Latest news on trade tariffs
Read the latest news stories as they are published.
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
Washington, 4 March (Argus) — A federal court has ordered President Donald Trump's administration to begin processing refunds on tens of billions of dollars in emergency tariffs the US Supreme Court said last month were unlawful. US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) must recalculate final duties owed on "any and all" imported goods without including the tariffs that Trump imposed under law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Richard Eaton, a judge on the US Court of International Trade, wrote in a three-page decision on Wednesday. Eaton, who said he is the only judge on the court hearing IEEPA tariff refund cases, said the Supreme Court's decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs should provide across-the-board relief, even to those that had not filed lawsuits. Thousands of companies have already filed lawsuits seeking refunds of the IEEPA tariffs, which collected an estimated $175bn from importers during the nearly one-year period when Trump had them in effect. "All importers of record whose entries were subject to IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit of the Learning Resources decision," Eaton wrote, referencing the name of the Supreme Court's tariff ruling. The court's order does not explicitly lay out the refund process, but instead applies to customs entries that are "unliquidated" — those that are pending — and those that are liquidated but not yet final. The order, issued as part of a tariff refund lawsuit an air filtration product company filed less than a week ago, suggests that courts intend to move quickly on refunds after the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling finding Trump had no authority to impose his emergency tariffs. Earlier this week, a federal appeals court denied a request by the Trump administration for a months-long delay in court proceedings over tariff refunds, allowing tariff lawsuits to resume in the Court of International Trade. Trump previously said the refund process might take "years" to resolve in court. The Trump administration told Eaton this week it was still considering "next steps" for the Supreme Court opinion, including the mechanics and "scope" of refunds. As of Wednesday, CBP said it had not paid refunds on any of the IEEPA tariffs. In a court filing earlier on Wednesday, the administration conceded that it would have to also pay interest on any tariff refunds it is required to make. The cumulative interest payments on the refunded tariffs could reach $700mn each month, according to calculations the think tank Cato Institute published this week. US senator Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts), in a letter on Wednesday to administration officials, said that the Trump administration's "dithering" on tariff refunds had created an opening for those on Wall Street to offer small companies with immediate cash needs "pennies on the dollars" to purchase their tariff refund rights. Further delaying tariff refunds would result in "more pain" for US companies and their customers, he wrote. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New US tariff keeps aromatics arbs shut: Correction
New US tariff keeps aromatics arbs shut: Correction
Corrects reason for BTX tariff exemption in paragraph 6 Houston, 2 March (Argus) — The new 10pc tariff on US imports that replaced earlier tariffs ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court keep aromatics arbitrage opportunities in the US closed on paper. The new 10pc tariffs will keep arbitrages closed for benzene, toluene and mixed xylenes (BTX) for chemical use. As of 24 February, US benzene (BZ) stood at a $145/t premium to South Korea BZ, according to Argus data, but with the 10pc tariff rate and freight costs at $72/t, the arbitrage remained closed on paper. Similarly, toluene closed at a $145/t premium and mixed xylenes closed at a $129/t premium to toluene and mixed xylenes in South Korea, but the 10pc tariff and freight costs kept those arbitrages shut. President Donald Trump has threatened to raise the 10pc tariffs — enacted under a different law that allows them to only be in place for 150 days before requiring Congressional approval — to 15pc . The new tariffs continue to provide the same explicit exemptions for shipments of BTX products imported under specific Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTSUS) codes as referenced in Annex II of the Executive Order 14257 establishing Reciprocal Tariffs, dated 2 April 2025. In 2025, the US imported 529,000 metric tonnes (t) of benzene, 488,193t of mixed xylenes and 183,379t of toluene, according to US Census Bureau data compiled by Global Trade Tracker. By Jake Caldwell Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US court to address refunds for Trump tariffs
US court to address refunds for Trump tariffs
Washington, 26 February (Argus) — The legal fight over an estimated $175bn paid by US importers under President Donald Trump's now-cancelled emergency tariffs likely will head back to the US Court of International Trade. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May 2025 that Trump's emergency tariffs were illegal, and the Supreme Court affirmed that decision on 20 February. The trade court at that time did not directly address the issue of processing refunds. The plaintiffs in the original case — a group of US businesses and, separately, a coalition of US states — on Wednesday asked the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to send their lawsuit back to the Court of International Trade to determine how to handle potential tariff refunds. The appeals court gave government lawyers until Friday to respond whether they will support or oppose sending the refunds issue to the trade court. Trump and his key economic advisers have said they expect a years-long court fight over the refunds. Lawyers representing US importers and states cited those statements and said they would like the Court of International Trade to quickly order the Trump administration to establish and implement a process for granting tariff refunds. The US had collected $165bn in emergency tariffs as of January, but the total estimated refund bill would amount to $175bn, according to economists at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School. The Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agency stopped collecting emergency tariffs on 3 February. More than 900 importers have already petitioned US courts to order refunds, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum. Demanding a tariff refund through the courts is not the only option for importers, analysts with the Congressional Research Service wrote last month. Importers can also file a protest with the CBP to demand a refund, but the timeline of that process may prove too long for many. Under US customs law, importers at first pay an estimated amount of the tariff and CBP typically makes a final determination of the tariff due — a process called "liquidation" — within 314 days of the entry of a product into the US. Importers can file a protest demanding a refund within 180 days of the liquidation date. CBP can take up to two years to rule on a protest. The administration estimated that as of mid-December, CBP processed 34mn customs transactions involving emergency tariffs and made a final determination of the tariff amount for 14.8mn of those. Importers that have yet to receive a final CBP assessment of the tariff due may have an easier time receiving a refund, according to the congressional researchers. Customs regulations generally would require a refund of the collected duty if a court invalidates a tariff before the CBP makes a final determination. US retailers, automakers and other merchants have previously said they were absorbing the cost of some of the tariffs in anticipation of a potential ruling striking them down, while also raising prices to cover their additional costs. But it is unlikely that merchants receiving refunds will directly pass those savings along to customers that already paid inflated prices. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
FedEx sues US for tariff refunds
FedEx sues US for tariff refunds
Houston, 24 February (Argus) — Global shipping giant FedEx has filed a lawsuit seeking tariff refunds from the US administration after the Supreme Court threw out most of the import duties imposed last year. FedEx, which transports goods into the US from many of the tariffed countries on behalf of its customers, said it has "suffered injury" caused by the now-cancelled tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The company said in the lawsuit it is seeking a full refund with interest of tariffs it paid, but did not mention a specific monetary figure. Separately, FedEx posted a notice on its website saying it "has taken necessary action to protect the company's rights as an importer of record to seek duty refunds from US Customs and Border Protection" but that no refund process has been established by regulators or the courts at this time. FedEx is waiting for additional guidance from the US and the courts, the notice said. The US had collected $133bn in tariffs under IEEPA as of December, but that amount has since likely risen to $175bn, according to economists at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School. Hundreds of companies, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum have previously filed lawsuits seeking to recover tariffs they have paid to the US for imported goods. But recovering the duties will be challenging due to the billions of dollars involved and the sheer number of importers that could be eligible for refunds. The upcoming refund process is likely to be a "mess" as the US may be required to refund "billions of dollars" to importers, associate supreme court justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a dissent to the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision throwing out the tariffs. Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over whether his administration must refund the tariffs. A new 10pc tariff on all US imports using a different law, Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Expansion Act, went into effect today , while Trump on 21 February said he will increased that tariff to 15pc tariff . By Eunice Bridges Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
