WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Donald Trump is rolling out a sweeping new round of tariffs against dozens of American trading partners, reinforcing a protectionist trade agenda that has become one of the defining policies of his second term.
The latest action imposes tariffs of either 10 percent or 12.5 percent on imports from 60 trading partners following investigations into foreign governments’ failure to prohibit or effectively enforce bans against goods produced with forced labor.
The tariffs replace a temporary global levy that expired Friday and cover the overwhelming majority of goods imported into the United States, subject to exemptions for certain products.
Countries that have adopted forced-labor import restrictions or made commitments to strengthen their enforcement will generally face the lower 10 percent rate. Other investigated economies will face tariffs of 12.5 percent.
The Office of the United States Trade Representative said the action was taken under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which authorizes the federal government to respond to foreign policies and practices determined to burden American commerce.
The administration argues that countries that allow products made with forced labor into their markets create an unfair advantage for companies that rely on abusive labor practices while placing American workers and responsible businesses at a competitive disadvantage.
The tariffs apply to approximately 60 economies and are expected to affect nearly all U.S. imports, although the administration exempted certain strategically important products and goods already covered by other trade restrictions.
Brazil and Canada Face Higher Tariffs
The new worldwide tariffs come as the Trump administration pursues separate and significantly higher duties against Brazil and Canada.
Brazilian imports are being hit with tariffs of 25 percent following a Section 301 investigation into the country’s trade practices.
The administration has accused Brazil of maintaining unfair barriers against American products, restricting U.S. technology companies, failing to provide sufficient intellectual property protections and limiting access to portions of its domestic market.
The tariffs affect Brazilian machinery, apparel, ethanol and other exports.
Brazilian officials have rejected the administration’s findings and are preparing financial assistance for businesses affected by the new duties.
Trump has also announced tariffs of up to 50 percent on approximately $20 billion worth of Canadian products, including liquor, dairy goods, cement, clothing and wood products.
Those tariffs are scheduled to take effect Aug. 19 unless the United States and Canada reach an agreement.
The administration has accused Canada of discriminating against American automobiles, alcohol and dairy products while restricting access to its market.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Canada is prepared to respond if the tariffs take effect, while maintaining that negotiations with Washington remain ongoing.
Administration Changes Legal Strategy
The Trump administration’s reliance on Section 301 represents a significant change from the legal strategy it used when initially imposing broad tariffs during the opening year of Trump’s second term.
Trump previously relied on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, known as IEEPA, to impose sweeping import duties after declaring America’s persistent trade deficits and other economic conditions a national emergency.
On Feb. 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.
The ruling forced the administration to abandon that legal justification and rebuild its tariff policy using other trade laws that more directly delegate authority from Congress.
Following the decision, the administration briefly relied on Section 122 of the Trade Act, which allows temporary tariffs intended to address serious balance-of-payment problems. Those tariffs were limited to 150 days and expired Friday.
The White House is now turning to Section 301, along with other provisions of federal trade law, to impose more durable tariffs against individual countries and groups of trading partners.
Billions Actually Refunded to Importers
The invalidation of Trump’s earlier IEEPA tariffs did not merely produce a court order requiring future repayments.
The federal government has already returned tens of billions of dollars.
Treasury Department budget figures showed that approximately $81 billion in tariff refunds had been paid during the current fiscal year as of mid-July, compared with approximately $5 billion during the same period one year earlier.
A Treasury official said the sharp increase was overwhelmingly connected to the Supreme Court’s tariff decision, with most of the refunds occurring during May and June.
Approximately $49.2 billion in tariff refunds were issued during June alone, contributing to a $120 billion federal budget deficit for the month. Another $22 billion was refunded in May.
Customs and Border Protection had previously reported processing approximately $35.5 billion in refunds, including interest, by May 11. The refunds covered millions of import entries.
The payments generally go to the importer of record—the company or individual that paid the tariff when the goods entered the United States.
They do not automatically go to consumers who may have paid higher retail prices after importers passed tariff costs through the supply chain.
Whether businesses use the refunded money to reduce prices, increase investment, pay debts or strengthen their balance sheets is a decision made by the companies receiving the refunds.
CBP has created an electronic system to process the claims and has said valid refunds are generally issued within 60 to 90 days after a claim is accepted. Additional claims remain under review, meaning the final cost of the refund process could climb substantially higher.
Tariffs Central to Trump’s Political Identity
Tariffs have been central to Trump’s political identity since his first presidential campaign.
Trump has long argued that decades of free-trade policies allowed foreign countries to exploit the American market while encouraging U.S. companies to move factories and jobs overseas.
During his first term, Trump imposed tariffs on steel, aluminum, solar panels, washing machines and hundreds of billions of dollars in Chinese imports.
Those policies led to a prolonged trade dispute with China and retaliatory tariffs against American agricultural and manufactured products.
Trump nevertheless continued defending tariffs as an essential tool for rebuilding domestic manufacturing, protecting industries considered vital to national security and forcing foreign governments to negotiate more favorable agreements.
He made an expanded tariff program a central promise of his 2024 campaign and has treated trade policy as a core part of his “America First” economic platform since returning to the White House.
The administration views access to the American consumer market as one of the country’s strongest forms of economic leverage.
Under Trump’s approach, foreign countries that refuse to lower trade barriers, protect American intellectual property or provide reciprocal access to their markets can be threatened with tariffs or other economic penalties.
Tariffs also generate federal revenue, although the refunds resulting from the Supreme Court ruling have demonstrated the financial risks of imposing duties under uncertain legal authority.
Consumers and Businesses Bear the Immediate Cost
While Trump frequently argues that foreign countries pay tariffs, the duties are collected by the U.S. government from American importers when goods enter the country.
Businesses can absorb those costs, negotiate lower prices from foreign suppliers or pass some or all of the expense to wholesalers, retailers and consumers.
Supporters of Trump’s policy argue that any short-term price increases are outweighed by the long-term benefits of encouraging American production and reducing reliance on foreign supply chains.
Critics argue that broad tariffs function as taxes on American companies and families and can increase prices on everyday goods, industrial equipment and materials used by domestic manufacturers.
Tariffs can also provoke retaliation against American farmers, exporters and manufacturers.
The administration maintains that the policy is producing new investment commitments and giving American negotiators leverage that previous presidents were unwilling to use.
A Defining Second-Term Battle
Trump’s new tariffs demonstrate that the Supreme Court ruling did not end his trade agenda.
Instead, the administration has shifted to different federal statutes in an attempt to preserve the policy while placing it on firmer legal ground.
That strategy will almost certainly face additional challenges from importers, industry groups and foreign governments that question whether the administration is stretching those laws beyond what Congress intended.
For Trump, however, tariffs are more than a source of government revenue.
They represent a central component of his broader effort to reshape the American economy, reduce foreign dependence and reverse trade policies he blames for decades of manufacturing decline.
With new tariffs now taking effect against 60 trading partners and substantially higher duties aimed at Brazil and Canada trade policy is once again emerging as one of the most consequential and controversial battles of Trump’s presidency.
