SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bonefish who wrote (1531367)4/1/2025 6:42:00 AM
From: Goose94  Respond to of 1572446
 
Hey it's your buddy B-day 2day. Happy Birthday Dopey!!



To: Bonefish who wrote (1531367)4/1/2025 9:17:04 AM
From: Mongo21161 Recommendation

Recommended By
rdkflorida2

  Respond to of 1572446
 
facebook.com



To: Bonefish who wrote (1531367)4/1/2025 4:55:14 PM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
rdkflorida2

  Respond to of 1572446
 
BOOM: Trump's "Liberation Day" will be the BIGGEST TAX HIKE in US HISTORY
The burden for paying the bulk of the president’s Liberation Day tariffs will fall on consumers, potentially at some $600 billion a year
31 March 2025 3:32pm BST
telegraph.co.uk

We might think of him as a tax-cutter, an enemy of big government, and an instinctive ally of businesses and consumers, and in his first term he certainly was. And yet as his second term takes shape, President Trump is morphing into something very different.

The final details of “Liberation Day” on Wednesday still have to be finalised. But the White House appears to be planning steep new tariffs, imposed on all of the US’s trading partners. On Fox News, Peter Navarro, one of the key backers of the tariff policy, suggested that levies on auto imports should raise $100 billion a year for the federal government. More significantly, he estimated that across the board tariffs would collect $600 billion annually.

Economists and trade experts will no doubt argue about the precise sum that might be raised. No American government has imposed tariffs on this scale in more than a century.

Some of the burden might be absorbed by foreign companies. State-backed Chinese companies, for example, might choose to live with the levies, given that they are more interested in increasing market share than making money. In other cases, production might shift from Stuttgart to San Francisco, or Lyon to Louisville, turning imports into domestic products.

By far most likely, however, is that much of the increased cost will be passed onto consumers in the form of higher prices. Either they will be forced to pay more for imported goods, or prices may rise in general because US companies have less of an incentive to improve productivity thanks to the protections afforded by that tariff wall.

And if tariffs do raise $600 billion annually, that is no small sum of money, even for an enormous economy like the United States.

For context, the US government raises $4.9 trillion a year in tax revenue, so if Navarro is right the tariffs will add a little under 15 per cent to that total. It would be more than the $424 billion the government raises from corporate taxes annually. Tariffs would be turned into the third largest source of government revenue, after federal income taxes, which account for just over 50 per cent of the total, and social security or payroll taxes, which account for around 30 per cent.

In effect, it would be the largest tax rise any president has ever imposed, and trigger a huge shift in how the federal government raises money.

President Trump and his team occasionally talk about replacing income or other taxes with tariffs instead. In fairness, it is not a completely ridiculous idea. Re-wind the clock by 150 years, and tariffs were indeed the main way that the American government, like most others around the world, funded itself (in 1850 they accounted for 90 per cent of revenues).

Here’s the catch, however. The government was far, far smaller in those days, and needed to collect far less money. Even if we assume that Elon Musk manages to cut $1 trillion or more out of the budget, the tariffs would have to be at least five or six times larger than anything yet proposed to cover Washington’s annual expenditure. They would need to be at least 100 per cent and possibly more simply to replace the federal incomes tax.

Tariffs at that rate would be off-the-scale, and would do huge damage to the global trading system. At risk of stating the obvious, if trade collapses to zero because of tariffs, then tariff revenue would also be zero.

Even worse, the president, and perhaps more importantly, the team around him, are getting this the wrong way around. If tariffs are imposed, they should be immediately offset by cuts elsewhere. Corporate taxes could be abolished, for example, or income taxes cut by at least a fifth, or social security contributions dramatically reduced, or some combination of all three.

That would be a shift in the tax base, and one that could be rationally debated. Instead, the president is imposing tariffs, while at the same time talking vaguely about taxes that might or might not be reduced at some point in the future. That is not even close to an acceptable way to run the administration.

