Posted on 04/03/2025 4:30:27 AM PDT by RandFan
@YALiberty
“One person is not allowed to raise taxes—the constitution forbids it.”
@SenRandPaul slams Trump’s tariffs as unconstitutional, calling them a tax on Americans— and he’s right.
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
No. BS.
Not that anyone cares or it matters, but Trump is correct. We need to use trade to strengthen America, not weaken her. However, tariffs, to me, are an extension of foreign policy. So, the question is: does the President have the power to change tariffs? This is what ChatGPT is saying about it:
under certain conditions, the President does have authority to change tariffs without seeking prior Congressional approval, but this authority is delegated by Congress through specific statutes, not inherent or unlimited constitutional power.
Constitutional Basis
The Constitution (Article I, Section 8) gives Congress the power “to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.”
Therefore, Congress controls tariff policy constitutionally.
Delegated Authority
Congress has passed several laws that delegate limited authority to the President to adjust tariffs in specific situations, including:
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
Allows the President to impose tariffs for national security reasons after an investigation by the Department of Commerce.
Example: Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs in 2018.
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974
Allows retaliation or tariffs in response to unfair trade practices by other nations.
Example: Tariffs against China during the U.S.-China trade war.
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA, 1977)
Grants broad authority during national emergencies, including regulating imports and exports.
Conclusion
The President does not have independent constitutional authority to change tariffs. However, Congress has delegated specific powers allowing the President to do so within legal limits and procedural requirements.
It seems to me, that President Trump does have the authority due to unfair trade practices, which most other countries have against the US.
It is taxation, but it is taxes on products that you buy. It shifts the tax burden away from you and onto manufactured goods in the country.
That is assuming that politicians do their jobs.
Thank you President Trump, for getting all these enemies of the country to expose themselves.
NAFTA was negotiated between governments, then passed in the House and Senate and signed into law by the President. The Smith Hawley Act is named after its sponsors in the House and Senate. It looks like precedent indicates this should go before Congress. If so, I hope it takes a simple majority to pass.
As tariffs are a source of government revenue, I think of them as a tax. It resembles a sales tax to me. Can a tariff and sales tax both apply to the same item?
It seems Rand has a point. No one brought this up before? Maybe team Trump has a valid reply.
I agree with Trump on policy, and there are indications that it is already working. However, it should be correct on process also.
Doesn’t Rand have some yard work to do?
NOPE.
Where was his anger when we have been tariffed out the ying yang for DECADES.
Rand should look at history, we had tariffs since day one because the Founders wanted it that way.
Rand has never been a member of the working poor nor will his grandchildren. He doesn’t seem to care about huge numbers of working poor here in Kentucky. Trump in his first did more for the working poor than anyone since FDR. Trump will bring back middle class jobs with industrial revitalization. I have nine grandchildren and their futures depend on Trump’s success.
Are you old enough to remember the first two years of Reagan’s administration? Some pain but look at the payoff.
I could not be more disappointed in Rand.
His blind ambition has caused him to expose himself as a fraud.
No. Both you and him are pimples on the buttock of the republic.
On this one point, screw Rand Paul.
Used correctly as a part of national America First policies, tariffs strategically foster domestic production in critical industries.
Defense, pharma, ship/plane/auto building, and hi-tech must be shielded from predatory cheap foreign competition and “short term profit only” seeking American investors.
Tariffs incentivize US companies to reshore/manufacture domestically. This creates more jobs for the middle and working classes.
Higher labor demand drives wages up and improves living standards and long term domestic demand. Witness US post WWII.
To offset the cost of more expensive labor, firms invest in capital—automation, technology, and infrastructure—boosting productivity and innovation.
All these and more strengthens critical industries, reduces dependency on foreign supply chains, and builds a resilient economy.
Recent targeted and too modest examples include the U.S. steel manufacturing and 750CC+ motorcycle industries all protected by tariffs from predatory foreigners.
Finally, we should by policy aggressively protect our “know how” and acquire by any means foreign best practices, processes, people and tech.
Had we not taught foreigners how to build cars, planes, ships, computers, etc etc etc....they would be buying them from us. Coca Cola guards its “secret formula” for just such reason.
Business is war. Usually, no one gets killed. Usually. We need to act like it.
Get serious or get off the floor.
MAGA.
Maybe he can go hunting with Dick Cheney.
No I’m not old enough. I’m a spring chicken around here.
It’ll be interesting to see who is vindicated. Rand is taking a gamble. It might not matter.
He says Borboun and car industry in KY are going to be hurt badly. That’s why McConnell joined him
Anyone who has had to pay VAT (Value added Tax) in a foreign country understands how it works. It sucks. My experience is Israel, but I have spent time in Europe has well, and always felt like Americans were getting the short end of the stick. I agree with Trump’s idea about leveling the playing field.
It’s so comforting to see Rand allied with those three losers.
No more campaign contributions from me, Randy!
Rand is a five-foot six ball of crap, who doesn’t deserve the right time of day. If I were Donald Trump, I’d make it my mission to end his political career.
Tariff are how the government was originally funded. Not unconstitutional at all.
Nope.
It’s not just one person who wants to raise taxes and Trump doesn’t want to do that. Paul is misrepresenting Trump.
Reciprocal tariffs are just fine. If Canada doesn’t like ours, they can drop their ridiculous ones on us.
Of coarse he wants a one way deal. The US is still responsible for about 20 percent of Canada’s economy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.