'Stop Production': Small US Firms Battered By Shifting Tariffs
The announcement involved a 10-percent levy on imports from most partners, set to rise further for many of them. For Cambodia, the planned duty was a staggering 49 percent.
"That night, we spoke to our factory," Knepler told AFP. "We literally cannot afford to bring our own product into the US with that kind of tariff."
The decision was even more painful for Knepler and his Pennsylvania-based company, True Places, given that he had previously shifted production of his outdoor chairs to Cambodia from China, following tariffs on Chinese imports imposed by Trump during his first presidency.
"We were facing 25-percent tariffs in China, and there were zero-percent tariffs in Cambodia," Knepler recalled.
It took him a year to move the massive equipment and molds to Cambodia only to see another steep levy.
With Trump's "reciprocal" tariff hikes taking effect last Thursday, these Cambodia-made chairs face a lower -- though still significant -- 19 percent duty.
Knepler's experience echoes that of many US companies producing everything from yo-yos to clothing abroad, after years of offshoring American manufacturing.
To cope, businesses use various strategies.
Some pass on the new costs as a surcharge to customers. Others halted imports when duties reached prohibitive levels, hoping Trump would strike bilateral trade deals that would make their businesses viable again.
Trump frames his tariffs as paid for by other countries, touting tens of billions in revenue this year -- but firms contest this description.
"We make the tariff payments when the product comes into the US," Knepler stressed. "Before we sell it, we're the ones who pay that tariff."
Now saddled with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt he took on to relocate the company's production to Cambodia, Knepler worries if his business will survive.
He likens the rapid policy changes to spinning a "wheel of misfortune," resulting in a new tariff each time. Over four months this year, the planned tariff rate on Cambodian exports has gone from 0 to 49 percent, to 10 percent, to 36 percent, to 19 percent, he said.
"No one knows what it's going to be tomorrow," he added. "It's impossible to have any kind of confidence in what the rate will be in three- or four-months' time."
Economists warn that tariffs could fuel inflation and drag on growth.
EY chief economist Gregory Daco noted that the duties effective Thursday raise the average tariff rate to 17.6 percent from 2.8 percent at the start of the year --- the highest level since the early 1930s.
While Trump lauds the limited effects his duties have had on US prices so far, experts say tariffs take time to filter through to consumers.
Many of Trump's sweeping levies also face legal challenges over his use of emergency economic powers.
The global tariffs are especially hard to avoid.
Barton O'Brien said he accelerated production and borrowed money to bring in as much inventory as possible before Trump took office.
On the election campaign trail, the Republican leader had floated a 60-percent tariff on imports from China, where O'Brien makes most of his products.
The Maryland-based veteran selling dog harnesses and other accessories rented a container to ship as many products as he could before Trump's new tariffs would take effect. "I had dog life jackets in the bathroom," he told AFP.
There is "no way" to produce domestically, he said, adding that comparable American-made products sell for nearly six times his retail prices.
He makes some items too in India and Vietnam.
But Chinese products face an additional 30-percent duty this year, even under an extended truce now expiring in November. The rates for India and Vietnam are 25 percent and 20 percent respectively.
