logo
Businesses Got Squeezed by Trump's Tariffs. Now Some of Them Want Their Money Back

Businesses Got Squeezed by Trump's Tariffs. Now Some of Them Want Their Money Back

WIRED27-05-2025
May 27, 2025 7:00 AM President Trump's rapid maneuvering on tariffs led to some businesses narrowly missing out on lower bills. A refund on the difference could spare consumers from price hikes. In an aerial view, a shipping container is lifted off a container ship docked at the Port of Oakland on April 28, 2025 in Oakland, California. Photograph:As the chief merchandising officer for one of the largest sellers on Amazon, Owen Carr knew that the deck chairs he ordered from a Chinese factory in early April would cost him more than ever before. That's because the chairs, which normally go for $79 on Amazon, were among the first Chinese imports subject to minimum tariffs of 145 percent—a sky-high rate imposed by President Donald Trump—when they arrived at a port in Seattle in late April. 'I was paying more to customs than to the factory for the good itself,' Carr says. 'Mind boggling.'
Now his company, Spreetail, is part of a narrow class of importers asking whether the Trump administration might provide a refund. On May 12, Trump reached a 90-day trade-war truce with China, cutting the minimum China tariffs to just 30 percent. The higher rate was in effect barely a month, from April 10 through May 14. 'We did think there would be an agreement, but we didn't think it would be that fast and that low,' Carr says.
A handful of trade attorneys who spoke with WIRED say they have told clients that refunds are unprecedented and unlikely—but not impossible. Businesses that had to pay the higher rate believe they were unfairly ensnared in Trump's hasty negotiations. 'There's still a chance' of refunds, says Michael Roll, a partner at Roll & Harris. 'I wouldn't say there's hope. I wouldn't bet on that.'
Trump, Congress, or the courts would have to authorize a new tariffs exemption for companies caught up in the trade deal for refunds to become a reality. Attorneys say their clients have been lobbying the Trump administration and lawmakers for exemptions, including retroactive measures that would result in money back. It's not a frivolous request. Companies that make cars, chips, and drugs have been spared from other tariff policies.
US Customs and Border Protection, which administers tariffs and exemptions, did not respond to a request for comment about the possibility of refunds.
Trump views his trade policies as crucial to increasing US manufacturing and gaining power over China. But his moves are beginning to erode the prices and product selection long familiar to US consumers, according to retail data and experts. Giving 115 percent back to merchants who paid the higher tariff rate would help avert further price increases and allow them to stay afloat if Trump renews tariff hikes, attorneys say. 'For all but the most profitable and largest companies, this has been devastating,' says Ron Oleynik, a partner at law firm Holland & Knight.
Paying higher tariffs even once can have long-term consequences for small-to-midsize companies, attorneys say. US rules require importers to hold a bond—effectively insurance—so that the government can claim at least some funds from companies that flout the law and don't pay what they owe. The level of insurance required is determined by a business' total tariff payments over the past 12 months; as coverage requirements rise, so do the overall costs of the bond. 'I have heard this is going to kill us if we have to up our bonds,' Oleynik says. 'Dollars Back'
Companies such as Spreetail recognized the risks of importing goods after Trump imposed a 125 percent tariff on Chinese imports last month. Many businesses decided against placing new orders, and others quickly halted shipments that were in progress. But Carr says Spreetail wanted to support its suppliers, who might otherwise have had to shut down factories as orders tumbled. He also felt confident that he could raise prices enough to make new imports financially worthwhile.
Spreetail ended up paying elevated rates on the deck chairs and about 200 other products out of the 20,000 it imports, which include Razor scooters, ChargePoint EV chargers, and Sterilite boxes, Carr says. It paid rates as high as 190 percent after accounting for item-specific tariffs. 'We will not be able to get those dollars back,' Carr adds, perhaps resigned to the limited prospect of refunds.
Companies have managed to get some money back. Products that were in transit when the higher tariff rate went into effect were exempted from having to pay it. But some of the initial bills importers received didn't reflect that. A straw hat importer, who didn't provide their name when asked in a series of direct messages on Reddit, tells WIRED that they successfully wrangled for an exemption and brought their tariffs rate to about 61 percent from an initially feared nearly 177 percent—though the rate is still double the 31.5 percent they paid in 2023.
Though the lobbying push in Washington, DC is moving forward, better luck may come from judges. Several lawsuits brought by businesses and states have alleged that Trump lacked the authority to impose recent tariffs such as those on Chinese imports. Some initial rulings are possible within days, but final decisions and any resulting refunds may be years away. Oregon attorney general Dan Rayfield, who is leading one of the cases, says that if he wins, the federal government must give back 'every cent of the illegal tariffs collected.'
If the court cases fail, then businesses could resort to a last-minute plea in about 16 months, which is generally the deadline to protest import bills. Mark Tallo, a partner at law firm Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, says he's telling clients to keep their ledgers open. 'Wait until month 15,' he says. There might just be a new ray of hope.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' could spell trouble for gamblers: What to know
Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' could spell trouble for gamblers: What to know

The Hill

timea few seconds ago

  • The Hill

Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' could spell trouble for gamblers: What to know

A gambling tax provision in President Trump's megabill that passed Congress earlier this month is ruffling feathers on both sides of the aisle. Tucked into the approximately 1,000-page tax and spending cuts plan is a measure that experts say will make it more expensive for gamblers to lose, and that some Republicans say they weren't even aware of until after it passed. Here are a few things to know about the change to the gambling tax. What does the gambling tax provision do? A major component of the plan passed by Republicans earlier this month was to extend expiring tax cuts enacted by Trump's signature 2017 tax law. But among the host of added tax changes in the plan, was a provision that reduces the tax deduction for gambling losses from 100 percent to 90 percent. The plan would take effect at the start of next year, absent congressional action. Asked about the plan in recent days, some GOP senators have downplayed the impact of the bill on their constituents. But members on both sides have pointed to the swift pace at which Congress moved to get Trump's tax agenda across the finish line. 'There was a reason I wanted a conference once we actually had language, and before we had motion to proceed, I wasn't granted that conference,' Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, said Tuesday. 'I knew we had all kinds of provisions that we had never discussed about in conference, and I wanted to discuss it,' he said. 'I wanted to wait.' Who is affected? Experts say the measure could wind up meaning big trouble for professional gamblers. 'It doesn't affect the population broadly, but this could have a very, very large impact on casino operators and the big group of people that we see this affecting are professional gamblers,' Adam Hoffer, director of excise tax policy at the Tax Foundation, said in an interview this week. Hoffer said the measure would lead to gamblers having to pay more when they break even, describing a scenario in which a professional spends a million dollars a year buying into poker tournaments. 'Over the course of that year, they also win, they cash out a total of a million dollars,' he explained. 'Now that's break even. They didn't actually make any money there. And in previous years, before this tax provision change, they wouldn't owe any net income.' 'However, with this change, instead of being able to deduct the million dollars that they spent on buying into poker tournaments, they're only allowed to deduct $900,000,' he said. He and others have also raised concerns that legislation puts at risk a growing sports betting industry and incentivizes offshore gambling. How did it get in the bill? The Senate's chief tax writing committee said the provision made it into the plan due to the strict rules governing the complex process Republicans used to pass the package. Under the wonky maneuver known as budget reconciliation, Republicans were able to greenlight the major tax bill through Congress without Democratic support in the Senate, bypassing the 60-vote threshold needed for most legislation to make it out of the upper chamber. But the process comes with limitations. A spokesperson for the committee said to comply with reconciliation rules, every provision from the president's 2017 tax law 'needed to be modified to create a budgetary effect.' 'In order to retain the gambling loss provision, it was changed to 90 percent,' the spokesperson said. What will it save? An estimate from the Joint Committee on Taxation that pegs the projected revenue generated from the provision at about $1.1 billion over roughly the next decade. By contrast, experts have pointed to overall estimates of the package, which project the plan would add more than $3 trillion to the nation's deficits over the same timeframe. Much of the cost comes from the tax proposals in the plan. At the same time, the new law includes major changes that could lead to hundreds of billions dollars in reduced spending for Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, new restrictions for student loan borrowers and the phaseout of multiple popular repayment plans, and changes targeting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's funding. 'The tax burden doesn't fall on the industry itself and has no tax implications for the gambling industry,' Lucy Dadayan, a principal research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said in an email. 'Still, the gambling industry is concerned the reduced profitability for players could dampen demand and push players into the unregulated gambling markets.' Will Congress undo it? Some Democrats have already been sounding alarm over the measure, which Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) unsuccessfully sought to undo earlier this month. 'It will do irreparable harm to our nation's gaming industry if it takes effect — especially in Nevada,' the Nevada Democrat said at the time, warning it would 'disincentivize' gamblers. The Senate Finance Committee said Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) is 'open to receiving feedback from affected stakeholders and learning more about industry reporting and compliance.' 'While the committee heard from gaming associations on other provisions after the Finance Committee's text was released on June 16, there were no concerns raised with lowering the threshold,' they added. Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), top Democrat on the Finance Committee, was pressed on Tuesday whether negotiations on the matter have reached leadership level as some Republicans have expressed interest in bipartisan tax action this year. Wyden said Cortez Masto immediately talked to him about the matter and that he intends to 'help in any way that I can,' calling it a 'very important issue to her constituents.' 'The Republicans did, according to my colleague, great damage to the economy of her state simply because they didn't consult with anybody,' he argued. 'They rushed it through.'

