Trump’s Global Tariffs Kick In at 10%
The United States has officially implemented a new 10 per cent global tariff on imports, marking a significant turn in U.S. trade policy that could reshape international commerce and rattle markets worldwide. The levy took effect on 24 February 2026, after President Donald Trump moved to reimpose duties following a setback in the U.S. Supreme Court, which last week struck down earlier broad tariffs as beyond executive authority. Trump’s administration said the new 10 per cent tariff applies under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, allowing a temporary duty that lasts 150 days unless extended by Congress.
The tariff will be added on top of existing U.S. “most-favoured-nation” duties and has already begun to sow uncertainty among trading partners. While Trump initially threatened a 15 per cent rate, the 10 per cent baseline provides a degree of immediate clarity, even as discussions continue about higher levies and legal authority.
Market Reaction and Trade Frictions
Global markets have responded cautiously to the new tariff regime. Currency and stock markets showed volatility as investors digest the implications of heightened trade barriers alongside deepening economic policy uncertainty. The tariff move comes as U.S. trade representatives engage with key partners, including the United Kingdom and European Union, to clarify how existing and future deals fit within the evolving U.S. tariff framework.
While some nations await assurances that preferential terms — such as those negotiated with the UK — will be preserved, others have expressed concern that the tariff layer could disrupt global supply chains, weaken export competitiveness, and fuel inflation pressures by raising the cost of imported goods.
Backdrop: Legal Battles and Trade Policy Turmoil
Last week’s Supreme Court decision dealt a blow to Trump’s earlier tariff strategy by ruling that he overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) when imposing broad global levies. The court affirmed that tariff authority resides with Congress and cannot be unilaterally wielded by the president under a declared “national emergency.” Trump’s pivot to Section 122 was a direct response to that ruling, ensuring that some form of tariff policy remains in place even as legal debates continue.
The ruling and subsequent executive action have fuelled debate among economists and policymakers about the legal limits of presidential trade authority and the broader impact of protectionist measures on the U.S. and global economies.
Bank of England Governor Flags Uncertainty on Rate Cut
Amid these global trade tensions, Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey told lawmakers that a potential interest rate cut in March remains a “genuinely open question,” underscoring the delicate balance policymakers face amid inflation and external economic pressures. Bailey highlighted that while U.K. consumer price inflation has edged closer to the Bank’s 2 per cent target, underlying inflation dynamics — particularly in services — continue to complicate the outlook.
Bailey noted that future data will be pivotal in determining whether the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee feels confident enough to lower the base rate at the March 19 meeting or hold off for further evidence of sustained price stability. Persistent global trade uncertainty, including potential inflationary effects from tariffs, could weigh on that decision.
Inflation Dynamics and a Cautious BoE Stance
Although headline inflation has eased — buoyed partly by softer food price inflation and moderating goods costs — services inflation remains sticky, raising questions about how quickly broader price pressures will subside. This has tempered market expectations for imminent rate cuts in the U.K., even as consumer price indicators hint at a return to target levels later this year.
The Bank of England’s approach contrasts with the Federal Reserve’s cautious stance in the United States, where central bank officials have increasingly debated the influence of external factors — such as tariffs and labour market conditions — on inflation and monetary policy timing.
Economic and Political Implications
The simultaneous unfolding of U.S. tariff escalation and monetary policy uncertainty in the U.K. highlights the interconnected nature of global economic decision-making at a critical juncture. For exporters and businesses reliant on international supply chains, the tariff regime adds a layer of complexity that could temper investment and trade flows. Meanwhile, central banks must weigh the inflationary risks of trade policy against domestic economic conditions when calibrating interest rate settings.
Analysts warn that prolonged trade frictions — if not resolved through diplomatic negotiation or legislative action — could slow global growth and intensify the challenges facing central banks striving to support economic stability while controlling inflation.
7 years in the field, from local radio to digital newsrooms. Loves chasing the stories that matter to everyday Aussies – whether it’s climate, cost of living or the next big thing in tech.
