How tariffs might affect Aptera

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 15 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 124

  • @johnhayes3314
    @johnhayes3314 10 часов назад +22

    It really doesn’t matter where in the chain, the tariffs are applied. The consumer ultimately pays the price.

  • @Lachesisms
    @Lachesisms 11 часов назад +20

    We certainly gone bananas over here.

  • @tylerreeves8026
    @tylerreeves8026 11 часов назад +14

    Off topic, but I just got my Aptera drag coefficient shirt in the mail. These things are way nicer than I was expecting. Thought it was going to be a cheap gimmic I would wear with some guilt for Aptera related events. But nah, this thing is easily the nicest feeling shirt own, it's getting worn all the time😂. And I'm really impressed with how well Aptera knows their customer base. 100% organic cotton, natural dies, sourced from permaculture farms in India... And That's just this one, their other non 100% cotton clothing articles are made from recycled PET (water bottles usually) and recycle cotton (this usually means its sourced from fast fashion waste streams)... Even the buttons are made from recycled materials! That's totally my jam, it's rare that I buy clothing, but when I do, I look for stuff like that. Very pleased and impressed they went through the effort to work with SoftShirts on these.

    • @kevinscott8642
      @kevinscott8642 Час назад +1

      I just got that same shirt, in black. I like it, and agree with what you said. 👍

  • @LightsOnMultiMediaMindArts
    @LightsOnMultiMediaMindArts 8 часов назад +5

    I suspect that tariffs will do nothing to encourage investors, which are what Aptera needs at this point.

  • @christopherbarrett9749
    @christopherbarrett9749 9 часов назад +7

    Blow back from globalization is a big problem. Since World War II the trend has been to produce wherever the product was the best. Japanese and German automotive industries hurt Detroit, but now many foreign companies produce them here, in Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, US. Known as on shoring, and returning to the USA. Exporting bananas from Kansas makes little sense. Bringing CPC Group to our lands makes better sense.
    The supreme Court more than likely will not get involved with this, but Wall Street might. Your economic analysis hit much of the highlights of the situation, and frankly we should have learned from the Smoot Hawley act that tarriffs are counterproductive at best. Being trading partners has always made sense, less chance of war is just a small piece of the benefits. Not sure if NAFTA will make Canada and Mexico better because of the proposition of tariffs, but our immediate abuttors should be a good place to be a supplier of parts. Windsor Ontario has lots of feeder companies to our automotive industry. Not sure an economic advisor will be enthusiastically endorsing any tariffs, because as a policy, they have proven to be more problematic then not. Globalization in the world we currently live in seems more palatable than trade wars.

  • @Tekaisuwu
    @Tekaisuwu 11 часов назад +15

    I’ve always heard sequels are typically worse, not really looking forward to the Great Depression 2 😂

  • @unclegeorge7845
    @unclegeorge7845 9 часов назад +5

    The end user pays for everything.

  • @kimbowilco
    @kimbowilco 3 часа назад +2

    In your introduction you stated that you like to avoid political issues on your channel. I think your discussion was an education in economics rather than politics. Pretty good job. Thank you. It would be great if public schools curriculums included macroeconomics, and a serious course in civics. It might increase our citizens' understanding and rational decision making.

    • @gr8dvd
      @gr8dvd 11 минут назад

      💯 👍

  • @aaronburton5188
    @aaronburton5188 8 часов назад +3

    Even the domestic sourced items are likely from international raw materials (that have tariffs) and the few remaining items with 100% of their supply chain in the US will raise their prices because their competition is still expensive. Additionally, any exports that Aptera makes will also be caught in the trade war becoming 20% more expensive on a vehicle that costs 20% more. It’s a huge impact. There’s nothing good about it for anyone.

