Category: Taxes

Trump Threatens 100% Canada Tariffs Over China Trade Deal

President Trump threatened Canada with 100 percent tariffs on all goods if Prime Minister Mark Carney proceeds with a strategic partnership deal with China. Trump wrote on Truth Social that Canada would become a “Drop Off Port” for Chinese products entering the U.S. market, claiming China would “eat Canada alive” and destroy its economy if such an agreement moved forward. Trump’s threat directly contradicted his earlier public statement that Carney “should be doing” and that a trade deal would be “a good thing for him to sign.”

Carney announced the China partnership earlier this month, which includes plans for China to lower canola tariffs to 15 percent by March 1, while Canada permits 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles into its market. The agreement emerged following Carney’s first visit to China by a Canadian prime minister in nearly a decade and focuses on expanding trade in agriculture, energy, and finance between the two nations.

Trump’s tariff threat followed Carney’s speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where the prime minister warned of “an era of great power rivalry” and declared that the U.S.-led global order was finished and “not coming back.” Without naming Trump directly, Carney’s remarks functioned as a direct rebuke of the president’s tariff regime, his previous demands to annex Canada as the 51st state, and his efforts to acquire Greenland.

Days after Carney’s speech, Trump retaliated by disinviting Canada from his newly established “Board of Peace,” which he described as “the most prestigious Board of Leaders ever assembled.” Trump wrote on Truth Social that the board was “withdrawing its invitation” to Canada, contradicting earlier reports that Carney had planned to accept membership in the organization, which Trump positioned as central to addressing Gaza.

Trump’s escalating threats demonstrate his use of tariffs and exclusion as political weapons against allies who pursue independent diplomatic initiatives. The confrontation underscores Trump’s demand for absolute deference from neighboring nations and his willingness to weaponize trade policy against countries that resist his territorial and geopolitical ambitions.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-tariffs-china-canada-carney-deal-b2906976.html)

Trump Suggests Switzerland Tariffs Stemmed From Friction With Swiss President – The New York Times

President Trump disclosed that he imposed a 39 percent tariff on Switzerland in August 2024 after a personal dispute with then-President Karin Keller-Sutter during a phone call he characterized as adversarial. Trump stated he initially planned a 30 percent rate but increased it to 39 percent after Keller-Sutter repeatedly objected, saying her repetitive pushback and aggressive tone “rubbed me the wrong way.” The tariff far exceeded rates negotiated with the European Union at 15 percent and Britain at 10 percent, revealing that personal friction—not trade policy analysis—determined the rate.

Trump recounted that Keller-Sutter emphasized Switzerland’s small size and inability to absorb such tariffs, to which Trump responded by referencing the U.S. trade deficit with the country. The Swiss central bank had noted that gold bullion and bars—which comprised roughly two-thirds of Swiss exports to the United States at that time—should not be counted in trade balance calculations, undermining Trump’s rationale. Trump’s acknowledgment that the tariff was retaliatory rather than economically justified contradicts any legitimate trade policy framework.

After the rate hike, Trump said “all hell really broke out” and that Rolex and other Swiss representatives lobbied to reduce the tariff. Trump eventually cut the rate to 15 percent, matching the European Union’s rate. Keller-Sutter’s presidential term ended in December, and Trump later remarked that Switzerland exists only because of U.S. support, stating “They’re only good because of us,” a comment that prompted gasps from World Economic Forum attendees in Davos.

Trump’s public explanation reveals how personal grievance and authoritarian impulse shape his trade decisions rather than coherent economic strategy. Using tariffs as punishment for perceived disrespect weaponizes trade policy as a tool for enforcing personal loyalty, establishing a pattern where foreign leaders must defer to Trump’s demands or face economic retaliation regardless of factual merit or proportionality.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/21/us/politics/trump-switzerland-tariffs-personal-friction.html)

Trump Denies $2K Tariff Check Promise Despite November Announcement

President Trump denied making a promise to distribute $2,000 tariff rebate checks to Americans when questioned by The New York Times on January 11, 2026, asking “When did I do that?” despite having publicly introduced the idea in early November 2026 on Truth Social. Trump later acknowledged the checks were planned, stating the tariff revenue collected is “so substantial” that he would issue $2,000 checks “toward the end of the year,” and claimed no Congressional approval would be required.

