In addition to the policy problems with just charging Nvidia and AMD a 15% share of revenues to sell advanced chips in China, the US Constitution flatly forbids export taxes.
Peter Harrell
2,447 posts
Peter Harrell
@petereharrell
Visiting Scholar, Georgetown Law School IIEL. Attorney. Host, “Security Economics” podcast. Mostly international economics posts.
Joined May 2010
- This question--why can't we just solve our rare earths problem already!--comes up a lot. As someone who worked on this when I was in government, several thoughts. This is to explain, not defend, why we are where we are, and to offer recommendations. Clearly, we need to fix theWhy can't the US do a Project Warp Speed for rare earth minerals? @SecretaryBurgum - This seems like a top priority. Can we get this done my Q2 2026?
- The Chinese would pay a lot for F35s and advanced US military technology, too. Regardless of whether you think Nvidia should be able to sell H20s in China, charging a fee in exchange for relaxing national security export controls is a terrible precedent.
- Replying to @peterfrankopanAnd it may get even worse for the tech companies as they move more squarely into the focus of foreign retaliation.
- And that is a wrap on the SCOTUS arguments. After that argument, if I were the Trump Administration, I'd be burning the midnight oil over the next couple of weeks drawing up tariff backup plans. A clear majority of the Justices appeared skeptical that IEEPA authorizes the type
- Trump’s emerging opposition to the CHIPS Act is only one of his proposals to stop rebuilding US chip manufacturing. The other is his 20% tariffs on the Dutch, Japanese, etc. tools that new US fabs will need to actually make the chips. (20% on a $300 million EUV machine hurts).
- Huge unanimous decision out of the Court of International trade finding all of Trump's IEEPA tariffs--Canada, Mexico, China, and "Liberation Day"--are unlawful. The government will immediately appeal. But if this is upheld, it is a fundamental blow to Trump's tariff agenda.
- Biggest tax hike of any kind in modern U.S. history.
- Just finished reading all the EOs. Maximalist tariffs tonight. For example: 25% duty on Canada covers all goods, except energy at 10%. Maple syrup, lumber, auto parts... 10% China tariffs cover all products, including stuff Trump didn't tariff in Term 1, e.g., laptops, TVs.
- Analysis of yesterday's Court of International Trade (CIT) decision enjoining Trump's IEEPA tariffs, and thoughts about what might come next: 1. The CIT found that all of Trump's IEEPA tariffs--the Canada, Mexico, and China tariffs, and the "Liberation Day" tariffs--are
- Breaking down the biggest tariff increase since 1930, which Trump announced this afternoon. (Also likely the largest tax increase of *any kind* in modern U.S. history). 1. Most US imports, with a number of exceptions that I'll come to, will be subject to *substantial* new
- As a trade lawyer, settling in to listen to SCOTUS hear the IEEPA tariff case this morning feels like getting ready to watch one of the greatest superbowls ever.
- Build back better is being built!
- The more I dig into the details of the government's new stake in Intel, the more I fear this is a bad deal for the taxpayer: 1. Under Intel's original CHIPS grant, Intel was slated to receive a total of about $11 billion from the Commerce and Defense Departments. This was not a
