[dfee]

even if we take the number presented as fact (i'm not sure we should), the articles claim is that:

> "Foreign exporters absorb only about 4% of the tariff burden-the remaining 96% is passed through to US buyers."

so yeah, the exporter does pay some burden. it's not binary. indeed, tariff exports can be designed in a way to dial either direction. certainly, we could dial foreign exporters burden to 0% – and we could dial it back up to 4% (where we're currently at). but, 4% likely isn't a hard ceiling, either. Of course, the 4% number is an aggregate, not the blanket value across indidual goods (or services).

finally, the effect of tariffs is argued to be wealth transfer to the US Treasury. this is worth thinking harder about. but also, exports may change from whom goods are purchased. thus, it's a diplomatic policy, as well.

[soared]

This is a whole lot of words with no meaning. Yes 4% is a number that can go up or down, cool? 4% is absolutely meaningless compared to to what was shouted loudly about how other countries would be paying these.

Does it change who customers buy food from? No, because everyone increases their prices regardless of if they’re impacted by tariffs or not.

The 2018 washing machine tariffs are a clear cut example of why tariffs are a garbage strategy.

https://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20250522.html#:~:text...

Price Pass-Through: Studies found that 100% of the tariff cost was passed through to consumers, resulting in an estimated $1.5 billion in additional costs to American families in the first year. The "Unexpected" Dryer Rise: Although tariffs only applied to washers, the price of dryers (a complementary good often sold with washers) also rose by an equivalent amount—approximately $92 per unit—as manufacturers increased prices on laundry pairs. Job Creation Cost: While the tariffs helped domestic manufacturers like Whirlpool, LG, and Samsung shift production to the U.S. and create about 1,800 new jobs, researchers estimated that consumers paid over $800,000 annually for each job created. Outcome: The tariffs resulted in a 49% decline in imports from 2017 to 2019. They expired in February 2023, after which washer prices decreased.

[dfee]

It wasn't a whole lot of words with no meaning, it was a response to the parent comment.

> Isn't this literally economics 101? How did we ever even end up imagining that tariffs are somehow paid by the exporter??

My response was that it's not binary, but a mixed case. And, furthermore, from the perspective of an individual exporter, their export profile may change if goods and services are purchased from a different exporter.

E.g. if the same good may be cheaper without a 25% tariff, then you'd expect the incentive to pay less to have some effect.

The US Treasury would still get money, but the exporting country might change.

[disgruntledphd2]

> finally, the effect of tariffs is argued to be wealth transfer to the US Treasury. this is worth thinking harder about. but also, exports may change from whom goods are purchased. thus, it's a diplomatic policy, as well.

It's a national sales tax really.

[dfee]

Yeah – I think that's what the paper suggests.