"If you look at the brands I compete with, we're all made in the same countries. We're all going to have to raise prices together," said O'Brien. US companies producing everything from yo-yos to clothing abroad are coping with a variety of strategies AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
8 minutes ago
- DW
Trump's DC intervention may be less likely in other cities – DW – 08/14/2025
US President Donald Trump has sent the National Guard into Washington, may well have other major cities in his sights. But could he replicate his capital intervention elsewhere? The arrival of 800 US National Guard troops in Washington, D.C. at the direction of President Donald Trump has been framed as an "authoritarian push" by the mayor of the nation's capital. Trump cast his decision to involve the National Guard in Washington and put the city's police force under the supervision of Attorney General Pam Bondi and Drug Enforcement Administration chief Terry Cole as a crime crackdown. He's calling the move a "Liberation Day" and claiming the city needed rescuing from "crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor." He's also named other cities, including New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and Baltimore, as possible future targets if they don't address their own local crime issues. But federal data contradicts that claim, with statistics showing that violent crime is at a 30-year low. Critics say that based on this, there is no emergency that requires a military presence in the capital. "The numbers simply do not justify this measure," said Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser. So if crime has been going down in Washington, why the intervention? "It does look, if you look at the data, [like] crime is going down," said Laura Dickinson, a law professor at George Washington University, US. "City officials have not asked for help [from the president] so it really does seem at best questionable." "This is really problematic and contrary to our tradition in the United States, where we've been very cautious about using the military to do law enforcement functions," Dickinson added. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video In part, because he can. Washington, D.C. (which stands for District of Columbia) is not part of any US state and largely falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Under the 1973 Home Rule Act, presidents can take control of the DC police during emergencies for 30 days without congressional approval. And because it's a federal enclave, the president also commands the city's National Guard. Some US commentators have observed the move could be a political attempt to distract from ongoing controversy related to the Epstein Files and the release of jobs figures that showed a rise in unemployment. Trump's popularity in his flagship policy areas — in particular immigration — has also recently declined. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video While Trump and his allies have pointed to city crime as justification for the move, his opponents inside and outside of congress say the action is designed to exact control over cities that do not support Congressional Black Caucus, which currently has no Republican members, also said the cities named by Trump as potential targets all have the common thread of being led by Black mayors, labelling the move a "blatantly racist and despicable power grab." The presidency has fewer powers outside of the nation's capital. The governors of the 50 US states preside over the National Guard within their own borders. It's a key distinction that William Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University, US, said would make it far more difficult for Trump to follow through on threats to extend interventions beyond the federal enclave of Washington, D.C. "It would be unwise, I think to generalize this example and apply it to other places in the United States," Banks told DW. "He can't go to Chicago or Philadelphia or New York City or Los Angeles and do the same thing. He simply doesn't have the authority." But what about in June, when he deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles? Banks said there are provisions for limited interventions to protect federal property and personnel, but Trump "was walking on very thin ice." "His argument was that they were needed to ensure that the protesters didn't destroy federal property or harm ICE and other immigration personnel who are on the ground there doing their job." While they can protect federal assets, military personnel are banned from being actively used in domestic policing by the Posse Comitatus Act. In California, a three-day trial investigating whether the deployment of the National Guard was in breach of this law, and potentially unconstitutional, has recently wrapped up, with a decision pending. Dickinson said the use of military forces by the federal government in American cities could also impact how these institutions are perceived by the public. "It could damage the credibility and respect that Americans have for the military and the National Guard," Dickinson told DW. "These are some of the few institutions in the United States that enjoy very broad bipartisan support." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Federal command of the DC police ends after 30 days, unless the Republican-controlled Congress approves an extension. The National Guard can remain active indefinitely. Despite alarms being raised by Trump's opponents, who are calling the move an authoritarian flex, Banks expects a return to the status quo is more likely, particularly when it comes to threats to other states. He said the United States' foundational history overthrowing the British military, and the norm that law enforcement should be maintained by civilian police, are crucial in understanding what Americans will accept in their communities. "Our situation is somewhat unique in the United States in not having any expectation of military involvement in law enforcement," Banks told DW. "We don't like military uniforms on our streets, we don't like men and women with guns patrolling our streets, it just rubs against the grain. "Posse Comitatus codifies that principle, but I think the norm is even more important and more fundamental."
Int'l Business Times
38 minutes ago
- Int'l Business Times
Germany Sacks Rail Chief With Train Network In Crisis
