- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: For those who claim tariffs are cost passed onto the consumer....
Posted on 2/24/26 at 8:34 am to wackatimesthree
Posted on 2/24/26 at 8:34 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
You can't prove that a business "passed on" an expense. Why? because businesses have a right to set prices wherever they want for whatever reason they want and change them at any time they want.
You clearly don’t buy a lot of shite. Many businesses had line items for the additional tariff.
0
Posted on 2/24/26 at 8:51 am to lake chuck fan
Pretty, sad attempt by Coulter. Those businesses may owe their customers a refund, but they are the ones the paid the government.
My favorite MAGA pap was "Well all those refunds will help the economy". If so... what did collecting the taxes do?
My favorite MAGA pap was "Well all those refunds will help the economy". If so... what did collecting the taxes do?
Posted on 2/24/26 at 8:52 am to lake chuck fan
Everybody has concrete proof that they were harmed by the tariffs.
Sounds like there is solid grounds to circularly dismiss every plaintiff for lack of standing.
Sounds like there is solid grounds to circularly dismiss every plaintiff for lack of standing.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 8:56 am to lake chuck fan
You need to pick up an economics book. Importers pay the tariffs (the tax) and then, in turn, raise the cost of the goods when it hits the shelves (increasing the cost to the consumers).
Tariffs are a tax on consumers. They penalize efficient foreign producers and reward inefficient domestic producers. Tariffs thereby distort production, shift it from more efficient to less efficient channels, and diminish the general standard of living.
Let me help you out on understanding the most basic fundamentals:
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232
Tariffs are a tax on consumers. They penalize efficient foreign producers and reward inefficient domestic producers. Tariffs thereby distort production, shift it from more efficient to less efficient channels, and diminish the general standard of living.
Let me help you out on understanding the most basic fundamentals:
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232
This post was edited on 2/24/26 at 9:01 am
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:02 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
This pretty much mirrors my view on tariffs. To me, tariffs are primarily a tool to protect the US manufacturing/production capacity and to use as a tool to punish countries who we want to change some of their foreign policies/actions. IF you are content to be a consumer nation, then go ahead and remove all tariffs so other countries can drive our own industry base into oblivion. To me, that is the mindset of a wannabe welfare state. In the end, we will rely on the foreign victors to provide that welfare - and they may just put us all in a gulag and feed us leftover rice. But by all means = "Trump wants to balance our trade status but HELL NO - TRUMP BAD!!!! "
Can I buy you a beer sometime?
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:05 am to Fat Fingers
quote:
I believe the issue wasn’t the illegality of the tariff as much as the rationale for charging the tariffs.
Way too simplistic a way to look at this.
Congress has indeed given POTUS the power to impose some tariffs under specific rules. There are various statutes giving POTUS tariff power, but each statute comes with its own set of rules.
For the first set of tariffs, Trump did not follow those rules, so the tariffs he imposed were illegal and ceased to be collected as of this morning.
Remember the "Liberation Day" tariffs, when Trump announced a variety of illogical and high tariffs on every nation in the world, and the markets tanked as a reaction, so Trump paused the tariffs to let everyone take a beat? That was all way beyond his legal authority, as well as the tariff rates he ultimately landed on.
Now, he didnt just change his rationale. He has enacted new tariffs, effective as of this morning, purporting to exercise his limited authority under section 122 of the Trade Act. The highest rate he can impose under that statute is 15%, and he has maxed that out except for the countries he already had an executive deal with, including Canada and Mexico. But these are completely new tariffs.
The thing about these new tariffs are, 1) They are only valid for 150 days unless approved by Congress, and 2) they are also probably illegal because of the way he is applying them, and also not applying them.
His next move will be tariffs under section 301, which gives him really broad authority, but only after the US Trade Representative provides a detailed report showing unjustifiable, unreasonable, or discriminatory trade practices by each targeted foreign country. I have no doubt Trump will receive the reports he needs, but until those investigations are completed he cannot use section 301.
This isnt just a matter of saying "oh, wait, I meant to use this other statute". There are conditions to be met and rules to follow.
So, yes, the tariffs enacted under the IEEPA were illegal, and are no longer in effect.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:09 am to lake chuck fan
A lot of companies ate those tariffs for a while so they wouldn't have to raise prices.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:10 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
They have a right to a refund because they are free to set their prices anywhere they choose for any reason they choose whether there are tariffs or not.
Well, some companies started putting the tariff as an additional line item to show they weren't increasing the cost of the item.
Are companies allowed to lie about fees they paid to collect more money from consumers? Because that would be the result of your logic.
It's not as black and white as you want to pretend.
Let's be technical though. You claim tariffs are a tax. Taxes can be backdated. The tariffs were not ruled illegal, only that Trump quoted the wrong law (which shows the stupidity of our legal system). So, since Trump can levy tariffs (taxes to you) and taxes can be backdated, then where is the problem?
You can pretend tariffs are taxes, so just pretend Trump backdated the legal tariffs. Now you don't have to cry about it.
It's hilarious how all the people constantly whining about spending now want to force the government to spend more. These idiots don't care about results. They only want things done their way regardless of the outcome.
I just can't take people seriously who constantly bitch about something and then demand action that exacerbates the issue they were complaining about to begin with. If your beliefs cause contradictions, then you need to reevaluate your beliefs.
quote:
How a company responded to the illegal tariffs is immaterial to the fact that the government charged them illegally and needs to pay them back.
So, you want a bailout. You want to pay corporations with tax payer funds even though the consumers paid the tariffs. Brilliant.
You aren't even demanding that any government loans these companies had are paid back. Nope, you just want to give free taxpayer money to corporations.
quote:
This argument is like saying that when the county double charged your property tax last year, you responded by cancelling a vacation to DisneyWorld, which took money out of the economy of Orlando that would otherwise have gone there. So you're not owed a refund on your property taxes because you passed along the tax to Disney.
It's not like that at all. How is canceling a vacation to Disney causing them to illegally pay more? Bad analogy.
If Disney gave you the money to cover the additional taxes and then you got a refund on the taxes Disney paid on your behalf, then you would owe that to Disney. You wouldn't deserve the refund. That's the scenario we're discussing.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:10 am to wackatimesthree
I thought he was going about the tariffs another way, bypassing the issue on the ruling.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:12 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
So, you want a bailout. You want to pay corporations with tax payer funds even though the consumers paid the tariffs. Brilliant.
Unless an audit shows otherwise, it would be a windfall for corporations.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:13 am to stout
quote:
FedEx filed a lawsuit yesterday asking for a refund on tariffs. They are just a carrier, so tariffs were overwhelmingly paid by the customers in their case.
Yea, FedEx is just a middleman. They are collecting 100 percent of what they pay
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:22 am to TrueTiger
quote:
it wasn't known when they were levied that there were any errors or that it was in violation of law.
So what?
Either way the tax was levied as a mistake, if that's what you want to call it.
What does that have to do with whether someone is owed a refund for a mistakenly levied tax?
And BTW, the Trump administration always knew that there was a good chance that the tariffs would be struck down. I think Trump was counting on the fact that levying them on the basis that they levied them on, then crying about what a mess it would be if they had to be repaid, would influence the court's decision. I think it was a deliberate strategy.
Even if it wasn't, so what?
Why are you guys working so hard to justify government fricking up and then not having to make good on their frickup? It's a very bad precedent to set. When the government dumps toxic waste on your lawn, they need to clean it up at their expense. When the government takes YOUR MONEY that they don't legally have a right to take, they need to pay it back. This isn't hard.
And we ALLLLLLLLLLL know—every single last one of us—that if this had happened under Biden or any Democratic administration, every single one of you would be storming the castle with pitchforks and torches livid about this and demanding that the government refund everyone.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:23 am to SlidellCajun
quote:
The companies who absorbed the tariffs are now going to want that money back. And they should. As an investor, I want them to get that money back.
But we've been told that all of us paid those taxes. I'm not clamoring for a refund on the tariffs I paid because I understand the point of the tariffs. I'm willing to let the government keep the little extra tariff money they got from me if it means the capital investment that came with the tariffs continues.
I guess I just care about the success of the country a little more than most. I'm willing to sacrifice a little for America. That means I'm more patriotic.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:23 am to i am dan
quote:
I thought he was going about the tariffs another way, bypassing the issue on the ruling.
He is for tariffs going forward.
