Orange Juice Importers Challenge Trump's Threatened 50% Tariff on Brazil at CIT
Orange juice importers Johanna Foods and Johanna Beverage Company took to the Court of International Trade on July 18 to get declaratory and injunctive relief from President Donald Trump's threatened 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods. The importers argued that the tariffs, which are set to come into effect on Aug. 1, exceed Trump's authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and represent an unconstitutional delegation of power (Johanna Foods v. United States, CIT # 25-00155).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
On July 9, Trump issued a letter to the Brazilian president threatening the 50% tariff on all goods from Brazil due to the Brazilian government's treatment of its former President Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil's attacks on free elections and the free speech rights of Americans, and the "longstanding and very unfair trade relationship."
Johanna Foods and Johanna Beverage told the trade court that this letter doesn't constitute a proper executive action and that the threatened tariff exceeds the authority granted to the president in IEEPA. The importers noted that IEEPA requires the declaration of a national emergency before the president can impose a tariff. Trump didn't declare a "separate national emergency for the imposition" of the tariff on Brazil, and the letter to the Brazilian president isn't a declaration of a national emergency, the complaint said.
Even if the letter could be seen as the proper vessel for declaring a national emergency, the stated grounds of the emergency aren't enough to create an emergency, Johanna Foods and Johanna Beverage said. The letter identifies the "longstanding" trade relationship, which, by itself, self-reports that the issue is not "an emergent" one, and, in any case, the U.S. has a trading surplus with Brazil.
The importers cited the trade court's prior decision on Trump's IEEPA tariffs, V.O.S. Selections v. Trump, to claim that tariffs can't be used to "create leverage to 'deal with' objectives other than the balance of trade." The Brazil tariff doesn't "deal with" an imbalance of trade, and any tariffs on Brazil seeking to address this very issue must be subject to the limits of Section 122, the complaint said. Section 122 limits tariffs to 15% for 150 days to address balance-of-payments issues, the brief said.
"An unbounded tariff, with no limitation in duration and scope, such as the Brazil Tariff, 'exceeds any tariff authority delegated to the President under the IEEPA,'" the importers said.
Johanna Foods and Johanna Beverage added that Trump's employment of IEEPA here represents an unconstitutional delegation of power. IEEPA only lets the president impose tariffs if there's a foreign threat to U.S. security, the threat is "unusual and extraordinary," a national emergency is declared and the president's use of IEEPA "deals with" the threat, the brief said. Here, no threat to national security is identified, there's no unusual or extraordinary threat identified in the letter, no national emergency was declared and the tariff is meant as "economic leverage over political issues and does not deal with any trade issues," the brief said.
The importers asked the trade court for declaratory judgment against the tariff, arguing that, without such relief, the companies "face potential layoffs of union manufacturing employees as well as administrative staff, reduced production capacity, and an existential threat to the sustainability of our business."