I am not really sure how this all works but this is pretty informative. It appears to me that the majority of Tariffs have been put on hold except for China. I assume that is because we import the most from them?

Link: https://www.tradecomplianceresourcehub.com/2025/04/24/trump-2-0-tariff-tracker/#country

This is all you need to know about tariffs, according to the financial geniuses here:



Tariffs will cause inflation in America and are a tax on our citizens.

None of that happens when they are implemented in other countries.



That's it! Now you understand tariffs!

Uh, pretty much everyone agrees tariffs ARE a consumption tax on citizens and residents of the nation implementing the tariffs because the cost increase is borne by the end consumer.

The only argument there is if the other effects are worth the cost or if other actions can mitigate that tax.

That applies everywhere they are done.

I've got a lengthy list for your last words after the comma, but I regret me wanting to allow China to have World Trade status.

I'm generally an economic purist, thinking it will allow China to further enhance their lifestyle after Mao murdered 50-70 million in the 60's. I was wrong.

And it has to a degree. But, they've done what every single communist nation has done in history. They've used the freedom of America (see capitalism) to enrich themselves ala capitalism. However, they used that free trade to hurt us economically by using their own tariffs, never keeping any business agreements, stealing every single piece of business acumen and technology, and then giving us a list of demands to hand to them to have access to their billions of citizens.

But, the one thing they absolutely can't do is innovate, at least not very well without stealing it from us. Competition, which we do so well because of freedom, is completely lost on all communist/fascist/socialist societies because the citizens don't have to compete.

That's why China has to steal, or confiscate through their agreements, and has such a hard time innovating. I realize my statement may not make sense in lieu of the AI advance recently along with some of their military advances, but once again, how did they obtain those advancements?

Tariffs are put on hold when ACTIVE negotiations are taking place.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Uh, pretty much everyone agrees tariffs ARE a consumption tax on citizens and residents of the nation implementing the tariffs because the cost increase is borne by the end consumer.

The only argument there is if the other effects are worth the cost or if other actions can mitigate that tax.

That applies everywhere they are done.

---

As long as those goods have domestic alternatives, the tarrifs should just balance the playing field and give more market share to the domestic option.

****ing Capitalist pigs and Economics 101 continue to destroy any Leftist narrative.

maybe they couldn't innovate 20 or 30 years ago but they sure as hell can now. They're world leaders in battery tech, electric cars, drones, and solar panels, and they can build a new nuclear plant for about 1/4 of what we pay. I think the world has mostly caught up on 5G but they were a world leader there for awhile too. Deep seek did lots of clever, novel things that our ai companies hadn't yet tried.

They can innovate.

Free trade without fair trade is a fantasy. The US has been living in fantasy land for decades.

Aggie Spirit said:

---

Free trade without fair trade is a fantasy. The US has been living in fantasy land for decades.

---

Exactly. We have the best standard of living by far of any large country and are lapping Europe on tech and growth. We should definitely shake up the system because they're putting tariffs on planes and cars and should instead mimic the practices that they've implemented that have essentially cost them a decade of growth.

Aggie Spirit said:

---

Free trade without fair trade is a fantasy. The US has been living in fantasy land for decades.

---

We have Trans Free Trade. It identifies as free but it is anything but.

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

maybe they couldn't innovate 20 or 30 years ago but they sure as hell can now. They're world leaders in battery tech, electric cars, drones, and solar panels, and they can build a new nuclear plant for about 1/4 of what we pay. I think the world has mostly caught up on 5G but they were a world leader there for awhile too. Deep seek did lots of clever, novel things that our ai companies hadn't yet tried.

They can innovate.

---

Yep, I considered that when I wrote it. I've spoken to several on TA that have spent time there.

While I do like to be certain on my comments, or as much as anyone can be regarding a country with centralized economies and tyrannical citizen oversight, I wonder how much they relied on our tech and research to get there? I'm 100% certain it is significant, and I use the word significant simply because I don't have concrete numbers.

I would assume some of their innovation is hampered because of what they can, and cannot, include on certain tech, like the truth.

I got a kick out of DeepSeek trying to answer a question about Tiananmen Square and it effectively said "huh, that was just a wonderful time in China".

