We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
The recent tariff ruling does not affect all trading partners equally. Nations like Vietnam, with high exposure to the now-defunct IEPA tariffs, will see significant changes. In contrast, countries like South Korea, whose exports are mainly subject to other unaffected tariffs (e.g., Section 232), will see little impact.
Paradoxically, tariffs intended to punish China could result in it facing lower duty rates than US allies like Japan or South Korea. This is because China possesses unique retaliatory leverage (e.g., rare earths) to force targeted tariff reductions from the U.S., an option unavailable to other nations.
Ford builds over 80% of its US-sold vehicles domestically. However, this scale requires importing the most parts, so US tariffs on parts penalize Ford more heavily than companies that import whole vehicles at a lower effective tariff rate, creating a competitive disadvantage.
While the US exports less to Canada by volume, its exports (electronics, pharma) have far higher margins and shareholder value multiples than Canadian exports (lumber, oil). Therefore, for every dollar of trade disrupted by tariffs, the US loses significantly more economic value, making the policy self-defeating.
Despite fears from announced tariffs, the actual implemented tariff rate on U.S. imports is only 10.1%, not the computed 17-18%. This is due to exemptions, trade deals, and behavioral changes by companies. This gap between rhetoric and reality explains the unexpectedly strong 2025 performance of emerging markets.
Because U.S. tariff levels are likely to remain stable regardless of legal challenges, the more critical factor for the long-term outlook is how companies adapt. Investors should focus on corporate responses in capital spending and supply chain adjustments rather than the tariff levels themselves.
Countries like Japan and the EU are unlikely to abandon their trade deals with the U.S. The deals address other tariff types (like Section 232 steel tariffs) that are still in place. Furthermore, no nation wants to risk provoking an unpredictable President Trump, who could retaliate in non-tariff ways.
Despite US tariffs, China’s trade surplus reached a record high. This is because China diversified exports to emerging markets, utilized transshipment through other countries, and key allies have not joined the US in a broad trade war.
Despite significant US tariffs hitting labor-intensive goods, China's overall export volume remains strong. This resilience stems from a structural shift towards high-tech sectors like semiconductors and autos, combined with strategically rerouting trade through intermediary ASEAN countries to circumvent direct tariffs.
A potential Supreme Court ruling curbing the President's AIPAA tariff authority will not impact all consumer goods equally. The effects are highly concentrated in specific categories where these tariffs dominate, such as toys (over 90% AIPAA-related), furniture (over 70%), and apparel (about 60%).
Countries like Britain that quickly negotiated lower tariffs are now disadvantaged. They face a new, temporary 15% global tariff, higher than their deal rate. Conversely, countries that held out may now be better off. This dynamic punishes allies who engaged in early, good-faith negotiations.