Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia
No News Is Bad News
Trump does not deny losing trillions of US$ in tariff blunders … now ‘quietly’ begs China to negotiate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24eE0HMjSXU (LIVE: US-China Tariff War | US Stocks Lose $11 Trillion | Vantage This Week With Palki Sharma |N18G
178,425 views Streamed live on 12 Apr 2025 #vantageonfirstpost #palkisharma #chinatariffs
US-China Tariff War | U.S. Stocks Lose $11 Trillion | Vantage This Week With Palki Sharma | N18G China has raised tariffs on U.S. imports to 125% in response to similar U.S. measures, calling them a violation of international trade rules. The Customs Tariff Commission accused the U.S. of unilateral bullying and warned that further tariffs would be economically meaningless. China said its market can no longer absorb U.S. goods at current tariff levels and vowed to ignore additional U.S. moves unless its interests are substantially harmed. A commerce ministry spokesperson blamed the U.S. for global market disruptions and urged Washington to cancel all unilateral tariffs, stating that symbolic delays on other partners don’t change America’s coercive trade stance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEmZDDXSqnc (Trump’s Tariff BLUNDER Sparks $6.4 Trillion MELTDOWN — Tesla Crashes, America in Crisis
8,972 views 13 Apr 2025
Trump’s Tariff BLUNDER Sparks $6.4 Trillion MELTDOWN — Tesla Crashes, America in Crisis
KUALA LUMPUR, April 15, 2025: International news website Finance Twitter has reported that the White House is begging China President Xi Jinping to call the mentally-challenged Donald Trump first for tariff negotiations.
This is in the back of reports that the US lost multiple trillions of US$ in tariff blunders (view above video clips).
Amid the super costly blunders, to save face, the White House is now frantically “lobbying” for China to call the US for tariff negotiations.
Meanwhile, the effects of the global tariffs imposed by the US on the rest of the world is costing multiple billions, if not trillions, of US$ daily due to retaliatory responses.
No News Is Bad News reproduces below the Finance Twitter report as re-posted by The Coverage:
White House Privately Begging Xi To Call Trump First – The U.S. Needs China More Than China Needs The U.S
15 April, 2025
Less than 24 hours after Beijing slapped a 125% tariff on all types of American goods going into China in retaliation, President Trump has started showing weakness when he scrambles to undo some of his self-inflicted damage. The U.S. – in yet another embarrassing U-turn – has now exempted smartphones and computers from reciprocal tariffs, including the 125% taxes imposed on Chinese imports.
The flip-flopping comes after concerns from American tech companies that the price of gadgets could skyrocket simply because most of them are made in China. Some estimates suggested iPhone prices in the U.S. would jump “three times” (US$3,500 for an iPhone)if the costs of Trump’s tariffs were to be passed on to consumers. Up to 80% of Apple’s iPhones sale in the U.S. are made in China.
This shows not only Americans cannot survive without “cheap” Made-in-China iPhones, but also an admission of Trump’s mistake that had led to Apple losing US$640 billion in market value. The latest exemptions – a result of Trump’s half-baked tariff policy – also include other electronic devices and components, including semiconductors, solar cells, memory cards, flat panel TV displays and flash drives.
It also shows that the U.S. needs China more than China needs the U.S. The Chinese can stop buying soybeans from American farmers, but the U.S. can’t replace smartphones imported from China – worth more than US$41 billion in 2024, not to mention US$36 billion worth of computers and similar devices. Overall, the exemptions cover more than US$101 billion or 22% of U.S. imports from China.
Besides making 80% iPhones and iPads as well as half of Mac computer products for Apple, Foxconn in China also manufactures products for Amazon, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony. But the damage to Apple is just a drop in the ocean. According to a study from Yale’s Budget Lab, Trump’s tariffs would cost the average American household about US$4,700 a year.
The new pricing of clothing and textile prices could spike up to 67%. Even Trump’s iconic “Make America Great Again” red hats, made in China, would see its price skyrockets. But for most businesses in the U.S., the damage will be “irreversible” soon as orders from China are being cancelled, including toys, furniture, apparel, and footwear and sports equipment.
