19th November 2025

Developments in US trade policy affecting the dietary supplement industry

Author(s)

This article provides a comprehensive overview of recent changes in US trade policy. It highlights key developments such as new global tariffs and bilateral trade agreements, sector- and country-specific investigations, North American trade developments, geopolitical trade measures, and US-China trade relations so that members of the US dietary supplement industry can better understand trade policy issues affecting the US market.

Keywords – international trade, pharmaceuticals, tariffs

Introduction

The Trump administration announced its trade policy priorities in a 20 January 2025 memorandum, stating its aims to promote investment in US manufacturing and jobs; address and counteract foreign trade policies and practices disadvantaging US industry and workers; investigate and address imports with a national security nexus; and negotiate bilaterally with US trading partners to advance US interests.¹ The memorandum signaled the administration’s intention to achieve these goals through sweeping country- and sector-specific changes to trade policy using a wide variety of legal tools. These changes continue to unfold rapidly in the global trade landscape.

New global, country-specific tariffs on imports are a particularly notable development. While the tariff rates have been subject to ongoing court challenges, they have occasionally been paused, lowered, or raised and are spurring a flurry of bilateral agreements with important US trading partners. The administration continues to use Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to initiate new investigations that may lead to additional trade measures. Trade with Canada and Mexico is also under scrutiny, despite the reset of North American trade relations under President Trump’s first term with the passage of a new trilateral free trade agreement. Other countries, such as Russia and Brazil, are also subject to recent and continuing restrictions on trade with the US due to various geopolitical issues. US-China trade relations are particularly dynamic and continue to play a significant role in US trade policy. Members of the dietary supplement industry should monitor these developments and assess opportunities to be proactive and strategic. Reviewing supply contracts, understanding compliance obligations for importing, and identifying opportunities for duty mitigation and supply chain realignment are some key ways in which US companies can adapt to the new trade environment.

Global tariffs and new trade agreements

In April 2025, the president declared a national emergency concerning the US trade in goods deficit and foreign trade measures burdening US businesses.² He imposed global, country-specific reciprocal tariff rates ranging from 10% (applicable for most countries) to 50%.² Many products, including various dietary supplements and related products classified under specific subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) are exempted from the reciprocal tariffs at this time under Annex II of the April 2 executive order, although this is likely only due to the ongoing Section 232 investigation on pharmaceuticals and their derivatives, as discussed below.² These tariffs are sweeping and apply to major global exporters of pharmaceuticals and nutrition products, such as Switzerland. The exact level, applicability, and duration of the tariff rates continue to change.^3,4 Engagement by industry stakeholders with relevant agencies and government officials assists the administration in understanding and accommodating, when possible, key priorities for the dietary supplement industry.^5,6 Although, as noted above, a number of dietary supplement products are listed in Annex II and continue to be exempted from these tariffs, other categories of products, like botanicals and herbs, are subject to these tariffs.

Notably, the products subject to these reciprocal tariffs are also changing over time, warranting continued monitoring by members of the dietary supplement industry. On 5 September 2025, the president issued an executive order amending the April 2 reciprocal tariff action.⁷ In particular, he amended the original list of products contained in Annex II that are exempted from the tariffs. The Notes column in Annex II lists newly added products, which include several chemical compounds, that will now be exempted from reciprocal tariffs. A small number of products were removed from Annex II, meaning they are now subject to the tariffs, none of which are particularly relevant to the dietary supplement industry.

The September 5 executive order also created a new annex (Annex III) listing products potentially eligible for duty exemption on a country-by-country basis if the US reaches an agreement regarding reciprocal trade with a particular country.⁷ This third annex is particularly relevant for the dietary supplement industry because it includes numerous specific subheadings marked Pharma that include “only non-patented articles for use in pharmaceutical applications.” In other words, should the US reach trade agreements with any trading parties such that Annex III exemptions would apply, an exemption for any product marked Pharma is limited in scope to only the nonpatented article for use in pharmaceutical applications.

