Latest news with #USTradeExpansionAct
Mint
2 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Trump's tariffs: Turfed out but raring to return
In a move that sets back US President Donald Trump's idiosyncratic plan to make America 'great again,' but could possibly slow down or arrest America's descent as a democracy, a court has ruled against the 'reciprocal' tariffs announced by him on 2 April, dubbed 'Liberation Day.' The power to levy such tariffs is held by the US Congress rather than its president, ruled the court, giving the White House 10 days to reverse import duties announced under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). Also Read: Democracy could be the greatest casualty of Trump's war While this law grants the president power to 'regulate' imports, it does not mention 'tariffs.' Given the significance of these tariff measures and their 'unbounded' nature, the court held as invalid the assumed delegation of Congress authority to the White House under that law. In other words, the tariff orders had exceeded his authority. US stock market index futures jumped after the ruling, but it is premature to conclude that Trump's tariff tantrums are behind us. This is so for three reasons. One, as the US Court of International Trade's order is being appealed by the administration, it could be overturned either by a federal appeals court or the Supreme Court. Two, Trump's team might look for another statute to back his trade barriers. And, three, he could try pressuring lawmakers to enact his agenda and thereby secure it from judicial interdiction. Also Read: The many dangers that democracy confronts today Although aimed at external threats, the IEEPA adopted in 1977 was partly designed to curb and specify the emergency powers granted to the US president under prior laws like its Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, which had been used by presidents to assume sweeping authority. In 1973, a Senate investigation had found various emergencies declared since 1933 still in force, which led to legislative efforts to constrain the White House. The IEEPA has hitherto been used to slam hostile countries with sanctions and confiscate foreign assets. Trump has been the first US leader to use this law to erect steep trade barriers against countries alleged to have put the country at threat by selling it more goods than buying US wares. Of the three judges who unanimously ruled against tariffs under the IEEPA, one had been appointed by Trump himself, a second by Obama and the senior-most by Reagan. It is difficult to pin their opinion on any partisan bias. The court also struck down tariffs imposed on countries for their alleged role in America's opioid crisis, citing a weak link between this action and its ability to deal with this declared emergency, but did not invalidate America's 25% duty on steel, aluminium, automobiles and auto parts levied under the US Trade Expansion Act. Under this law, tariffs can be imposed if the commerce secretary determines that specified imports threaten national security. Also Read: A trade arrangement that leaves out the US could trump Trump's tariffs It is conceivable that the Trump administration will seek to invoke such laws to re-impose levies should its appeal be rejected. However, it might be difficult to argue that garments from Asia pose a threat while clothes from Mexico do not. The win-win economic logic of trade should also make it hard to cast imports from specific countries as perilous, although political postures that feed on economic anxieties can colour popular views of what is good or bad for a country. Whichever way the legal battle goes, this week's court order on tariffs can be taken as a win for due process, even if uncertainty and volatility persist. Global growth is still at risk. Yet, at least on paper, an institutional commitment to the rule of law could relieve the world.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
"Court should have no role here," White House on US court blocking Trump's tariffs
The White House on Thursday (local time) expressed its stern disagreement with the US federal court for blocking the Trump administration's move to impose sweeping tariffs on other countries. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, lambasting the US court's ruling, said that the judges have failed to "acknowledge" the President's authority and that the court should have no role in interfering in this decision. "These judges failed to acknowledge that the president of the United States has core foreign affairs powers and authority given to him by Congress to protect the United States' economy and national security. The courts should have no role here," Leavitt said at the press briefing. Leavitt further expressed concern about judges "inserting themselves" into the presidential decision-making process and said that the US cannot function if diplomatic or trade negotiations are "railroaded by activist judges." "There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process. America cannot function if President Trump or any other president for that matter has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges. President Trump is in the process of rebalancing America's trading agreements with the entire world bringing tens of billions of dollars in tariff revenues to our country and finally ending the United States of America from being ripped off," she said. Live Events Leavitt said that these judges are undermining the credibility of the United States on the world stage. "The administration has already filed an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal and an immediate administrative stay to strike down this egregious decision, but ultimately the Supreme Court must put an end to this in the sake of our Constitution and our country," she said. Earlier, A US federal court ruled against US President Donald Trump's large-scale imposition of sweeping tariffs, deeming that this move exceeds his legal authority and that it would affect a wide range of imported goods, as reported by CNN. The decision, handed down by the US Court of International Trade in Manhattan, determined that the tariffs -- including those introduced under emergency economic powers -- were unlawful; however, the Trump administration has already filed an appeal, leaving the future of the tariffs uncertain, CNN reported. As per CNN, the court's decision halts the enforcement of most of Trump's tariffs, including the 30 per cent duties on Chinese imports, 25 per cent on certain goods from Mexico and Canada, and a general 10 per cent tariff on many other imports. However, the ruling does not apply to tariffs on autos, steel, and aluminium, which were enacted under a different law of the US Trade Expansion Act.
