The Commerce Department, after suggesting that the import of semiconductors, products containing semiconductors, and equipment and inputs used to make chips could be making the U.S. vulnerable to supply chain disruptions, is now hearing from dozens of stakeholders who say the administration has it completely backwards. Time after time, in more than 150 submitted comments for the Section 232 investigation, stakeholders said imposing tariffs is what would lead to shortages, manufacturing woes, and a loss of competitiveness in the design and manufacture of chips.
Members of the EU Parliament's Committee on International Trade are in Washington this week to discuss political, trade and investment relations between the U.S. and the EU. The delegation, led by committee Chair Bernd Lange of Germany, will hold meetings May 27-29 with various U.S. agencies, lawmakers, business groups, trade union representatives, think tanks and academia. They will specifically talk about "how the tariffs imposed by the US administration are being applied, how business is adapting to the tariffs and how can EU-US trade tensions be eased moving forward," Parliament said.
Correction: Higher country-specific reciprocal tariff rates imposed on some countries April 9 then suspended for 90 days that same day are set to resume effect July 9 (see 2505220009, 2505020060, 2505090006, 2505090061, 2505220008 and 2505010054).
President Donald Trump, after speaking to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on May 25, said it would be his "privilege" to give talks between the EU and the U.S. the same runway as other talks to avoid a hike in reciprocal tariffs.
One of the lawyers representing five importers suing President Donald Trump over his emergency tariffs said that the president's approach to tariffs, constantly threatening various new rates, sometimes backing off, and sometimes not, isn't just a "menace to the economy," it also "is totally at odds with the rule of law."
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The U.S. filed another defense of tariff action taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act last week at the Court of International Trade, more fulsomely embracing the notion that the president needs tariff-setting authority under IEEPA to address a host of foreign policy issues. Opposing a group of 11 importers' motion for judgment against the reciprocal tariffs and IEEPA tariffs on China, the government argued that "the success of the Nation" in "navigating and addressing a range of extremely consequential threats" is "built off the dispatch and unitary nature of the executive, girded by necessary tools," including IEEPA tariffs (Princess Awesome v. CBP, CIT # 25-00078).
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on May 27 heard arguments concerning the government's motion to transfer a case challenging International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs to the Court of International Trade and two importers' bid for a preliminary injunction against the tariffs. Judge Rudolph Contreras asked the government about what remedy the court could impose should it find for the plaintiffs and about the merits of the importers' claim that IEEPA doesn't provide for tariffs (Learning Resources, Inc. v. Donald J. Trump, D. D.C. # 25-01248).
The Court of International Trade on May 23 dismissed Wisconsin man Gary Barnes' case against the ability of the president to impose tariffs. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves held that Barnes didn't have standing because he failed to claim that any harm he would suffer by tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump is "particularized" or "actual or imminent."
President Donald Trump elaborated on his tariff intentions with reporters in the White House, after posting online earlier in the day that 50% tariffs would begin on EU exports on June 1, and that he would be imposing a 25% tariff on imported iPhones.