These tariffs have also spurred and hastened trade agreements between the current administration and foreign governments. In May 2025, the Trump administration announced its first trade agreement during the president’s second term with the UK.⁸ Notably for the dietary supplement industry, that agreement indicates future US-UK cooperation on potential forthcoming US trade measures affecting pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients.^8,9 In addition, after considering retaliatory measures that could have impacted EU exports to the US (including chemicals and other goods relevant to the dietary supplement industry),¹⁰ the EU also announced a deal with the administration in July 2025, which generally provides for a 15% US tariff rate on imported goods from the EU.¹¹ Some goods, however, such as certain chemicals, generic drugs, and others, are to be exempted, and the US and EU intend to reach an agreement establishing a 15% US tariff rate ceiling for pharmaceutical products currently subject to the administration’s Section 232 investigation discussed below.^12,13 In 2024, about 60% of US imports of pharmaceutical products came from the EU.¹⁴

The Trump administration has also announced a deal with Japan under which the US will apply a zero percent tariff rate to “products of Japan that are natural resources unavailable (or unavailable at sufficient scale to satisfy domestic demand) in the US, generic pharmaceuticals, generic pharmaceutical ingredients, and generic pharmaceutical chemical precursors.”¹⁵ A baseline tariff of 15% will apply to Japanese imports not otherwise named in the executive order as subject to a different rate.

The administration continues to negotiate bilateral deals with major trading partners that address these tariffs and other measures, which has so far yielded trade deals with Indonesia, outlined by the White House in published fact sheets, and announcements of the same with Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam.¹⁶ While official text and further details of these agreements largely remain to be seen, the announcements are notable in their specifying of tariff rates in effect as of 7 August 2025, although those may still be subject to changes and carveouts. The administration also continues to negotiate with the government of China concerning these and other trade measures. Members of the dietary supplement industry should continue to monitor tariff rates and changes for key trading partners impacting the industry, such as India, the EU, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Switzerland, and China.¹³

Several US companies and state attorneys general have brought lawsuits challenging the president’s unprecedented use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to authorize these actions, and federal courts have preliminarily found the tariffs to be unlawful.¹⁷ The trade measures have so far remained in effect, however, as the court decisions are appealed by the administration. At the time of publication of this article, the lead appeal challenging the IEEPA tariffs, VOS Selections, Inc. v. Trump, is pending before the US Supreme Court.¹⁷ While the legality and staying power of these measures is uncertain, the administration may yet identify other sources of legal authority to lean on if the courts significantly curtail the president’s authority under IEEPA.

Section 232 and Section 301 investigations

In April 2025, the US Department of Commerce announced the initiation of an investigation pursuant to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into the national security implications of imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, “including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items.”¹⁸ In connection with this investigation, the president recently reiterated a plan to hike tariffs up to 100% on pharmaceutical products, unless the drugmaker of affected products is currently building in the US, stating: “ ‘is building’ will be defined as, ‘breaking ground’ and/or ‘under construction.’ There will, therefore, be no tariff on these pharmaceutical products if construction has started.”

As of early October 2025, however, the administration signaled continued efforts to negotiate agreements with pharmaceutical companies, prompting it to delay imposition of Section 232 tariffs on pharmaceutical products while negotiations continue.¹⁹

Agreements announced earlier this year with the governments of the EU and the UK, as well as press reports, have indicated the anticipated imposition of pharmaceutical tariffs resulting from this investigation. Notably, the White House’s fact sheet detailing the US-EU trade deal states that the US will impose a 15% tariff on pharmaceutical imports from the EU, which the EU describes as a “ceiling.”^11,12 The US-UK agreement notes that the two governments “intend to promptly negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients.”^8,9 As with other trade measures discussed in this article, the dietary supplement industry can continue to be engaged by taking advantage of opportunities to provide formal and informal input to key decision makers.^18,20

It remains to be seen if the administration will initiate more country-specific investigations. Using Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the first Trump administration initiated six country-specific investigations conducted by the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR). The office is currently investigating certain unfair acts, policies, and trading practices by Brazil, which may result in the imposition of additional tariffs beyond the recently announced 40% tariff, as discussed below.²¹ Sweeping tariffs imposed on imports from China as a result of a Section 301 investigation concluded by the USTR in 2018 also remain in effect. Importantly, while the impetus for these investigations may be limited to certain acts or policies of a foreign government affecting a specific industry, the resulting trade measures can be broad in scope, meaning announcements and developments for country-specific investigations warrant continued monitoring.

