#use of tariffs

[southsouthcooperationday]

Develop Digitalized trade facilitation.

Launching of the AfCFTA e-Tariff Book in November 2022 further allowed for a digitalized trade facilitation that ensures tariff concession schedules are easily accessible to Trade and Customs Authorities. The Tariff book includes rules of origin and the customs procedures that apply to products which allows users to benefit from enhances knowledge and capacities in the use of tariffs, commodity classification and organisation of tariff-related work within Customs administrations and other relevant stakeholders. These tariff concessions have been offered by the customs unions and once agreed they will then be nationalised and traders will be able to trade fully.

[dontmean2bepoliticalbut]

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

By James Downie

“If everything’s honest, I’d gladly accept the results.” That was former President Donald Trump on Wednesday, playing cute with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s question over whether he’d accept the outcome of Wisconsin’s presidential election. As my colleague Clarissa-Jan Lim pointed out, Trump has a long track record of similar statements, offering sham justifications to disguise the fact that he doesn’t feel bound by election results. The events of Jan. 6, 2021, laid bare the true consequences of this shell game.

But this latest instance — coupled with statements Trump recently made in his interview with Time magazine — highlight a disturbing and underappreciated aspect of his 2024 campaign. Trump’s approach to election results has become his approach (and his devotees’ approach) to the law more broadly. Even as their policies and rhetoric have become more extreme, Trump and his MAGA acolytes are already lining up the justifications — legal and otherwise — to buttress their extremist and authoritarian agenda in ways that simply didn’t occur to the first Trump administration.

The deportation of millions, the deployment of the National Guard and even the military domestically, the firing of prosecutors, the autocratic expansion of executive authority, the potential weaponization of the Comstock Act to ban abortion: all of these will have excuses that range from “tendentious” to “outright fiction.” Or, as Trump told Time: “I’ll be doing everything on a very legal basis.”

Take, for example, immigration: It’s easy to forget how Trump’s immigration policy has shifted in eight years, even as it has remained consistently bigoted. His 10-point plan on immigration in 2016 consisted of the border wall and a bunch of truisms. (“We’ll build safe zones, which is something I think all of us want to see.”) The military was absent; the word “invasion” was nowhere to be found, and the courts barely merited a mention.

Contrast this with the Time interview, where Trump defends deploying the military both at the border and inland to deport “15 million and maybe as many as 20 million” undocumented immigrants — the equivalent of deporting the entire state of Florida. With bigger autocratic moves come bigger fictions. Migrants are no longer just “bringing crime”; Trump has created a whole separate (and demonstrably false) category of “migrant crime.”

Domestic deployment of the armed forces would seem to violate an 1878 ban on using troops against civilians. But this Trump, unlike the 2016 version, has a legal facade ready to go: Undocumented immigrants are invaders, not civilians, and “I will be complying with court orders.” Those two sentiments may seem difficult to reconcile, given that the former categorization flies in the face of legal precedent. But as recent oral arguments over presidential immunity have illustrated, precedent means little to this Supreme Court.

Immigration is just the tip of a very dangerous iceberg. In close advisers like Stephen Miller and aligned projects like Project 2025, we can see not only the policies but also the underlying justifications and legal authorities they have ready to go. Part of this effort is practical. Trump’s presidency was rife with policy efforts that either never got past the planning stage or wasted months (or even years) in false starts. The reality that Mexico wouldn’t pay for his border wall meant that less than 20% had been built when he left office. His administration spent the better part of a year tossing out different iterations of Trump’s self-described “Muslim ban,” searching for a version that could pass muster in the courts.

Trump’s supporters are determined not to waste time this round. There’s no better example of this than the Comstock Act: Rather than wait for congressional Republicans to pass a new national abortion ban, they could simply resurrect a “zombie law” to criminalize any materials used in abortions and count on the more Trump-friendly courts to back them up.

But mostly this effort is political. As writer Brian Beutler puts it, “To the MAGA core, he offers a bloody revanchism; to the uncommitted, a series of mollifying assurances.” Most of Trump’s signature policy proposals — such as a military deportation force and huge tariff increases — and those of his most devoted advisers are unpopular. So Trump balances the lawless extremes of his ambitions by minimizing how radical his plans sound, hoping to avoid scaring persuadable voters with his authoritarian signals. “When we talk military, generally speaking, I talk National Guard,” he says, as if those two terms are interchangeable. “But if I thought things were getting out of control, I would have no problem using the military.” Just like he’ll accept the results “if everything’s honest.”

“I don’t think they’re bold actions,” Trump tells Time of his policies, “I think they’re actions that are common sense.” But phrases like “if everything’s honest” and “if things were getting out of control” create loopholes as wide as they are chilling. It’s easy to imagine, for example, a deportation force being sent to New York and then beefed up when local residents resist — with horrible consequences. But if the platitudes get him back in the White House, he and his followers will move swiftly to welcome that horror.

[torterramerica]

[spicysigil]

havin a serious meeting with the two most powerful men in the country

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen at Axios:

Former President Trump, if re-elected, plans to immediately test the boundaries of presidential and governing power, knowing the restraints of Congress and the courts are dramatically looser than during his first term, his advisers tell us.

Why it matters: It's not just the Supreme Court ruling on Monday that presidents enjoy substantial legal immunity for actions in office. Trump would come to office with a Cabinet and staff pre-vetted for loyalty, and a fully compliant Republican coalition in Congress — devoid of critics in positions of real power.

[...]

The big picture: Trump promises an unabashedly imperial presidency — one that would turn the Justice Department against critics, deport millions of people in the U.S. illegally, slap 10% tariffs on thousands of products, and fire perhaps tens of thousands of government staff deemed insufficiently loyal.

He'd stretch the powers of the presidency in ways not seen in our lifetime. He says this consistently and clearly — so it's not conjecture.

[...]

What to watch: To hear Trump and his allies tell it, this is how early 2025 would unfold if he wins:

1. A re-elected Trump would quickly set up vast camps and deport millions of people in the U.S. illegally. He could invoke the Insurrection Act and use troops to lock down the southern border.

2. In Washington, Trump would move to fire potentially tens of thousands of civil servants using a controversial interpretation of law and procedure. He'd replace many of them with pre-vetted loyalists.

3. He'd centralize power over the Justice Department, historically an independent check on presidential power. He plans to nominate a trusted loyalist for attorney general, and has threatened to target and even imprison critics. He could demand the federal cases against him cease immediately.

4. Many of the Jan. 6 convicts could be pardoned — a promise Trump has made at campaign rallies, where he hails them as patriots, not criminals. Investigations of the Bidens would begin.

5. Trump says he'd slap 10% tariffs on most imported goods, igniting a possible trade war and risking short-term inflation. He argues this would give him leverage to create better trade terms to benefit consumers.

6. Conversation would intensify about when Justices Clarence Thomas, 76, and Sam Alito, 74, would retire.

Lists of potential successors are already drawn up.

President Biden said last month that "the next president is likely to have two new Supreme Court nominees."

If Trump were to win and the two oldest justices retired, five of the nine justices would have been handpicked by Trump.

Top Democrats privately predict Republican majorities in the House and Senate if Biden loses.

Most of Trump's most prominent critics — Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, et al. — will be gone. Even the few who remain, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), will be substantially less powerful.

Trump would be backed by an overwhelmingly Trump-friendly Senate and House — loaded with loyalists, top to bottom. Many were elected since his 2016 win, and many thanks to his endorsement.

=

Axios reports that a 2nd Donald Trump term in the wake of the Trump immunity decision by SCOTUS will be not only imperialistic, but also fascistic.

Trump must be defeated at all costs!

[uboat53]

It's always funny to hear political and economic commentators pondering how Americans can be so against inflation but also support tariffs which would increase inflation.

Guys, the answer is really simple, the average American doesn't know that tariffs would increase inflation and Trump is lying to them by saying it won't. Until other people start explaining the truth in a way that people can understand and actually educating them, there's no good reason to believe that people are forming these kinds of beliefs on the basis of accurate information.'

[spotlightstory]

Question: If you win in November, can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make child care more affordable? And if so, what specific piece of legislation will you advance?

Trump: "Well I would do that and we are sitting down. You know, I was somebody - we had Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It's a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I'm talking about - that, because look, child care is child care, couldn't - you know, there's something - you have to have it in this country. You have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers, compared to the kind of numbers I'm talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels they are not used to. But they'll get used to it very quickly. And it's not going to stop them from doing business with us. But they will have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers we are talking about, including child care, that it's going to take to care. We are going to have, I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all the other things that are going on in our country. Because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care. (What's that crazy self talk???) But those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I am talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just - that I just told you about. We're going to be taking in trillions of dollars. And as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it's, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we will be taking in. We are going to make this into a incredible country that can afford to take care of its people. And then we will worry about the rest of the world. Let's help other people. But we are going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It's about make America great again. We have to do it because right now, we are a failing nation. So, we'll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question. Thank you." Link to video

uh huh, m'hmm... WTF??? Trump knows nothing about American families or child care. He's so disconnected and demented. Trump is not fit for office.

JD's answer on child care wasn't much better. It was basically "Get Grandma to do it" and "Deregulate it".

Fun Fact - US Deficit: the federal budget deficit in fiscal year 2024 is $1.9 Trillion. Adjusted to exclude the effects of shifts in the timing of certain payments, the deficit amounts to $2.0 trillion in 2024 - Congressional Budget Office dot gov

Import Tariffs: increase the price of goods and services in domestic markets by applying a tax on imported goods that is paid by the domestic importer. To cover the increased costs, the domestic importer then charges higher prices for the goods and services. Are Americans ready for Trump's $10 banana? Those 'trillions' he's talking about from "countries sending product into our country" will increase the price of those products !!!

We are already struggling with Shrinkflation, Greedflation and the cost of living. This con man is not fit for office. Vote Blue

[wokeuplaughing]

I want the us to balkanize soooo bad I think economic disparity would humble texans correctly

[tomorrowusa]

US aid to Ukraine, delayed by pro-Putin House Republicans in the US, has caused European NATO members to speed up their own assistance to the Ukrainians.

Dutch Defense Minister Kajsa Ollongren says Ukraine should receive its first F-16 fighter jets this summer as Europe pushes to aid Kyiv amid complications sparked by a stalled aid package in the U.S. Congress. Ollongren told RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service during a visit to Kyiv on March 21 that a plan to deliver 24 F-16s jets is on track, with the first aircraft coming from Denmark. "I think we are on track to see deliveries, first Danish this summer, and then we're going to scale up," she said while declining to give the exact number of planes involved in the first delivery. "We know that we will start with the Danish F-16s, that is now in our planning and in the Ukrainian planning. And in the end, I mean, it doesn't matter anymore. If it's a Dutch or Danish or Norwegian F-16 because [the planes are] going to be Ukrainian." The arrival of the fighter jets will be a long-awaited development to help Kyiv fill a crucial hole in its defense capabilities. Russia has used its more advanced and more numerous jets to repeatedly bomb Ukrainian cities, slow its counteroffensive, and threaten its ships exporting grain crucial to its economic survival, making Kyiv’s acquisition of modern U.S. jets a key ingredient to its successful defense of the country.

There is also talk in Europe of imposing tariffs on Russian grain.

EU eyes tariffs to 'choke off' Russian grain sales

Back in the US, contact your House member and urge support for aid to Ukraine against Putin's genocidal invasion.

With Democrats, thank them for their support; appreciation for previous efforts will encourage them to stay the course. With Republicans, ask them why they are helping one of America's most virulent enemies; tell them that Ronald Reagan would be ashamed of their tacit backing for the Evil Empire.

Find Your Representative

These 18 17 Biden district Republicans are particularly vulnerable.

^^^ 10 of those 17 are from California or New York. Most of those Republicans on that chart are from blue states. This is not something we can dismiss as a red state matter.

[lesbianslovebts]

At work today, I did such sexy things with a spreadsheet that I almost moaned

[usadvlottery]

US Immigration and Customs Laws encompass a complex framework governing the movement of people and goods across the United States' borders. These laws are designed to regulate immigration, prevent illegal entry, ensure national security, and facilitate lawful trade and travel. They cover a wide range of topics, including visa requirements, border security measures, customs duties, import/export regulations, and enforcement mechanisms. Compliance with these laws is crucial for maintaining legal status, preventing unauthorized entry, and upholding the nation's safety and security. Various government agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, oversee the enforcement and administration of these laws.

[snurtle]

-_- ouhough for anyone wondering why I suddenly dropped off the face of the earth.... it's because plague. not miss rona, thankfully, but some kind of nasty bug nonetheless.

sipping broth and fantasizing about the trade-routes of fictional kingdoms will pull me through this, i just know it

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Calling the Republican Party the “party of fertilization,” former President Trump continues to make false claims in a recent interview with a Detroit TV station, while simultaneously taking credit for the overturning of Roe vs. Wade.

In an interview last week with FOX-2 Detroit following his Wednesday rally in Saginaw County, anchor Roop Raj asked Trump about the issue of abortion and how much it would impact the November election. The former president argued that the erasure of a 50-year precedent that provided women a constitutional right to an abortion was a positive development.

“I say what the people decide, and whatever it is, it’s within the state and what the people decide, and it’s working out,” said Trump. “For many, many years, people have said we’ve gotta bring this back to the states to decide, and that’s now working.”

Trump then outlined how different states were dealing with abortion rights, but appeared unaware that Michigan had already enshrined those rights in its constitution.

“All the states are deciding, and you know, for 53 years, people wanted to be able to get it out, Roe v Wade, get it out so the states can decide,” Trump said. “Your state [Michigan] will decide probably a liberal policy if it hasn’t already done it. … I think Michigan’s gonna actually be very loose. They’re gonna vote on it, and that’s gonna be the law.”

In 2022, Michigan voters overwhelmingly approved securing the right to an abortion and other reproductive rights, less than six months after the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause no longer provided a federal right to an abortion. Three of the six votes in favor of that decision were made by justices appointed to the court by Trump.

Trump also told Raj the GOP was “the party of fertilization because we are for the women,” referencing one of the issues that resulted from the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, namely in vitro fertilization (IVF).

“We wanna help the women because they were gonna end fertilization, which is where when the IVF, where women go to the clinics and they get help in having a baby, and that’s a good thing, not a bad thing. And we’re for it a 100%. They tried to say that they weren’t for it. They actually weren’t for it and aren’t for it as much as us, but women see that,” said Trump.

The IVF issue came to the forefront in February when the Alabama Supreme Court, citing the Dobbs decision nine times, ruled that embryos had the full legal rights of citizens. That left IVF clinics facing costly litigation, prompting a temporary halt to the procedure in that state until it passed a law extending criminal and civil immunity to IVF providers and patients. But because the measure didn’t declare when life begins, clinics there are still moving away from providing the service out of litigation concerns.

Trump’s claim that “they weren’t for it,” presumably meaning the Democratic Party, is false. In fact, Democrats like U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois — a disabled veteran who used IVF to become a mother — had been warning since at least 2022 that IVF would be the next target of GOP-led legislatures and courts if Roe v. Wade was overturned.

Additionally, Senate Republicans have rejected attempts to protect access to IVF treatments, while a bill sponsored by House Democrats, H.R. 7056, the Access to Family Building Act, which would establish a federal right to access assisted reproductive technology, including IVF, remains bottled up in committee by the Republican-led chamber.

Trump continued to insist in the interview that abortion “was not that big of an issue,” and “should be largely taken off the table.”

He also continued to push the false claim that abortions were routinely being done in the final month of pregnancy, or beyond.

“Nobody wants to see abortions in the ninth month and the eighth month and the seventh month, and nobody wants to see abortions or, in this case, killing after the baby is born,” Trump told Raj. “Right now, that’s what the Democrats can do. They can have it in the seventh, eighth, ninth month, and they can kill the baby. In numerous states, they can kill the baby after the baby is born, and nobody wants that. Nobody.”

Since at least 2016, Trump has been making the claim of abortions in the final days of pregnancy or even killing babies after they are born, and it has been fact-checked time and again as false.

And according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, less than 1% of all abortions are performed after 21 weeks of gestation — in the fifth month of pregnancy.

Raj asked Trump about Florida’s six-week abortion ban that went into effect last week.

“You have to understand, every legal scholar from all over the country, all over the world, they said ‘You have to get abortion out of the federal government, you have to take it away from the federal government, give it to the states’, and now that’s what we’ve been able to do. We’ve given it to the states, and some states have already decided, and people are satisfied with it.”

While there were certainly scholars who believed Roe had been decided incorrectly, they didn’t represent a majority, much less anything close to unanimity.

“Any claim that all legal scholars wanted Roe overturned is mind-numbingly false,” Rutgers Law School professor Kimberly Mutcherson, a legal scholar who supported the preservation of Roe, told CNN, which quoted several other legal experts in fact-checking that assertion as false.

“The people within the states … they seem to be very happy with the way it’s working out,” added Trump.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights, since the overturning of Roe, 30 states have enacted abortion policies that range from restrictive to the most restrictive.

Raj also asked Trump about labor policies, unions, immigration and the war against Hamas in Gaza.

When asked about the success of union efforts in southern states, such as the UAW’s historic victory last month with Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, Tenn., who voted by a nearly 3-1 margin to join the UAW, Trump instead talked about China building car plants in Mexico, insisted the public didn’t want all electric vehicles (EVs) and ended up in a diatribe against President Joe Biden.

“This character that’s destroyed our country, the worst president we’ve ever had, without question,” said Trump. “He’s destroying our country. What he’s doing with cars, he’s forcing the auto industry into China and other countries, and it’s so sad. And, by the way, Mexico is doing things that nobody can believe. They just started, and they’re doing them in conjunction with China, and it’s gotta be stopped. We can’t let that happen.”

Raj restated his question about growing union support in states like Tennessee that have been less than welcoming to organized labor in the past.

“Well, it could be happening,” Trump said. “I mean, it’s gonna be happening, but you gotta be very careful about what’s gonna happen in two years from now when China wants to take all of the jobs. Because frankly, then union or non-union, everybody’s gonna be hurt. Everybody.”

There have been concerns about Chinese automakers looking to avoid U.S. tariffs by building vehicles in Mexico and the Biden administration has addressed the issue. Last month, Reuters reported that under pressure from the U.S., Mexico was refusing to offer Chinese automakers incentives to build factories there such as low-cost public land or tax cuts for investment in EV production.

The report also quoted an official with the Office of the United States Trade Representative as saying the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which was negotiated during the Trump Administration, did not allow “a back door to China and others who may be seeking to access our market without paying … tariffs.”

On the topic of Israeli military attacks against Hamas in Gaza, in which more than 34,000 people have been killed according to the Hamas-run Ministry of Health in Gaza, Trump was asked how he would try and end the hostilities, and indicated he would give Israel a free hand.

“You gotta finish it off fast. You gotta get it done, and then you gotta have peace. And we’ll make peace fast. But you gotta get your work done and you gotta have peace. You know that Oct. 7 was terrible,” Trump said, referring to Hamas’ terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians that killed about 1,200 people.

The interview closed with Raj asking Trump if he would debate Biden on statewide television in Michigan.

“If you can get him, I’m there. I’ll go anywhere he wants to go,” said Trump. “What he’s done to Michigan is so bad. What he’s done to our country is so bad. What other man, what other person, would allow 15, 16 million people right now in our country? They came from prisons and jails. They came from insane asylums and mental institutions, not from South America, from all over the world, they’re pouring into our country at levels that nobody’s ever seen. Drug dealers. One stat before we go, Venezuela was very crime-ridden. They announced the other day 72% reduction in crime in the last year. You know why? They moved all their criminals from Venezuela right into the good old USA, and Biden let them do it. It’s a disgrace.”

“But, sir, where are those numbers coming from?” asked Raj.

“I guess I get them from the papers in this case. I think it’s a federal statement or well, they’re coming actually from Venezuela. They’re coming from Venezuela. That’s where they can’t come from,” said Trump.

Punishing sanctions imposed against Venezuela during the Trump administration have been blamed as at least one cause of the mass migration out of that nation. Trump also didn’t mention that one of his last acts as President was to give Venezuelan exiles in the U.S. illegally protection from deportation.

[cnevpost]

US 100% duty on Chinese EVs to take effect Sept 27, report says

The US government locked in sharp hikes in tariffs on Chinese imports on Friday, including a 100 percent tariff on EVs, according to Reuters. (A Buick E5 EV on display at the June 2024 Shanghai new energy vehicle show. Image credit: CnEVPost) The US government on Friday locked in significant tariff hikes on Chinese imports, including a 100 percent tariff on electric vehicles (EVs), according to a…

[abigailspinach]

But the two men gave remarkably different answers, neither of which seem likely to bring down the cost of child care.

Vance, speaking to a conservative activist at an Arizona church on Wednesday, thinks parents should look to grandparents, aunts and uncles for those who have them, and also suggested cutting down on training and certification requirements for day care workers. That answer, at least, focuses on the issue at hand, but it won’t satisfy any parent or potential parents who don’t live near their extended family or whose extended family can’t afford to work for free.

Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care. That – it’s going to take care – we’re going to have – I – I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country.

