Featured Stories
National Taxpayers Union: 'Sound Policies, Not Subsidies: Data Center Equipment Tax Exemptions'
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, Aug. 10 -- The National Taxpayers Union issued the following brief on July 22, 2026, by Pete Sepp and Jared Walczak entitled "Sound Policies, Not Subsidies: Data Center Equipment Tax Exemptions."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Introduction
Virginia adjourned its 2026 regular session without adopting a budget due to a dispute over the state's sales tax exemption for data centers. In Ohio, the governor has imposed an exemption moratorium. These are just two touchpoints in a debate taking place in state capitals across the country.
Most states exempt data center equipment (including
... Show Full Article
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, Aug. 10 -- The National Taxpayers Union issued the following brief on July 22, 2026, by Pete Sepp and Jared Walczak entitled "Sound Policies, Not Subsidies: Data Center Equipment Tax Exemptions."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Introduction
Virginia adjourned its 2026 regular session without adopting a budget due to a dispute over the state's sales tax exemption for data centers. In Ohio, the governor has imposed an exemption moratorium. These are just two touchpoints in a debate taking place in state capitals across the country.
Most states exempt data center equipment (includingservers, racks, chillers, electrical equipment, and backup generators) from the sales tax. Initially largely uncontroversial, these provisions have come under increasing scrutiny, often characterized as subsidies or framed as costing states revenue. In reality, these exemptions are simply the extension of ordinary sales tax treatment of equipment, which is, for good reason, almost always exempt. These exemptions are not tax preferences. On the contrary, their elimination would represent an economically harmful sales tax distortion.
These misconceptions are rooted in historical contingency. Manufacturing machinery is almost invariably exempt by right. Policymakers have largely recognized that an ideal sales tax falls on final consumption, and, while real-world sales taxes diverge from this ideal, lawmakers have typically agreed that machinery and equipment used in production are outside the scope of a retail sales tax. But the definitions used for machinery and equipment did not apply cleanly to data centers, even though they also use equipment for production. The principles were the same, but statutory definitions had not anticipated high-intensity production of digital rather than tangible goods. By the late 2000s, as data center projects grew in size and significance, states acknowledged the inconsistency and began to exempt servers and other data center equipment much like they exempted equipment producing tangible goods, but with one key difference: they structured the exemptions as incentives.
Traditional manufacturers do not have to commit to a certain level of capital investment, pledge to create a given number of jobs, or meet any other benchmark for their machinery and equipment to be exempt (Nevada is the only exception). These exemptions are considered structural features of the sales tax. But, as demand for data centers grew and states began competing for them, lawmakers made data centers' sales tax exemptions contingent on meeting eligibility requirements. Large hyperscale data centers can often meet these requirements easily, though they create additional compliance costs. By framing them as an incentive rather than a by-right exemption, however, lawmakers inadvertently signaled that the exemptions represented a tax preference that diverged from the proper sales tax base, when in fact they are a logical and appropriate extension of the principles that define the appropriate sales tax base. A data center server is production equipment, just like metalworking equipment, and should be treated the same way.
Today, 38 states exempt new data center equipment purchases or forgo a general sales tax, but only two provide a by-right exemption to all data centers. In several states, relief is discretionary or currently unavailable to new applicants under a moratorium. By contrast, 46 states exempt manufacturing machinery by right or forgo a sales tax.
This paper explains why production equipment does not belong in the sales tax base, documents the fact that states consistently follow this principle with by-right exemptions for manufacturing machinery and equipment but typically extend similar treatment to data center equipment through contingent incentives and sometimes on less favorable terms, and explores the economic implications of the new push to impose sales tax on data center equipment.
Data centers should receive the same sales tax treatment as other industries. Current law in most states already falls short of that aim. But states should avoid policies that impose unique and highly consequential penalties on a single industry.
