There will be a one to three month delay in increase in price due to the tariffs. For example, cars that are being sold right now we’re not imported today. They were imported months ago.

Bananas have already increased in prices.

The things that are gonna increase are every day items like toothpaste, soda in a can because of aluminum, shampoo, soap, toilet paper, paper towels, napkins.

The next will be increased in the cost of clothing. Fall clothes were imported in May before tariffs . You won’t see the increase until winter clothes.

Also wears the promise that everything was gonna drop in prices? We haven’t seen a drop in anything. Not eggs, not gas nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we are not big spenders, but we haven't seen any significant changes yet. So, no-nothing-burger at this point.

+100 all panic and then nothing just as I expected.

Have you been listening to this quarter’s earnings call? It’s not good.

Anonymous wrote:Suspect most of you are going to be disappointed come six months or next year. A persistent pattern on here, I've noticed.

As in.. the economy/stock market won't collapse and those on the sidelines will miss out?

Suspect most of you are going to be disappointed come six months or next year. A persistent pattern on here, I've noticed.

Anonymous wrote:When politicians eat rent seeking for breakfast, lunch and dinner be scared. Political appointees, if they are competent, can influence economic reports at our statistical agencies.

Do not be surprised if by the next midterms, this Admin attempt to change how CPI, GDP etc are calculated so they make the boss look good

CPI numbers are already not accurately calculated. The BLS cut back on staff and data collection. You can’t trust the numbers anymore.
https://fortune.com/2025/06/13/bls-data-federal-reserve-cpi-employment/

When politicians eat rent seeking for breakfast, lunch and dinner be scared. Political appointees, if they are competent, can influence economic reports at our statistical agencies.

Do not be surprised if by the next midterms, this Admin attempt to change how CPI, GDP etc are calculated so they make the boss look good

Trump's tariff deal with Japan has made US car manufacturers worse off. FAFO.

#The Art of the Really Stupid Deal
What the heck were the Trumpists thinking?
Paul Krugman
Jul 25

So far, these costs haven’t been fully passed on to consumers, probably in part because businesses have been expecting tariffs to come down. But once businesses see how high tariffs on Japan and Europe are after they’ve made deals, their willingness to absorb the tariffs rather than passing them on to consumers will evaporate.

So U.S. consumers will soon be suffering. But why are U.S. manufacturers so upset with the Japan deal? Because in combination with Trump’s other tariffs this deal actually leaves many U.S. manufacturers worse off than they were before Trump began his trade war.

This is clearest in the case of automobiles and automotive products. Trump has imposed a 25 percent tariff on all automotive imports, supposedly on national security grounds. This includes imports from Canada and Mexico. And here’s the thing: Canadian and Mexican auto products generally have substantial U.S. “content” — that is, they contain parts made in America. Japanese cars generally don’t.

But now cars from Japan will pay only a 15 percent tariff, that is, less than cars from Canada and Mexico.

OK, it’s not quite that straightforward, because imports from Canada and Mexico receive a partial exemption based on the share of their value that comes from the United States. Yes, it’s getting complicated. But we may nonetheless now be in a situation where cars whose production doesn’t create U.S. manufacturing jobs will pay a lower tariff rate than cars whose production does.

Wait, there’s more. Trump has also imposed 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum, which are of course important parts of the cost of a car. Japanese manufacturers don’t pay those tariffs.

Overall, the interaction between this Japan deal and Trump’s other tariffs probably tilts the playing field between U.S. and Japanese producers of cars, and perhaps other products, in Japan’s favor.

If this sounds incredibly stupid, that’s because it is.

Should be "the poorest" people, not the protest people.

Several people on my money saving Facebook groups are complaining about the rise in cost at Dollar Tree.

The protest people are absorbing more of the tariffs. Prices at the Dollar tree are doubling or tripling this month.

As the one pp said, I have read that some companies purchased ahead to keep prices down, but those inventories are now running out.

