Connect with us

Accounting

Trump’s global tariffs deemed illegal, blocked by trade court

Published

on

The vast majority of President Donald Trump’s global tariffs were deemed illegal and blocked by the U.S. trade court, dealing a major blow to a pillar of his economic agenda.

A panel of three judges at the U.S. Court of International Trade in Manhattan issued a unanimous ruling Wednesday which sided with Democratic-led states and small businesses that accused Trump of wrongfully invoking an emergency law to justify the bulk of his levies. The court gave the administration 10 days to “effectuate” its order, but didn’t spell out any steps it must take to unwind the tariffs.

The order applies to Trump’s global flat tariff, elevated rates on China and others, and his fentanyl-related tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico. Other tariffs imposed under different powers, like so-called Section 232 and Section 301 levies, are unaffected, and include the tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles.

The Justice Department filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately have the final say in the high-stakes case that could impact trillions of dollars in global trade. For now, the ruling permanently blocks the tariffs unless the appeals court allows Trump to reinstate them during litigation.

U.S. stock-index futures jumped on the ruling, with contracts on the Nasdaq 100 Index rising as much as 2.1%. The dollar strengthened and the yen tumbled.

The decision is one of the biggest setbacks in court for Trump amid a wave of lawsuits over executive orders testing the limits of presidential power. Others are challenging Trump’s mass firings of federal workers, restrictions on birthright citizenship and efforts to slash federal spending already approved by Congress.

The judges rejected the government’s argument that Trump had authority to unilaterally issue tariffs under a law intended to address financial transactions during national emergencies. The ruling was a so-called summary judgment, meaning a final victory for the plaintiffs in lower court without the need for a trial.

Trump’s executive orders invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to justify the sweeping global tariffs. The law grants the president authority over a variety of financial transactions during certain emergencies, typically with sanctions. 

The president cited the U.S. trade deficits and drug trafficking at the U.S. border as national emergencies that allowed him to invoke the law. The judges said Trump’s lawyers had stated during court hearings that the intention was to “pressure” other nations into striking better deals.

“The government’s ‘pressure’ argument effectively concedes that the direct effect of the country-specific tariffs is simply to burden the countries they target,” wrote the panel, which includes one judge appointed by Trump, one by Barack Obama and one by Ronald Reagan.

Global markets

Global markets have fluctuated wildly since Trump announced the so-called reciprocal levies in a sweeping executive order on April 2. Since then, trillions of dollars in market value have been shed and regained amid weeks of delays, reversals and announcements about potential trade deals, particularly with China.

In response to the latest court ruling, White House spokesman Kush Desai said “it is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency.”

“Foreign countries’ nonreciprocal treatment of the Unites States has fueled America’s historic and persistent trade deficits,” Desai said in a statement. “These deficits have created a national emergency that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind, and weakened our defense industrial base – facts that the court did not dispute.”

Emergency law

Trump has said he was permitted to use the emergency law to implement tariffs because the nation’s “large and persistent” annual trade deficits across the globe constituted “an unusual and extraordinary threat” to national security and the economy.

The panel of judges concluded that Trump’s initial executive order announcing global tariffs and subsequent order dealing additional levies on countries that retaliated both exceeded the president’s authority under the emergency law. A third executive order, hitting Mexico and Canada with tariffs over concerns about drug trafficking, were deemed to be illegal by the court because those levies do not ultimately attempt to address the trafficking problem.

A complaint brought by a conservative legal advocacy group on behalf of small businesses alleged Trump is misusing the law, essentially basing his tariffs on a bogus emergency. The Liberty Justice Center said the U.S. trade deficits are “neither an emergency nor an unusual or extraordinary threat.” Even if it were, the group said, the emergency law doesn’t allow a president to impose across-the-board tariffs.

The Democrat-led states alleged the tariffs amount to a massive tax on American consumers and infringe on the authority of Congress. The states also challenged Trump’s tariffs on Mexico and Canada, which cite the same emergency law based on claims about cartel activity and drug trafficking.

