Trump Telegram

DECISION REGARDING IEEPA TARIFFS: SUPREME COURT ADJOURNMENT

As regards the decision in the widely anticipated Learning Resources v. Trump case, the Supreme Court adjourned again last Wednesday, after the first adjournment from January 9 to January 14, and now for an indefinite period. In addition to the formal legal validity of the tariffs under IEEPA (which includes the 15% tariffs on most EU products), the key issue is whether and to what extent tariffs already levied would have to be reversed in the event of a rejection. Regardless of this, the customs agreement with the EU is also hanging in the balance in view of the latest US customs threats. The vote scheduled for this week in the EU Parliament is also expected to be postponed. At the same time, without a further extension, the EU retaliatory tariffs decided by the EU Commission in August and suspended for six months would take effect again on February 1, coinciding with the additional 10% threatened by Trump in relation to the demanded transfer of Greenland.

CUSTOMS OPTIMIZATION IN PRACTICE: DEDUCTION OF NON-DUTIABLE EXPENSES AS AN UNUSED TOOL

An important tool for customs optimization that is often not fully exploited in practice is the deduction of so-called non-dutiable expenses. These include in particular:

– Transport costs (foreign freight, international freight)
– Transport insurance
– Security fees (port security charge, supply chain security fee)
– Documentation fees (carrier booking fee, bill of lading, AMS filing, ISF “10+2”)
– Logistics fees (container handling, terminal handling, wharfage, container seal, yard monitoring, LCL handling, customs clearance)
– Storage costs with independent third parties
– Inspection and testing costs by independent third parties (after production, not for the purpose of production)
– Depreciation for goods already defective upon import
– Packaging as “instruments of international traffic” (e.g., pallets, cartons, hangers, not “normal packaging”)
– Post-importation price adjustments (via CBP reconciliation)
– Refunded foreign sales taxes (VAT/GST) – should already be omitted here
– Separately reported anti-dumping and countervailing duties (ADD/CVD)

Overpaid duties can be corrected retrospectively via the CBP Post-Summary Correction (PSC) Program until the Entry Summary is liquidated or within 300 days of importation, whichever occurs first.

$100,000 CAP FOR H1B VISAS: NEGOTIATIONS EXPECTED IN FEBRUARY

It remains unclear whether the administration will stick to its plan to introduce an additional H-1B visa fee of USD 100,000. One of the issues in the ongoing Chamber of Commerce et al. v. DHS case is the legal basis for this measure. Here too, the final word has not yet been spoken; further steps are expected in February.

VISA UPDATE: IMPORTANT CHANGES TO THE H-1B PROCESS

With immediate effect, the Trump administration imposed an administrative fee of US$100,000 at the end of last week for applying for and continuing to reside in the US on an H-1B work visa. H-1B visas are typically applied for by highly educated individuals who, for example, design software at Apple or teach at a university.

Therefore, the new regulation is likely to be of little concern to subsidiaries in the US, as employees sent from Germany usually apply for E or L category visas (these are work permits based on international treaties, investments, or trade). This applies in particular to US companies that have been acquired by German companies as part of an M&A transaction.

REVIEW OF TRUMP REGULATIONS BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

A large number of Trump administration regulations have since been reviewed by the US judiciary and either partially upheld or partially overturned as unlawful. Now that the majority of the import tariffs imposed by Trump have also been declared inadmissible on appeal due to a lack of legal basis (albeit currently still with suspensive effect), the question now is how the US Supreme Court will rule. It remains exciting.

TARIFFS AND TAX PLANS UNDER FIRE – US CASE LAW PUTS THE BRAKES ON TRUMP

The customs duties mandated by presidential decrees are now more frequently encountering resistance from the courts. Tariff decrees (as well as fiscal and social policy decrees) are being declared unconstitutional. Some prominent Republican politicians publicly oppose the administration’s plans to further increase the national debt. There is therefore a question mark over the adoption of the tax laws introduced by Trump (“One big beautiful bill”). Will it come to a constitutional showdown?

TRUMP VS JUSTICE – ESCALATION IN THE SEPARATION OF POWERS

The Trump government’s skirmishes with the American judiciary are becoming more frequent. Temporary injunctions are being ignored, Musk’s DOGE squad is undermining court orders, Trump is threatening to dismiss disagreeable judges, the chairman of the US Supreme Court is reprimanding the White House in no uncertain terms – a constitutional clash is brewing between the executive and judicial branches. What happens next…?

TARIFFS UNDER PRESSURE – US JUDICIARY EXAMINES LAWSUITS AND EXEMPTIONS

What role will the US judiciary play in lawsuits against the tariffs? Will individual industries be exempted from the sanctions? US government circles report that there are 3 motives for tariffs, (i) to offset “unfair” trade policies, (ii) to achieve political goals and (iii) to replenish the treasury – take a deep breath
and wait.