[atcon]

The authors ask “who bears the cost of these tariffs?” and use S&P Panijiva data from Jan 2024 to Nov 2025 for their 96% pass through rate to conclude tariffs function “as a consumption tax on Americans.” However, Panjiva is limited to FOIA requests for bill of lading data for 22 countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico) and excludes major US trading partners, such as the EU, UK, and Canada[1].

The limitations of the data are highlighted by the authors’ somewhat bizarre claim that “a 10 percentage point increase in tariffs leads to only a 0.39% reduction in export prices.” Yet the luxury industry, a major component of European exporters, reduced prices in 35-40% of all products in 2025 and registered a drop in operating margins from 20% in 2023 to 15% in 2025[2]. European car manufacturers also had to adjust. Porsche reported a billion euro 3Q25 loss and a 99% drop in operating profit through 2025, leading to its removal from the DAX and the CEO’s ouster.[3]

The short answer to who pays: too early to tell. Many consumers balk at price increases and reduce consumption, while many foreign exporters seem to be waiting and seeing for the Supreme Court to rule against the administration’s IEEPA claims or the midterm elections before deciding permanent price changes. But exporters are experienced navigators of multiple tariff layers, both internal and external. Many economists have noted the “value-added tax (VAT) system, a tax on final consumption, which the US administration views as similar to a tariff.”[4]

[1] https://www.spglobal.com/market-intelligence/en/solutions/pr... [2] https://www.ft.com/content/9553baf3-7cfc-40c2-b6bd-1871844af... [3] https://observer.com/2025/10/porsche-profit-drop-luxury-econ... [4] https://think.ing.com/downloads/pdf/article/reciprocal-tarif...

[skippyboxedhero]

I would argue tariffs are inherently easier to deal with than NTBs. I will never understand the absolute hate that is leveled at countries that use tariffs vs. the very noisy, tariff-hating countries that use NTBs.

EU is, obviously, one of the worst offenders here. Tariffs are a great evil...there are still massive barriers to trade within the EU. Let me repeat: WITHIN the EU, a bloc of countries that share a supra-national political system. Like Wymoing putting up a barrier to trade with Iowa (which, btw, do exist in the US too...but are significantly lower than in the EU where there isn't harmonization in even basic products like financial services due to the problems with competition in so many European countries).

The discussions on trade are insane.

[atcon]

Agreed. Never understood all NTB and tariff distinctions, except one suspects the pajandrums in Brussels and Geneva didn't quite believe companies could compete on price or product, and therefore needed a way to keep quotas and subsidies.

I'm not alone in this confusion. During oral argument, several Supreme Court justices asked repeatedly about the distinctions between quotas, tariffs, revenue-raising taxes, non-revenue taxes, etc. in IEEPA's statutory language and precedents like FEA v. Algonquin SNG, Inc., 426 U.S. 548 (1976).