Latest news with #JeremyHorpedahl
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Tariff court ruling throws another wrench into companies' trade strategies
The Wednesday court decision blocking President Trump's emergency tariff powers could give companies the option of getting a refund on duties they've paid, but it adds another layer of complexity for companies dealing with the administration's rapidly changing trade policies. While the White House immediately appealed the decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade, the ruling opens up the possibility that businesses will be able to apply for refunds from the government, trade and legal experts told The Hill. 'It is likely, even though the court order didn't say anything specific about refunds, that the affected companies will be able to apply for refunds. There is precedent for this,' Jeremy Horpedahl, an economist at the University of Central Arkansas and a scholar with the Cato Institute, told The Hill. Companies that have previously overpaid on tariffs that have been stacked on top of each other as a result of multiple White House orders have been applying for refunds that U.S. Customs has been processing, Horpedahl said. 'There is grounds for a refund,' Leila Carney, an attorney with Caplin Drysdale, told The Hill. 'Whether the government will put in place an administrative process for that or whether taxpayers will have to file refund claims and refunds suits depends on how this plays out.' Not all attorneys agree on this, however. Andrew Gould, an attorney with law firm Holtzman Vogel, noted the decision was 'silent' on the particular issue of refunds and that it could require further legal actions to make that option available to importers. 'The court's order is silent on that issue. I think there would have to be additional actions to actually pursue that,' he said. 'I think that's going to require separate follow up to try to get that relief.' U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Commerce did not immediately respond to The Hill's request for clarification on whether and how businesses will be able to apply for refunds as a result of the decision. Trump has pulled multiple tariff orders so far in the course of negotiations and the general economic reaction, and the Wednesday court ruling constitutes another policy reversal for Trump's trade war that businesses will have to deal with. 'It's not a sufficient basis for [companies] to make their business decisions on,' Carney said, adding that the environment of uncertainty around international trade will remain as a result of the decision. 'A question that our clients have been asking is, how do we pay? How do we know that we're paying the right amount? How do we argue if we think that we have a different product than the one that's addressed by the tariff?' she said. The order from the Court of International trade says that the tariffs are to be 'vacated,' as they do not fall under an appropriate use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). 'The worldwide and retaliatory tariff orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs. The trafficking tariffs fail because they do not deal with the threats set forth in those orders. … The challenged tariff orders will be vacated and their operation permanently enjoined,' the court ruled. The decision strikes down IEEPA tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada, as well as the 10 percent general 'reciprocal' tariff. Country-specific general tariffs would also be nullified by the decision, although those 'Liberation Day' tariffs have been paused while bilateral trade negotiations are being carried out. The total affected duties collected this year amount to about $13 billion, according to a tally by the U.S. Customs and Border protection. U.S. trade officials in the middle of these negotiations are ruing the decision. 'In each case, those ongoing, delicate negotiations are premised on the ability of the President to impose tariffs under IEEPA,' U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, as reported by trade publication Inside U.S. Trade. The ruling brings down the overall effective U.S. tariff rate, which was as high as 25 percent before China and the U.S. agreed to pause their triple-digit tariffs on each other. After the pause, the rate fell to about 13 percent and now stands around 7 percent, according to the Yale Budget Lab. That's still the highest level in decades. 'Consumers face an overall average effective tariff rate of 6.9 percent, the highest since 1969. After consumption shifts, the average tariff rate will be 7 percent, also the highest since 1969,' members of the Yale Budget Lab wrote in a Thursday analysis. The decision leaves in place nonemergency Section 301 tariffs on China affecting about $23.4 billion worth of goods. Section 232 tariffs on steel, automobiles and aluminum also remain in place, as do Section 201 tariffs on solar products. Morningstar economist Preston Caldwell noted Thursday that the administration has recourse to other laws if it wants to keep tariff rates elevated despite the injunction. 'Trump could use Section 122 authority to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for up to 150 days,' he wrote in a commentary. 'This could fill the gap and keep tariffs elevated until Section 232 or Section 301 tariffs come in place. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
29-05-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Tariff court ruling throws another wrench into companies' trade strategies
The Wednesday court decision blocking President Trump's emergency tariff powers could give companies the option of getting a refund on duties they've paid, but adds another layer of complexity for companies dealing with the administration's rapidly changing trade policies. While the White House immediately appealed the decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade, the ruling opens up the possibility that businesses will be able to apply for refunds from the government, trade and legal experts told The Hill. 'It is likely, even though the court order didn't say anything specific about refunds, that the affected companies will be able to apply for refunds. There is precedent for this,' Jeremy Horpedahl, an economist at the University of Central Arkansas and a scholar with the Cato Institute, told The Hill. Companies that have previously overpaid on tariffs that have been stacked on top of each other as a result of multiple White House orders have been applying for refunds that U.S. Customs has been processing, Horpedahl said. 'There is grounds for a refund,' Leila Carney, an attorney with Caplin Drysdale, told The Hill. 'Whether the government will put in place an administrative process for that or whether taxpayers will have to file refund claims and refunds suits depends on how this plays out.' Not all attorneys agree on this, however. Andrew Gould, an attorney with law firm Holtzman Vogel, noted that the decision was 'silent' on the particular issue of refunds and that it could require further legal actions to make that option available to importers. 