A 10% tariff increase is no longer enough for Donald Trump: he wants a 15% markupThe change happened within a day with harsh attacks on the Supreme Court of the United States for the judgment according to which the mechanism preferred by him for the application of tariffs it was illegal. Now Trump is looking for alternative routes to impose its duties and Tuesday will introduce itself before Congress for his State of the Union address. Meanwhile, the confusion reigns supreme among business partners.
“I, as President of the United States of America, will, effective immediately, raise the 10% worldwide tariff on countries, many of which have 'ripped off' the United States for decades, without retaliation (until I came along!), to the fully permissible and legally tested level of 15%,” Trump said yesterday in a social media post, clarifying that he decided 10% was not enough, even though he had said on Friday: “Every single thing I said today is a guaranteed certainty.”
No further details on the timing of the entry into force of the 15% tariff. The initial 10% tariffs announced by Trump on Friday were supposed to take effect at midnight Washington time on February 24, according to a White House press release.
Trump's State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday
Trump is now looking into other ways to impose tariffs: is implementing the new base tariff provided for by Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the President to impose tariffs for 150 days without the approval of Congress. Obtaining such approval may prove difficult, as the Democrats and some Republicans they opposed some aspects of his trade policy.
On Tuesday, Trump will address lawmakers, as well as members of the Supreme Court, in State of the Union Address to Congress in WashingtonThe prime-time address is expected to focus on his economic policies, as Republicans seek to convey a midterm election message to an electorate frustrated by prices and the cost of living.
Last April, Trump relied on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs ranging from 10% to 50% on dozens of U.S. trading partners. On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled by a vote of 6 to 3 that Trump had acted unlawfully by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, citing a national emergency, to justify his "reciprocal" tariffs, asserting that his attempt to circumvent Congress was not justified by the Constitution.
With the mid-term elections With November upon us, Trump's approval rating for his handling of the economy has steadily declined during his year in office, with 34% of respondents saying they approve of him and 57% said they disapproved of it, according to a survey Reuters / Ipsos The vote ended Monday. Affordability remains a top concern for voters. Democrats, who need to win only three Republican seats in the U.S. House of Representatives in November to secure a majority, have blamed Trump's tariffs for exacerbating the rising cost of living.
Initial reactions from trading partners: lack of clarity
La the situation is unclear to no one. Previously, there were duties imposed quickly with emergency; now the same duties, but introduced slowly with different formal proceduresFor European companies, the practical difference may be minimal.
Trump's trade representative, Jamieson Greer, Told Fox News that countries must respect the agreements even if they require higher rates. After changing his mind on Saturday, a government spokesman UK, which had the lowest reciprocal tariff of 10%, said that “under any scenario, we expect our privileged trading position with the United States to continue and will work with the administration to understand how the ruling will affect tariffs for the UK and the rest of the world.”
The industrial associations of the Germany — the main driver of European exports across the Atlantic — have asked for urgent clarifications from Brussels and Washington, reports ReutersCompanies no longer know what tariffs apply to their goods in the United States. Contracts, prices, and supplies had been built on the basis of the EU-US agreement, which provided for an average of 15%. After the ruling, no one knows at first instance whether it remains valid or what remains in effect. The German Chancellor Friedrich Merz He said he expected the decision to ease the burden on German companies. He said he would use his upcoming trip to the United States to reiterate that "tariffs hurt everyone." European Commission he responded cautiously: we are analyzing, we are waiting for details.
Exports to the United States from countries such as Malaysia and Cambodia would continue to be taxed at the negotiated rates ofl 19%, even though the universal rate is lower, Greer said.
The chief negotiator of theIndonesia Airlangga Hartarto, the US Trade Commissioner for Tariffs, said the trade agreement between the countries, which set US tariffs at 19% and was signed on Friday, remains in effect despite the court's decision. The ruling could be good news for countries like the Brazil, which has not yet negotiated a deal with Washington to reduce its 40% tariff rate, but could now see it drop to 15%, at least temporarily.
The still unresolved issue of potential refunds
The Supreme Court ruling raises new questions questions about revenues already collected through duties. According to an analysis by Bloomberg, over 1.500 companies had filed lawsuits tariffs at commercial courts in preparation for judgment.
The Supreme Court has not clarified whether importers are entitled to refunds, leaving the matter to the lower courts: apotential exposure of up to $170 billion, That's more than half of Trump's tariff revenue. The tycoon criticized the judges for failing to provide guidance, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that tariff revenue is expected to remain "virtually unchanged" in 2026, despite the ruling.
