Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

lostincalifornia

(3,908 posts)
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 05:30 AM Yesterday

US Companies, Consumers Are Paying for Trump's Tariffs, Not Foreign Firms

"Who’s paying for Donald Trump’s tariffs? So far, American businesses and consumers.

General Motors Co. was the latest US company to disclose how the levies are raising costs, with the automaker saying Tuesday that the duties dented profits by more than $1 billion as it chose to absorb the blow. That helps explain why car prices didn’t rise in last week’s inflation data, while robust price increases for other commonly imported goods like toys and appliances showed those tariff expenses are being passed on to consumers.

Meanwhile, import prices excluding fuel were up notably in June, suggesting foreign companies aren’t shouldering the burden by offering US firms lower prices — challenging the president’s claims that other countries pay the rate. Trump reiterated that characterization on Tuesday after a meeting with his counterpart in the Philippines, saying that country “will pay a 19% Tariff” in a post on social media.

While customs duties are giving a significant boost to US revenues, the data show that those coffers are being filled domestically.

“The top-down macro evidence seems clear: Americans are mostly paying for the tariffs,” George Saravelos, global head of FX research at Deutsche Bank AG, said in a note Tuesday. “There is likely more pressure on US consumer prices in the pipeline.”


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-22/us-companies-and-consumers-are-paying-for-trump-s-tariffs?srnd=homepage-americas

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Norrrm

(2,458 posts)
1. "revenues" --- The tariffs are going great.... if you say it in a certain way. Don't mention higher taxes or inflation
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 06:10 AM
Yesterday

"revenues" --- The tariffs are going great.... if you say it in a certain way.

Don't mention higher taxes or inflation or lost jobs.


Bernardo de La Paz

(57,204 posts)
6. Tariffs reduce economic activity and even if tariffs were constant, declining trade will reduce tariff taxes collected.
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 08:19 AM
Yesterday

Tariffs will have (are beginning to have) a negative effect on US economic activity. Stellantis announced a loss and GM profits were reduced. Reduced profits mean reduced money for re-investment or for spending. Higher prices means fewer purchases by consumers. Retaliatory tariffs mean fewer exports which leads to lower profits and fewer jobs which means fewer purchases.

doc03

(38,158 posts)
3. Whoever did the report on tariffs on MJ today repeated several times that countries had to pay tariffs.
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 07:24 AM
Yesterday

I believe it was Ratner that said later that the reporter was wrong saying the countries pay tariffs,
the consumers pay them. I have heard reporters do that several times on different reports, are they Trumpers or just
plain stupid? It's bad enough MAGAs think countries pay tariffs but someone calling themselves journalists should know
better.

newdeal2

(3,437 posts)
4. A bit of both
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 07:31 AM
Yesterday

I saw a CNN (I think) article the other day worded to say that Japan would be paying the tariff. I have to think they are mostly stupid because how would the US government collect a tariff from a foreign company?

Bernardo de La Paz

(57,204 posts)
7. Not Japan, but Japanese companies might absorb the cost by lowering prices to keep US dealer input costs stable
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 08:22 AM
Yesterday

More or less. I don't think they can absorb the cost forever. Without the article it is hard to critique the journalist even if it is easy to call them "stupid".

newdeal2

(3,437 posts)
8. Let me know if and when that happens
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 08:48 AM
Yesterday

They would have to absorb that reduction in their margins somehow or suffer as well.

Mr. Joe Steel

(10 posts)
5. "Stupid" may be too harsh a word.
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 07:38 AM
Yesterday

The reporters may understand the principles of journalism but they haven't got a grasp of economics. They should educate themselves before publishing.

Norrrm

(2,458 posts)
11. My senior friend, over 78, was totally convinced by Fox that China paid those billion$ in tariffs.
Wed Jul 23, 2025, 10:08 AM
23 hrs ago

My senior friend, over 78, was totally convinced by Fox that China paid those billion$ in tariffs.

(Trump's first four years)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»US Companies, Consumers A...