Video Analysis

The Supreme Court ruled against President Trump's broad use of the IEEPA for tariffs, a decision described as 'momentous' but not entirely unexpected. Trump responded by announcing a new 10% global tariff using a different, previously unused legal tool (Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974). This creates new uncertainties regarding its application and potential legal challenges, while the issue of refunds for past tariffs remains unresolved.

• The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 does not authorize the president to impose tariffs broadly.
• President Trump called the decision 'deeply disappointing' and announced he would sign an executive order imposing a new 10% global tariff using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
• Section 122 has never been used in this manner before and was not designed to address trade deficits, raising questions about its legal standing and potential court challenges.
• The ruling did not address whether tariffs already paid under IEEPA will be refunded, leading to anticipated demands for refunds in lower courts and a potentially 'messy' process.

Ed Siddell is bullish on the economy, citing positive durable goods orders and lower-than-expected CPI inflation. He anticipates 75-125 basis points of Fed rate cuts in 2026, which he believes will improve consumer affordability and stimulate small business growth. He identifies long-term investment opportunities in precious metals and nuclear energy, advising a well-balanced portfolio to navigate market volatility.

• Economy is heading in the right direction, supported by positive jobs reports, increased durable goods orders (metals, machinery, electronics), and CPI inflation numbers below expectations (2.4%).
• The Fed is expected to implement 75-125 basis points of rate cuts in 2026, with 100 basis points being probable, which should translate to improved affordability for consumers (e.g., mortgages, auto rates) and enable small business expansion.
• Long-term investment opportunities are seen in precious metals (gold, silver) due to concerns about US debt, and in nuclear energy, driven by the high electricity demands of AI and data centers.

The discussion centers on the Supreme Court's ruling striking down some of President Trump's tariffs, which he calls 'a disgrace.' Despite the setback, Trump asserts that existing national security tariffs remain in place and he will impose new global tariffs under different authorities. Experts discuss the legal avenues available to the President for implementing tariffs and their role in foreign policy and protecting U.S. interests.

• President Trump expresses disappointment with the Supreme Court's decision on tariffs but states existing national security tariffs under Sections 232 and 301 remain in full force.
• Trump announces he will sign an order imposing a 10% global tariff under Section 122, and will initiate other investigations to protect the country from unfair trading practices.
• Justice Kavanaugh's dissent and expert commentary highlight that the President retains broad tariff authority under other U.S. laws (e.g., Tariff Act of 1930, Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Trade Act of 1974).
• Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent argues the ruling is a 'loss for the American people' as it removes 'instantaneous leverage' but notes the Supreme Court affirmed the President's right to impose a full embargo, which is a more draconian measure.

The discussion revolves around the surprisingly weak Q4 GDP growth of 1.4% for 2025, which is seen as inconsistent with other strong economic indicators like rising production, manufacturing, business capex, and durable goods orders. Both speakers agree the economy 'feels like' a 4% economy, driven by pro-growth policies, despite some concerns about employment and the uncertainty from a recent Supreme Court tariff ruling.

• Q4 GDP came in at a surprisingly weak 1.4% annual rate, attributed partly to the government shutdown and lower-than-expected private consumption.
• Despite the Q4 GDP, other economic indicators like production, manufacturing, business capex, and durable goods orders suggest a much stronger economy, feeling like 4% growth.
• The Supreme Court's tariff ruling introduces uncertainty for businesses regarding refunds and future tariff applications, though the overall macro trade policy is expected to continue.

The discussion centers on the Supreme Court's tariff ruling and its market implications. The expert believes the ruling, while initially causing risky assets to rebound due to reduced uncertainty, will have little net impact on overall tariffs. He maintains a bullish outlook for equities, citing strong earnings and the AI revolution.

• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated that existing tariffs will remain in place due to other trade act mechanisms, despite the Supreme Court ruling.
• The expert, Adam Kobeissi, noted that the market's initial reaction was a rebound in risky assets, but he expects 'pretty little net impact on tariffs overall'.
• Kobeissi highlighted that tariffs have been 'accepted by the market' and 'largely ignored' recently, with equities near all-time highs, strong earnings, and significant capex spending by 'Mag 7' companies.
• The bond market's minimal reaction (10Y Note Yield up just 1 basis point) suggests it is not 'buying' a significant change, reinforcing the idea that tariffs will remain in some form.
• The expert concludes that the ruling provides more certainty, which is 'bullish for risky assets', despite potential ongoing litigation for refunds.

Larry Kudlow discusses the Supreme Court's decision to strike down President Trump's tariffs under the IEEPA, arguing it's a technicality. He asserts that Trump retains other, potentially stronger, legal options to impose tariffs and will continue his reciprocal trade policy to rejuvenate the American economy and attract investment.

• Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against President Trump's authority to levy tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
• Kudlow dismisses the ruling as a 'technical matter,' stating Trump's reciprocal trade policy will continue.
• Trump can utilize Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (up to 50% tariff for 150 days), Section 301 (unfair trading practices), and Section 232 (national security threats).
• Trump views these alternative tariff options as 'even stronger' than IEEPA and will employ them, including using tariffs as a foreign diplomacy tool.
• Kudlow concludes that 'nothing really changes' regarding Trump's trade strategy, which aims to level the playing field and attract investment.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Blakeman discusses tariffs, criticizing New York State's high taxes and regulations under Governor Hochul, and New York City's financial management under Mayor Mamdani. He advocates for policies to boost economic development, cut energy costs, and enforce immigration laws, aiming to make New York more affordable and safer.

• Blakeman supports tariffs for manufacturing jobs and a level playing field, noting a Supreme Court decision on Congress's role in setting them.
• He criticizes New York State's economic policies for high taxes and regulations, leading to job and population exodus, and proposes cutting energy bills.
• He criticizes New York City's financial management and calls for ending its sanctuary city status, advocating for working with ICE to remove criminals while providing a path to legality for law-abiding immigrants.

The video provides a comprehensive recap of the US market close, highlighting broad market gains across major indices like the S&P 500, Dow Jones, and Nasdaq, while the Russell 2000 saw a slight decline. Discussions included the muted market reaction to a Supreme Court tariff ruling, leading sector performance, and movements of individual stocks, alongside rising Treasury yields.

• S&P 500, Dow Jones, and Nasdaq finished the day in the green, with the Russell 2000 slightly lower, indicating investor uncertainty.
• Information Technology and Communication Services led sector gains, while Energy and Health Care were the only sectors to finish in the red.
• Top gainers included Comfort Systems USA Inc (FIX), General Electric (GE), and Alphabet A-Shares (GOOGL), driven by strong earnings and strategic initiatives.
• Top decliners included Blue Owl Capital Inc (OWL), Walmart (WMT), and Coreweave Inc (CRWV), with concerns over liquidity in private credit and a weak outlook for Walmart.
• Treasury yields rose across the board, with the entire curve shifting up, ahead of the next Fed decision.

The Supreme Court struck down President Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs, citing unconstitutional use of the IEEPA. This decision could lead to billions in refunds for importers and retailers, causing an initial market surge. However, uncertainty persists regarding future trade policies and whether the market has already priced in this development.

• Supreme Court ruled Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs (under IEEPA) unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.
• Retailers, wholesalers, and importers are expected to benefit from potential refunds, with stocks initially surging.
• Existing steel and aluminum tariffs, imposed under different authority, are not affected by this ruling.
• The market's initial positive reaction may be priced in, and future trade policy remains uncertain, with potential for new tariffs.

St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem discussed sticky inflation, the Fed's monetary policy, and the impact of a Supreme Court tariff ruling. He noted that inflation is running closer to 3% and that the Fed's policy is well-positioned to address both inflation and employment, suggesting a neutral real rate is appropriate. He also commented on the nomination of Kevin Warsh as a good pick for Fed Chair.

• PCE inflation accelerated to 2.9% annually in December, complicating hopes for early summer rate cuts, with June rate cut chances dropping from 70% to 52.1%.
• Musalem views the Fed's current policy as 'well-positioned' to respond to inflation or employment, with a neutral real rate being appropriate given the economic outlook.
• He believes Kevin Warsh is a 'very good pick' for Fed Chair, emphasizing the FOMC's collegial, evidence-based debate process.

Nobel laureate Paul Krugman discusses the Supreme Court's ruling against Trump-era tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). He argues that tariffs are essentially a sales tax on American consumers, leading to a higher cost of living and being slightly contractionary for the economy. The ruling limits the President's discretion in imposing tariffs, though new tariffs could still be implemented under different sections of trade law.

• The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against Trump's IEEPA tariffs, stating he exceeded federal authority, but did not address tariff refunds.
• Krugman views tariffs as a sales tax on American consumers, increasing the cost of living and being slightly contractionary.
• While new tariffs could replace lost revenue, they would not grant the President the same broad discretion as IEEPA, and any consumer relief from the ruling may be short-lived if new tariffs are imposed.

The Supreme Court struck down President Trump's tariffs imposed under a specific law, ruling that the power to tax belongs to Congress. This decision impacts $170 billion in collected tariffs, with uncertainty surrounding immediate collection cessation and the refund process. Experts suggest the President may utilize other tariff authorities or seek congressional amendments.

• The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Trump's tariffs, likely imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were unconstitutional as the power to tax resides with Congress.
• The decision impacts $170 billion in tariffs already collected, with debate on whether collection stops immediately and if refunds will be processed via regulatory means or lower court litigation.
• The President retains other tariff authorities (e.g., Section 122, 301) and may impose new tariffs or seek legislative changes to the IEEPA statute.

The US Supreme Court struck down a significant portion of former President Trump's global tariffs, ruling that the statute he used did not grant him the authority to impose them. This decision limits presidential power in trade policy, potentially leading to prolonged legal battles over refunds and forcing the president to use more constrained tariff powers in the future.

