Winners & Losers In The Trade War

Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
18,553
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/tariff-tracker/


Losers


  1. United Technologies: Expects 5-cent/share headwind this year, offset by price increases, and 15 cents next year. Much of the impact is in imported climate-control and safety equipment like carbon monoxide detectors.
  2. Harley-Davidson: Harley executives said they should be ready by early next year to share plans to mitigate the impact of tariffs that will cost the company as much as $48 million in 2018.
  3. 3M Co.: The maker of industrial, safety, health-care and consumer products sees $100 million in ``headwinds’’ from tariffs but has been able to compensate by raising prices. The negative full-year drag of raw-material costs is seen now at 15 cents a share, more than prior range of as much as 10 cents.
  4. Caterpillar: Shares tumbled after the construction equipment maker warned of rising costs. Tariff impact was about $40 million in third quarter; full-year effect is seen at the low-end of the range of $100 million to $200 million.
  5. Polaris: Maker of motorcycles and snow machines said suppliers must help offset tariff costs if they want to keep doing business with Polaris. Left its guidance for 2018 tariff costs unchanged at $40 million.
  6. Tile Shop: The rtile and flooring retailer gets half of its products from Asia and may cut that to 25 percent. Tariffs are a threat to its gross margin target of about 70 percent, especially if the current 10 percent tariff rises to 25 percent in January.
  7. Walmart: The giant retailer said tariffs are a threat to its efforts to be a low-price leader, and while it’s working to monitor margins, it’s possible some prices might rise. One-third of its goods come from outside the U.S.
  8. Panasonic: The Japanese maker of products including solar panels and electric-vehicle batteries may consider moving some production out of China. The U.S.-China trade dispute will have “significant” impact on Panasonic, said Yoshio Ito, the head of its automotive business.
  9. Ford: Ford CEO Jim Hackett said tariffs on metals “took about $1 billion in profit from us.”
  10. BMW: Trade conflicts are “feeding uncertainty,” hurting prices in several markets; sales, profit, margin forecasts cut.
  11. BP: BP sees impact of about $100 million in the U.S. due to increased costs for steel, CEO Bob Dudley said.
  12. Samsonite: Wholesale buyers notified in a letter than a 10 percent price increase is imminent if the U.S. follows through with tariffs on Chinese goods on Sept. 24
  13. Volvo Cars: The Swedish car company, owned by Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., delayed a planned IPO amid trade tensions. China’s retaliatory tariffs against the U.S. are disrupting plans to export cars to China from a new factory South Carolina.
  14. Walmart: In a letter to the U.S. Trade Representative, Walmart warns that the duties to be imposed Sept. 24 in the U.S. and China will raise prices for consumers and hurt profit margins for retailers and suppliers
  15. Giant Manufacturing: A 10 percent tariff would cost the industry an additional $100 million, and that figure would rise to $250 million if the duty rises to 25 percent, the company told the U.S. Trade Representative in a letter.
  16. Wilmar International: Company says trade tensions between the U.S. and China improved short-term crush margins, contributing to a jump in second-quarter profit. Still, it warned that a prolonged dispute would negatively impact margins due to lower plant utilization.
  17. Yamaha Motor: Sees several hundred million yen in negative impact starting next quarter from U.S. tariffs on Chinese-made engines; sees 1 billion yen impact on U.S.-made boats exported to Canada and Europe starting next summer.
  18. Newell Brands: Maker of Rubbermaid containers, Crock-Pot and Sunbeam appliances, and Graco infant gear estimates $100 million annualized impact
  19. Toyota: Said U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs cut full-year profit outlook by 10 billion yen ($90 million) and that any more levies would hurt its profit and sales outlook; on July 20 its North American chief said carmaker may have to stop importing some vehicles because of proposed U.S. tariffs
  20. Bunge: Posted a surprise loss after a wrong bullish bet on Chicago soybean futures, made on mistaken prediction the trade dispute would be brief and China would return as a buyer
  21. ArcelorMittal: The world’s largest steelmaker trader reported the highest profit in seven years after tariffs on imports boosted prices for production for the company’s U.S. plants
  22. Steve Madden: CEO predicts handbag prices will rise for U.S. consumers and weighs shifting production to Cambodia from China.
  23. Stelco Holdings: Canadian steelmaker pegs cost of tariffs at C$11 million ($8.45 million) in the second quarter
  24. Cummins: Lowered EBITDA forecast in part on expectation of $100 million in tariff-related higher costs in the second half
  25. SunPower: Paid $17 million for tariffs in first half and expects $51 million in second half -- more than it spends on R&D; says it may exit some businesses and cut jobs
  26. Daimler: Cut profit forecast on U.S.-China trade fight
  27. Caterpillar: Will boost prices to offset an expected $100 million to $200 million jump in tariff-related material costs in the second half.
