Where Tariffs Are Pink

A single number cannot describe a tariff.

Just a snippet from 700 pages of tariffs in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, the following partial page is on blankets. You can see electric, wool, and cotton blankets are categorized differently:

Further checking the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule, you would discover that (favoring the affluent) items made from wool, cashmere, and silk have lower rates than cotton, polyester, and nylon.

In addition, gender matters.

Let’s take a look.

Pink Tariffs

Men’s apparel has lower tariff rates than women’s. (The following data from 2017 would have been higher with 2022 numbers):

During 2022, women’s items averaged a 16.7% tariff and men’s, 13.6%. Asked why, history could have some answers. Looking back more than 50 years, scholars hypothesize that male dominance made the difference. More men’s clothing was made than women’s. Focused on lower tariffs for men, producers wanted lower entry barriers. (But also, did they have domestic industry to protect?)

The Pink Tariffs Study Act

Seeing tariff favoritism, several members of Congress recently introduced the Pink Tariffs Study Act. Their proposal indicates that, in addition to gender, they will look at whether tariffs favor affluent households. As a result, they will need to uncover the less obvious sides of tariffs. They cannot ignore that the rich buy silk and the poor, polyester. And yet, polyester has the higher rate. Also, they will surely ask why very similar cotton suit jackets for men and women have different tariff rates–with women higher.

Our Bottom Line: Choice Architecture

In addition to tariffs, we’ve seen gender bias with piano design, office temperatures, and tax returns. Asking why, we can guess that it’s not intentional. However, a behavioral economist (and plain old logic) would say your policies depend on your “choice architecture.” In other words, our decisions depend on the environment in which we make them. They depend on the incentives that nudge politicians, piano designers, and architects.

The choice architecture from regulatory authorities limited the bandwidth to male territory. Tariff details necessitate that a hierarchy be articulated. I would suggest that when men dominate public policy and product design, then the choices they make reflect their own life experience. Male dominated choice architecture leads to gender bias and pink tariffs.

My sources and more: Thanks to the Jen Psaki program on MSNBC for alerting me to pink tariffs. From there, CNN had more detail as did the NY Times, and this paper. From there, checking the Pink Tariffs Studies Act, I found the legislation  and also checked the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. However for the most excellent tariff impact reports, do go to the Yale Budget Lab.

Please note that several of today’s sentences were in a past econlife post.