De minimis allows people to evade tariffs by simply drop shipping each individual product all the way from China or wherever, so long as the retail price is below the threshold. I’m skeptical of tariffs in general but if you’re going to have them, it makes sense to close the loopholes.

▲

someotherperson 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

So execute it for China alone. The issue is that these blanket actions are lazy at best and exclusively populist.

▲

timr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> So execute it for China alone. The issue is that these blanket actions are lazy at best and exclusively populist.

Same argument. If there's a country that doesn't get tariffs, that country will very quickly become the leading global exporter to the US. It's the same thing for the "penguin island" that everyone mocked: if you put high tariffs on every place but penguin island, it will soon be Penguin Island Logistics Center.

Setting aside judgment of the tariff policy and the chaotic implementation, it does make sense to make them blanket actions. Much of the byzantine nature of our existing supply chains is due to gaming of international tariff policy.

▲

someotherperson 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> If there's a country that doesn't get tariffs, that country will very quickly become the leading global exporter to the US

No it won't lol, that's not how international logistics work. You don't just flick a switch overnight. Maybe measured in the order of years... in which case the policies can be adjusted. They clearly think this works for taxing Americans given how huge the tax code is.

> same thing for the "penguin island" that everyone mocked: if you put high tariffs on every place but penguin island, it will soon be Penguin Island Logistics Center

Penguin island was stupid because it reflected how lazy the policies they applied are. It clearly showed that the Trump administration doesn't fundamentally understand what trade deficits are nor does it have an actual, well thought out plan. The only thing Penguin island has in common with this is that both actions are incredibly lazy and superficial. The Trump admin needs to get serious.

	▲	timr 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> No it won't lol, that's not how international logistics work. You don't just flick a switch overnight. I didn't say "overnight". But if you don't think it would happen, you haven't been paying attention: it has been happening for decades. It's not a crazy thing to consider when establishing a tariff policy. > Penguin island was stupid because it reflected how lazy the policies they applied are. It clearly showed that the Trump administration doesn't fundamentally understand what trade deficits are nor does it have an actual, well thought out plan. The only thing Penguin island has in common with this is that both actions are incredibly lazy and superficial. The Trump admin needs to get serious. Flinging names ("lazy", "superficial") is not an argument. You've obviously decided that these actions are stupid -- maybe they are! [1] -- and nobody is going to convince you otherwise, but I just gave you a plausible reason that you'd choose to do it this way. [1] I don't personally like these policies, but I'm willing to admit when something I don't like as a whole makes sense in part.

▲

Symbiote a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Exports have a country of origin declared.

If I post something from Denmark to Canada, they want to know the origin of the goods. If it's China, the China tariffs (if any) apply rather than the Denmark/EU ones.

If the declaration is incorrect, the goods can be siezed or returned.

Penguin Island is a nature preserve (the whole thing), no one is building anything.

	▲	timr 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The words you're looking for are "substantial transformation" [1]. Exporters in country A (with high tariffs on exports to USA) ship partially completed products to country B (with no/lower tariffs to USA), and then do some manufacturing step. Country B then exports completed products to USA. China was doing this extensively via Mexico under the USMCA [2]. It's not a matter of debate. [1] https://www.trade.gov/rules-origin-substantial-transformatio... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i3Y14TNqCI

▲

philwelch 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

China isn’t the only country that drop ships.

▲

Ekaros 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But at least ensure you can then get paid... Which seems to be hang here. Failure to tell how to pay those tariffs...

▲

anigbrowl 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Baby, bathwater. For every person abusing it by splitting shipments (easily detectable and prosecutable) I'd bet there are many more taking their first small steps into entrepreneurship with goods or parts worth $100 or $500.

▲

philwelch 2 days ago | parent [-]

Splitting shipments is different from drop shipping. Splitting shipments would be if, instead of moving a whole container of goods from a Chinese warehouse to a US warehouse, you just mail each item over by itself. Drop shipping is when you mail each item directly to the end customer.

	▲	anigbrowl 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, that's why I wrote 'splitting shipments'. I don't think drop shipments to a bunch of different customers should be tariffed, that's why the de minimis exception exists in the first place.

▲

OutOfHere 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

De minimis is used a lot more by individuals than by corporations. People shouldn't have to pay tariffs on necessary medicines or any other items for personal non-commercial use.

Tariffs aren't even justified, as they're anti-free-market, anti-capitalistic, and the government provides no extra services. It's equivalent to an illegal federal sales tax. If anything, the government has been cutting major services.

▲

actionfromafar 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah dodge the steel tariffs in small envelopes!