Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av
Nixter
Hej, Ja i normala fall r det s det gr till, priset till konsument kar. Dock inte i detta fall. I Kina har deras styre givit std fr att de kinesiska leverantrerna skall kunna fortstta hlla samma pris. Man har frdelat kostnaden om tullen som r 10-25% p fljande stt:
33% av Tullkostnaden tar Fabriken som tillverkar (KINA)
33% av Tullkostnaden Handelsbolaget som sljer artikeln till USA (KINA)
33% av Tullkostnaden r importrens, dvs det Amerikanska tillverknings eller importbolaget. Hr har mnga bolag absorberat denna kostnad i deras marginal och sljer drmed varan till samma pris som tidigare med lgre marginal fr att skydda sin volym. (USA)
100% strafftull gr till den Amerikanska staten.
Det syns tydligt att varornas kostnad inte har kat i det amerikanska konsumentledet vilket skulle vara en tanke att det skulle ske, men detta d till att Kinas konkurrenskraft minskar vilket man frn Kinas hll inte nskar, drav har Kina lanserat massiva kvantitativa paket och subventioner fr att upprtthlla den prisniv som rdde innan tullarna.
Vad man n tycker om Trump r detta den kanske mest geniala lsningen fr att f Kina att betala sina strafftullar. Detta har kostat Amerikanska konsumenter frvnansvrt litet.
Sen kan vi ta den ngot mer filosofiska debatten huruvida konsumenten i USA r billig att betala kanske 2-3% extra fr en vara samtidigt som man behller jobb i landet samt tar in dessa massiva tullar. Svarat p den frgan torde vara ett rungande ja, exempelvis farmarna var ju beredda att frlora stora delar av deras spannmlsfrsljning till Kina fr att skapa ett tryck.
S det hr stmmer inte?
A recent study calculated that the 25 percent tariffs imposed on China would cost the average American household more than $800 a year, according to a blog post from the New York Federal Reserve.
But U.S.-based importers are managing the higher tax burden in a number of ways that hurt U.S. companies and customers more than China.
Such strategies include accepting lower profit margins; cutting costs - including wages and jobs for U.S. workers; deferring any potential wage hikes, as well as passing on tariff costs through higher prices for U.S. consumers or companies.
Most importers use a mix of such tactics to spread the higher costs among suppliers and consumers or buyers.
Higher duties on imports of metals and Chinese products, for example, increased Caterpillars production costs by more than $100 million last year. In response, the heavy-duty equipment maker increased prices for its products.
Tractor manufacturer Deere & Co estimates a $100 million increase in its raw materials costs this year because of Trumps tariffs on Chinese imports. Deere has cut costs and increased prices to protect its profits.
A Congressional Research Service report in February found that the tariffs boosted washing machine prices by as much as 12%, compared to January 2018, before tariffs took effect.
Steel and aluminum tariffs increased the price of steel products by nearly 9% last year, pushing up costs for steel users by $5.6 billion, according to a study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
U.S. companies and consumers paid $3 billion a month in additional taxes because of tariffs on Chinese goods and on aluminum and steel from around the globe, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Princeton University, and Columbia University. Companies shouldered an additional $1.4 billion in costs related to lost efficiency in 2018, the study found.
