A lot of them look like old people who've applied makeup with a shotgun in an attempt to look younger.
Search 'Mar-a-Largo Face'
so will we be putting 25% tariffs in Teslas? if not, why not?
It's pretty clear that Trump uses tariff announcements as a negotiating tactic, and it seems to work. Trump likes to make deals where people are reliant on his personal beneficence, he likes it when world leaders need to call him and plead their case as to why the tariffs shouldn't appy to them, and Trump agrees, and tells the world the next day that other world leaders should behave more like this other one, as he's "super nice, and smart" etc etc. BUt in his mind, they now owe him...or more correctly perhaps, he owns them.
so will we be putting 25% tariffs in Teslas? if not, why not?
Because most Swasticars sold in the UK come from China or Germany, not the US. And Elon is doing enough to damage their sales on his own, so tarrifs wouldn't do much more.
A 25% tariff should be put on any US cars though, what is that around 3 or 4 cars a year? Hands up those wannabee americans who bought a mustang.
But will it though? like it or not, BMWs and Merc's are very desirable, even in 'merica, and they are genearly expensive cars anyway.
Same argument as when people were saying that Brexit-induced pressure on German car manufacturers would lead to them lobbying Brussels to give in to our every whim.
I'm sure it will impact some sales, but your average twenty-something who wants a flash car they can't afford just buys it on tick anyway, so what's an extra X%?
Flooding the zone with shit indeed...
Yes, but it would send a message and hurt the First Buddy in the wallet.
As for the loss of F35 contracts, good news for Saab and Dassault shareholders. Shame I sold mine last year, but then my van got bought with the profits, so not really that sorry and Saab's dividend was shit anyway considering their order book and profits.
Does anyone else think Tulsi Gabbard is quite hot*?
Dead behind the eyes. Like Cheryl Cole.
Stay classy America!
Well, every cloud has a silver lining.
Should UK forces ever be involved in action with their US counterparts, they can protect themselves better from some trigger-happy Iowa farm boy in a jet if they join the group chat in advance.
A point I will be making on Xitter shortly when I will (inevitably) be fed some shill defending the indefensible again.
Either Starmer will grow some backbone, and refuse to engage in trade deal talks until Trump withdraws his bullying and damaging approach. Maybe some retaliation.
Or he'll carry on trying to play nice to get a deal. If he gives an inch to the orange buffoon he's just reinforcing that bullying works and sends totally the wrong message.
I guess this probably should be on the Starmer thread before this one gets derailed.
Trump just hit the world with a 25% tariff on all non US made cars. Yes, that includes us. No exemptions.
The economist on Newsnight just said that’s £5-6 bn of annual exports to US impacted. An awful lot of UK jobs will be affected. Grim.
Brexit benefit 💪
Go on then, explain what Trump's actions have to do with Brexit...
Well (and at the risk of derailing the thread), Trump's MO seems to be to identify weakness in an opponent and then use that and threats to get the best deal for him. Brexit showed the world how divided the UK was and successive leaders/'leaders' have demonstrated how utterly willing they are to debase themselves for any deal that can make up for the loss of the previous trade agreements the UK had with the EU.
Trump can, and will, exploit the living shit out of this to force a deal beneficial to the US on the UK. I honestly doubt that _any_ deal the UK does during a Trump presidency will have a benefit to the UK; it will be US only, or Trump and the US.
Because Brexit was sold as leaving a trading block to get better arrangements with countries outside it, especially the USA. Not going well that. If it wasn’t clear before why we’d be better off acting together as a block (Europe including the UK that is) it should be now.
My big fear here is that the UK government is now strong armed into a new trade deal with the USA that is detrimental to UK owned companies and we become subservient to USA companies, with a side helping of it being made more difficult to rebuild our position in our local markets.
Well (and at the risk of derailing the thread), Trump's MO seems to be to identify weakness in an opponent and then use that and threats to get the best deal for him.
I think you give him too much credit - I don't think he identifies weakness, he's just pushing buttons and hoping for the best.
so will we be putting 25% tariffs in Teslas? if not, why not?
For those that we import from the US, they're already doing a pretty good job with US tariffs. BHP (Aus) nickel, Ganfeng (China) lithium, Glencore (Africa, Aus, Canada, Norway) cobalt, CATL (China) batteries, LG and Panasonic (Japan) batteries
The US mixes Canada in as N.American production, so a chunk of the "US" 55% of a model X will be from Canada
There's a more comprehensive list here https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052815/who-are-teslas-tsla-main-suppliers.asp
It doesn't hurt in the circumstances to hold our tariffs back until needed so that we don't annoy our other allies
My big fear here is that the UK government is now strong armed into a new trade deal with the USA that is detrimental to UK owned companies and we become subservient to USA companies, with a side helping of it being made more difficult to rebuild our position in our local markets
That was always going to be the case. It was just a case of when, not if. The UK, alone in the world and desperate, was always going to getting bent over by all and sundry
Its obvious now to even the hardest of thinking that the trade deal we have with the EU is terrible. They basically said ‘take it or leave it, we don’t really care’ and Johnson signed. That’s understandable given the size and economic clout of the European, but even the Australians ran rings around morons like Frost to get a deal that’s hugely beneficial to themselves which shafts UK farmers.