If China wants to play dirty, it could increase the freshly baked tariff of 125% to 250% on smartphones and computer exports to the U.S. just to neutralize Trump’s exemption. This will definitely create a crisis in the United States. But the Chinese people are arguably the most pragmatic civilization in history. Unlike Donald Trump, they won’t cut the nose to spite the face.
Imagine a bully who punched you and then warned you not to retaliate. What if you don’t retaliate, but still the bully keeps punching you again because he mistaken your obedience as cowardice? That’s why China retaliates with equal force – matching the U.S. tariffs three times in a row. While Trump arrogantly said countries were queuing to “kiss his ass”, Vice President JD Vance rudely called the Chinese people as “peasants”.
The U.S. president might be busy with dozens of small and weak countries waiting to strike deals, lining up calls and meetings in the coming weeks. But one country is not in the list – China. Not only Beijing was out of reach, Xi Jinping did not even bother to answer the phone calls, which had been ringing off the hook, from the White House. The news from CNN was indeed humiliating to the Trump administration.
Apparently, before Beijing ratcheted up its own tariffs on American goods on Friday (April 11) to 125%, the White House had privately – and desperately – tried to engage with Beijing with two urgent messages. First, Trump’s team warned Chinese officials against retaliation. Second, it begged Chinese President Xi Jinping – once again – to request a call with U.S. President Donald Trump.
Instead, U.S. officials woke up to the news of increased Chinese tariffs (from 84% to 125%) and no request for a leader level call. Instead of calling Trump, Xi publicly lectured the Trump administration – “For over 70 years, China’s development has relied on self-reliance and hard work – never on handouts from others, and it is not afraid of any unjust suppression,”
Two senior White House officials told CNN that the U.S. will not reach out to China first. Trump has told his team that China must be the first to make the move. That’s because the U.S. president will lose face if he were to call the Chinese leader first. Not only Trump wanted to claim victory, that a trade war is easy to win, but also wanted to brag that President Xi kissed his ass like everyone else.
Unfortunately to Trump, Beijing refused to swallow the hook, line and sinker. As a result, China kept the U.S. waiting for two months, whilst Trump’s team continued to tell Chinese officials that Xi should request a call with Trump. The White House believes that Beijing has repeatedly refused to arrange a leader-level phone call as Xi does not want to be seen as weak by making the first move.
But China said any dialogue must be based on equality, respect and mutual benefit. The foreign affairs ministry said – “If the U.S. truly wants to have talks, it should stop its capricious and destructive behaviour. For the welfare of the Chinese and the people of the world, for the fairness and justice of the global order, China will never bow to maximum pressure of the U.S. Give the bully an inch, he will take a mile”.
President Donald Trump, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Advisor Peter Navarro all think China was an easy meat. But after Beijing retaliated with 125% tariff, making American goods no longer marketable in China, Bessent now said the U.S. is looking at ganging up with Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and India to isolate China – called a “grand encirclement” strategy.
Clearly, Bessent panicked after Spain’s prime minister, Pedro Sanchez, called for a European Union pivot toward China. His idea of ganging up with China’s neighbours to suppress Beijing was not only silly, but has a huge problem – Trump’s “America First” ideology. The U.S. president said himself – “Our allies have taken advantage of us more so than our enemies.”
If Trump would not think twice about betraying allies like the European Union, Canada, Japan and South Korea, what make Vietnam and Cambodia think – after threatened with high tariffs by the U.S. – that it’s a jolly good idea to ditch China in favour of America? Besides, Trump’s crusade is to destroy manufacturing jobs of the Vietnamese and the Cambodians.
The most popular belief in the U.S. that Uncle Sam will definitely win the tariff war against China is the argument that the “Chinese exports to the U.S. are five times our exports to China”. The conclusion that Beijing will go bankrupt if Washington refuses to do business with them is not only foolish, but retarded. Do you really think the Chinese 5,000-year civilization will lose to the Americans 250-year civilization?
Like it or not, China doesn’t care even in the worst case scenario that it is totally de-coupled from the U.S. Before the United States was founded in 1776, the Middle Kingdom was already a thriving and prosperous empire. And before the existence of the U.S., China had continued its trade and commerce with the world for thousands of years. So, what is so special about a country with US$36 trillion in debt?
