aware

An Analysis of Executive Order 14228: Further Amendment to Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People's Republic of China

The 1-Minute Brief

What: Executive Order 14228 doubles the tariffs on certain products from the People's Republic of China (PRC), increasing them from 10% to 20%. This action is a direct response to the President's determination that the PRC has not taken sufficient measures to stop the flow of synthetic opioids, like fentanyl, and their precursor chemicals to the United States.

Money: This executive order will increase tariff revenue for the U.S. government. For businesses importing affected Chinese goods, it represents a doubling of costs. While a precise Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score is not applicable to executive orders, the impact is a direct financial pressure tactic aimed at Beijing. The increased tariffs affect a wide range of goods, from electronics to toys.

Your Impact: The most likely direct effect on an average American will be higher prices for certain consumer goods imported from China. Companies facing doubled tariffs may pass those increased costs on to customers.

Status: The executive order was issued on March 3, 2025, and published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2025, and is currently in effect.

What's Actually in the Executive Order

This executive order is a targeted amendment to a previous order, Executive Order 14195. Citing the continued crisis of synthetic opioid trafficking from China, the President has invoked powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to intensify economic pressure on the PRC. The order explicitly states that this escalation is due to the PRC's failure to take "adequate steps to alleviate the illicit drug crisis."

Core Provisions:

The order amends Section 2(a) of Executive Order 14195, striking the tariff rate of "10 percent" and replacing it with "20 percent".
The legal justification is rooted in the determination that the PRC's inaction constitutes an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.
The order also targets deceptive shipping practices from the PRC that exploit the de minimis exemption (allowing shipments under $800 to enter duty-free) to smuggle illicit substances.

Stated Purpose (from the Sponsors):

The declared goal is to compel the PRC to enhance cooperative enforcement actions against the synthetic opioid supply chain. The administration frames this not as a trade war, but as a "drug war," using economic tools to achieve a critical national security objective: saving American lives.

Key Facts:

Affected Sectors: While not specified in this amendment, the original order and subsequent actions impact a broad range of Chinese imports, including electronics, toys, and other consumer goods. It also specifically targets items used in the drug trade, like pill presses.
Timeline: The 20% tariff rate became effective on March 3, 2025.
Scope: The order applies to all articles designated as products of the PRC, directly impacting U.S. importers and, by extension, consumers.

The Backstory: How We Got Here

Timeline of Events:

Pre-2019: The U.S. identifies China as the primary source of finished illicit fentanyl, often shipped directly through postal services.
May 2019: After intense U.S. diplomatic pressure, China schedules the entire class of fentanyl-related drugs, leading to a significant drop in direct fentanyl shipments. However, Chinese companies pivot to exporting precursor chemicals to Mexican cartels, which then produce the finished fentanyl and smuggle it into the U.S.
2020-2023: U.S.-China counternarcotics cooperation stalls. The U.S. opioid crisis continues to escalate, with synthetic opioids like fentanyl becoming the leading cause of overdose deaths. Provisional data for 2022 showed over 107,000 drug overdose deaths, with about 90% involving synthetic opioids.
November 2023: Presidents Biden and Xi agree to restart counternarcotics cooperation, with China taking some initial steps to monitor exports.
February 1, 2025: Citing insufficient action from Beijing, the White House issues Executive Order 14195, declaring a national emergency and imposing a 10% tariff on certain Chinese goods to address the fentanyl supply chain.
March 3, 2025: Finding China's response still inadequate, the President issues Executive Order 14228, doubling the tariffs to 20%.

Why Now? The Political Calculus:

The administration states the direct cause is the failure of the PRC to curb the flow of precursor chemicals despite renewed dialogue.
The move demonstrates a willingness to escalate economic pressure when diplomatic efforts are perceived as yielding insufficient results.
Using the IEEPA allows the Executive Branch to take swift action on a pressing national security issue without requiring new legislation from a potentially divided Congress.

Your Real-World Impact

The Direct Answer: This executive order primarily affects U.S. companies that import goods from China, with a potential secondary impact on consumers through higher prices.

What Could Change for You:

Potential Benefits:

The intended long-term benefit is a reduction in the supply of illicit fentanyl in American communities, which could lead to a decrease in overdose deaths and the associated societal costs.
Provisional data for 2024 has shown a decrease in overdose deaths for the first time since 2018, a trend the administration aims to continue.

Possible Disruptions or Costs:

Short-term (3-12 months):

Consumers may see price increases on various goods as importers and retailers pass on the higher tariff costs.
U.S. companies reliant on Chinese imports will face higher operational costs, potentially impacting their profitability and investment plans.

Long-term:

The tariffs could accelerate the trend of companies diversifying their supply chains away from China, a process that can be costly and disruptive.
There is a risk of retaliatory tariffs from China, which could harm U.S. exporters and further strain economic relations.

