Hasbr-uh-oh - Business and Tariffs Discussion

Steevy Maximus

Well known pompous pontificator
Citizen
I’m not sure the end of de minimis is the problem, itself. It’s the half-cocked, arbitrary, process by which this is all being implemented. The rules for these vast, global, interactions are being changed every few weeks, and international sellers are not going to continue “business as usual” until they what “usual” is supposed to be.
And that’s before trying to get the US’s half assed, often barely functional, domestic shipping providers all on board with systems on trying to collect on these new tariffs.
 
lastmaximal

lastmaximal

Administrator
Staff member
Council of Elders
Citizen
Both are problems, to varying degrees, and they're going to have (or are having) the expected effects. Costs are being felt by buyers, and the more that becomes a factor the more of a chilling effect that'll have.

But the bigger issue at the moment is logistics. Even if people could afford to still buy things (or the number bowing out was offset by the number of people still in), the slipshod way this is being implemented is going to create more trouble than these services are willing to navigate, so they're putting the service on pause until that gets sorted out. And if they're not on board, it makes much less of a difference how many people are still willing to put up with the steeply rising costs for their goods.
 

Autobus Prime

New member
Citizen
Steevy Maximus said:
I’m not sure the end of de minimis is the problem, itself. It’s the half-cocked, arbitrary, process by which this is all being implemented. The rules for these vast, global, interactions are being changed every few weeks, and international sellers are not going to continue “business as usual” until they what “usual” is supposed to be.
And that’s before trying to get the US’s half assed, often barely functional, domestic shipping providers all on board with systems on trying to collect on these new tariffs.
Click to expand...
Oh it's been chaotic, no doubt. It probably was always going to be, when tariffs got reintroduced as a major factor. Which, given the rise of AI and robots, was inevitable.

I'm not of the opinion that AI and robots will eliminate all jobs and therefore all taxable income ... but the possibility is not absent. But even in the most optimistic scenario that these new tools simply increase our productivity and eliminate scarcity, we will end up with massive created value that isn't captured as personal income. Government is likely to grow, not shrink, especially if UBI is needed for permanently displaced workers....so how to pay?

In the long run I can see only two options. Either tax the producers at such a high rate it's effectively nationalization, or tax consumption via tariffs. Increased productivity is going to drive trade increases, tariffs or none.

To an extent I think it is quietly seen as a convenience by some in the more liberal, free trade camp, that a chaotic populist is doing their experimentation for them. What succeeds, they'll keep as their template. What fails, they don't get blamed for. Watch and see what they do in the next decade...
 
blueskyscribe

blueskyscribe

Member
Citizen
Please keep abreast of the de minimis rules, because some of them state that the importer may pay between $80 to $200 per item. I'm not sure if "an item" refers to the parcel as a whole or to every individual thing inside the package. Alternatively some packages will pay a percentage (the tariff amount?) instead. However from what I've read you, the importer, do not get to choose which you will pay. This applies to all countries, not just China. This rule went into effect on August 29, 2025.
 

Autobus Prime

New member
Citizen
blueskyscribe said:
Please keep abreast of the de minimis rules, because some of them state that the importer may pay between $80 to $200 per item. I'm not sure if "an item" refers to the parcel as a whole or to every individual thing inside the package. Alternatively some packages will pay a percentage (the tariff amount?) instead. However from what I've read you, the importer, do not get to choose which you will pay. This applies to all countries, not just China. This rule went into effect on August 29, 2025.
Click to expand...

The flat fee option is available for 6 months only, for shipments where it would save money vs. a percentage.

It will most likely be used by parcel aggregators consolidating many individual shipments from an overseas hub to a US hub, or by importers with warehouses on both shores. In many cases that is what you will be dealing with, buying imports. In cases where you're not, like certain sellers in Japan who insist on doing everything the hard way, you will be paying a percentage unless your order is Wicked Huge.

The most likely scenario to see the flat fee assessed, when dealing with a single -average sized- international shipment, is if the shipper lowballs the value and gets caught.

If this happens to you, simple solution. Don't pay it. The package will get stopped by customs. File a charge back if you must, to recover your initial price. The shipper won't make that mistake again, believe it.

If a shipper charges you $80 to $200 claiming it's a customs duty, don't pay it, because it's potential fraud. Shippers are not authorized to collect duties. I don't even know what amount people pay to collect the exports I ship. Except when they gripe that I didn't lowball the value. (See above)
 
Last edited:

Autobus Prime

New member
Citizen
Undead Scottsman said:
Yeah, I don't think the people instituting these tariffs think UBI is something worth investing in.

Just gonna leave it at that.
Click to expand...

The people implementing them may not. But the people creating the concept would most likely do anything to maintain consumption of goods, in a situation where employment becomes impossible.

We already saw it done 5 years ago.

See, the thing with an AI/robot economy is, all its production efficiency becomes useless if no one can buy the product.
 

Autobus Prime

New member
Citizen
NovaSaber said:
If the purpose is to encourage more consumption, funding it with sales taxes (and a tariff is just an extra sales tax on imports) is counterproductive.
Click to expand...
No more counterproductive than funding the same with income taxes. Arguably better than a national sales tax. Certainly an easier sell. Americans have been hostile to direct taxation since colonial days.
 

Autobus Prime

New member
Citizen
Rhinox said:
Or we could, you know, actually tax the ******* billionaires and corporations appropriately.
Click to expand...

Yes, the corporate income tax will have to increase as well. But total US "wages, salaries, and tips" are about 3x -total- corporate net income. Which is why I said that, without personal income to tax, the only alternative to tariffs, is to tax corporate income so high it's effectively nationalization.

Anyway, what's so great about free trade from your perspective? If you don't like the present level of wealth concentration, you shouldn't like free trade, as that's largely what enabled the concentration.
 
Rhinox

Rhinox

too old for this
Citizen
Yeah I've had my nose thumped from political discussion outside the forum. Feel free to come round and we can have a spirited go.
 

Fullstrength Motleypuss

Well-known member
Citizen
Rhinox said:
Yeah I've had my nose thumped from political discussion outside the forum. Feel free to come round and we can have a spirited go.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but how many people actually post in P&R anymore? I'm pretty sure the crickets and cobwebs are starting to congregate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Top Bottom