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.
Importers who have paid tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) should take immediate steps to preserve their eligibility for potential refunds. Multiple lawsuits are currently challenging the legality of these tariffs, and the Supreme Court is set to decide the issue in November. If the Court ultimately invalidates the tariffs, importers may be entitled to recover duties paid. However, securing refunds depends on preserving jurisdictional options—especially given the uncertainty about whether these tariffs constitute a protestable decision under customs law. There are three potential refund mechanisms at play.
On May 28, 2025, a three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled in two cases (VOS Selections, Inc. v. Trump and the State of Oregon v. Trump) that the Presidential actions taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. §§ 1701–1707) to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China for illegal immigration and fentanyl smuggling are unconstitutional. The CIT said that the tariff actions did not directly address the declared emergency and were not delegated by Congress to the Executive Branch and therefore exceed the President’s tariff setting authority under the Constitution.
Prior to August 29 of this year, 19 USC 321 – popularly known as a Section or de minimis clearance – allowed imported shipments valued at less than $800 to enter the US free of duty and entry requirements. The idea behind this was (1) the cost of processing an entry and duty payment would be more than the duty collected, and (2) setting the threshold at this level would promote eCommerce. It would also allow US Customs & Border Protection (CBP) to use its resources more effectively.
Just look at the current landscape of how China has been innovating through various trade related sanctions, bans, and tariffs. Necessity has always been the mother of invention, and in the case of China and the never-ending western pressure it has also been the catalyst in many cases for that which ultimately drives them to create and overcome.
After challenging negotiations and rising tariff tensions, the U.S. and Japan have reached a trade deal. This agreement precedes the August 1st tariff deadline, preventing a scheduled 25% tariff increase on Japanese products. The deal includes substantial Japanese investments in the U.S.
Here we are. August 1st, 2025, and the media is now publishing what facts they have on the various trade deals as well as those that have yet to come to fruition, in addition to the new announcement of imposed global tariffs which range anywhere from 10% to 41%, Yes, the trade world is on fire from a U.S. perspective. CNN, my “go-to” is reporting that the Trump Administration is imposing tariffs on over 60 countries around the globe.
The President signed into law the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins of 2025’or ‘‘GENIUS Act of 2025’” (the Act) on July 18, 2025. The new law establishes a basis for regulators to permit a variety of bank and non-bank entities to issue payment stablecoins that will be used for payments and reserves for a variety of purposes. This analysis covers the major provisions of the new law.
Since taking office on January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration has undertaken an aggressive trade policy that has impacted, and will continue to impact, all countries trading with the US. Many of the actions seek to reverse the established principles of trade policy that have been supported by both political parties, enshrined in the rules of international agreements and organizations, and regulated by executive branch agencies since the end of World War II.
From a Mexican resident’s perspective, who is also involved in international trade, it appears that since the Trump administration took office, the global economic scenario has been altered by an escalating trade war, characterized by the imposition of tariffs by the U.S. government, on a range of countries. These measures, intended to safeguard the U.S. interests, have affected the relationships with certain international markets, as the U.S. is showing signs of progressive isolationist practices.
My internship in Mexico was with the Servicio de Administración Tributaria (SAT), the office responsible for applying tax and customs legislation, which facilitates trade through customs administration. With its influence extending across both the public and private sectors, SAT stands at the forefront of Mexico’s efforts to promote transparency, efficiency, and fiscal responsibility. My internship experience within this institution offered invaluable insights into its operations and the impact it has on the nation’s economic landscape.