{"id":15059,"date":"2024-10-17T17:44:22","date_gmt":"2024-10-17T17:44:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=15059"},"modified":"2024-10-17T17:44:23","modified_gmt":"2024-10-17T17:44:23","slug":"trump-and-harris-could-raise-taxes-without-asking-congress-congress-should-stop-them","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=15059","title":{"rendered":"Trump and Harris could raise taxes without asking Congress. Congress should stop them."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

“The signature policy proposal of Donald Trump\u2019s third campaign for the presidency is a tariff<\/a>: a tax of 60 percent imposed on all imports from China and 10 percent on imports from any other country. Not only does he want this tax hike, which would raise about $291 billion<\/a> or 1 percent of GDP<\/a> when fully implemented, but he says he\u2019ll do it unilaterally. \u201cI don\u2019t need Congress, but they\u2019ll approve it,\u201d Trump declared at a September 23 rally<\/a>. \u201cI\u2019ll have the right to impose them myself if they don\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a rather enormous policy change for a president to undertake unilaterally, and one of dubious legality. For comparison, the hike Trump is considering is over twice as large<\/a> as the tax increases used to fund Obamacare. (And make no mistake \u2014 tariffs are tax increases.) Experts like former World Trade Organization (WTO) deputy director-general Alan Wm. Wolff<\/a> have argued that no law passed by Congress gives the president the power to levy across-the-board tariffs along the lines Trump proposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even so, Congress has given the executive branch a remarkable amount of flexibility to set tariffs. This is a mistake. Members of Congress, whether or not they support Trump\u2019s tariff plans, should be able to agree on this much: As the Constitution lays out in the taxing clause<\/a>, it\u2019s Congress\u2019s job to set taxing and spending policy for the United States. It\u2019s been that way for the US\u2019s whole history, it\u2019s the traditional role of legislatures in all democratic countries, and putting this power instead in the president\u2019s hands cuts the people\u2019s representatives out of the process of determining how they are taxed \u2014 a concept that goes back to before the American Revolution.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The presidential power to impose tariffs does not originate from a simple bill or program; rather, it slowly accreted over time, with a particular expansion over the past decade as the Trump administration rediscovered authorities in old laws that enabled it to wage a trade war with China and protect the steel industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962<\/a>, for instance, gives the president the right to levy tariffs upon the secretary of commerce\u2019s recommendation without asking Congress. This was the authority Trump used to slap tariffs on steel and aluminum back in 2018<\/a>, tariffs which Biden recently expanded slightly<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974<\/a> gives a similar power to impose tariffs based on unfair trade practices by foreign nations on the advice of the Office of the US Trade Representative. Trump used this power to impose sweeping tariffs against China<\/a>. Biden has made liberal use of this power, too, expanding tariffs<\/a> on steel, batteries, solar cells, and electric vehicles from China<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, there\u2019s Section 201<\/a> of that same 1974 law, which allows tariffs against imports that \u201cseriously injured or threatened \u2026 serious injury\u201d to domestic companies. Trump and Biden have used this to justify tariffs on washing machines and solar cells<\/a> from most countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even if Trump couldn\u2019t implement a full 10 percent tariff on all imports with his executive powers \u2014 because the previous authorities apply only to specific industries or specific countries \u2014 he could make a lot of progress toward that goal. His 60 percent tariff on all Chinese imports, for instance, may very well be possible because it\u2019s narrowly targeted at one nation. He and Biden have proven that the president can, without Congress, raise taxes on imports very significantly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I happen to think most of both Trump and Biden\u2019s tariffs were wrongheaded and that Trump\u2019s plan for more sweeping tariffs amounts to a significant tax increase on the poor and middle class<\/a> that would hurt US exports<\/a>, invite retaliation from other countries, harm America\u2019s international reputation, and fail to create<\/a> any jobs for people<\/a> who need them. (Vice President Kamala Harris has attacked the Trump tariff plan as a \u201csales tax\u201d<\/a> but hasn\u2019t disavowed Biden\u2019s tariff policies.)”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy\/374102\/trump-harris-tariffs-congress<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“The signature policy proposal of Donald Trump\u2019s third campaign for the presidency is a tariff: a tax of 60 percent imposed on all imports from China and 10 percent on imports from any other country. Not only does he want this tax hike, which would raise about $291 billion or 1 percent of GDP when fully implemented, but he says he\u2019ll do it unilaterally. \u201cI don\u2019t need Congress, but they\u2019ll approve it,\u201d Trump declared at a September 23 rally. \u201cI\u2019ll have the right to impose them myself if they don\u2019t.\u201d
\nThis is a rather enormous policy change for a president to undertake unilaterally, and one of dubious legality. For comparison, the hike Trump is considering is over twice as large as the tax increases used to fund Obamacare. (And make no mistake \u2014 tariffs are tax increases.) Experts like former World Trade Organization (WTO) deputy director-general Alan Wm. Wolff have argued that no law passed by Congress gives the president the power to levy across-the-board tariffs along the lines Trump proposes.<\/p>\n

