The IEEPA Tariff Post-Mortem — Section 301 and 232 Are Now the Operative Frameworks, and the November Stack Is the Risk

The Supreme Court's February 20, 2026 ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump — striking down IEEPA-based tariffs — did not end US tariff policy; it redirected it. The Administration replaced voided IEEPA tariffs with a 10% global tariff under Section 122 (which has since expired for most countries), layered Section 301 tariffs where applicable, and maintained Section 232 national security tariffs on steel, aluminium, autos, and related goods. The result for China is a tariff stack as of August 13 that includes the Section 301 tariffs (which survived the IEEPA ruling), the fentanyl tariff (now structured under surviving authority), the new forced-labor tariff (July 24, Section 301), and — through November 10 — the suspended reciprocal tariff layer held in place by the Kuala Lumpur Arrangement. For trade counsel advising clients on tariff exposure and supply chain planning, the IEEPA ruling's practical aftermath is now fully visible: the risk is the November 10 cliff if the Kuala Lumpur Arrangement lapses without a successor arrangement, and the forced-labor tariff is a separate permanent addition that has already taken effect and is not subject to any current suspension. Companies that modeled their tariff exposure on the pre-IEEPA ruling landscape need a complete reassessment against the current framework.