Politics

Trump’s New Tariffs on 60 Trading Partners Took Effect at Midnight — Here’s What Changes

By Mike Harper · July 24, 2026

At 12:01 AM Friday, the tariffs that had been holding American import prices in place expired. By 12:02, new ones were already in effect.

President Trump signed proclamations Thursday imposing tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on imports from 60 trading partners — covering 99.4% of all US imports — just as a set of temporary stopgap duties ran out of their legal clock. The new tariffs are based on a different legal authority than the ones the Supreme Court struck down in February, designed to outlast the constitutional challenge that unraveled Trump’s first attempt to rebuild his signature trade wall.

The backstory matters for understanding what changed this week. In February, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose sweeping global tariffs was unconstitutional. The ruling forced the administration to refund roughly $81 billion in collected tariff revenue to importers and left the trade policy in shambles. Trump responded with a short-term global tariff under a different provision — Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 — but that law only permits tariffs for 150 days. That clock ran out Friday morning.

Thursday’s new tariffs are built on Section 301 of the Trade Act, which permits the president to impose tariffs and sanctions against countries found to engage in unfair trade practices. The administration’s justification is that 60 trading partners have failed to adequately enforce bans on goods produced with forced labor. The 10% rate applies to countries that have adopted or committed to import prohibitions on forced labor goods. The 12.5% rate applies to those that haven’t. Some products are exempted — oil, gas, fertilizer, and certain critical minerals.

Trading partners have pushed back sharply on the forced labor rationale. Brazil, which faces 12.5%, called the tariffs “arbitrary” and “unjustified.” Canada, which has also faced separate 50% tariffs announced last week, said it was evaluating its options. The Peterson Institute for International Economics called the investigation “not a labor-standards exercise” but rather “a mechanism for exporting America’s import ban on Chinese goods, as well as an attempt to recreate the tariff regime struck down by the Supreme Court.”

According to Yahoo News, the administration has been scrambling to rebuild its tariff regime ever since the February Supreme Court ruling — the forced labor framework is the most legally durable option it has found so far. Section 301 actions have survived court challenges before, unlike the IEEPA tariffs.

For American households, the practical question is what happens to prices. Tariffs on 99.4% of imports at 10% to 12.5% don’t automatically translate to 10% to 12.5% price increases at the register — importers absorb some of the cost, pass some to retailers, and retailers pass some to consumers. But the direction of pressure is clear, and economists broadly expect some portion of the cost to reach household budgets in the months ahead.

The new tariffs face immediate legal challenges. Multiple importing companies that won refunds after the February Supreme Court ruling have signaled they will contest this new framework as well. Whether Section 301 can sustain a global tariff of this scope has not been definitively tested in court.