One of the significant achievements of the past fifty years has been the dramatic reduction in global tariffs. From average levies on imports exceeding 10% in the 1970s to around 3% today, this decrease fueled international trade and contributed to a near tripling of global GDP per capita. Open trade policies enabled countries to thrive economically. Unfortunately, President Joe Biden’s recent decision to impose 100% tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) represents a sharp departure from these open market principles.
Trade policies that benefit consumers can pose political costs due to the specific harm they cause to certain workers and industries. This tension has always influenced political decisions regarding trade. Today, the political landscape is increasingly shaped by concerns over China’s unfair trade practices and the populist shift towards protectionist policies, exemplified by Donald Trump’s “America First” approach.
The argument for higher tariffs on Chinese goods, including EVs, centers on China’s substantial subsidies to its manufacturers, which give them a competitive edge globally. There are also national security concerns regarding the potential for Chinese EVs to be used for tracking and surveillance. However, Biden’s approach to addressing these issues through tariffs is flawed and economically damaging.
Economist David Ricardo’s principles, established over two centuries ago, advocate for open borders to imports, which typically result in lower prices and greater variety for consumers. Protectionist tariffs, on the other hand, tend to support inefficient domestic industries and hurt consumers. The U.S. experienced this firsthand in the 1980s when quotas on Japanese cars led to higher prices without improving the quality of domestic vehicles.
Today’s American automakers fear competition from Chinese companies like BYD, whose Seagull EVs are priced under $10,000 in China. By imposing tariffs, the U.S. is effectively allowing its manufacturers to continue selling lower-quality cars at higher prices, which contradicts the environmental goals of encouraging a shift to greener vehicles. Additionally, America’s green subsidies might end up benefiting Chinese firms, illustrating how one inefficient policy can lead to another.
The Biden administration’s implementation of these tariffs is also problematic. Typically, governments manage the political costs of trade through mechanisms designed to address unfair competition. For instance, the administration could have provided evidence of Chinese subsidies or documented the security threats posed by Chinese EVs before imposing countervailing duties. Instead, it added new tariffs on top of those imposed by Trump, initially justified by allegations of technology theft by China.
This lack of a rigorous case for the tariffs has severe consequences. Domestically, it encourages more firms to seek protectionist measures. Politically, it has led to a race to impose the highest barriers, with figures like Trump proposing even steeper tariffs on cars from Chinese-owned plants in Mexico. Internationally, other countries are likely to follow suit. Brazil and the European Union are already considering similar measures, further undermining the global trading system that the U.S. once led.
Beyond the immediate economic impacts, these tariffs could significantly influence the blockchain and cryptocurrency sectors. The rise in protectionism and the potential for a trade war might drive innovation in decentralized technologies and digital currencies. Blockchain technology offers a way to bypass traditional financial and trade barriers, providing a secure and transparent method for international transactions that are not subject to tariffs.
Cryptocurrencies, particularly Bitcoin, could see increased adoption as businesses and individuals seek alternatives to traditional banking systems hampered by trade restrictions. The decentralized nature of blockchain networks means that they are not controlled by any single entity, making them less susceptible to geopolitical tensions. Additionally, blockchain’s transparency and security features could help mitigate concerns about data privacy and security associated with Chinese EVs.
Furthermore, the use of blockchain technology in supply chain management could enhance transparency and efficiency, reducing the reliance on intermediaries and lowering costs. This could be particularly beneficial in a climate where trade policies are unpredictable, allowing businesses to maintain more resilient and adaptable supply chains.
In conclusion, while the Biden administration’s tariffs on Chinese EVs are intended to address unfair trade practices and national security concerns, they may have broader economic implications that could accelerate the adoption of blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. As the global trade system faces increasing fragmentation, decentralized digital solutions offer a promising alternative to navigate the complexities of international commerce in an era of rising protectionism.
