Trump Imposes Global Tariffs of 10% on Imports for 150 Days
On Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order mandating a comprehensive 10% tariff on imports from all countries, set to last for a temporary period of 150 days. This decision is part of his administration’s broader effort to recalibrate trade policy.
The White House, in an official statement, announced that the new tariffs will come into effect starting February 24. The decision falls within the powers granted to the president under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, allowing him to take extraordinary measures to address significant imbalances in international payments through additional taxes or restrictions on imports.
In a statement on his platform, Truth Social, Trump expressed his “pride” in signing the order, confirming that the tariffs will be implemented almost immediately.
According to official data, these temporary tariffs will not apply to a number of products, including critical metals, energy products, certain agricultural goods, pharmaceuticals, and specific types of electronics and automotive components, as well as items related to the aviation sector and information technology.
Additionally, the president directed the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to activate its authority under Section 301 to investigate what he described as “unreasonable and discriminatory” trade practices affecting the U.S. economy.
This decision comes amid a complex legal backdrop, as the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling the same day rejecting comprehensive tariffs previously imposed by Trump on foreign imports, stating that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose such tariffs.
Trump has relied on tariffs as a key tool in his trade policy since returning to the White House. He previously imposed “reciprocal” duties on most of the United States’ trading partners, including China, Canada, and Mexico, before the court ruled in May 2025 that such actions surpassed his legal authority.
Despite this, the U.S. administration has continued its legal efforts to defend these policies, arguing that restricting the president’s powers in this domain could harm diplomatic initiatives and limit foreign economic policy tools.
