Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Flaming Orange Craziness tariffs

Interrupting "Real Yield" today, Sonali Basak reported from Reuters than tariffs will not begin until March. Everything else I see says the ridiculousness will start on Feb 1st, but that oil/gas will be dogged by a smaller tariff. A report I saw earlier asserted 25% on Canada, 25% on Mexico, 10% on China. Really??? Reward China for being scumbags politically and militarily? ... But of course, the Orange Dolt thinks whatever he wants to think. His cardinal rule is that it must be nonsensical.

Any specific, actual updates? Thank you.
«13

Comments

  • The illegal crossing of migrants and the flow of fentanyl into the U.S. were the irritants Trump named when he first threatened to slap Canada and Mexico with 25 per cent tariffs last fall. Government officials say less than one per cent of each enters the U.S. from Canada. [Immigration Minister] Miller acknowledged on Friday they no longer believe border concerns to be at the heart of Trump’s tariff threats.
    ...
    Earlier in the day, fresh uncertainty had been injected into an already volatile situation following a report by Reuters, citing three unnamed sources, that Trump was expected to announce Canada and Mexico would face tariffs on their imports beginning March 1 ...

    “I was just with the President in the Oval Office, and I can confirm that tomorrow, the Feb. 1 deadline that President Trump put into place in a statement several weeks ago continues,” said White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. “These are promises made and promises kept by the president,” she added.

    “Starting tomorrow those tariffs will be in place.”
    https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/canada-uncertainty-tariffs-feb-1
    (report supposedly updated an hour ago)

    Reuters has a 26sec video clip of Leavitt making that statement. It's real.
    https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/north-america-braces-new-trump-tariffs-saturday-deadline-nears-2025-01-31/
  • Thank you very much.
  • the end of North America, as (the data-driven; pace FD1k) PK puts it in today's substack column:

    U.S. trade law gives the president huge discretion to impose tariffs, but only for a specific set of reasons: economic injury from import surges (Section 201), national security (Section 232), unfair foreign competition (Section 301), dumping — sales below costs. Drug smuggling, especially imaginary drug smuggling, isn’t on the list.

    ...

    As I wrote the other day, in the three decades since NAFTA went into effect, North American manufacturing has evolved into a highly integrated system whose products — autos in particular, but manufactured goods more broadly — typically contain components from all three members of the pact, which may be shipped across the borders multiple times. Manufacturers developed this system not just because tariffs were low or zero, but because they thought they had a guarantee that tariffs would stay low.

    One way of saying this is that until just the other day there was really no such thing as U.S. manufacturing, Canadian manufacturing or Mexican manufacturing, just North American manufacturing — a highly efficient, mutually beneficial system that sprawled across the three nations’ borders.

    But now we have a U.S. president saying that a duly negotiated and signed trade pact isn’t worth the paper it was printed on — that he can impose high tariffs on the other signatories whenever he feels like it. And even if the tariffs go away, the private sector will know that they can always come back; the credibility of this trade agreement, or any future trade agreement, will be lost. So North American manufacturing will disintegrate — that is, dis-integrate — reverting to inefficient, fragmented national industries.

    Hence my title ....
  • edited February 1
    FOTUS was hell-bent to get 'a better deal' for America in his first terme by renegotiating NAFTA. At least then there was industry consultation and a traditional diplomatic/commercial negotiation process. So now he's blowing up HIS deal that HE 'negotiated' for the same reason? I call shenanigans.

    These 'tariffs' are just the Sundowning Florida Man throwing arbitrary and ill-informed tantrums to show the world that there are somethings that 'I alone' have the ability to do -- I have power, I have to use it. He needs foreign or 'other' bogeymen and perceived 'threats' from the 'other' to justify his flailings, so this is what we get. How long before 'fetanayl' becomes 'foreign DEI' as his existential crisis du jour?

    Some of his more rational advisors I'm sure are going nuts over the Canada tariffs though ... especially over oil. Let the middle of the country (and his base) suffer for it. (Look at SOBO's pipeline map). He wants to lower inflation and the price of goods? Sure, tariffs will fix that riiiiiight up for ya, buddy. Wait for it -- and remember whose signature is on the orders that did that. (Hint: it's not Biden or Obama or the Democrats in Congress.)

    Yet he said yesterday “Tariffs don’t cause inflation. They cause success....Tariffs are going to make us very rich and very strong.” IDIOT.

    WaPo notes that "only 1.5 percent of migrants apprehended by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the 2024 fiscal year and 0.2 percent of fentanyl seized at U.S. borders came from Canada" and suggests that's just a canard pretense to justify his actions to his cult.

    I never believed he would start WW3 with our adversaries. However it is entirely likely he'll do so with our allies. Up is down, down is up, and you did not see that with your own eyes, people.

    Elect a clown, and the government becomes a circus. It'd be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.


    Oh ... just saw this tidbit:

    "The GOP also expects to factor in Trump’s tariffs as revenue that will reduce the[ir spending/tax plan] legislation’s price tag."

