• GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Because businesses are the ones that pay the tariff, not customers of the business. Did the extra tariffs give some companies an excuse to raise prices? Definitely. Does that mean the customer deserves a refund? Definitely not.

    • Epzillon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Correct me if im wrong. If businesses raise their prices to reduce the impact of tariffs on profits then the person actually paying the tariff (atleast to some extent) is the end customer, no? Is it not then only fair for the person who actually paid for this to be compensated appropriately when it is deemed unconstitutional?

      To me it seems insane that the people who already tossed away the problem further down the chain is to be compensated at all when they are not the ones who have primarily suffered the effects of it. Even if they where first in line to deal with it.

      • GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Unless they specifically included a new tariff fee or charge, they’re just charging the price they think people will pay.

      • MrShankles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        And then the refunds come from public tax dollars. So the customer has paid the unconstitutional tariffs twice. It’s a blatant transfer of wealth upwards, no other way to really cut it

        • Epzillon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I did not specify where the money comes from. But you are correct in that scenario. However, it would not necessarily have to go that route. If a company pays the government for tariffs, then proceed to get that money back, that money should then be returned to the end-customer that in the meanwhile has paid more. I fall to see how this is paid by public tax money although I am also not american nor do I know the specifics of the US tax system.

    • MrShankles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      You sweet summer child

      So you’re saying businesses should now cut deep discounts for buyers, because the (already imported) products’ tariffs have been paid (AND the business is being refunded for it). Are they going to drop prices now? Are they acting upon market pressures or taking advantage/manipulating them?

      If you think a wealth-class has to pay any mind to the invisible hand of the free market… I’ve got a nice ass bridge to sell ya, at a tarrif-free + ultra-discounted price!

      • GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        You’re just making shit up.

        I’m saying that the business is the one who was invoiced for the tariff. The customer wasn’t. The business increased the price to cover their extra cost, probably even added some extra profit on top as well, but that still doesn’t mean the customer actually paid the tariff. They didn’t. The tariff is paid on import, not sale.

        • MrShankles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          So if the customer paid more to cover the cost, why are the businesses entitled to a refund… that will come from the taxpayers?

          • GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            Because that’s not how buying and selling products works. The business chose to increase the price due to increased costs. As you said , it was an increased cost to the business - so why would the customer get the refund?

            The tariff was paid on import, not on sale.