Reviving our old thread as my interest in political and current event topics is on the upswing:
Toyota building Corolla in the US rather than Mexico! Nice!
Japanese automakers Toyota and Mazda confirmed plans Friday to build a $1.6 billion U.S. assembly plant that would create up to 4,000 jobs as part of an extensive new alliance. Toyota said it would make the Corolla sedan at the factory instead of in Mexico as previously intended.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/08/04/toyota-corolla-mazda-mexico/539179001/
The actual plant will be built in Huntsville, AL
http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2018/01/its_official_toyota-mazda_anno.html#incart_big-photo
4,000 jobs could turn into 16,000 as supply chain jobs come into the region. This is why manufacturing is so so so important to our economy. The job multiplier and the good wages and benefits plus the tax revenue for the local communities can't be matched by other employment sectors.
General Pencil Company
Great article in The New York Times @ link below
Inside One of America’s Last Pencil Factories
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/12/magazine/inside-one-of-americas-last-pencil-factories.html
General Pencil Company
Great article in The New York Times @ link below
Inside One of America’s Last Pencil Factories
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/12/magazine/inside-one-of-americas-last-pencil-factories.html
Very cool. Since 1889. That one worker photographed has been there 47 years!
Last I checked the Papermate mechanical pencils were USA. I have some regular pencils, will have to see if they are General.
On a sadder note, a few years ago my wife bought these magnet sets called "Create-a-Scene", it was a thing that folded open with magnet pieces kids could play with. We had a school, a house, a jungle, etc. They were big hits with the kids. They were made in USA. My wife just went to buy another one and they are made in China now.
Also, I noticed awhile ago Energizer batteries are starting to say something on the package like made in USA, Japan, Thailand, China, Singapore, etc. The actual battery will say where it is made and I've always been able to easily find ones that say made in or assembled in USA. I just saw some for the first time that said made in Poland. Duracells are the same way now, but not sure if it is as common, I've still been able to find USA ones.
More good news in the automobile manufacturing sector!
Fiat Chrysler will invest $1B in Warren Truck plant; bring Ram work back from Mexico
Eric D. Lawrence, Detroit Free Press Published 6:02 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2018 | Updated 1:08 p.m. ET Jan. 12, 2018
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles will invest more than $1 billion to modernize the company's Warren Truck Plant in metro Detroit, adding 2,500 jobs and moving production of its Ram Heavy Duty trucks from Mexico.
The changeover is to be complete in 2020.
The company said Thursday evening that the new federal tax law made the shift possible. That legislation, signed into law in December, cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%.
FCA also announced $2,000 bonuses that will be paid in the second quarter of this year to 60,000 hourly and salaried employees in the U.S., excluding senior leadership. Those bonuses are to be in addition to any profit sharing or performance bonuses the employees would receive this year.
More Fiat Chrysler news:
History of Warren Truck Assembly Plant
Fear of NAFTA collapse seen as factor in move of Ram production from Mexico
Trump tweets praise Fiat Chrysler's 'wise decision' to shift from Mexico to Detroit area
"These announcements reflect our ongoing commitment to our U.S. manufacturing footprint and the dedicated employees who have contributed to FCA's success," Fiat Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne said in a news release. "It is only proper that our employees share in the savings generated by tax reform and that we openly acknowledge the resulting improvement in the U.S. business environment by investing in our industrial footprint accordingly."
The investments will likely be one of the topics Monday when Marchionne is scheduled to speak to reporters at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit.
Natalie Farquhar of Port Huron works as a laborer at Center Line Packaging, which is part of FCA's Mopar division. The 23½-year company veteran was thrilled by the announcement.
"Wow! Wow, that’s great. That’s wonderful," Farquhar said, noting that the investment and bonuses tell her the company is doing well. She said she is hopeful the company will also start making full-time hires of the many temporary workers she knows of at numerous FCA plants.
"I'm thinking that's really good. A lot of these people who've been putting time in and working will be getting hired and getting full-time positions," Farquhar said.
Asked what she will do with her bonus, Farquhar laughed and said she might opt to help out the economy by making a down payment on a pontoon boat.
