Move to Cut China Tariffs

[Expat]

House Republicans, Democrats Lobby Joe Biden to Cut U.S. Tariffs on China

A total of 140 House Republicans and Democrats are lobbying President Joe Biden to cut United States tariffs on billions of dollars worth of China-made imports. Last month, Breitbart News ...

www.conservativenewsdaily.net

I see my Congressperson, Jackie Walorski, appears to be a leader in the move to relieve China from the tariffs.

 

[COOPADUP]

Section 301 was designed to discourage American companies to purchase certain goods from China by increasing the amount of duties due to the US Government.
So a commodity would be charged a certain duty as per the tariff and then a separate 301 tariff as much as 25 %

 

[Leadeye]

Be interesting to see where the money is coming from on this one, sounds like it's big and stealthy.

Leadership has aggressively driven some industries completely off shore so the tariff is really just a tax as it's not contributing to the growth of those industries domestically.

Right now we can't distribute the niagra of imports from china through the country so removing the tariff seems badly timed.

Always follow the money

 

[phylodog]

If given the chance, you'll want to lick the boots that'll be on your neck soon. No one wants a dirty boot on their neck for the Instagram photos.

 

[Leadeye]

I was amused at the list of "contributions", 4 figures, those are rookie numbers. What dc law/lobby firms are getting the 6 and 7 figure payouts?

 

[phylodog]

Our trade relationship with China has clearly left us in a magnificent position. Must take some kind of super genius to figure out that catapulting ourselves further into their loving arms is an awesome idea. Who ties these people's shoes for them before they walk out the door to go to congress?

 

[BugI02]

House Republicans, Democrats Lobby Joe Biden to Cut U.S. Tariffs on China

A total of 140 House Republicans and Democrats are lobbying President Joe Biden to cut United States tariffs on billions of dollars worth of China-made imports. Last month, Breitbart News ...

www.conservativenewsdaily.net

I see my Congressperson, Jackie Walorski, appears to be a leader in the move to relieve China from the tariffs.

Right there is one possible version of that list someone wanted of what 'republicans' to primary

 

[COOPADUP]

I was in the business when Trump enacted the additional tariffs.
He was putting the screws to US businesses so they would either build back in the US or outsource to another country but China. The additional tariffs were ever changing and drove up the costs effectively.
Changing now will only encourage more business with the Chinese.

 

[Tombs]

Might as well just draft a bill to switch our official flag to the chinese flag.

 

[ancjr]

Might as well just draft a bill to switch our official flag to the chinese flag.

The surrender occurred Jan 6, 2020.

 

[SnoopLoggyDog]

I never liked the proposal for NAFTA. Rolling back the tariffs against China is 1000 times worse.

 

[CampingJosh]

Tariffs make it more expensive for US companies to compete in a global economy. Hard to be a global leader if you intentionally handicap yourself.

Remember, China doesn't pay the tariffs; US businesses have to pay the tariffs or buy their supplies from somewhere else.

 

[Twangbanger]

I was amused at the list of "contributions", 4 figures, those are rookie numbers. What dc law/lobby firms are getting the 6 and 7 figure payouts?

You have to read just a little bit farther, to see where the real payout happens:

"...To ensure that this relief is meaningful, we urge USTR to broaden the scope of the exclusion process to include all products covered under Section 301 tariffs and to ensure meaningful retroactivity to make businesses whole and keep them competitive. [Emphasis added]..."

The tariff relief being sought is "retroactive." Ex-post-facto. Meaning: the U.S. Government will take tariffs already collected...and pay them back to the companies. The companies with the D.C. law firms. Who no doubt will get a cut from the money they "liberate."

No doubt, this is because the law firms cannot be paid out of costs "avoided" in the future. It takes retroactivity to produce a pile of cash on the table right now, a "settlement" which can be divvied up in the classic sense.

So the payday is coming. (But did you have a doubt?)

 

[BugI02]

Tariffs make it more expensive for US companies to compete in a global economy. Hard to be a global leader if you intentionally handicap yourself.

Remember, China doesn't pay the tariffs; US businesses have to pay the tariffs or buy their supplies from somewhere else.

Rule of law, as well as laws against fraud, polluting the environment and legal responsibility for marketing an unsafe product make it more expensive for US companies to compete in a global economy but that doesn't mean I want to do without them

A race to the bottom just ends up at ... the bottom

 

[CampingJosh]

Rule of law, as well as laws against fraud, polluting the environment and legal responsibility for marketing an unsafe product make it more expensive for US companies to compete in a global economy but that doesn't mean I want to do without them

A race to the bottom just ends up at ... the bottom

You really can find a strawman anywhere, can't you?

 

[Tombs]

Tariffs make it more expensive for US companies to compete in a global economy. Hard to be a global leader if you intentionally handicap yourself.

Remember, China doesn't pay the tariffs; US businesses have to pay the tariffs or buy their supplies from somewhere else.

I guess if you're a laissez faire capitalist, removing these tariffs would be a huge win.

Because screw our small businesses and domestic industry, it isn't giving a multinational $10k per hour CEO another hour of beach time this year.

 

[BugI02]

You really can find a strawman anywhere, can't you?

You really can find an alibi for globalists and China anywhere, can't you?

And from the same post of yours I quoted, 'Hard to be a global leader if ...' your manufacturing base is hollowed out, you have to buy strategic materials from your enemy and your economy is service based. Crack a history book and get back to me

 

[AtTheMurph]

Rule of law, as well as laws against fraud, polluting the environment and legal responsibility for marketing an unsafe product make it more expensive for US companies to compete in a global economy but that doesn't mean I want to do without them

A race to the bottom just ends up at ... the bottom

That's all background noise. The real issue for US manufacturers is that the dollar is reserve currency which drives up demand for dollars, raising it's value relative to other currencies..

Things made here as a result are relatively more expensive and things made elsewhere are relatively less expensive. There wasn't a concerted effort to off-shore jobs. It is a result of the currency positioning. I

That reserve status also allows Americans to live a much higher lifestyle than their work product would indicate. We can buy things from the rest of the world at a big discount. And we can do it on credit!

But that doesn't last forever. When it ends, it is going to be rough.

 

[Twangbanger]

...Things made here as a result are relatively more expensive and things made elsewhere are relatively less expensive. There wasn't a concerted effort to off-shore jobs. It is a result of the currency positioning.

This particular statement would come as a surprise to the CEOs and Boards of Directors who made a concerted effort to off-shore jobs.

 

[actaeon277]

"Tariffs are bad".
Yes. For free trade.

Where is the free trade?
Did we get rid of minimum wage?
Or the million different ways we tie back the hands of businesses?