How tariffs could break America

“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is tariff….it’s my favorite word.” ~ Donald Trump, October 2024

Americans’ experience with tariffs is mixed. The Smoot-Hawley tariffs of the 1930s prompted retaliatory tariffs and trade barriers from trading partners, causing a collapse in international trade that badly hurt US manufacturers. The tariffs were misguided because, at the time, the US ran large trade surpluses, which made it vulnerable to retaliation.

Now the US runs large trade deficits, of between $60 and $100 billion per month, which makes it far more difficult for trading partners to retaliate effectively.

US Monthly Trade Deficit (billions)

Stephen Miran, Trump’s nominee for chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, wrote a 40-page “job application” in October. In it, he praises Trump’s past performance with tariffs in 2018 and proposes restructuring the global trade system. However, misguided use of tariffs could damage the US.

Miran proposes implementing import tariffs, mainly targeting those trade partners that run large trade surpluses with the US, notably China. China’s global trade surplus has expanded to more than $100 billion per month, and a large percentage of this trade is with the US.

China: Monthly Trade Surplus

Import Tariffs

A tariff on imports will likely provoke two main responses: retaliatory trade barriers and a stronger Dollar.

Retaliation

We can expect trading partners to erect trade barriers to target politically sensitive industries in the US. In the 1930s, Europe responded with import restrictions on US automobiles, hurting the Ford Motor Company. Nowadays, China will likely restrict exports of critical materials in markets it dominates—like germanium, gallium, and rare earth elements—targeting semiconductors, electric batteries, and defense technologies. Another Chinese favorite is tariffs on agricultural imports like soybeans, targeting mid-west farmers. Electric vehicle imports are another obvious target, particularly Tesla because of Elon Musk’s proximity to the president.

Tesla (TSLA) has fallen 39% from its high in December.

Tesla (TSLA)

The Dollar

The Dollar will likely strengthen if trading partners do not retaliate against increased tariffs. A stronger Dollar will tend to offset the cost of the tariff to consumers, as in 2018-2019, when the Yuan weakened markedly against the Dollar.

Yuan per US Dollar

The result was that the US current account showed little benefit from the 2018-2019 tariffs.

US Current Account Deficit

To the extent that the exchange rate adjusts to absorb the effect of the tariff–so that the Dollar price of the imported goods does not change–the tariff is effectively a tax on the foreign exporter. However, the cost incidence is not that straightforward.

Cost Incidence

A central argument for tariffs is that the exporter, not the US consumer, bears the cost. However, it’s not that simple.

Miran cites a 2019 NBER paper by Cavallo, Gopinath, Neiman and Tang which found that the dollar import price increased by the amount of 2018-2019 tariffs, and that appreciation of the Dollar did little to offset this. “The move in the currency didn’t pass through into import prices.”

Pass Through of Tariffs to Import Prices

While Miran is correct that there may be longer-term adjustments, the study makes an important distinction. US producers responding to retaliatory tariffs on their exports were forced to bear a large percentage of the cost. Export prices for affected goods (red below) fell sharply relative to exports without tariffs (blue).

Affect of Retaliatory Tariffs on Export Prices

The difference is that US agricultural exports were a non-differentiated product with ready substitutes. China imposed a tariff on US soybean imports, comfortable in the knowledge that importers would increase orders from alternative suppliers like Brazil. So US farmers were forced to cut prices to compete.

The tariff cost for differentiated products, with no ready substitutes, such as high-level semiconductors and equipment, is far more likely to be borne by the customer.

Weakening the Dollar

Miran recognizes that the strong Dollar will harm exports and speculates that strategies could be employed to weaken the Dollar. However, that would increase the cost incidence on the consumer.

Efforts to weaken the Dollar would likely undermine its role as the global reserve currency and accelerate the migration of foreign central bank reserves to gold bullion as a reserve asset.

There are three likely negative consequences. First, a falling dollar would reduce foreign support for US Treasury markets, driving up long-term interest rates that would hurt financial markets and the economy.

Second, discouraging direct foreign investment in US financial markets—by tearing up tax treaties, for example —would cause an outflow from mega-cap technology stocks, Treasuries, and other key foreign investment targets. The result could crash financial markets and the economy.

Third, printing Dollars to buy assets in a sovereign wealth fund or other strategies that involve increased fiscal spending are likely to fuel an increase in inflation.

Weakening the Dollar may also involve lowering US interest rates vis-a-vis trading partners. However, this assumes that foreign central banks will not respond in kind and that the Fed will cooperate, ignoring the inflation risk.

Re-industrialization

The aim of tariffs is to create a favorable environment for establishing new industry. However, there are many barriers other than the price of competitive imports.

First, you need a skilled workforce with the education and training required to run new factories. Companies establishing semiconductor foundries in the US, for example, under President Joe Biden’s CHIPS and Science Act, have encountered skills shortages. (The Economist)

Then you need infrastructure. ALCOA, the largest aluminum producer in the US, relocated smelters to Canada because of advantageous electricity costs. CEO Bill Oplinger says the increased tariffs would not entice it to return. (Reuters)

You also need to secure the key materials required to support new industries, whether bauxite to supply aluminum smelters, copper for EVs and turbines, or critical materials–like gallium, germanium, and rare earth elements– for high-tech industry. China has spent the last two decades tying up supply contracts, and the US is a late arrival to the party.