The investments announced Thursday will be in addition to plans FCA unveiled last January when it said it would spend $1 billion at Warren Truck and in Toledo to expand Jeep production.
The company plans to build the Jeep Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer in Warren, is retooling in Toledo to produce a Jeep truck and is shifting production of the Ram 1500 to Sterling Heights. That's part of a broader plan that included shifting Jeep Cherokee production from Toledo to Belvidere, Ill.
Despite the shifting of Ram Heavy Duty production from Mexico, the Saltillo Truck Assembly Plant there will continue to operate. The company said that plant will be repurposed to build future commercial vehicles for global distribution.
The company said it has invested $10 billion in its U.S. manufacturing operations since June 2009.
Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel called the latest invesment a great announcement, saying "we’re extremely grateful for FCA and Sergio making that commitment. ... I can't wait to give him a big hug at the auto show."
Hackel noted the significance of bringing more Ram truck production to the county, which has seen substantial investment from automakers and suppliers in recent years.
"This has become somewhat of a Ram country here in Macomb County if you think about it because this is where it's being built ... and they're bringing them up from Mexico," Hackel said.
Brian Rothenberg, a spokesman for the UAW, offered cautious praise, explaining that the union had just been made aware of the announcement.
"While the news is positive, the UAW is reviewing the details," Rothenberg said, noting union officials would likely have more to say later.
The move is a boost for President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, who argued that their tax bill would encourage investment in the U.S.
In addition, Trump scolded automakers last year for building vehicles in Mexico to little effect — auto imports from Mexico to the U.S. hit a record level last year. In talks about revising the North American Free Trade Agreement, Trump's administration has proposed a requirement that 50% of all auto parts or vehicles assembled in Mexico start in the U.S., and fears have been renewed that the trade deal is imperiled.
Thursday's announcement was the second major auto factory news in as many days. On Wednesday, Toyota and Mazda announced they would build a $1.6-billion, 4,000-worker plant in Alabama.
Based off of casual observations I make, the Ram truck line had been made in two US plants prior to the Great Recession and the Fiat - Chrysler shotgun marriage. After that they closed the Missouri plant and moved that production to Mexico, all the 2500 and 3500 3/4 and 1 ton trucks were made there and only the 1500 1/2 ton trucks were made in the US. Now it sounds like the entire Ram line will be assembled here.
[Edited on 1/14/2018 by nebish]
NAFTA renegotiations resume with a 6th meeting in Canada next week.
Thom Hartmann had a segment on his show today with a representative from Global Trade Watch on where things stand.
[Edited on 1/19/2018 by nebish]
Whirlpool made formal complaints for years against Samsung and LG on kitchen and laundry appliances.
This past fall the International Trade Commission ruled in their favor on the laundry appliances:
The case, brought by U.S. appliance giant Whirlpool Corp (WHR.N), sought “global safeguard” restrictions to stop South Korean rivals Samsung Electronics Co Ltd (005930.KS) and LG Electronics Inc (066570.KS) from flooding the U.S. market with cheaper washers.
The commission, voting 4-0 in favor of a finding that the large number of imports was hurting domestic manufacturers, will recommend remedies by Dec. 4 to President Donald Trump, who is expected to make a final decision by early next year.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-whirlpool/panel-finds-u-s-washing-machine-makers-hurt-by-lg-samsung-imports-idUSKBN1CA1W4
Some history and illustration of what companies will do to avoid tariffs being levied on their goods:
But Whirlpool contended the companies have made washers in lower-cost countries, using cheaper labor and parts to undercut their big American competitor. When Whirlpool complained that the companies were doing this with machines made in Korea and Mexico, the U.S. Commerce Department investigated and agreed. It said new imports from those countries would face extra fees.
The companies then shifted production to China. They said they did so for legitimate business reasons. But Whirlpool and, subsequently, the Commerce Department said they did so at least partly to avoid the penalties from the case involving Mexico and Korea. New penalties were assigned.
Yet that still didn't stop the companies, which shifted production again, this time to Vietnam and Thailand, Whirlpool and Ohio lawmakers including U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown and Rob Portman said. Brown accused the companies of playing a version of the arcade game Whack-a-Mole, in which the target burrows underground and reemerges someplace else each time it is hit.
