• President Donald Trump may have other routes to impose tariffs if the court strikes down his current duties.
• A pause on Trump's use of the IEEPA to impose tariffs has been halted by an appeals court.
• International trade experts say other ways to hike tariffs may be limiting and time-consuming.

President Donald Trump has four more swings at implementing his tariffs — even if courts strike down his use of the IEEPA.

Experts in international trade told Business Insider that Trump could take four different routes to imposing trade barriers without Congress. All four are doable, though significantly more complicated, and are unlikely policies he could change at will overnight.

"Now we're over a hundred days into the tariffs, and tariffs are a very top-of-the-agenda item," Drew DeLong, lead in geopolitical dynamics practice at Kearney, a global strategy and management consulting firm, told BI.

"There are a number of motivations underneath tariffs, and whether his current tariffs stay, he will find ways to continue to amplify pressure on trading partners," DeLong added.

After small businesses sued Trump and his various trade officials over tariffs, the US Court of International Trade ruled unanimously on May 28 that he doesn't have the authority to levy sweeping tariffs using the IEEPA — a 1970s law typically used for economic sanctions during national emergencies.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit resumed the tariffs a day later, but their fate remains uncertain.

"That decision, if it is favorable to Trump, would still go to the Supreme Court for review," said Kent Jones, Professor Emeritus of international economics at Babson College. "Many conservative judges, even Trump appointees, have tended to view Trump's use of IEEAP as overstepping the limits of delegating tariff-making power from Congress to the President."

Here are four things the Trump administration could do next to keep trade barriers up without Congress.

Section 122

DeLong said Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, also known as the Balance of Payments Act, could be the White House's first choice if it wants to "continue the pressure immediately" on trading partners.

The act's official language allows it to be applied only if there are "large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits," otherwise known as trade deficits.

"Section 122 is probably going to be a top pick," Robert Shapiro, an attorney of international trade at Thompson Coburn LLP, told BI. "That gives Trump some vehicle, but it's a limited 15% for 150 days, and then he has to go to Congress."

"That would open the door for Congress to pass a whole bunch of trade actions, but the administration obviously didn't want to go through that first," Shapiro added.

Section 232

Section 232 under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 allows the White House to raise duties on imports it deems a threat to national security.

A recent probe into critical mineral imports, for example, argued that the US is overly dependent on foreign sources for materials essential to defense, infrastructure, and innovation.

DeLong said that at the moment, there are at least eight ongoing Section 232 investigations, including those involving copper, timber, and semiconductors. He said the recent June 3 tariff hike on steel and aluminum from 25% to 50% is also being done under section 232.

Jones said, however, that each section 232 tariff requires a formal investigation, and the sectors it could be applied to are limited.

"The problem with section 232 is that it requires a separate action for each industrial category of goods against which tariffs can be imposed," said Jones. "The perceived advantage of the IEEPA was that it allowed broad tariff coverage across the board to all industries."

Section 301

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 gives the US Trade Representative — now Jamieson Greer — broad authority to investigate whether other countries are violating existing trade agreements or hurting American businesses.

DeLong said that the first Trump administration leaned heavily on the provision to impose tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars worth of Chinese goods and aircraft from the European Union.

But section 301 would require a formal investigation and even a public comment period.

"The problem with sec. 301, however, is that it requires a separate determination of specific foreign unfair or discriminatory trade practices, country by country," said Jones.

"The IEEPA, again, seemed to give the President more flexibility in declaring an emergency against all global imports into the US without the need to document specific foreign practices," Jones added.

Section 338

DeLong said Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 could theoretically allow any US president to impose up to a 50% tariff on countries that discriminate against the US. However, he said this would be a very uncommon approach that could again bring the tariff argument into uncharted territories.

"That has not been used — and I don't think I'm understating this —in decades, or ever," said DeLong of section 338. "That would be relatively new."

China has been installing renewable energy at a spectacular rate and now has more renewable capacity than the next 13 countries combined, and four times that of its closest competitor, the US. Yet, so far at least, that hasn't been enough to offset the rise of fossil fuel use in that country. But a new analysis by the NGO Carbon Brief suggests things may be changing, as China's emissions have now dropped over the past year, showing a 1 percent decline compared to the previous March. The decline is largely being led by the power sector, where growth in renewables has surged above rising demand.