Trump administration considers additional hurdles for wind energy
Trump administration considers additional hurdles for wind energy

The Hill

timea few seconds ago

  • The Hill

Trump administration considers additional hurdles for wind energy

The Trump administration will consider putting up further hurdles for the development of wind energy onshore and offshore, it announced late Tuesday afternoon. In a press release, it said that it would undertake a review to consider 'whether to stop onshore wind development on some federal lands and halting future offshore wind lease sales.' In addition, the Interior Department will review bird deaths associated with wind energy. The Trump administration has weakened protections on migratory birds when they're killed by companies generally. The wind move comes after Trump again railed against wind energy while visiting Europe over the weekend. 'These policy changes represent a commonsense approach to energy that puts Americans' interests first,' said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum in a written statement. They follow a series of other actions taken by the Trump administration to hamper wind energy development as the president has repeatedly made clear his distaste for wind power. The Interior Department recently said it will also put solar and wind projects through an elevated review process that is expected to significantly slow down their approval. One of the first moves of Trump's presidency was also a pause on federal wind approvals. While the last Trump administration pledged to support an 'all of the above' energy strategy, this time around the administration has made clear that it favors fossil fuels and other energy sources like nuclear while it tries to hold up solar and wind energy development.

Trump's net approval rating hits new low of second term
Trump's net approval rating hits new low of second term

The Hill

timea few seconds ago

  • The Hill

Trump's net approval rating hits new low of second term

President Trump's net job approval rating reached its lowest of his second term in the latest Economist/YouGov poll. Trump's net approval is 15 points underwater — with 55 percent of Americans disapproving of the president's performance in office and 40 percent of Americans approving. For the last two weeks, 55 percent of Americans have disapproved, and 41 percent have approved of his performance in office; and for the two weeks before that, 53 percent disapproved, and 42 percent approved. Trump started his second term with 49 percent approval and 43 percent disapproval. The starkest change in the latest poll comes from Republicans, who've shifted away from the president by 12 points over the last two weeks, as the president navigates the country's fixation on the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump's latest net approval rating among Republicans is positive 74 points — with 86 percent approving and 12 percent disapproving of his job in office. That's down from Trump's net approval rating of 86 percent two weeks ago, when 92 percent of Republicans approved and 6 percent disapproved of his handling of the presidency. The latest poll marks Trump's worst performance among Republicans all year. Support for the president has remained largely stable since Trump took office in January, but his approval rating dropped below the 90-percent threshold for the first time last week, when 87 percent of Republicans approved and 11 percent disapproved of his job in office. Among Democrats, meanwhile, Trump net approval is negative 85 points; among independents, his net approval rating is negative 33 points. Compared with Trump's overall net approval rating, Americans are happier with the president's handling of immigration and jobs/the economy — with net approval ratings of negative 6 points and negative 11 points, respectively. But the president fares worse on several key issues. Trump is underwater by 25 points on inflation/prices; by 20 points on climate change and the environment; and by 19 points on abortion. Trump's handling of foreign trade and education matches his overall net approval of negative 15 points. The latest survey, conducted July 25-28, includes 1,777 adults and has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store