Whirlpool and the senators said the only solution left was to penalize the companies, and provide Whirlpool and its workers relief, by assessing a broad set of penalties not tied to a specific country.
Samsung accused of shell game that harms Ohio workers
Samsung accused of shell game that harms Ohio workers
Ordered to pay trade-law penalties on China-made washing machines, Samsung might be moving production to other countries instead.
Monday's decision is the culmination of that request, which started with an investigation and wound up with Trump agreeing with the recommendations of Trade Ambassador Robert Lighthizer, who said the domestic industry deserves protection in light of a surge of imports that started in 2012. The trade representative and his agency made that recommendation last fall but it was not clear if Trump would ultimately agree.
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2018/01/in_major_victory_for_whirlpool.html
See, these companies don't want to just concede and pay the tariff because then that makes them less competitive with domestic producers. They want, and in some cases, need that price advantage in their favor to garner market share and sales which hurts the domestic producers. So the foreign producers will do what they can to avoid the penalties and the higher costs.
The remedies recommended by ITC where a quota up to 1.2 million units imported with a tariff ranging from 0-20% and 50% on anything beyond 1.2 million.
Whirlpool did not feel this went far enough and neither did Ohio Senators Rob Portman or Sherrod Brown, both urged for a 50% tariff on all imported units.
The Trump Administration went with the ITC recommendation rather than a flat 50% tariff on all units.
The three years of trade restrictions on washing machines and parts will be set via a so-called tariff-rate quota, which allows imports of a certain number of fully assembled machines under a 20 percent tariff. Imports beyond the quota will be subject to a much higher 50 percent tariff the first year. The remedy stops short of Whirlpool’s petition for a flat 50 percent tariff on imported machines made by rivals Samsung and LG.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/22/trump-imports-trade-303859
The point may be moot in the near future. Both LG and Samsung are in the final stages of building production facilities in South Carolina and Tennessee. If only we could've got this trade penalty sooner maybe Samsung and LG would've located production here first before bouncing around to all the low labor countries. But that is part of the gig, they needed that low labor to build up their margins and profits and get the brand recognition strong enough with supporting sales to make such an investment in the US, and at what cost? Surely US manufacturers lost sales and jobs in that time span while the likes of Samsung and LG took away sales and enjoyed larger margins and competitive advantages.
Sell it here, build it here!
There were also trade penalties to be levied against imported solar panels based off of ITC findings.
There are solar panels made in the USA, but unlike large appliances sold here, or some other product or raw material, most of that is imported. The lionshare of production and what is sold in the US is made in East Asia. This is going to be an incredibly difficult area for the US to be competitive, even with the tariff.
Companies who produce in the US:
What are the Top Companies Making Solar Panels in the U.S.?
Though the large majority of solar manufacturers import their equipment from southeast asia (even in the case of leading American solar companies like SunPower), there is a short list of American solar companies that actually make their solar panels here in the United States.
Here is the breakdown of U.S. solar companies:
Itek Energy
Heliene
Solaria
Mission Solar
SunSpark
SolarWorld Americas
Suniva
Seraphim
SolartechMissing from the above list are Tesla and Panasonic who each began manufacturing U.S. solar panels in late 2017. The two companies are now producing Tesla’s new solar roof product and low profile solar panels at its large manufacturing plant in Buffalo, known as the Gigafactory.
The Top 10 List of Solar Panel Manufacturers (Global)
A big part of calculating solar panel quality is understanding the metrics and factors that determine it such as module efficiency and performance. Check out this solar panel analysis to better understand significant characteristics that will impact your solar panel performance. Also notable is the fact that not every company that made this list has a significant share of the US residential solar power market.
Table: Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in 2018 – Global ranking by shipment volume2017 - Rank -Company Headquarters
1 -JinkoSolar -China
2 - Trina Solar -China
3 - Canadian Solar -Canada
4 -JA Solar -China
5 -Hanwha Q CELLS - South Korea
6 -GCL-SI -Hong Kong
7 -LONGi Solar - China
8 -Risen Energy - China
9 -Shunfeng -China
10 -Yingli Green - China
Most of the US jobs in the solar segment are in sales and installation rather than manufacturing. And the two companies who petitioned for the import penalties are not US companies, they just assemble in the US and compete with imported panels.
