Comparing Tariff Levels. Where Does China Stand?

How do tariffs compare among the various major trading countries?  Recently the CATO institute published a commentary that provided such comparisons (figure 3.)

 

Comparative Country Tariff Levelsource: Cato At Liberty—Simon Lester

Figure 3

Source:  Cato Institute-Simon Lester

Analyzing the impact of the tariff structure can prove to be difficult as many countries negotiate bi-lateral agreements to moderate or eliminate some of these tariffs.  Clearly, China shows up in the table with higher tariff levels.   Along with that, China’s intellectual property “abuse”, and foreign business operating constraints shows the administration’s argument for change contains a degree of merit.

 

Industries Impacted by a Potential Trade War

The most global of U.S. industries include tech, energy, industrials, and materials.  For U.S. global companies, approximately one-third of their sales comes from non-U.S. operations.  In comparison, only 21% of revenues generated by Russell 2000 index companies comes from outside the U.S.  that difference, in part, may explain the recent out-performance of that index, when compared to the S&P 500 index (see figure 4.)

Figure 4

Source:  The Daily Shot

Implementing higher tariffs would likely change global trade flows.  If this occurs, transportation and shipping industries will certainly feel that shift.  Higher tariffs will also affect the flow of semi-finished products as they move from country to country in the complex global manufacturing systems.

Those companies providing out-sourced manufacturing for U.S. companies could suffer if potential higher tariffs impact the countries where they operate.   Their flexibility to shift production will determine the level of that hurt. Overall, these uncertainties will likely contribute to businesses holding off on some capital and business expansion plans.

 

Trade War Impact on U.S. Consumer Companies

Up to now, the U.S. administration did not increase tariffs on consumer products with the exception of a 17% tariff on washing machines.  That could change and result in a meaningful impact on many consumer product manufacturers and retailers.   Figure 5 shows the relative size of consumer product imports from China.

More specifically, the U.S. imported nearly $71 billion of cellphones last year from China—our largest consumer product import.  At the same time, last year, rising high end cellphone prices put a damper on demand.  The proposed 10% tariff on cellphone imports would likely create further demand uncertainty for high end cellphones.

Figure 5

Relating National Security Issues and German Auto Tariffs

As in the case of China, there may also be an underlying issue festering below the increased auto tariff headlines with Germany.  In our opinion, that underlying issue may be German defense spending which also reflects on its military readiness.  More on that shortly.

In 2014, NATO members pledged to spend 2% of GDP on defense by 2024.  The following table shows only Estonia, the U.K., and, yes, Greece hit that target last year (see figure 6.)

Figure 6

The U.S. expresses particular criticism of Germany’s relatively small proportional contribution considering the size of its economy.  In addition, according to a NATO expert at the Atlantic Council in Washington, “the readiness of the German military is abysmal.”  A recent article from stripes.com supports that quote.   This article points out that none of Germany’s submarines can be considered operational, that only four of its 128 Eurofighter jets stand combat ready, and it lists other important areas of similar concern.

Therefore, when the administration cites auto tariffs on German cars as a security issue it may be broader than the initial reading may suggest.  Once again, the administration seems to be using higher tariffs to achieve goals beyond what tariffs directly impact.  Unfortunately, it may simply lead to trade wars without resolving the indirect issues.

 

Investment Conclusions

Despite the trade war issues, we expect ultimately that world leaders will face up to the need to solve some of the legitimate concerns of this administration.  Perhaps, weaker financial markets and stress on their economies will push through an ultimate agreement.   Alternatively, with the president’s known focus on stock market performance, the evident investor displeasure with his trade fight may move him to a more conciliatory position.   At the end, it takes two to tango.  So far, no one showed up at this dance.

With that expectation, we remain of the opinion that the fed’s normalization policies will prove the most important force effecting financial markets this year and next.  If that proves the case, our view remains that fed normalization efforts will cap stock multiples.  Therefore, companies that can demonstrate above average earnings growth will benefit.  If these stocks suffer from the trade whirlpool, investors should use that opportunity to initiate or add to growth stock positions.

Andrew J. Melnick, CFA

Chief Investment Strategist

First Capital Investment Partners

Disclaimer:  Any distribution, copying or disclosure of this article is prohibited. The contents should not be construed as investment advice, unless explicitly stated. Further, this information is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Neither data nor other information contained herein (or in the attachments) are warranted as to completeness or accuracy and are subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein do not necessarily reflect the views of Skyview Investment Advisors LLC.  Finally, to the extent that performance information is contained herein, past performance is not necessarily indicative of future returns.
First Capital Advisors Group, LLC is a federally registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Registration as an investment adviser does not imply a certain level of skill or training. The oral and written communications of an adviser provide you with information about which you determine to hire or retain an adviser. First Capital Advisors Group, LLC, form Adv part 2a & 2b can be obtained by written request directly to: First Capital Advisors Group, LLC 512 east township road, 5 valley plaza, bluebell, pa 19422. This is prepared for informational purposes only. It does not address specific investment objectives nor is the content intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. An index is a portfolio of specific securities, the performance of which is often used as a benchmark in judging the relative performance of certain asset classes. Indexes are unmanaged portfolios and investors cannot invest directly in an index. An index does not charge management fees or brokerage expenses, and no such fees or expenses were deducted from the performance shown. The standard & poor’s 500, often abbreviated as the S&P 500, or just the S&P, is an American stock market index based on the market capitalizations of 500 large companies having common stock listed on the NYSE or NASDAQ. The Russell 2000 index is an index measuring the performance of approximately 2,000 small-cap companies in the Russell 3000 index, which is made up of 3,000 of the biggest U.S. stocks
8757676.1
7/2/2018 2:48 pm
« Previous     Next »