Trade Wars and Tariffs

#6,851
#6,851

Trump orders temporary 10% global tariff to replace duties struck down by US Supreme Court​

Reuters
Fri, February 20, 2026 at 12:58 PM CST

WASHINGTON, Feb 20 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that he would impose a 10% global ‌tariff for 150 days to replace some of ‌his emergency duties that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trump said that his order would be made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and the duties would be over and above tariffs that are currently in place.

The statute ‌allows the president to ⁠impose duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on any and all countries ⁠related to "large and serious" balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits.
 
#6,852
#6,852
DinkinFlicka said:
Oh, you misunderstood. I was referring to you.

I've theorized for a while now that the modern American voter goes all in on the horse they bet on, regardless of whether or not he/she makes massive errors in judgment, makes a blunder, or otherwise pursues poor avenues of reasoning. The person who voted for them will carry water from the ocean floor these days.

I believe that your typical Trump supporter faces their most odious task in simply admitting the big guy ****s up when he does indeed, **** up. It's an extension of admitting they themselves were wrong.
Click to expand...

I don’t need to comment on what I disagree with. There are plenty of liberal sheep in here that already handle whining about those things.
 
#6,853
#6,853
Thunder Good-Oil said:
They aren’t territories? Wouldn’t there be a potential loophole created by excluding them?

What’s the harm of leaving them on the list of 200 or 300 countries and territories? Nobody is flying and sailing down there to negotiate with the penguins.
Click to expand...
The point is it’s really stupid to tariff them in the first place and letting them stand so you feel better about your boy getting slapped down hard today isn’t relevant.

Pace yourself on that water carrying. Birthright citizenship is on deck next to get outraged over.
 
#6,855
#6,855
jmacvols1 said:

Trump orders temporary 10% global tariff to replace duties struck down by US Supreme Court​

Reuters
Fri, February 20, 2026 at 12:58 PM CST

WASHINGTON, Feb 20 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that he would impose a 10% global ‌tariff for 150 days to replace some of ‌his emergency duties that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trump said that his order would be made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and the duties would be over and above tariffs that are currently in place.

The statute ‌allows the president to ⁠impose duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on any and all countries ⁠related to "large and serious" balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits.
Click to expand...
And in 150 days by law he has to ask Congress to keep them in place.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sin City Vol, DinkinFlicka, NashVol11 and 2 others
#6,858
#6,858
DinkinFlicka said:
I rarely watch network news, but that press conference was 10/10.
Click to expand...
Yes it was. Give Trump a few more hours to stew over this and let’s see what havoc he’ll wreak. I’m betting on at least one big beautiful bright shiny object to try distract his leg humpers from this disaster. Watch for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sin City Vol, DinkinFlicka and OHvol40
#6,860
#6,860
NorthDallas40 said:
The point is it’s really stupid to tariff them in the first place and letting them stand so you feel better about your boy getting slapped down hard today isn’t relevant.

Pace yourself on that water carrying. Birthright citizenship is on deck next to get outraged over.
Click to expand...

The point is why carve anything out? To prevent the critics from having a punch line?

It sends a message. Moving the point of origin for anybody will not enable avoiding a tariff.
 
#6,864
#6,864
Thunder Good-Oil said:
So you’re not able to answer the questions?
Click to expand...
Oh I did. None of these broad sweeping tariffs should have been put in place in the first place. And today they were rightly struck down. You parsing why break out separately vs levying an illegal tariff en masse is really irrelevant.

You’ve got 150 days to get your defense of Trump straight when he isn’t able to get a congressional extension
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sin City Vol and DinkinFlicka
#6,865
#6,865
jmacvols1 said:

Trump orders temporary 10% global tariff to replace duties struck down by US Supreme Court​

Reuters
Fri, February 20, 2026 at 12:58 PM CST

WASHINGTON, Feb 20 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that he would impose a 10% global ‌tariff for 150 days to replace some of ‌his emergency duties that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trump said that his order would be made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and the duties would be over and above tariffs that are currently in place.

The statute ‌allows the president to ⁠impose duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on any and all countries ⁠related to "large and serious" balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits.
Click to expand...

If dumb Donald does another blanket tariff program he will, once again, get his balls snipped in court.

Key point:
The statute ‌allows the president to ⁠impose duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on any and all countries ⁠related to "large and serious" balance of payments issues.
Click to expand...

You said:​

List all the countries that the United States does not have a "large and serious" balance of payments issue with.

ChatGPT said:​

If we define a “large and serious” balance of payments issue as a very large bilateral goods trade deficit (for example, deficits roughly above ~$20–30 billion annually), then the United States has that issue with only a relatively small group of countries.

Countries Where the U.S. Does Have Large Bilateral Goods Deficits​

These are the primary countries typically cited:
  • China
  • Mexico
  • Vietnam
  • Germany
  • Japan
  • Ireland
  • South Korea
  • Taiwan
  • Italy
  • India
  • Thailand
  • Malaysia
  • Switzerland
(Exact rankings shift year to year, but these consistently account for the overwhelming majority of the U.S. goods trade deficit.)

