Posted on 12/06/2016 1:29:12 AM PST by reaganaut1
WASHINGTON — House Republican leaders signaled on Monday that they would not support President-elect Donald J. Trump’s threat to impose a heavy tax on companies that move jobs overseas, the first significant confrontation over the conservative economic orthodoxy that Mr. Trump relishes trampling.
“I don’t want to get into some kind of trade war,” Representative Kevin McCarthy, Republican of California and majority leader, told reporters in response to Mr. Trump’s threats over the weekend to seek a 35 percent import tariff on goods sold by United States companies that move jobs overseas and displace American workers.
Speaker Paul D. Ryan also pushed back against Mr. Trump on Monday in an interview with a Wisconsin reporter, saying an overhaul of the corporate tax code would more effectively keep companies in the United States than tax penalties. “I think we can get at the goal here,” he said, “which is to keep American businesses American, build things in America and sell them overseas — that can be properly addressed with comprehensive tax reform.”
Mr. Trump’s economic positions clashed with traditional conservatives during the campaign, but now these differences — on trade, government spending on infrastructure, and tax policies — have set the incoming president on a perilous course with the lawmakers whose support he needs to keep his agenda on track.
“There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35 percent for these companies wanting to sell their product, cars, A.C. units etc., back across the border,” Mr. Trump said in a series of Twitter messages over the weekend.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) was enacted by Congress and made effective on January 1, 1989, replacing the former Tariff Schedules of the United States. The HTS comprises a hierarchical structure for describing all goods in trade for duty, quota, and statistical purposes. This structure is based upon the international Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (HS), administered by the World Customs Organization in Brussels ; the 4- and 6-digit HS product categories are subdivided into 8-digit unique U.S. rate lines and 10-digit non-legal statistical reporting categories. Classification of goods in this system must be done in accordance with the General and Additional U.S. Rules of Interpretation, starting at the 4-digit heading level to find the most specific provision and then moving to the subordinate categories.
Our tariffs on imported products should be simple to calculate - it should be the greater of:
A - The total cost of regulations and taxes inflicted on a business if they operated within the US., or
B - An amount equal to the tariff that the sending country imposes on similar US goods.
Oh how The Slimes and Steinhoofer must be salivating to gen up some conflict with a “signal” of a kerfuffle with le Donald.
GO AWAY SLIMES! GO AWAY AND DIE! NO ONE NEEDS YOU ANYMORE!
From your link:
“Embargoes, anti-dumping duties, countervailing duties, and other very specific matters administered by the Executive Branch are not contained in the HTS.”
Case in point:
http://archive.fortune.com/2009/10/07/news/economy/obama_china_tires_tariff.fortune/index.htm
"... The tire case fell under a provision, called Section 421, that gives the President broad discretion on whether to impose quotas or tariffs when imports disrupt the U.S. market.
Ford wants to build a factory in Mexico. This is not dumping. This is not a disruption of U.S. markets. It has an impact on U.S. employment and that is the motive for Trump wanting the power to put a tariff on products imported from specific American companies.
He can do that. He just needs to get Congress to pass the applicable legislation.
Nice try. But not good enough.
Exactly..., and a good default position when you are not sure.
Agree...
I should have known better than to take the bait.
You nailed it!
Agree 100%
Look, the president has the power to conduct foreign policy and trade is part of it. Obama didn’t have to justify himself to anyone. He simply hit the Chinese with a 35% tariff. End of story. It wasn’t even controversial at the time.
Here is another example for you:
BUSH PUTS TARIFFS OF AS MUCH AS 30% ON STEEL IMPORTS
President Bush took some of the broadest federal action in two decades to protect a major American industry today, imposing tariffs of up to 30 percent on most types of steel imported into the United States from Europe, Asia and South America. The tariffs will last three years, he said, to give American steel producers time to consolidate operations and stem layoffs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/06/us/bush-puts-tariffs-of-as-much-as-30-on-steel-imports.html
Please - stop it! He suggested the tariff for companies that opted to leave the nation and expect to reap major benefits - not across the board.
Amen
The dumbasses are undercutting Trump’s whole negotiating strategy.
Read The Art of the Deal, people!!!
Bullshiite
Same spew used to sell NAFTA. None of it true. There is no free trade.
Tariffs were the primary source of revenue until 1913.
Ryan thinks tax reform id the best way? OK abolish income taxation. Then fedgov would have an incentive to do things that grow a real economy.
They’d have a stronger position if the benefits of NAFTA and similar trade deals were clear and apparent. They’re not. They’re shooting blanks.
Isn’t it true that our trade pardoners tax American goods sold in their countries while their goods come in here duty free??
If so, then that is not free trade and the war already exists.
“It would create a domestic incentive for effective competing products, save American jobs and promote American businesses.”
Here’s where I see the problem:
A hammer made in China costs $10. A 35% tariff is added to make the cost of the hammer $13.50.
What’s to prevent an American manufacturer from charging $13.50 for a hammer? We’ve gained nothing.
What’s your opinion on this pricing matter?
—”Trade war with whom? This tax isn’t on a foreign company exporting to the US - such as Chinese company selling their products in the US. It is on a US based company bringing their goods back into the US.”
You’re completely forgetting that US domestic-company cars (e.g. those made in Mexico) are competing against foreign imported cars (think Toyota/Nissan)...
If Trump makes these more expensive (via 35% tax), then Toyota/Nissan cars will be relatively cheaper. Then the domestic companies that manufacture in Mexico will have LESS sales and there will be layoffs (e.g. US job LOSSES).
So, the next step to “balance” the problem he created would be to tax all FOREIGN imported cars — and you’d have a trade war and higher prices for US consumers.
I’m all for Trump, but his trade protectionism stance is shallow economics. He’ll sooner or later understand this, but for a Wharton grad, I’m surprised he doesn’t seem to understand basic economic supply & demand & pricing principles.
The fact is, spoiled American workers expect too much salary if they want to produce products that compete against a global market. Trump doesn’t get this, but that’s the cold reality. We can’t simply “legislate higher wages.” American workers have to earn it just like everyone else.
Trump’s policy is just as wrong as left-wingers wanting to legislate higher minimum wages for American workers. It’s the use of force & coercion via gov’t against free individuals & businesses. Surely, both left-wing & “conservative” forms of market coercion go against the notion of liberty.
Hate to say it, but this is another use of the heavy hand of gov’t...
—” It’s one thing to use a tariff to remedy an unfair trade practice, but we shouldn’t use tariffs to mask serious inefficiencies and dysfunction in our own economic system.”
Exactly! You nailed it. And what do you say to those here who state “we’ve always had Tariffs and they work?”
The fact is, Trump (and US companies and US workers) need to address economic inefficiencies here.
Excessive business regulation is one place to start. As Reagan said, get gov’t out of the way.
I prefer tax cuts.
-—”These are American companies. You cannot have a trade war with companies in your own country.”
Ummm, think again...
A 35% tax on US companies IS A TRADE WAR with an American company.
This has to be done in another way (addressing US company inefficiencies and over-regulation).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.