Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#931

Post by carefulfungi »

lysace wrote: post #682
excerionsforte wrote: post #196

Should have been done sooner, I take issue with the 3 who dissented and how long it took there get there. The constitution is clear on this matter. Prices are insane already, we don't need fake emergencies to drive up prices even more.

https://apnews.com/live/supreme-court-tariff-ruling-updates Furious about the defeat, Trump said he will impose a global 10% tariff as an alternative while pressing his trade policies by other means. The new tariffs would come under a law that restricts them to 150 days. Don't you americans have some kind of mechanism for removing a president from office when the trust is no longer there? I remember hearing a lot abo…

In the US, Congress has two parts: the House of Representatives (members proportional-ish to state populations elected every 2 years) and the Senate (two members per state with 1/3rd of the body elected every 2 years to a 6 year term). To remove the President (impeachment), requires the House to "indict" the President with a majority vote; and the Senate to "convict" with a 2/3rds majority vote.

Both of these bodies are currently controlled by Trump's party. So .. it ain't happening. Trump's party supports his actions.

If Democrats win the house in the upcoming (November) elections, it is likely that they can pass an impeachment indictment for a number of causes. It is unlikely that the Senate finds the 2/3rds necessary to remove him from office, though.

Trump was impeached by the House twice in his first term (impeachment is rare in US history - it has happened 4 times and 2 of those are Trump); the Senate declined to remove him from office both times. Even after the January 6th riot, with MAGA literally storming through their offices threatening to hang their leader, only 7 Republican Senators voted to impeach. 43 Republicans voted No. With one of them, Susan Collins, famously saying she thought Trump had "learned his lesson." It's fair to say he did learn a lesson; but not the one Collins imagined.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#932

Post by ngetchell »

jongjong wrote: post #801

We need to abolish the legal system. Just go back to old-school vigilante justice. It's just too arbitrary. Blanket tariffs were a good idea but if they're being selectively applied, then it's fundamentally unfair; it becomes a matter of who is better at bribing the government using lobbyists. Justice is impossible at scale.

Blanket tariffs were a terrible idea. And the advisors that told Trump he could successfully start a gun fight with just his pointed finger in his pocket should scare us all.

No adults in the room to stop him.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#934

Post by DivingForGold »

xnx wrote: post #57

Am I understanding this right? 1) US customer pays huge import tax on imported goods in the form of higher prices. 2) Seller sends the collected tax to the US government 3) US government will refund all/most of that tax back to the seller after this ruling 4) Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profit (no refund to customer)

Trump responds that it will be litigated, like 5 years worth . . .

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#935

Post by DivingForGold »

sc68cal wrote: post #71
xnx wrote: post #57

Am I understanding this right? 1) US customer pays huge import tax on imported goods in the form of higher prices. 2) Seller sends the collected tax to the US government 3) US government will refund all/most of that tax back to the seller after this ruling 4) Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profit (no refund to customer)

The importer pays the tax and passes it on as higher prices to the consumer. So the importers are the one that had the tax collected from them and would be getting the refund. The importer CAN be the seller, but other times the importer is a middleman in the supply chain.

and if so, do you really believe any importers who paid the tariff will further refund back to the consumer ? It's eventually a net win for the importer.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#936

Post by justin66 »

SunshineTheCat wrote: post #658
linuxhansl wrote: post #301

Finally some sanity. The administration has use laws about "national security" and other so call "emergencies" to impose tariffs. If everything is an emergency then nothing is, and that was clearly not congress' intention with those laws. The power to impose tariffs rests with the legislator, not the executive. Of course our congress is effectively useless - we can thank decades of Mitch McConnell's (and others) "not…

Still find it kinda wild that it's the Republicans fighting tooth and nail against any balance of power to... ... raise taxes

Rip van Winkle, let me tell you how they are treating conflict with Russia…

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#937

Post by malfist »

davorak wrote: post #863
ckmate-king-2 wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offhand, yes, this looks legal, under section 22 of the Trade Act of 1974. Such tariffs, however, are limited to 150 days and a maximum rate of 15%.

I think I found the law: > SEC. 122. BALANCE-OF-PAYMENTS AUTHORITY. > (a) Whenever fundamental international payments problems > require special import measures to restrict imports— > (1) to deal with large and serious United States balanceof-payments deficits, > (2) to prevent an imminent and significant depreciation of > the dollar in foreign exchange markets, or > (3) to cooperate with other countries in correctin…

Its like going 70 mph in a sleepy subdivision because a road sign on the interstate says you can go 70 there.

Trump is taking an law that says "You can do X if Y" and saying "I can do X"

150 days thing is just moving the goal posts.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#938

Post by gcanyon »

beloch wrote: post #761
xnx wrote: post #57

Am I understanding this right? 1) US customer pays huge import tax on imported goods in the form of higher prices. 2) Seller sends the collected tax to the US government 3) US government will refund all/most of that tax back to the seller after this ruling 4) Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profit (no refund to customer)

This will be so in some cases, but there are extra steps in others. e.g. In a different path, 1 and 2 are the same, but things then diverge. 3) To recoup some of those tariff costs, the company sells the rights to any potential future tariff refunds. They recoup a portion of what they paid immediately but hand away the right to a full refund to another party, such as Cantor Fitzgerald. The seller might use this to re…

To the extent this is true, the entire thing could literally be a grift (I'm not saying Trump is smart enough to come up with this, just that people around him are, and he's grifty enough to go along with it):

   1. Trump enacts the tariff, despite knowing it will be struck down.
   2. The tariff extracts hundreds of billions from the economy.
   3. Finance firms buy the potential refund for pennies on the dollar, knowing that Trump has no plan to defend the tariff.
   4. The Supreme Court strikes down the tariff, as planned.
   5. The finance firms profit on the refunds.
   6. We are all poorer, Trump's cronies are richer.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#939

Post by Forgeties79 »

omnimus wrote: post #902
Forgeties79 wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many of you keep using the word “unfair.” What is so unfair? What can these countries do that we cannot? Have you considered all the advantages the US has over some of these countries? Is that not “unfair”? I would say the US’s relationship with the Internet is certainly an advantage even if we call it “fair.”

I think what they mean is that post war US got a special treatment from their main allies in exchange for US globalism, diplomacy, security. For example in EU with digital technology the US got: - always open arms for adoption (all govs prefer to use US software, although there have always been local alternatives). EU govs never really pushed adoption of their local software companies, they usually push for adoption…

I totally agree and rereading it I completely flipped it. I thought he was another person in this thread saying that other countries have an unfair advantage against the US. My mistake.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#940

Post by zaik »

aiauthoritydev wrote: post #878
xnx wrote: post #57

Am I understanding this right? 1) US customer pays huge import tax on imported goods in the form of higher prices. 2) Seller sends the collected tax to the US government 3) US government will refund all/most of that tax back to the seller after this ruling 4) Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profit (no refund to customer)

It is more complicated than that. Seller sold forward contracts to recoup tariffs at a lower price and passed on the benefits to the consumers already. E.g. For every $1 seller paid as tariffs, seller sold a contract to someone for $0.25 saying if government ever refunds the buyer of the contract can keep it. The $0.25 already passed to consumers as benefits. > Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profi…

Guess who took the other side of those forward contracts: https://www.wired.com/story/cantor-fitzgerald-trump-tariff-r...
Post reply on HN