Trump pursues new import taxes

Tariffs are back in court-proofing mode. The Supreme Court took away Donald Trump’s broadest shortcut in February, ruling that the emergency law he used — IEEPA — did not let a president impose sweeping import taxes. But the White House did not back off. This week, the U.S. Trade Representative started hearings for a new set of Section 301 cases that could rebuild a big chunk of that tariff wall through a slower, more traditional trade-law process. (cfr.org) ### What changed this week? The immediate news is procedural, but it is not minor. USTR held public hearings on April 28 and April 29 on whether 60 economies have failed to effectively block imports made with forced labor. A second set of hearings is scheduled to begin May 5 on whether 16 trading partners are creating structural exces(cfr.org)ows trade retaliation after a finding that foreign practices are unreasonable or discriminatory. (ustr.gov) ### Why does Section 301 matter so much? Because this is the cleaner legal lane. The Court said IEEPA let presidents regulate commerce during emergencies, but not tax imports across the board. Section 301 is different — it is an actual tariff tool Congress delegated. That (ustr.gov)ing to swap a dramatic shortcut for a narrower road with sturdier guardrails. (cfr.org) ### What are these two cases really about? The forced-labor case is huge in scope. It covers 60 economies and asks whether their laws or enforcement give producers an unfair cost advantage by letting forced-labor-tainted goods into trade flows. The overcapacity case is narrower in geography but still big in effect. It targets 16 econo(cfr.org)an manufacturers. Many major economies overlap across the two tracks. (ustr.gov) ### Is this just about China? No — and that is the point. China is in the frame, but these probes reach far beyond China. The forced-labor investigation spans economies that together account for 99% of U.S. imports, while the overcapacity probe covers economies accounting for abou(ustr.gov). (nbcwashington.com) ### What happens to Canada and Mexico? North America is getting squeezed from two directions at once. One is the legal redesign of Trump’s tariff program. The other is the political strain around the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement review. What was supposed to be a technical check-in has turned into a much sharper(nbcwashington.com)rican manufacturing works like one supply chain, not three separate national ones. (axios.com) ### Does this mean the old tariff shock is over? Not really. The broad “Liberation Day” structure got cut back, and the average effective U.S. tariff rate fell from its 2025 peak after the February 20 ruling. But it did not go back to pre-Trump levels. Other tariffs stayed in place, temporary replacements were added, and now Section 301 is the administration’s attempt to make part of the new regime stick for longer. (axios.com) ### So what is the real endgame? Revenue, leverage, and durability. The administration wants tariff income to keep flowing, wants bargaining power over trading partners, and wants a legal theory that survives judicial review. The catch is that a more defensible legal route is also a slower one. Section 301 needs investigations, comments, hearings, findings, and then remedies(axios.com)r than the ones the Court threw out. (nbcwashington.com) ### Bottom line? The story is not that Trump’s tariff project died. It is that it is being rebuilt — less like an emergency edict, more like a formal trade case. That is slower, messier, and probably more durable. (nbcwashington.com)