Korea Herald
07-05-2025
- Business
- Korea Herald
Seoul requests 'special consideration' as US mulls tariffs on semiconductor imports
South Korea has asked the United States to make "special consideration" of its chip exports as the Donald Trump administration is moving to impose tariffs on imported semiconductors, Seoul's industry ministry said Wednesday. The South Korean government submitted a written opinion to the US administration regarding Washington's national security investigation into semiconductor imports under the US Trade Expansion Act, according to the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. The Trump administration has been looking to impose new tariffs on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, with investigations into such imports currently under way. In its submitted opinion, the Seoul government called for "special consideration" of Korean semiconductor exports to the US, saying that semiconductors and manufacturing equipment made in Korea have "very limited" impact on the US security and supply chains. The written statement also said Washington's potential tariffs on chip imports may have a "negative" influence on Korean companies' investment plans in the US, including those for artificial intelligence infrastructure. Seoul also highlighted that the trade balance between the countries in the semiconductor sector is nearly equal, according to the ministry. "The government will continue close consultations with the US at all levels to minimize any negative impact on Korean companies," the ministry said. "We will also maintain close communication with industry stakeholders and develop strategic response measures, while continuing joint outreach efforts of the public and private sectors in the US." (Yonhap)
Al Etihad
25-04-2025
- Business
- Al Etihad
UAE to have least impact from proposed US tariffs, says S&P Global
25 Apr 2025 20:53 A. SREENIVASA REDDY (ABU DHABI) The UAE is expected to be among the least affected by the upcoming US tariff regime set to take effect after a 90-day pause announced on April 9, 2025, according to an assessment by S&P Global Market the new rules, all imports from the UAE to the US will be subject to a flat 10% tariff. However, this will have minimal impact since aluminum—UAE's largest non-oil export to the US—has already been subject to a 10% tariff since 2018 under Section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act. In 2024, aluminum accounted for 15% of total US imports from the UAE, a segment that remains US energy imports are exempt from the new tariffs, and when combined with aluminum, these two product categories represent about 40% of total UAE exports to the US. This insulation from the harshest effects of the tariff regime gives the UAE a strategic advantage as global trade tensions rise.S&P also pointed to broader macroeconomic benefits for the UAE stemming from currency dynamics. With the US dollar weakening in response to the tariff announcement, the UAE dirham—pegged to the dollar—has also depreciated, improving the cost-competitiveness of UAE exports in non-dollar markets. 'The upside is the competitiveness of the local production will be improving,' the report policy trends could also work in the UAE's favour. Should the US Federal Reserve pivot toward growth-oriented policies and cut rates in 2025 and 2026, the GCC countries, including the UAE, are likely to follow suit due to their currency pegs. Lower interest rates in the region are expected to stimulate private sector investment and spending, leading to potential upward revisions in growth a shifting trade landscape, UAE could also benefit from trade and investment diversion. As US firms seek to circumvent retaliatory tariffs from countries like China, they may look to establish production or distribution hubs in the GCC. 'The UAE, which has a well-developed trade and infrastructure network, could be a prime beneficiary of this development,' the report the favourable position, S&P warned of some downside risks the GCC countries. Chief among them is the impact of lower oil prices. S&P forecasts Brent crude to average $73 per barrel in 2025 and $69 in 2026, reflecting softer global demand. 'Weaker oil prices will likely force governments to revise their investment spending plans or increase borrowing plans, which will have knock-on effects on growth forecasts,' the report addition, the weakening US dollar, which lost nearly 10% to the euro and yen and about 7% to the pound between late February and April 23, will increase the cost of goods imports into the GCC and depress the value of dollar-denominated assets. As a result, inflation is expected to accelerate modestly in the GCC countries during the second and third quarters of 2025. Still, S&P's overall assessment suggests that, relative to its regional peers, the UAE is better positioned to absorb the fallout and may even stand to gain in some areas as the global tariff conflict unfolds.
