The difference between IEEPA tariffs, Section 122 tariffs, Section 232 tariffs, and Section 301 tariffs

• Section 122, Section 232, Section 301, and IEEPA tariffs are distinct United States trade measures with different legal authorities, purposes, and applications.
• Section 122 tariffs address U.S. balance-of-payment deficits or certain other fundamental international payment problems.
• Section 232 tariffs target specific products deemed to impair national security. The aluminum, copper, and steel tariffs are Section 232 tariffs.
• Section 301 tariffs address unfair trade practices and apply to specific countries or products. The tariffs set on many Chinese goods during Trump’s first term are Section 301 tariffs.
• IEEPA tariffs respond to national emergencies originating outside the U.S. and can be quite broad. 
• On February 20, 2026, in a 6–3 ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States decided IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. On May 7, 2026, the Court of International Trade invalidated the 10% global Section 122 tariffs. 

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act gives the president of the United States the authority to regulate economic transactions following a declaration of a national emergency. 

As the Congressional Research Service puts it, IEEPA empowers the president to take a variety of economic actions to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the President declares a national emergency with respect to such threat.”

That seems broad, but Congress enacted IEEPA in 1977 as part of an effort to limit — not expand — executive emergency authority granted under the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) of 1917.

No president has ever used IEEPA to impose tariffs until now. That said, the Congressional Research Service report observes that a president “could likely use IEEPA to impose additional tariffs on imported goods, as President Nixon did under TWEA.” 

Trump is the first president to invoke IEEPA for tariffs, and 2025 was the first year he did so. But during his first term in office, he announced an intention to use IEEPA to impose tariffs on Mexico until “the illegal migration crisis is alleviated through effective actions taken by Mexico.” However, he indefinitely suspended the proposed IEEPA tariff a few weeks later.

Instead of IEEPA, U.S. presidents have generally used the authority granted to them under Section 232 to establish new tariffs.

It comes down to whether IEEPA gives the president the power to impose tariffs, and whether the United States is facing a national emergency. 

Per IEEPA, “The authorities granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may only be exercised to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat with respect to which a national emergency has been declared for purposes of this chapter and may not be exercised for any other purpose.” (Emphasis mine.)

A group of businesses and 12 states separately argued that the U.S. is facing neither an unusual and extraordinary threat nor a national emergency, two conditions required by IEEPA. They also contended the president overstepped the authority granted by IEEPA to regulate economic activity.

The U.S. Court of International Trade sided with the plaintiffs on May 28 and issued an injunction on the IEEPA tariffs. “Because of the Constitution’s express allocation of the tariff power to Congress … we do not read IEEPA to delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the President. We instead read IEEPA’s provisions to impose meaningful limits on any such authority it confers.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit then temporarily stayed the injunction to allow the Trump administration time to appeal. The Federal Appeals Court heard arguments on July 31, and on August 29, 2025, it ruled that IEEPA does not explicitly grant the president “wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs.” The administration appealed.

On September 9, the Supreme Court agreed to expedite the review of Trump v. V.O.S. Sections and a related case, Learning Resources v. Trump. The court consolidated the two cases and held oral arguments in early November. On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court decided that IEEPA does not grant the president the authority to impose tariffs.

Several other lawsuits over the tariffs have been moving through the lower courts or were on pause pending the Supreme Court decision. “A separate question for another day is whether the president has authority to commit the United States to tariff negotiations without further congressional action,” observes the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows the president to temporarily impose tariffs or quotas to address “large and serious United States balance-of-payment deficits” or certain other fundamental international payment problems. Any such duties would be capped capped at 15% and limited to 150 days (unless Congress were to authorize an extension).

However, according to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report dated February 27, 2025, “Section 122 has never been used, and therefore courts have had no occasion to interpret its language.” 

On February 20, 2026, President Trump issued a proclamation imposing 10% global tariffs on all countries under Section 122. Yet on May 20, 2026, the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled that the 10% tariffs established under Section 122 are invalid.

Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 gives the U.S. president the authority to impose restrictions on imports or negotiate with trading partners if the U.S. Secretary of Commerce determines those imports “threaten to impair” U.S. national security. Unlike IEEPA, Section 232 talks of tariffs.

During his first term in office, President Trump invoked Section 232 to investigate aluminum, automobile and auto parts, steel, titanium sponge, transformers and transformer components, uranium, and vanadium. In 2018, he imposed Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum. 

Less than a year into his second term, Trump has invoked Section 232 to set new tariffs on aluminum, cars, car parts, and copper. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, he’s also launched more than 200 investigations into other types of products, including pharmaceuticals.

On April 2, 2026, the president invoked Section 232 to set duties on many pharmaceuticals and change tariffs on metals (aluminum, copper, and steel).

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 gives the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) the authority to investigate and act to enforce U.S. rights under trade agreements. These powers include imposing tariffs. 

An investigation may be requested by an interested party or initiated by USTR itself. Two presidents have requested Section 301 tariffs: 

• President Trump requested an investigation into China’s trade practices during his first term, leading to Section 301 tariffs on China. The president has also used Section 301 to initiate new tariffs during his section term.
• President Biden used Section 301 to extend and modify the China tariffs. 

Once imposed, Section 301 tariffs must be extended or modified after four years or be terminated.