Brett Fortnam
@brettfortnam.bsky.social
Senior editor at Inside U.S. Trade, fan of depressing sports teams. Never met a dad joke that wasn't worth the groan.
The U.S. wants this in more of its tariff deals. This from the New York Times this morning: www.nytimes.com/live/2025/08...
(11/n)
(11/n)
August 7, 2025 at 5:13 PM
The U.S. wants this in more of its tariff deals. This from the New York Times this morning: www.nytimes.com/live/2025/08...
(11/n)
(11/n)
The difference between transshipment and, well, the supply chain hinges on "substantial transformation." Commerce defines it as: (8/n)
August 7, 2025 at 5:13 PM
The difference between transshipment and, well, the supply chain hinges on "substantial transformation." Commerce defines it as: (8/n)
But he immediately follows that with something else entirely. Now, he says, a good with just 30% content from a third country gets hit with a higher tariff rate. (7/n)
August 7, 2025 at 5:13 PM
But he immediately follows that with something else entirely. Now, he says, a good with just 30% content from a third country gets hit with a higher tariff rate. (7/n)
Here we get a basic definition of transshipment. (6/n)
August 7, 2025 at 5:13 PM
Here we get a basic definition of transshipment. (6/n)
The executive order Trump signed last week to impose sweeping new tariffs on countries with which the U.S. has a trade deficit included a 40 percent tariff on transshipped goods. (2/n)
August 7, 2025 at 5:13 PM
The executive order Trump signed last week to impose sweeping new tariffs on countries with which the U.S. has a trade deficit included a 40 percent tariff on transshipped goods. (2/n)
Where does this gem rank with you former Cato gents?
June 12, 2025 at 1:28 AM
Where does this gem rank with you former Cato gents?
And here's the line that really gets me: (5/n)
April 25, 2025 at 3:57 PM
And here's the line that really gets me: (5/n)
So I was prepared to go on this whole screed about how U.S. and Chinese officials are obviously having informal conversations that Trump is referring to as trade deals and Beijing is adamant they're not that and that it's all semantics and optics and yada yada yada. Then this happens: (1/n)
April 25, 2025 at 3:57 PM
So I was prepared to go on this whole screed about how U.S. and Chinese officials are obviously having informal conversations that Trump is referring to as trade deals and Beijing is adamant they're not that and that it's all semantics and optics and yada yada yada. Then this happens: (1/n)
Finalizing the terms of reference to lay down a roadmap for negotiations sounds a whole lot like "we've identified where we think we might want the landing zones to be, but we have to get the permit to build those zones and then actually land the thing."
April 22, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Finalizing the terms of reference to lay down a roadmap for negotiations sounds a whole lot like "we've identified where we think we might want the landing zones to be, but we have to get the permit to build those zones and then actually land the thing."
and nobody updated their website: (7/n)
April 14, 2025 at 11:04 PM
and nobody updated their website: (7/n)
IF Commerce did launch the investigation on April 1, it doesn't sound like anyone told USTR. Here's Greer on Wednesday at the Ways & Means hearing: (6/n)
April 14, 2025 at 11:04 PM
IF Commerce did launch the investigation on April 1, it doesn't sound like anyone told USTR. Here's Greer on Wednesday at the Ways & Means hearing: (6/n)
So we asked the White House (and Commerce) about it. The White House spox didn't offer any insight on the timing. (3/n)
April 14, 2025 at 11:04 PM
So we asked the White House (and Commerce) about it. The White House spox didn't offer any insight on the timing. (3/n)
"China also wants to make a deal, badly, but they don’t know how to get it started. We are waiting for their call." (2/n)
April 8, 2025 at 4:09 PM
"China also wants to make a deal, badly, but they don’t know how to get it started. We are waiting for their call." (2/n)
The Trump administration also telegraphed this type of behavior in the EO.
April 7, 2025 at 8:40 PM
The Trump administration also telegraphed this type of behavior in the EO.
The White House in announcing its 'Liberation Day' tariffs printed out a bunch of handouts and posters with the names of countries and geographical regions. These included some rather obvious errors, like including the uninhabited Heard and McDonald Islands. (2/n)
April 7, 2025 at 5:23 PM
The White House in announcing its 'Liberation Day' tariffs printed out a bunch of handouts and posters with the names of countries and geographical regions. These included some rather obvious errors, like including the uninhabited Heard and McDonald Islands. (2/n)
On Wednesday, Trump signed an order saying the adequate systems were in place and ending de minimis treatment for Chinese goods. But the so-called 'reciprocal' tariff order included language on de minimis very similar to the walk-back of the ending of de minimis for China. Check it out: (11/n)
April 6, 2025 at 7:19 PM
On Wednesday, Trump signed an order saying the adequate systems were in place and ending de minimis treatment for Chinese goods. But the so-called 'reciprocal' tariff order included language on de minimis very similar to the walk-back of the ending of de minimis for China. Check it out: (11/n)
Carney said it didn't during his press conference, but I think I see the confusion:
April 3, 2025 at 9:20 PM
Carney said it didn't during his press conference, but I think I see the confusion:
The order specifies the tariffs don't hit countries with which we do not have normal trade relations -- Column 2 countries.
April 3, 2025 at 12:10 AM
The order specifies the tariffs don't hit countries with which we do not have normal trade relations -- Column 2 countries.