    So the GQP has swallowed FOTUS' idiocy that tariff money goes straight into the US Treasury. MORE IDIOTS.
  • edited February 1
    The voters decided to set Trump free to work his brand of magic. I am convinced he thinks the United States can have its cake and eat it too. My current understanding of his vision suggests that -- due to its unique position among the world's nations -- imposing both substantial across the board and targeted tariffs will prove to be beneficial for the United States. His vision also sees the proposed Department of External Revenue as becoming a major source of revenue for the federal government. Doubters can doubt, but it appears he is planning to rapidly impose this vision to the extent the other two branches of government and our trade partners enable him to do so. Time will tell how this all works out. But, business as usual doesn't appear to be part of his plan.
  • My current understanding of his vision suggests that -- due to its unique position among the world's nations -- imposing both substantial across the board and targeted tariffs will prove to be beneficial for the United States.

    If by beneficial you mean "less bad", then others agree.
    while tariffs are predicted to inflict pain on all three nations, they would cause more damage to Canada and Mexico, smaller economies that are deeply dependent on the United States.
    ...
    Economists predict that the initial effect would be negative for all three nations, which are bound by a free-trade agreement known as USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada).
    ...
    Here’s what tariffs could mean for each country.
    All links are into NYTimes article:
    How Could Trump’s Tariffs Affect the U.S., Canada and Mexico?
  • oh, sure, grift, graft, possible bribery:

    https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/why-has-trump-gone-soft-on-china

    "Could China have, in effect, bought itself lower tariffs by enriching Trump personally?"
  • edited February 1
    The 10% on China announced yesterday are on top of the Tariffs already in place. For an apples to apples comparison, are the Tariffs lower on Chinese products than on border countries' products? Another way to look at it is, total $ Tariffs imposed as a percentage of total imports.

    US trade rep / Commerce Dept website probably will have accurate and updated information.

    I expect Tariffs on China to be higher if not equal to that on border countries but someone can post the info when available.

    Over the past six-seven years a lot of Chinese manufacturers have moved their operations to other Asian countries and continue to be under (direct or indirect) China / CCP control.

    It would be good to know how have forum members changed or plan to change their portfolio because of the Tariffs. Your reaction can be very targeted to specific tickers, sectors, or market as a whole. For example, you decreased or plan to decrease your equity allocation because you think Tariffs will dampen (slow down) the economic activity in the US and / or cut into gross margins of US companies.
  • I am long gold and essential commodities the orange whatever cannot increase with the stroke of a pen, like grains and food. Inflation will not come down but will increase. The dollar will take a major hit, as the world will now realize America’s word is worth nothing.

    Increasing allocation to defense, as there is likely to be a major war somewhere , given his craziness.

    If the market tanks and the economy seems to be holding up I might increase equity but the real danger here is the market tanks, and destroying free trade, canceling foreign aid, eliminating the rule of law, destroying the CDC, FDIC and SEC etc, cause a major depression, as supply chains are disrupted, epidemics resurface, and corporate lawlessness eliminates any ability to understand future earnings.
  • No change in my asset allocation (wait & see).
    Tariffs doesn't bother me - it will be temporary. Most of the countries run trade deficit with US, export economy countries will suffer more (Example-Colombia). Our prices will not increase much - companies will eat some cost (they will get tax benefit to offset the increased cost). We will take control of Panama canal with Panama agreeing willingly or by force - will reduce transportation costs. Deregulation will reduce the operating costs. I consider it as consumption tax (since we don't have VAT, more than 50% population don't pay income taxes). I am looking at tax cuts which will more than offset cost increase due to tariff.
  • @Balu I sold off my Canadian pipelines that cross into the US but would happily buy them back again at some point. I kept my railroads, b/c I have huge gains on them and don't need the tax hit.

    Otherwise not adjusting my portfolio in any way.
  • edited February 1
    I think Monday is going to be a mess... Down a LOT. It's not just tariffs, he's dismantling the government. Down so much it might actually get his attention... we shall see.
  • gman57 said:

    I think Monday is going to be a mess... Down a LOT. It's not just tariffs, he's dismantling the government. Down so much it might actually get his attention... we shall see.

    If so, you can bet he'll blame Biden or Congressional Democrats, or DEI, or some marginalized social group, or anything other than HIM and his IDIOCY.....
  • Late December, bought into Panamanian Exchange Bank. BLX. I'm waiting and seeing. I'm a little itchy. The Orange Fool is indeed dismantling the gov't. It is a coup d'etat. No one can tell me he's not following Project 2025 playbook. Monday will be absolutely dreadful in world Markets. Inflation is coming back in a serious way.

    Another thought re: tariffs: if imported goods are going to cost more, you can bet domestic vendors are going to raise prices, to a point just under what the imports cost. Amazing and fabulous capitalism. Everyone was maybe hoping that deregulation would help the Markets, but he is sowing nutso chaos. Plain and simple.
  • Weak dollar, high gold prices appear a reasonable bet. Timing of a weak dollar is a bit difficult to nail down.

    (Not related to Tarriffs but because wars was mentioned, I expect overnight tactical military operations but I do not expect any major wars initiated by the US (On Trump’s bucket / wish list is Nobel Peace Prize). Besides, neocons are not in charge.)

