Most active commenters
  • rsynnott(3)

←back to thread

355 points Aloisius | 37 comments | | HN request time: 1.247s | source | bottom
1. tonyedgecombe ◴[] No.44391320[source]
>even with 24% VAT

If you are buying your finished goods from Europe you shouldn't be paying VAT.

2. unsnap_biceps ◴[] No.44391322[source]
Even if China paid the tariffs, how did you expect it to work? The manufacturers would just eat the entire fee and give you stuff for under cost?
replies(4): >>44391397 #>>44391613 #>>44391670 #>>44391702 #
3. ◴[] No.44391339[source]
4. bigstrat2003 ◴[] No.44391434[source]
It is deeply uncharitable to assume that someone is willfully ignorant. And frankly it is toxic to polite discussion to make accusations like that. Please consider extending charity to people if your goal is to have a constructive discussion rather than a quarrel.
replies(2): >>44391697 #>>44393926 #
5. danans ◴[] No.44391442[source]
> The only inconvenience is the package takes about 10 days of delivery, no other differences. My company located in Texas is letting go the final employees at the end of this month, some 45 emps.

That's sad for those employees in Texas, but relatedly, why were you manufacturing in Texas before? Was it just quick delivery or were labor rates lower in Texas?

Based on your description, your product sounds like it requires highly skilled assembly labor.

How much would labor rates have to fall in Texas for you to move manufacturing back despite the tariffs?

6. 83457 ◴[] No.44391459[source]
Are you saying that a $1000 box of 100 widgets imported from China has a $1700 processing fee on top of the tariff?
7. sephamorr ◴[] No.44391474[source]
So you employed 45 employees to do assembly work but bought each of 2000 parts one at a time so the processing fees were meaningful? Surely if the revenue supports that staffing, you should import by the pallet or container?
8. AshleyGrant ◴[] No.44391475[source]
> I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs. I was very much wrong.

Folks were screaming it from the rooftops for months prior to the election. So many folks, yourself included, refused to accept reality and now we all suffer the pain.

I would say "Maybe folks will learn!" But I know they won't. US voters as a bloc seem to have an incredibly short memory. They'll forget about all of this pain and stupidity within moments of Trump leaving office.

replies(1): >>44391770 #
9. shadowgovt ◴[] No.44391483[source]
Sorry about the bad experience.

What this administration's model of tariffs completely misses is how fungible labor and manufacturing are in the world now. Business is as much about strength of information as strength of arm or strength of steel. It's hard to believe they had any professionals in the room when they came up with this "protectionist" scheme.

A good analogy a friend once gave me was that there are two ways to build a car in the US. You can tool up an industry ecosystem where you can gather (or produce) base materials and then shape and combine them into small parts, make the small parts into larger parts, do final assembly, and roll them off an assembly line. Or, you can take about as much land as you'd use for that, maybe a bit less, and grow corn. Lots of corn. Lots and lots of corn. Then you put that corn on a boat. Ten months later, that boat comes back with cars on it.

When the world is that varied a place, one country trying to jam its finger in the dkye via tariffs is a fool's errand. The economy will interpret artificial cost as damage and route around it.

10. eightman ◴[] No.44391495[source]
> I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs. I was very much wrong.

How do you run a business that relies on imports and not know how tariffs work?

11. viraptor ◴[] No.44391498[source]
How does this story match up with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43590072 where you post after the tariff announcement (April 4th):

> Noone in their right mind will start building factories in USA because of temporary tariffs that all might go away with an executive order and a stroke of a pen comes January 2029.

(I checked because the story just smells weird...)

12. slaw ◴[] No.44391522[source]
Why don't you move jobs to China if you assemble Chinese parts
13. kotlip ◴[] No.44391523[source]
Why Europe? Did you consider moving production to Mexico or Canada instead to keep your delivery time lower?
14. botro ◴[] No.44391539[source]
Thanks for sharing your real world experience, it helps in seeing how regular folk are affected by policy decisions.

I understand from your post that you are a business person, buying product, performing value added services and selling for profit. Although I know little about business, I would guess that if one of your suppliers raised the prices on one of the inputs to your finished goods, you would likely increase the price of your product to preserve your profits and continue your business as a venture. I would guess that you would not pay the additional cost out of your own pocket.

My question is; why did you not expect the same logic to play out in the tariffs situation? That any country would pay the additional cost of doing business out of their own pocket and not pass it on to the consumer?

15. louthy ◴[] No.44391544[source]
[flagged]
replies(1): >>44393503 #
16. forty ◴[] No.44391561[source]
Since there was a lot of confusion in some people/president heads about VAT: this is more or less the equivalent of Sales Tax that you can have in the US. The rate is different depending on which country you are in (in France the main rate for most products is 20%).

If you are traveling or sell in Europe: in Europe, it is generally expected (or even mandatory) that customers are displayed the price all taxes included.

replies(2): >>44391962 #>>44395660 #
17. SrslyJosh ◴[] No.44391601[source]
> I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs.

Why would they pay a tax that's levied by the US government? In both the most literal sense, and in the sense of keeping their prices the same.

replies(1): >>44391650 #
18. MangoCoffee ◴[] No.44391613[source]
Chinese manufacturers will split the fee with buyers when the tariff rate is modest and doesn't eat too much into their profit.
replies(1): >>44391811 #
19. bcrosby95 ◴[] No.44391636[source]
> I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs. I was very much wrong.

