u.s. consumers who pay, correct? >> to some extent. both sides are suffer on this. >> the president still claimed falsely the u.s. would be taking in tens of billions of dollars in tariffs from china, no they're taking those tens of billions of dollars of tariffs from you. the trade war is not over. the administration says it has begun the process on raising tariffs on all remaining imports $300 billion worth. iphones, toys and tennis shoes have avoided the import taxes. in a new round, those will be included. this is what a trade war looks like. china's retaliation hitting u.s. farmers really hard at the worst possible time. farmers, this is the first week of planting season. last year's soybean crop is rotting in storage. until last year, one in three rows was shipped to china. the trade war ended that. the president has asked the usda to help farmers affected by tariffs, adding potus loves his farmers and will not let them down. there's a strong possibility the president will meet xi jinping. >> we are doubling down on leaders simila

u.s. consumers. that's after the u.s. high duties on those goods to 25 percent more terrorist might be coming according to u.s. trade representatives president donald trump took to twitter to assure his people that china would foot the bill for the new terrorists saying we will be taking in billions of dollars in terrorists from china. and are of and house but speaking on us t.v. one of trump's chief economic advisors was forced to admit that u.s. citizens were going to be splitting the bill with beijing in fact both sides will pay both sides will pay in these things and of course it was a tariff on goods coming into the country the chinese are paying no but the chinese will suffer g.d.p. losses and so forth with respect to a diminishing export market and goods that they may need for their own i just feel this but the president says china doesn't that china it pays the terrace they may suffer consequences but it's the u.s. businesses and u.s. consumers who pay correct and yes to some extent yeah i don't disagree with that

u.s. consumers will eventually face the burden from u.s. duties. u.s. futures lose out as stocks stocks looke and set to follow. uber plays it safe. in itses $8.1 billion ipo, trading on the new york stock exchange begins today. let's take a look at what is happening a half hour to the start of trading. i have bitcoin up on my terminal because it continues to march higher. right now, trading up about 3.6%. $275 and five cents. what is fueling the gains? it could be in a number of things, but it could be that the trade concerns are pushing investors into bitcoin is a safe haven asset? also that people are preparing for a wider adoption of the currency. in any case, it has had a tremendous year after the in 2017,drops we saw take a look at futures. we are up across the board in europe, even though u.s. futures are trading down, you have dax futures more than 1%. we have breaking news on danske bank. they are naming a new ceo. he has been named the new ceo, so if you are following this lender and the scandals, the alleged money-laundering issues that it is

u.s. consumer. and the vice versa is true. u.s. goods going to china that are now tariffed, it's the chinese importer, the chinese manufacturer, the chinese consumer. but, brooke, net, net who will suffer most? bear in mind the disparity between goods. arguably the chinese, because it's the year -- it's -- it will be the u.s. importers that pay the most. this is a very dangerous game. larry kudlow, by the way, knows full well the protectionist dangers of tariffs. to see him sitting there sort of justifying but at the same time squirming at the obviousness at the president's false economics is uncomfortable to watch. >> the justification and the squirm. richard quest, thank you for your analysis. i want to talk about who this hits so hard, the back and forth between the u.s. and china. it's been going on for two years. so many american businesses have been suffering from past retaliatory tariffs that the chinese put on u.s. goods. that includes stephanie nato exports lobsters. she is the owner of the lobster company in maine. stephan

u.s. consumer right u.s. consumers will pay more i'm reading maybe in a few months but they will pay more and the reason is these tariffs are hitting so many supplies they include rubber gaskets that consumers that businesses in the u.s. made to finish their products they include bicycles that consumers outright buy with ten percent tariffs which they were before on these items businesses had the option of either swallowing these costs or passing them on to the consumer or seeking another supplier they often ate the cost with twenty five percent tariffs it's harder and harder to do that when they can't find a new supplier so consumers will see prices go up and when they do find a new supplier that of course hurts china right turning much if you know is there any hope there in beijing that an agreement or a compromise can be found. soonest sat at the critical points are structural points intellectual property rights subsidies to state owned open is market access for foreign companies this seems to be where they

u.s. consumers. that's the reality. even though the president doesn't say that, i know you have heard this, i'm sure you have, but even his economic adviser is needing to concede that in interviews now. let me play you what larry kudlow said. >> it's not china that pays tariffs. it's the american importers, the american companies that pay what in effect is a tax increase, and oftentimes passes it on to u.s. consumers. >> fair enough. in fact, both sides will pay. both sides will pay in these things. >> do you think the president at this point, that he doesn't understand this, or that he does not care that he is not giving it to the american people straight on this? >> the facts are clear. his tariffs really are a tax on the american people, not on the chinese. he likes to imply china is paying this. china is not paying this. americans are paying. we're all paying the. i think the president just likes to talk tough on china generally. add to that, he loves tariffs. he's got tariffs on lots of countries around the world.

u.s. consumers china had already retaliated escalating the trade war even more raising tariffs on u.s. goods sold in china effective in june from 10 to 25 percent. last friday u.s. china trade talks ended abruptly with the u.s. side arguing discussions had been constructive but not enough for a deal. trump insists u.s. tariffs won't hurt americans but soybean farmers that export to china are already taking a hit with cotton and pork also seeing a slowdown trump's own economic advisor at mid it over the weekend american consumers are going to feel some pain again both size both sides will suffer and there is the uncertainty has rattled world financial markets and made investors nervous we're not at the beginning of the end we're at the end of the beginning and unfortunately we know from history that it's much much easier to start a trade war than is to end one especially. if you've done what the u.s. has begun to do here which is really make it a pride and autonomy question for people. most u.s. companies believe china does not abide by global trade rules but for months large u.s. retai

u.s. consumers. that's after the u.s. high duties on those goods to 25 percent more terrorist might be coming according to u.s. trade representatives president donald trump took to twitter to share his people that china would foot the bill for the new terrorists saying we will be taking in.

u.s. consumers who paid correct and yes to some extent and you know i don't disagree with that again both sides both sides will suffer on this i mean all trump has since restated his claim that it will be the u.s. that benefits from the new import tax a few hours ago he tweeted we are right where we want to be with china remember they brought the deal with us some tried to renegotiate will be taking in tens of billions of dollars in tires and china buyers of products can make it themselves in the u.s. or buy it from target countries doesn't jordan has more now from washington d.c. . the u.s. president's top economic advisor larry kudlow indicated on sunday that u.s. consumers might pay the ultimate price because of recent tariffs imposed on chinese goods some $200000000000.00 worth those tariffs are typically passed along from the companies that are selling the products to their consumers but a 25 percent hit on the price of goods made in china might dissuade u.s. consumers from actually opening their wallets and spending the way that they have been spending during this current economic e

u.s. consumer. what sort of an impact can be expected? >> it is still to be seen how much of an impact. estimate is more volume of goods being affected and how will consumers respond to it. it was also announced how this entire trade policy is trying to divert all the production that takes place in china to other countries. the capital investment from china into the u.s. being diverted away. all those other effects are happening, too. i would say you're looking at an impact on the u.s. economy that will be negative if these tariffs persist. in addition, and this is floating, too, how will china respond to the latest trades here in terms of how much of retaliation there will be. that $60 story out billion of goods will be affected. that, too, will affect u.s. companies. as we go through this, we will see data points coming in may that start to show what the impact could be on the u.s. economy. paul: yeah, we heard earlier this week from the fed saying that the u.s. economy is in a good place, but as those data points start to trickle in, at what point does the action on the bond market an

u.s. consumers elizabeth basically any time that there is an increase in a tariff or anytime there's somesort of tax imposed on a consumer product the consumer ins of having to pay that extra cost the business that does the production isn't going to just that part of the production cost it's going to pass that along to the consumer so if these tariffs do take effect and it looks as if they will in about five hours time u.s. consumers can expect goods coming from china to cost more so that's you know the first issue the other point which the u.s. president has been consistently making is that by raising tariffs on chinese made goods it makes it easier for u.s. companies to get back into the business of making everything from computer parts to household goods and the fact of the matter is the salaries that u.s. factory workers make is multiple times more than than that of what chinese factory workers make and so that is a factor that goes into the price of u.s. made goods and makes u.s. goods much more expensive so you're not going to see the return of factory return of manufacturing in the

