Tariff Tracker: A Guide to Tariff Authorities and their Uses

Glossary

Authority: The statute or authority that invests a part of the U.S. government with the ability to impose tariffs. As a general rule for all U.S. policy, no tariff or trade action goes into effect unless and until it is formally signed by the President. Anything short of that may be considered a statement of intent rather than the initiation of a policy. For that reason, actions like Trump’s February 13 announcement of reciprocal tariffs are included under the “Miscellaneous” section since the announcement called for an investigation into possible tariffs but did not cite a specific authority under which those tariffs would be initiated, nor did it cite an authority for the investigations.
Actor: The specific U.S. government position, department, or agency responsible for initiating and/or administering the authority.
Scope: How wide the authority extends and what specific situations the authority applies to
Timeline: The period of time between the formal initiation of a process and when it comes into action, usually when a law or executive order is signed by the President unless individual laws, executive orders, or proclamations call for a specific enactment date
Restrictions: Statutory caveats on given authorities that may delay enactment, block enactment entirely, or end enforcement. It is possible that certain actions may prompt legal challenges concerning whether a given action falls beyond the scope of presidential authority expressed in the Constitution or delegated to the office by Congress, such as the use of IEEPA to impose tariffs, because these authorities are being used in novel ways, but the potential for such cases is speculative and will not be covered here unless a challenge is formally initiated.
Recent use: Specific instances of the use of that authority during the Trump administration, but may also include instances from the Biden administration or Trump’s first administration if applicable

Authority: Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act

Actor: U.S. President, U.S. Department of Commerce
Scope: Section 232 gives the president broad authority to restrict imports of a particular good or set of goods to protect national security.
Timeline: Up to one year. The U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS) will investigate the issue for up to 270 days, after which the White House has 90 days to decide what actions to pursue in response to the findings of the report.
Limitations: There are no formal limitations on Section 232 authority.
Recent use: In 2018, Trump used Section 232 authority to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports into the United States. Trump’s “America First Trade Policy” Presidential Action on January 20 called for a series of reports and investigations, but did not cite Section 232 authority in calling for these.

On March 1, the Trump administration announced an executive order directing the Secretary of Commerce to initiate a Section 232 investigation to “determine the effects on the national security of imports of timber, lumber, and their derivative products”, including whether additional measures are required to protect national security, with a report due in 270 days from the announcement of the order (November 26).

Authority: International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977

Actor: U.S. President
Scope: This authority may be used by the President in response to a national emergency as defined under the National Emergencies Act (NEA). In response to that threat, the IEEPA may be used to ““to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States”. A “national emergency” is not defined in the NEA, but the legislation establishes procedures for declarations of national emergencies by the President. There are currently 37 national emergencies in effect in the United States, the oldest being declared by the Jimmy Carter administration in 1979 to freeze Iranian government assets in the United States.
Specific to trade, the IEEPA allows the President to “regulate” a variety of international economic transactions, including trade, but it is not clear if the meaning of “regulate” extends to tariff levels. While IEEPA powers have been used to implement sanctions and financial controls, no President has so far addressed tariffs through IEEPA, though Trump has threatened to against Mexico in 2019, Canada and Mexico in February 2025, and possibly Colombia in January 2025[1].
Timeline: A President may declare a national emergency at their discretion but must indicate the powers and authorities being activated to respond to the emergency in question. The declaration should include a date when any actions are expected to go into force (for example, Trump’s declaration of a national emergency on the northern border on February 1, 2025 called for the enactment of tariffs on February 4, 2025), but the specific timeline is at the discretion of the President.
Limitations: Congress could terminate the state of emergency by enacting a joint resolution of disapproval under expedited procedures provided under the National Emergencies Act.
Recent use: Proposed tariffs of 25 percent on Canada and Mexico announced on February 1, 2025, which were later paused for 30 days following commitments by the governments of Canada and Mexico to address the narcotics crisis which was the national emergency which prompted the use of tariffs. These tariffs were imposed at midnight (EST) on March 4, in addition to an additional 10% tariff on China on top of the 10% that was already imposed.

