On September 24, 2025, Covington’s tech industry experts explored what legal teams, government affairs professionals, and business leaders at tech companies need to know during this pivotal period and offered insights into anticipated challenges and emerging opportunities in the year ahead. Eight Covington attorneys shared their insights during a 60-minute session moderated by Covington partner Holly Fechner. Key takeaways from the Forum are outlined below.Continue Reading Covington Tech Briefing Spotlight: Impact of Latest Policy Developments on the Tech Industry
Kate McNulty
Kate McNulty is a senior associate in the Washington office who helps clients navigate complex international trade and investment matters. She counsels companies, trade associations, and governments on U.S. trade and tariff measures, as well as implementation of responsive measures by foreign governments. She provides legal and strategic advice to clients on global policy issues and geopolitical risks, including assessing and mitigating reputational, economic, or physical risk to their businesses or investments. She advises clients on the application and use of international treaties—including free trade agreements (FTAs), bilateral investment treaties (BITs), and agreements under World Trade Organization (WTO) framework—to open markets and resolve disputes, also advising clients seeking to understand and engage with the negotiation and implementation of such agreements.
Kate also focuses her trade practice on U.S. anti-forced labor laws as well as business-related human rights matters, advising clients on the application and enforcement of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) and Withhold Release Orders (WROs) issued by the U.S. government. She helps clients develop and implement strategies to mitigate supply chain risks, including by building compliance programs, developing due diligence procedures, and conducting risk assessments. She also advises clients on conducting human rights-related investigations and implementing related findings.
Kate has represented corporate clients in both commercial and investment treaty arbitrations, including under ICSID, ICC, UNCITRAL, and ICDR rules, and also represents clients in proceedings before U.S. administrative bodies and U.S. courts, including in trade remedy proceedings (AD/CVD).
She also maintains an active pro bono practice focused on international human rights and public international law. She has represented U.S.-funded media outlet Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to secure the release of one of its journalists in a prisoner exchange with Russia. Her work also includes representation of the Clooney Foundation for Justice, the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights, and the Public International Law & Policy Group.
Don’t Count on Immediate IEEPA Refunds: What President Trump Might Do If SCOTUS Throws Out IEEPA Tariffs
On November 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear the Trump Administration’s appeal of lower court decisions holding the imposition of certain tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) unlawful. If the Supreme Court rules that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs, the government would no…
Continue Reading Don’t Count on Immediate IEEPA Refunds: What President Trump Might Do If SCOTUS Throws Out IEEPA TariffsThe United States, Mexico, and Canada Launch Domestic Consultation Processes on Upcoming USMCA Review
Ahead of the July 2026 “joint review” of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”), the United States, Mexico, and Canada have each launched public consultation processes to solicit input from stakeholders on the operation of the USMCA, and possible changes those governments should seek to the Agreement as part of the review.
Continue Reading The United States, Mexico, and Canada Launch Domestic Consultation Processes on Upcoming USMCA ReviewU.S.-Colombia Relations Facing Key Decision Points with Implications for Businesses
The United States and Colombia have historically maintained a strong bilateral partnership that has been the envy of much of Latin America. However, the bilateral relationship today is facing a test as U.S. and Colombian approaches to shared problems increasingly diverge. The next several months present milestones that will have…
Continue Reading U.S.-Colombia Relations Facing Key Decision Points with Implications for BusinessesU.S. Tariffs and Sanctions Against Brazil and the Brazilian Response
As described in our prior client alert, President Trump threatened in July to impose tariffs of 50% on imports of products from Brazil in response to U.S. concerns regarding Brazil’s criminal prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro, recent judicial developments impacting social media regulation in Brazil, Brazil’s allegedly…
Continue Reading U.S. Tariffs and Sanctions Against Brazil and the Brazilian ResponseTrump Administration Imposes Secondary Tariffs on India
On August 6, President Trump issued an Executive Order (“EO”) (“Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of the Russian Federation”) invoking his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) to impose a tariff of 25% on most products imported from India, effective August 27, in…