Only simpletons like Bessent and Navarro think Beijing can’t afford to escalate a trade war to a level that fully throttles the U.S. economy. China’s 125% tariff is the clearest proof that it has the firepower to escalate the trade war. By pausing some tariffs for dozens of countries for 90 days and exempting electronics from some of his tariffs, Mr Trump has blinked more than once, to the amusement of Mr Xi. Trump’s MAGA could mean “Make Asia Great Again”.
Source : Twitter
China Won Tariff War Art Of Deal: Trump Bent The Knee & Blink First – Begging To Talk & Meet With Chinese President Xi Jinping
11 April, 2025
The Chinese went all in — jacking up their tariffs, selling Treasuries, probably threatening to pull back from today’s regularly scheduled auction of new Treasuries. And Donald Trump blinked.
US President Trump offers to talk and meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping to negotiate tariffs.
Trump is playing his usual game of ‘gracious master’ after being wounded.
Reporter: Would you consider talking or meeting with Xi Jinping?
Trump: President Xi, I like him, I respect him. Everyone wants to make a deal actually
He further stated that he is not concerned about escalation between the countries because Xi is “one of the very smart people in the world.”
China is ready to resist, but Trump is grumbling. China knows there’s no country on this planet that can truly replace its production power. It also knows the U.S. won’t survive the long road of trying to rebuild manufacturing from scratch. As usual, Trump is playing mind games — but China sees right through them.
In others words Trump has backed down on his ridiculous disrespectful attitude towards China.
President Trump said he did not think he would need to raise them further and that he expected Xi Jinping, China’s president, to reach out about a deal.
“I can’t imagine it. I don’t think we’ll have to do it more,” he said of additional tariffs on China. “No, I don’t see that.”
China is not backing down. Xi Jinping has the Mandate of Heaven for a reason and it’s because he shows strength in the face of foreign adversaries, unlike his predecessors. The China Ministry of Commerce has issued a statement to say that it will “fight to the end if the US insists on new tariffs.”
Trump administration genuinely thought it could stick it to China only now it realises it can’t do so, so it wants to form a gang of allies to try and stand up to China. It’s truly pathetic and highlights just how weak and ineffectual the US is now. As we have said for several years, it is the emperor with no clothes.
China Unlikely To Blink First As Trump’s Trade War Enters Uncharted New Territory
Since Trump’s first trade war with China in 2018, Beijing has ramped up trade with other countries, making it less dependent on the US.
The opening shots seem like a distant memory. Back in January, US president Donald Trump threatened to impose a tariff of 10% on Chinese imports. Less than three months later, the rate is now 125%.
China has condemned the tariffs. As well as applying its own reciprocal tariff of 84% on US imports, Beijing has been fighting a war of words.
“When challenged, we will never back down,” said China’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Lin Jian. The commerce ministry said: “China will fight to the end if the US side is bent on going down the wrong path.” Further countermeasures have been promised by Beijing.
The tit-for-tat measures could spark fears of a race to the bottom, with ordinary people suffering as prices rise and a fears of a global recession grow.
But although China’s economy has in recent years been beset by its own challenges, when it comes to tariffs specifically, Beijing is unlikely to blink first.
“For President Xi, there is only one politically viable response to Trump’s latest threat: Bring it on! Having already surprised domestic audiences with a forceful 34% reciprocal tariff, any appearance of backing down would be politically untenable,” says Diana Choyleva, founder and chief economist at Enodo Economics, a forecasting firm.
One of the most helpful factors in Beijing’s favour is the fact that the US is far more dependent on Chinese imports than China is on the US.
The main items that the US imports from China are consumer goods, such as smartphones, computers and toys. Last week, analysts at Rosenblatt Securities predicted that the cost of the cheapest iPhone available in the US could rise from $799 to $1,142 – and that was when Trump’s China tariffs were just 54%. “Trump cannot credibly deflect blame on to China for these economic hardships,” Choyleva says.
In contrast, the goods that China imports from the US are industrial and manufacturing supplies, such as soya beans, fossil fuels and jet engines. It is much easier for price increases in these commodities to be absorbed before a consumer gets their wallet – or in the case of China, their smartphone – out to pay.
