Fresh US tariffs on imported goods came into effect on Tuesday as President Donald Trump pushes forward his trade agenda following a Supreme Court ruling against several of his global duties.
The new tariffs, initially set at 10%, are intended to address the United States’ significant balance-of-payments deficits, according to a White House statement.
Trump has indicated plans to increase the rate to 15%, though exemptions will remain for goods covered by sector-specific investigations and the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
While his previous sector-specific tariffs on items such as steel and automobiles remain intact, the high court’s decision marks a setback for his broader global tariff strategy.
The new 10% duty, which applies to $1.2 trillion in imports annually, will last 150 days unless extended by Congress and serves as a temporary measure toward a more permanent trade policy.
US Customs and Border Protection confirmed that tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court will cease on Tuesday, while collection of the new duties begins immediately.
The conservative-majority court ruled six to three that Trump exceeded his authority under a 1977 law when imposing abrupt tariffs on individual nations.
Experts warn the tariffs will continue to affect American households. Erica York, vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, said the previous global duties led to a $1,000 annual tax increase per household in 2025.
The new measures are expected to raise household costs by roughly $700 in 2026.
Analysts also note potential challenges in international relations. Former US trade official Wendy Cutler explained that Trump’s “tariff wings” have been clipped, prompting alternative strategies like threatening licensing fees.
While retaliatory measures from trading partners are unlikely, countries may accelerate efforts to diversify away from the US market.
President Trump emphasized that despite the Supreme Court limitations, the administration will maintain pressure on trading partners, warning that nations attempting to circumvent agreements could face higher duties.
