Mexico, Canada, and the EU hit with new steel and aluminum tariff

Jump to Last Post 1-4 of 4 discussions (29 posts)
  1. RJ Schwartz profile image89
    RJ Schwartzposted 3 years ago

    The President announced today that America will levy tariffs on steel and aluminum to the EU, Mexico, and Canada tonight - retaliatory measures are already being drafted against the country and the stock market is tenuous at best. 

    Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said trade talks with the affected nations were progressing, but not enough to continue the March tariff exemption. He did not specify what requirements the EU, Canada and Mexico would have to meet in order to get the tariffs lifted.

    Thoughts?

    1. Credence2 profile image81
      Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Retaliation? They say that payback is a bi*ch

      Are we all sure that we and our economy can weather the reprisals from these trading partners?

    2. profile image0
      promisemposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Even the Koch brothers say it's a bad idea.

    3. Nathanville profile image93
      Nathanvilleposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yep, there are no winners in ‘Trade Wars’.

      But the EU has no option other than to retaliate, and it will hurt the American economy e.g. make exports from the USA to the EU less competitive as the EU slaps Tariffs on American Goods, and thus adversely affect American jobs. 

      It’s not the EU who has been ‘Dumping’ cheap steel on the USA; up until now the EU have been Trading with the USA in accordance with WTO Rules.

      It’s China who has been ‘Dumping’ cheap steel on both the USA and EU.  And therefore, rather than picking a fight with the EU, Trump should be working with the EU as an ally to combat ‘Dumping’ from China.

      1. RJ Schwartz profile image89
        RJ Schwartzposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Germany has the third largest trade deficit with America
        The US has been in a deficit position since 1975
        This is not a trade war really, but a balancing act

        1. Randy Godwin profile image62
          Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          And you believe Spanky is an expert juggler?  lol He cannot even handle his affairs and keep them quiet!!

          1. RJ Schwartz profile image89
            RJ Schwartzposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            It’s bigger than his ego - economics always find a way to come to equilibrium

        2. Nathanville profile image93
          Nathanvilleposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah, just about every country in the world imports more goods from some countries they trade with than it exports to them, that’s World Trade.  It’s no reason to start Trade Wars; especially when those countries you’re importing more goods from are dutifully following WTO Rules.

          Until the aftermath of the 2nd world war Europe, for thousands of years, had been one of most war-stricken places on Earth, and is well used to wars.  So, if Trump wants to pick a fight with Europe, Europe will fight e.g. we don’t take kindly to bullies.

        3. profile image0
          ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          RJ , good point , Trade is" a balancing act "     as you say and  not a give OR take deal just for the larger purchaser .   As but ONE MORE TRUMP OBSTRUCTION  for the left here -Who would rather the US suffer and pay more for its trade goods than any other country , I often wonder what immaturity from those on the left requires that they diss this country of ours rather than say China .

          Little do these trade experts HERE realize the bottom line costs of how for instance a country like China can subsidize its steel production AND in how many ways ?   Tax breaks for instance alone .  Say a non-nationalized steel producer country [US] puts out raw goods steel at  $ 80 a ton ,    China pops up and sells theirs at $ 40 a ton, Why ?   Because they don't have to worry about a" Profit " do they ?

          But the trade "experts " here still believe in dissing Trump for what ? Protecting US steel markets ?  That's extremely bright of them .  Had Obama moved to the same protectionism - They would have praised him on their knees .

          "Take a Knee "for steel ? Hmmmmmm.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image62
            Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Wrong as usual, horse. Do you ever read the other comments on a subject before posting a reply?

            1. profile image0
              ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              Randy so what ?  Do you on the left get a monthly print out of resistance , obstruction or liberal group thought talking points ?  Because all hypocrisy aside , you all blast forth with same thought controlling, resist fever , as if it were actually a plague , no matter the cause ,the political point  or issue.   Just simply 'go against the tide no matter what " ?  And all done as if hypocrisy were a common cold passed from one to the other .

              1. Randy Godwin profile image62
                Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                I listen to Hannity, horse. Unlike you though, I can tell which of his conspiracies  are lies and which are simply fabrications. Keep on listening to the ex-dishwasher for your "facts" and you'll be just fine! tongue

                1. profile image0
                  ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  If who represented my media was Joy Reid , Rachel Maddow , Joy Baer and Whoopi  Goldberg  ,  I too would be just as royally informed as your  party is . ...........mostly !  If not for identity politics , your media wouldn't know what politics was .
                  Power to the hypocrites .