Washington, 4 March (Argus) — A federal court has ordered President Donald Trump's administration to begin processing refunds on tens of billions of dollars in emergency tariffs the US Supreme Court said last month were unlawful. US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) must recalculate final duties owed on "any and all" imported goods without including the tariffs that Trump imposed under law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Richard Eaton, a judge on the US Court of International Trade, wrote in a three-page decision on Wednesday. Eaton, who said he is the only judge on the court hearing IEEPA tariff refund cases, said the Supreme Court's decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs should provide across-the-board relief, even to those that had not filed lawsuits. Thousands of companies have already filed lawsuits seeking refunds of the IEEPA tariffs, which collected an estimated $175bn from importers during the nearly one-year period when Trump had them in effect. "All importers of record whose entries were subject to IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit of the Learning Resources decision," Eaton wrote, referencing the name of the Supreme Court's tariff ruling. The court's order does not explicitly lay out the refund process, but instead applies to customs entries that are "unliquidated" — those that are pending — and those that are liquidated but not yet final. The order, issued as part of a tariff refund lawsuit an air filtration product company filed less than a week ago, suggests that courts intend to move quickly on refunds after the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling finding Trump had no authority to impose his emergency tariffs. Earlier this week, a federal appeals court denied a request by the Trump administration for a months-long delay in court proceedings over tariff refunds, allowing tariff lawsuits to resume in the Court of International Trade. Trump previously said the refund process might take "years" to resolve in court. The Trump administration told Eaton this week it was still considering "next steps" for the Supreme Court opinion, including the mechanics and "scope" of refunds. As of Wednesday, CBP said it had not paid refunds on any of the IEEPA tariffs. In a court filing earlier on Wednesday, the administration conceded that it would have to also pay interest on any tariff refunds it is required to make. The cumulative interest payments on the refunded tariffs could reach $700mn each month, according to calculations the think tank Cato Institute published this week. US senator Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts), in a letter on Wednesday to administration officials, said that the Trump administration's "dithering" on tariff refunds had created an opening for those on Wall Street to offer small companies with immediate cash needs "pennies on the dollars" to purchase their tariff refund rights. Further delaying tariff refunds would result in "more pain" for US companies and their customers, he wrote. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US court to address refunds for Trump tariffs
US court to address refunds for Trump tariffs
Washington, 26 February (Argus) — The legal fight over an estimated $175bn paid by US importers under President Donald Trump's now-cancelled emergency tariffs likely will head back to the US Court of International Trade. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May 2025 that Trump's emergency tariffs were illegal, and the Supreme Court affirmed that decision on 20 February. The trade court at that time did not directly address the issue of processing refunds. The plaintiffs in the original case — a group of US businesses and, separately, a coalition of US states — on Wednesday asked the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to send their lawsuit back to the Court of International Trade to determine how to handle potential tariff refunds. The appeals court gave government lawyers until Friday to respond whether they will support or oppose sending the refunds issue to the trade court. Trump and his key economic advisers have said they expect a years-long court fight over the refunds. Lawyers representing US importers and states cited those statements and said they would like the Court of International Trade to quickly order the Trump administration to establish and implement a process for granting tariff refunds. The US had collected $165bn in emergency tariffs as of January, but the total estimated refund bill would amount to $175bn, according to economists at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School. The Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agency stopped collecting emergency tariffs on 3 February. More than 900 importers have already petitioned US courts to order refunds, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum. Demanding a tariff refund through the courts is not the only option for importers, analysts with the Congressional Research Service wrote last month. Importers can also file a protest with the CBP to demand a refund, but the timeline of that process may prove too long for many. Under US customs law, importers at first pay an estimated amount of the tariff and CBP typically makes a final determination of the tariff due — a process called "liquidation" — within 314 days of the entry of a product into the US. Importers can file a protest demanding a refund within 180 days of the liquidation date. CBP can take up to two years to rule on a protest. The administration estimated that as of mid-December, CBP processed 34mn customs transactions involving emergency tariffs and made a final determination of the tariff amount for 14.8mn of those. Importers that have yet to receive a final CBP assessment of the tariff due may have an easier time receiving a refund, according to the congressional researchers. Customs regulations generally would require a refund of the collected duty if a court invalidates a tariff before the CBP makes a final determination. US retailers, automakers and other merchants have previously said they were absorbing the cost of some of the tariffs in anticipation of a potential ruling striking them down, while also raising prices to cover their additional costs. But it is unlikely that merchants receiving refunds will directly pass those savings along to customers that already paid inflated prices. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
Washington, 24 February (Argus) — A new 10pc tariff on US imports from all countries went into effect on Tuesday, replacing the emergency tariffs imposed last year that the Supreme Court struck down on 20 February. The new tariff will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. It will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement. The 10pc tariff will not be added on top of existing sectoral duties on steel, aluminum, copper, cars and auto parts. President Donald Trump on 20 February invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Expansion Act to impose the 10pc tariff. A day later, Trump posted on his social media platform that he would raise the rate to 15pc, but the social media post does not have legal force. The US will assess the Section 122 duty at the 10pc level, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency said late on Monday. The law cited by Trump allows him to maintain the 10pc tariff for a period of 150 days, unless the US Congress authorizes an extension. CBP also said it will stop collecting the invalidated emergency tariffs effective on Tuesday. The agency said it was ready to "implement current and any forthcoming executive actions as directed by the president" with regard to refunding an estimated $175bn in tariffs the US Supreme Court said were imposed unlawfully. Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over refunds. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Washington, 21 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump on Saturday said he will slap a 15pc tariff on all US imports, less than 24 hours after his administration unveiled a 10pc global import tax meant to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday. Trump, in a social media post, said that he "will be, effective immediately, raising the 10pc Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15pc level". Trump cited "a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued" on Friday as a justification for his decision. The White House has yet to release an official record of any decision to implement Trump's 15pc tariff threat. Trump on Friday had to rescind executive orders he signed in the past year that imposed tariffs by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal. Trump, in a separate proclamation on Friday, invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act to impose a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February. Trump's decision on Friday exempted energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports from new import taxes. The 10pc tax, which was to be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — exempted imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Why 10pc or 15pc? It is not clear why Trump announced on Saturday that he would raise the Section 122 tariff to the maximally allowed 15pc, or why his administration initially chose a lower rate, at 10pc. The Trump administration had signaled since mid-January that it would opt for a 10pc tariff under Section 122 authority if the Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariff. The Trump administration said it was planning to use the 150-day duration of the Section 122 tariffs to rapidly put in place other tariffs targeting specific industries and countries under existing, previously used trade authorities. While Trump said that his Section 122 tariff authority is "legally tested", no other president has invoked this power, and US courts have not weighed on its merits before. But Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the majority decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs, cited Section 122 five times in his separate opinion issued on Friday. Kavanaugh argued that since Congress delegated to the executive branch broad tariff authority to impose tariffs under Section 122 and multiple other laws, there was no reason to dispute Trump's authority to impose tariffs by invoking economic emergencies. Trump on Saturday called Kavanaugh "my new hero", together with two other justices who voted to uphold Trump's tariffs. Trump continued to lob insults at conservative justices who voted to strike down his tariffs, calling them "fools" and "lapdogs" of "radical left Democrats". More court action likely Despite criticism of the court's decision, Trump and his top officials have tried to put a positive spin on the ruling by arguing that he will instead impose "stronger" tariffs and raise even more revenue. But his Section 122 tariffs likely will face challenges in courts. The Supreme Court's majority opinion hinged on the finding that Congress did not explicitly authorize Trump to impose taxes, in the form of tariffs, under the legal authority he has cited. Chief justice John Roberts and two of the justices Trump appointed during his first term, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, also referenced the "major questions" doctrine to justify their decision, meaning that Congress, not the White House, should decide on matters of major economic significance. Trump has left little doubt that he plans to bypass Congress in rolling out new tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said on Friday. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. In the House of Representatives, where the Republican majority has shrunk to one, several Republican members have expressed support for the Supreme Court's decision. Trump on Saturday blasted one of those lawmakers, Jeff Hurd (R-Colorado), for "a lack of support, in particular for the unbelievably successful TARIFFS imposed on Foreign Countries and Companies". Trump endorsed Hurd's opponent in the upcoming Republican primary. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
