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)
When I have bought things internationally, I have always been the one doing the importing. This means I paid some Trump taxes and I will get my money back.
Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
731–740 of 1001 posts
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#732Earlier quoted context omitted.
What an odd thing to say. The businesses in the other countries are, you know, businesses. Even if it were Chinese companies that were paying the tariffs, that will be baked into the cost of the good. This is literally first-day economics. No such thing as a free lunch. The cost of the item that the end user pays should reflect all costs associated with production and distribution to that end user. I have no idea how…
> I have no idea how the fuck the rumor that these tariffs will be “paid by other countries” started. It's what POTUS was saying since day 1. That we've been getting ripped off and we're gonna make the other countries pay us etc etc etc. It is, as I said in the post, obviously wrong - but that's where it comes from.
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#733Am 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)
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#734Earlier 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…
I don't think the administration cares about the appearance of impropriety.
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#735Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#736I don't think tariffs should be imposed capriciously at the President's whim. But I do think tariffs are an appropriate policy tool that should be used to protect US companies against overseas competitors that get government subsidies or other unfair advantages: Low wages, safety regulations, worker protection, environmental rules, etc.
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#737I don't think tariffs should be imposed capriciously at the President's whim. But I do think tariffs are an appropriate policy tool that should be used to protect US companies against overseas competitors that get government subsidies or other unfair advantages: Low wages, safety regulations, worker protection, environmental rules, etc.
Tariffs are the most expensive way to try to onshore manufacturing. The cost per "job created" is astronomical usually. They incentivize corruption and black markets.
Even regular old subsidies are usually easier, cheaper, and less problematic
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#738Earlier quoted context omitted.
You think at some point america would get sick of having a billionaire gang of thieves in charge. Trump just gave himself a $10 billion dollar slush fund from taxpayers. Who stopped him? No one. This amount of money will buy you one great den. Noem wants luxury jets from the taxpayer. So. Much. Winning.
The irony is that Trump won on a message of "drain the swamp" which was supposed to address this issue. Instead it seems like it's more of just "replace the swamp" with his own guys.
Swamps are rich ecosystems with incredible natural beauty and diversity. Draining a swamp is extraordinarily bad in general, even if good for wealthy property developers.
Ironically, it seems that "drain the swamp" turns out to be an apt metaphor for what Trump and that gang have been doing, as promised.
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#739Great news for people who had to bend over backwards pretending this disruptive, nakedly corrupt behavior was "good, actually." But unfortunately, there are other channels for them to effectively do the same thing, as discussed in oral arguments. So still not a major win for American manufacturers or consumers, I fear.
Sure, but now SCOTUS can say they are not a rubber stamp for POTUS. "See, we just ruled against him. Sure, it's a case that doesn't really solve anything and only causes more chaos, but we disagreed with him. This one time."
The president doing horribly fascist things with ICE like obliterating habeas corpus? Using the military to murder people in the ocean without trial? That's fine.
Screwing with the money? Not okay.
See also how the prez is allowed to screw with any congressional appointees except the federal reserve.
Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court
#740Finally 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…