The Trump administration’s tariff agenda entered a new phase in late summer 2025, marked by sweeping policy expansions. In July, the administration introduced new reciprocal tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), alongside additional country-specific IEEPA surcharges on Brazil and India. New duties were also imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, while the elimination of the longstanding de minimis exemption — which had allowed imports valued under $800 to enter duty-free — transformed the landscape for cross-border e-commerce. Together, these developments signal a shift toward a more enduring tariff framework with broad implications for global supply chains, consumer prices, and United States trade relations.
This series continues to track how evolving US tariff policy reshapes trade dynamics worldwide. Building on earlier updates, the August edition incorporates the latest tariff measures, bilateral arrangements, and tariff stacking rules. New ITC simulations indicate that the combination of IEEPA-based tariffs and expanded Section 232 measures could lower trade partners’ potential exports to the United States by $439 billion by 2029, with developing countries bearing the burden of the loss.*
Latest Updates on US Tariff Measures
New reciprocal tariff rates
On July 31, the administration issued revised reciprocal tariff schedules, adjusting rates across more than 90 countries. These new levels range from 10% to 41%. The recalibration follows earlier reciprocal tariffs announced in April and reflects an effort to align duties with perceived bilateral trade imbalances. At the same time, these measures face growing judicial scrutiny: in late August, a federal appeals court ruled that the administration may have exceeded its authority under IEEPA, leaving the future of certain reciprocal tariffs likely subject to Supreme Court review.
Section 232 expansions
On June 3, Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum doubled to 50%, with the exception of the United Kingdom, which remains at 25% pending ongoing quota negotiations. The proclamation also revised the tariff base: certain derivative products are now charged only on their steel or aluminum content rather than on the full product value. By mid-August, the scope of Section 232 was further widened to cover additional derivative products, while a new 50% tariff on semi-finished copper and copper-intensive goods took effect on August 1.
Bilateral and regional arrangements
While broad tariffs proliferated, Washington also pursued selective frameworks with major allies. Framework agreements with the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam introduced targeted adjustments, in some cases including new tariff-quota systems and substituting fixed levies with negotiated caps. These arrangements reflect an effort to balance tariff escalation with managed trade concessions, particularly in sensitive sectors such as autos and critical minerals. Several of these frameworks remain under negotiation, and their final terms may evolve as talks continue.
Country-specific measures: Brazil and India
On July 30, the White House issued an executive order imposing a 40% IEEPA tariff on Brazilian goods, citing national security concerns and alleged political interference by the Brazilian judiciary. While broad in scope, the order granted exemptions for certain products, such as civil aircraft, orange juice, and some energy commodities. This duty comes on top of reciprocal rates, raising the duty on many Brazilian exports above 50%. A few weeks later, on August 27, India became subject to an additional 25% tariff, tied to its continued purchases of Russian oil. Like the Brazil measure, India’s tariff is cumulative, applied on top of reciprocal rates.
End of the de minimis exemption
A major change in customs treatment of low-value imports came on August 29, when the United States abolished duty-free treatment for shipments under $800. The de minimis exemption, in place since 1938, is no longer available for any country. For a six-month transition, postal operators may opt into flat duties ($80–200 per package depending on origin), but all shipments must shift to full ad valorem tariff collection by February 28, 2026. This affects over 1.3 billion annual shipments, with implications for online retailers, logistics providers, and US consumers. Several postal services have already suspended or limited shipments to the United States while adapting to new requirements. SMEs, which often sell through online platforms, face added costs and paperwork that may reduce their competitiveness in the US market.
To stay informed as the trade landscape continues to evolve, visit ITC's Market Access Map.
Country-Specific IEEPA Tariffs and Average Duties Before and After 2025
The table below displays the initial and new country-specific tariff rates, along with the effectively applied tariffs by the United States before and after 2025, for each country, weighted by 2024 US imports. Use the search function to quickly find a specific country and see how its tariff profile has evolved.
Source: ITC Trade Briefs, using data from ITC Trade Map and Market Access Map (2025)
Note: IEEPA tariffs include both reciprocal rates applied to all partners and additional country-specific surcharges on Brazil, India, China, Mexico, and Canada. Average tariff figures are trade-weighted, based on US import flows at the HTSUS 8-digit level, and reflect IEEPA and Section 232 tariffs in force as of August 2025. Section 301 duties and trade remedies (antidumping, countervailing) are not included. Estimates follow CBP tariff stacking rules; see CBP guidance for details.
The effective tariff each partner faces depends not only on the headline IEEPA rate but also on how these rates interact with other measures and exemptions. The same headline rate can translate into very different outcomes once a country’s export structure is taken into account. Countries with large shares of exempted goods see smaller increases, while those concentrated in Section 232-covered categories may face higher effective tariffs.
For instance, despite headline reciprocal rates of 25%–35%, Iraq (5%), Algeria (10%) and Kazakhstan (8.1%) record much lower effective averages due to their exports being concentrated in exempted categories such as fuels and critical minerals. By contrast, partners with a relatively modest 10% additional reciprocal tariff, such as Azerbaijan (39%), Bahrain (32%) and the United Arab Emirates (28%), see much steeper effective increases because of their exposure to Section 232-covered products.