US' Proposed China Tariffs Would Target Robotics, Satellites (engadget.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Engadget: The U.S. Trade Representative has published the list of Chinese products that would be subject to its proposed tech tariffs, and there are a few clear themes. The move would hike the costs of about 1,300 products, including industrial robots, communication satellites, spacecraft and a slew of semiconductors.The aim, as before, is to punish China for allegedly goading American companies into transferring their patents and technology to Chinese firms for the sake of claiming economic superiority. The USTR claimed the proposed tariffs would stymie Chinese plans while "minimizing the impact" on the American economy. The tariffs are still subject to a 60-day notice process that would include public comments until May 11th and a public hearing on May 15th.

Comments

So... let me get this straight...

[Opportunist]

Importing cheap semiconductors to the EU, designing and assembling my technology in Romania and then selling the finished product to the US could well be cheaper and more profitable than producing it in China and importing it directly from China to the US because the tariffs are going to even out the cents I have to pay the Romanians more? And all that without risking having my designs stolen so the Chinese could crank out cheap knockoffs?

On behalf of the EU, I wish to express my gratitude towards dear leader across the pond.

I guess we're in a trade war

[Okian Warrior]

Importing cheap semiconductors to the EU, designing and assembling my technology in Romania and then selling the finished product to the US could well be cheaper and more profitable than producing it in China and importing it directly from China to the US because the tariffs are going to even out the cents I have to pay the Romanians more? And all that without risking having my designs stolen so the Chinese could crank out cheap knockoffs?

On behalf of the EU, I wish to express my gratitude towards dear leader across the pond.

Don't discount the economic damage done by the cheap knockoff process - it's so common that it's become a meme. It's nigh impossible for anyone to make electronics in China any more, even small hobbyist designers (think Adafruit and Sparkfun) get their products copied and sold for pennies.

Then there's the direct theft of IP (trade secrets, business practices, and such) that the FBI estimates at $600B/year.

Then there's selling steel and aluminum at below-market prices until our domestic producers go out of business (at last count, we had one steel foundry left that was capable of making the steel plates needed for military hardware).

Then there's the lack of IP enforcement, so that lots of Chinese run pirated code and view bootleg media without paying for it.

Then there's "thousand grains of sand", where Chinese students and scientists (in the US) coming back to their country are encouraged to bring one or two small pieces of technological or scientific information.

Then there's keeping their currency artificially low, so that we always have a trade deficit with them (they end up getting more and more of our money).

China has consistently violated their trade agreement in every possible way, and has done so for decades.

We're *already* in a trade war, it's only just now that we're doing something about it.

Re:I guess we're in a trade war

[gnick]

And already losing it.

My president sent me a message that said "trade wars are good, and easy to win". You're not calling him a liar, are you?

Re:I guess we're in a trade war

[AmiMoJo]

Don't discount the economic damage done by the cheap knockoff process - it's so common that it's become a meme. It's nigh impossible for anyone to make electronics in China any more, even small hobbyist designers (think Adafruit and Sparkfun) get their products copied and sold for pennies.

So the Chinese are basically IKEA... They clone more expensive furniture, mass produce it out of cheap materials and massively undercut the master craftsmen who built the originals.

Then there's selling steel and aluminum at below-market prices until our domestic producers go out of business

That is indeed a problem, but pissing off your allies who you need to solve that problem by slapping them with tariffs too isn't the way to solve it.

Then there's the lack of IP enforcement, so that lots of Chinese run pirated code and view bootleg media without paying for it.

On the other hand, there's a ridiculous level of IP enforcement in the US. Perpetual copyright, ridiculous patents on rounded corners, even patent trolls whose sole business is suing other people who can't afford to defend themselves. Also, it's not like piracy is rare in the west either.

Then there's keeping their currency artificially low, so that we always have a trade deficit with them

The US is just as bad, with corporate welfare programmes and bailouts. The way to fix it is not to double up and start a trade war, it's to do what the EU does and agree to some rules banning it in exchange for trade.

Re:Played correctly, the US has an advantage

[hey!]

General Omar Bradley once said, "Amateurs talk strategy; professionals talk logistics." In other words winning a war depends not just on the damage you can inflict, but on your ability to sustain the conflict.

Let's suppose it's true, as you claim, that China will suffer greater damage in a trade war measured in dollars; that's a secondary point. The side that "wins" (note scare quotes) is the one that can maintain its will to fight the longest. You win a trade war by being the first to inflict economic damage that is too painful for the other side to sustain politically.

Suppose the US loses a million jobs as a result of the trade war. Now imagine saying to those million people who are out of work, "It's OK because China lost two million jobs. We won." Now further imagine China gets to decide exactly in which Congressional districts those one million jobs will be lost -- because for practical purposes they do.

It's important not to overestimate an enemy's strengths, but you can't ignore them either. The Chinese leadership isn't beyond public opinion, but it doesn't have to put a key part of its government up for elections every two years. Over here Democratic discussion sites are full of lugubrious hand wringing over the effects of a trade war, but there is a very discernible note of glee over what it is going to do to the Republicans.