This isn't the first time that China's emissions have gone down over the course of a year, but in all previous cases the cause was primarily economic—driven by things like the COVID pandemic or the 2008 housing crisis. The latest shift, however, was driven largely by the country's energy sector, which saw a 2 percent decline in emissions over the past year.

Carbon Brief put the report together using data from several official government sources, including the National Bureau of Statistics of China, National Energy Administration of China, and the China Electricity Council. Projections for future growth come from the China Wind Energy Association and the China Photovoltaic Industry Association.

Read full article

Comments

• Bill Ackman said a fear of looking weak is preventing the US and China from cutting tariffs.
• The billionaire hedge fund manager said tariffs should fall to "more reasonable levels" of 10% to 20%.
• He also questioned the belief that China can "win" a trade war with the US.

Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman has said that China and the United States should dramatically cut their tariffs on one another, and only the fear of "looking weak" is stopping them.

Ackman, the CEO of Pershing Square who supported President Donald Trump during the election, made the comments as imported Chinese goods entering the United States face a 145% tariff and American goods entering China face a 125% tariff.

A 10% baseline tariff on all imports into the United States remains in effect, while Trump has paused his raft of country-specific tariffs.

Ackman, who thanked Trump for announcing a 90-day pause on his proposed "reciprocal" tariffs earlier this month, posted on X on Saturday that tariffs were "very damaging in the short term to companies that rely on China for a large percentage of their goods."

He added China and the United States should reduce tariffs to "more reasonable levels — say 10% to 20% — as quickly as possible."

"The only thing stopping the reduction in tariffs to a more sensible level is the fear on the part of both countries' leadership of looking weak," he said.

"A pause, however, would not be a sign of weakness because it requires both countries to take down their tariffs. It is just common sense," he added.

Ackman also questioned the view that China could "win" a trade war with the United States.

"The problem with this assessment is that, the longer the tariffs persist, the more rapidly every company that has a supply chain based in China relocates it to India, Vietnam, Mexico, the U.S. or some other country," Ackman wrote.

"This is true for US and non-US companies. As a long-term player, China must understand this dynamic," he continued.

Ackman added that whatever happened, companies would no longer be willing to keep their supply chains in China. "That cake is already baked," he added.

Trump and China's leadership made conflicting statements this week about the status of trade talks.

"We're meeting with China," Trump said in an interview with "Time" magazine, which was published on Friday but held on Tuesday.

On Thursday, two Chinese officials said there were no ongoing talks.

The FBI is offering $10 million for information about the China-state hacking group tracked as Salt Typhoon and its intrusion last year into sensitive networks belonging to multiple US telecommunications companies.

Salt Typhoon is one of a half-dozen or more hacking groups that work on behalf of the People’s Republic of China. Intelligence agencies and private security companies have concluded the group has been behind a string of espionage attacks designed to collect vital information, in part for use in any military conflicts that may arise in the future.

A broad and significant cyber campaign

The agency on Thursday published a statement offering up to $10 million, relocation assistance, and other compensation for information about Salt Typhoon. The announcement specifically sought information about the specific members of Salt Typhoon and the group's compromise of multiple US telecommunications companies last year.

Read full article

Comments

Welcome to Edition 7.41 of the Rocket Report! NASA and its contractors at Kennedy Space Center in Florida continue building a new mobile launch tower for the Space Launch System Block 1B rocket, a taller, upgraded version of the SLS rocket being used for the agency's initial Artemis lunar missions. Workers stacked another segment of the tower a couple of weeks ago, and the structure is inching closer to its full height of 355 feet (108 meters). But this is just the start. Once the tower is fully assembled, it must be outfitted with miles of cabling, tubing, and piping and then be tested before it can support an SLS launch campaign. Last year, NASA's inspector general projected the tower won't be ready for a launch until the spring of 2029, and its costs could reach $2.7 billion. The good news, if you can call it that, is that there probably won't be an SLS Block 1B rocket that needs to use it in 2029, whether it's due to delays or cancellation.

As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don't want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets, as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.

