Latest news with #LearningResources
Mint
23-06-2025
- Business
- Mint
A toy maker sued Trump over tariffs and won. Its operations are still in tatters.
On paper, things are looking up for Rick Woldenberg and his Illinois-based educational-toy business. Tariffs on Chinese imports are down from stratospheric levels. Federal courts have ruled the duties were invalid in the first place. And trade deals could further ease import duties. But on the ground, it is a different story. Crucial equipment has been disassembled, packed and trucked hundreds of miles on mountain roads only to be trucked back on short notice. Staff members are constantly re-evaluating a catalog of more than 2,000 toys and games, deciding which to keep producing and which to put on ice indefinitely. And the business recently had to raise prices. 'We're moving at the speed of light here—flying the plane while fixing it," said Woldenberg, who runs the family business. Founded by his grandfather in 1916, it now comprises two companies, Learning Resources and hand2mind. For weeks, Woldenberg and his roughly 500 employees—most at a suburban Chicago headquarters—have hastened to halt shipments, reroute cargo, raise prices and freeze expansion plans. The companies sued President Trump and other administration officials in federal court, winning a reprieve that is now under appeal and on hold. On Wednesday, the companies asked the Supreme Court to intervene in their favor. Through it all, the most pressing questions are how to move toy production out of China, where to move it—and how to get tons of manufacturing equipment there in time to meet deadlines for end-of-the-year holidays. 'It's almost like an evacuation," Woldenberg said. 'We don't have a place to make important items our reputation is built around." Lining up new factories in another country is just the start. Heavy manufacturing-molds must be transported hundreds or thousands of miles by truck or ship and then reassembled. Quality-control processes and safety inspections must be re-created. On Woldenberg's list: Vietnam, India and Cambodia. One place he isn't considering: the U.S. American injection-molding factories aren't set up—or cost-effective—for the painting, assembly and labor-intensive finishing the toys need, he said. Employees have hurried to halt shipments, reroute cargo, raise prices and freeze expansion plans. Woldenberg's production has been centered on China since the 1990s, when his companies started pairing up with contract manufacturers there. Factories compete vigorously for his companies' relatively small batches, and have plenty of the unskilled but experienced workers needed to manually smooth, paint, assemble and package the products, he said. After the tariffs of Trump's first term, Woldenberg began exploring new manufacturing centers and moved production for about 15% of his products to Vietnam and India over nearly three years. Last year, the companies imported $65 million of products, about 60% from China. When Trump won his second term in November, Woldenberg prepared for a trade war with China and drafted a plan to offset tariffs as high as 40%: Cut costs by 10% in every department. Rein in capital expenditures. Negotiate concessions from factories in China. (He said he got about 5% on average 'after a lot of arguing.") Keep his own price increases under 10%. Then, Trump slapped 145% tariffs on goods from China. Woldenberg threw out his plan. With tariffs at that level, he started planning to move production. That meant relocating the company's 1,500 injection molds installed in Chinese factories, weighing what he estimated to be 1.5 million pounds combined. But where? The answer was clear for one of his top products: GeoSafari Jr. Kidnoculars—bright blue, green and yellow binoculars sold under the Educational Insights brand. Amazon alone has shipped more than 9,000 a month lately, pricing them just under $10 each, and ranking it No. 1 among nature exploration toys. A factory near Hanoi already made some Kidnoculars. Woldenberg's team ordered the 13 molds in China to be sent there. They filled a flatbed truck with bulky blocks of metal stacked on pallets and wrapped in plastic. By May 1, the Kidnocular molds had arrived. Production began soon after. 'That's probably the single easiest product to move," Woldenberg said. Cooper the STEM Robot, a newcomer to the Learning Resources lineup, proved trickier. The cheerful, blue-and-black programmable ball with alligator-clip hands has sensors to detect objects and light, and can wheel along a line drawn by a child. It sells for $79.99 online. Woldenberg's team hasn't found a place to build it, or other electronics, outside China. 'Once the inventory that we have is gone, I don't know how we're going to replenish it," he said. Woldenberg doesn't dodge publicity. Under President Barack Obama, he fought tougher lead-testing rules—and in recent weeks has campaigned on cable television to end Trump's tariffs. His daughter, a company executive, posts TikToks explaining the pain of tariffs. The companies sued in late April, challenging the tariffs on constitutional and other grounds. 'It's not really our corporate personality to wait for the building to fall on our head," Woldenberg said. 'No one's going to save me. We are going to save ourselves." In court, he argued that even the president's emergency powers don't let him impose such tariffs without legislation. The government said that losing the case would hurt trade negotiations and that Trump needed to maintain the tariffs to pursue delicate talks over border crossings, narcotics control and rebuilding U.S. manufacturing. While the case wound through the courts, the tariff policy kept changing. In mid-May, the U.S. and China reached a surprise deal, lowering the new U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports to 30% for 90 days. Production in China for Woldenberg was back on, at least for a few weeks. His team moved quickly, turning around a truck about to cross China's border with Vietnam, weighed down by heavy steel molds needed for making Sight Word Swat, the Sneaky, Snacky Squirrel Game and other games and toys. Aborting the shipment cost the company $13,000. Two more trucks bearing company molds had already crossed the border. Woldenberg would have held off moving them had he known a deal was coming. Costs in Vietnam were running 10% to 30% higher than in China for many products, he said. More good news arrived at the end of May. A federal judge ruled that the government couldn't impose the tariffs on imports by Woldenberg's companies. The government appealed within hours. Meanwhile, the tariffs remained in place. For Woldenberg, the temporary deal with China and his initial court victory are promising but not enough. His team is heading to India and Vietnam in coming weeks to oversee new production lines, which take time to get up to speed. Some molds, including those for the Peeksville Hide & Cheep Chicken Coop, are en route to India by ship. The company just raised prices, averaging 5% to 10%. Trump recently suggested on social media that tariffs on China would be 55%. Tariff rates for Vietnam and India are scheduled to rise sharply in July—to 46% and 26%, respectively. Woldenberg says he can't predict whether those will stick, rise or fall, but says he can't afford to import from China if tariffs are 55%. 'We're like a refugee from a war—if the higher ground we sought isn't safe, we will load everything up in a donkey cart and move again," Woldenberg said. 'It's a really terrible way to run a business." Write to Theo Francis at