1： While Trump’s Truth Social Post targeting Colombia on January 27, 2025 cited the IEEPA as authority for implementing financial sanctions against Colombia’s government, there was no authority cited for implementing tariffs in the post.

Authority: The Commerce Clause: U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3

Actor: U.S. Congress
Scope: Broad. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 grants Congress the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”. While there has been debate as to the meaning and scope of Congress’s ability to regulate commerce “among the several States”, its authority to levy tariffs and duties has not been significantly challenged by the courts.
Since the 1930s, Congress has sometimes delegated certain authorities, frequently called “Trade Promotion Authority” (TPA) to the President to negotiate trade agreements with foreign governments and pursue limited changes to tariffs, duties, and other trade restrictions without further congressional authorization.
Timeline: Undefined. TPA is enacted for a specific period of time at which point is authority expires, but in principle Congress may pass legislation addressing international trade and tariffs at any point.
Restrictions: The U.S. President may veto any legislation, but Congress may override this veto with a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers of Congress.
Recent use: The most recent TPA bill was in force from 2015 to 2021. In his first administration, Donald Trump implemented a trade agreement Japan and with the European Union under authority granted by the 2015 TPA. TPA has not been renewed by Congress since it expired in 2021. The Biden administration did not seek its renewal and Trump’s current administration has so far not sought renewal.

Authority: Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act

Actor: Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
Scope: Section 301 authority allows the Office of the USTR to impose tariffs or withdraw from agreements with countries engaging in unfair trade practices or violating trade agreements with the United States. Historically, Section 301 investigations were used to build a case before litigation at the World Trade Organization (WTO), but in Trump’s first administration Section 301 authority was used to act unilaterally, a practice that was continued under the Biden administration.
In response to unfair foreign trade practices, Section 301 allows USTR to impose duties or other import restrictions, withdraw or suspend trade agreement concessions, or enter into a binding agreement with the foreign government in question to either eliminate the conduct in question or the burden to U.S. commerce or compensate the United States with satisfactory trade benefits.
Timeline: Just over one year. The Office of the USTR may receive a petition from an interested person or party and has 45 days to decide whether to initiate an investigation upon receipt of the petition. USTR may also self-initiate an investigation after consultations with appropriate stakeholders. Generally, investigations take up to one year, followed by 30 days to implement retaliatory action if the investigation finds wrongdoing. It is possible that USTR may act faster than one year.
Restrictions: There are no formal restrictions on Section 301 investigations or remedies.
Recent use: Trump used Section 301 authority in 2018 to impose a total of $550 billion of imports from China, a decision that was extended by the Biden administration following a mandatory four-year review.

Authority: Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act:

Actor: U.S. President
Scope: Section 122 allows the President to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent on any country or group of countries with whom the United States has a “large and serious” trade deficit, along with providing for certain exemptions, such as if the product is unavailable in the United States.
Timeline: Imposition of Section 122 tariffs does not depend on the result of an investigation but may only be imposed no longer than 150 days. A longer-term extension would need to be approved by Congress.
Restrictions: Congressional action would be required to maintain trade deficit-related tariffs beyond 150 days, raising questions about Section 122’s viability as a long term tool or as a mechanism to build leverage without congressional approval to continue the tariffs.
Recent use: Section 122 has never been used to this point

Authority: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974

Actor: U.S. President, International Trade Commission
Scope: Section 201 actions are designed to safeguard U.S. industry by providing temporary relief from foreign competition, allowing the targeted U.S. industry an opportunity to adjust to market forces and compete successfully again.
Timeline: Generally, up to 240 days. Concerned stakeholders (firms, unions, trade associations, or a group of workers representing a U.S. industry), U.S. Trade Representative, House Committee on Ways & Means, Senate Finance Committee, or the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) may initiate a Section 201 investigation. Once initiated, the ITC’s investigation begins with a 120 day period to determine injury to U.S. industry or the threat of injury (this period may be extended for up to 30 days if the case is complicated), followed by up to 60 days to determine a suitable remedy to recommend to the President, and a further 60 days for the President to decide whether to implement the ITC’s recommendations and which of its recommendations to implement which is issued in a report that is also delivered to Congress.
Restrictions: Congress may pass a joint resolution of disapproval within 90 days of the President’s report if the President’s action differs from the ITC’s recommendation or if the President takes no action. If the joint resolution is passed, the ITC’s recommendation becomes the remedy regardless of the President’s report, and the President has 30 days to proclaim the recommendations.
Recent use: Donald Trump used Section 201 remedies in his first administration in 2018 when he proclaimed a proclaimed a four year safeguard measure on imports of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells (CSPV) cells and modules, and a three year safeguard on large residential washing machines following an ITC investigation into these imports.