• The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against Trump's tariffs, invalidating more than half of those imposed under the 'economic emergencies' statute.
• The court clarified that the tariff power is primarily Congress's, and the president cannot assume such authority without clear delegation.
• Significant litigation is expected over $170 billion in tariffs already paid, and future tariff attempts by the president will rely on more cumbersome and limited legal avenues.

The speaker, Scott Bessent, discusses the implications of a Supreme Court ruling on tariffs, noting that it narrowed the President's ability to collect revenue under IEEPA but did not eliminate the power to impose embargoes or other tariffs. He anticipates that overall tariff revenue will remain largely unchanged in 2026 due to the continued use of other statutory authorities like Section 232 and 301 tariffs.

• Supreme Court ruling on tariffs (6-3 vote) limited the President's ability to collect revenue via IEEPA powers, but not the power to impose full embargoes.
• Other tariff mechanisms, such as Section 232 and 301 tariffs, which have withstood over 4,000 lawsuits, remain available to the President.
• The speaker expects total tariff revenue to be 'little changed' in 2026, indicating a continuation of current trade policy.
• The dispute over previously collected tariff revenue (around $175 billion) has been sent back to the International Tax and Trade Court for further review.

President Donald Trump announced the imposition of a new 10% global tariff under Section 122, in addition to existing tariffs. He also confirmed that national security tariffs under Section 232 and existing Section 301 tariffs remain in full force and effect, aiming to protect the country from unfair trading practices.

• President Trump announced a new 10% global tariff under Section 122, effective immediately.
• Existing national security tariffs (Section 232) and Section 301 tariffs remain fully in place.
• The measures are intended to protect the U.S. from unfair trading practices by other countries and companies.

The video discusses the US economic resilience and its implications for Fed rate cuts, highlighting mixed views on inflation and growth. It also covers the Supreme Court's decision to strike down Trump's global tariffs, creating uncertainty about future trade policy and government revenue. Significant attention is given to intensifying private credit risks, particularly following Blue Owl's decision to restrict withdrawals from one of its funds, and the potential disruptive impact of AI on loan markets.

• US economic resilience and persistent inflation are weakening the case for immediate Fed rate cuts, with the Fed likely to remain on hold.
• The Supreme Court struck down Trump's global tariffs, leading to market uncertainty regarding future trade policy and potential government revenue shortfalls.
• Private credit markets are facing increased scrutiny due to Blue Owl's withdrawal restrictions and rising default rates in some sectors, raising concerns about systemic risks.
• Strong demand for investment-grade credit persists, but concerns about AI disruption in loan markets and potential oversupply from hyperscalers are emerging.

The video features Donald Trump announcing his intention to impose a 10% global tariff under Section 122, in addition to existing tariffs. He also plans to initiate Section 301 and other investigations to combat unfair trading practices from other countries.

• Trump proposes a 10% global tariff under Section 122.
• This new tariff would be applied over and above current normal tariffs.
• Plans include initiating Section 301 and other investigations to address unfair trading practices.

President Trump reacted to a Supreme Court decision striking down certain tariffs, expressing frustration but asserting his ability to use 'powerful alternatives' like trade embargoes or cutting off all trade. He views the court's decision as incorrectly limiting his ability to charge fees while affirming more drastic measures.

• Supreme Court rejected specific tariffs, but Trump claims he can still impose more severe trade restrictions.
• Trump states he has the right to 'destroy the trade' and 'destroy the country' through embargoes and cutting off business, even if he can't charge a dollar fee.
• He asserts 'powerful alternatives' will be used, implying continued aggressive trade policy.

President Trump expressed deep disappointment and shame regarding a Supreme Court ruling on tariffs, stating it was detrimental to the United States and beneficial to foreign countries that have historically 'ripped off' the US. He implied the ruling undermines efforts to protect American interests in trade.

• President Trump is deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court's ruling on tariffs.
• He criticized certain Supreme Court members for lacking the courage to do what's right for the country.
• He believes the ruling benefits foreign countries, making them 'ecstatic' and 'dancing in the streets'.

The discussion revolves around the Supreme Court's decision to strike down Trump tariffs, with analysts debating its legal, political, and economic implications. While some view it as a win for free trade, the conversation highlights ongoing uncertainty and the administration's intent to pursue alternative tariff measures, leading to a tepid market reaction.

• Tom Keene argues the ruling is a 'huge deal' on legal and political grounds, referencing historical tariff failures and public dissatisfaction with higher prices.
• Kevin Hassett from Fox Business defends tariffs as 'common sense' and effective, suggesting the administration has 'other authorities' to impose them.
• The Supreme Court, including Trump appointees, is seen as 'screaming for guardrails', asserting that the President cannot impose tariffs based on vague laws.
• The market's reaction was 'tepid' (Dow up only 37 points, retail down), reflecting uncertainty about the future of trade policy and the economic impact.