Loading ...TRUMP’S RESPONSE ON TARIFFS
“Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged…” – President Donald J. Trump
BESSENT IN PREPARED REMARKS: TREASURY’S ESTIMATES SHOW THAT USE OF SECTION 122 AUTHORITY, COMBINED WITH POTENTIALLY ENHANCED SECTION 232 AND SECTION 301 TARIFFS WILL RESULT IN VIRTUALLY UNCHANGED TARIFF REVENUE IN 2026
………………..
NOTE REFUNDS WERE NOT ADDRESSED IN THE RULING SO…..GO POUND SAND
President Trump announces that refunds over the $175,000,000,000 in tariff revenue will be litigated over for the next 5 years.
What is the alternative? Companies sending the government a bill on a trust me basis and using their own calculation of what the tariffs actually cost them versus what the supplier absorbed and external market price fluctuations?
The 10% global tariff under Section 122 is a strategic recalibration, not a retreat. Leverage requires adaptability—pressure must shift as adversaries fold. The Supreme Court’s IEEPA ruling didn’t weaken the strategy; it forced a pivot to a statute with explicit authority (Section 122) that still locks in revenue and pressure.
Tariffs under this framework will generate an estimated $90B annually, directly funding deficit reduction and tax cuts without congressional delays. Critics calling this “temporary” miss the point: the goal isn’t permanence, but forcing concessions. China already dropped retaliatory tariffs from 125% to 10% after Liberation Day—proof the model works.
This isn’t chaos; it’s high-velocity negotiation. Every dollar collected under Section 122 strengthens America’s hand while global competitors scramble. The alternative? Surrender to decades of trade abuse. Hard pas
pay the tariff or relocate business to the USA, they have a choice but will the manufactured item be cheaper in the US ?