President Donald Trump on Friday blamed Canada for sending wildfire smoke into the United States and said the costs associated with the pollution &#8220;must of necessity be added&#8221; to tariffs on Canadian imports.
In a Truth Social post, Trump accused Canada of &#8220;willful negligence,&#8221; saying America is &#8220;being unnecessarily invaded by filthy, polluted, and unhealthy air.&#8221; The president said he planned to call Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney later Friday to figure out a solution.
&#8220;Canada has refused to engage in basic Forest Management and Debris Removal, knowing that such refusal will lead to exactly this result,&#8221; Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116936952365066409">wrote</a>. &#8220;This is Willful Negligence, and becoming a yearly occurrence, costing the United States Billions of Dollars, which cost of this pollution must of necessity be added to the TARIFFS Canada is currently paying.&#8221;
Trump&#8217;s post comes as hundreds of Canadian wildfires sent smoke south, leading to air quality advisories for more than 100 million Americans in 18 states and Washington, D.C. Images of hazy, gray skies across much of the Midwest and Northeast flooded social media, blurring skylines, reducing visibility, and triggering some outdoor cancellations.
Nearly <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/canada-wildfire-smoke-response-d0d3613a">900 wildfires</a> are burning across Canada, forcing evacuations and threatening remote communities after a major wave of blazes erupted over the past two weeks.
The hardest-hit U.S. cities have been in the Great Lakes and Upper Midwest, including Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis-St. Paul and Cleveland, where Major League Baseball <a href="https://apnews.com/article/wildfires-pirates-guardians-0a1b831efa3f58d79e560a4e867d83dd?utm_source=copy&amp;utm_medium=share">postponed</a> Friday night&#8217;s Guardians-Pittsburgh Pirates game after the air quality reached the &#8220;very unhealthy&#8221; category. The smoke has also raised questions about Sunday&#8217;s World Cup final between Spain and Argentina in East Rutherford, New Jersey.
&#8220;We want to be safe for our players,&#8221; Cleveland Guardians manager Stephen Vogt said. &#8220;We want to make sure that it&#8217;s not too smoky and obviously for the fans as well. It&#8217;s just not safe to be out in that environment if it&#8217;s not playable.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Where did Lake Erie go? <a href="https://t.co/C1y4rFLYVg">pic.twitter.com/C1y4rFLYVg</a>
— News 5 Cleveland (@WEWS) <a href="https://x.com/WEWS/status/2078096444032987502?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 17, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As of Friday evening, Prime Minister Carney had not publicly responded to Trump&#8217;s comments or tariff threat. Canada is already subject to multiple rounds of tariffs from the Trump administration. Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who has pushed back against Trump&#8217;s trade agenda, fired back.
&#8220;If there&#8217;s some politicians out there chirping away, well maybe what you should do rather than complain, is send support, send help, because we have done the exact same thing for our American friends,&#8221; he <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/us-complaints-trump-widlfire-smoke-9.7274466">said</a>.

Chicago, July 17, 2026

Trump Says America Is Being ‘Unnecessarily Invaded’ By Canadian Wildfire Smoke

Canada

Donald Trump

Environment

Executive

Mark Carney

Tariffs

Wildfires

Toyota announced Monday that it would invest $3.6 billion to expand production of its Tacoma pickup truck in Texas, moving most of the model&#8217;s manufacturing from Mexico to the United States over the next four years. 
Toyota said the investment will expand its San Antonio plant and shift most Tacoma production from its Tijuana, Mexico, facility.
The expansion will increase annual production capacity by 150,000 vehicles. The company will add a second assembly line to support the Tacoma truck. 
President Donald Trump celebrated the company&#8217;s plans in a post on Truth Social Tuesday morning.
Production will shift over four years, with the Tijuana plant continuing to manufacture Tacomas during the transition before Texas becomes the main production site. The San Antonio plant currently produces Tundra pickups and Sequoia SUVs.
The investment follows Toyota&#8217;s <a href="https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/43553969.html">announcement</a> in November 2025 that it planned to invest up to $10 billion in additional U.S. investment over five years.
“Toyota’s continued investment in North America is a testament to our confidence in the region’s workforce, innovation and long-term growth potential,” said Ted Ogawa, President and CEO of Toyota Motor North America, on Monday.
Toyota joins other automakers shifting production to the United States in response to tariffs on imported vehicles and auto parts.
The nearly $4 billion expansion is estimated to create nearly 2,000 more on-site jobs in Texas.
“By expanding our San Antonio plant, we are deepening our commitment to American manufacturing, creating meaningful and sustainable jobs, while advancing our mission to deliver high-quality vehicles that meet the changing needs of customers today and into the future,” Ogawa said.