How price increases are adding up at Shein
Evidence for the impact of Trump’s trade war has shown up at the popular China-founded online retailer.
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-TRUMP/TARIFF-SHEIN/lbpgzlrjzvq/
By Kripa Jayaram and Arriana McLymore
Published July 25, 2025 06:00 AM EDT
Back in April, if you had ordered clothes from the popular Chinese-founded e-commerce website Shein, they would have reached your doorstep duty-free, thanks to to de minimis, a U.S. tariff exemption for goods valued $800 or less.

But that’s no longer the case. On May 2, the Trump administration ended the U.S. duty-free access for low-value shipments from China and Hong Kong, which had exploded in number in recent years.

Those shipments, often from popular overseas retailers like Shein and Temu, are now subject to tariffs, currently around 30%. Nearly two months since the exemption vanished, American consumers have started to feel the impact as prices begin to rise.

To see how much prices have changed, Reuters tracked the prices of nearly 200 items on Shein’s U.S.-facing website from April 24, the day before Shein announced its first price increases, to July 22. The data shows one example of how the U.S.’s new trade policies are passing costs onto consumers.

Anonymous wrote:I work in manufacturing. Don't worry! The price increases are coming.
Many of our suppliers overbought prior to the crazy tariffs and are just now coming to the end of their stock.

My finished product still has a few left that don't need a tariff becuase they were in stock. Starting in Sept--price increases for everyone.

Winning.

Manufacturing what ? Can you add some details ?

I work in manufacturing. Don't worry! The price increases are coming.
Many of our suppliers overbought prior to the crazy tariffs and are just now coming to the end of their stock.

My finished product still has a few left that don't need a tariff becuase they were in stock. Starting in Sept--price increases for everyone.

Winning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only ray of hope is that at least one investment bank is making a big bet that the supreme court will strike down nearly all these tariffs as illegal.

The appeals court starts hearing arguments on 7/31 at which point they believe fairly quickly Trump will lose again, and then this gets kicked up to the Supreme Court for final say.

Trump already decisively lost round 1, 3-0 to a panel comprised of I think a Bush, Obama and Trump 1.0 panel of judges.

Dream on! The Supreme Court has been bought and paid for.. I'm not aware of the details of the arguments that helped the other side win at the appeals court, but I would have thought Tariffs are the purview of the Executive Branch.. Correct me if I'm wrong..

Tariffs in emergency situations are the purview of the President. So, during wartime you can impose tariffs on other countries.

The problem is that the current administration has been claiming that trade deficits are emergencies...even though we have had trade deficits since the beginning of time and yet people have been doing just fine, even great. Also, hard to justify imposing 50% tariffs on Brazil where we run a trade surplus. Finally, there are countries like Nicaragua which are one of the largest suppliers of bananas and to some extent coffee, where of course we run a trade deficit because they are a poor country and the US can't grow bananas or coffee or other tropical products.

I kind of agree with you for 2 justices...but the other 4 conservatives are fairly principled and it's fairly cut-and-dry that unilaterally imposing tariffs for no reason is 1000% not a conservative principle.

Is there any law that says Tariffs cannot be imposed during non-war times or such tariffs need the approval of congress?

I know that a lot of anti-trump people (me included) are against these tariffs but what if, by the time the case comes up at the Supreme Court, Trump is able to show positive outcomes - tariff revenue, lack of inflation (or controlled inflation), employment at normal levels, robust stock market, etc.? Do you think the SC will still want to undo the tariffs and associated "benefits"?

The groups brining the lawsuits can already show tremendous harm to their businesses from the tariffs. This isn't just some generic lawsuit philosophically against tariffs, but actual plaintiffs with documented harm to their businesses.

Yeah but that's not really the legal question- if they have harm from the tariffs, although yes agreed that does give them standing for sure. The legal question is how much of a justification the president has to give that the current situation gives him the emergency authority under the relevant laws where Congress delegated this authority under certain circumstances. Can he just declare something to be an emergency and that's enough? What if the reason is obviously false or completely irrelevant/misleading? How much leeway should the courts give to the Executive to assert this type of authority, generally?

