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.
We are operating in one of the most volatile trade environments in recent memory. Tariff policy is shifting faster than most compliance programs can absorb. In that context, CBP’s March 15 guidance on Section 232 content value is not just a technical update. It brings meaningful clarity and importers who move quickly may find real money on the table.
The resurgence of Section 301 tariff investigations marks a pivotal shift in U.S. trade policy. Following the Supreme Court’s invalidation of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has turned to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 as a more durable legal pathway to reimpose and potentially expand tariff measures.
On March 20, 2026, the Trump Administration announced that it, “is committed to winning the AI race to usher in a new era of human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security for the American people.“ The White House issued a new comprehensive national legislative framework that addresses six key objectives.
In the final analysis, this case stands as one of the most important separation of powers decisions in the economic domain in U.S. history. It clarifies that tariffs are a form of taxation reserved to Congress, embeds the major questions doctrine in trade law, and reasserts the structural boundary between legislative and executive authority.
One of my recently published articles covered the World Economic Forum Davos speech by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, where he summoned the middle powers of the earth to unite against the US forces who are demanding that they take a knee and capitulate, per Governor Newsom who was in attendance handing out knee pads. (Really) Well, to say the least, that’s not happening by even the longest stretch of anyone’s imagination.
The global supply chain is the backbone of the U.S. economy, moving millions of tons of cargo daily. To keep things running smoothly and safely, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) place a significant reliance on the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT). This voluntary program trades “gold star” benefits—like fewer inspections, business resumption priority, and faster border crossings—for a company’s commitment to high-level security.
On March 9th, 2026, maritime tracking data showed just one outbound vessel, bearing an Iranian flag, transiting the Strait of Hormuz, with no inbound movements recorded at all. This lone vessel signifies a global conflict in a very important region around global trade.
Many trade practitioners that have had experience with a CBP prior disclosure or penalty action have encountered a request by CBP to execute a Statute of Limitations (SOL) waiver. These are usually accompanied by a request for the importer to provide a corporate resolution or the equivalent evidencing the authority of the SOL waiver signatory to sign the waiver on behalf of the importer / company.
Mexico’s Tax Administration Service (SAT) launched the 2026 Fiscal Regularization Program on January 22, offering businesses a strategic opportunity to resolve outstanding tax obligations with unprecedented penalty relief.
El marco jurídico mexicano en materia aduanera y de comercio exterior ha evolucionado hacia un modelo de cumplimiento más estricto y controlado. Las autoridades ya no solo exigen que los importadores identifiquen cual es la mercancía objeto de la importación, sino también que acrediten bajo que términos y condiciones se realiza la operación de comercio exterior.