Trump administration seeks permanent trade war powers through Section 301

The Trump administration is building a new tariff machine. After the Supreme Court clipped its wings on emergency economic powers, the White House has pivoted to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, launching sweeping investigations that could touch dozens of economies and reshape global supply chains, including those feeding the crypto industry.

On March 11, 2026, the US Trade Representative initiated two major Section 301 probes. One targets excess industrial capacity across 16 economies. The other examines forced labor practices spanning 60 economies. That brings the total number of active Section 301 investigations under this administration to four.

From emergency power to permanent infrastructure

Section 301 was designed as a scalpel. Congress created it in 1974 to let the executive branch respond to specific unfair trade practices by foreign governments.

The administration’s original tariff strategy leaned heavily on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. The Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA couldn’t serve as a blank check for tariff policy, effectively forcing the White House to find another legal foundation.

The two new investigations launched in March cover an extraordinary scope. Excess industrial capacity is being examined across 16 economies including China and EU member states. The forced labor probe casts an even wider net at 60 economies.

The crypto angle no one is talking about

None of the USTR’s recent communications mention cryptocurrencies or digital assets explicitly.

Bitcoin mining and crypto infrastructure depend on semiconductors, specialized chips, cooling systems, and networking equipment. Much of that hardware is manufactured in or sourced through the very economies now under investigation. The Section 301 tariffs originally imposed on Chinese goods during Trump’s first term are still in effect. Those tariffs already raised costs for ASIC miners and related hardware. Fresh investigations could layer additional duties on top, squeezing margins for mining operations that are already navigating tight economics after the 2024 Bitcoin halving.

Among the four active Section 301 investigations, at least one targets digital services taxes imposed by foreign governments. These are levies that countries like France, the UK, and others have placed on large tech companies. If the USTR’s findings lead to retaliatory tariffs or trade restrictions related to digital services, the compliance landscape for fintech and digital asset firms operating internationally could shift meaningfully.

Congress didn’t sign up for this

Trade policy authority belongs to Congress under Article I of the Constitution. Over decades, Congress has delegated specific, limited trade powers to the executive branch through statutes like Section 301 and IEEPA.

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling on IEEPA was, in part, about enforcing those limits. The administration’s response has been to shift the same ambitions onto a different legal vehicle. By maintaining multiple overlapping investigations across dozens of countries, the administration creates a kind of standing tariff authority that doesn’t require congressional approval or emergency declarations.

What this means for crypto investors

The immediate risk is supply chain disruption. Any expansion of tariffs on industrial goods from China or other major manufacturing economies could raise hardware costs for crypto miners and infrastructure providers.

The digital services tax investigations add a further vector. If the USTR concludes that foreign digital services taxes constitute unfair trade practices and imposes retaliatory measures, crypto exchanges and DeFi platforms with international operations could face new compliance costs or restrictions on cross-border activity.

The ongoing investigations from 2025 into Brazil and China’s trade commitments suggest this isn’t a one-off policy moment. It’s a sustained campaign to expand executive trade authority through Section 301.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.