Washington, 4 March (Argus) — A federal court has ordered President Donald Trump's administration to begin processing refunds on tens of billions of dollars in emergency tariffs the US Supreme Court said last month were unlawful. US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) must recalculate final duties owed on "any and all" imported goods without including the tariffs that Trump imposed under law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Richard Eaton, a judge on the US Court of International Trade, wrote in a three-page decision on Wednesday. Eaton, who said he is the only judge on the court hearing IEEPA tariff refund cases, said the Supreme Court's decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs should provide across-the-board relief, even to those that had not filed lawsuits. Thousands of companies have already filed lawsuits seeking refunds of the IEEPA tariffs, which collected an estimated $175bn from importers during the nearly one-year period when Trump had them in effect. "All importers of record whose entries were subject to IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit of the Learning Resources decision," Eaton wrote, referencing the name of the Supreme Court's tariff ruling. The court's order does not explicitly lay out the refund process, but instead applies to customs entries that are "unliquidated" — those that are pending — and those that are liquidated but not yet final. The order, issued as part of a tariff refund lawsuit an air filtration product company filed less than a week ago, suggests that courts intend to move quickly on refunds after the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling finding Trump had no authority to impose his emergency tariffs. Earlier this week, a federal appeals court denied a request by the Trump administration for a months-long delay in court proceedings over tariff refunds, allowing tariff lawsuits to resume in the Court of International Trade. Trump previously said the refund process might take "years" to resolve in court. The Trump administration told Eaton this week it was still considering "next steps" for the Supreme Court opinion, including the mechanics and "scope" of refunds. As of Wednesday, CBP said it had not paid refunds on any of the IEEPA tariffs. In a court filing earlier on Wednesday, the administration conceded that it would have to also pay interest on any tariff refunds it is required to make. The cumulative interest payments on the refunded tariffs could reach $700mn each month, according to calculations the think tank Cato Institute published this week. US senator Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts), in a letter on Wednesday to administration officials, said that the Trump administration's "dithering" on tariff refunds had created an opening for those on Wall Street to offer small companies with immediate cash needs "pennies on the dollars" to purchase their tariff refund rights. Further delaying tariff refunds would result in "more pain" for US companies and their customers, he wrote. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
FedEx sues US for tariff refunds
FedEx sues US for tariff refunds
Houston, 24 February (Argus) — Global shipping giant FedEx has filed a lawsuit seeking tariff refunds from the US administration after the Supreme Court threw out most of the import duties imposed last year. FedEx, which transports goods into the US from many of the tariffed countries on behalf of its customers, said it has "suffered injury" caused by the now-cancelled tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The company said in the lawsuit it is seeking a full refund with interest of tariffs it paid, but did not mention a specific monetary figure. Separately, FedEx posted a notice on its website saying it "has taken necessary action to protect the company's rights as an importer of record to seek duty refunds from US Customs and Border Protection" but that no refund process has been established by regulators or the courts at this time. FedEx is waiting for additional guidance from the US and the courts, the notice said. The US had collected $133bn in tariffs under IEEPA as of December, but that amount has since likely risen to $175bn, according to economists at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School. Hundreds of companies, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum have previously filed lawsuits seeking to recover tariffs they have paid to the US for imported goods. But recovering the duties will be challenging due to the billions of dollars involved and the sheer number of importers that could be eligible for refunds. The upcoming refund process is likely to be a "mess" as the US may be required to refund "billions of dollars" to importers, associate supreme court justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a dissent to the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision throwing out the tariffs. Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over whether his administration must refund the tariffs. A new 10pc tariff on all US imports using a different law, Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Expansion Act, went into effect today , while Trump on 21 February said he will increased that tariff to 15pc tariff . By Eunice Bridges Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US high court strikes down Trump's tariffs: Update
US high court strikes down Trump's tariffs: Update
Updates with details throughout Washington, 20 February (Argus) — The US Supreme Court has thrown out most of the tariffs President Donald Trump has imposed on nearly all US trading partners, finding his ability to unilaterally impose tariffs exceeded his powers under a decades-old law. The Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling released on Friday will block Trump's ability to use tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to extract concessions from trading partners and punish countries that reject his demands. The Constitution "did not vest any part of the taxing power in the executive branch," chief justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, backed by two other conservative justices and all three liberal justices. Trump, speaking hours after the court announced its ruling, raged against the justices who overturned his tariffs. "I'm ashamed of certain members of the court for not having the courage to do what's right for our country," Trump said. "It's an embarrassment to the families" of justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, he said. Trump appointed both justices during his first term. The majority opinion noted that "the Framers gave 'Congress alone' the power to impose tariffs during peacetime." Trump "must 'point to clear congressional authorization' to justify his extraordinary assertion of that power," the majority opinion said, adding that "He cannot." Trump scoffed at the opinion. "The court said that I'm not allowed to charge even one dollar under IEEPA", he said and suggested that the six justices were "swayed by foreign interests". What is affected? The Supreme Court decision affects Trump's tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China, where he cited an economic emergency created by the three countries' alleged inaction to stop the flow of fentanyl drugs into the US. The Supreme Court ruling also strikes down Trump's most extensive action — imposing tariffs of at least 10pc on nearly every US trading partner to address the "economic emergency" of persistent US trade deficits. The Supreme Court's decision also will affect the tariffs Trump imposed on imports from Brazil, US government lawyers informed the Court of International Trade last month. Trump cited Brazil's alleged suppression of freedom of speech as a reason to impose tariffs. The decision will not affect tariffs on US imports of steel, aluminum, cars and auto parts, which Trump imposed by citing well-tested legal trade authorities. Next steps Trump said he will sign an executive order later on Friday to impose a 10pc broad tariff on all US trading partners, in place of the struck down IEEPA tariffs. Trump said that action will invoke Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows imposing tariffs of up to 15pc to address a balance of payments issue. But that legal avenue comes with limitations. The administration can impose those tariffs only for a period of 150 days. Any extensions would require explicit authorization from Congress. The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. The House of Representatives and the Senate have voted on separate resolutions challenging the tariffs Trump has imposed on imports from Canada and Brazil, but they have not passed any tariff legislation. "Congress and the administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks" with respect to tariffs, House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said. But Trump likely would have trouble finding enough votes on Capitol Hill to support his tariffs. "The president must refrain from any further unilateral action on tariffs," House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said. Trump said he does not plan to work with Congress on tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Trump administration will also quickly begin the legal process for replicating the IEEPA tariffs with "Section 202" and "Section 301" tariffs, US trade representative Jamieson Greer said, speaking alongside Trump. A "Section 232" authority allows the Commerce Department or US Trade Representative's office to determine whether imports of a product need to be curbed on national security grounds. A Section 301 investigation would target a specific country on the grounds that it is discriminating against US exports. In both cases, the process for imposing tariffs can take months. It also requires public consultation and allows carveouts for the affected US importers. The use of Section 232 and 301 authorities is "a little more complicated" than IEEPA, and "those will also be challenged", Trump's former trade representative Bob Lighthizer told participants at the Argus Americas Crude Summit in Houston on 4 February. Trump's administration will have its work cut out for it in deciding how, and whether, to refund an estimated $175bn in tariffs collected using IEEPA tariffs. Trump in his remarks suggested that the refund process could take years. Hundreds of companies, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum, have already filed lawsuits seeking to recover the tariffs. The effective US tariff rate was around 13pc as of late 2025, up from 2.6pc a year earlier, according to research published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on 12 February. US companies and consumers paid about 90pc of the tariff burden, with only a fraction absorbed by foreign producers, the Fed researchers found. Foreign governments did not immediately react to the US court's tariff decision. "We take note of the ruling," the EU said. "We remain in close contact with the US administration as we seek clarity on the steps they intend to take in response to this ruling." By Haik Gugarats and Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US proposes wide-ranging foreign vessel fees
