Trumps tariffs 1440x1080 1

Court Ruling Challenges Trump’s Trade Strategy Amid Global Uncertainty

A U.S. federal court has ruled that President Donald Trump’s sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs are illegal — delivering what may prove to be a major blow to his trade policy agenda, or simply a temporary setback.

On May 28, 2025, the United States Court of International Trade determined that President Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by imposing broad tariffs on imports from numerous countries. The court found that the administration’s justification did not meet the IEEPA’s requirement of an “unusual and extraordinary threat,” rendering the tariffs an improper use of executive power.

The three-judge panel unanimously held that the IEEPA does not authorise the president to unilaterally impose such sweeping tariffs, stressing the need for a clear mandate from Congress when it comes to major economic decisions. As a result, the court issued a permanent injunction against the tariffs and ordered U.S. Customs and Border Protection to stop collecting them.

The ruling requires that the tariffs be halted within 10 days. The Trump administration has announced plans to appeal, which could take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Implications for Trade Policy
This decision directly challenges a key pillar of Trump’s trade strategy, which has leaned heavily on tariffs to address trade imbalances and shield U.S. industries. It may also influence ongoing negotiations with key partners such as the European Union and the United Kingdom by casting doubt on the legal basis for unilateral U.S. tariff actions.

While the court invalidated the sweeping global tariffs introduced on April 2 — including the baseline 10% levy and “reciprocal” duties — it did not strike down the administration’s sector-specific tariffs on imports like steel and cars, which remain in force.

The ruling is expected to embolden critics of Trump’s tariff policy across corporate America, foreign capitals, and Capitol Hill. It also comes at a sensitive moment for the administration, which is working to finalise new trade deals after suspending many of the planned tariff hikes.

The legal setback introduces fresh uncertainty into an already volatile global trade landscape — and may ultimately reshape how domestic and international actors engage with U.S. trade policy in the months ahead.

Stay informed as the US tariff and trade landscape evolves. Go to our home page to subscribe to our eBulletin updates for expert insight on the rulings, appeals, and what it all means for your supply chain strategy.

Parliament blur

UK Strikes Trio of Trade Deals in May

The UK government has made major strides in strengthening its international trade relationships this May, concluding three key agreements with India (6 May), the United States (8 May), and the European Union (19 May).

These agreements could reshape trade routes and sourcing decisions, reduce costs, and create new opportunities for exporters and importers alike. With further negotiations under way with Gulf nations, the UK is expanding its global footprint.

UK-EU Agreement Reduces Border Friction
The updated UK-EU agreement, the first substantial step forward in post-Brexit cooperation, sets out revised terms for trade, fishing rights and defence collaboration. Of particular note is the reduction in bureaucracy around food shipments, with most routine checks on animal and plant products travelling between the UK and EU scrapped.

This could significantly ease the administrative burden and reduce delays for companies dealing in perishable goods. However, details on how the agreement affects the movement of non-food goods, including machinery, textiles and other industrial or consumer products, remain to be clarified.

While the deal does not represent a return to the frictionless trade of the pre-Brexit era, it is an encouraging signal that practical cooperation is possible. For businesses that rely on predictable cross-border movements, this agreement may help restore a degree of confidence.

US Agreement Offers Narrow, Targeted Relief
Despite being framed as a “trade deal”, the UK-US agreement is a limited, sector-specific tariff arrangement rather than a full-scale free trade agreement. That said, it delivers tangible relief in several key areas.

For UK exporters of vehicles, the US has cut its tariff from 25% to 10%, but only for up to 100,000 vehicles annually. This mirrors the volume of UK exports in 2024, but it places a hard ceiling on further growth, with exports above that threshold subject to a 27.5% tariff.

The removal of 25% tariffs on UK steel and aluminium also brings welcome relief to manufacturers. However, these benefits come with conditions, including expected quotas and continued duties on certain products made with these metals, such as gym equipment and industrial machinery.

While the UK has dropped some tariffs on US food and agricultural products, reciprocal benefits for UK exporters beyond the automotive and metal sectors remain limited. A blanket 10% US tariff still applies to most other UK goods, and a 25% tariff on UK automotive parts remains in place. Details on additional product categories, including consumer goods and manufactured components, are expected in due course.

The deal is a step forward, but it leaves a patchwork of tariffs and quotas that will require careful navigation. Legal and regulatory uncertainties will persist in the months ahead as negotiations continue and further details emerge.

