**1. The tariff is announced – the shock begins**

| Time | What happens | Why | Immediate consequences |
|------|--------------|-----|------------------------|
| **Day 1** | Government imposes a 50 % ad‑valorem duty on every micro‑chip imported into the market. | The tariff is intended to give domestic suppliers a price edge and to protect a “critical” industry. | Importers now face a 50 % higher cost on the chips they buy. |
| **+1 week** | Import‑based distributors and OEMs (computer makers, smartphone assemblers, automotive OEMs, industrial equipment firms) scramble to re‑price their orders. | Their purchase‑to‑sell margin shrinks immediately. | Some firms raise prices for the next batch of goods; others absorb the extra cost to protect market share. |

---

**2. Short‑term ripple through supply chains (0–6 months)**

| Step | Actor | Action | Effect |
|------|-------|--------|--------|
| **a** | **Computer & consumer‑electronics manufacturers** | Shift orders to the few remaining lower‑cost suppliers (e.g., cheaper chips from “less‑regulated” countries) or order less‑capable chips that are exempt or less affected by the tariff. | Production schedules get disrupted; product specifications may degrade. |
| **b** | **Automakers** | Their assembly lines that rely on dozens of micro‑components (infotainment, power‑train control, safety‑critical ECUs) face shortages. | Some plants halt output or reduce shift hours. |
| **c** | **Retailers & distributors** | Expect higher wholesale prices and potential shortages of key components. | They start passing the premium on the shelf; inventory cycles lengthen. |
| **d** | **Consumers** | Face higher prices on the latest laptops, smartphones, and cars, especially in categories where chip upgrades are frequent. | Demand elasticity in the short‑term is low (buyers have to decide whether to postpone purchase or pay a premium). |

*Result:* The domestic economy experiences a **cost‑push inflation** on high‑tech goods and a temporary **slight contraction in the high‑tech manufacturing sector** because firms either cut back or pay more for parts.

---

**3. Immediate macro‑economic feedback (6–12 months)**

1. **Price‑pressure** spreads from electronics into the automotive sector (e.g., cars become ~3–5 % more expensive).  
2. **Demand erosion:** Higher prices reduce discretionary purchases. Sales of non‑essential cars and high‑end electronics drop 1–3 % year‑on‑year.  
3. **Manufacturing slowdown:** Reduced orders lead some factories to lay off or furlough workers.  
4. **Supply‑chain re‑routing:** Firms accelerate efforts to source “alternative” chips, often at a premium, adding to cost pressures.  
5. **Government fiscal response:** To cushion the blow, the central government offers temporary subsidies or tax rebates to large OEMs that can show a clear “chip‑shortage” problem.  

---

**4. International fallout – other countries’ reactions (12–18 months)**

| Actor | Response | Why | Consequences |
|-------|----------|-----|--------------|
| **United States & EU (major chip consumers and producers)** | Consider or impose retaliatory tariffs on goods that depend heavily on domestic chips (e.g., cars, electronics, industrial equipment). | To avoid the domestic market being flooded with cheaper imported chips from the tariff‑targeted country. | Potential for a trade dispute; WTO filing. |
| **China, Taiwan, South Korea** | Some may reduce chip exports to the tariff‑imposing country, citing supply‑chain risk. | Protecting domestic industry, or responding to pressure from their own governments. | Importers in the tariff country face a *second‑layer* shortage. |
| **Developing nations** | Use the event as an excuse to negotiate better terms for their own chip exports or invest in regional supply‑chain diversification. | To secure cheaper inputs in a shifting global market. | The tariff country may lose its “preferred supplier” status. |

*Medium‑term impact:* A **global realignment of chip supply chains**, with firms increasingly favoring “near‑shoring” and “dual‑ sourcing” arrangements.

---

**5. Domestic response to the tariff (12–24 months)**

| Action | Description | Effect on domestic tech sector |
|--------|-------------|-------------------------------|
| **Government stimulus package** | Capital injections, tax incentives, and R&D grants for chip‑fab construction, clean‑room tech, and semiconductor design. | Accelerates the timeline for domestic fabs to reach production capacity. |
| **Strategic partnership with multinational chip firms** | Joint‑venture agreements where foreign expertise and capital are coupled with local workforce and land. | Brings high‑skill jobs and technology spill‑overs into the labor market. |
| **Vocational training & university curriculum shifts** | Upskill existing engineers and create new semiconductor‑focused degree programs. | Expands the talent pipeline, though the workforce shift lag remains a few months. |
| **Export‑oriented domestic chip policy** | Encourage domestic fabs to supply not only the national market but regional neighbors. | Builds a regional “chip hub,” diversifying revenue streams for new fabs. |

*Key outcomes:*  
* **Domestic employment in the chip sector:** By 24 months, new facilities can create 10–20 % more high‑skill jobs than before the tariff.  
* **Employment in chip‑dependent sectors:** The initial losses from production slowdowns persist but gradually offset by the new jobs and the eventual cost‑normalization of chips as domestic supply ramps up.

---

**6. Net medium‑term picture (24 months onward)**

| Indicator | Trend | Interpretation |
|-----------|-------|----------------|
| **Price of consumer electronics & vehicles** | Initially rises ~5–7 %; normalizes within 18–24 months as domestic chip supply grows. | Indicates that tariff‑induced price shocks are temporary if domestic capacity scales up. |
| **Domestic chip production** | From 0 % import reliance to ~35–45 % of local chip demand. | Shows successful substitution but still reliant on imports for advanced chips. |
| **Employment** | Short‑term decline in manufacturing jobs (−3 % in high‑tech assembly). Long‑term increase in high‑skill semiconductor jobs (+5–10 %). | Reflects a transition in the labor market from lower‑skill to higher‑skill roles. |
| **GDP growth** | Modest slowdown (~0.5‑1 % lower than forecast) due to short‑term inflation and supply shocks. | Suggests the cost of protectionism is a trade‑off with growth. |
| **International trade balance** | Slightly worsens due to higher import costs and potential retaliatory tariffs. | Encourages the country to pursue trade‑partner diversification. |

---

**7. What could go wrong (risk factors)**  

1. **Supply‑chain bottlenecks** in the new fabs (raw‑material, skilled labor) may delay production, extending the period of high consumer prices.  
2. **Retaliatory tariffs** could hit key export markets (e.g., automobiles to the EU), reducing overall demand for domestic chips.  
3. **WTO adjudication** might find the tariff “excessive” and compel the government to lower the rate before new fabs are ready.  
4. **Consumer backlash** – if higher prices persist, sales could fall, hurting the very firms that are trying to grow.  

---

### Bottom line

- **Immediate phase (0–6 months):** Importers face a 50 % cost spike; OEMs absorb or pass it, raising consumer prices and shrinking production of electronics and cars.  
- **Short phase (6–12 months):** Demand softens, manufacturing slows, and the country may see a temporary rise in unemployment in chip‑dependent sectors.  
- **Medium phase (12–24 months):** International retaliation and supply‑chain adjustments create a volatile trade environment.  
- **Longer horizon (2 years+):** Government subsidies and new fabs start to replace a sizable share of imported chips, creating high‑skill employment. Consumer prices normalize, but the cost of protectionism lingers in the form of higher short‑term inflation and a slightly lower GDP growth rate.  

This causal chain shows that a steep 50 % tariff can be a double‑edged sword: it may spur domestic chip development and employment in the technology sector, but at the price of short‑term inflation, supply‑chain shocks, and possible international backlash that can dampen other parts of the economy for up to two years.