So how's that going? Outsourcing seems to be going strong, the tarriffs instead pissed off allies who are preparing counter-tarriffs, and the CHIPS Act is being dismantle as we speak (there goes our investment.

If TSMC acquires Intel (which is in the works), then chips act (basically a government handout to private corp) wont be needed anymore

Well, until it isn't. It's cheap for Intel and the administration short term though.

I believe that the long-term plan is to turn TSMC into an American company

You should let his Commerce Secretary know (or stop sanewashing)

https://www.axios.com/2025/02/20/commerce-secretary-lutnick-...

Cool, still unconstitutional.

So, for those of us who haven't studied this in depth, why do you say it's unconstitutional? Do tariffs require congressional approval? Or what?

Tariffs are a form of taxation. If I want to import say tea, and the government is placing a tariff on that imported tea, I am effectively taxed by the government. And only Congress can impose new taxes.

The Trade Act of 1974 gives the president power to impose retaliatory tariffs.

Not saying you're wrong, but... I have seen claims that tariffs are a source of government income that Congress doesn't control. You're claiming they do.

I haven't seen a citation from either side. Can you substantiate your position?

I have already explained my thinking up this comment chain. I'm mostly replying to GP who misunderstands that the intent of the tariffs is besides the point.

TL;DR read Article I section 8, read up about the Trade Expansion act of 1962 and Trade act of 1974, and "non-delegation doctrine", and you can trivially find legal debate about the constitutionality of IEEPA. Rather than listen to random nerds on HN you should seek out this information yourself.