Tariffs Are on the Table for U.S. Importers, Whatever the Election Outcome
U.S. companies are pulling away from China as Democrats and Republicans increasingly impose duties on Beijing
U.S. companies are pulling away from China as Democrats and Republicans increasingly impose duties on Beijing
Until a few years ago, Chinese factories supplied the world with Sharpie retractable pens and Oster blenders.
No more.
Consumer giant Newell Brands now makes those products, and more, at its own plants in the U.S. and Mexico. Many of its other products are made in factories in Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand.
Chris Peterson , Newell’s chief executive, said the company’s shift reduces its dependence on China at a time when both the Democratic and Republican parties “are getting more protectionist in terms of trade policy.”
Tariffs are becoming an entrenched tool tying together geopolitics and trade , and they are playing a bigger role in long-term manufacturing and sourcing decisions. Nowhere are they hitting harder than in China, where importers and exporters are navigating an increasingly complicated regime of levies on goods ranging from semiconductors to mattresses.
“Tariffs have always existed and they’ve always been regarded as a cost of doing business,” said Simon Geale, executive vice president of procurement at supply-chain consulting firm Proxima. “But they’ve been getting much more teeth in the last five or six years.”
The new era of tariffs kicked off under the Trump administration with duties on imports from a swath of countries and a focus on Chinese products ranging from truck chassis to consumer goods.
The Biden administration kept most of the tariffs in place, and then added further duties on Chinese steel, semiconductors and electric vehicles, citing national security concerns and an industrial policy aimed at reviving American manufacturing .
The two candidates in this year’s presidential election look set to continue the trend, as trade, manufacturing and the tools to tie them together take a prominent role in the campaign.
Former president Donald Trump , the Republican nominee, has said he would roll out new tariffs with a potential 10% across-the-board duty on imported goods and a 60% tariff on goods from China.
Vice President Kamala Harris , the Democratic nominee, so far hasn’t indicated a desire to deviate much from President Biden’s trade policies.
Before becoming vice president, Harris diverged from Biden on Trump’s revised North American Free Trade Agreement, known as the United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement. As a senator, Harris joined some Democratic lawmakers, saying it didn’t do enough to address climate change, suggesting Harris may have more of a focus on social justice issues when considering trade pacts.
Harris has been in lockstep with the president in the Biden administration.
At an electronics factory in Wisconsin last summer, Harris said she and Biden want to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. At a campaign event in North Carolina on July 18, she said Trump’s proposed universal 10% tariff “would increase the cost of everyday expenses for families.” She didn’t criticise current tariffs on Chinese goods .
Both Trump and Harris opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the expansive multination trade deal that was designed to expand alternatives to trading with China. Trump withdrew the U.S. from the agreement immediately on taking office in 2017.
The trade policies pose a conundrum for companies. Do they continue sourcing from China and risk the potential impact of escalating tariffs? Or do they look outside China, where costs are higher, but duties and other geopolitical risks are lower?
Trump’s threat of universal tariffs has even spooked supporters. Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk , who has endorsed Trump, said he would delay a decision on a new plant in Mexico until after the election because “it doesn’t make sense” if Trump wins and puts “heavy tariffs” on vehicles produced there.
Shifting supply chains to other countries is complex. Companies must find new suppliers of raw materials and finished goods. Suppliers and sub-suppliers must be vetted to make sure they don’t violate increasingly stringent U.S. rules on issues such as forced labor.
Anne van de Heetkamp , a vice president of product management at supply chain and logistics technology company Descartes , said when trade tensions started ratcheting up five years ago companies weren’t in a hurry to shift supply chains. Now that the duties appear more permanent, Descartes’s customers are mapping out new global supply networks.
Surging exports out of Southeast Asia, India and Mexico suggest Newell isn’t alone in its desire to reduce reliance on China. The shifts are fuelling new logistics investments in factories, warehousing and transportation operations around the world.
DHL Express U.S., a parcel unit of German logistics giant Deutsche Post , added a new direct flight between Vietnam and the U.S. in 2022 to cater to rising exports that used to reach the U.S. via Hong Kong. CEO Greg Hewitt said the unit is also looking at expanding its networks along the U.S. -Mexico border to serve surging demand there.
Hewitt cautioned that China remains the world’s top supplier of manufactured goods and will likely hold that position because of its streamlined supply chains and low costs for raw materials and labour.
Retail industry trade groups and some executives warn some items can’t be produced anywhere else in the world and that escalating tariffs will simply raise consumer prices and fuel inflation. Analysts at Goldman Sachs estimate that every percentage point increase in the overall U.S. tariff rate would increase core consumer prices by just over 0.1%.
“The problem is the best place to make shoes is China,” said Ronnie Robinson, chief supply chain officer at Designer Brands , parent company of footwear retailer DSW.
Robinson said for every dollar the government adds in tariffs, consumers pay an extra $2 to $4 at the checkout. “The reality is that you and I are paying for the tariffs as part of the ticket price when you go into the store and buy,” he said.
Robinson said Designer Brands sources about 70% of its footwear from China, down from 90% several years ago. He said the company aims to reduce its reliance further to about 50%, but China will remain the company’s largest single source of shoes.
Peterson said just 15% of Newell’s goods rely on products made in China today, down from more than 30% several years ago. He expects that by the end of next year the share will fall below 10%.
He said that when the company is searching for new Chinese suppliers one of its first questions is whether they have capacity or plan to add capacity outside the country.