* * *
View full issue brief at: link: https://www.ntu.org/library/doclib/2026/07/Sound-Policies-Not-Subsidies-Data-Center-Equipment-Tax-Exemptions.pdf
[Category: Political]
National Taxpayers Union: 'Powering Opportunity: Data Centers, Energy Policy, and Nebraska's Economic Future'
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, Aug. 10 -- The National Taxpayers Union issued the following brief on July 16, 2026, by Jim Smith and Jared Walczak entitled "Powering Opportunity: Data Centers, Energy Policy, and Nebraska's Economic Future."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Energy policy is increasingly becoming one of the most important drivers of economic competitiveness in the United States. As artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital infrastructure expand, the demand for reliable electricity is rising rapidly. Data centers, which power much of the modern digital economy, require consistent energy
... Show Full Article
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, Aug. 10 -- The National Taxpayers Union issued the following brief on July 16, 2026, by Jim Smith and Jared Walczak entitled "Powering Opportunity: Data Centers, Energy Policy, and Nebraska's Economic Future."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Energy policy is increasingly becoming one of the most important drivers of economic competitiveness in the United States. As artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital infrastructure expand, the demand for reliable electricity is rising rapidly. Data centers, which power much of the modern digital economy, require consistent energysupplies. The states that can provide reliable, affordable electricity while maintaining competitive tax and regulatory environments will be best positioned to attract investment in this growing sector.
For Nebraska, this reality presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The state is already beginning to see the effects of this transformation. Electricity demand is rising, and projections show that electricity consumption will increase further in the coming years. Meeting this demand will require careful planning, reliable generation resources, and policies that encourage investment in both energy infrastructure and the broader economy.
At the same time, Nebraska faces broader economic pressures that make these decisions even more important. The state is losing population, particularly among college graduates and young professionals who are choosing to pursue opportunities elsewhere. Retirees are increasingly priced out by rising property taxes. Businesses evaluating where to invest often look for locations with strong labor markets, competitive tax environments, and reliable infrastructure. When those conditions are lacking, investment flows elsewhere.
These trends create a difficult cycle. With fewer people contributing to the tax base, the cost of maintaining roads, bridges, and other infrastructure must be spread across a smaller population. Government services cannot easily scale down alongside population declines, placing upward pressure on taxes and accelerating outmigration.
Breaking this cycle requires policies that empower economic growth through investment, innovation, and opportunity. Nebraska must create an environment that attracts businesses, expands employment opportunities, and encourages workers to build their careers in the state.
The Platte Institute works to support that transformation. As Nebraska's leading free-market policy organization, the Platte Institute provides rigorous research, strategic communications, coalition building, and legislative expertise to equip policymakers with solutions that strengthen the state's economic competitiveness. In recent years, these efforts have helped support major policy reforms, including the largest income tax reduction in state history, property tax reform measures, and regulatory reforms designed to improve the state's economic climate.
These reforms mark an important step forward, but reversing the state's population and workforce challenges will require continued policy leadership. Nebraska's regional competitors are already making decisions designed to attract both talent and capital.
The growth of data centers and digital infrastructure represents one of the most promising opportunities for economic expansion. These facilities bring significant capital investment, support high-paying jobs, and generate substantial local tax revenue. At the same time, their expansion reinforces the importance of energy policy. The electricity required to power the digital economy will shape economic development decisions for years to come.
Nebraska's policy choices today will determine whether the state captures these opportunities or falls behind competitors that are moving quickly to support the infrastructure needed for the next generation of economic growth.
