Blog

Tax News & Views Tariff Pigs in a Blanket Roundup

By Trina Pinneau
April 24, 2025
Pigs in a blanket

Key Takeaways

  • Tariffs
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Tax Legislation
  • Revenue Rulings
  • In the Courts
  • Pigs (or Carrots) in Blankets

Tariffs

More States Challenge Trump Administration’s Tariffs – Andrea Muse, Tax Notes ($):

Oregon and 11 other states have filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade seeking to have President Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) declared unlawful.

In their April 23 complaint in Oregon v. Trump, the states argue that Trump “has upended the constitutional order and brought chaos to the American economy,” adding that the text and history of the IEEPA confirm that the law does not authorize the president to arbitrarily impose tariffs, including “the worldwide tariffs he has imposed, which were not a response to an emergency as IEEPA defines it.”

NY, 11 Other States Sue Trump Administration to Block Tariffs – Dorothy Atkins, Law360 ($):

A dozen states are seeking to block tariffs the Trump administration imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, claiming in a lawsuit Wednesday the tariffs illegally constitute unprecedented tax hikes on Americans and violate constitutional separations of powers.

In a 38-page complaint filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, New York, Colorado and 10 other states alleged President Donald Trump's recent IEEPA orders imposing sweeping tariffs on U.S. imports — making them the highest tariffs imposed since the 1940s — violate the separation of powers under the U.S. Constitution as well as the Administrative Procedure Act.

US Customs Duties Hit New High as Trump Tariffs Take Effect – Gregory Korte, Bloomberg ($):

Revenue from customs duties spiked more than 60% in April as the first of President Donald Trump’s fresh tariffs took effect, bringing in at least $15 billion, according to Treasury data released Wednesday.

The data from the Daily Treasury Statement reflects customs duties that larger importers and brokers paid in April on imports arriving in US ports in March.

Trump Says 145% Tariffs on China Will Fall Significantly – Kevin Pinner, Law360 ($):

The U.S.' tariffs on China will end up nowhere near 145%, the current level for most Chinese goods, but they will not go away entirely, President Donald Trump said in the Oval Office.

Trump called the U.S. tariff rate on China "very high" Tuesday when answering questions from reporters at the swearing-in ceremony of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins, according to a video on C-SPAN. Trump imposed two 10% tariffs on Chinese goods in February and March, citing concerns about fentanyl trafficking, added a 34% tariff on April 2 over trade concerns, and then increased the trade-related tariffs to 125% on April 9, bringing the total rate to 145%.

US Tariffs Will Slow Global Economic Growth, IMF Says – Natalie Olivo, Law360 ($):

The "abrupt increase" in U.S. tariffs has resulted in countermeasures and uncertainty that will significantly slow global economic growth, according to a report from the International Monetary Fund.

The "flurry of tariff announcements" from the U.S. between Feb. 1 and April 4 — in addition to countermeasures from other countries — has reduced the IMF's global growth forecast to 2.8% this year and 3% next year, according to the report, released Tuesday. This is a cumulative downgrade of about 0.8 percentage points relative to the IMF's January update, the report said. 

US Officials Mull Easing Tariffs Targeting the Auto Industry – Maya Averbuch, Eric Martin, Josh Wingrove, and Keith Laing, Bloomberg ($):

The Trump administration is considering whether to reduce certain tariffs targeting the auto industry that carmaker executives have warned would deal a severe blow to profits and jobs.

One measure would spare automobiles and parts already subject to tariffs from facing additional duties from levies on steel and aluminum imports, according to people familiar with the matter. That would eliminate so-called “stacking” of levies.

Another option being studied would fully exempt auto parts that comply with the US-Mexico-Canada trade pact, known as the USMCA, some of the people said. Those components don’t currently face tariffs, but the administration had planned to tax the non-US share of those parts from Canada and Mexico. Fully sparing those parts would abandon that approach, which would present a potentially herculean logistical challenge.

 

Collective Bargaining

Judge Seems Doubtful of Trump’s Move to End Collective Bargaining – Mary Katherine Browne, Tax Notes ($):

A district court judge questioned the legality of President Trump’s executive order repudiating collective bargaining agreements with a federal government labor union that represents employees from 37 departments and agencies, including Treasury and the IRS.

During oral arguments in NTEU v. Trump on April 23, Judge Paul L. Friedman disagreed with the government that the president can unilaterally decide whether a federal agency or department’s primary objective is national security.

Judge Likely to Block Trump Collective-Bargaining Ban – Jared Foretek, Law360 ($):

A D.C. federal judge appeared ready on Wednesday to block President Donald Trump's executive order threatening to strip as many as 100,000 federal employees of their collective bargaining power, saying the order seems to target unions because they've challenged his actions, not because of any purported national security justification.

At a hearing on the National Treasury Employees Union's bid to block the March 27 order, U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman of the District of Columbia suggested that Trump would have been better off not giving any justification at all for the action, which would effectively end collective-bargaining rights for a wide range of federal agencies and subdivisions. But instead, the order came with a White House fact sheet calling out "certain federal unions" that "have declared war on President Trump's agenda" and pointing out that the "largest federal union" — the one representing Treasury employees — has "described itself as 'fighting back' against Trump."

