Analysis | A profound cut in established trade patterns: 25% tariffs on auto imports in the USA

Economy under pressure: New car tariffs affect manufacturers and consumers alike

The introduction of 25% tariffs on car imports into the US is becoming a reality and represents a profound disruption to established trade patterns. Given the substantial number of vehicles imported into the United States annually, this measure will have far-reaching consequences. The global automotive industry is characterized by complex and cross-border supply chains, meaning that the impact of these tariffs will not be limited to foreign manufacturers but will also affect American companies, suppliers, and ultimately, consumers.

Suitable for:

• 25% US tariffs on all cars – The failure of politics, companies and consultants – Misjudgments and dependencies

The motives behind the US car import tariffs

Stated political and economic goals

President Trump argues that the introduction of 25% tariffs on car imports aims to boost domestic production and stimulate economic growth. The expectation is that these tariffs will incentivize both American and foreign automakers to relocate their production facilities to the United States. Furthermore, the administration anticipates generating substantial revenue from these tariffs, estimated at approximately $100 billion annually, with the potential goal of reducing the national debt.

It is evident that the primary goal of this policy is protectionist in nature, with the stated desire to relocate production to the USA. Generating tax revenue appears to be a secondary, albeit significant, aspect. The support from labor unions and domestic production groups suggests a domestic political dimension to this measure.

Historical context and previous cases of trade protectionism in the US automotive sector

This is not the first time the United States has used tariffs as a trade policy tool, suggesting a recurring pattern of protectionism, particularly in sectors deemed strategically important or highly competitive. The tariffs imposed in 2018 on steel and aluminum imports serve as a precedent for this type of trade measure. The current proposal is based on a 2019 Commerce Department study that cites national security concerns. Appealing to national security provides a legal basis for the tariffs that extends beyond purely economic considerations.

Evaluation of the arguments for and against the tariffs based on economic principles and industry data

It is argued that tariffs could lead to increased domestic investment and production in the long run. However, there are also significant counterarguments, such as the potential for higher car prices for consumers, possibly by as much as $12,500 per imported vehicle, which could lead to general inflation. There is also concern that US automakers are heavily reliant on global component supply chains, so tariffs on imported parts would also increase their costs. Furthermore, there could be a reduced selection of new cars on the market. Analyses suggest that tariffs could negatively impact automakers' operating profit margins. It is also argued that tariffs might not significantly reduce inflation and could even make supply chains more vulnerable.

The economic arguments for and against tariffs are therefore highly controversial. While proponents emphasize the domestic benefits, opponents highlight the costs for consumers and the disruption of established supply chains. The global interconnectedness of the automotive industry makes unilateral tariffs a complex issue with potential unintended consequences.

Omissions and wrong decisions that led to the current situation

Assessment of the role and potential shortcomings of political decision-making in trade policy

Political motivations, such as election promises and the desire to reduce the budget deficit and maintain economic dominance, may have influenced the decision to consider tariffs. It is debated whether the complexity of global supply chains and the potential for retaliation from trading partners are adequately considered. The back-and-forth regarding tariff threats and responses suggests policy instability. It is also argued that broad-based tariffs are not effective in addressing trade imbalances.

Political considerations appear to be a significant driver of this policy, possibly at the expense of thorough economic analysis and consideration of international relations. The unpredictability of trade policy can create uncertainty for businesses and hinder long-term planning.

Analysis of the strategic reactions and potential missteps of automotive companies

Although automakers have global production networks, they underestimated the likelihood or impact of such comprehensive tariffs. The automakers' initial resistance and the temporary suspension of some tariffs indicate an awareness of the negative consequences. The question arises whether the industry could have been more proactive in diversifying supply chains or investing more heavily in domestic production earlier to mitigate this risk. The American Automotive Policy Council expresses concerns about avoiding price increases for consumers and preserving the integrated North American automotive sector.

Although automakers operate globally, their reliance on established supply chains, particularly in North America, makes them vulnerable to these tariffs. A more proactive approach to supply chain diversification and domestic investment might have mitigated the potential impact.

Evaluation of the findings and potential blind spots of management consultants and industry analysts

Analysts play a role in predicting potential price increases and negative impacts on profit margins. The question arises whether analysts have sufficiently highlighted the potential for such significant and widespread tariffs in their previous reports and recommendations. Analysis by consulting firms such as the Anderson Economic Group on potential price increases and by Ducker Carlisle on the long-term versus short-term effects is well-known. It is worth considering whether the focus might be more on optimizing global supply chains for cost efficiency than on resilience against protectionist measures.

