CSPAN - Washington Journal David Shepardson

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 6, 2025 01:32-02:19 - CSPAN

46:56

Washington Journal David Shepardson

Participants

Appearances

mark carney

can 00:44

tammy thueringer

cspan 04:55

Clips

lee hawkins

00:17

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Sunday night on C-SPAN's QA.
		Journalist and musician Lee Hawkins, author of I Am Nobody's Slave, talks about the impact that slavery and Jim Crow have had on his family through multiple generations.
		Mr. Hawkins examines the relationship between the past violence experienced by family members, often at the hands of white people, and the way his parents raised and severely disciplined him.
lee hawkins ▲ ● ▼		All I knew growing up was that if I asked too many questions, if I said no to my parents, if I question any aspect of upbringing, and if I fell short of excellence, the price was going to be physical violence.
unidentified		Journalist, musician, and author Lee Hawkins.
		Sunday night at 8 Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
		You can listen to QA wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Joining us now to discuss President Trump's tariffs and the auto industry is David Shepherdson, correspondent with Reuters.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		David, welcome back to the program.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Been with us many times and we always appreciate it.
unidentified		Thanks.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		President Trump did sign an executive order levying a 25% tariff on all cars and light duty trucks imported to the U.S. Tell us how much of an impact that's going to have.
unidentified		It's going to be a big impact, right?
		And it's super complicated, right?
		Because first you've got the steel and aluminum tariffs, the 25% that are already impacting the auto sector.
		And then you have the tariffs that first kicked in on vehicles imported from Mexico and Canada.
		So that took place about a month ago, but President Trump exempted USMCA-compliant vehicles, meaning vehicles that comply with the trade rules from the trade deal that replaced NAFTA signed during his first term.
		So that means vehicles that have a certain amount of content from North America, at least 40 to 45% of the materials were produced by workers making $16 an hour.
		The new tariffs that took effect this week are 25% tariffs on vehicles all across the globe.
		And so now you have this two-tier tariff regime on autos that both affects cars from outside the U.S. and as well as the tariffs from North America.
		And then you have a third bucket of vehicles, which actually is getting hit by a couple different tariffs, right?
		So take a vehicle in Mexico.
		Perfect example is two Infiniti SUVs that Nissan announced this week would no longer be imported to the U.S.
		Those are getting hit by the 25% fentanyl tariff that took effect about a month ago, as well as the new tariff.
		So you'll have about a 52% total tariff on those vehicles.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		And one of the things to note is that the 25% tariffs are on any vehicle not assembled in the U.S. How many cars are actually assembled in the U.S.?
unidentified		So it's about half and half.
		So the United States buys and produces about 16 million vehicles a year.
		Sorry, buys 16 million.
		About 8 million of those are produced in the United States, 8 million outside.
		Of that total, about 4 million are produced in Mexico and Canada.
		The other 4 million come from South Korea, Canada, the European Union.
		So this is going to be a major disruption to the industry.
		And for U.S. vehicles, these U.S. MCA-compliant vehicles, they'll be able to deduct the value of the U.S. parts.
		So we'll reduce that 25% tariff somewhat, but it will still have a significant impact.
		The experts anticipate roughly $4,500 per vehicle once the existing inventory sells off.
		So right now, you're still seeing some discounts on vehicles.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		So that was my next question.
		Ultimately, tariffs are about the consumer and what happens.
		If somebody was getting ready to purchase a new car, maybe researching and looking around, how much time could they have?
		When could we see that existing inventory be depleted and those tariffs kick in?
unidentified		So, we already saw a big jump in sales just before the tariffs took effect, right?
		I think we saw maybe 100,000 more vehicles or some estimates were purchased at the end of March.
		So, auto companies did have a better month than they had thought.
		So, a lot of companies are offering discounts or promising not to raise prices.
		Ford and Solantis are offering employee prices through the month of April at least.
		So, I think, again, for certain very popular models, this might not last as long.
		But for the month of April, I think you should be able to get the vehicle you want without seeing a lot of price hikes.
		But again, as time goes on, I think dealers are going to be less likely to offer discounts, the same level of discounts that you might have gotten before, given that we all know what's coming, right?
		Higher prices, higher tariffs, as that inventory starts to run out.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We'll share our audience some graphics that give a better idea of the tariffs.
		10%, these are Trump's tariff plan: 10% tariff on all nearly all imports that went into, that goes into effect today.
		Higher reciprocal tariffs for China, 34%, Japan, 24%, and the EU, 20%, among other countries.
		That will take place.
		Those will go into effect next Wednesday.
		The 25% tariff on imported vehicles that went into effect April 3rd, so this week.
		25% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports.
		That went into effect in March, and that's something that you also mentioned was going to be affecting the auto industry.
		And also, a 20% tax on Chinese imports that was previously announced in March, which means China now faces a total tariff rate of 54%.
		You have a recent article on Reuters, the headline: U.S. Senators Seek to Rein in Trump Tariff Authority.
		Does President Trump have the authority to put these tariffs in effect?
unidentified		So, the short answer is yes.
		The question is, how long?
		So, the president is invoking emergency authority.
		He's declaring a national emergency, and in the case of cars, he is relying principally on a 2019 report that was created during his first term under this section of the trade law called 232.
		And he is saying that the fact the United States imports about 8 million vehicles a year is a national security risk because in the event of a war, that, say, World War II, what happened?
		The United States quickly changed its auto plants to build tanks, airplane engines, other armaments for the war effort.
		Given that the United States is importing a sizable number of vehicles, its industrial footprint is much smaller than it was proportionally, say, during World War II.
		So, you know, so as a result of that, it's clear under the law, he has the authority.
		The question is, how long can these tariffs take effect?
		And so, under the other emergency authorities called IEPA, right, there are a lot of people who argue that this is temporary, that he's only allowed to do it for 150 days and there has to be a specific emergency, and that they're not supposed to be a permanent change in the tariff regime.
		And so, I do think there's a likelihood that you'll see more lawsuits.
		We've already seen one lawsuit about the tariffs.
		And what this proposal would say is we'd return the power of tariffs expressly to Congress, right?
		It's in the Constitution.
		Congress has the power to levy tariffs.
		This bill, which is getting has gotten four or five Republican senators already, would say the tariffs would expire in 60 days absent an affirmative approval of Congress.
		Now, obviously, it would take two-thirds of both houses to overturn a presidential veto, and Trump's, you would think, not going to sign a bill that would constrain his own authority.
		But I do think it's sending a message that a lot of Republicans want President Trump to get to a deal, right?
		They don't want these tariffs to be in place permanently given the huge price hikes you would see over time versus making this into our new way of life where everything's 10% minimum, as you said, and things like everything from China would be 54%.
		Obviously, President Trump views these as a long-term way to prod American manufacturers to produce more goods in the United States.
		The question is, is he, the Republican Party, and others willing to tolerate the short-term pain, short to medium-term pain, of how long it would take to actually get these goods and the supply chains moved to the United States.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		David Shepardson, Reuters correspondent, is our guest for the next 35 minutes or so.
		If you have a question or comment for him, you can start calling in now.
		The Lions Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Democrats, 202-748-8000, 8,000.
		And Independents, 202-748-8,002.
		David, on Thursday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced his country will impose a 25% tariff on U.S. vehicles.
		We want to show you that announcement.
		We'll talk about it on the other side.
unidentified		Canada will respond to the U.S. auto tariffs.
mark carney ▲ ● ▼		And today I'm announcing that the government of Canada will be responding by matching the U.S. approach, by matching the U.S. approach, with 25% tariffs on all vehicles imported from the United States that are not compliant with CUSMA, our North American free trade agreement.
		And on the non-Canadian content of CUSMA-compliant vehicles from the United States as well.
		Our tariffs, though, unlike the U.S. tariffs, will not affect auto parts because we know the benefits of our integrated production system.
		And they will also not affect vehicle content from Mexico, who is respecting the CUSMA agreement.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		How is that going to, that Canadian tariff on U.S. vehicles, how is that going to impact the American auto industry?
unidentified		Well, it was really interesting, right?
		Because as you heard the Prime Minister say, he's carving out Canadian auto parts, right?
		And that's one of the hugely important things, right?
		Auto parts production, right there.
		In Michigan, there are a thousand auto parts suppliers, significant ones.
		And Canada, the U.S. relies intensely on those auto parts companies.
		So he doesn't want to do anything that would further incentivize American auto companies to more quickly shift production of parts from Canada to the United States.
		Now, it's interesting.
		I think it's about 8% of vehicles that are not compliant.
