🌊 Is the US Getting Ripped Off?

Did someone forward you this? Subscribe here free!

By Max Frost

In 1987, Donald Trump took out a full-page ad in The New York Times: "Let's not let our great country be laughed at anymore," it said. 

As a politician, he’s made the point countless times: “They're laughing at us,” “They're taking advantage of us,” “They’re ripping us off.” From his first campaign speech, he promised to put an end to it. 

Now, between trade deals and tariffs, he’s turned his rhetoric into policy: In the last two weeks, one trading partner after another – including Japan, South Korea, and the EU – signed up for a trade deal. Those that didn’t came under punishing tariffs. As of Friday, Swiss goods face a 39% tariff, Indian ones 25%, and Canadian 35%.  

Today, we investigate Trump’s claims: Has America been getting ripped off? Do places like the EU put American companies at a disadvantage? 

That’s the subject of today’s deep-dive.

Many of the obstacles governments create for foreign companies can be split into two buckets: Tariffs and non-tariff barriers (NTBs). Tariffs act directly as a tax on imported goods; NTBs make it harder for foreign companies to do business in certain economies or sectors. Trump has said his negotiations seek to address both kinds of obstacles. 

Here’s how these worked in the EU before last week’s trade deal. 

In 2020, the average US tariff on EU goods was 3.4%; the EU’s average applied rate on US goods was 5.1%. Yet each side has higher tariffs on specific goods: The EU tariffs trucks at 22%, bicycles at 14%, and agricultural products at 30%. US tariffs are generally lower, although it has applied a 25% tariff on imported pickup trucks. 

Yet where the real issues allegedly emerge is less so tariffs than NTBs.

Editor’s Note

We hope you had a nice weekend. There’s a lot more to write about these tariffs, and we’re working on some more related stories. In the meantime, we’re curious what you all think: Are tariffs needed? Or is the US shooting its economy in the foot? Let us know by replying here. 

Loads of replies to yesterday’s story on Candace Owens and Brigitte Macron, but most interesting were the suggestions of what topics mainstream media ignores that we should look into. Here’s a brief list: 

• Climate change (heard this from both those who are very concerned about it and those who think its risks are overstated)

• Peter Thiel’s influence

• Curtis Yarvin’s influence

• The implosion of American industry + are tariffs a solution?

• The defunding of public broadcasting

• Policies encouraging mass migration to EU/Canada

• Origins of fentanyl crisis

Thanks for the ideas. If you have more, please send them over. Your feedback is very helpful for us as we figure out what to cover. 

And in case you missed our past five stories, you can read them here:

• Brigitte Macron and the Trans Theory

• What Kamala Harris and Sydney Sweeney Have in Common

• Israel’s Endgame in Syria

• What’s Crossing the Canadian Border?

• Roca’s Exclusive Interview with Mayor Eric Adams

That’s all for today. See you tomorrow!
–Max and Max