THE MORNING RANT: Any Refund of Tariffs Already Collected Should Go to Taxpayers, not Businesses

Last November,President Trump announced that he would share the financial bounty of his tariffs by sending $2,000 “tariff dividend” payments to most Americans. Truth be told, even though I am a strong supporter of the tariffs, I did not care for this idea since it comes across as exchanging a government check for political support.

The outsource-all-the-manufacturing-jobs “free traders” were apoplectic, of course. National Review had a hair-on-fire piece titled “Trump’s $2,000 Check is a Disastrous Idea.” Perhaps. But with the Supreme Court having just invalidated many of the tariffs, and with businesses suing to claw back tariffs that they paid, who should get the money if the tariffs are going to be refunded?

Don’t forget, the opponents of tariffs reflexively bleat “Tariffs are a tax on consumers” at any mention of there being economic benefits from tariffing imports. Doesn’t it follow then that if tariff revenues were taxes paid by consumers, and if those tariff revenues were illegal and must be returned, the tariff refunds should go to taxpayers rather than to corporations?

Maybe it’s time to re-think the “tariff dividend.”

Those of us who support President Trump’s tariffs want to restore America’s industrial might, repatriate manufacturing jobs, reduce trade imbalances, and protect our national sovereignty. We argue that tariffs keep economic prosperity at home, and reduce US dependence on supply chains involving hostile foreign regimes.

The opponents of Trump’s tariffs envision a utopian, one-world economic market in which the US is a weak country dependent on overseas manufacturing. Although they call themselves “free traders,” they do not actually argue for reciprocal free trade. They argue passionately that the US should unilaterally surrender to foreign mercantilism, keeping our markets open to those same countries that block American exports. When tariffs are proposed to break down those unfair trade barriers, the “free traders” immediately start reciting their overused buzz phrase, “Tariffs are a tax on consumers.”

My motivation for supporting tariffs has nothing to do with collecting tariff revenue. I’d be happy if tariff revenues were nominal, indicating that we have a broadly diverse domestic economy that is not significantly reliant on imports. That said, Trump’s tariffs have been successful in generating revenue during this time of transition. Whoever is ultimately paying the tariffs – be it consumers, importers, or foreign suppliers - $133 billion has already been collected so far.

But as I mentioned above, businesses that actually remitted the tariff payments on their imported goods are now demanding those tariffs be refunded to them:

“Businesses Push for Tariff Refunds as Trump Aides Hint at Fight to Come” [NY Times – 02/25/2026]

Now that the president has suffered such a stinging defeat, major businesses including Dyson, FedEx and L’Oreal have filed an early barrage of lawsuits in search of hefty tariff payouts.

At stake is more than $100 billion in revenue collected over the past year under a roster of tariffs that the Supreme Court invalidated last week. While a defiant Mr. Trump has since taken steps to try to revive the duties, he still faces the prospect that the money collected from his past tariffs might have to be paid back.

So far, roughly 900 claims seeking those refunds have been filed in federal court, according to the Liberty Justice Center, a legal group that represented some of the small businesses in the lawsuit that reached the nation’s justices.

Since the free traders have so persistently argued that “Tariffs are a tax on consumers,” why should the businesses involved in importing goods be entitled to any tariff refunds? I thought we the consumers were the ones who paid those tariffs, not the businesses or their overseas suppliers.

Here’s an idea on how we could resolve the refund of these contested tariffs to consumers - a tariff dividend from the government to taxpayers, just like President Trump proposed.

Irrespective of how this specific political battle plays out, the Trump administration has plenty of other avenues to fix the nation’s trade imbalance, including the imposition of tariffs under other statutes. The “free traders” so desperate to see other countries prosper at the expense of the United States, and who despair at the thought of an American industrial revival, will not prevail. New tariffs will be imposed, because tariffs are working.

As documented by F. Andrew Wolf Jr. at The American Spectator, the US trade deficit plunged a whopping 45% in Q4 of 2025 compared to Q4 of 2024! This was due to the Trump tariffs.

There has also been a torrent of announcements from corporations in the past year regarding major investments in the United States for new manufacturing plants. Just a small sample of these announcements include:

• APPLE: $500 billion investment including a new Texas manufacturing plant.

• MICRON: $200 billion investment including $15 billion for a new chip fabrication facility in Idaho.

• ELY LILLY: $6 billion plant in Huntsville, AL creating 450 jobs.

• ASTRA ZENECA: $50 billion across multiple states.

• JOHNSON & JOHNSON: $2 billion in North Carolina.

The hundreds of billions being invested in the United States will create high paying jobs, which will then circulate money and prosperity throughout those communities. The products being manufactured stateside will also result in dollars remaining in the US to circulate, rather than being sent overseas.

The Supreme Court’s ruling is a small setback, but it would be foolish for any company to think there will be a return to the business model of sourcing cheap products manufactured by foreign, poverty-wage labor.

Ideally, the Trump administration will keep the tariffs already collected and find a workaround to re-impose the tariffs. But if those revenues must be refunded, they should be paid directly to American taxpayers as a “tariff dividend.” There is absolutely no reason for corporations to be the recipient of any refunds, because I’ve been reliably told that their collection was always a “tax on consumers.”

Happy Birthday Texas!

Today is Texas Independence Day! It was on March 2, 1836, in Washington-on-the-Brazos (near College Station, TX) that Sam Houston, Lorenzo de Zavala, Samuel Maverick, Jose Navarro, and 55 other brave patriots signed the Declaration of Independence from Mexico.

170 miles away in San Antonio, William Travis, Jim Bowie, David Crockett and about 200 others were under siege from Mexican President Santa Anna and his army. Four days later, the Alamo fell, and Santa Anna then headed east to destroy Sam Houston’s ragtag army and quash the Texas Revolution. He failed.

What started on the banks of the Brazos, changed North America and changed the United States. Texas was an independent country for over 9 years before becoming a US state. (Texas even had a a four-ship navy.)

Texas has a meh state song (“Texas, Our Texas”) and several unofficial anthems. There are frequent discussions in online Texas history forums about what the national anthem of Texas should be if it were ever to become a country again.

My vote for Texas National Anthem would be the Hill Country Theme. It was cowritten in the 1960s by Cindy Walker (who is famous for the song “You Don’t Know Me” and many Bob Wills songs.) Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops put it to an orchestral arrangement for a TV special about the Hill Country of Texas, where LBJ spent much of his presidency. It soon became a popular song played by Texas high school orchestras, and it also became the theme song of a show called Texas Country Reporter.

Here’s a nice video featuring the Boston Pops’ version of the Hill Country Theme:

By the way, if anyone is triggered by discussion of LBJ, the part of Texas he comes from has been solid Republican from the Civil War to present, and in the 1960s, his neighbors voted against him!

[buck.throckmorton at protonmail dot com]

posted by Buck Throckmorton at 11:00 AM

| Access Comments