Hacker News Reader

Comment by Aurornis | Hacker News Reader

Applied at time of passing through customs.

More typical policy would give 90 days notice so businesses could plan ahead. This policy was implemented far too fast with far too high of numbers and now it’s also changing rapidly. It doesn’t make sense.

> I'm not American but it seems madness to apply them at any other time

I’m American and I fully agree it’s madness. This administration clearly doesn’t understand or even care how businesses work. They just thought this was going to be a chest-thumping bargaining chip that caused other countries to come begging at the negotiation table.

It’s not working and now they’re panicking. They don’t want to look weak by backing down so we’re suffering.

View on HN

Right. The normal way this works is that when you buy something to be imported into the US, you compute the tariffs and post a "customs bond" with CBP at the same time you pay for the product. When the shipment arrives in the US, the customs bond is used to pay the tariff, and the shipment is released by CBP. Shipping companies such as DHL integrate this into their systems so the end user doesn't have to deal with it directly. To the purchaser, it looks like tariffs are paid when the product is ordered. That's the happy path, taken by most imports.

But when tariffs change faster than it takes to get the shipment from source to destination, the bond won't be for the right amount. You then enter the wonderful world of "insufficient bonds". Here's "Understanding Insufficient Customs Bonds in Nine Easy Steps", which outlines the process and tries to sell you on a service that deals with the problem.[1]

Coming May 2: the end of "de miniumus" customs exemptions for small packages under $800 value. Goodbye, Shein, Ali Express, and dropshippers. Unless, of course, the rules are changed again.

[1] https://www.afcinternationalllc.com/customs-brokerage-news/u...

Trump has been spouting the same shit about trade deficits and the US getting ripped off for several decades. I think he legitimately believes high tariffs are a good idea to "fix" trade deficits.

It’s not about trade deficits-it’s about becoming an independent manufacturer again. Whether or not anyone international buys what we make is secondary. Wealth is disproportionately allocated to those that benefit from globalization but the vast majority of Americans are hurting from it, even if a OLED TV costs nickels.

How do these tariffs help the vast majority of Americans? Maybe in a half a decade-decade time they can get a job in some factory as a tech??? Except there's so much uncertainty and so much tariffs even on raw material that it doesn't even make sense from that perspective.

Raising prices on everything is not going to help the majority of Americans. Taxing the rich might have but half the rationale for these tariffs is tax cuts for the rich.

There is no plan or logic to this.

Was there a plan and logic to outsourcing those jobs and leaving half the country to fend for itself and beg for handouts though?

Yes, cheaper goods and more profits duh. If Walmart and others can pay as low as possible wages and shift burden onto the state and it's legal they'll do it. And they did.

There's a lot more to manufacturing than "just" being a line assembly worker.

The factories have to be designed and built. This includes all of the manufacturing processes, equipment, tooling, automation, etc. All of which are done by reasonably paid, middle class engineers and trades.

Then you have all the 2nd order businesses that get stimulated. Energy must be provided. Mines, mills, refineries, etc. to make the raw materials. The packaging for the end products. Logistics for supplies and end products.

All of the value above used to be in the US but has been captured overseas for decades now.

Who is going to build a factory when there's a fifty percent chance the tariff plan changes the next day? Or a refinery? Or a mill? Or a mine?

That is a valid use case for tariffs. I'm not convinced the evidence supports that being the reasoning in this case though.

Development of manufacturing takes time. If that were truly the logic behind the tariffs, wouldn't it make more sense to slowly ramp up tariffs on particular categories of goods with a long notice period to allow time for industries to develop?

Also why all the talk about "punishing" other countries for "taking advantage" if the real goal is to bring manufacturing home?

Development of manufacturing also means not tariffing the steel that's required to make the machines to make the things.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-pr...

If you think that Trump's goal is to help the average person at the expense of the capital class, I have a few bridges to sell you.

If they scream NO in the same loud voice they do on taxes, something is working.

The vast majority of Americans will be hurt even more when product prices double just to subsidize a handful of jobs. If there's such strong interest in ensuring some people have a salary—regardless of the cost to everyone else—we might as well drop the pretense and just pay them directly.

Except, of course, if we did that, the government wouldn't be able to hand those factories over to their friends or political allies. That's the real feature of these "industrial policy" moves, not a bug.

Argentina has been running a nearly identical playbook for decades: impose high tariffs and taxes on imports, hand out subsidies to politically connected local manufacturers, and claim it's all in the name of "national production" and "job creation." The result? Inefficient, uncompetitive factories that only survive because they're protected from global markets. Consumers get stuck paying absurd prices for low-quality goods, innovation dies, and the overall economy stagnates. The only real winners are the cronies who cash in on state favors.

If the U.S. goes down that same path, just like Argentina, it's not going to end in a manufacturing renaissance. It's going to end in inflation, stagnation, and a bunch of overpriced junk no one wants to buy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com