So Trump is about to impose a huge tax rise, and the blunt truth is that like any other tax rise it will crush the American economy.



To: Bonefish who wrote (1531367)4/1/2025 4:56:25 PM
From: sylvester80  Respond to of 1572446
 
BOOM: ‘Businesses will shut down’: MAGA backfires as Americans suffer under tariffs
The president has promised utopia. But US companies face a much starker reality
telegraph.co.uk



To: Bonefish who wrote (1531367)4/1/2025 5:07:12 PM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
Land Shark

  Respond to of 1572446
 
BOOM: US MANUFACTURING SLIPS INTO CONTRACTION AS COSTS SURGE, pressured by Trump tariffs
finance.yahoo.com
Alexandra Canal · Senior Reporter
Tue, April 1, 2025 at 9:50 AM MST 3 min read

Data out Tuesday showed activity in the manufacturing sector slipped into contraction for the first time this year and costs continued to surge as suppliers weigh the impact of President Trump's tariff policy.

The Institute for Supply Management's manufacturing PMI registered a reading of 49.0 in March, down from February's 50.3 reading and below the 49.5 economists polled by Bloomberg had expected. Readings above 50 for this index indicate an expansion in activity, while readings below 50 indicate a contraction.

The prices paid index surged to 69.4, up from 62.4 the month prior and the highest reading since June 2022, reflecting companies' continued increase in costs. Economists had expected a reading of 64.6.

"Demand and production retreated and destaffing continued, as panelists’ companies responded to demand confusion," Institute for Supply Management chair Timothy Fiore wrote in the release. "Prices growth accelerated due to tariffs, causing new order placement backlogs, supplier delivery slowdowns and manufacturing inventory growth."

Many survey respondents cited increased uncertainty due to tariffs as companies attempt to restock inventories ahead of future policy rollouts, with reciprocal levies set to come as soon as Wednesday.

Notably, new orders fell to the lowest reading since May 2023.

"The slight dip in the ISM manufacturing index in March suggests that, rather than triggering a reshoring factory renaissance, the uncertainty surrounding President Trump’s tariff threats are depressing activity," Harry Chambers, assistant economist at Capital Economics, wrote in reaction to the data.

"While the prices paid index is still some way below its pandemic [level], even after rising again in March, it seems likely to increase further next month once more tariffs come into effect," Chambers said. "There’s a whiff of stagflation in the air."

Shortly following the data's release, the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta's GDPNow tracker, which analyzes incoming data points, signaled negative growth of 3.7% in Q1, an escalation of the prior negative 2.8% reading.

Trump uncertainty 'a key concern'Another reading on manufacturing activity out Tuesday also raised concerns over Trump's tariff uncertainties. The final reading of S&P Global's manufacturing PMI hit 50.2 in March, down from a strong 52.7 in February.

Despite the slowdown, it was the third month the index registered a reading above 50 "but only just."

"The PMI signaled a marginal improvement in operating conditions that was the weakest of the year so far," S&P Global said in the release, noting a drop in production for the first time since December weighed heavily on the headline index while order books expanded only modestly.

Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said in the release, "The strong start to the year for US manufacturers has faltered in March."

While business confidence about the outlook remains relatively elevated by standards seen over the past three years, this is based on companies hoping that the near-term disruption caused by tariffs and other policies will be superseded as longer-term benefits from the policies of the new administration accrue," he continued. "However, March has seen more producers question this belief."
S&P said a "key concern" among manufacturers is the degree to which heightened uncertainty resulting from policy changes, notably tariffs, cause customers to cancel or delay spending, along with the ripple effect when it comes to rising costs and deteriorating supply chains.

"Tariffs were the most cited cause of factory input costs rising in March, and at a rate not seen since mid-2022 during the pandemic-related supply shock," Williamson said. "Supply chains are also suffering to a degree not seen since October 2022 as delivery delays become more widespread."