“If a supplier doesn’t have manufacturing capability outside of China, we will not select them as a vendor for us,” he said.
BNW Developments has established a Sydney presence, joining Arada and Sobha Realty among the growing number of UAE developers pursuing Australian buyers and development opportunities.
The Australian leather house has opened an immersive four-day pop-up in Manhattan, unveiling its Bloom Collection and redefining what a product launch can look like.
Strong family financial planning can help reduce taxes and support younger generations. From intrafamily loans and asset gifts to inheritance disclaimers, strategic cooperation can create meaningful financial benefits—when families have the trust and structure to make it work.
Happy is the family whose members—parents, grandparents and grown children—trust each other enough to cooperate on shared goals, especially financial ones. When that is truly the case, Uncle Sam’s tax rules can help as well.
This matters especially now that mortgage rates are above 7%, and many families are looking for ways to help younger members. If the elders have resources and are confident younger ones can cooperate, a family loan could make homeownership possible while providing the elders with a useful income stream.
Other strategies can actually lower taxes, such as when funding 529 plans or Roth IRAs, or when someone inherits a traditional IRA with required withdrawals larger than they will need.
Here are three strategies useful for functional families.
It is perfectly legal for families to lend money to a relative for a down payment or even a private mortgage.
But it is important not to cut corners, says Ryan McKeown, a CPA with Modern Wealth Enhancement in Minnesota. If the loan is for a down payment, be honest with the mortgage provider and have a formal agreement. The lender owes tax on the interest payments received.
If the loan is for a private mortgage, both sides should have legal representation with a formal written agreement, including payment terms. The lender owes tax on the interest, and the borrower often can deduct it if he or she itemizes.
To avoid IRS trouble, the interest rate shouldn’t be lower than the agency’s Applicable Federal Rate at the time of the loan. Currently that is about 5% for loans longer than nine years; about 4.5% for loans three to nine years; and about 4% for loans three years or less. Currently, traditional mortgage rates are generally above 7%.
In addition, the lender could use the $19,000 annual gift-tax exemption (described below) to forgive some or all of the interest or principal annually. If both lenders and borrowers are married, that is up to $76,000 a year. There is no tax for the borrower on such forgiveness, because it is from a gift.
If you’re going this route, McKeown advises against having a fixed plan to forgive the debt. Instead, do it in one-off letters specifying the amount—and keep careful records. Otherwise the IRS might try to treat the loan as a taxable gift.
Powerful tax-saving moves for families often use gift-tax provisions. Under current law, anyone can give anyone else up to $19,000 of assets annually, free of gift tax. That means a married couple with three grandchildren could give them a total of $114,000 in 2026.
The gifts can be cash or other assets, like stock. For noncash gifts, the cost basis—which is the starting point for measuring taxable gain after a sale—“carries over” to the recipient. So if someone buys $1,000 of stock and gives it away when it is worth $5,000, the recipient’s cost basis is $1,000. If the recipient later sells the shares for $8,000, the taxable gain is $7,000.
Here’s an example showing how gifts could save a family taxes. Grandma is a widow of modest means, while her child and spouse have prospered. The couple has two children, and they want to contribute $5,000 to a 529 college-savings plan for each—but they need to sell stock to do it. Their tax rate on the sale would be 18.8%, and they would need to sell about $11,000 of stock.
However, Grandma’s federal tax rate on the stock sale is 0%. If the couple gives $10,000 of shares to Grandma, she could sell them, pay no tax, and fund the grandchildren’s 529 plans. This saves about $1,000 of tax.
These moves are legal, and they could be used in other ways, such as to help a young person fund a Roth IRA.
But trust among family members is essential: Under the law, givers can’t put conditions on a gift. Grandma could use her stock proceeds to take a cruise, but she makes 529 contributions instead.
Mark Sellner, a retired tax attorney and CPA living in Sarasota, Fla., uses this strategy. His children sell stock he gives them and fund 529 plans for his grandchildren.
The family’s tax savings aren’t huge, but he likes other benefits. The sales by his children don’t boost his adjusted gross income, which in turn could raise his Medicare Irmaa premiums or his 3.8% surtax on net investment income.
Sellner doesn’t worry about his children using the funds for another purpose.
“There can’t be any strings attached to gifts. Of course, it is up to us to decide whether to make them in the future,” he says.
Two caveats: The “kiddie tax” applies to most children under age 24, and it is levied at the parents’ rate on investment income above $2,700 in 2026. Consider this before making gifts to a young person.
Investors who give away stock also forgo the step-up, an important provision that exempts assets held at death from capital-gains tax.
Sellner knows he’s losing a step-up, but says, “The children could use a little more now. Why should they wait 20 years to get it?”
A disclaimer is a highly useful strategy in which one heir renounces an inheritance in favor of another heir. Assuming family members cooperate, this can save taxes.
Here’s one example. Dad died and had a large traditional IRA that he left to Mom. She has enough assets and income to cover her expenses, and she lives in a state with a stiff estate tax. The inherited IRA would put her estate over the threshold.
Also surviving are three young-adult children. If Mom disclaims all or part of Dad’s IRA within nine months of his death, that amount could go directly to the children. They will have 10 years to empty the account, and the family as a whole will likely save estate and income taxes.
Disclaimers have many key details, especially regarding beneficiary documents. Although heirs have great freedom in choosing what assets to disclaim, the rules about who gets disclaimed property are rigid. It is best if the original owner names tiers of heirs so that if one disclaims, the next recipient is clear.