【By Observer News, Wang Kaiwen】The trade war launched by US President Trump against the world has triggered a series of legal challenges within the United States. Previously, several judges of the US Supreme Court have questioned the legality of his tariff policies.
Bloomberg reported on November 22 that the Trump administration is secretly preparing a backup plan in case the Supreme Court overturns its main tariff powers, so it can quickly adopt other measures to continue collecting tariffs.
According to informed US officials, the "B Plan" researched by the US Department of Commerce and the Office of the US Trade Representative includes using the US Trade Act of 1974, Sections 301 and 122, which grant the president the power to impose tariffs unilaterally.
However, the report points out that these alternative measures carry risks; they are slower to implement, cover a more limited scope, and face similar legal challenges. For the US government, the best outcome would be to win the current lawsuit directly. Trump has repeatedly urged the judges to maintain the tariffs he implemented based on an "economic emergency."
In February this year, the Trump administration imposed tariffs on products imported from Canada, Mexico, and China under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), and on April 2, it imposed so-called "reciprocal tariffs" on all trading partners under the same law. American companies affected by Trump's tariff policy and 12 US states previously filed a lawsuit, questioning the legality of the policy.
Earlier, the US court ruled that Trump had no right to invoke the IEEPA to impose tariffs on multiple countries, and the Trump administration then appealed to the US Supreme Court.
Currently, among the nine Supreme Court justices, six are conservative and three are liberal. However, at the hearing held on November 5, not only did the three liberal justices question Trump's tariff policy, but at least three conservative justices also expressed doubts.
Bloomberg pointed out that the Trump administration's preparation of a "B Plan" shows that it is already preparing for a possible loss, and also shows its determination to collect tariffs even if it uses untested methods.
On March 26, 2025, local time, US President Trump signed an executive order in Washington, D.C., announcing tariffs on imported cars. Oriental IC
A US government official who did not want to reveal their name said that regardless of the court's ruling, tariffs will remain a core part of Trump's economic agenda.
"We are waiting for the ruling, we hope the result will be good, but if it is not, we will find a way - we always find a way," Trump said on the 19th.
The White House declined to comment on the details of its preparatory work, but admitted it was seeking "new methods" to continue Trump's trade policy.
"President Trump is exercising the emergency tariff powers granted by Congress to the executive branch according to law, and the government is confident of winning at the Supreme Court," said White House spokesperson Kush Dasai. "The government has been looking for new ways to address the historic trade deficit in goods and bring manufacturing back to the country and economy that are crucial to national and economic security."
It is currently unclear when the US Supreme Court will rule. The judges may maintain the tariffs, completely overturn them, or take a more targeted approach; the ruling could also bring further uncertainty for businesses and governments around the world.
The report stated that the core issue of the case is the use of the IEEPA by the Trump administration. According to estimates by Bloomberg Economics, the overall effective tariff rate on imported goods in the United States is currently about 14.4%, with more than half coming from tariffs imposed under the IEEPA.
Economists expect that even if the Supreme Court cancels the tariffs based on the "national" category, most tariffs will eventually be collected in some other way.
"My expectation is that they will immediately take action to restore the tariffs," said Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute, an American think tank. "They will basically put everything together."
Bloomberg noted that the so-called "B Plan" of the Trump administration has been used in certain cases, such as the US announcement in July of an investigation into Brazil under the 301 clause. Similarly, the same method was used by Trump during his first term against certain Chinese goods. However, imposing tariffs under the 301 clause requires a longer period of investigation.
Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, previously claimed that if the Supreme Court rules against the Trump administration, Trump may use the powers of the 301 or 122 clauses to re-impose import tariffs.
"We have many means to use other legal authorizations to re-implement these policies," Hassett said on November 13 while being interviewed by Bloomberg host and co-founder and co-chairman of Carlyle Group, David Rubenstein.
The 301 clause authorizes the US Trade Representative to investigate "unreasonable or unfair trade practices" by other countries and recommend the President to implement unilateral sanctions after the investigation ends.
The 122 clause authorizes the President to impose a maximum 15% tariff when dealing with a "huge and serious international balance of payments deficit." This is the threshold set in the trade agreements that Trump has reached with many countries. However, this tariff can only be imposed for a maximum of 150 days. Navarro, Trump's trade advisor, pointed out earlier this year that the time limit is why the government does not intend to rely on this clause.
Additionally, Trump is using Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act to impose tariffs on industries such as metals and automobiles. The Trump administration has announced new investigations and new tariffs, and the range of manufactured goods affected by these tariffs continues to expand, causing dissatisfaction among US trading partners including Europe, who believe this undermines the tariff ceilings set in the US-EU trade agreement.
"I am beginning to doubt whether the 232 clause will become the government's B plan if taxing under the IEEPA is ruled unconstitutional," said former US trade negotiator Wendi Carter on social media last month. "It's just a matter of time before the 232 clause covers most of our manufacturing industry."
Bloomberg pointed out that the 338 clause of the 1930 Tariff Act is also a potential trade tool for Trump. This clause authorizes the President to impose a maximum 50% tariff on countries that implement discriminatory trade measures. However, this clause has never been used before and could lead to new legal disputes.
The report stated that considering the limitations of these clauses, it will not be easy for the Trump administration to implement them. Officials will have to deal with some new legal issues, such as whether the 122 clause can be used in conjunction with other clauses? Can the tariffs be canceled before the deadline and then reopened for a new cycle to reimpose the tariffs? Or, if a new clause is activated, can the tariffs be retroactively applied to avoid having to refund the tariffs already collected?
"This will cause great chaos," said Lincicome.
According to estimates by Bloomberg Economics, if the court rules against the Trump administration, the latter may have to refund over $8.8 billion in tariffs already collected.
James Blair, Deputy Chief of Staff to the White House, said he believes the Trump administration has a 50% chance, or even higher, of winning the case. Even if it loses, officials can restore the tariffs that were overturned.
"There are already some tools in the president's existing powers that can basically restore the tariffs through different means. Let's see what the court's ruling will be," Blair said.
The Wall Street Journal reported in October that the Trump administration is quietly relaxing its tariff policy, having exempted dozens of products from tariffs. Trump said that after reaching trade agreements with other countries, hundreds of products such as agricultural products and aircraft parts may be exempted. These actions also show that the US government is preparing for a possible loss.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7575827441562829327/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author and others. Please express your opinion by clicking on the 【Up/Down】 button below.