patrick.net

RWSGFY says

Regarding 321 de minimis

Why would a firm that makes their shit in the US be against ditching 321 de minimum?

Answer: they use that loophole to get around existing tariffs for stuff they sub-componentise in China that they then incorporate into their final product here in the US.

Their bullshit is glaring.

AD says

How much of California's tax revenues are from capital gains tax such as from the stock market ?

A lot.

MolotovCocktail says

RWSGFY says

Regarding 321 de minimis

Why would a firm that makes their shit in the US be against ditching 321 de minimum?

Answer: they use that loophole to get around existing tariffs for stuff they sub-componentise in China that they then incorporate into their final product here in the US.

Their bullshit is glaring.

Yep, fuck "businessmen". All we care about is proletariat: the calloused manufacturing workers is the salt of the earth and this is the only employment worth having. What was that fucker producing anyway? Some sort of "fast fashion" clothes? Nobody needs that. Jeans, boots and canvas jacket - is all anyone would ever need.

That guy should shut down his so-called "business" and go seek employment at a steel mill. Once these are built, that is. I.e. in 3 years tops.

Eric Holder says

California is preparing to ask a court to block Donald Trump’s “illegal” tariffs, accusing the president of overstepping his authority and causing “immediate and irreparable harm” to the world’s fifth-largest economy.
The lawsuit, to be filed in federal court on Wednesday by California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, and attorney general, Rob Bonta, is the most significant challenge yet to Trump’s flurry of on-again-off-again tariffs. In the complaint, California officials argue that the US constitution explicitly grants Congress the power to impose tariffs and that the president’s invocation of emergency powers to unilaterally escalate a global trade war, which has rattled stock markets and raised fears of recession, is unlawful.

Pure jacking off hoping to find a whacko activist judge. States have no tariff authority whatsoever. California has representatives and senators.

Gavin Calhoun can suck it.

AmericanKulak says

Pure jacking off hoping to find a whacko activist judge. States have no tariff authority whatsoever. California has representatives and senators.

Gavin Calhoun can suck it.

We fought a civil war over it, any state(s) that tried got the Grant and Sherman treatment.

Last week, Japan sent its chief trade negotiator to Washington to speak with US leadership regarding a trade deal. Reports indicate the reason no deal has been reached is that Japan hasn’t gotten a firm, consistent answer on what the US wants.

Economic Revitalization Minister Ryosei Akazawa was in Washington DC until Friday last week but left without finalizing a deal with Trump’s trade teams. This morning, Fox Business Senior Correspondent Charles Gasparino reports that Japanese negotiators left frustrated and complaining about a lack of information.

“Japanese negotiators are complaining that the problem with the trade negotiations with the White House, what’s delaying concrete progress and a real deal, is the US keeps changing its ask in terms of exactly what it wants, said one financial CEO who speaks regularly to country officials,” Gasparino posted on X, formerly Twitter.

:facepalm:

(Bloomberg) -- US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told a closed-door investor summit Tuesday that the tariff standoff with China is unsustainable

This is wonderful. Trump shouldn't give a shit.

Of course, the Establishment's level of Trust and Accuracy is buried on the 10th subfloor of Iron Mountain between Iraqi WMDs, Records of Airline Bailouts never repaid, 100s of boxes of reports of Economists that Permanent Plateaus had been reached and buy now in 2007 or be locked out forever, and the Lost Ark

Eric Holder says

(Bloomberg) -- US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told a closed-door investor summit Tuesday that the tariff standoff with China is unsustainable

Sure he did. (Not)

But if he did, he was referring to China.

If RINOs want free markets so much, let them reform or completely eliminate Car Dealership Franchise laws in their state.

(Teehee, FARS and other state car dealership associations are among the top donors to the GOP.)

MolotovCocktail says

Sure he did. (Not)

But if he did, he was referring to China.

Yeah, I read alternative versions of this.

"According to sources" and "According to people in the room".

AmericanKulak says

(Teehee, FARS and other state car dealership associations are among the top donors to the GOP.)

...and the Dems

Donnie continues to negotiate with himself:

The Trump administration is considering reducing high tariffs on Chinese imports to 50%-65% instead of the previously imposed 145%,

- WSJ.

The pattern has emerged.

Blink, blink, BLINK:

""The Trump administration is considering slashing its steep tariffs on Chinese imports—in some cases by more than half—in a bid to de-escalate tensions with Beijing that have roiled global trade and investment, according to people familiar with the matter." -- WSJ

I doubt the tariffs will be applied to the retail price of things; imagine what the cost of an iPhone is to Apple, it's far below retail.