Drug trafficking

The states alleged that the broad nature of Trump’s tariffs undercut his claims about the purported emergency because they don’t target goods or services connected in any way to drug trafficking.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul hailed the ruling on social media.

The U.S. trade court is part of the nation’s federal court system and was created by Congress to handle specialized disputes around trade, including tariffs. Decisions are appealed on the same track as rulings from district courts, meaning a challenge by Trump would go to a federal appeals court and then the U.S. Supreme Court. As with other federal courts, the judges are appointed by sitting presidents.

Republicans in Congress have advanced legislation that would give the president broad authority to impose so-called reciprocal tariffs, but concern about the impact of Trump’s widespread levies is expected to limit the appetite for moving that measure now.

‘Second-guessing’

The Trump administration argued in court filings that the plaintiffs are improperly questioning his executive orders, “inviting judicial second-guessing of the president’s judgment.” 

The government had asked the panel of judges to issue only a narrow ruling if they were to rule in favor of the plaintiffs, but the court concluded that wasn’t possible given the nature of the tariffs.

“There is no question here of narrowly tailored relief; if the challenged tariff orders are unlawful as to plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all,” the panel said.

The court said it didn’t need to weigh in on the plaintiffs’ argument that Trump had declared a false national emergency, saying that argument is moot for now because the president had used the law improperly regardless.

New York Attorney General Letitia James praised the ruling in a statement.

“These tariffs are a massive tax hike on working families and American businesses that would have led to more inflation, economic damage to businesses of all sizes, and job losses across the country if allowed to continue,” James said.

The cases are V.O.S. Selections v. Trump, 25-cv-00066, and Oregon v. Trump, 25-cv-00077, U.S. Court of International Trade (Manhattan).

Continue Reading

Accounting

Continuous Auditing Transforms Corporate ERPs

Published

on

continuous auditing transforms corporate erps

As corporate accounting departments cross the threshold into late July 2026, the adoption of continuous, automated auditing systems has reached a definitive turning point. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence and deep integration with modern Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platforms, leading finance organizations are moving away from traditional, periodic post-hoc audits in favor of real-time, 100% transactional verification. This technological transition is redefining internal control environments, reducing compliance costs, and eliminating the structural delays inherent in legacy quarterly closing processes.

Unlike traditional auditing frameworks that rely on statistical sampling—a process that inevitably leaves operational blind spots—continuous auditing software monitors operational data feeds continuously. Every purchase order, electronic invoice, payroll disbursement, and cross-border wire transfer is automatically cross-referenced against established corporate governance parameters, regulatory tax schedules, and anti-fraud algorithms in real time. Anomalies or unauthorized ledger entries are flagged instantly, allowing internal audit teams to investigate and remediate compliance gaps immediately rather than months after the close of a financial period.

The implications for executive financial management are far-reaching. By embedding continuous verification directly into daily transaction workflows, chief financial officers gain uninterrupted visibility into the organization’s true financial standing. Real-time balance sheet auditing eliminates the severe operational bottlenecks associated with month-end and quarter-end financial reconciliations, freeing accounting professionals to focus on strategic financial modeling, tax planning, and capital allocation rather than manual data entry and spreadsheet consolidation.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting leadership to invest heavily in data governance and technical upskilling. Internal audit teams must evolve from manual ledger reviewers into system architects capable of auditing complex algorithms and validating automated data pipelines. Accounting firms and corporate controllers that master continuous auditing will establish a resilient compliance framework capable of meeting stringent international regulatory standards with total transparency.

Continue Reading

Accounting

U.S. Imposes New 50% Tariffs on Canadian Imports Under Rare Legal Provision

Published

on

U.S. Imposes New 50% Tariffs on Canadian Imports Under Rare Legal Provision

WASHINGTON — In a major escalation of cross-border trade friction, U.S. President Donald Trump has signed executive orders imposing new 50% tariffs on a wide selection of Canadian exports, citing discriminatory practices by Ottawa targeting American auto, dairy, and beverage industries.

The new duties, announced Monday, will take effect in 30 days. They target a broad spectrum of consumer and industrial goods—ranging from wine, liquor, and milk products to commercial cement, furniture, clothing, and hockey equipment.