Trump, as an experienced rapist himself, must be dying to go in dry on the UK. In the words of the Jesus in the Big Lebowski “are you ready to be ****ed, man?”
other allies
Interesting turn of phrase. There's a strong case to suggest that the US is rapidly losing ally status. So that could possibly just read 'allies'.
Not that the US has to give a toss about an isolated UK's opinion, obviously.
Starmer is hoping our Brexit 'freedom' will allow him and us to perform the role of a bridge between the US and EU. Two problems with that:
1. It is an unofficial 'role' and the UK was able to fulfil it absolutely fine when we were in the EU in any case - probably just as much about common first language etc.
2. Trump is an utter **** and views negotiations simply as a transactions between two parties. He sees post-Brexit Britain as an isolated victim to be bullied. He views the EU the same, just not as isolated and thus not as easily bullied. International relations are a series of duels to him, not a web of support and considerations.
To re-emphasise - he is a total ****ing ****.
The FT thinks Trump has a point here. The 25% tariff merely balancing the advantage EU carmakers get by exporting cars VAT free while US carmakers sell into the EU paying VAT.
https://www.ft.com/content/1de4d6b6-834e-48ef-bb56-049ab58b336c
TBH I thought they did sales tax on cars in in the USA depending on the state where you register it.
In December 2024, Trump settled a defamation case with ABC News after anchor George Stephanopoulos incorrectly stated that the jury found Trump liable for rape in the case. ABC News agreed to pay $15 million to Trump's presidential library and $1 million for his legal fees, as well as issue a public apology.
We’ll have to have a whip round for Binners at least enough to buy a book for Trumps library.
It's pretty clear that Trump uses tariff announcements as a negotiating tactic, and it seems to work.
He has done more than announce them. He’s added 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum products entering the USA.
"TBH I thought they did sales tax on cars in in the USA depending on the state where you register it.
"
In addition, All but 5 states also continue to charge tax on used cars. So effecttively every time a car is sold again, it generates tax. This is all state/county level sales tax though, not "federal" tax.
The FT thinks Trump has a point here. The 25% tariff merely balancing the advantage EU carmakers get by exporting cars VAT free while US carmakers sell into the EU paying VAT.
That FT article is behind a paywall but what's the logic behind their argument? Irrespective of locality of manufacture, all car sales to (non-business?) end users are charged VAT....
Do the US charge sales tax of vehicles they export out of US?? If so, that's something within their control...??
The 25% tariff merely balancing the advantage EU carmakers get by exporting cars VAT free while US carmakers sell into the EU paying VAT.
Surprised that's in the FT. Can't read the article today, but all carmakers selling in the EU face VAT being charged on their product... French, German, British... it's not something for USA carmakers only... it's not an import duty... it's not biased against USA production.
No idea what the AG really is all about but dignity and objectivity aren’t in the job description…
“What we should be talking about is, it was a very successful mission.”
Bondi also said: “If you want to talk about classified information, talk about what was in Hillary Clinton’s home. Talk about the classified documents in Joe Biden’s garage, that Hunter Biden had access to.”
Thanks. Still makes no sense.
Which bit, why US car manufacturers are at a disadvantage? The paragraph below explains it
Take a $100 good for example. European producers can sell it domestically at about $120 after VAT but export it free of the tax at $100. US exporters to European markets must compete against domestic companies, paying VAT locally while also bearing embedded domestic US taxes. That might be one reason there are a lot more BMWs sold in the US than Cadillacs in Europe.
Still makes no sense. If EU countries stop charging VAT on cars, how does that remove any disadvantage for USA built cars? They still face the same taxes back home, and would still face the same levels of sales tax as EU built cars when selling in the EU. No advantage gained.
Bondi also said: “If you want to talk about classified information, talk about what was in Hillary Clinton’s home. Talk about the classified documents in Joe Biden’s garage, that Hunter Biden had access to.”
Can we talk about the boxes and boxes of classified documents in Trump's bathroom?
Which bit, why US car manufacturers are at a disadvantage? The paragraph below explains it
Take a $100 good for example. European producers can sell it domestically at about $120 after VAT but export it free of the tax at $100.
But the European producer doesn't get the $120? They get $100 and their government gets the $20 VAT. The producer gets the same whether they sell domestically or export, no?
