|
I do find it a bit weird that a country obsessed with calling everyone else communists has decided to cut itself off from the world and become self sufficient. I hope they have a nice time.
|
I hope they have a nice time.
I don't, I hope they suffer, it's their own fault for being daft enough to elect am obviously barmy president, an autocrat with zero diplomatic skills.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that they just see the way that the winds are blowing & making plans accordingly ...
www.thebusinessdesk.com/eastmidlands/news/2096242-...e
Perfectly aware that RR Holdings PLC has nothing (other than history) to do with BMW AG's RR Motors, thank you.
Both Airbus & Boeing as well as the 3 major engine manufacturers are production limited with long waiting lists stretching to many years. I wonder:
a) how do their existing order contracts deal with the potential for tariffs?
b) whether given the above situation there would just be wholesale swapping of Europeans to European suppliers & US ones to US suppliers but actually having relatively little impact on production in either?
Meanwhile, Comac would be licking it's lips about possibly getting some orders from the spillover.
Mid-term elections in the USA in under 2 years & Trump's term ends (unless he manages to change the laws) in 4. Long enough to do serious damage economically for a while but not really that long in planning terms for major capital projects like aerospace engineering factories.
|
|
As I understand it, the tariffs on foreign cars are designed to invigorate the American car industry. However, you have to ask why so many Americans have chosen to buy foreign when they also have the choice of a domestic product! He has now suggested tax breaks on finance interest for American cars. So he wants to force them into buying something they don't want
It would also seem that he has no objection to foreign car makers opening factories in the US. This is after recently saying he did not want to see one foreign car on the streets of New York or Washington? Surely, once the European and Far Eastern car producers gained a foothold in the USA, they would eat the US auto industry from within.
|
It would also seem that he has no objection to foreign car makers opening factories in the US. This is after recently saying he did not want to see one foreign car on the streets of New York or Washington? Surely, once the European and Far Eastern car producers gained a foothold in the USA, they would eat the US auto industry from within.
Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mazda & Subaru are already there. Iirc the car with the highest US content (more than any GM or Ford) is a Toyota!
|
|
|
|
|
US car sales are ~15m units pa, of which about 50% are imported.
Mexico is the largest source of imported vehicles ($50bn), closely followed by Japan, South Korea and Canada. China currently feature little. The US also imports ~$80bn pa car components upon which I believe the tariff will also be levied.
On the face of it his actions will simply reduce the choice available to US consumers and increase the cost of new cars. It is noted that the US has a major balance of payments deficit in cars which Trump may be hoping to reverse!
How rapidly US companies could step up production of cars and components is debatable - they are unlikely to quickly displace most/all currently imported volumes by stepping up local production which will require investment and manpower.
There are three possibilities
- Trump is playing "disruptor" in the hope of forcing change in trading relationships
- Trump is an economically illiterate m****
- Trump is both
Similarly - the Trump plan for tariffs on some raw materials - about 50% of aluminium is imported (mainly from Canada). It could take up to a decade to develop new mines, build refining plant and the necessary power supplies needed for local US production.
|
|
When the US import tax on steel was introduced that their local manufacturers responded by increasing their prices by 30%. It negates any advantage the tariffs gave and will increase the price of anything that uses steel. Anything from washing machines to skysc***ers. I will be interested to see if car manufacturers do so also.
www.marketplace.org/2025/03/26/heres-why-prices-of.../
|
When the US import tax on steel was introduced that their local manufacturers responded by increasing their prices by 30%. It negates any advantage the tariffs gave and will increase the price of anything that uses steel. Anything from washing machines to skysc***ers. I will be interested to see if car manufacturers do so also.
www.marketplace.org/2025/03/26/heres-why-prices-of.../
They will They will !
|
|
One of the main causes of the Great Depression (and hence WW2) was the effect of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs. Is DT trying to wipe out his debt?
|
|
David Dimbleby has done an interesting article for the BBC about what Trump is up to and how he's ultimately reverting to how things were before Reagan and Thatcher.
|
|
In all the discussion about vehicle tariffs, it seems to be assumed that exports to the USA will abruptly stop. Range Rover are one company concerned about a loss of sales to the US. However, I would imagine that buyers of Range Rovers in the states can probably absorb the price rises, after all what are the serious options from home grown cars from both a luxury and a status point of view? Yes, I am sure there will be some loss of sales but I wouldn't think it would be catastrophic.