Although analysts offer insights into the potential consequences of tariffs, there may have been a general underestimation of the likelihood and extent of such policies. The prevailing focus on globalization and cost optimization may have overshadowed the risks of increasing protectionism.

Suitable for:

• The US Trade Deficit: A Challenge for the Global Economy

The amplifying effect of global supply chain vulnerabilities

Analysis of how events like the Ever Given incident illustrate the fragility of global logistics

The grounding of the container ship Ever Given in the Suez Canal and the resulting disruption of global trade dramatically illustrate the vulnerability of global logistics. The incident is causing significant economic losses, estimated at several billion US dollars per day. It is causing delays, congestion, and increased shipping costs. This event demonstrates the dependence of many industries on just-in-time supply chains and the vulnerability of critical transportation routes.

The Ever Given incident serves as a stark reminder of the inherent risks of complex, geographically distributed global supply chains. A single point of failure can have cascading and significant economic consequences. This vulnerability likely strengthens the argument for more localized or regionalized production.

Discussion of the interplay between supply chain risks and the justification for import tariffs

The vulnerability highlighted by events such as the Ever Given incident could strengthen the political justification for tariffs as a means of promoting domestic production and reducing dependence on potentially unstable international supply chains. It is argued that policymakers view tariffs as an instrument for enhancing national economic security by reducing reliance on foreign sources for critical goods such as automobiles. However, it should also be noted that tariffs themselves disrupt existing supply chains and create new vulnerabilities.

While supply chain vulnerabilities may justify tariffs in the eyes of some policymakers, the imposition of tariffs can itself significantly disrupt supply chains. There is a potential trade-off between reducing dependence on international risks and creating new domestic and regional supply chain challenges.

Strategies for avoiding and circumventing US car import tariffs

Detailed analysis of “customs circumvention by concealing origin” (circumvention), including “tariff avoidance through general cargo production” and “production splitting”:

"Circumvention" refers to concealing the true origin of goods to avoid tariffs. "Tariff avoidance through component production" describes the strategy of producing components in a country with low tariffs and then assembling them in the destination country (USA) to potentially reduce the overall tariff burden. "Production splitting" involves dividing the manufacturing process across multiple countries to benefit from different tariff rates or rules of origin.

Assessment of the feasibility and impact of component production outside the USA and final assembly within:

Automakers might consider shifting component production to countries with lower tariffs or free trade agreements with the U.S. (assuming these remain unaffected) and then assembling the vehicles in the U.S. to reduce tariffs on the final product. However, it is crucial to consider the "substantial transformation" rules for determining the country of origin. Simply assembling components may not be sufficient to change the origin and avoid tariffs on the value of the components. It should be noted that tariffs could apply to both finished cars and parts. The complexity of determining the content level for USMCA exemptions, which may still result in tariffs being levied on non-U.S. content, is also relevant.

It should be noted that simply relocating assembly may not change the place of origin and could lead to penalties if classified as illegal transshipment. While component production outside the US and final assembly within is a potential strategy, it is heavily dependent on complex rules of origin and the specific details of customs import. It may not offer complete tariff avoidance, especially if tariffs were also levied on imported parts. The risk of being classified as illegal transshipment is also a significant concern.

Nearshoring as a strategic alternative

Examination of the potential for nearshoring production to countries within the USMCA region (e.g., Mexico, Canada): Nearshoring refers to the relocation of production facilities closer to the main sales market, typically within the same continent. Mexico proves to be a potentially attractive nearshoring destination due to lower labor costs, shorter supply chains, and favorable free trade agreements (USMCA). Canada represents another nearshoring option within the USMCA. The USMCA offers potentially simplified customs procedures and reduced trade barriers.

There is a trend of companies considering nearshoring as a response to rising tariffs and to reduce their reliance on Chinese production. Nearshoring, particularly to Mexico, appears to be a viable strategy for automotive companies to mitigate the impact of US tariffs, especially on production destined for the US market. The USMCA provides a framework for potentially tariff-advantaged trade within the region. This
analysis examines the advantages and challenges of nearshoring for automakers in light of US tariffs.

Advantages: Potential reduction or elimination of tariffs on vehicles and parts produced within the USMCA region, depending on the rules of origin. Lower transportation costs and shorter lead times compared to offshore production. Increased supply chain resilience and better control over quality and intellectual property. Proximity to the US market for faster response to changes in demand.

Challenges: Potential costs associated with relocating or establishing new production facilities. Possible differences in labor costs and regulatory frameworks compared to other offshore locations. The need to build local supplier networks and infrastructure at nearshoring locations. Uncertainty regarding the long-term stability of tariff policies, as tariffs could potentially be imposed on imports from Mexico and Canada. Potential for increased costs of components sourced from the USMCA region if demand rises due to nearshoring.

Nearshoring offers significant advantages in reducing tariffs, but also presents challenges related to implementation costs, supply chain development, and the uncertainty of future trade policies within the USMCA region. Companies must carefully weigh these factors.

From local to global: SMEs conquer the global market with clever strategies - Image: Xpert.Digital

At a time when a company's digital presence determines its success, the challenge is how to make this presence authentic, individual and far-reaching. Xpert.Digital offers an innovative solution that positions itself as an intersection between an industry hub, a blog and a brand ambassador. It combines the advantages of communication and sales channels in a single platform and enables publication in 18 different languages. The cooperation with partner portals and the possibility of publishing articles on Google News and a press distribution list with around 8,000 journalists and readers maximize the reach and visibility of the content. This represents an essential factor in external sales & marketing (SMarketing).

More about it here:

• Authentic. Individually. Global: The Xpert.Digital strategy for your company

The role of buffer stocks in mitigating customs and supply chain risks:

Explanation of how strategic buffer stocks can help mitigate the effects of tariffs and disruptions

Buffer stocks, also known as safety stocks or emergency stocks, are additional inventories held to cope with unexpected increases in demand or supply disruptions. Having buffer stocks can help companies continue to meet customer demand despite potential delays or increased costs associated with tariffs. Companies might consider increasing their inventory levels before tariffs take effect to avoid immediate price increases.

Buffer inventories play a role in protecting companies from demand fluctuations and supply chain disruptions, including those caused by tariffs or retaliatory measures. Buffer inventories can provide a temporary buffer against the immediate effects of tariffs, such as price increases and potential supply chain disruptions. They offer a degree of resilience in an uncertain trade environment.

Discussion of optimal buffer inventory management in the context of potential trade barriers

Effective use of buffer stocks requires careful planning and management, taking into account forecast accuracy, lead times, storage costs, and the potential for dynamic adjustments. Replenishment lead times must be considered, especially when tariffs affect import processes. Replenishment frequency and plans are important. The costs associated with holding buffer stocks, such as storage and potential obsolescence, must also be considered.

Dynamic buffer inventory management techniques, which adjust inventory levels based on real-time data and market conditions, could be considered. Technology and artificial intelligence can play a crucial role in optimizing buffer inventory strategies in the face of trade uncertainties. Effective use of buffer inventory requires careful planning and management, taking into account forecastsegen, lead times, inventory holding costs, and the potential for dynamic adjustments. Technology can play a crucial role in optimizing buffer inventory strategies in the face of trade uncertainties.

Suitable for:

• Supply chain optimization: New logistics strategies due to the Corona pandemic, including digital twins

Further strategic responses for automotive companies:

Examining options such as export market diversification: Automotive companies heavily reliant on the US market might consider diversifying their export targets to reduce their vulnerability to changes in US trade policy. This could involve focusing on markets in Europe, Asia, or other regions with more stable trade relations. Export market diversification can reduce a company's dependence on a single market and mitigate the risks associated with protectionist measures in any one country.

Adjustment of pricing strategies

Automakers can adjust their pricing strategies to absorb some of the tariff costs or pass them on to consumers, depending on market conditions and competitive pressure. The potential impact of price increases on sales volumes and market share must be considered. Pricing is a crucial tool for managing the effects of tariffs. Companies must carefully analyze the price elasticity of demand and the competitive landscape to determine the optimal pricing strategy.

Investments in domestic US production

Foreign automakers could invest in building or expanding production facilities within the U.S. to avoid import tariffs. Hyundai's plan to build a steel plant in Louisiana is one example. However, this is a long-term strategy that requires significant investment and time to implement. Investing in domestic U.S. production is a more direct way to circumvent import tariffs, but it requires substantial capital and a long-term commitment to the U.S. market.

Customs design and HTS reclassification

The strategy of modifying products or their classification according to the Harmonised System (HS) can be used to potentially achieve lower customs duties. This could involve importing components under different classifications or making minor changes to the product to alter its tariff number. Customs structuring can be a technical, but potentially effective, means of reducing customs burdens, requiring expertise in customs law and product classification.

Use of free trade zones and foreign trade zones (FTZs)

Utilizing Free Trade Zones (FTZs) in the US offers the opportunity to store imported goods without paying customs duties until they are used or enter the domestic market. This can improve cash flow and potentially reduce or eliminate duties on re-exported goods, or if sufficient US content is added within the zone. FTZs provide a way to defer or potentially reduce customs payments, thus creating flexibility in managing imported goods.

Potential countermeasures by the EU and other non-US states

Analysis of the types of retaliatory measures that could be taken

The EU is responding to previous US tariffs on steel and aluminum by reinstating suspended retaliatory measures and considering new tariffs on US goods. Products that could be affected include agricultural products, industrial goods, and consumer goods. The EU's threat of a 50% tariff on US spirits and Trump's response of a potential 200% tariff on EU alcoholic beverages point to the risk of escalating trade disputes. Canada has also imposed retaliatory tariffs on US goods in the past. Other major car-exporting countries, such as Japan and South Korea, could also take countermeasures. The concept of "reciprocal tariffs," in which countries mirror the tariffs imposed by the US, is also being discussed.

The potential for retaliatory measures from key trading partners such as the EU and Canada is significant and could lead to a broader trade war affecting several sectors beyond the automotive industry.

Assessment of the potential impact of these countermeasures on the US and global economies

Retaliatory tariffs can make US exports more expensive in foreign markets, potentially harming US industries and leading to job losses. The example of US agricultural exports, which have suffered from retaliatory tariffs in the past, is relevant. The OECD reports that Trump's tariff policies are likely to slow economic growth in the US and globally. There is a risk of higher prices for consumers both in the US and in the countries that impose retaliatory measures. Warnings are issued that escalating retaliatory measures could bring global trade to a standstill and impair economic growth.

Countermeasures would likely have negative effects on both the US and global economies, leading to reduced trade, higher prices, and potentially slower economic growth.

Suitable for:

• Reusable logistics and efficient reusable management – ​​Optimizing logistics processes and supply chains

Global impact on the automotive industry and international trade

Assessment of potential shifts in global production and trade flows

The US tariffs could lead to a restructuring of global automotive supply chains, with companies potentially shifting production to avoid tariffs or serve less affected markets. There is a possibility of increased regionalization of production, with more vehicles and components manufactured within large trading blocs (e.g., North America, Europe, Asia). Some Asian and European automakers with limited US presence could gain a competitive advantage due to price differences.

The tariffs could trigger a significant reshaping of the production and trade patterns of the global automotive industry and potentially lead to more regionalized supply chains and shifts in competitive advantages.

Analysis of the impact on consumer prices and market competition

It is likely that US consumers will bear a significant portion of the cost of these tariffs in the form of higher prices, particularly for imported vehicles. Competition in the US market will decrease if tariffs significantly increase the price of imported vehicles. The impact on the market share of domestic versus imported vehicles must be considered.

Consideration of the long-term impact on the structure of the global automotive industry:

It is speculative whether these tariffs could lead to a more fragmented global automotive industry with less cross-border integration. There is a possibility of increased investment in the production of electric vehicles within the US to benefit from tariff-related advantages for domestically produced EVs. The uncertainty regarding the long-term sustainability of such tariff policies and the potential for future revisions or reversals must be acknowledged.

The long-term impact on the global automotive industry is uncertain, but could include a shift towards greater regionalization, an increased focus on domestic production in key markets, and potential investment shifts towards new technologies such as electric vehicles. The stability of this policy will be a key factor in shaping the industry's future.

Global supply chains under pressure: Strategies against new tariff risks

The introduction of 25% tariffs on car imports into the US is driven by the stated goal of promoting domestic production and stimulating economic growth. However, analysis shows that this measure carries significant risks, including higher prices for consumers, disruption of established supply chains, and the threat of retaliation from international trading partners. The vulnerability of global supply chains, as illustrated by the Ever Given incident, underscores the need for resilient production strategies.

Companies have several options available to address these potential tariffs, including nearshoring, adjusting supply chains and pricing strategies, and utilizing free trade zones. However, it is crucial that policymakers carefully consider the broader economic consequences and potential impact on global trade relations before implementing such far-reaching measures.

recommendations

Political decision-makers

It is recommended that the broader economic consequences and the potential for international retaliation be considered before comprehensive tariffs are imposed. Targeted measures and negotiations should be examined as alternatives.

automotive companies

It is advisable to develop flexible supply chain strategies, examine nearshoring and domestic production options, analyze opportunities for tariff avoidance, and diversify export markets.

Management consultants and analysts

It is important to provide comprehensive risk assessments that include the potential for significant protectionist trade policies and to advise clients on developing resilient supply chains.

The matter is complex and multifaceted and requires a careful and strategic approach from all parties involved.