Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

The 30% tariff hike: SA must strengthen diplomatic ties, diversify trade partnerships beyond the US

07 April 2025 Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Calvin Mudzingiri, Assistant Dean: Economic and Management Sciences, University of the Free State, Qwaqwa Campus

The sudden hike of import tariffs by US President Donald Trump and his administration to countries across the world is set to reduce the volume of goods traded and affect citizen welfare across the globe. The Trump administration implemented a global 10% import tariff and a varying targeted reciprocal tariff to a host of countries, including South Africa. The reciprocal import tariff to be levied on South African export goods to the US is set at 30%. Historical data show that yearly trade between SA and US amounts to $23 billion and the US is SA’s the second biggest trading partner after China. The high tariff will reduce the competitiveness of South African export goods to American markets, leading to reduced demand of SA exports in US markets, low income to firms, job losses, low income to households and ultimately lower South African economic growth.

SA and US trade

South Africa exports platinum, locally assembled cars, raw aluminium, ferroalloys and agriculture products, among other goods, to the US. The implication of the US administration’s 30% tariff hike could result in job losses in the mining, automobile, agriculture and many other industries. More income losses to SA agricultural exports can also be experienced if the African Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA) expires in September 2025, if the US congressmen decide not to renew the agreement. Given the low economic growth rate in South Africa in 2024, which is estimated at 0.6%, the tariff hike by the US will exacerbate sluggish economic growth and recovery from the COVID 19 pandemic.

Statistics also show that SA imports energy products, machinery, vehicle, industrial and other consumer goods. The goods and services SA imports from the US play a critical role in developing and sustaining local industry. SA can decide to source the goods from other markets and if this happens with all economies where tariffs were imposed, the US will be worse off. There is a possibility that economies which received a tariff hike from the US will implement a reciprocal tariff hike to the US reducing the volume of global trade. The reduced trade volumes have dire implications for job creation, income generation by firms and households, making citizens worse off.

US current trade policy

It is important to note that President Trump administration’s trade policies are premised on a trade notion synonymous to ‘mercantilism’, which was practised in Europe between the 16th to 18th centuries. Under mercantilism, an economy aims to maintain a trade surplus, the government regulate the economy, discourage imports (in the case of the US using tariff hikes) and promote growth of home industries among other initiatives. Conventional economics wisdom has proved that policies pursued by the Trump administration of protectionism are a breeding ground for trade wars. There is great potential of fellow trading partners retaliating and if that happens, global citizens will be made worse off as they will be forced to pay high prices for goods due to additional costs driven by tariff hikes. In addition, US industry relies on raw materials from other countries. If the suppliers of raw material resources retaliate, the production cost model of US firms will rise, reducing export competitiveness of US exports.

Trump’s administration is calling for firms across the world to move and produce goods in the US to avoid tariff levies. The action works against the benefits of free trade and can affect firms’ comparative advantages. The production cost structure in the US can be higher than in other countries leading to firms realising low profits if they move to the US. It is essential to note that free trade with absolutely no trade barriers will enhance the welfare of citizens at large, since goods and services will be purchased at low prices. The US government’s act of over-regulating trade can limit economic growth not only of other countries but even that of the US economy.

Options for the SA government

In the face of trade adversity, the SA government must not fold its hands and do nothing. It is enlightening to note that the authorities have already initiated diplomatic and trade negotiations. Negotiations can possibly focus on tariff reduction, maintaining the AGOA, and delving deep in the logic used to arrive at the 30% tariff hike. The diplomatic initiatives must encompass improving perceptions and clarity of SA policies such as the Expropriation Act which is one of the reasons cited by the US administration in ratcheting the tariff trade war.

South Africa must re-orient its trading patterns and partnerships. The aggregate world gross domestic product (GDP) is greater than the US total production for goods and services. There is need for SA to improve trade relations with other economies to broaden its trade base. The current frosty trade relationship between SA and the US presents a window to strengthen trade with the EU, Asia, BRICS plus, Africa, and any other economy willing to get into trade partnerships. SA must explore other markets where the export goods still enjoy competitiveness.