		And it's basically aiming to punish companies that have the least footprint in Canada, United States, the ones that are not compliant, the ones that are more bringing things from South Korea, Japan, the EU, and not meeting those value requirements.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		And when could the auto industry see the impacts?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		When could the American auto industry see the impacts of those Canadian tariffs?
unidentified		I think almost immediately, I don't know if it's not in effect now, it will be effect very soon.
		And again, I think it's a similar cadence, right?
		People have inventory, but you will see, like you saw in the case of Nissan, quick companies parking vehicles, not bringing them in, and taking immediate steps because these are very expensive.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk with some callers.
		We'll start with Robert in Waldorf, Maryland, Line for Independence.
		Hi, Robert.
unidentified		Good morning, ma'am.
unidentified		How are you doing?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We're doing well.
unidentified		Okay.
		Look, the media, and since this whole thing is broke, I don't think it's fair to just talk about the tariffs that the president is imposing on these countries.
		They never mentioned the tariffs that these countries have been posing on us for the past 30 to 40 years.
		I mean, Trump's basic business mindset is to make it cost-effective to bring these jobs back to the United States.
		The politicians and all these CEOs of these corporations have moved all these jobs away to make it cost-effective for them to be more profitable to screw over the American worker.
		And that's what they've done over the years.
		These politicians have sold their vote to allow these people to impose all these tariffs on us.
		They've allowed China to take all of our jobs.
		They've allowed China to take all of our products.
		And what Trump is doing is just pure, straight-up business that makes it cost-effective for these companies to move their business here to make it profitable for them to do it.
		If they want to keep them overseas, it will not be profitable.
		So for the media to sit here and say Trump's evil, Trump's evil, let's mention the tariffs that China's put on us, that Europe has put on us.
		Those numbers, look at those tariffs.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Okay, go ahead.
		Got your point, Robert.
		We'll get a response from Dave.
unidentified		I think the caller really accurately sums up President Trump's position, and there's a lot of validity to this argument.
		It's true that with the ascension of China and the WTO and NAFTA and USMCA, we saw a significant shift of auto production, especially auto parts production, to lower-cost countries, notably Mexico, and then obviously China and other countries in Asia.
		And so, and the caller's correct that the United States imports about half of its vehicles.
		This is the most profitable auto market in the world, and there are very few markets that have the same level of openness that the United States does.
		And certainly many of the countries have significant non-tariff barriers as well as some tariffs to U.S. vehicles.
		Now, it's worth mentioning: the United States has a 25% pickup truck tariff that has protected the United States market for more than 60 years.
		It's called the chicken tax.
		It was put in place temporarily in the 60s in response to West Germany putting taxes on our frozen chicken, and it's still there to this day.
		But I do think the fundamental question here is: President Trump's goal is, as the caller said, to more level the playing field and to make it more economically incentivize American companies, auto parts, and manufacturers to build their vehicles here.
		The question is, it will be more expensive, and it will take a long time to move factories, potentially two, three, four years.
		Is the White House willing to tolerate significant pain, lower sales, higher costs, economic disruption for this longer-term goal of moving more production here?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Nancy, Bowling Green, Kentucky Line for Democrats.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Nancy.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
unidentified		How are y'all?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We're doing well, Nancy.
unidentified		Okay, great.
		No, my question is: I'm 65.
		When this began, I worked for a company called Fruit of the Loom.
		And we were getting, they were manufacturing stuff in, you know, like El Salvador.
		And we were cutting out the El Salvador label and sewing in a made in the USA.
		And these were Army contracts because we were making t-shirts for the United States Army.
		So I'm a product of this long ago.
		I could see this coming, but the people that wanted to make the monies, I mean, they've already made money, you know, doing this outside the country years ago.
		Now, Mr. Trump is trying to give them more money with the tax bracket.
		And when I hear that Social Security is an entitlement, that was my 401k, the Social Security was, but it was the FICA.
		I was only making minimum wage, so I didn't invest.
		I didn't take more money out to invest in anything.
		I was barely making it as is.
		And now that I've gotten older, I'm making even less.
		So I always thought that there would be a better time where you could maybe get ahead and move ahead.
		But the older I get, the more I know that's not, it's never going to happen.
		Well, again, I think this caller makes some really good points about the fact that the dichotomy is American consumers benefit from these low-cost consumer goods, right?
		We don't make, we only make 2% of the clothes that we use in this country.
		Sneakers, televisions, right?
		You know, toys.
		You mentioned fruit of the loom.
		So the question is, at one point in the United States, about 40% of the jobs, maybe 35, 40, 50 years ago were manufacturing jobs.
		Say that number is 8% or 9%, right?
		So our economy has shifted dramatically away from producing goods.
		And there have been many sectors of the economy, many areas of the country that saw substantial declines in employment.
		Certainly Michigan is an example, my home state, of where there was an enormous economic disruption and you saw a huge number of jobs go away.
		The question is now, are we willing to pay much more for these goods if they're shifted here?
		And if a car was built in the United States, as auto committees have pointed out to the Commerce Secretary, it might cost three, four, five times as much as it does here.
		That's separate from this issue of tariffs, which are going to raise prices.
		So how do you thread the needle between finding ways to incentivize companies to build more here while also not overly increasing American prices?
		And so it's a hard balancing act, whether you're President Trump, Democrats, and Congress.
		And I think that it's still left to be determined where it all shakes out.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Another headline of yours, Stellan, is to temporarily lay off 900 U.S. workers as tariffs bite.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Tell us what temporary means and how others in the auto industry are reacting.
unidentified		This is a really interesting anecdote because it got a ton of attention because it was the first example of a negative impact on American workers, right?
		So because of these 25% tariffs that took effect, Stellantis, which used to be Chrysler, used to be Fiat Chrysler.
		This is a company that's been bought and sold multiple times at one time.
		Dimore owned, it was called Dymo Chrysler.
		That's off the subject.
		So Stellantis decided to temporary close the plant in Windsor, Ontario, just across the river from Detroit, that makes minivans for a few weeks, as well as a plant in Mexico because of the tariffs.
		And as a result, it decided to temporarily lay off 900 workers at five transmission and other plants that provide parts for those factories.
		And so it's a good example of how the integrated supply chain, and a lot of Democrats said, see on day one, the Trump tariffs are hurting American workers.
		That's certainly true.
		And will at least be, Stellantis has said, as long as those two plants are closed, we don't, I mean, this two to four week period could be extended.
		On the other side of the ledger, you have Nissan, which we talked about earlier about stopping the infinities.
		Well, they had planned to go from one, so from two to one shifts in Smyrna, Tennessee, building the Nissan rogue, and then take or backfill the need for rogues with rogue SUVs produced in Japan.
		Well, as a result of this, they're not going to do that.
		They're going to keep those two shifts in place.
		Now, a lot of workers already accept early buyouts.
		It's not clear what the employment impact of that is.
		But I think the big thing to remember is there's no easy answers.
		There's winners and losers, and the economic disruption of this is going to be way more complicated than just tariffs equals more U.S. manufacturing.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Rick in Hayward, Wisconsin, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Rick.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I don't know.
		This is kind of a complex subject, and I'm for the workers and all that stuff.
		But my message is to Ford.
		I've never owned a foreign vehicle.
		I don't know much about Nissan, but, you know, whatever's going to be the affordable vehicle.
		My question is this.
		Why do we have a backup?
		Every vehicle has a backup camera, a dashboard full of who knows what technology.
		Isn't there, what's the point of making all that stuff?
		Why don't they make a vehicle that doesn't have a backup camera and power windows and all these things?
		I don't need any of that.
		I'm on my third Ford F-150 since the late 90s, probably.
		And fortunately for me, I was able to buy, you know, two of them new.
		The one I have now is getting very old, but I can't afford a $50,000 vehicle.
		There's no way.
		So I wonder what you have to say about that, the technology aspect of it and how much that's costing.
		Thank you.
		Perfect question.
		So first on your auto safety question, because I also cover that.
		So that was mandated by Congress, something called the Cameron-Gill-Branson Act, because a little boy was killed by a driver backing up in a driveway, mandating these backup cameras to try to reduce deaths of pedestrians, especially children and senior citizens, you know, who are slower and shorter and aren't able to be seen as well, especially from drivers like the F-150.
		If you're sitting up a lot higher, it's harder to see a smaller child behind a car.
		So it is mandated in all vehicles.
		In terms of pricing, you're absolutely right.
		The average new car price is $47,000 a year.
		The average income of a new car buyer is, I think, $115,000 a year, family income.
		It's almost twice the median family income.
		So affordability of vehicles is a very big issue.
		And it does, it is a question here.
		And one of the reasons that the car companies are very nervous is not just that those new, people who can afford to buy a new car won't be able to pay that extra money, but it's about the perception of your wealth.
