{"id":5230,"date":"2025-06-30T19:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-07-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/?p=5230"},"modified":"2025-09-29T14:55:48","modified_gmt":"2025-09-29T19:55:48","slug":"tariffs-a-jumbled-mix-of-issues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/2025\/06\/30\/tariffs-a-jumbled-mix-of-issues\/","title":{"rendered":"Tariffs: A Jumbled Mix of Issues"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"htmlBody article_div\">\n<div class=\"roofHeader\">Feature<\/div>\n<div class=\"byline\">By <span class=\"author-name\">Tom Ewing<\/span><\/div>\n<figure class=\"picture\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/8\/2025\/06\/008.jpg\" alt=\"tariffs a jumbled mix of issues\" \/><figcaption><span class=\"attribution\"><a href=\"http:\/\/ISTOCK.COM\/\">ISTOCK.COM<\/a>\/TREKANDSHOOT, FRAMALICIOUS\/<a href=\"http:\/\/SHUTTERSTOCK.COM\">SHUTTERSTOCK.COM<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><span class=\"dropCap\"><strong>T<\/strong><\/span>he super-hot topic of tariffs received spotlight attention during AAPA\u2019s Legislative Summit on March 18, in Washington, D.C.<\/p>\n<p>The session \u201cMainstage Panel: Tariffs are Taxes\u201d presented a far-reaching set of insights, comments and \u2014 most importantly \u2014 concerns regarding President Trump\u2019s commitment to make tariffs a central US policy lever to impact trade, taxes, fentanyl and drug trafficking, steel and aluminum production, and federal revenue. The panel\u2019s common concern: For this outsized mix of international issues, it\u2019s hard to see how tariffs can deliver the beneficial outcomes hoped for by the president.<\/p>\n<p>The Mainstage panelists included:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Jon Gold, Vice President of Supply Chain and Customs Policy, National Retail Federation<\/li>\n<li>Dr. Noel Hacegaba, Chief Operating Officer, Port of Long Beach<\/li>\n<li>David Gutheil, Interim President &amp; CEO\/Chief Commercial Officer, Port of Cleveland<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The session was moderated by Dan Ronan, News Anchor for Washington, D.C.\u2019s WTOP News and for National Public Radio. The following is a summary of some of the top issues raised during the panel\u2019s discussion.<\/p>\n<h2>Small Businesses Will Get an Outsized Hit<\/h2>\n<p>Dan Ronan opened the discussion with reference to the uncertainty characterizing tariff implementation and policies. One day, the tariffs are on, Ronan noted, the next day, they\u2019re off. Similarly, they\u2019re set at one level on one day, then the next day, it\u2019s different.<\/p>\n<p>Jon Gold commented on this, stating right away: \u201cTariffs are taxes.\u201d The cost of tariffs, he said, are passed on to customers, and the money collected is paid to the government.<\/p>\n<p>Gold added further that tariffs present tougher issues for small businesses compared to large businesses. Small businesses, Gold said, usually don\u2019t have the resources, flexibility, and market scope that large businesses can draw upon. Most small businesses can\u2019t absorb the cost of the tariffs and have no choice but to pass those costs on and hope their final price remains competitive.<\/p>\n<h2>Proposed Policies Aren\u2019t Clear<\/h2>\n<p>Of course, it\u2019s one thing if a policy \u2014 even an unpopular one \u2014 is straightforward, clear and unswerving. But that hardly characterizes how the 2025 tariff issues started. Tariffs were a priority in the first Trump administration, Gold noted, but he added that policies and implementation were different then: The tariffs were smaller, more targeted, and businesses had more time to prepare and to react.<\/p>\n<p>Today, in contrast, Gold described the tariff debate as chaotic, with unanswered questions about additive costs, disagreement among agencies, challenges among officials and, of course, zig-zagging pronouncements that change almost daily.<\/p>\n<p>During their discussion, the panelists noted, with frustration, the broad brush of issues the new tariffs are supposed to affect. Indeed, a look back at the executive orders in January and February is a clear reminder of why \u201ctariffs\u201d is the president\u2019s favorite word \u2014 or, as moderated later, one of his favorite words. In January\u2019s \u201cAmerica First\u201d Trade Policy, for example, tariffs are cited as a way to correct trade imbalances. In February, it\u2019s tariffs that would stop fentanyl and drug trafficking from Canada, Mexico, and China. Also in February, new aluminum and steel tariffs were announced to help bump up demand from U.S. producers and address unused and slack production capabilities. Ditto regarding the on-again-off-again timing \u2014 Canadian tariffs were paused, until March, two days after they were announced.<\/p>\n<p>As points of national entry, coastal ports are at the tip of the spear regarding tariffs. Ronan asked Noel Hacegaba how the Port of Long Beach (POLB) was facing the new tariff policies, and how these changes are impacting port activities, especially following a very busy and successful year in 2024.<\/p>\n<figure class=\"picture\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/8\/2025\/06\/010.jpg\" alt=\"steel imports are a major activity\" \/><figcaption><em>Steel imports are a major activity at Port of Cleveland, pictured, and other Great Lakes ports. Tariffs will impact economic expansion and related infrastructure projects, for ports and industries like steel and aluminum.<\/em> <span class=\"attribution\">PORT OF CLEVELAND<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<h2>Uncertainties: Never Good for Business<\/h2>\n<p>For Long Beach, Hacegaba said, one early impact was a rush of shipping volumes to the Port, because shippers are trying to get ahead of the tariffs. But he cautioned: \u201cWe\u2019ve seen this [tariff]issue before, but this is so different.\u201d He said if Trump\u2019s tariffs from his first administration were a movie, this new round of tariffs \u201cshould not be considered a sequel. This new movie is very different,\u201d he commented, adding that \u201cthe stops and starts are unprecedented.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>David Gutheil from Cleveland, which is largely a breakbulk port, not a container port like POLB, said that steel imports \u2014 40,000 to 50,000 tons\/year from Canada \u2014 are a major activity at Cleveland and other Great Lakes ports. He said the tariff controversy has been \u201cfrustrating for us and the steel industry.\u201d He, too, cited uncertainties about timing and even implementation.<\/p>\n<p>He noted that tariffs will impact economic expansion and the related, necessary infrastructure projects, both for ports and for heavy industries like steel and aluminum. Policy uncertainties undermine decisions about next steps, about which road to follow, and how to plan investments and financing. If tariffs cut steel imports, that shapes infrastructure in one direction. But if tariffs are in doubt, so are future developments.<\/p>\n<p>Gutheil called the tariff roll-out a \u201cgatling gun approach\u201d across unrelated issues. For example, he said he asked Cleveland steel producers if they can increase U.S. production by 50% in three years. Their answer: No way. \u201cIf (tariffs) are a play to improve steel making, it\u2019s a long runway,\u201d Gutheil commented, adding, \u201cI can\u2019t connect the dots to that endgame.\u201d Similarly, if the goal is drug interdiction, he commented wryly: \u201cI don\u2019t think you can smuggle fentanyl in a steel coil. Maybe somebody\u2019s figured it out, but we haven\u2019t seen it.\u201d<\/p>\n<h2>New Fees Could Skew the System<\/h2>\n<p>The panel\u2019s discussion broadened, highlighting two topics: One is the support for shipbuilding that is growing across the federal sector, both within the Administration as well as Congress. The second is the intent by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to place per\/ton fees on Chinese vessels calling in U.S. ports.<\/p>\n<p>Worth noting: Since the March 18 Mainstage discussion, this USTR fee proposal \u2014 a \u201cSection 301 Action\u201d in regulatory jargon \u2014 has advanced. On April 17, the USTR proposed that, starting in October, vessels used by Chinese ship operators and shipowners and operators of Chinese-built ships will be assessed a fee of $50 per net ton, estimated to add up to total fees between $1 and $1.5 million per ship. The fees will increase every six months. Then, a second phase would start in three years to:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIncentivize U.S. built liquified natural gas (LNG) vessels, limited restrictions on transporting LNG via foreign vessels (sic). These restrictions will increase incrementally over 22 years.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In the future, additional Chinese equipment, e.g., cranes, may be similarly assessed. In their March discussion, the panelists questioned the logic behind these moves. Jon Gold commented: \u201cNote how the Sec. 301 text is written, it includes any Chinese vessel.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Dave Gutheil wondered whether Canadian ships \u2014 likely built in China, given China\u2019s dominance in international shipbuilding \u2014 could afford to sail the Great Lakes. He said the million-dollar fees will cripple the Great Lakes maritime industry. He noted that when steel comes into a port, agriculture or other products are then exported. If ships with steel don\u2019t arrive, how will exports move out? Gutheil predicted shipping lanes will consolidate because operators will move to avoid port calls and new fees.<\/p>\n<p>Hacegaba expressed concerns that port slowdowns could impact the national economy and employment. He said cargo volumes at POLB support 2.6 million jobs across the country, in all 50 states, delivering a total economic impact of $2.8 trillion.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI like to say,\u201d Hacegaba commented, \u201cthat the movement of goods is literally the economy in motion. So don\u2019t slow that.\u201d Again, with reference to shipbuilding and other social and economic goals, he expressed support for such programs. \u201cBut if the long-term play is shipbuilding,\u201d he added, \u201cthen we need more coordination, better strategy.