The US tariffs on China have been paid almost entirely by US importers: IMF study

https://www.wsj.com/articles/on-chi...-the-unwilling-11558517581?mod=hp_major_pos12

From today's WSJ:
On China, Trump Leads a Coalition of the Unwilling

Instead of making U.S. allies more amenable to U.S. demands, tariffs have done the opposite. Canada and Mexico had ample incentive to appease the U.S. in a renegotiated North American Free Trade Agreement. When the U.S. hit them with tariffs on steel and aluminum, both retaliated. U.S. steel companies claim to be adding 12,800 jobs, but Gary Hufbauer and Euijin Jung of the Peterson Institute for International Economics say higher steel prices cost American steel consumers $11.5 billion—or $900,000 to protect one steel job. Once those costs plus foreign retaliation are factored in, the tariffs have likely been a net negative, and provoked howls of protest at home and abroad. Chuck Grassley, the Iowa Republican who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, bluntly told Trump the new Nafta was “dead” unless tariffs were lifted.

 

Cars lose that once they leave the dealers lot.

 

Take a look at Huawei Facts (@HuaweiFacts): https://twitter.com/HuaweiFacts?s=09

 

You are missing the point. Ok instead of cars think houses.

 

I have no desire to enter this "debate," but I just wanted to point out that deflation does not equal depreciation.

 

A Quick Review of 250 Years of Economic Theory About Tariffs- Harvard Business Review

But the greatest economists in history would be wary of imposing taxes to address a trade imbalance. The better way to reduce a trade deficit is to export more, not to reduce imports by making them more expensive.

Using tariffs to improve a country’s trade position was essentially what Britain rejected over a century ago. The argument was won due to the work of two great economists, Adam Smith, the father of economics, and David Ricardo, the father of international trade. When the UK repealed the Corn Laws, a piece of protectionist legislation, in 1846, it marked an era of greater opening for Britain, then the dominant trader in the world.

https://hbr.org/2018/07/a-quick-review-of-250-years-of-economic-theory-about-tariffs

 

I don't know, just looked at the US$ Yuan exchange rate a year ago vs today, year ago 1 US$ = ~6.25Y, today 1 US$ = ~6.9Y, a Yuan depreciation of ~10%. So, I don't think the importers are paying for the tariff. Neither are the US consumers since in US$ equivalent, price hasn't budged. So, who pays?

The question for me is will we see another 15% depreciation of the Yuan to US$ exchange rate?

Maybe you economists and professionals can enlighten me?

 

You are talking perfect economy by theoretical economists, what if the other party put restrictions on importing your goods?