  • @IAmJamesTheFirst
    @IAmJamesTheFirst 4 часа назад +1

    Excellent video! I loved the deep dive into the history of tariffs, and learned a couple things as well. Suffice to say Aptera is not well pre-positioned for a higher tariff environment, regardless how severe it ends up being. I wouldn't hold out too much hope on the Supreme Court ruling against tariffs. Congress holds the power to set tariffs and will have a GOP majority in both houses. Historically they legislate according to the whims of the president if the officeholder is also GOP. The Supreme Court will have no legal standing to say anything, which is dominated by GOP nominees anyway. Buckle up, and be prepared to pay a lot more for your Aptera.

  • @robertkirchner7981
    @robertkirchner7981 11 часов назад +6

    If I were to try to put a positive spin for Aptera on tariffs, (and believe me I've been spinning a lot for the past week), it would be that I increases the chances of CPC opening a production facility in the U.S., which I have always suspected was their long term goal.
    But that's it. That's all.

    • @jerrymolnar8010
      @jerrymolnar8010 10 часов назад +5

      This could definitely incentivize CPC to build a production facility here, but could Aptera wait that long?

    • @aaronburton5188
      @aaronburton5188 8 часов назад +1

      Where do the raw materials come from? Not the US. So still doesn’t work.

    • @charlesbeane8795
      @charlesbeane8795 7 часов назад +1

      @@jerrymolnar8010 Well since Aptera is almost out of money I'd say no, they can't wait that long.

  • @RomanChaar
    @RomanChaar 9 часов назад +3

    US Capital launch happened back in JULY.....where is an update!?!?!? They claimed just TWO months would be needed to raise the funds..........

  • @e-economy-
    @e-economy- 10 часов назад +4

    Tariffs are typically a sign of something going wrong for quite some time. Then politicians, lobbyists or interest groups want protection because they usually did something wrong or not at all. Not a good thing.

  • @eriksleeuwenhoek2206
    @eriksleeuwenhoek2206 7 часов назад +2

    "American made" cars from the legacy car makers have a very large percentage of foreign made parts and materials. So the tariffs will increase the cost of foreign as well as domestic cars. I don't think this will hit Aptera any harder than any other car manufacturer.

  • @williamread8186
    @williamread8186 11 часов назад +4

    I don’t know what role if any the Supreme Court could have on this. The Biden student loan forgiveness was overturned because the executive branch was executing a policy that is under control of the legislative branch. I don’t know if tariffs work the same way.

    • @gr8dvd
      @gr8dvd 50 минут назад

      SCOTUS. has overstepped into most everything saying they’re the ultimate arbiter on agency (executive branch) rules implementing legislation in recent rulings on environmental regulations.

  • @garykunz5305
    @garykunz5305 12 часов назад +9

    There are three options with tariffs; the consumer pays, the producer eats the cost, or some combination of both. The consumer may pay the cost, but the producer can lower the product cost to reduce the cost to the consumer. The other option is to on shore the production to avoid the tariff. Not a big fan of tariffs, but they should be fair.
    This is from google. "The European Union charges a 10% tariff on cars imported from the United States. But 85% of cars assembled in the United States and sold in Europe are exempted because they contain European parts. The United States charges a 2.5% tax on cars imported from Europe".

    • @jimbo92107
      @jimbo92107 11 часов назад

      Tariffs are a provocation, inviting counter tariffs. They also spur governmental corruption via lobbyists for domestic industries. They also jack up inflation. Winter grocery prices will quickly double. A general 20 percent tariff will bankrupt Aptera and many other companies that rely on importation. It is not political to state that neither Biden nor Harris intended such a tariff. That was a Trump idea. Good luck to Aptera.

    • @andrewfuller8440
      @andrewfuller8440 10 часов назад +2

      The producer eats the cost? What dream world are you talking about? Billionaires do not eat costs, they reduce them

  • @mattmiller220
    @mattmiller220 9 часов назад +2

    One of the first things I saw was Trump's campaign saying they'll end the EV tax credit as a first priority once in office.

  • @madmotorcyclist
    @madmotorcyclist 11 часов назад +3

    Tariffs will impact the Cherry products Aptera uses. The Italians will not be tariffed probably since it is small potatoes in the scheme of trade with Italians. The Vitesco motor might get hit as well.

    • @TimothyHaas-u3u
      @TimothyHaas-u3u 2 часа назад

      While Vitesco is European, the EMR3 powertrain is built in China.

  • @charlesbeane8795
    @charlesbeane8795 8 часов назад +1

    Assuming Aptera continues their current trajectory, they will close the doors in a few months. Tariffs shouldn't affect them much.
    If you are assuming they will stay in business beyond that, they will certainly be affected by sourcing from targeting countries. They will have to pay more for their parts and they will pass that cost on to their customers. Simply put, it will make Aptera's cost more. How much is dependent on where they have sourced everything.
    Again, they have bigger fish to fry (like raising money and getting 10mi/kwh ).

  • @scottwilson2859
    @scottwilson2859 8 часов назад +1

    Well done. If only we could have seen such a cogent lesson on tariffs before the election and not after.

  • @scottstormcarter9603
    @scottstormcarter9603 7 часов назад +1

    Interesting historical detail about the "chicken tax".

  • @gmv0553
    @gmv0553 8 часов назад +1

    No doubt about it! Tariffs will definitely have a negative impact on Aptera!

  • @davidtiemeyer7580
    @davidtiemeyer7580 8 часов назад +1

    Thanks for providing the historical perspective on tariffs.

  • @phileasler5401
    @phileasler5401 5 часов назад +1

    Yes, put on tariff’s on Chinese goods for sure👍. We, USA needs to make it here or a friendly country, and NOT trade with The Axis of Evil !

  • @aftonline
    @aftonline 6 часов назад +1

    How do those Mexican tariffs affect the NAFTA agreement? You can't have free trade and tariffs at the same time.

  • @lucristianx
    @lucristianx 9 часов назад +1

    I’m normally against Tariffs. But the income tax bracket creep is real. If it’s 20% tariff I’m okay. But that creep into higher rates is what scares me.

  • @theresa337
    @theresa337 5 часов назад +1

    Thanks for the interesting and informative info!! I knew part of this but not all.

  • @greenbergp
    @greenbergp 11 часов назад +3

    Maxeon is a Singaporean country and inthink makes most of their cells in Malaysia or somewhere in Asia

  • @glike2
    @glike2 10 часов назад +12

    Tarrifs are a great way to sell a reverse progressive tax on the poor in the name of fixing the budget and deficit, while they extend the corporate tax cut, and maybe lower taxes on very high income people

    • @charlesbeane8795
      @charlesbeane8795 7 часов назад +4

      I think you mean a regressive tax? Or maybe they call it a reverse progressive tax these days. Anyway I agree.

    • @glike2
      @glike2 7 часов назад +3

      @charlesbeane8795 yes thanks better way to say the same thing

  • @DemaGeek
    @DemaGeek 10 часов назад +2

    It will be very interesting to see how the details shake out for Aptera. Informative Steve, thank you.

  • @johnmalcom9159
    @johnmalcom9159 6 часов назад

    Thanks AOC for the thorough research and analysis on tariffs! We will need to live with them for the next few years at least so all need to be level set on them. The important thing to have in the back of our minds is that the PRODUCT PURCHASER pays the sum total of tariffs incurred on foreign sourced components to manufacture the purchased product. (NOT paid by the originating country or US Government entity, or absorbed by the product manufacturer). Since most of Aptera's major production components are of foreign manufacture, they will increase the cost/price of an Aptera. Of course the same affects will be experienced on other vehicle products too.

  • @petedawg
    @petedawg 11 часов назад +1

    Economists may think that free trade is the way to go, but they leave out externalities. For example, if there's a disruption in the supply chain, or environmental or human exploitation, and so forth.

  • @tims8603
    @tims8603 11 часов назад +1

    Thanks for explaining tariffs in a clear way. I won't say anymore because it would probably get deleted.

