New Articles

Do Tariffs Cause Prices To Go Up? Not Necessarily

Do Tariffs Cause Prices To Go Up? Not Necessarily

President Trump recently raised tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese exports and threatened to impose import duties on all Chinese goods coming into the United States. Will American prices rise substantially as a result? This is a loaded question, because contrary to popular belief, tariffs don’t always raise prices.

One alarming study from The Trade Partnership, a think tank, estimates that an average American family of four may have to pay an extra $767. And if all Chinese exports are taxed, the cost could rise to more than $2,000.

However, the effects of tariffs on prices are not as straightforward as they may appear at first glance. Indeed, until the pioneering contribution by the late Lloyd Metzler, a University of Chicago professor, the question was not even explored. It was taken for granted that tariffs automatically raise the prices of imported goods. But Metzler’s article, known in the literature on international economics as the Metzler Paradox, changed this view once and for all. Let us analyze the problem without hysteria.

Tariffs have two effects on prices: one tending to raise them, the other tending to lower them. The overall impact depends on which effect is stronger.

It all comes down to supply and demand for goods in China. The United States is a large importer of Chinese products, so tariffs will cause a huge decline in American demand for Chinese goods because of the initial rise in prices. But as demand falls substantially, prices of exportable goods inside China will also decline substantially.

Assuming that transportation costs are minimal, as they are nowadays, the American price of a Chinese product is determined as follows: American Price = Chinese Price(1 + t), where “t” is the rate of tariff. From this formula, it is clear that there are two countervailing effects on the U.S. price of a Chinese good. A rise in the tariff rate initially tends to raise it, whereas the resultant fall in the Chinese price tends to lower it. The final effect depends on whether the Chinese price declines more or less than the rate of tariff.

As a simple example, suppose Walmart imports a shirt from China for $20, and then faces a 25 percent tariff on that import. If China’s price is constant, then the same shirt will now cost $24. But the Chinese price cannot stay constant. Since the United States imports a vast number of Chinese shirts, the demand for Chinese shirts will fall sharply, and that will lower the Chinese price. Say this price declines to $18, then a 25 percent tariff will raise its U.S. cost by one fourth to $22.50, which is still higher than its free-trade cost of $20.

At a Chinese price of $16, the tariff-inclusive price will be the same as the free-trade price. But if the Chinese price were to fall below $16, the cost to Walmart will be less than $20. Thus, it all depends on the forces of supply and demand inside China.

The extent of the Chinese price decrease depends on the cost of producing a shirt. If this cost is low, then the price decrease can be large in the wake of declining demand, because a producer can still make some profit. Since Chinese wages are much lower than American wages, the Chinese cost of producing a shirt is likely to be very low, in which case the Chinese shirt price can fall substantially. If that happens, American prices of goods imported from China could actually decline.

Indeed, this may explain why thus far the U.S. tariffs that were imposed on Chinese exports in September 2018 have not been inflationary. In fact, even the Federal Reserve has been surprised by the recent cooling of core inflation and, as a result, pledged not to raise interest rates any further.

So the American consumer has nothing to worry about, especially when the consumer can easily switch to imports from other countries.

Large trade deficits with China have decimated American manufacturing and wages. U.S. industries need a revival, and tariffs are indispensable toward this purpose. In 1800, at the start of the American republic, barely 5 percent of the U.S. labor force was employed in manufacturing; today, according to the Economic Report of the President, 2019, the share is about 8 percent — vastly below the 30 percent figure that prevailed in the 1960s. We are very close to where we were in 1800, and clearly, the manufacturing sector still needs a lot of support.

Note that under Abraham Lincoln tariffs were as high as 60 percent. As a result, following the Civil War, American manufacturing became the envy of the world. By 1900 the United States was among the nations with the highest living standard. Even though tariffs were high, prices fell or remained stable for several years.

Such price behavior helped raise the overall standard of living. When a 60 percent tariff rate could not harm the American consumer, how can a mere 25 percent? Free trade has been the holy grail of international economics for decades, but historically, the fastest growth in the American living standard has occurred under the umbrella of tariffs.

Ravi Batra is a professor of international economics at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. He is the author of The Myth of Free Trade. His latest book is End Unemployment Now: How to Eliminate Joblessness, Debt, and Poverty Despite Congress.

Asian Logistics and Maritime Conference 2018

Prepare to join thousands of global  industry experts at this year’s Asian Logistics and Maritime Conference from November 20-21 at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre.

A press release from October highlights the conference’s three main areas of focus on “Asian connectivity,  new retail revolution and its implications to logistics and logistics technology” in addition to the rapid changes in the industry (HKTDC).

An expected 70 industry experts are scheduled to speak along with Secretary-General Dato Lim Jock Hoi, who  will kick-off the conference at the opening session.

Other topics anticipated include supply-chain management, logistics, air freight, cold-chain logistics, e-commerce and the ” the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) new air cargo security requirements and logistics technology in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area,” (HKTDC).

“Asian countries and regions are now pushing forward various trade agreements and regional development strategies, including the Hong Kong-ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] Free Trade Agreement signed last year, the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area development plan, and the China-Singapore Initiative on Strategic Connectivity,” said HKTDC Deputy Executive Director Raymond Yip. “Under the Belt and Road Initiative, many major infrastructure projects, including new road transport systems and port developments, have been kick-started, with a number of them already completed. Such projects foster the development of trade and logistics in Asia, driving better connectivity within the regional supply chain,” (HKTDC).

In addition to traditionally seen forums and discussions, a “New Tech Dialogue and Tech Demo Session” will be featured, spotlighting some key insights and information in block chain technology and hyperloop transportation. Transpod co-founder and CEO Sebastien Gendron and Chief Analytics Officer of Blockchain in Transport Alliance are among those that will review industry tips and developments.

There are more than 100 exhibitors expected and more than 150 one-on-one business-matching sessions are being arranged in an effort to boost industry relations and spur business relationships. For a full list of noted speakers, please visit: ACNNewswire.com

 

Source: ACNNewswire.com, HKTDC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brazil’s BRIC Cracks on Disappointing Growth Figures

Los Angeles, CA – There’s a serious fissure developing in the BRIC wall as the latest government figures show that Brazil has slipped into recession, with the Latin American giant’s gross domestic product (GDP) contracting for a second consecutive quarter.

According to the official government statistics bureau in Brasilia, the country’s GDP stands at about $567 billion, down 0.6 percent from the previous three months, while revised figures for the first quarter showed a drop of 0.2 percent.

The government had initially had reported first-quarter growth of 0.2 percent.

The country last experienced a recession in late 2008 and early 2 009, when a world economic crisis slashed demand for steel, minerals, farm goods and other key Brazilian exports.

The BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – together represent 18 percent of the world total, are all experiencing slowdowns in their once fast-paced rates of growth. Exacerbating the economic difficulties is Russia’s volatile activity in Ukraine, which has sparked a rash of sanctions on Moscow by the US and the European Union.

Last month, leaders of the five countries met in Brazil and decided to create their own development bank as a counterweight to what they perceive are “western-dominated financial organizations like the US-based World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

The new development bank will reportedly be based in Shanghai and is expected to be functional within two years. It will be capitalized at $50 billion, a figure that could grow to $100 billion to fund infrastructure projects. The fund would also have $100 billion at its disposal “to weather economic hard times.”

08/29/2014