Edited by davecooper on 28/03/2025 at 16:01
|
In all the discussion about vehicle tariffs, it seems to be assumed that exports to the USA will abruptly stop. Range Rover are one company concerned about a loss of sales to the US. However, I would imagine that buyers of Range Rovers in the states can probably absorb the price rises, after all what are the serious options from home grown cars from both a luxury and a status point of view? Yes, I am sure there will be some loss of sales but I wouldn't think it would be catastrophic.
I think Cadillac and Lincoln are supposed to be posh aren't they?
I tend to agree, though, the kind of sucker that pays for a Range Rover would probably be glad to pay more for it. When I lived in Australia 20 years ago, European cars were way more expensive than Japanese and Korean (and Australian) cars. I don't know if that was tariffs or just the need to ship them further, but it certainly gave European cars a certain image.
People lording it up in a Jaguar X Type was quite entertaining but the strangest bit was there being two Honda Accords; the usual one and the 'Euro', which was much more expensive (and the same as the UK one).
|
|
Even if domestic supply can step in, US manufacturers will be jacking up their prices.
|
|
They already have, that's why dealer stock is burgeoning with USD100k pick up trucks. Way overpriced.
Edited by Ethan Edwards on 28/03/2025 at 21:33
|
|
Trump has told auto industry CEO's that they must not raise their prices to offset the tariffs.
I'd say trouble ahead on that one.
|
|
Meanwhile in Blighty we forge ahead on the net zero bandwagon which results in ever higher energy costs for business, and our manufacturing industry continues to perish before our very eyes.
But somehow Trump's policies to bring energy prices down even further and bring manufacturing back to the US (tariffs being just one of the methods) are wrong.
We'll see in due course who has this one right.
|
Meanwhile in Blighty we forge ahead on the net zero bandwagon which results in ever higher energy costs for business, and our manufacturing industry continues to perish before our very eyes.
But somehow Trump's policies to bring energy prices down even further and bring manufacturing back to the US (tariffs being just one of the methods) are wrong.
We'll see in due course who has this one right.
The UKs energy costs are high as they are tied to the cost of gas which itself is expensive. If they were tied to the actual costs of renewables it would be a lot lower. Higher energy costs are a choice - we can have net zero and lower energy costs, if the government chose to.
Although, if we continue to pump out all the pollution into the country there won't be a country left to live in so something needs to be done about it.
What Trump is doing is not necessarily wrong in the long term - the way in how it is happening is. You can't change how something like a car is made over night - tariffs turning up/changing/being dropped give no stability and cause as many issues that you complain the UK has with manufacturing - it's going to make things worse for the manufactures and the consumers.
|
The UKs energy costs are high as they are tied to the cost of gas which itself is expensive. If they were tied to the actual costs of renewables it would be a lot lower. Higher energy costs are a choice - we can have net zero and lower energy costs, if the government chose to.
Although, if we continue to pump out all the pollution into the country there won't be a country left to live in so something needs to be done about it.
What Trump is doing is not necessarily wrong in the long term - the way in how it is happening is. You can't change how something like a car is made over night - tariffs turning up/changing/being dropped give no stability and cause as many issues that you complain the UK has with manufacturing - it's going to make things worse for the manufactures and the consumers.
You simply cannot run a manufacturing base on unreliable wind and/or sun in our climate, the power requirements of manufacturing industry are huge 24/7/365 and many factories mills etc can't just stop because the wind has stopped and its night time, where i work our mills take hours to fire up fully, to switch everything on suddenly would cause serious issues to the grid, all staple foods producers have similar issues, if net zero leads to production stoppage real food shortages are days not weeks away and would take months of uniterrupted production to get stocks back up.
We sit on hundreds of years of coal and a finite amount of gas that has to be extracted, when those running the country into the ground over the last 30+ years have finally accepted it is already bankrupt and heading for oblivion in multiple ways someone is going to have to make the decisions that should have been made decades ago, let us all hope there's something worth saving when that time comes
Britain virtue signalling its economic, and the soon to follow, social destruction via its net zero rush won't make the slightest difference to the world's climate, Germany is currently finding out what happens when one makes an enemy of one of the world's largest suppliers of gas. not to menton everyone turning a blind eye to the deliberate sabotage of one of the gas pipelines by Germany's (and ours) alleged allies.
Outsourcing production to countries that pay only lip service to climate agreements (let alone human rights) whilst preening virtue is the height of hypocrisy.
Edited by gordonbennet on 30/03/2025 at 09:15
|
|
I think people are making the decisions that should have been made decades ago aren't they? That's kind of the point.
The inconsistency of renewable energy is a red herring. Energy can be stored but, more practically, it can be traded. We already trade energy with the continent and can continue to do so.
