this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
662 points (99.1% liked)

News

32006 readers
3019 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

(page 3) 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago

Those businesses will never see a goddamn cent

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 12 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Increasing the uncertainty is not necessarily beneficial either. Businesses won't want to keep changing their pricing. People don't want to plan their purchases around whether tariffs are likely to change up or down in the future. Their instinct will be to wait.

The tariffs were illegal in how they were implemented but Congress could easily do it and would follow his instructions as they have done before.

It's a shit show, as expected.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

Cool. Can other countries sue for the damage it caused to their industries as well?

[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 5 points 16 hours ago

It shouldn’t go back to businesses, it should be a tax credit (with documentation.)

[–] aramis87@fedia.io 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Turns out either I can't read or can't math.

~~Funny how the refund works out to a total of about 60 cents per American, when I know I've paid WAY more than that in tariff-related bullshit.~~

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

60 cents? You may have confused "billion" for "million" somewhere, unless I'm misunderstanding you, in which case we'd be talking closer to $600

[–] aramis87@fedia.io 1 points 15 hours ago

Whoops, you're right! Thanks :)

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

The money will go back to American businesses, which means American consumers. That means that's more proof that Americans are paying for the tariffs.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] einlander@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

Don't worry, the supremes will make it all go away.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 5 points 17 hours ago

Or else what?

[–] lemmysquezzy@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

Can you imagine having to refund ~6 months of US Imports? The paperwork alone would take years. Each entry would have to be re-verified with customs. Not to mention the staffing increase for CBP to process the refunds. I don't see SCOTUS not enforcing this.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›