		If your 401k is going down, even though you're not going to spend that money for 10, 20, 30 years, you feel less wealthy, you might be more reluctant to buy that vehicle.
		And as a result, and again, this goes to tariffs.
		The other issue is people are going to put off buying a new car if they can, right?
		So I don't get six more months, a year out of my old clunker.
		I don't know.
		I'll get it repaired.
		And so as a result, you're going to see fewer used cars entering the market.
		I mean, the day the tariffs got announced, Hertz's stock price went up about 20% because they sit on such a big, you know, big inventory of used cars.
		And so this could have downstream effects.
		Fewer used cars equals higher used car prices, equals fewer prices for replacement parts, higher prices for insurance, for your repairs.
		So the entire ecosystem of autos could see a dramatic impact in these tariffs, not just at the new car lot.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk with Chris Stowe, Massachusetts, Line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Chris.
unidentified		Hey, how's it going?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We're doing well, Chris.
unidentified		Awesome.
unidentified		So what are we talking about today?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Deborah in New York, Line for Democrats.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Deborah.
unidentified		Hi.
		My concern is that, you know, with these tariffs going on, the market going down, I am retired.
		I live on Social Security and a small IRA, which probably after this week is non-existent.
		But how does somebody my age who was looking at, okay, I can make it, all of a sudden you've turned this into, and I will hang up as soon as I finish saying this, where I don't know where my money's going to, you know, how far my money's going to go.
		I know the price of tomatoes went up 20 cents in one day at my local grocery store.
		And so I mean, you know, what do we just keep taking things out of our diets?
		Is maybe the government going to come out with some ways for us to, you know, okay, well, if you're on a limited budget, eat, you know, dirt or something like that.
		I don't know.
		I'm going to hang up and let you respond.
		Thank you.
		Well, I've got three kids, so I am certainly very cognizant of the grocery prices.
		I spend a lot of money.
		Our family spends a lot of money on groceries, too.
		And your caller's right.
		One of the first impacts are going to be the price of produce, tomatoes, bananas, avocados, coffee, other vegetables.
		We don't produce enough, especially in the winter months in the United States.
		So there will be very fast impacts.
		And obviously, there's not a lot people can do.
		I mean, if you want fresh produce, people can buy things ahead.
		And I do think we are seeing Costco's, Walmarts, and others are reporting some level of people trying to buy non-perishable goods ahead of time that are concerned about the prices.
		But long term, there's a lot of uncertainty.
		We don't know are these tariffs going to stick, right?
		And if they do, if there's a 10% tariff across the board, right, for all countries and higher in some places, there's certainly going to be higher prices people are going to pay.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Tom in Habbertown, Pennsylvania, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Tom.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My point is that there was a time for protective tariffs in the United States.
		And we had industry to protect back in, let's say, the late 70s, 1980s, when all of the manufacturing started disappearing from the United States.
		And I believe it was President Reagan who said we could become more of a service economy than a manufacturing economy, and that that would be fine.
		And it wasn't fine.
		And it's the mess that we're in now.
		But now is not the time because especially the way that these tariffs are being rolled out.
		And Peter Navarro was on TV saying this is not for negotiation.
		These are permanent tariffs that are not going to go away.
		And a half hour later, the president said, well, let's see what China says they're bringing to the table.
		And maybe we can negotiate if it's something really good.
		That kind of chaos and mixed messaging is going to make any responsible CEO unwilling to invest the kind of money and time it takes to rebuild infrastructure for manufacturing in the United States back.
		Because it would be stupid to invest the planning and the money if...
		tariffs are not permanent and going to be bankable.
		I think the caller hits on a good point.
		So auto companies want certainty, right?
		They want to know what the rules of the road are.
		And we've had in recent years sort of this shifting back and forth beyond tariffs.
		And I think this is right, that before companies are going to invest, they want to know what the tariff landscape is, but also about the environment, right?
		So right now, the Congress is considering repealing the California waiver, which is something the Biden administration gave them to allow them to impose a requirement that by 2035, about a dozen states want to ban internal combustion engine-only vehicles, right?
		We have electric, hydrogen, and plug-in hybrid.
		They've got at least 50 miles of battery power range alone.
		So there's a push in Congress to repeal those now.
		It's not clear if they'll be able to or whether it's legal given the rules under the CRA.