Trump believes that the US can be self-sufficient so he can make whatever deal he likes on his terms. He might be right, but has possibly overplayed his hand in terms of how much anyone needs or wants to do a deal with the US. He needs Russia to keep Europe busy and disfunctional so that deals with the US are needed.
The obvious solution would be to tell him to do one and kick the Russians out of Ukraine. Nobody will do that due to the vast economic and human cost, so we have to carry on appeasing Trump to minimise the damage until he leaves office
|
The UKs energy costs are high as they are tied to the cost of gas which itself is expensive. If they were tied to the actual costs of renewables it would be a lot lower. Higher energy costs are a choice - we can have net zero and lower energy costs, if the government chose to.
Although, if we continue to pump out all the pollution into the country there won't be a country left to live in so something needs to be done about it.
What Trump is doing is not necessarily wrong in the long term - the way in how it is happening is. You can't change how something like a car is made over night - tariffs turning up/changing/being dropped give no stability and cause as many issues that you complain the UK has with manufacturing - it's going to make things worse for the manufactures and the consumers.
You simply cannot run a manufacturing base on unreliable wind and/or sun in our climate, the power requirements of manufacturing industry are huge 24/7/365 and many factories mills etc can't just stop because the wind has stopped and its night time, where i work our mills take hours to fire up fully, to switch everything on suddenly would cause serious issues to the grid, all staple foods producers have similar issues, if net zero leads to production stoppage real food shortages are days not weeks away and would take months of uniterrupted production to get stocks back up.
We sit on hundreds of years of coal and a finite amount of gas that has to be extracted, when those running the country into the ground over the last 30+ years have finally accepted it is already bankrupt and heading for oblivion in multiple ways someone is going to have to make the decisions that should have been made decades ago, let us all hope there's something worth saving when that time comes
Britain virtue signalling its economic, and the soon to follow, social destruction via its net zero rush won't make the slightest difference to the world's climate, Germany is currently finding out what happens when one makes an enemy of one of the world's largest suppliers of gas. not to menton everyone turning a blind eye to the deliberate sabotage of one of the gas pipelines by Germany's (and ours) alleged allies.
Outsourcing production to countries that pay only lip service to climate agreements (let alone human rights) whilst preening virtue is the height of hypocrisy.
Of course you can run using wind/solar in the UK - you just store the energy until it is needed as well as increasing the UK's nuclear capacity - no reason for manufacturing to need to turn off. Also 'Net Zero' would allow for gas generation - it just needs the pollution from that to be offset elsewhere. You are describing an issue that does not exist.
As for having coal/gas reserves - yes, we do - but coal especially is very inefficient/dirty and polluting. Why on earth would you want to go back to that when there are better alternatives?
Germany's issue are self made - had they invested in better renewable storage and invested in nuclear (like France) then they would not have the issues that they do now.
Just ignoring man made climate change is just showing contempt for your children's future and saying that you just don't care as it won't affect you.
|
|
I've seen one report that estimates that the tariff will cost GM about $15bn /year as many of their cars and most of their parts are imported.
I've also seen a report showing that Toyota has more local content, ie made in the US, than GM or Ford !
|
|
Trump has convinced his supporters that other countries not US consumers will pay the tariffs. You don't need to be an economist to understand the basic principle of tariffs in terms of who ultimately pays.
Trump also insists that, for example, only car parts that are manufactured in, say, Canada and Mexico will be subject to the tariffs and that the customs regime will be easy to police and enforce. It's a fact that, for example, an engine piston produced for a so-called 'US-made' vehicle in Detroit starts out as Canadian aluminium sourced 15 minutes drive away in Windsor, Ontario. In the process of being manufactured the unfinished piston crosses the US-Canadian border several times before finally being installed in the 'US-made' engine.
The same applies to hundreds/thousands of other car components some of which cross the US-Mexican border several times. How is it possible to accurately identify a pure US manufactured product to be exempt from tariffs where so many of its components have come from integrated supply chains when Ford, GM etc depend on slick, just-in-time stock control systems?
Maybe Mr Musk has AI up his sleeve with a solution........
.
|
... for example, an engine piston produced for a so-called 'US-made' vehicle in Detroit starts out as Canadian aluminium sourced 15 minutes drive away in Windsor, Ontario. In the process of being manufactured the unfinished piston crosses the US-Canadian border several times before finally being installed in the 'US-made' engine.
And does the 25% tariff get applied to the part every time it crosses the border ? Or is it cancelled like VAT ?
