White House press secretary says border wall will be funded by 20 percent import tax...
Source: The Washington Post
White House press secretary says border wall will be funded by 20 percent import tax on Mexican goods
By Joshua Partlow January 26 at 3:40 PM
MEXICO CITY--President Enrique Peña Nieto on Thursday called off a trip to Washington, after President Trump launched his plan to construct a border wall and insisted he would stick Mexico with the bill. The incident opened one of the most serious rifts in memory between the United States and its southern neighbor.
Trump spokesman Sean Spicer added a stunning new detail about the proposed wall project later Thursday, saying that Trump intended to pay for it by imposing a 20-percent tax on all imports from Mexico.
Peña Nieto had been scheduled to meet with Trump on Tuesday to discuss immigration, trade and drug-war cooperation. He called off the visit after Trump tweeted that it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting if Mexico was unwilling to pay for the wall.
Trumps moves have rekindled old resentments in Mexico, a country that during its history has often felt bullied and threatened by its wealthier, more powerful neighbor. The legacy of heavy-handed U.S. behavior which includes invasions and the seizure of significant Mexican lands -- has mostly been played down by a generation of Mexican leaders who have pursued pragmatic policies and mutual economic interests with both Republican and Democratic U.S. administrations. .
-snip-
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/mexican-president-cancels-visit-to-washington-as-tensions-with-trump-administration-intensify/2017/01/26/ececc3da-e3d9-11e6-a419-eefe8eff0835_story.html?pushid=breaking-news_1485463353&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.dedeb7ea35d4
bucolic_frolic
(43,137 posts)Won't the higher prices just be passed along?
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,137 posts)Once you start dicking around with tariffs and import taxes, you create
winners and losers. Sales of goods from other countries will rise, for example,
because they won't pay an import tax as of now.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)It likely won't pass but was never designed to hurt those already reaping profits from foreign deals and not paying taxes.
Roy Rolling
(6,915 posts)"If you just raise taxes on them they will just pass along the cost to consumers. So it is really a tax on the American people."
I guess they forgot that gem like everything they've lost, including their minds.
Mosby
(16,301 posts)whether tariffs or taxes are passed onto the consumer is based on several factors, the most important is the elasticity of demand for the product.
20% is just ridiculous though, and while I fully support tariffs on Mexican goods, it would be really stupid to spend the money on a fence.
If we put small tariffs on imports (5-7%) coming from countries without minimum wage laws, workplace safety, building codes etc. we could fund universal healthcare, SS and infrastructure improvements.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)and all you will see are Avocados from Mexico. Bins of them. Yes, I will pay more for them. Sorry, Donald. No comparison to Florida Avocados. You can add to this Tortillas from Mexico. Old El Paso? Crap.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)No matter how he tries to spin it- it's Americans paying.
HoneyBadger
(2,297 posts)Prices varied between $40-100 in the last 12 months. There is so weird stuff happening.
displacedtexan
(15,696 posts)Can you imagine a 20% increase in salads and salsa? Damn. I just spent a month in Ft. Worth, and virually every meal would be affected by this tax, including the tomato on my scrambled eggs in the morning. And what about Bimbo Bakeries? Mexico produces a lot of the breads and baked goods in Texas supermarkets.
I don't believe this tax will ever happen.
yuiyoshida
(41,831 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,137 posts)msongs
(67,395 posts)marybourg
(12,621 posts)has no taxing power.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)it's a tax on American businesses
SCantiGOP
(13,869 posts)He would have to end NAFTA first; and it would have to eventually be extended by Congress.
I have read a Forbes report that a complete cessation of trade with Mexico would cost 5 million American jobs.
He can also impose tariffs 1) during a time of war or, 2) during a national emergency. The Forbes article said an attempt to use either one of those against Mexico would likely be blocked by a court immediately, which might be what he wants. That way he did what he said and the loser court wouldn't back him.
I have been wondering, considering how he has been acting, what he is going to do the first time a court tells him he can't do something.
Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)The Republicans won't go for it.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)IronLionZion
(45,433 posts)and tell us that Mexico is paying somehow.
Just like they piss on us and tell us it's raining. Alternative facts
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)NCjack
(10,279 posts)The GOP must be patting itself on the back in coming up with this solution. Mexico will pay for the wall -- what a sack of horse shit.
brush
(53,771 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)He's a great deal-maker though
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)NCjack
(10,279 posts)will suffer more than us, so more Mexicans will come here to work.
herding cats
(19,564 posts)Mexico is our second largest consumer of US exports. Trump must have just forgot that little fact in his poutrage today.
I posted about this in more detail in the link below.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8542371
cstanleytech
(26,284 posts)make more of a profit than dealing with the US when there is a higher tax on anything they might try to sale us.
brush
(53,771 posts)But the US is just a truck ride across the border, no negotiations and expensive, overseas shipping to deal with, other expenses seen and unforeseen that come up.
Slapping similar tariffs on US goods may even make trump back off once prices start to rise here.
cstanleytech
(26,284 posts)Mexico is not going to pay for this wall.
brush
(53,771 posts)it'll be a wash and we'll watch prices rise.
IronLionZion
(45,433 posts)by having Americans pay for it
Coventina
(27,104 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Sanity Claws
(21,846 posts)We will pay for it in higher prices.
tenorly
(2,037 posts)I detest the WTO; but why create a pointless trade war!?
Right! The racist GOP base digs it.
Oneironaut
(5,492 posts)Because protectionism will work so well the 253rd time around.
Vinca
(50,269 posts)Such a tax would have a huge impact on OUR economy and it wouldn't be a good one.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,999 posts)What is week Two going to bring, our esteemed Republicon colleagues across the aisle?
When will you decide enough is enough and invoke Amendment 25?
Friend or Foe
(195 posts)safeinOhio
(32,674 posts)and raise grain would be screwed.
DFW
(54,365 posts)I would make a public statement that I would rather deal with Alec Baldwin's version of Trump than the one currently in the White House, since Baldwin's version showed more maturity and common sense.
THAT should overload Trump's circuits enough for a while.
Lithos
(26,403 posts)I would establish a program to welcome those from the US who are wanting to avoid the effects of stifling inflation and lack of freedom.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)US is probably going to hit a recession as Trump's trade policy crushes consumer purchasing power
Sancho
(9,067 posts)As long as Trump doesn't mess with my taco truck, I really don't care about his border tax.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Sancho
(9,067 posts)Most didn't end up in tacos (but likely resulted in people feeling hungry for a taco).
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)not Mexico.
They are fucking idiots.
dalton99a
(81,455 posts)47of74
(18,470 posts)The cut off one's nose to spite one's face wing of the Branch Trumpvidian party don't give a shit how much that idiot tapeworm's policies hurt the American people, because they like seeing other people being hurt - especially if they're minorities, poor, or women.
Botany
(70,501 posts)* https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/agricultural-trade/
Trump and company are clueless. Where do you think that nice fresh cucumber comes from
when people in the midwest go shopping in the winter?
Making Mexican inports into the US cost more will cause a loss of demand for those products
and a resulting loss of jobs in Mexico and where will those people go to look for work? And
we sell a lot of "stuff" in Mexico too and so what will happen when the Mexicans stop buying
our products?
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,999 posts)Botany
(70,501 posts)Figures from 2013
Statistics from the U.S. Department of Agriculture show that Mexico by far is the most important supplier of fresh produce to the U.S., accounting for 69% of U.S. fresh vegetable import value and 37% of U.S. fresh fruit import value in 2012.
U.S. imports of Mexican fresh fruit totaled $2.86 billion in 2012, with the import value increasing by an average of about 20% per year from 1999 to 2012. By comparison, the value of U.S. imports of Chilean fruit totaled $1.22 billion in 2012, up an average of 10% per year over the same period.