		But I do think if auto companies get more certainty about where we're going in terms of electric vehicle policy, you could see some shift in production, maybe increasing some of the internal combustion production in the United States.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		The current average, we heard a caller earlier talk about he doesn't have $50,000 to spend on a new vehicle.
		That's about right.
		The average cost of a new vehicle is $48,000.
		Bank of America estimates that the tariffs could cause those prices to go up as much as $10,000.
		Do we know if the automakers would pass everything on to the consumer?
		Is there any hope?
unidentified		I think the answer is no, not all of it, probably, because this is a hyper-competitive market.
		I mean, what other industry can you go and get so many different options, so many different cars, right?
		I mean, there's so many permutations of vehicles, right?
		So it's very, very competitive.
		However, the auto companies have a relatively thin profit margin normally.
		I mean, they're actually can't eat that level of cost.
		So they're certainly going to pass on some.
		There are some estimates that say the U.S. could see a $1 to $1.5 million reduction in auto sales if this went on indefinitely.
		So, you know, we don't know what the actual numbers we know directionally prices will go up and sales will go down to some level.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Andrew, Middleton, New Jersey, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Andrew.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		David, I want to know: is this cease tariffs, which to me is nothing more than a tax, is this going to have a ripple effect through the whole economy?
		Because not only people buying new cars, but let's not forget if you have a car that's 10 years old like I do, and you have to have it repaired in an auto shop, when he gets the ports for this, like they said, for instance, brake pads will go up as high as $35, $40.
		So he's going to pass that on to you.
		Now, one thing that we cannot have is just the service industry in this country.
		This country one time had manufacturing, technological jobs, and I don't think this is right.
		And we had a president, he's not my president, come on TV yesterday and says it's time to get rich.
		Well, who's going to get rich?
		People like Trump, people like Elon Musk.
		And right now, people are struggling with high food prices in this country.
		Go into any supermarket, go into any store.
		You're going to see higher prices.
		And I don't think this is right to play a tax game or a tariff game for China since 60% of the stuff coming into this country is coming from China.
		So look, on the one hand, we do protect the United States market from China, right?
		Unlike, say, for autos, you're right that the caller is right that so much of what we get here is produced in China, but not cars.
		That's in part because of a series of actions, tariffs, other regulatory actions designed to prevent nearly all Chinese vehicles from coming to the United States.
		In fact, there's basically only a handful, the Buick Envision, the Lincoln Nautilus, that are actually assembled in China and produce here.
		But I think the caller, again, keeps hitting on this fundamental sort of two opposing ideas.
		We want low prices.
		We want, you know, consumers want to pay as little as possible.
		But if that's what the United States wants, then everything would be produced outside the United States in low-wage countries, right?
		Because it's almost every place cheaper to produce outside the United States, absent tariffs.
		Other countries have less strict environmental rules.
		It's easier to build plants and so on.
		So there is this question about how do we ensure that the United States continues to produce goods, essential goods, and at the same time provide consumers with lower prices.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We talked about Canada placing reciprocal taxes on parts of the auto industry.
		China also announcing that they are placing reciprocal taxes on the U.S. in response to President Trump's announcement.
		How is that going to impact consumers?
unidentified		Not so much on the auto side, at least not yet, but it's certainly going to start to hit across various sectors, right?
		People talk about like, we had a story where it was about maybe the $2,500 iPhone, right?
		I mean, as a result, they said, I mean, so there are a lot of consumer goods.
		I mean, so much of what we consume from China, consume comes from China, right?
		There's socks, right?
		There's so many different sneakers, right?
		There's so many different other industries that have moved to China.
		So I think obviously, like in so many things, you see inventory, like in some places, might last two, three, six months.
		But again, those prices are going to start to go up as time goes on.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Jerry in New Jersey, Line for Democrats.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Jerry.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I have a couple of questions for you.
		One, I just want to bring up something.
		Yesterday I heard that they said that when the interest rate comes down, because supposedly we're at 10% or something, and when the interest rate comes down, I think Trump's goal is to refinance the debt.
		Does that sound right to you?
		Because I think there's a couple of things going on here.
		It's not just about the tariffs for the country.
		I think he's trying to bring the interest rate down in order to refinance the debt to make it easier for our country.
		Now, the other question I have for you, I hear the news media, and this is C-SPAN and everybody, prices could go up, might go up.
		This could happen.
		That could happen.
		Everybody panic.
		And what if it doesn't happen?