u.s. consumers who pay, correct? >> to some extent. i don't disagree with that. both sides will suffer on this. >> breaking from his boss who falsely claimed the u.s. will be quote taking in tens of billions of dollars in tariffs from china. okay, so this trade war is not over. the administration says it's begun the process of raising tariffs on everything else the u.s. imports from china. that's another $300 billion worth. for now, iphones, toys and tennis shoes, they have avoided taxes but in a new round of tariffs, those will be included. guys, this is what a trade war looks like. china's retaliation hitting u.s. farmers especially hard here at the worst possible time. farmers right now first week of planting season, they can't get into the fields because of flooding and last year's soybean crop is rotting in storage. until last year, one in three rows of soybeans was shipped to china. agricultural secretary sonny purdue, trump has asked the usda for a plan for farmers affected by tariffs. is that going to be another bailout. is the american president picking w

u.s. consumer and on u.s. businesses. that's what's really difficult about all of this. they seem to get lost in translation. these are attacks on consumers. i think that's one of the things we're worried about going forward. if we get the next tranche that covers about anything you go into big box discounter, you'll see it or online discounters, that's going to effect the goods at the lowest end of the income the most. we're worried if we get the full out trade war, it's deflation on other things like farm goods, as you mentioned the farmers. any subsidies that go to the farmers have been too little too late. we've seen bankruptcies in the farm sector rise. it's a tax on u.s. consumers this. if we get the full throttle, it risks a u.s. recession. >> when you hear the president mention he'll be meeting with president xi at the g-20 at the end of june, does that e lay concerns? clearly not by the looks of the market. >> we like to see -- one of the things the chinese is requiring is we remove some of the tariffs for them to negotiate further. the difference between the two

u.s. consumers and u.s. manufacturers and companies wind up paying more because effectively. but the president tweeting this morning, there is no reason for the u.s. consumer to pay the tariffs. china should not retaliate, only get worse. you had a great deal, almost completed and you backed out. that notion, though, that china bears the brunt contradicted by the president's own top economic adviser over the weekend. take a listen. >> fair enough, in fact, both sides will pay. both sides will pay in these things. >> the president says china pays the tariffs, they may suffer consequences, but it's u.s. businesses and u.s. consumers who pay, correct? >> yes. to some extent. i don't disagree with that. >> so, the question is, what happens next? to this point in time, no talks are scheduled, but kudlow said it is very possible that he will meet with chinese president at the g-20 summit next month. hallie. >> stephanie, talk through why the markets are having the reaction. not just the china retalatory tariffs but threat of more down the road. >> when the president says there's no

u.s. consumers down the road rose thank you. the commander of the ron's elite military unit the revolutionary guards is the u.s. does not have the ability to wage a war against his country it also described the deployment of extra u.s. warships and fighter aircraft in the region as psychological warfare the pentagon says a reign of aggression is reason why it did so increased u.s. military presence was discussed in the iranian parliament on sunday president hassan rouhani urged unity in the face of pressure he calls unprecedented same bus route he has more from tehran. while it is a matter of routine for the new head of the islamic revolutionary guard corps to address iranian members of parliament and answer their questions major general hussein salamis turn comes at a time of heightened tensions with the united states the new i.r. g c chief assured m.p.'s that a war with the united states is unlikely because americans know the closer their military hardware comes to iranian territory the more vulnerable it becomes to iranian def

u.s. consumers for the u.s. economy. consumers will likely see price increases in the coming months it won't be immediate they're not going to go into wal-mart tomorrow and see that their favorite items have increased these tariffs are hitting a range of products everything from bicycle parts to the rubber gasket so some of these are items that consumers will buy directly a lot of them will p. passed on to them by businesses who have already maybe eaten the ten percent tariff that this that was on these products before that twenty five percent more and more of them are going to have to pass along those costs to consumers if they want to stay afloat and so that's what is expected when you see this tariff increase is that they can't say anymore all right we'll take this one on but now it's going to be the consumers are going to have to take this so it will be interesting to see what their responses and what about retaliation from china what can we expect that it will be interesting to see i mean you can't underestimate them

u.s. consumer because they're going to go on to eventually the price increases will be passed on to the consumer and if certain areas that have been exempt from from tire of so far getting tooted for example if your i phone becomes more expensive in the u.s. i think consumers are going to feel that at the same time i think the conditions for the trade talks about making greater market access and things i thought if all of those conditions are met and if there is a deal in the trade in the trade conflict then i think that would definitely benefit the u.s. consumers so there's two very different strains at work here so this is this is president trump trying to up the pressure on the chinese during the negotiations hoping to extract more from those negotiations china has been as you say their brother a paik hard to figure out what they're thinking but they say they will retaliate what do you think we can expect will have several options if they really wanted to go nuclear so to speak they could. they could basically organize a boycott of u.s. goods in china we've seen they've done that before with

