02-07-2025

Imposing Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border

Executive OrderView the Original .pdf
View the Original .pdf

The 1-Minute Brief

What: Executive Order 14193 imposes new tariffs on Canadian goods to compel Canada to increase its efforts in stopping the flow of illicit drugs, particularly fentanyl, across the U.S. northern border.

Money: The order imposes an additional 25% ad valorem tariff on most Canadian products and a 10% tariff on Canadian energy products. It does not provide a specific cost or revenue estimate, but the impact will depend on the volume of trade affected.

Your Impact: American consumers and businesses are likely to see increased prices for a wide range of Canadian goods, including energy, raw materials, and manufactured products. The order also eliminates duty-free "de minimis" shipments from Canada, meaning even low-value online purchases could become more expensive.

Status: This Executive Order was issued by the President on February 1, 2025, and went into effect at 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 4, 2025.

What's Actually in the Bill

Executive Order 14193 uses the President's emergency powers to place tariffs on Canadian goods. The stated goal is to pressure Canada into taking more aggressive action against drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) and the smuggling of illicit substances like fentanyl into the United States. The order claims that Canada has not adequately coordinated with U.S. law enforcement to address this issue.

Core Provisions:

  • Imposes an additional 25% ad valorem tariff on all articles that are products of Canada, with certain exceptions.
  • Imposes a lower additional tariff of 10% on energy and energy resource products from Canada.
  • The tariffs apply to goods entered for consumption in the U.S. on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 4, 2025.
  • Eliminates the use of "de minimis" duty-free treatment for the specified Canadian articles, which previously allowed small-value shipments to enter without tariffs.
  • Authorizes the President to increase the tariffs if Canada retaliates with its own duties on U.S. exports.
  • The tariffs are to be removed upon the President's determination that the Government of Canada has taken "adequate steps" to alleviate the crisis through cooperative enforcement.

Stated Purpose (from the Sponsors):

The executive order states its purpose is to address a national emergency caused by the influx of illicit drugs and the threat it poses to American lives, public health, and national security. The sponsors claim:

  1. To compel Canada to increase cooperation in arresting, seizing, and intercepting DTOs, drug and human traffickers, and illicit drugs.
  2. To end the public health crisis fueled by fentanyl and other narcotics smuggled across the northern border.
  3. To address the failure of Canada to devote sufficient resources to stem the tide of illicit drugs, which is described as an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the U.S.

Key Facts:

Affected Sectors: Energy, Manufacturing, Agriculture, Consumer Goods, and any industry reliant on cross-border trade with Canada.
Timeline: The tariffs took effect on February 4, 2025, and will remain until the President determines Canada's actions are sufficient.
Scope: The order applies to all goods imported from Canada, with the exception of items specifically excluded under U.S. law.

The Backstory: How We Got Here

Timeline of Events:

The Opioid Crisis and Border Security (2016-Present):

The United States has been grappling with a devastating opioid crisis for years, with fentanyl emerging as a primary driver of overdose deaths. While public and legislative focus has often been on the southern border, this executive order shifts significant attention to the northern border. The order builds on previous actions, including Proclamation 10886, which declared a national emergency at the southern border, and Executive Order 14157, which targeted cartels as terrorist organizations. This new order explicitly expands that emergency to include the northern border, citing the presence of fentanyl synthesis labs in Canada and the flow of drugs through international mail.

Why Now? The Political Calculus:

  • Leverage for Enforcement: The administration is using economic pressure in the form of tariffs as a tool to achieve foreign policy and law enforcement objectives, a tactic used previously. The order argues that diplomatic dialogue since 2016 has been insufficient.
  • Perceived Inaction: The text claims that despite ongoing dialogue, the problem has worsened, necessitating a more forceful approach. The administration points to data suggesting the amount of fentanyl that crossed the northern border last year was enough to kill 9.5 million Americans.
  • National Emergency Framework: By expanding a previously declared national emergency, the President can invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose these tariffs without direct Congressional approval, a move that has been legally controversial.

Your Real-World Impact

The Direct Answer: This directly affects American businesses that import Canadian goods and consumers who buy those products.

What Could Change for You:

Potential Benefits:

  • If the policy succeeds as intended, it could lead to a reduction in the flow of illicit fentanyl from Canada, potentially saving lives and reducing the strain on public health resources in some U.S. communities.

Possible Disruptions or Costs:

Short-term (Weeks to Months):

  • Higher Prices: Consumers may see price increases on a wide variety of goods, from gasoline and lumber to food and consumer products, as importers pass on the cost of the new tariffs.
  • Supply Chain Disruptions: Businesses relying on "just-in-time" supply chains with Canadian partners may face disruptions and higher operational costs.