The Herald
23-04-2025
- Automotive
- The Herald
Nelson Mandela Bay not immune from global trade wars
US President Donald Trump's 90-day pause on sweeping 'reciprocal' tariffs on imports from around the globe may have brought a sense of relief, but SA cannot afford to push pause on efforts to address what may potentially have major implications for our local economy. While the more than 30% duty allocated to all South African goods has been temporarily suspended, the 10% across-the-board base rate of the US's global reciprocal tariffs announced on April 2 remains in place. In addition, the 25% import tariff on vehicles and a targeted list of automotive components, announced earlier under the US Trade Expansion Act (referred to as 'section 232 tariffs') also remains in place, and has already come into effect. It is still not clear whether automotive exports to the US will be subject to a 'stacked' tariff, that is the reciprocal 10% plus the 25% auto-specific duty. These actions effectively wipe out the duty-free access to the US market that South African goods, particularly from the agriculture and automotive sectors, have enjoyed under the Africa Growth and Opportunities Act (Agoa). The preferential trade access under this Act comes to an end in September, unless the legislation is renewed — which increasingly looks unlikely in the current US policy environment. The US is SA's second biggest trading partner and our automotive industry's second biggest export market, with vehicle exports to the US in 2024 valued at R24bn and components at R4.3bn. More than 24,000 vehicles exported from SA to the US in 2024 represent 8% of our total vehicle exports — which may sound small, but this number represents thousands of jobs at local auto and components manufacturers, and in the supply chains of logistics and other services supporting this sector. Losing this 8% will make many of the companies in the supply chain sub-critical. The automotive industry is the largest manufacturing sector in the country and accounts for 60% of SA's exported manufactured goods. It is a privilege to have an industry like this in our country, especially considering the technology and skills which it brings and its knock-on job creation impact through the economic eco-system. The Nelson Mandela Bay economy is highly reliant on automotive manufacturing, representing almost half the country's direct employment in this sector. It is vital to understand that the impact on the South African economy of these tariffs and the global trade wars they are sparking goes far beyond the bilateral trading relationship with the USA. The entire global trade system has been upended and the competitiveness of local manufacturers, and the attractiveness of SA as an investment destination versus other manufacturing locations, is at stake. In particular, SA's Southern African Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union and duty-free access to the US market under Agoa has boosted the case for investment in the local automotive manufacturing industry over the past two decades, and the loss of these benefits will have a negative impact on future investment decisions. This, together with how the tariffs affect and are responded to by other countries, will affect global business strategies and decisions on optimal manufacturing locations. A number of countries will now have significant cost advantages over SA, including countries on this continent, while other countries like Japan and Korea will simply absorb the tariffs through internal incentives. This will put SA, which already has a logistics and distance disadvantage compared to other markets, in a very uncompetitive position. Our local manufacturing economy, which has been relatively agile and resilient in responding to energy, logistics and enabling environment challenges in the country, is already struggling to be competitive versus other manufacturing operations around the world. The SA automotive industry represents just 0.6% of global vehicle production, and its competitiveness relies heavily on the economies of scale derived from combined domestic demand and export orders. A decline in export orders, if global automakers shift manufacturing from their SA plants to more favourable locations due to the impact of tariffs, would be a severe blow to those economies of scale, with knock-on impacts in terms of job losses and rising prices for consumers. From a Bay perspective, our economy is anchored by vehicle manufacturing and includes a deep components manufacturing eco-system of first-, second- and third-tier suppliers. Beyond this logistics, security, cleaning, catering, retailers and most types of businesses in the Bay indirectly benefit from the industry. Thousands and thousands of local jobs have been created and are sustained through our automotive manufacturing industry. The agriculture sector will be impacted too by the 10% base rate import tariff, particularly in citrus, where the Eastern Cape is the second largest citrus producing province, and the Sundays River Valley is the country's largest single production area. SA citrus plays an important role in supplying the US market during their off-season, and our duty-free access under Agoa has enabled SA citrus to compete with other southern hemisphere producers such as Peru and Chile. As a result, SA's citrus exports to the US have almost doubled since 2017. The citrus industry is seasonal, and these changes are happening at the start of the new citrus season, creating uncertainty. A speedy and proactive strategic response is required to enable local manufacturers and agricultural producers to find alternative solutions and implement mitigation actions. Government needs to move with absolute urgency to restore a mutually beneficial trading relationship with the US, while assessing alternative markets and opportunities to reinvent and reposition our manufacturing and other affected sectors. The situation has highlighted the pressing need for SA to diversify its trading relations, especially to leveraging relationships with Brics partners (where there are currently no free-trade agreements in place) and strengthening trade relations with the European Union and South East Asia markets. Opportunities in the burgeoning economies of the Middle East must be explored, as well as under the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA). If we are to create new markets for our locally built vehicles on the continent, it is vital that the rules of origin for vehicles are finalised as a matter of urgency, and that grey imports are prohibited. Alongside trade policy, it is also crucial that government review industrial policy, particularly the SA Automotive Master Plan and automotive industry incentives to protect the competitiveness of local manufacturing — shielding against the impact of punitive tariffs and the flood of cheap imports and dumping of vehicles, as well as accelerating the localisation of component manufacturing. As a small country and economy, heavily dependent on commodity exports, we must become more competitive to build resilience against these global shifts. Competitiveness is not just a matter for industry to address. It needs to start with an enabling environment with regards to efficient logistics especially in terms of the ports and rail, stable and reliable energy supply and the delivery of basic municipal services. Now is the time for all of us to take action to retain vital investment and employment in the Bay. Denise van Huyssteen is chief executive of the Nelson Mandela Bay Business Chamber. The Herald