US proposes wide-ranging foreign vessel fees
New York, 17 February (Argus) — The US is proposing fees on cargo carried into the US by foreign-built vessels, an effort to boost the US shipbuilding industry that could substantially increase costs for US importers. The administration's America's Maritime Action Plan released late last week proposes fees of between 1-25¢/kilogram (kg), or effectively $10-$250/tonne (t), for all cargo imported into the US by non-US built vessels, which make up the vast majority of the global fleet across all commodity segments. The plan does not specify cargo types and describes the fee as "universal". This could mean shipments of Venezuelan crude loaded onto an Aframax tanker into the US Gulf coast carried on a foreign-built vessel could incur a fee between $700,000 lumpsum at $10/t or $17.5mn at $250/t. The freight rate for an Aframax tanker on a Caribbean-US Gulf coast voyage was at $32.57/t on 16 February, or $2,279,900 lumpsum. The proposed fee could be as much as 30pc of the total freight cost at the low end or increase the freight cost by nearly eight times at the high end. The proposed fees could be used to build a proposed Maritime Security Trust Fund to support "programs identified as helpful for the promotion, growth and strengthening of the domestic maritime sector", according to the plan. The fund is part of a broader plan the administration of President Donald Trump launched last year to support shipbuilding in the US. The US and China reached an agreement in November 2025 to pause new shipping fees which ended a months-long series of proposed, and shortly implemented, retaliatory shipping fees between the two countries. The pause was for at least one year, making additional shipping fees into the US before November 2026 unlikely. The plan released last week does not include any specific timelines for implementing fees. Autonomous vessels on tap The 37-page action plan also said the US needs to develop systems and regulations for non-human-staffed ships to navigate existing waterways. "To ease testing for industry, the US Coast Guard should establish one or more areas within the exclusive economic zone of the US, to include the Great Lakes region, that would allow for the safe and expedited testing of commercial robotic and autonomous maritime technologies," the plan says. The testing would help the US Navy develop emerging technologies to field affordable weapon platforms, like remotely operated or fully automated submarines and small vessels, to balance high-cost assets like aircraft carriers in battle. But the action plan also lays out plans that suggest the administration is preparing for fully automated commercial shipping. Automated shipping lacks the regulatory framework to account for the absence of a human crew, especially for emergencies like spills. Insurers also have no framework for how to decide who is responsible for a collision with an unmanned vessel, among a host of other issues, according to the action plan. Pilots, who climb onto ships outside of ports in sometimes dangerous conditions to physically guide the vessel to its terminal, seem the most likely industry to be first affected by autonomous navigation systems like those proposed in the action plan. There is a need to develop "redundant sensor systems to guarantee safe navigation in complex environments like ports", the plan said, language likely referring to tasks now handled by human pilots. The plan also calls for the development and certification of control centers for remote operators, as well as "ensuring safe workloads when operators may supervise multiple vessels from shore". By Ross Griffith Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
US court orders refunds on Trump's IEEPA tariffs
Washington, 4 March (Argus) — A federal court has ordered President Donald Trump's administration to begin processing refunds on tens of billions of dollars in emergency tariffs the US Supreme Court said last month were unlawful. US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) must recalculate final duties owed on "any and all" imported goods without including the tariffs that Trump imposed under law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Richard Eaton, a judge on the US Court of International Trade, wrote in a three-page decision on Wednesday. Eaton, who said he is the only judge on the court hearing IEEPA tariff refund cases, said the Supreme Court's decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs should provide across-the-board relief, even to those that had not filed lawsuits. Thousands of companies have already filed lawsuits seeking refunds of the IEEPA tariffs, which collected an estimated $175bn from importers during the nearly one-year period when Trump had them in effect. "All importers of record whose entries were subject to IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit of the Learning Resources decision," Eaton wrote, referencing the name of the Supreme Court's tariff ruling. The court's order does not explicitly lay out the refund process, but instead applies to customs entries that are "unliquidated" — those that are pending — and those that are liquidated but not yet final. The order, issued as part of a tariff refund lawsuit an air filtration product company filed less than a week ago, suggests that courts intend to move quickly on refunds after the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling finding Trump had no authority to impose his emergency tariffs. Earlier this week, a federal appeals court denied a request by the Trump administration for a months-long delay in court proceedings over tariff refunds, allowing tariff lawsuits to resume in the Court of International Trade. Trump previously said the refund process might take "years" to resolve in court. The Trump administration told Eaton this week it was still considering "next steps" for the Supreme Court opinion, including the mechanics and "scope" of refunds. As of Wednesday, CBP said it had not paid refunds on any of the IEEPA tariffs. In a court filing earlier on Wednesday, the administration conceded that it would have to also pay interest on any tariff refunds it is required to make. The cumulative interest payments on the refunded tariffs could reach $700mn each month, according to calculations the think tank Cato Institute published this week. US senator Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts), in a letter on Wednesday to administration officials, said that the Trump administration's "dithering" on tariff refunds had created an opening for those on Wall Street to offer small companies with immediate cash needs "pennies on the dollars" to purchase their tariff refund rights. Further delaying tariff refunds would result in "more pain" for US companies and their customers, he wrote. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US court to address refunds for Trump tariffs
US court to address refunds for Trump tariffs
Washington, 26 February (Argus) — The legal fight over an estimated $175bn paid by US importers under President Donald Trump's now-cancelled emergency tariffs likely will head back to the US Court of International Trade. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May 2025 that Trump's emergency tariffs were illegal, and the Supreme Court affirmed that decision on 20 February. The trade court at that time did not directly address the issue of processing refunds. The plaintiffs in the original case — a group of US businesses and, separately, a coalition of US states — on Wednesday asked the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to send their lawsuit back to the Court of International Trade to determine how to handle potential tariff refunds. The appeals court gave government lawyers until Friday to respond whether they will support or oppose sending the refunds issue to the trade court. Trump and his key economic advisers have said they expect a years-long court fight over the refunds. Lawyers representing US importers and states cited those statements and said they would like the Court of International Trade to quickly order the Trump administration to establish and implement a process for granting tariff refunds. The US had collected $165bn in emergency tariffs as of January, but the total estimated refund bill would amount to $175bn, according to economists at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School. The Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agency stopped collecting emergency tariffs on 3 February. More than 900 importers have already petitioned US courts to order refunds, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum. Demanding a tariff refund through the courts is not the only option for importers, analysts with the Congressional Research Service wrote last month. Importers can also file a protest with the CBP to demand a refund, but the timeline of that process may prove too long for many. Under US customs law, importers at first pay an estimated amount of the tariff and CBP typically makes a final determination of the tariff due — a process called "liquidation" — within 314 days of the entry of a product into the US. Importers can file a protest demanding a refund within 180 days of the liquidation date. CBP can take up to two years to rule on a protest. The administration estimated that as of mid-December, CBP processed 34mn customs transactions involving emergency tariffs and made a final determination of the tariff amount for 14.8mn of those. Importers that have yet to receive a final CBP assessment of the tariff due may have an easier time receiving a refund, according to the congressional researchers. Customs regulations generally would require a refund of the collected duty if a court invalidates a tariff before the CBP makes a final determination. US retailers, automakers and other merchants have previously said they were absorbing the cost of some of the tariffs in anticipation of a potential ruling striking them down, while also raising prices to cover their additional costs. But it is unlikely that merchants receiving refunds will directly pass those savings along to customers that already paid inflated prices. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
