Trump tariffs

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Want to see where Trump’s tariffs are leading US business? Look at Georgia

      by

      If you want a bellwether to measure the broad impact of Donald Trump’s tariffs on the economy, look south, to Georgia. The political swing state has a $900bn economy – somewhere between the GDPs of Taiwan and Switzerland.The hospitality industry is facing an existential crisis. Wine merchants wonder aloud if they will survive the year. But others, like those in industrial manufacturing, will carefully argue that well-positioned businesses will profit. Some say they’re insulated from international competition by the nature of their industry. Others, like the movie industry, are simply confused by the proposals that have been raised, and are looking for entirely different answers. So far, it’s a mixed bag.In a state Trump won by two points and with yet another pivotal US Senate race in a year, Republican margins are thinner than those of the retailers with their business on the line here.Carson Demmond, a wine distributor in Georgia, finds herself looking at seaborne cargo notices for her wine shipments from France with the nervousness of a sports gambler watching football games. She’s betting on her orders of French champagne and bordeaux getting to a port in Savannah before tariffs restart.It’s a risk. Demmond put a hold on orders after Trump enacted sky-high tariffs on European goods last month. When he paused the tariffs days later, Demmond began to assess what she might chance on restarting some purchases.But her wine isn’t showing up on a ship in France yet, she said.“I don’t see them booked on ships yet, and normally they would already be booked, and I would already have sail dates,” she said. “I see a lot of my orders now collecting in consolidation warehouses in Europe, which says to me that there’s something wrong.”Demmond suspects that shipping is suffering from a bullwhip-like effect from uncertainty around tariffs and the economy: so many buyers are trying to get ahead of tariffs that there aren’t enough shipping containers to go around to meet the short-term demand.“It means that as strategic as I’m trying to be with regards to timing my orders so I don’t get hit with lots of tariff bills at the same time, I feel like now all of that is out of my control,” Demmond said. “I never want to face a situation where I have too many orders that all sail and land at the same time, and then getting hit with really large tariff bills in one fell swoop.”US courts, meanwhile, are vacillating on the legality of Trump’s tariffs. The stock market rallied this week after the US court of international trade (CIT) ruled that Trump’s use of extraordinary powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) exceeded his authority. Less than a day later, an appellate court lifted the lower court’s block on the tariffs while the case plays out.Unpredictability is driving volatility, and volatility is poisonous to businesses built for stable markets and stable prices.Georgia’s ports have not yet witnessed the massive slowdown occurring on the west coast. Shipping at the port of Los Angeles is down by a third as buyers cancel orders from China. But Savannah – the third-busiest port in the United States behind the Los Angeles area and New York/New Jersey ports – just came off its busiest month.“We’re still watching how this goes,” said Tom Boyd, the chief communications officer for Georgia’s ports authority. “We still are having 30 to 32 vessels a week. Most everybody has been front loading to avoid any supply chain disruptions. Volumes are strong, but we expect volumes to decrease.”Savannah’s port sees more ships from the Indian subcontinent, Vietnam and Europe than from China, because it’s a few days shorter from India through the Suez Canal than across the Pacific, he said.Demmond, who runs the wine distributor Rive Gauche, watches the reports up and down the eastern seaboard carefully because many of the ships from Europe dock in New Jersey before coming south, she said. About 60% of her business is in French wine. Shipping volumes are making logistical planning difficult, she said. Amazon has hired away warehouse workers, which slows down unloading and can leave her wine on a ship for longer periods.She likened the logistical disruption today to the effects of Covid-19 shutdowns.“There’s going to be a crazy ripple effect through multiple industries,” Demmond said. “In normal times, I could count on approximately eight weeks from the time I send my purchase order to the winery for them to prepare it, to the time that it arrives at port. Now, you know, I have no idea, because everything is different and unpredictable. I have a hard time quoting arrival times to people.”Demmond is a wine merchant, not a political economist. Predicting the course of trade negotiations has become a business hazard. She and other Georgia wine distributors met with the representative Hank Johnson last month to describe the effect of a 200% tariff on European wine imports on their business.Many restaurants derive half of their revenue or more from alcohol sales. If the cost of spirits triples, many people will change their dining habits. Domestic supply can’t make up the difference, she said. A decision to expand a domestic winery made today wouldn’t produce a bottle of wine for three to five years. By then, Congress or a new president may have rescinded the tariffs, blowing up the investment.If it were just European liquor, a conservative might dismiss the disruption as something affecting well-heeled wine snobs. But the problem has wide applicability, Demmond said.