u.s. consumers or u.s.ying goods in the form of higher prices, but part of it is paid by the chinese producers who face higher costs in one of their main markets. it differs product by product depending on the market structure how that tariff pain is split between the producers and the end users. there are people who benefit, mainly the producers from third countries who now have the opportunity to sell into the u.s. at a higher price because the tariffs will push price level in the u.s. up and that producers from countries apart from china are not going to pay that tariff but they'll gain the benefit of whatever amount of that tariff is passed through the final prices. it's a very complex situation and why you see different lobbying stances from different sectors. >> right. president trump insists the u.s. is right where it wants to be with china. what do you think he means by that? could this strategy backfire on mr. trump once u.s. consumers do figure out that they're the ones paying for the majority of

u.s. consumers who pay. >> yes, to some extent. i don't disagree with that. >> joining me to talk about this, nbc white house correspondent kristin welker and david jolly. matt mccarty and msnbc's ali velchi. things weren't looking good frankly before the tweets. the conversations had fallen apart. now you have retaliation from china. this is really a mess. >> i think last year we were having a splendid markets year until the trade war started. then we started this year off and it was going very well. now we have lost four percent in the last week. to lose four percent in the last week is a fairly serious matter. half of all people say i have nothing to do with the markets. what kudlow admitted to chris wallace saying i largely agree. you have to 100% agree. when you impose a tariff on goods from another country, the country pays nothing to you. companies pay the tariffs and pass it on to consumers unless you are a remarkable company that doesn't pass on the expenses to your consumers and some very wealthy companies with a lot of c

u.s. consumers.g that it will have to increase its prices due to the ongoing trade war. the company's cfo telling reuters they will try to ease the pain by seeking out suppliers from other countries. gary cohen back with me. gary, tariffs. in the past, you have said not a good idea. you advised the president that they weren't a good idea and this week, a former close colleague of yours, former ceo of goldman sachs on twitter kind of said the opposite. he said tariffs might be an effective negotiating tool saying it hurts us misses the point. china relies more on trade and a labor strike where management and workers both get hurt. the process may demonstrate relative strength or resolve and where compromise needs to happen. >> stephanie, let's talk about this. i think everyone in the country universally agrees that china is it stealing our intellectual property and they're invading copyrights. that's a subject that everyone agrees upon. we all agree that the president taking on this issue is the right

u.s. consumers and businesses up front pay for these tariffs. why is it that the white house continues to mischaracterize -- it's not subjective, these very basic facts. if the president wanted to say listen, this thing is going to hurt, but in the end it's going to help us, but right out of the gate, he's not telling the truth. >> it seems to be a political tactic. and that is why it was so remarkable to hear his top economic adviser larry kudlow break so sharply with president trump and acknowledge that it will be u.s. consumers, u.s. businesses that also bear the brunt of these tariffs. now, of course, kudlow made the point that china will hurt as well. we were wondering what the retaliation would look like from china, and now we see it. the trade war is escalating by the day. president trump just this morning tweeting directly to president trump xi saying i say openly that china will be hurt very badly if you don't make a deal because companies will be forced to leave. he urges president xi to make a deal with him. now, when might that happe

u.s. consumers. in a new report, goldman sachs confirmed the cost of u.s.iffs have fallen entirely on u.s. businesses and households and warned the consequences could worsen if a deal is not reached. even white house economic adviser larry kudlow admitted unday the administration's approach hurts the u.s. >> but it is u.s. businesses and u.s. consumers who pay, correct? er yes, to some extent. again, both sides will suffer on ilis. >> reporter: among those suffering, minnesota soybean farmer brad hovel. >> it's getting really tough. >> reporter: hovel says china's demand for minnesota's soybean crop has dropped significantly since the trade war began. today soybean prices hit a ten- year low. >> it is a shame they put the retaliatory tariffs on us. >> reporter: president trump says he will meet with china's president xi jinping at the g-20 ummit, but that's seven weeks away. and so far that far-off prospect ars not been enough to reassure nervous investors. john? or dickerson: all right. paula reid at the white house for us. thanks, paula. let's bring in no

