Just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled he overstepped his authority to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), President Donald Trump on Friday unfurled a new 10% levy on global imports.
There was hope that SCOTUS’s suspension of the administration's tariffs—some as high as 145%—would provide at least a brief lift to spot freight rates as importers rushed to move freight inbound before Trump responded to the ruling.
Jason Miller, associate professor and interim chair of the Department of Supply Chain Management at Michigan State University, noted that a sudden influx of goods out of bonded warehouses and foreign trade zones into the "consumption channel" over the next few days would be "great news for spot market rates, which had seemed to be plateauing."
That hope lasted just a few hours. "This will throw some cold water on the spot surge possibility," he said of the 10% tariffs.
Shortly after SCOTUS published its 170-page IEEPA opinion, Miller predicted President Trump "will move quickly" to use another part of tariff law, likely §122, to impose a new tariff. That's exactly what happened, although the §122 tariffs, Miller added, will likely face legal challenges.
"I would say that the impact of the Supreme Court arguably on trucking is now pretty much negligible, as there is no time for any sort of pull forward," said Avery Vise, FTR Vice President of Trucking, regarding the 10% global tariffs.
The new duty still could be good news for containerized imports. For example, Vietnam's tariff rates would fall from 20% to 10%, Miller said. "Similarly, the EU sees a drop to 10% from 15%."
One wildcard as it relates to the new 10% tariff, Miller noted, is there is no clarity currently if it has a USMCA exception. "That is a critically important issue," he said.
To the extent that prior tariffs had encouraged any move toward reshoring, Vise said a tariff level of 10% "probably does not offset the costs of doing so." In other words, this latest action likely just raises costs—borne by U.S. businesses and consumers—without leading to any significant new domestic production or sourcing, according to Vise.
"Of course, the steel and aluminum, automotive, heavy truck, and other Section 232 tariffs are still in place," he added.
Miller also theorized the White House might get creative with Section 232 steel and aluminum derivatives to claw back some of what it lost in the IEEPA ruling.
"For example, they could lump machinery into a 25% tariff bin for the entire value of the product and effectively recreate what IEEPA plus Section 232 steel and aluminum was doing using just the Section 232 steel and aluminum," he said.