\u201d<\/p>\n<figure class=\"picture\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/8\/2025\/06\/011.jpg\" alt=\"port slowdowns could impact the national\" \/><figcaption>Port slowdowns could impact the national economy and employment. Cargo volumes at Port of Long Beach, pictured, support 2.6 million jobs across the country, delivering a total economic impact of $2.8 trillion. <span class=\"attribution\"><a href=\"http:\/\/ISTOCK.COM\/\">ISTOCK.COM<\/a>\/LPETTET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<h2>Tariffs Are Taxes<\/h2>\n<p>The panelists discussed the possibility that revenue from tariffs and Chinese vessel fees could pay for new programs, e.g., to support the president\u2019s goals to expand maritime cargo and expand U.S. shipbuilding. Are the tariffs primarily a way to raise revenue, Ronan asked at the start of this discussion, possibly to pay for upcoming tax cuts?<\/p>\n<p>Gold answered directly: \u201cYes, tariffs will raise money from every U.S. individual,\u201d including from low-income people who normally don\u2019t pay federal taxes. Ronan asked further: Then it will be 340 million U.S. citizens paying the tariffs? That\u2019s correct, Gold replied, American customers will pay, not people overseas. Gold noted additional, early discussions from the Trump Administration about an \u201cexternal revenue service\u201d that might be established to oversee tariff revenue and expenditures, an idea possibly linked to tax cuts. But there are no details or clarity yet on those ideas, Gold said, with reference again to the jumbled context of the overall tariff rollout.<\/p>\n<p>During an audience Q&amp;A session, an audience member asked about the questions port customers are asking port officials and what kind of activities, at least in response to the tariffs, those customers are seeking?<\/p>\n<p>Hacegaba said, yes, POLB officials get many questions. Their frequent reply: \u201cWe\u2019re all trying to make sense of this.\u201d He commented that events such as this discussion are important for seeking clarity and sharing ideas.<\/p>\n<p>Dave Gutheil agreed. \u201cWe\u2019re all talking about it,\u201d he said, and added that \u201cmost of the questions we\u2019re getting are from FTZs\u201d (foreign trade zones). In the U.S., FTZs have an international standing, offering a location where goods handled solely for export can take advantage of certain allowances regarding taxes and fees and tariffs. FTZs are important economic development tools used across the country, not just in maritime port cities.<\/p>\n<p>In their discussion about broader issues that might be linked to tariffs and new initiatives, workforce recruitment and development was one of the top priorities. Workforce challenges are critical across many sectors, the panelists said, from steelmaking to construction to expanded maritime and cargo operations, and, of course, for ports.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe need labor,\u201d Gutheil comment. Gold added that the U.S. economy is very productive, with domestic manufacturing at an historic high. \u201cBut we need upskilling,\u201d he noted, again commenting that these various issues will not be solved by tariffs, at least as such issues have been associated with tariffs so far.<\/p>\n<p>Both Hacegaba and Gutheil did draw attention to high schools in their cities, with a focus on maritime issues. Hacegaba referenced the High School of Global Logistics, in Long Beach, which introduces maritime careers to students. Gutheil mentioned the Davis Aerospace &amp; Maritime High School, part of Cleveland, Ohio\u2019s public school system. Davis hosts the marine-focused Argonaut program which, Gutheil said, is already connecting students with Great Lakes shippers.<\/p>\n<p>As the session drew to a close, Ronan asked: How will this end? No one jumped out with an easy answer. Gold noted support, from many sectors, for policies that will revitalize the economy, take on bad actors and help with tax reform. \u201cBut tariffs won\u2019t help us get to those endpoints,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Feature By Tom Ewing ISTOCK.COM\/TREKANDSHOOT, FRAMALICIOUS\/SHUTTERSTOCK.COM The super-hot topic of tariffs received spotlight attention during AAPA\u2019s Legislative Summit on March 18, in Washington, D.C. The session \u201cMainstage Panel: Tariffs are Taxes\u201d presented a far-reaching set of insights, comments and \u2014 most importantly \u2014 concerns regarding President Trump\u2019s commitment to make tariffs a central US policy &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":47,"featured_media":5231,"comment_status":"close","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[1264,98,1282],"class_list":["post-5230","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-features","tag-port-legislation","tag-port-of-cleveland","tag-tariffs"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5230","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/47"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5230"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5230\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5231"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5230"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5230"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aapaseaports.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5230"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}