Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Government China The Almighty Buck

Trump Slaps a 100% Tariff On Heavy and 'Sensitive' Drones (engadget.com) 54

Posted by BeauHD from the locally-sourced dept.
President Trump has imposed tariffs of up to 100% on heavier and "sensitive" drones, including models over 55 pounds or equipped with docking stations or thermal imaging. "Those include commercial models from DJI and others used for operations like power line inspection, crop spraying and search and rescue, along with any parts used in their manufacturing," reports Engadget. Meanwhile, smaller drones face a 25% tariff "that will apply to new and existing drones by DJI and other already approved by the FCC." The White House says the measures are meant to strengthen national security and encourage U.S. drone manufacturing.

Trump Slaps a 100% Tariff On Heavy and 'Sensitive' Drones More | Reply

Trump Slaps a 100% Tariff On Heavy and 'Sensitive' Drones

Comments Filter:

  • Why not a ban? (Score:3)

    by memory_register ( 6248354 ) on Friday August 14, 2026 @01:02PM (#66288871)

    If these drones are a security risk, what's the point in a large tariff when an outright import ban would make more sense. A 'large' drone that could be used as a weapon (if, say, it was taken over by China during operation over a power plan etc) sounds less like 'we should make these less prevalent' and more like 'we should not import them'.

    • Re:Why not a ban? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by shanen ( 462549 ) on Friday August 14, 2026 @01:14PM (#66288889) Homepage Journal

      Sorry, but that's a silly question. The YOB is just trying to tilt the playing field for his own personal profit. You didn't know he owns a drone company? He doesn't want to risk destroying the drone market while he's in the process of looting it.

      Good luck clawing back any loot from the YOB. Or clawing back the Constitution or even the Republic for which we all stood.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        > The YOB is just trying to tilt the playing field for his own personal profit. You didn't know he owns a drone company? He doesn't want to risk destroying the drone market while he's in the process of looting it.

        LLM -

        Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump hold investments in multiple U.S. defense tech and drone companies—such as Powerus and Unusual Machines Inc.—that have secured federal funding and surged following administration-backed domestic drone prioritization and import tariffs. These inter

    • Re:Why not a ban? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ClickOnThis ( 137803 ) on Friday August 14, 2026 @01:17PM (#66288893) Journal

      The current administration also imposes a 100% tariff on BYD electric vehicles from China, for the same reason: the vehicles are a perceived security threat. The result is that they are prohibitively expensive, this resulting in a de facto ban.

      My guess would be that a huge tariff looks better politically than a ban. And Trump has stated many times that he considers "tariff" to be his "favorite word."

      Question for extra credit: who pays the tariff? Because if it isn't the consumer, then the disincentive isn't there, is it?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 0123456 ( 636235 )

      I presume it's because Muh Rule Of Law says that Trump can't ban them but can put tariffs on them.

      "Rule of Law" makes everything stupid.

      • I presume it's because Muh Rule Of Law says that Trump can't ban them but can put tariffs on them.

        Since when have laws impeded any of Trump's actions during his second term?

    • Because tariffs go to the government and into his pocket.

    • Re:Why not a ban? (Score:5, Informative)

      by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Friday August 14, 2026 @02:18PM (#66288993)

      If these drones are a security risk, ...

      Or maybe it's that his sons Don Jr. and Eric have invested in domestic drone companies and this will boost their value?

      Company backed by Trump sons looks to sell drone interceptors to Gulf states being attacked by Iran [pbs.org]
      Eric Trump backs $638M Space-Eyes, McKinley Acquisition merger [manufacturingdive.com]
      The White House Intervened to Get a $620 Million Deal for a Company Tied to Donald Trump Jr. [propublica.org]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      If these drones are a security risk

      They're not, any more than Canada is a drug den or Europe is a mecca for slave labour. The US president is not allowed to levy taxes; that's a power given to the US congress by the US constitution. However, in the case of an emergency the executive can give itself more power. Emergencies like national security risks.

      Most countries have that kind of emergency mechanism. They're usually used very rarely and for limited durations in times of war or terrorist attacks, stuff li

      • I was kind of surprised that Rogan a complete suckup actually complained about the paid access to the tweets. Several R's have, also a bit of a surprise. I guess they are pissed they did not get free access. I mean they wanted this right?

      • However, in the case of an emergency the executive can give itself more power. Emergencies like national security risks.

        It's interesting that none of the Constitutional crises Trump has perpetrated have resulted in the use of emergency powers but any and all competition to his business interests seem to be rife with the use of emergency powers.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      At least in theory a lot of the risk isn't some specific drone.

      But market risk. The worry would not be so much that we get attacked by/with drones in some way but that we become economically dependent on them and China ends up controlling a big share of the market.

      Imagine a scenario 15 years from now, where 80% of home deliveries are done by drone. The trucks have been parked and the drivers laid off for a long time. You can't just turn a key and go backwards. US-Sino relation suddenly deteriorate, a shou

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by caseih ( 160668 )

        Problem is China needs the US to buy their goods almost as much as the US needs to buy their goods. Refusing to sell to the US isn't really an option for China. Anyway it's certainly not an easy thing for China to do.