Jaguar / Land Rover are big Exporters to the USA.
Have to admit, I'd forgotten about them. And Mini, another big exporter apparently.
Ford and GM both have manufacturing plants in Europe. If there's an advantage to doing this, then they can choose to export European made cars to the US but they (presumably) have done the math and figured out it doesn't make financial sense. So that FT piece sounds like bollocks...
But the European producer doesn't get the $120? They get $100 and their government gets the $20 VAT. The producer gets the same whether they sell domestically or export, no?
Yes the European producer gets the same but US manufacturers are at a disadvantage because they pay US and European taxes.
So that FT piece sounds like bollocks...
FT readers should perhaps cancel their FT subscriptions and register on STW instead, it might make more financial sense!!
FT readers should perhaps cancel their FT subscriptions and register on STW instead, it might make more financial sense!!
On that, we can all agree 👍 😉
US manufacturers are at a disadvantage because they pay US and European taxes.
So the US gov. is putting extra taxes on their own manufacturers and that's the fault of the Europeans 🤔
I'm going to agree with the "FT article is b*llocks" theory!
So the US gov. is putting extra taxes on their own manufacturers and that's the fault of the Europeans 🤔
Where does it say that it's the fault of Europeans? The article simply points out that US car manufacturers are at a disadvantage and offers a remedy.
I am not sure that describing it as "bollocks" is appropriate. Which bit is bollocks, the bit about US car manufacturers being at a disadvantage or the solution being suggested?
I found the last paragraph interesting :
Trump has identified a genuine imbalance in trade with Europe that has vexed US policymakers for decades. Although he may not hold a PhD in economics, his economic advisers like National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett and Council of Economic Advisers chair Stephen Miran do. Their advice will translate Trump’s instinct for fairness into practical trade policy.
Edit : I wonder how much effect the 25% tariff on car imports from the UK will have. My understanding from the BBC news is that the volume isn't huge but the total is about £9bn per year (I think) because they tend to be very high end luxury vehicles such as Jaguars, Aston Martins, Bentleys, and Rolls-Royce. I would imagine most American buyers of these vehicles are extremely wealthy and probably prepared to pay an extra 25%
For your inciteful political commentary, I recommend the Marsh Family from Faversham...
So the US gov. is putting extra taxes on their own manufacturers and that's the fault of the Europeans 🤔
Where does it say that it's the fault of Europeans? The article simply points out that US car manufacturers are at a disadvantage and offers a remedy.
I am not sure that describing it as "bollocks" is appropriate. Which bit is bollocks, the bit about US car manufacturers being at a disadvantage or the solution being suggested?
I found the last paragraph interesting :
Trump has identified a genuine imbalance in trade with Europe that has vexed US policymakers for decades. Although he may not hold a PhD in economics, his economic advisers like National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett and Council of Economic Advisers chair Stephen Miran do. Their advice will translate Trump’s instinct for fairness into practical trade policy.
Ok, I won't describe it as bollocks, I'll describe it as cloud ****ing cuckoo land pie in the sky bollox,
and as for this "Their advice will translate Trump’s instinct for fairness into practical trade policy."......
ha....ha....ha....ha.....ha.....I hope trump has a very debiilating stroke that leaves him dribbling and every member of his cabinet and sycophantic team suffer a slow painful death
Take a $100 good for example. European producers can sell it domestically at about $120 after VAT but export it free of the tax at $100. US exporters to European markets must compete against domestic companies, paying VAT locally while also bearing embedded domestic US taxes. That might be one reason there are a lot more BMWs sold in the US than Cadillacs in Europe.
Soooooo......because of US taxes it's not fair that US producers pay the same tax in Europe as european producers? That's the logic of a toddler who already ate his ice cream but is crying because his brothers now got one and he cant have another to make it "fair". Total shite.
and as for this "Their advice will translate Trump’s instinct for fairness into practical trade policy."......
I think you will find that the author of the article is a Trump supporter, there are quite a few of them in the United States, Trump did after all get more than 50% of the vote.
Personally I think that Trump is a narcissist psychopath but that isn't the issue being discussed here, it's the thinking behind the tariffs being slapped on car imports from Europe.
The commentary piece in the FT explains it, even if it is from the perspective of a Trump supporter. Which is presumably why the FT felt it was worth publishing.
Not every position that Trump takes is wrong, even if it might be taken for the wrong reasons. Personally I think Trump is absolutely right about rejigging the United States role in defending Europe. Why the **** should American taxpayers pay for the defence of European countries and in effect subsidize the public spending of European governments? There are up to a hundred thousand US troops in Europe wtf?!? These aren't poor European countries who can't afford to defend themselves.
You have got be trolling now Ernie.
Maybe that's it. You can decide.
