8 ms·

Single malt Scotch whisky targeted by United States tariffs

55 points by luu 7y ago

inferiorhuman 7y ago
The list[0] goes way beyond food and liquor. 0: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/EU_Large_Civil_Aircraft_Final_Product_List.pdf https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investig...
asciident 7y ago
I think this could be a good moment for us to pause our consumption a bit, and think about buying only what we really need. Not just because of the tariffs but as a signal that we as consumers can pull back when necessary.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- hannasanarion 7y ago
  Parmasean isn't an extravagance.
  - snagglegaggle 7y ago
    Parmesan cheese from Parma is. That was one of the shocking things to me about European stores: there was only Parmesan (or yes, Parmesan-style) cheese from Italy due to food provenance laws, and yes, it was some of the most expensive cheese in the store.
    - riffraff 7y ago
      You can actually get many kinds of cheese which is similar to parmigiano in Europe. Grana Padano is a much less expensive protected hard cheese, and many producers have similar non-protected cheese (Biraghi is a very large producer, for example). There's usually plenty of mixed pre-grated cheese bags too. The point is: it's not called parmigiano or parmesan, as that would be cheating the consumer.
      - molmalo 7y ago
        > as that would be cheating the consumer. That's the excuse, it's more about pleasing the local producers, as Denomination of origin laws generally are. As a consumer, I care much much more about taste and price for the same type of product. That is, if it tastes the same or better, and is cheaper.... I don't care if it was produced 100 meters from my house outside of Europe, or in the basement of a 1300-year old church in a specific region of Italy. With today's technology, it's perfectly possible to emulate the ambient conditions from the original place in the super controlled food producing facilities. But the local producers in said region might lose competitiveness or would have to stop pricing it as a "premium" product just because of where it was produced. So, in my opinion, the concept of Denomination of Origin ends up being a legalized scam, as it end ups cheating more on the consumer, because in reality it doesn't necessarily mean the product is of better quality (as it's often advertised).
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        riffraff 7y ago
        > As a consumer, I care much much more about taste and price for the same type of product. that's great, as you're free to buy any of the things not called "Parmigiano". There's plenty of awesome stuff which is not PDO/PGI. The only reason you would call something unrelated "parmigiano" is if you wanted to attach yourself to the concept of "premium" without having to follow the same rules. You can absolutely make a great succesful product and not give a damn about denomination of origin rules. Bolgheri Sassicaia[0], for example, established itself as a fantastic wine without having an italian DOC(G) classification, until one was defined explicitly for it. > So, in my opinion, the concept of Denomination of Origin ends up being a legalized scam, as it end ups cheating more on the consumer, because in reality it doesn't necessarily mean the product is of better quality (as it's often advertised). But that is true of any advertisement. I agree that the basic denomination of origin does not imply quality, but I don't see how removing it improves things. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuta_San_Guido https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuta_San_Guido
  - newnewpdro 7y ago
    I think that depends on how you define extravagance. Actual quality aged parmesan-reggiano imported from Italy is of similar cost to filet mignon by weight at the stores I frequent. Growing up in an Italian household, I often got in trouble for sneaking chunks off the expensive cheese to be eaten without grating. It was reserved exclusively for grating, or served sliced thinly on special occasions.
- Johnny555 7y ago
  You're fighting against human nature - do you really expect people to lock themselves up in their homes and subsist on a few vegtables? My needs are very simple, my wants and expectations are more complicated. I'm not saying that everyone should expect to have what they want, but expecting the world to survive on what they need is unrealistic.
- XorNot 7y ago
  For a country that spends so much time worrying about government interference in the lives of private citizens the reaction to the government introducing a slew of new taxes on the import and purchases of private citizens has been illuminating.
crazy1van 7y ago
The EU subsidized Airbus, which hurt the American company, Boeing. Therefore, all Americans have to pay 25% more for european wines, cheeses, and whiskey. How does this make any sense?
- leeoniya 7y ago
  i was wondering this, too. :/
- shantly 7y ago
  Drops demand for same items, hurting the producers and the countries they're based in, while maybe also diverting consumer money to domestic alternatives (or at least other countries that aren't quite so tariff'd). Right? Not siding with the tariffs, but that's the idea, no?
  - lettergram 7y ago
    That’s actually what happens when tariffs are imposed yes.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
      The only thing we can be certain of, when tariffs are imposed, is that the price of those goods / services go up.
  - corodra 7y ago
