Trump exempts phones, computers, chips from ‘reciprocal’ tariffs

Scope and Mechanics of the Exemptions

• Commenters quickly pulled the primary CBP bulletin and decoded the tariff codes: exemptions cover a wide swath of tech—PCs/servers, smartphones, networking gear, solid‑state storage, displays, most semiconductors and fab tools—while notably excluding LEDs, photovoltaics, and some other components.
• Several point out the media framing is misleading: legally, product categories are exempt, not named companies. Practically though, this overwhelmingly benefits a small set of giants (Apple, Nvidia, Dell, HP, major server makers).
• For these categories, analysis shared in the thread says effective rates drop from ~45% to ~5%; Chinese electronics go from a planned 145% down to ~20%, while other Chinese exports still face the full hike plus earlier tariffs.

Perceived Corruption and “Pay‑to‑Play”

• Many see this as overt oligarchic favoritism: big tech gets relief while small and mid‑sized importers are “left to burn.”
• Multiple links and anecdotes tie tariff rollbacks and export decisions to million‑dollar Mar‑a‑Lago dinners and inauguration donations, described as de facto bribes.
• This is repeatedly compared to “banana republic” or Russian‑style crony capitalism: a small circle with political pull gets exemptions; everyone else faces arbitrary punishment.

Impact on Small Business, Supply Chains, and Prices

• Import‑dependent small businesses report immediate chaos: materials that can’t be sourced domestically are suddenly tariffed; suppliers are pivoting away from China, driving up global prices.
• Commenters with logistics experience note containers caught mid‑transit now face unexpected duties; some shippers (e.g. laptop brands) reportedly paused US‑bound shipments.
• Several stress that selective exemptions are worst for US manufacturing: finished electronics are shielded, but raw materials, tooling, and intermediate inputs still face steep tariffs, making local production even less competitive.

China, Retaliation, and Trade‑War Dynamics

• A strong bloc characterizes the move as an outright capitulation: China’s retaliatory tariffs remain; the US has unilaterally carved out its most China‑dependent sectors.
• Concern that China can now selectively squeeze US exporters (via tariffs, export controls, or coerced buyouts) while Washington has already spent its main leverage.
• Others argue there was a broader anti‑China goal—forcing decoupling, reshoring, and alliance realignment—but say execution (sudden, huge, and reversible) has badly backfired.

Governance, Strategy, and Institutional Damage

• Widespread consensus that policy is incoherent or purely transactional: threats, then rapid walk‑backs, often announced late at night and contradicting current advisors.
• Some call it “vibe governing” or “chaos as strategy”: keep markets, allies, and firms off balance, then sell exemptions as a form of political extortion.
• Many fear long‑term damage: erosion of trust in US trade reliability, the dollar, and Treasuries; accelerating capital flight; allies rethinking defense and sourcing ties.
• A few note equal‑protection and constitutional questions—selective carve‑outs, emergency powers, and Congress being sidelined—arguing this exposes deep structural vulnerabilities rather than a coherent economic plan.