Trade Cases
Business Forward: Tariffs Causing “Demand Destruction”
Written by Sandy Williams
December 13, 2018
A new American Steel Index report by Business Forward shows U.S. steel prices have risen 7.4 percent since February, while foreign steel prices have fallen 9.8 percent. As a result, American manufacturers are paying 17.2 percent more for hot- and cold-rolled steel than their foreign competitors.
“President Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum are increasing consumer prices and hurting American exports,” said Business Forward President Jim Doyle. The long-term costs of tariffs are becoming clear, he added, as production moves overseas and firms cut back on capital investment.
The Section 232 tariffs are intended to reduce steel imports and strengthen U.S. manufacturing. Instead, the opposite effect is occurring as manufacturers switch strategies to importing more finished products from abroad while manufacturing less in the United States. Business Forward refers to this phenomenon as “demand destruction.”
“In order to have great manufacturing, a country or region must have cheap or affordable materials and energy,” said Josh Spoores, Principal Steel Analyst for CRU. “The U.S. has energy, but steel is not cheap. You also will see substitution and once that comes, it is challenging for a switch back.”
Business Forward maintains that the Trump administration’s defense of tariffs by comparing price increases for steel to finished product prices is wrong. “They should compare price increases with a manufacturer’s profit margin,” says Doyle. Higher steel prices are increasing input costs and negatively impacting profits for U.S. manufacturing firms.
Business Forward describes itself as a civic-minded, bipartisan advisory organization that works with business leaders across the country to advise Washington on how to create jobs and accelerate the economy.
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Trade Cases
Leibowitz on trade: How much will the Trump tariffs hurt the US? How much will they help?
The benefits from higher tariffs are speculative and unproven. The disruptions caused by tariffs and other trade restrictions are better documented and cannot be rationally denied. For the tariffs to be good policy, the Trump argument must therefore be sure that the benefits to the US exceed the cost of these disruptions. Otherwise, we have madness masquerading as policy.
Trump to place 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico, 10% on China starting Tuesday
The Trump administration will implement 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico and 10% tariffs on China, according to a White House fact sheet and executive orders circulated on Saturday. The administration said that it would tariff “energy resources” from Canada at a lower rate – 10%. The tariffs will go into effect at 12:01 ET on Tuesday, according to an executive order. The White House documents made no mention of exemptions.
Canacero claims ‘surge’ of US steel exports, backs retaliation against potential tariffs
Mexican steel trade association Canacero said US steel exports represent “a threat to the Mexican steel industry.” Canacero also backed retaliatory measures if President Trump enacts 25% tariffs on Mexico by Feb. 1.
Updated timeline for coated steel trade case
Less-than-fair-value investigations The US Commerce Department has agreed to postpone preliminary decisions in the corrosion-resistant steel (CORE) antidumping duty (AD) investigations. Commerce said in a Federal Register filing that it will now issue initial AD margin determinations by April 3. The deadline had previously been Feb. 12. The extension comes after domestic petitioners requested earlier […]
Trump threatens 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico as soon as Feb. 1
President Donald Trump said on Monday evening that he was considering placing tariffs of 25% on imports from Canada and Mexico. The president said the tariffs could go into effect as soon as Feb. 1. President Trump threatened the tariffs as he signed a raft of executive orders in front of reporters in the Oval […]