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.
On March 3, 2025, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) released the 2025 Trade Policy Agenda and 2024 Annual Report on the Trade Agreements Program. The report outlines the rationale of the Trump Administration for its trade policy goals and actions. It complements and expands on the America First Trade Policy Executive Order and also encompasses the massive imposition of tariffs by the President on April 2 in his so-called “Liberation Day” Executive Order and Fact Sheet.
Donald Trump’s first term in office pursued an aggressive foreign policy toward China, imposing tariffs, restricting technology transfers, and accusing Beijing of unfair trade practices. However, one unintended consequence of this hardline approach has been China’s accelerated expansion into Latin America—a region traditionally within the U.S. sphere of influence.
Liberation Day passed with the promised reciprocal tariffs touted by the Trump administration. The president, surrounded by workers in the Rose Garden on April 2, executed a number of tariffs promising to Make America Wealthy Again. How did they calculate these tariffs? Well, there’s speculation.
On March 7, 2025, the White House hosted a Digital Assets Summit to celebrate the creation of a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve and a Digital Assets Stockpile by an Executive Order titled, “Establishment of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile“. The Executive Order recognizes that “The Bitcoin protocol permanently caps the total supply of bitcoin (BTC) at 21 million coins, which is critical to its value proposition as a scarce asset.
The various tariffs that President Trump has imposed since retaking office are based on delegated authority found in several existing statutes. But a century ago, tariffs were primarily the purview of Congress. One of the most controversial manifestations of U.S. tariff legislation (and of American legislation in general) was the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, signed into law by President Hoover shortly after the United States—and the world—fell into the black hole of the Great Depression.
Several fundamental conditions are widely presumed necessary for a country to enjoy the benefits of global trade. One condition is that import activity ought not exceed export activity. Put more simply, we must sell more than we buy. On its face this seem reasonable. It seems logical that a trade deficit (that is, selling less than we buy) is a drain on our economy. Indeed, every month the news media feed us the bad news about the negative “balance of trade” data reported by the Commerce Department.
Prior to the origination of the plans for the Panama Canal vessels of trade had few options of getting goods from Europe and Asia to N. America. One was to sail around the southern tip of South America (Cape Horn) adding months to the journey if they were lucky enough to make it through what is known as one of the most hazardous shipping routes in the world, where it’s estimated that over 800 ships have been lost over the last couple of centuries of trade.
On February 10, 2025, President Trump signed proclamations to reinstate the full 25% tariff on steel imports and increase tariffs on aluminum imports to 25%. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 affords the President with the authority to adjust imports being brought into the U.S. in quantities or under circumstances that threaten to impair national security. The President says the reinvigorated Section 232 tariffs “will support the program’s original objective of revitalizing the domestic steel and aluminum industries and achieving sustainable capacity utilization of at least 80%.”
The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) joint review process is scheduled to begin on July 1, 2026, but the time to prepare is now. Embedded trade compliance professionals should already be doing scenario analysis—pulling data, calculating the supply chain impacts of potential changes, and helping their companies to strategize accordingly.
President elect Lai Ching-te’s victory in Taipei ignited tensions across the Taiwan strait and now the geopolitical field waits to see if China will kick off World War Three. I’m only slightly joking, but Beijing has exerted diplomatic pressure on nations maintaining close ties with the island in the past and Taiwan’s decision to remain a democracy will no doubt ramp up China’s reunification process in the coming months. But how will that affect trade relations?
In the complex world of international trade compliance, few people possess the expertise, dedication and problem-solving skills that Brad Menard, President of Braumiller Consulting Group, brings to his clients.
In recent years, the global spotlight has illuminated the grave concerns surrounding human rights violations within China’s Xinjiang region, particularly those impacting the Uyghur population. The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) stands as a pivotal piece of legislation designed to address these concerns and to ensure that products imported into the United States are devoid of forced labor originating from the Xinjiang region.
The implementation of trade policies in what many consider acts of protectionism and manipulation are the norm, and of course China and the U.S. are a prime example. Solutions include nearshoring, reshoring, and protectionism. It’s complicated, so for the purpose of this article, let’s stick with nearshoring.
On November 1, 2023, FDA issued a proposed rule that would make changes to its prior notice regulations, if the rule is finalized. These changes include requiring the name of the mail service and a mail tracking number to be provided in prior notice for food articles arriving by international mail. In addition, the FDA proposes that food facility registration information and prior notice be submitted within a specific timeframe after receiving certain notices of refusal or hold (“post-refusal” and “post-hold” submissions).
On October 4, 2023, A coalition of 14 U.S. aluminum extrusion producers and labor unions filed petitions before the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC) seeking to impose antidumping (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD) on aluminum extrusions produced in 15 countries and exported to the U.S.
As we have previously explained in other articles, an IMMEX is a duty deferral program from the Mexican federal government created in 2006, which stands for Industria Manufacturera, Maquiladora y de Servicios de Exportación (Manufacturing, Maquiladora and Export Services Industry).
On October 25, 2023, the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) published interim final rules amending the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) to add/clarify new controls on semiconductor manufacturing equipment (“SME”), advanced computing integrated circuits (“IC”), and computer commodities containing them.
In April of this year U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) issued Headquarters Ruling H330077. The ruling was in response to a protest filed by an importer that had a shipment of wearing apparel excluded from entry under a Withhold Release Order (WRO) at the port of Newark, NJ. The wearing apparel was processed from cotton produced in India, made into yarn and fabric in China, and converted to wearing apparel in Cambodia. None of the parties to the transaction were located in the Xinjiang Region of China.
The Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”), Made in America Office issued a Final Rule to clarify the Build America, Buy America Act (“BABA”) provisions of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act4 (“IIJA”) and to clarify existing provisions related to domestic preferences. The Final Rule amends Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”), subtitle A, chapter I by adding a new Part 184 to support implementation of BABA. OMB also amended 2 CFR 200.322 to clarify existing provisions within part 200. According to OMB, the Final Rule “is intended to improve consistency in the implementation of BABA requirements across the Federal Government.”5 The Final Rule will take effect October 23, 2023.