Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Report: Trump’s Proposed Tariff May Result in Higher Prices for Beer, Soft Drinks

Report: Trump’s Proposed Tariff May Result in Higher Prices for Beer, Soft Drinks

Beer Institute: “Tariffs are taxes. And taxes are job killers and prosperity killers”

The Beer Institute, a 501(C) organization based in DC, “condemns” President Trump’s proposed tariff on steel and aluminum stating that it will have a significant impact on American beer-makers (and buyers).

Fox News reports:

The Beer Institute is condemning President Donald Trump’s surprise plan to impose tariffs on aluminum and steel imports.

Despite a significant drop in the stock markets on Thursday and Friday, Trump gave no indication that he would back off the plan for a 25 percent tariff for steel imports and 10 percent tariff for aluminum imports.

The Beer Institute — which promotes beer and responsible consumption  as well as sound public policy and regulation for all of America’s brewers, beer importers and industry suppliers — says the aluminum tariff would increase costs to American businesses and endanger American jobs.

“Tariffs are taxes. And taxes are job killers and prosperity killers,” Beer Institute President Jim McGreevy said on “Your World” on Friday, revealing that they estimate this move will cost America’s beverage industry, including brewers and beer importers, $347 million.

He said he hopes the Trump administration will listen to concerns of the beer, soda, aerospace and auto industries, along with the hundreds of other industries that are downstream users of aluminum.

Watch the report:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Globalists pigs got the largest corporate tax break in history but won’t protect middle and working class jobs. Fugg ’em.

    Milhouse in reply to mrboxty. | March 4, 2018 at 12:12 am

    You’re the one who’s going to have to pay more for everything that involves steel or aluminum, which is to say practically everything. If you love US metal workers so much, set up a fund to collect voluntary donations for them, but what right do you have to tax everyone for their benefit? Why do we owe them a living? And how is this different from welfare?

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969991653393039361

Donald J. Trump
‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

The United States has an $800 Billion Dollar Yearly Trade Deficit because of our “very stupid” trade deals and policies. Our jobs and wealth are being given to other countries that have taken advantage of us for years. They laugh at what fools our leaders have been. No more!

9:43 AM – 3 Mar 2018

Some people need to quit their disingenuous sniveling and crying, and taking the Press at its no good word. President Donald J. Trump knows what he is doing – especially in this arena – and I’m behind him 100% even if I have to pay a little bit more for a six-pack of beer. Or a six-pack of soda. Or one, single solitary whole extra car payment.

Big deal. Such a ridiculously small price to pay for the benefit of America, Americans, and American industry. Unemployment is at its lowest since 1969, and the economy is growing by leaps and bounds.

I’m all in. I voted for the man, and I absolutely most definitely shall vote for him again as it currently stands. These are the things he pledged to do — and by God, the man is doing his level best to keep all of his pledges and promises with no help, back-up, or cover from our spineless, yellow, two-faced, backstabbing, ridiculously debauched GOP.

God Bless and Protect President Donald J. Trump

I don’t have a problem with the idea that governments can—and should—control their borders. “Control” means regulation of the flow of people, goods, capital, mail, etc. All legitimate functions of government.

Some people don’t think the flow of people should be controlled; some think the same of trade goods. Neither are obviously right.

    Milhouse in reply to tom_swift. | March 4, 2018 at 12:14 am

    Read The Wealth of Nations. The liberal (now known as conservative) political movement descends from the Anti Corn Law League, which was founded for the sole purpose of fighting protectionism.

how in hell will a tariff on aluminum raise the price of soda packaged in plastic bottles???
and that 340 million $$ cost to the beer companies….
divide 340 mill by the trillion or so cans of beer sold each year and the cost per six pack is 1 1/2 CENTS (http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2018/03/03/navarro-media-reaction-steel-aluminum-tariffs-bunch-horse-puckey).
maybe it’s time for beer to come in plastic, like soda and water.

Let’s do the math. Aluminum costs roughly $1.00 per pound. If the tariff is imposed, the price will increase to $1.10 per pound. An aluminum can weighs roughly 1 0z. so there are about 16 cans per pound. Therefore the price of a can will rise from $.0625 to $.0688. So we’re talking about a little over 1/2 cent per can increase. I can live with that.

    BobM in reply to snopercod. | March 4, 2018 at 9:07 pm

    It’s likely worse (or better) than that. If the 10% increase is an increase in MATERIAL cost, aluminum doesn’t spontaneously form itself into soda cans, car parts, and guard rails. Manufacturing costs are a significant portion of the final cost of any metallic item.

    US Manufacturing costs are unaffected by tariffs on raw material, if the tariffs will also apply to finished aluminum/steel products as well, then the 10% would be an increase in empty soda can costs.

    Although I recall once reading a significant portion of soda cans are from recycled metal as opposed to new raw material, so even then it shouldn’t reach 10%.

    In short, take whatever panic about paying a penny more a soda/beer can with a grain of salt.

We need to get out of NAFTA, too. The Chinese are avoiding their own export tariffs and U.S. import tariffs on aluminum by shipping fabricated aluminum to Mexico, melting it down, and shipping the ingots to the U.S. duty free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vyBtks8DkE

Connivin Caniff | March 4, 2018 at 11:17 am

It seems that China and Japan profit mightily from heavily restricting imports. They mustn’t have read Wealth of Nations either.

    Milhouse in reply to Connivin Caniff. | March 5, 2018 at 7:08 am

    No, they’re not profiting, they’re damaging their own people. The Japanese politicians have probably read it and know what they’re doing to their constituents, but like politicians everywhere they’d rather cater to the special interests than to the general interest. The special interests, because they are concentrated, speak louder and have money to spend, so politicians identify with them, just as they do here. In the Chinese case the government are the special interest, so they serve their own interest and don’t care what they’re doing to the people, who don’t vote anyway.

When we stop subsidizing the sugar industry and the corn industry, then I’ll worry about protectionism.

Oh goodie, beer in bottles like it should be.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend