Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Right now, the U.S. federal government has levied duties through several different legal authorities: Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 - Section 122 allows the President to impose tariffs of up to 15% on imports in response to a balance of payment crisis for up to 150 days. The President has used this authority to levy a 10% tariff on imports from most U.S. trading partners, with exceptions for goods in certain sectors and with duty-free treatment under USMCA. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 - Section 232 is used to address imports deemed to threaten U.S. national security. The President has used this authority to levy tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper products and their derivatives; patented pharmaceuticals; timber and lumber; trucks and truck parts; and automobiles and auto parts that range from 10 to 100%.  Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 - Section 301 is used to respond to foreign trade practices that restrict U.S. commerce. USTR conducts a 270-day investigation and submits findings to the President, who may then impose tariffs or other measures on imports from the countries involved. The President has used this authority to levy tariffs ranging from 7.5 to 25% on a wide range of Chinese goods in response to unfair trade practices. Generally, these tariffs stack on top of pre-existing duties including: The Most Favored Nation (MFN) rate - The U.S. sets a baseline tariff for imports from all of the countries that it has permanent normal trade relations with. These can be accessed through the Harmonized Tariffs Code.  Anti-Dumping/Countervailing Duties - The Federal Government levies duties on 882 products–intended to offset the value of dumping (a predatory pricing practice where foreign competitors sell at below-market prices to undercut local competition) or subsiziation–from foreign countries. See here for a full guide.

On May 8, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that the President’s use of Section 122 to impose a “worldwide” 10% tariff was illegal. The Court held that the statute, which was intended to address “balance-of-payments,” was not intended to address the U.S. trade deficit. While the panel blocked the tariffs as applied to the plaintiffs, including spice company Burlap & Barrel and toy company Basic Fun!, it declined to issue nationwide relief. As a result, it remains unclear how the ruling will impact other importers who are subject to the 10% tariff. The U.S. The Department of Justice is likely to appeal to the Federal Circuit, and the case may ultimately head to the Supreme Court.  We Pay the Tariffs will continue to monitor this case and provide its members with relevant updates.

Yes. The Trump administration has announced plans to levy further tariffs through a series of Section 301 investigations, which it aims to complete by July. Multiple members of the administration have stated that the level of duties under Section 301 will match those imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) before it was struck down by the Supreme Court.

USMCA: While the Trump administration did not levy IEEPA or Section 122 tariffs for USMCA-compliant goods, it currently levies Section 232 duties on USMCA-compliant goods from both Canada and Mexico. It is unclear if Section 301 tariffs will be applied to these goods.  Other Free Trade Agreements: The U.S. has Free Trade Agreements with about 20 trading partners, including Colombia, Korea, and Australia. Items that were treated as “duty free” under these agreements were subject to tariffs under IEEPA, are currently subject to Section 122 tariffs, and are likely to be subject to Section 301 tariffs.

Following the Supreme Court's ruling striking down IEEPA tariffs, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is preparing to administer refunds through its Centralized Automated Processing of Entries (CAPE) system. CBP is expected to begin rolling out refunds by approximately May 11. While the agency has been working to operationalize the refund mechanism, importers should anticipate that initial disbursements may be staggered as CBP processes the backlog of affected entries.Refunds will be issued to the Importer of Record (IOR)—the party that paid the duties at entry—not to downstream purchasers, end customers, or other parties in the commercial chain. See here for directions to enroll.

No. The first Phase of IEEPA tariff refunds covers approximately 63% of imports subject to IEEPA tariffs, excluding those subject to antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) as well as entries liquidated more than 80 days ago. CBP says that other tariff refunds are set to be addressed in further phases of the rollout.

The Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling was a major win for small businesses, but the fight is not over. The administration has made clear it intends to replace IEEPA tariffs with new duties under Section 301, Section 232, and other authorities: meaning the same costs that have squeezed small businesses for the past year are poised to return under different names. We Pay the Tariffs is working to make sure that doesn't happen. Sign the Section 301 letter. Tell the administration and Congress that small businesses cannot absorb a new round of permanent tariffs to replace the ones the Supreme Court struck down. The more businesses on this letter, the harder it is for policymakers to ignore the economic damage.