While recent White House executive order removes some trade uncertainty, many questions remain

The White House issued an executive order earlier this month, which it said it takes steps to modify tariff policies and also establish procedures to implement trade and security agreements with foreign partners, in regards to what it called persistent U.S. goods trade benefits that are considered a national security threat.

Entitled, “Modifying the Scope of Reciprocal Tariffs and Establishing Procedures for Implementing Trade and Security Agreements,” the executive order cites one made in April, when the White House rolled out its reciprocal, or “Liberation Day” tariffs, on most of the nation’s global trading partners, with some of those tariffs subsequently paused, as the U.S. and various countries worked towards new trade deals.

In what could be viewed as the main takeaway of the executive order, the White House said that tariffs could be reduced or eliminated for goods from countries entering into meaningful trade and security agreements with the U.S.

As an example, it explained that in the recent trade deal between the U.S. and the European Union, the U.S. said it plans to reduce tariffs on certain EU products to 0% and to reduce tariffs imposed under Section 232 for automobiles and automobile parts originating from the European Union if the European Union takes certain steps.

Other key parts of the executive order included the White House’s criteria for tariff reduction, including: scope and value of a trading partner’s commitments; impact on U.S. national interests and security; and domestic supply needs (for items not produced in the U.S.). And in a list of “Potential Tariff Adjustments for Aligned Partners, eligible goods for tariff reductions include: agricultural products; aircraft and parts; non-patented pharmaceuticals; and rare goods not sufficiently available in the U.S.

A client brief regarding the executive order by Cleveland-based law firm Benesch observed that the White House has also directed ongoing agency oversight to track the trade conditions that triggered the national emergency used to support the reciprocal tariff programs. Which is comprised of the Secretary of Commerce and USTR (United States Trade Representative) continuously monitoring factors, including trade deficits, unfair trading practices, and domestic manufacturing strength. The firm added that this monitoring system signals that the U.S. tariff environment remains fluid, with the White House preparing to quickly adjust its policy as economic circumstances shift.

In an interview, Jonathan Todd, Partner and Vice-Chair, Transportation & Logistics, at Benesch, explained that in looking at the state of global trade, everyone has been using the word, “uncertainty,” throughout 2025—and for obvious reasons. But that comes with a few caveats, he noted.

“I think that people who say uncertainty now really mean to communicate that they don't like the current state of affairs,” he said. “We know where the reciprocal tariffs landed. We know where material discussions are happening with countries. There's a lot that we do know. The number one thing we don't know is what's going to happen with the U.S. Supreme Court, but we'll know that in due time. I think this is less a period of uncertainty.”

As for what this ostensible reduced uncertainty means, Todd put it in terms of tariffs. One key aspect of that is that throughout this year, conversations have been focused on country-level tariffs, which very well may change.

To that end, he explained that recent executive order was two-fold: one part being commodity level changes in tariff levels, with some remaining and some falling off the list, with the levels outlined in Annex Two of the executive order—which he called commodity level changes. The other part coming in what Todd called a “head’s up,” as the President negotiates new framework deals with other countries.

“He is reserving the right to roll on or roll off reciprocal tariffs and also the Section 232 tariffs as he sees fit with those countries,” said Todd. “But either way we are still likely in a commodity-specific world. Going forward, the big change is there is less uncertainty. There is more of a need for a focus on commodity-level imports and what exactly is happening for companies and for specific sectors and really getting a grip on that. On the bright side, ideally, won't have the speed of change that we had back in April and earlier the year. That gets back to the uncertainty point. The speed of change may kind of normalize, but the focus is now on commodities, with the second focus on commodities and sectors, and that will be the point of attention.”

While Todd’s comments, regarding a reduction in uncertainty, can be viewed as welcome news on the global trade and tariff front, there still is plenty to monitor moving forward, including: how the Supreme Court rules on the legality of the White House’s IEEPA tariffs; what happens with the U.S.-China tariff pause in mid-November; and also, the impact of the removal of the de minimis exemption, among others.