Authority: Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930

Actor: U.S. President, International Trade Commission
Scope: Section 338 authorizes the President to impose by proclamation “new or additional duties” in cases where evidence is found that specific countries discriminate against commerce of the United States. The investigation may be initiated by the U.S. government or through a private petition by a concerned stakeholder to the International Trade Commission (ITC). Duties under Section 338 may not be raised by more than 50 percent ad valorem of the targeted products.
Timeline: While Section 338 appears to require an investigation that delivers an affirmative finding to initiate its use, there is no specified timeline for the delivery of the investigation’s report, the decision on retaliation, and the initiation of retaliatory measures.
Restrictions: While not a statutory restriction, Section 338 measures would seem to run counter to the frameworks provided under the World Trade Organization and other trade agreements, allowing for the possibility that members may be permitted to impose retaliatory measures against the United States if Section 338 was used to impose tariffs.
Recent use: There appears to be no activity under Section 338 provisions since 1949.

Miscellaneous:

Dispute settlement mechanisms: The World Trade Organization and individual agreements provide dispute settlement mechanism that allow participants to impose penalties upon other parties, including tariffs, if attempts negotiated settlement are unsuccessful.
Presidential Actions: These are actions that the President may take pursuant to his constitutional and statutory authority. These include executive orders/memoranda which are directions to the staff of the various departments and agencies of the Executive Branch and draw upon the statutory authorities given to the President under the Constitution and law. While they carry the force of law while in effect, they may be removed, amended, or supplanted by other executive orders.

The President may also issue executive proclamations which do not carry the force of law and are generally ceremonial but may be issued by a President in the context of implementing existing legislation and statutes. In these context, proclamations may only make adjustments or already existing statutes to make adjustments to tariff barriers, a practice that Presidents have used since the Trade Act of 1974, while continuing to rely on congressional legislation to address nontariff barriers like quotas and rules of origin.

Most recently, section 103(a) of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, the TPA authority that was in force from 2015-2021, allowed the President to use their proclamation authority to reduce tariffs rates up to 50 percent on existing rates with no restrictions on rates at 5 percent or below. Under the first Trump administration, proclamations under this authority were used to enter into trade agreements with Japan (October 2019) and the European Union (November 2020), both of which adjusted U.S. tariffs generally consistent with the stipulations in section 103(a), though some members of Congress argued that the agreements went beyond the scope and intent of the 2015 legislation.

With the expiration of TPA in 2021, any proclamations that address tariffs would only be applicable to trade actions initiated under the 2015-2021 TPA. For example, Trump issued proclamations on February 10, 2025, to adjust the tariff rates on imports of steel and aluminum into the United States under the authority from the initial Section 232 investigation from 2018 that originally prompted the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports.

Finally, it is worth reminding that without a specified authority, any statements on tariffs are declarations of intent rather than settled fact.

Directing federal agencies to identify the potential for reciprocal tariffs through the “Reciprocal Trade and Tariffs” memorandum on February 13 is somewhere in between. As President, Trump has the authority to both direct the relevant agencies to study countries’ tariff lines to look for where reciprocal tariffs may be applied, and to apply such tariffs accordingly, likely either through Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act (which can impose tariffs on countries with unfair trade practices towards the United States) or Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (which can impose tariffs on countries which discriminate against U.S. commerce). The February 13 announcement of investigations in tariff lines did not cite a specific authority, but once the reports are submitted the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative will make a decision on how to initiate “all necessary actions” which will likely draw on existing presidential authorities that will be outlined in a report detailing “proposed remedies in pursuit of reciprocal trade relations with each trading partner”.

(Photo Credit: Reuters/ Aflo)