“There are no American coffee growers. There are no coffee farms here,” she said. “That’s an impossibility. All you’re doing is increasing prices. You’re not helping create jobs by taxing that stuff. Some of it is impossible to re-shore.”Georgia calls itself the Peach state, but California has long eclipsed Georgia’s peach production. Instead, the most widely exported Georgia peach has been the one moviegoers see at the end of the credits: Georgia had $2.6bn in film and television production in 2023.Georgia’s tax incentive program is among the most aggressive in the US and the reason Georgia has become a rival to Hollywood. It’s an economic development strategy that has unusually bipartisan support in a state famously split down the middle politically. Studios have invested billions in Georgia over the last 10 years.Between Disney’s Marvel movies such as The Avengers, Tyler Perry’s studios in Atlanta and Netflix productions including Stranger Things, Georgia has overtaken Hollywood as a center for cinematic production. In any given year, studios spend $2-$4bn making movies in Georgia, according to figures from the Georgia Film Office.But the tax-incentive-chasing film industry is fickle. Acres of shiny new studio space springing up across the state have not prevented the movie business from slowing down a bit over the last couple of years. With the release of Thunderbolts*, for the first time in more than a decade no Marvel movies are slated for production in Georgia. Disney has shifted to studios in England and Australia.So when Trump said he wanted a 100% tariff on foreign-produced films, Georgia Entertainment CEO Randy Davidson did a double take.“It kind of took people by surprise,” Davidson said. “You know, on the one hand, you have people that have been struggling with their jobs here already, thinking initially that was going to be like a quick-fix answer to get production back here. … And then there was the other side: how is politicizing movies into the tariff discussion beneficial? Because it doesn’t make sense.”Trump’s tariff talk emerged after a meeting at the White House with actor Jon Voight and independent film producer Steven Paul. Voight proposed to support the domestic film industry with federal tax credits and international cooperative production agreements, not with a tariff, said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, Sag-Aftra’s chief negotiator and national executive director.“You know, we haven’t had a federal tax incentive in the United States,” Crabtree-Ireland said. “It’s quite common in a lot of major production centers around the world now, and I think it’s definitely time for us to have that conversation.”Films are largely a digital service today. Setting aside the logistical difficulty of assessing a tariff on intellectual property, doing so would violate American law.Crabtree-Ireland suggested that Trump’s rhetoric might be an aggressive negotiating ploy, starting out with an extreme stand that moves a compromise point to a more favorable position. But a workable plan would have more nuance, Crabtree-Ireland said: “Which is what I think ultimately would be under consideration.”Crabtree-Ireland said he wouldn’t expect a federal tax incentive to supplant state tax credits. But any international agreement to level the incentive playing field would have to address it.“What Georgia can hope for is that this topic does not get entangled in a charged-up political atmosphere where it will have a shot to be an actual bipartisan effort and initiative that would actually be good for the country,” Davidson said.As Georgia companies try to manage inventory before a tariff deadline, warehouse space is only one issue. Capital is another.“Most companies can’t afford to get two years’ worth of inventory to manage their business while we figure out what’s going to happen, right? So, they’re going to buy a little time, but not a lot,” said Carl Campbell, an executive director for business recruitment at the Dalton chamber of commerce.Not that there’s a warehouse to be rented in Dalton right now. The north Georgia mill town of about 34,000 in far-right representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s district is a longstanding center of the carpet-and-flooring industry in the US. But it has had competition for warehouse and industrial space in recent years from solar panel manufacturers, spurred by state tax incentives, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and federal incentives for the semiconductor industry.“Everything’s full, you know.” Campbell said. “We’ve got companies that are going to grow manufacturing capacity. They’re currently deciding where to do it, and so the tariffs may swing it to the US. Sometimes that’s swinging that our way. Sometimes it’s making that decision happen sooner rather than later, and sometimes it makes it not happen at all.”Campbell notes that both Democrats and Republicans can lay claim to Dalton’s industrial successes. Qcells, a solar panel manufacturer owned by the Korean conglomerate Hanwha, is an example, he said.“When Trump was in office the first time, he implemented tariffs on goods from China,” Campbell said. “They suddenly got very, very serious about doing panel production and assembly in the US. And they had to do that quickly and as fast as possible.” The same tariff regime began imposing costs on imported flooring from Asia, which boosted Dalton’s flooring manufacturers.Three years later, the Inflation Reduction Act – enacted under Joe Biden – added incentives for clean energy manufacturing, and Georgia’s two Democratic senators, Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, worked to make sure some of the benefit landed in Georgia. About $23bn has been invested in clean energy production in the state since the act passed. Qcells used those incentives to expand in 2023, and employs more than 2,000 people today.“Tariffs are sometimes a tale of winners and losers. And so, yeah, we won a little bit on that,” Campbell said. “And of course, some of our companies got hurt, and they lost a little bit on that.”The problem, again, is uncertainty, he said.“It can create an opportunity for folks like me and companies like ours, yeah, but it can also crush business plans – if you’re reliant on foreign goods and suddenly you just took a 25% hit on your cost. It’s made some people sit on their hands and not move forward on some efforts that we were thinking would happen soon. It’s made some other folks, you know, escalate plans and have to do them faster.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump announces 50% steel tariffs and hails ‘blockbuster’ deal with Japan