GettyImages-1173365374

World’s Largest Automaker Is Making A Major Manufacturing Shift To America

Auto Companies

Automobiles

Business

Economy

While President Donald Trump lost his sweeping tariffs after the Supreme Court ruled against his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on Tuesday that tariffs are far from over.
“What we are doing now is we have investigations ongoing in my office and we are investigating specific unfair trading practices,” Greer <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/video/2026/06/02/u-s-trade-rep-greer-were-investigating-specific-unfair-trade-practices-by-different-countries.html">told</a> CNBC. “You will see over the next few weeks, we will be releasing our findings. We are covering a lot of countries, over 70 countries. If we find unfair trading practices — structural excess capacity, forced labor, things like this — we will put out proposals on how we think we should fix it and that may be proposed tariffs.” 
Trump initially relied on IEEPA because it allowed him to impose broad tariffs quickly without the lengthy investigative processes required under traditional trade laws.
“When the president used his emergency authority he was able to move very quickly to get at this issue, get a lot of leverage, and impose tariffs,” Greer explained.
After the Supreme Court blocked Trump&#8217;s use of IEEPA earlier this year, the administration turned to Section 122 and implemented a temporary 10% tariff on February 24. But unlike the tariffs announced on &#8220;Liberation Day&#8221; in April 2025, Section 122 tariffs are temporary by law and were later struck down by the U.S. Court of International Trade.
With those options curtailed, the administration has shifted its focus to Sections 301 and 232: the two principal trade authorities that require the involvement of Greer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.
Greer said the results of his Section 301 investigations would be released in the coming weeks, which could introduce new tariffs across the world. Under Section 301, the Office of the United States Trade Representative investigates whether foreign countries are engaging in unfair trade practices, gathers evidence, solicits public comments, and holds hearings before recommending tariffs or other trade restrictions. 
That is the same authority Trump used to impose tariffs on China during his first term. Those tariffs survived legal challenges, but investigations typically take between three and nine months to complete, making them slower and less useful as an immediate negotiating tool than emergency tariff authorities.
Lutnick, like Greer, can also launch investigations, not into unfair trade practices, but into industries that are crucial to national security. Unlike Greer’s Section 301 investigations, which focus on unfair trade practices, Lutnick’s Section 232 investigations examine whether imports threaten industries deemed critical to national security. Those investigations allowed Trump to impose tariffs if the Commerce Department determines that a strategic industry is vulnerable because of import dependence. 
The department began launching Section 232 investigations just weeks after Trump returned to office. Global Trade Alert <a href="https://globaltradealert.org/blog/s232-expanding-when-ieepa-fell">observed</a> that Section 232 “had never stopped expanding” and noted that the administration had launched, relaunched, or expanded roughly 20 actions from the section before the Supreme Court ruled against Trump&#8217;s IEEPA tariffs, suggesting the White House was already building alternative pathways for trade restrictions.
The pathway no longer available is Trump&#8217;s ability to wield tariffs during negotiations.
In January, he threatened to impose tariffs on countries that do business with Iran, citing the country’s repression of protesters, support for proxy terrorist groups, and continued pursuit of nuclear capabilities. In negotiations with China, Trump warned that tariffs would increase if China continued withholding rare earth minerals from the United States. Rare earth minerals are vital for products ranging from household appliances and automobiles to semiconductors for artificial intelligence chips.
The delay in collecting additional tariff revenue could raise budget concerns, with Trump repeatedly claiming that tariffs would help fund the extension of his 2017 tax cuts in the &#8220;Big Beautiful Bill.&#8221;

President Trump Holds “Make America Wealthy Again Event” In White House Rose Garden

Is Trump Working On A ‘Liberation Day’ Part Two?