        • That's true now but it's highly probable that China's economy will eventually outpace the U.S. to a point where they could tell us to piss off. Sure, it would hurt China's economy but it would hurt the U.S. a lot more. While that may seem unlikely today, it's something they may be willing to do if relations between the countries deteriorate significantly.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by pla ( 258480 )
        Then we're going to need a lot more funnels to refill all those toothpaste tubes.

        If you removed every foreign-made product from a typical Walmart, you'd basically be left with a steel-frame building stripped to the beams.

        If you replaced every one of those products with an American version - You'd have Niemann Marcus plus Erewhon, with some products simply not available at any price (short of bespoke).
    • Donny doesn't issue orders to make Americans safer. He issues orders to solicit bribes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      > If these drones are a security risk, what's the point in a large tariff when an outright import ban would make more sense.

      Well when it happens we can feel better, because those people's lives were exchanged for a good price then.

    • Lack of self sufficiency is a national security risk in and of itself.

    • Paying a tariff on imported drones is a security measure in the same manner as charging an extra $45 for airline passengers who don't have a Real ID is a security measure. Evildoers don't have modest amounts of extra cash to throw at the U.S. government for the purpose of inflicting harm or death on proles, and if they do have that cash then they'd better be ready to pay for the privilege.
  • This is a roundabout way to implement a national sales tax. Rich people love that and by Rich I mean if you're reading this you aren't one of them.

    Tariffs shift the tax burden to people who work for a living. That's because you and me have to spend most of our resources just surviving. Maybe if you're doing really really well only about half of everything you get your hands on goes to food and shelter and transportation and medicine and saving for when you can't physically work anymore.

    The goal is t
    • Agree in part. Yes it amounts to a sales tax, but, after all, no person buying these drones is likely to be living at the poverty line. So not wild about the rest of your argument. Right?

      OTOH the US has one of the most progressive tax systems in world. IIRC, even if you include state taxes, only a couple of provinces in Canada are (slightly) more progressive. Yes, in the whole world. Those value added taxes hit Europeans especially hard. So an argument could easily be made that "poor" in the US should b
    • Winner! This is about Chinese drone companies being forced to pay bribes to Trump to remove the tariffs, and if that fails then the fallback is that the tariff is enacted and acts as a national sales tax. Republicans have wanted a national sales tax for years because the lower and middle classes spend a larger percentage of their income on goods than rich people do. And for importers and retailers, tariffs are much worse than a sales tax: sales tax is only paid on items that were sold and the retailer ha
  • Why won't anyone think of the sensitive drones feelings!

  • It will likely be overturned, or China will threaten and Trump will TACO again ...
    Until then US Taxpayers will pay more as the Tariff charges are passed on by the companies, this is a tax on US Citizens

    • Is it still "chickening out" if he changes his mind after receiving a sake full of cash? Sounds more like "mission accomplished" to me...

  • Just remember (Score:4, Informative)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Friday August 14, 2026 @01:41PM (#66288925)

    Republicans could hold a vote today to do away with these “emergency” powers. But the cult shuts up and falls in line.

  • Well that's a lie. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Friday August 14, 2026 @01:52PM (#66288949)

    A 100% tariff does nothing related to national security.

    But at this point I don't understand why any explanation needs to be offered for any tariff. They do what they want and the Supreme Court has been revealed as a toothless, sycophantic shell company owned outright by the republicans. Whatever losses they hand the right are performative.

    Just don't say why. Follow any objections up with, "See you in court... eventually..."

    I suppose when the automatic urge is dishonesty it's hard to override it and say nothing.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      I'm sure the drones being flown across borders, like say the Ukraine border or various other borders of the Middle East will stop and pay the tariff.

      Or maybe that's the way to get Iran to pay? You sent drones on our airbases and now need to pay tariffs on your bombing drones you brought to us?

      • That's not how tariffs work. He'd have to collect from crewmen at the bases that got bombed. You know, the importers.

  • The US are fools because they can't comprehend the Chinese economic playbook. They prop up and subsidize industries until they have a cost monopoly and undercut everyone else and become the manufacturing kings. They've done this with rare earths, with drones and also electric cars to name a few. But a simple tariff isn't going to build up an industry, you need subsidies and tax cuts for that industry to compete. But the first thing is to not let the bird fly away in the first place. Get ahead of it and star

  • We're gonna ban drones. No we aren't. We're gonna tariff drones. No we aren't. We're going to restrict AI chips. No we aren't. We're gonna stop immigration. No we aren't. Now Russia is hitting Ukraine with cruise missles that have Nvidia chips in them, drone companies from China can buy a 'license' to get around the import restrictions on drones, and as long as you have $5,000,000 you can buy an instant immigration card regardless of what country you hail from. Fuck Trump. And fuck ANYONE who still

  • No one in their right mind would start a business hoping that a protectionary 25% tariff would be permanent. Right objective, stupid plan.

  • Was he there when they determined the head of the Executive branch can't impose tariffs? I'm pretty sure he was.

  • As the title says, what a fucking moron. He never does the right thing, never.

    I swear to god, his parents must have made him wear a life preserver when he ate soup.

  • As someone else said, if these are a security risk, ban them. A tariff just makes them more expensive for the buyer. He clearly does not know how tariffs work, even after his first wave got rolled back by the courts.

    And the refunds went to the companies, not the consumers.

    Or is he trying that game again to benefit his oligarchy?

Slashdot Top Deals

A list is only as strong as its weakest link. -- Don Knuth

Close