How We Lost Our New [Big Island] Home To Trump's Illegal Tariffs

[MyManao]

If you're on my ignore list...

Fun. I don't use such a think, never have seen the practicality of it. If I like ignore I just ignore.. but it is cool seeing how it works. Thanks for sharing.

What I am curious about is, with all those folks on your list, why even bother looking at all?

[ironyak]

Maybe Rob can add an AI filter that algorithmically only shows posts that align with your views and those that put on the AI Vision Blinkers can reach perfect peace by looking only at their own ideas and marveling at their perfection.

I wonder if the Hilo docks in mid 2025 had any of those Prefabricated Houses (HS code 9406.90.0130 for metal structures) that contained any steel? "Steel and aluminum imports subject to a Section 232 duty of 50% on the value of the steel/aluminum content as of June 4, 2025." [1]

Maybe some “Trump tax” / Section 301 style additional duties? Maybe some those reciprocal tariffs in play? And all that has to be added up or "stacked"?

Several sources pointed to this tariff calculator to help get an idea of the various Country and Sector Specific tariffs in play. Note that it has been updated for the rates effective in January 2026 so no more illegal IEEPA tariffs, and drops in various sector specific rates, but seems pretty useful to get some idea for how the tariffs affect Hawai'i and its residents, like Will.

I'd guess someone like Durian Fiend might find some value in it, along with seeing this message, unlike Wao nahele kane who can only gyre and gimble in the wabe he chooses to exclusively see.

[Wao nahele kane]

I, as a common sense centrist and independent voter, I would like to vouch for Durian Fiend's realtive objectivity and healthy skepticism for the commentary piece which leaned heavily toward interpretive storytelling.  Peeking through The Looking Glass, at least in Durian Fiend's case, the Jabberwocky moniker seems unfair. 


and stupid tariffs as a tax on American consumers.  Which, of course, is true. - Durian Fiend


That's a good thing though right?





Hehe - just some good hearted fun.  I have greatly appreciated Durian's quest for truth in this thread.  

Enjoy your Sunday all.

PS:  I can also vouch that Moderator 2 did berate me with that green stuff and it was kinda like they are representing it.

The OP article is dated Feb 26, 2026 and begins as so...
"Months before the last presidential election, my wife and I bought a house."

This indicates that the story teller (I use that word, story, in the sense of a very tall tale), allegedly bought the house sometime in 2024, before the presidential election. 

In 2024, the applied duty on prefabricated homes had been in place since 2019. It hasn't changed to this day according to online government records. So, at no time were Trumps IEEPA tariffs applied to prefabricated homes for the purposes of this OP "publication" storyline. The story teller indicates a shipping container home thus pointing towards a steel container and therefore subject to the 2.9% base and 25% added duty for 27.9%. So, effectively we can cite it as 30%, so, I've no objection to that claim of 30% duty, rounded up and close enough. 

My point is in the fact that the story teller attempts to portray or ellude that Trump slapped surprise tariff on their prefabbed home while in transit. No such thing occurred. The established duties existed years before the thier purchase and haven't changed since 2019. 

Civilbeat should have checked out the varacity of the claims before publishing the story and they failed to do so. 
The story teller did not lose a new home due to sudden tariffs applied by Trump. If they lost the home due to Duty rates, they lost it due to thier own ignorance in failing to check the duty rates before entering into the purchase agreement. And the story should be titled, Buyer Beware, Check all Duty Rates Before Buying Overseas. 

It's really that simple.

[ironyak]

I, as a common sense centrist and independent voter, I would like to vouch for Durian Fiend's realtive objectivity and healthy skepticism for the commentary piece which leaned heavily toward interpretive storytelling.  Peeking through The Looking Glass, at least in Durian Fiend's case, the Jabberwocky moniker seems unfair. 


and stupid tariffs as a tax on American consumers.  Which, of course, is true. - Durian Fiend


That's a good thing though right?