Canada and Mexico under scrutiny

While the July 2020 entry into force of the US-Canada-Mexico Agreement (USMCA) reset trade relations and rules in the North American market, trade with Canada and Mexico is subject to renewed and contentious scrutiny. In February 2025, the administration announced new tariffs on imports from Mexico to address inflows of illicit drugs and human trafficking.²² By invoking IEEPA and the National Emergencies Act, the president declared that a national emergency warranted imposing a 25% tariff on imported goods from Mexico. He simultaneously proclaimed a national emergency to address inflows of illicit drugs from Canada and similarly imposed a 25% tariff on imports from Canada (certain energy products, however, were subject to a lower 10% rate).²³ Both of these tariff regimes were later amended to exempt imports that qualify for preferential treatment under the USMCA.

Both of these measures included various rules and exceptions governing their precise applicability, meaning US companies should carefully evaluate any impact on their operations. Furthermore, as with the additional tariffs imposed on other countries, these actions have prompted ongoing negotiations, and the exact level, duration, and applicability of these measures have changed over time. In August 2025, the Trump administration raised the tariff rate for Canada from 25% to 35% for non-USMCA-qualifying goods.²⁴ As with the global reciprocal tariffs discussed above, however, these tariffs are subject to court challenges and have also been preliminarily found to be unlawful by US district courts, but remain in effect (subject to any changes by the administration) as the litigation continues. Notably, all of these developments are unfolding as the planned trilateral review of the USMCA is scheduled to formally take place by mid-2026. In September 2025, the USTR commenced the process for seeking public input, including the opportunity to submit written comments and appear at a public hearing, in connection with this review of the USMCA.²⁵ Members of the dietary supplement industry should therefore continue monitoring developments and consider formal and informal engagement with key government officials.

Geopolitical trade actions

Additional developments in US trade policy and certain US trade measures deal with various foreign policy matters. For example, a wide array of sanctions imposed on Russia following its invasion of Ukraine in 2022 remain in effect.²⁶ The administration has also demonstrated a willingness to impose trade measures on trading partners it views as assisting countries targeted by US action. In August 2025, the president issued an executive order providing for an additional 25% tariff on imported goods from India (bringing total IEEPA tariffs on Indian imports up to 50%) because of India’s direct or indirect importing of oil from Russia, a product targeted by an existing US sanction on Russian fuel.²⁷

The administration also imposed an additional 40% tariff on imported goods from Brazil classified under specific HTSUS subheadings.²⁸ According to the executive order announcing those tariffs, the measures are intended to address certain freedom of expression issues in Brazil. Notably, the president relied on the same law (IEEPA) to impose these tariffs targeting India and Brazil that he used to impose the reciprocal tariffs and the new tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China discussed in this article – and that are subject to litigation. As with other trade policy developments, US companies should monitor trade measures pertaining to foreign policy aims and the potential for these additional measures to create new obligations and rules impacting US companies, as well as potential legal challenges to these actions.

US-China trade relations

Trade relations between the US and China remain particularly dynamic. The first Trump administration imposed sweeping tariffs on imported products from China in 2018 as a result of USTR’s Section 301 investigation concerning intellectual property issues and China’s corresponding retaliatory actions. While the precise levels and applicability of these tariffs changed over time, tariffs imposed on Chinese goods generally ranged from 7.5% to 25% and the measures pertain to specific HTSUS subheadings. USTR also permitted companies to request exclusions from these tariffs, although very few of the exclusions previously granted remain in effect. The Biden administration largely left these Section 301 measures in place and even increased tariff rates on certain specified Chinese goods.²⁹ With the exception of the heightened tariff rates on the goods targeted by the Biden administration’s tariff rate increase, many goods imported into the US from China continue to be subject to these Section 301 tariffs that range from 7.5% to 25%. Limited exclusions to these tariffs also remain in effect, although US companies should continue to monitor the status of these tariffs and associated exclusions.³⁰

In February 2025, the current administration announced new additional 10% tariffs on Chinese products in response to a national emergency declaration concerning the Chinese government’s failure to “arrest, seize, detain, or otherwise intercept chemical precursor suppliers, money launderers, other [transnational criminal organizations], criminals at large, and drugs.”³¹ Similar to the emergency declarations addressing immigration and drug trafficking issues with Canada and Mexico, the president relied on IEEPA in imposing these additional tariffs on China, which are broad in scope and remain in effect while subject to ongoing litigation.^32,33 The administration increased these tariffs from 10% to 20% in March.^34,35

