U.S. trade court reviews 10% tariff

A U.S. trade court is deciding whether President Donald Trump could legally revive a 10% tariff on nearly all imports after the Supreme Court rejected his earlier tariff strategy. (usnews.com) The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade heard arguments on Friday, April 10, over tariffs Trump announced on February 20 and put into effect on February 24. The challengers are 24 mostly Democratic-led states and two small businesses. (usnews.com) Trump based the new tariff on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, a law that allows duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days during a “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficit or an imminent dollar crisis. His administration says chronic U.S. trade deficits justify using it. (usnews.com) The lawsuit says Section 122 was written for short-term monetary stress, not for a standing gap between what the United States imports and exports. Judges pressed both sides on how to apply a 1974 statute built for a different financial system, and one judge said, “We’re not quite sure how to translate 1974 into 2026.” (politico.com) The case lands less than two months after the Supreme Court ruled, on February 20, that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not let a president impose tariffs. That decision wiped out Trump tariffs tied to drug-trafficking emergencies and a broader trade-deficit emergency. (congress.gov) Congress’s research arm said Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs and regulate foreign commerce, even though Congress has delegated some narrower tariff powers to presidents in later statutes. That constitutional backdrop is now central to the fight over whether Section 122 is a temporary stopgap or a lawful replacement. (congress.gov) The court hearing also carried a deadline: Politico reported the Section 122 tariffs can last only 150 days, which would take them into July unless Congress extends them. The White House has said it wants to use the duties as a bridge while it looks for other legal authorities that could support longer-lasting tariffs. (politico.com) This legal fight is unfolding as other trade barriers are moving ahead outside the United States. The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism entered its definitive regime on January 1, 2026, requiring larger importers of covered goods to obtain authorization and buy carbon certificates tied to embedded emissions. (taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu) The European Commission says the carbon border system applies to importers bringing in more than 50 tonnes a year of covered goods, and the certificate price is linked to the European Union Emissions Trading System carbon price. That adds a second layer of border cost calculation for companies moving metals and other industrial inputs across markets. (taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu) The International Monetary Fund has also been warning this month about a weaker global outlook as governments confront overlapping shocks. The fund scheduled its April 14 World Economic Outlook briefing during the Spring Meetings that began April 13 in Washington, after Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva delivered a global outlook speech on April 9. (imf.org) The judges did not say on April 10 when they would rule. Their decision will determine whether Trump’s 10% tariff survives long enough to shape summer import costs, or joins the earlier tariffs the Supreme Court already knocked down. (politico.com)