          2. GA Anderson profile image93
            GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Your China example thoughts aren't that far off-base ahorseback, at least relative to it being some sort of Chinese government support or intervention that allows the price differences you described.

            But ...this topic is about Canada, Mexico, and the EU, none of which have been shown to use unfair government support, (subsidies, tax breaks, etc.), like China does.

            Although you sarcastically refer to the "experts" here, I haven't seen their comments, and I doubt you could point any out. In my comment I specifically noted I only had a shallow understanding from a brief look-around.

            However, considering your lecturing tone, maybe you are the expert and the rest of us should pay attention to what you are saying.

            Since I don't know a lot about these "trade war" issues, I would give that a shot, if, you could just get your topics right. This topic is about Canada, Mexico, and the EU. What are your thoughts about our steel production problems with them?

            I am certain you will also find it in your research efforts, but even as the per-ton steel price fluctuates, the price difference between these four countries runs about 40%, (example; $988 U.S. steel vs. $587 Canadian steel). And that difference seems to be completely production costs related.

            Can you explain how  those three countries fit the same tariff rationalization that you use for China?

            GA

            1. profile image0
              ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              Steel , aluminum  , coal or oil for that matter , Steel production is but one small part of a large picture .      Example , Why do we worry about one product like steel between say the U.S. , Mexico and Canada when there are larger and more pressing problems and  negotiating factors involved ?   
              The US and Canada are great partners and don't need a trade war but ........ So , The don't raise tariffs against Canadian steel  but we pull back our costs of international  defense and make Canada build their own Navy. Neither  Canada nor Mexico have to invest anything at all in national defense , does that mean it's America's duty to patrol their borders securing   strategic defenses  for them ?

              I don't know alot about these trade issues either but  looking at WSJ
              doesn't tell an entire picture of either trade assets or deficits , strategic military protections or any other "costs" of international diplomacy  .   Immigration for instance is another factor , perhaps Mexico can be wedged to actually do something about illegal immigration to protect their  heavily subsidized  trade partnership with us .

              1. Credence2 profile image81
                Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                This is bullsh*t, Ahorseback, why are you dragging in a dead cat when a simple response to how the EU, Canada, and Mexico are taking advantage of America through unfair advatage will do?. The saber rattling explanation referring to America's bellicose nature in the Age of Trump relative to the nations that are the subject of this discussion is quite lame.

                1. profile image0
                  ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Oh really ?    So America having to accept the masses of Mexican unemployed into our labor markets isn't just as important a trade factor than say the price of raw steel ?    The US cost to our military for regional protections of nations with little or no military of their own isn't fair trade ?
                  None of this can be considered ? Really ?

                  If twenty five million illegals from Mexico , Central America ,South America  are taking US jobs and affecting our labor , insurance  , health care , labor investigations , OSHA , unemployment ,  corporate profits and law enforcement .........this can't become part of the overall trade deals ?

                  I think Trade negotiations encompasses a huge picture . If it doesn't  ; I sure bet it will with the Trump administration .

              2. GA Anderson profile image93
                GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                Well ahorseback, at least it looks like we got that "expert" point aired out. But I don't see how the rest of your comment applies to the topic, so I will just move on.

                GA

                1. profile image0
                  ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  GA , If it were all as simple as setting the prices of steel , aluminum , potatoes and oil between trading nations , wouldn't it seem we could set the price and send the government employees home for the year ?
                  But that doesn't quite cover it does it ?

                  Trade Expert ? Nope ........................there aren't any I know of here .

                  1. GA Anderson profile image93
                    GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    Nah, I'm not for anybody but the producers setting the price ahorseback. As long as everyone is playing on the same field, (Canada, Mexico, and the EU do seem to be playing by the rules - on the same field), the customers of those producers will let them know what they think of the prices they have set. I don't see a place for the government having anything to do with the price-setting in that scenario.

                    We will always need those government employees on the job, but it will be to keep the field level, (re. China's actions), not call plays.

                    But even then, you are right, it is never that simple or that covered.

                    GA

  2. GA Anderson profile image93
    GA Andersonposted 3 years ago

    Has anyone asked the question "why?"

    I took a brief look around and it seems that Canadian steel is a ton, (pun intended), cheaper than U.S. steel - to the tune of about 40%. But, it also appears this is just a production cost difference, not a subsidized cost difference. Canadian steel doesn't appear to be unfairly government subsidized, such as examples of China's steel costs would show.