Trade War

Trump Administration

President Donald Trump was elected on a promise to revitalize America’s heartland by reviving the manufacturing industry, which has no doubt seen a steady erosion of jobs under successive administrations. Part of Trump’s grand strategy is tariffs, including Section 232 <a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IN12519">tariffs</a> aimed at making it more expensive to import certain products from abroad, including pharmaceuticals, copper, steel, and aluminum. The legal case for 232 tariffs has been stretched to the limit, and consumers pay for it at car dealerships and in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/12/business/steel-tariffs-tin-cans-food-prices.html">grocery</a> aisles.
The White House’s central <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2026/04/trump-effect-american-manufacturing-is-roaring-back-as-factory-activity-hits-four-year-high/">claim</a> is that the steep 50% tariffs will “bring manufacturing back to America — and his [Trump’s] policies are delivering the largest reshoring wave in American history.” But the facts simply don’t bear that out.
Take steel, for example. Has U.S. domestic steel production actually increased because of the Trump administration’s tariffs on imports? Barely. In 2025, American steel production rose by just <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-steel-rebounds-under-trump-124500983.html?guccounter=1&amp;guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&amp;guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEfXMuMFy2WUizAXMyDY0C4aMmjIODFTYVz-NQQbsXlUzAL4d6Wudz5UQkADVxA4ARUdNi-A7OX3l3iPrWwOSD3jcxHdpVnZ0jEFEmIHsqeBi2bfcz7c7qgptUuHPiKzpY9X7fUjq4dPCTxndbUpr465F4Vbxyk61ofI5x0IRBTF">3%</a>. Worse still, the Tax Foundation estimates that <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-trade-war/">104,000</a> U.S. jobs have been lost in relation to Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper.
The Peterson Institute for International Economics has found that every steel job “saved” by the Trump administration’s policies has cost U.S. taxpayers<a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-ottawa-must-steel-itself-against-tariffs/"> $650,000</a>. It’s unlikely that voters who backed tariffs envisioned subsidized jobs as costly as the salaries of Wall Street executives or big-city lawyers.
The math is brutal — tariffs protect <a href="https://www.mercatus.org/economic-insights/expert-commentary/steel-and-aluminum-tariffs-do-more-harm-good">one</a> steelworker for every 80 jobs that depend on affordable steel inputs — such as the automotive, rail, and housing sectors. On the consumer side, Canadian jet ski manufacturer BRP Inc. has <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-14/sea-doo-maker-brp-gets-crushed-by-us-tariff-changes-pulls-outlook">cut</a> $353 million from its 2027 balance sheet projections due to the tariffs. Summer adventurers looking to buy or rent a Sea-Doo for the lake will inevitably pay more. The same goes for food that requires a tin can, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/12/business/steel-tariffs-tin-cans-food-prices.html#:~:text=As%20tariffs%20push%20up%20the%20cost%20of%20American%20canned%20goods%2C%20imports%20of%20foreign%20canned%20goods%20are%20rising.%20That%E2%80%99s%20in%20part%20because%20they%20benefit%20from%20a%20loophole%20that%20puts%20American%20canned%20products%20at%20a%20disadvantage%3A%20Imported%20foreign%20cans%20are%20exempt%20from%20the%20steel%20tariffs%20when%20they%20contain%20food.">squeezing domestic suppliers</a> and, perversely, benefiting foreign producers of canned food.
All of this makes Washington’s focus on production rather illogical. Slivers of good news for domestic producers of steel, aluminum, and copper can be devastating for other sectors and consumers.
Affordability is a tricky issue and continues to <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/708905/affordability-dominates-americans-financial-worries.aspx">dominate</a> voters’ concerns heading into the midterm season. The administration seems stuck between its populist promises to revive certain jobs and the reality that this means higher prices on everything from homes to a new tractor. MAGA influencer Benny Johnson <a href="https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1908235617873650101">put it this way</a>: &#8220;Losing money means nothing. Digital ones and zeroes. In the end, you won&#8217;t miss any of it. Losing your country costs you everything.&#8221;
This is the definition of a losing message. It&#8217;s also an economically illiterate one. A 50% tariff is a 50% de facto tax on the raw materials U.S. manufacturers need to supply what consumers demand.
The experience of Bremen, Indiana’s BCI Solutions Inc., is instructive. The company is a small metal foundry that sells to a range of agriculture and heavy equipment makers. CEO J.B. Brown <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-factory-headcount-falling-despite-trumps-promised-manufacturing-boom-2026-01-09/">told</a> Reuters that his workforce is down to 130 people from a high of 240 people a couple of years ago.
“Every time I hear that manufacturing is booming, I scream at the TV,” <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-factory-headcount-falling-despite-trumps-promised-manufacturing-boom-2026-01-09/">said</a> Brown.
Far from reshoring jobs, tariff policies are costing them.
Because of these policies, companies like Brown’s have seen input prices soar, making their products more expensive and thereby weakening demand. The end result is the need to lay off workers, which is exactly the opposite of the boom Trump promised would follow his protectionist tariff policies.
It’s time for Mr. Trump to put down the cudgel of tariffs, and if he wants to revive the manufacturing industry, fully rescind his Section 232 tariffs and reduce the federal government’s role in the economy. Consumers will be the first to benefit, and that will redound to the president’s benefit in November, but the clock is ticking.
***
Stephen Kent is a conservative commentator and author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/How-Force-Can-Fix-World/dp/1546000461">How The Force Can Fix The World: Lessons on Life, Liberty &amp; Happiness From a Galaxy Far, Far Away.</a> Kent is the Media Director for the Consumer Choice Center. Follow him @<a href="https://x.com/StephenKentX">StephenKentX</a>.

tariffs word on calculator screen with Invoice and export – Import declaration report.