* * *
View full issue brief at: link: https://www.ntu.org/library/doclib/2026/07/Platte-Institute.pdf
[Category: Political]
National Taxpayers Union: 'How Carbon Taxes Collapsed Pennsylvania's Generation Investment and What It Means for the Data Center Boom'
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, Aug. 10 -- The National Taxpayers Union issued the following brief on June 29, 2026, by Joshua Schubert entitled "How Carbon Taxes Collapsed Pennsylvania's Generation Investment and What It Means for the Data Center Boom."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
I. Introduction
Pennsylvania is the largest exporter of electricity in the nation, the powerhouse of the PJM interconnection, and ground zero for America's data center and Artificial Intelligence (AI) infrastructure boom. Announcements for data center investment in the commonwealth have reached more than $70 billion, including
... Show Full Article
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, Aug. 10 -- The National Taxpayers Union issued the following brief on June 29, 2026, by Joshua Schubert entitled "How Carbon Taxes Collapsed Pennsylvania's Generation Investment and What It Means for the Data Center Boom."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
I. Introduction
Pennsylvania is the largest exporter of electricity in the nation, the powerhouse of the PJM interconnection, and ground zero for America's data center and Artificial Intelligence (AI) infrastructure boom. Announcements for data center investment in the commonwealth have reached more than $70 billion, including$25 billion from Blackstone, $20 billion from Amazon, a $10 billion gas-powered data center campus at the former Homer City coal plant, and a $1.6 billion restart of Three Mile Island's (TMI) nuclear reactor under a twenty-year agreement with Microsoft.1,2,3,4
Yet, Pennsylvania is simultaneously a cautionary tale. From 2019 through 2024, regulatory uncertainty over the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) shrank Pennsylvania's proposed generation pipeline by 62% in cumulative pipeline volume compared to the prior six-year period, and by 38% counting only genuinely new projects entering the pipeline. Developers who were building power plants at the fastest rate in the PJM region stopped proposing projects. Three large natural gas plants were cancelled. The state's largest coal plant and a nuclear reactor closed. These reductions in supply, coinciding with new data center demand for electricity, rippled across the thirteen-state PJM grid: wholesale capacity prices spiked 833%, and the grid fell short of its reliability standard for the first time in history.5,6
Pennsylvania demonstrates a clear lesson. Any state imposing or threatening carbon taxes will see reduced generation, often requiring electricity imports to achieve the same level of reliable operable generation. New investment adapts, targeting states with regulatory certainty and a tax climate friendlier to new generation projects. Pennsylvania's experience offers a transferable framework: what happens when state energy policy discourages investment in an industry where the state has a comparative advantage, and what policies elected leaders can pursue to prevent that outcome.
II. The Evidence: What Carbon Tax Uncertainty Did to Pennsylvania's Generation Pipeline
In October 2019, then-Gov. Tom Wolf directed the Department of Environmental Protection to join RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program that would impose carbon costs on fossil-fuel generators. Six years of regulatory uncertainty followed--rulemaking, litigation, legislative challenges, a Commonwealth Court injunction--that ended only when Act 45, part of the 2025-2026 Pennsylvania State Budget, formally repealed Pennsylvania's RGGI participation in November 2025. No carbon allowances were purchased; no revenue was collected. But the uncertainty and credible threat of higher taxes proved devastating.
The generation proposal collapse: Analysis of U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Form 860 data for all generation types reveals the scale of the damage. Two matched six-year periods, first the pre-RGGI baseline (2013-2018), compared against the RGGI uncertainty era (2019-2024), reveal Pennsylvania's proposed generation pipeline declined 62% in cumulative pipeline volume--a measure that sums each year's proposed megawatts across the six-year period, capturing the sustained intensity of development activity rather than only new entries. At the 2017 peak during the Marcellus Shale boom, Pennsylvania's proposed generation pipeline contained 12,873 megawatts (MW). By 2022, it had collapsed 90% to 1,286 MW. Since this analysis confines itself to a generation proposal's nameplate capacity, rather than accounting for a project's Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC), which measures a generation type's contribution to grid reliability, it understates the problem.7
The Ohio comparison: Ohio shares Pennsylvania's key characteristics: PJM membership, Marcellus and Utica Shale gas access, a comparable coal-to-gas fuel transition, and exposure to the same wholesale electricity market, commodity prices, and federal regulations. The critical difference is that Ohio did not face RGGI. During the same period that Pennsylvania's proposal volume collapsed, Ohio's grew. Counting only genuinely new proposals entering each state's proposal pipeline--a stricter measure than cumulative pipeline volume--Pennsylvania projects declined 38% (13,232 MW to 8,202 MW) while Ohio's grew 33% (8,406 MW to 11,213 MW), a 71-percentage-point swing in investment momentum between neighboring states sharing the same wholesale market.8