I know they're quite capable and certainly innovate these days. I just want to unleash our guys who've had 25-30 years of relatively consistent success.

Something that I don't think the page shows is that some of these tariffs are eligible for drawbacks. For some of the items I source at work from China, it initially looks like I'd be paying 150% tariff. But after taking into account HTS codes, exporting back out of country/end user, special exemptions.....I actually only see a 20% tariff.

Also adding to it is that some Chinese suppliers are so desperate to hang on to business that they're decreasing costs enough to offset any remaining tariffs.

AJ02 said:

---

Also adding to it is that some Chinese suppliers are so desperate to hang on to business that they're decreasing costs enough to offset any remaining tariffs.

---

Impossible!

This is the second poster with first hand knowledge of foreign manufacurers eating part of the costs of tariffs.

Oh for sure! Even non-Chinese suppliers, it depends on incoterms. I have one supplier in UK whose incoterms currently have them paying the tariffs to ship us inventory. They're under contract, so they can't change anything or increase prices until contract term is up. Another supplier is splitting the tariff costs 50/50.

Oh no doubt they've ripped off a lot of our IP over the years. No arguing with you there. But they've built enough of a base that they're now innovating on cutting edge techs.

Also, it's interesting but China sometimes lets companies engage in fierce competition. I think the government seeded a hundred electric car companies and then pulled out and let them fight to the death. It's not the command economy of Mao anymore.

I'll be the first one to admit I'm not much of a follower of Global Economics, but it seems to me that breaking our addiction on an individual level from cheap Chinese produced goods may not be a bad deal. Since the inception of Amazon Prime I've really been noticing that we are flooded with a lot of stuff we really just don't need. I heard on the radio today that we need to brace ourselves for the steep increases in prices for Halloween costumes and I couldn't help but think that was a good thing.

For my job I'm required to enter houses during the sale process and a lot of the time i notice the sheer amount of just "stuff" people have. I can't help but think if these tariffs could curb our addiction to consumerism on stuff wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

am I wrong here?

4 said:

---

This is all you need to know about tariffs, according to the financial geniuses here:



Tariffs will cause inflation in America and are a tax on our citizens.

None of that happens when they are implemented in other countries.



That's it! Now you understand tariffs!

---

buying cheap goods from china drives inflation.

We exchange USD for cheap materials and labor. China buys US Treasuries increasing the money supply. Rinse/repeat.

This is a misleading take. They can only buy treasuries that are on sale. They can't demand them and force us to print them. If our government engaged in less deficit spending, the market of available treasuries would be smaller. That's what's driving the increase in money supply, not Chinese participation in a sale that's already occurring.

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

This is a misleading take. They can only buy treasuries that are on sale. They can't demand them and force us to print them. If our government engaged in less deficit spending, the market of available treasuries would be smaller. That's what's driving the increase in money supply, not Chinese participation in a sale that's already occurring.

---

don't you think they are offered for sale knowing that there is already a buyer on the other side?

Additionally, if you know that buyer to be china wouldnt you favor deals that help china sell cheap goods into the US? Because that allows you to raise more funds for govt programs?

Point being our trade with china by way of anchor to cheap goods and thirst for them to own our debt has put us in a very very weak position with china over the last 25 years.

Ragoo said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

This is a misleading take. They can only buy treasuries that are on sale. They can't demand them and force us to print them. If our government engaged in less deficit spending, the market of available treasuries would be smaller. That's what's driving the increase in money supply, not Chinese participation in a sale that's already occurring.

---

don't you think they are offered for sale knowing that there is already a buyer on the other side?

Additionally, if you know that buyer to be china wouldnt you favor deals that help china sell cheap goods into the US? Because that allows you to raise more funds for govt programs?

Point being our trade with china by way of anchor to cheap goods and thirst for them to own our debt has put us in a very very weak position with china over the last 25 years.

---

So we're running 2 trillion deficits. We don't get to decide when to do auctions. When debt comes due, we have to sell new debt to pay the old debt. We aren't making a decision to sell to China, we're just running huge deficits without a care and they're funding a small part of them.