  • @sxsignal
    @sxsignal 11 часов назад +3

    its a govt double win. Tariff paid to the govt ($$) THEN because the item is now more expensive, consumer has to pay more on tax of that item... another govt win ($$) ultimately, the consumer loses

    • @e-economy-
      @e-economy- 11 часов назад +7

      When goods become more expensive then less of them are sold. Historic economic evidence across the world shows that it is a lose lose game, not added income.

  • @patriot1229
    @patriot1229 11 часов назад +6

    I prefer to see this as an opportunity rather than a hindrance. The American market has the ability to engineer and produce new products in very short order whenever that goal is enabled by regulators whom have an incentive to allow it. As you know economy is a function of scale and the demand for this unique and innovative product will prove its worth shortly after the launch of the unit to the market place. America is craving all the principles that Aptera represents, independence, reliability, innovation, efficiency built designed and maintained by an American company.

    • @ModernNeandertal
      @ModernNeandertal 9 часов назад

      You had me wondering what product is being produced in short order. Many of Aptera's parts are being made quite quickly but putting them together here in Carlsbad seems to be the bottleneck.

    • @patriot1229
      @patriot1229 9 часов назад

      @
      Thanks for the feed back. I was referring to the manufacture of components such as the battery cells themselves and the motor assembly and power management systems presently being supplied from china. If I am wrong please correct me.

    • @ModernNeandertal
      @ModernNeandertal 6 часов назад

      @@patriot1229 Just stirring the pot.

    • @patriot1229
      @patriot1229 6 часов назад

      @
      No problem the pot needs to be stirred frequently or the pot boils over.

  • @deanmcmanis9398
    @deanmcmanis9398 Час назад

    I don't anticipate tariffs across ALL imported parts. But from China, yes. Being a relatively small start up automaker, Aptera does not have a lot of control with suppliers. But for things like batteries, they can probably buy U.S. manufactured produced and sourced products, which afford Aptera more freedoms compared to legacy automakers who have big supplier commitments at high volumes and unavoidable cost escalation.

  • @Fairburne69
    @Fairburne69 7 часов назад

    If the foreign business payed the Tariff it would be worse. A $100 item for example with a 20% Tariff would cut the profit margins to $80. The foreign company would that hike the price 25% to $125 so the now the 20% Tariff would cost the foreign company $25 to the original $100 profit margin. So now the American business would essentially be paying 25% more instead of 20% more. Which means they would need to sell the goods 25% more.

  • @jeffp423
    @jeffp423 8 часов назад +2

    This simplistic analysis ignores bad actions by China when they subsidize industries they have identified as strategic in order to destroy those industries worldwide. Making us reliant on adversaries like China and entangling our economic interests prevent us from standing up to them on human rights. Standing around with our hands in our pockets while they destroy our domestic steel production, solar panel production, and now EV production doesn't serve our country or our workers. When China was allowed into the WTO and given most favored status without demanding any changes on human rights was unethical. When Motorola was putting the Iridium constellation into orbit China would not allocate spectrum unless they got paid to launch the satellites. Motorola lobbied to transfer military grade missile guidance to China so they could launch Motorola's satellites. It isn't a black and white topic.

    • @charlesbeane8795
      @charlesbeane8795 7 часов назад +1

      So true. It was easy to let them take over manufacturing, it will be a lot harder to take it back. It will take decades.

