**Submission statement**: I think the relevance is obvious (?), so Happy 🌮 Tuesday everyone.
**Longer statement if needed**: Article is about current global tariffs rates which is relevant to this sub (tariffs) and clarifies the confusion about which rate is currently in effect.
On Friday (Feb 20), Trump signed an executive order imposing a global 10% tariff rate on all countries, effective Tuesday, Feb 24 at 12:01pm.
> Importantly, the Trump team itself has acknowledged this distinction. Indeed, in a filing last year in the tariffs case, officials conceded that the administration couldn’t necessarily use Section 122 authority to address trade deficits.
> It said that Section 122 didn’t “have any obvious application here, where the concerns the President identified in declaring an emergency arise from trade deficits, which are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”
Gyn_Nag on
What explains the difference between this and the Liz Truss saga?
She was shot down in flames by the markets for a mere tax plan, yet POTUS is flip flopping trillions of dollars of uncertainty and markets are fairly steady.
2 Comments
**Submission statement**: I think the relevance is obvious (?), so Happy 🌮 Tuesday everyone.
**Longer statement if needed**: Article is about current global tariffs rates which is relevant to this sub (tariffs) and clarifies the confusion about which rate is currently in effect.
On Friday (Feb 20), Trump signed an executive order imposing a global 10% tariff rate on all countries, effective Tuesday, Feb 24 at 12:01pm.
Later on Saturday (Feb 21st), in a rambling ragepost on Truth Social, [Trump announced that he had increased the rate to 15%](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/21/trump-tariff-supreme-court-00792288?cid=apn), supposedly “effective immediately.” However, there has been no sign of an updated EO amending the rate to 15% since then.
(In fact, the original order [no longer shows up as an EO on the WH site](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-orders/) and is apparently [now a “Presidential Proclamation”](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/imposing-a-temporary-import-surcharge-to-address-fundamental-international-payments-problems/) instead… for unknown reasons. AFAIK, proclamations have usually been symbolic, but this order is obviously still being implemented by CBP)
**What would you like users to discuss**: Users should discuss the confusion regarding the current rates, its economic impacts, why the original order is now a Presidential Proclamation instead of Executive Order, and/or the [potential illegality](https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trumps-section-122-tariffs-are-illegal/) of Section 122 tariffs – [which was even admitted by the government’s lawyers in last year’s fillings](https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/23/politics/donald-trump-tariff-difficulties-section-122):
> Importantly, the Trump team itself has acknowledged this distinction. Indeed, in a filing last year in the tariffs case, officials conceded that the administration couldn’t necessarily use Section 122 authority to address trade deficits.
> It said that Section 122 didn’t “have any obvious application here, where the concerns the President identified in declaring an emergency arise from trade deficits, which are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”
What explains the difference between this and the Liz Truss saga?
She was shot down in flames by the markets for a mere tax plan, yet POTUS is flip flopping trillions of dollars of uncertainty and markets are fairly steady.