[Global Times reporter Ni Hao] The U.S. government's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs on foreign countries was once again found illegal. The US media believe that this ruling is a heavy blow to the Trump administration's radical trade policy, and the judicial disputes and differences of opinion around tariff policy in the United States will still bring great uncertainty to international trade. After the announcement of the ruling, US President Trump refused to recognize it and announced that he would appeal to the Supreme Court. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) said that this ruling raised an unavoidable question, that is, whether the previous trade agreement reached with the United States is still valid?

US Federal Court of Appeals upholds verdict

Public reports show that after taking office in January this year, the Trump administration invoked the U.S. International Emergency Economic Powers Act and introduced a series of tariff increases by directly issuing executive orders without congressional approval. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that the move was illegal. Subsequently, the Trump administration filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On August 29, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit voted 7 - 4 to uphold the previous ruling of the International Trade Court, finding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not grant Trump the power to implement "fentanyl tariffs" and "reciprocal tariffs."

The court ruling shows that tariffs are a core power of Congress. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act authorizes the president to enact certain economic measures in emergencies to respond to "extraordinary and extraordinary threats." It grants the president the power to regulate imports, but does not mean it authorizes the president to impose tariffs by issuing executive orders. The U.S."Political News Network" mentioned that in the past 50 years, U.S. presidents have often invoked this law introduced in 1977 to impose economic sanctions on other countries, but no president has previously used the law to impose external tariffs.

The ruling will not take effect until October 14, allowing the Trump administration to appeal it to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump criticized the Court of Appeal for being "extremely partisan" after the verdict was announced, claiming that the ruling was a "disaster" for the United States and that "if allowed to stand, this decision will completely destroy the United States."

Several ministers warn of ¡°destructive¡± consequences

According to U.S. media reports, the Trump administration pursuant to article 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act implemented steel and aluminum tariffs, car tariffs are not affected by this decision. data from the U.S. Treasury Department shows that in February to July this year, the Trump administration imposed about $107 billion in tariffs, of which a considerable part was imposed by citing the International Emergency Economic Power Act, the withdrawal of this part of the tariffs could mean "financial collapse".

According to Bloomberg News, in a statement submitted to the court on August 29th, cabinet ministers of the Trump administration asked the court to immediately suspend any ruling against the government until the Supreme Court makes a final ruling, otherwise it will bring "devastating and terrible consequences". U.S. Treasury Secretary Bescent and Secretary of State rubio warned that ruling that the president's tariff policy is illegal would "cause serious diplomatic embarrassment", make months of negotiations with the European Union, Japan, South Korea and other regions come to naught, and may prompt other countries to take retaliatory measures. U.S. Commerce Secretary Lutnick said that the unfavorable ruling would "send a signal to the world that the United States lacks the determination to defend its own economy and national security".

According to the BBC, the Federal Court of Appeal¡¯s ruling is not only a major setback to the core agenda of the Trump administration, but could also have a direct impact on the U.S. economy and a chain response to global markets. The report said that trade partners who are about to draft terms of specific trade agreements with the U.S. may consider whether U.S. tariffs have legal effect and if the Supreme Court overturns the Federal Court of Appeal¡¯s ruling, it will set a precedent to encourage the president to use the law more radically.

Negotiations with many countries continue.

According to the information of China Thai Securities Statistics, the United States has announced that it has reached trade agreements with the United Kingdom, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea, Japan, the European Union and other countries and regions, but the announcement is a summary of the trade agreement, and the final agreement is still to be announced after the details.

Starting from August 27, the additional tariffs imposed by the United States on India increased to 50%. Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry Goyal said on August 29 that India will not "give in" but will focus on opening up new markets. Indian officials revealed that New Delhi has no plans for retaliation. Brazil, which has also been imposed by the United States with tariffs of up to 50%, has initiated procedures related to the Economic Parity Act. President Lula said that although Brazil has begun to prepare for countermeasures, it still hopes to resolve the dispute through negotiations.

Trade negotiations with U.S. allies continue. According to the Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Ryosei Akazawa, Japan's chief trade negotiator, suddenly canceled his trip to the United States on August 27th, allegedly because he was dissatisfied with the executive order of the US President, including Japan's plan to purchase more American rice and reduce tariffs on agricultural products. Japan's Kyodo News has learned that the Japanese and American governments have begun to write documents, and intend to simultaneously issue special measures to reduce the burden of "reciprocal tariffs" on Japan and a presidential executive order to reduce automobile tariffs.

The European Union Commission released a draft law on August 28 to reduce the import tariffs of all US industrial products to zero, hoping to reduce the European Union auto import tariffs in exchange for the United States, but the European Parliament has opposed it, criticizing the European Union for unilateral concessions to please the United States.