    I didn't look at the EU or Mexico's  steel industry, but their steel price differences, (per ton),  seem to be on par with Canada's.

    One question is if this is just a difference in production costs, unlike China's steel where the difference is government support.

    With my shallow knowledge of the subject, it looks like this issue is not related to unfair advantage, a la China.. One article even noted that the U.S. steel industry benefited, (in previous years),  by the cost differential in that it forced them to become more efficient.

    So what's up with letting the waivers expire? Could it be a bargaining ploy? I wouldn't jump on the condemnation wagon yet, there could be other factors that will come to light, but I haven't found the logic to support it, (the demise of the waivers),  yet.

    GA

    1. Nathanville profile image93
      Nathanvilleposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yep GA, when I researched this a month ago (when Trump was first threatening such action) I came to the same conclusion e.g. that American steel production costs are far higher, and that countries like Canada, Mexico and the EU are not unduly subsidising their steel industries.  So, in that respect I fully agree with what you say.

      1. profile image60
        spacemastudioposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Ok. But steel production is but one small part of a large picture

  3. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    Trade deals like all negotiations vary widely , no longer can we afford as a nation to suck up the higher cost margins to protect even smaller markets that are more often than not subsidized by individual and much different governments and tax systems than our own ,  Mexico - Canada - the EU , all of our deals are now and are even becoming much more fluid situations .  If we can't revisit every trade agreement we have regularly ,  we lose .

  4. IslandBites profile image91
    IslandBitesposted 3 years ago

    Trump offers $12B in aid to farmers hit by tariffs

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) on Tuesday announced it would offer $12 billion in aid to farmers hindered by retaliatory tariffs imposed on U.S. grain, produce and meat exports as the Trump administration digs in for a protracted trade battle.

    The department will use the emergency aid to assist and buy crops from farmers who’ve lost billions of dollars in sales from foreign buyers in the European Union, Canada, Mexico and China.

    American farmers have been targeted by top U.S. trading partners in response to Trump’s imposition of levies on imported aluminum, steel and Chinese goods. The EU, Canada, Mexico and China have responded with tariffs on key U.S agricultural exports like corn, soybeans, beef, poultry and apples, sinking global demand for American farm goods.

    Billions of pounds of American crops and meat have reportedly sat idle in storage facilities while their producers lose money from canceled sales.

    “They put in place a policy that requires our farmers to go on welfare and, you know, it’s a ridiculous policy that just needs to be reversed,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has sought to repeal Trump’s tariffs.

    Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) argued that direct aide was not sustainable, and only helped a portion of the farmers affected by tariffs.

    "There’ll never be enough money to solve the problem,” Moran said. “What happens when other countries gain our markets? Can you do $12 billion regularly? How long does this take?”

    Federal Reserve officials have noted a decrease in planned business investment and expansion, and a slew of U.S. manufacturers have warned that their business could soon fail because of rising costs of raw materials and supplies.

    http://thehill.com/policy/finance/39863 … by-tariffs

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      "Billions of pounds of American crops and meat have reportedly sat idle in storage facilities while their producers lose money from canceled sales."

      It is not the normal harvest season for most American crops or meat.  It has been just a month or two since foreign punitive tariffs were introduced.  I'd take that claim of "Billions of pounds of crops and meat" with a grain of salt.  Or maybe a billion grains. smile

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        We all know , or should , that the US has incredible resources available to supplement these farmers , All we have to do is take it out of foreign aid , internal entitlement programs and support our own growers ,  Who will starve first ?   The one who has the smallest cupboards .   Believe me , Trump will make sure our cupboards outweigh the neighbors , America First !

    2. IslandBites profile image91
      IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Senator Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican, said in a statement, "This administration’s tariffs and bailouts aren’t going to make America great again, they’re just going to make it 1929 again."

      "You have a terrible policy that sends farmers to the poorhouse, and then you put them on welfare, and we borrow the money from other countries," said GOP Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee. "It’s hard to believe there isn’t an outright revolt right now in Congress over what is happening."

      Speaking to reporters outside of a GOP lunch on Tuesday, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., compared the trade assistance to something out of the former Soviet Union.

      "This is becoming more and more like a Soviet-type of economy here" with "commissars" passing out benefits, Johnson said.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)