News

Trump considers new Section 232 tariffs after Supreme Court ruling

After the Supreme Court curtailed key second-term tariffs, the Trump administration is turning to Section 232 to pursue new national security levies.

Summary:

  • Administration considering new Section 232 tariffs on six industries

  • Follows 6–3 Supreme Court ruling striking down many levies

  • New 232 tariffs separate from recently announced global 15% levy

  • Steel and aluminium 232 tariffs to be revamped

  • Companies could face higher effective payments under revised rules

The Trump administration is considering a fresh round of national security tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, following a Supreme Court ruling that struck down many of President Trump’s tariffs.

According to The Wall Street Journal (gated), the administration is weighing new investigations covering roughly half a dozen industries, including large-scale batteries, cast iron and iron fittings, plastic piping, industrial chemicals, and power grid and telecom equipment. These levies would be imposed under Section 232, which allows the president to restrict imports deemed a threat to national security.

The move comes after the Supreme Court voted 6–3 to invalidate most of Trump’s tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court ruled the president overstepped his authority in imposing so-called reciprocal tariffs on virtually all U.S. trading partners. Those measures accounted for more than half of the revenue generated by his second-term tariff regime.

In response, Trump announced a new global 15% tariff that can remain in place for five months, alongside additional levies planned under Section 301 of the Trade Act. The prospective Section 232 tariffs would be issued separately from these measures.

Importantly, the Supreme Court decision did not affect existing Section 232 tariffs, which have not faced serious legal challenges. During his second term, Trump expanded the scope of 232 measures beyond raw materials such as steel, aluminium and copper to include a broader range of consumer products incorporating those inputs. Exemptions have been limited, with only modest relief offered to U.S. automakers.

It remains unclear when the Commerce Department will formally announce new investigations or when tariffs could ultimately be imposed. Section 232 requires a formal investigative process before duties are enacted, though once in place the president retains broad authority to modify them.

The administration is also moving to revamp existing Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminium. While nominal tariff rates on some goods may fall, the changes would apply tariffs to a product’s full value rather than only the steel or aluminium content. That shift could result in higher overall tariff payments for many companies.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said last week the administration may “adjust the way some of the tariffs are applied for compliance purposes,” signalling further technical changes ahead.

Separately, the administration had already been reviewing tariffs under Section 232 for nine additional industries, including semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, drones, industrial robots and polysilicon used in solar panels. Some of those investigations were opened nearly a year ago and could be accelerated following the Supreme Court decision.

A White House spokesman said safeguarding national and economic security remains a priority and that the administration is committed to using all lawful authorities available.

This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

US payrolls revision in focus. Gold and silver: the calmer the better?

Revisions to old data trump new data when it comes to US payrolls.

Listen to the full episode now or follow the Saxo Market Call on your favorite podcast app.

Today’s Links

A key listen for understanding a lot of the churn in the US market internals of late We’ve noted the extreme divergences in the US equity market internals, and this great rundown with Nomura’s Charlie McElligott on the Odd Lots podcast (from last week) gives great insight into the kind of drivers here - for example, why poor names have outperformed and some of the key narratives that are being tested and what happens when positions get over-crowded.

Some follow up on efficiency focus in US defense contractors. Many of the major US defense names have seen a very strong start to the year in anticipation of more defense spending and despite the Trump administration’s threats to ban dividends and buybacks and limiting executive compensation if undefined delivery requirements are not met. WSJ ran an exclusive on Monday talking up the Pentagon’s plans for “sweeping performance reviews” that could result in “noncompliance determinations” and eventual “remediation. Amazing that the shares aren’t in a more defensive stance over this.

The big fear with AI: all benefits to accrue to capital. How will our democracies cope? WSJ’s Greg Ip with long term perspectives on the decline of labor’s share in the economy relative to capital, something that could get worst as AI spreads throughout the economy. How will our democracies cope when so much of the working class is rendered “useless” as Yuval Harari would phrase it - something he anticipated before the ChatGPT release, by the way in his book Homo Deus.

The great Mr. Craig Tindale: Fed can’t control the bulk of inflation. Also, passive investing set to hit icebergs from here? Another great post from Craig Tindale, this one pointing out that Fed has little control of CPI when so much of it is determined by import prices it can’t in any way control in the first place and how China has gamed the system, requiring a “war mindset” for Fed policy. I noticed as well that Craig posted a thought piece on the dangers to passive investing as well on his Substack, a piece that dovetails nicely with the SMC podcast from yesterday in which Peter Garnry laid out his argument that the great profit pool of the Mag7+ are increasingly endangered.

Bitcoin miners transition to AI data centers - apparently it’s a thing. With the price of Bitcoin dropping while the amount of power needed to mine a bitcoin as high as ever (and electricity prices rising), some crypto mining operations are looking to diversify into other uses for their hardware. And yet, “the whales” have apparently not yet given up on Bitcoin.

Chart of the Day - Adobe

Adobe stock is emblematic of the carnage in Software-as-a-service names that investors fear will be disrupted by AI. Despite the fear, the company continues to grow at a solid pace of around 10% year-on-year, yes a downshift from 20% and higher growth rates pre-pandemic when the company’s shift to its subscription model from 2011-12 started ramping results as older software packages needed replacing. EBITDA margins are still 40% and higher and have never missed a beat in recent years. In price-per-share terms, the stock first reached the current levels levels in 2018, when the company’s revenue was only a bit more than a third of its current revenue. The share count, by the way, is some 13% smaller than in 2018. The forward P/E is around 10-11 for the company. Will Adobe be disrupted as quickly as the market fears? The company sells a lot of mission critical and complex software…and unlike the Mag7 stocks or others, has not been plowing huge funds into data centers, although its AI-related product sales have disappointed. Things need to go very wrong and rather quickly for this company for the current price to look justified. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t, but the cushion looks bigger here than the value for so many other companies. Target Stores, a currently no-growth retail store with EBITDA margins in the 8-9% area, has much higher earnings multiples!

Source: Bloomberg

Questions and comments, please!

We invite you to send any questions and comments you might have for the podcast team. Whether feedback on the show's content, questions about specific topics, or requests for more focus on a given market area in an upcoming podcast, please get in touch at [email protected].
This content is marketing material and should not be considered investment advice. Trading financial instruments carries risks and historic performance is not a guarantee for future performance. The instrument(s) mentioned in this content may be issued by a partner, from which Saxo receives promotion, payment or retrocessions. While Saxo receives compensation from these partnerships, all content is conducted with the intention of providing clients with valuable options and information.
Saxo Market Call
Saxo Bank
Topics: Podcast Highlighted articles Forex