  • @timothymitchell3546
    @timothymitchell3546 10 часов назад +3

    Steve, sorry in advance for this bloviating. Thank you for that information. I, too, will shy from politics as much as I can, (Tariffs are political) but tariffs had, during Trump's 4 years, and will be implemented against those, these next 4 years, that charge tariffs on US products to their countries.
    Our economy during Trump's first 4 years of tariffs, was great. Again, tariffs implemented only against those that charged tariffs against our products, and not across the board, as Economists believe will happen. It's a tool only to make trade with other countries fair. I did hear and see the definition of tariffs that you showed, but real events of threats of implementing tariffs on another country and their reaction proved that tariffs have a significant effect against that country that is attempting to undermine US businesses and labour. Case and point---China wanted to build a gigantic manufacturing plant in Mexico to attempt to manufacture products and sell to the US for lower prices, but President-Elect Trump threatened high tariffs against THEIR products which facilitated their reaction to HALT the building of that plant. Now, if by definition of what a tariff is were true, then why would China care and stop that plant from going up, if the US consumer was the one who would bear the brunt of those tariffs? By observation, I surmise that the Economists reaction, you showed, were biased against him in the first place. This is my take on the tariffs. Tariffs RAISES the prices in a free market atmosphere so that the consumer will shy away from buying that product or products that the PARTICULAR country that the tariffs are implemented against. So, it seems to me that it's not the definition of tariffs that makes it negative, but HOW it is implemented to protect the US industries, products and our labour force from cheaper labour and products external to our country. Other countries, by definition of tariffs, place tariffs on US products so that they're so expensive to buy that their population will be encouraged to buy local products, therefore, SUPPORTING that economy and not the US's economy. In conclusion, Tariffs, when used by aiming it at UNFAIR trading against the US, helps our economy. If the Biden Administration began to implement tariffs more so across the board, then I agree that it would be bad for our economy, as the economists pointed out in the articles cited, especially, in the long term. But, this new administration will use it as a tool against UNFAIR trade and not to fleece the American consumer. I suspect that President-Elect Trump will discontinue "across the board" tariffs where they are not warranted and WE are being UNFAIR to other countries to whom we do business and they MAY or MAY not have tariffs on our products. In conclusion, again, Aptera will be safe, for the most part, except for parts from China, if they do not trade fairly with our country. Thank you so much, Steve, for this update and explanation of tariffs. I'm actually clearer on the tariffs definition and understand better why Trump implemented them and why Biden implemented more over time. Amazing how two interpretations can use tariffs for two different reasons. Only in AMERICA. 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🤙👍😎🛐✝️🔥⛪

    • @PandaKnight52
      @PandaKnight52 9 часов назад

      You are wrong here you need to do some not biased towards Trump research. You will pay more because of tariffs. It ain't protect the US because US businesses have already left the US.

    • @jeffpitoniak
      @jeffpitoniak 5 часов назад

      @@timothymitchell3546 trumps economy was a continuation of Obama until his tax cuts and jobs act and tariffs kicked in as basically nothing was done to affect it prior. Once these started to affect the economy, the stock market had 3 of the 10 worst crashes in history. The one on August 14, 2019 was due to the 3 year and 10 year bond yields reversing which ALWAYS signals a recession within 18 months. Inflation and unemployment started increasing and remember trump bragging that farmers love him because he gave them billions of $$$? That was because when he tariffs China, they retaliated with other tariffs and canceled nearly all us agricultural contracts. The us had the most farm bankruptcies in the shortest time in history necessitating this bailout for the farmers. No, his actual economic history was not a success.

  • @ModernNeandertal
    @ModernNeandertal 9 часов назад +3

    If Aptera says nice things about Dump like what a genius he is then Dumpster would probably remove all Aptera foreign parts off the tariff list.

  • @stevelane5023
    @stevelane5023 7 часов назад

    John Deere wants to move most production to Mexico. Trump said he would place a 150% tariff on John Deere product that are imported from Mexico. One can assume that the tariff would raise the consumer cost of imported John Deere product to a level that the product would be unaffordable to U.S. consumers therefore declining sales would either force John Deere to slash costs of its Mexican sourced product, or start producing back stateside. I do believe the tariffs will be more laser focused on products that could be produced stateside but aren’t due to the cheaper labor aspect. Aptera will pay more for the Chinese goods they import.

  • @speciesofspaces
    @speciesofspaces 8 часов назад

    And the bananas we import are basically the ones much of the world doesn't prefer eating.

  • @glike2
    @glike2 10 часов назад +1

    Great audio except the occasional BOOM ... BOOM ...

