Publications /
Opinion

Back
Trump Tariffs Have Hurt U.S. Manufacturing Jobs
Authors
January 5, 2020

The hike in tariffs imposed by the United States against its major trading partners since early 2018 has been unprecedented in recent history. President Trump alluded to, among others, the goal of revitalizing jobs in the country’s manufacturing industry by protecting it from unfair trade practices of other countries, particularly China. However, according to a study by two Federal Reserve Bank staff – Aaron Flaaen and Justin Pierce – released last December 23, the effect so far has been just the opposite, i.e. a reduction in U.S. manufacturing employment!

Tariff escalation – and retaliation from those affected – from 2018 onwards took place in three stages. In February of that year, surcharges were imposed on imports of washing machines and solar panels, followed in March by others affecting steel and aluminum imports. China, the European Union, Canada, and Mexico responded with retaliation on U.S. exports. A third moment came with the sequence of tariffs on imports from China announced starting in April, always accompanied by Chinese retaliatory reactions against U.S. exports.
Chart 1, taken from the Fed study, depicts the escalation of U.S. import tariffs and retaliations since 2018, including the latest rounds currently suspended after the announcement of an incoming “phase one” U.S.-China trade deal.

PCNS

In addition to the Trump administration’s references to U.S. security issues and trade deficit reduction targets, with an emphasis on bilateral deficit cases, the resumption of domestic manufacturing employment had emerged as a promise since the electoral process. Tariffs would provide the opportunity for local production processes to take market shares occupied by foreign competitors. Higher product prices, whether imported or locally import-substituted, would be an acceptable and limited welfare cost offset by increases in manufacturing employment levels.
However, two other tariff impacts should also be considered. The imposition of tariffs on inputs and intermediate products leads to cost increases for those who use them, damaging their competitiveness domestically and externally. In addition, retaliation also affects the ability of domestic production to compete in the corresponding overseas markets.
Flaaen and Pierce estimated the weight of these effects at a very detailed sector level, namely the gain of local market shares against the burden of rising intermediate costs and overseas losses. The study comes to figures showing that the burden has outweighed the gains, with the positive contribution on employment driven by tariff protection being more than negatively offset by the impacts of rising input costs and retaliatory measures. In addition, it has led to increases in U.S. wholesale price levels.
The characteristics of industrial production as value chains integrating fragmented and geographically dispersed activities, particularly since the 1980s, explain why tariffs on specific segments end up negatively affecting a much broader set of economic activities. In addition, they tend to frustrate tariffs that are specifically set on countries of origin, on a bilateral basis: for example, much of Chinese production has moved to Vietnam, Thailand and other countries rather than to the U.S.
Is the negative effect temporary, lasting only while local production does not adjust to the new context via new investments? It should be noted that adaptation can also reinforce the negative impact sides on jobs. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that the immediate, short-term consequences of the tariff escalation would wind down over time.
The Fed study of the effects of tariff escalation did not even encompass the broader negative indirect effects, namely the depressive effect on manufacturing investments and economic growth in the U.S. and abroad generated by trade policy uncertainty, affecting particularly capital goods industries and world trade. Such an impact on investments was one of the major factors explaining the global economic growth in 2019 as the lowest since the global financial crisis.
But hasn’t the U.S. GDP and employment performance remained favorable since the onset of the tariff escalation? That has occurred for other reasons, such as the fiscal stimulus provided by the tax reform of the early Trump administration, the pivotal turn of the Fed’s monetary policy, and the buoyancy of domestic consumption and services. It would have been otherwise if it had depended on the manufacturing industry – Chart 2 – and trade policy of the Trump administration.

PCNS

Finally, it is worth remembering the mistake of finding it possible to shrink the U.S. current account deficit via trade measures upon countries with which it has negative bilateral balances. The current account deficit reflects the difference between domestic “absorption” (consumption and investment) and local production. In the absence of miraculous increases of the latter, the reduction of the current deficit would only occur with recession and falling domestic wages, just the opposite of the promise.

RELATED CONTENT

  • November 17, 2021
    The escalating US-China trade tensions has resulted in the rise of two separate spheres of influence in both trade and technology and contributed to reshaping the global trade landscape. In order to de-escalate the conflict, the two hegemonies signed the Phase One trade deal in January ...
  • October 08, 2021
    L'espace indo-pacifique est en phase de devenir le cœur battant du commerce international et le centre de la croissance économique mondiale. Dans cette perspective, la France et en tant q ...
  • Authors
    October 8, 2021
    Annoncé le 16 septembre dernier, l’arrêt définitif de l’enquête annuelle sur le climat des affaires est une erreur. Véritable référence pour l’analyse économique et entrepreneuriale dans 190 pays, c’est un instrument perfectible, mais indispensable. Dans la foulée d’une enquête indépendante menée par le cabinet d’avocats WilmerHale, qui pointait les pressions inopportunes exercées par la Chine et par d’autres pays lors de la préparation de son rapport annuel Doing Business, la Banq ...
  • Authors
    September 22, 2021
    Face à la concurrence mondiale croissante, les Emirats arabes unis (EAU) ont pu constater le retard enregistré dans le domaine maritime dans les points stratégiques traditionnels au début du 21ème siècle. Pour autant, le pays détient une position importante sur la scène internationale en ce qui concerne le transport maritime. Grâce à la DP World, instrument diplomatique émirati, le lancement d’initiatives permettant au pays de regagner une place et une implantation dans différents p ...
  • Authors
    July 16, 2021
    The BDA Currents: Where Diplomacy Meets Business, is the Brussels Diplomatic Academy’s annual report covering the wider geopolitical and other factors influencing and affecting the world of diplomacy, international relations and global business. The journal focuses on issues of topical interest around the centers of global power, influence and importance, including the continents of Europe and Africa, the Middle East, China, India & Asia, Russia and the Commonwealth of Independe ...
  • May 20, 2021
    Le Policy Center lance une nouvelle émission. Africafé, le nouveau rendez-vous bimensuel présenté par Youssef Tobi, spécialiste en relations internationales, décryptera l'actualité des organisations africaines et du continent avec des experts africains. Pour ce deuxième épisode, Larabi ...
  • February 24, 2021
    L'intégration régionale en Afrique est considérée comme une priorité par de nombreux responsables politiques et acteurs économiques du continent. Avec la signature de l'accord portant création de la ZLECAf par l'ensemble des pays africains, le défi consiste désormais à mettre en place un marché continental pour les biens et les services et à jeter les bases d'une union douanière continentale. Nombreux sont ceux qui, sur le continent, considèrent la ZLECAf comme un plan d'investissem ...
  • February 5, 2021
    Regional integration in Africa is seen as a priority by many of the continent’s policymakers and economic stakeholders. With all Africa now signed up to the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), the challenge now is to implement a continental market for goods and services and establish the foundations of a continental customs union. Many on the continent see the AfCFTA as an investment, economic-diversification, and job-creation blueprint that will shape the future of A ...
  • Authors
    December 30, 2020
    According to this month’s OECD economic outlook, global GDP --- which took a huge hit from the pandemic and is still 3% below its level of a year ago – will not recover its pre-pandemic level until the end of 2021. In a downside scenario, the return could take almost a year longer. The OECD predictions, which imply high and protracted unemployment, are in line with the view of many other official and private organizations. The arrival of effective vaccines such as Pfizer-BioNTech wa ...