The majority of the sweeping tariffs Donald Trump imposed during his second term face one final litmus test that will determine whether he can continue to levy them – and also whether businesses are eligible for massive refunds.

That potentially dramatic turn in the tariff saga comes after a federal appeals court ruled on Friday that Trump unlawfully leaned on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose across-the-board duties on countries.

Trump had used those powers to push import tax rates as high as 50% on India and Brazil – and as high as 145% on China earlier this year.

  • WanderWisley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Spoiler alert: even if Donny loses this battle he won’t pay anyone anything he never has and never will admit to losing or owning anything to anyone.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s not Donny’s money. What will happen is that importers will pass the tariffs onto consumers, as they pretty much have to, then the tariffs will be overturned and the money given back to importers, thus robbing regular people once again and transferring wealth to the capitalists.

      • KeavesSharpi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        I doubt the importers will be refunded. Obviously if they were, 90%+ will not refund their customers because why would they? I can imagine class action lawsuits down the road, but honestly I predict the supreme court will overturn any lower court rulings and let him tariff away, saying it’s the congress’s job to reign him in since “it’s their prerogative” or some such, in a 6-3 ruling. If they wanted to stop the tariffs, the majority will argue, they could simply cancel them.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          I obviously grasp the injustice, but I can’t imagine what the basis of a class action would be. If you agree to buy a product for $5 and they supply said product, the courts aren’t going to care if their cost for it was $4 or $2. There is no constitutional right to suppliers with low profit margins.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Nah you get the bill citizen. Don’t worry, glorious leader will have another illegal act for you to pay the fine for soon too

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      The tariffs will go away, but the companies have realised that you’re okay with paying $10 for something that used to cost $8 anyway so you’ll be paying $10 from now on

      • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’ll just remind everyone that the people making those ghoulish decisions have home addresses. Just normal homes in normal neighborhoods, most often without any extra security.

        Be a shame if they suddenly realized there were consequences for social murder.

      • tempest@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        They’ve been shrinkflating the shit out of everything so much.

        I’ve recently noticed a stick of deodorant from Costco seems to be the same (already shrunken over the years) plastic shell with less actual deodorant in it.

      • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        The only solution is to confiscate all wealth over $100 million, and use it to establish Health Care 4 All, free college/trade, UBI, minimum living wage, public services, etc.

  • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    People haven’t caught on to the grift yet. One of the people in the committee who runs the tariff decisions literally runs a financial/law institution that since the tariffs started, has been contracting with companies to pay a portions (10, 20, 40%) of the tariffs to “ease the load on the companies” but they retain the rights, in the case of what is going on i.e. tariffs being recalled and paid back, to take 100% of the tariff payback.

    So a government official is steering the tariff policy to essentially steal money from companies with some alight risk of the tariffs not getting overturned. Crazy grift.

  • LoafedBurrito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    None of us will see any money refunded. Remember that this is all planned out to make products more expensive for americans, so we get used to the higher prices. Then the companies with hundreds of millions in profit can make more profit when costs for them go down, they keep our prices the same and also SHRINK the size of the product.

    Corporations are stealing from Americans every day and politicians are all in on the scam, so no one will do anything about it.

    • oatscoop@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      “Look, we lowered prices!” – ignoring that the new “lower” prices are still higher than the pre-tariff prices.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Eehhh, consumers paid this, not the businesses. This way businesses would essentially get a bonus

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s the point of Republican business support. Remember COVID, where businesses got money to “survive”?

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      AKA: Trump’s standard delaying tactic whenever he gets ruled against.

      Appeal everything no matter how ridiculous, just to waste time and allow him to keep doing whatever shitty thing for a few more months/years until all appeal venues are exhausted.

    • Decq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Wouldn’t surprise if this is part of the scam. Put on tarrifs, hike prices. Let the customer pay and then give companies a rebate with tax money. So the average citizen is charged twice. And of course those price hikes will only go partially down. So the consumer keeps getting screwed.

      • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        The average citizen is charged more than twice when you consider that they’re paying a much higher tax rate than the ultra-wealthy.

      • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        It is. Trump has his own stablecoin. That means he needs to hold massive $ reserves. So high rates due to lots of government debt are good for Trump.

      • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Soon “See, this is yet another example of why we can’t trust the government to do anything right and why we should defund and shutter all of our public institutions.” - moderate pundit on well respected mainstream news channel

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Seeing that our Judicial branch is limping along, and at least attempting to curtail this march toward totalitarianism, gives me hope.

    I’ll be pleasantly surprised if this happens.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      He regularly ignores court orders with zero consequences. He has empirically proven that the courts can say whatever they want but he doesn’t have to listen.

  • SlippiHUD@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    How far does this refund go? My distributor paid the tarrifs and then passed that cost onto me, which I passed onto my customers.

    Will my customers, distributors, or myself be refunded? I assume just my distributor since they directly paid the tarrif. And I doubt prices will come down when tarrifs end, so everything is permanently more expensive for no fucking reason, and the top middle man just boosted his profit margin through the roof.

    • moakley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      So that would mean that the Trump tariffs were sending American money overseas for no reason. I doubt it’ll actually happen, but holy shit is Trump an incompetent idiot.

      • SlippiHUD@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        No, the US company recieving the import pays the tarrif to the US government.

        But yes, Trump is an idiot.

        • moakley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          Oh, duh. I’m embarrassed I got it confused. I was thinking that the cost is passed on to the importer, but it’s actually paid by the importer.

          • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Yeah they aren’t telling companies you have to pay to send your product here, because there would be no way to collect that, as they aren’t governed by us. (Trolls standing on a bridge comes to mind). Instead every item imported into the country is bought by someone, that someone has to have an itemized list of what they purchased to go through customs and what not to make sure they aren’t crates full of dynamite, or plant seeds that are unauthorized. That inventory and costs are then taxed by the government or held by customs I believe.

            e.g. If Paul sets a tariff on Amazon orders at his house, his wife orders a package off Amazon. USPS or whomever delivers the package, Paul’s security guard, likely Paul himself gets the inventory of the packages that arrive, see it is from Amazon and charges his wife 50% of that cost to take it into the house. Amazon has no part in that process. Buttt what it may do is make Puals wife less likely to order from Amazon, IF it is cheaper to get the product from someone else then. If the product was $50 on Amazon, and $100 at the store, she would still buy it off Amazon as she would still only pay $75 after the tax, instead of $100.

            Paul just made $25 in taxes that he can invest into the house. His wife spent $25 more. Amazon made the same, but may lose future business.

            • moakley@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              Right. I was thinking of the suspension of the de minimis exemption. Because that’s an $80 fee that the exporter does have to pay, if I understand it correctly.

              • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 days ago

                Those are paid by the importer as far as I understand. The di minimus exemption that was passed was essentially supposed to make it so low cost items bought from other countries were exempt from tariffs/taxes. This meant that if you ordered something from Brazil, China, wherever and it was under a certain amount (think it was $800) it would just go through without being hit by the tax. Thus making it cheaper for the end buyer. Trump made an executive order to stop that because that would exempt a lot of people from getting hit by the taxes. Which was put in place with both parties supporting it… So it’s solely a new maga tariff thing in my opinion. Buy a $3 million server rack from elsewhere, pay a fee, buy a new shirt, would be exempt. But Trump didn’t want that, so he claimed it would reduce security and allow drugs into the country or some shit.

                • moakley@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Right. There was an Australian redditor who made his living selling handmade wallets, but he had to shut it down because the price just went up $80 per wallet. Fucking idiotic.

      • paperazzi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yes, yes he is and that was abundantly clear from his first term. But at least the female POC didn’t get in, right? Dodged a bullet there.

        /s of course

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    how would refund like this even work? Many businesses closed shop entirely due to these tarrifs, could they sue the government too? This would be crazy and this massive overhead risk could block the entire thing.

    • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Most likely the only ones getting refunds are those joined to the law suit that got the tariffs removed. Everyone else is SOL.

    • bigfondue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      This is why huge policy changes are discussed and planned for years. One guy being able say “Tariffs starting on Monday!” is fucking idiotic.

      • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yuuuuuup! One of the key parts of planning policies is evaluating its strength in court. SCOTUS gave the executive branch a free pass to just try anything with zero consequences. Why bother asking if something is legal when it literally doesn’t matter if it isn’t.