Be kinde to folk. This changeth the whole habitat.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 11
... must be refunded, pronto:
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a defeat for the Trump administration, a federal judge in New York ruled Wednesday that companies that paid tariffs struck down last month by Supreme Court are due refunds. Judge Richard Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade wrote that “all importers of record’’ were “entitled to benefit’’ from the Supreme Court ruling that struck down sweeping double-digit import taxes President Donald Trump imposed last year under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). ...Apparently, government systems are being readied:
US preparing system to process refunds on billions in illegal Trump tariffs
Brandon Lord, a top official at US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), said in a filing to the US court of international trade on Friday that the total sum held in relation to such tariffs was estimated to be “approximately $166bn”. The declaration came as government lawyers were meeting with a federal trade judge to hammer out a process for returning the money to about 330,000 importers.https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariff-refunds-09...https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/06/us....
So, bottom line on those tariffs so far -
* much anxiety, chaos, and bad will for nothing - other than lots of prime time on TV
* revenue collected was already spent on 'worthy causes', so how will the refunds be funded
* importers now set to receive windfall profits on costs that were in fact borne by the consumer (at ca. 95%) - will there be endless squabbles (class action suits...) on who should get them in the end
* new section 122 tariffs are in effect at 10% - that has not yet caught up with the leader's overnight mind change to 15%
* there are a number of indications that the legal base for the new tariffs (acute "balance of payments problem" from the gold standard era) will not hold either
To be continued.
It must all be very good for the economy though.
No. of Recommendations: 3
It must all be very good for the economy though.
Hahahahaha.
No.
Good for Trump and his cronies. They'll make out just fine.
No. of Recommendations: 1
the corporatists are so happy the government loses revenue, and corporations get money back.
But---'taxes' are ok. Not tariffs.
No. of Recommendations: 3
... must be refunded, pronto:
Don't count on it. Trump the Magnificent is expert at keeping things tied up in litigation for years.
Steve
No. of Recommendations: 3
The total amount of the Trump tariffs was on the order of $130-140 billion.
In an economy with a GDP of $30 trillion +.
It's a rounding error and economically insignificant in itself.
However, Trump has shown foreign countries that American can't be kicked around vis a vis international trade any longer.
Which was precisely his objective.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Trump has shown foreign countries that American can't be kicked around vis a vis international trade any longer.
ROFLMAO !!
Canada proves it *every day*. That is just ONE country.
No. of Recommendations: 13
It's a rounding error and economically insignificant in itself.
It's 2.3% of the federal budget that will need additional funding, hardly that insignificant.
However, Trump has shown foreign countries that American can't be kicked around vis a vis international trade any longer.
... or shown government incompetence, whatever way you want to look at it.
It's not over yet, years of litigation, and new challenges to 'tariffs 2.0' coming - just the kind of stable investment climate businesses thrive upon.
No. of Recommendations: 12
It's 2.3% of the federal budget that will need additional funding, hardly that insignificant.
Trump the Magnificent was proposing to use a part of that money to mail out checks to Proles, to impress them what a wonderful human being he is. Now, he can blame "libs" and "Dems" for the Proles not getting "free money from the government", which wasn't really free, because they had already paid that much, and more, for his scheme to eliminate the income tax, which would mostly benefit those with the highest incomes.
Steve
No. of Recommendations: 2
Backtracking on this thread, I see that you are responding to someone responding to someone not worth reading.
Ignoring this thread now.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Suisse Bear,
It is simply $130 billion going from the government's pockets back into the pockets of the businesses who paid the tariffs. If anything, that will have a positive, stimulative economic effect on the economy, albeit a very small one.
It does not represent any net change in real economic activity.
No. of Recommendations: 7
It is simply $130 billion going from the government's pockets back into the pockets of the businesses who paid the tariffs.
Except the pockets they came out from originally were those of consumers, through tariffs being passsed on through price increases.
Likely, businesses are going to make rather nice windfall profits while the US consumer / taxpayer has already paid / will pay once more.
If anything, that will have a positive, stimulative economic effect on the economy, albeit a very small one.
Perhaps "small" if put into relation to price increases coming due to Middle East war being waged by your leadership.
No. of Recommendations: 12
It is simply $130 billion going from the government's pockets back into the pockets of the businesses who paid the tariffs.
...
Except the pockets they came out from originally were those of consumers, through tariffs being passed on through price increases. Likely, businesses are going to make rather nice windfall profits while the US consumer / taxpayer has already paid / will pay once more.
More specifically, refunds (if any are made) would go to the "importers of record", as they are the proximal entities who paid them: the ones with the receipts. Unlike most countries, in the US the importer of record can be a non-US entity. For approximately 20% of the duties deemed unlawful, the importer of record was a Chinese company.
I gather that the administration is attempting to simply stonewall all requests for refunds, but if/when the courts order them paid, that's going to make a truly memorable headline.
Jim
No. of Recommendations: 4
It is simply $130 billion going from the government's pockets back into the pockets of the businesses who paid the tariffs.
I thought the foreign countries were paying the tariffs. That’s what Trump told us. What gives here??? Why would businesses be paying the tariffs? It’s supposed to be the foreigners paying them!!
—Peter
No. of Recommendations: 3
The point is in a $30 Trillion + economy, it's just an insignificant drop in the bucket.
Especially if most of the money goes back into the pockets of U.S. businesses.
It will be a small economic stimulus.
That will be good for the economy.
No. of Recommendations: 11
The point is in a $30 Trillion + economy, it's just an insignificant drop in the bucket.
Hmm, maybe. That's over $1000 per household. Is that material? Just a drop perhaps, but a big one.
Jim
No. of Recommendations: 3
Replying to mungofitch
The point is in a $30 Trillion + economy, it's just an insignificant drop in the bucket.
Hmm, maybe. That's over $1000 per household. Is that material? Just a drop perhaps, but a big one.
Jim
*****************
This is sort of known to everyone but because it can't be blamed on Trump, this much much bigger bucket just ain't sexy to the MSM or on internet message boards:
"The Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund is projected to run out of money in 2032, requiring a benefit reduction of approximately 7% to 24% for recipients if Congress does not act, reported by Fox Business. The total shortfall between 2032 and 2036 is estimated to be $2.8 trillion."
U.S. News & World Report
