On September 25, 2025, President Donald Trump announced on social media that the United States will impose a 25% tariff on heavy-duty trucks beginning October 1, 2025. The social media post did not specify the legal basis for the tariff but indicated it was necessary “for many reasons, but above all else, for national security purposes,” suggesting a reliance on Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. That statutory provision authorizes the president to adjust duties on goods imported in quantities or under circumstances that threaten U.S. national security following an affirmative finding from a Department of Commerce investigation. Earlier this year, the Trump administration launched a Section 232 investigation to assess the national security risk posed by imports of medium- and heavy-duty trucks, medium- and heavy-duty truck parts, and their derivative products (see Update of April 24, 2025). President Trump’s post, however, did not mention any tariffs on medium-duty trucks, medium- and heavy-duty truck parts, or their derivative products.

Minutes later, President Trump posted again on social media to announce that the United States will institute a 50% tariff “on all kitchen cabinets, bathroom vanities, and associated products” and a 30% tariff on “upholstered furniture,” effective October 1, 2025. Like his earlier post, President Trump did not identify the statutory authority for these tariffs but indicated they were necessary “for national security and other reasons,” alluding to Section 232 once more. The Trump administration launched a Section 232 investigation into the national security threat posed by imports of timber, lumber, and their derivative products earlier this year, which included wood-based cabinetry and furniture (see Update of March 3, 2025).

Shortly after, President Trump posted once more to announce a 100% tariff on “any branded or patented pharmaceutical product, unless a company is building their pharmaceutical manufacturing plant in America.” The social media post defines “is building” to mean “ground broken and/or under construction.” However, this definition creates ambiguity regarding how such products will be treated when made by companies that manufacture some branded or patented pharmaceutical products in the United States and in other countries but do not currently have a new U.S. facility under construction. Earlier this year, the Trump administration also initiated a Section 232 investigation in the national security threat posed by imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients (see Update of April 15, 2025).

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Aaron C. Mandelbaum Aaron C. Mandelbaum

Aaron focuses his practice on advising clients on compliance with international economic sanctions, export controls, and U.S. import laws and regulations. He is also involved in assisting clients with complex cross-border transactions, anti-dumping and countervailing duty litigation, utilization of international and preferential trade…

Aaron focuses his practice on advising clients on compliance with international economic sanctions, export controls, and U.S. import laws and regulations. He is also involved in assisting clients with complex cross-border transactions, anti-dumping and countervailing duty litigation, utilization of international and preferential trade agreements, and customs classifications. Most recently, Aaron has counseled clients navigating requirements under the Export Administration Regulations.

Photo of David M. Schwartz David M. Schwartz

David is the leader of Thompson Hine’s International Trade practice group and a member of the firm’s International Committee. He advises clients on the risks and opportunities presented by U.S. international trade laws and regulations and international trade agreements. He focuses on antidumping…

David is the leader of Thompson Hine’s International Trade practice group and a member of the firm’s International Committee. He advises clients on the risks and opportunities presented by U.S. international trade laws and regulations and international trade agreements. He focuses on antidumping (AD), countervailing duty (CVD) and safeguard litigation, international trade policy, and cross-border compliance issues affecting goods, services, technology and investments that involve transportation, customs, export controls, economic sanctions, anti-boycott and anti-bribery laws and regulations.

Photo of Scott E. Diamond** Scott E. Diamond**

Scott is a senior policy advisor with more than 25 years’ experience with the legislative and regulatory processes involved in international trade policy, remedies and enforcement. This includes working with clients on matters involving export controls, economic sanctions, human rights and forced labor…

Scott is a senior policy advisor with more than 25 years’ experience with the legislative and regulatory processes involved in international trade policy, remedies and enforcement. This includes working with clients on matters involving export controls, economic sanctions, human rights and forced labor compliance, corporate anti-boycott and antibribery compliance, national security investigations, and foreign direct investment in the United States.

**Not licensed to practice law.