831–840 of 1001 posts
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)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think GPs point was that Tariffs are legitimate as a practice and that some people have been led to believe that they shouldn't exist at all.
Can you make an example of a tariff from the last 100 years that definitely benefitted the US in a long-lasting way?
US stumpage fees are set by the market, while Canada sets a below market fee.
Tariff adjusts cost of softwood lumbar from Canada to adjust for this.
Where is my prize?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
at the end of the day, it's average joe who bought his things more expensive, and he won't get back his money. That's what matters, don't care if it's the seller or a middleman that gets this money. That's really a shame for american citizens, i'd be furious if i was american.
Many are beyond furious
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)
> 4) Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profit Seller may not reduce the price as well. Thus, continues to keep the raised price due to tariffs as free profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Some additional context to your note: Howard Lutnick is Trump's Secretary of the Treasury. And also was Epstein's literal next-door neighbor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the CPAs among us: will the refunded import taxes be treated as extra profit for all the importers who paid them? I could see an argument that they don't have a legal obligation to pass the refunds on to their customers, any more than my local grocery store owes me 5 cents for the gallon of milk I bought last year if the store discovers that their wholesaler had been mistakenly overcharging them.
I got charged a $600 tariff from UPS to ship a $30 25-pound sandbag into the US from Canada. UPS didn't even deliver the product. I'm suing them in small claims. We'll see what happens. I imagine that even after the ruling, our ass backwards legal system will somehow say this makes sense, even though the tariff rate was never near high enough for that bill to make any sense. Further, they're going to get refunded the…
It's not the point, but why were you doing this? Surely internationally shipping a sack of sand is more painful than getting a local one?
Useful site for daily tariff updates: Trade Compliance Resource Hub.[1] They've marked which tariffs are now invalid and which are still valid. [1] https://www.tradecomplianceresourcehub.com/2026/02/20/trump-...
Section 122: Implemented (effective Feb. 24, 2026) [1]
Amusingly, the new 10% tariff doesn't apply until Feb 24th, so you have a few days to avoid it. All this expires July 24th, because the law being invoked here has a time limit unless Congress extends it.
[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/impo...