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

71–80 of 1001 posts

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

#71

Post by sc68cal »

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.

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

#72

Post by fuoqi »

leopoldj wrote: post #67
fuoqi wrote: post #32

Let the fun of returning hundreds of billions of the illegal tariff revenue back to importers through litigation begin!

"The ruling was silent on whether tariffs that have been paid under the higher rates will need to be refunded." - from CNBC

This is why I mentioned "litigation" in my comment, i.e. you probably would need to separately sue the government if you want to refund the tariffs.

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

#73

Post by alex43578 »

franktankbank wrote: post #48
illithid0 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The power to impose tariffs is given to Congress in the Constitution. Exceptions are allowed but in rare and specific situations. The fact that SCOTUS struck it down means the tariffs as imposed were unconstitutional. You can be for tariffs all you want, I'm not here to argue their efficacy. But you absolutely cannot with any intellectual honesty still be on the fence about whether he abused his power given this ruli…

It is flip flopping policy as far as it was here one day and struck down the next. That's what matters to people attempting to start something here. I should have stated I was not interested in arguing the actual rule process, you have 6-3 vote from the Supreme Court in your favor.

It was absurd to think this was valid policy in the first place. The IEEPA clearly didn’t delegate unilateral tariff authority to the president, especially on the flimsy basis of a “trade emergency”.

If Trump wanted a durable trade policy, work with the legislative majority to pass a real policy with deliberation - just like they should have done with immigration.

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

#74

Post by munk-a »

tfehring wrote: post #56
sschueller wrote: post #4

The global damage has been done. It took too long and it looks like it will only be partially reversed. Constitutional changes are required for other countries to trust in the stability of the US in the future.

I don’t see how constitutional changes would help. The constitution already creates separation of powers, limits on executive authority, and procedures for removing an unfit president or one who commits serious crimes. But these only matter to the extent that majorities of elected and appointed officials care, and today’s ruling notwithstanding, there’s no political will to enforce any of them. The plurality of Ameri…

The majority of American voters can be as dumb as they want - the two big failures here are the legislature and the judiciary. The judiciary let an obviously illegal thing sit for far too long while the legislature is too partisan to actually take actions against the administration (except in the case of the Epstein files which has been surprisingly admirable and a rare ray of light in the last year).

If the majority of American voters elect snoopy the dog snoopy can do all of the things snoopy wants to do within the bounds of the law. Snoopy can use his bully pulpit to fight against dog restrictions in restaurants and grant pardons to previous offenders. Snoopy can ensure efficient spending of money on public water fountains accessible to canines... but if snoopy starts issuing open hand-outs to the red baron (snoopy in a moustache) that's when the other branches of government are supposed to step in - we aren't supposed to need to wait four years for the next election to stop open corruption (especially since corruption is really good at funding more corruption so there's a vicious cycle that can begin if you let it fester @see the recent FBI raid on GA election offices).

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

#75

Post by tills13 »

SilverElfin wrote: post #51
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…

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…

This admin? Conflict of interest? Add it to the list.

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

#78

Post by stevenwoo »

pavlov wrote: post #65
jen729w wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Constitutional changes Y'all have proven how worthless that piece of paper is.

There are many countries that have functioning constitutions that are regularly revised. It’s not impossible for the USA to get there one day.

We still haven't fixed things caused by putting chattel slavery into the Constitution almost 150 years after a civil war.

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

#80

Post by sowbug »

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)

Or maybe this is used to justify a new emergency federal law that all purchases must be reported on your tax return, just in case the government ever needs to refund any illegally collected import taxes.

I think I'm kidding, but I'm not really sure anymore.

Post reply on HN