all down], when it's now possible for the others to compete.

          Predatory competition has been used forEVAR to shut down the competition, form monopolies, and then REALLY rape the customer down to his last penny. Tariffs are a way for a nation to STOP this at the border. That's what's happening NOW.

          Now, when it comes to TAX CUTS: When cigarette taxes are used to stop people from smoking, it should be obvious that taxation REDUCES an activity. In the case of taxing INCOMES, why REDUCE them? Don't people DESERVE to KEEP what they earn? And those who earn MORE _ALSO_ deserve to KEEP it!

          The only TRUE FAIR TAX RATE is the SAME rate, whether your single, married, have kids, or earn MORE than the next guy. Seriously. And the end-result of HIGH TAXES on "the wealthy" are always twofold: a) "The Wealthy" always seem to have the resources to CIRCUMVENT it since often their income is NOT EARNED, and b) those who DO earn high incomes are likely to just say FUCK IT and either retire or stop WORKING THEIR ASSES OFF to get ahead.

          High marginal tax rates on "the rich" are on those trying to BECOME the rich, not the ACTUAL rich. So your STUPID CLASS ENVY BULLSHIT is JUST a SOCIALIST PLOY to use CLASS ENVY to EMPOWER "them". Aka SOCISLISTS.

          Whenever you LOWER tax rates on those who INVEST and CREATE BUSINESSES, you get more, uh, INVESTMENT and BUSINESSES. This means JOBS. And that's the point.

          This is why Trump-economis WORKS, just like Reagonomics WORKED in the 80's, and if you don't actually remember SEEING it and LIVING it, then your revisionist history BULLSHIT is talking, not THE TRUTH.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: The only thing the tariffs accomplish

            > Reagonomics WORKED in the 80's

            For a "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" value of "WORKED".

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Talk is cheap

    One party rule doesn't leave much room for accountability.

    Even without sanctions, China has problems sustaining the desired growth rate without some shady grabs.

    My goodness, China continues to ban "Winnie the Pooh", for fear of causing political instability.

    Its hard to keep the charade hidden, even with a great firewall. Sanctions stink for all involved, but trade is a give and take relationship that can't always be "take" for one side.

    1. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

      Re: Talk is cheap

      The Xi Jinping and Winnie the Pooh memes are protecting my web server from Chinese brute-force attacks. Don't say the ban is a bad thing.

      1. NetBlackOps
        Pint

        Re: Talk is cheap

        Oooh! Stealing this.

        1. MrDamage

          Re: Talk is cheap

          Don't forget have a few folders full of Tienanmen Square Massacre information as well.

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Talk is cheap

      "trade is a give and take relationship that can't always be "take" for one side."

      Very! Well! Said!

  7. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

    Trump likes winners

    So most of this production will be moved to Vietnam and welcomed in tarrif free

    1. DougS Silver badge

      Re: Trump likes winners

      Land is expensive in Vietnam, existing factories mostly aren't up to snuff, the power grid doesn't have the capacity in many areas, etc. To say nothing of the whole supply chain being in China. It isn't so easy as just putting out a "help wanted" sign in Vietnam.

      There were companies already considering the move or in the process of making it because of rising wages in China, but it is a long process. Just like shifting production to China in the first place was a long process.

      1. NetBlackOps

        Re: Trump likes winners

        Recent stats have Vietnam at near maximum industrial capacity as is.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: Trump likes winners

          >Recent stats have Vietnam at near maximum industrial capacity as is.

          But presumably their capacity to unload a ship from China, re-stamp an export certificate and load a ship to the USA is holding up

          1. bombastic bob Silver badge
            Meh

            Re: Trump likes winners

            last I heard this sort of thing was a form of TAX EVASION...

            and if they ARE doing it, they deserve the appropriate punishment (even sanctions, etc.)

            1. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: Trump likes winners

              But who's going to stop them when it's their own sovereign government blessing it and fabricating the details to anyone who dares to ask?

              Ah, the joys of sovereignty...

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Free Trade Golf Course

    Just designate Trump's course up in Scotland as Free Trade Golf Course and we'll be able to import and re-export everything through it a jiffy. It will be yugely successful.

    1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      Re: Free Trade Golf Course

      It will be yugely successful

      And maybe finally turn a profit.

      It takes a special sort of fail to allow money-making machines like casinos and golf-courses to lose money hand over fist.

  9. Palpy

    Ah, Trumpeting to the unthinking masses.

    Trump: "Until such time as there is a deal, we'll be taxing them."

    Of course Trump pretends he is taxing China. But of course, the tariffs are paid by US importers, who pass the cost on to American consumers.