Egan has written about the widely held fear among economists that Trump’s proposal to place a new 60% tariff tax on goods from China and a 10% across-the-board tariff on goods from other countries would mostly just be passed along to consumers and not replace income tax for the government. Trump’s not listening to those warnings.

Because I have to say with child care – I want to stay with child care – but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just – that I just told you about.

Hear that, parents? The cost of child care is small change compared with all the money the US is going to be bringing in from Trump’s tariffs. What you’re not hearing is a concrete proposal for a tax credit or a program to transform those tariff dollars Trump is sure the US government will be swimming in into help for affording child care.

We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars. And as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in.

Repeat: Child care – actually not very expensive, per Trump.

The child care question was put to Trump by Reshma Saujani, founder of Moms First and Girls Who Code. Spoiler alert: Saujani was not satisfied with what Trump had to say.

“I don’t even think he’s actually thought about this, and parents are suffering,” she later said on TikTok, arguing families are being crushed by the cost of child care.

While she might not have been expecting much from Trump’s answer, the question as she posed it on stage was detailed and not at all partisan. Here’s what she said:

President Trump, you – you talked about how the increase in the price of food, gas and rent is hurting families, but the real cost that’s breaking families’ backs and preventing women from participating in the workforce is child care. Child care is now more expensive than rent for working families and is costing the economy more than $122 billion a year, making it one of the most urgent economic issues that is facing our country. In fact, the cost of child care is outpacing the cost of inflation, with the majority of American families of young children spending more than 20% of their income on child care. One thing that Democrats and Republicans have in common is that both parties talk a lot about what they’re going to do to address the child care crisis, but neither party has delivered meaningful change. If you win in November, can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make child care affordable? And if so, what specific piece of legislation will you advance?

-- Reshma Saujani

Saujani is mostly right on her facts. That $122 billion figure comes from a 2023 study by the nonpartisan nonprofit group Council for a Strong America. Luhby reported in May about another report that found in 11 states and Washington, DC, parents with two kids in a child care center could expect to pay at least twice as much for child care as for typical rent. CNN’s Matt Egan has also reported on the child care crisis.

So, this is not a new issue. But here’s what Trump had to say:

Well, I would do that. And we’re sitting down – you know, I was somebody – we had – Sen. Marco Rubio and my daughter Ivanka were so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue.

Trump’s off to a good start here. When she worked in the White House, his daughter Ivanka did help add provisions to Trump’s tax cut law that doubled the child tax credit to $2,000 per child for millions of Americans, according to a CNN fact check.

However, those increases were not granted to the millions of children whose parents don’t make enough to pay income tax. Democrats would later further expand the child tax credit by up to an additional $1,600 and also gave the credit as cash even to families who don’t pay income taxes. That additional bump and expanding it to all parents was credited with cutting the child poverty rate nearly in half in 2021. But Democrats failed to get the votes for a longer-term expansion of that experiment.

Vice President Kamala Harris has promised to try to permanently extend and expand that credit, and Vance, not the Trump campaign, has also suggested he supports an expansion, but details are sketchy.

Even Trump’s doubling of the credit to $2,000 is set to expire next year, so this will be a key issue for whoever wins the White House. Luhby has written extensively about the child tax credit.

This is where Trump stops making much sense:

But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that – because, look, child care is child care. It’s – couldn’t – you know, it’s something – you have to have it. In this country, you have to have it.

Yes, you do have to have child care. But what are these numbers he’s talking about?

But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to, but they’ll get used to it very quickly – and it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us but they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country.

So Trump has moved from the cost of child care to the taxes – tariffs – he plans to impose on imports.

Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care. That – it’s going to take care – we’re going to have – I – I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country.

Egan has written about the widely held fear among economists that Trump’s proposal to place a new 60% tariff tax on goods from China and a 10% across-the-board tariff on goods from other countries would mostly just be passed along to consumers and not replace income tax for the government. Trump’s not listening to those warnings.

Because I have to say with child care – I want to stay with child care – but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just – that I just told you about.

Hear that, parents? The cost of child care is small change compared with all the money the US is going to be bringing in from Trump’s tariffs. What you’re not hearing is a concrete proposal for a tax credit or a program to transform those tariff dollars Trump is sure the US government will be swimming in into help for affording child care.

We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars. And as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in.

Repeat: Child care – actually not very expensive, per Trump.

We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people, but we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first, it’s about Make America Great Again. We have to do it because right now we’re a failing nation. So we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question.

Yep. Very good question.