Presidential Power (US)

Latest story

125 Shares99 Views

Tariff Ruling Gives Businesses Hope, but They’re Soon Unmoored Again

by

Companies welcomed a court decision striking down President Trump’s tariffs. Then a stay of that ruling left no one breathing easy.Emma Mcilroy’s apparel company, Wildfang, had been working overtime to move its production out of China in the months since President Trump launched his trade war. Finding another factory that could produce jumpsuits and button-downs — while every other U.S. importer was also jockeying for space — was a huge drain on the 11-person staff’s attention.But when Ms. Mcilroy saw on Wednesday night that a federal court had ruled most of Mr. Trump’s tariffs illegal, all of that work paused. Would the tariffs be gone when her next shipment arrived in August, or not?“I have absolutely no idea where it’s going. I am learning in real time how to run my business,” Ms. Mcilroy said Thursday. “Yesterday I would’ve told you, ‘Yes, absolutely, you’re going to see me manufacturing stuff in Vietnam.’ Today I’m not sure.”American businesses are rapidly digesting the latest twist in Mr. Trump’s roller-coaster trade war, which has made it impossible to plan more than a few weeks in advance. It’s particularly hard on industries that place their orders entire seasons ahead of time.The details of Wednesday’s decision seemed likely to bring relief. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that the Trump administration had acted illegally in using an emergency powers law to impose 30 percent tariffs on goods from China, 25 percent tariffs on most goods from Mexico and Canada, and 10 percent on everyone else. The court gave the White House 10 days to halt the new duties.Hours later, a higher court stayed the decision.If the initial ruling sticks, it will preclude the return of steeper “reciprocal” tariffs that Mr. Trump paused for 90 days in early April. It might even allow companies that have paid the emergency tariffs over the past several months to claim refunds, already an established process at Customs and Border Protection.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 75 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariffs Prompt Wave of Lawsuits

    by

    The cases are the latest test of the president’s expansive claims of executive power.Somewhere along a roughly 7,500-mile journey that begins in Shenzhen, China, there are 19 shipments bound for Rick Woldenberg, the chief executive of Learning Resources, an educational toy company in Vernon Hills, Ill.Eventually, the containers of puzzle cards, child binoculars and other products will reach a port in the United States, and Mr. Woldenberg will face a difficult and expensive decision. He can pay the sky-high tariffs that President Trump has imposed on most foreign goods, or forgo at least some of the much-needed inventory, perhaps imperiling his bottom line.Mr. Woldenberg expects to do a bit of both. But he has also opted for a more aggressive course of action, joining a growing roster of opponents now legally challenging Mr. Trump’s ability to issue some of the tariffs in the first place.Nearly four weeks into a costly global trade war with no end in sight, Mr. Trump is facing a barrage of lawsuits from state officials, small businesses and even once-allied political groups, all contending that the president cannot sidestep Congress and tax virtually any import at levels to his liking.The lawsuits carry great significance, not just because the tariffs have roiled financial markets and threatened to plunge the United States into a recession. The legal challenges also stand to test Mr. Trump’s claims of expansive presidential power, while illustrating the difficult calculation that his opponents face in deciding whether to fight back and risk retribution.None of the lawsuits filed this month are supported by major business lobbying groups, even though many organizations — including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable — have been sharply critical of the president’s tariffs and lobbied to lessen their impact. The chamber privately debated bringing a lawsuit, but ultimately decided it was “not the best course of action at this time,” said Neil Bradley, the executive vice president of the group.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariff Reversal Calms Some G.O.P. Nerves, but Questions Linger

