Nathaniel Bolin, partner at the law firm K&L Gates, shared his insights on recent U.S. tariff developments and their impact on free trade agreements and policies with attendees at the National Glass Association Glass Conference: Ann Arbor. His remarks focused particularly on the complex interaction between newly imposed tariffs and existing free trade agreements, especially the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, known as USMCA.
Many factors complicate North American tariffs
Boland detailed how certain goods originating from the U.S., Mexico and Canada continue to benefit from duty-free treatment under USMCA, despite the introduction of "Liberation Day" tariffs announced in April by the Trump administration. According to Bolin, qualifying products, based on their country of origin and manufacturing content, are exempt from these tariffs as well as the earlier fentanyl-related duties imposed in February. However, he cautions that the landscape remains complicated. For example, products containing steel or aluminum might still be subject to Section 232 tariffs, even if they qualify under USMCA. He used the example of Canadian fabricators reliant on glass imports to illustrate how the origin of inputs—from U.S.-sourced glass to Chinese imports—can greatly affect tariff liabilities when products are eventually shipped back to the U.S.
"It's a complicated picture. It depends on the classification of the merchandise you're bringing into the U.S., and the country of origin under the relevant trade rules in terms of the overall impact and how that may affect specific companies within your industry," says Bolin. "I'll take the example of a Canadian fabricator who is reliant on imported glass for its operations. It is presumably doing further fabrication into an architectural product, [such as] a window, using that [imported] glass as a key component. What tariffs may apply will depend very much on a few factors, including the origin of the glass. The analysis depends on the classification of the product as it is coming back into the U.S."
Tariffs face legal challenges, but many are likely to remain
In addition to tariff classifications, Bolin highlighted ongoing legal challenges surrounding these tariffs. The administration's reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as the statutory basis for several recent tariff measures is currently in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in November, with a decision expected by late 2025 or early 2026. Lower courts have been divided, and while Bolin acknowledges the inherent unpredictability of the court's ruling, he suggests there is a greater than 50% chance the tariffs will be upheld based on the current Supreme Court composition and government arguments. He notes that the administration has prepared for potential setbacks by maintaining a robust second line of defense: the Section 232 tariffs of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 related to national security, which have previously withstood legal scrutiny. These tariffs cover nearly all major import categories into the U.S., except for crude oil and certain energy products.
Bolin concludes that despite legal uncertainties, the current U.S. tariff framework is expected to remain largely intact, regardless of the Supreme Court's final decision, continuing to shape the trade and tariff environment for North American businesses. "At the end of the day, the net effect on businesses will be that the current tariff picture and the U.S. administration's approach on tariffs and trade is going to survive, whatever the outcome," says Bolin.