    But we all know that. It's JAL for Trump -- just another lie.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The Depression of the 1930's was not caused by a stock market crash - it was the world wide enactment of tariffs that changed a recession into a full blown economic collapse. We have a president that loves to repeat the worst aspects of history - except he's not too thrilled about warfare - threats maybe but would rather not actually send troops - maybe the only thing that is socially redeeming about him.

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      "he's not too thrilled about warfare"

      So he says, but a large amount of what he's been doing is resulting in an increased likelihood of war.

  11. Rol Silver badge

    Transfer of technology

    Sadly I can see Trumps point, but as usual he has blunted it into a hammer.

    Aim the taxes at the offending products, and get China to agree to respect American, and while we're at it, everyone else's ip.

    Clearly, we can't return to the dark ages where American corporations hold an unchecked monopoly, but they do have a right to profit from their intellectual property. Which brings me to my second point - America's patent system - they need to adopt one that has some credibility beyond drooling Texan lawyers.

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      Re: Transfer of technology

      "they do have a right to profit from their intellectual property"

      Of course. But they don't need action by the US government to protect their IP. They voluntarily do business with a nation knowing that doing so means it's likely their IP will be stolen. They could protect their IP by not doing that.

      What they're really demanding is the use of US governmental power to force another nation to do business in a way that US corporations prefer. That's amazingly unethical and abusive.

  12. Fungus Bob Silver badge
    Headmaster

    One niggling little point about the article

    Ya misspelt 'Glorious Leader'

    Both words should be capitalized....

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Worrying...

    China has a very big stick to beat the Donald with: a massive holding of US debt.

    If they were to dump their holding of US dollars at well below market price, it could easily provoke a run on the dollar. If they also pushed, together with Russia to replace the US dollar as the main trade currency (which has already been mooted by the BRIC countries), we could well be seeing some very trying times ahead.

    China has always played the long game - a natural side effect of not living in a world where four years is the furthest you look ahead as a political player - and I would wager that the Donald has neither the wits or patience to win a long game with China.

    1. cdrcat

      Re: Worrying...

      > If they were to dump their holding of US dollars at well below market price, it could easily provoke a run on the dollar

      Ummmm, you don't think the US has heard of that and might have a plan? Maybe as simple as freezing their account!

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Worrying...

        Plus it's not like China holds most of the US debt (the "1 million vs. 100 million" argument); most US debt is domestically held.

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: Worrying...

      "a massive holding of US debt."

      which COULD get canceled... (this was Obaka's fault, by the way, to have them buy up all of those bonds)

      1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        Re: Worrying...

        which COULD get canceled...

        Thus pushing the US international credit rating to the level of junk bonds.

  14. martinusher Silver badge

    He needs the money for the next round of tax cuts for the well off

    This isn't a tariff, its more of a Federal sales tax. The 2017 tax cuts have worked their way through the economy, making the wealthy a bit wealthier and giving corporations the loot for stock buybacks and bonuses, so now there's pressure for more tax cuts. There's already a runaway deficit, you can't increase taxes, you can't cut programs (and you sponsors need those new military contracts) so what better way to raise revenue than to impose tariffs and deflect blame to the Chinese?

    What Trump doesn't realize is that its screwing up businesses in the US. Its true that some of the ones that will be hit are in places like California, places which are politically unimportant, places his supporters would like to bring down a peg or ten, but this is eventually going to hit the Heartland.

    The bad news is that the Democratic sheep are going along with the program because its 'patriotic'. Oh well......

    1. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: He needs the money for the next round of tax cuts for the well off

      your FEELINGS have been noted, and observed to be nothing but opinions based in emotional reaction.

      Unless you have actual EVIDENCE... [which I doubt]

  15. _LC_ Bronze badge
    FAIL

    In case nobody noticed: The US of A is stone-broke

    … and China already owns half of it. ;-)

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Who knows

    Trump has some valid points when saying that China indeed copied all kind of things.

    Now the problem is that America didn’t had a problem with that as long as their products were graded has lower quality and they could pay virtually zero for labor. Please remember an employee that manufactures an iPhone gets probably less than 100 usd and each phone out of the factory doesn’t cost much more than 100 usd, in the stores costs 800 usd. America never gave a dammmm about contributing for exploitation in the name of capitalism and profits. Now the problem is that China with that experience gained competencies and money and start making their own R&D with a number of brands like the ones we all know, and they became popular, very popular, and then they became better as well and reasonably priced, and then they started shifting the niddle where the profits of exploitation were going.

    In this, other countries are being caught, remember that Europe and even Canada are being affected, with such taxes, not to the same extend of course.

    The interesting thing is that we could all argue this would be good for economy in USA, to further increase the jobs in US by moving production back to US... well seems that all companies don’t care about US that much in the end, they will move production to Thailand, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, etc. starting all over again and we all know where this leads. US is being a patron of other countries, by assuming other countries, just because they are under developed and in poverty that means they are dumb, but they are not.

