Trump says he will raise global tariff rate from 10% to 15%

President Donald Trump said on Saturday (21 February) that he will raise temporary tariffs on nearly all U.S. imports from 10% to 15%, the maximum allowed under the law, after the Supreme Court struck down his previous tariff program.

Trump had immediately announced a 10% across-the-board tariff on Friday after the court's decision, which found the president had exceeded his authority when he imposed an array of higher rates under an economic emergency law.

The new levies are grounded in a separate law, known as Section 122, that allows tariffs up to 15% but requires congressional approval to extend them after 150 days.

In a social media post on Saturday, Trump said he would use that period to work on issuing other "legally permissible" tariffs.

The administration intends to rely on two other statutes that permit import taxes on specific products or countries based on investigations into national security or unfair trade practices.

"I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level," he wrote in a Truth Social post.

Trump has shown little sign of backing off his global trade war in the hours since the court's 6-3 decision, attacking individual justices in personal terms and insisting he retained the power to impose tariffs as he sees fit.

International reaction

French President Emmanuel Macron said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling demonstrates the importance of checks and balances in democracies.

“It is not bad to have a Supreme Court and, therefore, the rule of law,” Macron said at the annual agricultural fair in Paris, referring to the court’s decision that tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were illegal.

“It is good to have power and counterweights to power in democracies.”

Macron added that France would assess the consequences of Trump’s new 10% global tariff and adapt accordingly, stressing that France intends to continue exporting agricultural, luxury, fashion and aeronautical goods.

• Macron warns of renewed tensions with U.S., urges EU to push reforms
• Macron warns U.S. is ‘turning away from allies’ and international rules

Global implications

The Supreme Court’s decision rejects one of Trump’s most controversial assertions of presidential power and carries significant implications for the global economy.

The tariffs have been central to the global trade war that Trump initiated after beginning his second term, a conflict that has alienated trading partners, unsettled financial markets and heightened economic uncertainty worldwide.

The Trump administration has not released tariff collection data since 14 December. However, economists at the Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated on Friday that more than $175 billion had been collected under tariffs imposed pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

That amount would now likely need to be refunded following the Supreme Court’s ruling against the IEEPA-based tariffs.

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress - not the president - the authority to levy taxes and tariffs. Mr Trump instead relied on statutory authority, invoking IEEPA to impose tariffs on nearly every U.S. trading partner without congressional approval.

He has imposed additional tariffs under separate laws that were not at issue in this case. Government data from October to mid-December show that those measures accounted for roughly a third of the revenue generated by Trump-imposed tariffs.

IEEPA allows a president to regulate commerce during a national emergency.

Mr Trump described the tariffs as essential to U.S. economic security, stating in November that without them “the rest of the world would laugh at us because they’ve used tariffs against us for years and took advantage of us”.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and other administration officials said the United States would pursue alternative legal justifications to preserve as many of the tariffs as possible.

These include a statutory provision permitting tariffs on imported goods deemed to threaten U.S. national security, as well as another allowing retaliatory measures - including tariffs - against trading partners that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative determines have engaged in unfair trade practices against American exporters.

However, none of these alternatives offers the flexibility or blunt-force impact that IEEPA provided Trump, and they may not be able to replicate the full scope of his tariffs quickly.

Trump’s ability to impose tariffs immediately on goods from any trading partner under a declared national emergency had significantly strengthened his leverage in trade negotiations.

• Indonesia, U.S. finalise trade pact cutting tariffs to 19%, palm oil among key exemptions
• U.S. House rejects move to shield Trump tariffs on Canada as vote looms
• U.S. to cut India tariffs to 18% as New Delhi stops buying Russian oil

Legal and constitutional issues of IEEPA

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that if all current tariffs stay in place, including the IEEPA-based duties, they would generate about $300 billion annually over the next decade.

Total U.S. net customs duty receipts reached a record $195 billion in fiscal 2025, which ended on 30 September, according to U.S. Treasury Department data.

Key actions, trade impact and ongoing lawsuits

On 2 April, the president announced what he called "reciprocal" tariffs on goods imported from most U.S. trading partners, again invoking IEEPA to address what he called a national emergency related to U.S. trade deficits -despite the United States having run trade deficits for decades. 

In February and March of 2025, Trump invoked IEEPA to impose tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico, citing the trafficking of the often-abused painkiller fentanyl and illicit drugs into the United States as a national emergency.

IEEPA was passed by Congress and signed by Democratic President Jimmy Carter. In enacting the measure, Congress placed additional limits on the president's authority compared to a predecessor law.

The cases on tariffs before the justices involved three lawsuits. 

The Washington-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sided with five small businesses that import goods in one challenge, and the states of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont in another.

Tags

Trump United States Politics U.S. supreme court tarrifs Congress