  28. BMW: BMW raised suggested retail prices of its X5 and X6 SUVs in China by 4% to 7%. The carmaker previously warned it wouldn’t be able to absorb China’s tariff increase completely.
  29. Tyson Foods: Cut fiscal 2018 profit forecast to as low as $5.70 a share from range of $6.55-$6.70, citing tariffs’ negative effect on domestic and export prices, mainly for chicken and pork
  30. Eastman Chemical: Put a hold on a five-year effort to sell ethylene plants in Texas as prices fall and China erects barriers
  31. Schneider Electric: Tariffs on imports to the U.S. could affect earnings by as much as $23 million this year.
  32. Hyundai Motor: Company is trying to minimize risks related to the potential U.S. tariff on imported cars and parts, and may increase local production of SUVs. Hyundai previously warned that the tax would be devastating and push up production costs at its Alabama plant by 10% a year.
  33. Fiat Chrysler: Fiat cut profit and revenue targets partly because Maserati buyers delayed purchases due to China’s import duty
  34. General Motors: Cut forecast for year on surging prices for steel and aluminum as tariffs stoke demand. Could be forced to cut U.S. jobs if tariffs are applied to imported vehicles and auto parts.
  35. Ford: Carmaker says it may incur as much as $300 million in extra costs this year due to escalating Chinese tariffs; Ford says it took a $300 million hit in the quarter because of pricier commodities such as steel and aluminum, whose costs have also been inflated by tariffs.
  36. Coca-Cola: Raised prices for soda and other beverages to offset higher costs for freight shipments and metals used in its bottling systems.
  37. Whirlpool: Cites rising cost of raw materials contributing $50 million to $100 million to previous forecast for input-cost increases this year
  38. Hexcel: Aerospace materials supplier expects a tariff impact of $2 million to $3 million on an annual basis related to imports from China.
  39. Harley-Davidson: Cuts profit margin forecast for year. Earlier had announced plans to move production overseas, amid EU tariff costs of $100 million annually
  40. Plains All American Pipeline: Company says tariffs will lead to an additional $40 million in the construction of a pipeline in the largest North American oil field.
  41. Philips: CEO says company will raise prices on products such as hair clippers imported from China if the U.S. imposes tariffs
  42. Illinois Tool Works: Tariffs seen representing about 10 percent to 15 percent of the higher cost of materials in 2018 for the maker of equipment for restaurants, medical labs and oil rigs
  43. Lincoln Electric: Maker of welding equipment and supplies is raising prices on so-called consumables via surcharges instead of permanent hikes because it’s not clear how long tariffs will be in place
  44. Lennox International: Maker of air conditioners forecasts $5 million in costs in 2018 from tariffs and is raising prices to offset the expenses
  45. Stanley Black & Decker: Estimates $35 million impact in 2018 from tariffs already implemented; projects up to $80 million a year in costs from Trump’s proposal for $200 billion additional China tariffs including vacuums, hand tools, power tool accessories. Plans price increases to offset.
  46. General Electric: Sees as much as $400 million a year in impact from current and proposed tariffs, though about half could be offset by credits for exports to China. May adjust supply chain to mitigate effects.
  47. Gentex: Maker of rearview mirrors for cars cut its annual gross margin forecast, citing increased raw material costs of as much as $8 million in the second half linked to imports from China.
  48. Saudi Aramco: Raised prices for butane and propane as Chinese companies are buying more LPG from the Saudi state-run producer and cutting imports from the U.S.
  49. PPG Industries: Maker of coatings for manufacturing, automotive industries says tariffs adding “modest cost” to raw materials, especially for tinplate used for paint cans.
  50. Sonoco: Maker of packaging materials, including pull tabs for canned food, projects as much as $9 million in tariff costs in second half of the year, plans price hike on some products.
  51. Alfa: Owner of processed-foods maker Sigma switched to Canadian, European and South American suppliers from the U.S. to avoid tariff.
  52. Electrolux: Expects $10 million in added second-half costs from parts imported to U.S. and higher steel and aluminum prices.
  53. Alcoa: Cut profit forecast ranges by $500 million, citing tariffs on aluminum it imports from Canada along with higher energy costs and lower market prices
  54. Procter & Gamble: Cites ‘meaningful’ impact of tariffs on a handful of products in Canada, which accounts for 3% of global sales
  55. Kloeckner: Steel trader raises earnings forecast on higher U.S. prices.
  56. Suntory Holdings: The owner of Jim Beam bourbon whiskey, produced in Kentucky, says it must consider raising prices next year if EU tariffs on U.S. products continue.
  57. Osram: Trade tensions will weaken sales of automotive lighting parts
  58. Volvo Cars: Owner Li Shufu says cars will cost more as trade wars escalate
  59. Brown-Forman: Raised Jack Daniel’s prices in light of EU tariffs
  60. MillerCoors: Brewer says profit could fall by $40 million depending on how much aluminum prices rise


