The WSJ (hates Trump, loves Globalists) grabbed a NY Fed study and came to a conclusion which is highly dubitable: that the US consumer pays 90% of the Trump tariffs.
Breitbart disagrees.
...First, we have the foreign-subsidiary problem. “U.S. importer” is a location, not a nationality. Many importers of record are U.S.-incorporated subsidiaries of foreign multinationals. If a tariff hit shows up as lower margins in the importing entity, the burden may land on the foreign parent’s consolidated profits and on foreign shareholders. Fed Governor Stephen Miran has made the definitional point directly: trade data can be misleading because “U.S. importers” can be U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies. The Fed’s framework doesn’t observe who owns the importer’s residual profits. It observes that the remitter is on U.S. soil. That is not “Americans paid.” It is “a U.S.-registered entity wrote the check.”
This matters because it means the “U.S. side” bucket is not even cleanly “U.S.” in an economic sense. It is the legal remitter. The leap from remitter to “Americans” is a leap over ownership. ...
There are also tax/regulatory matters which impact the formula--none of which favor the WSJ's declaration.
But let's make it easier.
...Since Liberation Day, commodities less food and energy—the CPI category most directly exposed to import price pass-through—has risen at an annualized rate of less than half a percent. That is not what 90 percent consumer incidence looks like. ...
Somebody is taking a hit, but it is not the American consumer.
No comments:
Post a Comment