七问特朗普关税政策“违法”事件

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. International Trade Court (CIT) ruled that Trump's imposition of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) was an overreach of authority, requiring the government to cease these tariffs within 10 days, which has raised market concerns [2][13]. Group 1: Impact of CIT Ruling - The CIT ruling affects all tariffs imposed under IEEPA, including a 20% tariff on fentanyl from China and a 25% tariff on fentanyl from Mexico and Canada, while tariffs imposed under Section 232 (e.g., 25% on steel and aluminum) remain unaffected [2][5]. - Current tariffs remain in effect as Trump has appealed the CIT ruling, and the Federal Circuit Court has granted a temporary stay, allowing tariffs to continue until June 9 [2][4]. - The key focus will be whether the Federal Circuit Court will approve a long-term stay after June 9, which could either suspend all IEEPA tariffs or leave current tariffs unchanged [2][3]. Group 2: Legal Controversies - The main legal controversies surrounding Trump's tariff policy include whether he has the authority under IEEPA to impose global tariffs without Congressional approval and whether trade deficits and fentanyl influx constitute an "unusual or special threat" [6][20]. - The CIT found that IEEPA does not grant the President unlimited tariff authority, emphasizing that tariff imposition is a power reserved for Congress [21][22]. - The court also ruled that the tariffs aimed at addressing trade deficits exceeded IEEPA's scope, suggesting that the appropriate legal framework for such tariffs would be the Trade Act of 1974 [25][26]. Group 3: Future Actions and Market Perception - If Trump ultimately loses the appeal, he may still impose tariffs using other legal provisions, such as the Trade Act of 1974, which allows for tariffs up to 15% for a maximum of 150 days [32][33]. - Market analysts generally believe that the CIT ruling will have limited impact on Trump's tariff policy, as the government has alternative channels to impose tariffs, albeit with potentially slower implementation [11][35]. - Analysts from major financial institutions suggest that while the CIT ruling introduces uncertainty, it is unlikely to significantly alter the overall outcome of U.S. trade policies [36].