While the Chinese government has generally maintained various retaliatory trade measures since the first Trump administration imposed Section 301 tariffs in 2018, the recent additional tariffs imposed on China have spurred additional countermeasures. In April 2025, for example, China’s State Council Tariff Commission announced an 84% tariff on all goods imported from the US, prompting the administration to raise the reciprocal tariff rate on China, first to 84% and then to 125%.³⁶ Negotiations between the two countries, however, are yielding some reprieves. Within a few weeks of raising China’s tariff rate, citing progress in negotiations, the administration lowered the tariff on Chinese goods to 34%.³⁷ In August 2025, the administration also announced that as negotiations continue, this heightened reciprocal tariff rate of 34% on China would remain suspended.³⁸

Managing risk

The trade landscape has changed significantly in 2025, and all indications are that the current pace will continue in the near future. Managing risk is key as businesses navigate these changes. There are several steps that companies can take to remain diligent:

Conduct a thorough review of the company’s supply chain. If a company imports from abroad, it should ensure that the HTS classification and country of origin of the imports are correctly declared. These are two critical items to ensure proper declaration of imported goods and can impact whether tariffs apply and at what specific rate. For questions or complicated classification questions, one should engage a customs broker or trade counsel to confirm HTSUS classifications, country of origin, and to identify any exclusion opportunities.
Review company strategy to determine whether any opportunities for USMCA preferential treatment may apply. Procuring products or inputs from Canada or Mexico presents unique challenges and opportunities.
Be aware of duty assessment timing differences. Imports may be classified in different ways. For example, an import may be declared as entered for immediate consumption in the US, or it may enter a bonded warehouse or free trade zone. The entry type for imports affects when and whether duties are owed.
Build a supply-chain strategy to ensure ongoing compliance. This may include analyzing HTSUS codes for key ingredients, assessing tariff and enforcement risk by country and (more specifically) by supplier, and identifying qualified backup suppliers. If a product is subject to other types of duties (e.g., antidumping/countervailing duties), then the tariff rate for that product and country may vary by specific supplier/exporter.
Certain issues may warrant advocacy before the administration or Congress.

Conclusion

The dynamic developments noted above mean that US companies and the dietary supplement industry should continue to remain informed and engaged in trade policy. With the Trump administration’s willingness to take bold action and seek to resolve trade disputes through one-on-one negotiations, opportunities to inform the administration of specific problems and priorities for the dietary supplement industry are worth pursuing. As the administration continues negotiations with foreign governments, and including the upcoming USMCA renegotiation, US companies should monitor developments, understand the changing trade rules, compliance obligations, and the applicability to their operations, and identify ways to leverage opportunities for advocacy and engagement.

Abbreviations
EU, European Union; IEEPA, International Emergency Economic Powers Act; HTSUS, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States; UK, United Kingdom; USMCA, United States-Canada-Mexico Agreement; USTR, Office of the United States Trade Representative.

About the authors
Melissa M. Brewer, JD, is a special counsel at Kelley Drye & Warren LLP based in Washington, DC. She has 15 years of experience as an attorney focusing on international trade issues, helping clients navigate the decision-making processes involved in trade cases. Brewer holds a bachelor of arts degree from Franklin & Marshall College and a juris doctorate from The Catholic University of American Columbus School of Law. She can be reached at [email protected]

Matthew T. Martin, JD, is an associate at Kelley Drye & Warren LLP based in Washington, DC. He has two years of experience as an attorney specializing in international trade issues, including antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings before federal agencies and courts. Martin holds a bachelor of arts degree from Georgetown University and a juris doctorate from the William & Mary Law School. He can be reached at [email protected]

Citation Brewer MM, Martin MT. Developments in US trade policy affecting the dietary supplement industry. Regulatory Focus. Published online 14 November 2025. https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/News-Articles/2025/11/Developments-in-US-trade-policy-affecting-the-diet

References
All references were last checked and verified on 12 November 2025.