Fresh details on Astra's strategic pivot. Astra, the once high-flying rocket startup that crashed back to Earth with investors before going private last year, has unveiled new details about its $44 million contract with the Department of Defense, Space News reports. The DOD contract announced last year supports the development of Rocket 4, a two-stage, mobile launch vehicle with ambitions to deliver cargo across the globe in under an hour. While Astra's ill-fated Rocket 3 focused on launching small satellites into low-Earth orbit, Astra wants to make Rocket 4 a military utility vehicle. Rocket 4 will still be able to loft conventional satellites, but Astra's most lucrative contract for the new launch vehicle involves using the rocket for precise point-to-point delivery of up to 1,300 pounds (590 kilograms) of supplies from orbit via specialized reentry vehicles. The military has shown interest in developing a rocket-based rapid global cargo delivery system for several years, and it has a contract with SpaceX to study how the much larger Starship rocket could do a similar job.

Read full article

Comments

The buried roots and stumps of an ancient forest in southern China are the charred remains of an ancient war and the burning of a capital city, according to a recent study from researchers who carbon-dated the stumps and measured charcoal and pollen in the layers of peat surrounding them.

It may not be obvious today, but there’s an ancient forest hidden beneath the farmland of southern China’s Pearl River Delta. Spread across 2,000 square kilometers are thick layers of waterlogged peat, now covered by agriculture. It’s all that is left of what used to be a thriving wetland ecosystem, home to forests of Chinese swamp cypress along with elephants, tigers, crocodiles, and tropical birds. But the peat hides the buried, preserved stumps and roots of cypress trees; some of the largest stumps are almost 2 meters wide, and many have burn marks on their tops.

“These peat layers are locally known as ‘buried ancient forest,’ because many buried trees appear fresh and most stumps are found still standing,” writes Ning Wang of the Chinese Academy of Scientists, who along with colleagues, authored the recent paper. It turns out that the eerie buried forest is the last echo of the Han army’s invasion during a war about 2,100 years ago.

Read full article

Comments

Donald Trump has started signaling that he's ready to slash tariffs on Chinese imports, but economists have warned that the US softening its stance now likely cedes power to China, which perhaps benefits from dragging out trade talks.

On Tuesday, Trump confirmed that he is willing to reduce 145 percent tariffs on all Chinese imports. A senior White House official told The Wall Street Journal that the tariffs may come "down to between roughly 50 percent and 65 percent." Or perhaps the US may use a tiered approach, charging a 35 percent tax on goods that don't threaten national security, while requiring 100 percent tariffs on imports "deemed as strategic to America’s interest," other insiders told the WSJ.

For now, Trump is being vague, only confirming that tariffs "won't be that high" or "anywhere near" 145 percent. Attempting to maintain a tough veneer, Trump warned that China must act quickly to make a deal to end the trade war or else risk making concessions that China may not consider ideal.

Read full article

Comments

The semiconductor industry is bracing to potentially lose more than $1 billion once Donald Trump announces chip tariffs.

Two sources familiar with discussions between chipmakers and lawmakers last week told Reuters that Applied Materials, Lam Research, and KLA—three of the largest US chip equipment makers—could each lose about "$350 million over a year related to the tariffs." That adds up to likely more than $1 billion in losses between the three, and smaller firms will likely face similarly spiked costs, estimating losses in the tens of millions.

Some chipmakers are already feeling the pain of Trump's trade war, despite a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs and a tenuous exception for semiconductors and other electronics.

Read full article

Comments

Despite a recent pause on some tariffs, Apple remains in a particularly thorny spot as Donald Trump's trade war spikes costs in the tech company's iPhone manufacturing hub, China.

Analysts predict that Apple has no clear short-term options to shake up its supply chain to avoid tariffs entirely, and even if Trump grants Apple an exemption, iPhone prices may increase not just in the US but globally.

The US Trade Representative, which has previously granted Apple an exemption on a particular product, did not respond to Ars' request to comment on whether any requests for exemptions have been submitted in 2025.

Read full article

Comments

Later today, a former Facebook employee, Sarah Wynn-Williams, will testify to Congress that Meta executives "repeatedly" sought to "undermine US national security and betray American values" in "secret" efforts to "win favor with Beijing and build an $18 billion dollar business in China."

In her prepared remarks, which will be delivered at a Senate subcommittee on crime and counterterrorism hearing this afternoon, Wynn-Williams accused Meta of working "hand in glove" with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). That partnership allegedly included efforts to "construct and test custom-built censorship tools that silenced and censored their critics" as well as provide the CCP with "access to Meta user data—including that of Americans."

Wynn-Williams worked as Facebook's Director of Global Public Policy from 2011 to 2017. She left at the height of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, just before Mark Zuckerberg got grilled by Congress over misinformation and election interference on its platform.

Read full article

Comments