Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bigbadfeline 123 days ago
> it would be impossible to return the funds to them due to diffusion.

It's very much possible if money isn't (or only partially) returned to the companies and used for targeted investment benefiting the public. Of course this won't help much if government spending priories and legislative objectives aren't revised, but that's unlikely because there's nobody in government or academia with anything close to a good idea about it.
2 comments
_DeadFred_ 123 days ago
Without these tariffs Trump and his advisors' already legislated and approved agenda adds 2 trillion dollars to our national debt. Step one is the Republican Congress rolling back the big beautiful bill that is no longer funded, if they truly are the fiscally responsible political party.

But we all know they are actually the party of unsustainable debt (with the political agenda of it blowing up the country as they lay out in their 40+ years of starve the beast policy). They then come to threads like this and talk about...the unsustainable debt that their 40+ years of policymaking has created and how government doesn't work (because of their 40+ years of policy making) and we need to get rid of it. 40+ years of destroying the country via starve the beast policy and placing the country in unsustainable financial peril all for a political agenda they can't reach any other way.

link
kasey_junk 123 days ago
That allows the illegal tax to continue. The tax has to be returned to the people it was collected from, and that’s the importers.

Otherwise it’s the same as just leaving the illegal tax in effect.

link
bigbadfeline 123 days ago
> Otherwise it’s the same as just leaving the illegal tax in effect.

The SCOTUS didn't say that in their decision. No matter how you call it, the tariffs were found in breach with simple law passed by Congress - that is, the undoing of tariffs can be legislated by Congress and it can take any shape they like - it will be legal. Anyway, fine-tuning this is a waste of time, the big problems are elsewhere.

link
tptacek 121 days ago
They don't have to say it in their decision. Their only remit was to determine whether the tax was legal or not. It is not. Lower courts will then hear cases about disbursement of the illegitimate takings; those cases will almost certainly not make it up to the Supreme Court.

The money is getting "returned", at least in some fashion. The parent commenter is right.

link