Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
The bill requires that the President may impose any import duty only after submitting a proposal and obtaining an enacted joint resolution of Congress approving the duty.
It applies to many statutory authorities (Tariff Act of 1930, Trade Expansion Act, IEEPA, Trading with the Enemy Act, trade agreements, and other customs laws).
Full exclusions or embargoes of all articles from a country are exempted.
Broad reallocation of executive trade and emergency powers, high controversy, and operational burdens on Congress make enactment unlikely without major revisions.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear and legally framed substantive change—requiring congressional enactment to permit presidential imposition of import duties—and integrates that requirement into the Trade Act of 1974 and related statutes. However, it provides limited procedural detail, no fiscal/readiness analysis, scant treatment of transitional or emergency scenarios, and minimal accountability provisions.
Role of executive power: conservatives welcome limits; liberals worry about losing enforcement tools.
Role of executive power: conservatives welcome limits; liberals worry about losing enforcement tools.
Likely mixed-to-skeptical.
Supports checking executive unilateral power but worries the change could slow or block tariffs used to enforce labor, environmental, or human-rights standards.
Concerned congressional inaction or corporate influence could prevent protective trade measures.
Generally favorable to restoring congressional authority, but cautious about reducing executive agility.
Sees the bill as improving checks and transparency while potentially introducing delays for urgent trade responses and national-security actions.
Broadly supportive as a restoration of Article I powers and a check on executive overreach.
Views the bill as preventing presidents from imposing de facto taxes without Congressional authorization, while acknowledging some tradeoff in rapid response capability.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Broad reallocation of executive trade and emergency powers, high controversy, and operational burdens on Congress make enactment unlikely without major revisions.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Role of executive power: conservatives welcome limits; liberals worry about losing enforcement tools.
Broad reallocation of executive trade and emergency powers, high controversy, and operational burdens on Congress make enactment unlikely w…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear and legally framed substantive change—requiring congressional enactment to permit presidential imposition of import duties—and integrates that req…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.