DC Judge Questions Trump’s Ability to Nullify Union Contracts – Parker Purifoy, Bloomberg ($):

A federal judge Wednesday appeared poised to grant a preliminary injunction for a union representing over 100,000 federal workers to pause an executive order that stripped its members of their collective bargaining rights.

Judge Paul Friedman of US District Court for the District of Columbia seemed unconvinced by arguments from Department of Justice attorneys that President Donald Trump retains the exclusive right to determine which executive agencies fall under federal labor protections during a hearing Wednesday.

 

Tax Legislation

The Semi-Calm Before the Storm of Assembling a Giant Tax Bill – Doug Sword & Cady Stanton, Tax Notes ($). “Negotiations on what tax provisions will and won’t make the reconciliation bill are in full swing, although it may not have looked it as the House and Senate finally finished tussling over technicalities leading up to a two-week break.”

Cracks Emerge in Support for Trump’s Tax-Free Tips, Overtime Ideas – Chris Cioffi & Zach C. Cohen, Bloomberg ($):

Divisions are emerging in Congress over making President Donald Trump’s promises to exempt taxes on tips and overtime into law.

Lawmakers are racing to turn the president’s campaign rallying calls into tax policy. While some tax writers smooth out the legislative mechanics to determine eligibility, others say costs are too high and should be set aside for now.

The overtime exemption is proving “controversial in the Senate,” said former Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.), a former tax writer who’s now a partner at BakerHostetler. Some Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee are pressing the White House to “drop it” because it threatens to discourage hiring, he added.

Trump Rejects Millionaires Tax Hike – Richard Rubin, Wall Street Journal:

President Trump tossed cold water on the idea of raising tax rates on the highest-income Americans, ending for now a Republican flirtation with higher taxes at the top to help pay for his broader agenda.

He called a potential millionaire’s tax “very disruptive” on Wednesday, a day after former House Speaker Newt Gingrich circulated a message from Trump saying the president loves the idea of a small tax increase on the rich but was counseling Republicans against it for political reasons.

Trump Says Millionaire Tax Would Push Wealthy to Leave the US – Steven T. Dennis & Hadriana Lowenkron, Bloomberg ($). “President Donald Trump said that imposing a higher tax rate on millionaires would spur the country’s richest to leave the US, downplaying an idea that is under discussion in some Republican circles as a way to pay for an economic package.”

Trump, Johnson squelch talk of tax hike for wealthiest Americans – Benjamin Guggenheim, Politico:

President Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson on Wednesday came out against a tax hike on the wealthiest Americans — likely putting the nail in the coffin of the idea.

Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that he thought the idea would be “very disruptive” because it would prompt wealthy people to leave the country.

 

Revenue Rulings

Keeping Basis-Shifting Revenue Ruling Adds Up, Ex-Official Says – Kristen A. Parillo, Tax Notes ($). “The IRS’s decision to retain a basis-shifting revenue ruling while repealing related regulations makes sense because it reflects the agency’s litigating position in several cases, according to a former Treasury official.”

 

In the Courts

TurboTax Maker Fends Off H&R Block's False Ad Claims – Anna Scott Farrell, Law360 ($). “A California federal judge tossed H&R Block's claims that competing tax-preparation company Intuit duped its customers into buying its TurboTax product by falsely claiming an expert would review returns, saying H&R Block failed to show the expert review feature influenced customers' purchasing decisions.”

Intuit Gets ‘Expert Review’ False Advertising Claims Tossed – Bernie Pazanowski, Bloomberg ($). “HRB Digital LLC’s counterclaims alleging that Intuit Inc. falsely advertised that its customers who get “expert final review” of their tax returns will automatically have an expert review their entire return was dismissed by a federal court.”

11th Circ. Denies Couple's Medical, Business Deductions – Kat Lucero, Law360 ($). “The Eleventh Circuit rejected Wednesday numerous tax deductions that a couple had claimed for business and medical expenses, affirming the U.S. Tax Court's position that the pair failed to provide enough supporting documents to take advantage of the perks.”

Hurricane, Fraud Don’t Move 11th Circuit in Ruling on Tax Breaks – Tristan Navera, Bloomberg ($). “A taxpayer’s travel and business expenses weren’t clearly established enough to justifying tax deductions a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.”

 

What Day is it?

Hooray, its National Pigs in a Blanket Day! And for you vegans out there, have no fear, I found a carrot pigs in a blanket recipe for you!

We're Here to Help

We are here to help
From business growth to compliance and digital optimization, Eide Bailly is here to help you thrive and embrace opportunity.
Speak to our specialists

About the Author(s)

Trina Pinneau photo

Trina Pinneau

Senior Manager
Trina has more than 10 years of public accounting experience providing tax consulting services and analyzing complex tax situations. She has spent the majority of her time in the credits and incentives space with a focus on energy credits and excise taxes. Trina also has experience in tax controversy and accounting methods. In joining Eide Bailly's National Tax Office Trina is focusing her efforts on energy efficiency incentives while being a resource for the excise and tax controversy team.

Any opinions expressed or implied are those of the author and not necessarily those of Eide Bailly. Opinions found in linked items are those of the authors of the linked item, not of your bloggers or of Eide Bailly. “$” means link may be behind a paywall. Items here do not constitute tax advice.