ON DECK:
PROGRAMMING NOTE: Clearing the decks because we’re off to that kind of a start to the week.
- Section 232 steel, aluminum tariffs set to double tomorrow
- Motions fly and Plan Bs float after last week’s IEEPA court cases
- U.S.-China truce bogs down over rare earths
- U.S. working on letter demanding final offers from negotiating partners
DISCLAIMER: The below is intended to inform, not to be construed as an official statement from the office of Rep. Yakym
Tidbits
Make It a Double
As always, I don’t like talking about something unless there’s an official doc, but we’re butting up against the deadline, so I’m just putting what we’ll know and will follow up when we have something more official to go off of (likely 10 minutes after I hit send).
On Friday at a speech at a U.S. Steel facility in Pennsylvania, President Donald Trump announced he’d be doubling the Section 232 steel tariff from 25% to 50%, saying, “It’s at 25%, they can sort of get over that fence, at 50% they can no longer get over the fence.”
A follow-on truth clarified – no wait – it’s steel and aluminum, effective June 4. Again, that’s kinda all we have to go off right now. Derivatives I assume are also increasing but not sure. Goods on the water tends to happen but not confirmed.
Canada and the EU hinted at retaliation, but nothing has been announced yet. UK Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds is meeting with USTR Jamieson Greer today and will see what he can get. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the move “inappropriate” and “an act of economic self-harm,” though he added his country wouldn’t be disproportionately impacted.
A-B-C, Easy as 122, 232, 301
There were continued reverberations from last week’s court rulings. The Department of Justice (DOJ) appealed the district court ruling blocking the IEEPA tariffs for two companies. In the Court of International Trade (CIT) case, bothsides are duking it out over whether the IEEPA tariffs should be collected while the appeal makes its way through the system. Also of note in that case, the DOJ said its interpretation of the ruling meant the end of the ending of China de minimis, which was under the IEEPA action too.
President Donald Trump weighed in on the decision, blasting it as “so wrong, and so political!” He added, “Hopefully, the Supreme Court will reverse this horrible, Country threatening decision, QUICKLY and DECISIVELY.” But the Supreme Court has been moving toward a narrower interpretation of the major questions doctrine, so he may not want that after all.
And, for the millionth time, since I’m not a lawyer, I’ll add a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that makes an argument on deficiencies in the CIT’s decision. It’s worth noting I can think of at least two Section 232-related cases from Trump 1.0 where the Federal Circuit overruled the CIT in favor of the Administration. One reversed the CIT to uphold as legal the sudden doubling of the Section 232 steel tariffs on Turkey, and the other reversed the CIT to uphold the imposition of the Section 232 steel derivatives tariffs.
In other CIT news, the court is weighing a request to suspend consideration of two other IEEPA-related cases to let the appeal play out. One involves a challenge to the IEEPA tariffs, which DOJ contends is functionally “identical” to the others, while the other involves a more specific challenge of the ending of China de minimis.
Legal process aside, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Trump Administration’s Plan B involves some combination of Sections 122, 232, and 301. The former, though untested, would provide a 15% universal tariff for 150 days, which would buy time for the notice-and-comment periods for the 301s to play out (all pending 232s are, as of tomorrow, out of their comment periods). That said, Section 122 involves declaring a balance-of-payment problem, which has its own complications.
Here’s My Number, So Call Xi Maybe
In last Thursday’s Tidbits, I noted that the Commerce Department suspended export licenses to China for technologies relating to jet engines, chips, and certain chemicals and machinery. A story I didn’t include related to the State Department saying it would revoke visas for Chinese students studying in the U.S. It seemed like it was in that trade-adjacent bucket of things that I sometimes include and sometimes don’t. Well, it turns out the story was actually directly trade-related. And, taken together, the export licenses and visas were the beginning of a new Thing between the U.S. and China.
At issue is the ongoing squabble over China’s promised rollback of export restrictions on rare earths. Per the Joint Statement from a few weeks ago, China agreed to “adopt all necessary administrative measures to suspend or remove the non-tariff countermeasures taken against the United States since April 2, 2025.” But that’s been slow-going – to the point that American and European automakers are staring down a potential supply chain crisis due to a lack of rare earth magnets.
So we had the aforementioned actions, plus some comments from various Trump Administration officials. On Thursday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News that discussions were “a bit stalled.” By Friday morning, President Trump weighed in on Truth Social, saying China “HAS TOTALLY VIOLATED ITS AGREEMENT WITH US.” Shortly after the truth came out, USTR Jamieson Greer went on CNBC and said the Chinese were “slow-rolling” their compliance on rare earths. He added, “You make every effort to be diplomatic and professional and to do things behind closed doors, you know. But at some point, you know, the impact on the US economy, or the trade relationship, becomes such that it’s hard to withhold that anymore.” There are other examples, but you get the gist.
On Monday, China was all, “Oh yeah? Well the U.S. isn’t living up to the Geneva consensus either so [fart noise].” The Commerce Ministry pointed to the export licenses and visas as examples.
How does this all end? The prescription from the U.S. perspective is more cowbell to get a Trump-Xi call on the books. As USTR Greer put it, “I would say that conversations and calls continue at lower levels. But ultimately, the nature of the things we’re talking about, it does require some leader-to-leader understandings.” Whether China agrees is unclear. Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, who’s leading negotiations, is ready to play hardball as President Xi doesn’t want to use the same playbook as under Trump 1.0.
