Almost Half of U.S. Imports Now Have Steep Tariffs

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/11/05/business/economy/trump-tariffs-us-imports.html?smtyp=cur

Just under half of all goods that enter the United States are now subject to tariffs, a New York Times analysis of Census Bureau trade data shows, a stark sign of how President Trump has reshaped American trade since returning to office in January.

archive article: https://archive.ph/37EpC

108 points · 11 comments · view on lemmy.world

11 Comments

Nvermind@sh.itjust.works · 20 pts · 286d

Really need to put “Emergency” in quote marks on that one. The only emergency there is a president who doesn’t understand basic economics.

ignirtoq@feddit.online · 13 pts · 286d (2 replies)

If the court rules against the president, it will nullify a major tool in Mr. Trump’s trade agenda. He has used the law under question, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to impose tariffs on an estimated 29 percent of all U.S. imports, the Times analysis found. So far this year, these emergency tariffs have hit more than $300 billion in imported goods.

Not that I expect it to happen, but if they rule against him, what happens to the money the government has collected from illegal tariffs so far? Do they just keep it? Do they have to go through the books and return it to the importers? The costs were often absorbed by vendors at the start, but there's no question a large fraction have already been passed on to consumers.

jacksilver@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 286d

I imagine that it would be a decision that just affects things going forward to avoid all of that.

Entertainmeonly@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 286d

I don't think it will matter. Not like he has listened to a thing a judge has told him in the last decade.

What i mean is he's yaking that money no matter what.

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 286d

Not really. Donald can say whatever he wants, but there’s no emergency.

And if there were an emergency, it’s not clear that would give him authority to impose tariffs.

Bell@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 286d (1 reply)

The graphs in this are terrible

RandAlThor@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 286d

LOL yeah honestly! they've outsourced graph making to kids in grade school.

avidamoeba@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 286d (2 replies)

Am I reading this right that the SC could cancel only the "Emergency tariffs" part?

village604@adultswim.fan · 6 pts · 286d

That's the vast majority of tariffs he's enacted.

justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io · 1 pts · 286d

Note that most of that 46% is likely Canadian goods that fall under CUSMA. Which means most of that, if not all, is also "emergency" tariffs.

Almacca@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 286d

I suppose you could describe smashing it with a sledge hammer as "reshaping".

TheBat@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 286d

[ removed ]