In the wake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision, China has formally called upon the United States to revoke all unilateral tariff measures imposed on its trading partners. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce announced on Monday that it is conducting a comprehensive evaluation of the ruling’s implications and will vigilantly monitor any subsequent ‘alternative measures’ Washington might deploy to sustain high import duties.
The judicial upheaval occurred on February 20th, 2026, when the Supreme Court struck down a broad swath of tariffs instituted by former President Donald Trump, deeming them an overreach of executive authority. This decision nullified specific tariffs, including those related to fentanyl and so-called ‘reciprocal’ levies on China. Consequently, the composite tariff rate on Chinese goods was poised to drop from 37% to approximately 21.9%, according to analyses by Guosheng Securities.
However, the trade landscape was swiftly scrambled once more when President Trump responded by invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, proclaiming a new 15% ‘global tariff.’ This maneuver effectively pushes the aggregate duty rate on Chinese imports back up to an estimated 28.6%.
A spokesperson for China’s Commerce Ministry condemned the U.S.’s unilateral actions, stating they breach both international trade norms and U.S. domestic law, ultimately serving no nation’s interests. While reaffirming China’s commitment to cooperative and stable global economic relations, the official underscored Beijing’s readiness to enact firm countermeasures should its legitimate interests be infringed.
Economic analysts highlight that the core leverage in the protracted Sino-U.S. trade negotiations hinges on each nation’s economic resilience and technological prowess. Luo Zhiheng, Chief Economist at Yuekai Securities, emphasized that fortifying China’s economic fundamentals and bolstering its capacity for independent innovation are paramount to navigating external uncertainties and securing long-term strategic initiative.
Furthermore, experts like Xiong Yuan from Guosheng Securities point to statutory limitations, noting that Section 122 imposes a strict 150-day time limit, making it an unlikely long-term solution and suggesting a future pivot back to more enduring legal mechanisms like Sections 301 and 232.
Amid these developments, voices from the business community, such as Sean Stein of the U.S.-China Business Council, advocate for a shift in dialogue beyond tariffs and toward fostering effective economic cooperation, enabling companies from both powerhouse economies to thrive in each other’s markets.