Money Stuff: The Podcast Fat Wallet: Tariffs, Mergers, Brands
51 snips
Nov 7, 2025 Hosts delve into the Supreme Court’s skepticism regarding Trump's tariff authority and the constitutional implications of tariffs as taxes. They explore the complexities of refund logistics if tariffs are overturned, alongside Novo Nordisk's controversial bid for Metsera, which raises antitrust concerns. The discussion extends to Samuel Bankman-Fried’s legal troubles and the allegations of fraud against former executives at First Brands. They also consider how diligent inquiry and blockchain technology could help prevent invoice financing fraud.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Court Skepticism Over Broad Presidential Tariffs
- The Supreme Court seemed skeptical that the president can impose broad tariffs under the 1977 IEEPA without Congress because tariffs function as taxes.
- Major questions and non-delegation doctrines increase the chance the Court will strike down universal tariffs.
Tariff Refunds Create Complex Claim Markets
- If tariffs are overturned, refund logistics are messy because many importers sold refund claims to hedge funds.
- The economic incidence suggests companies, not consumers, have largely borne the tariff costs so refunds may flow to funds that bought claims.
Upfront Payments As An Antitrust Hedge
- Novo Nordisk paid Metsera shareholders up front to sidestep antitrust timing and lock the company despite regulatory risk.
- That structure makes the deal a bet: Novo recoups proceeds if approval fails, while denying rivals a clear path to buy Metsera.