←back to thread

639 points CTOSian | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
zaptheimpaler ◴[] No.45029926[source]
> importers must declare the exact amount of steel, copper, and aluminum in products, with a 100% tariff applied to these materials. This makes little sense—PCBs, for instance, contain copper traces, but the quantity is nearly impossible to estimate.

Wow this administration is f**ing batshit insane. I thought the tariffs would be on raw metals, not anything at all that happens to contain them.

replies(22): >>45029962 #>>45029965 #>>45030034 #>>45030053 #>>45030129 #>>45030340 #>>45030343 #>>45030393 #>>45030421 #>>45030466 #>>45030477 #>>45030502 #>>45030605 #>>45030634 #>>45030776 #>>45030954 #>>45030975 #>>45031125 #>>45031196 #>>45031214 #>>45031243 #>>45034509 #
WorkerBee28474 ◴[] No.45029962[source]
The amount of copper on a PCB is only impossible to estimate if you don't try. Otherwise, you take the PCB copper thickness that you paid for, multiply it by the surface area, and multiply it by a guess of how much remains after etching.
replies(5): >>45029998 #>>45030024 #>>45030052 #>>45030261 #>>45030882 #
xerp2914 ◴[] No.45030024[source]
It's not that easy according to the post:

> U.S. customs is demanding a Certificate of Analysis (which could cost thousands of dollars and to determine what exact amount of Aluminum, Copper and Steel are in the product), otherwise they assume the entire PCB consists of copper, aluminum, and steel, and charge a 100% tariff on the whole product. This is a prime example of unnecessary complexity in international trade.

Also why would they go through all that trouble? Easier to not sell there anymore.

replies(4): >>45030102 #>>45030119 #>>45030353 #>>45030680 #
petercooper ◴[] No.45030119[source]
Also why would they go through all that trouble? Easier to not sell there anymore.

I don't agree with it, but isn't that ostensibly the end goal? That is, to force/encourage the manufacturing of goods in the US, rather than importing them. Of course, the metal itself still needs to enter the US either way.

replies(3): >>45030178 #>>45030452 #>>45031891 #
organsnyder ◴[] No.45030178[source]
Sure, that could be the eventual goal. But for that to happen, we need to ramp up manufacturing in thousands of sectors: not just the device, and not just everything it contains, but also the machines that make each of the components, the machines that make the parts for those machines, the raw materials for each...

If this was a serious economic policy, it would have started small—perhaps a 5% tariff, to take effect in six months. Then, promise to ramp it up (say an additional 5% every year).

replies(1): >>45030334 #
1. xg15 ◴[] No.45030334[source]
Also, it's a weird way to do "hidden" tariffs, in addition to the official ones that are bad enough.

E.g. if he wanted to tariff electronic devices, why not tariff them directly, instead of those weird mental gymnastics?