By Andrea Shalal
WASHINGTON, Sept 18 (Reuters) – The Russia sanctions bill passed by Congress this week gives US President Donald Trump new powers to impose tariffs that could last well beyond his presidency, injecting more uncertainty into the global economy after nearly two years of trade wars.
The immediate impact may be limited, given Trump’s reluctance to take actions that could push consumer prices higher ahead of the November midterm elections, when control of Congress is at stake, analysts said.
But critics say the legislation, which imposes tariffs on Russia’s biggest trading partners, has broad language that could herald trouble for other countries as well if they find themselves in Trump’s crosshairs in the future.
The bill requires Trump to impose tariffs of up to 100% within 30 days on all goods imported into the US from the five largest importers of Russian crude oil or gas as well as any country that knowingly made new purchases of oil or gas 30 days after the law was enacted or was among the top five countries helping Russia evade sanctions.
China and India are among the biggest buyers of Russian oil, but critics say the law gives US officials enough leeway to name a range of targets since it does not name any country or spell out how the top-five lists would be calculated.
“Given the discretionary authority that the president has, it is likely to be abused,” said Laura Brank, a lawyer at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner who focuses on cross-border transactions.
Since returning to office in January 2025, Trump has imposed tariffs of up to 50% on more than 80 countries, though the Supreme Court has struck down many of them, saying he exceeded his authority. Trump has cited a variety of reasons, including disagreements with foreign leaders, for his actions.
Challenging the latest tariffs in court could be difficult since the law specifically calls for the duties, while previous challenges to tariffs have successfully argued that the Trump administration misapplied laws from decades earlier.
US Representative Don Beyer, a Virginia Democrat, argued that Trump had wrongly used existing trade laws to pursue his agenda in the past and is likely to do the same with the new law. The White House has denied abusing any trade laws.
“We don’t know when, but you don’t need a crystal ball to know what is likely to happen next,” Beyer said on social media.
Once Trump agreed to move forward with the bill in July after over a year of delays, US officials pushed for quick passage to give Trump additional leverage in his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping next week, according to congressional sources.
US officials have tried to reassure lawmakers that the measure has sufficient guardrails, while acknowledging its significance in handing control of tariffs to the White House.
“It is the first time in nearly forty years that Congress has granted new tariff authorities to the executive branch,” White House legislative director James Braid said in a post on X on Wednesday.
Trump is expected to sign the bill on Friday, a White House official said. The White House did not respond to a request for comment on concerns about the broader scope of the measure.
LACK OF CLARITY ON TARGET COUNTRIES
The sweeping bill, which passed Congress on Wednesday, aims to deprive Russia of funds used to pay for its nearly five-year war on Ukraine. The legislation authorizes sanctions against Russia’s energy and defense industries, as well as its “shadow fleet” of tankers used to evade existing sanctions.
Moscow on Thursday said further U.S. sanctions against Russia would make it harder to reach a peace deal in Ukraine.
Jeannette Chu, vice president of the National Foreign Trade Council, a trade group that advocates for open trade, said different entities had differing assessments of which countries could be hit with tariffs since no firm criteria were spelled out. The countries speculated as likely include Brazil, India, Japan and countries in the European Union, she said.
China said it “consistently opposed long-arm jurisdiction that lacks a basis in international law” while India warned Washington that new tariffs could impact bilateral ties.
In a worst-case scenario, Chu said, Ukraine itself could suffer if the new tariffs cut off Russian oil and gas supplies for refined products in EU countries, given it relies on diesel from refineries in Hungary and Slovakia.
Not everyone agrees the bill gives the Trump administration too much leeway. The conservative think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies argues that the bill lays out sufficient criteria on which countries can be hit and rejects the idea that it gives Trump a back door to imposing other tariffs. It noted that the original version of the bill required even higher tariffs of 500%.
RISKY TIMING
Any new duties would have to be announced just days before the midterm elections, which could push oil prices higher at a time when voters are already unhappy over rising costs. Trump’s popularity has declined since he launched a war on Iran in February that has disrupted oil shipments from the Middle East.
“Given the state of the current energy markets, it certainly seems risky,” said Ryan Majerus, a former senior US official who served under both Democratic and Republican presidents and is now with law firm King & Spalding. He says Trump could get around the timing issue by imposing a zero-rate tariff and revising it later, at will.
Others say Trump’s reluctance to take tough action against Russia since returning to office raises questions about how he will implement the legislation, which also gives Trump broad authority to waive tariffs or sanctions for national security reasons. That would let him avoid hitting Moscow or its backers harder, simply by notifying Congress, they said.
“This is entirely discretionary,” said Ben Harris, a former senior Treasury Department official under former Democratic President Joe Biden. “The definitions are vague and the president has kind of a get-out-of-jail-free card in the form of a waiver.”
(Reporting by Andrea Shalal; additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Steve Holland; editing by Andy Sullivan and Deepa Babington)
Comments