Untested Legal Mechanism

To enact the sweeping measures, the administration invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930—a rarely used legal provision allowing the executive branch to levy additional tariffs of up to 50% on foreign nations deemed to discriminate against U.S. commerce.

White House officials noted that Section 338 addresses trade discrimination rather than national security or economic emergencies. The move comes months after prior global emergency tariffs faced legal challenges in domestic courts, signaling Washington’s pivot toward alternate statutory authorities to maintain import duties.

Senior administration officials briefed reporters that the measure directly responds to Canadian provincial bans on U.S. alcohol, restrictions on American vehicle exports, and import quota disparities affecting U.S. dairy and cheese producers relative to third-party trading partners.

“While the administration continues to secure reciprocal trade agreements globally, Canada retaliated against efforts to protect domestic industry,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated.

USMCA Impact and Carve-Outs

Significantly, the newly ordered 50% duties will apply to designated items even if they otherwise comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

However, the administration confirmed key targeted exemptions:

  • Energy products (including oil and natural gas)
  • Potash and critical minerals
  • Fish and seafood
  • Goods already governed by sector-specific duties (such as existing steel and aluminum tariffs)

Administration representatives emphasized that the tariffs do not stem from recent disputes concerning drifting Canadian wildfire smoke, noting that policy options regarding environmental spillover remain under separate review.

Canadian Response and Market Reaction

Following the White House announcement, the Canadian dollar experienced a sharp decline against the U.S. dollar, falling approximately 0.4% during evening trading.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney issued a statement emphasizing that Canada’s earlier counter-duties had merely matched previous U.S. trade actions. “Canada stands ready to engage intensively to address outstanding issues with the U.S. to the mutual benefit of our citizens,” Carney stated, pointing to detailed proposals Ottawa submitted to modernize the USMCA framework.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford took a firmer stance, urging a “dollar-for-dollar” reciprocal response if the measures go into effect on August 19.

With a 30-day implementation window before the duties officially lock in, industry associations and trade groups on both sides of the border are calling for urgent bilateral negotiations to avert further supply chain disruption across North America.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Continuous Auditing: Transforming Compliance and Real-Time Financial Oversight

Published

on

Transforming Compliance and Real-Time Financial Oversight

The traditional accounting paradigm—defined by periodic monthly closures and post-hoc annual audits—is rapidly giving way to continuous, automated financial oversight. As of July 2026, forward-thinking accounting practices and multinational corporate finance departments are leveraging continuous auditing systems powered by advanced machine learning models. These systems monitor operational transactions in real time, shifting audit methodologies from sample-based post-analysis to absolute, 100% transaction-level verification.

The operational advantages of continuous auditing are transformative. Standard auditing procedures historically relied on statistical sampling, which, despite rigorous methodology, inherently left gaps where anomalies or fraudulent transactions could go undetected for months. Modern continuous auditing platforms integrate directly with enterprise resource planning (ERP) databases, instantly cross-referencing purchase orders, invoices, bank feeds, and tax records. Any deviation from established control parameters or unusual transaction behavior triggers immediate flags for internal audit teams, dramatically reducing detection lag from quarters to seconds.

Beyond fraud prevention, continuous auditing fundamentally alters internal reporting and decision-making. Executive leadership no longer has to wait weeks after the close of a quarter to evaluate precise financial standing; real-time verified ledger data provides an uninterrupted view of operating margins, tax liabilities, and cash flow dynamics. This real-time visibility enables corporate controllers to adjust capital allocation strategies dynamically, mitigating liquidity constraints and capitalizing on emerging commercial opportunities far more efficiently than competitors bound to legacy reporting cycles.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting professionals to acquire new analytical capabilities. The role of the auditor is evolving from manual data reconciliation toward system validation, algorithmic model governance, and strategic risk interpretation. Accounting firms and corporate finance departments must invest in continuous technical education, ensuring that audit staff possess the data engineering skills necessary to design, maintain, and evaluate complex automated compliance systems.

Continue Reading

Trending