this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2025
392 points (98.3% liked)
Not The Onion
15846 readers
2002 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
tl;dr: They're claiming that it was to "prevent countries with tariffs from shipping through there to avoid tariffs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heard_Island_and_McDonald_Islands
... Why were we allowing items into the country that were shipped through an uninhabited island to begin with? Like, that should be the red flag... They should treat it like losing your parking garage ticket, you pay the top rate.
I even put it in bold.
Yeah...I saw that. Hence my comment. Why would they allow that in? Even if it was labeled as that, they could do like I said in my comment and slap the highest tariff available on it - if that were the actual goal, and not an obvious lie to cover up their ineptitude.
I agree, it's insane that customs ever accepted a fictional port on uninhabited islands as a point of origin in the first place. That's the loophole they should close. It does appear that that's a thing that did actually happen though, so it's not a complete fabrication. I'd say customs should have been authorized to confiscate any such good until a non-fictional provinence was proven.