  • @jerrymolnar8010
    @jerrymolnar8010 10 часов назад +2

    It’s obvious this is a complex and nuanced subject. It matters exactly how much and for how long tariffs are implemented. Tariffs have been around for a loooooong time. Some might be good some bad. Hopefully our incoming administration takes a looong hard look at exactly how much and where the tariffs are implemented. Even Aptera ends up costing 3000-5000 more people might still want it cause of its other benefits, but let’s say there were nooo barriers to Chinese EVs, would people choose at $35,000 Aptera or a $20,000 well executed Chinese EV?? Wouldn’t that hurt Aptera’s chances. After the novelty of Aptera wears off, in the end I believe people might just choose the vehicle that costs 30% less. But, on the other hand , if a very innovative company like Tesla has NO competition because of huge tariffs, they have NO incentives to reduce production costs even further and innovate even further, they become a monopoly which none want , including myself .
    So no easy solutions here. The big mistake people make is assuming that the Chinese automakers got where they are overnight, they’ve been building up to this point since the 90s while the rest of the world ignored them, even Tesla. Isn’t this reminiscent of the 1970s? When Japanese automakers recognized the need for smaller much more efficient and affordable cars, while US automakers ignored them??

  • @TogetherinParis
    @TogetherinParis 5 часов назад

    Glad to hear you got the economics right.

  • @MistSoalar
    @MistSoalar 10 часов назад

    Imported products with direct/indirect govt subsidies need to be balanced somehow. Tariff and quota are still effective.

  • @glike2
    @glike2 10 часов назад

    The Supreme Court has to have standing to step in and I don't see how they have standing on tariffs

  • @tikitinatv1420
    @tikitinatv1420 Час назад

    Well like yourself I pulled the trigger on an E-car. I’m done. I put my money where my mouth is. Im glad I stopped waiting.
    As to tariffs it’s far more complicated that a few news articles. It’s actually good there will be tariffs on certain countries. It’s as simple as that. Would you prefer China undercuts Aptera by flooding the US with cheaper E cars?!?!?! People need to understand tariffs better. If these tariffs gets lifter we can keep sending our jobs offshore and we can get flooded with cheap Chinese cars. Be careful what you wish for because getting it would be a nightmare

  • @DrTeeHenry
    @DrTeeHenry 6 часов назад

    I would be more comfortable with a new tariff policy if Trump fully understood how tariffs work. Maybe he does, but the way he flaunts them, this sure doesn't seem to be the case. My impression is that tariffs can be a good thing if applied strategically (e.g., to bring foreign prices up to the price of domestic alternatives to encourage domestic consumption), but blanket tariffs are foolish. Unfortunately, one person's strategic tariff is another person's opportunity for corruption. And there are not too many guardrails against corruption these days and there will be even fewer come January 20th.

  • @RomanChaar
    @RomanChaar 10 часов назад +3

    What will come first, the turkey or a US Capital update?

  • @J9_j3
    @J9_j3 12 часов назад +4

    if/when china sparks a war for/over Taiwan, having ourselves decoupled from china imports is rather urgent thing to do, if we to believe intelligence community rumors of having just 2-3 years before big stink in the Pacific region begins. High tariffs is the one if not the only way to 'incentivize' businesses from continuing producing goods in china. at the moment 60-80% of consumer goods are direct china imports. remainder being partially produced here or in other countries but with chinese base components. tariffs are going to attempt to force either re-shoring of majority manufacturing or at very least move them out to safer harbors if not into US. this theoretically will constitute smaller shorter term pain than if we wait until south pacific is ablaze. nobody talks about this because few folks look at the issue from geopolitical and strategical point of view. history is repeating itself, we are on the same but slightly higher level spiral as early 20-ths century. world is a powder keg that is already lit on fire, it's just flame at the moment just charring the outside of the keg and didn't yet get to content.

    • @sojourner4726
      @sojourner4726 11 часов назад

      I love people like this who think they know Taiwan better than people who live in Taiwan. Taiwan is part of China. The United States would not tolerate foreign governments funding separatists in Texas. Yet you expect China to do the same?
      The world is worse off because of like you.
      Ukraine flag having idiots will complain all day about Russia funding separatists in the Donbass but when the United States does it to intentionally destabilize and establish economic control of a region it’s suddenly fine? Fool.

