Example collocations logo

Tariffs in sentence

1238 examples of Tariffs in a sentence

China has adopted some policies to reduce its trade surplus, such as lowering import tariffs, withdrawing tax rebates for exported goods, and gradual exchange-rate appreciation.
Just before the inauguration, he suggested that he might impose high tariffs on imported German cars, singling out BMW with particular relish.
In the dispute with Turkey, he did not hesitate to throw tariffs around like confetti, regardless of the potential blowback on US businesses and consumers.
Since the election, Trump has mostly avoided talking about his trade-protectionist campaign pledges, such as imposing punishing tariffs on China and Mexico, dismantling the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and rescinding America’s bilateral trade agreement with South Korea.
But, as trade liberalization has lowered tariffs and duties, the share of trade taxes has declined, while other sources have not compensated for falling trade revenue.
The result will be a decline in the US trade deficit with China, with no increase in tariffs.
The 2004 reforms, with their elimination of restrictions on access to foreign exchange and reduction of import tariffs, gradually improved the business and investment climate.
However, if the policy slips into more coercive measures such as carbon tariffs and the like, the result is likely to convert climate change into an energy security struggle.
The companies calling for political intervention to create green jobs tend to be those that stand to gain from subsidies and tariffs.
With Trump in the White House, what was once viewed in the US as the “nuclear” option – officially charging China with currency manipulation and imposing high across-the-board tariffs on Chinese imports – has become a strong possibility.
Here the G-20 could play a particularly constructive role, especially when it comes to the revival of the Doha Trade Round, the reduction of duties, tariffs and quotas on exports from the least-developed countries, and the gradual elimination of domestic subsidies.
Although US and EU tariffs on each other’s marketed manufactured goods are already low (below 3%, on average), a free-trade agreement would be enormously beneficial in promoting further investment, thereby boosting economic growth and creating more jobs.
In both countries, the well-established methodology of cost-benefit analysis is being applied to interventions as varied as anti-poverty measures, agricultural tariffs, child immunization, legal aid reform, e-government solutions, and rebuilding the armed forces.
Tariffs and TortillasBUENOS AIRES – Ever since Mexico’s so-called “Tortilla crisis” this past January, street protests against food shortages and high prices, or against increasing taxes on agricultural production, have spread from Haiti to Central American countries, and across Latin America.
Perhaps that explains his lies about North Korean weapons, European tariffs, and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s interference in the 2016 US presidential election.
By substituting imports with domestic production, relying on government planning to target priority sectors, and implementing selective trade protection (for example, by imposing tariffs, quotas, and import licensing), they attempted to accelerate their transitions from raw-materials suppliers to manufacturing-based economies.
Though there was no market failure to remedy, the government obliged, introducing high import tariffs and subsidies for powerful local growers; as a result, productivity declined.
Meanwhile, political leaders gradually developed regulatory and trade regimes that eliminated tariffs, simplified border crossings, and opened exciting new markets.
It could promote its industries through high tariffs, explicit subsidies, domestic content requirements on foreign firms, investment incentives, and many other forms of industrial policy.
China’s tariffs declined precipitously in the late 1990’s, and many of the other inducements were also phased out.
The US, however, has taken these industrial policies as evidence of mercantilist state intervention that justifies punitive trade tariffs and other sanctions.
This means leveraging unglamorous tools like tariffs, industrial standards, market regulation, and cooperation in research and education in our relations with countries like Russia and Egypt, just as we have done with Norway and Switzerland.
But now, US President Donald Trump’s latest dose of import tariffs could push the world into a full-blown trade war, undoing much of that progress.
To justify his tariffs, Trump points to America’s bilateral (or multilateral) trade deficits with its trading partners.
But while tariffs can change the composition of trade flows, they will have little bearing on the current-account balance, which is determined by national savings and investment.
To be sure, tariffs can have an incidental effect on the current-account balance.
As a tax on domestic consumers and a subsidy for certain domestic producers, tariffs reduce consumers’ disposable income and augment capital income.
To the extent that more capital income is saved relative to labor income, tariffs will increase the economy’s overall savings rate.
At the micro level, Trump might argue that tariffs are necessary to protect particular sectors.
So, to determine whether tariffs are actually protecting the value added – wages and profits – in a particular US sector, one must also account for the US value added within imports that are now facing levies.
BackNext