Even if you assumed that, you started at step 1 and didn't think past that.

Let's assume China pays the tariff. Is China going to eat that? They will probably pass it onto the seller.

OK now what? Let's say before the tariffs, their total unit cost is $5, and they sell it to you for $10 (I'm just making stuff up here).

Tariffs were 145% at some point. So China pays $14.50. China passes it onto the seller, now the total unit cost is $19.50. They lost $9.50.

Are they in the business to lose money with every sale? No.

However, that presents a problem. The tariff they paid? It's higher than the price they sold it to you. That will remain the same regardless of the price you have to pay. Even if they charged you $1mil, they could not make a profit, because the tariff would be $1.45mil.

So, yeah, you were very much wrong. The idea is not only unrealistic, it is mathematically impossible if the goal is to actually make money when tariffs are 100% or more.

replies(1): >>44391922 #
20. watwut ◴[] No.44391697{3}[source]
[flagged]
21. mindslight ◴[] No.44391702[source]
Yes, because we're supposed to believe that China having a surplus of manufactured goods constitutes a liability, and our need for manufactured goods constitutes a strength. So with our good strong healthy mentally competent leader, China will soon be paying us to take their products. Noted experts like Ron Vara have explained this in depth. </s>
22. grg0 ◴[] No.44391770[source]
Bonhoeffer's theory of stupidty is relevant here: https://www.onthewing.org/user/Bonhoeffer%20-%20Theory%20of%...
replies(2): >>44393401 #>>44397090 #
23. mikestew ◴[] No.44391802[source]
I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs.

“Man on the street” doesn’t know how tariffs work (or at least believes the bullshit), and I’m not surprised. But I’m truly surprised that someone running a business fell for this, especially given the person saying it.

replies(1): >>44395651 #
24. spiderfarmer ◴[] No.44391811{3}[source]
The rate isn’t modest so the straw already broke the camel’s back.
25. ◴[] No.44391869[source]
26. spacechild1 ◴[] No.44391872[source]
> I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs

You have been importing parts from China, yet you didn't know how tariffs work? I have a hard time believing this.

27. danielodievich ◴[] No.44391912[source]
>I assumed, like President said

Like all the other sibling comments, just... sigh.

I did not assume any such thing.

My current home remodeling project with new siding and windows and so on, I've had to pay ~$2K extra in tariffs on just the materials for my soffits (planks of Canadian cedar). Boils my blood in anger.

28. youngtaff ◴[] No.44391962[source]
In the UK retailers that sell to consumers must include VAT in the listed price

Companies selling to other companies normally use an ex VAT price and then VAT is added on top

29. sorcerer-mar ◴[] No.44393401{3}[source]
This is amazing, thank you for sharing!

> The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with a person, but with slogans, catchwords and the like, that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being.

I spend a lot of time (too much, apparently) chatting with MAGA folks and this is a stunningly accurate description. It really is just pre-programmed slogans. You see it now even in Congressional hearings of cabinet members, which is fucking horrifying.

replies(1): >>44398280 #
30. stevenwoo ◴[] No.44393503[source]
I think a key thing is he often states multiple sides of an issue depending upon the audience and even people who I’ve seen interviewed who heard both say they just disregard the parts they disagree with - it’s a level of cognitive dissonance approaching double think in 1984, IMHO.
31. Herring ◴[] No.44393926{3}[source]
[flagged]
32. platevoltage ◴[] No.44394083[source]
You should really assume by default that whatever that guy says, the opposite is true. Don't give any money to anyone claiming to be a Nigerian Prince.
33. rsynnott ◴[] No.44395543[source]
> I assumed, like President said, that it will be China, not me, who pays the tariffs. I was very much wrong.

... Wait, why did you assume that? Like, you looked at, in one corner, essentially every economist in the world, and on the other corner ol' Minihands, with his background in failing to sell steak and run casinos, and thought "yeah, this guy's probably right"?

I'm genuinely kind of fascinated; was this a kind of active "expertise is bad, people who don't know anything are more likely to be right about things than experts in those things" thing?

> and even with 24% VAT (local tax) it is way cheaper to produce your merch and then send it to USA

If you are paying VAT on product which you are then exporting to the US, then you need to urgently talk to an accountant. You should likely not be paying this, and depending on the country you may have a limited window to reclaim such overpayment.

34. rsynnott ◴[] No.44395651[source]
This was somewhat common with Brexit; small business owners promoting Brexit, then suffering or going out of business when it actually happened. It's even less excusable in this case, though; the reasons that a hard-but-not-no-deal Brexit (which is what the final result was) are bad for businesses, and particularly small businesses, are often at least somewhat subtle and non-obvious (to the extent that _new_ problems which economists hadn't really predicted are still being discovered), whereas it's hard to imagine something simpler than "making stuff more expensive to buy is bad for people who buy stuff".
35. rsynnott ◴[] No.44395660[source]
> in Europe, it is generally expected (or even mandatory) that customers are displayed the price all taxes included.

It's mandatory to include VAT in displayed consumer prices, yeah. In some countries there are _other_ point of sale fees which may not have to be displayed, though; in particular deposit return fees for cans and bottles often aren't displayed.

36. reciprocity ◴[] No.44397090{3}[source]
I appreciate you posting this link.
37. grg0 ◴[] No.44398280{4}[source]
The guy isn't a random broccoli either, he's got some history. If you found that interesting, you might want to check out his other works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Bonhoeffer