That Cake Is Already Baked,' Says Bill Ackman, Warning U.S.-China Tariff War Is Driving Companies Out Of China For Good
The economic friction between the U.S. and China just reached a boiling point. Last month, the U.S. slapped a 145% tariff on Chinese imports, and China has responded with a 125% tariff on American goods.
Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, warned that prolonged trade tensions are pushing global companies to shift supply chains away from China—permanently.
"That cake is already baked," he wrote April 26 on X, referring to the irreversible decisions companies are making to exit China.
Don't Miss:
Tariffs Stack Up And Ships Slow Down
The tit-for-tat tariffs were detailed in an April overview by China Briefing, a publication by the consulting firm Dezan Shira & Associates, highlighting the mounting cost burdens for businesses on both sides of the Pacific. While President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order announcing a 90-day pause on future reciprocal tariffs on April 9, the relief excludes China.
Ackman shared on the same post that "tariffs are very damaging in the short term to companies that rely on China for a large percentage of their goods." He pushed for both countries to lower tariffs to 10%–20%, adding, "The only thing stopping the reduction in tariffs to a more sensible level is the fear on the part of both countries' leadership of looking weak."
Trade volumes are already feeling the pinch. Gene Seroka, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, told CNBC he expects a 35% drop in container arrivals from China this spring compared to 2024 levels.
Trending: How do billionaires pay less in income tax than you? Tax deferring is their number one strategy.
Global Supply Chains Find New Homes
As companies scramble to minimize exposure, Ackman argued the longer the tariffs persist, "the more rapidly every company that has a supply chain based in China relocates it." He pointed to India, Vietnam, Mexico, and the U.S. as new manufacturing hubs for both U.S. and non-U.S. firms.
Data from Rhodium Group shows a surge in foreign direct investment into Southeast Asia and Mexico. Ironically, Chinese companies are driving much of this growth, expanding their own operations abroad as Western firms pull back.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hedge fund titan Bill Ackman shares the secret that got him through his lowest moments
At a financial conference, billionaire Bill Ackman shared the life advice that he says got him through a tumultuous time in his life. Applying the principle of compounding interest to his personal life, he said he tried not to look back, because that will depress you, but instead tried to improve a little bit every day. Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman is known for his activist approach to investments—and, lately, to politics. His personal life has been just as dramatic. In the mid-2010s, Ackman went through an expensive divorce, saw his firm Pershing Square Capital Management lose billions of dollars, and nearly lost control of the company—all within the span of a few years. Ackman shared the story on stage at the Forbes Iconoclast Summit in New York on Thursday. 'I was going through a divorce, which is great financial pressure. The fund was down 30-something percent,' he told Forbes Editor-in-Chief Steve Forbes. 'And then the industry, if you will, sort of ganged up on us,' he said, shorting stocks that Pershing Square owned and going long stocks the fund was shorting, most notably Herbalife. Ackman unwound a position in Valeant by dumping Pershing's stake, which ultimately lost the fund nearly $4 billion. But with the backing of a $300 million loan from JPMorgan Chase, he solidified control of his fund. It was a particular mindset that helped him make it through those years, Ackman recalled. Applying the principle of compounding interest to his personal life, he said, 'my method was just trying to make a little progress every day.' He quipped, 'If you make 0.1% progress every day, it doesn't sound like a lot—but annualized!' So that's what Ackman reminded himself every day, he told Forbes. 'I'm going to make progress. I'm not going to look back to where I was. If I look there, I'm going to get discouraged. I'm just going to focus on the next step, and then the next step, and the next step,' he said. 'You don't notice any meaningful change for the first few weeks,' he added. 'About 90 days in, you're like, 'Okay, I'm here … and I'm just going to keep compounding.'' The curve of progress doesn't look like much initially, Ackman said, but soon—thanks to compounding—it takes off. While Ackman's near-professional-death experience was particularly stark, he believes his approach to progress can benefit anyone. 'All of us are going to have a moment like this, unfortunately… It could be a health issue. It could be you're fired from your job, your startup fails,' he said. 'And it's even harder when you've fallen from a high place to a low place.' After several years in a low place, Ackman is today back on top. His net worth nearly doubled last year to an estimated $8 billion after a new valuation round for Pershing Square. And while his divorce from his first wife reportedly cost a nine-figure amount, Ackman is now happily remarried to designer Neri Oxman. This story was originally featured on
Forbes
32 minutes ago
- Forbes
Outsmarting AI: 4 Ways To Future-Proof Your Threatened Career
