Who is really paying for Trump's China tariffs?

WSJ: 

"An industry-by-industry analysis by the Federal Reserve showed that tariffs did help boost employment by 0.3%, in industries exposed to trade with China, by giving protection to some domestic industries to cheaper Chinese imports.

But these gains were more than offset by higher costs of importing Chinese parts, which cut manufacturing employment by 1.1%. Retaliatory tariffs imposed by China against U.S. exports, the analysis found, reduced U.S. factory jobs by 0.7%."

My favorite quote from the brilliant free market economist himself:

“I happen to be a tariff person because I’m a smart person, OK?”

11 Comments
 

I am not an economist but I would think that tariffs are not an efficient way to create job growth.  If we apply a tariff to chinese goods, to offset the tariff, they would raise prices.  As a result, US consumers would pay more for goods.  And since we import a lot, we US consumers are worse off.  

 

the libs

I am sure more of this can only be good for American workers. 

Never discuss with idiots, first they drag you at their level, then they beat you with experience.
 

I mean, when you let China run rampant with their subsidies and zero cost labor, most rational economic players would flock to the Chinese. 

Array
 

American companies pay the import tariffs, which are then absorbed, or more often passed along to American consumers via higher prices. This has been one of Trump’s many persistent big lies since he started campaigning, but the average voter is too stupid to realize it. 

Anyone advocating for increased protectionism to balance out any trade with China should check out how that’s worked for Brazil the last 25 years. 

"I don't know how to explain to you that you should care about other people."
 

Every single reputable economist, regardless of the school of thought, say tariffs don't balance trade deficits. (Because they never have in real life!).

Tariffs are nothing but political moves that almost every single president has used in some way to gain political favors.

Devaluing your currency, taxing capital flows, and somehow decreasing national spending on the other hand have always worked.

 

Milton Friedchickenman

Every single reputable economist, regardless of the school of thought, say tariffs don't balance trade deficits. (Because they never have in real life!).

Tariffs are nothing but political moves that almost every single president has used in some way to gain political favors.

Devaluing your currency, taxing capital flows, and somehow decreasing national spending on the other hand have always worked.

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/inf….

What economists are your reading? 

Never discuss with idiots, first they drag you at their level, then they beat you with experience.
 
Most Helpful

Vero quis sed id sint hic voluptas dolor. Numquam ea enim fuga itaque aperiam.

Voluptas illum ratione dicta. Accusantium commodi natus quas dignissimos velit. At eum vel maiores facere et officia vel maiores. Maiores voluptatem excepturi voluptatem ut rem totam mollitia.

Asperiores est vel vel saepe est ex. Vel qui magnam amet blanditiis perferendis exercitationem. Ea dolor occaecati consectetur nam asperiores. Aliquam blanditiis natus quis sequi ducimus porro rerum.

Quam necessitatibus ut qui provident fugit aut sapiente. Illum reiciendis tempore est eligendi quod voluptatem. Eos qui sit autem. Perferendis consequatur veritatis dicta id commodi occaecati.

Array

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 03 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.9%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.3%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • JPMorgan No 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (51) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (26) $182
  • Intern/Summer Associate (15) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Mimbs's picture
Mimbs
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”