Plus, this is not China’s first rodeo. Since Trump’s first trade war with China in 2018, China has ramped up trade with other countries, making it less dependent on the US. Between 2018 and 2020, Brazil’s soya bean exports to China increased by more than 45% compared to the 2015-2017 average, while US exports declined 38% over the same period. China is still the largest market for US agricultural goods, but the market is shrinking, hurting American farmers. In 2024, the US exported $29.25bn of agricultural products to China, down from $42.8bn in 2022.
China has other measures up its sleeve. On Tuesday, two influential nationalist bloggers published identical lists of possible Chinese retaliations, based on sources. China’s foreign ministry declined to comment on the articles but did not deny their content either.
The suggestions included suspending cooperation on fentanyl control, investigating US companies’ intellectual property gains in China, and banning Hollywood films from China. On the final point, a top-down embargo may not be necessary. China has in the past allowed online nationalists to whip up grassroots boycott campaigns. In 2017, Chinese consumers participated in a mass shunning of the South Korean supermarket chain Lotte, in response to the conglomerate’s involvement in a deal that allowed a US missile defence system to be installed in South Korea, which China saw as a security threat. Nearly half of the company’s more than 100 stores in mainland China were forced to close.
China’s strategic advantages do not make it totally immune from a trade war. The stock markets in China and Hong Kong are falling. Beijing has not yet figured out a way to meaningfully boost domestic demand, something that economists say is essential to truly tariff-proof the economy.
The political impact of Trump’s tariffs, coupled with the fear that the US is trying to turn other countries against China, is pushing US-China relations to an all time low. “I do not remember ever being this pessimistic about the trajectory of US-China relations,” wrote China analyst Bill Bishop in a newsletter. “The trade relationship is the linchpin between the two countries, and as it breaks we should probably expect other areas to see more stress.” But as the Trump administration talks of “Chinese peasants” and suggests that China is playing with a weak hand, Beijing is unlikely to back down anytime soon.
US ‘Madman Theory’ vs. Chinese Preparation
There are no such constraints this time, with a Trump fan club in place of a government. Trump can now apply the “madman theory”, a foreign policy strategy associated with former US president Richard Nixon consisting of making interlocutors believe the man in the White House is capable of anything.
Washington has also decided, in its mad dash for all-out tariffs, to take particular aim at countries – such as Mexico and Vietnam – that Chinese exporters used as intermediaries to get around the tariffs in 2018.
But Trump is taking on a rival which is better prepared than in 2018. “China has had a lot of time to prepare for a resumption of the trade war. They were caught a bit off-guard in 2018. But once it became apparent, especially under the Biden administration, that a lot of these tariffs were going to be left on, it really signified to Beijing that we need to start preparing our defences for when the situation might accelerate,” Lanteigne said.
Over the past seven years, China has succeeded in diversifying its export base. “China’s export reliance on the United States has been reduced significantly. Back in 2018, exports to the US accounted for around 20 percent of China’s total exports. Now that figure has been decreased to around 14 percent. So, even though this time, the tariff rates are much higher compared with 2018, China is relatively better prepared,” Xin said.
“China’s trade with Global South countries has actually overtaken its trade with the G7,” added Petry. “Compared to ten years ago, they’re not as sensitive anymore to US tariffs.”
Many experts believe China probably also has more ammunition than the US to limit the economic damage of a trade war. “The Chinese government has a lot of fiscal and monetary room to manoeuvre,” said Petry. “They can go down with interest rates. They can spend more money. The central government can issue more debt. Government debt in China, for instance, is not as high as in the US.” In the US, on the other hand, the deficit has risen from just under 4 percent in 2018 to over 6 percent in 2024. The US government knows that in the event of a recession, it will not have the same reserves as it had in 2018.
Alienating Allies Gives China A Win
China also has more options to increase the economic pain on its competitors and adversaries, and that can extend to the sphere of rare earth minerals critical for electronics, optics and other high-precision sectors. “China can impose export controls over a wider range of rare earths because currently China only imposes bans on rare earths for certain elements, but not all of them,” said Xin. “If tariffs – the trade wars – escalate even further, it’s a possibility that China could apply export controls over a wider range of rare earths.”
