• merdaverse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      7 个月前

      Not necessarily: the company can choose to absorb part or all the tariff, since the demand would drop at the higher price anyway, and they might make more overall profit at a lower margin per item. But generally yes, most of the cost will be passed on to the consumer and prices will increase on average.

      Example:

    • phx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 个月前

      the end consumer always foots the bill.

      Or the consumer can’t/won’t take on the extra burden of cost, and the business loses enough sales to go under.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 个月前

      The only difference would be that money we spent would be going to the companies instead of the government. Tarrifs are a government putting taxes on their people to strangle industries in other countries. In both scenarios we pay the same, but the flow of money is different

    • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 个月前

      The difference is that this way it’s much easier to calculate prices.

      If the tax were 20%, the exporter would have to do the inverse calculation. That is, “which price will result in me gaining $1000?” Which is not 1200, since 20% of 1200 is 240. x = 0.8y -> y = (1/0.8)*x -> y = 1.25x. so the exporter would have to price it at 1.25x the price, $1250. 20% of 1250 is 250.

      So it’s unintuitive that a 20% tax would result in a 25% price increase. That’s my guess why tariffs are applied to the importer instead of exporter.

    • Sceptiksky@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 个月前

      Wouldn’t refunding the amount of the tariff to the customer fix this? Ignoring the very important diplomatic and retaliation tariffs which makes the whole post unusable for real life

      • Canada sells a product A $100.
      • Tariffs makes it $120 when you buy it
      • so Canada gets $100, USA gets $20, USA customer pays $120.
      • USA has now $20, they can directly refund the customer for $20 via a policy to reduce the price of the category of A.
      • So customer gets $20 reduction of the product A via tax something, so USA now has $0 and USA customer actually paid only $100.
      • Except now if USA company make the product A they can sell it for like $100 and customer pays $80.
      • There is a slight increase of imported goods price here because tariffs cannot actually refund $20, it will be a % of the local vs imported production.
      • Over time you can expect to get a local advantage because of this price inequality, so local companies will be subsidized by imports until imports are no longer significant.

      Where am I wrong here ?

      • Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 个月前

        In your scenario how is the local made $100 item bought at $80? Where is a $20 refund paid from? You are double spending it on both imported and local goods

        • Sceptiksky@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 个月前

          In the scenario local good is still worth $100 but given that you refund all good by the amount added by the tariff later, you have $20 refunded (not really $20 as i tried to show previously, but $20 x total_tariff / total_amount_of_good_bought_locally_and_imported, so somewhere between $80 and $100 net for local production and between $100 and $120 for imported good, depending on the ratio import/import+localprod