Trump slaps a tarriff on solar panels and washing machines

[_honorentheos]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-impose ... 1516658821

Some of Mr. Trump’s fellow Republicans weren’t as sanguine. “Here’s something Republicans used to understand: Tariffs are taxes on families,” Nebraska GOP Sen. Ben Sasse said in a statement.

[_Res Ipsa]

Or is Lowes acting as agent for LG?

I wouldn’t expect so. Just buyer and seller.

[_honorentheos]

Or is Lowes acting as agent for LG?

I wouldn’t expect so. Just buyer and seller.

Escalation of unilateral actions such as this are a step backwards for globalization and innovation. The complaint against China's support of their solar industry being met with making their products cost more for potential US buyers isn't resolved by making them more expensive for US consumers. Rather, China will continue to accelerate their dominance in investment in the future green energy economies as they sell to other buyers in the global economy while US green energy industries get to find out what it's like to be the US auto industry in the 1980s. And tariffs are a tool every nation has access to, so that famously concerning trade imbalance...? Yeah. A trade war will hurt everyone. Well, we might have the silver lining of not having to see Bach post about his portfolio in the future...

This should be rather concerning to people, really.

[_honorentheos]

From another WSJ article that seeks a broader perspective on the subject:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-allies ... x_artPos=1

Trump Tariffs Spark Criticism, Raise Tensions Over Trade
Eleven Pacific Rim nations forge a new trade bloc without the U.S. and Europe moves to shore up other ties as Washington takes tougher approach

Mr. Trump’s emerging trade policy involves three main components, each advanced in different forms this week.

The first is ramping up trade-enforcement actions, like the broad, steep tariffs announced Monday aimed at protecting U.S. makers of solar panels and washing machines. Administration officials said more of these types of protections are coming, with studies under way for action on steel and aluminum.

...

The second part of the trade agenda is either shunning pacts negotiated by previous administrations, like TPP, or rewriting them. A large delegation of U.S. trade negotiators is in Montreal this week to press Canada and Mexico for concessions to rebalance the North American Free Trade Agreement in ways aimed at steering manufacturing from Mexico back to the U.S.

...

The third element of the policy agenda is to shake up the World Trade Organization, the overseer of the global trading system since 1995. Administration officials said the Geneva body too often rules against U.S. interests, and doesn’t do enough to rein in China’s state-driven trading system.

To make its point, the U.S. is blocking appointments to the WTO’s court responsible for arbitrating trade disputes between members, a move that risks gumming up the world commercial legal system.

In a tense meeting of world trade officials in Geneva on Monday, Mexico introduced a proposal backed by nearly 60 WTO members demanding the U.S. end its filibuster. Eighteen delegates—including those from Canada, Europe, and China—spoke to support the proposal, one warning of “major consequences” for the WTO. The U.S. representative declined to yield.

There has been a lot of discussion during Trump's first year as to what the consequences would be if he started down this path. For example, this article from back in July in the Washington Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mon ... 1a1d75016e

Unlike many of Trump’s formal trade policy announcements, these moves could have an almost immediate impact. They will probably lead to more trade barriers and barriers that are poorly vetted. U.S. consumers will suffer, as well as manufacturers that rely on imported inputs to remain competitive, as will those companies’ employees.

While a political victory for anti-globalists, there will be unintended costs and redistribution. Self-initiated cases are also likely to raise barriers that don’t meet the international legal standards of the World Trade Organization, leading to disputes at the WTO and retaliation from trading partners.

...

It’s plausible that Trump wants more self-initiated cases simply to take political credit for protecting U.S. firms and jobs. Yet this approach will likely have costs.

First, they may create more trade barriers, inflicting pain on the U.S. economy. Steel tariffs would increase costs for U.S. manufacturers and construction companies that rely on imported inputs, making matters worse for U.S. consumers and taxpayers. Even if some U.S. steel jobs end up being saved, it would come at the expense of U.S. jobs in other sectors. And any new import taxes on other consumer or retail goods would likely be regressive – in other words, they would increase prices disproportionately for poorer Americans.

Second, there will likely be less evidence to support these new trade barriers, making them vulnerable to successful WTO actions from other countries. This weakens a 70-year-old U.S. commitment to promote the international rule of law and encourages others to engage in tit-for-tat retaliation. China did this repeatedly between 2009 and 2011, harming U.S. exports and workers in sectors as diverse as poultry, autos and steel.

Finally, these actions may be politically costly. They could open the way to new and harmful allegations of cronyism in the Trump administration. New barriers inevitably create winners and losers. The losers will ask whether the U.S. policymakers behind the self-initiating – whether in the White House, Commerce or Congress – are tilting the playing field to benefit certain U.S. industries and their own investment portfolios, at the expense of other Americans.

[_MeDotOrg]

I can actually imagine Trump being in a pique regarding the recent rapprochement between North and South Korea. The washing machine tariff hits South Korea as well.

[_moksha]

Curtailing solar sales will be good for the fossil fuel industry. Bring back coal burning and you can help choke all those clean air liberals.

Count on Trump not tampering with tariffs on foreign luxury autos.

[_Dr. Shades]

Who the Hell is "LG," damn it?

[_Jersey Girl]

Who the Hell is "LG," damn it?

LG Electronics.

[_Jersey Girl]

Life's Good... (if you can afford their stuff)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Electronics

We're not getting any of their stuff, Shades.

[_Ceeboo]

Who the Hell is "LG," damn it?

Lady Gaga.