President Donald Trump has issued a stern warning to countries "playing games" with recent trade deals. This follows a Supreme Court decision that blocked many of his previously imposed tariffs.

Get the latest headlines in your email

In response, countries are reassessing their trade arrangements. The European Union announced the suspension of a deal ratified over the summer, while India postponed talks to finalize a separate agreement.

On Truth Social, Trump warned that countries exploiting the ruling might encounter even higher tariffs. The Supreme Court decision overturned his tariffs from the previous year, imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, citing that the law did not authorize such measures.

Trump reacted by proposing a new 15% global tariff, replacing the initial 10%. This new tariff, set to take effect Tuesday, exempts some products. However, it has left many countries uncertain about deals negotiated following his initial tariff measures. These deals often included lower levies in exchange for promises to facilitate American businesses abroad.

The UK is actively seeking clarity on its trade agreement with the US, previously setting tariffs at 10%. UK Business and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle expressed concerns about the current uncertainty and assured that "all options" are being considered to protect UK interests.

Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament's International Trade Committee, noted the suspension of deal ratification between the US and EU, highlighting increased uncertainty.

The White House maintains its stance on trade, leveraging other legal avenues to continue imposing tariffs. Trump employed Section 122 to temporarily impose tariffs without Congressional approval, and launched investigations under Section 301, targeting specific unfair trade practices.

These new tariffs will coexist alongside others on items like steel, aluminum, and cars, unaffected by the court ruling. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated that the core of US trade policy remains unchanged, despite shifts in legal mechanisms.

The uncertainty has impacted financial markets, leading to a 1% drop in the S&P 500. This is partly due to the ongoing trade uncertainty, which analysts expect to persist.

The 15% tariffs are scheduled to expire after 150 days unless extended by Congress. However, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has pledged to oppose any efforts to extend them. Schumer criticized Trump's economic strategies as detrimental.

Despite this, Trump maintains that congressional approval is not required for tariff implementation, asserting his authority to continue his trade agenda.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

  Adapted by ASEAN Now · Source · 23 Feb 2026

View full article

As we communicated on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that tariffs cannot be applied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). We are writing to inform you the collection of duties under IEEPA will end effective 12:01 a.m. ET, February 24, 2026. Duties imposed pursuant to IEEPA under the following presidential actions, including all modifications and amendments, will no longer be in effect and will no longer be collected for goods entered for consumption or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 24, 2026. More specifically, the following tariffs will no longer apply: ● 35% tariff imposed against goods originating from Canada under Executive Order 14193, Imposing Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border, 90 Fed. Reg. 9113 (Feb. 1, 2025). ● 25% tariff imposed against goods originating from Mexico under Executive Order 14194, Imposing Duties To Address the Situation at Our Southern Border, 90 Fed. Reg. 9117 (Feb. 1, 2025). ● 10% tariff imposed against goods originating from China under Executive Order 14195, Imposing Duties To Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People's Republic of China, 90 Fed. Reg. 9121 (Feb. 1, 2025). ● 25% tariff imposed against products originating from any country that imports oil from Venezuela under Executive Order 14245, Imposing Tariffs on Countries Importing Venezuelan Oil; 90 Fed. Reg. 13829 (Mar. 24, 2025). ● Baseline 10% “reciprocal” tariff (in some cases a higher tariff rate) imposed on all goods imported into the U.S. irrespective of origin under Executive Order 14257, Regulating Imports With a Reciprocal Tariff To Rectify Trade Practices That Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits, 90 Fed. Reg. 15041 (Apr. 2, 2025). ● 40% “free speech” tariff imposed on goods originating from Brazil under Executive Order 14323, Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Brazil, 90 Fed. Reg. 37739 (July 30, 2025); and ● 25% tariff on goods originating in India (already rescinded previously) under Executive Order 14329, Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of the Russian Federation, 90 Fed. Reg. 38701 (Aug. 6, 2025), as amended.

Refund on duties already paid At this time, there is no official guidance with respect to refunds on duties paid under IEEPA. The administration of IEEPA refunds will be determined by the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), which is currently reviewing the matter.  We recognize you have many questions about refunds and the refund process. We are committed to communicating with you in a timely manner as soon as official guidance becomes available. However, at this time, there remain many unknowns. In the interim, we encourage you to begin reviewing your trade-compliance data to understand how the removal of IEEPA duties from tariff stacking affects your duty obligations, declaration information and requisite documentation at time of entry into the commerce of the United States. Other tariffs still in effect It is important to note that the removal of IEEPA tariffs does not apply to tariffs imposed under different legal statutes, such as Section 232 of the Trade Act of 1962 or Section 301 of the Trade act of 1974. Numerous tariffs have been imposed under Section 232 over the course of the past year, including (but not limited to) tariffs on steel, aluminum, steel and aluminum derivatives, copper, wood, automobiles, auto parts, and more. It is important to understand whether your products are subject to tariffs under Section 232 or only under IEEPA, as tariffs imposed under Section 232 will continue to be applied. Potential future tariffs being reviewed Section 301 tariffs can be imposed after legislative due diligence on products from countries seen to be engaging in unfair or unlawful trade practices.  While the current U.S. administration has not imposed tariffs under Section 301, tariffs were imposed against China under Section 301 by the first Trump administration and later expanded by the Biden administration.  In addition, the current administration has numerous Section 301 investigations running concurrently and there is a possibility that additional Section 301 tariffs may be imposed in the coming weeks and months. Section 301 tariffs can be imposed on specific products coming from a specific country or can apply to a broad range of products from a specific country.  Additional Section 232 investigations that could potentially (though not necessarily) lead to tariff actions are also currently underway.

