What tariff retreats teach us
Daily update
Daily update
- US President Trump (temporarily) retreated from ending de minimis tariff exemptions. De minimis rules mean US consumers do not pay trade taxes on imports worth less than USD 800. This, alongside retreats from taxing Colombian, Mexican, and Canadian goods, emphasizes trade tax visibility. Consumers would notice the cost of these tariffs (affecting food and fuel prices, or the price of purchases from Temu), and would quickly realize that US consumers, not foreigners, pay tariffs. Highly visible tariffs lead to a quick retreat.
- Taxing steel and aluminum is less visible to end-consumers. Taxing (bulk) imports from China is also less visible (imports from China tend to fall in price, so tariffs may mean less deflation, not price increases). Trade taxes in these areas are likely to be more enduring. They are still economically negative (a tax is a tax), but there are potentially fewer second-round effects.
- ECB President Lagarde is speaking to the EU Parliament today. Markets know the general direction of ECB policy. However, policy uncertainty from the US may exacerbate the north-south divide in Europe, and Lagarde’s views on that may be sought.
- Trump suggested mega-donor Musk had found irregularities with “Treasuries”. Treasury officials clarified the US president’s apparent confusion, saying it referenced payments made by the Treasury not bonds.
Explore more CIO Daily Updates
- How quickly will US inflation increase?
- ….not well
- ±….
- Economists’ ignorance is the problem
- United fronts
- “End the Fed”?
- US inflation pain a global gain?
- State controlled prices
- Tax facts
- Who believes the numbers?
- Insecurity
- Fiscal inefficiency
- Animal spirits measurement
- Tariffs start to show up
- Sort of stagflation?
- US rates – who decides?
- Changing the growth narrative
- A tale of two consumers
- Regional variations
- The rising price of drowning sorrows
- Cutting confidence more than spending
- Powell is not a chicken farmer
- When economics takes over
- Deflation and inflation
- Tax and retreat
- Taxes, spending, and rate cuts
- A disturbance in the force
- Tax attacks
- Taxes and data tampering
- Durable inflation?
- Markets start to fret
- US President Trump’s confusion
- Panem or Panglossian?
- Is an avocado tax credible?
- Breaking with the past
- Time to invest in the US?
- The risk of fantastic savings
- Nervousness about policy
- More taxes ahead
- Hiring and firing
- Keeping trade in the spotlight
- What US retreats tell us
- Protectionist, or pushover?
- The damage of data dependency
- The wider politics of price rises
- Time to plead for exceptions?
- The fear of fear
- Revising history
- Right person, right job, right time
- Trivialities and perceptions
- Retreat repeat
- The Phantom Menace?
- Another fun year
- Time for more taxes
- Policy and policy uncertainty
- Rates and spending
- Efficiency versus GDP
- Reassuring signals?
- Tariff tales
- Setting rates
- Tariffs may not “solve” everything
- Threats and freezes
- Scripted versus unscripted
- Competitiveness considerations
- Will dollar strength magic away tariffs?
- Trade taxes and the US Treasury
- Benign inflation; now, what about growth?
- Shell shocked?
- Trade taxes and boiling frogs
- Buy before prices rise
- Does deregulation always boost growth?
- Dullness, and bias
- Ninety one days
- US rates paths
- Guardrails
- Taxes or tips?
- Laboring a point
- Here we go again
- A year of upsetting everyone
- Solid foundations, political threats
- Rates: Same story, different risks
- The end of the rate cut scramble
- Political noise, again
- Shuffling demand around
- Can food prices fall?
- Supporting consumers
- Real talk
- Taxing US consumers, cutting China’s taxes
- Taxing via tariffs
- The other side of the coin
- Employment without consensus
- Barnier falls
- Rule of law
- Après moi, le déluge?
- The importance of being the dollar
- Supply and demand, and inflation
- Budgets and bonds
- The good life
- Rate cuts and tax hikes
- Orthodoxy does not have influence