      by

      Donald Trump announced on Friday he was doubling foreign tariffs on steel imports to 50%, as the president celebrated a “blockbuster” agreement for Japan-based Nippon Steel to invest in US Steel during a rally in Pennsylvania.Surrounded by men in orange hardhats at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, Trump unveiled the new levies, declaring that the dramatic rate increase would “even further secure the steel industry in the United States”.“Nobody is going to get around that,” Trump said, of the tariff rate hike from what was 25%.In a social media post after the conclusion of his remarks, Trump announced that the 50% tariffs on steel would also apply to imported aluminum and would take effect on 4 June.“This will be yet another BIG jolt of great news for our wonderful steel and aluminum workers,” he declared in the post.It was not immediately clear how the announcement would affect the trade deal negotiated earlier this month that saw tariffs on UK steel and aluminum reduced to zero.Trump’s Friday tariffs announcement came a day after a federal appeals court temporarily allowed his tariffs to remain in effect staying a decision by a US trade court that blocked the president from imposing the duties.The trade court ruling, however, does not impede the president’s ability to unilaterally raise tariffs on steel imports, an authority granted under a national security provision called section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act.The precise relationship between Nippon Steel and US Steel raised questions on Friday, even for some of Trump’s allies. The president has thrown his full support behind the deal, months after insisting he was “totally against” a $14.9bn bid by Nippon Steel for its US rival.The United Steelworkers union had previously urged Trump to reject Nippon’s bid, dismissing the Japanese firm’s commitments to invest in the US as “flashy promises” and claiming it was “simply seeking to undercut our domestic industry from the inside”.Speaking to steelworkers, Trump insisted that US Steel would “stay an American company” after what he is now calling “a partnership” with Nippon.But US Steel’s website links to a standalone site with the combined branding of the two companies that features a statement describing the transaction as “US Steel’s agreement to be acquired by NSC”.On the website touting the deal, there were also multiple references to “Nippon Steel’s acquisition of US Steel” and the “potential sale of US Steel to Nippon Steel”.Even pro-Trump commentators on Fox expressed bafflement over the exact nature of the deal.“This is being described as ‘a partnership’, this deal between Nippon and US Steel – but then it’s described as an acquisition on the US Steel website,” Fox host Laura Ingraham pointed out on her Friday night show.She asked a guest from another pro-Trump outlet, Breitbart: “Who owns the majority stake in this company?”When the guest said he did not know, Ingraham suggested Trump might not be aware of the details. “I don’t know if he was fully informed about the terms of the deal. We just don’t know.”Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, had blocked Nippon’s acquisition, citing national security concerns, during his final weeks in office.During his remarks at the rally, Trump gloated that the Nippon investment would once again make the American steelmaker “synonymous with greatness”. He said protections were included to “ensure that all steel workers will keep their jobs and all facilities in the United States will remain open and thriving” and said Nippon had committed to maintaining all of US Steel’s currently operating blast furnaces for the next decade.The president also promised that every US steel worker would soon receive a $5,000 bonus – prompting the crowd to start a round of “U-S-A!” chants.Trump told the steelworkers in attendance that there was “a lot of money coming your way”.“We won’t be able to call this section a rust belt any more,” Trump said. “It’ll be a golden belt.”During the event, Trump invited local members of United Steelworkers on to the stage to promote the Nippon deal, which saw its leader break with the union to support it. Praising the president, Jason Zugai, vice-president of Irvin local 2227, said he believed the investments would be “life-changing”.But the powerful United Steelworkers union remained wary.“Our primary concern remains with the impact that this merger of US Steel into a foreign competitor will have on national security, our members and the communities where we live and work,” United Steelworkers president David McCall said in a statement.“Issuing press releases and making political speeches is easy. Binding commitments are hard.”Trump framed the administration’s drive to boost domestic steel production as “not just a matter of dignity or prosperity or pride” but as “above all, a matter of national security”.He blamed “decades of Washington betrayals and incompetence and stupidity and corruption” for hollowing out the once-dominant American steel industry, as the jobs “melted away, just like butter”.“We don’t want America’s future to be built with shoddy steel from Shanghai. We want it built with the strength and the pride of Pittsburgh,” he said.In his remarks at a US steel plant, Trump also repeated many of the false claims that have become a feature of his rallies including the lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him. He gloated over his 2024 victory and, gesturing toward his ear that was grazed by a would-be assassin’s bullet last year at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, said it was proof that a higher power was watching over him.He also called on congressional Republicans to align behind his “one big, beautiful bill,” urging attendees to lobby their representatives and senators to support the measure.Lois Beckett and Callum Jones contributed reporting More

    • 200 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Surprise doubling of steel tariffs risks global market turmoil – again

      by

      Donald Trump said he was doubling tariffs on imported steel to 50% at a rally celebrating a “partnership” deal between US Steel and Japan-based Nippon Steel on Friday.Speaking in front of an audience of steelworkers, the US president said: “We are going to be imposing a 25% increase. We’re going to bring it from 25% to 50%, the tariffs on steel into the United States of America, which will even further secure the steel industry in the United States.”The surprise announcement, which contained no further detail, was cheered by the crowd at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania. Trump added: “Nobody is going to get around that.”He spoke after US markets closed for the weekend. But the increase, set to take effect next week, is likely to create fresh economic turmoil.Here are the key stories of the day:Trump announces 50% steel tariffsThe US president announced he was doubling foreign tariffs on steel imports to 50%, as he celebrated a “blockbuster” agreement for Japan-based Nippon Steel’s to invest in US Steel during a rally in Pennsylvania.Surrounded by men in orange hardhats, Donald Trump unveiled the tariff rate increase as he spoke at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, declaring that the dramatic hike would “even further secure” the US steel industry.It was not immediately clear how the announcement would affect the trade deal with the UK, negotiated earlier this month, that saw tariffs on steel and aluminium from the UK reduced to zero.Read the full storyTrump bids farewell to Musk – though not reallyThe president saw Elon Musk off from the White House on Friday, as the Tesla chief concluded his more than four months leading the so-called department of government efficiency’s disruptive foray into federal departments that achieved far fewer cost savings than expected.Standing alongside Trump in the Oval Office, Musk – who faced a 130-day limit in his tenure as a special government employee that had ended two days prior – vowed that his departure “is not the end” of Doge.Read the full storyMusk allegedly took lots of drugs while advising TrumpElon Musk engaged in extensive drug consumption while serving as one of Trump’s closest advisers, taking ketamine so frequently it caused bladder problems and travelling with a daily supply of about 20 pills, according to claims made to the New York Times.Read the full storyGolden Dome won’t be done by end of Trump’s termThe president’s so-called Golden Dome missile defence program – which will feature space-based weapons to intercept strikes against the US – is not expected to be ready before the end of his term, despite his prediction that it would be completed within the next three years.Read the full storyTrump fires National Portrait Gallery chiefDonald Trump says he is firing the first female director of the National Portrait Gallery, which contained a caption that referenced the attack on the US Capitol that his supporters carried out in early 2021.Read the full storyHarvard visitors to face social media screeningThe Trump administration has ordered US consulates worldwide to conduct mandatory social media screening of every visa applicant seeking to travel to Harvard University, with officials instructed to view private accounts as potential signs of “evasiveness”.Read the full storySupreme court allows White House to revoke migrants’ protected statusThe US supreme court on Friday announced it would allow the Trump administration to revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants living in the US, bolstering the Republican president’s drive to step up deportations.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      The state department is seeking to create an “Office of Remigration” as
      part of a restructuring of the US diplomatic service to facilitate Trump’s rightwing anti-immigration policies.

      The FBI is investigating an apparent impersonator who pretended to be the White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, in texts and calls to her contacts, including prominent Republicans.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 29 May 2025. More

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Why Trump does not suffer Congress when it comes to his prized tariffs

      by

      When it comes to cutting taxes or paying for mass deportations, Donald Trump is happy to work with Congress. But if the issue is his prized and disruptive tariff policy, the president has made clear that he has no time for their legislative wrangling.Trump underscored his sentiment towards Congress after a US trade court this week briefly put a stop to his controversial policy of placing levies on a wide range of countries, before a different court reversed that decision while legal proceedings continue.“The horrific decision stated that I would have to get the approval of Congress for these tariffs. In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around DC for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other Countries that are treating us unfairly. If allowed to stand, this would completely destroy Presidential Power – the Presidency would never be the same!” the president wrote on Truth Social.The statement served to put Congress in its place, even though its Republican leaders have shown Trump great deference since taking office. The Senate has approved just about every official he has nominated, no matter how controversial, while the House of Representatives last week overcame substantial differences among the GOP conference to pass the One Big Beautiful bill containing Trump’s tax and spending priorities.If there’s one place where there is daylight to be found between Trump and his Republican allies, it’s his tariff polices. Even avowed supporters of the president have raised their eyebrows at his on-again, off-again imposition of levies on the countries from which US consumers buy their goods and factories source their inputs, and Republican leaders have gone to great lengths to thwart their attempts to do something about them.Which might be why Trump struck out on his own, and hoped the courts would back him up. So far they have not. The US court of international trade, which ruled to block Trump’s tariffs on Wednesday, was very clear it believed his policies “exceed any authority granted to the president”.The matter may ultimately come down to the views of the supreme court, where Trump appointed half of the six-justice conservative supermajority during his first term. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor, said the case is likely to present a test of how the supreme court views the “major questions doctrine” (MQD), which argues clear congressional authority is needed for agencies to carry out any regulations of national importance, in light of Trump’s tariffs moves.The doctrine was used to defang regulators last year when the court overturned the Chevron decision, limiting regulators’ powers and arguing they had overstepped their authority.The supreme court may not be minded to accept the major questions doctrine when it comes to the commander in chief, wrote Goldsmith in his newsletter, Executive Function. “It is an open question whether the MQD applies to congressional authorizations to the president. Every Supreme Court decision involving the MQD has involved agency action, and lower courts are split on whether the MQD applies to presidential authorizations,” he said.For Congress’s beleaguered Democrats, this week’s court intervention, however fleeting, provided grist for the case they’ve been trying to make to voters ever since Trump took office, which is that he is trying to act like the sort of monarch America was founded on rejecting.“This is why the Framers gave Congress constitutional power over trade and tariffs,” said Suzan DelBene, a Washington state House Democrat who has proposed one of many bills to block Trump’s tariffs. “The court spoke decisively in defense of our democracy and against a president attempting to be king.” More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: tariffs reinstated, for now, after rollercoaster of court decisions

      by

      President Trump’s tariffs remain in place, at least for now, after an appeals court ruled that his administration can continue to collect import fees.The latest ruling came just a day after a separate court ruled that Trump had overstepped his power, a judgment that his administration has pushed back against.White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said on Thursday that America cannot function when diplomatic or trade negotiations are “railroaded by activist judges”.Here are the key stories at a glance:Trump wins breathing space after major blow to tariff policyThe Trump administration is racing to halt a major blow to the president’s sweeping tariffs after a US court ruled they “exceed any authority granted to the president.”A US trade court ruled the US president’s tariffs regime was illegal on Wednesday in a dramatic twist that could block Trump’s controversial global trade policy.On Thursday, an appeals court agreed to a temporary pause in the decision pending an appeal hearing. The Trump administration is expected to take the case to the supreme court if it loses.Read the full storyTrump allies rail against court’s tariff rulingRepublicans and close allies of Donald Trump are railing against a federal judicial panel that blocked a wide swath of the US president’s tariffs Wednesday night, including those against China.Some attempted to frame the decision as part of a broader fight between the Trump administration and US justice system. Trump has frequently complained about legal decisions that don’t go his way, attacking judges on social media in ways that have alarmed civic society experts.Read the full storyTariffs derailed by law firm that received money from Trump backersDonald Trump’s tariff policy was derailed by a libertarian public interest law firm that has received money from some of his richest backers.The Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit against the US president’s “reciprocal” tariffs on behalf of five small businesses, which it said were harmed by the policy.Previous backers of the firm include billionaires Robert Mercer and Richard Uihlein, who were also financial backers of Trump’s presidential campaigns.Read the full storyChina condemns US decision to revoke student visasChina has lodged a formal protest over the US declaration that it will “aggressively” revoke the visas of Chinese students, with the foreign ministry saying it had objected to the announcement made a day earlier by Marco Rubio.Read the full storyFed asserts independence from Trump over interest ratesThe Federal Reserve issued a rare, strongly worded statement on Thursday after chair Jerome Powell spoke with Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday morning, holding firm on the central bank’s independence amid pressure from Trump to lower interest rates.The three-paragraph statement emphasized the Fed’s independent, non-partisan role in setting monetary policy based on economic data.“Chair Powell did not discuss his expectations for monetary policy, except to stress that the path of policy will depend entirely on incoming economic information and what that means for the outlook,” the statement read.Read the full storyTrump violating right to life with anti-environment orders, youth lawsuit saysTwenty two young Americans have filed a new lawsuit against the Trump administration over its anti-environment executive orders. By intentionally boosting oil and gas production and stymying carbon-free energy, federal officials are violating their constitutional rights to life and liberty, alleges the lawsuit, filed on Thursday.Read the full storyImmigration agents get quota to arrest 3,000 people a dayThe Trump administration has set aggressive new goals in its anti-immigration agenda, demanding that federal agents arrest 3,000 people a day – or more than a million in a year.The new target, tripling arrest figures from earlier this year, was delivered to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) leaders by Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, and Kristi Noem, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary, in a strained meeting last week.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      Robert F Kennedy Jr’s flagship health commission report contains citations to studies that do not exist, according to an investigation by the US publication Notus.

      Top House Democrat Jamie Raskin has demanded Donald Trump reveal a list of who attended his private dinner last week for major investors in his meme coin, as questions swirl about the deep and secretive connections between the Trump administration and the cryptocurrency industry.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 28 May 2025. More

    • 213 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Trump’s tariffs: the courts have drawn a line. So must Congress | Editorial

