No, Trumpove carine sledijo logiki impulzivnosti Trumpovega značaja.  Pri njegovih carinah gre za popoln kaos. Carine uvaja na podlagi hipne percepcije odnosov s posameznimi državami brez pomisli na učinke. Logika carin je, (1) da se jih ne uvaja na inpute (ker to poviša stroške domači industriji in še poslabša njeno konkurenčnost), (2) da se uvedejo uniformne carine, s čimer se zmanjša administrativna kompleksnost njihovega izvajanja in (3) da se ne spreminjajo skozi daljše obdobje (da lahko podjetja ustrezno načrtujejo investicije v proizvodnjo in sourcanje inputov.

Pri Trumpu pa je popolni kaos. In težko je najti carino, ki ni bolj v škodo ZDA kot pa države, za katero jo je uvedel. Ta negotovost lahko vodi samo v gospodarsko stagnacijo in povišano inflacijo. In natanko to se Trumpu trenutno dogaja.

Trump’s new tariff rate lack rhyme or reason (other than rewarding big countries that made an effort to give him a win … )

But — as the decision on Brazil showed — it is always important to know the exclusions as well as the headline rate …

The 35% tariff rate on Canada is crazy. Nuts. Insane. dumb. Shows a lack of interest in supporting US manufacturing (the US runs a surplus in manufactures with Canada).

But if oil and USMCA compliant trade are exempt, its practical impact will be modest …

Same with the high tariff on Switzerland. Crazy. Even to my eyes, and I am no fan of Switzerland’s coddling of corporate tax avoidance.

But most US imports from Switzerland are pharmaceuticals and gold, and both are exempt from the reciprocal/ IEEPA tariffs

Taiwan didn’t get a deal — unlike Korea. But the reward for a deal is modest, a 15% tariff relative to a 20% tariff …

& until there is a semiconductor 232, most of Taiwan’s exports to the US (chips and chip heavy electronics) aren’t tariffed.

This is in no way a defense of tonight’s tariff actions.

It is intellectually and economically indefensible to have a higher headline term 2 tariff on Canada (where the US runs a surplus ex oil) than on China (a true global problem … ) even in Trumpian terms …

I don’t get why it makes sense for most of southeast Asia to be tariffed at 19% while Vietnam is at 20% — extra administrative complexity for no real reason …

Tariffing “transshipped” goods ( transshipment for tariff avoidance is already illegal, so the term is being misused) from China at 40% when the tariff on goods coming straight from China face a 30% base tariff (plus the 301 tariff, minus 10% for a 232 sector) makes no sense

There aren’t yet actual rules defining the Vietnamese content needed to make a good Vietnamese rather than Malaysian or Chinese, but a higher tariff on transshipped goods than on goods from China penalizes Vietnamese assembly … 8/

Chinese parts, assembled in China & shipped from China, in a non 301 sector and a non 232 sector = 30% …

Chinese parts, assembled in Vietnam and shipped from Vietnam = 40% tariff … (or so it seems …)

This isn’t just protectionism, it is bad protectionism — and will have all sorts of unintended consequences.

But its actual impact for now depends on the scale of the exclusions

Also seems like 15% is the new base tariff — with some lucky countries getting 10% and a big exclusion for now for USMCA compliant trade (in non-232 sectors, which is about 20% of US non-oil imports) and a lot of 20% and 30% bringing the overall tariff rate up.

Vir: Brad Setser