HOUSTON – Is the US economy in hot water or is it the “hottest economy in the world”, as President Donald Trump likes to say in nearly every speech?
That is a key question now that Mr Trump has invoked a law designed to be used when the US economy is in serious crisis, in order to impose
a new global tariff of 10 per cent
on nearly all goods imported into the US – including from Singapore.
These tariffs – imposed in the wake of a US Supreme Court ruling on Feb 20 that
declared most of Mr Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs illegal
– have been imposed under Section 122 of the US Trade Act of 1974.
It is a power granted by Congress as a remedy – the tariffs can only last for up to 150 days – when the US economy experiences “large and serious balance-of-payments deficits” or faces “imminent and significant depreciation of the dollar”.
Except, most economists concur that the US is facing no such crisis. And legal experts predict imminent suits in the Court of International Trade in Washington, challenging the use of a statute that no president has invoked until now.
The tariff is especially jarring when it comes to Singapore, a free trade partner and one of the few Asian economies with which the US has consistently run a trade surplus.
The US-Singapore trade relationship speaks to US export strength in high-value items like semiconductors, aircraft parts and pharmaceuticals, and adds nothing to the US$1.2 trillion trade deficit that is a sore point for Mr Trump.
The US surplus with Singapore actually helps its balance of payments, and Singapore’s Ministry of Trade and Industry said it would engage US counterparts to seek clarity on the new tariffs.
Experts also question if Section 122 is a blunt tool that allows for a uniform global surcharge.
“Most trade professionals do not see Section 122 as a blanket tariff as is now being applied,” said Mr Frank Lavin, the US ambassador to Singapore from 2001 to 2005 who played a key role in negotiating the 2004 US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement.
“So I do not see Section 122 applying in general, and it would be very hard to make the case it should apply to Singapore,” he said.
The law does not take into account country-specific realities, like the goods trade surplus of US$3.6 billion the US racked up with Singapore in 2025, said Mr Manu Bhaskaran, a partner of Centennial Group International and the founding director and chief executive of Centennial Asia Advisors.
“I could be wrong, but I think Section 122 allows tariffs against all countries in the event of a balance of payments crisis, whether that country has a deficit or surplus with the US,” he said, calling it “collateral damage” for Singapore in the current period of trade turbulence.
The US has frequently claimed that the Singapore exchange rate is undervalued, he pointed out. “That claim could still be used against Singapore, even though it is debatable,” he said.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore adjusts the Singapore dollar’s trading band against a basket of currencies to control imported inflation and keep exports affordable, which is crucial for a small, open economy where trade exceeds 300 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP).





