Since returning to the White House, President Trump’s implementation of double-digit tariffs on imports has significantly altered U.S. trade policy. These tariffs, aimed at reducing the trade deficit and boosting domestic manufacturing, have increased the effective tariff rate to its highest level since 1935, reaching nearly 17% by November. While the tariffs have generated substantial revenue for the U.S. Treasury and contributed to a narrowing trade deficit, the disruption to global supply chains has impacted trade with major partners like China, and led to significant market volatility.
Read More
Ohio farmers see one-year, 74% loss in Chinese sales due largely to Trump tariffs, a situation that really puts things into perspective. It’s almost unbelievable, isn’t it? A massive drop in sales, a huge chunk of their market just vanishing. And the main culprit? The tariffs, those taxes on imports, that were a cornerstone of the previous administration’s trade policy.
Now, imagine being an Ohio farmer. You’ve got your land, your crops, your livelihood, and suddenly a massive buyer, like China, drastically reduces its purchases. That’s a huge hit to the bottom line, a significant disruption to your business. The numbers don’t lie – a 74% decrease in a single year is a staggering blow.… Continue reading
According to a new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee (JEC), the average US household has paid $1,200 in tariff costs over the past 10 months due to President Trump’s trade policies. This amount is derived from official US Treasury Department data on tariff revenue, and is expected to continue to rise. Democrats, including Senator Maggie Hassan, have criticized the tariffs, arguing they contradict Trump’s promise to lower costs for families. Furthermore, the JEC projects that if current tariff levels remain, families will pay $2,100 annually, compounding the financial strain felt by many Americans.
Read More
Trump signs order to remove tariffs from Brazilian beef, coffee, and it’s a bit of a head-scratcher, isn’t it? It’s like, he slapped these tariffs on in the first place, seemingly without a clear plan, and now he’s removing them. It’s a classic case of self-inflicted wounds, only to then pose as the hero who mended them. You have to wonder, was this some grand strategic masterstroke, or just another instance of someone improvising their way through a complicated situation?
The whole situation seems to have been tied to the political landscape, particularly with Brazil’s former president, Bolsonaro. Now, with Bolsonaro facing legal troubles, it almost feels like the tariffs were some kind of leverage play that ultimately didn’t work out as planned.… Continue reading
President Trump has recently reversed course on his previous tariff policies by removing tariffs on over 200 agricultural staples, including beef and coffee, a move celebrated by some of his supporters. This decision follows the initial imposition of tariffs on food products in April, a move that was praised for its support of American food production. The change has prompted criticism and irony, as it contrasts with Trump’s historical support for tariffs. The decision to lower tariffs comes as Americans are dealing with increased food costs, with prices of staples like coffee and beef rising significantly in recent months, potentially influenced by recent Democratic wins on the topic of affordability.
Read More
In response to rising inflation concerns, President Trump signed an executive order on Friday to lower tariffs on various food imports, including beef and coffee. This decision retroactively removes duties imposed earlier in the year, representing a significant change in stance for the President. The move comes amidst growing concerns about high grocery prices, with Democrats criticizing the administration for creating and then attempting to fix the problem. Additionally, the order follows recent framework trade deals aimed at eliminating tariffs on certain food imports from specific countries.
Read More
The U.S. Senate did vote in late October 2025 to end President Trump’s tariffs on Canadian and Brazilian imports, as well as global tariffs he had imposed. These actions were part of a broader effort to repeal Trump’s trade policies. The votes saw four Republican senators joining Democrats on each resolution. Although the Senate passed the three joint resolutions, they were unlikely to be brought to a vote in the House of Representatives at that time.
Read More
The Supreme Court hearing regarding the Trump administration’s tariffs was heavily criticized, with six justices expressing strong disapproval of the Justice Department’s defense. Observers noted the court’s apparent frustration with the government’s arguments, suggesting a swift and decisive ruling could have been made. Mark Joseph Stern of Slate highlighted the anticipation surrounding the court’s stance on presidential power, suggesting a dislike of taxes may have influenced their decision.
Read More
The Supreme Court Justices on Wednesday, expressed considerable skepticism regarding the legality of the aggressive tariffs imposed by the Trump administration. Justices questioned the administration’s justification for enacting the tariffs, with both conservative and liberal justices scrutinizing the process. The core of the legal challenge centers on whether the tariffs, levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, overstepped the President’s authority and infringed on Congress’s power to tax, as lower courts have ruled. If allowed to stand, the tariffs could generate trillions in revenue, highlighting the potential fiscal impact.
Read More
The Supreme Court is hearing a case regarding President Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose tariffs, a move with significant implications for the global economy. The administration defends the tariffs, arguing they are permissible under emergency law, while challengers, including small businesses and Democratic-leaning states, claim the president overstepped his authority. The core dispute revolves around whether the 1977 emergency powers law grants the president the authority to unilaterally levy tariffs, a power constitutionally reserved for Congress. A ruling against Trump could impact the $195 billion in revenue generated by the tariffs and potentially set the tone for future legal challenges to his policies, despite Trump having appointed a conservative majority to the court.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood