Tariffs

[tggzzz]

The Bull in the China shop is slowly realising the errors of his ways in accelerating the cost of living on his subjects.

You are assuming the bull cares.

us666a has nothing to worry about: it was announced that everybody will be given $2000 in recompense, and if he doesn't like that he could go back to Sochi.

[pope]

(Attachment Link) (Attachment Link) (Attachment Link)

Check this out, bro ordered from Europe, Switzerland.

From Sweden. Not that it makes much difference. The tariffs are 15% for EU and recently for Switzerland too, after Trump was bribed by Rolex and some other Swiss big corporations.

[u666sa]

I am not aware of any currently for sale in the US

Here is more explanation. Seller used incorrect HS code. What HS code if any did your seller use?

The Bull in the China shop is slowly realizing the errors of his ways in accelerating the cost of living on his subjects.

It's MAGA, make America great again, it's slow long term zeitgeist. Tariffs are going to go up and down based on American needs. Some countries sell beef, which is echoed by your concern. Other countries sell titanium, enriched uranium and fertilizers. They have ZERO tariffs, and they will never have a tariff, because that's straight up national interests of United States. If you want to have any reasonable trade, you'd have to sell to United States, and in order to sell to United States you'd have to pay to United States. This is economic aspect of MAGA. It will make United States rich and in some instances bring jobs back, because in some instances it makes more financial sense to produce a product in United States. Sure, you can sell beef to other countries, theoretically. But other countries have less money. Only Americans make enough to afford a lot.

Trump was bribed by Rolex and some other Swiss big corporations

Every country has their own version of conspiracy theory about being buddies with Trump. But 15% sounds good.

[Cyclotron]

I am not aware of any currently for sale in the US

Here is more explanation. Seller used incorrect HS code. What HS code if any did your seller use?

(Attachment Link)

The Bull in the China shop is slowly realizing the errors of his ways in accelerating the cost of living on his subjects.

It's MAGA, make America great again, it's slow long term zeitgeist. Tariffs are going to go up and down based on American needs. Some countries sell beef, which is echoed by your concern. Other countries sell titanium, enriched uranium and fertilizers. They have ZERO tariffs, and they will never have a tariff, because that's straight up national interests of United States. If you want to have any reasonable trade, you'd have to sell to United States, and in order to sell to United States you'd have to pay to United States. This is economic aspect of MAGA. It will make United States rich and in some instances bring jobs back, because in some instances it makes more financial sense to produce a product in United States. Sure, you can sell beef to other countries, theoretically. But other countries have less money. Only Americans make enough to afford a lot.

Trump was bribed by Rolex and some other Swiss big corporations

Every country has their own version of conspiracy theory about being buddies with Trump. But 15% sounds good.

I wish I had kept my packing slip and shipping info. I don't know what coding was used. Hopefully UPS gets it sorted.

Just so you know, the comments trolling on politics are just that. They want to pull you into that and then point at you for arguing politics, which violates the forum's rules. Been there, done that.

[ifonlyeverything]

Has anyone ordered from LCSC recently, with the package delivered to a residential address? Is this "tariff policy FAQ" accurate (albeit from JLC and not LCSC)? If I place a small order of e.g. $50 goods plus shipping and have it delivered to a residential address with the cheapest Global Direct Standard Line shipping, I should not expect to pay any additional tariffs or have any tariffs charged to me by whoever delivers the package? https://jlcpcb.com/help/article/us-tariff-policy-faq

In case anyone else is wondering, I recently placed a small $20 LCSC order with Global Direct Standard Line shipping. The order was placed 2/2/26 and was delivered 2/17/26. USPS was the last mile carrier. There were no additional tariffs or import fees charged. The price I paid to get the order in my hands was exactly what was charged to me on the LCSC website.

[jmelson]

I ordered some Xilinx XC3S50AN FPGA chips from LCSC for a good price.  30 units for ~9.82 each.  Anybody in the US wanted $35 - 100+ each.
But, then UPS wanted $204 in tariffs for a $300 order.  That seems like a 68% tariff!
Jon

[Smokey]

There is some talk in another thread of shipping stuff from Canada into the USA.  Anyone done that recently?  Can you just tell DHL to bill the recipient the tariff amount?  Is there anything else DHL doesn't just take care of?

[Altair8800]

B R E A K I N G   N E W S

Trumps Tariffs declared ILLEGAL by the Supreme Court 6-3

For those outside USA, the Supreme Court decision means this is a final Legal decision and cannot be appealed any further.

[KE5FX]

B R E A K I N G   N E W S

Trumps Tariffs declared ILLEGAL by the Supreme Court 6-3

For those outside USA, the Supreme Court decision means this is a final Legal decision and cannot be appealed any further.

Au contraire.  Orange Foolius has stated his intention to disregard the ruling by using a different illegal rationale for the tariffs to remain in place. 

Not only that, but there will be another 10% added as punishment for the back talk.

This is normal.

[TimFox]

B R E A K I N G   N E W S

Trumps Tariffs declared ILLEGAL by the Supreme Court 6-3

For those outside USA, the Supreme Court decision means this is a final Legal decision and cannot be appealed any further.

Au contraire.  Orange Foolius has stated his intention to disregard the ruling by using a different illegal rationale for the tariffs to remain in place. 

Not only that, but there will be another 10% added as punishment for the back talk.

This is normal.

No.  The Court ruled that Trump's executive-proclaimed tariffs under the IEEPA Act were illegal:  they pointed out that the Congress had granted the authority (in that statute) for the President for nine verbs, none of which involved taxes or duties.
However, there are other statutes that grant the President some power to impose duties, but since they had limits on his regal authority, he had not used them to impose the recent arbitrary and capricious levies.
He can now proceed to use those other statutes, within the stated limits, as Congress intended.
However, duties imposed under these statutes are limited in duration and must be properly justified.
If you doubt my ability to parse Congressional intent, see the majority opinion:  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf
In a dissenting opinion from Justice Thomas (which was never in doubt) he did make one valid point:  the question is not about "tariffs", which in law are a list of things.  The legal terms for the taxes on imports are "duties" or "imposts".
The Court ruling had no real guidance about refunding the illegally collected duties.

[soldar]

Au contraire.  Orange Foolius has stated his intention to disregard the ruling by using a different illegal rationale for the tariffs to remain in place. 

Not only that, but there will be another 10% added as punishment for the back talk.

This is normal.

This Administration has been disregarding court orders for quite some time now. This is not good. IMHO the rule of law is a basic requirement for a country to function and this is not good.

The rule of law is important not because any law is good but because everybody needs to know what to expect and be able to act accordingly. This is a very bad thing. The rule of law is one of the fundamental pillars of anglo culture and when the authorities who are charged with enforcing the laws are the first ones breaking their own laws the country is doomed. 

[Randy222]

10% global for 150days without approval.
Bye bye filibuster.
Back to tariffs yet again.

US will continue to square-up trade.............  so it seems.

[KE5FX]

In a dissenting opinion from Justice Thomas (which was never in doubt) he did make one valid point:  the question is not about "tariffs", which in law are a list of things.  The legal terms for the taxes on imports are "duties" or "imposts".
The Court ruling had no real guidance about refunding the illegally collected duties.

One of the (Trump-appointed) Justices justified his dissent, in part, by claiming it would be a "mess" to make the injured parties whole.

This is the definition of jurisprudence these days.  This is the kind of person Trump has installed on the Supreme Court bench, and the kind that the Republicans in Congress have rubber-stamped on his behalf.

[Cyclotron]

Good news! The US separation of powers appears to be still intact.  So many said that Trump's court would just approve his wishes.  I guess they get to eat those words now.

It's still a quagmire, as this only impacts those tariffs declared under IEEPA and only some of those.

De minimus remains out, so all the eBay and other international purchases remain the same. I actually think this could mean we pay more for a couple of reasons, but we will see how those complexities fall out.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/continuing-the-suspension-of-duty-free-de-minimis-treatment-for-all-countries/

I've mentioned it before, the government will just use different methods to keep the tariffs in place.

[Andy Chee]

the Republicans in Congress have rubber-stamped on his behalf.

The Republicans never rubber-stamped the tariffs.  If congress had, then the case wouldn't have gone to the SC in the first place!

[KE5FX]

the Republicans in Congress have rubber-stamped on his behalf.

The Republicans never rubber-stamped the tariffs.  If congress had, then the case wouldn't have gone to the SC in the first place!

The judges are what were rubber-stamped.  Specifically, Kavanaugh in this case.

To be fair, he's far from the worst of the judicial and cabinet-level appointments rubber-stamped by the Republican-dominated Congress.  I think you'd have to give that honor to RFK, but there's room for argument.

[Cyclotron]

the Republicans in Congress have rubber-stamped on his behalf.

The Republicans never rubber-stamped the tariffs.  If congress had, then the case wouldn't have gone to the SC in the first place!

The judges are what were rubber-stamped.  Specifically, Kavanaugh in this case.

To be fair, he's far from the worst of the judicial and cabinet-level appointments rubber-stamped by the Republican-dominated Congress.  I think you'd have to give that honor to RFK, but there's room for argument.

The democrats rubber-stamped their own herd of incompetence. Let's not set down that the ludicrous placement of people "carrying water" is one-sided.

One of the most recent was the addition to SCOTUS that has even gone too far for her two peers in the same party a number of times. The same person who refused to define "woman" due to it being outside of the jurisprudence space and politically charged, but who has distinctly delivered politically charged rulings both prior to the SCOTUS position and afterward.

I don't know what RFK has to do with tariffs, but I feel the case is closed on SCOTUS being corrupt or taking sides for Trump, at least in this case.

[Randy222]

The underlying issue was the idiot Trump lawyers who tried to defend the tariffs as-is. With that defense it was certain to fail at US supreme court, and it was already understood. If it were argued that the tariffs were something else outside of the IEEPA, then it probably would have been ok.