If the prices for solar panels increases, will it hurt installation jobs and will this be a net job loser? There are those who say it will. It depends, does the consumer want solar panels or not? If the answer is yes, they will continue to buy them because in the long-run they will still save on electric bills, it just means that recoup time may be longer now. But the recoup will still occur, if it is purely a financial decision. Then there is the ethical side, which I'm sure many progressives believe in the appeal of renewable and green energy sources - if that is one's belief, to an extent, the price of the product is only a hurdle and the reason to go solar makes it all worth it big picture.
But the real problem is that the consumer hasn't had to bear the full cost of the solar panel purchase and install because of tax breaks that were created to incentivize them. So they have been insulated from the actual cost and now that the US tries to make the playing field level, the fear is the consumer will protest more? There should've been no subsidy for solar in the first place.
In this case I actually do not think the tariff will have much positive impact on the domestic solar panel industry some hope and I don't think it will have much of a negative impact on the sales and install jobs some fear. I tend to think the trajectory is going that direction for more solar and isn't likely to slow much. But if you have your choice, why not buy panels assembled in the USA?
Trump imposes 30 percent tariff on solar panel imports
The new tariff falls to 25 percent after a year, and then 20 percent and 15 percent each year after, before phasing out entirely. The first 2.5 gigawatts of imports each year are exempt.
Solar panels already are subject to significant tariffs when imported from China and Taiwan.
Suniva and SolarWorld Americas requested tariffs of 50 percent on imported panels last year, saying their operations were decimated by cheap imports. The International Trade Commission endorsed tariffs of up to 35 percent after it ruled that domestic manufacturers suffered "serious injury" from the imports, a finding required to impose tariffs under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Most of the rest of the solar industry, including installers and companies that make related technology, oppose the tariffs, saying they would threaten tens of thousands of jobs.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/370171-trump-imposes-30-tariffs-on-solar-panel-imports
Day 1 of NAFTA renegotiate part 6 started today
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trade-nafta/nafta-negotiators-open-key-round-of-talks-amid-upbeat-signs-idUSKBN1FC242
My wife has been finding lots of made in the USA women's clothes on this site:
https://gozon.com//blockquote >
Came across this site as well for women's clothes, small operation, claim materials to be USA. Forwarded link to my wife, more excuses for her to buy new clothes!
Latest NAFTA talks conclude without much significant progress. Described as a step forward, but they are at a point in the process it is about time for a leap or withdrawal is a possibility (which by the way, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton said they would withdraw from NAFTA if it was unable to renegotiate during the 2008 campaign) - just to state this isn't exactly a moment of recklessness from the Trump Administration's desire to renegotiate or withdrawn.
Signs of Progress in Nafta Talks but Countries Remain Deeply Divided
Leer en español
By ANA SWANSONJAN. 29, 2018MONTREAL — Discussions to revamp the North American Free Trade Agreement moved from stalemate to actual negotiation during the sixth round of talks that concluded on Monday, but a deal was still far from guaranteed as Mexico, Canada and the United States continue to squabble over how to reshape the 24-year-old pact.
Government officials and trade analysts described the mood around the talks as “cautiously optimistic” as Canada, in particular, joined Mexico in offering counterproposals to America’s requests for drastic changes, an outcome that seemed likely to dissuade the United States from imminent withdrawal.
Yet more than six months into the talks, a conclusion still appeared elusive. And tensions between the countries grew as the United States criticized Canada’s suggested changes to the pact on areas including automobile manufacturing and investment.
Robert Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, suggested that Canada had been responsible for the stalled talks. He said discussions were now progressing as the nation recognized the need to protect its trading relationships, though he added that talks were not moving fast enough.
“The reality is some of the participants weren’t willing to talk about anything,” Mr. Lighthizer said in remarks to the media. “Now, they’re starting to realize that we have to begin to talk. I think that’s a reason for guarded optimism. But you know, I’m never really very optimistic,” he added.