Conclusion

Tariffs on imports will likely provoke retaliatory tariffs from trading partners, which could harm international trade and exact a cost on both economies. The US is in a strong position because of its large trade deficit; so it can inflict greater damage on its competitor. However, we should not ignore other forms of retaliation like restricting access to critical materials, where there are no ready substitutes, and erecting other trade barriers that impose a cost on US exporters.

Under no circumstances should tariffs be placed on imports of goods where there is no readily-available substitute. The US consumer will bear the cost.

The Dollar will also likely strengthen in response to US tariffs on imports, which could partially offset the cost of the tariff to consumers. However, a strong Dollar will reduce the competitiveness of US manufacturers in export markets. Miran speculates that the US may be able to offset this by policies to weaken the Dollar. But you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Efforts to weaken the Dollar could also undermine its role as the global reserve currency, crash financial markets and the economy, or cause a resurgence of inflation. If not all three.

A strategy to re-industrialize the US economy requires a holistic approach. First, ensure that you build up the necessary skills and resources through a comprehensive education and infrastructure program and secure supplies of key materials. Then, progress to the next stage of establishing the groundwork for a new global trade and currency accord. Ignoring the first stage is like putting the cart before the horse.

An impatient president has surrounded himself with a team unlikely to oppose him. Developing a program to re-industrialize the economy will require skill, patience, and meticulous planning. It could take the better part of a decade, but that seems unlikely to happen.

Acknowledgments

A slow-motion train wreck

Facebook parent Meta’s shares fell 20% after hours as it said revenue growth will slow, partly because users were spending less time on lucrative services. (WSJ)

Meta Platforms (FB)

Facebook lost about half a million global daily users in the fourth quarter of 2021 compared to the previous quarter, according to the quarterly earnings report of Meta, its parent company. That might not seem like a major drop relative to its under 1.93 billion total daily active users, but it represents a low point for a metrics-driven company whose user base long grew at a rapid pace across its different apps. The statistic shows how Meta has struggled to stay relevant to younger users, many of whom are drawn to competing apps like TikTok. (Vox)

Facebook/Meta’s dissapointing performance is not an isolated problem. Tesla (TSLA), the darling of retail investors — trading at 22 times sales and 93 times forward earnings — is also staring into the abyss. Breaking primary support at 900 last week, TSLA quickly recovered — indicating a false break — but is again testing the 900 support level. Trend Index peaks below zero warn of selling pressure. Breach of support at 900 for a second time would confirm a primary down-trend. Initial target for a decline would be 600 — a 50 per cent fall from its recent peak of 1200.

Tesla (TSLA)

Jesse Felder shows how precarious the market situation is, with the median price-to-sales ratio at a record 3.5 times. Compare that to the Dotcom bubble, with a peak of just 2.0.

Median Price to Sales ratio

Warren Buffett’s favorite market valuation metric of market-capitalization-to-GDP is not quite as alarming, when you compare to the Dotcom peak in 2000, but nevertheless sounds a grim warning.

Market Cap/GDP

We consider MarketCap/GDP to be the most accurate long-term valuation metric available. By focusing on total stock market valuation relative to output, it avoids distortions caused by the financial trickery of stock buybacks and fluctuating profit margins caused by factors like the current supply chain issues.

Conclusion

This is like watching a slow-motion train wreck. The worst I have seen in nearly forty years in financial markets. The Fed may be able to postpone a market crash by several months but the eventual outcome is inevitable. The draw-down has the potential to be truly eye-watering, overshadowing the Dotcom Crash and Global Financial Crisis.

We are overweight Gold (including gold miners), defensive stocks, and key commodities and underweight high-multiple growth stocks.

A Tesla in the coal mine

All five US technology behemoths — Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Alphabet (GOOGL), Facebook (FB) and Microsoft (MSFT) — show strong up-trends over the past 6 months, boosted by strong inflows from international investors who are giving the bond market a wide berth.

AAPL, AMZN, GOOGL, MSFT, FB

But the canary in the coal mine is Tesla (TSLA), the darling of retail investors and the largest holding in Cathy Wood’s ARK Innovation Fund (ARKK). TSLA encountered resistance at 700 and looks ready for another test of primary support. Breach of 550 would signal a primary down-trend.

Tesla (TSLA)

Trading at more than 17 times sales (TTM Q1 FY21), Tesla shows spectacular exponential growth in revenues over the past ten years. But investors should be wary of extrapolating that growth as heavyweights like Volkswagen, Ford and GM invest heavily in the EV space.

Tesla (TSLA)

Also, free cash flow is patchy, reaching $3.4 billion in FY20 on a levered basis.

Tesla (TSLA)

That starts to look anemic when one takes into account stock compensation of $1.7 billion — which does not affect cash flow but dilutes existing stockholders. Adjusted free cash flow, net of stock compensation, is $1.7bn. Against market cap of $621bn that gives an earnings multiple of 365 times!

Tesla (TSLA)

If we take adjusted free cash flow for the trailing 12 months to March 2021, of $1.4bn, that gives an even higher multiple of 443 times.

Conclusion

Valuations of stocks like Tesla (TSLA) are precarious and breach of primary support levels could spark a flurry of margin calls.

Notes

  1. Revenue and cash flows are from SeekingAlpha