Mexico accounted for $4.05 billion in U.S. fresh vegetable imports in 2012. From 1999 to 2012, the average annual growth in the value of U.S. fresh vegetable imports from Mexico was 15%, compared with 14% annual growth in in the value of U.S. fresh imports from Canada. While Peru accounted for just 5% of U.S. fresh vegetable import value in 2012, annual growth in the value of imports of fresh vegetables from Peru averaged 31% from 1999 to 2012, according to the report.
Total U.S. vegetable import volume has increased at an average rate of 5.1% in the last twelve years, almost double the 2.7% average annual growth in the volume of U.S. fruit imports, according to the report.
http://www.thepacker.com/fruit-vegetable-news/Mexico-dominates-US-fresh-produce-imports-201449021.html
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,999 posts)randr
(12,411 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,999 posts)jehop61
(1,735 posts)Our biggest import is oil! Nice going ........
Demobrat
(8,970 posts)a 20% increase in food prices, as long as it means the dishwasher at their favorite restaurant is out of a job.
Stonepounder
(4,033 posts)Plus, as mentioned above, lots and lots of produce imported from Mexico. The importers pay the tax and pass the cost on to the buyers. No matter how you slice it, Americans will pay for his damn useless wall.
Mr. Trumpenfuhrur, tear down this wall!
Skittles
(153,150 posts)he's a MORON
Tanuki
(14,918 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,999 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,137 posts)Trump's Folly!
Retrograde
(10,133 posts)A lot of the winter vegetables and fruits we get here in California are grown in Mexico - and I suspect it's similar in other states.
cstanleytech
(26,284 posts)the money will find its way into the pockets of the very same politicians who vote yes to it as well either via companies they own and or lucrative lobbyist jobs after they leave office if not both.
herding cats
(19,564 posts)Both of our economies would be damaged, and all because Trump has his little ego bruised.
The GOP is going to have to get a handle on Trumps tantrums before he does irreparable damage.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,853 posts)Given it's Trump, the six months will probably be ignored and his administration will simply say, "What are they going to do about it?"
https://geopoliticalfutures.com/the-american-presidents-power-over-nafta/
Despite the complexity of the agreement, the mechanics of withdrawing from NAFTA are simple. Article 2205 of the agreement says: A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties. The withdrawal process from NAFTA is clear and uncomplicated. The deeper question is: who in the United States gets to make that decision? Can the president, without consulting Congress, withdraw the U.S. from NAFTA simply by dispatching a letter to Mexico and Canada and waiting six months?
The U.S. Constitution is silent on this question. The Constitution covers treaties not agreements and NAFTA is not technically a treaty. It is the North American Free Trade Agreement. Within the framework of U.S. law, NAFTA is what is called a congressional-executive agreement (CEA). One of the major differences between treaties and CEAs in the United States is how they are made law. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution says the president shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur. CEAs, on the other hand, are not mentioned and are approved by a simple majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Even if NAFTA were a treaty, the Constitution would not make the situation much clearer. This is because the Constitution says nothing about who has the power to terminate a treaty. The question also has not been answered by American jurisprudence.
Lanius
(599 posts)but also with Mexico? Because this 20 percent import tax will be passed on to American consumers. It looks like, in the end, Americans really will pay for the Trump Border Wall (TM). Why aren't the idjits (oh, sorry, the "low-information voters" up in arms about this?
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Makes all Mexican imports more expensive and US produce as well w/o immigrant labor.
Who's paying for the wall?
get the red out
(13,462 posts)I assume they go to the grocery store, and eat, we would have that in common. Don't they already feel "taxed too much"? I got into a fight on a friend's FB page right after the election who said she voted for Trump because she couldn't afford to pay anymore taxes.
C_U_L8R
(45,000 posts)Avocados, tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers,
melons, grapes, citrus, berries, etc...
Unless Trump voters foresaw and budgeted a
20% household Trump tax, they might be in
for quite a shock.
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)NOT!!!
LisaM
(27,803 posts)Great food, prepared by charming young women whom I believe are all from Mexico (and, I think, legally documented). Who knows what must be going through their heads?
