Its Happening - Law to Tax Overseas Income Now in Progress

[rooster59]

Trump ups ante on China, threatens duties on nearly all its imports

By Steve Holland and David Lawder

 

U.S. President Donald Trump walks to Marine One while departing the White House in Washington, U.S., September 6, 2018. REUTERS/Chris Wattie

 

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump warned on Friday he was ready to slap tariffs on virtually all Chinese imports into the United States, threatening duties on another $267 billion of goods on top of $200 billion in imports primed for levies in coming days.

 

The moves would sharply escalate Trump's trade war with Beijing over his demands for major changes in economic, trade and technology policy. China has threatened retaliation, which could include action against U.S. companies operating there.

 

Hours after a public comment period closed on his $200 billion China tariff list, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he was "being strong on China because I have to be."

 

"The $200 billion we are talking about could take place very soon depending on what happens with them. To a certain extent it's going to be up to China," Trump said. "And I hate to say this, but behind that is another $267 billion ready to go on short notice if I want. That totally changes the equation."

 

Stock prices slipped after his comments, with the S&P 500 off 0.2 percent, while China's off-shore trade yuan currency fell against the dollar. [MKTS/GLOB]

 

Trump has already imposed 25 percent tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods, mostly industrial machinery and intermediate electronics parts, including semiconductors.

 

The $200 billion list, which includes some consumer products such as cameras and recording devices, luggage, handbags, tires and vacuum cleaners, would be subject to tariffs of 10 percent to 25 percent.

 

Cell phones, the biggest U.S. import from China, have so far been spared, but would be engulfed if Trump activates the $267 billion tariff list.

 

Trump's threatened tariffs, now totaling $517 billion in Chinese goods, would exceed the $505 billion in goods imported from China last year. But 2018 imports from China through July were up nearly 9 percent over the same period of 2017, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.

 

Earlier on Friday, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told Bloomberg Television the administration would evaluate public comments before making decisions on the $200 billion tariff list.

 

The U.S. Trade Representative's office received nearly 6,000 comments and held seven days of public hearings on the proposed levies.

 

Most comments were from companies seeking to remove products from the tariff list, arguing there were few, if any alternative sources and the duties would cause financial hardship. Comparatively few applauded the tariffs.

 

Major technology company Apple Inc said a "wide range" of its products would be hit by the tariffs, but not its iPhone. It said in a late submission that its AirPods headphones, some of Apple's Beats headphones, and its new HomePod smart speaker would face levies, causing its shares to slip in late trading.

 

"Our concern with these tariffs is that the U.S. will be hardest hit, and that will result in lower U.S. growth and competitiveness and higher prices for U.S. consumers," Apple said in the letter.

 

Retailers had successfully kept high-profile consumer electronics such as cell phones and television sets off of previous tariff lists.

 

But David French, top lobbyist for the National Retail Federation, whose members include Amazon.com , BJ’s Wholesale Club and Macy’s, said nearly every consumer good could be affected if Trump follows through on all threatened tariffs.

 

"The Chinese aren't paying these tariffs, American families are going to pay these tariffs. These are taxes and they're going to find their way into the pocket book of folks around the country," French said.

 

STILL TALKING TO CHINA

 

Kudlow, who heads the National Economic Council, told CNBC the administration was still talking with China about trade issues but so far China had not met U.S. requests.

 

The United States has demanded that China better protect American intellectual property, cut its U.S. trade surplus, allow U.S. companies greater access to its markets and roll back its high-technology industrial subsidy programs.

 

"We are still talking with China on a number of issues ... Those talks will continue to go on. We want lower (trade) barriers across the board," Kudlow said.

 

Specifically, Kudlow said, the United States was seeking "zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers, zero subsidies, stop the IP theft, stop the technology transfer, allow Americans to own their own companies."

 

"Those have been our asks for many months and so far those asks have not been satisfied," he said. "However, hope springs eternal."

