Trump administration devises ‘Plan B’ to uphold tariffs amid legal challenges

The Trump administration is reportedly working on a “Plan B” to maintain its tariffs, despite a recent court ruling against these import taxes.

According to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), US officials are considering potential actions should they need to establish a new legal foundation for the tariffs initiated by President Donald Trump.

These considerations arise after the Court of International Trade determined that Trump overstepped his authority by imposing widespread tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). An appellate court has, however, temporarily halted this ruling.

This week, the Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority with the comprehensive tariffs imposed using IEEPA.

Following this ruling, an appellate court temporarily suspended the decision’s enforcement.

In previous statements, Trump argued that tariffs would “restore the economy and prevent fraud,” asserting that for decades the US had been “looted, exploited, and its assets stolen by both friends and enemies.”

Sources familiar with the matter told WSJ that Trump’s team is currently evaluating two potential courses of action.

The first option involves imposing temporary tariffs of up to 15% on a broad array of products under Section 122 of the US Trade Act of 1974. This seldom-used provision permits tariffs for 150 days to address trade balance deficits.

Concurrently, plans are reportedly underway to develop individual tariffs for key trading partners under Section 301 of the same act, a provision employed against unfair trade practices.

Sources indicated to the newspaper that Section 301 offers greater legal reliability but involves protracted procedures.

Trump utilized this section when applying tariffs against China during his first presidential term.

The WSJ‘s sources stressed that no final decision has been made within the White House. The administration might postpone the implementation of alternative strategies pending the appellate court’s judgment.

White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt stated in a prior announcement that the administration is assessing various tariff options but refrained from providing specifics.

WSJ also noted that the White House and the Office of the US Trade Representative did not respond to requests for comment regarding this issue.

Everett Eissenstat, former deputy director of the US National Economic Council during Trump’s first term, cautioned that prematurely shifting to alternative measures could be viewed by the courts as an “admission of defeat” by the White House.

“The administration can swiftly resort to other tariff measures,” Eissenstat stated, “but with the decision still in the judicial process, such a move might be interpreted as a lack of confidence in the ultimate ruling.”

On April 2, Donald Trump declared it “Liberation Day” for the American economy, implementing “reciprocal” tariffs on goods from over 180 countries, including the closest US allies. He subsequently granted a 90-day deferral for some nations.

Reuters news agency reported that the Court of International Trade’s ruling deeming the tariffs illegal was unforeseen but has not discouraged US administration officials.