    I'm no expert, but I'd assume it's to make good on other trade negotiations the public isn't privy to. In regards to the like of the extra $9b free up for US exporters to Japan, mostly ag. Complete and utter hidden... on the front page of the ustr.gov site. Takes a real investigative journalist expert to find. I mean, who would ever look on the same site on China trade deals to find negotiations opening up with other countries... https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2019/september/fact-sheet-agriculture%E2%80%90related https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-s... Hurting Scotch means a better chance for the Japanese whiskey market in the USA. Total random speculation on that. There are lots of other products without Japanese replacement. Especially since scotch is really one of the smallest mattering products in that list. Parmesan, I argue, is a far bigger deal and we'll see that effect more. At least for me. But, to be fair, after looking into trade relations for a while, Trump isn't as insane as CNN and BBC makes him out to be. I don't understand why everyone makes it seem like he's throwing dice and making decisions in a bubble. I'm starting to think he's making short term pains for long term gains. Which, to be honest, is the thing we should always be doing. Losing in the short term for mid to long term gains is not insane, stupid or crazy. Just... you know, sucks for a while. On top of that, everyone seems to be a trade-deal expert suddenly because they've obviously negotiated with foreign govs all the time. I'm not and don't claim to be like others on HN and reddit. I just see there's more going on than just China and things don't look as one sided as it's being made out to be. But then again, BBC and CNN, and social media agreed, thought China would dump $1+ trillion in US bonds for pennies on the dollar and lose out on the loan leveraging they get to "punish the US"...by bankrupting themselves? Which never happened anyways. Such great "economic experts" who can't figure out supply/demand market dynamics taught in macro econ 101 textbooks. Same folks are commenting on the trade war. So whatever...
DollarGuru 7y ago
Maybe a silly question but it seems these big high ticket businesses like Boeing and Airbus cannot provide affordable aircraft and survive without some government intervention and the bar to entry is too high for new players so why not come to some international agreement on how they are supported by government instead? It's seems better to have 2 manufacturers supported by government than to have only 1 that essentially owns the whole market.
- camillomiller 7y ago
  Especially considering that the best candidate to become a third relevant subject would be Comac, the Chinese state-subsidized manufacturer...
- defertoreptar 7y ago
  Boeing contends otherwise: > Myth: Aerospace is different from other industries and requires some level of government support. > Fact: Boeing has proven otherwise. We have financed all of our new airplane programs without the kind of government handout that launch aid represents. http://www.boeing.com/company/key-orgs/government-operations/wto.page http://www.boeing.com/company/key-orgs/government-operations...
  - blub 7y ago
    The WTO found that they were and are being illegally subsidized [1]. Maybe they're saying that they're not getting a particular type of subsidy. But it's clear that both these companies are getting a ton of government contracts and have a special relationship with the US/EU. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-28/wto-issues-mixed-decision-in-eu-boeing-subsidy-dispute https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-28/wto-issue...
  - inferiorhuman 7y ago
    Do you expect Boeing to come out and say they accept subsidies when their whole business model is to sue the competition? https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-boeing-washington-20170503-story.html https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-boein... https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/boeings-historic-tax-break-from-state-even-bigger-than-thought/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/boeings-historic-t... Boeing doesn't necessarily get direct subsidies but they get hefty tax breaks. Boeing will almost certainly get bailed out by the feds if the MAX or 777X come close to bankrupting them.
johngrefe 7y ago
This is an excellent move, as it'll be removed as part of a UK wide FTA post Brexit. Puts the US in the position of "giving something up".
throwaway010718 7y ago
Does the U.S. president claim that the Chinese are paying the tariffs on the EU products too ? I still can't tell if our all tactics and no strategy president understands how tariffs works.
- Bootwizard 7y ago
  He's running the US like he runs all his businesses: into the ground.
  - cobookman 7y ago
    “The US first filed the case in 2004, arguing that cheap European loans for Airbus amounted to illegal state subsidies.“ “The US was given the go-ahead to impose tariffs on $7.5bn (£6.1bn) of goods it imports from the EU following a World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling on Wednesday.” The WTO imposed the tariffs against the EU due to a recent ruling.
    - belltaco 7y ago
      The US did not have to impose the tariffs under WTO but chose to.
lettergram 7y ago
Note, This is a WTO imposed fine basically. The WTO sided with the U.S. when it claimed the EU subsidized Airbus with below market rate loans. The US won the case. The outcome is basically this. It’s amazing to me the EUs solution to this is to increase tariffs themselves (at least that’s their threat). It would be much cheaper to just stop subsidizing airbus or reduce it to a level where it’s not undercutting Boeing (which is the real target).
- berkut 7y ago
  The EU have a corresponding case against the US and Boeing as well. They can also apply tariffs based on the fact they didn't do so last time they won a case against the US and Boeing: https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/29/eu-ready-to-instantly-retaliate-if-us-imposes-tariffs-in-airbus-wto-case/ https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/29/eu-ready-to-instantly-reta...
  - lettergram 7y ago
    ... then I guess the bet is Boeing took less aid? Seems like a pretty bold move, with no gain. Honestly, from Trumps perspective it’s probably a win either way. A less integrated world appears to be his goal