'The court's order is silent on that issue. I think there would have to be additional actions to actually pursue that,' he said. 'I think that's going to require separate follow up to try to get that relief.' U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Commerce did not immediately respond to The Hill's request for clarification on whether and how businesses will be able to apply for refunds as a result of the decision. Trump has pulled multiple tariff orders so far in the course of negotiations and the general economic reaction, and the Wednesday court ruling constitutes another policy reversal for Trump's trade war that businesses will have to deal with. 'It's not a sufficient basis for [companies] to make their business decisions on,' Carney said, adding that the environment of uncertainty around international trade will remain as a result of the decision. 'A question that our clients have been asking is, how do we pay? How do we know that we're paying the right amount? How do we argue if we think that we have a different product than the one that's addressed by the tariff?' she said. The order from the Court of International trade says that the tariffs are to be 'vacated,' as they do not fall under an appropriate use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). 'The worldwide and retaliatory tariff orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs. The trafficking tariffs fail because they do not deal with the threats set forth in those orders … The challenged tariff orders will be vacated and their operation permanently enjoined,' the court ruled. The decision strikes down IEEPA tariffs on China, Hong Kong, Mexico and Canada as well as the 10-percent general 'reciprocal' tariff. Country-specific general tariffs would also be nullified by the decision, although those 'Liberation Day' tariffs have been paused while bilateral trade negotiations are being carried out. The total affected duties collected this year amount to about $13 billion, according to a tally by the U.S. Customs and Border protection. U.S. trade officials in the middle of these negotiations are ruing the decision. 'In each case, those ongoing, delicate negotiations are premised on the ability of the President to impose tariffs under IEEPA,' U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, as reported by trade publication Inside U.S. Trade. The ruling brings down the overall effective U.S. tariff rate, which was as high as 25 percent before China and the U.S. agreed to pause their triple-digit tariffs on each other. After the pause, the rate fell to about 13 percent and now stands around 7 percent, according to the Yale Budget Lab. That's still the highest level in decades. 'Consumers face an overall average effective tariff rate of 6.9 percent, the highest since 1969. After consumption shifts, the average tariff rate will be 7 percent, also the highest since 1969,' members of the Yale Budget Lab wrote in a Thursday analysis. The decision leaves in place non-emergency Section 301 tariffs on China affecting about $23.4 billion worth of goods. Section 232 tariffs on steel, automobiles and aluminum also remain in place, as do Section 201 tariffs on solar products. Morningstar economist Preston Caldwell noted Thursday that the administration has recourse to other laws if it wants to keep tariff rates elevated despite the injunction. 'Trump could use Section 122 authority to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for up to 150 days,' he wrote in a commentary. 'This could fill the gap and keep tariffs elevated until Section 232 or Section 301 tariffs come in place.
New York Times
18-03-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Egg Prices Have Dropped, Though You May Not Have Noticed
The wholesale price of eggs has dropped sharply since the beginning of March after soaring for months, but it may take a few weeks for grocery shoppers to see the decline. Wholesale egg prices, which is what retailers pay to procure eggs, have fallen to a national average of just over $4 for a dozen large white eggs, down from a peak of more than $8 at the end of February, according to data from the Agriculture Department released last week. But because eggs typically have a four-week shelf life, it may be the end of March before retail prices start to drop, said Jeremy Horpedahl, an associate professor of economics at University of Central Arkansas. Some stores, he added, may not lower prices until their current inventory sells out. Economists said that the decline in wholesale prices, which are still above long-term averages, was very likely fueled by a combination of factors: bird flu coming under control, weaker consumer demand, ramped-up supply and producer pricing decisions. The Agriculture Department noted that there had been no significant outbreaks of avian flu in March so far, and economists say any new outbreaks could push up prices again. The virus has forced egg producers to cull tens of millions of hens since late last year. In February, the retail price of eggs rose 10.4 percent from the previous month, continuing a monthslong climb, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics released last week. Economists noted that prices might not come down evenly across the country. Areas with competing grocery stores might see egg prices fall more quickly, Mr. Horpedahl said, while those dominated by a single chain — with the power to keep prices high for longer — may not. Retail prices may also depend on grocery chains' strategies, with some opting to keep prices lower to entice customers into stores. 'They can pass the savings of wholesale prices onto us entirely, or not at all, or somewhere in between,' said David Anderson, a professor of economics and business at Centre College in Danville, Ky. High demand for eggs leading up to Easter may keep prices elevated through then, he said. President Trump, who made lowering grocery prices a key part of his campaign, has jumped on the wholesale price trend, citing the drop in his speech at the Justice Department last week. At the same time, his sweeping tariffs have stoked concern about an uptick in prices for a host of products, including grocery staples. Egg producers have blamed the spread of avian flu for tighter supplies. United Egg Producers, the industry's trade association, noted that the industry had lost more than 40 million egg-laying hens in 2024 and 31 million in just the first two months of this year as the virus accelerated. Mr. Anderson said that bird flu has hit supply in 'dramatic ways.' But at the same time, he added, 'the industry may see the bird flu epidemic as a cover for additional price hikes that aren't necessarily needed.' 'Part of it is they're really dealing with a crisis,' he said. 'Part of it might be, 'Do we have some cover to keep our prices artificially high?'' The Justice Department is in the early stages of an antitrust investigation looking into whether major egg producers have shared information about pricing and supply that contribute to a spike in prices. Some lawmakers and advocacy groups had previously called for federal regulators to investigate the industry's pricing practices.
