Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 254

Trump’s tariff proposals benefit global infrastructure

During the 2016 US presidential campaign, a familiar rhetoric used by Donald Trump was the need for the US to re-evaluate trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as well as several bilateral trade agreements with the intention to improve domestic employment and industries.

In line with this protectionist view of international trade, on 1 March 2018, President Trump announced his plan to enforce a 25% tariff on steel imports and a 10% tariff on aluminium imports. Immediately post-announcement, the US and global equity markets pulled back sharply over global trade concerns.

Since this initial statement, several trade negotiations have taken place, and on 22 March, the Trump Administration announced that it would suspend the steel tariffs on select countries until 1 May 2018, including Australia.

However, on the same day, President Trump also issued a memorandum directing his Administration to take action under section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974, related to China’s acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property and innovation. The actions include:

  • Restrictions on Chinese investment in the United States.
  • Imposition of higher customs duties on imports from China.

This announcement sparked global concerns over a potential trade war between the US and China which resulted in another sharp drop in global equity markets. As trade negotiations continue, the outcome of the tariff proposals and the Administration’s broader trade policy remain unclear. Many market participants believe that a ‘watered down’ version of the initial proposals may be implemented.

Impact on infrastructure and flow of trade

Theoretically, the enactment of tariffs changes the trading dynamics between economies, which in turn, changes the flow of trade. For the importing nation, the local consumer must seek domestic alternatives or pay a premium for imported goods. For the exporting economy, on the assumption that the volume of goods produced remains unchanged, these goods can be redirected to other countries. This redirection of trade flow has a net positive impact on infrastructure. Let’s explore why.

From a global perspective, user-pay infrastructure, specifically port, road, and rail operators, move goods throughout the global economy as well as domestically. Given tariffs impact trade flows, these companies are set to be most exposed to the impact of a US tariff on Chinese imports.

We believe that in the event the proposed tariff on Chinese imports is imposed, it will likely change the direction of trade flowing out of China rather than the volume. In other words, it’s likely that the goods will be shipped to other countries instead of the US.

For port operators outside the US, this could mean that shipping volume could remain neutral, or, in fact, could stimulate the need for greater shipping which positively affects the infrastructure needed to support the redirected trade. For instance, the frequency of the China to US route might be replaced by increased China to Europe shipments. As an extension of this, where the goods land will require a recalibration of that economy’s infrastructure to account for the increased goods coming in and then the movement of these goods around that economy. Domestic freight rail operators, and warehousing and storage providers, may have to increase their capacity to account for the increased trade.

From the perspective of the US, fewer goods being imported from China may see long-haul rail companies experience a reduction in freight volumes, however, domestic intermodal operators might see increased activity domestically as US consumers switch to alternative products. This will result in a need to re-calibrate US infrastructure. Trump’s infrastructure proposal, if passed by Congress, will help make capital available for this recalibration.

Caveats on identifying consequences

However, we do see some cautionary elements to consider:

1) The actions of the Trump Administration, including high-level personnel changes, since taking office have heightened US political risk. Some market participants believe that the recent share price movements signal that the equity markets are factoring in this heightened risk, that is, it’s less about trade, and more about general policy uncertainty.

2) Investors like infrastructure assets because they are typically characterised by long useful lives and a stable cash flow profile. Tariffs, in contrast, are often short lived and thus have a limited impact. For instance, in early 2002, the Bush Administration imposed steel tariffs of up to 30% on the import of steel. Similar to Trump’s tariffs, this tariff was highly controversial, with many market pundits fearing a global trade war. In November 2003, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruled against the steel tariffs citing that they had not been imposed during a period of import surge and thus the tariff violated the US WTO tariff-rate commitments. Given a looming $2 billion penalty in sanctions coupled with trade retaliation from the European Union, the US withdrew this tariff in December 2003. This tariff was only enforced for an 18-month period.

3) The enactment of a tariff may not completely remove the comparative advantage some economies have in the production of certain goods. For instance, relative to the US, Australia has a comparative advantage in the production and export of steel (predominately in the cost of transportation from the point of origin in East Coast Australia to the final market in the US West Coast). The implementation of a steel tariff, for instance, is highly unlikely to completely erode this and thus may not result in the intended redirection of steel trade flows.


Nick Langley is Chief Investment Officer of RARE Infrastructure, an affiliate of Legg Mason, a sponsor of Cuffelinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.


Leave a Comment:



China’s new model is a plan for a hostile world

We’re number 106, and that’s not good

It’s getting hot in here


Most viewed in recent weeks

Three steps to planning your spending in retirement

What happens when a superannuation expert sets up his own retirement portfolio using decades of knowledge? He finds he can afford much more investment risk in his portfolio than conventional thinking suggests.

Finding sustainable dividend stocks on the ASX

There is a small universe of companies on the ASX which are reliable dividend payers over five years, are fairly valued and are classified as ‘negligible’ or ‘low’ on both ESG risk and carbon risk.

Among key trends in Australian banks, one factor stands out

The Big Four banks look similar but they are at fundamentally different stages as they move to simpler business models. Amid challenges from operating systems, loan growth and neobank threats, one factor stands tall.

Why mega-tech growth are the best ‘value’ stocks in the market

They are six of the greatest businesses ever and should form part of the global portfolios of all investors. The market sees risk in inflation and valuations but the companies are positioned for outstanding growth.

How inflation impacts different types of investments

A comprehensive study of the impact of inflation on returns from different assets over the past 120 years. The high returns in recent years are due to low inflation and falling rates but this ‘sweet spot’ is ending.

How to manage the run down in your income in retirement

The first of five articles on modern retirement income products that aim for an increasing pension that lasts for life and on average should not decline in real terms. They are not silver bullets but worth a look.

Latest Updates


Retirement income promise relies on spending capital

The Government has taken the next step towards encouraging retirees to live off their capital, and from 1 July 2022 will require super funds - even SMSFs - to address retirement income and protect longevity risk.


How retirees might find a retirement solution in future

Superannuation funds need to establish a framework that offers retirees a retirement income solution that lasts a lifetime. It will challenge trustees to find a way to engage that their members understand and trust.

Investment strategies

Dividend investors, your turn is coming

Dividend payments from listed companies, depended on by many in retirement, have lagged the rebound in share prices over the past year. Better times are ahead but sources of dividends will differ from previous years.

Investment strategies

Four tips to catch the next 10-bagger in early-stage growth

Small cap investors face less mature companies with zero profit that need significant capital for growth. Without years of financial data to rely on, investors must employ creative ways to value companies.

Investment strategies

Investing in Japan: ready for an Olympic revival?

All eyes are on Japan and the opportunity to win for competing athletes. After disappointing investors for many years, Japan is also in focus for its value, diversification and the safe haven status of its currency.

Fixed interest

Five lessons for bond investors from the Virgin collapse

The collapse of Virgin Australia not only hit shareholders, but their bond investors received between 9 and 13 cents in the $1. A widely-diversified portfolio can tolerate losses better than a concentrated one.

Investment strategies

The 60:40 portfolio ... if no longer appropriate, then what is?

The traditional 60/40 portfolio might deliver only 1.5% above inflation in future without diversification benefits. Knowing an asset’s attributes rather than arbitrary definitions is better for investors.


Two factors that can transform retirement investing

Retirees want better returns but they have limited appetite to dial up their risk exposure in order to achieve it. Financial advice and protection strategies in portfolios can enhance investment outcomes.



© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.