Trump Tariffs

Trump prepares fresh tariffs on dozens of countries: Report www.channelnewsasia.com
News Source

EXCERPT:

US President Donald Trump is poised to unleash fresh tariffs on dozens of countries as soon as this week, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday (Jul 21), with his temporary 10 per cent global tariff scheduled to expire on Friday.

The FT said the most immediate new duties are expected to be on a par with the 10 per cent tariffs currently in place, but the administration was also working on other investigations that could grant it the legal authority to propose higher duties.

Reuters could not immediately verify the report.


President Donald Trump appears prepared to utilize tariffs as a geopolitical tool once again. He announced a 50% tariff on Canada that came without warning. The administration is also signaling more tariffs on more countries are soon to follow. This could indicate the administration believes it has a legal path to apply tariffs that doesn’t conflict with SCOTUS’ recent ruling on tariffs.

US Hits Canada With 50 Percent Tariffs gellerreport.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The administration is responding to the retaliatory stance that Canada had retained toward the US:

“At the outset of the president’s trade policy, which he implemented early last year, there were only two countries that retaliated against the United States: the People’s Republic of China and Canada,” an official said. “Canada has retained substantial retaliation against the United States, as the U.S. imposes trade actions to re-industrialize, re-shore, and support its manufacturing. Specifically, Canada has to be held accountable for this continued discrimination,” the official continued (Townhall).

Financial Times: On Monday evening the administration published a list of specific goods that would be subject to the 50 per cent tariff, including milk and dairy products, alcoholic drinks, clothing and furniture…. The Trump administration will base the tariffs on Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which has never been used to impose duties on trading partners. A senior administration official said the law gave the president the authority to impose duties when a country discriminated against the US “relative to the treatment it gives a third country” (Financial Times).

Fact sheet: (White House).

Trump hits Canada with surprise 50% tariffs — and he didn’t warn Carney during their World Cup talk

By Emily Goodin, NY Post, July 20, 2026:

WASHINGTON — President Trump slapped a mammoth 50% tariff on certain Canadian goods — a move meant to combat what the administration described as the country’s “continuous discrimination” on American products.

The new tax will apply to a range of imports, including wine, hockey sticks, and cement and goes into effect in 30 days, but the administration indicated in a Monday briefing call that it was open for negotiations on the matter.

“Canada has retained substantial retaliation against the United States,” a senior administration official told reporters on a Monday briefing call.

Trump admin refunds $81B in tariffs after his key trade policy was struck down by Supreme Court www.independent.co.uk
News Source
EXCERPT:

News Source
EXCERPT:

 

Often untethered to unfair foreign trade practices, President Donald Trump’s fetish for tariffs is foolish. Tariffs reduce prosperity and opportunity for the vast majority of the public in order to benefit far smaller numbers of Americans in specific industries. Still, tariffs have value when it comes to penalizing unfair economic activity by U.S. trade partners. Trump is thus right to now threaten new tariffs on the European Union and European nations over their threat to American technology companies.

In a social media post last Friday, Trump warned that European countries were discussing the “imminent” introduction of digital services taxes on U.S. technology giants. He added that any “country that imposes such a Tax will immediately be met with a 100% TARIFF on any and all Goods sent to the [U.S.].” While Trump’s 100% tariff rate is arbitrary, he is right to warn of robust action. Contrary to their claims of justified regulation, the European digital taxes in question serve a simple and wholly unjustified purpose: extorting American companies.

News Source
EXCERPT:

A federal appeals court has approved of President Trump’s backup tariff plan — at least, for now.

On Thursday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit extended a block on a lower court ruling striking down the tariffs.

This means that President Trump can keep collecting 10% global tariffs under Section 122 temporarily as the further litigation continues.

Here are the details:

Blurb:

Critical minerals are mined all over the world but the majority of the supply ends up passing through China. For a broad range of key metals and minerals, China is either the largest miner, the dominant refiner, or both. This is true for rare earths, lithium, cobalt, graphite, nickel, and many other metals and minerals that are essential to defense, energy and high-tech applications.

It is less about where ores are dug out of the ground and more about where they are turned into usable components. In other words, Chinese processing plants are essentially the gatekeepers of global supply.

Blurb:

President Donald Trump said his administration will continue pursuing tariffs through alternative legal authorities after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a major portion of his administration’s tariff program earlier this year.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump criticized the ruling but emphasized that the decision did not eliminate his ability to impose tariffs through other laws.

“The Court knew where I stood, how badly I wanted this Victory for our Country, and instead decided to, potentially, give away Trillions of Dollars to Countries and Companies who have been taking advantage of the United States for decades,” Trump wrote.

