The America First Trade Policy EO is relatively long, so here are the highlights for those who don’t want to read the whole thing:

• Various government officials are to investigate why the U.S. has such large trade deficits and what we can do to remedy them
• The EO implies that other countries are engaging in various unfair trade practices that we need to root out and fix
• U.S. officials must implement the External Revenue Service Trump announced
• U.S. officials are to assess the impact of the duty-free de minimis exemption on revenue and the flow of illegal drugs and counterfeit goods into the U.S.
• U.S. officials are to review all trade agreements to ensure they favor American workers and business owners
• The U.S. Trade Rep is to review our trade agreement with China and determine if China should be sanctioned for violating it or failing to protect U.S. intellectual property rights
• U.S. officials are to determine if legislative changes are necessary regarding Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China
• Officials must determine which imports are a threat to national security and adjust them
• Officials are to assess the flow of illegal migrants and fentanyl from Canada, China, Mexico, and “other relevant jurisdictions” and take appropriate measures
• The EO sets an April 1, 2025 deadline for most sections of the EO and an April 30, 2025 deadline for the rest

On January 20, 2025, Trump issued the America First Trade Policy executive order. It opens with dubious claims that Trump’s policies in his first term “spurred an American revitalization.”

Trump goes on to claim that his new America First trade policy will benefit American workers, farmers, manufacturers, ranchers, businesses, and entrepreneurs. Unfortunately, most economists disagree.

Addressing unfair and unbalanced trade

Sec. 2 of the EO says that the Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of the Treasury, and the United States Trade Representative will investigate the causes of the United States’ trade deficits and the economic and national security implications of them. It will then recommend actions, such as imposing tariffs or other policies to “remedy” these deficits.

These government officials will also be responsible for determining the feasibility of and best methods to implement an External Revenue Service to collect tariffs and other trade-related revenues. They are also to review and identify “unfair trade practices” by other countries and recommend actions based on their findings.

Sec. 2 charges the United States Trade Representative with preparing for the July 2026 review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. They are also to consult with other officials to assess the impact on American farmers, workers, service providers, ranchers, and other businesses and report to congressional committees on their findings and recommendations.

The Secretary of the Treasury is to review and assess the policies and practices of the United States’ major trading partners with respect to the rate of exchange between their currencies and the U.S. dollar. The Secretary is then to recommend measures to counter “currency manipulation or misalignment” that provides partners with an unfair competitive advantage.

The U.S. Trade Representative is also to identify countries that the U.S. can negotiate bilateral or sector-specific agreements with, providing export market access for American businesses. The Secretary of Commerce is to review policies and regulations regarding antidumping and countervailing duty laws and consider modifications as appropriate.

U.S. officials are to assess the loss of tariff revenues and the risks of importing counterfeit products and contraband drugs, such as fentanyl, that result from the duty-free de minimis exemption currently in the U.S. Code. They are also to investigate whether any foreign country subjects U.S. citizens or corporations to discriminatory or extraterritorial taxes.

Officials will review the impact of all trade agreements, including the World Trade Organization Agreement on Government Procurement, on Federal procurement, and ensure that agreements favor domestic workers and manufacturers.

Economic and trade relations with the People’s Republic of China

Sec. 3 instructs the U.S. Trade Representative to review the Economic and Trade Agreement Between the Government and the United States and the Government of the People’s Republic of China. He is to determine whether China is abiding by the agreement and recommend actions based on his findings, such as imposing tariffs.

The U.S. Trade Rep will assess a May 14, 2024 report to determine if additional tariff modifications are necessary. He is also to investigate other actions and policies by China that may “burden or restrict” U.S. commerce and recommend actions based on his findings.

U.S. officials are to assess legislative proposals regarding Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China and recommend changes. They are also to assess whether China is appropriately protecting U.S. intellectual property rights.

Additional economic security matters

Sec. 4 charges officials with conducting a full economic and security review of the United States’ industrial and manufacturing base to determine how they should adjust imports that they deem to threaten national security. The section makes special mention of measures on steel and aluminum in section 1862 of Title 19 in the United States Code as needing particular review for national security reasons.

Next, the EO talks about reviewing the export control system and modifying it to maintain a technological edge on “geopolitical rivals” and eliminate loopholes in export controls. The Secretary of Commerce is to review and recommend action on rulemaking by the Office of Information and Communication Technology and Services on connected vehicles and controls on ICTS transactions.

The Secretary of the Treasury is to review Executive Order 14105 and modify, rescind or replace it as needed to address national security threats. The Director of the Office of Management and Budget is to assess any “distorting impact” of foreign government financial contributions or subsidies on Federal procurement programs.

Officials are to assess the unlawful migration and fentanyl flows from Canada, China, Mexico, and any other “relevant jurisdictions” and recommend appropriate action.

It also sets an April 1, 2025, or April 30, 2025 deadline for various sections of the EO to be completed. It ends with some boilerplate about the authority of law etc etc.

Of note about this EO, is that Trump seems to have jumped the gun on some of its directives, deciding to impose tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico without the “assessment” the EO calls for. It also claims that all this will be done within the boundaries set by law, but we have already seen that following the law doesn’t seem to be a priority of this administration.