TimeChaser
(5,551 posts)We need to repeat this. To anyone who will hear
People's grocery bills are going to go up.
Mosby
(16,301 posts)Seems like the free trade gobalists have won, even liberals don't get it anymore. (not referring to you per se)
Q: What do you make of NAFTA?
A: We ought to change NAFTA. Weve only done half the job with globalization. Youve globalized the rights of big corporations to do business anywhere in the country, but what we now need to do is globalize the rights of workers, labor unions, environmentalists and human rights. If you do that, you raise the standard of living in other countries. And what happens is our jobs stop going away because the cost of production goes up.
Q: Americas farmers need open markets for their crops around the world, but other American workers want a level playing field. How would you balance those interests?
DEAN: Theres no reason we cant do both. NAFTA and the WTO only globalized the rights of multinational corporations, but they did not globalize the rights of workers. They are not going to globalize human rights, environmental rights, the right to organize. That needs to happen. And if it doesnt happen, NAFTA and the WTO simply arent going to work. Right now, were exporting jobs.
We need to have a level playing field. We need to have the same kinds of environmental protections, labor protections, human rights protections and worker protections if were going to have open borders. That will not disadvantage exports.
What about free trade?
A: Weve gone the first mile. I dont disagree with the premise of the free traders. But we need an emerging middle class in these countries, and were not getting one. So now is the time to have labor and environmental standards attached to trade agreements.
Q: What if they say no?
A: Then Id say, Fine, thats the end of free trade.
Q: What do you mean, thats the end of free trade? Then we slap tariffs on these countries?
A: Yes.
Q: So youd be in favor of tariffs at that point.
A: If necessary. Look, Jimmy Carter did this in foreign policy. If you cant get people to observe human rights, and say that were going to accept products from countries that have kids working no overtime, no time and a half, no reasonable safety precautions I dont think we ought to be buying those kinds of products in this country. Were enabling that to happen.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Howard_Dean_Free_Trade.htm
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)BruceWane
(345 posts)Imports from Mexico in 2015 were $295 billion.
A 20% tax would pay the estimated ~$15 billion for Donald's Folly in about three months.
If you were anywhere near the realm of serious, why would you bother to go for such an extraordinarily high rate of repayment?
Why would you even announce something this obviously stupid if you intended to have any shred of credibility?
Only thing I can think of is that they really are stupid enough to just randomly throw out numbers without so much as glancing at a calculator.
BruceWane
(345 posts)Then again, perhaps this is just a typical interest rate that Donald is used to paying himself when financing his projects, since most legitimate banks closed their doors to him and his "great" business acumen many years ago................
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)OnlinePoker
(5,719 posts)Of course, turnabout is fair play and Mexico will just slap duties on U.S. imports and pretty quickly we're back to 1929-30 with tariffs going up worldwide and falling into a global depression. Idiots have learned nothing from the past.
moondust
(19,972 posts)zagamet
(8 posts)Spicer specifically said proposal was part of GOP tax overhaul plan already in the works. Here's an explanation of this from Ryan's tax plan.
It's from a GOP friendly site that was linked in my twitter feed - sorry I don't know another place to see it interpreted:
So. At the end of the day, this is what Ryan and the GOP wanted passed, all along...
https://taxfoundation.org/house-gop-s-destination-based-cash-flow-tax-explained
SHRED
(28,136 posts)0rganism
(23,944 posts)if they work as designed, they deter purchases of foreign goods by changing the price point, thereby safeguarding local production (reducing demand for foreign competition)
they are NOT a goddamn reliable source of government revenue, unless the shit you produce locally is so much worse than the imports that people are willing to pay the tariff for better quality
doesn't mean tariffs aren't useful in some cases, but the idea that you're going to fund a huge infrastructure project with them is either an admission of defeat or large-scale economic insanity.
Dismade
(11 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,778 posts)Mexico is not paying by this method.
This new tax is a tax paid by the American consumer.
Doug.Goodall
(1,241 posts)How is a person supposed to know if they are smoking untaxed Michoacán or Acapulco Gold?