The Herald Scotland
21-06-2025
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Trump toy tariffs: Supreme Court won't speed decision on challenge
More: Hasbro layoffs: Toymaker restructures due to tariff struggles and weak demand The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on May 29 that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency legal authority he had cited for them. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now. Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington, where the case is pending. More: 'Two dolls instead of 30': Trump acknowledges prices will force consumers to cut back More: Second federal court blocks Trump tariffs, this time for Illinois toy importers Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited for them, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
Int'l Business Times
20-06-2025
- Business
- Int'l Business Times
Supreme Court Declines To Fast-Track Challenge To Trump-Era Tariffs
The US Supreme Court on Thursday declined to expedite a major legal challenge to former President Donald Trump's tariffs on Chinese imports, opting not to intervene early in a case that could reshape presidential authority over trade policy. Educational toy companies Learning Resources and hand2mind had petitioned the Court to bypass the standard appeals process, citing the "sweeping economic consequences" of the tariffs and their impact on businesses and consumers nationwide. The Court's rejection means the case will proceed under the usual timeline, with the federal government now having until mid-July to file its response, Reuters reported. The companies argue that the tariffs, imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were unconstitutional. They contend that the Act does not authorize the president to unilaterally impose trade barriers without congressional oversight. A lower court ruled in their favor in May 2024, stating that Trump lacked the authority to use emergency powers to enact the tariffs. That decision, however, is currently on hold pending appeal. In urging the Court to take up the case directly, the companies stressed what they called "unremitting whiplash" and an "unprecedented economic burden" placed on U.S. businesses. They asked the justices to schedule oral arguments as early as September 2025. The Biden administration opposed the motion, arguing that expedited review was "unwarranted" and that a similar case making its way through the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit presented a more suitable vehicle for resolving the legal questions. Solicitor General D. John Sauer advised the Court to allow the appellate process to play out, suggesting a decision could be better timed for the October 2025 term. While the Court's procedural ruling does not address the underlying legality of the tariffs, it delays any definitive resolution. The justices could still choose to hear the case in the next term or later, depending on the outcome of related appeals.
New York Times
20-06-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Supreme Court Won't Fast-Track Tariffs Challenge
The Supreme Court said on Friday that it would not fast-track a petition from two toy manufacturers challenging a major piece of President Trump's tariffs program. The court's order was one sentence long and gave no reasons. The companies' request was unusual for several reasons. Petitions seeking review ordinarily come from the losing side, but the companies had won in front of a district court judge last month. They then sought to leapfrog the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which would ordinarily rule before the justices considered whether to grant review. And they asked the justices to move quickly, asking that they schedule arguments in September or October. The companies — Learning Resources and hand2mind — said Mr. Trump's tariffs had given rise to a national emergency warranting extraordinarily quick judicial action. They asked the court to order the government to respond to their petition by Monday. 'In light of the tariffs' massive impact on virtually every business and consumer across the nation and the unremitting whiplash caused by the unfettered tariffing power the president claims,' the petition said, the companies' challenges 'cannot await the normal appellate process (even on an expedited timeline).' In response, D. John Sauer, the U.S. solicitor general, said the government would file its opposition to the petition on the usual schedule — by July 17 — and that the justices could rule on it over the summer. The manufacturers argued that the law Mr. Trump relied on, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, did not authorize tariffs. Until Mr. Trump acted, their companies' brief said, 'no president had ever invoked I.E.E.P.A. to impose a single tariff or duty on goods in the statute's nearly 50-year history.' In a separate and broader challenge, the Court of International Trade also ruled against the administration's tariffs program. A different appeals court, the Federal Circuit, is set to hear arguments in that case next month. Both lower court rulings have been paused, allowing Mr. Trump to press forward with his tariffs. Once the appeals courts have ruled, appeals to the Supreme Court are all but certain, and the justices are quite likely to take up one or both of them at that point. The toy companies sought to use an unusual procedure to bypass the D.C. Circuit, 'certiorari before judgment.' The procedure used to be rare, mostly reserved for national crises like Nixon's refusal to turn over tape recordings to a special prosecutor or Truman's seizure of the steel industry. Mr. Sauer, the solicitor general, told the justices that the toy companies' case did not require expedited treatment. 'Certiorari before judgment,' he wrote, quoting from the court's rules, 'is an exceptional procedure reserved for cases 'of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this court.''
Al Jazeera
20-06-2025
- Business
- Al Jazeera
US Supreme Court declines to speed up decision to take up fight over tariff
The court declined to fast-track the review of the dispute over Trump having legal power to impose broad tariffs. The United States Supreme Court has declined to speed up its consideration of whether to take up a challenge to President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs even before lower courts have ruled in the dispute. The Supreme Court denied on Friday a request by a family-owned toy company, Learning Resources, that filed the legal challenge against Trump's tariffs to expedite the review of the dispute by the nation's top judicial body. The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on May 29 that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency authority he had claimed. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now. Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington, where the case is pending. Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
