Brooks, Kane, & LaHaye Evaluate Status of Trump’s Tariffs in Published Law360 Article

Adams & Reese attorneys Jeff Brooks, Chris Kane, and Luke LaHaye are published in a Law360 “Expert Analysis” column, “Evaluating the Current State of Trump’s Tariff Deals.”

Brooks is a leading member of the Adams & Reese GR Team, and a Partner in the DC office. Kane is the Adams & Reese Global Trade & Transportation Team Leader and a Partner in the New Orleans office. LaHaye is a member of the Adams & Reese Litigation Practice Group and an Associate in the DC office.

Brooks, Kane, and LaHaye discuss how the Trump administration’s trade strategy, marked by the widespread use of tariffs, is rooted in a long-standing U.S. tradition, echoing the protectionist views of figures like Alexander Hamilton.

“The Trump administration's trade approach is not new. The U.S. has a long history of using tariffs to foster domestic manufacturing, promote skilled labor and achieve national independence. Alexander Hamilton advocated for a more restrictive trade policy to promote U.S. economic growth,” writes Brooks, Kane, and LaHaye. “The Trump administration has adopted these same principles, but instead of leveraging tariff policy to reset trade balances, it is also looking to reset geopolitical challenges.”

The administration has implemented a series of tariff changes, often through executive orders:

• Reciprocal Tariffs: Initially, a 10% baseline “reciprocal tariff” was imposed on all imported goods, with higher rates for specific countries, except China, which were later delayed. Country-specific rates, which could be higher or lower than initial announcements, went into effect on Aug. 7, subjecting any non-listed country to the 10% baseline. The order included an increased 40% tariff on goods found to be transshipped to evade duties.
  
  
• Tariffs on Canada, China, and Mexico: The tariff on Canada goods, linked to a purported fentanyl-related national emergency, was increased from 25% to 35%, with exemptions for USMCA goods. Mexico received an extension to continue negotiations and remained subject to a 25% tariff (USMCA goods exempt). The country-specific tariff on China was reduced from 125% to 34%, with a 24% portion suspended until Nov. 10.
  
  
• Aluminum and Steel Tariffs: The Department of Commerce expanded the list of derivative products subject to Section 232 tariffs, applying them to the value of the aluminum or steel content.
  
  
• Newly Imposed Tariffs: Brazil was hit with a new 40% tariff – bringing the total to 50% - based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which claims Brazil's policies pose an “unusual and extraordinary threat”. Brazil has initiated a consultation process at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Litigation challenging the President’s authority under IEEPA is ongoing, with one recent circuit court ruling upholding a decision that the president exceeded his authority under the statute. A 50% tariff on copper was also imposed under Section 232.
  
  
• De Minimis Entry Suspension: An executive order suspended the duty-free de minimis exemption for most shipments, regardless of value, effective Aug. 29.
  
  
• Tariffs on India: A 25% tariff was imposed on goods from India, also under IEEPA, in response to its continued imports of Russian oil.

While formal, detailed deals are lacking, several framework agreements have been announced:

• United Kingdom: A framework for a deal was announced, including an annual tariff-rate quota of 100,000 automobiles subject to a reduced 10% tariff.
  
  
• Indonesia: The U.S. agreed to decrease threatened tariffs from 32% to 19% in exchange for Indonesia addressing non-tariff barriers.
  
  
• Japan: The U.S. announced an agreement to lower the threatened tariff on goods from Japan from 25% to 15%. The U.S. claims Japan committed to a $550 billion investment, though the details and nature of this commitment remain contested.
  
  
• European Union: A framework agreement proposes that the EU eliminate tariffs on all U.S. industrial goods. The U.S. committed to applying only the higher of its most-favored-nation (MFN) tariff or 15% (including Section 232 and reciprocal tariffs) on EU goods. The EU also pledged large-scale energy purchases and investment in the U.S.
  
  
• Vietnam, the Philippines, and South Korea: Trump announced deals with these nations, claiming reduced tariff rates and commitments to remove tariffs on U.S. goods. South Korea was said to have committed to $350 billion in investment, but these deals have not been formally confirmed by the respective countries, and key terms are unclear.

“The market is eager to reach calmer waters and certainty,” write Brooks, Kane, and LaHaye. “While some preliminary deals and framework agreements have been reached, most are limited in scope and leave key details unresolved. And legal challenges to Trump's authority to impose his tariffs are ongoing, with the very real possibility of another Supreme Court ruling. Ongoing trade negotiations and forthcoming appellate court decisions will shape the future direction of U.S. trade policy and its effects on the global economy.”