    • @jerrymolnar8010
      @jerrymolnar8010 10 часов назад

      And also how bout the fact the Chinese control 80-90% of strategic minerals, the corrupt EPA has stifled much needed mining for decades now. Hopefully mining and refining is deregulated with upcoming administration. We need to be energy independent. As well as a little less Chinese dependent for crucial minerals. We might as Elon suggested have to HAVE a little pain, economically, before we can move forward. We have to shore up our deficiencies that we’ve ignored for too long. Just like a person who realizes they’ve ignored fiscal responsibility for a long time realizes that they need to endure some economic pain in order to get their finances back on track. But,, is America capable of doing so?

    • @jerrymolnar8010
      @jerrymolnar8010 10 часов назад +1

      Excellent points!! People forget framing this in geopolitical aspects. Tariffs take on different meaning when seen in geopolitical context.

    • @mattsimon4167
      @mattsimon4167 7 часов назад

      Just putting blanket tarrifs up doesn't necessarily encourage domestic markets though. For one as explained in the video, tarifs can make domestic manufacturing more expensive, in the last round of tarrifs a lot of manufacturers found it cheaper to move overseas and eat the tarrif on the assembled product rather than on every part. Also if the product isn't made locally it's unlikely to create a domestic manufacturer, so some companies that used specialty steels went under because of the steel tarifs.
      Tarifs make some sense for products that are strategically necessarily to produce locally but in those cases it's best to subsidize those industries as well in order to actually directly encourage that local supply chain.
      If you read through what is being subsidiezed in the "chips and science" and "build back" plans those are the same things that also still have tarrifs on them.

    • @eriksleeuwenhoek2206
      @eriksleeuwenhoek2206 6 часов назад

      It works the other way around. Only reason China hasn't invaded already is that it would seriously hurt their economy (trade).

  • @thomasollie1712
    @thomasollie1712 7 часов назад

    Just interview someone who knows tariffs and the special situation with China ( not an ally ) and Mexico succumbing to Chinese $$$.
    You were describing a historical view which includes allies.

    • @ApteraOwnersClub
      @ApteraOwnersClub  6 часов назад

      The proposed tariffs are also for European imports and imports from Korea and Japan and Australia and every other country...

  • @TopwizSoft
    @TopwizSoft 10 часов назад

    The high tariff plan is to replace lost revenue from elimination of the income tax.

  • @mattmiller220
    @mattmiller220 9 часов назад

    Did you see Lotus' 'Theory 1' car?

  • @ScottOstr
    @ScottOstr 12 часов назад +2

    America should use a Value-Added Tax (VAT)

    • @LarryDickman1
      @LarryDickman1 12 часов назад

      Only if you get rid of the income tax.

    • @matthewryonadams
      @matthewryonadams 12 часов назад +1

      Oh yeah, why exactly?

    • @ScottOstr
      @ScottOstr 12 часов назад

      @matthewryonadams EU does it. It would make it much easier to pull economic levers annually.

    • @ScottOstr
      @ScottOstr 12 часов назад +2

      @matthewryonadams "Critics, on the other hand, argue that VAT is a regressive tax that places an undue economic burden on lower-income consumers"

    • @marauder450
      @marauder450 11 часов назад +3

      They taxed every penny I earned. Now tax every thing you buy? Pick one not both.

  • @billsmith5960
    @billsmith5960 9 часов назад +1

    Tariffs mean nothing to Aptera as they are immune from it. Remember the thousands of comments and lots of videos mentioning how Elaphe and CPC wanted to get to the US market and thus start making their products here? As for the battery, it's a fact they will be made in the US too. So very little will be made outside the US. I bet the next update, Aptera will tell us how much of the Aptera will have US content. I'm thinking 95%.
    Since the Aptera factories are cut and paste (as what Chris told me) then if the EU throws a tariff on the Aptera, then it doesn't matter as in short order, they will paste a plant there. So this is just spreading FUD. Everything is taken care of.
    I love that all EV tax breaks are done as it makes Aptera way more attractive. That 20K per year for the US is now 60K.

