>>11489628
how do people still not know tariffs?
It comes down to either decrease in profit or no more profit for the company exporting it.
Option A is to 'not eat' the tariff but to pass it on. Vietnam company pays the tariff charge, that money goes to the feds. Then, the Vietnam company passes that cost increase onto the consumer to offset it. Now that item costs more to the consumer. This means the consumer will either still buy it or not buy it. That is a new risk to the Vietnam company with the tariffs. Their product sells less or stops selling altogether.
Option B is for the Vietnam company to 'eat the tariff'. They pay the feds the tariff charge and not pass it on the consumer. Their profits are now lower.
Tariffs only work when the one's implementing it have the buying power and are the #1 consumers, which is the US.
The other half of this whole thing is income tax. With tariffs back in effect AND income tax on the consumer, the feds are double dipping into the consumer's wallet. For Option A to take hold, income taxes have to be abolished if the commitment to tariffs is true. The cost increase to the consumer wouldn't sting as much because now they get a decent percentage of their income back and the company selling the product could continue to maintain their regular sales volume.
Tariffs won't be viable longterm with income tax still in effect. It's 2 different systems the feds use to make money. Having both in effect is brutal on the consumer.
