Management decisions threaten the entire electronics industry.Tariffs always have an effect. It’s usually not the intended one.

Tell me it isn’t so. Tell me we are not going back, excuse me, that’s backwards, to when I began my career in the 1970s! As you age, you remember the way things were, for better or worse. And in my case, add being a student of history, albeit a casual one, as well as a selective packrat of industry periodicals. Together, looking at the current state of the global world of technology, the trajectory certainly appears less forward and more backward.

In the 1970s, America was an epicenter of manufacturing, including electronics and technology. Then Japan and Taiwan began to outperform the US in terms of quality and value. At that time, South Korea, Vietnam, Thailand and even China were not yet mainstream economic engines. The time-to-market for new technology stretched years. While innovation flourished, double-digit inflation hindered any single company or nation from profitably funding significant technological advancements.

Business executives are resourceful, however. Western countries, led by the US, began to study how Japan was transforming its economy into one that produced cost-effective and high-quality products. One of the most notable observations was how Japanese companies began to source components and sub-systems from lower-cost countries. Even more importantly, Japanese companies invested in building manufacturing facilities in lower-cost countries and taught the local workforce how to produce the quality products the Japanese required. By observing and copying the successes that Japan and Taiwan enjoyed, the modern global supply chain came to life.

Since the 1970s, companies around the world have developed global supply chains for virtually all products. These supply chains offer several advantages, including the ability to collaborate across different parts of the world, which creates a 24/7 workforce. This collaboration has significantly reduced time-to-market to months from years. Additionally, when product development teams are international, they account for the tastes, needs and unique preferences of consumers worldwide, resulting in products that truly appeal to a global audience. These two examples have dramatically reduced cost-to-market, while enhancing global product demand to enable scalable manufacturing, resulting in much lower unit costs. In short, a win-win-win for consumers, companies and countries!

Even in successful endeavors, however, imbalances can occur. Currently, certain specific technologies and industries need a better mix of imports versus domestic production. When we identify such imbalances, focusing on them has proven successful in the past. The CHIPS and Science Act, enacted by Congress in 2022, serves as an example of this approach to rebalancing critical needs. By implementing legislation similar to the Chips Act, rebalancing can take place without destroying the long-evolved and highly efficient global economy.

But now, these highly efficient supply chains that support global economies face threats from tariffs that one leader believes will revitalize its manufacturing industries. Regrettably, bulk, across-the-board tariffs have never worked. Worse, the taxing country loses more than the nation it taxes. The Smoot-Hartley Tariff Act, which the US Congress enacted in 1930, led to the collapse of international trade, prolonged the Great Depression and served as a catalyst for World War II.

Over the years, selective tariffs have worked, but only when implemented with the precision of a surgeon, not a lumberjack. Even then, free-trade biases have discouraged tariffs. Two decades ago, the June 2004 IPC Review recapped the IPC Capitol Hill Day, where Rep. Donald Manzullo (R-IL), chairman of the Committee on Small Business, stated, “Tariffs don’t work.” He discussed how tariffs raise costs and reduce supply of impacted materials. The results of 1930 and 2004 are harbingers of what could come.

Yet one government’s worldview may regrettably take everyone on a long, torturous journey back to the 1970s. Like a bumpy rollercoaster ride, markets will reel, shortages of critical items will develop and many common consumer products will disappear from store shelves. Costs for everyone will rise and time to market will equally suffer.

If the global industry has patience and sets a positive example by encouraging collaboration, we may be able to mitigate the disruptions that history suggests are likely to occur. Hopefully, we will wake up from a bad dream and resume thriving as part of a highly efficient global economy in 2025, not the 1970s!

Peter Bigelow has more than 30 years’ experience as a PCB executive, most recently as president of FTG Circuits Haverhill; peterbigelow@msn.com.

• Next