Trump raises global import tariff to 15% for 150 days

Let’s slow the headlines down. On Friday 20 February 2026, the US Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that President Trump’s earlier round of global tariffs, imposed under emergency powers, went beyond what the law allowed. Within hours, the White House said a new 10% import charge would start on Tuesday 24 February. On Saturday 21 February, Mr Trump said he would raise that to 15% using a different law. The key number to hold in your head: 150 days. That is the legal ceiling for this temporary tariff without Congress stepping in. (pwc.com)

Here is what’s firm and what’s fuzzy. Firm: a 10% surcharge was scheduled to begin at 12:01 a.m. (Washington time) on Tuesday 24 February, running through to about 24 July 2026 unless Congress extends it. Fuzzy: Mr Trump’s Saturday post said the rate would be 15% “effective immediately”, but officials had not clarified the paperwork or exact start time for the higher rate by Sunday. Treat the 15% as the administration’s plan, with final implementation details still being set. (business-standard.com)

What this means in plain English: most goods shipped into the United States could face a 15% import charge on top of normal customs duties, for a limited window. Early signals suggest carve‑outs for some critical minerals, certain medicines and a handful of strategic products, but the full exemption list is not yet public. Expect updates as agencies publish guidance. (ft.com)

Why the switch in legal footing matters. The court struck down the earlier tariffs because the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) doesn’t clearly allow a president to levy taxes like tariffs; that power rests with Congress. The administration has now turned to Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which explicitly allows a temporary, across‑the‑board surcharge of up to 15% for up to 150 days in a balance‑of‑payments crunch. It’s fast, time‑limited, and-until now-unused. (pwc.com)

The politics are raw. The 6–3 ruling featured Chief Justice John Roberts and two Trump appointees in the majority. Mr Trump called the decision “anti‑American” and doubled down on tariffs as part of a re‑industrialisation push. European leaders, including France’s Emmanuel Macron and Germany’s Friedrich Merz, have warned that uncertainty around shifting tariffs is harmful and say any response should be based on reciprocity, not unilateral moves. (apnews.com)

Quick Q&A for students and small firms: Who actually pays a tariff? Importers do at the border, and costs often pass through to shoppers over time. That’s why retailers and business groups cheered the court’s decision and are now urging fast refunds where duties were ruled unlawful. The National Retail Federation wants a “seamless process” for repayments; the US Chamber of Commerce has made similar calls. (washingtonpost.com)

Do other US tariffs still apply? Yes. Sector‑specific measures made under separate laws-like national‑security tariffs on steel, aluminium and vehicles-continue unless changed separately. The administration has also flagged further case‑by‑case actions under Section 301, which target specific countries or practices after an investigation. Think of the new 15% as a temporary “baseline” layered over a patchwork of existing duties. (whitehouse.gov)

What about the UK (and Australia)? Britain previously negotiated a 10% ceiling on many goods, but Washington has signalled that the new across‑the‑board surcharge would supersede bespoke caps for the next 150 days. Downing Street says it expects the UK’s “privileged trading position” to continue while officials work through the details. UK deals covering civil aerospace, some auto trade and pharmaceuticals were set via different channels and are not directly altered by Friday’s court ruling, though the Section 122 surcharge could still bite if applied broadly. (theguardian.com)

Where refunds stand. The Supreme Court did not order repayments; that job now moves to lower courts, likely starting with the Court of International Trade. Senator Maria Cantwell has pressed the Treasury on plans to reimburse businesses, and industry groups say quick refunds would support growth. Expect litigation and administrative guidance over months, not days. (cantwell.senate.gov)

Does any of this shrink America’s trade deficit? Not so far. New data show the US goods gap widened to a record-around $1.2 trillion in 2025-even with higher tariffs in place, driven by strong demand and shifting supply chains toward Taiwan, Mexico and Vietnam. Tariffs can redirect trade, but they haven’t eliminated the overall deficit. (washingtonpost.com)

Timeline you can teach from: Friday 20 February 2026-Supreme Court rules IEEPA tariffs unlawful. Friday evening-White House says a 10% global tariff will begin Tuesday 24 February under Section 122. Saturday 21 February-Mr Trump says the rate will be raised to 15%, the legal maximum for this short‑term tool. Over the next 150 days-Congressional engagement is required to extend any surcharge beyond late July. (apnews.com)

What to watch next in class or briefing notes. Look for a formal proclamation or Federal Register notice that sets the precise rate, start time and exemptions for the 15% plan; agency guidance on how it interacts with sectoral tariffs; and court filings that map the route to refunds. Also track any new Section 301 investigations, which could replace the temporary blanket rate with targeted duties. (ft.com)

Glossary-IEEPA. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (1977) lets a president regulate certain economic transactions during a declared emergency. The Supreme Court has now said it does not clearly authorise imposing tariffs, which are taxes Congress controls. (pwc.com)

Glossary-Section 122 (Trade Act of 1974). A rarely referenced clause allowing a temporary, nondiscriminatory import surcharge of up to 15% for no more than 150 days, tied to balance‑of‑payments problems or dollar pressure. To run longer, Congress must act. (congress.gov)

Glossary-Section 232. A national‑security tool that lets the president adjust imports (including via tariffs) if they threaten to impair US security. Current steel, aluminium and some vehicle measures sit here and are unaffected by Friday’s ruling. (whitehouse.gov)

Glossary-Section 301. A trade‑enforcement tool directed by the US Trade Representative to respond to “unreasonable or discriminatory” foreign practices after an investigation. It can result in targeted tariffs and may be used to replace the blanket surcharge. (congress.gov)

Classroom note-reading the numbers. You will see very large sums attached to “tariff refunds”. Business groups cite roughly $130bn+ collected under the now‑invalidated IEEPA tariffs. Any refund process will run through the trade courts, not the Supreme Court, and is likely to take time. (wsj.com)