The domino effect of geopolitics impacting trade policy and that policy—mostly centered around tariffs—impacting compliance and sourcing decisions will be a continuing theme throughout 2026, according to experts in trade law.
“We still generally expect the trade policies to continue changing this year, especially if the Supreme Court strikes down the [International Emergency Economic Powers Act] tariffs,” Sophie Jin, senior counsel at Holland & Knight said Tuesday during a webinar hosted by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) and World Salon.
Related Stories
But companies hoping for a Hail Mary may be disappointed. Government officials have indicated ad nauseam that they plan to pursue other paths should the current tariff structure be invalidated, and they will “immediately rely on other statutory authorities to reimpose the tariffs,” she said.
As such, importers must be crystal clear on the risks they’re facing. “The risks around country-of-origin determinations are among the most common issues I see in practice. And the second major area would be HTS classification,” Jin said, along with undervaluation of goods being imported.
Keeping clean and precise transaction records to protect themselves is a must, as the Department of Justice and Customs and Border Protection have been tasked with cracking down on any attempts at tariff evasion.
“It is also very important that importers conduct their own country of origin analysis, because importers are required to access exercise reasonable care when declaring information to U.S. customs, including country of origin information,” she added. “Solely relying on the foreign suppliers’ origin determination is not enough. If the declared origin is wrong, customs may find negligence on the U.S. importers’ part and assess civil penalties.”
But companies can also pursue mitigation strategies that might help them save some money in the near term.
“On the country of origin front, I think it might be helpful for companies to build strong relationships with suppliers in multiple countries. If the supply chains need to be shifted quickly, the importer can do so based on existing supplier relationships,” Jin said.
When it comes to valuation, one commonly used duty mitigation tactic is the First Sale for Export Rule. “When an importer purchases goods through a middleman rather than directly from the foreign manufacturer, the First Sale rule may allow the importer to use the middleman’s lower purchase price instead of the importer’s higher purchase price to calculate duties,” she explained.
Laura Siegel Rabinowitz, chair of the New York international trade practice at Greenberg Traurig said she’s advised clients to be prepared for a potential Supreme Court ruling.
“If we’re talking about 2026 and tariffs, companies who have been importing into the U.S. have to be prepared for the potential duty refunds if the Supreme Court overturns the Trump administration’s IEEPA tariffs,” she said. “That should be on everyone’s to-do list: to get organized.”
Rabinowitz and her clients are “anxiously awaiting that decision,” which won’t come before Feb. 20 because of the high court’s recess schedule. In the meantime, though, “It’s really important for companies to track those entries, dates of entry, dates of liquidation, amounts of IEEPA duties paid to prepare for a potential refund process,” she said.
“We are cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will overturn the tariffs. It may not be 100 percent—it could be, very likely, a nuanced opinion, but there should be, hopefully, some opportunity for refunds, whether it’s administrative or judicial or a combination of both,” she added.
When it comes to tariff mitigation strategies, the lawyer drew a distinction from Trump’s first term, when China was the primary target of tariff firepower. “It was easier under the first Trump administration, when it was an anywhere-but-China strategy to change the country of origin. Now, companies have to be a little bit more creative in terms of origin, because every country has tariffs,” she said.
“I don’t think there will be certainty in 2026; I think it’s going to be very volatile, just like ’25,” she added. “The negotiations with other countries are ongoing, it’s not stable, and it’s very, very difficult for sourcing executives. I think the key is to diversify.”
Melissa Nelson, general counsel at SanMar Corporation noted that while compliance was somewhat of an afterthought for companies a year ago, “It no longer is.” The firm’s clients have become well-versed in the language of the modern trade landscape, and are keeping tabs on the changes that happen almost daily.
“I think while we focus on resilience and being able to supply change and be able to move quickly,” Nelson said. But while the industry attempts to mitigate the cost pressures the tariffs have created, she urged stakeholders not to undermine suppliers in the process.
“We need to take into account the social responsibility piece, and make sure that we’re not harming one when we’re working on the other piece”—i.e., the business impacts.
“A lot of what companies have done over the past year is shift production, which absolutely makes sense, but understand that there is a cost to that too when we’re leaving a factory,” she said. Nelson said she’s focused on “[making] sure we’re leaving in the most responsible way possible” for workers.
As the company continues to diversify its own sourcing base, there’s no room to let standards slip. “When we’re starting a new factory, [we’re] making sure that we’re hitting all of our requirements on labor.”
“It’s a cost,” she said, noting that “you can’t ignore those pieces when you’re shifting production.”
