Category: Trade

Trump Yanks Hurd Endorsement Over Tariff Opposition

President Donald Trump withdrew his endorsement of Representative Jim Hurd (R-CO) on Saturday via Truth Social, citing the congressman’s opposition to Trump’s tariff policies. Hurd voted for H.J.Res.72, which seeks to terminate Trump’s 25% tariff on Canadian goods, an action Trump characterized as betrayal of the country.

Trump claimed this was only the second time he has yanked an endorsement, the first being ex-Representative Mo Brooks (R-AL) in 2022 after Brooks questioned Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election. In his Saturday post, Trump stated Hurd “let me and our Country down” by prioritizing foreign interests over American ones, describing the congressman as more loyal to countries “ripping us off for decades” than to the United States.

Trump immediately endorsed Hope Scheppelman, a Navy veteran and nurse, as Hurd’s replacement in Colorado’s 3rd District. Trump praised Scheppelman as someone who “will never let you down,” contrasting her with what he called a “RINO” (Republican in Name Only) in Hurd. This endorsement shift demonstrates Trump’s willingness to weaponize party support to enforce loyalty to his tariff agenda.

The withdrawal follows Trump’s earlier threats against six Republican members of Congress who opposed his tariff policies, with Trump declaring they would “seriously suffer the consequences come Election time.” The move underscores Trump’s pattern of using primary challenges and endorsement reversals to punish Republicans who defy his economic agenda, effectively demanding absolute loyalty over independent legislative judgment.

Trump’s action came one day after the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that his tariff authority exceeded his statutory power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Trump attacked the justices who ruled against him as “unpatriotic and disloyal,” demonstrating his broader campaign to punish any institution or individual who challenges his authority.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-yanks-endorsement-for-republican-lawmaker-for-second-time-ever-over-lack-of-support-for-tariffs/)

Trump Escalates Global Tariffs to 15% After Court

Donald Trump announced a 15% global tariff effective immediately on Saturday via Truth Social, escalating from the 10% levy he imposed Friday after the Supreme Court struck down his reciprocal tariff policy. Trump claimed the higher rate was “fully allowed, and legally tested,” attacking the court’s decision as “ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American” while asserting countries have been “ripping off” the United States for decades.

The British Chambers of Commerce condemned the increase as damaging to UK businesses, warning that the additional 5% tariff on most British exports would harm trade, US consumers, and global economic growth. William Bain, head of trade policy at the BCC, stated the announcement proved their fears that Trump’s backup plan would be worse than his initial proposal and called for businesses to receive “clarity and certainty” rather than escalating tariffs.

Britain had negotiated the lowest initial rate of 10% under a deal between Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Trump, with carve-outs protecting steel, automobiles, and pharmaceuticals. The UK government indicated it expected these preferential arrangements to remain intact under the new 15% framework, though officials acknowledged uncertainty about the tariff’s full implications for British trade.

Trump bypassed Congress by signing an executive order Friday invoking emergency powers after the Supreme Court overturned his reciprocal tariffs policy, allowing him to unilaterally increase import taxes. His escalation to 15% followed his public attacks on Supreme Court justices as “unpatriotic and disloyal” for blocking his previous tariff authority.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/president-donald-trump-keir-starmer-government-uk-government-b2925023.html)

Trump Threatens GOP Tariff Dissenters With Primary Challenges

President Donald Trump threatened Republican members of Congress with primary challenges and electoral defeat if they vote against his tariff policies, declaring they will “seriously suffer the consequences come Election time.” Trump made the threat on Truth Social after six GOP representatives—Don Bacon of Nebraska, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Jeff Hurd of Colorado, Kevin Kiley of California, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and Dan Newhouse of Washington—joined Democrats in voting to block his emergency tariffs on Canada.

Trump justified the tariffs by citing stock market gains and claimed they reduced the trade deficit by 78 percent, asserting that tariffs provide both economic and national security benefits. He stated that “no Republican should be responsible for destroying this privilege” and framed opposition as disloyalty to the party and the administration’s economic agenda.

Rep. Gregory Meeks, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, countered that the vote was straightforward: “stand with working families and lower costs, or keep prices high out of loyalty to Donald Trump.” Rep. Don Bacon defended his vote by writing that tariffs function as a tax on American consumers and that congressional debate should precede major trade policy decisions.

The nonpartisan Tax Foundation estimated that Trump’s tariffs imposed an average tax increase of $1,000 per U.S. household in 2025 and warned costs could rise further if the policy continues. The tariffs have strained relations with major trading partners including Canada, Mexico, China, India, Brazil, and the European Union, triggering Canadian retaliatory boycotts of American goods.