The Trump ‘Affordability’ Policy That’s Hurting More Than It Helps

DW Opinion

Jobs

Manufacturing

Special Reporting

NEW YORK, May 8 (Reuters) &#8211; The Trump administration on Friday appealed a court ruling that found a 10% global tariff imposed in February was not justified under a 1970s trade law.
The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on Thursday in a 2-1 decision that Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act was not meant to address trade deficits that occur when the U.S. imports more goods than it exports. The court, however, only blocked the tariffs for three importers that sued &#8211; two small businesses and the state of Washington.
While the ruling applies to a set of levies due to expire in about two months, it marks another setback for Trump&#8217;s global tariff ambitions and comes a week before he is due to discuss trade tensions with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing.
It also sets the stage for another protracted legal battle over billions of dollars&#8217; worth of tariff refunds, three months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck ​down Trump&#8217;s sweeping global tariffs imposed under a national emergencies law.
Trump blamed the trade court decision on &#8220;two radical left judges&#8221; when speaking to reporters on Thursday. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on Friday the Trump administration expects to prevail in the appeal, although he also expressed confidence in earlier tariffs that were ultimately invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled in February that Trump had no authority to impose the earlier tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, leading Trump to impose replacement tariffs of 10% on all imports using Section 122 of the Trade Act.
The new tariffs were a temporary replacement, and they were due to expire on July 24 unless extended by Congress.
The Trump administration still plans to impose broader tariffs on major trading partners by invoking ⁠a third law that has withstood numerous legal challenges, Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which covers unfair trade practices. It has three Section 301 tariff investigations underway due for completion in July.
(Reporting by Dietrich Knauth; Editing by Rod Nickel and Sanjeev Miglani)

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Tariff Ruling Faces Pushback As Trump Blasts ‘Radical Left Judges’

Courts

NEW YORK, May 7 (Reuters) &#8211; The U.S. trade court on Thursday ruled against President Donald Trump&#8217;s latest 10% global tariffs, finding across-the-board tariffs were not justified under a 1970s trade law.
The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in favor of small businesses that challenged the tariffs, which took effect on February 24. The ruling was 2-1, with one judge saying it was premature to grant victory to the small business plaintiffs.
The small businesses had argued the new tariffs were an attempt to sidestep a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down the Republican president&#8217;s 2025 tariffs ​imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
In his February order, ​Trump invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows for duties for up to 150 days to correct serious &#8220;balance of payments ​deficits&#8221; or head off an imminent depreciation of the dollar.
Thursday&#8217;s court ruling found the law was not an appropriate step for the kinds of trade deficits that Trump cited in his February order.
“This decision is an important win for American companies that rely on global manufacturing to deliver safe and affordable products. Unlawful tariffs make it harder for businesses like ours to compete and grow,” said Jay Foreman, CEO of toymaker Basic Fun!
“We are encouraged by the court’s recognition that these tariffs exceeded the President’s authority. This ruling brings needed clarity and stability for companies navigating global supply chains,&#8221; he said in a statement.
The Trump administration had argued that a serious balance-of-payments deficit existed in the form of a $1.2 trillion annual U.S. goods trade deficit and a current account deficit of 4% of GDP. But some economists and trade lawyers argue the U.S. is not on the cusp of a balance-of-payments crisis, making the new duties vulnerable to a legal challenge.
(Reporting by Dietrich Knauth; Editing by Chris Reese and Sonali Paul)