Washington, 24 February (Argus) — A new 10pc tariff on US imports from all countries went into effect on Tuesday, replacing the emergency tariffs imposed last year that the Supreme Court struck down on 20 February. The new tariff will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. It will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement. The 10pc tariff will not be added on top of existing sectoral duties on steel, aluminum, copper, cars and auto parts. President Donald Trump on 20 February invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Expansion Act to impose the 10pc tariff. A day later, Trump posted on his social media platform that he would raise the rate to 15pc, but the social media post does not have legal force. The US will assess the Section 122 duty at the 10pc level, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency said late on Monday. The law cited by Trump allows him to maintain the 10pc tariff for a period of 150 days, unless the US Congress authorizes an extension. CBP also said it will stop collecting the invalidated emergency tariffs effective on Tuesday. The agency said it was ready to "implement current and any forthcoming executive actions as directed by the president" with regard to refunding an estimated $175bn in tariffs the US Supreme Court said were imposed unlawfully. Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over refunds. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Washington, 21 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump on Saturday said he will slap a 15pc tariff on all US imports, less than 24 hours after his administration unveiled a 10pc global import tax meant to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday. Trump, in a social media post, said that he "will be, effective immediately, raising the 10pc Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15pc level". Trump cited "a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued" on Friday as a justification for his decision. The White House has yet to release an official record of any decision to implement Trump's 15pc tariff threat. Trump on Friday had to rescind executive orders he signed in the past year that imposed tariffs by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal. Trump, in a separate proclamation on Friday, invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act to impose a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February. Trump's decision on Friday exempted energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports from new import taxes. The 10pc tax, which was to be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — exempted imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Why 10pc or 15pc? It is not clear why Trump announced on Saturday that he would raise the Section 122 tariff to the maximally allowed 15pc, or why his administration initially chose a lower rate, at 10pc. The Trump administration had signaled since mid-January that it would opt for a 10pc tariff under Section 122 authority if the Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariff. The Trump administration said it was planning to use the 150-day duration of the Section 122 tariffs to rapidly put in place other tariffs targeting specific industries and countries under existing, previously used trade authorities. While Trump said that his Section 122 tariff authority is "legally tested", no other president has invoked this power, and US courts have not weighed on its merits before. But Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the majority decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs, cited Section 122 five times in his separate opinion issued on Friday. Kavanaugh argued that since Congress delegated to the executive branch broad tariff authority to impose tariffs under Section 122 and multiple other laws, there was no reason to dispute Trump's authority to impose tariffs by invoking economic emergencies. Trump on Saturday called Kavanaugh "my new hero", together with two other justices who voted to uphold Trump's tariffs. Trump continued to lob insults at conservative justices who voted to strike down his tariffs, calling them "fools" and "lapdogs" of "radical left Democrats". More court action likely Despite criticism of the court's decision, Trump and his top officials have tried to put a positive spin on the ruling by arguing that he will instead impose "stronger" tariffs and raise even more revenue. But his Section 122 tariffs likely will face challenges in courts. The Supreme Court's majority opinion hinged on the finding that Congress did not explicitly authorize Trump to impose taxes, in the form of tariffs, under the legal authority he has cited. Chief justice John Roberts and two of the justices Trump appointed during his first term, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, also referenced the "major questions" doctrine to justify their decision, meaning that Congress, not the White House, should decide on matters of major economic significance. Trump has left little doubt that he plans to bypass Congress in rolling out new tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said on Friday. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. In the House of Representatives, where the Republican majority has shrunk to one, several Republican members have expressed support for the Supreme Court's decision. Trump on Saturday blasted one of those lawmakers, Jeff Hurd (R-Colorado), for "a lack of support, in particular for the unbelievably successful TARIFFS imposed on Foreign Countries and Companies". Trump endorsed Hurd's opponent in the upcoming Republican primary. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Trump threatens 10pc tariff against UK, EU members
Trump threatens 10pc tariff against UK, EU members
Houston, 17 January (Argus) — President Donald Trump on Saturday threatened to impose a 10pc tariff on US imports from the UK and seven key members of the EU, citing their participation in a military mission in Denmark's Greenland territory, which he is threatening to annex. US imports from the UK, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway and Sweden would be subject to a 10pc tariff from 1 February, rising to a 25pc tariff from 1 June, Trump announced via his social media platform. The tariff would remain in place until "such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland", Trump said. Trump has stepped up discussion of taking over Greenland — a self-governing island under Denmark's control — following a US special forces raid that captured Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro on 3 January. Denmark and Greenland have rejected US overtures to buy the island, as well as Trump's threat to take over the island by force. Trump is citing Greenland's alleged lack of military protection as the latest justification for his threats. He has denigrated Denmark's commitment to the island's defense against alleged threats from Russia and China. "They currently have two dogsleds as protection, one added recently," Trump said on Saturday. Denmark's foreign minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, who traveled to Washington on 14 January to meet Trump administration officials, pushed back against that accusation. "Denmark has already stepped up our own contribution by committing additional funds for military capabilities — not [dogsleds], but ships, drones, fighter jets," Rasmussen said. The countries threatened with new tariffs by Trump joined Denmark to dispatch troops and military experts to Greenland on a mission to assess the island's security needs. Trump on Saturday said that the reconnaissance mission "journeyed to Greenland, for purposes unknown." EU leaders expressed solidarity with Denmark and called for dialogue, but they omitted mention of possible retaliation if Trump makes good on his threat to impose new tariffs. "Tariffs would undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral," European Council president Antonio Costa and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said in response to Trump's post. "Europe will remain united, coordinated, and committed to upholding its sovereignty." "Applying tariffs on allies for pursuing the collective security of Nato allies is completely wrong," UK prime minister Keir Starmer said on Saturday. "We will of course be pursuing this directly with the US administration." US imports from the UK already are subject to a 10pc import tariff, and imports from the EU face a 15pc tariff. While Trump is threatening tariffs against seven out of 27 EU members, the bloc collectively negotiates trade matters and sets tariffs. Trump is scheduled to attend the Davos Economic Forum in Switzerland on 21-22 January. A bipartisan delegation of 11 US senators and members of the House of Representatives traveled to Copenhagen on 16 January to express support for Denmark's government and push back against Trump's designs on Greenland. "There is no need, or desire, for a costly acquisition or hostile military takeover of Greenland when our Danish and Greenlandic allies are eager to work with us on Arctic security, critical minerals and other priorities under the framework of long-standing treaties," said US senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire) and Thom Tills (R-North Carolina), who were part of the congressional delegation. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Mexican auto industry aims high in tough USMCA talks
Mexican auto industry aims high in tough USMCA talks
Mexico City, 15 January (Argus) — Mexico's auto industry wants a return to zero tariffs on vehicle exports to the US and Canada under a pending update of the free trade agreement (USMCA) between the three countries, but there are concerns about the speed of the talks. If negotiations succeed, USMCA would be renewed for another 17 years on 1 July 2026 — six years after its launch — a step that industry sources say is critical to restoring investor confidence and unlocking the full potential of nearshoring in Mexico. Mexico was the largest foreign source of vehicles for the US in 2025, supplying 17pc, or 2.7mn units, of the 16.2mn light vehicles sold in the US, according to automaker association AMIA. Mexico was also the top supplier of auto parts to the US in 2025 and the world's third-largest exporter of light vehicles by value. Industry representatives say that success now hinges on continuity in the treaty, which remains uncertain as disputes between Mexico, the US and Canada persist. Those concerns were outlined by Mexico's main auto groups at an event in Mexico City this week. Negotiations are unfolding under a tense US trade backdrop. In March 2025, US president Donald Trump imposed 25pc blanket tariffs on USMCA partners under a national security provision, measures that Mexican automakers are still seeking to unwind. "There is nothing more important right now than the treaty review and dealing with these tariffs still hanging over us," said Guillermo Rosales, head of auto dealers' association AMDA. "The goal must be to return to zero." A key point of contention is the treaty's regional value content rules, where light vehicles must contain at least 70pc North American content. That is a threshold more than 90pc of Mexican auto exports to the US already meet, but industry groups are pushing for flexibility for firms still on a compliance pathway. Heavy vehicle makers are still working to reach compliance. "We are at 64pc regional content and aiming for 70pc by 2027," said Mexico's association of truck and bus manufacturers Anpact head Rogelio Arzarte, noting that sourcing components not currently produced in North America remains complex. Mexico's industry is also seeking changes to the USMCA's rapid response labor mechanism, arguing it has been applied disproportionately against Mexican facilities. While talks began early, the process is already slipping. The US trade representative has yet to submit a required report to Congress, raising fears the review could drift toward US midterm elections, prolonging uncertainty and delaying investment. "I want to be positive," said AMIA head Rogelio Garza. "But it's not going to be easy for some industries, among which I believe we are included." By James Young Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Brazil antidumping duties to disrupt PE markets
