this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
306 points (98.7% liked)

News

37153 readers
1678 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://archive.is/rrE5R

By analyzing $4 trillion of shipments between January 2024 and November 2025, the Kiel Institute researchers found that foreign exporters absorbed only about 4% of the burden of last year’s U.S. tariff increases by lowering their prices, while American consumers and importers absorbed 96%.

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 65 points 2 months ago (2 children)

... Isn't that. Like. The point of a tarrif?

What are they trying to distract us from? trump doing the nazis thing? the epstein thing? the invasions of other countries thing?

Maybe trump died and they're hiding it while they shove the refurbished chucky-cheese animatronic robots up his ass.

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 33 points 2 months ago

What are they trying to distract us from?

[–] dipcart@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Five nights at Donny's

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 48 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Was the methodology for the study "Step 1, open eyes. Step 2, look at reality as it exists. Step 3, Document results."

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This is the methodology for most studies. Science is just trying to understand the observable world with measurements.

Of course Americans are paying for the tariffs. There's the possibility that sellers would eat the costs (by lowering prices proportionately to account for the tariffs), but that only happened 4% of the time.

I'm not especially surprised, but I did think it'd be even closer to 0% than it is.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

Like Adam Savage said: The difference between science and screwing around is recording the results.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Fair point. I'm just saying it could be published in Well, Obviously Monthly.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That . . . is how tarriffs work, yes.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago

I mean if there is enough room in the profit margin the producer could adjust the price to keep the cost the same.

I can't imagine why they would given the the way the tariffs are applied though.

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

But the orange man told me the exporting country would pay!

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago

Trump to Europe today/yesterday: Let me take Greenland or I'll tax my own population even harder!! Join my board of "peace" or my citizens are getting a tax increase! That will show you!

[–] Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If those poor Americans could think, they would be very upset.

[–] FatVegan@leminal.space 3 points 2 months ago

Thank god they can't. Imagine they do something right accidentally for once.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Next thing they'll say Mexico didn't pay for the wall either.
Maybe even that the economy isn't actually doing that great and unemployment is increasing.
Or that USA doesn't really need Greenland for security.
It's like a smear campaign against Trump, as if he was lying all the time.
This is liberal propaganda, you can clearly tell because they use facts, and everybody know that facts have a strong liberal bias.
A serious reporter should report both sides equally!
/s

[–] cv_octavio@piefed.ca 8 points 2 months ago

Next you're gonna tell me they weren't even EaTiNg ThE cAtS aNd DoGs Of ThE pEoPlE wHo LiVeD tHeRe either!

[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So in the end, the tariffs really are just a sales tax paid by americans. I seem to recall that the average tax is about 20%, up from the 2.4% in the Biden term. So americans voted for a sales tax, and this evidence shows that they got it. Something like 20% tax on $4 trillion of imports would be about $800 million (so far) of taxes paid by americans so the orange buffoon can give some to Qatar, Argentina, Honduras and the tech bros. Congratulations american voters, you are successfully looting your own pockets.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-trade-war/

The Trump tariffs amount to an average tax increase per US household of $1,100 in 2025 and $1,500 in 2026.

[–] Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Thats how much my computer, I built the day after the election, went up in parts cost alone.

Not seriously, but probably pretty close. There is no way that the cost is that little per household.

[–] diabetic_porcupine@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago
[–] DCErik@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

In other 'news', Sun to Rise in East Tomorrow, Pope Professes Catholicism, Bear Relieves Self in Wooded Area...

Film @ 11:00

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

I can see the Sun. I have no interest in the Pope. But where was that film of the bear having a shit? SHOW ME THE BEAR HAVING A SHIT, NOW!!

Also, did you know if an orange child rapist tries to distract everyone from the decades of child rape he did with his best mate Jeffery Epstein then most of the time it doesn't work? Isn't that weird...

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago
[–] rslogix89@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

In other news, water is wet.

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 months ago

Thank you captain obvious. Why do we have to do studies into things everyone already knows, when Trump doesn't understand something and spreads bullshit? We know what tariffs are. Looking up the meaning of the word in a thesaurus I wouldn't call "research".

[–] BigBolillo@mgtowlemmy.org 8 points 2 months ago

No shit Sherlock..

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Thats the most pointless study ever.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Confirming what we assume is not useless.

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A tarrif is a tax paid by the purchaser, theres nothing to assume. This study is pointless.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Actually it's paid by the importer.

[–] Alloi@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

we spent a lot of money to figure out that this water, do be wet

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

Good things money was spent studying... The definition of a tariff.

[–] svullo56@feddit.nu 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm amazed that they put scientists on this. A toddler could see these results coming. Well at least a European toddler. American toddlers are probably eating crayons with their parents.

Having specific data and studies is very important.