> This month, many investors feel dazed and confused. No wonder: as the US government flirts with another shutdown and President Donald Trump intensifies his trade war, indices of economic uncertainty have skyrocketed above even the 2020 pandemic or the global financial crisis of 2008.
> But the uncertainty could get worse. For amid all the tariff shocks, there is another question hovering: could Trump’s assault on free trade lead to attacks on free capital flows too? Might tariffs on goods be a prelude to tariffs on money?
> Until recently, the notion would have seemed crazy. After all, most western economists have long seen capital inflows as a good thing for America, since they have helped to fund its $36tn national debt and business. For instance, Elon Musk, Trump’s adviser, has benefited from Chinese investment, some of which is private.
> But some maverick economists, such as Michael Pettis, have long dissented from this orthodox view. Pettis sees these capital inflows as not “just” the inevitable, and beneficial, corollary of America’s trade deficit, but as a debilitating curse. That is because inflows boost the dollar’s value, foster excessive financialisation and hollow out America’s industrial base, he says, meaning that “capital has become the tail that wags the dog of trade”, driving deficits.
> Pettis wants curbs, like taxes, therefore. And six years ago, Democratic senator Tammy Baldwin and Josh Hawley, her Republican counterpart, issued a congressional bill, the Competitive Dollar for Jobs and Prosperity Act, which called for taxes on capital inflows and a Federal Reserve weak-dollar policy.
> The bill seemed to die. But last month American Compass, a conservative think-tank close to vice-president JD Vance, declared that taxes on capital inflows could raise $2tn over the next decade. Then the White House issued an “America First Investment Policy” executive order that pledged to “review whether to suspend or terminate” a 1984 treaty that, among other things, removed a prior 30 per cent tax on Chinese capital inflows.
> This did not grab headlines, since Trump was “flooding the zone” with other distractions, notably on tariffs. But it spooked Asian observers and probably contributed to recent US stock market falls, as some investors preemptively flee.
not sure if the free movement of capital is covered by this ping, lmk if you’re not interested in this !ping CONTAINERS
jiucaihezi on
Somewhere on wallstreetbets, a degenerate is buying SPY puts, and they’re gonna print like hell
breakinbread on
Could we not?
Master_of_Rodentia on
The hot part of the stove is a pathway to many policies economists consider to be irrational.
fakefakefakef on
“Tariffs on imports into the country so people will invest in American manufacturing”
..
“Tariffs on investments in American manufacturing”
RolltheDice2025 on
Who has standing to sue over Tariffs? If congress isn’t gonna do it’s job can we at least make the argument in Courts these tariffs aren’t legal
NeueBruecke_Detektiv on
Trump on the way to implement the CPMF in the US.
(To the brasilians reading this: pqp kkkkkkkkkkk)
Oh my fucking god
The man is studying history to pick the absolute worst decisions of south american governments and emulate them in the US.
7 Comments
> This month, many investors feel dazed and confused. No wonder: as the US government flirts with another shutdown and President Donald Trump intensifies his trade war, indices of economic uncertainty have skyrocketed above even the 2020 pandemic or the global financial crisis of 2008.
> But the uncertainty could get worse. For amid all the tariff shocks, there is another question hovering: could Trump’s assault on free trade lead to attacks on free capital flows too? Might tariffs on goods be a prelude to tariffs on money?
> Until recently, the notion would have seemed crazy. After all, most western economists have long seen capital inflows as a good thing for America, since they have helped to fund its $36tn national debt and business. For instance, Elon Musk, Trump’s adviser, has benefited from Chinese investment, some of which is private.
> But some maverick economists, such as Michael Pettis, have long dissented from this orthodox view. Pettis sees these capital inflows as not “just” the inevitable, and beneficial, corollary of America’s trade deficit, but as a debilitating curse. That is because inflows boost the dollar’s value, foster excessive financialisation and hollow out America’s industrial base, he says, meaning that “capital has become the tail that wags the dog of trade”, driving deficits.
> Pettis wants curbs, like taxes, therefore. And six years ago, Democratic senator Tammy Baldwin and Josh Hawley, her Republican counterpart, issued a congressional bill, the Competitive Dollar for Jobs and Prosperity Act, which called for taxes on capital inflows and a Federal Reserve weak-dollar policy.
> The bill seemed to die. But last month American Compass, a conservative think-tank close to vice-president JD Vance, declared that taxes on capital inflows could raise $2tn over the next decade. Then the White House issued an “America First Investment Policy” executive order that pledged to “review whether to suspend or terminate” a 1984 treaty that, among other things, removed a prior 30 per cent tax on Chinese capital inflows.
> This did not grab headlines, since Trump was “flooding the zone” with other distractions, notably on tariffs. But it spooked Asian observers and probably contributed to recent US stock market falls, as some investors preemptively flee.
not sure if the free movement of capital is covered by this ping, lmk if you’re not interested in this !ping CONTAINERS
Somewhere on wallstreetbets, a degenerate is buying SPY puts, and they’re gonna print like hell
Could we not?
The hot part of the stove is a pathway to many policies economists consider to be irrational.
“Tariffs on imports into the country so people will invest in American manufacturing”
..
“Tariffs on investments in American manufacturing”
Who has standing to sue over Tariffs? If congress isn’t gonna do it’s job can we at least make the argument in Courts these tariffs aren’t legal
Trump on the way to implement the CPMF in the US.
(To the brasilians reading this: pqp kkkkkkkkkkk)
Oh my fucking god
The man is studying history to pick the absolute worst decisions of south american governments and emulate them in the US.