      by

      If one thing is more challenging to the rule of law than a genuine emergency, it is the invention of a phoney one. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has upended global trade and international relations, wiping billions off the stock market in the process, by imposing tariffs that he claims are a necessary response to an emergency. Yet that emergency does not really exist, except in the manner that Mr Trump himself has created it.The president claimed, on 2 April, that a lack of reciprocity in US overseas trade arrangements was “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States”. He claimed that this justified him in declaring an emergency and governing by executive decree under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Congress, which normally has the responsibility to decide US trade policy, was thus wholly ignored. Statutory consultative arrangements, traditionally an essential preliminary, went out of the window too. Mr Trump was effectively exercising an executive power grab.Now, after this week’s ruling by a US federal trade court, most of Mr Trump’s tariffs have been blocked. In a case brought by a coalition of businesses and US states, the court of international trade found that most of the tariffs “exceed any authority granted” to the president under the 1977 law. The White House will appeal. Meanwhile, trade talks aimed at creating so-called deals between the US and nation-state victims of the Trump policies are likely to be paused, while existing deals, including that with the UK, may be affected too.There will be a worldwide sense of relief for as long as it lasts. But the higher courts now face an important political responsibility as well as a judicial one. The ruling has left nations and businesses hanging. Some tariffs will remain, such as those on steel, aluminium and cars. Many others are suspended. Markets hate uncertainty.The issues at stake are very large. They are immediate, because the ruling suspends many but not all tariffs, and also strategic, because it challenges Mr Trump’s wide-ranging attempts to rule by executive order. Both are extremely important. Global trade and economic recovery, in Britain among many other countries, rest on the outcome. But so does Mr Trump’s strategy, which dates back to his first term, of using IEEPA powers to rule by decree, not merely on trade issues but, for example, in sanctioning officials from the international criminal court.The good news is that the president’s plans to impose tariffs on almost every country on the planet will now be subjected to something approaching the legal and constitutional scrutiny that they should have had in the first place. The rule of law, thankfully, has struck back, at least for now.The bad news is that Congress still shows no sign of reining Mr Trump in, as it should. Ironically, the IEEPA was originally a Jimmy Carter-era legislative attempt to boost congressional oversight of presidential emergency powers. Under Mr Trump, that role has been trashed. The worst of all outcomes would be for Congress to now give Mr Trump the powers to which he has laid claim. That is a real danger. The best outcome would be for Congress to give the IEEPA a fresh set of teeth. These would ensure that emergency powers are properly defined and applied, and never again abused by this or any other overmighty president.

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump tariffs derailed by law firm that received money from his richest backers

      by

      Donald Trump’s tariff policy was derailed by a libertarian public interest law firm that has received money from some of his richest backers.The Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit against the US president’s “reciprocal” tariffs on behalf of five small businesses, which it said were harmed by the policy.The center, based in Austin, Texas, describes itself as a libertarian non-profit litigation firm “that seeks to protect economic liberty, private property rights, free speech, and other fundamental rights”.Previous backers of the firm include billionaires Robert Mercer and Richard Uihlein, who were also financial backers of Trump’s presidential campaigns.Mercer, a hedge fund manager, was a key backer of Breitbart News and Cambridge Analytica, pouring millions into both companies. He personally directed Cambridge Analytica to focus on the Leave campaign during the UK’s Brexit referendum in 2016 that led to the UK leaving the European Union.For its lawsuit against Trump’s tariffs, the Liberty Justice Center gathered five small businesses, including a wine company and a fish gear and apparel retailer, and argued that Trump overreached his executive authority and needed Congress’s approval to pass such broad tariffs.The other group who sued the Trump administration over its tariffs was a coalition of 12 Democratic state attorney generals who argued that Trump improperly used a trade law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), when enacting his tariffs.In such a polarized time in US history, it may feel odd to see a decision celebrated by liberal and conservatives. But Trump’s tariffs have proven controversial to members of both parties, particularly after Wall Street seemed to be put on edge by the president’s trade war.The US stock market dipped down at least 5% after Trump announced the harshest of his tariff policies. Recovery was quick after Trump paused many of his harshest tariffs until the end of the summer.Stocks started to rally on Thursday morning after the panel’s ruling. The judges said that the law Trump cited when enacting his tariffs, the IEEPA does not “delegate an unbounded tariff authority onto the president”. The decision is on a temporary hold after the Trump administration appealed.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhile the ruling does not impact specific tariffs on industries such as aluminum and steel, it prevents the White House from carrying out broad retaliatory tariffs and its 10% baseline “reciprocal” tariff. The White House is appealing the ruling, which means the case could go up to the US supreme court, should the high court decide to take on the case.Members of both groups who sued the Trump administration celebrated the ruling. Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel for the Liberty Justice Center, said in a statement that it “affirms that the president must act within the bounds of the law, and it protects American businesses and consumers from the destabilizing effects of volatile, unilaterally imposed tariffs”. Oregon’s Democratic attorney general, Dan Rayfield, who helped the states’ lawsuit, said that it “reaffirms that our laws matter”.In a statement, Victor Schwartz, the founder of VOS Selections, a wine company that was represented by the Liberty Justice Center in the suit, said that the ruling is a “win” for his business.“This is a win for my small business along with small businesses across America – and the world for that matter,” he said. “We are aware of the appeal already filed and we firmly believe in our lawsuit and will see it all the way through the United States Supreme Court.” More