But that doesn't change the money already collected.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:24 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
But we've been told that all of us paid those taxes.
Are you confirming that?
You can't argue from that basis on good faith unless you think it's true.
So who paid the tariffs?
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:27 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Either way the tax was levied as a mistake, if that's what you want to call it.
For the sake of argument I will go along with you and go so far as to call it an injustice.
Your answer is to give taxpayer money to businesses that may have incurred no losses whatsoever.
That would be an injustice on top of another injustice. In what universe is that a righteous thing?
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:28 am to Pickle_Weasel
quote:
Tariffs are a tax on consumers. They penalize efficient foreign producers and reward inefficient domestic producers. Tariffs thereby distort production, shift it from more efficient to less efficient channels, and diminish the general standard of living.
So you think that forcing suppliers are 'barely making a profit" on the goods they ship to us.
bullshite. - that would only make sense if the product was something we had no way to produce ourselves.
The primary way Trump is using tariffs is to combat unfair trade practices that have driven many of our US companies out of business. They cannot compete with countries who use the equivalent of slave labor.
Countries that are trying to replace us as the leader of the world are willing to sell things at a loss as long as it drives a competitor in the US out of business. They are playing the long game - once we have no capacity within our borders to produce the things we need, then they can demand anything they want of us - whether it be higher prices or changes in our foreign policy.
As for our 'friendly nations' they have been protecting THEIR industries by charging high tariffs on the things we try to sell to THEM.
Our industrial capacity has almost been driven out of existence in some areas already. You want that to continue??
We don't charge high tariffs on things we have no inhouse means to produce
Negotiating these terrible trade deals is one of the things that is ripe for corruption. Some countries may go so far as to tell the POTUS that IF he will lower the tariffs on their plastic yo-yos, they could find a nice place on one oF their countries board of directors for his drunkard drug addict son.
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:37 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
So, you want a bailout. You want to pay corporations with tax payer funds even though the consumers paid the tariffs.
No, I would have preferred that this had been done properly if Trump was going to do it at all.
But he didn't. he created a mess that now has to be cleaned up.
Same thing I tell people who say things like, "Well, we need to remove illegals, but it's THE WAY Trump is doing it that I don't agree with."
How exactly do you remove people who are fugitives from the law and hiding from law enforcement other than how ICE is doing it? Yeah, it's a mess. I wish Joe Biden hadn't made all of this necessary by allowing 15-20 million illegal people to stream over the border for four years, but he did, and now we have to do what is necessary to clean up the mess.
Same with this.
quote:
They only want things done their way regardless of the outcome.
How dare people want things done legally? Those assholes.
quote:
Well, some companies started putting the tariff as an additional line item to show they weren't increasing the cost of the item.
Link? Not that it matters, but I'd like to see a link to that claim.
quote:
You claim tariffs are a tax.
No, I didn't claim that. They are universally recognized as such.
quote:
So, since Trump can levy tariffs (taxes to you) and taxes can be backdated, then where is the problem?
It's true that taxes can be levied under limited circumstances retroactively, and if Trump signs an EO levying these tariffs retroactively and it passes Constitutional muster, then sure, I have no legal objection.
To answer your question, though, the problem right now is that that hasn't happened. if it does and is considered a Constitutionally valid retroactive action, I have no problem with it (other than the fact that the general tariffs are stupid).
quote:
You can pretend tariffs are taxes, so just pretend Trump backdated the legal tariffs.
I could pretend all sorts of things. I could pretend you weren't a drooling, mouth breathing idiot. The problem with pretending, however, is that pretending takes place in a fantasy world.
I know that's where you populists like to live, in your childish fantasy world, but the problem with that is that children are incapable of seeing the negative consequences of their actions, which is why they need adults to protect them from themselves. Populists are like little kids who want to eat chocolate and play video games all the time and throw tantrums when an adult redirects them for their own good.
Just like you are doing now.
This post was edited on 2/24/26 at 9:38 am
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:39 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
No, I didn't claim that. They are universally recognized as such.
No they aren’t. While I think they are an excise tax…that is not a universal belief.
This post was edited on 2/24/26 at 9:41 am
Posted on 2/24/26 at 9:48 am to winkchance
quote:
What product do they produce?
Branded and unbranded packaging materials that are produced overseas.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News