Trump’s threat represents his pattern of weaponizing federal authority against officials and lawmakers who resist his demands, extending party discipline through electoral intimidation rather than policy persuasion.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-republicans-tariffs-threat-canada-b2918970.html)

Trump Blocks Bridge After Billionaire Competitor Meets Commerce Secretary

Donald Trump threatened to block Canada’s Gordie Howe International Bridge hours after Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick met privately with Detroit billionaire Matthew Moroun, who controls the competing Ambassador Bridge, according to The New York Times. Two officials briefed on the meeting confirmed Lutnick met with Moroun in Washington on Monday, and Lutnick subsequently spoke with Trump by phone about the matter.

The Moroun family has spent decades attempting to prevent the Gordie Howe bridge through litigation and lobbying, including a challenge that reached Canada’s Supreme Court. The family previously urged Trump to halt construction of the $4.7 billion publicly funded bridge, which will compete with the Ambassador Bridge for over $300 million in daily cross-border trade once operational.

Trump posted on Truth Social threatening to block the bridge unless Canada addressed “a long list of grievances,” according to the Times report published Tuesday. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Trump’s position by claiming he was “putting America’s interest first,” objecting to Canadian control of the bridge and land on both sides, and criticizing insufficient use of American-made materials.

The timing coincides with escalating tension between the nations since Trump’s election, during which he has questioned Canadian sovereignty and imposed tariffs on steel, lumber, and automobiles. The Gordie Howe bridge is fully financed by Canada and will be jointly operated by Canada and Michigan, making Trump’s threat an intervention in a cross-border infrastructure project already under construction.

(Source: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-canada-2675257271/)

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 Imposes 25% Tariff on Iran Trading Nations

President Trump announced a 25 percent tariff on all nations conducting business with Iran, declaring the measure “final and conclusive” via Truth Social without providing legal justification or implementation details. The White House offered no official documentation of the policy, declined to clarify its legal authority, and did not respond to requests for comment regarding scope or enforcement mechanisms.

Iran’s major trading partners—including China, Turkey, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and India—would face the tariffs under Trump’s declaration. China’s embassy immediately rejected the measure, stating it opposes “indiscriminate imposition of tariffs” and warning it would take “all necessary measures” to protect its interests, noting that “tariff wars and trade wars have no winners.”

The announcement coincides with Iran’s largest anti-government demonstrations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, driven by economic collapse and calls for systemic change. The U.S.-based rights group HRANA documented 599 deaths—510 protesters and 89 security personnel—since protests began on December 28, with Iran experiencing its gravest challenge to clerical rule in decades.

Trump has threatened military action against Iran while claiming to maintain diplomatic channels with opposition figures and Tehran’s leadership. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated diplomacy remains “the first option,” though Trump authorized U.S. military airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June and supported Israeli military strikes on Iran in 2025.

Trump’s tariff authority faces legal scrutiny as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to overturn broad sections of his existing tariffs. Iran exported goods to 147 trading partners in 2022 according to World Bank data, suggesting the tariff threat would disrupt extensive global commerce networks.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-iran-tariffs-china-trade-b2899268.html)

TACO strikes again: Italian pasta becomes the latest product to have tariffs slashed by Trump

President Donald Trump’s administration slashed proposed tariffs on Italian pasta manufacturers in January 2025, reducing rates from 92 percent to between 2 and 14 percent for specific companies and 9 percent for others. The Department of Commerce had initially accused 13 Italian pasta makers of unfair trade practices and “dumping” products below market rates, with La Molisana and Garofalo cited for failing to cooperate with pricing investigations. Italy’s government contested these allegations through its embassy in Washington, D.C., and the companies’ cooperation prompted the dramatic reversal.

Italy’s Foreign Ministry characterized the tariff reduction as recognition of the companies’ “constructive willingness to cooperate,” according to Reuters. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had expected her alignment with Trump to shield Italian companies from steep levies, making the initial high tariff proposal a source of political embarrassment. Italy’s pasta exports totaled approximately $4.7 billion in 2024, with the United States accounting for roughly $800 million of that revenue.

The pasta tariff reversal represents another rollback in Trump’s tariff regime, following a pattern critics label “Trump Always Chickens Out” (TACO). The administration delayed furniture and kitchen cabinet tariffs for one year on New Year’s Eve, removed tariffs from over 200 agricultural products in November, and announced a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs affecting Canada and Mexico earlier in 2025.

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett defended the reversals to CNBC and ABC News in November, claiming the policy shifts do not indicate failure and attributing price increases to factors beyond tariffs. The Trump administration maintains its tariff strategy remains intact despite the recurring delays and rollbacks.

Polling data demonstrates widespread consumer concerns about pricing: more than one-third of Trump’s own voters reported the cost of living as the worst they have experienced, according to a November Politico survey. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether Trump’s claim of emergency powers to impose tariffs by executive order is constitutional, with Trump warning the court in November against “serving hostile foreign interests” ahead of its ruling.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-tariffs-italy-pasta-taco-b2893225.html)

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.

1 2 3 … 12