Officials from Canada and Mexico sounded more positive about the prospects for a deal. Ildefonso Guajardo Villarreal, the Mexican economic secretary, said that the three countries were at “a better moment in this negotiation process,” and that progress made so far had put the countries “on the right track to create landing zones to conclude the negotiation soon.”
Chrystia Freeland, the Canadian foreign minister, said that Canada had come to the table “with creative ideas we believed could move us forward.” She also emphasized the benefits of trade with Canada for the United States.
The Nafta pact, negotiated by President George H.W. Bush and signed into law by President Bill Clinton, spurred trade between the three countries by reducing Mexico’s high tariffs on goods from Canada and the United States. But, as President Trump has often highlighted, it also incentivized companies to shift labor-intensive manufacturing to Mexico.
Mr. Trump has repeatedly threatened to walk away from the trade pact if it cannot be renegotiated in the United States’ favor, a position that has put him at odds with many in the business community and Congress, who see trade with Mexico and Canada as integral to industries as varied as manufacturing, agriculture and energy. The auto industry, in particular, has arranged its North American supply chains around the deal’s terms.
With talks now reaching into their seventh month, negotiators are about to butt up against several political events that could make an agreement even more difficult, including the Mexican general election on July 1.
The election could usher in a leftist political party that may be less willing to make concessions. The front-runner, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, has advocated a more combative approach to the Trump administration.
“Doing this before the Mexican election is critical, because you don’t know who is going to be leading afterward,” said Representative Will Hurd, a Texas Republican who attended the talks.
The negotiations have faced a series of collapsing deadlines. Last year, officials insisted that the deal must be largely concluded by the end of 2017. Then in October, they decided to extend the talks into the first quarter of 2018, with March widely cited as a deadline.
Negotiators did not specify a new target for concluding the talks. In remarks on Monday, Ms. Freeland said that Canada looked forward to continuing its work at the next round in Mexico City in late February, and in Washington in April.
Officials from all three countries say they would rather have a good deal than a rushed one. But the delay is not without risks — some trade analysts fear that an extended process could cause Mr. Trump to lose patience, and spur an American withdrawal.
Midterm elections in the United States on Nov. 6 could also complicate the deal. The administration will need a simple majority in both the House and Senate to approve their revised trade agreement, which could prove difficult if Democrats win control of either chamber.
Mr. Lighthizer reiterated in his remarks on Monday that he hoped to win the support of some Democratic lawmakers. That may hinge on the administration’s efforts to improve labor standards. Last Tuesday, more than 180 Democrats and one Republican lawmaker sent a letter to Mr. Lighthizer urging the administration to propose stronger measures to improve Mexican labor conditions.
Representative Sander Levin, a Michigan Democrat and one of the signatories, said the Trump administration’s current labor proposals just “mask maintaining the status quo.” Mr. Levin said “the traditional view of these issues is that they’ll work out in the wash, but workers have been taking a bath.”
Negotiators said they reached agreement on a Nafta chapter focusing on anti-corruption, and were nearing completion on several other sections. But the ideas Canada brought forward to counter the Trump administration’s proposals were proving a source of contention.
The United States has proposed significantly raising the so-called rules of origin, which govern how much of a car needs to be manufactured within the free-trade area to be exempt from tariffs.
The Canadians last week discussed changing the way the figures were calculated to include design, investment and parts of an automobile like high-tech software and sensors that are common in cars today but not measured under Nafta.
The change is likely to raise the proportion of a car’s value produced by the United States, because many high-tech industries are centered there. But it also appeared unlikely to address Mr. Trump’s primary reason for renegotiating Nafta: strengthening American manufacturing.
Mr. Lighthizer criticized the idea, saying that it “may actually lead to less regional content than we have now” and said “this is the opposite of what we’re trying to do.”
Mr. Lighthizer also used his remarks to criticize a recent case Canada brought to the World Trade Organization, in which it claimed that the United States system for policing dumping and subsidies was unfair. “It is imprudent, and my suspicion is, spiteful,” he told reporters.
I went to the Cleveland Auto Show this weekend. Very disappointed to see Buick had three of the Envision in their display all of which were assembled in China for the US market.