Brazil antidumping duties to disrupt PE markets
Houston, 28 August (Argus) — Brazilian trade regulators' decision to impose provisional antidumping duties on polyethylene (PE) resin imports from the US and Canada is expected to disrupt trade flows throughout the Americas. The new duties issued by foreign trade council Gecex/Camex, set at $199.04/t for US-origin resin and $238.49/t for Canadian-origin resin, will be effective immediately and valid for up to six months. The duties are part of a broader shift in Brazil's trade policy, which raised overall polymer import taxes from 12.6pc to 20pc in October 2024. Decom will conclude the full antidumping investigation by 2 February 2026. A global trader active in the Brazilian market said on Thursday that they are already reassessing all delayed orders, pending shipments, and goods in transit to determine how to proceed with clients. Many of those clients have expressed concerns the measure is a strategy to improve Braskem's short-term financials, especially as creditor banks holding the company's shares as collateral are expected to take over the task of selling the company. This follows unsuccessful negotiations with Brazilian investor Nelson Tanure who had sought to acquire Braskem. In contrast, an executive at a Brazilian plastic resin converting company said the decision is good news, as it helps level the playing field with competitors in the Manaus Free Trade Zone, who largely import from the US under tax-free conditions, unlike buyers in the rest of Brazil. But there could be a side effect, the executive said, of manufacturers in Manaus turning to Asian suppliers, which may drive up prices for those imports as well. The executive said he is watching to see what Braskem's new pricing levels for September will be. With the antidumping duties in place, analysts expect a short-term drop in prices as exporters seek alternative destinations for resin traditionally sent to Brazil. Analysts expect Braskem to be the primary beneficiary for the measures, having faced ongoing losses, reduced operating rates, and workforce cuts. US-Brazil trade death blow? US traders are concerned with the new duties, with one trader saying it "will probably kill the economics" of trade between the US and Brazil. "It's just one more thing gone wrong," the trader said. "It will be a huge pain, short term." Another US trader said it expects some orders to be cancelled. Ultimately, traders said it is likely that more material will be sent from the US to surrounding countries, such as Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. But it is unlikely that those countries will be able to absorb all of the resin that had been moving to Brazil. "It's not good," said one North American producer of the new duties. "Brazil will not be the way to go [with exports]. We will need to move to other regions." Another producer agreed, saying the news "is not helpful," but that the full impact will not be known until Braskem announces its new price position. "This was initiated by Braskem, and they want to get their prices up," the producer said. "Where is the balance between Braskem getting their prices up and producers in North America absorbing some amount of [the anti-dumping duty]? That's obviously unknown at this point." The impact will likely be different from product-to-product and producer-to-producer. Brazilian buyers who are purchasing resin that is highly specialized and not easily replaced by another supplier, are likely to see their prices rise significantly. But buyers purchasing more commodity-type resin will have other supply alternatives and may not see as much of an impact. Trade flow changes likely The move is likely to result in some trade flow shifts. In some cases, US producers who have assets in other regions can shift volume from one region to another. For instance, a company like ExxonMobil, which has assets in Saudi Arabia and the US, could shift volume from Saudi Arabia to Brazil and move US material that would normally have gone to Brazil to other regions to fill in gaps traditionally sourced out of Saudi Arabia. Dow, which has assets in Argentina, is likely to supply more into Brazil from those assets, sources said. "Trade patterns will adjust," said a US trader. The antidumping measures could boost Braskem's pre-tax earnings by $150mn-$250mn, representing a 10-15pc increase, according to a July report by Brazilian bank BTG Pactual. If combined with the approval of legislation that restores tax incentives to the petrochemical sector, the company's earnings could rise by up to 45pc in 2026. Despite the potential upside, BTG maintains a neutral recommendation for Braskem shares, citing pressured spreads, high leverage, and unresolved environmental liabilities. By Fred Fernandes and Michelle Klump Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Brazil imposes PE duties on US, Canada
Brazil imposes PE duties on US, Canada
Sao Paulo, 28 August (Argus) — Brazil's foreign trade council, Gecex/Camex has confirmed provisional antidumping duties on polyethylene (PE) resin imports from the US and Canada effective immediately and valid for up to six months. Gecex/Camex set the duties at $199.04/t for US-origin resin and $238.49/t for Canadian-origin resin. These rates reflect the dumping margins identified by Decom, with a 10pc reduction applied. The decision follows a recommendation by the Department of Trade Defense (Decom), which found evidence of material injury to Brazil's domestic industry caused by US and Canadian PE imports. The investigation began on 31 July 2024, following a petition from petrochemical producer Braskem, Brazil's sole PE producer. Decom concluded that dumped imports continued to enter the market, posing further injury to the domestic industry. Brazil imported 706,000t of PE from January-June 2025, a 9.9pc decline compared to the same period in 2024. The US was the leading supplier, accounting for 488,800t, followed by Argentina, Canada, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Despite the looming tariffs, US shipments remained strong in the weeks leading up to the decision, as buyers who had delayed orders returned to the market. Prices for PE in Brazil had not reacted to the recommendation as of 22 August. Argus reported a sharp increase in LDPE prices for Brazil and the west coast of South America (WCSA) during that week. By Fred Fernandes Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
Washington, 24 February (Argus) — A new 10pc tariff on US imports from all countries went into effect on Tuesday, replacing the emergency tariffs imposed last year that the Supreme Court struck down on 20 February. The new tariff will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. It will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement. The 10pc tariff will not be added on top of existing sectoral duties on steel, aluminum, copper, cars and auto parts. President Donald Trump on 20 February invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Expansion Act to impose the 10pc tariff. A day later, Trump posted on his social media platform that he would raise the rate to 15pc, but the social media post does not have legal force. The US will assess the Section 122 duty at the 10pc level, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency said late on Monday. The law cited by Trump allows him to maintain the 10pc tariff for a period of 150 days, unless the US Congress authorizes an extension. CBP also said it will stop collecting the invalidated emergency tariffs effective on Tuesday. The agency said it was ready to "implement current and any forthcoming executive actions as directed by the president" with regard to refunding an estimated $175bn in tariffs the US Supreme Court said were imposed unlawfully. Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over refunds. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Washington, 21 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump on Saturday said he will slap a 15pc tariff on all US imports, less than 24 hours after his administration unveiled a 10pc global import tax meant to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday. Trump, in a social media post, said that he "will be, effective immediately, raising the 10pc Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15pc level". Trump cited "a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued" on Friday as a justification for his decision. The White House has yet to release an official record of any decision to implement Trump's 15pc tariff threat. Trump on Friday had to rescind executive orders he signed in the past year that imposed tariffs by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal. Trump, in a separate proclamation on Friday, invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act to impose a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February. Trump's decision on Friday exempted energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports from new import taxes. The 10pc tax, which was to be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — exempted imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Why 10pc or 15pc? It is not clear why Trump announced on Saturday that he would raise the Section 122 tariff to the maximally allowed 15pc, or why his administration initially chose a lower rate, at 10pc. The Trump administration had signaled since mid-January that it would opt for a 10pc tariff under Section 122 authority if the Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariff. The Trump administration said it was planning to use the 150-day duration of the Section 122 tariffs to rapidly put in place other tariffs