Disclosing Tariff Impacts Is A Hostile And Political Act

[Bitjuggler]

 I've been trying to wrap my head around this one since I first heard it.
 
Synopsis of the situation:
Punchbowl News reports that "[Amazon] will soon show how much Trump’s tariffs are adding to the price of each product”. A number of other outlets pick up on and start reporting about the story. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responds by calling the move a “hostile and political act,” adding that she had spoken about the matter with President Trump earlier. It's later reported that Trump has spoken to Jeff Bezos about it, and that Bezos has relented and won't be listing the breakout of tariff contributions to product prices.
 
What I’ve been debating:
To me it seems like a manufactured crisis of the moment. I ask myself, "Why would Amazon list tariff contributions per product?" ... because doing so would reveal the base price of the product they've purchased, and in so doing, would reveal their markups on those products (which would probably raise more ire from their customers than would the price of the tariffs).
 
Let's say an Amazon seller orders 10,000 units of a Pink Chinese vibrator that plays "Oh Cum all Ye Faithful", for which he pays the Chinese manufacturer $2 per unit. He then turns around and sells each vibrator on Amazon for $19.99. Current tariffs on Chinese goods are 145%, which would add $2.90 to the $2 price the Amazon seller pays. The seller decides not to absorb any of the tariff, and raises the Amazon price to the consumer by $2.90 to $22.89 to cover that tariff. The tariff listing on the product is shown as $2.90. Does the seller really want customers to realize that said seller is charging consumers ten times their cost for this cheap climax inducer? No, absolutely not!
 
Given this, I don't think that Amazon ever had any intention of listing the tariff contributions to the products they sell. So I'm left wondering what all of this political song and dance was all about. The best my girlfriend can cum up with (being in possession of one of said units) is that it was to make it look like Amazon backed down to the "tough guys" in the Trump administration.

[Brad R]

I remember my first trip to the U.K., decades ago.  The Value-Added Tax was at that time -- and I assume still is -- included in the sticker price of anything you bought.  So the price on the goods was the price you paid, with nothing added at the cash register.  I imagine that made budgeting a bit easier if you were trying to decide "do I have enough money for these three items?"

The flip side, of course, is that you never knew how much money from your purchase was going to the state.  Sure, you could calculate it if you knew all the rates, but no one ever did.  This was seen as a good thing for the state.

In Canada we have a weird mix -- most goods are priced in the American style (or what I presume to be the American style), where the price on the sticker is the pre-tax price, and the tax is calculated and added in -- and printed separately on the receipt -- at the time of purchase.  One exception is alcoholic beverages, whose price stickers show the "all-in" price, with the sales tax and liquor tax included.  (The deposit for returnable bottles is also included in the sticker, but broken out as a separate line on the receipt.)

Some years ago, when there was a big hike in the gasoline tax, and Canadians were starting to grumble at the oil companies, those companies responded by putting printed stickers on the gasoline pumps, breaking out how much of the pump price was actually tax going to different levels of government.  That was eye-opening.  I don't recall how long that program lasted, before they removed the printed stickers and went back to business as usual.

I'm not sure any of the "transparency" policies had a lasting impact.