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.
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.
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.