The main US option for maintaining the initiative in the escalating trade war would be, apart from imposing ever-higher customs duties, to impose financial and economic sanctions similar to what was done for Russia or Iran, notes Petry. But while the prospect cannot be ruled out entirely, experts interviewed by FRANCE 24 believe it would be a measure of last resort.
“Had Trump not also placed tariffs on, for example, the European Union, Japan and Korea, he probably could have convinced these countries to link resources and put even more pressure on China. I don’t think that’s going to happen under current circumstances. I think that it’s going to be very difficult for the US to get partners and allies to deal with China under the current situation,” said Lanteigne.
The responses of other countries towards the two global economic giants remain the main unknown factor in this new trade war. If the US succeeds in forcing other countries to put an end to their tariffs, and if they get behind it in the trade war against China, that would be a worst-case scenario for Beijing, notes Xin.
That’s one of the reasons China decided to react quickly and forcefully to the Trump tariffs. “It was to send a strong signal to everybody else that there is no tolerance from China about this kind of trade barriers and tariffs,” Xin said. “If anybody else would like to raise tariffs against China in a similar way [as] the United States, then they should be ready to face the consequences.”
Soya Beans: China Secret Weapon Against Trump’s Tariff Wars?
Here’s what to know about what a soya bean trade war could mean – and why it could be a big deal for the US, economically and politically:
Why is soya so important for the US?
Soya, in the form of whole beans, animal feed, or oil, is a cornerstone of the US agricultural industry and represents one of America’s biggest agricultural revenue earners.
It accounts for about 0.6 percent of GDP. The US has more than 500,000 soya bean producers, according to the Department of Agriculture’s Census of Agriculture. That includes at least 223,000 full-time jobs supported by the soya bean industry, according to a 2023 report for the National Oilseed Processors Association and the United Soybean Board.
The industry is worth $124bn in the US – that’s more than the entire economy of Kenya or Bulgaria.
Although local demand for soya in the US is growing, exports form the basis of the crop’s success. The US is presently the second-largest exporter of soya beans globally, selling more than half its yield to about 80 countries.
Who does the US export soya beans to?
Soya beans contributed more than $27bn of US annual exports in 2023, according to data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), an open-source data visualisation platform.
That’s more than any other agricultural export.
China, which imports $15bn of US soya beans, is by far the most important market, followed by the EU – and especially Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, which buy about $2bn worth of the oilseed.
Yet, both China and the EU are now at the heart of a global pushback against Trump’s tariffs. They were both on the “worst offender” list of countries hit by a barrage of tariff hikes announced by Trump last week. The list included countries that Washington claimed were unfairly taxing US goods in their countries.
Will the EU and China retaliate with tariffs on soya?
Both entities appear to be targeting US soya, a soft spot for Washington, considering the importance of their markets to American farmers.
The EU earlier promised to target US goods worth up to €26 billion ($28bn) in retaliatory tariffs. A draft of the full list was leaked earlier but has not officially been released.
On Wednesday, the bloc voted on a surcharge of up to 25 percent on the list of targeted goods. A first set of tariffs will be enforced from April 15.
While those tariffs are expected to be enforced in phases, one of the products on the EU’s list is soya.
Meanwhile, US soya exports to China, its biggest market, are also facing a battering. China had earlier honed in on US food products, slapping a 15 percent duty on commodities like chicken, wheat and corn, while imposing a 10 percent levy on soya beans, meat and other farm exports.
On Saturday, China placed an additional 34 percent on all US goods, bringing the surcharge on soya, in particular, to 44 percent. A further 50 percent hike on all US goods will take effect on Thursday, Beijing has announced.
That means American soya beans will now face 94 percent tariffs in China.
Experts say China can afford to gamble with soya because it has increasingly turned to Brazil for its soya imports since 2017 when the first trade war began during Trump’s first administration.
US soya exports to China have fallen in the time since, while Brazil now holds more than half of the market share. In 2024, Brazil exported $36.6bn worth of soya to China while the United States exported $12.1bn worth of soya.
How are US soya farmers reacting?