Blurb:

REUTERS—A U.S. appeals court on Monday returned the lawsuits that led to most of President Donald Trump’s tariffs being struck down to the U.S. Court of International Trade, which could determine the process for refunding more than $130 billion to importers.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a one-page order granting the motion by importers to send the case back to the trade court, where it originated in early 2025.

The motion was opposed by the Trump administration, which said it wanted the case delayed for up to four months to give it time to consider its options.

Blurb:

The conservative bloc of the Supreme Court, and his own nominees, were divided on the tariffs decision, which Trump called “disappointing” and “very unfortunate” in his State of the Union address but used far harsher language when he spoke to reporters after it was handed down.

In the end, two of the three Trump-appointed justices voted against the president’s position on his signature economic policy, with only Justice Brett Kavanaugh pleasing him.

The two most conservative justices appointed by other Republican presidents, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, voted with Trump. They are also the two most likely justices to retire, creating vacancies for Trump to fill.

Blurb:

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent told “Sunday Morning Futures” host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday that revenue from tariffs would not drop, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling against the authority President Donald Trump’ invoked to levy his “Liberation Day” tariffs.

The high court decided Trump exceeded his powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in a 6-3 ruling issued Friday. Bartiromo questioned Bessent about claims made Friday by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget that the deficit would increase due to the loss of revenue.

“Yes, so, Maria, let’s take a step back here. And Maya MacGuineas should be ashamed, and they should take the word ‘responsible’ out of her organization’s name,” Bessent responded. “Everything she told you was completely irresponsible and, look, where were they when the Biden administration blew out the deficit that we had a fiscal contraction last year? So she should be ashamed.”

“So let me tell you what’s going to happen first, this ruling was a very narrow ruling in terms of the president’s ability to use IEEPA to collect revenues. The Supreme Court said the president can put in a full embargo, but he cannot collect one dollar,” Bessent continued.

Blurb:

Many have disagreed with the rationale for the Trump tariffs, lamented their content and consequences, and been alarmed about the president’s expansive use of emergency powers to impose them. But the Supreme Court’s ruling challenging them ought to be alarming because it allows Congress’s dereliction of duty to continue while tipping the balance of power even further toward the judiciary.

The Supreme Court’s decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, is also alarming for a number of other reasons. To begin, it was dubious, seeing as how a splintered majority dismissed all “[s]tatutory text, history, and precedent” to the contrary in holding that tariffs are not a means to “regulate … importation” under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), as Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, persuasively argued in his dissent. The court’s decision was also nonsensical, given that under its ruling, per the dissent, a president could “shut off all or most imports from China, but not … impose even a $1 tariff on imports from China.”

Blurb:

Most observers predicted the recent Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruling striking down President Trump’s International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs; however, the decision raises new doubts and questions about trade with the United States for exporters from countries like South Korea. This explainer discusses what the recent ruling means for trade between South Korea and the United States and how South Korea may respond to relations with the U.S. in the coming days.

Blurb:

President Donald Trump’s new tariffs have come into effect today at a rate of 10%, after the US supreme court blocked many of his import taxes on Friday.

The president signed an executive order last Friday authorising the 10% tariffs just hours after the supreme court ruling. He later threatened to raise the rate to 15%, but did not officially do so by Tuesday 12.01am time in Washington, when the 10% levy came into effect.

However, Bloomberg is reporting that officials in the White House are working on a formal order that will increase the rate to 15%.

It comes after Trump declared this week that he can use tariffs in a “much more powerful and obnoxious way”.

Blurb:

Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said Friday on Newsmax that President Donald Trump’s legal team made the “wrong argument” defending Trump’s tariff authority.

The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 Friday that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize Trump to impose tariffs, holding that the statute’s phrase “regulate importation” does not include the distinct and extraordinary power to levy duties absent explicit congressional approval. Dershowitz appeared on “The Record with Greta Van Susteren.”

“I thought that the lawyers for Trump made the wrong argument to the Supreme Court, and I predicted they were going to lose based on their argument. Look, if you argue that it’s fundraising activity by Congress, of course you’re going to lose,” Dershowitz said. “This, the Article One of the Constitution, says that duties and taxes can be imposed only by Congress, and Congress can delegate that authority to the president.”

 

Blurb:

President Donald Trump announced Saturday an increase in the global tariff rate on imports from 10 percent to 15 percent. The change — which comes just a day after the administration was forced to restructure due to a controversial Supreme Court ruling — took effect immediately and applies to goods imported from most countries.

The announcement came one day after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling on in the consolidated cases Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc. The Court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.

Blurb:

The EU’s top executive body has urged US President Donald Trump not to impose new tariffs on the bloc’s goods and to clarify his position following the US Supreme Court ruling that struck down most of his earlier measures.

On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump had no authority to impose tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Trump responded by signing an order imposing a 10% global tariff through a different law and later said he would raise it to 15%. He denounced the justices who ruled against him as “a disgrace to the nation.”