India Deal Signals Long-Term Growth Potential
The UK’s agreement with India stands out as the most comprehensive and forward-looking of the three deals. It includes significant tariff reductions and market access improvements across a wide range of products, and is forecast to increase bilateral trade by £25.5 billion annually by 2040.

UK exports set to benefit include whisky, gin, aerospace components, medical devices, cosmetics, and high-end vehicles. In return, the UK will lower tariffs on Indian exports such as clothing, footwear, frozen foodstuffs, jewellery, and processed goods.

For importers, the deal offers more competitive access to one of the world’s fastest-growing economies. For exporters, it opens the door to India’s expanding middle class, which is already larger than the entire population of the EU and is hungry for high-quality, internationally branded products.

Beyond tariffs, the agreement promises to streamline customs procedures and reduce non-tariff barriers, improvements that will be welcomed by any business frustrated by red tape or unpredictable clearance processes. However, the full legal text is yet to be published, and the final impact will depend on detailed implementation rules, particularly around rules of origin and product classifications.

Looking at Gulf Nations Opportunities
Speaking to the BBC on 20 May, Chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed that the UK’s next strategic focus is on securing trade agreements with countries in the Gulf, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar. Ongoing discussions aim to boost UK exports of food and drink, renewable energy technologies, and manufactured goods, while encouraging more inward investment.

Reeves also clarified that the government is “not looking to have trade negotiations” with China, which draws a line under speculation about future UK-China trade relations for the foreseeable future.

Implications for UK Businesses
For UK businesses, whether they import raw materials or finished goods, or export to overseas markets, these deals bring both opportunity and complexity. While tariff reductions and customs streamlining can offer immediate cost savings and efficiency gains, the sector-specific and quota-based nature of the agreements means that success will depend on careful planning and informed decision-making.

The three deals signal a broader shift in the UK’s trade strategy, one that favours targeted, bilateral agreements over sweeping free trade pacts. They also reflect a pragmatic effort to strengthen links with fast-growing economies and key strategic allies.

As implementation details unfold and further negotiations continue, UK businesses will need to stay agile, review their supply chains, and consider how to best take advantage of the new landscape.

Metro’s established freight services, in-house customs brokerage, and on-the-ground teams in both India and the United States mean we’re uniquely placed to help UK businesses respond to this new trade landscape.

Whether you’re reviewing sourcing strategies, navigating new tariffs, or planning market entry, our experts can support you with compliant, cost-effective solutions across every mode and market.

EMAIL Managing Director, Andrew Smith to explore how we can optimise your global trade strategy.

Indian port congestion looms

Cargo Rush Sparks Port Congestion and Equipment Shortages

The recent 90-day pause on US tariffs on Chinese imports has sparked a dramatic surge in demand, as American importers scramble to front-load shipments ahead of the 14 August deadline. The demand spike is now placing considerable pressure on supply chains across Asia and Europe, threatening to disrupt global freight flows into the traditional peak season.

Freight bookings from China to the US rocketed 300% in just one week, marking the highest volume levels of the year so far, as US importers use the temporary reprieve to push through previously delayed shipments.

While the tariff rate remains high at 30%, it is significantly lower than the 145% rates imposed earlier in the spring. Importers are moving quickly to take advantage of this limited window of cost certainty, but the consequences are already being felt far beyond China’s borders.

With ships now flooding back into Chinese ports, congestion has rapidly intensified:

  • Shanghai and Qingdao are experiencing berth waiting times of 24–72 hours.
  • Ningbo reports delays of 24–36 hours, while the congestion there is now worsening due to diverted volumes.
  • Busan is reporting 72-hour waits at the PNIT Terminal.
  • Singapore and Yokohama are also affected, with waiting times up to 36 and 24 hours, respectively.

Carriers are reporting widespread bunching and missed berths, forcing some vessels to skip port calls entirely. Simultaneously, container availability is tightening, especially in Shanghai and Ningbo, where carriers have begun rationing equipment based on rate levels and space commitments. Maersk and HMM are among those limiting container release in an attempt to balance capacity with available slots.

Further down the line, ports in southern China, Southeast Asia, and even intra-Asia trades are also reporting backlogs. Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Ho Chi Minh City, and Port Klang have all seen yard utilisation rise and service delays build.

Strain Spreads to Europe as Container Flows Disrupt
The congestion is not limited to Asia. As carriers reposition vessels and adjust service rotations to meet surging demand on eastbound transpacific routes, European ports are beginning to feel the knock-on effects.

