Cheat Sheet

November 6, 2025

Hardwood Federation Comments on USMCA Review: On Monday, the Hardwood Federation submitted comments to the U.S. Trade Representative regarding renewal of the U.S. Canada Mexico (USMCA) trade agreement. Those comments may be found here. In our comments, we advocated that USTR make minimal changes to the existing agreement as USMCA in its current form has resulted in the free flow of hardwood forest products among the three countries under a zero-tariff regime. Changes that would be welcome include updates delivering more transparent and efficient phytosanitary reviews of our products crossing the border.  In addition, we support efforts to eliminate the threat of foreign goods unfairly competing with U.S. made products by being transshipped through Canada or Mexico. 

Government Shutdown Sets Record: We are on Day 37 of the lapse in funding for U.S. government operations with a deal among Republicans and Democrats to reopen the government not yet in sight. There is a group of moderate/centrist Democrat and Republican Senators that has been actively negotiating a compromise deal on a short-term Continuing Resolution, but there is not a broad consensus on that proposal. Meanwhile, flights at major airports will be curtailed by 10 percent beginning Friday due to workforce constraints. Funding for export promotion programs run by the American Hardwood Export Council are also stalled.  We anticipate that flight cancellations due to the government funding lapse will be the key factor that brings the parties together on a deal, particularly in light of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday. The situation is fluid and we continue to monitor progress…or the lack of progress.

Supreme Court Takes Up Trump Trade Policy: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in the consolidated case challenging the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) to justify sweeping import tariffs. The case is under intense scrutiny as how the Justices rule could impact Presidential powers for the foreseeable future.  At issue is whether IEEPA authorizes the President, upon declaring a national emergency, to impose tariffs and, if so, whether that delegation is constitutionally permissible.

The dispute centers on two key questions:

1. Whether IEEPA provides sufficient statutory basis for the imposition of tariffs under a declared emergency.
2. If so, whether such authority is consistent with constitutional limits on the delegation of legislative power.

For importers, exporters, supply-chain participants, and other stakeholders affected by these tariffs, the outcome remains uncertain. First, the Court may decide as a matter of statutory interpretation that IEEPA does not authorize any tariffs, in which case the IEEPA tariff regime would come undone. Second, at the other extreme, the Court may decide that IEEPA authorizes tariffs and these particular tariffs are all lawful, in which the current status quo would remain in place. Third, the Court could reach some sort of middle ground, by which case it might hold that IEEPA authorizes tariffs but that one or more of the existing IEEPA tariffs cannot be justified on the existing record. Additional questions also remain, such as “Can the President use other trade authorities to impose similar-looking tariffs” and “If some or all of the existing IEEPA tariffs are ruled unlawful, can importers who paid those tariffs seek a refund and, if so, how?” It is less clear whether the Court’s decision will take up these questions, or if they’ll be addressed in any opinions of individual justices. (Credit: Crowell & Moring Alerts; November 6, 2025)