트럼프의 관세 정책: 경제적 영향과 글로벌 결과

### 관세의 영향: 트럼프의 경제 전략 이해하기
* 🐔 1960년대의 '치킨 전쟁'은 관세가 어떻게 시장을 교란시킬 수 있는지 보여주는 사례로, 유럽 관세로 인해 **5파운드짜리 치킨 가격이 1.60달러에서 2.25달러로 상승**하여 미국 농부들을 분노하게 만들었습니다.
* 🚚 이에 대한 보복으로 미국은 **독일 트럭에 25%의 관세**를 부과하여 독일 트럭의 판매량이 크게 감소했고, 관세가 특정 산업을 보호하는 동시에 소비자 가격을 인상하는 방법을 보여주었습니다.
* 💰 2018년 도입된 트럼프 대통령의 관세는 세탁기에 관세를 부과하여 소비자에게 혜택을 주고 일자리를 창출한다는 취지였지만, 결과적으로 **약 1,800개의 일자리 창출에 15억 달러의 비용**을 소비자에게 부담시키는 결과를 초래했습니다.
* 🏭 철강과 알루미늄에 대한 관세는 중국에 불이익을 주고 국가 안보를 지원하기 위한 것이었지만, **이러한 소재에 의존하는 산업의 비용을 증가**시켜 **다운스트림 부문의 일자리 감소**로 이어졌습니다.
* 📊 연구에 따르면 제조업의 일부 일자리 안정화에도 불구하고 **소비자에게 전가되는 가격 상승**으로 인해 전반적인 일자리 손실이 발생했으며, 관세 역시 **중국의 공격적인 무역 행태를 바꾸지 못함**.
* ⚖ 트럼프가 두 번째 임기를 위해 제안한 관세는 **중국산 수입품에 60%, 기타 품목에 10~20%의 관세**를 부과하는 것으로, 미국 가정에 **평균 1,700달러의 비용**이 발생하고 **684,000개 이상의 일자리가 위험**에 처할 수 있습니다.
* 💵 관세는 경제에 해로운 것으로 여겨지지만, **연간 약 4조 달러의 세수**를 창출할 수 있을 것으로 예상되는 등 감세를 상쇄할 수 있는 수입원으로 여겨지고 있습니다.
* 🌍 중국이 제조업 강국으로 부상하는 등 글로벌 무역 환경이 변화하면서 경제 및 지정학적 목표 달성을 위한 도구로서 **관세에 대한 논의가 재점화**되어 향후 무역 관계에 대한 불확실성이 커지고 있습니다.

관세는 특정 산업을 보호할 수 있지만 소비자와 전체 경제에 해를 끼치는 경우가 많습니다.

- [Speaker] Before we get into tariffs, - The heart of the Donald Trump economic plan. - [Speaker] We should talk about the chicken war. - The chicken war is a cluckin' good story. - [Speaker] In post World War II, West Germany, people started eating a lot of chicken, specifically American chicken. Midway through 1962, US farmers were on track to sell more than $50 million worth, half a billion in today's money. This made European farmers mad. So the organization that later became the European Union put a tariff on chicken. A five-pound chicken that started as $1.60 became $2.25. Imports quickly dropped. US chicken farmers and politicians were furious. - And we thought, Germany's our big market for chicken. And so if we hurt the Germans, maybe we'll get them to change their mind on chicken. - [Speaker] So the US put a 25% tariff on trucks.

like Germany's Volkswagen, and it worked. Their truck sales in the US fell by half, and they never really recovered. Meanwhile, Germans paid more for their chicken, and Americans had fewer truck options. It's kind of a perfect example of what tariffs do: hurt consumers while protecting very specific industries or attempt to get countries to change their behavior. While they haven't been a large part of trade policy in decades, former President Donald Trump wants to change that. - Some might say it's economic nationalism. I call it common sense. I call it America first. - President Trump has really sort of brought a lot of people out to think that tariffs might be something that's useful in America's economic arsenal in a way that hasn't been used in the past. - [Speaker] Here's how tariffs work and what Trump's proposals would do. Let's start in 2018 when President Trump put tariffs on- - Washing machines.