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-09-08

[billd766]

If he manages to introduce this new set of tariffs what will he do after that as there won't be anything left for him to tariff any more?

[ReMarKable]

He is just compensating for his small hands.

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, rooster59 said:

roll back its high-technology industrial subsidy programs.

US Federal Research and Experimentation Tax Credit incentive claims totaled $11.3 billion in 2013 (equivalent to 0.24% of GDP). http://www.oecd.org/sti/rd-tax-stats-united-states.pdf

The tax credit may be carried back one year and carried forward 20 years!

Will the US also roll back its tax subsidy programs as well to provide a level trade field?

Trump says he doesn't make concessions in trade negotiations, so unlikely.

[MaiChai]

Americans will end up paying more for the consumer goods made in China. Also the Chinese have work around these issues before by 'finishing' goods in other countries like Thailand and Vietnam; solar panels are a good example.

[Tug]

Get ready for your 20%trump tax and what do you receive for your new tax?nothing and there’s more!!!do you think China will be inclined to help with n Korea ? That’s our Donald!!!yupthe art of fiasco!!!

[Esso49]

Americans get ready for the massive dollar slump when the Chinese start economic warfare.   Trump and his childish goods tariffs  ain't seen nothing yet.

[khaowong1]

Of course China taxes our imports to them, but it's not fair if the US taxes their imports to us.  Does anyone else see something wrong here?  

[Basil B]

I am sure China can throw the biggest punches in this war...

[Nyezhov]

35 minutes ago, Basil B said:

I am sure China can throw the biggest punches in this war...

Perhaps you should study the issue a bit more.

[manarak]

anyone who understands economics knows free trade can't go on with low-wage high resource countries like China if our countries want to preserve living standards.

[Srikcir]

10 hours ago, khaowong1 said:

Of course China taxes our imports to them, but it's not fair if the US taxes their imports to us.  Does anyone else see something wrong here?  

Some good discussion on that topic here: https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-United-States-government-allow-China-to-place-a-huge-import-tax-on-American-goods-and-yet-let-them-flood-the-American-market-with-cheap-low-quality-goods-Would-mirroring-their-import-taxes-level-the-playing-field-and-bring-back-jobs

Of special note is that on all imports no matter the country into China are subjected to a Value Added Tax versus the US that does not have a national VAT.

[stevenl]

43 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Some good discussion on that topic here: https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-United-States-government-allow-China-to-place-a-huge-import-tax-on-American-goods-and-yet-let-them-flood-the-American-market-with-cheap-low-quality-goods-Would-mirroring-their-import-taxes-level-the-playing-field-and-bring-back-jobs

Of special note is that on all imports no matter the country into China are subjected to a Value Added Tax versus the US that does not have a national VAT. 

" Of special note is that on all imports no matter the country into China are subjected to a Value Added Tax versus the US that does not have a national VAT. "

Nothing to do with import, all products sold are subjected to VAT.

[bandito]

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

If he manages to introduce this new set of tariffs what will he do after that as there won't be anything left for him to tariff any more?

 

Hit the red button.

[ballpoint]

17 minutes ago, bandito said:

 

Hit the red button.

But Chinese tariffs on incoming ICBMs are prohibitive.

[Slip]

6 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

But Chinese tariffs on incoming ICBMs are prohibitive.

Positively punitive...

[Roadman]

Happy down here in the South Pacific thanks to the Trumpster. Our companies exports into the Chinese market are always profit cyclable every few years, but since this tit for tat has started what was starting to be the normal downturn from a few months ago has turned as Chinese importers have come to us to replace volume from American suppliers. Thanks to the Trumpster our profit margins will hold up for the year so a maximum bonus for the back pocket. 

[GOLDBUGGY]

Free Trade should also mean Fare Trade. 

 

Last year the United States Purchase $376 Billion Dollars more in Goods from China then what China purchased from the United States. How Fare is that? This reminds me of the Opium Wars when Britian sold Opium to China to try and balance the huge Trade Deficite it had with China then for buying all there Tea. 

