861–870 of 1001 posts
In response, POTUS just declared a global 10% tariff. Does anyone understand if this is legal? https://www.reuters.com/world/china/trump-orders-temporary-1...
Offhand, yes, this looks legal, under section 22 of the Trade Act of 1974. Such tariffs, however, are limited to 150 days and a maximum rate of 15%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
America is pretty sick of both parties. Had the Democrats ran a half decent candidate, they could easily have won. But they're just not capable of doing that.
Why do you guys have only two parties and the executive is made of a pseudo king that rules with no opposition?
In response, POTUS just declared a global 10% tariff. Does anyone understand if this is legal? https://www.reuters.com/world/china/trump-orders-temporary-1...
Offhand, yes, this looks legal, under section 22 of the Trade Act of 1974. Such tariffs, however, are limited to 150 days and a maximum rate of 15%.
> SEC. 122. BALANCE-OF-PAYMENTS AUTHORITY.
> (a) Whenever fundamental international payments problems
> require special import measures to restrict imports—
> (1) to deal with large and serious United States balanceof-payments deficits,
> (2) to prevent an imminent and significant depreciation of
> the dollar in foreign exchange markets, or
> (3) to cooperate with other countries in correcting an international balance-> of-payments disequilibrium,
> the President shall proclaim, for a period not exceeding 150 days
> (unless such period is extended by Act of Congress)—
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-10384/pdf/COMPS-10...
search for "SEC. 122." to find it quickly.
None of these seem to apply and I am not a lawyer, but if they do not apply then, why would the president have the power of taxation when that is given to the legislative branch not executive branch.
Not clear to me why these new tariffs would be on better footing than the last and the last never seemed to be on good footing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The opinion should merely read > The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises (which it does, and expounds upon)
Yes but in practice they delegate this power to the executive. Congress doesn’t run the IRS themselves after all
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no strategy here. Unless the money is fully accounted and restituted, I believe we can assume what the strategy is.
This ruling like most of the kleptocracy, will show the kleptocrats who is willing to lick boot and who will not. The goal, whether extrinsic or intrinsic, is to find the fascist threats and harm them. This specifically will happen when businesses request the legal refund and the "deep state" gets to decide whether they deserve a refund.
yep. For someone who claims to be draining the swamp, this sure as hell sounds like they're digging it in even deeper.
I 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
A federal law has to be approved by Congress, that isn’t happening. An executive order maybe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but in practice they delegate this power to the executive. Congress doesn’t run the IRS themselves after all
> Yes but in practice they delegate this power to the executive. No, they do not delegate the power to lay (set) taxes to the executive, they do assign the executive the function of collecting the taxes laid by Congress. > Congress doesn’t run the IRS themselves after all The IRS doesn't freely set taxes, it collects the taxes set by Congress.
The quote from the constitution is "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes," not for the executive to collect taxes. If they can delegate collecting to IRS in the executive branch, why not can they not delegate the "Power To lay" taxes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a sense this is the correct level of punishment for all. The courts are slow and deliberative. The Congress could solve this in a week. Impeachment and removal from office.
You are correct. My country does not have the similar separation of powers the US has. I do not understand why Americans have a hard time realizing this: the President and other elected officials work for YOU. They literally run for office to get the position, and they get voted in. Why would someone let an elected official enrich themselves and their friends with your money? Why would the legislative branch allow th…
To put it another way, I have not participated in a federal election where I was excited about my options, ever. I have always been triage voting in federal elections ever since I was old enough to vote.
So yes, we do vote for our clowns, but only because we're not given any decent options to vote for.
Fortunately, the US giving a lot of power to states means that our more local elections are a lot more interesting to participate in and at least in my state, I have several decent options to vote in people who will make a real difference.