American soya farmers have urged Trump to remove tariffs on China, the EU, and other top markets like Mexico. Most have emphasised China’s importance to US farmers.
“China bought 52 percent of our (soya bean) exports in 2024,” the American Soybean Association’s chief economist, Scott Gerlt, told the AFP news agency. Given the size of its purchases, China cannot easily be replaced, he added.
Some farmers say many won’t be able to hold out for too long if the trade spat continues, as their produce would become too expensive to be competitive on the global market.
“If this trade war lasts beyond the fall, you’re going to see farmers go out of business,” soya bean farmer David Walton told US news channel ABC.
Trump Tariff – Millions Of Consumers Are Boycotting US Goods Around The World – “Boycott USA” Messages & Searches Have Been Trending
11 April, 2025
As politicians around the world scramble to respond to US “liberation day” tariffs, consumers have also begun flexing their muscles. “Boycott USA” messages and searches have been trending on social media and search engines, with users sharing advice on brands and products to avoid.
Even before Donald Trump announced across-the-board tariffs, there had been protests and attacks on the president’s golf courses in Doonbeg in Ireland and Turnberry in Scotland in response to other policies. And in Canada, shoppers avoided US goods after Trump announced he could take over his northern neighbour.
His close ally Elon Musk has seen protests at Tesla showrooms across Europe, Australia and New Zealand. New cars have been set on fire as part of the “Tesla take-down”, while Tesla sales have been on a deep downward trend. This has been especially noticeable in European countries where electric vehicles sales have been high, and in Australia.
“It’s the only way they [shoppers] can make a little protest on Trump,” Sanne, a store worker at a Copenhagen branch of Danish grocery store chain Føtex, told CNBC.
“F— the U.S. basically at this point,” said shopper Sanja, an Australian now living in Copenhagen.
“I would prefer European products versus American, not only because of the conflict, but also the standards. Now that the conflict is what it is, it’s even more so,” said Sanja, whose mother was visiting from Australia and said she, likewise, planned to shun U.S. products back home.
Another shopper, Eva, agreed: “Yes, I would avoid American products. I think they need a new president.”
The boycotting of U.S. products has been mirrored elsewhere in Europe, with the #BoycottUSA hashtag spreading on social media and Facebook groups emerging to help consumers locate regionally made goods. It follows similar moves by shoppers in Canada, where Americano coffees have been renamed Canadianos.
Big U.S. brands have also faced a backlash, with one French poll pointing to pushback against household name like Starbucks, McDonald’s and Coca Cola. Perhaps the most prominent among them, Tesla has seen sales drop significantly across the region, with some dealerships in Germany, Italy and Sweden vandalized in a rejection of CEO Elon Musk’s political moves.
This targeting of Trump and Musk’s brands are part of wider boycotts of US goods as consumers look for ways to express their anger at the US administration.
Denmark’s biggest retailer, Salling Group, has given the price label of all European products a black star, making it easy for customers to avoid US goods.
Canadian shoppers are turning US products upside down in retail outlets so it’s easier for fellow shoppers to spot and avoid them. Canadian consumers can also download the Maple Scan app that checks barcodes to see if their grocery purchases are actually Canadian or have parent companies from the USA.
Who owns what?
The issue of ostensibly Canadian brands being owned by US capital illustrates the complexity of consumer boycotts – it can be difficult to identify which brands are American and which are not.
In the UK, for example, many consumers would be surprised to learn how many famous British brands are actually American-owned – for example, Cadbury, Waterstones and Boots. So entwined are global economies that attempts by consumers to boycott US brands may also damage their local economies.
This complexity is also present in Danish and Canadian Facebook groups that are dedicated to boycotting US goods. Consumers exchange tips on how to swap alternatives for American products.
The fact that Facebook is a US-based company only demonstrates how deeply embedded consumer culture is in US technologies. European businesses often depend on American operating systems and cloud storage while consumers rely on US-owned social media platforms for communication.
Even when consumers succeed in weeding out American products, if they pay using Visa, Mastercard or Apple Pay, a percentage of the price will nonetheless be rerouted to the US. If a touch payment is made with Worldpay, the percentage could be even greater.
