The global trade landscape is once again bracing for turbulence. Just days after the US Supreme Court struck down country-specific emergency tariffs imposed last year, the Trump administration is preparing a new wave of national security investigations that could pave the way for fresh import duties.
President Donald Trump, determined to rebuild his global tariff framework, is turning to alternative legal provisions to keep his trade agenda intact. While the court ruling curtailed his ability to rely on emergency powers, it has not ended his broader push for protectionist measures.
Section 232 Back In Focus
Citing an individual familiar with internal deliberations, Bloomberg reported that the administration is planning to launch investigations under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The provision allows the president to impose tariffs if imports are deemed a threat to national security.
The proposed probes are expected to examine imports of batteries, cast iron and iron fittings, electrical grid equipment, telecom equipment, plastics and plastic piping, and industrial chemicals. The Wall Street Journal first reported the development.
Section 232 has been used before. During his second term, Trump has invoked it to place levies on metals and automobiles. Tariffs justified under this authority are widely viewed as more legally durable compared with those imposed under emergency powers.
A Temporary Global Tariff And What Comes Next
Following the Supreme Court decision, the administration announced a 10 per cent global levy, which took effect Tuesday morning. Trump subsequently signalled he could raise that rate to 15 per cent.
However, the president can likely keep those tariffs in place for only five months. Trump has indicated he will use that window to construct a broader tariff framework capable of replacing the levies struck down by the court.
Tariffs backed by Section 232 investigations could form the backbone of that new regime. If imposed, they would extend beyond a temporary measure and carry greater legal resilience.
Section 301: Another Lever
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has also said the administration will consider launching investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. That law is designed to counter discriminatory trade practices by foreign governments.
Greer stated that the inquiries could cover “most major trading partners” and focus on “areas of concern such as industrial excess capacity, forced labour, pharmaceutical pricing practices, discrimination against US technology companies and digital goods and services, digital services taxes, ocean pollution, and practices related to the trade in seafood, rice, and other products.”
The investigations, he added, are expected to conclude on an “accelerated” timeline.
Warning To Trading Partners
Trump has made it clear he intends to act decisively. On Monday, he warned that countries attempting to exploit the Supreme Court ruling would face steeper penalties.
“Any Country that wants to ‘play games’ with the ridiculous Supreme Court decision, especially those that have ‘Ripped Off’ the U.S.A. for years, and even decades, will be met with a much higher Tariff, and worse, than that which they just recently agreed to. BUYER BEWARE!!!” Trump wrote on social media.
In a subsequent post, he added, “As President, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs.”
Global Deals In Limbo
The administration’s rapid push to construct replacement tariffs is partly aimed at preserving recently negotiated trade agreements. The Supreme Court ruling weakened Trump’s ability to set broad tariff rates using emergency law, creating uncertainty among trading partners.
The European Union has already frozen the ratification process for its agreement with the US. Officials in the European Parliament have said they want clarity on Washington’s tariff direction before proceeding.
China, Japan, South Korea and the UK are among other major partners that have negotiated trade pacts with the US. It remains unclear whether Trump’s latest warning was directed at a specific country or region.