- shantly 7y ago
  The EU alleges the US does similar things with Boeing and in the past those crossed accusations have been enough for neither side to call the other over it. The EU's proceeding with their complaint at the WTO and are probably pissed off that the US didn't back down (especially if their accusations have merit) and are trying to get the US to drop this without having to wait for their own WTO ruling, by talking tariffs now. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44120525 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44120525
XMPPwocky 7y ago
If the UK leaves the EU while these tariffs are still in place, are they still valid under the WTO ruling against the EU?
- rob74 7y ago
  EU or no EU, Britain is a prominent member in the Airbus consortium (https://www.airbus.com/company/worldwide-presence/uk.html https://www.airbus.com/company/worldwide-presence/uk.html), and that's unlikely to change despite Brexit. Although I wouldn't put it past Trump to ignore that in order to encourage Brexit, of course...
bbanyc 7y ago
On one hand, you have a sclerotic political establishment that at best hasn't figured out that the '90s free trade playbook doesn't work on China and at worst only cares about the WTO for its handy role in policy laundering. On the other hand, you have this ridiculous flailing, which actually makes the establishment look good. There really is no alternative. Makes me want to start drinking. But since tariffs are up on scotch, I'll have a bourbon instead.
- sremani 7y ago
  Is it wrong to set the table for the upcoming negotiations with UK and EU. If you list the tariffs against US in EU, it is not even a debate who is holding the short end of the stick.
  - mads_ravn 7y ago
    Do you have any sources listing total tariffs on each side? I tried searching, but couldn’t find anything.
    - defertoreptar 7y ago
      > The EU imposes a 10 percent tariff on passenger cars, compared with the 2.5 percent U.S. duty on European autos. A study by the CESifo Institute in Germany found unweighted average EU tariffs of 5.2 percent, compared with the U.S. rate of 3.5 percent. “The EU is by no means the paradise for free traders that it likes to think,” Gabriel Felbermayr, director of the think tank’s Center for International Economics, told the German business newspaper Handelsblatt. https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/22/europe-resists-donald-trumps-zero-tariff-trade-off/ https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/22/europe-resist...
      - kbrosnan 7y ago
        The US has a 25% tariff on light trucks and 2d SUVs since 1964. As manufacturers tried different ways to circumvent the US government has closed these loopholes. The most famous is Ford Transit vans were shipped to the US with seats in an exempt configuration. In Baltimore the seats were removed before delivery to dealers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
throwaway98765t 7y ago
Bad move if Boeing is going to need subsidies in the future. If it’s a Boeing, I ain’t boarding
andrei_says_ 7y ago
I am wondering if someone is keeping track of laws in a git repo so we can see diffs and possibly undo damage in the future?
siruncledrew 7y ago
> "The US was given the go-ahead to impose tariffs on $7.5bn (£6.1bn) of goods it imports from the EU following a World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling on Wednesday." After reading this, I had the stupid question: Couldn't producers of tariffed goods in an EU country send their goods to a shipping hub of a nearby non-EU country to change the country of origin to avoid the tariffs? Example: Could or could not Scottish whisky producers send their bottles to be shipped from Iceland to America to avoid the tariffs? My presumption of the article is that places matter more to the tariffs than the actual goods themselves sourced from anywhere else (?).
- caf 7y ago
  It's the production location. Maybe you could ship it in barrels and bottle it in Mexico or something though.
  - p2t2p 7y ago
    If they “sell” it to a firm in Iceland and then said firm sells it to US does the same apply?
- p2t2p 7y ago
  That’s what they did for Russian sanctions. We had nice prawns, freshly caught in Belarus. Belarus is a magical place, we also had some oranges and other tropical fruits from there. Suddenly it became a major producer of cheese and so on ;-)
caf 7y ago
Since Scotch whisky has a very long shelf life, it seems like if you're in the US then now might be the time to buy a couple of cases of some reasonably in-demand mid-market single malt with a view to flipping them for a quick profit when the price goes up 25%.
pvaldes 7y ago
Plus Spanish wines, olive oil, cheese and iberian ham exports valued 1270 million Euro. I assume that Canada and Russia will keep gladly buying this products as before, and that new channels will open with China and other Asian countries. Is not impossible also that the raise in prices for US citizens would be made permanent after trump interlude by the increase of demand. Is uncertain what will happen. Interesting times to be alive ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- ghostDancer 7y ago
  Canada buying and then selling them to the USA more expensive than direct but cheaper than with the penalty.
  - pvaldes 7y ago
    Is a probable outcome, yup. Or US citizens smuggling products across the frontier, The Simpson's style. Taking in mind that those are among some of the most faked products in the world I would not surprise if a black market emerges to overcome regulation and somebody became pretty rich selling counterfeits. Maybe US now will need a wall also in the North, who knows?. Other probably scenery is that a lot of US citizens start self-restricting themselves to consume only US products that is a perfectly respectable option also (but would increase pressure against US nature).

