According to a recent Goldman Sachs report, U.S. consumers are currently bearing as much as 55% of the costs associated with President Trump’s tariffs on imports, and that number could rise further. This assessment comes as consumer prices have increased monthly since April, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) reaching 2.93% in August. Despite the administration’s assertion that foreign exporters will ultimately bear the cost, analysts’ findings indicate that consumers are feeling the burden, even if it is less than during the 2018 trade war. The report also notes that the potential doubling of tariffs on China and other actions could significantly increase costs, potentially reaching 70% for consumers.
Read More
US stocks experienced a significant downturn on Friday following President Trump’s threat to impose higher tariffs on Chinese imports, reigniting trade war anxieties. The Dow, S&P 500, and Nasdaq all saw substantial losses, with tech stocks leading the market decline. Trump’s announcement regarding potential tariffs and his stance on rare earth exports triggered a surge in market volatility and a flight to safe-haven assets, while also impacting oil prices. Furthermore, this sparked investor concern regarding a potential economic slowdown and negatively affected the Fear and Greed index.
Read More
In a significant escalation of trade tensions, former President Donald Trump announced plans to impose an additional 100% tariff on Chinese goods, on top of the existing 30% tariffs, potentially starting November 1st. This move is a direct response to China’s increasing export controls on rare earths and comes after months of a trade truce between the two nations. The announcement has already triggered negative reactions from investors, causing major market indexes to plummet on Friday. The potential for further tariffs, coupled with China’s expected retaliation, raises concerns about the impact on the interconnected economies of the United States and China.
Read More
In response to China’s new export controls on rare earth minerals, President Trump threatened significant retaliatory measures. He announced the potential for “a massive increase of Tariffs” on Chinese imports, as well as other countermeasures under consideration. Trump’s post also included a threat to cancel his upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. These announcements followed China’s implementation of new regulations requiring licenses for the export of products containing rare earths, a move that caused stock markets to decline.
Read More
In a move to counter China’s new export controls on rare earth minerals, President Trump announced on Friday that the U.S. would impose 100% tariffs on Chinese imports, effective November 1st, in addition to existing tariffs. The President also stated that the U.S. would implement export controls on “any and all critical software” starting on the same date. These actions follow China’s decision to control exports of rare earth minerals, crucial for high-tech industries, which make up around 70% of the global supply. Trump had threatened to cancel an upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in response to China’s actions.
Read More
The stock market experienced a sharp downturn on Friday following President Trump’s threat of increased tariffs on Chinese imports, marking the worst day for the S&P 500 since April. The Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq composite also plummeted significantly. This market decline occurred amidst already existing concerns about high stock valuations and the potential for a downturn, as well as heightened worries about the impact on oil markets from trade tensions. The yield on the 10-year Treasury also dropped. International markets, including those in Europe and Asia, also reflected this downward trend.
Read More
China has ceased its soybean purchases from the United States, escalating trade tensions and impacting American farmers. This action is a strategic move by Beijing, particularly as both countries anticipate potential discussions. The cessation has significantly reduced US soybean exports to China, prompting the Trump administration to consider a bailout for affected farmers. Furthermore, China views the import halt as leverage in trade negotiations, while the US perceives it as a means of coercion.
Read More
American farmers are facing significant challenges, largely due to President Trump’s trade policies. The White House is working on a multi-billion dollar bailout package, with the agriculture industry’s expenses projected to reach $467.4 billion in 2025. The administration is considering options such as using tariff revenue or tapping into a Department of Agriculture fund. With the US soybean industry in crisis, the administration is facing pressure to secure a trade deal with China.
Read More
President Trump recently acknowledged that his trade policies, specifically the trade war with China, are negatively impacting farmers by hindering soybean sales. This admission arrives amid concerning economic indicators, including a loss of 32,000 jobs in September reported by ADP, potentially signaling further economic decline. These unfavorable economic conditions are further complicated by an impending government shutdown battle. Therefore, Democrats may be in a stronger position to negotiate in the shutdown standoff due to these mounting economic vulnerabilities for Trump and the Republicans.
Read More
South Korea cannot pay $350 billion to the US for a tariff deal, according to the assessment, and this is a pivotal starting point to dissect what’s really going on. The sheer magnitude of that number is enough to make anyone pause, especially when considering the realities of international trade and economic negotiation. It’s not just a simple exchange; it’s a complex web of agreements, regulations, and, well, sometimes, pressure tactics.
This brings us to the core of the issue: the suggestion of a $350 billion payment for a tariff deal is viewed by many as a form of extortion. Think of it as a demand rather than a negotiation, a scenario where one party is essentially holding the other’s access to a market hostage.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood