Tariff Wise We Could Have Done Worse

---

 


YOURSAY | ‘Negotiations with the US must be sustained. It’s a marathon, not a sprint.’
COMMENT | Ginormous RM1t bill for small tariff cut
OrangePanther1466: I often do not agree with what you write, P Gunasegaram, but in this instance, you are spot on. Well done, mate.
You have backed up your criticisms with facts and figures.  
Perhaps the next step would be for countries with 19 percent or more tariffs to consider mutually beneficial cooperation in pressuring the United States to ease the tariffs.
I know it’s easier said than done, as each has its peculiar circumstances, but we could find some common ground.
For instance, insist on the US to include all current account elements in the calculation of the balance of payments.
A notable exclusion was the services’ element (non-tangible goods) that the US “exports”.
Royalty, franchise fees, IP licence fees, financial product fees like insurance, advisory fees, and so on.
The continued pivot to the Brics bloc, discussions about setting up a rival development financial institution and adoption of an alternative trade settlement mechanism and currency should be intensified to mitigate reliance on Western economies, particularly the US.  
Discussions with the US must be sustained to work down the tariff rate and the list of products subjected to it. This should be a marathon and not a sprint.
The jury is still out on the “success” achieved by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and Trade and Industry Minister Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz thus far in this regard.
Coward: The headline trade items feel like trade that would have happened regardless of whether there is a tariff in place.
In short, it looks like a repackaging of a known fact so that someone looks good.  
As for the over-the-top praise for Anwar, it started with US President Donald Trump.
He used it to butter up Anwar for the deal. 
I don’t think there is any sincere praise from Trump for Anwar’s Thailand-Cambodia border peace effort.
Again, it is exploited by him to make Anwar more agreeable.
Anwar himself is not the victim here. He also uses it to butter up his image.
As for the customary over-the-top praise by others on Anwar?
Bread and butter from the same crowd of professional “angkat” people.  
Rukun_Negara: International trade is about finding synergies and developing mutual interests and gains.
In this case, I see the 19 percent tariff outcome as a win-win situation.
Had the US slapped Malaysia with a 24 to 30 percent tariff, our exporting businesses (to the US) would have started losing big time against other countries in terms of 'relative competitiveness'.
Quigonbond: One can also say we could have done worse with tariffs at 25 percent.
It’s about paying to stay in the game, not about a rational outcome.
Easy to say it’s a bad deal when done in hindsight and not being at the negotiation table.
This is reality and a demonstration of Malaysia’s position in the world.  
The 19 percent tariff is nine percentage points more than the global 10 percent tariff. Is it great? No. Is it bad? Not so. It’s ok.
The pain will translate to (if no retrenchment at some US export-dependent businesses) reduced employment, less profit, less tax to pay the government, less/no increment/bonus, less money to be recycled through the local economy - so yes, the economy will take some hits.
But it won’t be fatal. I’d prefer to focus on what we must do now, aka increase our competitiveness and productivity.
RedGecko6275: Tariffs just make goods more expensive for the American people themselves. They are taxing their people.
Does it make our goods less competitive? Yes, if we are the only country to impose a tariff on the US.
But if our goods have a 19 percent tariff and all other countries have the same as well, it doesn’t make our goods less competitive.
Scoop: Sorry, Gunasegaram. Your premise is that Malaysia is going to follow through on these promises to buy x billion of this or that and invest x billion in the US.
Since Trump 1.0, companies and countries have been making similar pledges to get on his good side, but have only made good on a small fraction of those pledges.
There are countless examples of pledges that were designed to avoid some kind of punitive action that have come to nought.
Koel: Tariffs seem to be a madman’s game.  
While Malaysia’s tariff rate was set at 25 percent, both Cambodia's and Thailand's rates were set at 36 percent.
Since the so-called ceasefire, all three countries have overnight had their rates uniformly lowered to 19 percent.
Trump now claims that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for bringing the “war” to an end. Coincidence?
Or some manchild’s game of Art of the Deal? So, what was the backroom deal struck exactly?
Are tariffs some new blackmail tool for persuading smaller countries to help prop up some spurious international credentials for a former TV showman?
Open-minded 2281: All the above concessions are known. The question is, are there further concessions which may, for political reasons, be kept hidden?
It is unbelievable that Trump agreed that Malaysia did not open the car market to the US without the AP system in place.
Meerkat: Whether you love or hate him, Trump is going to upend the traditional way of international trade and relations.
That means drastic changes.
Unfortunately for Malaysia, it’s not geared to respond to such changes because of the system, inefficiency, huge administrative costs and, mostly, corruption. - Mkini

---