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

431–440 of 1001 posts

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

#431

Post by throwaway27448 »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #372
SilverElfin wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s an insane conflict of interest. His sons took over the firm? It was already bad that Lutnick took over in the first place. As I recall he sued the widow of Cantor to steal control of the company after Cantor died. But I guess this is not very surprising. I am sure every friend and family member of Trump administration people made trades leading all those tariff announcements over the last year, while the rest…

Serious question - what do you think the kids should do when their parents get political positions, not work?

Having control of a company is not exactly "work".

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

#432

Post by zeroonetwothree »

ycsux wrote: post #90
krapp wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, DOGE saved us so much money it won't even matter /s.

The national debt went up by $2.5T since Feb 2025, keep up the DOGE work

But without DOGE it would have gone up $2.51T

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

#433

Post by oldcigarette »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #305

I swear that whoever is advising trump is trying to purposefully give tariffs, and immigration enforcement a bad name. It seriously feels like a scheme to ensure cheap labor.

Yeah the resulting stigma on tariffs is a bit unfortunate. You could imagine a system of tariffs that was intended to set a sort of globalized minimum wage in certain segments. The US could even have foreign entities to distribute the tariff income to the workers in those countries for example.

Tariffs are totally a reasonable tool for protecting national security interests or leveling the playing field for the American worker. Unfortunately none of that was done in a coherent or legible way.

With all the global fallout and nothing to show for it I'm really not sure I could have come up with a better way to sabotage the United States.

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

#435

Post by xnx »

jrmg wrote: post #392
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)

Can I get compensation from UPS or FedEx for making me pay illegal tariffs - and making me pay a fee to them for processing it too? (I know the answer is practically ’no’, but it does still seem to me that the bureaucracy and companies that went along with this obviously illegal operation bear some culpability...)

That's be nice, but I place more blame on the half of Congress that was OK with this.

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

#436

Post by SteveNuts »

latchkey wrote: post #210
fuzzfactor wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a legitimate tax. That's why it taxed the economy much worse than a legitimate President would do.

maybe i lean too much in one direction, but what is a "legitimate tax"? Once again, count on hn for the downvotes. Yep, those shall not speak of downvotes, or taxation.

> but what is a "legitimate tax"?

One that goes through all three branches of government, the way it's been since we decided "no taxation without representation" is how such things should be collectively implemented.

If a citizen's stance is there is no such thing as a legitimate tax, perhaps there should be a legal process for banishing them from all public services, including roads, electricity, telephone, fire and rescue services, etc. and make consuming them a crime. But I guess even that would be a problem because we need to pay for the justice system that would prosecute such a sovereign citizen that breaks the rules...

Basically an "opt-out" of modern life almost in its entirety. I think most people that subscribe to "no legitimate taxes" might be surprised how isolating that would be if they actually think it through.

To be clear, I don't think this is a good idea, it's simply a thought exercise.

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

#439

Post by hinkley »

mastax wrote: post #229
apexalpha wrote: post #136

It's odd to me that something as fundamental as 'can the President unilaterally impose tariffs on any country he wants anytime he wants' is apparently so ill defined in law that 9 justices can't agree on it.

It seems likely to me the ruling took this long because John Roberts wanted to get a more unanimous ruling. Additionally, the law in this case isn’t ill defined whatsoever. Alito, Thomas, and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are just partisan hacks. For many years I wanted to believe they had a consistent and defensible legal viewpoint, even if I thought it was misguided. However the past six years have destroyed that no…

Thomas isn’t a hack, he’s a shill. And he’s not even trying to be subtle about it. He’s somebody’s bitch and he literally drives around in the toys they bought for him as compensation.

If any justice deserves to be impeached it’s him. I can’t believe they approved him in the first place. Anita Hill sends her regards.

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

#440

Post by JKCalhoun »

sophacles wrote: post #326
edot wrote: post #40

Howard Lutnick and his sons are surely happy about this. It’s almost like Howard Lutnick, the Secretary of Commerce , knew this would happen. His sons, at their firm Cantor Fitzgerald, have been offering a tariff refund product wherein they pay companies who are struggling with paying tariffs 20-30% of a potential refund, and if (as they did today) they get struck down, they pocket the 100% refund. https://www.financ…

Yeah, he's gotta finance the payments to whoever the kiddie peddler du jour is somehow. Especially now that he can't just walk next door or steer his yacht towards a conveniently located island.

You don't think there's already a replacement island?
Post reply on HN