 

The Chinese are also no fools when it comes to trading. I never met one who could not make money from any trade they did. As we all know Tea now grows in several different countries, but back then it only grew in China. This was because back then Tea Leaves and Seeds was a safely and highly guarded secret which carried the penalty of death for anyone who tried to sell them, or reveal this secret. Are things much different today? 

 

Today China imports and buys cheap raw materials like Rubber from Thailand. They then send this to one of there Rubber Factories which keeps there people working and not unemployed, to build Car Tyres. Due to using Cheap Labour, they are able to Sell and Export this finished product all the way to the USA, who can no longer compete with this Cheap Labour, as the Consumer will buy this Chinese Prodict at a cheaper price.

 

So other than the Consumer saving a few dollars at the till when he buys these cheaper tyres, how does the United States benefit from such a deal with China? Well in reality they don't. They don't get any of the benefit of creating manufactory jobs, or the company profit from that, to expand there business. They also lose out on all the Tax Income all this would generate. 

 

I am not a big Trump Fan! I am not sure anyone is anymore. But I am also not a huge Fan of Free Trade either, when you are competing against countries like Mexico and China, who use something close to Slave Labour. With Tariffs the American People will have to pay more at first, but this also keeps there finished products more competitive. So in the long run it is probably better for them then constantly giving these jobs away to other countries. 

 

This is not new news or something that hasn't been brought up before Trump. Ross Perot (another Billionaire) mentioned this a long time ago and during his run for Presidential Election in the early and mid 90's. Nobody took him serious then. I wonder if they will  listen to Trump now? 

[stevenl]

4 minutes ago, GOLDBUGGY said:

Free Trade should also mean Fare Trade. 

 

Last year the United States Purchase $376 Billion Dollars more in Goods from China then what China purchased from the United States. How Fare is that? This reminds me of the Opium Wars when Britian sold Opium to China to try and balance the huge Trade Deficite it had with China then for buying all there Tea. 

 

The Chinese are also no fools when it comes to trading. I never met one who could not make money from any trade they did. As we all know Tea now grows in several different countries, but back then it only grew in China. This was because back then Tea Leaves and Seeds was a safely and highly guarded secret which carried the penalty of death for anyone who tried to sell them, or reveal this secret. Are things much different today? 

 

Today China imports and buys cheap raw materials like Rubber from Thailand. They then send this to one of there Rubber Factories which keeps there people working and not unemployed, to build Car Tyres. Due to using Cheap Labour, they are able to Sell and Export this finished product all the way to the USA, who can no longer compete with this Cheap Labour, as the Consumer will buy this Chinese Prodict at a cheaper price.

 

So other than the Consumer saving a few dollars at the till when he buys these cheaper tyres, how does the United States benefit from such a deal with China? Well in reality they don't. They don't get any of the benefit of creating manufactory jobs, or the company profit from that, to expand there business. They also lose out on all the Tax Income all this would generate. 

 

I am not a big Trump Fan! I am not sure anyone is anymore. But I am also not a huge Fan of Free Trade either, when you are competing against countries like Mexico and China, who use something close to Slave Labour. With Tariffs the American People will have to pay more at first, but this also keeps there finished products more competitive. So in the long run it is probably better for them then constantly giving these jobs away to other countries. 

 

This is not new news or something that hasn't been brought up before Trump. Ross Perot (another Billionaire) mentioned this a long time ago and during his run for Presidential Election in the early and mid 90's. Nobody took him serious then. I wonder if they will  listen to Trump now? 

Volume has nothing to do with fair trade.With some countries there is a deficit, with some a surplus, that is trading.

 

Following the reasoning 'it should be fair, let's slap a tariff on them', many countries should slap tariffs on US products, and following that reasoning it should be a one way street. And take into account that there are quite a few ways to measure the trade volume.

[GOLDBUGGY]

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Volume has nothing to do with fair trade.With some countries there is a deficit, with some a surplus, that is trading.

 

Following the reasoning 'it should be fair, let's slap a tariff on them', many countries should slap tariffs on US products, and following that reasoning it should be a one way street. And take into account that there are quite a few ways to measure the trade volume.

We are not talking nickels and dimes here, or a Pee in the Ocean when it comes to trading with China and the USA. We are talking a $376 Billion Dollar deficite to the United States on total trading with China of about $500 Billion Dollars. That is Huge! And the last time I checked "deficite" still means shortage or debt, and not something else. 

 

Many countries do slap tariffs (or Taxes) on US Products. Have you been down to your local supermarket lately to buy Imported Cheese or Wine from the USA, or Heaven Forebid, Canadian Maple Syrup?

 

But there is other issues besides Tariffs that need to be considered and addressed as well. For example a country may subsidize a product making it cheaper to buy in that country. If China decided to subsidize imported Rubber from Thailand, for example, this would make it cheaper for the Tyre Factory to buy raw material and thus also lower the cost to produce a Tyre. I would think that this would go against Free Trade as well. 

 

I am sorry but I have never seen any benefit of Free Trade to me, or my country, in all these years. I recall back when Canada was first making a Free Tade Deal with the USA, they said in Canada that this will produce hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of new jobs for Canada. But I never saw any of that happening either. Except the unemployment rate did climb shortly after that announcement.

 

I say that if you can't produce a finished product in your own country, where it is competitive enough that your own people will buy it, then you sure as hell are not gong to be able to sell it to a poorer country like China.        

[manarak]

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

Volume has nothing to do with fair trade.With some countries there is a deficit, with some a surplus, that is trading.

 

Following the reasoning 'it should be fair, let's slap a tariff on them', many countries should slap tariffs on US products, and following that reasoning it should be a one way street. And take into account that there are quite a few ways to measure the trade volume.

in itself, trade balance has nothing to with fairness, agreed.

 

but the trade balance can be good or bad. when it's negative, it means the country is bleeding out in terms of wealth.

 

this happens when a country needs to import an expensive good or when its products are not competitive on the world market and other countries produce the same goods much cheaper, so the business logic is to buy them abroad and import them.

 

where it starts to be unfair is when said foreign products are cheaper because of cheap labor and labor conditions that would not be allowed in the importing country.

That's what happens with China.

In the long term that means there are two scenarios: continue free trade and our countries bleed out, and in the end our workforce will have to adapt to Chinese wages and living standards, or impose either tariffs or quotas in order to reduce the bleed and make national products competitive on the market again, at least on the local market.

[stevenl]

33 minutes ago, manarak said:

in itself, trade balance has nothing to with fairness, agreed.

 

but the trade balance can be good or bad. when it's negative, it means the country is bleeding out in terms of wealth.

 

this happens when a country needs to import an expensive good or when its products are not competitive on the world market and other countries produce the same goods much cheaper, so the business logic is to buy them abroad and import them.

 

where it starts to be unfair is when said foreign products are cheaper because of cheap labor and labor conditions that would not be allowed in the importing country.

That's what happens with China.

In the long term that means there are two scenarios: continue free trade and our countries bleed out, and in the end our workforce will have to adapt to Chinese wages and living standards, or impose either tariffs or quotas in order to reduce the bleed and make national products competitive on the market again, at least on the local market.

There are more scenarios, look at Germany and some other European countries that are doing fine.

[manarak]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

There are more scenarios, look at Germany and some other European countries that are doing fine.

absolutely.

the thing is, Germany is still producing things that others can't make at the same level of quality and technology. German workforce is also a major advantage.

Also, German exports were massively helped by the Euro, the weakness of the other EU countries artificially cheapened German exports.

I don't expect things to remain like that forever though.

Edited September 9, 2018 by manarak