u.s. consumer. the u.s. consumer does pay for the tariffs. he might see that come through the economic data over the coming months which might put pressure on president trump. but one thing is clear. president trump loves to blame fed chair jerome powell for dramatic drops in the market. this is all trump's doing. john? >> all trump's doing. keep us posted as the day progresses. thank you very much. with me in the studio to share their reporting and insights, kaitlan collins and two members from "the washington post." >> nobody should get fixated on one day in the market, the president is fixated but not on this one. if you believe his tweets he seems to be in this for the long haul. >> privately his advisers are saying that these tariffs and implementing them is not a long-term policy. it's not sustainable. can't keep it up even thought the president is sending the opposite message. they do know that and that's why the president's own advisers and larry kudlow saying, yes, this is going to hurt americans because it's the importers who pate c

u.s. consumers. >> fair enough. in fact, both sides will pay. both sides will pay in these things. >> well, u.s. senators from both parties are expressing concern over the lingering battle. >> putting tariffs on our allies, putting tariffs on even the chinese that are actually taxes on american producers, american farmers, taxes on the american consumer and taxes on the american worker i think are completely the wrong way of doing this, and i can assure you the chinese have a longer attention span than donald trump has. >> i think there are ways the chinese market could open up and that would be good, but i would still advise the administration to get this done because the longer we're involved in a tariff battle or a trade war, the better chance there is we could actually enter into a recession because of it. >> this president and this administration have failed to understand that we are stronger when we work with our allies on every issue, china included. >> so let's go live to beijing. cnn's stephen jung is following this story. he joins us no

u.s. consumer makes up about 70 percent of the u.s. is g.d.p. really keeping the economy afloat that according to economists could really have a negative impact on the u.s. economy it could stop consumer spending it could have the spill on effect of in fact slowing the economy down and with the presidential campaign now in full swing that could bode ill for the president as he tries to run his re-election bid yet and how much political pressure is there now on trying to get a deal rosa many lawmakers on both sides a worry that i put track to try to will will undermine economic progress. that's right and certainly the voting population here in the u.s. will look at their representatives in congress as well is that whoever is sitting in the white house if the economy starts to go south now certainly they want to see a deal because they say look the fact is the u.s. is part of a global economy the chinese economy is the 2nd largest next to that of the united states and that it makes good economic sense as well as good diplomatic sense to have a tra

u.s. consumer that ultimately pays you know, i often see estimates that would indicate the average consumeree if those projections come to fruition it's going to be difficult to know whether it's an issue the u.s. consumer is going to face president trump thinks the effects will be more negative on the economy than the u.s. >> thank you for your thoughts tony natale, senior vice president for bryn mawr. thanks for joining it. unpredictable crohn's symptoms following you? for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision proble

u.s. consumers, they are paid by u.s. s that are importing these things and paying 10% now, maybe 25% and maybe 25% on everything china exports to the united states. that's immediately going to consumer prices. the idea that this creates wealth is the opposite of the truth, it takes money from americans and he's going to use that money to buy farm goods. this is like subsidizing the farm sector that republicans said they didn't want to do. >> stay with me here, congressman, republicans are unified in attacking any democratic socialism whip on any of these candidates' platforms, how can they possibly say nothing. what the president is saying is a managed economy here. >> and the tax. can you imagine if instead of saying tariff, we said tax. donald trump is proposing a 25% tax. to ben's point, this is so important for viewers. this is a tax paid by americans, not chinese. when we use the word tariff, we think, oh, the big bad chinese who are trying to take over our economy are going to have to pay more. that's not it. the u.

u.s. consumers. >> fair enough. in fact, both sides will pay. these things. >> it's u.s. businesses and u.s. consumers who pay, correct? >> yes, to some extent. i don't disagree with that. again, both sides, both sides will suffer on this. >> stephen: yeah, technically one side pays the price, but both sides suffer. it is a bold marketing strategy. it reminds of that ad campaign: "taco bell: everyone will suffer." ( laughter ) ( cheers and applause ) ♪ ooh, i bet you wonder how i knew ♪ ♪ about your plans to make me blue. ♪. >> wam as continued to drag could lo kick-- couldly quud low kicking and screaming into reality. >> how long was he wage this trade war with china which clearly has cost to the american economy and sceumenters and businesses. >> well, i don't know. i mean can i substitute trade negotiation for trade war? >> stephen: no, you can't. nice try though. i know why you want to change it, because it makes it seem less dangerous. there say reason no there's a reason no one went to see: "avengers: infinity negotiation." now, ultimatel