Nothing hurts a narcissist more being ridiculed for his seemingly ingenious idea that ends up backfiring. The response is usually doubling down and blaming others. He should be more worried about his future past the mid-term.

As per usual,anything the grifter touches he screws up. What a loser this clown actually is. Cannot wait until thi s idiots time is over,all the building s and plaques with this morons name will all be torn down and back to the original state.

... AND they're OFF!

FedEx sues Trump administration for tariff refunds after Supreme Court ruling

The shipping company said it was owed refunds for any tariffs it paid under a rule the high court found exceeded the president's authority.

"Accordingly ... Plaintiffs seek for themselves a full refund from Defendants of all IEEPA duties Plaintiffs have paid to the United States," lawyers for FedEx wrote in the lawsuit, lodged at the Customs and Border Protection Agency in the U.S. Court of International Trade.

FedEx says that when tariffs were in effect under the IEEPA law, it imported goods from countries subject to the duties. It says it "paid IEEPA duties to the United States and thus [has] suffered injury caused by those orders."

FedEx's suit appears to be the first refund case brought by a major corporation since the Supreme Court's ruling Friday. But several cases had already been filed in the specialized international trade court.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/fedex-sues-trump-over-tariff-refunds-rcna260350

sounds of the wheels coming off...

He could have accept the court rulings, backed off the tariffs and save his party's annihilation at mid-term. He could even blame the court for not being able to fulfil his pledge to use tariffs. But his malignant narcissism surrounded by his grifting sycophants have refused to accept any defeat and he has become a even more dangerous man to US and the world. Trump is now vowing to avenge his most damaging loss of his term by going after the judges and promising even higher tariffs on imports. Now there are new uncertainties for the business and consumers and more alienation and distrust from allies, Trump need to go before he cause severe damage to the US economy for years to come.

Interestingly enough, Trump team acknowledged last year that Section 122 may not be applicable to trade deficit, in a court filling!

"It said that Section 122 didn’t “have any obvious application here, where the concerns the President identified in declaring an emergency arise from trade deficits, which are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”

Also interesting:

"That’s because Section 122 later refers separately to “balance-of-trade surpluses” — and offers different authorities for that scenario. The fact that it refers to “balance-of-payments” and “balance-of-trade” separately suggests the drafters of the law viewed them as distinct from one another."

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/23/politics/donald-trump-tariff-difficulties-section-122

Trump is the very definition of both a one-trick pony and an absolutely empty suit. This man does not possess one nanogram of creativity in his entire wretched, toxic body, all he talks about is tariffs, tariffs, tariffs, you would think by now he would have figured out that these threats just don't amount to much, since he's a coward and he's always backing down anyway. But he really does not have the creative Juice to figure out any of this stuff. And I guess since he is becoming less relevant by the day, it doesn't really matter. We all just have to learn to ignore the nonsense.

So, continuing his illegal ways. He doesn't help his case by often saying he is imposing the tariffs to 'punish' this person or that person, this country or that country--usually for something he didn't like. Not liking a person or a country does not equate to an 'emergency'.

Donald Trump is unwell.

His handlers should give him a colouring book and crayons and say “Mr President sit here and call us when you need your diaper changed or when you want a cheeseburger “.

Trouble is that there are no grown ups left in the White House capable of steadying the ship.

Interesting times ahead.

Go, Trump, Go!

I want to see 150% tariffs on Chinese RAM to the USA.

This will send more DRAM and SSD memory my way.

The US needs higher tariffs.

American consumers understandably do not like higher tariffs.

If left to their own devices, American consumers will consume their way into oblivion.

Americans, during the past 100 years, have not been taught, nor do they understand, self control.

Bunch of losers.

Those who are unable to practice self-control will not suceed.

Bunch of Blue-Collar workers that insist on being paid, weekly, on Fridays, instead of...

Annually.

No self respect.

1 hour ago, Red Forever said:

Interesting times ahead.

I think you meant to say "dangerous times ahead"!

7 hours ago, JerryM said:

FedEx's suit appears to be the first refund case brought by a major corporation since the Supreme Court's ruling Friday.

Probably, UPS will follow as well.

11 hours ago, ASEAN NOW News said:

President Donald Trump has issued a stern warning to countries "playing games" with recent trade deals.

Have there actually been any "deals" ratified by relevant government bodies?

"Seems every one of these "trade deals" turns out to be nothing more than a public relations announcement claiming success, while only providing an "agreed framework for further negotiations in pursuit of an eventual trade deal."

1 hour ago, scottiejohn said:

I think you meant to say "dangerous times ahead"!

Actually, no, and...He is correct.

In China, it is always interesting times, and not dangerous times.

Those in China or interested in Asia know the origin of this sentiment.

7 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

He could have accept the court rulings, backed off the tariffs and save his party's annihilation at mid-term. He could even blame the court for not being able to fulfil his pledge to use tariffs. But his malignant narcissism surrounded by his grifting sycophants have refused to accept any defeat and he has become a even more dangerous man to US and the world. Trump is now vowing to avenge his most damaging loss of his term by going after the judges and promising even higher tariffs on imports. Now there are new uncertainties for the business and consumers and more alienation and distrust from allies, Trump need to go before he cause severe damage to the US economy for years to come.

Not only that there’s a strong possibility that if he backed off prices would start coming down and make things more affordable…..perhaps it’s a blessing that he’s trying to milk the grift a bit longer we don’t want this abomination starting to gain popularity again!