Smartphones, computers and other electronics are exempt from Trump’s reciprocal tariffs for now

Engadget - Apr 12th, 2025

US Customs and Border Protection announced that certain electronic products, including smartphones, computers, semiconductors, and memory cards, will be excluded from the newly imposed tariffs on Chinese goods. This decision follows President Trump's recent escalation of tariffs on Chinese imports to a total of 145 percent. The exclusions aim to mitigate the adverse impact on the electronics industry, which has already seen companies like Nintendo and Razer adjusting their US product launch strategies in response to the tariffs.

The decision to exclude these products is significant amid ongoing trade tensions between the US and China, as it reflects an attempt to balance protectionist measures with the need to maintain the competitiveness of the US electronics market. While other global imports face a 10 percent tariff, the exclusion of key electronic components suggests a strategic move to avoid further disruption in technology supply chains. However, given the volatility of the current trade policy environment, the longevity of these exclusions remains uncertain, raising questions about future trade relations and economic stability.

Donald Trump Trade Policy Smartphones China Tariffs Us Customs And Border Protection Semiconductors Electronics Industry Computers

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The story provides a timely and relevant overview of U.S. tariffs and exemptions, particularly concerning electronic products. However, it suffers from a lack of detail and precision in key factual claims, such as the total tariff rates on Chinese goods. The absence of diverse perspectives and authoritative sources limits the story's balance and credibility. While the article is generally clear and accessible, its engagement and impact are constrained by the lack of comprehensive analysis and expert insights. Overall, the story addresses an important topic but requires more depth and transparency to fully inform and engage readers.

Accuracy

The story's accuracy hinges on several key claims about tariffs and exemptions. While it correctly identifies that certain electronic products are exempt from tariffs, there is ambiguity regarding the total tariff percentage on Chinese goods. The article mentions a 145% tariff, which seems inconsistent with other reports indicating a 125% rate. This discrepancy raises questions about the precision of the information provided. Additionally, the story's claim about the impact on companies like Nintendo and Razer lacks specific source support, making it difficult to verify fully. Overall, while the story presents some factual information, the lack of precise details and verifiable sources for certain claims affects its accuracy.

Balance

The story predominantly focuses on the U.S. tariffs against China and the exemptions for electronic products. It lacks a balanced perspective by not including viewpoints from affected countries or industries, such as China's response or the broader economic implications. The article could benefit from a wider range of perspectives, including economic analysts or affected businesses, to provide a fuller picture of the situation. The absence of these viewpoints suggests a potential bias towards the U.S. administration's narrative without exploring the broader international context.

Clarity

The article is generally clear in its language and structure, making it relatively easy to follow. The use of straightforward language helps convey the main points about tariffs and exemptions. However, the lack of detailed explanations for certain claims, such as the tariff rates and their implications, affects the overall clarity. While the article succeeds in presenting a coherent narrative, the absence of detailed context and precise information limits its effectiveness in fully informing the reader.

Source quality

The article does not cite specific sources or authorities, such as official government statements or expert analyses, to support its claims. This lack of attribution raises questions about the reliability of the information presented. Without clear references to credible sources, such as government documents or statements from industry experts, the story's authority is diminished. The absence of source variety and attribution makes it challenging to assess the impartiality and credibility of the reporting.

Transparency

The article provides limited context and lacks transparency in its reporting. It does not disclose the methodology behind the information presented or any potential conflicts of interest. The basis for claims, such as the tariff percentages and the impact on companies, is not clearly explained, leaving readers without a clear understanding of how these conclusions were reached. The lack of transparency in the article's sourcing and methodology undermines its credibility and leaves readers with unanswered questions about the underlying factors influencing the story.