
Let’s start by saying that “tariff” is an annoying word. I seem to never be able to remember if it is two r’s or two f’s (and occasionally pause and wonder, “is it double r and double f?” I mean, it just never looks right to be me. Google tells me that the word has its origins in Arabic and has come to English via Italian and French. So now you know.
Sadly, I think I am going to get used to spelling it the right way.
At any rate, a talking point that I have seen is that the tariff threat is just Trump trying to art the deal. For example, via Politico: Grassley: Trump’s new tariff threats are just ‘negotiating tool’ — for now.
“But right now, I see everything that Trump’s doing on tariffs as a negotiating tool,” he reiterated. “And we’ll have to wait and see how successful he is about that.”
Well, ok. But if what you are asking for is ending illegal immigration and fentanyl smuggling, then the negotiating tactic in question needs to, you know, be connected to the thing you want. If I want a raise at work and I threaten my next-door neighbor with stealing his dog, I am not sure this is a great way to negotiate, even as an off-the-wall, disruptor move.
Meanwhile, the CRS has a good primer on the legal parameters regarding presidents and tariffs: Presidential Authority to Address Tariff Barriers in Trade Agreements.
See, also, A quick guide to Trump’s new tariffs from Wake Up to Politics, which has some historical charts of interest.
Also via CSIS: Making Tariffs Great Again: Does President Trump Have Legal Authority to Implement New Tariffs on U.S. Trading Partners and China?







