4 ms·

Yes, they do. Taxes and shipping are separate line items on every Amazon invoice.

by 34679 1y ago

SirMaster 1y ago
Maybe I am missing something but sales tax is something that the seller pays. It's a % of the retail price and so they collect it from the customer, so it's added in and shown to the customer. Tariffs are paid by the importer and I would think that they would put that into the price of the good itself based on their desired profit margins etc. How would Amazon even know what to put for the tariff amount? It's not a % of the retail price, it's a % of the import price which the seller doesn't typically share with the end customer.
- PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
  "What it costs now" - "What it cost in March" = "Tariff cost" The math is not perfect, but to a good approximation (certainly a far better approximation than the administration's insane computation of international "tariffs") that will indicate the cost to the consumer of Trump's tariff policies. So yes, if the importer eats a significant chunk of the tariff cost and doesn't pass it on to Amazon/the consumer, the computation will reflect that (as it should). And if they don't, it will reflect that too (as it should).
  - roman_soldier 1y ago
    Have they shown tariffs before on their prices?, I don't think the US had zero tariffs before Trump increased them
    - PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
      How does that matter if the purpose is to show the effect of recent, chaotic, ill-conceived policies of the current administration?
      - roman_soldier 1y ago
        "recent, chaotic, ill-conceived policies of the current administration" So it's not political?
        PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
        Recent: indisuputable matter of fact. Chaotic: one might disagree on the magnitude of flip-flopping that can be labelled "chaotic", but the unpredictable on-again, off-again nature of the policies is well-described by "chaotic" I think. Ill-conceived: if you can find me one serious economist who agrees with the Trump tariff policy (i.e. agrees on the goal, the means and the ends, and the match between them), I'll consider retracting this. Otherwise, yep, ill-conceived describes imposing tariffs without any apparent understanding of how they work or their likely effects. Also, did I say it's not political at any point?
        roman_soldier 1y ago
        > Also, did I say it's not political at any point? Then we agree!

Yes, they do. Taxes and shipping are separate line items on every Amazon invoice.

by 34679 1y ago

Yes, they do. Taxes and shipping are separate line items on every Amazon invoice.

Maybe I am missing something but sales tax is something that the seller pays. It's a % of the retail price and so they collect it from the customer, so it's added in and shown to the customer. Tariffs are paid by the importer and I would think that they would put that into the price of the good itself based on their desired profit margins etc. How would Amazon even know what to put for the tariff amount? It's not a % of the retail price, it's a % of the import price which the seller doesn't typically share with the end customer.

PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
"What it costs now" - "What it cost in March" = "Tariff cost" The math is not perfect, but to a good approximation (certainly a far better approximation than the administration's insane computation of international "tariffs") that will indicate the cost to the consumer of Trump's tariff policies. So yes, if the importer eats a significant chunk of the tariff cost and doesn't pass it on to Amazon/the consumer, the computation will reflect that (as it should). And if they don't, it will reflect that too (as it should).
- roman_soldier 1y ago
  Have they shown tariffs before on their prices?, I don't think the US had zero tariffs before Trump increased them
  - PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
    How does that matter if the purpose is to show the effect of recent, chaotic, ill-conceived policies of the current administration?
    - roman_soldier 1y ago
      "recent, chaotic, ill-conceived policies of the current administration" So it's not political?
      - PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
        Recent: indisuputable matter of fact. Chaotic: one might disagree on the magnitude of flip-flopping that can be labelled "chaotic", but the unpredictable on-again, off-again nature of the policies is well-described by "chaotic" I think. Ill-conceived: if you can find me one serious economist who agrees with the Trump tariff policy (i.e. agrees on the goal, the means and the ends, and the match between them), I'll consider retracting this. Otherwise, yep, ill-conceived describes imposing tariffs without any apparent understanding of how they work or their likely effects. Also, did I say it's not political at any point?
        roman_soldier 1y ago
        > Also, did I say it's not political at any point? Then we agree!