Edited by Andrew-T on 29/03/2025 at 17:17
|
The same applies to hundreds/thousands of other car components some of which cross the US-Mexican border several times. How is it possible to accurately identify a pure US manufactured product to be exempt from tariffs where so many of its components have come from integrated supply chains when Ford, GM etc depend on slick, just-in-time stock control
Perhaps the Canadians will insist that every component or assembly that leaves Canada is subject to a 25% tariff.....every time it leaves Canada. After all, Trump said that the tariff would apply to all cars and components entering the US.
While the US does not have the capacity to do the work in house and probably won't have for three or four years, the strength is with Canada.
Edited by davecooper on 30/03/2025 at 12:24
|
Perhaps the Canadians will insist that every component or assembly that leaves Canada is subject to a 25% tariff.....every time it leaves Canada. After all, Trump said that the tariff would apply to all cars and components entering the US.
While the US does not have the capacity to do the work in house and probably won't have for three or four years, the strength is with Canada.
I am not sure the strength is with Canada - as a policy these tariffs are economically illiterate.
US consumers will pay more for their cars as either (a) tariffs increase costs and price paid, or (b) as manufacturers increase US capacity to make more cars and components locally probably at a higher cost than previous lower cost imports.
Overseas car manufacturers (including Canada) will see sales volumes fall over time (not immediately) as the US steps up local production.
Jobs in the US will increase offset by decreases overseas. Demographic shift (aging population, fewer young) in the US will create the perfect storm when combined strict limits on immigration - mainly the source of increased labour capacity.
|
|
<< I am not sure the strength is with Canada - as a policy these tariffs are economically illiterate. >>
As long as 'economic literacy' consists of continuous expansion to finance further growth the literacy may lie in other areas. A capitalist system only flourishes on steady(ish) growth, and we all know that growth is finite. Some of the world's problems are the result of that IMHO, plus the fundamental one of rapid population growth during the 20th century. Much of the immigration we are trying to contain just now is because (for example) north Africa can no longer support its numbers - and some of them have heard that the UK is a soft touch.
Not much to do with Trump's tariffs, but not completely disconnected ?
|
<< I am not sure the strength is with Canada - as a policy these tariffs are economically illiterate. >>
As long as 'economic literacy' consists of continuous expansion to finance further growth the literacy may lie in other areas. A capitalist system only flourishes on steady(ish) growth, and we all know that growth is finite. Some of the world's problems are the result of that IMHO, plus the fundamental one of rapid population growth during the 20th century. Much of the immigration we are trying to contain just now is because (for example) north Africa can no longer support its numbers - and some of them have heard that the UK is a soft touch.
Not much to do with Trump's tariffs, but not completely disconnected ?
I agree with half of this, but we actively encourage immigration because there is a big disparity between how many people are paying tax and how many are using public services, particularly healthcare. At the moment, immigration is the only way to rapidly increase the working age and, hence, predominantly tax paying population.
Constant cuts to public services and benefits are a further, albeit marginal, method of trying to redress the balance. Unfortunately for my generation and the subsequent ones, the long term solution is to increase retirement age so that we get back to a position where we only have around ten years between retirement and death.
|
|
Unfortunately for my generation and the subsequent ones, the long term solution is to increase retirement age so that we get back to a position where we only have around ten years between retirement and death.
Oh dear.. 2 years to go for me....
Fortunately whichever bunch does tariffs ain't gonna bother me.
I'm too busy s k I n g.
Edited by Orb>>. on 30/03/2025 at 17:03
|
Unfortunately for my generation and the subsequent ones, the long term solution is to increase retirement age so that we get back to a position where we only have around ten years between retirement and death.
Later retirement is only part of the solution. Many grow older thanks to medical science, but spend longer in old age with chronic health problems which limit work capacity.
The UK like much of the first world has a demographic problem - a falling birth rate which has been below 2 per woman since 1975. The result - fewer people of working age to support more young and (particularly) old who do not work.
The UK has "solved" the problem short term through immigration. This is not a sustainable long term strategy - healthy young immigrants will eventually grow old and need the services many currently provide.
The solution is to automate all activity where possible to free up the maximum number to do those jobs which cannot be delivered with technology. AI may be a key driver - as a society we need to embrace change not resist it.
|
|
<< The solution is to automate all activity where possible to free up the maximum number to do those jobs which cannot be delivered with technology. AI may be a key driver - as a society we need to embrace change not resist it. >>
I think all the indications are that AI will be both used and abused, taking automation still further and increasing the ranks of the unemployable. There will probably be even more leisure time to fill, which many will spend on their already overworked phones ?
|
I'm too busy s k I n g.
Seconded!
|
|
|
|