55 points by luu 7y ago

The list[0] goes way beyond food and liquor. 0: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/EU_Large_Civil_Aircraft_Final_Product_List.pdf https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investig...

asciident 7y ago

I think this could be a good moment for us to pause our consumption a bit, and think about buying only what we really need. Not just because of the tariffs but as a signal that we as consumers can pull back when necessary.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
hannasanarion 7y ago
Parmasean isn't an extravagance.
- snagglegaggle 7y ago
  Parmesan cheese from Parma is. That was one of the shocking things to me about European stores: there was only Parmesan (or yes, Parmesan-style) cheese from Italy due to food provenance laws, and yes, it was some of the most expensive cheese in the store.
  - riffraff 7y ago
    You can actually get many kinds of cheese which is similar to parmigiano in Europe. Grana Padano is a much less expensive protected hard cheese, and many producers have similar non-protected cheese (Biraghi is a very large producer, for example). There's usually plenty of mixed pre-grated cheese bags too. The point is: it's not called parmigiano or parmesan, as that would be cheating the consumer.
    - molmalo 7y ago
      > as that would be cheating the consumer. That's the excuse, it's more about pleasing the local producers, as Denomination of origin laws generally are. As a consumer, I care much much more about taste and price for the same type of product. That is, if it tastes the same or better, and is cheaper.... I don't care if it was produced 100 meters from my house outside of Europe, or in the basement of a 1300-year old church in a specific region of Italy. With today's technology, it's perfectly possible to emulate the ambient conditions from the original place in the super controlled food producing facilities. But the local producers in said region might lose competitiveness or would have to stop pricing it as a "premium" product just because of where it was produced. So, in my opinion, the concept of Denomination of Origin ends up being a legalized scam, as it end ups cheating more on the consumer, because in reality it doesn't necessarily mean the product is of better quality (as it's often advertised).
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - riffraff 7y ago
        > As a consumer, I care much much more about taste and price for the same type of product. that's great, as you're free to buy any of the things not called "Parmigiano". There's plenty of awesome stuff which is not PDO/PGI. The only reason you would call something unrelated "parmigiano" is if you wanted to attach yourself to the concept of "premium" without having to follow the same rules. You can absolutely make a great succesful product and not give a damn about denomination of origin rules. Bolgheri Sassicaia[0], for example, established itself as a fantastic wine without having an italian DOC(G) classification, until one was defined explicitly for it. > So, in my opinion, the concept of Denomination of Origin ends up being a legalized scam, as it end ups cheating more on the consumer, because in reality it doesn't necessarily mean the product is of better quality (as it's often advertised). But that is true of any advertisement. I agree that the basic denomination of origin does not imply quality, but I don't see how removing it improves things. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuta_San_Guido https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuta_San_Guido
- newnewpdro 7y ago
  I think that depends on how you define extravagance. Actual quality aged parmesan-reggiano imported from Italy is of similar cost to filet mignon by weight at the stores I frequent. Growing up in an Italian household, I often got in trouble for sneaking chunks off the expensive cheese to be eaten without grating. It was reserved exclusively for grating, or served sliced thinly on special occasions.
Johnny555 7y ago
You're fighting against human nature - do you really expect people to lock themselves up in their homes and subsist on a few vegtables? My needs are very simple, my wants and expectations are more complicated. I'm not saying that everyone should expect to have what they want, but expecting the world to survive on what they need is unrealistic.
XorNot 7y ago
For a country that spends so much time worrying about government interference in the lives of private citizens the reaction to the government introducing a slew of new taxes on the import and purchases of private citizens has been illuminating.