Pacific Container Terminal in Long Beach, California

Court Moves Against Trump Trade Agenda In Major Ruling

Politics

WASHINGTON—A decade into his political career, Donald Trump is still finding precedents to break.
Trump hinted to reporters earlier this week that he would attend Wednesday&#8217;s Supreme Court session, sitting in the gallery as the justices hear oral arguments surrounding his executive order banning birthright citizenship.
“I’m going,” Trump said Tuesday. “I think so. I do believe.”
No sitting president has ever attended oral arguments, though they are technically permitted to do so. Trump said he was going to attend oral arguments for October&#8217;s &#8220;Liberation Day&#8221; tariffs case, but later <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/02/donald-trump-supreme-court-tariff-arguments-00633159">changed course</a>. When the High Court ruled against Trump in that case in February, the president <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/20/donald-trump-tariff-supreme-court-reaction-00791245">lashed out</a> at the justices — particularly Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, his appointees — calling them a &#8220;disgrace to our nation&#8221; and suggesting they were corrupted by foreign influences.
Trump reiterated that criticism just days ago at a dinner with the National Republican Congressional Committee.
“The Supreme Court, that’s right, of the United States cost our country — all they needed was a sentence — our country hundreds of billions of dollars, and they couldn’t care less,” <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/26/trump-supreme-court-tariffs-barrett-gorsuch-trade-ieepa-ruling.html">Trump said</a>. “They couldn’t care less.”
“They sicken me because they’re bad for our country,” Trump said, once again singling out Gorsuch and Barrett.
Whether or not this heated rhetoric means the president intends to actually attend the session remains to be seen. But Wednesday&#8217;s case, Trump v. Barbara, is at least as important to the president as the liberation day tariffs.
Shortly after returning to office last year, the president signed an executive order barring the children of illegal immigrants or foreigners with temporary visas from receiving citizenship upon birth. The order, &#8220;Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship&#8221; was swiftly challenged in a number of lawsuits arguing the order violated the 14th Amendment, which affords citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
That definition of the 14th Amendment&#8217;s guarantee of &#8220;birthright citizenship,&#8221; while commonly held, has come under scrutiny in recent years. The Claremont Institute, which filed an <a href="https://www.claremont.org/the-claremont-institute-files-amicus-brief-on-birthright-citizenship/">amicus brief</a> in support of Trump&#8217;s order, has been at the forefront of the charge to rethink the automatic granting of birthright citizenship.
&#8220;The notion that foreign nationals can secure American citizenship for their children merely by being present on U.S. soil — lawfully or unlawfully — has no basis in the text, history, or original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment,&#8221; Claremont Institute president Ryan Williams said, saying Trump&#8217;s order promoted &#8220;a constitutional understanding of citizenship — one based on consent, allegiance, and a nation’s sovereign right to define its own political community.”
Opponents say that ending birthright citizenship will be detrimental to around 150,000 children born to foreign parents on American soil every year.
While Trump could become the first president to attend oral arguments, he is not the first executive to clash with the Supreme Court.
In 1832, the Court handed down a landmark ruling on Native American rights in Worcester v. Georgia. Conventional wisdom held that President Andrew Jackson would have to intervene to ensure state governments obeyed the Court&#8217;s ruling.
Faced with this prospect, Jackson — whom Trump idolizes and whose portrait has hung in the Oval Office during both of the president&#8217;s terms — famously, though likely apocryphally, said, &#8220;John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.&#8221;
Oral arguments begin at 10:00 a.m. ET.

President Trump And First Lady Melania Trump Host Women’s History Month Event At The White House

Will Trump Be The First Sitting President To Attend Supreme Court Arguments?

birthright citizenship

Executive Orders

Illegal Immigation

Neil Gorsuch

Supreme Court

Small business owners are overwhelmingly satisfied with the Trump administration’s economic policies, with one exception: tariffs. 
A new survey the Daily Wire obtained exclusively from Echelon Insights for Advancing American Freedom found that 88% of small business owners say conditions are going “very well” or “somewhat well,” and many expect that stability to continue. Another 45% said they expect conditions to improve over the next 12 months. 
Respondents credited the permanent extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts as a key driver of their success under Trump&#8217;s second term. The poll found that 60% of small business owners said maintaining those tax cuts would help their business &#8220;a lot&#8221; or &#8220;some,&#8221; including 17% who said &#8220;a lot.&#8221; By contrast, 58% said allowing the tax cuts to expire and raising taxes would have negatively impacted their operations.
Tax relief ranked as the top policy priority, with 28% of respondents naming it as the single most helpful action Washington could take.
Tariffs, however, emerged as a major concern. According to the survey, 42% of small business owners said tariffs have increased the cost of supplies, 36% reported raising prices for customers as a result, and 26% said they had to change suppliers. When asked to name the most helpful policy change, 19% specifically called for reducing or eliminating tariffs.
Democrats have repeatedly attacked President Donald Trump’s trade policies, arguing that tariffs function as a tax on American businesses and consumers. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said, “His tariff chaos is eating away at retailers, restaurants, small businesses, and it is still estimated that these tariffs will cost thousands of dollars for each family each year.” 
Trump has acknowledged his tariffs could bring “a little pain,” a sentiment reiterated by members of his administration. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent called the tariff implementation a &#8220;detox period.” 
Vice President JD Vance framed the issue in broader economic terms.
“Incurring a huge amount of debt to buy things that other countries make for us … is not a recipe for economic prosperity, it’s not a recipe for low prices, and it’s not a recipe for good jobs for the United States of America,” Vance said. “We cannot keep going down the globalist Joe Biden pathway where we have $2 trillion of peacetime debt and deficits.”
The Trump administration says tariffs are intended to incentivize companies to bring manufacturing back to the United States, where goods would no longer be subject to import duties. But small business owners say that transition is neither simple nor immediate. 
“We can’t just move factories overnight,” <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/91337470/americas-manufacturing-revival-requires-a-marshall-plan-for-small-business-marshall-plan-small-business?utm_source=chatgpt.com">said</a> Daniel Rogge, CEO of Tormach, an industrial manufacturing equipment company. 
Others cited uncertainty as a primary obstacle. “The uncertainty is the most significant effect … People don’t want to make decisions with uncertainty,” <a href="https://www.dallasfed.org/cd/communities/2026/2602?utm_source=chatgpt.com">said</a> one wholesale trade business owner.