    In the end of the day what these policies will drive is that no other global players that are by far bigger market combined than US internal market, is that they will not risk much in a unstable country in trade policies, like US became, Everett second week or less they change the rules and then change them back and then temporary rules to overcome issues. No one would make long term partnerships With such entity.

    US really is risking isolating themselves, other players in Asia are benefiting from this, Japan and Korea mainly for example and will absorb even more market and at some point it might happen that US companies become irrelevant.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Who knows

      I can't speak about Thailand, Indonesia, or Vietnam, but, if you think Taiwan is "under developed" you're even dumber than your post makes you appear. My wife is Taiwanese and I've spent a fair amount of time in her country. Yeah, they have their poor areas, but not any more so than Japan or Korea (which I have also spent time in). In fact their economy (while good) would be much better if China would stop threatening to invade them every six months or so.

      Stop jerking around and think this through. China has a huge economy BECAUSE of American dollars. You dry that up, even with the American debt owed to them, and China becomes destitute. Hell, they can't even feed their own country. What are they going to do? Invade another country and take their resources? For all their bluster they have very minimal force projection capabilities. Do the numbers. They can't successfully invade and hold even tiny Taiwan. Are they going to throw a tantrum and nuke someone? Yeah? And then what? They'll have nothing left to use on their starving population when the those masses come for them. Think their military will stand in lock-step and defend the tyrants when they and their families are starving and said tyrants have plenty to eat? Imagine the French Revolution in China.

      What they will do is buy more Congress-critters and mass media folks and continue the propaganda campaign that shifted into high gear during the Clinton regime and, as you've demonstrated, continues to this day. China is a paper tiger and that paper is American dollars. No dollars, no tiger.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: Who knows

        "What are they going to do? Invade another country and take their resources?"

        They could also just work directly with the other nations of the world and ignore the US. Which is what they've been working toward being able to do for years now, and they're well on that path. Ironically, Trump's policies are making that effort a lot easier and faster as a result of the US' increasing isolation and reduction of influence worldwide.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Since everything is made in China, of course, they copy everything and make money on selling in volume. Are tariffs really going to stop that?

  18. Claverhouse Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    The Wages of Neo-Liberalism

    One major aspect, if Trump were vindictive would be to drive old Walmart down.

    Walmart, as much as Hollywood was firmly in the bag for Hillary Clinton. Not only was she Walmart's very own daughter, as a lawyer who worked for them back when they were crushing unions and was profoundly admired by the venerable founder, Sam Walton; but the family, who are not poor, remained personal friends with the awful old fraud for 40+ years, and were major contributors to her campaign when she ran against Trump and lost.

    Walmart imports a lot of Chinese crap.

    1. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: The Wages of Neo-Liberalism

      "Walmart imports a lot of Chinese crap."

      doesn't take long going through the store to determine whether this is true or not, but yeah, low-end department stores nearly always buy from the cheapest supplier, which currently involves a lot of companies in China. Do you blame them?

      The question that arises is whether or not China is engaging in predatory trade practices that KEEP these stores from buying their 'cheap crap' from OTHERS...

  19. crayon
    FAIL

    Fake news is everywhere, even here

    "In June, the situation seemed to be improving. Trump met his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, at the G20 Summit and agreed not to impose further tariffs. It wasn't to last."

    They agreed to a 3 month ceasefire. June + 3 months is September or thereabouts which is when the new tariffs kick in.

    "(despite describing the proposed tariffs as "fake news" just days later)."

    I skimmed through the article that was linked to, it seems to be about calling "proposed bans on investments in tech companies" fake news. I can't see anything about anyone calling the "proposed tariffs" fake news.

  20. Tempest
    Happy

    In IndoChina We Love Trump's Tariffs

    The Blond Headed Dummy is working wonders for economies in IndoChina.

    With every increase in the idiots Tariffs on Chinese products, more plants are built in Laos, Kampuchea (Cambodia) and Thailand where re-labeling is the main 'production' activity.

    Recently, a dummy company located in VietNam was shuttered when it was re-labeling Chinese made products as being "Made In VietNam'.

    Additionally, exports to our region, from China, are being discounted more in order to keep Chinese workers employed.

    Thank you Trump - for screwing Americans again.

  21. Jonjonz

    This is all just so much drama, with litle substance

    News reports fail to put the actual amount of these tariffs in perspective. The total income from the bloated bigot in DC, is less than 1% of the US annual tax income, so this is all just posing and theatre. The stock market volititility has nothing to do with this, but is just the fallout from more and more black box trading.

    There is not a single politician in the world that really has a handle on just how bent over the multinationals have us all.

  22. mithrenithil

    Cunning?

    Maybe its just all part of a cunning plan to make property more valuable... Or he has a ton of Bitcoin!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019