crazy1van 7y ago

The EU subsidized Airbus, which hurt the American company, Boeing. Therefore, all Americans have to pay 25% more for european wines, cheeses, and whiskey. How does this make any sense?

leeoniya 7y ago
i was wondering this, too. :/
shantly 7y ago
Drops demand for same items, hurting the producers and the countries they're based in, while maybe also diverting consumer money to domestic alternatives (or at least other countries that aren't quite so tariff'd). Right? Not siding with the tariffs, but that's the idea, no?
- lettergram 7y ago
  That’s actually what happens when tariffs are imposed yes.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
    The only thing we can be certain of, when tariffs are imposed, is that the price of those goods / services go up.
- corodra 7y ago
  I'm no expert, but I'd assume it's to make good on other trade negotiations the public isn't privy to. In regards to the like of the extra $9b free up for US exporters to Japan, mostly ag. Complete and utter hidden... on the front page of the ustr.gov site. Takes a real investigative journalist expert to find. I mean, who would ever look on the same site on China trade deals to find negotiations opening up with other countries... https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2019/september/fact-sheet-agriculture%E2%80%90related https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-s... Hurting Scotch means a better chance for the Japanese whiskey market in the USA. Total random speculation on that. There are lots of other products without Japanese replacement. Especially since scotch is really one of the smallest mattering products in that list. Parmesan, I argue, is a far bigger deal and we'll see that effect more. At least for me. But, to be fair, after looking into trade relations for a while, Trump isn't as insane as CNN and BBC makes him out to be. I don't understand why everyone makes it seem like he's throwing dice and making decisions in a bubble. I'm starting to think he's making short term pains for long term gains. Which, to be honest, is the thing we should always be doing. Losing in the short term for mid to long term gains is not insane, stupid or crazy. Just... you know, sucks for a while. On top of that, everyone seems to be a trade-deal expert suddenly because they've obviously negotiated with foreign govs all the time. I'm not and don't claim to be like others on HN and reddit. I just see there's more going on than just China and things don't look as one sided as it's being made out to be. But then again, BBC and CNN, and social media agreed, thought China would dump $1+ trillion in US bonds for pennies on the dollar and lose out on the loan leveraging they get to "punish the US"...by bankrupting themselves? Which never happened anyways. Such great "economic experts" who can't figure out supply/demand market dynamics taught in macro econ 101 textbooks. Same folks are commenting on the trade war. So whatever...

DollarGuru 7y ago

Maybe a silly question but it seems these big high ticket businesses like Boeing and Airbus cannot provide affordable aircraft and survive without some government intervention and the bar to entry is too high for new players so why not come to some international agreement on how they are supported by government instead? It's seems better to have 2 manufacturers supported by government than to have only 1 that essentially owns the whole market.

camillomiller 7y ago
Especially considering that the best candidate to become a third relevant subject would be Comac, the Chinese state-subsidized manufacturer...
defertoreptar 7y ago
Boeing contends otherwise: > Myth: Aerospace is different from other industries and requires some level of government support. > Fact: Boeing has proven otherwise. We have financed all of our new airplane programs without the kind of government handout that launch aid represents. http://www.boeing.com/company/key-orgs/government-operations/wto.page http://www.boeing.com/company/key-orgs/government-operations...
- blub 7y ago
  The WTO found that they were and are being illegally subsidized [1]. Maybe they're saying that they're not getting a particular type of subsidy. But it's clear that both these companies are getting a ton of government contracts and have a special relationship with the US/EU. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-28/wto-issues-mixed-decision-in-eu-boeing-subsidy-dispute https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-28/wto-issue...
- inferiorhuman 7y ago
  Do you expect Boeing to come out and say they accept subsidies when their whole business model is to sue the competition? https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-boeing-washington-20170503-story.html https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-boein... https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/boeings-historic-tax-break-from-state-even-bigger-than-thought/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/boeings-historic-t... Boeing doesn't necessarily get direct subsidies but they get hefty tax breaks. Boeing will almost certainly get bailed out by the feds if the MAX or 777X come close to bankrupting them.

johngrefe 7y ago

This is an excellent move, as it'll be removed as part of a UK wide FTA post Brexit. Puts the US in the position of "giving something up".

throwaway010718 7y ago

Does the U.S. president claim that the Chinese are paying the tariffs on the EU products too ? I still can't tell if our all tactics and no strategy president understands how tariffs works.

Bootwizard 7y ago
He's running the US like he runs all his businesses: into the ground.
- cobookman 7y ago
  “The US first filed the case in 2004, arguing that cheap European loans for Airbus amounted to illegal state subsidies.“ “The US was given the go-ahead to impose tariffs on $7.5bn (£6.1bn) of goods it imports from the EU following a World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling on Wednesday.” The WTO imposed the tariffs against the EU due to a recent ruling.
  - belltaco 7y ago
    The US did not have to impose the tariffs under WTO but chose to.

lettergram 7y ago

Note, This is a WTO imposed fine basically. The WTO sided with the U.S. when it claimed the EU subsidized Airbus with below market rate loans. The US won the case. The outcome is basically this. It’s amazing to me the EUs solution to this is to increase tariffs themselves (at least that’s their threat). It would be much cheaper to just stop subsidizing airbus or reduce it to a level where it’s not undercutting Boeing (which is the real target).

berkut 7y ago
The EU have a corresponding case against the US and Boeing as well. They can also apply tariffs based on the fact they didn't do so last time they won a case against the US and Boeing: https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/29/eu-ready-to-instantly-retaliate-if-us-imposes-tariffs-in-airbus-wto-case/ https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/29/eu-ready-to-instantly-reta...
- lettergram 7y ago
  ... then I guess the bet is Boeing took less aid? Seems like a pretty bold move, with no gain. Honestly, from Trumps perspective it’s probably a win either way. A less integrated world appears to be his goal
shantly 7y ago
The EU alleges the US does similar things with Boeing and in the past those crossed accusations have been enough for neither side to call the other over it. The EU's proceeding with their complaint at the WTO and are probably pissed off that the US didn't back down (especially if their accusations have merit) and are trying to get the US to drop this without having to wait for their own WTO ruling, by talking tariffs now. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44120525 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44120525

XMPPwocky 7y ago

If the UK leaves the EU while these tariffs are still in place, are they still valid under the WTO ruling against the EU?

rob74 7y ago
EU or no EU, Britain is a prominent member in the Airbus consortium (https://www.airbus.com/company/worldwide-presence/uk.html https://www.airbus.com/company/worldwide-presence/uk.html), and that's unlikely to change despite Brexit. Although I wouldn't put it past Trump to ignore that in order to encourage Brexit, of course...

