Tariff Ruling Threatens a $2 Trillion Fiscal Hole in Trump Plan
(Bloomberg) — The court ruling that blocked much of President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs threatens to blow what some economists estimate as a $2 trillion hole into the US fiscal outlook over the coming decade, should the judgment stay in place.
NYC Congestion Toll Brings In $216 Million in First Four Months
Now With Colorful Blocks, Tirana's Pyramid Represents a Changing Albania
The Economic Benefits of Paying Workers to Move
NY Wins Order Against US Funding Freeze in Congestion Fight
Why Arid Cities Should Stick Together
The ruling could also present a new obstacle for Republicans who are relying on the revenue to help offset the cost of a roughly $4 trillion tax cut moving through Congress.
'At face value, this ruling will take away billions of dollars of prospective tariff revenue' annually, said Douglas Elmendorf a Harvard Kennedy School professor and former director of the Congressional Budget Office — a nonpartisan arm of the US legislature.
A federal appeals court Thursday paused the Court of International Trade's Wednesday ruling striking down a swath of Trump's levies, and the White House is pushing to overturn the judgment entirely, aiming to appeal to the Supreme Court as soon as Friday.
If the CIT ruling survives appeal, it would remove duties that would have raised nearly $200 billion on an annual basis, according to estimates by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Citigroup Inc. Trump and his aides had been relying on that increased revenue to get Republican lawmakers united behind the president's 'big beautiful bill' tax-cut package.
The $2 trillion in added revenue over a decade would have gone some way towards offsetting the cost of the tax cuts, as measured by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, as the legislation's spending reductions aren't expected to cover even half the tab.
Failing judicial success, Trump's trade team would have to stitch together duties using executive authority other than the one struck down. But the process would take months, and decisions could still end up facing legal challenges, economists say. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Fox News Thursday that 'anything that the courts do to get in the way both harms the American people in terms of trade and in terms of tariff revenue.'
Even a short-term hit to revenue would pose problems: the government is currently barred from raising net new debt, and the Treasury has been using special accounting maneuvers to make good on payments. Monthly customs revenue just hit a record of over $16 billion, helping the department's cash flows.
Barclays Plc warned that the court ruling will bring forward the date by when the Treasury will have exhausted its cash and extraordinary measures. That in turn builds pressure on Republicans to get the tax bill done, as it includes an increase in the debt limit.
'The fiscal outlook just got a lot worse as a result of this court ruling,' said Ernie Tedeschi, who is director of economics at Yale University's Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'Very high tariffs just got less likely.'
The Budget Lab also estimated revenues would be about $2 trillion lower over 10 years — roughly $700 billion compared with $2.7 trillion — if the court ruling stands, and current tariff levels remain in place.
Wednesday's court ruling involved Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to threaten the highest tariff rates in more than a century. The April 2 'Liberation Day' tariffs involved a universal baseline levy of 10% plus much bigger rates for various trading partners — though Trump had put those on pause prior to the ruling. Bloomberg Economics estimated that the average US tariff rate got as high as nearly 27% at one point. The court ruling takes it below 6%.
Other channels Trump has to impose tariffs include Section 232 authority to impose sectoral levies. The administration has already invoked it to set the stage for import taxes on items including smartphones and jet engines. Pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, lumber and other products are also being eyed for tariffs. Existing duties are in place on steel and autos, among others.
'There are other avenues to do the tariffs,' said Stephanie Roth, chief economist at Wolfe Research, who sees a $180 billion annual revenue hit from the court ruling.
Economists at Citi, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley expect the administration will ultimately raise the tariff revenue it needs.
White House Council of Economic Advisers Chair Stephen Miran on May 27 told Bloomberg Television the tariffs would take in hundreds of billions of dollars a year, helping alleviate concerns about the fiscal deficit.
Those estimates have bolstered the Trump administration against charges that its tax bill blows a hole in the budget.
'The blatantly wrong claim that the one, big beautiful bill increases the deficit is based on the Congressional Budget Office and other scorekeepers who use shoddy assumptions,' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Thursday. They have 'historically been terrible at forecasting,' she said.
After the House passed a version of the tax bill earlier this month, it's now in the Senate's hands. It's possible that Senate Republicans could propose adding tariffs in the multi-trillion dollar spending bill to help offset costs, though it's unclear it would garner enough support to pass.