In November, Trump announced Americans would receive “a dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high-income people!)” funded by tariff collections he claimed would reach “Trillions of Dollars.” The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated the government would need approximately $600 billion to issue such checks. However, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told ABC News on November 12 that he and Trump had not discussed the tariff rebate possibility, and later advised Americans to save the funds to avoid inflation.

Trump’s tariff policy faces legal scrutiny, with cases pending before the Supreme Court regarding whether the tariffs violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Trump previously falsely attributed $1,776 “Warrior Dividend” payments to service members to tariff revenue, when the funds actually derived from Congressional appropriations. If the Supreme Court rules the tariffs illegal, the Treasury Department would refund approximately $774 billion collected, with repayment potentially spread over weeks or a year.

Trump’s claim to unilaterally distribute tariff revenue without Congressional approval contradicts established fiscal law requiring legislative authorization for government expenditures. The shifting timeline—from an undefined date in November to “toward the end of the year” in January—and his initial denial of the promise demonstrate the absence of a concrete plan. Trump has similarly made unilateral economic directives without legislative or procedural authorization, including ordering representatives to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds to lower housing costs.

The discrepancy between Trump’s initial November announcement and his January denial, combined with the absence of a detailed distribution mechanism and Bessent’s explicit contradiction, indicates the tariff rebate remains an unfulfilled campaign-style promise dependent on uncertain tariff collections and unresolved legal challenges to the tariff policy itself.

(Source: https://people.com/trump-asks-when-did-i-do-that-when-asked-about-sending-americans-2k-tariff-checks-11884184?utm_campaign=peoplemagazine&utm_content=photo&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_term=6965c2e5490dd2000189e8c3&fbclid=IwdGRleAPS4wpleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeFyrAxSrIgq2CeX5Yw6brG7rJkPekajqBm2cQ5dveBEOMvcqnR6VLAQwzp3M_aem_ljbHllP-Gcm_wwfEaMjG6Q)

Trump Rages Over the Stock Market’s ‘TRUMP RULE’

President Trump attributed positive economic data to his tariff policies while simultaneously blaming the Federal Reserve and “Wall Street heads” for failing to celebrate economic growth with corresponding stock market gains. The Commerce Department reported fourth-quarter GDP growth of 4.3%, exceeding economist forecasts of 3.2%, yet Trump characterized this as evidence of a broken market system he labeled “The Trump Rule,” where good news triggers market stagnation or decline due to trader concerns about potential interest rate increases.

Trump demanded the next Federal Reserve Chair lower rates during periods of market strength and stated anyone disagreeing with this position would be disqualified from the role, targeting incumbent Jerome Powell by name. He claimed the current Fed structure prevents economic greatness and prevents the nation from achieving GDP gains of “10, 15, and even 20 points in a year.” His demands directly contradict the Federal Reserve’s statutory independence from presidential direction in setting monetary policy.

Trump’s public grievance contradicts standard economic principles: markets respond to inflation expectations, and Fed rate decisions reflect data rather than political pressure. His characterization of Federal Reserve officials as “eggheads” and his assertion that the market “should” rise on good news and fall on bad news disregards the complex relationship between growth, inflation, and monetary policy that shapes investor behavior.

Trump’s stated intention to replace Powell and reshape the Federal Reserve’s leadership around personal economic preferences represents an effort to subordinate an independent institution to presidential demands. This pressure campaign directly undermines the structural autonomy the Federal Reserve requires to manage inflation without regard to short-term political consequences or equity market performance.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump/trump-rages-over-the-stock-markets-trump-rule-amid-good-economic-news/)

Trump Claims He’s Finding Money That Doesn’t Exist

President Donald Trump recently claimed that his administration is discovering previously unseen money, particularly from tariffs, during a bizarre press interaction. When asked about renegotiating the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), Trump misrepresented the expiration date, incorrectly stating that it would end in a year; in fact, it remains valid until 2036.

Trump went on to make unfounded assertions about “finding money” through tariffs he imposed, referencing an imaginary $30 billion that he claimed came from the “tariff shelf.” This chaotic narrative included Trump suggesting that officials confirmed to him that the tariffs were unexpectedly generating revenue, even though they were reportedly set to commence later.

The president expressed his hope that the Supreme Court would uphold the legality of his tariffs, despite skepticism from several justices regarding the extent of the president’s unilateral authority to impose them. Dismissing those who challenge his tariff policies, Trump labeled them as “bad people,” showcasing his typical incendiary rhetoric.

These comments reflect Trump’s continuing trend of misleading statements regarding economic policies and their implications, raising questions about the veracity of his claims amid increasing scrutiny of his administration’s economic practices.