Long-term:

  • Sustained Inflationary Pressure: If the tariffs remain in place for an extended period, they could contribute to long-term inflation in specific sectors.
  • Economic Strain on Border Communities: U.S. towns and cities whose economies are tightly integrated with their Canadian neighbors could experience economic downturns.
  • Trade Disputes: The order explicitly threatens further tariffs if Canada retaliates, which could escalate into a broader trade war, impacting American exporters.

Who's Most Affected:

Primary Groups: U.S. importers of Canadian goods, American manufacturers who use Canadian raw materials or components, and consumers of Canadian products.
Secondary Groups: U.S. exporters who could be targeted by Canadian retaliatory tariffs, and logistics and transportation companies involved in cross-border trade.
Regional Impact: States along the northern border with significant trade ties to Canada, such as Michigan, New York, Washington, and Maine, are likely to feel the economic impact most acutely.

Bottom Line: You will likely pay more for Canadian goods, and businesses that trade with Canada will face new costs and uncertainty.

Where the Parties Stand

Republican Position: "Economic Leverage for National Security"

Core Stance: Generally supportive of using tariffs as a tool to pressure other countries to align with U.S. security and economic interests.

Their Arguments:

  • ✓ The President is taking decisive action to combat the flow of deadly drugs that are killing Americans.
  • ✓ Tariffs are a legitimate tool to force trading partners to address security threats they are perceived to be ignoring.
  • ⚠️ Some Republicans have expressed concern over the economic impact of broad tariffs and the potential for trade wars, viewing them as a tax on American consumers and businesses.

Legislative Strategy: Supporting the President's executive action and framing it as a necessary step to protect the country, while some members may quietly harbor concerns about the economic fallout.

Democratic Position: "Tariffs Hurt American Workers and Consumers"

Core Stance: Generally opposed to the use of broad tariffs, arguing they harm the U.S. economy and strain relationships with allies.

Their Arguments:

  • ✓ Acknowledges the severity of the opioid crisis but disagrees with the method.
  • ⚠️ Argues that cooperation and targeted sanctions, not broad tariffs on an ally, are the appropriate tools to address drug trafficking.
  • ✗ Tariffs are a tax on American families and businesses, increase consumer costs, and create economic chaos.

Legislative Strategy: Criticizing the executive order as an overreach of presidential power and a misuse of trade policy. They may attempt to introduce legislation to curb the President's authority to impose such tariffs.

Constitutional Check

The Verdict: ⚠️ Questionable

Basis of Authority:

The Executive Order cites the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as its primary legal authority. IEEPA grants the President broad powers to regulate economic transactions after declaring a national emergency in response to an "unusual and extraordinary threat" originating substantially outside the United States.

Relevant Portion of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8): "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations..."

Constitutional Implications:

[Separation of Powers]: The use of IEEPA to impose tariffs raises significant questions about the separation of powers. The Constitution explicitly grants Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce and lay duties. Critics argue the executive branch is usurping a core legislative function.
[Precedent]: Historically, IEEPA has been used for sanctions, freezing assets, and embargoes, not for imposing broad tariffs on a major trading partner. Its use for this purpose is a recent and legally contested development.
[Federalism]: This action is within the federal government's purview over international trade and foreign policy and does not directly overstep powers reserved for the states.

Potential Legal Challenges:

The executive order is highly vulnerable to legal challenges. Business groups, importers, and potentially states are likely to sue, arguing the President has exceeded the authority granted by IEEPA and infringed on Congress's constitutional power over trade. Courts have previously ruled against similar uses of IEEPA for tariffs, though those cases remain under appeal. The core legal question is whether "regulating" imports under IEEPA can be interpreted to include imposing tariffs, a power traditionally reserved for Congress.

Your Action Options

TO SUPPORT THIS BILL

5-Minute Actions:

  • Call Your Rep/Senators: Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 "I'm a constituent from [Your City/Town] and I urge [Rep./Sen. Name] to support the President's Executive Order using tariffs to stop the flow of fentanyl from Canada."

30-Minute Deep Dive:

  • Write a Detailed Email: Contact members of the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committee, which have jurisdiction over trade.
  • Join an Organization: Groups like the Coalition for a Prosperous America advocate for using tariffs to protect U.S. industries and address trade imbalances.

TO OPPOSE THIS BILL

5-Minute Actions:

  • Call Your Rep/Senators: Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 "I'm a constituent from [Your City/Town] and I urge [Rep./Sen. Name] to oppose Executive Order 14193. These tariffs on Canada will hurt American families and businesses."

30-Minute Deep Dive:

  • Write a Letter to the Editor: Explain how tariffs on Canadian goods will increase prices for your community.
  • Join an Organization: Coalitions like Americans for Free Trade and business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce oppose broad tariffs. The American Association of Exporters and Importers (AAEI) also advocates against trade restrictions.