		What if he succeeds in getting everything corrected?
		I see that Israel's going to zero.
		Vietnam's going to zero.
		I think Argentina's going to go to zero.
		So what if it reverses?
		Is the news media going to change all this?
		I don't quite understand.
		And the other question I have is, you know, the prices have been extremely high with Biden for four years.
		So what exactly are we talking about with prices going up?
		I've never saw them come down.
		No, I think one of the reasons President Biden lost the election was voter frustration with high inflation, high prices.
		So that's certainly true.
		And I think the question is, is this the start of a negotiation?
		I mean, President Trump likes shock and awe.
		If you go back and read the Arden Deal, he likes to, you know, come out with a very aggressive position.
		And the caller is right.
		I mean, if he's successful and opts to negotiate and gets tariff rates down, that would certainly lead, you would think, to higher U.S. exports.
		The question is, though, does he want that?
		Or does he really want to sort of completely restructure the U.S. economy around more U.S. production and make us much more self-sufficient rather than have a market where we're exporting more as opposed to necessarily producing more for our own market?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Andrew, Rockville, Maryland, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Andrew.
unidentified		Hi.
		I guess following up what the previous callers have both spoke about, the prices will need to be absorbed somewhere.
		The increased cost for the tariffs.
		Does the Trump administration think that tariffs will be affected in the short term?
		Or does he think that are they going to somehow argue that the government will absorb these price changes?
		Because if things then, and then my next question is, when the things get to be produced here, won't they still continue to be higher because you're going to be paying an American wage with benefits that are attached to it?
		And then my last question is, do you think that the Trump administration is actually committed to manufacturing, or is it simply part of his ploy to bring companies and countries to the table?
		Great question.
		So certainly on the question about pricing, you're absolutely right that shifting production here is going to result in people making higher wages and sort of, and directionally going to lead to higher prices.
		In terms of what the money is going to be used for, obviously President Trump wants to use some of this tariff revenue to offset the cost of tax cuts that Congress is considering.
		But if you go back to the first term, a large chunk of the money, tariff revenue, was used to provide farmers relief because they lost access to export markets, notably China.
		So you're right.
		In terms of whether Trump's truly committed to manufacturing, I would say yes, only because he's been talking about this issue for decades, right?
		He, you know, going back to the 80s, he really believes he wants to see more manufacturing.
		I think it goes back to a lot of states that voted for him, like notably Michigan, my home state, where when I was in high school, all my friends' parents, dads primarily could go to the Chevy factory in town and the day they graduate from high school and get a job.
		And so there was this idea that if you worked hard, you didn't need a lot of skills, you could graduate from high school and get a well-paying job.
		And I think part of this is about trying to appeal to people who have felt like they lost out over the last 20, 30 years as the U.S. economy shifted away from manufacturing toward more services.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Michael in New Kensington, Pennsylvania, Line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Michael.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		And thank you for your guest.
		I think it's good that we have somebody with a little bit more of an optimistic view of what's going on here.
		But I think that we get too many doom and gloom around here, focusing on one thing, which is the price of the stocks.
		And I think that's a bad thing.
		I mean, it's obviously hurting me and a lot of people, you know, a lot of other people.
		But there are so many good things.
		If you look at what, if you look at some, if you look behind the curtain, Trump's trying to do a lot of good things here that if they come to fruition, and he's got a track record to prove that, he's a guy that seems to know how to captain the ship.
		And I think that if you look at the possible advantages of a permanent tax cut, that's going to help consumers.
		If you look at what they're doing with those, try to get rid of wasteful government spending.
		If you look at refinancing the debt, which was something that somebody else pointed out, he can do things in a hurry.
		And already those tariff prices have come down significantly in other countries, already 25 countries.
		And so we're seeing results.
		And you see all these companies coming back to the United States to improve our manufacturing base.
		I think it's true that President Trump has had some wins.
		There are so many examples of auto companies that have shifted some production back.
		I think the stock market reaction is in part because of just the deep uncertainty.
		And the fundamental question remains, is this a negotiation?
		Is this about getting deals?
		Or is this about a permanent change in tariff relief?
		There are so many industries like aerospace, like airplanes, right, that rely on free trade.
		And that if we get rid of the existing free trade rules so abruptly, we're going to face enormous amounts of pain in the short term.
		And are people, you know, are industries willing to tolerate it?
		Is the White House willing to tolerate it?
