Even by Donald Trump’s standards, 2026 has been unusually frenetic. From the ousting of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, to threats to annex Greenland, to repeated vows of military action against Iran, much has been happening. Yet one tool has defined both of Trump’s presidencies: tariffs.
Trump’s fixation on tariffs dates back decades. Observers say his view was shaped by the booming Japanese economy of the 1980s. He concluded that Japan’s success stemmed from unfair terms with the US and came to see tariffs as a near-magic way to rebalance trade — a belief he has held for more than 40 years, regardless of country or context.
He often turns to tariffs when cornered. At the height of the Greenland row, after European leaders rebuked his rhetoric, he threatened tariffs against those who opposed his plans. His faith in tariffs’ effectiveness appears unshaken. “I always say tariffs is the most beautiful word to me in the dictionary,” he said at his January 2025 Inauguration Day parade. “Tariffs are going to make us rich as hell, it’s going to bring our country’s businesses back.”
Trump’s preferred trade tool has been removed
That helps explain why the US Supreme Court’s February 20 decision ruling his emergency tariffs illegal could be a defining moment of his second term. Has the ruling removed Trump’s main leverage? Will it force a change of course, or will he double down?
Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told DW that while the ruling doesn’t eliminate tariffs from Trump’s toolbox, it may blunt their impact. “No matter what happens going forward, this removes Donald Trump’s preferred avenue for making tariffs the issue with which he deals with any foreign policy or any policy issue overall by simply saying, you know, at very short notice, this country gets, you know, 20%, 30%, 50% tariffs,” Kirkegaard said. “That degree of unpredictability in US trade policy has now gone away.”
Yet after the ruling, Trump imposed a 10% global tariff and the next day raised it to 15%, signaling he does not intend to back off. “Trump will not be moderated,” Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, told DW. “Expect him to continue his trade disruption and tariff policies for as long as he remains in the Oval Office.”
Not all tariffs were invalidated. Levies on steel, aluminum and cars — sectors of particular interest to China and the EU — remain. The administration is exploring other statutes to impose tariffs, and Elms says some of these can be potent. She points to Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows the US to levy tariffs in response to practices it deems “unjustifiable” or “unreasonable.” “I don’t think people appreciate yet what a big weapon Section 301 can be,” she said. “Once the US has decided, unilaterally, that a country is practicing unfair trade, it gets to act as judge, jury and executioner. It can impose tariffs or, basically, anything it wants in retaliation.”
Still, many of the “reciprocal” tariffs Trump had imposed around the world were removed and replaced with the new global tariff, which faces legal constraints: it already has a 150-day expiry and requires Congress to extend it.
What’s the future of Trump’s trade deals?
A pressing question for governments is whether trade agreements made with the US to roll back “Liberation Day” tariffs will hold now that the legal basis for those emergency tariffs has been struck down. Will partners like India or the EU try to renegotiate for better terms?
Experts say countries are unlikely to unilaterally revoke deals, fearing immediate US retaliation once the legal picture clears. Elms says states are unlikely to announce revocations because “that would result in instant punishment,” though they may delay implementing US agreements.
Initial reactions from EU leaders such as German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron hinted that tariffs might ease for European exporters. The EU could pause ratification of an EU-US trade deal; the European Parliament’s trade committee scheduled an emergency meeting. Kirkegaard notes that a US global tariff of 15% could effectively break a trade agreement with the EU, since it might be on top of agreed rates.
Earlier this month, India and the US reached an interim deal that included an 18% “reciprocal tariff.” After the ruling, India delayed sending a trade delegation to Washington that had been due to finalize the deal. “Some deals — such as those with Switzerland or India — made explicit reference to the emergency tariffs, as the new tariff rates were framed as reductions from those emergency levels. As the legal reference tariff rate has now disappeared, these deals might have to be redrafted,” said Carsten Brzeski, Global Head of Macro at ING Research.
All eyes on Trump’s China visit
If Japan shaped Trump’s early fixation on tariffs, China has been his ongoing focus. The ruling complicates his planned visit to Beijing on March 31. When Trump launched his “reciprocal” tariff blitz last April, levies on China peaked at 145% before a fragile truce in May reduced them.
At first glance, the ruling seems to hand Beijing an advantage, removing one of Trump’s main levers. But analysts caution China will likely remain measured ahead of the summit. “It will give China a moral boost in their negotiations with Trump’s team ahead of the summit, but they are prepared for the scenario that nothing actually changes in reality,” said Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center.
Ali Wyne of the International Crisis Group says Xi Jinping will not flaunt the Supreme Court decision but will aim to keep relations with Trump constructive. Observers note that while Trump lost his easiest method for imposing tariffs, other tools remain — and China and others know maintaining a positive relationship with Trump is often the best way to secure favorable outcomes.
Will Trump take the off-ramp offered by the SC ruling?
Some hoped the ruling might give Trump a political off-ramp, since his tariffs are unpopular amid inflation; a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll released the day of the ruling found 64% of voters disapproved of his handling of tariffs. Many Republicans have also criticized his tariff approach, with some members of Congress voting to rebuke or curtail tariffs on partners like Canada.
But Brzeski says the evidence suggests Trump will not use the ruling to retreat. “On the contrary, announcements since the Supreme Court’s ruling strongly confirm that Trump has no intention of removing his ‘most beautiful word’ from the English dictionary.”
Trump has so far rejected any off-ramp. “I have the right to do tariffs, and I’ve always had the right to do tariffs,” he said after the ruling. That remains true in a general sense, but not in the specific way he previously believed. How this will affect the efficacy of his signature policy will become clearer in the months ahead.
Edited by: Ashutosh Pandey