To ensure economic resilience to trade wars in the long run, SA needs to seriously invest in research and development that promote value addition of local production, enhancing local production and technology advancement that can stimulate economies of scale, which can boost competitiveness of export goods. Competitiveness can be further enhanced by improving energy production efficiency, which is a crucial input of goods and services production. Developing a powerful and skilled human capital base can lead to labour productivity efficiency, further enhancing competitiveness. SA has a dilapidated infrastructure ranging from roads, rail, buildings and industry among others. Improving the infrastructure will go a long way in improving local production, leading to creation of jobs and improved incomes for households.

Boosting local economic activity can stimulate local consumption of goods as household income improves. If the incomes of SA citizens improve, there is a potential to increase local consumption. Goods meant for export markets can end up being consumed in the domestic markets, providing a homemade solution to dwindling export goods markets. The SA government must consider developing and supporting new industries that can compete in the local and international markets. In this way, the trade challenges posed by unfriendly US administration trade policies can present opportunities to the SA economy in the long run.

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof. Phillipe Burger

2007-11-26

Attending the lecture were, from the left: Prof. Tienie Crous (Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences at the UFS), Prof. Phillipe Burger (Departmental Chairperson of the Department of Economics at the UFS), and Prof. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS).
Photo: Stephen Collet

A summary of an inaugural lecture presented by Prof. Phillipe Burger on the topic: “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

South African business cycle shows reduction in volatility

Better monetary policy and improvements in the financial sector that place less liquidity constraints on individuals is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the volatility of the South African economy. The improvement in access to the financial sector also enables individuals to manage their debt better.

These are some of the findings in an analysis on the volatility of the South African business cycle done by Prof. Philippe Burger, Departmental Chairperson of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Economics.

Prof. Burger delivered his inaugural lecture last night (22 November 2007) on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein on the topic “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

In his lecture, Prof. Burger emphasised a few key aspects of the South African business cycle and indicated how it changed during the periods 1960-1976, 1976-1994 en 1994-2006.

With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of the business cycle, the analysis identified the variables that showed the highest correlation with the GDP. During the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006, these included durable consumption, manufacturing investment, private sector investment, as well as investment in machinery and non-residential buildings. Other variables that also show a high correlation with the GDP are imports, non-durable consumption, investment in the financial services sector, investment by general government, as well as investment in residential buildings.

Prof. Burger’s analysis also shows that changes in durable consumption, investment in the manufacturing sector, investment in the private sector, as well as investment in non-residential buildings preceded changes in the GDP. If changes in a variable such as durable consumption precede changes in the GDP, it is an indication that durable consumption is one of the drivers of the business cycle. The up or down swing of durable consumption may, in other words, just as well contribute to an up or down swing in the business cycle.

A surprising finding of the analysis is the particularly strong role durable consumption has played in the business cycle since 1994. This finding is especially surprising due to the fact that durable consumption only constitutes about 12% of the total household consumption.

A further surprising finding is the particularly small role exports have been playing since 1960 as a driver of the business cycle. In South Africa it is still generally accepted that exports are one of the most important drivers of the business cycle. It is generally accepted that, should the business cycles of South Africa’s most important trade partners show an upward phase; these partners will purchase more from South Africa. This increase in exports will contribute to the South African economy moving upward. Prof. Burger’s analyses shows, however, that exports have generally never fulfil this role.

Over and above the identification of the drivers of the South African business cycle, Prof. Burger’s analysis also investigated the volatility of the business cycle.

When the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006 are compared, the analysis shows that the volatility of the business cycle has reduced since 1994 with more than half. The reduction in volatility can be traced to the reduction in the volatility of household consumption (especially durables and services), as well as a reduction in the volatility of investment in machinery, non-residential buildings and transport equipment. The last three coincide with the general reduction in the volatility of investment in the manufacturing sector. Investment in sectors such as electricity and transport (not to be confused with investment in transport equipment by various sectors) which are strongly dominated by the government, did not contribute to the decrease in volatility.

In his analysis, Prof. Burger supplies reasons for the reduction in volatility. One of the explanations is the reduction in the shocks affecting the economy – especially in the South African context. Another explanation is the application of an improved monetary policy by the South African Reserve Bank since the mid 1990’s. A third explanation is the better access to liquidity and credit since the mid 1990’s, which enables the better management of household finance and the absorption of financial shocks.

A further reason which contributed to the reduction in volatility in countries such as the United States of America’s business cycle is better inventory management. While the volatility of inventory in South Africa has also reduced there is, according to Prof. Burger, little proof that better inventory management contributed to the reduction in volatility of the GDP.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept