If such legislation is passed, the manufacturing industry would be revived, unemployment would reduce, and the government would reduce expenditure on insurance for unemployment and social security. In case the bill is approved, the United States will not have contravened the provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) which provides that members can take any action that is intended to protect its security interests1.
It is the department’s position that although these arguments hold considerable weight, the negative effects of such legislation will by far outweigh the positives. One of the anticipated negative effects is that these countries, mostly China will retaliate by imposing their own duties on the United States. For example, in 2009, the United States imposed a tire tariff on Chinese tires thus reducing the influx of these tires into the country and saving approximately 900,0002. The Chinese responded by exercising antidumping duties on American chicken parts. The antidumping duties cost the United States approximately 1 billion dollars3.
Although more jobs will be created in the manufacturing industry, a same number of people, if not more, will lose their jobs in the retail industry. In addition, if the import tariff is imposed, the manufacturing industry will become crowded with everyone wanting to be a manufacturer, as a result, the quality of products will reduce and the cost of raw materials will go higher. As such, the protected products are bound to cost more if domestic production is inefficient or if the cost of buying raw materials is higher than before, meaning that the United States will not benefit from these tariffs.
On a political front, the relationship between the United States and China will be strained thus derailing the effort by the former to get the latter to convince North Korea to do away with nuclear weapons. As Rosati & Scott write, since North Korea borders China, the support of