> otherwise they assume the entire PCB consists of copper, aluminum, and steel, and charge a 100% tariff on the whole product.

Do I understand this correctly that if I have a 1kg product that costs $1000... the US is trying to charge me a $1000 tariff on at most $10 [1] worth of metal?

[1] Copper is the most expensive of those metals at roughly $10/kg

▲

chrisco255 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

If you don't go through the work of detailing your materials, then yes, they have to assume worse case as they are not going to go through each package individually and compute an accurate number for you.

▲

2 days ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

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

I wonder who will flinch first. I highly doubt domestic manufacturing can scale up fast enough to meet demand but It'd be fun to be proven wrong.

▲

gpm 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You're assuming domestic manufacturing will scale up... tariffing the raw inputs to manufacturing seems unlikely to do this.

	▲	procaryote 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		also, the tariffs have changed very rapidly for a bit now, so you can't really make multi year investments based on them

▲

runako 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I have yet to see any compelling argument for the expected source of labor for the scale-up in manufacturing. We're going the other way and reducing our labor force.

In a country where people were ready to riot when service was slow at Chili's in the summer of '20, policy aimed at reducing restaurant employment seems risky.

▲

cooper_ganglia 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

That seems exceedingly reasonable.

▲

skybrian 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I wonder if you could weigh the FR4 material, weigh the final result, and subtract them to get the weight of everything else? It would be better than being taxed on the entire weight.