Continue Reading Trump Administration Imposes Secondary Tariffs on IndiaU.S.-EU Trade Framework: Outcome and Next Steps
On July 27, the United States and the European Union announced a trade framework agreement, following a meeting between President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The deal avoided imposition of a 30% reciprocal U.S. tariff on EU goods that was set to take effect August…
Continue Reading U.S.-EU Trade Framework: Outcome and Next StepsStatus of Section 232 Actions by the Trump Administration
Since taking office in January, President Trump has taken a number of actions under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (“Section 232”), a statute that authorizes the President to “adjust” imports—including through application of tariffs, quotas, tariff rate quotas, and license fees—where the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”)…
Continue Reading Status of Section 232 Actions by the Trump AdministrationU.S. Tariffs and Brazil’s Potential Response: A Guide for Businesses
- In a July 9 letter sent to his Brazilian counterpart, President Trump vowed to impose a 50% tariff on “any and all Brazilian products” imported into the United States, effective August 1. He also previewed the initiation on July 15 of a U.S. investigation under Section 301 of
EU Consults on New Tariffs on €95 Billion of U.S. Imports
On 8 May 2025, the European Union launched a public consultation on potential countermeasures in response to U.S. automotive tariffs and the potential imposition of a 20% “reciprocal” tariff on EU-origin goods—covering around €379 billion of EU exports to the U.S. In particular, the EU is considering imposing tariffs on U.S. imports worth approximately €95 billion, covering a wide range of industrial and agricultural products. The Commission is also evaluating possible restrictions on EU exports to the U.S., principally steel scrap and certain chemical products, valued at €4.4 billion. If implemented, the export restrictions could take the form of export duties, quantitative restrictions such as quotas or licensing requirements, additional administrative charges, or a combination of these measures. No specific tariff rates have been proposed at this stage and the consultation is open until 10 June. Notably, the EU has not thus far targeted U.S. services as part of its retaliatory measures.
These countermeasures could be activated if ongoing EU-U.S. negotiations fail to deliver a mutually acceptable resolution, and the U.S. tariffs remain in place. While the U.S. currently imposes a 10% global reciprocal tariff on most imports, the negotiations follow a decision by President Trump to pause higher, country-specific tariff rates that were scheduled to come into effect on April 9 and would have increased the reciprocal tariff rate on U.S. imports from the EU to 20%. Those higher tariffs are paused for 90-days, or until 9 July 2025, absent an extension. EU exports of autos and auto parts to the U.S. are also subject to 25% tariffs, while the U.S. is also considering imposing additional sector-specific tariffs on—among other sectors—imports of pharmaceuticals and related ingredients; semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment and their derivative products; critical minerals and their derivative products; as well as commercial aircraft, jet engines, and related parts. Should it proceed with any of these measures, the EU is likely to increase the scope of its proposed response.
If adopted, the EU countermeasures would supplement the existing EU “Rebalancing Tariffs” previously introduced—and suspended until 14 July—in response to increased U.S. steel and aluminum duties. Most of the products covered by the Rebalancing Tariffs would be subject to a 25% ad valorem duty, with some facing a reduced rate of 10%. The Rebalancing Tariffs would apply to U.S. goods exports worth up to €26 billion.
The Enforcement Regulation and the Anti-Coercion Instrument
In preparing for a scenario in which negotiations with the U.S. fail to bring tariff relief, the EU has several legal instruments at its disposal to take responsive countermeasures, most notably the Enforcement Regulation and the Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI), with some overlapping and some distinguishing features.
A. Intended Use of the Two Instruments
The Enforcement Regulation is a long-standing mechanism designed to enforce the EU’s rights under international trade agreements, including under World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements. Initially adopted in 2014 and amended in 2021, it empowers the EU to respond to breaches of trade obligations—particularly when a trading partner withdraws concessions granted under WTO agreements or fails to implement a ruling adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body. Crucially, the amended Regulation now allows the EU to act unilaterally when multilateral adjudication is not possible, including in the absence of a functioning WTO Appellate Body (which has lacked the necessary quorum since late 2019, following a U.S. refusal to appoint additional members to the body).Continue Reading EU Consults on New Tariffs on €95 Billion of U.S. Imports