Recently, US elected President Trump threatened that when he takes office one of his first orders will be a 25% import duty on all goods coming from MX into the US. The intention is to put pressure on Mexico to stop the flow of illegal drugs and immigrants.
On October 23, 2024, the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls published proposed changes to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) affecting exports of spacecraft and launch vehicles and related activities. Subsequently the department extended the comment period from Nov. 22 to Dec. 23, 2024. The Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS) of the Department of Commerce published corresponding proposed changes to the Export Administration Regulations on Oct. 23, 2024.
This article examines the constitutional authorities and various statutes that reserve tariff authorities for Congress and some legal authorities in which Congress has delegated tariff authorities to the President. The U.S. is a party to numerous multilateral and regional trade agreements that have binding tariff commitments that will be impacted as well.
Historically, trade agreements have focused on reducing barriers to trade—such as tariffs and quotas—while encouraging economic integration and growth. Environmental protection was often considered a separate issue, addressed primarily through national regulations or multilateral environmental agreements like the Paris Agreement. However, recent developments suggest that trade and environmental concerns are converging, with many new trade agreements incorporating specific environmental provisions.
President-elect Trump has repeatedly stated that he will increase tariffs. While it is unclear to what extent, while campaigning he proposed a 10% to 20% tariff on all imports and an additional 60% or more on goods from China.
One of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court’s recent term was Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. While the specific underlying dispute in Loper Bright isn’t relevant to the trade community—did fishermen have to pay for government-mandated observers on their vessels?—the Court used this case to overturn the broadly applicable judicial deference test established in 1984 in Chevron U.S.A. Inc., v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
By: Judy Davis, Senior Trade Advisor, Braumiller Consulting Group In the global trade universe, where time holds huge importance, weak security practices in your international
Several tribunals and courts were established at various periods of America’s history to resolve trade-related litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels, and even the Supreme Court has played a significant role in these disputes. The jurisdiction and structure of these courts evolved as the complexities and volume of trade disputes grew.
On September 15th, 2024, the Mexican Congress published on the Diario Oficial de la Federacion (Mexican Official Gazette) a decree to amend, add, and abolish several provisions of the Mexican Constitution regarding the Judicial Power. This reform, as it is being called, is one of the major changes to the Mexican Judicial System and has been met with heated debates by opponents who fear it will put the balance and separation of power at risk as it will result in a weakened and deteriorated judicial system overpassed by the legislative and executive powers.
This is the second of a three-part series about the USMCA joint review process, focusing on China, Mexico, and competing visions of a “worker-centered” trade policy. Part one introduces the USMCA joint review process and explores how US trade policy would likely operate during Trump’s second term. Part two outlines some of the major trade issues that will be on the table during joint review, focusing on the Mexico-US relationship, and anticipates Harris’s likely approach to trade policy.
Global reliance on critical minerals for emerging technologies has created a competition between nations to secure reliable supply chains for continued innovation pertinent to national security. This is necessary from a national security perspective for both partners in this agreement.
The GENIUS Act has authorized several regulatory agencies to issue regulations to develop the first comprehensive federal regulatory framework governing payment stablecoins in the United States. The statute directs multiple federal financial regulators to implement a coordinated supervisory structure governing issuance, reserve management, redemption rights, anti-money laundering compliance, custody, and market structure.
United States President Donald Trump met with President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China at a summit in Beijing in mid-May. The two leaders spoke for about two hours behind closed doors, discussing the trade relationship between the world’s two largest economies, the emergence of artificial intelligence, and energy cooperation. But it was a pointed comment from Xi about Taiwan that hinted at an unresolved issue that may make or break global relations.
When the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated certain tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, it did more than reshape trade policy. The decision triggered a complex series of questions regarding tariff refunds, consumer rights, and corporate liability – questions whose effects continue to be felt far beyond the trade community, reaching businesses and households across the US.
Walmart has been in China for about 30 years, entering the market in 1996 when it opened its first Walmart hypermarket and Sam’s Club in Shenzhen. There are now 342 retail stores, 279 Walmart Supercenters, and 63 Sam’s Clubs in China.
Mexico’s tax authority (Servicio de Administración Tributaria – SAT) has postponed the mandatory implementation of the Electronic Value Manifest (Manifestación de Valor Electrónica – EVM). The requirement is now expected to become mandatory on June 1, 2026.
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.