Winners


  1. Covanta: U.S. tariffs on imported steel helped raise its revenue forecast for metal it recycles from waste by $10 a ton, to $145-$175.
  2. Nucor: Credits tariff for higher prices and demand, sees more than doubling investments to $1 billion in 2018.
  3. CSX: Rail operator sees positive effect on both steel and ore shipments as U.S. steelmakers add production
  4. Ryerson: Metal processor’s sales guidance exceeds estimates in part because of higher anticipated demand from inventory dislocations tied to tariffs.
 
Almost all of these are "estimates" or guesses about future decisions. Meanwhile corporations are enjoying very real 1 trillion in tax cuts. And why include many non US companies in this list? Volvo is listed twice.... fail.
 
Last edited:
Winner: [A very small handful of politically well-connected] Americans

Loser: Globalists Everyone else.



FIFY

If you really believe the tripe you post, you really should consider learning something about actual economics. Here's a good place to start:

https://mises.org/system/tdf/Henry%20Hazlitt%20Economics%20in%20One%20Lesson.pdf?file=1&type=document

Seeing the kind of economic ignorance you routinely post on a site dedicated to a major champion of the Austrian School is a bit embarrassing.
 
Moron.

We want global trade. “Globalism” refers to global governance. Not global trade.

Dumbass.


Progressives always trying to confuse terms for the purposes of central control.
Ignoramus.

You want global trade if it is free and fair, current trade arrangements are neither and are designed to facilitate global government.
 
Take it up with Hazlet. Or Bastiat. Or Mises. Or Hayek. Or Rothbard. Or Ron Paul. You know, the guys who actually knew/know something about economics.

Oh, andcsleeping in class is a poorvway to assimilate knowledge.
You are the one who needs an education about the difference between current managed trade agreements and free trade, I'm so far ahead of you that I can afford to sleep through your drivel.
 
You are the one who needs an education about the difference between current managed trade agreements and free trade, I'm so far ahead of you that I can afford to sleep through your drivel.


Quite the contrary. I'm opposed to those managed trade agreements precisely because they are not true free trade. Unlike yourself however, I'm intelligent enough to realize that the solution to too much government interference with trade is not to engage in even more government interference with trade. Please. Educate yourself. Or just quit spamming your Big Lie bullshit. Whichever applies.
 
Almost all of these are "estimates" or guesses about future decisions.

Companies aren't in the business of underestimating their own future earnings.

If they publish bad news about themselves, you can be sure that they believe it's true, and they're in the best position to know.
 
Quite the contrary. I'm opposed to those managed trade agreements precisely because they are not true free trade. Unlike yourself however, I'm intelligent enough to realize that the solution to too much government interference with trade is not to engage in even more government interference with trade. Please. Educate yourself. Or just quit spamming your Big Lie bull$#@!. Whichever applies.
We can't let everyone else tariff our goods and subsidize theirs or we will become dependent on them for our needs and that will be used to subject us to world government.