The German government sacked the embattled head of Deutsche Bahn on Thursday as it seeks to overhaul the ailing public rail network after years of criticism about deteriorating services. Once widely admired for its punctuality and efficiency, Germany's rail service has worsened dramatically in recent years owing to what critics say is chronic underinvestment. Passengers now often complain of long delays and cancelled trains in Europe's biggest economy -- last year, almost 40 percent of long-distance services were late. Richard Lutz, who took the helm of the publicly owned institution in 2017, will leave his chief executive post two years before the end of his contract, the government confirmed. "The situation at Deutsche Bahn is dramatic, if you look at customer satisfaction, punctuality figures or profitability," Transport Minister Patrick Schnieder told a press conference to announce Lutz's departure. "The company must become faster, leaner, more effective and also more economical." The 61-year-old will stay on until a successor is found, with the government saying the hiring process would start immediately. Karl-Peter Naumann from rail passenger association Pro-Bahn warned that changing the boss would not solve Deutsche Bahn's problems. The situation would only change if policies improved and funding was increased, he told AFP. "All previous transport ministers have more or less failed and have contributed greatly to the railways being in the situation they are in today," he said. Lutz's days had seemed numbered since a new coalition under Chancellor Friedrich Merz took power in May. Schnieder had publicly complained earlier this month about the railways' poor punctuality and suggested he was looking at personnel changes. Workers on the railways -- Deutsche Bahn has some 220,000 employees -- had also spoken out against Lutz, with the GDL train drivers union calling in July for him to be sacked. The transport minister also said he would present a major plan to fix the network in late September. The government's is seeking to fix crumbling infrastructure more broadly, establishing a 500-billion-euro fund. Deutsche Bahn has already embarked on a push to renew parts of the network but it is likely to take years to complete. It has seen falling profits in recent years and is also saddled with more than 20 billion euros in debt. The government's is seeking to fix crumbling infrastructure more broadly AFP Passengers now frequently complain of long delays and cancelled trains in Europe's biggest economy AFP Railway workers had also spoken out against Lutz, with the GDL train drivers union calling for him to be sacked. AFP
DW
an hour ago
- DW
Europe holds its breath as Trump meets Putin in Alaska – DW – 08/14/2025
Europe hopes that Trump will threaten Putin with secondary sanctions if he doesn't agree to a ceasefire but dread a deal over their heads and against their interests. In a bid to influence the outcome of the meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, key European leaders got on a video call with the US president as Germany hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Berlin. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen posted on X that Europe, the US and NATO"strengthened the common ground for Ukraine," and will remain in close coordination. The EU's diplomatic intervention was aimed at impressing upon Trump the bloc's collective desire for peace, but also to brief him on the suspected motives of his Russian counterpart ― and warn against conceding Ukrainian territory in the talks. There was some hope that the European allies may have managed to convince Trump against selling out Ukrainian and European interests. Still, since they will remain far away while Trump and Putin hold closed-door talks, tensions over what may transpire remain palpable. During Wednesday's call, Ukraine and its European allies said they wanted a ceasefire before commencing any negotiations with Russia. Trump seems to have made a note of that, though it's not a precondition for him ― he believes a ceasefire "would be a show of goodwill from Russia," reported CNN. Even though Trump is meeting Putin without Zelenskyy in Alaska, he indicated there might be a trilateral meeting including the Ukrainian president soon. French President Emmanuel Macron said the trilateral could take place in a neutral country in Europe after the tete-a-tete in Alaska. Trump has said earlier swapping some territory may be necessary to end the war. But after speaking to the Europeans, he said no such concessions would be made without Zelenskyy at the table. And while Trump is still opposed to Ukraine joining NATO ― which Kyiv has long said was essential as a security guarantee, experts suggest the US may be more open to offering some other sort of assurance to deter future Russian aggression. "The nature of US security guarantees and practical contributions would be subject to further negotiations," Kristine Berzina, a Washington, D.C.-based senior fellow of the German Marshall Fund (GMF), told DW. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Ukraine and the EU also expect the US to ask Russia to pay part of the massive reconstruction bill as part of future negotiations. It is estimated to cost between $500 billion and $1 trillion to repair the damage caused by Russian bombings in Ukraine. Kyiv and its supporters argue a part of that should come from frozen Russian assets, about €200 billion of which are located in Belgium, predominantly in a bank called Euroclear. There is also a push for President Trump to ask for the return for thousands of Ukrainian children abducted by Russia, as well as Ukrainian prisoners of war. The bloc also hopes the US will tighten its screws and impose secondary sanctions on Russia if the Russian president refuses to hold fire. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Despite some relief after the call there are still fears that Putin may outwit Trump. Europe faces a difficult scenario if Putin convinces Trump to cut off weapons supply to Ukraine, even through European partners, and intelligence sharing, since Ukraine needs both US military equipment and reconnaissance. Another one of Europe's fears is that the US may withdraw its assets from the continent and make the alliance weaker. "Russia wants to push the US out of eastern Europe and assert military dominance. Putin could use this meeting to encourage the US to withdraw troops from Europe," said Rafael Loss, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). This is a worrying possibility since, "the US is already reviewing its global force posturing." "In that case first and foremost the Europeans would need to shore up their own defenses" in eastern European nations, Loss said. "US force reductions are anticipated, though the scale of the withdrawal is not yet clear," said Berzina of the GMF. "But of course, this process is happening at the same time as the Ukraine and Russia negotiations are taking shape. It will be tricky for the US to withdraw troops from Europe if it wants to signal to Russia that the US is deeply committed to European security." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
