5 ms·
There have been no decisions about refunds. The court avoided addressing that. That topic will surely go back to the courts, kicking and screaming
by not_a_bot_4sho 8mo ago
There have been no decisions about refunds. The court avoided addressing that.
That topic will surely go back to the courts, kicking and screaming
- conductr 8mo agoPersonally think it should not get refunded. There’s no sane way to get it back to its source. And no one group should be making profit from it. Best if it stays with the government like a federal forfeiture so in theory we all benefit from it as citizens , maybe it goes against the national debt or lessens our deficit next year.
- czl 8mo agoNot a bad idea, but how do we prevent this from creating incentives to engineer similar situations in the future?
- nathan_compton 8mo agoPresumably such future attempts would be stopped immediately given this ruling.
- ngc248 8mo agoGovernment is a poor spender, we should not be handing them more money
- conductr 8mo agoWe all participate in this system through, most of “us” passively. Use the normal means to enact the change you want to see
- hermanzegerman 8mo agoSo illegal actions shouldn't have consequences for anyone? That's a good way to deter such acts in the future
- conductr 8mo agoThat’s a separate issue from where the already paid tariffs should go
- hermanzegerman 8mo agoNo, it isn't. Because there is no deterrent against future illegal actions in the future, if there won't be reimbursements. Trump will just declare illegal tariffs again, until the Scotus strikes it down and then repeat
- FpUser 8mo ago>"maybe it goes against the national debt or lessens our deficit next year." And help to prosecute those who broke the law and raised illegal tax /s