Hehe - just some good hearted fun.  I have greatly appreciated Durian's quest for truth in this thread.  

Enjoy your Sunday all.

PS:  I can also vouch that Moderator 2 did berate me with that green stuff and it was kinda like they are representing it.

The OP article is dated Feb 26, 2026 and begins as so...
"Months before the last presidential election, my wife and I bought a house."

This indicates that the story teller (I use that word, story, in the sense of a very tall tale), allegedly bought the house sometime in 2024, before the presidential election. 

In 2024, the applied duty on prefabricated homes had been in place since 2019. It hasn't changed to this day according to online government records. So, at no time were Trumps IEEPA tariffs applied to prefabricated homes for the purposes of this OP "publication" storyline. The story teller indicates a shipping container home thus pointing towards a steel container and therefore subject to the 2.9% base and 25% added duty for 27.9%. So, effectively we can cite it as 30%, so, I've no objection to that claim of 30% duty, rounded up and close enough. 

My point is in the fact that the story teller attempts to portray or ellude that Trump slapped surprise tariff on their prefabbed home while in transit. No such thing occurred. The established duties existed years before the thier purchase and haven't changed since 2019. 

Civilbeat should have checked out the varacity of the claims before publishing the story and they failed to do so. 
The story teller did not lose a new home due to sudden tariffs applied by Trump. If they lost the home due to Duty rates, they lost it due to thier own ignorance in failing to check the duty rates before entering into the purchase agreement. And the story should be titled, Buyer Beware, Check all Duty Rates Before Buying Overseas. 

It's really that simple.

Saving for posterity's sake

Hey Rob - do I still have to "assume the best and ask questions" of those that have chosen on Punaweb to be deaf, dumb (in the literal stupid-is-as-stupid-does sense), and blind?

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

The established duties existed years before the thier purchase…
they lost it due to thier own ignorance in failing to check …

thier their spelling?
Usually I just let the flowing water of grammatical and spelling errors slide off a duck’s back, it’s the thought that counts, right?  But when the writer presents himself as a know-it-all telling everyone else how it is, even dressing down and dispensing with his spell checker(?*) it does make one wonder.  It detracts from the whole omniscience thing.

* I would have paid a dollar to have sat in on that man vs. software disagreement resulting in yet another entity blocked.

[Wao nahele kane]

The author, Will Bailey, conspicuously fails to divulge his own ignorance about the U.S. import process, including longstanding tariffs on Chinese goods, which creates a deceptive narrative for readers. By omitting any mention of his lack of research into potential duties—such as consulting the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, U.S. Customs resources, or a broker before committing to a $20,000 international purchase—he portrays the 30% duty as an unforeseen ambush rather than a foreseeable cost for which he was unprepared. This lack of self-accountability misleads readers into believing the tariff was a sudden, arbitrary imposition tied directly to Trump's actions during the shipment's transit, rather than a consequence of his own oversight in treating a complex cross-border transaction like a risk-free domestic buy.

This deception is evident in how Bailey frames the story to imply Trump personally placed a "new" tariff on his specific "house" while it was en route across the Pacific. He describes the duty taking effect "mid-voyage" after the prefab container home was already built and shipped, using language like "policy shifts mid-voyage" and "rules changing after the fact" to evoke a sense of unfair retroactivity. This leads readers to envision a capricious presidential edict targeting his shipment in real-time, when in reality, tariffs apply at the time of customs entry upon arrival—not departure or order date—and such timing risks are standard for importers who don't plan accordingly. Bailey's ignorance here amplifies the deception, as he doesn't clarify that diligent preparation could have anticipated or mitigated the issue, instead shifting all blame to Trump to heighten the emotional impact.

