Twelve_Percent

 (d)  With respect to articles from Canada, I have imposed additional duties on certain goods to address a national emergency resulting from the flow of illicit drugs across our northern border pursuant to Executive Order 14193 of February 1, 2025 (Imposing Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border), as amended by Executive Order 14197 of February 3, 2025 (Progress on the Situation at Our Northern Border), and Executive Order 14231 of March 2, 2025 (Amendment to Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border).  With respect to articles from Mexico, I have imposed additional duties on certain goods to address a national emergency resulting from the flow of illicit drugs and illegal migration across our southern border pursuant to Executive Order 14194 of February 1, 2025 (Imposing Duties To Address the Situation at Our Southern Border), as amended by Executive Order 14198 of February 3, 2025 (Progress on the Situation at Our Southern Border), and Executive Order 14227 of March 2, 2025 (Amendment to Duties To Address the Situation at Our Southern Border).  As a result of these border emergency tariff actions, all goods of Canada or Mexico under the terms of general note 11 to the HTSUS, including any treatment set forth in subchapter XXIII of chapter 98 and subchapter XXII of chapter 99 of the HTSUS, as related to the Agreement between the United States of America, United Mexican States, and Canada (USMCA), continue to be eligible to enter the U.S. market under these preferential terms.  However, all goods of Canada or Mexico that do not qualify as originating under USMCA are presently subject to additional ad valorem duties of 25 percent, with energy or energy resources and potash imported from Canada and not qualifying as originating under USMCA presently subject to the lower additional ad valorem duty of 10 percent.  

(e)  Any ad valorem rate of duty on articles imported from Canada or Mexico under the terms of this order shall not apply in addition to the ad valorem rate of duty specified by the existing orders described in subsection (d) of this section.  If such orders identified in subsection (d) of this section are terminated or suspended, all items of Canada and Mexico that qualify as originating under USMCA shall not be subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty, while articles not qualifying as originating under USMCA shall be subject to an ad valorem rate of duty of 12 percent.  However, these ad valorem rates of duty on articles imported from Canada and Mexico shall not apply to energy or energy resources, to potash, or to an article eligible for duty-free treatment under USMCA that is a part or component of an article substantially finished in the United States. 

source: The White House

                                               *     *     *

COPILOT:

Sure! Let me break this down for you:

1. What are tariffs? Tariffs are taxes or duties imposed by a country on goods imported from other countries. These taxes can make foreign goods more expensive and are often used to encourage people to buy local products, generate revenue, or address specific issues.

2. What is happening here? In this case, the U.S. government has applied extra tariffs on certain goods imported from Canada and Mexico. These are called ad valorem duties, which means the tariff is a percentage of the item's value.

3. Why are they doing this? The U.S. claims these tariffs are addressing two national emergencies:

   • From Canada: To combat illicit drugs crossing the northern border.

   • From Mexico: To combat both illicit drugs and illegal migration across the southern border.

4. Specific rules for goods:

   • Goods that qualify under the USMCA trade agreement (an agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico) benefit from preferential terms and are mostly exempt from these extra tariffs.

   • Goods that don't qualify as originating under USMCA face additional tariffs:

     • 25% extra tariff for most items.

     • 10% extra tariff for energy resources and potash from Canada.

5. Exceptions:

   • Energy resources, potash, and certain goods finished in the U.S. may be exempt or have lower tariffs.

   • If the emergency orders are ended, tariffs on goods not qualifying under USMCA would drop to 12%.

So, the U.S. is using tariffs not just to collect money but also to address specific border-related challenges. I hope this simplified explanation helps clear things up! What do you think about these measures?

                                                                *     *     *

Where to go from here!!???

Here's a fun thought experiment. Let the US reason through its Trade

Imbalances as if it were Canada ie learning from Canada's experiences

in rebalancing manufacturing and trade.

It has been noticed that Canada's population is thinly spread near its

Southern border across the long diameter of the country. The warmest

part. As a result, when new economic acivity s required, the workers best

suited to accomplish the needed tasks are often in the wrong place, by a long

distance. The answer: Manpower Mobility. Canada's federal government steps in

with mobility grants and/or training to place workers where they are needed.

This is a historical example, but it was done. Today that seems a little inhuman,

lifting people from their communities and families in the name of economic 

rationality but - on reflection - it is indeed economically rational. And by that I mean,

the best use of economic resources.

One of the recent interestng elements from the US was an interview from Tim Cook,

the CEO of Apple. He pointed out that many think Apple manufactures its products

in China and other Asiatic countries to benefit fron cheaper labour. That may have

been an element  in the past, but that is no longer the case. Asia is where the workers 

have the skills and mental focus to perform the extremely demanding work of putting 

together and testing the increasingly small elements that make-up current computers 

and phones. End of story.

Let me rephrase that: you can't guzzle bourbon and make an iPhone at the same time.

And it helps to be a petite female...

So from the point of view of achieving a Free Trade World,  economically rational and 

just for all, coming down hard on China for what it's doing right might not be the place to 

start. And applauding it's capacity to produce small electric cars for the home market seems

about right to me!!