The White House. America First Trade Policy. Dated 20 January 2025. Accessed 5 August 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/america-first-trade-policy/
Executive Order No. 14257. Regulating Imports With a Reciprocal Tariff To Rectify Trade Practices That Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits. 90 Fed. Reg. 15041. Published 7 April 2025. Accessed 5 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-04-07/pdf/2025-06063.pdf
Executive Order No. 14259. Amendment to Reciprocal Tariffs and Updated Duties as Applied to Low-Value Imports From the People’s Republic of China. 90 Fed. Reg. 15509. Published 14 April 2025. Accessed 5 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-04-14/pdf/2025-06378.pdf
Executive Order No. 14326. Further Modifying the Reciprocal Tariff Rates. Published 6 August 2025. Accessed 10 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-08-06/pdf/2025-15010.pdf
Letter from Consumer Healthcare Products Association to Office of the US Trade Representative. Request for Comment to Assist in Reviewing and Identifying Unfair Trade Practices and Initiating All Necessary Actions to Investigate Harm from Non-Reciprocal Trade Arrangements. (90 Fed. Reg. 10677 [February 25, 2025]); Docket No.: USTR-2025-0001. Date 11 March 2025. Accessed 10 August 2025. https://comments.ustr.gov/s/docket?docketNumber=USTR-2025-0001
Natural Products Association. Trump Administration’s Leadership Secures Key Exemptions for Dietary Supplement Ingredients in Latest Tariff Announcement. Accessed 10 August 2025. https://www.npanational.org/news/trump-administrations-leadership-secures-key-exemptions-for-dietary-supplement-ingredients-in-latest-tariff-announcement/
Executive Order No. 14346. Modifying the Scope of Reciprocal Tariffs and Establishing Procedures for Implementing Trade and Security Agreements. 90 Fed. Reg. 43737. Published 10 September 2025. Accessed 6 September 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-09-10/pdf/2025-17507.pdf
Office of the US Trade Representative. USTR Fact Sheet: US-UK Reach Historic Trade Deal. Dated May 2025. Accessed 10 August 2025. https://ustr.gov/about/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2025/may/ustr-fact-sheet-us-uk-reach-historic-trade-deal
Office of the US Trade Representative. General Terms for the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Economic Prosperity Deal. Published 8 May 2025. Accessed 10 August 2025. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/fs/US%20UK%20EPD_050825_FINAL%20rev%20v2.pdf
European Commission. Information Gathering Notice under Regulation (EU) No 654/2014 on New US Tariffs on Imports Originating in or from the EU, and Possible EU Measures in Response. Dated 8 May 2025. Accessed 11 August 2025. https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/consultations/information-gathering-notice-under-regulation-eu-no-6542014-new-us-tariffs-imports-originating-or-eu_en
The White House. Fact Sheet: The United States and European Union Reach Massive Trade Deal. Dated 28 July 2025. Accessed 11 August 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-the-united-states-and-european-union-reach-massive-trade-deal/
European Commission. EU-US Trade Deal Explained. Published 28 July 2025. Accessed 10 August 2025. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_25_1930
National Products Association. Tariffs: Tariff Breakdown. Last updated 23 July 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.npanational.org/tariffs/
UN Comtrade Database. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://comtradeplus.un.org/
Executive Order No. 14345. Implementing the United States-Japan Agreement. 90 Fed. Reg. 43535. Published 9 September 2025. Accessed 9 September 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-09-09/pdf/2025-17389.pdf
The White House. Fact Sheet: The United States and Indonesia Reach Historic Trade Deal. Dated 22 July 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-the-united-states-and-indonesia-reach-historic-trade-deal/
VOS Selections, Inc. v. Trump, 149 F.4th 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2025), cert. granted, __ S. Ct. __, 2025 WL 2601020 (mem.) (Sept. 9, 2025) (No. 25-250)
Department of Commerce. Notice of Request for Public Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Pharmaceuticals and Pharmaceutical Ingredients. 90 Fed. Reg. 15951. Published 16 April 2025. Accessed 12 November 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-04-16/pdf/2025-06587.pdf
Desrochers D. Trump Delaying Triple-Digit Pharma Tariffs to Negotiate Drug Price Deals. Politico. Dated 1 October 2025. Accessed 2 October 2025. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/01/trump-delays-triple-digit-pharma-tariffs-to-negotiate-drug-price-deals-00590051
Consumer Healthcare Products Association. CHPA Submits Official Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Pharmaceuticals. Dated 8 May 2025. Accessed 12 November 2025. https://www.chpa.org/news/2025/05/chpa-submits-official-comments-section-232-national-security-investigation
Initiation of Section 301 Investigation: Brazil’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Digital Trade and Electronic Payment Services; Unfair, Preferential Tariffs; Anti-Corruption Enforcement; Intellectual Property Protection; Ethanol Market Access; and Illegal Deforestation; Hearing; and Request for Public Comments. 90 Fed. Reg. 34069. Published 18 July 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-07-18/pdf/2025-13498.pdf