    by

    President Trump’s whipsawing tariff policy has prompted bipartisan alarm on Capitol Hill, where Democrats are outraged and Republicans are caught between their deep opposition to tariffs and fear of criticizing Mr. Trump.The president’s abrupt announcement on Wednesday that he would halt most of his reciprocal tariffs for 90 days just a week after announcing them allayed the immediate concerns of some G.O.P. lawmakers, many of whom rushed to praise Mr. Trump for what they characterized as deal-making mastery.But behind those statements was a deep well of nervousness among Republican lawmakers who are hearing angst from their constituents and donors about the impact of Mr. Trump’s trade moves on the financial markets and the economy. Some of them have begun signing onto measures that would end the tariffs altogether or claw back Congress’s power to block the president from imposing such levies in the future.“I’m just trying to figure out whose throat I get to choke if it’s wrong, and who I put up on a platform and thank them for the novel approach that was successful if they’re right,” Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, said of the sweeping tariffs on Tuesday during a hearing with Jamieson Greer, the Trump administration’s top trade official.On Wednesday, after Mr. Trump pulled back most of the tariffs but retained a 10 percent tariff rate for most countries and announced additional penalties on China, Mr. Tillis still sounded anxious. He said the move was likely to “reduce some of the escalation,” but added that there was still considerable work to be done to prevent another market meltdown.“We’ve got to get a deal before we get rid of uncertainty,” he told reporters soon after Mr. Trump announced the change in a social media post.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Tests Fed’s Independence With Order Expanding Authority Over Agencies

    by

    The Federal Reserve’s independence from the White House has long been enshrined in the law. But an executive order that President Trump signed this week seeking to extend his administration’s reach over independent agencies is prompting concerns about how much further he will go to challenge that separation.Mr. Trump’s directive took aim at regulatory agencies that had typically operated with limited political interference as authorized by Congress.The order partly shielded the Fed by exempting the central bank’s decisions on interest rates. Those are voted on at every meeting by seven presidentially appointed members of the Board of Governors, who typically serve 14-year terms, as well as a rotating set of five presidents from the regional reserve banks.But the order sought to exert authority over how the Fed oversees Wall Street, decisions that are ratified with majority support by the board.The order was the president’s latest attempt to centralize the executive branch’s power over the government. It requires independent organizations to submit proposed rule changes to the White House for review and gives the Office of Management and Budget oversight of how these institutions spend funds and set priorities. It also asserts that the president’s and the Justice Department’s interpretations of the law are binding and that alternative interpretations require authorization.The expansive nature of the order has raised questions about whether Mr. Trump’s decree is legally applicable to an institution like the Fed. It has also fueled speculation that the president — who has a history of trying to influence the central bank’s decision on interest rates — may eventually turn his scrutiny to monetary policy decisions.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Moves to Invalidate Recent Labor Agreements With Federal Workers

    by

    In the latest effort to put his stamp on the federal work force, President Trump on Friday issued a memorandum invalidating government labor contracts finalized in the last 30 days before a presidential inauguration.The policy applies to certain contracts negotiated toward the end of the Biden administration, the memo says. Such “last-minute, lame-duck” agreements, it states, “are purposefully designed to circumvent the will of the people” and “inhibit the President’s authority to manage the executive branch.”Unions at several agencies rushed to negotiate collective bargaining agreements ahead of Mr. Trump’s inauguration to preserve some practices of the previous administration, like remote work, and insulate them from changes that could make it easier to fire civil servants.The memo appears to allude to such practices, which it calls “inefficient and ineffective,” and cites an agreement with the Education Department that attempts to preserve remote work arrangements. The memo says the agreements could be undone if they have not yet been approved by an “applicable” agency head.Other agencies, like the Social Security Administration, approved new collective bargaining agreements outside the 30-day window, presumably leaving them unaffected by the memo.It was unclear if the memo would survive legal pushback initiated by federal employee unions, though it appeared to anticipate legal challenges, noting that it should remain in force if a portion alluding to prohibited bargaining agreements from the Biden administration is found to be invalid.“Federal employees should know that approved union contracts are enforceable by law, and the president does not have the authority to make unilateral changes to those agreements,” Everett Kelley, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said in a statement. “Members will not be intimidated. If our contracts are violated, we will aggressively defend them.” More