'They might include trying to get some tariffs,' said Alex Durante, senior economist at the Tax Foundation. 'But I really don't see the appetite for something as broad as what the president has done.'
Trump in a Truth Social post Thursday evening blasted the option, saying, 'In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around DC for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other countries that are treating us unfairly.'
YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom
Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back?
Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce
Inside the First Stargate AI Data Center
How Coach Handbags Became a Gen Z Status Symbol
©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Miami Herald
20 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
New order by California judge protects some Venezuelan TPS holders from deportation
A federal judge has granted protection from deportation and work permits to as many as 5,000 Venezuelans who have Temporary Protected Status. U.S. District Judge Edward E. Chen in San Francisco on Friday granted an emergency motion filed by Venezuelan plaintiffs following last week's Supreme Court ruling that the Trump administration can deport some Venezuelans on TPS while a challenge wends its way through the courts. Chen's order involves two key dates: Jan. 17, 2025, when Alejandro Mayorkas, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security at the time, extended TPS for Venezuelans until next year, and Feb. 5, when the new DHS secretary, Kristi Noem, announced she was revoking the extension. In an 11-page ruling, Chen ordered the government to uphold the rights of TPS holders who received government documentation — such as work permits and/or TPS renewals — under Mayorkas's extension between between those two dates. 'If DHS granted that extension, it must honor it and comply with the court's order,' said Emi MacLean, a senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who is among the lawyers representing the Venezuelans in the case. During Thursday's hearing, the government estimated that about 5,000 Venezuelans re-registered for TPS or work permits, a figure Chen referred to in his ruling. 'What we do know is that two of the named plaintiffs in our case do benefit from the order,' MacLean said. 'We also have named plaintiffs who fall outside the scope of Judge Chen's ruling—for example, those who received an automatic extension but only after February 5th. Additionally, we know there are people who made the effort to re-register but didn't receive any official notice in time to benefit from it.' The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU Foundation of Southern California and the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. Noem revoked TPS protections for roughly 350,000 Venezuelans effective April 7 — stripping their right to work and exposing them to potential detention and deportation. Many affected individuals live in South Florida. After the Supreme Court ruling, Homeland Security updated its TPS guidance but has yet to clarify how it will implement the decision. On March 31, Chen blocked the Trump administration's attempt to revoke deportation protections for Venezuelans just days before their legal status was set to expire. Chen ruled that Venezuelan nationals with TPS could suffer 'irreparable injury' without a stay on their deportations. In April, a federal appeals court upheld Chen's stay, rejecting the government's request to lift it. However, on May 19 the Supreme Court issued a ruling favoring the Trump administration by allowing the termination of TPS to proceed while the case is litigated. The Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the lawsuit, which was filed by seven Venezuelans and the National TPS Alliance in federal court in San Francisco. The high court clarified that its order does not prevent ongoing challenges to Noem's decision to cancel work permits and other official documents set to expire on Oct. 2, 2026.

Miami Herald
25 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Appeals court keeps pauses on Trump's mass firings at 21 agencies
May 31 (UPI) -- An three-judge federal appeals panel has kept in place a lower court's decision to pause the Trump administration's plans to downsize the federal workforce through layoffs. Late Friday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision denied an emergency motion by the federal government to stay U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's order on May 9 that halted terminations at 21 agencies. The layoffs are called reductions in force, or RIFs. In a 45-page ruling, the appeals court in California wrote the challengers likely will win the case on the merits. The appeal panel said the Trump executive order on Feb. 13 "far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution." The Trump administration has also asked the Supreme Court to decide and has not acted. "A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch," White House spokesman Harrison Fields told CNN in a statement. "The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch - singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the President's agenda." Ruling for the plaintiffs were Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton and Lucy Koh, selected by President Joe. Consuelo Maria Callahan, an appointee of President George W. Bush, wrote in her dissent that "the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs." Fletcher wrote: "The kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval." Illston, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and serves in San Francisco, had backed the lawsuit by labor unions and cities filed on April 28, including San Francisco, Chicago, Baltimore and Harris County in Houston. She questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in reducing the federal workforce and felt Congress should have a role. "The