Trump’s Third Tariff Framework in Six Months
The Trump administration imposed new tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on more than 80 countries on July 24, 2026, replacing a temporary 10% global levy that expired the same day. The new duties cover major trading partners including China, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, Mexico, Australia, and India. They were implemented under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which gives the president authority to penalize countries whose trade practices harm U.S. commerce.
The justification this time is forced labor. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on July 23, 2026 that it was “well past time” that countries eradicated forced labor from global supply chains. But the legal framing is the third distinct rationale the administration has used since 2025.
Each Justification Replaced a Struck-Down One
The Supreme Court struck down Trump’s first round of tariffs, which were imposed on national security and national emergency grounds. The administration then imposed a temporary 10% blanket levy in February 2026, citing balance-of-payments concerns. That authority also expired, leading to Friday’s new Section 301 tariffs.
“Lacking a legal basis under domestic law to support its protectionist trade policy, the U.S. Trade Representative chose to manipulate an issue of great importance to human rights and workers’ rights movement.”
Brazil’s government, official statement, July 24, 2026
The rotating legal justifications are drawing criticism not just from foreign governments but from Democratic lawmakers and some Republicans. When a president’s stated rationale shifts with each court loss, the legal durability of the new approach is uncertain.
Who Gets Hurt
Tariffs are paid by U.S. importers, not foreign governments. Those costs are routinely passed to consumers and businesses. The previous 10% blanket levy had already contributed to higher prices across electronics, clothing, and food imports. The new 10-12.5% duties cover a similar or wider scope of goods.
Critics also point to an internal contradiction in the forced labor justification. The Guardian’s Eduardo Porter notes that the U.S. itself relies on prison labor, where incarcerated workers are paid pennies or nothing, making the moral argument difficult to sustain under international scrutiny.
Section 301 tariffs have been challenged in court before. Whether this round survives legal review will depend on whether courts accept forced labor as a valid basis for across-the-board duties on 80-plus countries with varying labor records.
What You Can Do Now
-
Call your senators at (202) 224-3121 and ask them to demand a congressional vote before any tariff regime becomes permanent. The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, authority over trade. Ask your senator to co-sponsor the Trade Review Act of 2025, which would require legislative approval for tariffs above 10%.
-
Contact your House representative at (202) 225-3121 and ask what steps they are taking to review the economic impact of rolling tariff increases on your district. Ask specifically whether they support the Ways and Means Committee holding hearings on Section 301 authority.
-
Submit a public comment to the U.S. Trade Representative at regulations.gov by searching “USTR Section 301 2026.” If a comment period opens, you can state whether these tariffs have raised your costs as a consumer or small business owner.
-
Contact your state attorney general and ask whether your state plans to join any legal challenge to the new Section 301 tariffs. Find your AG at naag.org/find-my-ag.
Sources
Foreign Policy: Trump Swaps Out Tariffs for Even More Tariffs Under Forced Labor Rationale
The Guardian: Trump Accused of Using Forced Labor as Convenient Justification for Tariffs
The Guardian: If Trump Cares About Forced Labor He Should Look at US Prisons First
USTR: Section 301 Trade Act Authority Explained