u.s. consumers and the economy right i mean the u.s. consumers will pay more because of course we know that in a globalized economy it's not so simple as everyone is dipping their hands and the u.s. piggy bank were heavily reliant in the u.s. on goods that come from china and including manufacturing in china as much as mentioned so it will take some time probably a few months but the prices will go up you have to understand that businesses that are importing chinese goods into the u.s. they only have so many options when it comes to rising tariffs they can either eat the cost they can pass it on to the consumer or they can find another supplier and so in the case when you can't find another supplier then it may be easier when it's ten percent to eat that cost at twenty five percent on all of these goods that is much much more difficult you're talking about everything from rubber gaskets to bicycles so it affects a large range of products consumers are definite go see the difference so they're going to feel the pinch in the u.s. what is t

u.s. consumers who pay, correct? >> yes, to some extent. i don't disagree with that. both sides will suffer on this. >> now unless there is a deal struck there could be a lot more tariffs on the way. later today we expect the trump administration to detail how they might put $300 billion more in tariffs on chinese imports to the united states. that could hit everything from toys to iphones, alisyn. it's not over yet >> interesting to hear the straight scoop from larry kudlow when pressed. thank you very much. >> that's like admitting water is wet. >> first time we have heard it. >> the idea that tariffs hit u.s. consumers is not a stunning admission. >> it's a given. >> it's the way things are. >> it still took chris wallace a while to get it out of him. >> good on him. >>> now to washington where president trump and his allies are working to block more than 20 separate investigations. house democrats are frustrated by what they call the unprecedented lack of cooperation. they are discussing fining or jailing trump officials who don't comply with subpoenas. joe johns

u.s. consumers china had already retaliated escalating the trade war even more raising tariffs on u.s. goods sold in china effective in june from 10 to 25 percent. last friday u.s. china trade talks ended abruptly with the u.s. side arguing discussions had been constructive but not enough for a deal. trump insists u.s. tariffs won't hurt americans but soybean farmers that export to china are already taking a hit with cotton and pork also seeing a slowdown trump's own economic advisor at mid it over the weekend american consumers are going to feel some pain again both size both sides will suffer and that is the uncertainty has rattled world financial markets and made investors nervous we're not at the beginning of yet and we're at the end of the beginning and unfortunately we know from history that it's much much easier to start a trade war than is to end one especially. don what the u.s. has begun to do here which is really make it a pride and autonomy question for people. most u.s. companies believe china does not abide by global trade rules but for months large u.s. retailers like wa

u.s. consumers. in a new report, goldman sachs confirmed the cost of u.s.en entirely on u.s. businesses and households and warned the consequences could worsen if a deal is not reached. even white house economic adviser larry kudlow admitted sunday the administration's approach hurts the u.s. >> but it's u.s. businesses and u.s. consumers who pay, correct? >> yes, to some extent. again, both sides -- both sides will suffer on this. >> reporter: among those suffering, minnesota soybean farmer brad hovel. >> it's getting really tough. >> reporter: hovel says china's demand for minnesota's soybean crop has dropped significantly since the trade war began. today soybean prices reached a ten-year low. >> it is a shame they put them retaliatory tariffs on us. >> reporter: president trump says he will meet with china's president xi jinping at the g20 summit. so far that far-off prospect has not been enough to reassure nervous investors. >> so what comes next in president trump's trade war with china? jill schlesinger discussed it all with john dickerson. >> jill, l

u.s. consumer. just think for a minute about the millions of americans who simply believe the president of the united states because that's what an american should do, believe their president or those that are on twitter. one of the reasons the market is so spooked today is because weeks ago many people said, listen, the president isn't wrong in his sentiment to say things are unfair with china. the fact that he's approaching tariffs in this way, a former bank ceo told me thursday night it's stunningly stupid the way the president is handling it. you know who knows this, xi jinping, he knows the president is running in 2020 on the good economy. zi jinping who's not on twitter is watching this and saying look at all the cards i have in my hand. >> because they're all manufactured in china, that iphones go to $1,250? >> we don't know the price. if you think about apple they have pretty broad margins. where did we see it hit last year? washing machines, prices went up $100. if the president were honest

