President Trump’s trade strategy faced a challenge this week as the United States Court of International Trade blocked a significant portion of his tariffs. The court’s decision, as detailed in a Yahoo Finance article, underscores the legal complexities surrounding the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 for tariff imposition. However, Trump has alternative pathways to pursue his tariff agenda.
Read also: Trump Defends Trade Strategy Amid Tariff Criticism
According to data from the IndexBox platform, the United States’ trade balance continues to be a focal point, with significant attention on sectors such as steel, aluminum, and semiconductors. Trump’s potential use of the balance-of-payments authority under section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 could allow for swift tariff implementation, albeit with a 150-day limitation and a maximum tariff rate of 15 percent.
Furthermore, section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 offer more established, albeit slower, routes for imposing tariffs. These sections require thorough investigations and public consultations, which could delay immediate action but provide a more permanent solution. The White House is reportedly conducting investigations into goods like pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, indicating a strategic focus on these areas.
Despite the setback, Trump’s administration remains committed to maintaining tariffs, with plans to appeal the court’s decision and potentially involve the Supreme Court. The administration’s resolve is evident in its pursuit of various legal avenues to reinforce its trade policies, aiming to prioritize American industrial sectors over consumer goods like sneakers and t-shirts.
