The Corner

Economy & Business

A Blinkered Look at Tariffs from MarketWatch

Shipping containers at a port in Shanghai, China. (Aly Song/Reuters)

For MarketWatch, Brett Arends writes, “Most of what the public is being told about [the Trump administration’s tariffs on imports from China] is either misleading or a downright lie.” What he means is that other people who write or talk about the tariffs aren’t making points that he considers extremely important.

These points are that tariffs are merely taxes, and these taxes are not large as a proportion of the federal budget. He writes, “Yes, tariffs are ‘costs.’ But they do not somehow destroy our money. They do not take our hard-earned dollars and burn them in a big pile. Tariffs are simply federal taxes. That’s it. The extra costs paid by importers, and consumers, goes to Uncle Sam, to distribute as he sees fit, including, for example, on Obamacare subsidies . . .

“And the amounts involved are trivial. Chicken feed.”

The reason other people have not emphasized these points is that some of them are false and others don’t have much to do with why economists generally look on tariffs with disfavor.

It is not, for instance, true that all the higher costs that importers and consumers pay as a result of tariffs go to the treasury. Let’s say you’re laid off because the company you work for is paying more for machinery, you’re paying a cost that doesn’t increase tax revenue. If the company is paying more for machinery from a U.S. supplier that was able to raise prices because of the tariff, the extra money it’s paying (and its customers may be paying) doesn’t increase tax revenue either.

Tariffs tend to be a relatively inefficient way of raising federal revenue because of these kinds of effects: They do a lot of damage to the economy per dollar raised. (You could even say they “destroy our money.”) But the words “deadweight loss” do not appear in Arends’s article.

Arends writes that “the total value wiped off U.S. stocks during Monday’s panic was about $700 billion. More than 20 years’ worth of the new tariffs.” One possible explanation: The economic effects of the tariffs aren’t limited to the revenues they produce. Another: The market was responding not just to the Trump administration’s tariffs but to the tariffs China imposed in response — as the story to which Arends links plainly says — and to the possibility that more cycles of retaliation are in store.

We could also go with Arends’s theory, that markets aren’t as rational as he is.

Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor for National Review, a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and a senior fellow at the National Review Institute.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

The Problem with Certainty

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is Jonah Goldberg’s weekly “news”letter, the G-File. Subscribe here to get the G-File delivered to your inbox on Fridays. Dear Reader (Including those of you having this read to you while you white-knuckle the steering wheel trying to get to wherever you’re going for the ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Worst Cover-Up of All Time

President Donald Trump may be guilty of many things, but a cover-up in the Mueller probe isn’t one of them. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, attempting to appease forces in the Democratic party eager for impeachment, is accusing him of one, with all the familiar Watergate connotations. The charge is strange, ... Read More

Theresa May: A Political Obituary

On Friday, Theresa May, perhaps the worst Conservative prime minister in recent history, announced her resignation outside of number 10 Downing Street. She will step down effective June 7. “I have done my best,” she insisted. “I have done everything I can. . . . I believe it was right to persevere even ... Read More
PC Culture

TV Before PC

Affixing one’s glance to the rear-view mirror is usually as ill-advised as staring at one’s own reflection. Still, what a delight it was on Wednesday to see a fresh rendition of “Those Were the Days,” from All in the Family, a show I haven’t watched for nearly 40 years. This time it was Woody Harrelson ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Democrats’ Other Class War

There is a class war going on inside the Democratic party. Consider these two cris de couer: Writing in the New York Times under the headline “America’s Cities Are Unlivable — Blame Wealthy Liberals,” Farhad Manjoo argues that rich progressives have, through their political domination of cities such as ... Read More

The Deepfake of Nancy Pelosi

You’ve almost made it to a three-day weekend! Making the click-through worthwhile: A quick note about how National Review needs your help, concerns about “deepfakes” of Nancy Pelosi, one of the most cringe-inducing radio interviews of all time, some news about where to find me and the book in the near ... Read More
White House

For Democrats, the Party’s Over

If the Democrats are really tempted by impeachment, bring it on. Since the day after the 2016 election they have been threatening this, placing their chips on the Russian-collusion fantasy and then on the phantasmagoric charade of obstruction of justice. The attorney general accurately gave the ingredients of the ... Read More

America’s Best Defense Against Socialism

The United States of America has flummoxed socialists since the nineteenth century. Marx himself couldn’t quite understand why the most advanced economy in the world stubbornly refused to transition to socialism. Marxist theory predicts the immiseration of the proletariat and subsequent revolution from below. ... Read More