The governments of the countries have had three alternatives to face the tariffs of Donald Trump, President of the United States.
Trump imposed “emergency” tariffs on products from Mexico, China and Canada, “reciprocal” tariffs on goods from dozens of countries, under Section 232 (steel, aluminum, automobiles and auto parts) and under Section 301 (products originating in China).
Alternatives to face the tariffs of Donald Trump
On Thursday, a U.S. federal appeals court temporarily reinstated the “reciprocal tariffs” and those linked to the “fentanyl emergency”. The move suspends a previous decision while further legal arguments are analyzed. There is still no final ruling on this key policy of President Trump.
Juan Antonio Dorantes, managing partner of the consulting firm Dorantes Advisors, highlighted these three alternatives for dealing with the tariffs:
- Negotiate with the Trump administration.
- Resorting to dispute settlement mechanisms of the World Trade Organization (WTO) or trade treaties.
- Challenge in the U.S. judiciary.
The Federal Circuit, based in Washington, D.C., took a new step in the tariff litigation. It asked the companies that challenged the tariffs to submit their arguments in writing by June 5. In turn, it asked the Justice Department to respond by June 9.
“Since the beginning of this whole maelstrom of unilateral measures by the United States, it was contemplated that one of the possible variables that would have to be taken into consideration were the lawsuits that would be filed internally against all these executive orders and circulars,” said Dorantes.
Other lawsuits
The first ruling on Trump’s tariffs was issued by the U.S. Court of International Trade, which reviews disputes over customs and trade laws.
This court oversees cases involving tariffs, imports and decisions by agencies such as the Bureau of Customs. It operates with specialized judges and has exclusive jurisdiction over certain disputes related to international trade and protectionist measures.
“There was a lot of expectation, because many of the judges of this international trade tribunal tend to give the government the right in many occasions,” Dorantes said. “It’s a fairly independent tribunal, we’ll have to see how the other lawsuits come.”