Why do governments impost tariffs?
538315
Supposedly, its either in an effort to raise money (this was the sole source of income for the early U.S. government) or to "protect" certain industries from foreign entities.  However, economists generally state that no industry should be protected: a totally free enterprise system works best.  Why should we keep making horse and buggies, for instance, if the rest of the world is making automobiles?  Why should we protect industries like sugar when the average American family must pay over $250 a year more for sugar than the rest of the world pays?  Just to keep an inefficient market in place?  Hardly.
528923
Because these moronic bureaucrats enjoy wasting tax payers hard earned money.\n\nCall for an end to the European Union...after all it is a farce of the highest order, and we in the UK were taken into it under false pretenses...it is no longer a common market as we were led to believe, and why doesn't Tony Blair and his cronies have the guts to hold that promised referendum!
415178
They can't justify it that's why they do it, politicians are contrary creatures!\n\nActually, I agree with you, all governments seem to spend more money on stupid things than on something that's actually pertinant to their society!  I think there's a certain amount of one-up-manship, but perhaps also the fact that politicians are so well paid that they don't care about real issues, they just care about themselves!
877512
You'll have to provide a few more details...are you referring to the system of bribes to obtain contracts?  Or the system of monopolies?  Or the government tariffs against European goods to protect the higher American wages and to promote the growth of American industry?
135151
I think what you are referring to is actually duty.  \nTo find out how much duty you may have to pay you can check out the following link, it is free to register.\nhttp://www.apectariff.org/\nClick on the link of the country YOU ARE FROM as that is what determines the amount of duty you would pay as each country sets their own rate of duties.\nIt is not updated as often as your country's official tariff schedule, but it should give you a good idea.\nPlus here you can search by description!\nHope this helps!
634116
okay, the tariff, as you know, is a tax on imported goods from other countries.  Governments implement tariffs in order to discourage other countries from selling their goods here.  \nHow does this affect our economy? The US's Net exports (a factor which contributes to the nation's wealth, therefore the higher the net exports, the better for our economy) equals the US exports minus imports.  The tariffs reduce imports, and therefore increaces the NET EXPORTS, which adds to the US wealth.  \nThis is also good for another reason.  Becuase the US exports increase and the imports decrease as a result of the tariff, other countries need the US dollar in order to buy the US goods.  As a result of the increase in demand, the dollar will become more valuable, or appreciate, making the dollar stronger abroad.  \n\nThe negative aspect actually comes as a result of the prior two advantages.  As the dollar becomes stronger, it becomes more expensive for other countries to buy the US goods, therefore discouraging the exports that initially rose as a result of the tariff.  So, in the end, there is no change in the NET EXPORTS, this disadvantage and the first advantage balance each other out. \n\nSO, after looking at three main outcomes of implementing a tariff, the advantage to the economy is this:  The dollar becomes stronger abroad, therefore making it cheaper for the US to buy other countries goods, even if fewer imports are being brought in to the US.  It also decreases foreign competition for US based companies\n\nHope this helps, good luck with the paper!
1087249
With the taxes - we are forced to play by their rules.\n\nBin Laden plays by his own rules.\n\nCheers!
654763
cuz the govt cant tax it
695405
They use the governments money... unless its simply private business of thier own, like buying a computer for home use.
46097
Not only that, they can have the receiving country adhere to certain guidelines before releasing a penny.  These guidelines include trade, migration, human rights, banking and public finance policies.
883079
I think the issue is that they aren't paying most taxes.  (You pay taxes to America every time you buy something...)
688192
Because the government does not want third parties to profit off of other businesses. While scalping tickets does effectively help cover the portion of the "demand" market, it does so at the expense of making a dollar on the company. Overall, this aids in causing the demand to go down and the prices for the busienss to drop over the long run.
851105
Well... This is probably an answer you're not going to like, but I'm going to share it anyway...\n\nThe imposition of tariffs is a very bad idea for several reasons:\n\n1. Tariffs stifle innovation. Starting in the 1920s, Britain began imposing tarrifs on imported coal to protect the mining industry. One effect of this was to take away any incentive for the coal companies to invest in newer technologies that were being introduced by competing nations, and as a result the industry went into a tailspin from which it never recovered. The fact is, the marketplaces of today are far more interconnected then they were in the 19th century (which is why your analogy of the American steel industry is irrelevant). And in the global marketplace, tarrifs artificially reward market inefficiencies that always come back to bite the offending nation in the butt.\n\nA perfect example of this in the 20th century is the economy of India. After achieving independence, the Indian government swiftly moved to slap tariffs on a variety of imported goods. Probably the most important of these was textiles. As a result, the Indian textile industry stagnated, as its antiquated production methods quickly fell behind those of other nations which did not employ a protectionist policy (Hong Kong, Singapore, etc.). Invariably, protection leads to another problem...\n\n2. Subsidization. As industrial output declines because of the non-competitive rewards of tariffs, the need to protect jobs becomes a paramount concern for governments. This leads to government bail-outs for failing industries. It exacerbates the already dangerous trend toward business inefficiency, and constitutes a useless drag on public finances that could be spent to much greater effect in any number of other worthwhile areas.\n\n3. With tariffs, you also get higher prices for consumer goods. In 2004 (to pander to the steelworker's vote) the Bush administration imposed tariffs on imported steel. He knew this was a direct violation of the US's obligations under the WTO, but did it because he knew the WTO would force him to rescind only after the elections. In the interim, however, the tariffs cost the automobile and construction industries billions of dollars, which were all passed on to consumers.\n\nBottom line, it isn't fair to punish the many for the sins of the few.\n\n4. When nations impose tariffs, other nations retaliate. As stated, the international marketplace is totally interconnected, and it isn't rational to assume that a nation will allow its nation's economy to be harmed with impunity. As prices rise, economies experience downturns, and the tit-for-tat trade wars that erupt by tariffs result in the decline of productivity on a global scale.\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nYou ask if "free trade means free labor." Of course not. But what you need to consider is that economies evolve. Like the song says, "One man's half-way up is another man's half-way down." You have to look at economic development in the same way. All too often, well intentioned people decry the seeming exploitation of workers in developing countries. They denounce the "Sweat Shops," and urge an end to this. But you need to understand the evolving nature of things. \n\nThe economic condition of the vast majority of these people is profoundly superior to the conditions of their parents and grandparents. You can't fairly compare conditions in Tanzania with those in Boston. You must look at where the Tanzanian people were, where they are now, and where they are clearly headed.\n\nPlease understand, the conditions that are present in many developing countries today are identical to those in the US at the turn of the 20th century. The American economy evolved beyond this -- and if given sufficient time so will the others. This is why, last year, the Tanzanian Minister for Trade and Industry went
1037991
Most international companies have studies done by outside consultants to substantiate the intergroup markups that they charge on international transactions within the company.  That is the only way to insure that their practices pass the mustard with governmental tax agencies around the world, and yet don't cripple the company's business efforts.
627678
"If a country's major industries lose to foreign competition, the loss of jobs and tax revenue can severely impair parts of that country's economy. Protective tariffs have been used as a measure against this possibility. However, protective tariffs have disadvantages as well. The most notable is that they increase the price of the good subject to the tariff, disadvantaging consumers of that good or manufacturers who use that good to produce something else: for example a tariff on food can increase poverty, while a tariff on steel can make automobile manufacture less competitive. They can also backfire if countries whose trade is disadvantaged by the tariff impose tariffs of their own, resulting in a trade war and disadvantaging both sides."
1034066
higher taxes and greater government interference
1187533
Corruption among the government leaders. Lack of government trade laws that can severely destroy your business in an instant.