Analysts say Trump tariffs may endure despite court setback

Analysts said President Donald Trump has found ways to keep broad US tariffs in place after the Supreme Court ruled against an earlier use of emergency economic powers.

This week, Trump imposed sweeping new tariffs on 60 trading partners and 25 percent duties took effect on Brazilian products. He also separately used an untested justification for 50 percent tariffs on many Canadian goods. Wendy Cutler of the Asia Society Policy Institute said the actions showed Trump's continued support for tariffs and said they were not going away while he remained in the White House.

The newest tariffs of 10 percent to 12.5 percent apply to goods from 60 economies starting Friday. They followed investigations into forced labor concerns under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Cutler said this legal route had a lower chance of being overturned by courts, saying Trump's trade official Jamieson Greer had carefully followed procedural requirements before imposing duties.

Josh Lipsky of the Atlantic Council said Trump's use of Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against Canada was more concerning because it was untested. The stated basis was Canada's alleged discriminatory treatment of US exports, with duties due to take effect after a month. Lipsky described the move as tariff-as-punishment. Scott Lincicome of the Cato Institute said the approach created uncertainty.

Trump's newest tariffs already face legal challenges from small businesses. Lincicome said courts have previously allowed Section 301 duties, so legal arguments may focus on the official findings used to justify action. He said courts typically do not want to weigh in on such findings. Some critics argue that Trump does not have broad enough powers to impose sweeping tariffs.

The source said the Supreme Court in February deemed illegal Trump's use of emergency economic powers to impose a range of tariffs after he returned to the presidency. Other sector-specific tariffs on steel, automobiles and other goods, imposed under different legal authorities, were not affected. Officials have since opened Section 301 investigations, including on forced labor, to reinstate duties. Lincicome warned that earlier investigations were more substantial, including a first-term China probe that took a year before duties were imposed, while the probes into 60 economies including the European Union and India lasted four months.

Analysts also said tariffs can be hard to remove. Lipsky said revenue considerations could complicate reversal by a future leader. The Trump administration has struck 19 framework or reciprocal tariff deals, but further duties remain possible as Washington investigates 16 economies, including China, the European Union and Japan, over excess industrial capacity. Cutler said the administration had been careful not to exceed tariff levels agreed in bilateral deals, but trading partners were concerned that assurance may not hold.

Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics said Trump was missing a chance to address larger problems such as China's rare earth export curbs. He said trading partners had to deal with both Trump's tariffs and China's export restrictions. Cutler said countries had expressed disappointment, but there were no signs of retaliation because they risked further US tariff escalation.