Tariffs Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter BubbaOtis
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 149K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...



“… Ryosei Akazawa was due to fly to Washington to craft a written confirmation of the terms of the package, such as the split of investment returns between the U.S. and Japan, a government source previously told Reuters.

… "It was found that there are points that need to be discussed at the administrative level during coordination with the American side. Therefore, the trip has been cancelled," Japan's government spokesperson Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters on Thursday.

… While Trump has touted the package as "our money to invest" and said the U.S. would retain 90% of the profits earned, Japanese officials have stressed that the investments will be determined based on whether they will also benefit Japan.

Japanese officials have repeatedly said they would rather have an amended presidential executive order first to remove overlapping tariffs on Japanese goods before releasing a joint document on the investment details.…”
 
A former peer at work left his job a year ago to be Treasurer of a company headquartered in Canada. He just lost his job due to the tariffs.
Tough time to be looking for a job.
 


🎁 —> https://www.wsj.com/economy/trade/t...a?st=VqyRqx&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

“The Trump administration plans to expand national-security tariffs on steel, aluminum and a variety of other industries in coming months in hopes of redirecting production in these sectors to the U.S. and thwarting potential legal threats in the trade war.

Tariffs on steel and aluminum were expanded this month, covering more than 400 new product lines with 50% levies and increasing compliance costs for companies. Those charges will likely be broadened further, along with expansions of existing tariffs on copper and automotive parts.

New levies on sectors like semiconductors, heavy trucks, pharmaceuticals and ingredients, processed critical minerals, and commercial aircraft and parts, among others, are also likely to be unveiled in coming months. …”
 
nycfan said:


🎁 —> https://www.wsj.com/economy/trade/t...a?st=VqyRqx&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

“The Trump administration plans to expand national-security tariffs on steel, aluminum and a variety of other industries in coming months in hopes of redirecting production in these sectors to the U.S. and thwarting potential legal threats in the trade war.

Tariffs on steel and aluminum were expanded this month, covering more than 400 new product lines with 50% levies and increasing compliance costs for companies. Those charges will likely be broadened further, along with expansions of existing tariffs on copper and automotive parts.

New levies on sectors like semiconductors, heavy trucks, pharmaceuticals and ingredients, processed critical minerals, and commercial aircraft and parts, among others, are also likely to be unveiled in coming months. …”
Click to expand...

“…
The reciprocal tariffs are based on a novel interpretation of presidential emergency authorities, and are subject to a court challenge that could force the administration to refund those duties to companies. The sector-specific tariffs, by contrast, are imposed under a separate legal authority that is far more established and durable—Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

A federal appeals court heard arguments on the reciprocal levies last month, and whichever side loses is expected to immediately appeal to the Supreme Court, which could rule as soon as June. In the meantime, the administration intends to broaden the coverage of Section 232 tariffs so they can remain in place, or be expanded, if the administration loses in court and needs to find another legal authority for its reciprocal duties. …”
 


Companies had been hoping for a TACO reprieve and biting the bullet, but now they are just looking for cover to acknowledge the inevitable. No one wanted to be the first to publicly concede price hikes to avoid political wrath, but once the flood gates open businesses are scrambling to pass along some or all tariff-related and other supply chain price hikes to customers.

The pressure on prices is more of a predictable but slow-moving mudslide than a sudden avalanche.
 
nycfan said:


Companies had been hoping for a TACO reprieve and biting the bullet, but now they are just looking for cover to acknowledge the inevitable. No one wanted to be the first to publicly concede price hikes to avoid political wrath, but once the flood gates open businesses are scrambling to pass along some or all tariff-related and other supply chain price hikes to customers.

The pressure on prices is more of a predictable but slow-moving mudslide than a sudden avalanche.
Click to expand...

We went to Publix last night, 80% of what I picked up was BOGO and I didn't buy much and it was over $100. What I purchased feels like it's doubled in the past few years.

My salary surely hasn't kept up with the prices.


Thanks trumplicans.
 
mpaer said:
Help us here Super
This " overturning " does not take effect until Oct ? Or just some of them?
Click to expand...
See, this is why media sources are unreliable. I don't know where the October thing came from. I was reading the opinion, but figured that the news story would at least correctly describe the remedy. It did not. I've edited accordingly.

Never mind the above. I was originally correct about October. See below.

Here's what is really happening: the Federal Circuit remanded to the trial court to determine whether a universal injunction remedy is appropriate, given that the Supreme Court recently changed the standards for a universal injunction. So now the trial court has to determine whether enjoining the tariffs in their entirety is necessary to give the plaintiffs complete relief. I'm pretty sure the answer is yes, though not positive (it's unworkable to charge different duties for different importers, and possibly unconstitutional).

The administration could appeal this straight to the Supreme Court, but I doubt the Supremes will take it up -- rather, it will probably let the trial court sort it out in the first instance, because that's what they did for birthright citizenship.

So we're looking at a remand to the trial court. Rebriefing and consideration would be needed, but the issues are straightforward so we might have a decision from that court in a month. Possibly sooner, but I doubt it. I have almost no experience with the Court of International Trade so I don't know how quickly or sluggishly it works.

This first stage will likely enter an injunction against enforcement, but I expect that will be stayed pending appeal. So it will go the Federal Circuit, which could take another two months or so, judging by the pace of this case. I expect the Federal Circuit to dissolve the stay and render a final judgment. Then the administration will appeal to the Supremes, which could choose to take the case or not. It could choose a quick schedule or not. It could impose a stay or not. Basically, all options are open at SCOTUS and I won't try to predict what they will do.

At the end of all this, I suspect the tariffs will be invalidated but I have no confidence in that projection given that SCOTUS gonna SCOTUS. And we might reach a resolution by the end of the year, or the end of next year, or who knows.
 
Last edited:
I should add that this ruling only applies to the trafficking tariffs against Canada Mexico and China, and the reciprocal tariffs imposed on countries around the world.

It does not address the sectoral tariffs like steel, aluminum, semiconductors, etc. Those tariffs are likely on firm legal footing, though economically stupid.

An interesting wild card: what about the "trade deals"? I think it now matters whether anything has been committed to writing. If the EU signed a treaty, even if the threatened tariffs are unlawful, the president could submit the treaty to Congress and it would be subject to a majority up-and-down vote of both houses. That's because -- for reasons I don't really know -- trade treaties are not considered treaties at all, but rather trade "agreements." Don't ask me. I don't know.

But if there hasn't been anything in writing and signed by the relevant authorities, then I would expect the EU, Japan, etc. to basically withdraw from the "agreement"
 
mpaer said:
Help us here Super
This " overturning " does not take effect until Oct ? Or just some of them?
Click to expand...
All right, take #3. I'm not familiar with the Federal Circuit website or court procedures, so I wasn't looking in quite the right place.

The above timeline is correct as far as I know, with one correction: the case doesn't go back to the trial court until October 14, to give the parties time to appeal to SCOTUS. So if SCOTUS doesn't act (as I suspect it won't, based on the birthright citizenship case), the process outlined above will start about a month and a half from now and the timeline should proceed accordingly.

That said, I'm no expert on CIT or Fed Circuit procedure and seeing as how I've already messed this up a couple of times, you probably shouldn't take my timeline too seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top