Trump Considering Huge Tariff Increase on Steel, Aluminum With Weak 'National Security' Rationale

[EasyAce]

Tariffs are an unnecessary step that will hurt American manufacturers and increase prices on a wide range of products, from cars to beer cans.
By Eric Boehm
http://reason.com/blog/2018/02/23/trump-considering-24-percent-tariff-on-a

The Trump administration is trying to sell its plan to slap tariffs on imported steel and aluminum as necessary for national security, but the import taxes are an unnecessary step that will hurt American manufacturers and increase prices on a wide range of products, from cars to beer cans.

Last week, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross formally submitted to the White House a proposal for 24 percent tariffs on all steel imports. Alternatively, the plan calls for a 53 percent tariff on steel imported from 12 nations, including China, with import quotas on steel produced in all other countries, capping possible imports from those locations at 2017 levels. The proposal also calls for a tariff of 7.7 percent on aluminum imports from all countries, or a 23.6 percent import on products from five countries (China, Hong Kong, Russia, Venezuela, and Vietnam) with a quota on all imports from other places.

The tariffs are necessary because relying on imported steel and aluminum "threatens to impair the national security," Ross said. The theory is that, because American weapons of war depend on steel and aluminum supplies, domestic producers must be protected from international supplies that could be cut-off in the event of a conflict.

That rationale is "weak," according to a collection of libertarian, conservative, and nonpartisan think tanks—the American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC Action, the R Street Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, FreedomWorks and the National Taxpayers Union—that wrote an open letter to the White House on Friday opposing the tariffs. In the event of a conflict, the Pentagon has specific deals with American allies to continue supplying steel and aluminum . . .

. . . The last time the federal government imposed steel tariffs—during George W. Bush's tenure in the White House, when tariffs ranging from 8 percent to 30 percent were set—the higher costs for importing steel dealt a $4 billion hit to the economy and led to 200,000 job losses, the six groups who wrote to the White House argued. Those tariffs were intended to remain in place for three years, but were withdrawn just a year after they were imposed . . .

. . . The Trump administration has already slapped tariffs on solar panels (30 percent) and washing machines (ranging from 20 percent to 50 percent) in the name of protecting domestic manufacturers.

Those tariffs weren't created in the name of national security. And, when you get right down to it, the proposal for tariffs on steel and aluminum aren't about national security either. It's just protectionism, and it leaves almost everyone worse off.

[DB]

We don't produce steel and aluminum because they take a lot of energy and the US has made energy very expensive. High energy costs reduces everyone's standard of living across the board. Energy is the life blood of any modern economy and environuts have done everything in their power to make it more costly.

[LMAO]

How long before the law of unintended consequences rears it head assuming this goes through?

[EasyAce]

We don't produce steel and aluminum because they take a lot of energy and the US has made energy very expensive. High energy costs reduces everyone's standard of living across the board. Energy is the life blood of any modern economy and environuts have done everything in their power to make it more costly.

@DB
You'd hope energy secretary Rick Perry---wasn't he once the governor of an oil state?---would know that and counsel Donaldus Minimus accordingly.

[EasyAce]

How long before the law of unintended consequences rears it head assuming this goes through?

@LMAO
You have to ask? ;)