These American financial services show just how embedded US businesses are in retail in ways that consumers may not appreciate. In practice, an absolute boycott of US business is almost unimaginable.
All-American brands
But American branding is not always subtle. In addition to brands directly connected to the US administration – such as the Trump golf courses and Tesla – many other companies have always been flamboyantly American. Coca-Cola, Starbucks and Budweiser are just some examples where their American identities and proudly on show.
As such, it’s possible that consumers will increasingly avoid blatantly American brands. They may be less concerned about the complexities and contradictions of a more comprehensive boycott.
Consumer actions where the goal is political change are known as “proxy boycotts” because no particular company is the ultimate target. Rather, the brands and firms are targeted by consumers as a means to an end.
Do boycotts work?
A classic example of a proxy boycott took aim at French goods, particularly wine, in the mid-1990s. This was in response to president Jacques Chirac’s decision to conduct nuclear tests in the Pacific. The large-scale consumer boycotts contributed to France’s decision to abandon its nuclear tests in 1996.
In Britain, for example, French wines in all categories lost market share as demand fell during the boycott. At the time, it cost the French wine sector £23 million (about £46 million today).
These boycotts are a reminder that the interplay between corporations, brands and consumer culture are inevitably embedded in politics. The current political impasse demonstrates that consumers can participate in politics, not just with their votes, but also with their buying power.
Trump clearly wants to demonstrate American strength. The “liberation day” tariffs, which were higher than most observers expected, bear this out. But many US corporations will now be worrying about how consumers in the US and around the world might respond. Trump could see a mass mobilisation of consumer power in ways that will give the president something to think about.
Avoiding U.S. travel
The change in shopping patterns points to a wider shift in consumer sentiment, with data suggesting travelers are also increasingly turning their backs on trips to the U.S. amid Trump’s trade policies, unfavorable currency fluctuations and high-profile detainments of visa-holders.
Canada’s largest airline Air Canada said last week that bookings for trans-border flights from Canada to U.S. cities were down 10% for the April-to-September period versus last year. Travel data provider OAG, meanwhile, said Canada-U.S. flight bookings were down 70%.
It follows earlier comments from the vice chair of Canadian carrier WestJet, who said that U.S.-Canada border crossings were down as passengers “shift from the U.S. to other destinations.”
Similar trends appear to be emerging in Europe, too. Accor CEO Sebastien Bazin told Bloomberg last week that summer bookings from Europe to the U.S. were 25% lower because of “anxiety to go in an unknown territory.”
For shopper Sanja, that has made visits to her Italian-Colombian husband’s family more difficult. But when asked whether she was avoiding U.S. travel in the current climate, she was unequivocal.
“Hell yeah. Even when we go to Colombia, we’ll travel around it [the U.S.],” said Sanja. “I have two young kids, it’s not worth it.”
Consumer boycotts gather pace
Several Facebook groups have been set up since Trump first indicated tariff measures to organize boycotts and campaigns. A Swedish group called “Bojkotta varor fran USA” in Swedish, meaning “Boycott goods from the US,” had almost 86,000 members when the tariffs were due to come in.
It hopes boycotts will pressure the Trump administration to end its sanctions. The use of the American platform Facebook is justified as it is “the best weapon,” it added.
A French group called “BOYCOTT USA: Achetez Francais et Europeen!” — BOYCOTT USA: Buy French and European! — has almost 30,000 members.
There also appears to be support for a similar stance in Germany. Research group Civey found 64% of Germans would prefer to avoid US products, if possible. A slim majority said Trump’s policies are already influencing their shopping choices.
An online movement across social media and messaging boards like Reddit has also led to consumers in Europe and Canada turning American products upside down on store shelves, hoping the visual cue will dissuade purchasers.
European companies are also taking action against US firms. Denmark’s largest retailer, Salling Group, has said it will tag European products in its stores with a black star to help customers identify them.
The company will still sell US products, but its CEO Anders Hagh wrote on LinkedIn the new label is an “extra service for customers who want to buy goods with European brands.”
Meanwhile, some companies are taking even more decisive action. Norway’s Haltbakk Bunkers, which provides oil and fuel to ships, recently said it would stop supplying fuel to US Navy ships.
No comments:
Post a Comment