Which countries and products are still facing US tariffs after the Supreme Court ruling

What the ruling did not do was eliminate the broader tariff regime Trump has built using other legal powers.

• Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariff authority
• New 10 percent tariff imposed under a different trade law
• Many industry-specific and China tariffs remain unchanged

Did our AI summary help?

The US Supreme Court may have invalidated a central pillar of President Donald Trump’s trade strategy, but the practical effect on global commerce is far narrower than it first appeared. Even after the ruling, a large share of goods entering the United States remain subject to tariffs, often at high rates.

Within hours of the decision, the White House moved to replace the struck-down duties with new ones, preserving a trade landscape defined less by clarity than by constant adjustment, the New York Times reported.

What the court actually struck down

The ruling focused on tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a 1970s law never before used to levy import duties. Trump had relied on the statute to impose what he called “Liberation Day” tariffs last spring, including rates that climbed as high as 50 percent for some countries.

The justices found that the law did not give the president authority to impose tariffs, cutting off one of his most aggressive tools for reshaping global trade. Those emergency tariffs are now invalid.

What the ruling did not do was eliminate the broader tariff regime Trump has built using other legal powers.

The new global 10 percent tariff

Almost immediately after the decision, Trump imposed a new across-the-board 10 percent tariff on many imports using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. No previous president had invoked this provision.

The authority is narrower. Tariffs under Section 122 can rise no higher than 15 percent and can only remain in place for 150 days unless Congress extends them. They are also meant to address specific problems such as trade deficits, not serve as open-ended economic pressure.

The new 10 percent tariff is scheduled to take effect on February 24. It excludes certain agricultural goods, imports already covered by national-security tariffs, and products traded under the US–Mexico–Canada Agreement.

Industry-specific tariffs remain untouched

Some of the most consequential tariffs were not affected by the Supreme Court ruling at all. These are duties imposed under Section 232, which allows tariffs on products deemed essential to national security.

Steel and aluminium face tariffs of 50 percent. Autos and auto parts are taxed at 25 percent. Other affected goods include copper components, timber and lumber, cabinets, upholstered furniture, heavy-duty trucks, buses, and some semiconductors. Investigations are underway that could extend tariffs to pharmaceuticals, aircraft, wind turbines, medical equipment, robotics, and other sectors.

These duties apply regardless of where the product is made and form a durable core of Trump’s trade policy.

Deals that now sit on shaky ground

Over the past year, the administration struck trade agreements with major partners including the European Union, Japan, South Korea, India, and Indonesia. Many of these deals reduced tariffs to around 15 percent in exchange for investment pledges and market access.

The problem is that many of those rates were set using the same emergency authority the court has now rejected. While Trump has said some agreements will remain in force, their legal footing is unclear and could be challenged.

For businesses, that uncertainty makes long-term planning difficult.

China remains a special case

China continues to face some of the highest tariffs in the system. Rates fluctuated wildly over the past year, peaking at 145 percent during retaliation before falling to about 30 percent under a negotiated truce. A separate 20 percent “fentanyl-related” tariff also remains in place.

While tensions have eased, China remains central to Trump’s trade agenda, and tariffs are still being used to address a wide range of grievances beyond narcotics enforcement.

Canada, Mexico and the end of de minimis

Canada and Mexico face 25 percent tariffs on some goods, though many products remain exempt under the USMCA. That agreement is due for review later this year, adding another layer of uncertainty.

At the same time, the administration has ended the de minimis rule, which had allowed imports under $800 to enter duty-free. The change hits e-commerce directly, especially low-cost shipments that previously avoided tariffs altogether.

A tariff system still very much alive

The Supreme Court ruling removed one powerful lever, but it did not dismantle Trump’s trade framework. What remains is a patchwork of global tariffs, sector-specific duties, fragile trade deals and new legal experiments.

For exporters, importers and consumers, the message is clear. Despite the court’s intervention, tariffs are still a defining feature of US trade policy, and they are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future.