President has the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, but he must do so in lawful ways and, in the case of large-scale reorganizations, with the cooperation of the legislative branch," Illston wrote after hearing arguments from both sides. "Many presidents have sought this cooperation before; many iterations of Congress have provided it. Nothing prevents the President from requesting this cooperation -- as he did in his prior term of office. Indeed, the Court holds the President likely must request Congressional cooperation to order the changes he seeks, and thus issues a temporary restraining order to pause large-scale reductions in force in the meantime." The coalition of organizations suing told CNN said after the appeals decision: "We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds." After Trump's executive order, the Department of Government Efficiency submitted a Workforce Optimization Initiative and the Office of Personnel Management also issued a memo. During Trump's first 100 days in office, at least 121,000 workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs, according to a CNN analysis. There are more than 3 million workers among civilian and military personnel. Some of them have taken buyouts, "including those motivated to do so by the threat of upcoming RIFs," according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. That includes 10,000 at the Department of Health and Human Services through RIF as part of a plan to cut 20,000 employees. That includes 20% of the workforce of the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agencies, run by Cabinet-level personnel, sued were Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State and Treasury, Transportation, Veterans Affairs. The Education Department, which Trump wants to dismantle, was not listed, but 50% of the workforce has been let go. Six additional agencies with statutory basis elsewhere in the United States Code were named: AmeriCorps, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. Elon Musk, who officially left Friday as special White House adviser, was named in the suit. Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Miami Herald
25 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Bono Sparks MAGA Backlash After Joe Rogan Appearance
Irish rock star Bono has come under fire from supporters of President Donald Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement after citing an academic who said the administration's cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) may have been a factor in 300,000 deaths. Bono made the claim during an appearance on Joe Rogan's popular podcast which was released on Friday, after which he was branded "a liar/idiot" by former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) chief Elon Musk. Newsweek contacted USAID for comment on Saturday via email outside of regular office hours. After coming to power in January the second Trump administration ordered a halt to most foreign aid funding and attempted to shut down USAID, though this was blocked in court. Supporters argued cuts saved American taxpayers money that was being used ineffectively, while critics said it would hit some of the most vulnerable around the world. During his appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience Bono, a founding member of U2, said: "Just recent report, it's not proven, but there's surveillance enough [to] suggest 300,000 people have already died from just this cut off, this hard cut, of USAID so there's food rotting in boats, in warehouses, this will f*** you off." Bono appeared to be referencing research conducted by Boston University infectious disease mathematical modeler Brooke Nichols who concluded USAID cuts could have resulted in 300,000 otherwise preventable deaths, including 200,000 children. Bono's claim sparked a furious response from Trump supporters on social media including Elon Musk, who on Friday was given a large key by the president as thanks after stepping down from the day-to-day management of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a post on his X, formerly Twitter, website, referring to Bono, Musk said: "He's such a liar/idiot. Zero people have died!" The tech billionaire was responding to Mike Benz, executive director of the Foundation For Freedom Online campaign group, who shared a clip of Bono's remarks adding: "These USAID numbers are f***** faker than their COVID numbers." Popular conservative X commentator Catturd added: "Elon Musk calls out low IQ moron Bono for being an idiot and a liar." However, Bono's comment was welcomed by the Protect Kamala Harris X account, which has over 90,000 followers and posts in support of the former presidential hopeful. The account shared a photograph on Bono, captioned: "RETWEET if you stand with Bono against Donald Trump!" During his podcast appearance Bono said: "There is 50,000 tons of food that are stored in Djibouti, South Africa, Dubai, and wait for it Houston, Texas, that is rotting rather than going to Gaza, rather than going to Sudan, because the people who know the codes for the warehouse are fired, they're done." In response, Joe Rogan said: "They're throwing the baby out with the bathwater, this is the problem, the problem is for sure there have been a lot of organizations that do tremendous good all throughout the world. Also, for sure it was a money-laundering operation, for sure there was no oversight, for sure billions of dollars are missing, in fact trillions, that are unaccounted for." It remains to be seen whether the Trump administration will succeed in its bid to close down USAID entirely or whether this will continue to be blocked in the courts. Related Articles Old Video of Bono Snubbing Diddy Resurfaces Amid Sex Crimes ArrestBono's Jill Biden Comment SlammedWhy Bono Was at the State of the Union AddressPowerball Drawing Tonight: $825M Jackpot Would Make Winner Richer Than Bono 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.