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

Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 843 posts

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#251

Post by philipallstar »

zoobab wrote: post #234
mgkimsal wrote: post #194

One thing I don't see mentioned enough with the whole "the consumers paid these tariffs! we should get refunds!"... We "paid" not just in higher prices, but in many layoffs, reduction in working hours, skipped bonuses and raises. Companies that get 'refunds' will have an opportunity to use that money to rehire and repay workers. I'm cynical enough to think that will happen in large measures across the whole country,…

"use that money to rehire and repay workers" or give it to shareholders.

They only do that after tax, so there'll be more tax paid if they do that.

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#252

Post by bcrosby95 »

gruez wrote: post #200
mrwh wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The executive class are out to get as much as they can as quickly as they can while the music plays, then retire to whatever luxury boltholt they can prepare. It's FIRE with private islands, and without even a figleaf of noblesse oblige any more.

>The executive class are out to get as much as they can [...] This is just hollow populist anti-elite rhetoric. Who do you think sold them the tariff refunds? They're not buying them from granny who didn't know any better. They bought it from other executives who knew, or at least ought to know what was at stake.

Lol. Granny paid for the tarrif then the refund was sold by an elite to an elite for 20 cents on the dollar.

Everyone wins except granny.

To be fair, I think some companies didn't raise prices because they thought they would be overturned.

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#253

Post by Jeremy1026 »

intrasight wrote: post #205
Jeremy1026 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> probably Hah, we are 100% not getting our money back. And the higher, tariff level, prices aren't going to go back down either.

The "Importer of Record" gets the refund. I read that a large fraction of those importer of record are Chinese companies.

Yes, but when the product costs went up to cover their fees who paid that? We did. So the "Importer of Record" will (maybe) get a refund from the government, while also getting the higher prices paid to them from the distributors/consumers.

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#254

Post by jasondigitized »

duxup wrote: post #96

Absolutely absurd that we’re at this point. The courts / SCOTUS let the government roll out a massive and obviously illegal tax on citizens for a long time. They should have stepped in earlier. Now we the people probably don’t get our money back….

I like Class Action lawsuits for $100 please

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#255

Post by parineum »

coldpie wrote: post #189
jonlucc wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, the entities who gave money directly to the US government are the ones who paid the tariff. Those entities should be pressured to refund the consumers, but in practice, that's unlikely. I (unknowingly) ordered something on Etsy from another country. UPS delivered the items, then sent me a letter requiring I pay the tariff and an extra tariff handling fee. UPS paid the government, so UPS should get their…

UPS is definitely pocketing most of whatever refund they get. And golly gee gosh what a shocker, the company supports Republicans. I'm afraid you've been robbed. > ‘Corporate and industry group political action committees have donated more than $44 million directly to the campaigns and leadership PACs of the 147 members of the Sedition Caucus. Companies and trade associations that pledged to suspend donations have gi…

> UPS is definitely pocketing most of whatever refund they get. And golly gee gosh what a shocker, the company supports Republicans. I'm afraid you've been robbed.

Looks like they've given a pretty similar amount to both parties[1]. UPS charging a specific "Tariff Fee" is bound to have angered Trump.

[1]https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/united-parcel-service/summa...

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#256

Post by trymas »

Side topic, but this number puts into how crazy it was for trump[0] to go on tariff war against enemies and friends alike. All the propaganda and extortionist language about how all countries will pay up to USA.

Astronomical tariffs in some cases, trade wars and dramas, alienate all allies and from all of this they got only $130B ?

$7T of spending, $1.77T in deficit[1] and they planned to fix this hole with $100B?!

Masterminds!

…and now they need to refund it.

NB: also puts into perspective how numb I became about reading AI and AI related sums of money, and how crazy actually those numbers are.

[0] off course many knew that it’s crazy way before it happened.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_federal_bud...

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#257

Post by nkassis »

gruez wrote: post #176
seydor wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it not a conflict of interest if you facilitate the legislation of tarrifs that you knew are illegal?

>if you facilitate the legislation of tarrifs that you knew are illegal? Did they know it was illegal? Any more than say, the Biden administration "knew" that forgiving student loans were illegal?

That's not really the comparable here, you need to find a person with vested interest in the outcome of the student loan forgiveness program.* Someone that was working within the agency responsible for the program and actively was in the discussions where the legality was discussed. Then made a scheme to financially get rewarded. Not only that used his son as a way to create the illusion of separation.

* And not just a borrower that wouldn't be anywhere similar to this level of conflict.

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#258

Post by philipallstar »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #237
andyfilms1 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the frustration but I don't understand the logic. The businesses who paid the tariffs (who were literally sent an invoice that they paid) should be the ones refunded. How would the government even be able to determine if a business increased product prices due to tariffs vs other factors, or even if the business increased prices at all? What if the product is a loss leader and the company was fine just e…

> I understand the frustration but I don't understand the logic. The businesses who paid the tariffs (who were literally sent an invoice that they paid) should be the ones refunded. So if I'm the owner of Uncle Billy Bobs Autoparts and I ship from Madeupcountry. I billed you $500 extra for some new car part. The US government refunds me on the tariffs they charged me to import my product to you, and now your taxes is…

You just refund the people who pay the tariffs. You can't do any more than that.

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#259

Post by seydor »

gruez wrote: post #176
seydor wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it not a conflict of interest if you facilitate the legislation of tarrifs that you knew are illegal?

>if you facilitate the legislation of tarrifs that you knew are illegal? Did they know it was illegal? Any more than say, the Biden administration "knew" that forgiving student loans were illegal?

even if they were not sure 100%, the fact that introducing the legislation is connected to him making money is a conflict of interest.

Re: Judge orders government to begin refunding more than $130B in tariffs

#260

Post by philipallstar »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #83
mhb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the cost was probably split between reduced profit and additional customer cost, it seems pretty impractical to determine who is due a refund - end users or businesses. Or the logistics of refunds to customers. One possibility would be for businesses to return the fraction of the tariff paid by customers to future customers by offering the items affected with a negative tax until the refund is used up.

"Since the cost was probably split between reduced profit and additional customer cost…" Ha ha, that's a good one. I have yet to hear about reduced profits anywhere. Instead, as I said in another comment, I have actual physical receipts with the additional tariff cost (itemized!) in a pile on my workshop (which I'll never see refunded).

> Instead, as I said in another comment, I have actual physical receipts with the additional tariff cost (itemized!) in a pile on my workshop (which I'll never see refunded).

You could ask for a tariff refund from those suppliers.

Post reply on HN