✅ Therefore:​

The United States does not have a “large and serious” balance of payments issue with every other country in the world.
That includes:
  • Most of Europe (e.g., U.K., France, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, etc.)
  • Most of South America (Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, etc.)
  • Most of Africa
  • Most of the Middle East
  • Most of Central America and the Caribbean
  • Many smaller Asian economies
  • Nearly all small and lower-income countries globally
With these countries, U.S. trade is either:
  • Roughly balanced
  • In U.S. surplus
  • Or too small in volume to be macro-economically significant

Big Picture​

Out of ~190+ countries globally, only about a dozen to fifteen countries account for the vast majority of the total U.S. goods trade deficit. With the rest, there is no large or systemic imbalance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#6,866
#6,866
jmacvols1 said:

Trump orders temporary 10% global tariff to replace duties struck down by US Supreme Court​

Reuters
Fri, February 20, 2026 at 12:58 PM CST

WASHINGTON, Feb 20 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that he would impose a 10% global ‌tariff for 150 days to replace some of ‌his emergency duties that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trump said that his order would be made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and the duties would be over and above tariffs that are currently in place.

The statute ‌allows the president to ⁠impose duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on any and all countries ⁠related to "large and serious" balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits.
Click to expand...



This is also known as "a tantrum."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Berry4Heisman14, bamawriter, DinkinFlicka and 4 others
#6,868
#6,868
NorthDallas40 said:
Oh I did. None of these broad sweeping tariffs should have been put in place in the first place. And today they were rightly struck down. You parsing why break out separately vs levying an illegal tariff en masse is really irrelevant.

You’ve got 150 days to get your defense of Trump straight when he isn’t able to get a congressional extension
Click to expand...

Why shouldn’t they all be at the same starting point? Why can’t a base be established and then each is adjusted based on te specific scenarios. Start with the biggest 20 or so and then eventually work their way down to the penguins? Does country #175 need to be dealt with immediately while moving the UK, China, Canada, Japan, France, Brazil, etc down the list? What about #150? Or #160? There’s a finite number of staffers that can be assigned to the deals. The resources are best used commencing with the largest trading partners (and adversaries) and dealing with the minutia when they get around to it.

Sorry. I don’t remember your explanation of why those particular territories need to be addressed at all in the initial round.
 
#6,870
#6,870
MontyPython said:
If dumb Donald does another blanket tariff program he will, once again, get his balls snipped in court.

Key point:

You said:​

List all the countries that the United States does not have a "large and serious" balance of payments issue with.

ChatGPT said:​

If we define a “large and serious” balance of payments issue as a very large bilateral goods trade deficit (for example, deficits roughly above ~$20–30 billion annually), then the United States has that issue with only a relatively small group of countries.

Countries Where the U.S. Does Have Large Bilateral Goods Deficits​

These are the primary countries typically cited:
  • China
  • Mexico
  • Vietnam
  • Germany
  • Japan
  • Ireland
  • South Korea
  • Taiwan
  • Italy
  • India
  • Thailand
  • Malaysia
  • Switzerland
(Exact rankings shift year to year, but these consistently account for the overwhelming majority of the U.S. goods trade deficit.)

✅ Therefore:​

The United States does not have a “large and serious” balance of payments issue with every other country in the world.
That includes:
  • Most of Europe (e.g., U.K., France, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, etc.)
  • Most of South America (Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, etc.)
  • Most of Africa
  • Most of the Middle East
  • Most of Central America and the Caribbean
  • Many smaller Asian economies
  • Nearly all small and lower-income countries globally
With these countries, U.S. trade is either:
  • Roughly balanced
  • In U.S. surplus
  • Or too small in volume to be macro-economically significant

Big Picture​

Out of ~190+ countries globally, only about a dozen to fifteen countries account for the vast majority of the total U.S. goods trade deficit. With the rest, there is no large or systemic imbalance.
Click to expand...

Exclude any of the rest and some of the bigger partners will exploit a loophole and export their goods through them. China has already had their playbook exposed using this strategy.
 
#6,871
#6,871
Delmar said:
Yes it was. Give Trump a few more hours to stew over this and let’s see what havoc he’ll wreak. I’m betting on at least one big beautiful bright shiny object to try distract his leg humpers from this disaster. Watch for it.
Click to expand...

Iran gonna get f*cked over big time in the next 7-10 days...
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79, Delmar, DinkinFlicka and 1 other person
#6,872
#6,872
NorthDallas40 said:
Because they shouldn’t have existed in the first place. I’m not amenable to splitting hairs on how to parse these idiot tariffs I’m in the remove them all right now
Click to expand...

Reciprocal and fair tariffs aren’t something that I oppose. Neither is giving away access to the US consumer base without getting things in return.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top