• Epzillon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4 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
      2
      ·
      21 minutes 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
      1
      ·
      1 hour 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
        1
        ·
        46 minutes 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.