Small Business Owners Say Things Are Great In Trump 2.0 — But They Want One Change

Small Businesses

Tax Cuts

The across-the-board global tariff imposed by President Donald Trump took effect on Tuesday at 10%, lower than the 15% rate the president said would be implemented. 
A <a href="https://content.govdelivery.com/bulletins/gd/USDHSCBP-40b3b7b">bulletin</a> issued Tuesday by Customs and Border Protection announced an “additional 10% ad valorem duty on imported articles of every country for a period of 150 days, unless specifically exempt.” The notice comes just days after Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-hikes-his-new-tariffs-to-15-after-complete-review-of-scotus-decision?author=Mary+Margaret+Olohan&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Blasts+Past+Original+Tariff+Vow+After+Supreme+Court+Ruling">said</a> that he would raise the global tariff rate to 15% “effective immediately.” 
“Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday, after MANY months of contemplation, by the United States Supreme Court, please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been ‘ripping’ the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level,&#8221; Trump wrote on Truth Social. 
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/friendly-fire?utm_campaign=dwplus&amp;utm_content=20260224_sotu_aa_desktop&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=banner" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Watch the State of the Union with The Daily Wire! Live coverage from the nation&#8217;s capital begins at 7:45 ET.</a>
A White House official <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-global-tariff-start-10-percent-despite-announcement-15-percent-rcna260369">told</a> NBC News that the rate would start at 10% while officials prepare a separate executive order to increase it to 15%. The Daily Wire has reached out to the White House for clarification on the tariff rates. 
The Customs and Border Protection bulletin cited an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/imposing-a-temporary-import-surcharge-to-address-fundamental-international-payments-problems/">executive order</a> Trump signed Friday after the Supreme Court struck down his &#8220;Liberation Day” tariffs, which had been imposed under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). 

“I find that a surcharge in the form of ad valorem duties on certain imports is required to deal with the United States’ large and serious balance-of-payments deficit,” Trump wrote. “Accordingly, I impose, for a period of 150 days, a temporary import surcharge of 10 percent ad valorem, as described below, on articles imported into the United States, effective February 24, 2026.”
Products exempt from the tariffs include certain critical minerals, metals used in currency, energy and energy products, certain agricultural products, pharmaceuticals, certain electronics, and some passenger vehicles. 
These tariffs were imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which authorizes the president to address “certain fundamental international payment problems through surcharges and other special import restrictions.”
The Supreme Court ruling has led to uncertainty surrounding Trump’s broader economic agenda. On Monday, the European Union <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/eu-pauses-trade-deal-after-trump-warns-countries-not-to-play-games?topStoryPosition=undefined&amp;author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=1&amp;rowHeadline=Top+Stories&amp;rowType=Top+Stories&amp;title=EU+Pauses+Trade+Deal+After+Trump+Warns+Countries+Not+To+‘Play+Games’">moved</a> to pause adoption of a trade deal with the United States that had been negotiated under Trump’s IEEPA tariffs.