We will probably not get much in the way of answers to those questions, because the Special Boy gets what he wants.

President Donald Trump’s trade deals are illegal, Piper Sandler flatly declares in a new research note. The investment bank analyzed ongoing court battles and legislative authority, and concluded that Trump’s reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose wide-ranging tariffs and cut bilateral deals far exceeds the powers granted by Congress.

It’s not a new opinion from Piper, necessarily—the bank laid out its reasoning in April, shortly after Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement of universal tariffs under the IEEPA. Then, as now, it sees a 9–0 ruling in the Supreme Court against Trump as more likely than a Trump win.

The reason that the Piper Sandler team of Andy Laperriere, Don Schneider, and Melissa Turner is revisiting the subject is that oral arguments in these and similar cases are scheduled through September. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will hear oral arguments on whether Trump truly has unlimited authority under the IEEPA to impose tariffs on Thursday, July 31. Piper Sandler forecasts that appellate courts will issue rulings over the next several months.

“Trump will probably continue to lose in the lower courts, and we believe the Supreme Court is highly unlikely to rule in his favor,” the bank said.

According to Piper Sandler, the heart of the matter is congressional intent. As it did in April, the firm argues that the IEEPA, enacted in 1977, was designed to give the president certain emergency economic powers, but not blanket authority to set tariffs. Courts have consistently rejected the idea that the statute includes such sweeping power.

Even recent bilateral deals, such as Trump’s agreement with Japan, do not cure the underlying legal flaw. Congress, not the president, holds the ultimate authority to impose tariffs and approve international trade agreements. Piper Sandler stresses, “Making a deal with another country has no bearing on the legality of Trump’s tariffs,” highlighting that executive-led deals absent congressional approval lack legal standing. “If Trump does not have the authority to impose tariffs he is claiming, it doesn’t matter whether he makes a deal with Japan or anyone else.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only ray of hope is that at least one investment bank is making a big bet that the supreme court will strike down nearly all these tariffs as illegal.

The appeals court starts hearing arguments on 7/31 at which point they believe fairly quickly Trump will lose again, and then this gets kicked up to the Supreme Court for final say.

Trump already decisively lost round 1, 3-0 to a panel comprised of I think a Bush, Obama and Trump 1.0 panel of judges.

Dream on! The Supreme Court has been bought and paid for.. I'm not aware of the details of the arguments that helped the other side win at the appeals court, but I would have thought Tariffs are the purview of the Executive Branch.. Correct me if I'm wrong..

Tariffs in emergency situations are the purview of the President. So, during wartime you can impose tariffs on other countries.

The problem is that the current administration has been claiming that trade deficits are emergencies...even though we have had trade deficits since the beginning of time and yet people have been doing just fine, even great. Also, hard to justify imposing 50% tariffs on Brazil where we run a trade surplus. Finally, there are countries like Nicaragua which are one of the largest suppliers of bananas and to some extent coffee, where of course we run a trade deficit because they are a poor country and the US can't grow bananas or coffee or other tropical products.

I kind of agree with you for 2 justices...but the other 4 conservatives are fairly principled and it's fairly cut-and-dry that unilaterally imposing tariffs for no reason is 1000% not a conservative principle.

Is there any law that says Tariffs cannot be imposed during non-war times or such tariffs need the approval of congress?

I know that a lot of anti-trump people (me included) are against these tariffs but what if, by the time the case comes up at the Supreme Court, Trump is able to show positive outcomes - tariff revenue, lack of inflation (or controlled inflation), employment at normal levels, robust stock market, etc.? Do you think the SC will still want to undo the tariffs and associated "benefits"?

The groups brining the lawsuits can already show tremendous harm to their businesses from the tariffs. This isn't just some generic lawsuit philosophically against tariffs, but actual plaintiffs with documented harm to their businesses.