Marsikaj smo že videli, toda tako bizarnega, psevdoznanstvenega pristopa h kreiranju ekonomskih ukrepov v zahodnih državah se ne spomnim. No, ta Trumpova formula za izračun recipročne bilateralne carine, ki je tako bizarna kot njen promotor osebno, bo šla v zgodovino:

recipročna carina = 0.5 * deficit / uvoz

The formula used by USTR to compute “reciprocal” tariffs is a lil “fancier” than the goods trade surplus of a country vs the US divided by its exports to the US. It also includes in the denominator two elasticity terms, epsilon and phi, whose product is in practice equal to 1. So in practice only (x-m)/m matters for measuring reciprocal tariffs.

But still the entire formula is totally flawed as it assumes that the only fair trade balance is zero. By that standard since the US runs a trade surplus in services other countries should impose a large services reciprocal tariffs against the US to balance that trade too! That reciprocal services tariff against the US should average 28% as the US services surplus was about $280 billion in 2023 relative to US exports of about $1 trillion of such services.

Vir: Nouriel Roubini

Ta kitajska poteza – prepoved investiranja v ameriška podjetja – je potencialno najbolj učinkovit in za ZDA najbolj nevaren protiukrep. Denimo, da se ta ukrep razširi v splošno prepoved kupovanja ameriških vrednostnih papirjev in da temu sledijo ostale države. Če vse države nehajo kupovati ameriške delnice in če nehajo kupovati še ameriške državne obveznice, lahko to zruši ameriške borze in požene ceno zadolževanja za ameriško vlado v nebo.

To lahko pomeni finančni krah za Trumpovo Ameriko.

Prve modelske ocene kažejo, da bo zaradi uvedbe Trumpovih carin, ameriški BDP v vsakem primeru upadel. Samo Kanada in Mehika bi doživeli večji šok od ZDA. S tem, da naj bi ameriški BDP upadel bolj (za 1.4 %), če bodo prizadete države uvedle povračilne carine (v isti višini), kot pa če ne bi reagirale (takrat bi upadel za 0.5 %). Do tega pride, ker bodo carine udarile tudi po uvozu izdelkov, ki jih ameriška podjetja prek različnih aranžmajev proizvajajo širom sveta in nato uvažajo nazaj, zato se bodo ti izdelki podražili in zmanjšala se bo njihova prodaja. Učinek bo ustrezno večji, če druge države uvedejo povračilne ukrepe, ker bodo s tem prizadeti tudi ameriški izvozniki.

Pomembna ugotovitev teh modelskih ocen je, da se EU mora maščevati z uvedbo zaščitnih carin, da bi se izognila upadu BDP. V primeru, da ne bi uvedla povračilnih carin, bi BDP EU upadel za 0.3 %, če pa bi jih uvedla, pa bi to nevtraliziralo šok Trumpovih carin in se BDP ne bi spremenil.

Pomembno je še, da bo zaradi globalne trgovinske vojne, ki jo je sprožil Trump, prizadeto celotno globalno gospodarstvo – globalni BDP naj bi upadel za med 0.26 % (brez povračilnih carin) in 0.43 % (s povračilnimi carinami). To je standardni nauk iz zunanje trgovine – trgovinska vojna je slaba za vse države. In bolj kot se zaostruje in bolj kot se znižuje medsebojna trgovina, večja je škoda (v obliki upada BDP, delovnih mest, koristi za potrošnike itd.). V končni instanci – če pride do popolnega prenehanja trgovanja (avtarkija), nobena država ne more izkoriščati svojih primerjalnih prednosti in se specializirati, zato je splošna učinkovitost gospdarstva nižja.

Toda komu to govorimo? Trump je zadnja oseba, ki bi prisluhnila agumentom.

____________

We now have a clearer picture of Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and how they will affect other trading nations, including the United States itself.

The US administration claims these tariffs on imports will reduce the US trade deficit and address what it views as unfair and non-reciprocal trade practices. Trump said this would

forever be remembered as the day American industry was reborn, the day America’s destiny was reclaimed.