Who's Most Affected:

Primary Groups: U.S. importers of Chinese goods, Chinese manufacturers, and American consumers.
Secondary Groups: U.S. industries that compete with Chinese imports and U.S. exporters who could be targets for retaliation.
Regional Impact: There is no specific regional focus; the impact will be felt nationwide wherever affected goods are sold and consumed.

Bottom Line: The administration is raising the cost of certain Chinese goods to force action on the fentanyl crisis, and you may end up paying part of that cost at the cash register.

Where the Parties Stand

(Note: As an executive order, this did not go through a legislative vote. The positions below reflect general party stances on the issue and the tools used.)

Republican Position: "A Necessary Tool to Fight a Drug War"

Core Stance: Generally supportive of using tariffs and a hardline approach against China, particularly on the issue of fentanyl.
Their Arguments:

✓ Tariffs are a powerful tool to hold China accountable for its role in the fentanyl crisis and generate revenue.
✓ Strong executive action is needed to protect American lives when diplomacy fails.
⚠️ Some Republicans may share concerns with free-trade advocates about the economic impact of broad tariffs on U.S. businesses and consumers.

Legislative Strategy: The party largely supports the President's use of executive authority in this instance, viewing it as a fulfillment of campaign promises to be tough on China and the fentanyl crisis.

Democratic Position: "Targeted Tariffs Can Work, But..."

Core Stance: The President, as the head of the party, initiated the action. However, there is a broader debate within the party about the widespread use of tariffs.
Their Arguments:

✓ Support taking strong action to combat the opioid crisis and holding foreign partners accountable.
⚠️ Many Democrats express concern about the "chaos" of broad tariffs and their inflationary impact on American families and farmers.
✗ Some progressives and free-trade advocates within the party argue against tariffs as a primary policy tool, fearing they hurt American workers and consumers more than the intended target.

Legislative Strategy: The administration's strategy is direct executive action. Congressional Democrats are generally focused on supporting the policy's anti-drug trafficking goals while monitoring the economic fallout.

Constitutional Check

The Verdict: ✓ Constitutional (with legal challenges)

Basis of Authority:

The executive order is based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. This act grants the President the authority to regulate international commerce after declaring a national emergency in response to an "unusual and extraordinary threat" originating from outside the U.S.

Relevant Portion of the Constitution (Article II, Section 2): "[The President] shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States... he shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties... and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors..." (While not an enumerated power for tariffs, this establishes the President's role in foreign affairs, which IEEPA builds upon).

Constitutional Implications:

Legal Principle: IEEPA provides broad, but not unlimited, power. The President must declare a national emergency and identify a specific foreign threat, which was done in the initial E.O. 14195.
Precedent: Presidents of both parties have used IEEPA extensively to impose sanctions. However, its use to enact broad tariffs is more recent and has faced legal scrutiny.
Federalism: This action falls under the federal government's authority over foreign policy and international commerce; it does not impede on powers reserved for the states.

Potential Legal Challenges:

The use of IEEPA for tariffs is currently being challenged in federal court.

Plaintiffs' Argument: Importers and several states argue that IEEPA does not explicitly grant the power to set tariffs, which they contend is a form of taxation reserved for Congress. They claim the President is exceeding the statutory authority granted by the act.
Government's Argument: The administration argues that the power to "regulate" importation during a national emergency is broad enough to include imposing tariffs as a regulatory tool.
Outlook: While lower courts have issued conflicting rulings, appeals courts have allowed the tariffs to remain in effect pending a final decision, which will likely be made by the Supreme Court.

Your Action Options

TO SUPPORT THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER

5-Minute Actions:

Contact the White House: Use the White House comment line or website to express your support for using economic pressure to combat fentanyl trafficking.
Engage on Social Media: Share information about the opioid crisis and your support for the administration's actions.

30-Minute Deep Dive:

Write to Your Congressional Representatives: Urge them to support the administration's policy and consider complementary legislation, like the FEND Off Fentanyl Act.
Join an Organization: Connect with groups focused on ending the opioid epidemic or those that advocate for a more assertive foreign policy towards China.

TO OPPOSE THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER

5-Minute Actions:

Contact the White House: Use the White House comment line or website to express your concerns about the economic impact of these tariffs on American consumers and businesses.
Engage on Social Media: Share articles and data about the potential negative consequences of tariffs and trade wars.

30-Minute Deep Dive:

Write a Letter to the Editor: Submit an op-ed to your local newspaper explaining how tariffs could harm your community or local businesses.
Join an Organization: Connect with free-trade advocacy groups or business associations that oppose broad-based tariffs, such as the US-China Business Council or the Cato Institute.