华尔街日报批特朗普关税“大规模敛财” 究竟在保护美国，还是掏空美国人的钱包？

Core Viewpoint - The Trump tariffs, initially aimed at protecting American manufacturing, have evolved into a significant fiscal revenue mechanism, raising concerns about their legality and implications for U.S. economic policy [1][4]. Group 1: Tariff Revenue and Economic Impact - The Trump administration has expanded tariffs not only on China but also on Europe, Mexico, and Vietnam, framing them as measures for national security and fair competition, while effectively acting as an "invisible tax" on American consumers [3][5]. - If the current tariff structure remains in place until mid-next year, the U.S. government could generate between $750 billion to $1 trillion in revenue, marking the largest tax increase in nearly two decades [3][5]. - The American Employers Federation estimates that U.S. businesses will incur over $82 billion in additional costs due to tariffs in 2024, leading many small manufacturers to raise prices or reduce production [5]. Group 2: Legal and Constitutional Challenges - The legality of the tariffs is under scrutiny, as the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to levy taxes, and the Trump administration's use of "emergency economic powers" to impose tariffs may violate this principle [5][7]. - Supreme Court justices have expressed doubts about the constitutionality of the tariffs, suggesting that significant economic decisions should require explicit congressional authorization [5][7]. - If the courts determine that the tariffs are effectively taxes, it could trigger constitutional disputes and potentially require the government to refund up to $19.5 billion in collected revenue [5]. Group 3: Political and Diplomatic Implications - The perception of tariffs as a covert tax undermines the credibility of U.S. trade policy in international negotiations, as trade measures are increasingly viewed as revenue-generating tools rather than diplomatic instruments [6][7]. - The Trump administration faces a dilemma: maintaining that tariffs serve as trade tools necessitates proving their direct link to national security, while acknowledging their fiscal role risks being deemed unconstitutional [7]. - The situation illustrates a broader internal conflict regarding power, money, and constitutional limits, as tariffs transition from trade levers to fiscal instruments, complicating the administration's economic agenda [7].