1) The Trump admin can still do the same thing again and claim it does not fall under IEEPA at all.
2) There are plenty of non-IEEPA alternatives to do get same money from tariffs.
3) Rules on Senate may change, opening door to use tariffs under IEEPA.

Hence, most law scholars agree the ruling has no real bite.

[TimFox]

There are statutes that explicitly allow the President to impose tariffs, but they aren't the blank check for that activity that he thought he had with IEEPA.
The majority opinion read that statute literally, since it does not mention tax, duty, imposts, or tariffs at all.
Previous acts by other Presidents under this statute involved embargoes and other non-tax actions.
Specifically, one of the other statutes allows him to freely impose duties, but they expire in 150 days unless confirmed by the Congress.
Not very regal.

[dietert1]

Still it's a clear decision and everybody can see how they screwed up. Probably he won't get anywhere with his second term. I mean the government debt situation and a new war don't make any sense.

[soldar]

Good news! The US separation of powers appears to be still intact.  So many said that Trump's court would just approve his wishes.  I guess they get to eat those words now.

I disagree with "The US separation of powers appears to be still intact". In my opinion it is being undermined and eroded very fast.  The fact that it has not totally collapsed does not mean it is intact.

The executive is refusing to comply with many court orders and an independent judiciary is worthless if the executive does not abide by its rulings and orders. To function correctly a state needs all three branches to cooperate in good faith and defer and respect the others. When the executive undermines the judiciary by not complying with their orders and by insulting and criticizing and questioning their motives and legitimacy then that is the beginning of a road which leads to very bad places.

Further, the judiciary is being eroded by appointing judges who are beholden to the leader rather than to the law.

And another way of eroding the judiciary is by undoing their rulings by issuing pardons.

The judiciary in the US is not "intact" even if it has not been totally neutered. And the President makes it very clear that he considers the judiciary as an obstacle to be demolished in whatever measure possible. He does not want to uphold the law but rather he wants to be the law.

I suppose we can find consolation in that other countries are worse off.

All this instability and uncertainty is a disaster for world commerce and for US interests. Certainty and stability are paramount for investors, for commerce, for development.

It is ironic that it is China today who offers stability and certainty while the US rocks the boat and nobody can be sure what the US might do tomorrow. The tables have turned. It did not use to be that way.

[Cyclotron]

Good news! The US separation of powers appears to be still intact.  So many said that Trump's court would just approve his wishes.  I guess they get to eat those words now.

I disagree with "The US separation of powers appears to be still intact". In my opinion it is being undermined and eroded very fast.  The fact that it has not totally collapsed does not mean it is intact.

I have no problem with you disagreeing. But be sure your opinion is based on facts rather than others' subjective opinions. The nature of power struggle and politics in the 3 branches of the US government hasn't changed over the past 250 years. The judiciary branch has long had judges who have used their positions for political purposes, on both sides. I don't know of any time in US history where there was a non-biased/non-political court. I don't know where people get that idea.

It's disappointing that the courts do issue political orders, as much as it is disappointing that the executive appears to ignore them, and that Congress does, at times, worse. I don't think the system is perfect, but it self-corrects, though maybe not on the time scale you or I might wish. The will of the people is tough to deliver on, and while the US system is imperfect, it is far from broken or on the verge of collapse.

As far as stability, I'm shocked you'd say China is stable. Are you willingly ignoring the multiple things it has done?

Here are a few that come to mind:
South China Sea aggression?
Intimidation of the Philippines and aerial harassment
Ongoing island militarization
Escalation against Taiwan and Japan
"Justice Mission 2025" Exercises
Economic Coercion and "Weaponized" Trade, targeting non-defense companies, such as clothing companies
Impact to get PCBs made due to compliance (listed right here on this board)
Suddenly halting the rare earth trade with the world
NXP debacle
Bolstering Russia's defense
It's an internal military purge
Latin American intelligence build-up
Cyber Security incursions and thefts
The slavery of its own people in state-imposed forced labor, child labor, human trafficking, and so on.

So, I disagree that China is more stable than the US. I also think the world trades with it despite its supposed morals. Putting greed ahead of morals, China takes advantage of the fact that the world will do that.

[soldar]

One of the reasons of the success of China has been that they offer traders and investors security and stability.  China today is more stable than the US for traders and investors. You can go and make a deal with them for a decade or two and you have much more chances of them upholding their end of the bargain. OTOH you have no idea what Trump might say next week. It is not China who is rocking the boat.

[soldar]

[Cyclotron]

One of the reasons of the success of China has been that they offer traders and investors security and stability.  China today is more stable than the US for traders and investors. You can go and make a deal with them for a decade or two and you have much more chances of them upholding their end of the bargain. OTOH you have no idea what Trump might say next week. It is not China who is rocking the boat.

I don't think anyone could argue that the US's efforts to restructure trade deals over the past few months haven't raised some trade concerns.
But your views of instability are just profoundly wrong. The graph attached to this post illustrates the "instability" in investing in the US. It's moving up and to the right.