The “reciprocal” tariffs are designed to impose charges on other countries equivalent to half the costs they supposedly inflict on US exporters through tariffs, currency manipulation and non-tariff barriers levied on US goods.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Najbolj perverzno, in po svoje zabavno, je dejstvo, da bodo Trumpove  carine najbolj prizadele ameriška podjetja. Tista podjetja, ki so pred tremi desetletji v nekončnem profitnem pohlepu začela prenašati proizvodnjo v države z nizko ceno dela in tam organizriale dolge dobaviteljske verige. Domača ameriška industrija je izpuhtela, razvile pa so se industrije v Mehiki, Vietnamu, Kitajski…. No, in zdaj bodo ameriški iPhoni in vsi drugi izdelki, ki prihajajo iz Kitajske načeloma dražji za 20 % + 34 % carine. Ameriška podjetja bodo morala na novo postaviti dobaviteljske verige, da bi se izognila dvigu cen pri uvozu teh izdelkov v Ameriko. To pa pomeni potrebo po novih investicijah in 5 do 10 let prilagajanja.

Pra tako veseli so bili menedžerji največjih ameriških korporacij na Trumpovi inavguraciji…

_____________

Thinking about it, ironically maybe the biggest victims of the Trump tariffs may end up being American companies.

Take Apple for instance. These guys have spent decades building incredibly complex global supply chains that span dozens of countries.

They can’t just flip a switch and move everything back to America. Their supply network represents tens of billions in investment, thousands of supplier relationships, and logistics systems perfected over decades.

Dismantling this overnight is impossible, and building a comparable domestic alternative – which is the stated goal of the Trump tariffs – would take 5-10 years minimum, cost extortionate amounts of money and would increase their product costs considerably.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

A quick thread of charts showing how Trump’s economic agenda is going so far:
1) Trump has had the same impact on economic uncertainty as a global pandemic.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Andrew Korybko

He’d sacrifice his political career, his envisaged legacy in Ukrainians’ eyes, and part of his country’s economic sovereignty, but he’d avert a much worse scenario than if he rejected this deal.

Trump warned last weekend that Zelensky will have “some problems – big, big problems” if he “tries to back out of the rare earth deal” amidst reports that the latest version of this agreement is very lopsided. It allegedly compels Ukraine to contribute half of its revenue from all resource projects and related infrastructure into a US-controlled investment fund, pay off all US aid from 2022 onward through these means, and give the US the right of first offer on new projects and a veto over resource sales to others.

These tougher terms can be considered punishment for Zelensky picking his infamous fight with Trump and Vance at the White House in late February, but the whole package is being sold to Ukraine as a “security guarantee” from the US. The argument goes that America won’t let Russia threaten these projects, which also include pipelines and ports, thus leading to it at the very least resuming 2023-levels of military-intelligence aid and maybe even directly escalating with Russia to get it into back down.

Ukraine kinda already has such Article 5-like guarantees from the US and other major NATO countries per the bilateral pacts that it clinched with them all throughout last year as explained here, but this proposed arrangement gives the US tangible stakes in deterring or immediately stopping hostilities. The trade-off though is that Ukraine must sacrifice part of its economic sovereignty, which is politically uncomfortable since Zelensky told his compatriots that they’re fighting to preserve its full sovereignty.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Trump sicer pravi, da je namen uvedbe carin pripeljati proizvodnjo nazaj v Ameriko. Morda bo delno to lahko uspelo (če bodo v ZDA lahko našli dovolj kvalificirane delovne sile). Toda glavni namen je morda nekje drugje.

Isabella Weber ima dobro poanto, da je namen Trumpovih carin lahko predvsem v dvigu carinskih prihodkov. Trumpove carine je zato treba razumeti v konjunkciji z delom Muska v DOGE. Namen Trumpovih carin je morda zelo prozaičen: skrčiti javne izdatke na eni in povečati davčne prilive iz carin na drugi strani, da bi lahko še bolj znižali davke za podjetja in premožne.

Olivier Blanchard, nekdanji profesor na MIT in nekdanji glavni ekonomist IMF, ima dober nasvet glede tega, kako bi morala EU reagirati na Trumpove carine:

Preudarno; udariti nazaj, kjer Trumpove tehnološke tajkune najbolj boli; prenehati kupovati ameriško orožje; ohraniti pravila svetovne trgovine z državami, ki to želijo; in skleniti dogovor s Kitajsko, ki glede e-avtomobilov omogoča opcijo med carinami in kitajskimi investicijami v EU.

Tentative advice to the European Union:

Take your time to respond. Let cool heads prevail.

If you think that Trump will not back down (likely in my opinion), best economic (not necessarily political) response: Do not retaliate. Ignore it.  Not because the Trump administration shot the US in the foot that there is any reason to do the same to the EU.

If you think you can get Trump to change his mind, then go for choke points. Make life harder for the GAFA using the anti coercion instrument. They have the phone numbers of the White House, and, if they hurt, they will call and explain the facts of life to the boss. (But realize that this is not without costs to the EU consumer)

Kill two birds at once. Shift as much of defense spending from the US to Europe. Have a major reallocation plan.  This will take years but is high priority.  Spend the EU money you need to help.

Be constructive rather than  only defensive.  Form coalitions of the willing with the countries still willing to play by some rules, going beyond Europe to Asia, Latin America, and Africa.  Do it for multinational corporate taxation, global warming, health, even tariff rules. 

Have a major negotiation with China, in particular on automobiles (tariffs, but with attractive inward FDI/joint venture conditions)

Vir: Olivier Blanchard

Včerajšnja Trumpova tiskovna konferenca je bila podobno bizarna kot Evrovizija. Izgedala je enako bizarno kot bizarno oblečene kreature, ki na na evropskem pevskem tekmovanju prepevajo bizarne popevke. In Trumpova licitacija carin po posameznih državah je bila na las podobna podeljevanju nacionalnih ocen za bizarne nastope nacionalnih predstavnikov, za katere nikomur ni jasno, kako – razen nacionalne bližine – so bile kreirane. 

Mnogi so se spraševali, kako je Trump prišel do denimo tega, da naj bi Vietnam imel uvedene 90 % carine na uvoz ameriških izdelkov in da si zato zasluži 46 % carino. Od kod 61 % carina za uvoz ameriških izdelkov v Švico in posledična 31 % carina na uvoz švicarskih izdelkov v ZDA? S čim si je Kitajska zaslužila 34 %, Tajvan 32 % in EU 20 % carine? Kakšne formule je Trumpova administracija uporabila za te izračune?

No, zdi se, da je bila odkrita skrita formula za izračun ameriških carin. In ta formula je – o moj Bog – enako bizarna, kot je bizarno vse, kar je povezano s Trumpom. Zadržite dih.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Fokusiranje na strah pred imaginarno invazijo in na oboroževanje, namesto da bi se soočili z razlogi za gospodarski zaton Evrope in na akcijski načrt za oživitev konkurenčnosti evropskega gospodarstva, seveda ne samo, da ne more rešiti problema, pač pa ga z ignoriranjem še potencira. S fokusiranjem na oboroževanje Evropa ne more izboljšati konkurenčnosti svojega gospodarstva, ker pač teh proizvodov in povečanega števila vojakov ne more izvažati. Nasprotno to preusmerja proračunska sredstva in investicije podjetij v neproduktivne namene. Takšno strategijo “orožje namesto razvoja” lahko predlagajo samo povsem nori politiki, ki so povsem izgubili kompas. Zaradi te strategije bo EU še pospešila zaostajanje za Kitajsko in ZDA in zaradi te strategije in posledičnega gospodarskega upadanja se bo zaostrila socialna in s tem tudi politična situacija v Evropi. Nacionalizem se bo razširil kot rak v vse države. 

Strategija “orožje namesto razvoja” razbija Evropsko unijo in njen uspešen razvojni recept po drugi svetovni vojni. EU je bila ustanovljena kot mirovni projekt na strategiji “razvoj namesto oboroževanja“. Sedanje vodstvo EU in politični voditelji EU držav zdaj to strategijo opuščajo in Evropo vračajo v miselno in politično okolje izpred 2. svetovne vojne. In rezultat te strategije “orožje namesto razvoja” bo, da bodo bolj oborožene članice začele izsiljevati eno drugo in se za dosego svojih ciljev tudi vojaško spopasti.

Na oblasti imamo vodtelje z noro in nevarno strategijo.

Alastair Crooke, nekdanji britanski diplomat:

Europe’s elites—France, Germany, Britain—are trapped in a dangerous delusion: preparing for war with Russia out of desperation, not necessity. They see their system collapsing, their power slipping, and the middle class sinking into poverty. The crisis is no longer confined to the margins; now, the majority struggle to afford basic comforts while governments pour money into militarization instead of their people.

A storm is brewing—a clash between the ruling class and the 60-70% of Europeans pushed into deprivation, anger, and helplessness. With no solutions left, the elites cling to the oldest trick in the book: rally the masses behind a war, distract them with nationalism, and salvage their dying order.

But this is madness. War won’t fix their failures—it will only deepen the chaos. Europe isn’t on the brink of invasion; it’s on the brink of revolt. And if the elites keep pushing this suicidal path, the real explosion won’t come from foreign tanks—it will come from within.