General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsthe orange pedos 15% tariffs arent legal either
from the lawyer that got hi first ones thrown out
Link to tweet
?s=20
basically there the law hes using allows him to implement them if there is a balance of payments deficit. which doesnt exist since we went to floating currencies in the 70's. the morons lawyers evern argued that the law didnt apply in his case at teh supreme court
bucolic_frolic
(54,673 posts)This is just running out the clock.
Where is all that tariff money going? Trump is stuck to the idea like glue.
moonshinegnomie
(3,957 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(22,623 posts)Those sec. 122 Tariffs are only good for 150 days, and its unlikely there would be a final ruling within that time, there will likely be preliminary rulings and stays pending appeals. 150 days should be enough time to further damage the economy, destroy more small businesses, and add more seats to the Blue Tsunami coming in November.
The question is, once a final ruling on whether these current Sec 122 tariffs are legal comes down, will it prevent Trump from issuing future 150 day tariffs?
In the meantime, Trumpy Whack-a-Mole continues
LetMyPeopleVote
(177,634 posts)trump's new replacement tariffs are illegal. These tariffs can only be used when there is a balance-of-payments deficit which is very different from a balance of trade deficit. Since the US is no longer on a currency fixed exchange rate there have not been any balance of payment deficits for a couple of decades. These tariffs will be challenged and trump will lose again
Fascinating National Review post on Trump's latest Tariff gambit. Archive link here (it's pay walled, please don't give them money lol)
— Rude Law Dog (@esghound.com) 2026-02-21T19:01:57.437Z
archive.is/r4Xdf
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trumps-section-122-tariffs-are-illegal/
A trade deficit between the U.S. and a foreign nation occurs, mainly in connection with goods (which is just one aspect of international commerce), when imports are greater than exports. This is not really a problem for a variety of reasons e.g., a trade deficit results in an investment surplus, the U.S. is a major services economy and often runs exported services surpluses that mitigate the imports deficit in goods, etc.
The balance of payments is a broader concept than the balance of trade. It accounts for all the economic transactions that take place between the United States and the rest of the world. Even without getting into every kind of transaction that entails, suffice it to say that foreign investment in the United States, coupled with the advantages our nation accrues because the dollar is the worlds reserve currency, more than make up for the longstanding trade deficit in goods.
Our overall payments are in balance. There is no crisis.
Its vital to understand why Section 122 was enacted. There was a financial crisis in the late 60s and early 70s under the Bretton Woods system, when the dollar was tied to gold. Foreign countries that held dollar reserves could exchange them for gold at a fixed rate. Meanwhile, our government was spending at a high clip due to the Vietnam War and Great Society programs. This and the obligation to pay out gold put enormous pressure on the dollar. In response, in 1971, President Nixon severed the dollars tie to gold and as several justices recounted in Fridays Learning Resources opinions imposed a temporary 10 percent import surcharge (a tariff) to stabilize the economy......
There is no rationale under Section 122 to impose tariffs. Because President Trump has no unilateral authority to order tariffs, he must meet the preconditions of Section 122 to justify levying them. He cannot. Not even close.