As political observers note, Trump’s attempts to paint a rosy economic picture are at odds with the realities of national debt and the complex nature of trade agreements, further emphasizing the need for accountable governance.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/tv/trump-bizarrely-claims-his-administration-is-finding-money-that-nobody-realized-ever-existed/)

Trump’s Panic as Supreme Court Reviews His Tariffs

President Donald Trump launched into a frantic tirade on social media, calling on his supporters to pray for the Supreme Court’s favorable ruling on his tariff policies. During this rant, he labeled critics of his trade approach as “evil, American hating forces,” demonstrating his growing desperation as legal challenges threaten his presidency.

Trump claimed that his implementation of tariffs has restored America’s international respect, saying, “Without which we would be a poor and pathetic laughingstock again.” Experts, however, predict that the Supreme Court may find his tariffs illegal, which could lead to significant financial repercussions and calls for the U.S. to return collected revenues.

The president’s assertions hinge on the argument that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act provides him with expansive authority to impose tariffs during perceived emergencies. Trump’s rhetoric indicates a fear that losing these tariffs could lead to a weakening of the U.S. economy, with warnings that it could fall to “almost Third World status.”

His social media posts touted claims of economic strength, boasting about low inflation and high stock market performance, while framing the tariffs as critical to national security and economic prosperity. The contradictory stance shows Trump’s attempt to divert attention from the real threats posed by his policies.

This alarming display reveals a president unwilling to confront the legal ramifications tied to his trade decisions, instead resorting to emotional pleas and inflammatory language. As his reliance on tariffs faces scrutiny, Trump’s narrative becomes increasingly detached from economic realities and grounded in fearmongering.

Trump Repeals Tariffs on Beef and Coffee to Lower Grocery Prices

Donald Trump has announced the repeal of tariffs on beef, coffee, and tropical fruits, a move that appears driven by his desire to present an image of reducing grocery prices amidst growing inflation. This decision comes amid criticism that his past tariff impositions have severely affected various sectors, including agriculture. By lifting these tariffs, Trump seeks to lower consumer costs at the grocery store, a calculated move as public dissatisfaction over rising food prices grows.

Historically, Trump’s tariffs have faced backlash for harming American farmers and importers. In particular, his trade policies have adversely impacted sectors reliant on foreign goods. Now, the reversal on these tariffs may be seen as an attempt to shift blame for economic challenges away from his administration. Trump’s erratic approach to trade continues to complicate the agricultural landscape as he shifts strategies with minimal regard for the long-term implications.

Experts criticize this tactic, contending that these last-minute policy changes do little to address the intricate economic realities facing consumers. Tariffs were previously justified as a means to protect U.S. interests, but the sudden rollback raises questions about the motivations behind such a significant pivot. Observers speculate that this could be a mere electoral strategy ahead of upcoming elections, as Trump aims to mask the failures of his administration’s economic policy.

Additionally, Trump’s administration has been accused of mishandling agricultural relations, with a contradictory stance evident in his messaging. While he promotes lower prices now, many farmers are still reeling from previous tariffs imposed under his leadership. The agricultural community’s response remains tepid, showing skepticism about any real benefits from this policy change.

Overall, this move encapsulates Trump’s ongoing struggle to maintain control of his narrative around economic issues. It highlights his tendency to prioritize immediate political optics over consistent and effective policy-making. As Trump continues to navigate a fraught political landscape, this tariff rollback may ultimately serve more as a distraction than a solution.

Donald Trump Erupts Against Supreme Court

Donald Trump has publicly erupted against the Supreme Court as it deliberates his authority to impose tariffs. He expressed his frustration on his social media platform, Truth Social, questioning why he, as president, can enact measures as drastic as stopping all trade with a foreign nation but cannot impose tariffs for national security. This startling assertion reflects his misunderstanding of the foundational principles underpinning U.S. governance.

The Supreme Court recently began hearing arguments challenging Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to justify his tariffs, prompting skepticism among the justices about the legality of his claims. This critical judicial review suggests a growing concern regarding Trump’s interpretation of executive power and trade regulation, leading to increased public speculation about the possible outcomes.

Trump’s panicked response indicates significant anxiety over the potential judicial ruling against his tariff policy, which he has boasted is beneficial for American business. His erratic declarations imply that he views tariffs as essential for national economic health, despite the legal challenges they pose. This reflects his tendency to conflate policy success with personal legacy, often disregarding established legal frameworks.

