On 24 July, the administration of US President Donald Trump imposed new tariffs of 10% and 12.5% on goods from 60 trading partners, including the European Union and China. The White House attributed the decision to insufficient enforcement of the ban on forced labour. The new rates came into force at the same time as the 150-day temporary global tariff of 10% expired.
Briefly about the main points
- The new US tariffs amount to 10% or 12.5%, depending on the country.
- The measures cover 99.4% of US imports, but provide for exemptions.
- Goods already in transit are exempt until 28 July.
- The EU, Australia, Brazil and Norway have criticised the US decision.
- The tariffs were imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act 1974.
The tariffs have replaced the temporary global levy
Previous A 10 per cent global tariff The US suspended the measure at 00:01 Eastern Time on 24 July — after 150 days in force. At that very moment, the new tariffs announced the previous day in the Federal Register came into effect.
The administration invoked Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, citing the failure of other states to adequately enforce bans on the import of goods produced using forced labour. US Trade Representative Jamison Greer stated that the United States has long had such a ban in place and enforces it strictly, and that the new measures are intended to address human rights abuses and trade distortions.
In February, the US Supreme Court overturned the «retaliatory» tariffs ranging from 10% to 50%, which had been introduced last year and which the administration had justified under the Emergency Powers Act. The new legal mechanism allows Washington to maintain a minimal tariff on almost all imports; Section 301 has already withstood legal challenges.
Partner rates and product exclusions
The 10% rate has been set for Argentina, Bangladesh, the United Kingdom, Cambodia, Canada, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Trinidad and Tobago.
For the EU, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and Switzerland, the level of new duties, together with the existing most-favoured-nation rates, has been set at 10% or 12.5%. The remaining 38 countries have been assigned a rate of 12.5%, including Vietnam and China. The US accuses China of detaining members of the Uyghur minority in labour camps; Beijing denies this.
At the same time, the tariffs do not apply to oil and gas, fertilisers, certain foodstuffs, aircraft and their parts, or critical minerals. An exemption also applies to cars, steel, aluminium and copper, which are already subject to Section 232 tariffs. Goods that meet the requirements of the US–Mexico–Canada Agreement have been exempted from the duties, given the integrated North American supply chain and the significant proportion of US content.
Goods that were already in transit when the tariffs came into force will not be subject to the new duties until 00:01 Eastern Time on 28 July.
The partners described the decision as unfounded
The decision immediately drew objections from a number of trading partners. The EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Kaja Kallas, described the tariffs as a shock and told Reuters that Washington’s explanation made no sense. She pointed to EU labour legislation, in particular paid leave and working conditions.
Australia and Brazil have described the tariffs as unjustified and stated that they will seek their repeal. Norway has stated that there are no grounds for such measures. Canada, whose goods have already been hit by new tariffs worth $20 billion this week, reacted more cautiously: Dominique Leblanc, the minister responsible for trade with the US, announced his intention to continue constructive dialogue with Washington.
According to Kelly Ann Shaw, a former White House trade adviser, the economic impact of the new scheme is broadly similar to the previous status quo. She noted that around 471 goods have been added to the list of exemptions, and the tariff restrictions agreed by some partners will mean lower rates for them than under previous agreements.
The legal framework gives Washington room for manoeuvre
A senior official in the Trump administration has rejected the assessment that new duties is simply a direct replacement for the tariff that has just expired. According to him, the US imposes stricter bans and controls on the import of goods produced using forced labour than other countries, and this, in Washington’s view, gives competitors an unfair trade advantage.
Trade lawyer Ryan Majerus believes that the new tariffs may be more difficult to challenge in court than the measures struck down by the Supreme Court. Following the introduction of Section 301 duties, the administration has considerable flexibility to adjust the rates. This could allow the White House to maintain the base tariff whilst adjusting it for existing trade agreements or specific categories of goods.
With regard to China, US officials had previously informed the Chinese side of their intention to restore the aggregate tariff level to 20%, as agreed in the trade truce with Chinese President Xi Jinping in November 2025, but not to exceed it. Prior to this decision, the rate for China stood at 10%, excluding the 25 per cent tariff on industrial goods imposed during Trump’s first term.