    I expect a weaker economy if Tariffs go full on but I do not know if and how that might impact equity indices. I am cutting back on individual stocks as long term ideas.

    Rick,

    Selling pipelines and hanging on to rail roads makes sense. Shipping stocks are iffy.
  • Ben Carlson on Bluesky:
    If social media sentiment translated into market moves we would see a 1987-like crash on Monday

    I hope everything is a giant overreaction but I can't wait to see how the markets digest the tariffs

    It does feel like an airpocket event is on the table.
  • BaluBalu said:

    The 10% on China announced yesterday are on top of the Tariffs already in place. For an apples to apples comparison, are the Tariffs lower on Chinese products than on border countries' products? Another way to look at it is, total $ Tariffs imposed as a percentage of total imports.

    US trade rep / Commerce Dept website probably will have accurate and updated information.

    I expect Tariffs on China to be higher if not equal to that on border countries but someone can post the info when available.

    Over the past six-seven years a lot of Chinese manufacturers have moved their operations to other Asian countries and continue to be under (direct or indirect) China / CCP control.

    It would be good to know how have forum members changed or plan to change their portfolio because of the Tariffs. Your reaction can be very targeted to specific tickers, sectors, or market as a whole. For example, you decreased or plan to decrease your equity allocation because you think Tariffs will dampen (slow down) the economic activity in the US and / or cut into gross margins of US companies.

    I too am wondering. Why 25% on Canadian and Mexican products and "only" 10% on Chinese products?
  • B.C. is removing U.S. Red State Liquor from shelves. All U.S. alcohol is not being sold in N.S. provincially-run stores. Also, I read that N.S. is doubling tolls on commercial vehicles entering from the USA. That makes no sense. It is N.B. which borders Maine, not N.S. ... If it's a reference to port tolls, then it might make sense.
  • Recession will start this month in Canada and Mexico, causing USD to strengthen. Our neighbors will be buying fewer American goods with their weak currency.
  • equalizer said:

    Recession will start this month in Canada and Mexico, causing USD to strengthen. Our neighbors will be buying fewer American goods with their weak currency.

    Ya, a nutjob is in charge, but the US holds the stronger hand.
  • “While you see a chance, take it,” for the world may not understand the grand vision I have. With superior funds and a military unmatched, I would seize the Panama Canal, the lifeblood of global trade, ensuring that every vessel passes under my command. “Don’t you know by now, you can’t make it” without controlling this vital gateway. And as for Greenland, “I’m on my way,” to claim it, its icy lands rich with untapped resources. I will move swiftly, decisively, as the world watches and wonders, knowing full well that power waits for no one. With apologies to late Will Jennings, and Steve Winwood for poetic license.
  • Here are the source documents -

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/news/
  • Trump cares about Pearl Harbor but he isn't concerned about Hawaii because it's a blue state.

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

    Judging by who the USA has trade deficits with, I would hazard a guess that the EU, ASEAN, individual ASEAN countries like Vietnam, individual EU countries like Ireland and Denmark (because of Greenland) could be the next targets of Trump's tariffs. Panama too.

    In addition to the economic troubles (both in the USA and abroad) caused by Trump's tariffs, various security arrangements will be in question as countries respond to Trump's tariffs. Could violence against USA interests abroad and USA citizens abroad be forthcoming if Trump's tariffs are expanded to other countries? At what point is Trump considered to be a national security threat?

    Vladimir Putin is smiling ...
  • We will take control of Panama canal with Panama agreeing willingly or by force - will reduce transportation costs. Deregulation will reduce the operating costs.

    I find it ironic that those who support taking over the canal (which, btw, is professionally managed, charges reasonable fees, and is considered by many to be better run now than when the US government was in charge) in part because of nearby port investments by other countries are also more likely to support deep cuts in foreign aid and foreign investment. Soft power can be just as, if not more, effective (and with much less loss of life and destruction) than military action for purely economic gain.

  • I'm waiting for FOTUS to use America's need for Ozempic/Wegovy as a cudgel to threaten Denmark over Greenland. IE, I'm going to tariff these pharmaceuticals 500% until you give us Greenland! Will Denmark care about the wailing of patients in America? *shrug*

    I'm sure the thought has crossed his mind.
  • edited February 2
    "At what point is Trump considered to be a national security threat?"

    It has been abundantly clear that Trump is a national security threat
    since his inept and criminal mishandling of classified documents.
    And yet the Teflon-Don got away scot-free once again!
    There ought to be a law against this type of activity...
  • Just manage to get enough blithering doinks to vote you into office, and all legal trouble vanishes. The DOJ policy surely never anticipated such a childish, impulsive, amoral criminal who behaves like he has nothing to lose.

    In my denomination's rule book, it is flatly stated that the rules and structures will not work unless all concerned behave in good faith and a sense of trust with each other. Obviously, that applies to our public institutions and the Constitution, too. We are being sabotaged. Right now.
  • With all the craziness happening these past two weeks, I had intended to move a significant percentage of equities to our mmkt acct on Friday, but chose to wait and see at the last moment. Sheesh! Foolish me!
Sign In or Register to comment.