On February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the case challenging the legality of the Trump Administration’s tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”). By a 6-3 majority, the Court held that IEEPA does not authorize the President
Continue Reading IEEPA Tariffs Terminated, Replacement Section 122 Tariffs Take Effect
A Month in Semiconductor Policy: Section 232 Measures, BIS Rule, and Taiwan Deal Signal Strategic Push
January brought several significant, long-awaited developments in the U.S. semiconductor policy space, marking an inflection point in how the Administration is deploying trade tools to advance national security and industrial policy objectives.
On January 14, 2026, the White House issued Presidential Proclamation 11002 (the “Proclamation”) and an accompanying Fact Sheet adopting
The United States, Mexico, and Canada Launch Domestic Consultation Processes on Upcoming USMCA Review
Ahead of the July 2026 “joint review” of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”), the United States, Mexico, and Canada have each launched public consultation processes to solicit input from stakeholders on the operation of the USMCA, and possible changes those governments should seek to the Agreement as part of the review.
Continue Reading The United States, Mexico, and Canada Launch Domestic Consultation Processes on Upcoming USMCA ReviewTrump Administration Imposes Secondary Tariffs on India
On August 6, President Trump issued an Executive Order (“EO”) (“Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of the Russian Federation”) invoking his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) to impose a tariff of 25% on most products imported from India, effective August 27, in
Continue Reading Trump Administration Imposes Secondary Tariffs on IndiaUN World Court Finds Consequences of Climate Change Underscore Its Existential Threat
On 23 July 2025, the International Court of Justice (the “Court”) issued its highly anticipated advisory opinion on Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change. In a lengthy, unanimous opinion, the Court clarified States’ obligations under international law “to ensure the protection of the climate system and other
Continue Reading UN World Court Finds Consequences of Climate Change Underscore Its Existential ThreatStatus of Section 232 Actions by the Trump Administration
Since taking office in January, President Trump has taken a number of actions under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (“Section 232”), a statute that authorizes the President to “adjust” imports—including through application of tariffs, quotas, tariff rate quotas, and license fees—where the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”)
Continue Reading Status of Section 232 Actions by the Trump AdministrationTrump Administration Issues Executive Order on “Most-Favored-Nation” Prescription Drug Pricing
On May 12, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order titled “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients” and an accompanying “Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Announces Actions to Put American Patients First by Lowering Drug Prices and Stopping Foreign Free-riding on American Pharmaceutical Innovation
Continue Reading Trump Administration Issues Executive Order on “Most-Favored-Nation” Prescription Drug PricingTrump 2.0 Tariffs and Commercial Disputes: Key Questions to Consider
Introduction
The Trump Administration’s implementation of significant and widespread tariffs – and the potential for additional and farther-reaching tariffs – represents more than just a trade challenge. For companies engaged in international commerce, the uncertainty created by these measures increases the risk of commercial disputes. Among other things, tariffs can increase costs, reduce margins, and reveal contractual assumptions and ambiguities that lead to disputes throughout the supply chain: between buyers and sellers, manufacturers and distributors, and in a variety of other business dealings.
Below we highlight four key questions for assessing and mitigating commercial dispute risks. Whether reviewing existing contracts or negotiating new ones, companies should take strategic steps to protect their interests and minimize potential disputes and supply chain disruptions.
Background: Tariffs Under the Trump Administration
Since the America First Trade Policy memorandum that President Trump signed on the first day of his second term, the current administration has imposed a variety of country- and product-specific tariffs, threatened additional tariffs, and promised other future actions. Importers, foreign producers, and U.S. purchasers of imported products all face a heightened risk that products that they have contracted to purchase or supply may be impacted by tariffs, at times potentially altering the fundamental bargain between the parties. The threat of retaliatory tariffs leads to even further uncertainty.
At the time of publication, the Trump Administration has imposed or threatened to impose a variety of tariffs under an array of different statutory authorities. For instance:
- Canada, Mexico, and China Tariffs: President Trump ordered 20% tariffs on products from China and 25% tariffs on products from Canada and Mexico not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”) under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (“IEEPA”).
- Steel and Aluminum Tariffs: Separately, for the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum, President Trump removed country-specific exemptions, is phasing out the product-specific exclusions and removing General Approved Exclusions, and is creating a petition process for the expansion of the tariffs to derivative steel and aluminum products not already covered.
- Reciprocal Tariffs: Meanwhile, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Department of Commerce are leading a broad review of foreign trade partners to determine whether they are imposing nonreciprocal tariffs and other trade restrictive measures, for the United States to respond in kind (possibly with higher tariffs of its own).
- Other Potential Tariffs: All the while, myriad agencies are reporting to the President in April on a variety of trade and tariff issues, which could serve as the foundation for additional, future tariff actions by the Trump Administration.
Continue Reading Trump 2.0 Tariffs and Commercial Disputes: Key Questions to Consider
USTR Seeks Public Comment on Unfair or Non-Reciprocal Trade Practices
On February 20, 2025, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) announced that it is seeking public comments on any unfair trade practices and non-reciprocal trade arrangements implemented by foreign trading partners. The comment period is currently open and the deadline for submitting comments is March 11, 2025.
According to the Federal Register notice, comments can be submitted through a portal accessible at https://comments.ustr.gov/s/, under docket number USTR-2025-0001. USTR will accept comments from any interested party, including businesses, individuals, and trade associations, among others. Interested parties are able to include business confidential information in their submissions, which will not appear in the public version of their comments.
USTR’s announcement also stated that the public comment process is not the only opportunity to provide information to the agency on these issues, and that USTR “welcomes ongoing engagement with and information from any interested party.”
This comment period offers a new opportunity for U.S. exporters to seek the Administration’s potential support in eliminating foreign market access barriers. If you are interested in submitting comments to USTR as part of this process, Covington can assist in the preparation and transmission of these comments. We would also be happy to assist in crafting a broader strategy for engaging USTR and other relevant agencies on these or other trade-related issues.
Background
USTR’s launch of this public comment process follows the issuance of the “America First Trade Policy” memorandum by President Trump on his first day in office, which directed USTR to lead a review of unfair foreign trade practices and to recommend appropriate remedies. USTR also linked the comment process to President Trump’s “Reciprocal Trade and Tariffs” memorandum issued on February 13, which directed USTR and the Commerce Department to investigate “the harm to the United States from any non-reciprocal trade arrangements adopted by any trading partners” and to recommend actions in response. Covington’s alert on this memorandum is available here.
Scope of Requested Comments
USTR has invited comments on a country-by-country basis (or also on an economy-wide basis in the case of the European Union) regarding (i) “any unfair trade practice by a foreign country or economy”; or (ii) “any non-reciprocal trade arrangements.” USTR has defined unfair trade practices broadly, to include “policies, measures, or barriers that undermine or harm U.S. production, or exports, or a failure by a country to take action to address a non-market policy or practice in a way which harms the United States.” USTR has also requested that comments quantify the harm caused by such practices—ideally with a corresponding dollar amount—and to explain the underlying methodology used to calculate that figure.Continue Reading USTR Seeks Public Comment on Unfair or Non-Reciprocal Trade Practices
Trump Administration Imposes Tariffs on Imports from Canada, Mexico, and China
On February 1, President Trump issued three executive orders (“EOs”) imposing broad tariffs on U.S. imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, initially to be effective on February 4. Invoking Presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”), the EOs expand the national emergency declared by
Continue Reading Trump Administration Imposes Tariffs on Imports from Canada, Mexico, and China