u.s. consumers correct and yes to some extent i don't disagree with that again both sides both sides will suffer on this. and with one from beijing. well larry kudlow scott ments in a sense bear out what chinese leaders have been saying again and again namely it will be the u.s. consumer that will be hardest hit by this increase in tariffs larry kudlow also indicating it'll be at least another 3 months before all these tariffs actually start to take effect because there has to be a 60 day consultation period for the levies that president trump says he now wants to put on some $300000000000.00 worth of chinese goods that's the balance of the goods that china of course exports to the united states the language we're getting from chinese leaders continues to be fairly restrained very moderate i think that's because they want to be seen to be very much the adults in the room right now but state controlled media is not holding back in particular the global times newspaper which has a very sort of nationalistic leaning it has a very belligerent editorial on monday warning that the u.s. strategy

u.s. consumer is actually bearing the cost of these tariffs. e may see the u.s. lose a little leverage. i think that the overall consensus from investors is that we'll get there on a deal between the u.s. and china. the we is how much pain will it take to get there. is it 10%? i've seen notes on the street that say a 15% decline is in order before the two sides feel a need to come to the table. that's what it's going to come down to right now. >> that would be huge. 10% is officially a correction, but 15%, if they're talking in those terms, that would wipe out, would it not, christine, this year's gains. >> i think the biggest loser could be honestly here american farmers. i think politically this is going to be a huge story. this is the first week of planting season. they have to decide if they're planting corn or soy beans. it's wet, terrible flooding. they have soy beans that are rotting from last year that were going to go to china but they didn't buy them. political pressure for the president if, in fact, some of the states that supported h

u.s. consumers as well as u.s. businesses paying the bill for for this terrifying certain goods will become more expensive that will be employed in ported from china among them are consumer electronics and other goods however though all of these goods that are currently on the way that are currently shipped from china to the united states say on a container ship for instance those goods are not included and so technically at least if the two negotiating groups would get together soon again there would still be some chance to find an agreement all over we're hearing words like constructive and amoco ball being used to describe the negotiations. obviously there are sticking points what are they. although apparently there are sticking points or also within the communist party in china there are two groups that are basically fighting reformers and hard liners and that's led to a very late decision off of the chinese president. to walk back certain parts of the agreement that were made in the first place when they were v

u.s. consumers aren't paying for it is disputed by larry kudlow this weekend. we consumers are paying for those tariffs. what is interesting to me is the retaliation from the chinese has not been announced yet. i wonder whether they are planning something very dramatic. i think that is the key moment. we have to see how china retaliates. david: one of the things that struck me over the weekend was parties seemed to go further apart. over the weekend, we heard from liu he, mr. kudlow, and mr. trump, and it doesn't sound like they are coming together. marty: i think the whole notion of trump and xi talking over the phone and reaching some sort of deal, the devil is in the details. they can't reach a deal. it is the people underneath them who do. it is not going to get sorted by a phone call. alix: that is when market participants tend to say it is too important, there has to be a deal. but when you look at the underlying issues within china, chinese pride and political maneuvering, it is a very different story. it also seemed like president trump really wanted to

u.s. consumers. trump is referring to a theoretical study done sometime last year suggesting they organize the tariffs to fall mostly on china hasn't happened. long term hurt china yes? do they have to make other changes? yes. at the moment every data point suggests all tariffs borne by u.s. consumers and u.s. businesses. >> we're using the term "tariff." the reality is, these are bigger ta taxes? >> yes. >> a tax hike, inescapable tax by and large i contend. not like most can avoid buying the products being tariffed? >> yes. exactly right. that's why the big worry is the next trend of terrorists on another $300 billion. that list, should it come into effect is all consumer goods's iphones, soap, toilet paper, everything that you buy at walmart or best buy, and that would be 25% higher prices on all of that stuff. they've tried so far to ease the pain on consumers. make it intermediate goods such as businesses use. go to $550 billion, that's everything. immediate tax on consumers, and e, yes, tariff

u.s. consumer.her wages you had tax cuts it was a really strong year for spending this year it's still good but not as good as last year >> it's a macro issue in part for the u.s. consumer. are there any -- i know more of an economist question but we saw it this morning. it's amazing how volatile retail sales have been. this terrible december number and great january. now a bad april and why -- any sense as to why the environment is so much more volatile and hard to figure out >> part of it, i cover apparel and weather really plays a factor my thermostat was 45 degrees so that pushes the spring selling further into may that did hurt april to a certain degree but we also think that the consumer as their wages aren't going up quite as much anymore, it's probably a little more discerning with what they're buying >> more down 20% for the broad sector from the highs. and so far the u.s. gdp numbers have been okay i understand there's fits and starts but this has been a better start to the year than we wo