Also, some iPhone costs aren't imported; Apple pays royalties to Qualcomm, Broadcom, ARM.

Finally, what if the tariffs are applied to the local currency (yuan), and the CCP devalues their currency?

I'm not really following the tariff subject closely, but I just had random thoughts.

clambo says

I doubt the tariffs will be applied to the retail price of things; imagine what the cost of an iPhone is to Apple, it's far below retail.

EXACTLY, the tariff applies to what the Chicoms hand over to Apple so if only about X% of the total price is for Chicom labor and supply toward a $Y Apple hardware (or Y x X%), so an 80% "reduced" tariff mean 80% x (Y x X%) "tax".

So if 20% of an Apple hardware product that sells for $2000 is "Chicom sourced" (i.e., service, labor and parts), then this means only a 16% increase in the price of the Apple hardware

80% x ($2000 x 20%) = $320 tariff or "tax"

320 / 2000 x 100% = 16%

.

AD says

So if 20% of an Apple hardware product that sells for $2000 is "Chicom sourced" (i.e., service, labor and parts), then this means only a 16% increase in the price of the Apple hardware

It won' even be that. Th iPhone already sells at what the market will bear, so no increase in price. Apple will just make 16% less profit per phone,

More blinking:

.

Lets see how the stock market responds tomorrow to this. I guess Bessent tried to clarify his comments yesterday during after hours trading which caused a +8% spike in Amazon stock.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/live/trump-tariffs-live-updates-bessent-says-theres-no-unilateral-offer-to-slash-tariffs-on-china-191201348.html

,.

One more challenge filed:



https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/court-filings/state-of-oregon-et-al-v-donald-j-trump-united-states-department-of-homeland-security-et-al-complaint-2025.pdf

HeadSet says

It won' even be that. Th iPhone already sells at what the market will bear, so no increase in price. Apple will just make 16% less profit per phone,

Unless you're a phone junkie, who the hell gets new phones? I maybe get one every 5 years.

The phones are a revenue generator, but it's in the form of sucking you into their ecosystem. App store sales. Mac sales. Music subscriptions. They'd be better off cutting the price because the net per phone is so high. Sell 1M more phones the money generated there is by app developers and musicians and they skim 30%. You then get the user locked in and other people did the work for you.

WookieMan says

Basically I haven't noticed any tariff price increases on products.

Because it's too soon to see any, if they are even going to have an effect. Meaning that prices are based on whatever the market will bear, not necessarily on the cost to make the item. Offshoring was all about reducing producer prices, not consumer prices. That's why the stock market has been doing what it's been doing lately. Corporate profits will potentially be lower.

zzyzzx says

Offshoring was all about reducing producer prices, not consumer prices

Bingo. And THAT IS WHY the bullshit about "'free trade' is great for Americans" and 'tariffs are bad for consumers' is being posted all over social media and the official narrative of the MSM.

...and even some PatNetters.

But it is not working anymore.

Let's see. If Apple is the one that has to pay the US government the tariff on parts, then someone has to eat that cost:

Consumer? Prolly not if they're already paying the max they're willing to pay.
China? Apple could tell them to lower their prices by the amount of the tariff, but I'm pretty sure Apple already negotiated them to the bone.
Apple? They have massive margins at the expense of the US worker.

So yes, I think Apple is the one that's going to be the real payer, and that's justified because they refused to use US workers, and the tariffs are a revenue source for the government that is not income tax or money printing. Let's see their stock:



One could argue that the stock market agrees that Apple's profits the expense of US workers will be lower, and that's why the stock took a hit.

Yes. The comparative advantage thing only exists when capital and labor is not allowed to cross borders.

Therefore all the talking heads - even Economics Ph.Ds and professors who teach Econ - who play the comparative advantage card on TV are full of shit.

The media of course, never calls them out on it.

Apple can eat shit if they don't like the tariffs.

So what if an iPhone costs another 50 bucks; people finance them in some cases.

zzyzzx says

Offshoring was all about reducing producer prices, not consumer prices. That's why the stock market has been doing what it's been doing lately. Corporate profits will potentially be lower.

🤡🤡🤡

"The American people support this agreement because they know it's good for jobs in America . And good for human rights. And the development of democracy in China."
Bill Clinton, 10 October 2000
https://www.c-span.org/.../trade-relations-with.../105973

.

