Several lawsuits challenging the legal validity of the tariff actions taken by President Trump since he took office on January 20, 2025, are in process of moving through the federal courts. They raise a variety of important jurisdictional and constitutional questions and seem poised to lead to challenges in federal circuit courts and the Supreme Court.
On May 8, 2025, the United States and United Kingdom (UK) unveiled the new trade terms of an “economic prosperity” deal. This deal comes after President Trump imposed a 10% reciprocal tariff on all products from the UK and additional tariffs on steel and aluminum, and automobiles and automobile parts. While the 10% reciprocal tariff will remain in effect, the two countries were able to agree on alternative arrangements for steel and aluminum, automobiles, and other strategic sectors.
On May 28, 2025, the United States’ Court of International Trade (CIT) struck down the President’s use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs. This includes tariffs imposed on Canada, China, and Mexico in response to the fentanyl crisis at U.S.’ borders and reciprocal tariffs imposed on almost all foreign imports on April 2, 2025. The Government immediately appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).
A quiet but significant power shift has been unfolding across Latin America. While the United States has long been the dominant economic and political influence in the region, its recent inward turn under the “America First” doctrine has created openings that China is eager to fill.
A few weeks ago, at the Trade and Cargo Security Summit, held in New Orleans, we learned that CBP (Customs and Border Protection) WAS NOT going to discuss the current administration’s policy during the conference. (Cue the dramatic music). Will you feel better if I tell you the groan across the audience was conspicuously audible? No? Well, I tried.
Many of our basic freedoms are guaranteed by the Constitution. Speech, press, assembly, religion: these are all accepted as sacrosanct rights by reasonable people across the political spectrum. But should we not have the same freedom when it comes to the economy?
The first quarter of 2025 has reshaped the U.S. trade landscape with a flurry of executive actions by the Trump administration, introducing a new wave of tariffs on imports from almost all U.S. trading partners. The Trump Administration has also levied broad duties on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, on the basis of emergency powers of the Executive Branch, citing national security, border control, and illicit drug interdiction.
As a broad stroke of tariffs are now levied against various countries to close the trade deficit gap, without truly examining the reason(s) for the imbalance, there will most likely be automatic retaliatory tariffs in a lose-lose situation. The White House stated that currently 50 countries are on the phone with the President, but that is hard to confirm. US consumers will ultimately pay the price, as well as SME’s.
On April 3, 2025, during the presidential daily morning briefing, Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum responded to the import tariffs announced the day before by President Trump, which targeted several countries. She emphasized that, of all the nations affected by these new duties, Mexico was the least impacted. She attributed this to the strong bilateral relationship between Mexico and the United States. She also reiterated that, since Mexico does not impose tariffs on U.S. goods, it is unfair for the U.S. to impose tariffs on Mexican products.
As is well known the US has imposed duties of 25% on imports from Canada and Mexico. This means that those imports will take the regular duty plus 25%. For example, a switchgear assembly classified under 8537.10.91 made in Canada or Mexico will take a duty of 2.7% plus the special tariff of 25% for a total rate of 27.7% of the value.
Several lawsuits challenging the legal validity of the tariff actions taken by President Trump since he took office on January 20, 2025, are in process of moving through the federal courts. They raise a variety of important jurisdictional and constitutional questions and seem poised to lead to challenges in federal circuit courts and the Supreme Court.
On May 8, 2025, the United States and United Kingdom (UK) unveiled the new trade terms of an “economic prosperity” deal. This deal comes after President Trump imposed a 10% reciprocal tariff on all products from the UK and additional tariffs on steel and aluminum, and automobiles and automobile parts. While the 10% reciprocal tariff will remain in effect, the two countries were able to agree on alternative arrangements for steel and aluminum, automobiles, and other strategic sectors.
On May 28, 2025, the United States’ Court of International Trade (CIT) struck down the President’s use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs. This includes tariffs imposed on Canada, China, and Mexico in response to the fentanyl crisis at U.S.’ borders and reciprocal tariffs imposed on almost all foreign imports on April 2, 2025. The Government immediately appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).
A quiet but significant power shift has been unfolding across Latin America. While the United States has long been the dominant economic and political influence in the region, its recent inward turn under the “America First” doctrine has created openings that China is eager to fill.
A few weeks ago, at the Trade and Cargo Security Summit, held in New Orleans, we learned that CBP (Customs and Border Protection) WAS NOT going to discuss the current administration’s policy during the conference. (Cue the dramatic music). Will you feel better if I tell you the groan across the audience was conspicuously audible? No? Well, I tried.
Many of our basic freedoms are guaranteed by the Constitution. Speech, press, assembly, religion: these are all accepted as sacrosanct rights by reasonable people across the political spectrum. But should we not have the same freedom when it comes to the economy?
The first quarter of 2025 has reshaped the U.S. trade landscape with a flurry of executive actions by the Trump administration, introducing a new wave of tariffs on imports from almost all U.S. trading partners. The Trump Administration has also levied broad duties on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, on the basis of emergency powers of the Executive Branch, citing national security, border control, and illicit drug interdiction.
As a broad stroke of tariffs are now levied against various countries to close the trade deficit gap, without truly examining the reason(s) for the imbalance, there will most likely be automatic retaliatory tariffs in a lose-lose situation. The White House stated that currently 50 countries are on the phone with the President, but that is hard to confirm. US consumers will ultimately pay the price, as well as SME’s.
On April 3, 2025, during the presidential daily morning briefing, Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum responded to the import tariffs announced the day before by President Trump, which targeted several countries. She emphasized that, of all the nations affected by these new duties, Mexico was the least impacted. She attributed this to the strong bilateral relationship between Mexico and the United States. She also reiterated that, since Mexico does not impose tariffs on U.S. goods, it is unfair for the U.S. to impose tariffs on Mexican products.
As is well known the US has imposed duties of 25% on imports from Canada and Mexico. This means that those imports will take the regular duty plus 25%. For example, a switchgear assembly classified under 8537.10.91 made in Canada or Mexico will take a duty of 2.7% plus the special tariff of 25% for a total rate of 27.7% of the value.