We're going to benefit our consumers, and we're gonna create a lot of jobs. - [Speaker] Since then, whenever a washing machine is imported to the US, the company on the US side doing the importing pays a tariff to the US government. - Their margins are pretty low. They've gotta pass that price on to consumers who ultimately pay it. That's the whole point in some sense, to reduce demand for those goods and create space for domestic producers. - [Speaker] After the tariffs, not only did the price of imported washing machines go up, so did the ones made in the US. - There's this myth out there that if we tax imports, domestic producers won't change their prices. And that's not the case. You're creating more demand for them. - [Speaker] So naturally, the price goes up. And it wasn't just washers. Dryers went up in price too, even though they weren't part of the tariffs.

- Usually, it's the case if you buy a washer, you buy a dryer. So even though dryers weren't directly affected by the tariff, they were indirectly affected by the shift in demand. - [Speaker] Now, it wasn't all bad. These tariffs did- - Create a lot of jobs. - [Speaker] About 1,800, mostly from those foreign companies like Samsung and LG opening plants in the US, and a study found the US collected $82 million annually. But because of those price increases, it cost consumers 1.5 billion more. So they basically paid $815,000 per job. - This is a very expensive job creation program. And so that's one another reason why economists don't like tariffs. They're much more cost-effective, more efficient ways of increasing employment in those industries. - [Speaker] These weren't the only tariffs Trump created in 2018. The big ones were on-

- Steel and aluminum. - Those were really designed to punish China for its transgressions of international trade rules. - [Speaker] Also for national security. They're used to make a lot of military equipment, but also everyday things like cars. - All the industries that use steel have to pay the higher price that squeezes their profit margins. And it also puts them at a competitive disadvantage against foreign producers of those same goods who don't have to pay those inflated costs for their inputs. And so a lot of studies have shown that you lose jobs, as many if not more jobs in those downstream industries as you gain in the upstream industries that are being protected by the tariffs. - [Speaker] Many studies on the 2018 tariffs found some pros, some cons. Manufacturing jobs, which were on the decline, didn't increase, but they did level out. The overall economy lost jobs, mostly in those downstream industries, and the cost of the tariffs were passed on

to US companies and consumers. So not great for the economy, but it did motivate US companies to move out of China and made supply chains more resilient. But it didn't change much of China's behavior and in many ways they became more aggressive. But here's the thing, even with all the economic downsides, a review by the Biden administration suggested Trump's tariffs should remain and the administration should add or increase them, which they did. - Once tariffs get in place, there are two factors that sort of keep them in place for some time. - First of all, they're gonna be domestic interest groups that have a stake in seating those tariffs maintained 'cause they like the extra market share that they've gained as a result of those tariffs. And second of all, tariffs are a bargaining chip. So why would we sort of unilaterally get rid of these, even if there's some economic benefits when we might use it

in some negotiations down the road. - [Speaker] Tariffs are really hard to remove. It's why 60 years later there's still a 25% tariff on trucks, even though US chicken farmers no longer care about selling in Europe. - So we're still living with the legacy of the chicken war. So that's sort of another lesson of history is you have to be careful about imposing these tariffs because you think you're doing it for short-term strategic reasons or you're just helping out this industry temporarily. But they can last for decade upon decade upon decade. - [Speaker] Tariff policy is kind of old. Even by the chicken war, they were only imposed on around 7% of US imports. Trump's plan for a second term is to bring them back dramatically. - This is the policy that built this country and this is the policy that will save our country. - [Speaker] He's proposing a 60% tariff

on everything from China and a 10 or even 20% on every importer from every other country. - Countries are gonna finally, after 75 years, pay us back for all that we've done for the world. - [Speaker] Multiple independent studies looked at the possible effects. One found it would cost the average American household $1,700 from higher prices. Another found it could cost more than 684,000 jobs. And they don't factor in how domestic goods might get more expensive or retaliatory tariffs from other countries. - They're not gonna take that this lying down. They're not going to change their behavior in some way to appease the administration that imposes such tariffs. They're going to retaliate. So not only will US import shrink, but US exports will shrink as well. - [Speaker] Trump wants to use these tariffs as a revenue stream for the US to pay for tax cuts. - Whereas tariffs on foreign countries go up,