Executive Order No. 14194. Imposing Duties To Address the Situation at Our Southern Border. 90 Fed. Reg. 9117. Published 7 February 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-07/pdf/2025-02407.pdf
Executive Order No. 14193. Imposing Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border. 90 Fed. Reg. 9113. Published 7 February 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-07/pdf/2025-02406.pdf
Executive Order No. 14325. Amendment to Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border. 90 Fed. Reg. 37957. Published 6 August 2025. Accessed 6 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-08-06/pdf/2025-14999.pdf
Office of US Trade Representative. Request for Public Comments and Notice of Public Hearing Relating to the Operation of the Agreement Between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada. 90 Fed. Reg. 44869. Published 17 September 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-09-17/pdf/2025-18010.pdf
Office of Foreign Assets Control. Russia-Related Sanctions. Last visited 12 August 2025. https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs-and-country-information/russia-related-sanctions
Executive Order No. 14329. Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of the Russian Federation. 90 Fed. Reg. 38701. Published 11 August 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-08-11/pdf/2025-15267.pdf
Executive Order No. 14323. Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Brazil. 90 Fed. Reg. 37739. Published 5 August 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-08-05/pdf/2025-14896.pdf
Memorandum. Actions by the United States Related to the Statutory 4-Year Review of the Section 301 Investigation of China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation. 89 Fed. Reg. 44541. Published 20 May 2024. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-05-20/pdf/2024-11193.pdf
Office of US Trade Representative. Notice of Product Exclusion Extensions: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation. 90 Fed. Reg. 23987. Published 5 June 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Issue_Areas/Enforcement/Section%20301/90%20FR%2023987.pdf
Executive Order No. 14195. Imposing Duties To Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China. 90 Fed. Reg. 9121. Published 7 February 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-07/pdf/2025-02408.pdf
US Customs & Border Protection. Implementation of Additional Duties on Products of the People’s Republic of China Pursuant to the President’s February 1, 2025 Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China. 90 Fed. Reg. 9038. Published 5 February 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-05/pdf/2025-02293.pdf
US Customs & Border Protection. Amended Notice of Implementation of Additional Duties on Products of the People’s Republic of China Pursuant to the President’s February 1, 2025 Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China. 90 Fed. Reg. 9431. Published 12 February 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-12/pdf/2025-02576.pdf
The White House. Further Amendment to Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply China in the People’s Republic of China. Dated 3 March 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/further-amendment-to-duties-addressing-the-synthetic-opioid-supply-chain-in-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
US Customs & Border Protection. Further Amended Notice of Implementation of Additional Duties on Products of the People’s Republic of China Pursuant to the President’s Executive Order 14195, Imposing Duties To Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China. 90 Fed. Reg. 11426. Published 6 March 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-03-06/pdf/2025-03677.pdf
Executive Order No. 14266. Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates To Reflect Trading Partner Retaliation and Alignment. 90 Fed. Reg. 15625. Published 15 April 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-04-15/pdf/2025-06462.pdf
Executive Order No. 14298. Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates To Reflect Discussions With the People’s Republic of China. 90 Fed. Reg. 21831. Published 21 May 2025. Accessed 12 August 2025. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-05-21/pdf/2025-09297.pdf
The White House. Further Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates to Reflect Ongoing Discussions With the People’s Republic of China. Accessed 11 August 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/08/further-modifying-reciprocal-tariff-rates-to-reflect-ongoing-discussions-with-the-peoples-republic-of-china/

Developments in US trade policy affecting the dietary supplement industry

Author(s)

Introduction

Global tariffs and new trade agreements

Section 232 and Section 301 investigations

Canada and Mexico under scrutiny

Geopolitical trade actions

US-China trade relations

Managing risk

Conclusion

Related assets

Related topics

Developments in US trade policy affecting the dietary supplement industry

Introduction

Global tariffs and new trade agreements

Section 232 and Section 301 investigations

Canada and Mexico under scrutiny

Geopolitical trade actions

US-China trade relations

Managing risk

Conclusion

Related assets

Related topics

Recommended content