According to Gallup, 22% of U.S. workers are worried they will lose their jobs to generative AI—a seven percent increase since 2021. Companies are moving faster than expected to replace workers with AI. Recently, Microsoft cut three percent of its staff, and Duolingo said it would reduce contractors as AI takes over their tasks. The digital consultancy firm Customertimes reports that Google searches for 'Will AI take my job' have risen by +108% after the latest layoffs. And 18.4 million TikTok videos criticize Duolingo's 'AI-first' strategy, calling for a strike. It's time to consider steps to take for outsmarting AI in the age of the machine. Atalia Horenshtien, head of AI practice at Customertimes, is leading the introduction of AI-workers in many global companies. She told me by email that if you've been laid off in an AI restructure, don't blame yourself for a company's failure to evolve responsibly. Instead, she advises that you take inventory by asking 'What broke without you? What decisions relied on your judgment?' She points out that that's your edge: context, nuance and expertise AI still can't replicate. 'In this new era, proving your value means showcasing the human skills machines can't mimic,' Horenshtien explains. "And while companies chase automation, they'd do well to remember: AI doesn't build culture, loyalty or trust. People do.' If you're concerned about losing your job in the age of AI, here are four tips Horenshtien, shared with me on how you can future-proof your career and compete against the algorithms. She reminds you that AI isn't here to compete with your work ethic. 'It's here to automate what can be automated and amplify what you do best,' she says. 'Tools like generative AI aren't just time-savers, they unlock skills many never had before. Writers write faster, non-writers become content creators and everyday professionals suddenly have design, research or strategy capabilities at their fingertips. The most valuable professionals won't be the ones who resist AI--they'll be the ones who know how to partner with it to level up.' AI will likely replace tasks, not whole jobs, especially those rooted in repetition, according to Horenshtien. 'What it still can't replicate well: original thinking, emotional intelligence, ethical judgment and complex decision-making. If your role leans heavily on these, double down. If not, it's time to pivot.' She states that prompt engineering, model selection and workflow design are fast becoming core skills. 'You don't need to become a data scientist, but you do need to know how to make AI tools useful. The ability to bridge the gap between tech and business outcomes is what will set people apart.' Horenshtien suggests that the worst move is to stay still. "If your role includes repetitive tasks, assume they're next in line for automation. Upskilling now, whether in AI tools, business strategy or adjacent fields, puts you ahead of the curve and out of the risk zone when change hits. Before leaders can help employees with the fears of AI taking their jobs, they must first understand the quandary themselves and have clear and factual explanations to the question on everyone's mind, 'Is AI a tool or a threat?' Horenshtien asserts that business leaders have a responsibility to take action for their employees, telling me that they can take at least five steps. Horenshtien explains that if you're like most people, you know change is coming. She believes the worst thing you can do as a leader is to go silent. 'Uncertainty breeds fear, and fear drives talent out the door. 'Be clear about what AI means for your business, how it will affect roles and what support you'll offer. When people understand the plan, they're far more likely to stay, adapt and contribute to the shift." She admits that letting people go may seem efficient, but cautions you that it's short-sighted. She recommends, instead, that your better move is to invest in internal mobility. 'Map out which roles are at risk and which are growing,"she suggests. "Offer real pathways to reskill toward AI-enhanced positions, and make that part of a clear workforce transition strategy, not an afterthought'. 'AI is part of your future, it needs to be part of your onboarding,'she advises. 'Don't just roll out tools—equip people to understand and use them effectively. Introduce AI basics, tool-specific training, and real examples during onboarding so employees build confidence early. When teams know how and why AI fits into their day-to-day, adoption becomes a mindset, not a mandate." She points out that AI frees up time and recommends that you use it wisely. 'Encourage employees to test new tools, automate the boring stuff and rethink their workflows. When people are given the mandate to innovate, many will discover value the business didn't know it needed.' 'AI adoption is a change management challenge as much as a technical one,' she explains, adding the importance of preparing teams for shifts in roles, responsibilities and expectations. 'Give managers the training and support they need to lead through change, not just push new tools.' I spoke with Alari Aho, career expert and CEO of Toggl Hire, who suggests the first step to bounce back from an AI threat is to remember that layoffs are the beginning, not the end. If you're faced with a sudden job layoff, Aho suggests it could be a gift in disguise, calling layoffs a rebranding moment. 'It's a chance to take control of your story, redefine your professional identity and show the market what you're truly made of.' He suggests that you start by owning the narrative—frame the layoff as a business decision, not a personal failure. Then sharpen your value through a thoughtful rebrand, reconnect with your network with purpose and use any downtime to upskill in ways that align with where you want to go next. If you're a full-time employee and are replaced by AI, business leaders declare that one of the best ways of outsmarting AI in 2025 is to build gig jobs as a safety net, not only as extra income to make ends meet but as career insurance in case your job disappears or you're faced with layoffs. Studies show that many laid-off workers end up in side hustles with more autonomy, making higher salaries than in their previous positions that rival full-time wages.