Ben Shapiro's take on BBFT at 58:33 :

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XvSq2mxAPk0&t=51s&pp=2AEzkAIB

Patrick says

Let's see. If Apple is the one that has to pay the US government the tariff on parts, then someone has to eat that cost:

Consumer? Prolly not if they're already paying the max they're willing to pay.
China? Apple could tell them to lower their prices by the amount of the tariff, but I'm pretty sure Apple already negotiated them to the bone.
Apple? They have massive margins at the expense of the US worker.

So yes, I think Apple is the one that's going to be the real payer, and that's justified because they refused to use US workers, and the tariffs are a revenue source for the government that is not income tax or money printing. Let's see their stock:



One could argue that the stock market agrees that Apple's profits the expense of US workers will be lower, and that's why the stock took a hit.

Or the iPhones will become much more cheap and primitive while still costing the same to the consumer.

this is my take on it thus far:

tariffs will be minimal, too many panicans.
manufacture will stay overseas.
white collar will offshore to India and AI

what happens after… america will be like rest of the world, few ultra rich, rest living in poverty. feels like it’s going that way anyhow.

.

Remember the Foxconn deal (or the Fox Con Job) in Wisconsin ?

https://www.govtech.com/question-of-the-day/what-technology-is-going-to-revitalize-the-failed-foxconn-center-in-wisconsin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconn_Valley_Science_and_Technology_Park#Foxconn_construction_and_manufacturing

That went no where , but at least maybe not a complete failure. As they say, its better than nothing, and the deal was made during Trump's 1st administration.

Trump can promote "better than Biden" (more so than better than nothing) as far as getting not only Taiwan Semiconductor to build more in the USA, but companies like Apple, Johnson and Johnson, Nvidia, Hyundai Steel, and IBM.

.

Fortwaye says

what happens after… america will be like rest of the world, few ultra rich, rest living in poverty. feels like it’s going that way anyhow.

Not sure about that, as this is the first 100 days of Trump deal making. I'd say this is W I N N I N G.

IBM on Monday announced that it will invest $150 billion in U.S. manufacturing to "fuel the economy."

South Korea's Hyundai Steel will invest $5.8 billion along with Hyundai Motor Group to build a steel plant in the U.S. state of Louisiana.

Johnson & Johnson's plan to invest $55 billion in U.S. manufacturing

Apple and Nvidia have also announced substantial commitments to expanding their U.S. manufacturing capabilities. The iPhone maker said in February it is committed to spending more than $500 billion on growing its U.S. manufacturing facilities and increasing jobs at its plants in Arizona, California, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas and Washington.

clambo says

So what if an iPhone costs another 50 bucks; people finance them in some cases.

Most cases? Very rare that people buy them without financing through the cell phone provider/carrier.

The thing people don't get with the iPhone is it has ZERO to do with parts. It's the ecosystem they suck you into. You get an apple watch, mac mini or iMac, music, apps, cloud storage and other various revenue generating setups.

Apple throws Verizon, Att and others a bone to give people a deal. That has nothing to do with parts. It's new customers. That's it. One new customer will likely buy 2-4 Apple products after getting an iPhone. The camera is probably the most expensive part of the phone. Why? People need to store their photos so they don't lose them. Monthly cloud storage that you set and forget. You like music, $10/mo or whatever it is and you can listen to anything. Buy a movie for your AppleTv and they get 30%. Same with apps.

Point is nothing is physical. iPhone is their top seller but the subscriptions and sales of something as simple as an AppleTV is higher margin. It's all about downstream labor free revenue with subscriptions. Parts don't matter if tariffed.

WookieMan says

Most cases? Very rare that people buy them without financing through the cell phone provider/carrier.

Good point as I was looking at Cricket Wireless (owned by AT&T) and it is offering "deals" such as $199 for an IPhone 16 for minimum 2 years service.

This concept is similar to Google and your fav Chromebook (aka: CheapBook) , as well as an Android phone. I just bought a new Samsung A15 for $100.

.

AD says

Good point as I was looking at Cricket Wireless (owned by AT&T) and it is offering "deals" such as $199 for an IPhone 16 for minimum 2 years service.

I'm making this up, some one else may have, but I think of it as the domino economy. The iPhone, the Chromebook, Samsung product. You get one and you're in. I only know of one person that switched from Samsung to Apple. ONE. Or vice versa. They will switch carriers, but that's a monthly service/revenue.

There are very few industries that can do it. Banks and tech are the biggies. Southwest locked us in, but we're the worst possible people on the planet for them to have as customers. We're nearing a decade not paying for a flight as a family of 5.

Another rollback on car parts. Shows how well-thought out the whole thing was.