In a fit of rage, Trump lamented that other nations can impose tariffs on the U.S. but not vice versa, suggesting a perceived bias in the judicial system. His failed logic demonstrates his ability to manipulate facts to mount a defense, even as the legal grounds for his actions remain dubious. The justices’ skepticism could lead to a decisive ruling undermining his administration’s tariff policies.

As the court weighs its options, Trump’s volatility raises questions about the implications of his policies. The outcome could potentially reshape his economic agenda and alter the trajectory of U.S. foreign trade relations. The anxious rhetoric Trump uses reflects an increasingly authoritarian grip on power, undermining the established checks and balances intended to preserve American democracy.

Trump’s 100% Tariff on Imported Chips Could Spike Prices and Undermine U.S. Manufacturing Efforts

Donald Trump has announced a controversial 100% tariff on imported computer chips unless tech companies build production facilities in the United States. This decision raises significant concerns regarding inflation and the cost of essential products, as many industries rely on these crucial components. Trump stated that while U.S.-based chip manufacturers would be exempt from the tariff, imported chips might lead to inflated prices for electronics and vehicles, further straining consumers already facing rising costs.

The announcement came as Trump met with Apple CEO Tim Cook, showcasing the growing influence of major tech companies on his policies. Trump’s comments followed a temporary exemption issued in response to the pandemic-induced chip shortage, which had previously been a catalyst for increasing prices across various sectors. Despite the potential economic impact, Wall Street reacted favorably to the news, with Apple’s stock price experiencing gains following the announcement.

Under Trump’s administration, there is a clear shift away from initiatives established during President Biden’s tenure aimed at reviving domestic chip production through the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act. This act allocated substantial funding to support the development of chip plants and associated research, contrasting sharply with Trump’s tariff approach that aims to compel companies to reassess their production strategies.

The repercussions of Trump’s tariff threats could extend beyond tech companies, increasing the prices of everyday items, including household appliances and vehicles. Critics warn that Trump’s methods could disrupt ongoing efforts to bolster domestic manufacturing capacity through cooperation with the private sector, as companies may be hesitant to respond favorably to punitive tariffs despite investing in new infrastructure.

As the global demand for computer chips continues to rise, with recent reports indicating a 19.6% increase in sales, Trump’s reliance on tariffs represents a gamble that could backfire. By prioritizing tariffs over comprehensive economic strategies, Trump’s approach risks undermining the collaborative efforts needed to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor industry while potentially exacerbating inflationary pressures on consumers.

Trump Administration Axes IRS Fraud Investigation Unit to Protect Billionaires

Under the leadership of President Donald Trump, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is dismantling critical components of federal oversight, particularly targeting the Department of Justice’s Tax Division. This move not only echoes Trump’s long-documented disdain for accountability but also serves the interests of wealthy elites, including himself and his billionaire cabinet members. By effectively closing down the Tax Division, DOGE continues to shield individuals like Trump from scrutiny, perpetuating a culture of corruption.

Recent reports suggest that this dismantling has already contributed to an estimated loss of over $500 billion in revenue that should have been collected by the IRS. This revenue loss is a direct result of the internal sabotage occurring within the IRS, highlighting how the Trump administration is prioritizing the protection of billionaires over essential public services. As Trump manages to pay a mere $750 in federal income taxes, the average citizen bears the burden of these financial shortfalls.

The implications of shuttering the Tax Division extend far beyond mere budgetary concerns; they strike at the very heart of public trust in government. By eliminating oversight mechanisms that are designed to investigate tax fraud among affluent individuals, including powerful political allies, Trump and his administration are instituting a rigged financial system that favors the wealthy. This not only undermines democracy but also exacerbates socioeconomic disparities.

Elon Musk’s involvement with DOGE and his close ties to Trump further complicate matters. Musk’s influence allows him to manipulate federal policies that drastically favor billionaires while simultaneously cutting essential programs that benefit ordinary Americans, such as public education and healthcare. This blatant prioritization of financial gain for the few over the welfare of the many exemplifies the unethical ethos perpetuated by Trump’s administration.

As the administration continues its assault on transparency and accountability, it becomes evident that these actions are not just operational adjustments but systematic efforts to reinforce oligarchy in America. The implications are clear: under Trump’s guidance, corruption and greed are thriving at the expense of democratic values and public service integrity.

(h/t: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/doge-to-shutter-doj-tax-division)

1 2 3 4