Comment by sdenton4

I have to assume that some of that 4% has second order negative effects on US importers and consumers.

Profit margins can not always go down by 4% and in those cases goods and services would then not be available to US importers and consumers is only one example.

My assumption is that the 96% statistic does not fully encapsulate the negative costs to consumers. I have to to wonder how much higher the burden is over 96% when all second order effects are taken into account.

That's not just consumers. That is "importers and consumers"

Importer != Consumer. I think that's very obvious to anyone paying attention to this whole thing. In fact, it's a small minority of imports that are direct to consumer.

It absolutely is a mix of the importer (e.d. manufacturer, producer, wholesaler, retailer, etc.) absorbing some in their margin and the consumer picking up the bill via price increases for the rest.

It's quite obviously not 96% being paid by the consumer across the board just from looking at the CPI numbers.

All this study states is the obvious: foreign producers didn't lower their cost by much in response to tariff burden. They largely charged the same rate to a buyer in the US vs. a buyer in Germany.

This isn't to defend the tariff situation - just that this study gets trotted out a whole lot in an extremely disingenuous manner. Other data that exists is better that measures direct consumer impact.