this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
867 points (99.0% liked)

News

37418 readers
1464 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


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. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


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 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

Around $6000 to my small business. I’m sure the Supreme Court will side with Trump though.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 13 points 7 months ago (2 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 (2 replies)
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Republicans are so fucking stupid. They imposed a stupid tax on all of us.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

We're never fucking financially recovering from this administration

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 6 points 7 months 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.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

He’s already spent it on bling from Kohl’s.

[–] C1pher@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Those businesses will never see a goddamn cent

[–] aramis87@fedia.io 6 points 7 months 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 7 months 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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 6 points 7 months ago

Thanks CNN. Now the Supreme Court justices know their asking price

[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago

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

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Or else what?

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

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

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›