The 10% tariff that had applied to most goods entering the United States since late February, Swiss watches among them, expired at 12:01 a.m. Eastern on July 24 after 150 days in effect, because Congress did not vote to extend it. But new tariffs took its place at that exact moment: duties of 10% and 12.5% on goods from 60 trading partners, including Switzerland, China, and the EU, issued under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and announced in a Federal Register notice on July 23. The stated basis is that those countries failed to curb imports made with forced labor in their supply chains, an allegation the countries deny.

For Swiss watches, the new number is 12.5%. It is the fifth U.S. tariff rate applied to them in fifteen months, after the 10% interim rate of April 2025, the 39% of August, the 15% agreed in November, and the flat 10% in place since February. Switzerland's new rate is applied net of existing most-favored-nation duties, a combined ceiling rather than a surcharge stacked on top, and the Swiss government, while disputing the forced-labor allegations, said it adheres to the joint statement Washington and Bern signed in November 2025. The action covers 99.4% of U.S. imports, and watches are not among the exemptions: the only watch-and-clock provisions in Switzerland's portion of the notice cover instrument panel clocks and clock movements, exempt only as articles of civil aircraft. Switzerland's own exemption list in the notice runs instead to unset diamonds, natural pearls and precious stones, along with tulip bulbs, silk, and live rabbits, among other goods. The loose stones enter free of the new duty; the finished watch they are set into pays 12.5%.

"I do not think it is remotely likely that Congress will extend Section 122," Lyle Fass, President & CEO of Fass Selections, a U.S.-based wine importer, said before the deadline passed. "Tariffs are a tax on American businesses and American consumers. No member of Congress wants to run for re-election while openly voting to extend a tariff regime that makes groceries and everyday goods more expensive." 

The imposition of new tariffs was not unexpected, since the administration has spent the months since the Supreme Court struck down its original tariff authority lining up other statutes. Some were already in motion prior to the Section 122 tariffs expiring: a 25% tariff on most Brazilian goods took effect on July 22, and a 50% tariff on certain Canadian goods, hockey sticks included, arrives on August 19.

Tariffs have been big news, over and over, since the early days of the second Trump administration. In April 2025, the Trump administration first announced a 31% tariff on imported Swiss goods, as well as tariffs levied on imports from many other countries. The announcement occurred after trading hours had closed in major U.S. markets, which was late at night in Switzerland, a couple of days into the world's largest watch industry trade show, Watches & Wonders.

Most of the U.S. watch press stayed up late that night to write breaking news announcements about the sweeping new tariff order, and the next day the show floor was abuzz with talk of how vastly this would affect the industry. In the 90 days that followed the announcement, with a temporary 10% tariff in place, the watch industry, as well as many other industries that heavily rely on imports for goods or materials, grappled with how to handle the change. Increase prices? Absorb the costs? Some combination of the two? It seemed, for a while, that it was a part of every single conversation within the watch industry and, to some extent, among consumers, who worried that the cost of everything was about to go up.

The numbers show the whiplash: Swiss watch exports to the U.S. surged 150% in April 2025 as brands rushed inventory across the border ahead of the duties, then fell 14.8% in the first half of 2026 against that inflated base, according to the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry.

The period since has brought a rollercoaster of changes to tariff rules. There have been legal challenges, price increases, negotiations, price decreases, more legal challenges, and finally, a Supreme Court ruling that some thought would be the end to all of this, but actually wasn't. Here's a primer on the key points so far, and on what may happen in the weeks and months ahead.

The bottom line: tariffs are taxes on goods that are being imported from another country. Tariffs are paid by the business that is importing the goods, and they are paid to the business's home country's customs authority. The exporter does not pay the taxes; that tax burden falls on the importer, and those costs are usually passed on to the end consumer of the goods.

April 2, 2025: Initial reciprocal tariff order announced using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) statute.

April 5, 2025: 10% interim tariff begins.

April 9, 2025: Country-specific tariffs, except for China, paused for 90 days, until July 9, 2025.

April 10, 2025: Tariff of 125% takes effect on goods from China, a manufacturer of many materials that are imported to be included in goods manufactured or packaged in the U.S.

August 7, 2025: Tariffs take effect at 39% on Swiss imports.

August 29, 2025: De minimis exemption suspended on imports from all countries. The de minimis exemption applied to low-value shipments, exempting many purchases under $800 from import duties. This effectively made all packages inbound to the U.S. taxable, paid by the recipient, at the full tariff rate applicable to the country of origin.

November 14, 2025: The United States, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein sign a joint statement cutting the U.S. tariff on Swiss imports from 39% to a 15% ceiling; the reduction is implemented in December, retroactive to November 14.

February 20, 2026: Supreme Court rules against the Trump administration in their use of the IEEPA statute; the same day, the Trump administration invokes a new global 10% tariff on most goods using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, good for 150 days.

February 24, 2026: Section 122 tariffs take effect; Customs and Border Protection stops collecting the IEEPA tariffs.

May 7, 2026: The U.S. Court of International Trade invalidates the Section 122 tariffs, but limits relief to the plaintiffs; the government appeals.

July 22, 2026: A 25% Section 301 tariff takes effect on most imports from Brazil.

July 24, 2026: Section 122 tariffs expired at 12:01 a.m. Eastern; congressional action would have been required to extend them. New duties of 10% and 12.5% on goods from 60 trading partners, imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, took effect at the same moment, with goods in transit exempted until 12:01 a.m. Eastern on July 28.

August 19, 2026: A 50% Section 338 tariff takes effect on certain Canadian goods.

The impact to many industries was immediate upon the issuance of the initial executive order, with companies that import goods scrambling to figure out how to incorporate the new taxes into their pricing. A 39% tariff on Swiss imports is a big pill to swallow, especially given the prices of the goods and the very high prices of raw materials like gold. That rate lasted just over three months before the November 2025 joint statement cut it to 15%, and the flat 10% under Section 122 followed in February.

The Supreme Court ruling in February 2026 brought a sigh of relief for some importers, but it left a lot of questions: how would businesses who paid the tariffs get reimbursed? Who pays for what, when? And what happens next?

"The IEEPA reversal was a huge legal victory and, for about an hour, it felt like actual relief," said Fass. "Then Trump immediately moved to Section 122, so the practical relief has been close to zero."

Refunds have begun for some businesses who paid tariffs while the IEEPA-based executive order was in effect, but the process is moving slowly, and is far from over. "The refund process is now phased and complicated," said Fass. "Customs and Border Protection (CBP) built a system called CAPE to process refunds, and some refunds are moving, especially for larger importers with lawyers and clean claims. But there is a major fight right now over finally liquidated entries, especially for importers who did not sue or otherwise preserve claims," he continued.

There are other sections of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Trade Act of 1974, and the Tariff Act of 1930 that can be invoked, and the administration has already reached for one of them: the duties that took effect on July 24 were issued under Section 301. The choice of statute matters, because unlike the emergency-powers tariffs the Supreme Court struck down, Section 301 tariffs have survived prior court challenges. "The Court of International Trade has already ruled against the Section 122 tariffs, but the practical impact has been limited because the relief was largely confined to the plaintiffs," said Fass, referring to importers who sued to stop the tariffs. "If Section 122 ultimately disappears, the two statutes people immediately point to are Section 301 and Section 232. Section 301 deals with unfair trade practices. Section 232 is the national security statute that was used for steel and aluminum," he continued. Section 232 is currently in effect for imports of some steel, aluminum, copper, automobiles and automobile parts, timber and wood products, and pharmaceuticals.

There's also Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, a provision of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which historians associate with deepening the Great Depression. It had sat dormant for decades before the administration invoked it on July 20 to impose a 50% tariff on certain Canadian goods starting on August 19, 2026. The argument is that the President can impose duties of up to 50% on goods from countries that discriminate against U.S. commerce. The three proclamations name motor vehicles, alcohol, and dairy as the disputes, but the annexes reach considerably further: wine, cement, furniture, fishing rods, seeds, wigs, swimming pools, and hockey sticks all make the list. That same argument applies to Section 301. Unfair trade behavior is one thing, but the arguments about national security are altogether different.

"Section 232 requires some theory of national security. You can at least construct a national security argument around steel, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, or critical minerals," said Fass. "But arguing that a bottle of Barolo or Chablis threatens the national security of the United States pushes the concept beyond the limits of even a cynical imagination." It's difficult to argue that the importation of watches, cars, and other luxury goods would have much of an impact on national security, though there are certainly steel components involved in some of them.

The scavenging is not finished: a separate Section 301 investigation into excess capacity targets 16 trading partners, including Switzerland, the EU, and China, with additional tariffs still to come.

"One lesson of the past few years is that when one legal theory collapses, another one often appears. But each new statute is narrower, slower, more vulnerable to challenge, and harder to explain to the public," said Fass. "At some point, the administration runs into the reality that Congress, not the executive branch, is supposed to control trade policy. The more courts reject these workarounds, the closer we get to the moment where they either have to convince Congress to legislate tariffs or accept that they have reached the end of the statutory scavenger hunt."