The History of Presidential Tariff Powers — And Why There’s Growing Concern Over Abuse Today

If you’ve been following U.S. politics, you’ve probably heard about tariffs popping up more and more in debates about the economy, foreign policy, and trade wars. Recently the stock market has been on a rollercoaster ride in response to the Trump administration’s latest round of tariffs. Investors are showing growing concern over the potential for higher costs on imported goods, supply chain disruptions, and strained international trade relationships.  Markets hate uncertainty, and these unpredictable tariff moves are creating exactly that.

But how did we get here? And why are experts raising the alarm that the current administration might be misusing these powers in ways the original laws never intended?

Let’s break it down.

A Quick Look Back: Why Presidents Got Tariff Powers in the First Place

Historically, tariffs — taxes placed on imports — were the job of Congress. Under the Constitution, Congress has the exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, which includes setting tariff rates. But over the 20th century, lawmakers slowly handed more and more control over tariffs to the President.

Why? Flexibility.

After the Great Depression, the U.S. wanted to avoid rigid, protectionist policies that had worsened global economic downturns. So Congress passed laws like the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and the Trade Act of 1974, which gave the President broad authority to adjust tariffs in response to foreign trade practices or national security concerns.

One of the most famous examples is Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which allows the president to impose tariffs if imports are deemed a national security threat. Originally, this was meant for extreme cases — like protecting U.S. steel in wartime — but over the years, presidents have used it more creatively.

The Modern Era: Tariffs as a Political Weapon

Fast forward to today, and tariffs have gone from obscure trade tools to political bargaining chips.

Under President Trump, for example, Section 232 was used to justify wide-ranging tariffs on steel and aluminum — not just from rivals, but from close allies like Canada and the EU. Critics argued that this was a stretch of the "national security" label and more about economic leverage than true defense concerns.

Now, in 2025, the Trump administration has floated new plans to expand and harden tariff use even further. Proposals have included across-the-board tariffs on all imports, regardless of origin, and efforts to sidestep Congress entirely when raising trade barriers.

This raises some serious red flags for trade experts, economists, and constitutional scholars alike.

Why This Matters: The Risk of Abuse

When a president can unilaterally impose tariffs without much oversight, it creates real risks:

• 💡 Economic Volatility: Tariffs can cause price spikes for everyday Americans, disrupting supply chains and making basic goods more expensive.
• 💡 Foreign Policy Manipulation: Tariffs are sometimes used as thinly veiled threats in international negotiations — creating tension, not solutions.
• 💡 Congressional Bypass: If tariffs are used as an economic or political weapon rather than for genuine national security, it cuts Congress out of decisions it was designed to handle.

Many legal experts argue that the present administration’s approach could test — or even break — the system. Rather than acting as a last-resort measure, tariffs are at risk of becoming a first-choice policy for economic coercion and headline-grabbing politics.

Calls for Reform: Reining In Presidential Tariff Powers

Given the potential for misuse, both Democrats and Republicans in Congress have floated ideas to rein in presidential tariff powers. Proposals include:

• 🧾 Requiring Congressional Approval for tariffs imposed under the national security exception.
• 🧾 Adding Clearer Definitions of what constitutes an actual “threat” to national security.
• 🧾 Time Limits on emergency tariffs, unless extended by Congress.

The truth is, these powers were meant for emergencies — not everyday trade disputes or personal political agendas.

The Bottom Line

Presidential tariff powers were created to give the White House flexibility during global emergencies, not unlimited economic control. Over time, these powers have expanded, and the current administration’s increasingly aggressive use of them is raising legitimate concerns about abuse.

With the global economy more interconnected than ever, how the U.S. uses tariffs — and who gets to decide — will have ripple effects for businesses, consumers, and international allies for years to come.

>Wear Your Voice: Political T-Shirts Speak Without Saying a Word<