Even so, Congress has given the executive branch a remarkable amount of flexibility to set tariffs. This is a mistake. Members of Congress, whether or not they support Trump\u2019s tariff plans, should be able to agree on this much: As the Constitution lays out in the taxing clause, it\u2019s Congress\u2019s job to set taxing and spending policy for the United States. It\u2019s been that way for the US\u2019s whole history, it\u2019s the traditional role of legislatures in all democratic countries, and putting this power instead in the president\u2019s hands cuts the people\u2019s representatives out of the process of determining how they are taxed \u2014 a concept that goes back to before the American Revolution.”<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“The presidential power to impose tariffs does not originate from a simple bill or program; rather, it slowly accreted over time, with a particular expansion over the past decade as the Trump administration rediscovered authorities in old laws that enabled it to wage a trade war with China and protect the steel industry.<\/p>\n

Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, for instance, gives the president the right to levy tariffs upon the secretary of commerce\u2019s recommendation without asking Congress. This was the authority Trump used to slap tariffs on steel and aluminum back in 2018, tariffs which Biden recently expanded slightly.<\/p>\n

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 gives a similar power to impose tariffs based on unfair trade practices by foreign nations on the advice of the Office of the US Trade Representative. Trump used this power to impose sweeping tariffs against China. Biden has made liberal use of this power, too, expanding tariffs on steel, batteries, solar cells, and electric vehicles from China.<\/p>\n

Finally, there\u2019s Section 201 of that same 1974 law, which allows tariffs against imports that \u201cseriously injured or threatened \u2026 serious injury\u201d to domestic companies. Trump and Biden have used this to justify tariffs on washing machines and solar cells from most countries.<\/p>\n

Even if Trump couldn\u2019t implement a full 10 percent tariff on all imports with his executive powers \u2014 because the previous authorities apply only to specific industries or specific countries \u2014 he could make a lot of progress toward that goal. His 60 percent tariff on all Chinese imports, for instance, may very well be possible because it\u2019s narrowly targeted at one nation. He and Biden have proven that the president can, without Congress, raise taxes on imports very significantly.<\/p>\n

I happen to think most of both Trump and Biden\u2019s tariffs were wrongheaded and that Trump\u2019s plan for more sweeping tariffs amounts to a significant tax increase on the poor and middle class that would hurt US exports, invite retaliation from other countries, harm America\u2019s international reputation, and fail to create any jobs for people who need them. (Vice President Kamala Harris has attacked the Trump tariff plan as a \u201csales tax\u201d but hasn\u2019t disavowed Biden\u2019s tariff policies.)”<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy\/374102\/trump-harris-tariffs-congress<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[221,217,165,272,355,314,966,208,141,170],"class_list":["post-15059","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-share","tag-donald-trump","tag-economics","tag-economy","tag-foreign-affairs","tag-foreign-policy","tag-international-relations","tag-kamala-harris","tag-tariffs","tag-taxes","tag-trump"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15059","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15059"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15059\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15060,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15059\/revisions\/15060"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15059"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15059"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15059"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}