Gas prices remained stable. The most intuitive alternative explanation for this trend is that falling natural gas prices discouraged investment, but the figures show little variation. The correlation between Henry Hub spot prices and Pennsylvania's proposed generation is essentially zero (r = -0.08). Gas prices averaged virtually the same across the two periods, i.e., $3.24 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) pre-RGGI and $3.28 per million during RGGI. Pennsylvania's pipeline hit its absolute trough in 2022, the year Henry Hub spot averaged $6.42 per MMBtu, which was the highest since 2008. Ohio maintained a robust pipeline throughout the same price environment, confirming that Marcellus gas generation remained commercially viable. The constraint was specific to Pennsylvania's regulatory environment.9,10
The proposal to operation conversion collapse: Analysis of project lifecycle data following entry into the proposal pipeline reveals something more granular than a simple decline in proposals. Across all generation types, Pennsylvania's conversion rate fell from 73% (9,709 MW of 13,232 MW proposed reaching operable status) to 9% (764 MW of 8,202 MW) during the RGGI period. Ohio's conversion rate declined modestly, from 62% to 48%--reflecting real headwinds like the PJM interconnection queue backlog, but nothing approaching Pennsylvania's freefall. For natural gas specifically, the collapse is even starker. During 2013-2018, Pennsylvania's pipeline operated at a 75% conversion rate with 9,562 MW of natural gas proposals reaching operable status. During the RGGI uncertainty period, only 40 MW of the proposed 4,438 MW of natural gas generation projects converted to operable, implying a conversion rate of less than 1%. The result was a 99.6% collapse in gas conversion, consisting entirely of small distributed projects, like the Pittsburgh Airport gas plant. No utility-scale natural gas generator proposed during 2019-2024 has come online. Meanwhile, Ohio converted 3,265 MW of natural gas within the same window. The market for gas generation existed, but Pennsylvania's regulatory environment killed investment.11
Zero gas proposed, 2019-2023: Of the 4,438 MW of natural gas that entered Pennsylvania's pipeline during 2019-2024, 4,398 MW is the Homer City coal-to-gas repowering project proposed in 2024, with initial power production targeted for 2027. Driven by the new increase in demand for generation driven by the data center boom, the project was viable before RGGI was abrogated in PA's November 2025 state budget. Zero new utility-scale natural gas generation was proposed in Pennsylvania from 2019 through 2023. Over the same five years, Ohio received thousands of megawatts in gas proposals.
The lag effect: Large generation projects take three to four years from proposal to operation. Pennsylvania's completions in 2019-2021 (4,881 MW) were almost entirely projects proposed before the RGGI announcement--they were under construction before the executive order. The real impact arrives in 2022-2024, when the pipeline runs dry: Pennsylvania completed just 648 MW (8 MW of gas) while Ohio completed 4,107 MW (2,055 MW of gas). That is a 6-to-1 gap in total completions and a 257-to-one gap in gas completions during the years when Pennsylvania should have been delivering new capacity.
* * *
View full issue brief at: link: https://www.ntu.org/library/doclib/2026/06/Commonwealth.pdf
[Category: Political]
Election Month Ruling By Supreme Court Regrettable
FAIRFAX, Virginia, Aug. 10 [Category: Government/Public Administration] -- Americans for Limited Government posted the following news release:
* * *
Election Month Ruling By Supreme Court Regrettable
*
Americans for Limited Government Executive Director Robert Romano today issued the following statement on the Supreme Court's ruling in Watson v. Republican National Committee:
"In an apparent bid to avert Democrats' threatened Supreme Court packing scheme, Republican-appointed justices John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett have apparently opted to just give Democrats everything they want including
... Show Full Article
FAIRFAX, Virginia, Aug. 10 [Category: Government/Public Administration] -- Americans for Limited Government posted the following news release:
* * *
Election Month Ruling By Supreme Court Regrettable
*
Americans for Limited Government Executive Director Robert Romano today issued the following statement on the Supreme Court's ruling in Watson v. Republican National Committee:
"In an apparent bid to avert Democrats' threatened Supreme Court packing scheme, Republican-appointed justices John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett have apparently opted to just give Democrats everything they want includingan election month voting where ballots are counted no matter how late they arrive after Election Day. Arguing there is no prohibition against late ballots, the nation's highest court has effectively made Election Day a dead letter. Now, the only resort for the American people who want to restore same-day voting is for Congress to pass another statute to clarify what federal law has already stated for more than a century was 'the day for the election...' This ruling is regrettable and will prove Stalin's maxim that it is not those who vote, but those who count the ballots that decide everything."