President Trump Holds Press Briefing On Supreme Court’s Decision To Strike Down His Global Tariffs

Trump’s Global Tariffs Kick In At Lower Rate Than Expected

Customs and Border Protection (CPB)

trade

President Donald Trump ripped into the Supreme Court again on Monday over its decision to strike down most of his “Liberation Day” tariffs, saying he would continue to use other tools to implement his economic agenda. 
“The supreme court (will be using lower case letters for a while based on a complete lack of respect!) of the United States accidentally and unwittingly gave me, as President of the United States, far more powers and strength than I had prior to their ridiculous, dumb, and very internationally divisive ruling,” Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/116119857222583140">wrote</a> on Truth Social. 
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled 6-3 that Trump could not use the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad-scale tariffs on countries across the globe. On Saturday, Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-hikes-his-new-tariffs-to-15-after-complete-review-of-scotus-decision?author=Mary+Margaret+Olohan&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Up+Next&amp;rowType=Up+Next+Carousel&amp;title=Trump+Hikes+His+New+Tariffs+To+15%25+After+%E2%80%98Complete+Review%E2%80%99+Of+SCOTUS+Decision">signed</a> a global 15% tariff on all countries under the Trade Act of 1974. 
Trump suggested Monday that he would impose licensing requirements on foreign goods entering the United States. 
“For one thing, I can use Licenses to do absolutely ‘terrible’ things to foreign countries, especially those countries that have been RIPPING US OFF for many decades, but incomprehensibly, according to the ruling, can’t charge them a License fee — BUT ALL LICENSES CHARGE FEES, why can’t the United States do so? You do a license to get a fee! The opinion doesn’t explain that, but I know the answer!” Trump said. 
The president added that the Supreme Court should be “ashamed” of the tariff ruling, except for the three justices who dissented. Justice Brett Kavanaugh <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kavanaugh-trump-has-other-legal-paths-to-keep-tariffs-in-place-despite-scotus-ruling?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Kavanaugh+Lays+Out+How+Trump+Could+Recreate+Tariffs+Through+Other+Laws">authored</a> the dissenting opinion, which was joined by conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. 
“Our incompetent supreme court (sic) did a great job for the wrong people, and for that they should be ashamed of themselves (but not the Great Three!),” Trump said. 
The president also suggested that the Supreme Court might next strike down his executive actions to prevent the children of illegal immigrants or foreigners with temporary visas from receiving citizenship upon birth in the United States. Trump said that striking down his actions would benefit China. 
“This supreme court (sic) will find a way to come to the wrong conclusion, one that again will make China, and various other Nations, happy and rich,” Trump said. “Let our supreme court (sic) keep making decisions that are so bad and deleterious to the future of our Nation &#8211; I have a job to do.”

President Trump And The First Lady Host Governor’s Dinner In East Room Of White House

‘A Great Job For The Wrong People’: Trump Renews Attack On SCOTUS’s ‘Incompetent’ Tariff Ruling

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced on Saturday that he will hike his worldwide tariffs to 15% after a &#8220;complete review&#8221; of the Supreme Court decision blocking his tariffs on Friday.
&#8220;Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday, after MANY months of contemplation, by the United States Supreme Court, please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been &#8216;ripping&#8217; the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level,&#8221; said Trump in a Saturday morning Truth Social post.
The president added: &#8220;During the next short number of months, the Trump Administration will determine and issue the new and legally permissible Tariffs, which will continue our extraordinarily successful process of Making America Great Again &#8211; GREATER THAN EVER BEFORE!!!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NEW: President Trump is raising the 10% worldwide tariff to the &#8220;fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/0JsJDqLsh2">pic.twitter.com/0JsJDqLsh2</a>
— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaryMargOlohan/status/2025242938624589857?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2026</a></blockquote>
The White House clarified on Friday that Trump is levying the tariffs by invoking his authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, empowering him to address “certain fundamental international payment problems through surcharges and other special import restrictions.&#8221; The initial White House proclamation imposed a 10% ad valorem import duty on all articles imported into the U.S. for 150 days, taking effect February 24 at 12:01 a.m.
“By taking this action, the United States can stem the outflow of its dollars to foreign producers and incentivize the return of domestic production,” a White House fact sheet explains. “By increasing its domestic production, the United States can correct its balance-of-payments deficit, while also creating good-paying jobs, and lowering costs for consumers.”
<div id="attachment_1047745" style="width: 886px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-hikes-his-new-tariffs-to-15-after-complete-review-of-scotus-decision/trumps-global-tariffs-struck-down-by-us-supreme-court" rel="attachment wp-att-1047745"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1047745" class="wp-image-1047745 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-876x576.jpg" alt="" width="876" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-876x576.jpg 876w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-300x197.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-768x505.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 876px) 100vw, 876px" /></a>President Donald Trump imposed a 10% global tariff on foreign goods, moving quickly to preserve his trade agenda after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down many of the levies he imposed last year. Photographer: Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
Trump&#8217;s actions come after the Supreme Court struck down his reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries in a 6-3 decision on Friday, saying that the president does not have the authority to impose those broad-scale tariffs.
Trump, in a White House press briefing on Friday and in subsequent social media posts, said repeatedly that he is “ashamed” of the Supreme Court justices who ruled against him for “not having the Courage to do what is right for our Country.”
On the other hand, the president has repeatedly praised the justices who ruled in his favor.
&#8220;My new hero is United States Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and, of course, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito,&#8221; he posted on Saturday morning. &#8220;There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that they want to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!&#8221;

