Workflow
《国际经济紧急状态权力法》(IEEPA)
icon
Search documents
特朗普政府警告法院:反对关税的裁决将引发“经济灾难”,真的吗?
Di Yi Cai Jing· 2025-08-15 10:49
Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration argues that a court ruling against tariffs could undermine U.S. foreign policy, threaten recent trade agreements, and harm the U.S. economy, warning of potential financial collapse if tariffs are overturned [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings and Arguments - The Trump administration has appealed a ruling from the International Trade Court that stated the President does not have "unlimited power" to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [3]. - Trump's legal team claims that the IEEPA allows the President to take extraordinary measures to regulate trade, which they interpret as the authority to impose tariffs [3]. - If the court rules against the Trump administration, it could lead to refunds for importers, as the Justice Department has acknowledged the possibility of refunds if tariffs are deemed illegal [3][4]. Group 2: Economic Implications - The Trump administration warns that losing the tariff case could lead to a financial collapse, with potential consequences likened to the Great Depression [4]. - Current tariff revenues have reached $142 billion in the fiscal year, but they only account for 3.1% of total federal revenue projected for fiscal year 2025 [1]. - Experts argue that the loss of tariff revenue is unlikely to cause a catastrophic economic downturn, as the U.S. government has significant debt and the tariffs do not directly fund social security or Medicare [7][8]. Group 3: Political and Strategic Considerations - The Trump administration's legal strategy appears to be aimed at maintaining tariffs to avoid perceived negative consequences, with some legal experts suggesting that the administration is trying to act quickly to prevent the Supreme Court from overturning tariffs [9]. - The administration emphasizes the importance of recent trade agreements with major partners, warning that unfavorable court rulings could jeopardize these agreements and lead to significant economic repercussions [4][5].