***
Original text here: https://getliberty.org/2026/06/election-month-ruling-by-supreme-court-regrettable/
Consumer Choice Center: World Consumer Airport Index
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (TNSLrpt) -- The Consumer Choice Center issued the following report in July 2026 entitled "World Consumer Airport Index"
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Introduction
The 2025-2026 period was marked by sharp contrasts for airports worldwide. Some hubs demonstrated remarkable resilience amid geopolitical conflict, energy shocks, aging aircraft fleets, and uneven passenger demand, while others struggled with delays, weak transport links, limited airline competition, and overcrowding. Dusseldorf emerged as the top-performing airport overall, while Barcelona-El Prat led among the largest
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (TNSLrpt) -- The Consumer Choice Center issued the following report in July 2026 entitled "World Consumer Airport Index"
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Introduction
The 2025-2026 period was marked by sharp contrasts for airports worldwide. Some hubs demonstrated remarkable resilience amid geopolitical conflict, energy shocks, aging aircraft fleets, and uneven passenger demand, while others struggled with delays, weak transport links, limited airline competition, and overcrowding. Dusseldorf emerged as the top-performing airport overall, while Barcelona-El Prat led among the largesthubs. Dubai International also stood out for restoring operations and maintaining strong performance despite being directly affected by regional conflict. Together, the results show how operational efficiency, connectivity, competition, and adaptability increasingly determine which airports succeed in an exceptionally challenging global environment.
About the research
Our second edition of the World Consumer Airport Index introduces advanced statistical methods, including the Ivanovic distance metrics, inspired by the same technique in our Sharing Economy Index and by co-authored academic analyses on how to improve indices. The ranking has been updated to include 10 additional airports representing major venues outside Europe and North America. The threshold for what is considered a large hub has been updated to reflect the increase in entries. The cutoff point is now at 47.2 million passengers. The two resulting lists are the 25 biggest venues and the 35 smaller alternatives. Finally, the index refines and updates our analysis using airport data, annual reports, online statistics, and our own research.
Results
Dusseldorf leads the overall ranking with a strong network of 67 airlines and 171 destinations, almost instantaneous security processing, and efficient airport operations. Barcelona-El Prat ranks first among the largest airports, supported by broad passenger choice and short average security waits of just three minutes. Airline availability and the number of destinations are among the most important factors shaping airport performance, reflecting the value passengers place on convenient departure times, fewer connections, and greater competition between carriers.
Operational conditions also make a substantial difference. Long security queues, restrictive nighttime flight rules, weak public transport connections, and unreliable internal infrastructure can significantly reduce the quality of the passenger experience. Heathrow's strict nighttime limits restrict early and overnight connections, while Frankfurt continues to face problems with terminal access, delayed infrastructure, and the temporary closure of its new Skyline train. Seoul Gimpo and Antalya similarly demonstrate how limited options and operational weaknesses can outweigh airport size or passenger volume.
* * *
View the full report at: https://consumerchoicecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/Airport-Index-2026.pdf
[Category: Consumer Services]
Consumer Choice Center: Off the Rail or on the Books: Problem Gambling and Smart Regulation
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (TNSLrpt) -- The Consumer Choice Center issued the following report in May 2026 entitled "Off the Rail or on the Books:
Problem Gambling and Smart Regulation."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Bans and steep taxes drive bettors offshore to unregulated sites with no age verification, no deposit caps, and no self-exclusion.
Problem gambling rates are flat, returning to 2018 baselines despite a 3,000%+ rise in legal betting volume since the Supreme Court's 2018 Murphy v. NCAA ruling.
Competitive, moderate-tax markets work. Connecticut's regulated market (including
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (TNSLrpt) -- The Consumer Choice Center issued the following report in May 2026 entitled "Off the Rail or on the Books:
Problem Gambling and Smart Regulation."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Bans and steep taxes drive bettors offshore to unregulated sites with no age verification, no deposit caps, and no self-exclusion.