President Donald Trump

Trump Blasts Past Original Tariff Vow After Supreme Court Ruling

U.S. President Donald Trump will travel to China from March 31 to April 2 for a highly anticipated meeting between the leaders of the world&#8217;s two biggest economies, a trip announced as the Supreme Court overturned Trump&#8217;s sweeping tariffs on imported goods.
A White House official confirmed the trip on Friday, just before the highest U.S. court dealt Trump a stinging defeat by striking down many of the tariffs he has used in a global trade war, including some against rival China.
Trump&#8217;s talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping on an extended visit to Beijing had been expected to revolve around extending a trade truce that kept both countries from further hiking tariffs.
But the Supreme Court&#8217;s reversal created new questions for tense U.S.-China relations that had recently stabilized after Trump trimmed tariffs on Chinese goods, in exchange for measures from Beijing, including cracking down on the illicit fentanyl trade and pausing export restrictions on critical minerals.
Twenty-percent tariffs on China&#8217;s U.S.-bound exports were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, which the court ruled Trump had overstepped. Those tariffs were tied to national emergencies related to fentanyl distribution and trade imbalances.
Other duties on Chinese goods, including those implemented under legislated trade authorities known as Section 301 and Section 232, remain in place.
It was not immediately clear how many of the tariffs Trump would restore, but he told a press conference that he would impose a new 10% global tariff for 150 days.
Trump&#8217;s last trip to China, in 2017, was the most recent by a U.S. president.
&#8220;That&#8217;s going to be a wild one,&#8221; Trump told foreign leaders visiting Washington on Thursday about the upcoming China visit. &#8220;We have to put on the biggest display you&#8217;ve ever had in the history of China.&#8221;
The Chinese embassy in Washington declined to comment on the dates of the trip, which were first reported by Reuters. Beijing has not confirmed the trip.
The Trump administration has said the global tariffs were necessary because of national emergencies related to trade imbalances that have weakened U.S. manufacturing.
Trump had already been &#8220;playing defense&#8221; in the trade war, given the effectiveness of Beijing&#8217;s threat to cut off rare earths, said Scott Kennedy, a China economics expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. The tariff defeat likely &#8220;cements his weakness in their eyes,&#8221; he said.
Chinese officials &#8220;like the direction of travel of the bilateral relationship in which the U.S. is diminished and they want to keep things from re-escalating,&#8221; Kennedy said.
Trump&#8217;s visit will be the leaders&#8217; first in-person talks since an October meeting in South Korea, where they agreed on the trade truce.
While the October meeting largely sidestepped the sensitive issue of Taiwan, Xi raised U.S. arms sales to the island when the two leaders spoke this month.
China views democratically governed Taiwan as its own territory, a position Taipei rejects. The U.S., bound by law to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself, has formal diplomatic ties with China, but it maintains unofficial ties with Taiwan and is the island&#8217;s most important arms supplier.
Washington announced its largest-ever arms sale approval with Taiwan in December, including $11.1 billion in weapons that could ostensibly be used to defend against a Chinese attack. Taiwan expects more such sales.
Xi also said during the February call that he would consider further increasing soybean purchases, according to Trump. Struggling U.S. farmers are a major political constituency for Trump, and China is the top soybean consumer. Analysts said on Friday that China may be less likely to follow through on another big purchase of U.S. soybeans after the Supreme Court ruling.
Although Trump has justified hawkish policy steps from Canada to Greenland and Venezuela as necessary to thwart China, he has eased policy toward Beijing in the past several months in areas from tariffs to advanced computer chips and drones.
The global trade war Trump initiated after he began his second term as president in January 2025 has alienated other trading partners, including allies.
Critics had argued that imposing steep tariffs on countries across the board actually insulated Beijing from the tariff barrage and reduced incentives to move supply chains out of China.
Friday&#8217;s ruling could indirectly increase pressure on Beijing if the effective tariff rates on other countries, particularly in Southeast Asia, fall more than those on China, said Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute of International Economics.
&#8220;Unlike with many other countries, there is a well-established, much more legally durable mechanism for most of the tariffs on China that make them less affected than those on other countries,&#8221; Chorzempa said.
(Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt and Michael Martina; Additional reporting by Katharine Jackson; Editing by Andrei Khalip, Colleen Jenkins, Rod Nickel, Patricia Zengerle)

Menu