targeting specific industries and countries under existing, previously used trade authorities. While Trump said that his Section 122 tariff authority is "legally tested", no other president has invoked this power, and US courts have not weighed on its merits before. But Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the majority decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs, cited Section 122 five times in his separate opinion issued on Friday. Kavanaugh argued that since Congress delegated to the executive branch broad tariff authority to impose tariffs under Section 122 and multiple other laws, there was no reason to dispute Trump's authority to impose tariffs by invoking economic emergencies. Trump on Saturday called Kavanaugh "my new hero", together with two other justices who voted to uphold Trump's tariffs. Trump continued to lob insults at conservative justices who voted to strike down his tariffs, calling them "fools" and "lapdogs" of "radical left Democrats". More court action likely Despite criticism of the court's decision, Trump and his top officials have tried to put a positive spin on the ruling by arguing that he will instead impose "stronger" tariffs and raise even more revenue. But his Section 122 tariffs likely will face challenges in courts. The Supreme Court's majority opinion hinged on the finding that Congress did not explicitly authorize Trump to impose taxes, in the form of tariffs, under the legal authority he has cited. Chief justice John Roberts and two of the justices Trump appointed during his first term, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, also referenced the "major questions" doctrine to justify their decision, meaning that Congress, not the White House, should decide on matters of major economic significance. Trump has left little doubt that he plans to bypass Congress in rolling out new tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said on Friday. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. In the House of Representatives, where the Republican majority has shrunk to one, several Republican members have expressed support for the Supreme Court's decision. Trump on Saturday blasted one of those lawmakers, Jeff Hurd (R-Colorado), for "a lack of support, in particular for the unbelievably successful TARIFFS imposed on Foreign Countries and Companies". Trump endorsed Hurd's opponent in the upcoming Republican primary. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New Trump tariffs to exempt energy, metals, USMCA
New Trump tariffs to exempt energy, metals, USMCA
Washington, 20 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump will enact a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday, but the new tariffs will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. The new 10pc tax, which will be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Trump's proclamation of the new tariff invokes Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows imposing tariffs of up to 15pc to address a balance of payments issue. The Section 122 tariffs will also exempt "natural resources and fertilizers that cannot be grown, mined, or otherwise produced in the US", according to a White House fact sheet. Trump's proclamation also exempts beef, oranges and tomatoes from the 10pc tariff. The new tariff will not apply to steel, aluminum, cars, auto parts and any other products subject to sectoral tariffs Trump's administration has imposed in the past year or plans to tax in the future. Trump directed the US Trade Representative's office (USTR) to immediately launch "Section 301" investigations to justify future tariffs directed at specific, yet unnamed countries. A Section 301 investigation would target a specific country on the grounds that it is discriminating against US exports. China almost certainly would be subject to import taxes under this rubric. USTR launched a Section 301 investigation against China last October, citing its lack of compliance with the 2020 US-China deal. The Supreme Court earlier on Friday threw out most of the tariffs Trump has imposed on nearly all US trading partners, finding his ability to unilaterally impose tariffs under the pretext of economic emergencies exceeded his powers under a decades-old law. Uncertainty ahead The announcement of exemptions for USMCA, energy and other products addresses concerns raised by US importers in the wake of the Supreme Court rulings. The exemption regime is the same established under the emergency tariffs Trump applied since last year. But Trump's choice of the legal avenue for reverse-engineering the now invalid emergency tariffs points to more uncertainty ahead. The administration can impose those tariffs only for a period of 150 days, according to law. Any extensions would require explicit authorization from Congress. "Is the 150 day limit an actual limit? We'll see," Georgetown University law professor Kathleen Claussen said on Friday. No president has previously invoked Section 122 to impose tariffs, and "it's hard to see what would stop him from trying to" unilaterally extend it by a further 150 days, she said during a webinar hosted by WITA - The International Trade Membership Association. The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. The House of Representatives and the Senate have voted on separate resolutions challenging the tariffs Trump has imposed on imports from Canada and Brazil, but they have not passed any tariff legislation. "Congress and the administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks" with respect to tariffs, House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said. But Trump likely would have trouble finding enough votes on Capitol Hill to support his tariffs. "The president must refrain from any further unilateral action on tariffs," House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said. No clarity on refunds Trump on Friday also signed an executive order formally rescinding all his previous tariffs that were imposed by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal, including those on Brazil and those threatened against countries doing business with Iran. The US will immediately stop collecting duties imposed under the emergency tariffs. But the order makes no mention of any mechanism to refund the previously collected emergency tariff revenues. Trump said earlier today he is expecting a years-long court fight over whether his administration must refund an estimated $175bn in emergency tariffs. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US to roll out $12bn of farmer aid
US to roll out $12bn of farmer aid
Houston, 8 December (Argus) — US president Donald Trump today announced $12bn of aid payments to farmers to help offset the financial burdens of high-cost inputs and low crop prices. Trump today during a roundtable meeting at the White House said that he will leverage revenues collected from tariffs to secure $12bn worth of funding for farm assistance. Of the full aid package, $11bn will be used for the farmer bridge assistance (FBA) program, which provides broad relief to growers of corn, soybeans, wheat and other crops and grains, according to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Farmers who qualify for the FBA program can expect to receive payments by 28 February, with commodity-specific rates expected to be released by the end of this month. The remaining $1bn of bridge payments are reserved for commodities not covered under the FBA program such as specialty crops and sugar, according to the USDA. But details and a timeline of these payments were not immediately released. After the White House meeting, the USDA clarified that the $12bn in funds would be authorized under the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter (CCC) Act and administered by the Farm Service Agency. How funds authorized by the CCC are tied to tariff revenue was not immediately clear. The Argus NPK fertilizer affordability index has recovered from its lows earlier in the year, but remains at around 0.89 on 4 December, indicating lower crop prices relative to input costs. Front-month CBOT corn prices have increased by about 20¢/bushel since 1 October to $4.36/bushel on 8 December, while granular urea prices at Nola have declined by $46/st on a midpoint basis to $355.50/st fob Nola over the same period, according to Argus data. Market participants expect most of the aid to go toward paying down debt farmers have accumulated while operating on thin margins in recent years. The removal of fertilizer tariffs drove significant declines in phosphate, urea, and UAN prices, slightly easing input costs for growers. USDA expects 95mn acres of corn to be planted next year, so clearing debt could open the door for more borrowing and spring spending, depending on when these payouts arrive. The push to bolster domestic production to reduce reliance on fertilizer imports remains a key effort by the Trump administration to improve farmer profitability. Trump said he would even impose "very severe tariffs" on Canada if it was necessary to expand US production, but that would be a departure from administration trade policy that has so far exempted Canadian fertilizer imports, especially potash, from tariffs. Trump said he is willing to use tariff revenue again should farmers find they need additional relief. Calls for farmer aid have come from the Trump administration since as early as September this year, but were stalled by the partial shutdown of the US government and questions about how aid could be funded. By Sneha Kumar and Chris Mullins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
New US 10pc tariff goes into effect
Washington, 24 February (Argus) — A new 10pc tariff on US imports from all countries went into effect on Tuesday, replacing the emergency tariffs imposed last year that the Supreme Court struck down on 20 February. The new tariff will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. It will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement. The 10pc tariff will not be added on top of existing sectoral duties on steel, aluminum, copper, cars and auto parts. President Donald Trump on 20 February invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Expansion Act to impose the 10pc tariff. A day later, Trump posted on his social media platform that he would raise the rate to 15pc, but the social media post does not have legal force. The US will assess the Section 122 duty at the 10pc level, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency said late on Monday. The law cited by Trump allows him to maintain the 10pc tariff for a period of 150 days, unless the US Congress authorizes an extension. CBP also said it will stop collecting the invalidated emergency tariffs effective on Tuesday. The agency said it was ready to "implement current and any forthcoming executive actions as directed by the president" with regard to refunding an estimated $175bn in tariffs the US Supreme Court said were imposed unlawfully. Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over refunds. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports
Washington, 21 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump on Saturday said he will slap a 15pc tariff on all US imports, less than 24 hours after his administration unveiled a 10pc global import tax meant to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday. Trump, in a social media post, said that he "will be, effective immediately, raising the 10pc Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15pc level". Trump cited "a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued" on Friday as a justification for his decision. The White House has yet to release an official record of any decision to implement Trump's 15pc tariff threat. Trump on Friday had to rescind executive orders he signed in the past year that imposed tariffs by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal. Trump, in a separate proclamation on Friday, invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act to impose a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February. Trump's decision on Friday exempted energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports from new import taxes. The 10pc tax, which was to be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — exempted imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Why 10pc or 15pc? It is not clear why Trump announced on Saturday that he would raise the Section 122 tariff to the maximally allowed 15pc, or why his administration initially chose a lower rate, at 10pc. The Trump administration had signaled since mid-January that it would opt for a 10pc tariff under Section 122 authority if the Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariff. The Trump administration said it was planning to use the 150-day duration of the Section 122 tariffs to rapidly put in place other tariffs targeting specific industries and countries under existing, previously used trade authorities. While Trump said that his Section 122 tariff authority is "legally tested", no other president has invoked this power, and US courts have not weighed on its merits before. But Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the majority decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs, cited Section 122 five times in his separate opinion issued on Friday. Kavanaugh argued that since Congress delegated to the executive branch broad tariff authority to impose tariffs under Section 122 and multiple other laws, there was no reason to dispute Trump's authority to impose tariffs by invoking economic emergencies. Trump on Saturday called Kavanaugh "my new hero", together with two other justices who voted to uphold Trump's tariffs. Trump continued to lob insults at conservative justices who voted to strike down his tariffs, calling them "fools" and "lapdogs" of "radical left Democrats". More court action likely Despite criticism of the court's decision, Trump and his top officials have tried to put a positive spin on the ruling by arguing that he will instead impose "stronger" tariffs and raise even more revenue. But his Section 122 tariffs likely will face challenges in courts. The Supreme Court's majority opinion hinged on the finding that Congress did not explicitly authorize Trump to impose taxes, in the form of tariffs, under the legal authority he has cited. Chief justice John Roberts and two of the justices Trump appointed during his first term, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, also referenced the "major questions" doctrine to justify their decision, meaning that Congress, not the White House, should decide on matters of major economic significance. Trump has left little doubt that he plans to bypass Congress in rolling out new tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said on Friday. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. In the House of Representatives, where the Republican majority has shrunk to one, several Republican members have expressed support for the Supreme Court's decision. Trump on Saturday blasted one of those lawmakers, Jeff Hurd (R-Colorado), for "a lack of support, in particular for the unbelievably successful TARIFFS imposed on Foreign Countries and Companies". Trump endorsed Hurd's opponent in the upcoming Republican primary. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New Trump tariffs to exempt energy, metals, USMCA
New Trump tariffs to exempt energy, metals, USMCA
Washington, 20 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump will enact a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday, but the new tariffs will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. The new 10pc tax, which will be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Trump's proclamation of the new tariff invokes Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows imposing tariffs of up to 15pc to address a balance of payments issue. The Section 122 tariffs will also exempt "natural resources and fertilizers that cannot be grown, mined, or otherwise produced in the US", according to a White House fact sheet. Trump's proclamation also exempts beef, oranges and tomatoes from the 10pc tariff. The new tariff will not apply to steel, aluminum, cars, auto parts and any other products subject to sectoral tariffs Trump's administration has imposed in the past year or plans to tax in the future. Trump directed the US Trade Representative's office (USTR) to immediately launch "Section 301" investigations to justify future tariffs directed at specific, yet unnamed countries. A Section 301 investigation would target a specific country on the grounds that it is discriminating against US exports. China almost certainly would be subject to import taxes under this rubric. USTR launched a Section 301 investigation against China last October, citing its lack of compliance with the 2020 US-China deal. The Supreme Court earlier on Friday threw out most of the tariffs Trump has imposed on nearly all US trading partners, finding his ability to unilaterally impose tariffs under the pretext of economic emergencies exceeded his powers under a decades-old law. Uncertainty ahead The announcement of exemptions for USMCA, energy and other products addresses concerns raised by US importers in the wake of the Supreme Court rulings. The exemption regime is the same established under the emergency tariffs Trump applied since last year. But Trump's choice of the legal avenue for reverse-engineering the now invalid emergency tariffs points to more uncertainty ahead. The administration can impose those tariffs only for a period of 150 days, according to law. Any extensions would require explicit authorization from Congress. "Is the 150 day limit an actual limit? We'll see," Georgetown University law professor Kathleen Claussen said on Friday. No president has previously invoked Section 122 to impose tariffs, and "it's hard to see what would stop him from trying to" unilaterally extend it by a further 150 days, she said during a webinar hosted by WITA - The International Trade Membership Association. The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. The House of Representatives and the Senate have voted on separate resolutions challenging the tariffs Trump has imposed on imports from Canada and Brazil, but they have not passed any tariff legislation. "Congress and the administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks" with respect to tariffs, House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said. But Trump likely would have trouble finding enough votes on Capitol Hill to support his tariffs. "The president must refrain from any further unilateral action on tariffs," House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said. No clarity on refunds Trump on Friday also signed an executive order formally rescinding all his previous tariffs that were imposed by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal, including those on Brazil and those threatened against countries doing business with Iran. The US will immediately stop collecting duties imposed under the emergency tariffs. But the order makes no mention of any mechanism to refund the previously collected emergency tariff revenues. Trump said earlier today he is expecting a years-long court fight over whether his administration must refund an estimated $175bn in emergency tariffs. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Trump threatens 'global' tariff on aluminum scrap
Trump threatens 'global' tariff on aluminum scrap
Houston, 20 February (Argus) — US imports of aluminum scrap may be subject to a 10pc tax after President Donald Trump sought to counteract the US Supreme Court ruling today that struck down the "reciprocal" tariffs that he imposed last year. Trump threatened to impose the trade measure on Friday, hours after the US Supreme Court ruled that he exceeded his power when implementing country-specific duties under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) on 4 April 2025. He said an executive order would come in the afternoon, but none had been posted by publication time. If he decides against levying a 10pc tariff, then aluminum scrap would return to being freely traded. In touting the new tariffs, Trump planned to invoke Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows for the US to impose duties of up to 15pc to address balance-of-payment issues. Those tariffs can only remain in place for 150 days, though, with Congress having sole authority to approve any extensions. He added that he was considering taking action under sections 232, 201, 301 or 330 of the act. Section 232 tariffs on imports of P1020 and other grades of primary aluminum remain in effect at a 50pc rate, aside from imports from the UK, which are subject to a 25pc rate. Previously, goods subject to section 232 tariffs have been exempted from stacking of additional tariffs for specific countries, except for imports from China. Still, Trump's latest tariff threat likely would benefit certain countries, while being a wash for others, as the baseline duty rate under IEEPA already was 10pc. Fewer than half of the top 15 suppliers of aluminum scrap to the US in 2025 were subject to a higher "reciprocal" tax. The US brought in 581,000 metric tonnes (t) of aluminum scrap at a declared value of $1.53bn from May-December 2025, the latest data from the US Commerce Department shows. Still, tariff costs on consumers were minimal during that period, given that material coming from Canada and Mexico — which accounted for 89pc of shipments to the US — is largely imported duty free under the US-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) free-trade agreement. It remains to be seen whether importers will be able to recoup tariff costs or whether aluminum scrap shipments covered by USMCA would be affected by the Section 122 tariffs, given that it was not clear by publication time if the latest legal avenue proposed by Trump would supersede that deal. By Alex Nicoll and Jenna Baer Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