bbanyc 7y ago

On one hand, you have a sclerotic political establishment that at best hasn't figured out that the '90s free trade playbook doesn't work on China and at worst only cares about the WTO for its handy role in policy laundering. On the other hand, you have this ridiculous flailing, which actually makes the establishment look good. There really is no alternative. Makes me want to start drinking. But since tariffs are up on scotch, I'll have a bourbon instead.

sremani 7y ago
Is it wrong to set the table for the upcoming negotiations with UK and EU. If you list the tariffs against US in EU, it is not even a debate who is holding the short end of the stick.
- mads_ravn 7y ago
  Do you have any sources listing total tariffs on each side? I tried searching, but couldn’t find anything.
  - defertoreptar 7y ago
    > The EU imposes a 10 percent tariff on passenger cars, compared with the 2.5 percent U.S. duty on European autos. A study by the CESifo Institute in Germany found unweighted average EU tariffs of 5.2 percent, compared with the U.S. rate of 3.5 percent. “The EU is by no means the paradise for free traders that it likes to think,” Gabriel Felbermayr, director of the think tank’s Center for International Economics, told the German business newspaper Handelsblatt. https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/22/europe-resists-donald-trumps-zero-tariff-trade-off/ https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/22/europe-resist...
    - kbrosnan 7y ago
      The US has a 25% tariff on light trucks and 2d SUVs since 1964. As manufacturers tried different ways to circumvent the US government has closed these loopholes. The most famous is Ford Transit vans were shipped to the US with seats in an exempt configuration. In Baltimore the seats were removed before delivery to dealers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax

throwaway98765t 7y ago

Bad move if Boeing is going to need subsidies in the future. If it’s a Boeing, I ain’t boarding

andrei_says_ 7y ago

I am wondering if someone is keeping track of laws in a git repo so we can see diffs and possibly undo damage in the future?

siruncledrew 7y ago

> "The US was given the go-ahead to impose tariffs on $7.5bn (£6.1bn) of goods it imports from the EU following a World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling on Wednesday." After reading this, I had the stupid question: Couldn't producers of tariffed goods in an EU country send their goods to a shipping hub of a nearby non-EU country to change the country of origin to avoid the tariffs? Example: Could or could not Scottish whisky producers send their bottles to be shipped from Iceland to America to avoid the tariffs? My presumption of the article is that places matter more to the tariffs than the actual goods themselves sourced from anywhere else (?).

caf 7y ago
It's the production location. Maybe you could ship it in barrels and bottle it in Mexico or something though.
- p2t2p 7y ago
  If they “sell” it to a firm in Iceland and then said firm sells it to US does the same apply?
p2t2p 7y ago
That’s what they did for Russian sanctions. We had nice prawns, freshly caught in Belarus. Belarus is a magical place, we also had some oranges and other tropical fruits from there. Suddenly it became a major producer of cheese and so on ;-)

caf 7y ago

Since Scotch whisky has a very long shelf life, it seems like if you're in the US then now might be the time to buy a couple of cases of some reasonably in-demand mid-market single malt with a view to flipping them for a quick profit when the price goes up 25%.

pvaldes 7y ago

Plus Spanish wines, olive oil, cheese and iberian ham exports valued 1270 million Euro. I assume that Canada and Russia will keep gladly buying this products as before, and that new channels will open with China and other Asian countries. Is not impossible also that the raise in prices for US citizens would be made permanent after trump interlude by the increase of demand. Is uncertain what will happen. Interesting times to be alive ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

ghostDancer 7y ago
Canada buying and then selling them to the USA more expensive than direct but cheaper than with the penalty.
- pvaldes 7y ago
  Is a probable outcome, yup. Or US citizens smuggling products across the frontier, The Simpson's style. Taking in mind that those are among some of the most faked products in the world I would not surprise if a black market emerges to overcome regulation and somebody became pretty rich selling counterfeits. Maybe US now will need a wall also in the North, who knows?. Other probably scenery is that a lot of US citizens start self-restricting themselves to consume only US products that is a perfectly respectable option also (but would increase pressure against US nature).