  • @andrewfuller8440
    @andrewfuller8440 10 часов назад +9

    Well, duh! Are you Trump😢 supporters listening?

    • @brentwalker8596
      @brentwalker8596 10 часов назад

      They're mostly clueless. Mass deportations are going to really help America, too. SMH.

    • @jerrymolnar8010
      @jerrymolnar8010 10 часов назад +1

      This isn’t as simple as might seem at first glance. Tariffs as seen simply in economic impact only seem bad, but in a tense geopolitical context where China controls 80-90% of crucial materials Tarrifs ( at least temporarily) might actually be good. We NEED to be at least somewhat energy and crucial materials independent. We CAN possibly expand our energy exports, and simultaneously expand production of renewables. Isn’t this exactly what Norway does? We currently are sitting on HUGE undeveloped mineral resources which because of politics and beuracracy and over regulation have gone undeveloped for decades, while China has done the opposite. We should be able to open up our vast untapped resources in a responsible way. California sits on a vast uptapped natural gas resource mostly unused, WHY? Politics. Our military depends on access to crucial minerals and energy.

    • @aaronburton5188
      @aaronburton5188 8 часов назад +3

      @@jerrymolnar8010tariffs on everything is not the way to do that. It’s like killing a fly with a demolition ball. Preferential sourcing, rebates, strategic government investment and other interventions have much less collateral damage and work way better.

    • @gmv0553
      @gmv0553 8 часов назад +6

      ​@@thejose24the economy was actually strong considering the consequences we and the world were facing fighting inflation and results from covid! Our economy is the envy of the world!

    • @jeffpitoniak
      @jeffpitoniak 6 часов назад +4

      ​@thejose24 according to the data and international economic sources, the us economy has led the world no matter what the gop wants you to believe

  • @andromedach
    @andromedach 10 часов назад +1

    Come on now, Aptera would have to make it to production to worry about tariffs and all signs point to that not happening at this point. when Chris and Steve will not provide updates on the convertible note it can be reasonably assumed it is not good. not that that note would have gotten them to production, they need more than double that.

    • @rchender
      @rchender 7 часов назад

      Once again....???????

  • @SteveBueche1027
    @SteveBueche1027 11 часов назад +1

    Tariffs equal the playing field. If the CCP heavily subsidizes their EV’s thereby making them cheaper in the US market, the tariff would keep the price equal to the current market prices. CCP has been heavily subsidizing most of their imported products to the US.

    • @sojourner4726
      @sojourner4726 11 часов назад +3

      United States government pitched more money for EV development in the Chinese government did. The only difference is the Chinese companies under government direction put it towards research and development instead of stock buyback. I don’t blame you for your ignorance, but know your own house before you criticize another.

    • @charlesbeane8795
      @charlesbeane8795 6 часов назад

      @@sojourner4726 Ouch. Stock buybacks are definately real but Steve's point about subsidized production in China is valid.

  • @leonwleklinskidc4329
    @leonwleklinskidc4329 5 часов назад

    I'd rather have a 2% federal tax on everything we buy at point of sale and eliminate our federal income tax system.

  • @boywonder5179
    @boywonder5179 6 часов назад

    Abolish the 16th Amendment... to me, it looks like there's waaayyyyy more corruption in our income tax system (tied to central banks & the Fed). Personally, I'd rather have tariffs over taxes!

  • @IDNHANTU2day
    @IDNHANTU2day 10 часов назад

    Where's my Aptera?

  • @paulhop69
    @paulhop69 11 часов назад

    Interesting. Might just need an industrial plan, or at least vision for future? Or...

  • @gmv0553
    @gmv0553 7 часов назад

    Click bait title! Video on tariffs and not how they will hurt Aptera!