Washington (AFP) – US President Donald Trump on Thursday won a temporary reprieve for his aggressive tariff strategy, with an appeals court preserving his sweeping import duties on China and other trading partners — for now. The short-term relief will allow the appeals process to proceed, after the US Court of International Trade on Wednesday barred most of the tariffs announced since Trump took office, ruling that he had overstepped his authority.
Since returning to the presidency in January, Trump has moved to reconfigure US trade ties with the world while using levies to force foreign governments to the negotiating table. But the stop-start tariff rollout, impacting both allies and adversaries, has roiled markets and snarled supply chains. Prior to Thursday’s decision from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, known as an administrative stay, the White House was given 10 days to halt affected tariffs.
The Trump administration called the ruling “blatantly wrong,” expressing confidence that the decision would be overturned on appeal. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters that the judges “brazenly abused their judicial power to usurp the authority of President Trump.” Leavitt said the Supreme Court “must put an end” to the tariff challenge, while stressing that Trump had other legal means to impose levies. A separate ruling by a federal district judge in the US capital found some Trump levies unlawful as well, giving the administration 14 days to appeal.
Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, told Fox Business that “hiccups” sparked by the decisions of “activist judges” would not affect talks with trading partners, adding that three deals are close to finalization. Trump’s trade advisor Peter Navarro told reporters after the appellate stay that the administration had earlier received “plenty of phone calls from countries” who said they would continue to “negotiate in good faith,” without naming those nations.
Trump’s import levies are aimed partly at punishing economies that sell more to the United States than they buy. The president has argued that trade deficits and the threat posed by drug smuggling constituted a “national emergency” that justified the widespread tariffs — a notion the Court of International Trade ruled against. Trump unveiled sweeping duties on nearly all trading partners in April, at a baseline 10 percent — plus steeper levies on dozens of economies including China and the European Union, which have since been paused.
The US trade court’s ruling quashed these blanket duties, along with those that Trump imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China separately using emergency powers. But it left intact 25 percent duties on imported autos, steel, and aluminum. Beijing — which was hit by additional 145 percent tariffs before they were temporarily reduced to make space for negotiations — reacted to the trade court decision by saying Washington should scrap the levies. “China urges the United States to heed the rational voices from the international community and domestic stakeholders and fully cancel the wrongful unilateral tariff measures,” said commerce ministry spokeswoman He Yongqian.
Asian markets rallied Thursday; US indexes closed higher while Europe closed slightly down. The trade court was ruling in two separate cases — brought by businesses and a coalition of state governments — arguing that the president had violated Congress’s power of the purse. The judges said the cases rested on whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) delegates such powers to the president “in the form of authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world.”
The judges stated that any interpretation of the IEEPA that “delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional.” Analysts at London-based research group Capital Economics said the case may end up with the Supreme Court, but would likely not mark the end of the tariff war.
© 2024 AFP
