Latest news with #smallBusinesses
Wall Street Journal
2 days ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
The Economic Arguments That Launched the Suits Against Trump Tariffs
President Trump claims tariffs will make the U.S. rich. A coalition of states and small businesses dealt a blow to his trade war by arguing the opposite. On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with 12 states and a handful of small-business owners in ruling that Trump didn't have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs. These states, which all have Democratic attorneys general, included a basic argument to justify the suit: The levies will lift prices for things they buy.
Japan Times
3 days ago
- Business
- Japan Times
U.S. trade court blocks Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs
A U.S. trade court on Wednesday blocked President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs from going into effect, ruling that the president overstepped his authority by imposing across-the-board duties on imports from nations that sell more to the United States than they buy. The Manhattan-based Court of International Trade said the U.S. Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce with other countries that is not overridden by the president's emergency powers to safeguard the U.S. economy. "The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President's use of tariffs as leverage. That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it," a three-judge panel said in the decision. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 13 U.S. states. The companies, which range from a New York wine and spirits importer to a Virginia-based maker of educational kits and musical instruments, have said the tariffs will hurt their ability to do business. At least five other legal challenges to the tariffs are pending. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat whose office is leading the states' lawsuit, called Trump's tariffs unlawful, reckless and economically devastating. "This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim," Rayfield said in a statement. The White House and lawyers for groups that sued did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is meant to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during a national emergency. The law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. The Justice Department has said the lawsuits should be dismissed because the plaintiffs have not been harmed by tariffs that they have not yet paid, and because only Congress, not private businesses, can challenge a national emergency declared by the president under IEEPA. In imposing the tariffs in early April, Trump called the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his 10% across-the-board tariff on all imports, with higher rates for countries with which the United States has the largest trade deficits, particularly China. Many of those country-specific tariffs were paused a week later. The Trump administration on May 12 said it was also temporarily reducing the steepest tariffs on China while working on a longer-term trade deal. Both countries agreed to cut tariffs on each other for at least 90 days. Trump's on-and-off-again tariffs, which he has said are intended to restore U.S. manufacturing capability, have shocked U.S. financial markets. The U.S. dollar rose against both the Swiss franc, a traditional currency safe-haven, and the Japanese yen following the court decision. Wednesday's decision can be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court.
CNA
3 days ago
- Business
- CNA
US trade court blocks Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs
NEW YORK: A United States trade court on Wednesday (May 28) blocked President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs from going into effect, ruling that the president overstepped his authority by imposing across-the-board duties on imports from nations that sell more to the US than they buy. The Manhattan-based Court of International Trade said the US Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce with other countries that is not overridden by the president's emergency powers to safeguard the US economy. "The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the president's use of tariffs as leverage. That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it," a three-judge panel said in the decision. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small US businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 13 US states. The companies, which range from a New York wine and spirits importer to a Virginia-based maker of educational kits and musical instruments, have said the tariffs will hurt their ability to do business. At least five other legal challenges to the tariffs are pending. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat whose office is leading the states' lawsuit, called Trump's tariffs unlawful, reckless and economically devastating. "This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim," Rayfield said in a statement. The White House and lawyers for groups that sued did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is meant to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during a national emergency. The law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the US or freeze their assets. Trump is the first US president to use it to impose tariffs. The Justice Department has said the lawsuits should be dismissed because the plaintiffs have not been harmed by tariffs that they have not yet paid, and because only Congress, not private businesses, can challenge a national emergency declared by the president under IEEPA. In imposing the tariffs in early April, Trump called the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his 10 per cent across-the-board tariff on all imports, with higher rates for countries with which the US has the largest trade deficits, particularly China. Many of those country-specific tariffs were paused a week later. The Trump administration on May 12 said it was also temporarily reducing the steepest tariffs on China while working on a longer-term trade deal. Both countries agreed to cut tariffs on each other for at least 90 days. Trump's on-and-off-again tariffs, which he has said are intended to restore US manufacturing capability, have shocked US financial markets. The US dollar rose against both the Swiss franc, a traditional currency safe-haven, and the Japanese yen following the court decision.
Wall Street Journal
13-05-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
A Big Week for a Little-Known Trade Court
Plenty of attorneys get out of law school without ever even hearing about the institution called the Court of International Trade. It's about to have its biggest week ever. A three-judge panel in the little-known Manhattan court will hear arguments this week on whether President Trump has the authority to impose his sweeping tariffs. The lawsuit was brought by New York-based wine importer V.O.S. Selections and four other small businesses who say he doesn't. Go deeper:
Reuters
09-05-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Trump to sign order discouraging criminal enforcement of regulatory offenses
WASHINGTON, May 9 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump plans to sign an executive order discouraging criminal enforcement of regulatory offenses, in a bid to combat the overcriminalization of federal regulations, a White House official told Reuters on Friday. Trump's order is meant to ease the burden on small businesses that do not have the same compliance resources as large corporations, according to a draft the official shared. The executive order would have agencies publicly post a list of regulatory violations that can trigger criminal charges, and guidance on the circumstances under which they would refer violators for prosecution. The order would discourage prosecutors from filing charges not on the lists, and charges that do not require prosecutors to prove the defendant had criminal intent. One such law has been used to prosecute executives for misbranded or adulterated food and drugs. The order would not apply to immigration or national security. The reach of federal criminal statutes has long been a target of criticism for some conservatives and business groups.
