Readers respond to trade policy
HBSDealer’s poll question from Jan. 24 asked “Should the U.S. pursue a policy of aggressive tariffs?” Days later, President Trump paused a plan to ramp up tariffs on Mexico and Canada.
The topic has generated a variety of responses, including the following:
“If tariffs are not used strategically, then, yes, they can be bad and end up costing the American consumer more for a foreign-made product. However, if used correctly they can be a benefit if not in the short term, they can work out in the long term.
“The purpose of tariffs is to economically disrupt the flow of goods from a selling country by increasing their costs to sell. President Trump is using them as a bargaining chip to get the other countries to alter their behavior to benefit the United States. So far the tariffs have worked. All it took was the threat of a tariff and they knew what the economic consequences were and they conformed to our requests. As long as they are used in that manner and the outcome is achieved, then I have no problem with tariffs.”
— Kelvin Kunath, Kunath’s Hardware
“It’s the wrong question to ask. Why?
“The Trump administration did not propose the Canada and Mexico tariffs as a “policy.” It was an opening position for an upcoming negotiation. He used tariffs as an easy-to-grab lever to get what he really wanted—a more serious effort on their part to help control our north and south borders. He took this position on Friday and by Monday both countries agreed to work on the more serious problem and the talk about tariffs was postponed to start the negotiations. Secondly, 'aggressive' is a terrible word to put into a poll because it can mean so many things, usually pejorative.”
— Peter Ganahl, Ganahl Lumber
“With lumber prices expected to rise due to increased tariffs on Canadian imports, the solution is not cutting down more U.S. forests, it is supporting American businesses and leveraging innovative alternatives to traditional lumber. U.S. made products will be more readily available and less affected by tariff-related delays. Buying domestic also strengthens American manufacturing, creates jobs and drives economic growth, particularly in rural communities.
Traditional wood lumber is becoming less essential in construction, especially as deforestation accelerates (the world loses five million hectares of forests every year). Fortunately, innovative materials can effectively replace lumber by repurposing more abundant and sustainable resources rather than relying on old-growth trees that take centuries to mature. By embracing these advancements, we can build more responsibly while reducing dependence on an increasingly strained lumber supply.”
—Chris Guimond, CEO Modern Mill
“Lumber producers have the [service level agreements] to bolster their position but others, like panel and veneer producers, see zero respite and no champions for our cause. Canadian veneer and panel imports massacre the Pacific Northwest producer—nobody mentions that. The tariffs would do us some good.”
—Eric Ortiz, Veneer sales, Freres Engineered Wood
“Tariffs hit key building components such as lumber, appliances and other manufactured components. Combine this with the serious labor shortage that will be compounded with new immigration policies and prices will increase until they can’t. There is a point where the consumer is totally tapped out. At that time inflation will be solved in a very painful way.
“So much for campaign promises to lower inflation.“
— Jim Inglis, President, Inglis Retailing
“The United States already has an affordable housing crisis and we as a nation must be focused on advocating for measures that reduce construction costs and eliminate regulatory barriers, not policy that discourages or creates new challenges for developing affordable housing. We applaud President Trump for swiftly reaching an agreement to delay the tariffs avoiding further strain on the housing market and to the American consumer. We will continue to work with the White House administration and policymakers to implement policy that supports the housing market and reduces regulatory burdens.”
— NLBMDA CEO Jonathan Paine
“Canadian lumber producers’ continuous unfair trade practices are forcing idling and closures of U.S. lumber mills. Canada must cease treating the United States as a dumping ground for its excess lumber production, which amounts to a Canadian jobs program at the expense of American workers, their families, and forestry dependent communities.”
— Steve Swanson, Chairman of Swanson Group, an Oregon-based forest products company (from a press release from the U.S. Lumber Coalition)
Click here to add your vote to the poll. Or share your thoughts at news@hbsdealer.com.
