On January 14, 2026, President Donald Trump issued Proclamation 11001, concluding that processed critical minerals and their derivative products (PCMDPs) would not be subject now to an additional tariff under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Section 232 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.

The proclamation, however, makes clear that the decision not to impose an additional Section 232 tariff on PCMDPs may be short-lived. Proclamation 11001 directs the Secretary of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative to pursue negotiations with trading partners over the next 180 days to ensure the United States maintains adequate supplies of critical minerals while mitigating supply-chain vulnerabilities affecting PCMDPs. “Depending on the status or outcome of those negotiations,” the proclamation reads, the Trump administration “may consider alternative remedies in the future,” including the imposition of an additional sectoral tariff. Such a tariff could be imposed by July 2026.

The President’s decision follows a Section 232 investigation into PCMDPs initiated by the Department of Commerce in April 2025 (see Update of April 16, 2025). According to the proclamation, the Department transmitted its final report to the President on October 24, 2025. While that report has not been made public, Proclamation 11001 summarizes the Department’s conclusions that: (1) PCMDPs are “embedded across defense and commercial supply chains” and play an essential role in the production of advanced weapons systems, energy infrastructure, and everyday consumer goods; (2) the United States is overly reliant on foreign sources of PCMDPs and lacks access to sufficiently secure and reliable PCMDP supply chains against a backdrop of unsustainable price volatility in the critical mineral markets; and (3) domestic PCMDP manufacturing and production capacity has “weakened,” leaving the United States dependent on downstream imports of PCMDPs.

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.