On the final day of 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a pivotal statement that rippled through global trade circles: the United States would postpone a sharp increase in import tariffs on a range of wood and furniture products. The decision, announced under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, means that the planned tariff hikes—originally set to kick in on January 1, 2026—will now be delayed by a full year, giving manufacturers, exporters, and trading partners a much-needed reprieve and time to recalibrate their strategies.
Specifically, the U.S. move affects finished wood products such as upholstered chairs, kitchen cabinets, and bathroom cabinets, with the new, higher tariffs now scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027. According to SGGP, these products, covered under Directive 10976 issued in September 2025, had been facing a jump from a 10 percent tariff on raw wood and 25 percent on processed wood products to a daunting 30 percent and 50 percent, respectively. The current rates, however, will remain in place for the time being, much to the relief of exporters and importers alike.
The U.S. administration explained the postponement as a move to provide “flexibility for ongoing trade negotiations” while also supporting the broader aims of economic security and supply chain stability. The Ministry of Industry and Trade of Vietnam, a country whose timber exports to the United States have continued to grow steadily throughout 2025, was quick to highlight the significance of the decision. Avoiding an immediate tariff shock at the start of the year, Vietnamese businesses can now maintain orders, keep prices steady, and adapt their market strategies with a little more breathing room.
Yet, as the Ministry was careful to note, this is not a full suspension of tariffs—just a delay in the planned increases. Imported timber products will still face Section 232 tariffs at the current rates, and the future trajectory of these tariffs remains closely tied to the results of ongoing negotiations. As the Ministry put it, 2026 should be seen as a period that is “temporarily stable but not yet secure.” The message to Vietnam’s wood sector is clear: keep a close eye on U.S. policy, maintain open lines of dialogue with American counterparts, and be ready with long-term contingency plans.
Interestingly, the decision to delay the Section 232 tariff increases is entirely unrelated to any U.S. Supreme Court rulings on reciprocal tariff orders. As SGGP reports, these tariffs are imposed on the grounds of national security and fall under executive authority, separate from retaliatory measures under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. So, any judicial changes to retaliatory tariffs won’t affect the ongoing enforcement of timber tariffs under Section 232.
Meanwhile, the United States appears to be broadening its use of Section 232, expanding investigations to a wider array of imported goods. The Ministry of Industry and Trade warns that further tariff adjustments could be on the horizon, depending on the direction of trade negotiations or shifts in domestic economic and political pressures in 2026. For now, though, exporters in Vietnam and elsewhere have a window of relative stability—albeit one that requires constant vigilance.
This American recalibration of trade policy is not limited to the timber sector. On January 2, 2026, the U.S. made headlines in Europe by significantly reducing proposed anti-dumping tariffs on Italian pasta. The revised rates, announced ahead of the final investigation conclusion scheduled for March 11, 2026, marked a dramatic shift from the provisional figures set in September 2025. According to ANSA, the duties were slashed from a staggering 91.74% to just 2.26% for La Molisana, 13.98% for Garofalo, and 9.09% for eleven other non-sampled producers, including Barilla.
This turnaround followed months of intense diplomatic engagement from Italy and robust support from the European Commission. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Rome called the redetermination of duties “a sign of the US authorities’ recognition of our companies’ active willingness to cooperate.” Italian Agriculture Minister Francesco Lollobrigida echoed the sentiment, stating, “The good news coming from the United States demonstrates how serious work, without unnecessary alarmism, bears fruit.” He added, “We have been following the situation from the very beginning; in October in Chicago, together with Ambassador Marco Peronaci, we sent an important signal: Italian institutions would not abandon Italian pasta producers.”
Coldiretti and Filiera Italia, two leading Italian agricultural associations, praised the government’s efforts, noting that “the actions of the Italian government, particularly Ministers Tajani and Lollobrigida, and our diplomatic structure, led to an initial temporary reduction in US tariffs on Italian pasta.” The stakes are high: in 2024, Italian pasta exports to the U.S. reached an estimated €671 million, making the American market a strategic priority for the sector.
Importantly, the anti-dumping investigation remains open, with the ultimate fate of the tariffs to be decided when the U.S. administration publishes its final conclusions on March 11, 2026. Until then, the effect of the new, lower tariffs is suspended, but the diplomatic progress is undeniable. The Italian government credits both its own efforts and those of the European Commission, which filed defense briefs on behalf of the companies under investigation, for the positive outcome so far.
The broader context for these trade moves is a White House strategy to protect U.S. industrial capacity, particularly in sectors like wood and furniture. The tariffs, introduced in October 2025 with an initial rate of 25%, were part of a larger effort to shore up domestic industries. Yet, as ANSA reports, the postponement of further increases was motivated by the need to “leave room for ongoing production negotiations” with trading partners. The message from Washington is one of tactical patience: use tariffs as leverage, but don’t move so quickly as to disrupt critical supply chains or alienate allies.
This approach, blending protectionism with negotiation, is now a hallmark of U.S. trade policy under President Trump. It’s a balancing act that seeks to promote economic security at home while keeping doors open for dialogue—and, perhaps, compromise—abroad. For exporters in Vietnam, Italy, and beyond, the immediate threat of punishing tariffs has receded, but the underlying uncertainty remains. The coming year will demand both caution and agility as businesses and governments alike navigate a trade landscape that is anything but settled.
As 2026 unfolds, the world’s exporters and policymakers find themselves in a waiting game, watching closely for the next move from Washington. The only certainty, it seems, is that the rules of global trade are still very much in flux.