    • 250 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      It’s been a big, beautiful week of bad news for Trump. But don’t expect it to stick | Zoe Williams

      by

      Nothing is going according to plan for the Trump administration. The big, beautiful bill, originally vaunted to save the US taxpayer at least $2tn, so far, according to projections, delivers savings in the region of $9.4bn. Elon Musk has exited government, saying he wasn’t in favour of the bill, which could be big, or beautiful, but in this case, not both. Musk’s government contract ran for only 120 days, so it would have been up at the end of this week anyway.Just to try to lasso those words back to an observable reality where they might mean something, the bill isn’t all that big; there are some very vindictive moves around Medicaid entitlement, intended to fund tax cuts elsewhere, that will have seismically bad outcomes for vulnerable individuals without necessarily burning a hole in anyone else’s pocket. Tips and overtime are exempted from tax, but probably the only thing that’s legitimately big, or if you like, huge, is the increase of the debt ceiling by $4tn. So it gives with one hand, takes away with the other, promise-wise – those tax exemptions were mentioned often on the campaign trail, but a government that causes havoc trying to shrink the state while simultaneously increasing the amount it can borrow isn’t going to please anyone in either party but sycophants.As for “beautiful” – the supplemental nutrition assistance program (Snap) will see reforms that throw more costs on to each state. Forty-two million low-income Americans are on Snap, and there would be more requirements upon those who are childless. Centring cuts on those who are already hungry has a cruelty that glisters in an age of necropolitics, but it lacks the scale, the granite finality, that “beauty” would connote to these people.“We have to get a lot of votes, we can’t be cutting – we need to get a lot of support,” Trump said, in response to Musk’s criticism, which seems to have enlivened in the president some fresh appreciation of how democracy works, though whether it will last until lunchtime is anyone’s guess. The worry about Musk’s departure is not that Doge will be lost without him, but that his criticism will embolden the hawks in Congress, who didn’t want to vote for the bill in the first place. Then it really will be a puddle of words without meaning.Meanwhile, a US federal court struck down almost all Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs, in the classic judicial way, by deeming them an overreach of his powers. The ruling is purely on legislative grounds (Trump didn’t wait for the approval of Congress) rather than on any economic grounds (that they would make everything much more expensive for the US public, obliterating the impact of any big or beautiful tax cuts with a single big-ticket purchase, particularly if any part thereof was made in China, which means almost everything). The justice department has filed an appeal.The observer could file all this under “government: harder than it looks”. Moving fast and breaking things doesn’t work. Borrowing and spending while slashing and burning in a formless, ad hoc fashion doesn’t work. Billionaires with fragile egos, trying to cooperate while reserving the right to say whatever they like about each other, well, this has never worked.It would be the gravest imaginable mistake, though, to think that just because the wheels are coming off it this bus is losing its destructive power. One of the global indignities of the US spectacle is having to lose hours analysing the hidden meanings and augurs of the acts of men who don’t, themselves, give one second’s thought to anything. Did Trump mean to humiliate Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and if he didn’t, what came over him, and if he did, what could we predict of the future of Europe? Did Musk mean to Sieg Heil, and if he didn’t, has he lost his mind, and if he did, has he lost his mind? Did they mean to fall out, will they get back together, is this a pantomime, will one chase the other further from reality or back towards it?These questions fundamentally debase us, at the same time as giving the false sense of security that, once these guys step away from public life, singly or together, sense will be restored. The dangerous thing about them is the thing that makes them infinitely replaceable: there will always be another richest guy in the world; there will always be another high net-worth individual who has become separated from social values, not by the wealth itself but by the single-minded solipsism of its accretion. Trump and Musk could get to a place of such enmity that they eschewed the offices of state to spend the days mud-wrestling, and there would be no comfort to take from it, just a new double-act, with new peccadilloes that would be strikingly like the last.The federal court’s decision is another matter, and can be mutedly celebrated until it fails to act on some other gross constitutional transgression.

      Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist More