Trump Expands Trade War with New Tariffs on Imports from Dozens of Countries

President Donald Trump has intensified his trade war by declaring new tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on imports from dozens of countries, despite previous legal obstacles and court challenges to his broad tariff measures.

Trump has long argued that U.S. import tariffs were unfairly low and entered the White House determined to restructure the American trade system. However, his efforts have repeatedly faced setbacks due to judicial rulings.

In his latest move, Trump decided to impose new tariffs starting Friday on goods his administration claims are produced using what it calls "forced labor," replacing the global 10% tariff that expires at midnight Friday.

These tariffs were initially imposed by Trump in February after the Supreme Court invalidated tariffs he had introduced the previous year.

The new tariffs will be applied under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which authorizes the U.S. president to impose tariffs on countries engaging in what are deemed unreasonable or discriminatory trade practices.

Imports of oil, gas, and certain natural resources will be exempt from the new tariffs, as will goods covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and items subject to security-related tariffs previously imposed by Trump on automobiles, steel, and other products.

The United States contends that the countries targeted by the new tariffs have not taken sufficient measures to prevent products made in regions permitting what the U.S. describes as "forced labor" or slavery from entering the market.

Although the U.S. still allows the use of prison labor under conditions described by labor organizations as "coercive," it has enforced laws prohibiting the import of goods made with what it defines as "forced labor" for nearly a century.

Additional tariffs are expected in the coming weeks, as the administration has proposed a new set of tariffs under Section 301 targeting 15 countries and the European Union to counter what the White House describes as unfair manufacturing practices in those regions.

An administration official told The New York Times on Thursday that the investigation into this matter is ongoing.

During testimony before Congress on Wednesday, U.S. Trade Representative Jameson Greer affirmed the administration's determination to continue imposing tariffs regardless of the legal basis employed.

Over the past seventeen months, the Trump administration has shifted among several trade laws in an effort to build a system protecting the U.S. economy from foreign competition.

This latest decision underscores Trump's resolve to reshape the global trade system despite numerous lawsuits and objections from American consumers and businesses burdened by higher taxes resulting from these tariffs.

Earlier this week, the administration also invoked a rarely used trade law when Trump signed orders imposing 50% tariffs on Canadian exports valued in the billions of dollars.

This decision was based on the Tariff Act of 1930, also known as the Smoot-Hawley Act, enacted by Congress to protect U.S. companies at the onset of the Great Depression, although many historians believe it deepened the economic crisis. Section 338 of this law had never before been used to impose tariffs.

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the authority to regulate trade, but lawmakers have passed several laws allowing the president to impose tariffs under specific circumstances. These laws are typically designed to address trade practices deemed "unfair" in certain countries or sectors, not to overhaul the entire U.S. tariff system.

In February, the Supreme Court struck down the primary legal tool the Trump administration relied on to impose tariffs, ruling that its use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs was unlawful and ordering the return of about $160 billion in tariff revenues.

Trump had used the emergency law to announce "Liberation Day" tariffs on foreign countries last year, as well as tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China due to allegations of fentanyl smuggling into the United States.

Following the Supreme Court ruling, Trump turned to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 as a temporary solution, a provision never before used to impose tariffs. This section allows the president to impose tariffs to address balance of payments issues but limits their duration to 150 days, a period ending early Friday morning.

Trump’s use of Section 122 has also faced legal challenges, with a group of small businesses and a coalition of states filing lawsuits against the administration, arguing that the government failed to meet the strict conditions required by the law.

In May, a majority of judges at the U.S. Court of International Trade agreed with this view, delivering another significant legal setback to Trump’s tariff policy.

The administration appealed the ruling, and courts have allowed the government to continue collecting the 10% tariffs on imports pending the appeal decision.