The globalists talk about doing that but you are too ignorant to understand.
 
Companies aren't in the business of underestimating their own future earnings.

If they publish bad news about themselves, you can be sure that they believe it's true, and they're in the best position to know.


Come on now man! It makes Trump look bad so it absolutely must be fake news. Or Soros propaganda. Whichever, it simply can't be the truth.
 
Quite the contrary. I'm opposed to those managed trade agreements precisely because they are not true free trade. Unlike yourself however, I'm intelligent enough to realize that the solution to too much government interference with trade is not to engage in even more government interference with trade. Please. Educate yourself. Or just quit spamming your Big Lie bull$#@!. Whichever applies.

so smart. All other nations weaponize tariffs against the USA and your response is: Do nothing. So smart. You think China is going to follow Hayak or Mises because you ask them nicely????

I say no, this is part of why we revolted against Britain, they were taxing and tariffing our goods to protect their domestic markets. Mercantilism and protectionism is bad, but when all other nations are using it against us and we do nothing is worse.
 
We can't let everyone else tariff our goods and subsidize theirs or we will become dependent on them for our needs and that will be used to subject us to world government.

The globalists talk about doing that but you are too ignorant to understand.


Sorry, but when most of the greatest minds in economics from the last several hundred years say one thing, and Swordsmyth says the reverse, the smart money is always on those aforementioned great minds. Always. Buy a fucking clue. You're making yourself look foolish.
 
Sorry, but when most of the greatest minds in economics from the last several hundred years say one thing, and Swordsmyth says the reverse, the smart money is always on those aforementioned great minds. Always. Buy a $#@!ing clue. You're making yourself look foolish.
There are plenty of great minds that recommend defending your country against trade warfare.

Your attempt to appeal to authority shows your inability to defend your position.
 
Sorry, but when most of the greatest minds in economics from the last several hundred years say one thing, and Swordsmyth says the reverse, the smart money is always on those aforementioned great minds. Always. Buy a $#@!ing clue. You're making yourself look foolish.

Adam Smith endorses retaliatory tariffs to procure concessions in foreign markets that use high barriers to our goods.
 
Adam Smith endorses retaliatory tariffs to procure concessions in foreign markets that use high barriers to our goods.

He was still not a fan of them. From Adam Smith: https://taxfoundation.org/adam-smith-trump-tariffs/

When there is no probability that any such repeal [of a tariff in a foreign country] can be procured, it seems a bad method of compensating the injury done to certain classes of our people to do another injury ourselves, not only to those classes, but to almost all the other classes of them. When our neighbours prohibit some manufacture of ours, we generally prohibit, not only the same, for that alone would seldom affect them considerably, but some other manufacture of theirs. This may no doubt give encouragement to some particular class of workmen among ourselves, and by excluding some of their rivals, may enable them to raise their price in the home-market. Those workmen, however, who suffered by our neighbours prohibition will not be benefited by ours. On the contrary, they and almost all the other classes of our citizens will thereby be obliged to pay dearer than before for certain goods. Every such law, therefore, imposes a real tax upon the whole country, not in favour of that particular class of workmen who were injured by our neighbours prohibition, but of some other class.

If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry employed in a way in which we have some advantage. […] The value of [a country’s] annual produce is certainly more or less diminished when it is thus turned away from producing commodities evidently of more value than the commodity which it is directed to produce [by trade policies]. […] The industry of the country, therefore, is thus turned away from a more to a less advantageous employment, and the exchangeable value of its annual produce, instead of being increased, according to the intention of the lawgiver, must necessarily be diminished by every such regulation.
 
Last edited:
There are plenty of great minds that recommend defending your country against trade warfare.

Your attempt to appeal to authority shows your inability to defend your position.


If our conversation were occurring in a vaccuum you might actually have a point. Unfortunately for your position that is not the case. There are voluminous amounts of hard data aside from citations to legitimate authorities posted all over these forums which demonstrate the errors in your position, including some nice hard facts in the OP. I'm just adding to the mix.

Regardless of what data is posted, however, you invariably simply dismiss or ignore it. So it is evident that you have no interest in having an honest, forthright discussion, merely in finding any excuse you can to maintain your pre-existing dogma.

Epic fail.
 
Back
Top