Atlantic
32 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Musk and Trump Still Agree on One Thing
Far be it from me to judge anyone enjoying the feud between Donald Trump and his benefactor Elon Musk over Trump's signature legislation, the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act. But in the conflict between the president and the world's richest man, the public is the most likely loser. Four days ago, Musk described the bill as 'disgusting,' 'pork-filled,' and an 'abomination.' He also suggested that Trump was ungrateful, claiming that Republicans would have lost the 2024 election without all the money he had spent supporting GOP candidates. Trump fired back in a post on his network, Truth Social, saying, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.' Musk then accused Trump of being in 'the Epstein files,' referring to the late financier and sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein, whom both men have ties to. Musk later deleted that post, as well as another calling for Trump's impeachment. If all this seems painfully stupid, it is, and it was all made possible by the erosion of American democracy. The underlying issues, however, are significant despite the surreal nature of the exchange. As it happens, Trump and Musk's dueling criticisms are each, in their own ways, at least partially valid. The bill is an abomination, although not because it's 'pork-filled.' And much of Musk's wealth does come from the federal government, which he has spent the past few months trying to dismantle while preserving his own subsidies. According to Axios, among other things, Musk was angry that the bill cuts the electric-vehicle tax credit, which will hurt the bottom line of his electric-car company, Tesla. But neither billionaire—one the president of the United States and the other a major financial benefactor to the president's party—opposes the bill for what makes it a monstrosity: that it redistributes taxpayer dollars to the richest people in the country by slashing benefits for the middle class, the poor, and everyone in between. The ability of a few wealthy people to manipulate the system to this extent—leaving two tycoons who possess the emotional register of toddlers with the power to impoverish most of the country, to their own benefit, speaks ill of the health of American democracy, regardless of the outcome. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' would make the largest cuts to food assistance for the poor in history, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, eliminating $300 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program at a time when inflation is still straining family budgets. Some 15 million Americans would become uninsured because of the bill's cuts to Medicaid, also the largest reductions to that program in history, and because of cuts to the Affordable Care Act. The CBPP estimates that about '22 million people, including 3 million small business owners and self-employed workers, will see their health coverage costs skyrocket or lose coverage altogether.' Not everyone would suffer, however, as the bill does offer significant tax cuts to the wealthiest people in America while adding trillions of dollars to the national debt. Whatever meager benefits there are to everyone else would likely be eaten up by the increase in the cost of food and health care caused by the benefit cuts. Charlie Warzel: The Super Bowl of internet beefs For all the insults flying between Trump and Musk, they are both fine with taking from those who have little and giving generously to those who have more than they could ever need. For years, commentators have talked about how Trump reshaped the Republican Party in the populist mold. Indeed, Trumpism has seen Republicans abandon many of their publicly held commitments. The GOP says it champions fiscal discipline while growing the debt at every opportunity. It talks about individual merit while endorsing discrimination against groups based on gender, race, national origin, and sexual orientation. It blathers about free speech while using state power to engage in the most sweeping national-censorship campaign since the Red Scare. Republicans warn us about the 'weaponization' of the legal system while seeking to prosecute critics for political crimes and deporting apparently innocent people to Gulags without a shred of due process. The GOP venerates Christianity while engaging in the kind of performative cruelty early Christians associated with paganism. It preaches family values while destroying families it refuses to recognize as such.