Crucially, the tariffs in question had been in place since 2018 under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, targeting unfair Chinese trade practices like intellectual property theft. These duties imposed additional rates of 7.5% to 25% (and up to 30% in some escalations) on billions in Chinese imports, including categories like prefabricated buildings and steel structures that encompass container homes (e.g., HTS Chapter 94). They were legally authorized by Congress via the Trade Act, have been upheld in court challenges, and remained active through 2026 with extensions and adjustments (e.g., increases finalized in 2024 for certain goods). Bailey's shipment, ordered pre-2024 election and arriving amid ongoing trade tensions, was almost certainly subject to these pre-existing, legal Section 301 tariffs—not the separate, broader "emergency" tariffs imposed in 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

By conflating his case with the IEEPA tariffs— which the Supreme Court later ruled unauthorized in February 2026's Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump—Bailey's ignorance leads to outright deception. He labels them "Trump's illegal tariffs" and ties his loss directly to the Court's decision on IEEPA, misleading readers into thinking the duty on his home was part of the unconstitutional emergency measures, when it aligns far more with the longstanding, congressionally backed Section 301 framework. This blending serves to editorialize his personal setback as evidence of broader illegality, exploiting readers' potential unfamiliarity with trade law distinctions while hiding his failure to educate himself on basics that could have flagged the 2018-origin tariffs well before ordering.

[Punatang]

That is very interesting Kane but in Will Bailey's defense, from a human perspective, if Lady Tang was ripping me a new one because I just lost twenty thousand dollars, on a deal she would have been HIGHLY (sorry for yelling) skeptical of,  I might just blame Trump too. It's human nature.

[HiloJulie]

I suppose a reply is irrelevant since I am blocked to the poster I am replying to, but what the heck, so let's review:

In April, 2025, "Liberation Day" was announced. The tariffs issued that day and subsequently adjusted, delayed, reinstated or whatever were issued by Executive Orders under the IEEPA. These sweeping tariffs were, once again, "on top" of any other tariffs in place under Section 301, and in most cases were assessed on the "total value" of the goods imported, which in the determination of total value, included any prior enacted tariffs.

Further, as noted, in Will's Civil Beat article, he placed the order in late 2024, prior to the election. I find it absolutely impossible that at the time of order/purchase, Will had no knowledge or understanding of the tariffs at that time, nor would any American based importer not include that in the purchase price Will paid. Further, Will states it took 8 months to build. No mention of shipping time. If we assume he bought this home in say October of 2024, 8 months takes up to May, 2025, 1 month after Liberation Day. I assume 2 month to ship. That puts us into July/August, 2025. 

Additionally, and more specifically, Will's Civil Beat article also says "When the ship arrived, the importer sent us the bill from U.S. Customs. A 30% duty plus port storage and clearance fees had been assessed under the new tariffs."

Why would anyone think Will is discussing anything OTHER that the additional Liberation Day tariffs, which around July/August of 2025 were in the 30ish percent range with respect to China.

Will then further states in his Civil Beat article, "Two days ago, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the legal foundation of the very tariffs that hit our shipment. In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose tariffs."

So, even though Will's article is short on specific dollars and dates, it has to be clear to any reasonable fact minded person that the basis of Will's article is nonetheless, spot on.

[ironyak]

Edge - But when the writer presents himself as a know-it-all telling everyone else how it is, even dressing down and dispensing with his spell checker(?*) it does make one wonder.

Yeah, it's so bad as likely to be baitin' (watch me make all the Puna libs correct my errors, hur de hur), brain damage (can anyone contact Kane's keeper?), or maybe some form of performative stupidity where whoever can look the most idiotic online is sent all expenses paid on Hawaiian Air to DC to head a federal agency.

Punaweb is pulling for you Wao nahele kane! We all know you can achieve the highest levels of stupidity!

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

likely to be baitin' (watch me make all the Puna libs correct my errors, hur de hur)

I considered that, especially with two misspellings (to make sure the libs didn’t Evelyn Woods thier way right on through the first one). But I thought I’d enjoy myself anyway while kane may or may not chortle his way through the cocktail hour owning at least one lib, with a low down payment, and deferred monthly installments. And it only gets funnier as the night trails on and the bottle drains down.