This is just more of the same behavior we've seen for years now, but you still throw your hands up and ask, what have we come to as a country? You get tired of doing this weekly.<p>That the President could even think of uttering the phrase that "we should get a cut for allowing this deal to go ahead". As if we're gangsters borderline extorting businesses because "we wouldn't want any harm to come to your very nice deal here, would we?"<p>Pro-business Republicans, this is what the party stands for? The party line was, benefits of economic growth and business going directly to the people, not government -- and you'll get behind a statement like this, carving out a special rule to take a percentage off the top?
“I did say that ‘If you buy it [TikTok]… a very substantial portion of that price is going to have to come into the Treasury of the United States, because we’re making it possible for this deal to happen.’ Right now they don’t have any rights unless we give it to them.”<p>Can anyone help me understand how this would work?
Full article:<p><a href="https://archive.fo/3zM7h" rel="nofollow">https://archive.fo/3zM7h</a><p>Does anybody know of any precedent for this or similar cases? It sounds extremely illegal to target random business deals like this, but I have no clue really...
Traditionally governments take a slice of any purchase and it's not viewed as extortion it's called taxes. Trump can talk all he wants but he doesn't have the unilateral power to block a sale or issue a tax on that sale.<p>If the comment is interpreted as a suggestion that taxes should be made then that is something to be considered as there are always positive and negative implications to any tax.