Lots of buzz, most of it negative, about import tariffs on steel and aluminum. Reporting of these kinds of things are usually negative because, 1) most people have been taught and subscribe to traditional economic theory supporting free markets and opposing trade restrictions, 2) broader corporate interests with most Republicans and some Democrats lead them to oppose trade restrictions for specific companies and sectors, 3) when it is Trump everything he does or wants to do is always reported negatively.
I heard some very confused and uninformed news commentators and political guests speak on the subject in TV and radio news.
One thing that people need to understand is that China doesn't directly import as much to the US as a % of our overall foreign sourced steel, they still drive the over-capacity and dumping issues in the US and globally. The US has already imposed 24 anti-dumping and contervailing duties on Chinese steel mill products. The Chinese have seeked to evade these restrictions and duties by shipping their products to secondary countries for minor finishing procedures which allows their steel to then be imported into the US without restrictions and fees. Bush and Obama both filed complaints and enacted tariffs and restrictions on foreign steel products during their administrations. In fact Obama again filed a complaint in January of 2017. So this is a long on-going issue, not a new one that Trump has just created. The decision Trump has announced is the result of Commerce Department investigation from April 2017 and the results of the report were released February 16th. The administration has 90 days to take action. When the executive branch acts, they are fully within their authority and responsibility to do so.
While official actions have not been announced, Trump did say rather informally it would be 25% of steel and 10% on aluminum imports across the board.
This is very good policy. The steel industry in the US is a mixture of domestic and foreign owned companies; the largest being US owned Nucor, US Steel Corp, Steel Dynamics and AK Steel plus foreign owned ArcelorMittal USA and Gerdau North America.
As of December 2017, the United States was the world's largest steel importer - we use alot of steel and more than we can produce. However, we do have the existing capacity and ability here to produce more and employ more. Imports have grown 219% from 2009. The steel industry has historically been and will continue to be a vital industry in the US and it is important to protect their survival and foster future growth.
There is fear that higher material costs will hurt other industries and sectors that rely on steel and aluminum and then those higher costs get passed along. Remember the goal of the import tariffs is to spur more production here at US plants with US workers who both contribute to the local economies and tax bases. So these potential higher costs do not take place in a vacuum, there is an economic benefit to it as well. People say, remember Smoot-Hawley, we'll have inflation, we'll have a recession, we'll have a depression, it will start a trade war...smoot-hawley has been mischaracterized for a century and we are already in a trade war, and we are losing.
[Edited on 3/2/2018 by nebish]
Remember the goal of the import tariffs is to spur more production here at US plants with US workers who both contribute to the local economies and tax bases.
For a second, I'll grant you every other point you made.
But the one I quote above...exactly when and where does that...start...ever?
Remember the goal of the import tariffs is to spur more production here at US plants with US workers who both contribute to the local economies and tax bases.
For a second, I'll grant you every other point you made.
But the one I quote above...exactly when and where does that...start...ever?
US steel capacity utilization has declined from 87% in 1998 to 81.4% in 2008 to 69.4% in 2016. The most recent 6 year period 2011-2016 average utilization was 74%. 80% is needed to sustain the industry.
So by putting imported steel at a competitive disadvantage, domestically produced steel demand can rise along with their production capacity. More output by the domestic mills will either lead to more employment or more hours worked by existing workers, or a combination. In either event more workers earning benefits or static number of workers earning more benefits creates a larger tax base for state and federal income withholding taxes for anything from local schools to social security. And with more people employed, it reduces the stress on social safety net programs those individuals may've been using. And with more money in pay checks it finds it's way into the local economies where they reside. More sales and profits by the corporations leads to more tax dollars for local municipalities, states and federal government coffers.
Here is the commerce department report and further detailed reporting links contained within:
Additional reading, I believe 3rd qrt 2017 published in December is the most recent report available:
https://www.trade.gov/steel/countries/pdfs/imports-us.pdf
How China uses third-party countries for relabeling origination
http://www.americanmanufacturing.org/blog/entry/commerce-goes-after-third-country-steel-imports-originating-in-china
Something else about the "when and where" does something start related to tariffs and getting more jobs here out of it, take a look at the LG and Samsung laundry appliance situation. Not the actual tariff, not what the ITC ruled or what the Trump administration ruled.