A few last stories on the China beat before moving on. The New York Times took a look at why the export licenses on aerospace technology matter so much for China. USTR extended the remaining 178 Section 301 exclusions for another three months, pushing expiration from May 31 to August 31.
Leverage Limbo
As we wait for the courts to sort things out, Reuters is reporting that a draft letter from USTR that’s set to go out to negotiating partners will call for countries’ best and final offers on tariffs, non-tariff barriers, purchases, digital trade, and economic security by tomorrow. The U.S. will then evaluate the offers and return with a “possible landing zone,” which could include a reciprocal tariff rate. Is this the letter President Donald Trump mentioned a few weeks ago?
But with the IEEPA tariffs in question, why not just blow off the letter? As Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick put it, “All of the countries that are negotiating with us understand the power of Donald Trump and his ability to protect the American worker.”
And with that, let’s get into a quick flyover of the latest from some of these negotiations:
- Australia: Defense Minister Richard Marles told Bloomberg TV that the U.S. has not pressured the country to find a new buyer for the Chinese-owned Port of Darwin.
- The EU: Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic had a call with Secretary Lutnick last Thursday. He’ll also meetUSTR Jamieson Greer on the sidelines of an OECD meeting in Paris today. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the EU is “negotiating in good faith” now. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins traveled to Italy this week, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz will meet with President Trump in DC on Thursday. This comes as German carmakers plan “massive investments” in the U.S., but also as the country weighs adding a new trade irritant in the form of a 10% tax on large online platforms.
- India: Secretary Lutnick said a deal between the two countries should be expected “in the not-too-distant future.” However, in light of last week’s court action, it has reportedly begun making a more aggressive push to scrap the 10% IEEPA universal tariff.
- Japan: Chief negotiator Ryosei Akazawa was in DC last week for meetings and may visit for at least the third week in a row. He reiterated Japan’s call for the U.S. to drop the Section 232 tariffs, especially on autos: “If that is not possible, then it will be difficult for us to agree to a deal.” Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba may visit the U.S. ahead of a G7 summit this month.
- Switzerland: The government gave its negotiators the green light to discuss market access for citrus, nuts, and shellfish. It may also simplify the approval process for medical devices.
- Taiwan: In the wake of last week’s court action, Deputy Foreign Minister Chen Ming-chi said in an interview that his country remained “serious” about its negotiations regardless.
- Vietnam: Anonymous officials told Reuters that the U.S. sent Vietnam a “long” list of “tough” demands, including reducing use of Chinese materials and components and more closely monitoring its supply chains.
Quick Hits
- USTR announced a comment period and hearing for the annual eligibility review for the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)
- The U.S. and Mexico resolved a USMCA Rapid Response Labor Mechanism case
- EU nations approved restricting market access for Chinese medical devices, leveraging its new International Procurement Instrument for the first time
Tarif-Fone
Let me know if I missed anything. It’s not unpossible. A strikethrough on the IEEPA tariffs felt too final since, so I italicized them instead.
Trade Actions in Effect | ||||
As of | Who | What | Rate | Authority |
2/4/25 | China | 20% (10% from 2/4/25-3/3/25) | ||
3/4/25 | Canada | 25% | ||
3/4/25 | Mexico | 25% | ||
3/12/25 | All countries | 25% (50% effective 6/4/25) | ||
3/12/25 | All countries | 25% (50% effective 6/4/25; was 10%) | ||
4/2/25 | Countries importing Venezuelan oil (currently none) | 25% | ||
4/3/25 | All countries | 25% | ||
4/4/25 | All countries | 25% | ||
4/5/25 | All countries (minus Canada, Mexico, Cuba, North Korea, Russia, Belarus) | 10% | ||
4/9/25 | China | 10% (was 125% from 4/10/25-5/3/25; was 84% on 4/9/25) | ||
5/2/25 | China, Hong Kong | N/A | ||
5/3/25 | All countries | 25% | ||
Coming Attractions | ||||
Status | Who | What | Rate | Authority |
Comments due 6/3/25 (report due 1/26/26) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
Comments due 6/16/25 | All countries | Inclusion requests for Section 232 steel and aluminum derivatives | 25% | |
Due 6/24/25 | All countries | Inclusion process for auto parts | 25% | |
Suspended until ~7/9/25 | 57ish countries(minus China) | |||
Suspended until 8/12/25 | China | Reciprocal tariff | 34% | |
Expires 8/31/25 | China | Certain Section 301 China tariff exclusions | 7.5% or 25% | |
9/1/25-9/15/25 | All countries | Inclusion request window for Section 232 steel and aluminum derivatives | 25% | |
Effective 10/14/25 | Shipping companies | Various fees | ||
Due 10/22/25or 1/20/26 (comments due 5/16/25) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
Due 11/25/25 (comments due 4/1/25) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
Due 11/25/25 (comments due 4/1/25) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
Due 12/10/25 (hearing was 3/11/25) | China | TBD | ||
Due 12/27/25 (comments due 5/7/25) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
Due 12/27/25 (comments due 5/7/25) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
Due 1/20/26 (comments due 5/16/25) | All countries (probably) | TBD | ||
TBD (no current deadline) | Canada | 25% | ||
TBD (no current deadline) | Mexico | 25% | ||
TBD | All countries (probably) | 100% | TBD (maybe Section 232) | |