In northern Europe:

  • Hamburg is facing 5–6½ days of berth delays,
  • Southampton and London Gateway are seeing 3-day waits,
  • Antwerp is experiencing severe disruption with delays extending to 15½ days,
  • Piraeus and Tangiers are also impacted, each facing waits of up to 4 and 3 days, respectively.

Labour shortages, reduced barge capacity on the Rhine, and tight schedules are compounding these delays. Meanwhile, rerouted vessels from Asia–Europe services are creating bunching at key transhipment hubs such as Bremerhaven and Hamburg, which in turn serve Scandinavia and the Baltic.

Equipment Shortages and Capacity Gaps Ahead of Peak Season
Container availability is expected to worsen in the coming weeks. With vessels already departing China at high utilisation levels, the return of empty containers and the repositioning of ships to Asia may not keep pace with demand.

If previously produced goods held in bonded warehouses are added to this surge in volumes during May, demand could increase by nearly 50%. A delay to June would ease the burden, but it could still be over 15%, which still represents a steep challenge ahead of the summer peak.

This front-loading of cargo to the US may lead to a sharp, compressed peak season starting now and stretching into mid-July, followed by potential equipment shortages and service volatility in August and beyond.

We are closely monitoring port performance, vessel schedules, and rate volatility across all major trade lanes, to support customers with:

  • Priority bookings and space management on transpacific and key routes
  • Equipment selection and container allocation strategies
  • Alternative routing and scheduling options to avoid bottlenecks
  • Global shipment visibility to SKU

EMAIL Managing Director Andrew Smith to discuss current conditions, risk mitigation, and booking options tailored to your business priorities.

COSCO appoint Metro partner

US Port Fees on Chinese-Built Vessels

The United States Trade Representative (USTR) has finalised a revised plan to impose port fees on Chinese-built containerships calling at US ports.

This follows the reintroduction of the SHIPS for America Act, part of President Donald Trump’s broader push to revive the US shipbuilding industry and reduce reliance on Chinese maritime infrastructure.

While significantly less disruptive than the original February proposal, which threatened to add up to $1.5 million per port call and cost the industry $24 billion, the revised version will still increase shipping costs by approximately $1 million per voyage. These added costs may have ripple effects across global supply chains.

What’s Changing – and When?

USTR Port Fee

  • Start Date: Mid-October 2025
  • Escalation: Costs will increase every 180 days over a three-year period
  • Estimated Additional Costs:
    • Chinese operators (e.g. COSCO/OOCL): USD $250–$1,600 per TEU
    • Non-Chinese operators using China-built vessels: USD $100–$400 per TEU

Crucially, carriers will only be charged once per US rotation, not at every port call. Exemptions apply for:

  • Vessels under 4,000 TEUs
  • Voyages under 2,000 nautical miles
  • China-built vessels owned by US-based carriers

Carrier Reactions and Supply Chain Impacts
Most non-Chinese carriers are expected to redeploy tonnage to avoid the fees, shifting Chinese-built vessels away from US trades in favour of non-Chinese built ships. Some may elect to use transhipment hubs in the Caribbean to bypass direct calls to US ports.

Chinese carriers like COSCO and OOCL will be hardest hit. With limited ability to avoid the charges, these carriers may lean more heavily on alliance partners like CMA CGM or Evergreen, potentially distorting market dynamics and reducing competition on some transpacific routes.

Despite initial fears, widespread surcharges are currently seen as unlikely. Market competition and alternative capacity could prevent many carriers from passing costs directly onto shippers, tthough selective route-specific or carrier-specific fees may still emerge.

SHIPS for America Act
This proposed legislation, while not yet passed, aims to further penalise Chinese-built, -owned or -registered vessels. It also opens the door for other “countries of concern” to be added in future. No cost estimates have been released, but shippers should remain alert to potential follow-on impacts.

The evolving policy landscape introduces fresh uncertainty for importers and exporters, especially those with supply chains linked to Asia–US routes.

Metro is actively monitoring developments and engaging with carriers and industry bodies to stay ahead of the real-time implications. Our goal is to help customers navigate any changes smoothly and make informed decisions.

If your business could be affected by these measures, or you simply want to future-proof your supply chain with revised routing strategies and updated landed cost assessments, please EMAIL our Managing Director, Andrew Smith.