Whirlpool filed formal complaints against LG and Samsung way back in 2011. There were years of hearings and investigations by groups like the WTO and ITC along with US Dept of Commerce. Internal planning and strategy of the Korean brands LG and Samsung can't fully be known. LG execs say it was a 6 year process (hmmm coincidence, trade complaint filed 2011 + 6 years later = 2017 announcement). In early 2017 LG announced plans to built a plant in Tennessee. In June 2017 Samsung announced their plans for the South Carolina plant. This will enable them to make their products here rather bearing the cost of an import tax on machines made in Mexico or South Korea and employ American workers in the process.
That is how it is supposed to work. We need more things like that to happen and trade barriers can be a means to that end.
Time will tell.
The problem is it also causes issues like this:
Electrolux puts $250 million US investment on hold over Trump's tariff hike
Sweden's Electrolux said it would delay a planned $250 million investment in Tennessee, after President Donald Trump announced tariffs on imported aluminum and steel.
Trump said the duties — 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum — would be formally announced next week.
The company is waiting to see the final details of the U.S. plans before making a final decision.
The problem is it also causes issues like this:
Electrolux puts $250 million US investment on hold over Trump's tariff hike
Sweden's Electrolux said it would delay a planned $250 million investment in Tennessee, after President Donald Trump announced tariffs on imported aluminum and steel.
Trump said the duties — 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum — would be formally announced next week.
The company is waiting to see the final details of the U.S. plans before making a final decision.
Now that is an interesting decision because that investment was to modernize their existing plant not about creating new jobs or expanding their current US assembly footprint. So they may be hindering their own competitiveness and efficiency in doing this. But if they want to continue to build in the plant without updates that makes them better that is their choice. And if we put tariffs on units they import I think they would see fit to invest more in the US rather than somewhere else. Assuming this market is still somewhere they want to sell their products, and that answer is would be a yes. We say jump, they jump, or they can try offsetting those lost sales somewhere else, good luck. Meanwhile we'll just buy other brands.
As the push for higher US content in Mexican and Canadian built autos, the head of the US team has to unexpectedly leave NAFTA talks in Mexico City to meet with the auto companies. Jesus. Don't do what they want, that is how we got these shitty deals, by doing what the corporations want. You have what Mexico wants, you have what Canada wants, and you have what US and multinational corporations want. How about what the US workers want? That is the whole point of trying to renegotiate in the first place!
Technical discussions on auto content at the latest round of talks to rework the North American Free Trade Agreement were disrupted this week by the sudden departure of the head of the U.S. team for that issue, Jason Bernstein.
The three sides aimed to hold talks as soon as possible to continue addressing a U.S. proposal to raise the amount of North American content used under NAFTA, Smith said. The U.S. demand has been a major sticking point at the talks.
“It’s going to restart soon, not in this round, but we hope that there is a meeting at technical level next week to continue the talks,” Smith told reporters.
Officials said Bernstein returned to the United States for technical consultations with the auto industry, and Smith told reporters he had not returned to the talks in Mexico City.
This was supposed to be the final meeting with a revised agreement on the table by the end of this month. Seems like negotiations will need to be extended. Read they have only agreed on 5 of 30 "chapters" up for discussion.
The new tariff on steel and aluminum can be a bargaining chip, a concession the US can use in order to get something else in return.
Wilbur Ross made some rounds to media outlets last week, where he said:
“There’s about one ton of steel in a car, the price of a ton of steel is $700 or so, so 25 percent on that would be one half of 1 percent price increase on a typical $35,000 car. So it’s no big deal.” = $175 price increase.
And this is causing angst?
Oh, everyone is getting fired up on this "trade war". For some 40 years US corporations and foreign corporations alike have benefited from cheaper foreign labor and production costs for their products sold to the American consumer. Why are US wages stagnant? Blame trade agreements that serve the interests of international globalists and their influence in our government.
Cohen is gone. Good. Promote Navarro.
Economists view America simply as a market. We aren't just a market, we are a country who's strength and prosperity has suffered as a result of global economic theory. Time to turn the tables.
