On September 27, 2026, the White House announced new developments from the U.S.-China Board of Trade, called “30-FOR-30.” Under this initiative, the United States and China have identified certain items, “with a view toward providing reduced tariff treatment to those goods in a reciprocal manner.” See the China imports list of goods here, and the U.S. imports list here.
In response to the U.S. implementation of the 50% Section 338 tariff on certain Canadian products, Canada announced counter-tariffs of 15%, 25%, or 50% on certain imports from the United States, including steel, dairy products, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper products, and electronics. See the news release.
On August 21, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) issued guidance implementing the 50% Section 338 tariff on certain Canadian products effective August 22, 2026, following a temporary suspension. See CSMS #69606660.
The law firm Much Shelist PC, along with partners, Rock Trade Law, Associated and Miller Cooper invite you to the Webinar: Navigating Your Business Planning in the Wake of Renewed Tariff Imposition
Two lawsuits have been filed challenging the legality of the recently announced Section 301 forced labor tariffs imposed by the Office of the United States Trade Representative ("USTR") on imports from numerous countries based on alleged failures to adequately prohibit goods produced with forced labor. A copy of the complaints can be found here and here.
On September 27, 2026, the White House announced new developments from the U.S.-China Board of Trade, called “30-FOR-30.” Under this initiative, the United States and China have identified certain items, “with a view toward providing reduced tariff treatment to those goods in a reciprocal manner.” See the China imports list of goods here, and the U.S. imports list here.
In response to the U.S. implementation of the 50% Section 338 tariff on certain Canadian products, Canada announced counter-tariffs of 15%, 25%, or 50% on certain imports from the United States, including steel, dairy products, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper products, and electronics. See the news release.
On August 21, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) issued guidance implementing the 50% Section 338 tariff on certain Canadian products effective August 22, 2026, following a temporary suspension. See CSMS #69606660.
Two lawsuits have been filed challenging the legality of the recently announced Section 301 forced labor tariffs imposed by the Office of the United States Trade Representative ("USTR") on imports from numerous countries based on alleged failures to adequately prohibit goods produced with forced labor. A copy of the complaints can be found here and here.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has just announced its final responsive action in the Section 301 investigations examining whether 60 U.S. trading partners have failed to prohibit and effectively enforce bans on the importation of goods produced with forced labor.
On May 7, 2026, the United States Court of International Trade (“CIT”) struck down Section 122 tariffs in a 2-1 decision. While the court declined to issue a universal injunction, the panel ordered that tariffs can no longer be collected from plaintiffs only who imported merchandise subject to the tariff and brought the action. The panel also ordered refunds with interest to plaintiffs only. This means that filing an action in the CIT is likely necessary to receive immediate benefit from this decision.
The Supreme Court's recent February 20th decision invalidating IEEPA tariffs has necessarily set off a flurry of confusion and conjecture regarding the pathways and process for obtaining IEEPA tariff refunds. With over 2200+ lawsuits seeking refunds, and millions of entries processed weekly, all eyes are on when the Court, CBP, and the plaintiffs will agree on a refund process.
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its long-anticipated decision invalidating tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The ruling has significant implications for importers that paid IEEPA tariffs, including reciprocal and Russia-related assessments. While the decision provides important guidance, it does not automatically result in refunds. Importers must take affirmative steps to preserve and pursue recovery.
On February 20, 2026, President Trump signed an Executive Order revoking the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”). He then issued a Proclamation imposing a 10% tariff on all imports (with limited exceptions) under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act.
In March 2025, Section 232 tariffs were extended to certain steel and aluminum derivative articles, with duties assessed based on the “content” of such metal. However, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) has never defined the term “content,” nor has the agency clarified whether Section 232 duties should apply only to the value of the underlying steel or aluminum or instead to the full entered value of the derivative article.
On November 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a consolidation of actions challenging tariffs imposed pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). These actions cover tariffs, such as:
IEEPA China Fentanyl
IEEPA Mexico
IEEPA Canada
IEEPA Universal/Reciprocal
At this time, importers should urgently consider filing their own court actions to challenge IEEPA tariffs to avoid having to file transactional refund requests, and secure comparable treatment as the lead litigants in this case.
On November 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS or Court) heard oral argument on the validity of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs. The Court, including conservative Justices, appeared skeptical of and hard pressed the Government on their claim that President Trump had authority to impose global tariffs under the IEEPA. SCOTUS is likely to invalidate the tariffs upholding lower courts’ decisions in Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287 and Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250. While we await the decision later this year or in early 2026, one thing is clear – it is absolutely critical that importers start planning a refund strategy now to ensure that refunds are received if/when IEEPA tariffs are invalidated by SCOTUS.
On September 24, 2025 the Department of Commerce announced the commencement of a Section 232 investigation and a request for public comments regarding the importation of Personal Protective Equipment, Medical Consumables, and Medical Equipment, Including Devices. This announcement follows an investigation, initiated on September 2, 2025 concerning the effects on national security of imports of personal protective equipment (PPE).
On September 25, 2025, President Trump announced via TruthSocial the forthcoming imposition of three new tariffs covering pharmaceuticals, kitchen cabinets, and heavy trucks. These measures will take effect on October 1, 2025, and represent an expansion in the administration's increasingly extensive list of proposed tariff modifications.
On September 25, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) authority to impose tariffs on Chinese-origin goods included in Lists 3 and 4A under Section 301of the Trade Act of 1974. The Court’s ruling in HMTX Industries LLC v. United States (No. 23-1891) rejected arguments from U.S. importers that the tariffs exceeded USTR’s statutory authority or failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The importers are expected to seek review by the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming days or weeks.
In a judgment issued this afternoon, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that most of President Donald Trump's global tariffs are illegal as they exceed the authority granted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The full text of the CAFC's opinion is available here.