taxes on American workers and families come down. - [Speaker] Studies found his proposal would likely bring in around a quarter of a trillion dollars per year, about 5% of what the federal government currently brings in with taxes. So if tariffs are harmful, always harmful even to the economy, why is Trump so focused on them? In the last 20 years, China has gotten aggressive investing in manufacturing to become the world's largest exporter. Even today, they invest more than any other country. It has let them export things like steel and aluminum at below market values. That coupled with numerous trade rule violations- - Allowed President Trump to really restart the whole discussion about using tariffs to achieve certain objectives such as punishing other countries. And the Biden administration has just continued that. So the whole environment has really changed from 20 years ago when trade policy was pretty quiet business, and now we're talking about industrial policy, tariffs,

subsidies, and all these different interventions because the whole global and geopolitical environment has changed quite dramatically. - [Speaker] And it would change even more dramatically with Trump's proposed tariff plan. In the short run, we know the economy will suffer. In the long run, no one really knows. Will it be a war between the US and the rest of the world or the western world against China? Trump wants to play a game of chicken to find out.

Why Economists Hate Trump's Tariff Plan | WSJ

The Wall Street Journal takes you inside carefully selected stories and events in a visually captivating way so you can dig deeper into the news and insights that matter to you. 

The Wall Street Journal

치킨 전쟁과 트럼프의 관세 전략

2차 세계대전 후 독일에서 발생한 닭고기 전쟁은 미국의 성공적인 닭고기 수출로 인해 미국 농부들의 분노를 불러일으킨 관세 부과로 이어졌습니다.

이에 대응하여 미국은 독일 트럭에 25%의 관세를 부과하여 독일 트럭의 판매가 크게 감소했습니다.

이러한 일련의 관세는 각국의 행동을 바꾸기 위한 것이었고, 트럼프 전 대통령의 제안은 미국의 경제 전략에서 관세를 다시 부활시키려는 것이었습니다.

수입 세탁기에 대한 관세는 수입 모델과 국산 모델 모두의 가격 상승으로 이어져 건조기 등 관련 상품에 파급 효과를 일으켰습니다.

관세는 수입 수요를 줄이고 국내 생산을 늘리려는 목적이었지만, 결과적으로 소비자들에게 상당한 비용 상승을 초래했습니다.

관세는 주로 외국 기업의 공장 설립을 통해 미국 내 일자리를 창출했지만, 소비자들의 높은 비용 부담으로 인해 이 일자리 창출 전략의 효과에 대한 우려가 제기되었습니다.

철강 및 알루미늄에 대한 관세의 영향

철강과 알루미늄에 대한 관세는 무역 규칙 위반과 국가 안보를 이유로 중국을 처벌하기 위해 시행되었습니다.

이러한 관세는 전방 산업의 비용을 증가시켜 일자리 손실과 미국 생산업체의 경쟁적 불이익으로 이어졌습니다.

제조업 일자리를 평준화하고 미국 기업이 중국을 떠나도록 동기를 부여하는 등 일부 긍정적인 효과에도 불구하고 관세는 궁극적으로 경제에 부정적인 영향을 미쳤으며 중국의 행동을 바꾸지 못함.

60년 동안 지속된 트럭에 대한 25% 관세에서 볼 수 있듯이 관세는 제거하기 어렵고 장기적인 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다.

트럼프의 두 번째 임기 계획에는 관세를 대폭 인상하여 중국에 60%, 다른 국가에 10~20%의 관세를 부과하는 방안이 포함되어 있습니다.

독립적인 연구에 따르면 이러한 관세로 인해 미국 가구당 평균 1,700달러의 비용이 발생하고 68만 4,000개 이상의 일자리가 사라질 수 있으며 다른 국가의 보복 조치로 이어질 것으로 예상됩니다.

트럼프의 관세 제안은 중국의 공격적인 제조 및 수출 전략에 대응하여 연간 약 2,500억 달러의 수입을 목표로 하고 있습니다.

지난 20년간 글로벌 무역 정책의 변화는 관세와 산업 개입에 대한 새로운 관심으로 이어졌습니다.

트럼프가 제안한 관세 계획은 글로벌 경제 지형을 극적으로 변화시킬 수 있으며, 장기적인 결과는 불확실합니다.