Assuming Navarro does take on a larger role, here is a good piece recent piece on him:
The problem is it also causes issues like this:
Electrolux puts $250 million US investment on hold over Trump's tariff hike
Sweden's Electrolux said it would delay a planned $250 million investment in Tennessee, after President Donald Trump announced tariffs on imported aluminum and steel.
Trump said the duties — 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum — would be formally announced next week.
The company is waiting to see the final details of the U.S. plans before making a final decision.
It will be interesting to see what impact the tariff will have on the legislation to improve the infrastructure. My guess it will make the needed materials more expensive.
It will be interesting to see what impact the tariff will have on the legislation to improve the infrastructure. My guess it will make the needed materials more expensive.
If we are building the material for the infrastructure we need, it is a win-win. Why give some other country the jobs for the things we need? I'd rather have more people working and making good wages in my state and your state for our country.
GE just released a statement saying the potential input cost for them would be "minimal".
So much fear mongering is out there.
Let's circle back to Electrolux. They closed a plant in Greenville Michigan in 2006 and built a brand new plant in Juarez Mexico. Somebody making $20 an hour in Michigan, something you can support your family on, save and afford the things one needs, poof, gone, lost their job. Why? Did Electrolux want to be closer to the market in Mexico, did it make some logistical sense? No, they sell very few appliances in Mexico and Central America. Electrolux closed the plant and moved production to Mexico because it made financial sense and free trade with Mexico allowed them to do it where they could export appliances into the US for free. Based off of 2017 figures, over 32% of their sales are in the USA. No company can survive with losing 32% of their global sales. So what if we said "the only way you can sell your appliances in the USA is you have to build them here or you will be subject to tariffs on your imports". They would do what is necessary to sell to the American consumer and be competitive with their counterparts in the industry because we are an important market for them. It is our government's role to act in the best interest of our nation, not in what the interest of what Electrolux wants or any other multinational company and their bottom line.
It has taken decades to get where we are now and it isn't going to change in a few months or several years. Everyone is so entrenched with free trade goggles on, it is like sacrilege to do anything contrary. Well I don't like where free trade has taken us. Do you? That was a driving factor in my vote for Bernie Sanders and it was a driving factor in my vote for Donald Trump. Only political outsiders speak loudly on the damage free trade has meant for our country and our workers. I'm not surprised so many controlled by corporate interests and global economic theory act in such a way. But I am surprised that more regular people aren't voicing support. Well, actually they did, in part with their votes for Sanders and Trump in 2016. The message on trade they delivered is what we needed to hear and now we need action. And what do we get instead? Resistance. How can anything change, when everyone fights change.
I didn't vote for status quo, don't give me status quo.
Jesus Christ, Don Lemon just literally said "what if a can of coke costs $3 under this plan". An aluminum can costs .10-.11 cents each. If a can was made entirely from imported aluminum it would be 10% higher cost with the tariff. So now it costs 11-12.1 cents each. Well, that's it, we might as well sign our death warrant on that one folks.
So those pennies add up for producers, and the Beer Institute says it will "cost" $347 million. The beer industry is about a $108 billion dollar market, that $347mill makes what, under a half one %. And somehow the beer institute says 20,300 workers would lose their jobs because of this. Who takes these kinds of comments seriously? The price of beer isn't going up 10%. Production costs aren't going up 10%. One input component of the production process is going to be subject to higher prices and it is a minimal amount.
These corporations were just given windfall tax breaks and now they stand to lose some small portion of that gain with potentially higher input costs and we see them act like a spoiled child who throws a temper tantrum when they don't always get their way.
Goldman Sachs....How is GM and Ford going to lose a billion dollars each, when the steel component of a $30,000 car could increase less than $200? Are they eating all of it because they are nice guys and want to make less profit? It gets passed along, GM and Ford don't "lose it" any increase gets rolled into the car loan and $200 on a $30,000 buy ain't shit in the big picture of such an asset purchase. And if GM and Ford increase their purchase of domestic steel as that added capacity comes online they avoid any tax on imported steel. The more steel we produce the more competitively priced it becomes as plants get more efficient.
These assumptions are all wrong. What they are saying isn't just hyperbole, it is outright blatant lies.