		As the caller said, a lot of it relies on getting this big tax cut bill done, which probably won't happen for a few months.
		And so will people be willing to tolerate the pay of tariffs for some period while Congress tries to get some sort of big tax relief bill done.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Jim in Idaho, line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jim.
unidentified		Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
		I'd like to say one thing that nobody seems to bring up is go ahead, Jim.
		One thing people don't seem to care about is our federal government's bank account is $30 trillion in the hole.
		And China owns that.
		And then you got Canada letting China's military do winter maneuvers here.
		We got China buying up farmland here in the U.S.
		So hopefully the taxes this year will help fill that $30 trillion hole in the bank account.
		Certainly the accrued U.S. federal deficit is a huge issue for both parties.
		And it's sort of undergirding this whole debate on Capitol Hill about how much money can be used to pay for the existing Trump tax cuts that are set to expire and a lot of new tax cuts.
		Remember, President Trump wants to ban taxes on Social Security and taxes on new car loans and taxes on tips for service workers.
		So this is very expensive.
		And you're right, at the same time, lawmakers are grappling with an enormous amount of debt and enormous large interest payments on that debt that come due every year.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We have one last call for you.
		We'll talk with Reba, Maryland, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Reba.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Boy, did I come on at the right moment.
		So we do hear lawmakers talk a lot about the deficit.
		What we don't see is them saying they are going to appropriate the tax revenues that come in to the deficit, to the debt.
		We don't hear that.
		We hear them say that they're going to apply it to tax cuts.
		So I think this is a huge, huge shell game because most of the tax cuts are for the wealthy.
		There'll be some that's for the upper middle class.
		It's really interesting to look at charts about this.
		And any tax cut I get will be eaten up by higher food costs, higher goods cost, and the tanking of my investments.
		And we don't even know what's going to happen with Social Security.
		It's a shellgame.
		If they are really concerned about the deficit, they will take this double tax revenues from the double taxation and add it and pay off some of the deficit.
		So everybody watch out for that shellgame.
		One final comment.
		I wish when people talked about on showing factories, they wouldn't just talk about the number of factories, they would talk about the number of jobs.
		Because a lot of factories have very, very few people working in them.
		They're all robotic and they're all lights out.
		And it's just like we're not in the 1950s anymore, people.
		Absolutely right.
		factories don't employ nearly as many people.
		American workers are much more productive in part because of robotics.
		You're right.
		And I think in terms of the deficit, right, it's easy for both parties to say, you know, let's give tax cuts or let's spend more money on programs that help people.
		It's a lot harder to make people feel pain, right?
		Cutting spending means cutting programs that people rely on, right?
		So in general, politicians are it's easier for them to give people the carrots rather than the sticks of deficit reduction.
		So there have been many times, you know, across both parties where people have talked about taking more difficult steps to pay down the debt.
		And, you know, it's a lot easier to, it's a lot easier to cut taxes and spend money than it is to take things away from people.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		David Sheperson is a correspondent with Reuters.
		You can find his work online at Reuters.com.
		David, thank you so much for being with us this morning.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
		C-SPAN's Washington Journal, our live forum inviting you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy from Washington and across the country.
		Coming up Sunday morning, Henry Olson of the Ethics and Public Policy Center talks about President Trump's agenda and other political news of the day.
		Then the Center for Election Innovation and Research founder David Becker will talk about President Trump's executive order requiring proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.
		C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
		Join in the conversation live at 7 Eastern Sunday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, or online at c-span.org.
		Non-fiction book lovers, C-SPAN has a number of podcasts for you.
		Listen to best-selling non-fiction authors and influential interviewers on the Afterwords podcast and on QA.
		Hear wide-ranging conversations with the non-fiction authors and others who are making things happen.
		And BookNotes Plus episodes are weekly hour-long conversations that regularly feature fascinating authors of nonfiction books on a wide variety of topics.
		Find all of our podcasts by downloading the free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts and on our website, cspan.org slash podcasts.
		Democracy.
		It isn't just an idea, it's a process.
		A process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guarding its basic principles.
		It's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted.
		Democracy in real time.
		This is your government at work.
		This is C-SPAN, giving you your democracy unfiltered.
		C-SPAN, democracy unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Midco.
		Where are you going?
		Or maybe a better question is, how far do you want to go?
		And how fast do you want to get there?
		Now we're getting somewhere.
		So let's go.
		Let's go faster.
		Let's go further.

▲