Problem gambling rates are flat, returning to 2018 baselines despite a 3,000%+ rise in legal betting volume since the Supreme Court's 2018 Murphy v. NCAA ruling.
Competitive, moderate-tax markets work. Connecticut's regulated market (includingiGaming) has a lower problem-gambling rate today than it did in the 1990s -- before mobile sportsbooks existed. Indiana maintains moderate taxes, clear rules, and has similarly low problem-gaming numbers.
Smart policy: debit only transactions, age verification, self-exclusion tools, and rejection of punitive tax proposals in North Carolina, Virginia, Illinois, and elsewhere.
The Numbers Don't Match the Headlines
The dominant media narrative, that legalized sports betting has triggered a crisis of addiction among young men, is not supported by national data. It is more nuanced and reassuring than the headlines suggest.
The National Council on Problem Gambling's 2024 NGAGE Survey -- the most comprehensive national tracking study available -- found that risky gambling behaviors fell roughly 27% from their 2021 pandemic peak, returning to 2018 baseline levels. About 7-8% of Americans reported at least one warning sign of problematic gambling in 2024. Participation in sports betting also declined from 26% in 2021 to 23% in 2024.
The 2021 spike is the key context critics usually omit. Mass lockdowns, pandemic stimulus payments, and the Wall Street Bets phenomenon all drove a broad surge in risky financial behavior -- not just gambling. The spike reflected the COVID outlier moment, not a structural shift driven by the legalization of betting.
Even among the highest-risk demographic, young men, the overwhelming majority do not develop a problem. The policy question isn't whether we can erase this risky behavior (you can't, in a country of smartphones and convenience stores). The question is whether it happens in a market with guardrails or one without.
* * *
View the full report at: https://consumerchoicecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Off-the-rails-or-on-the-books.pdf
[Category: Consumer Services]
Consumer Choice Center: Are Tariffs Making America Great Again? The Consumer Case Against Tariffs on Steel, Aluminum, and Copper
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (TNSLrpt) -- The Consumer Choice Center issued the following report in June 2026 entitled "Are Tariffs Making America Great Again?
The consumer case against tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Introduction
Tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper are sold to the public based on two promises: bringing manufacturing back to the United States and raising revenue. The problem is that these two goals are mutually exclusive. If tariffs succeed in reshoring production, revenue derived from tariffs on imports would bottom out. If revenue were to stay
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (TNSLrpt) -- The Consumer Choice Center issued the following report in June 2026 entitled "Are Tariffs Making America Great Again?
The consumer case against tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Introduction
Tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper are sold to the public based on two promises: bringing manufacturing back to the United States and raising revenue. The problem is that these two goals are mutually exclusive. If tariffs succeed in reshoring production, revenue derived from tariffs on imports would bottom out. If revenue were to stayso high that the Administration could end the income tax (as has been suggested) the US economy would have to be entirely driven by foreign imports, thus defeating the reshoring goal. You simply cannot have your cake and eat it too on tariffs and on restoring U.S. domestic manufacturing.
Key Takeaways
* Tariffs are a tax on Americans. Steel, aluminum, and copper tariffs are particularly egregious because they touch so many everyday essentials -- cans, cars, appliances, homes.
* Costs pass straight through. The USITC found a near-100% pass-through rate in year one; peer-reviewed research this year puts the consumer share at 96-100%.
* Allies are collateral damage. Canada is America's largest foreign supplier of steel and aluminum; Mexico is the second-largest steel supplier and third-largest aluminum partner. Middle Eastern alternatives are imperiled by regional instability.
* The way forward is eliminating tariffs. Short of that: taxing components rather than the full product value would be an improvement over the status quo. Exempt key defense products, restore Canada/Mexico exemptions, and give markets a genuine sense of stability.
* * *
View the full report at: https://consumerchoicecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Polict-note-Tariffs-The-consumer-case-against-tariffs-on-steel-aluminum-and-copper.pdf
[Category: Consumer Services]
