Quotes About Tariffs

All the U.S. is asking for is free, fair trade.

the tax constituted the second largest source of federal revenues and was indispensable to Hamilton. If deprived of that crucial tax, he would have to raise tariffs, which would encourage more smuggling and tax evasion and spur commercial retaliation abroad. The government also needed money to finance military expeditions against the Indians—expeditions that were especially popular in the affected frontier communities, such as those of western Pennsylvania.

Tariffs have almost never saved a domestic industry from decline and, often times, by sheltering domestic producers from competition, only reward and prolong bad business practices.

Opening the Pandora's box of tariffs will be an endless game, and it will be a lose-lose proposition.

The United States can't keep a completely open system if the rest of the world is less open. The United States may have to take a leaf out of the book of Japan, China, and Germany, and have protectionism inside the system.

It will be said, however, that protection tends to destroy commerce, the civilizer of mankind. Directly the reverse, however, is the fact.

Imported consumer goods were either banned or enormously expensive due to high tariffs,

We are in favor of free trade.

We need fair and free trade.

I think there's no such thing as free trade. I think there has to be fair trade.

Free trade was once a Republican conviction.

One thinks that one is winning when we slap tariffs or introduce barriers to imports from another country, and we think we win. But you lose when you export because the other countries are going to raise tariffs as well. They're going to introduce barriers as well. So you win with one hand and you lose with the other.

In almost every case, whenever a tariff or quota is imposed on imports, that tax is strongly supported by the domestic industry getting the protective shield from lower-priced foreign competition. The sugar industry supports sugar tariffs; textile mills lobby for tariffs on foreign clothing.

The American Revolution was sparked by a series of taxes and tariffs on tea. More recently, the Thatcher and Reagan 'revolutions' were rooted in overturning the status quo - excessive taxation - to empower the individual and encourage a free society and prosperous economy.

The problem with tariffs is they shift higher costs onto the backs of non-protected industries and consumers.

We must deal with Chinese theft of intellectual property, though no one is sure that tariffs are the solution.

Leaving the E.U. with no trade deal is the worst possible option. It will condemn British exporters to the full range of tariffs and barriers that apply under WTO rules.

Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on.

In 1828 we raised the duties, on an average, to nearly fifty per cent, when the debt was on the eve of being discharged, and thereby flooded the country with a revenue, when discharged, which could not be absorbed by the most lavish expenditures.

human ingenuity will find a way to defy government rules and regulations, such as customs tariffs, when they fly in the face of self-interest.

There are some who want to move us back to the days when we were protectionists and keep all goods off our shores.

The EU has made it very clear that for frictionless trade and no tariffs on goods there is a mechanism for achieving that, but there are consequences. There are trade-offs that will have to happen.

This is where I would lodge my deepest criticisms. We have very whimsically been threatening and then backing off of tariffs. The people who are paying the price for the lack of strategy are North Carolina consumers who are paying more for durable goods and North Carolina farmers who don't have markets today.

The underconsumptionist of 1819 believed that consumption would be stimulated by tariffs, while the underconsumptionist of a later day urged monetary expansion as the remedy. On the other hand, the remedy proposed for the shortage of money capital was monetary inflation in 1819, encouragement of savings and thrift in the 1930s.