Tax – Page 18 – Law Ivy

The First Wave: U.S. Imposes Tariffs on Canada (or not?), Mexico (or not?), and China (well, yeah, probably so)

On February 1, 2025, President Trump issued three executive orders imposing tariffs on nearly all imports from Canada[1], Mexico,[2] and China.[3] However, on February 3, the President said on social media that the tariffs on Canada and Mexico will be suspended for one month while the countries discuss potential agreements to reduce or rescind the tariff imposition.[4] A subsequent federal register notice provides details of the China tariffs.[5]
So, at the time of this publication, only one of the three new sets of tariffs have gone into effect: those adding a 10% duty on nearly all imports from China to the United States. Under the executive order, the 10% additional duty is added to “any other duties, fees, exactions, or charges applicable” to goods from China.
1. The China Tariffs[6]
While the U.S. tariffs on China appear to be a continuation of President Trump’s first-term (Trump I) measures against Chinese imports, they bear some notable differences that may show us much about the tactics and effects of this renewed trade war.
1.1 The Consumer Impact
In 2018, the first Trump administration’s tariffs on China (imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act) were estimated to have added an additional cost of $14 billion to domestic consumers and importers in that year alone.[7] So we expect that, in the short term, we will see a rise in consumer product prices as importers pass the costs of paying the tariffs on to their customers.
Moreover, many consumer items imported directly from China were protected from the Section 301 tariffs by application of the standard de minimis rule on imports. Under that rule, any import valued at less than $800 is not normally subject to tariffs. The application of that rule to the Section 301 duties eased the effect on many consumers, including the vast quantity of Chinese-origin goods that Americans purchase through e-commerce channels.
By contrast, the executive orders implementing these new tariffs expressly state that the de minimis protection will be unavailable. Moreover, it appears from our reading of the orders that the de minimis rule will be unavailable for the older Section 301 tariffs in addition to the new tariffs. As a result, total tariffs of up to 35% on goods from China (up to 25% Section 301 duties from Trump I, plus the 10% tariffs now imposed in the new administration), will apply to all subject Chinese imports, regardless of how small the value. A trade association has noted that without de minimis the average $50 package would more than double the delivery cost. That means the tariffs are more likely to show up in the bottom line of U.S. households, which purchase billions of dollars in Chinese consumer goods each year.
1.2 National Security Concerns
You may recall that in the first Trump presidency, we reported on several rounds of China tariffs (in fact, we kept a China Trade War Scorecard . . . which will need some updating). As we noted above, those tariffs were imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the executive branch to respond to foreign countries’ unfair trade practices by imposing measures including substantial tariffs.
Interestingly, President Trump has invoked a different law for the current wave of tariffs: the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).[8] Traditionally, IEEPA is used to impose export controls and economic sanctions to protect U.S. national security. Unlike other tariff laws[9] which impose time-consuming procedural steps, IEEPA allows the president to impose measures quickly and easily, requiring only a declaration of a national emergency under the National Emergencies Act (NEA) and an annual renewal.
But IEEPA has never before been used to impose tariffs. For that reason, President Trump’s use of IEEPA for these tariffs may face legal challenges. Some reports have indicated that certain Trump administration personnel were cautious to impose tariffs under IEEPA, reportedly citing the possibility that opponents of the measure could seek injunctions. However, courts have generally been deferential to a president’s use of national security powers for trade measures.
1.3 Exclusions and a Few Other Details
Humanitarian and Communications Imports. Humanitarian donations, informational materials, and personal baggage are exempted from the tariffs. This is because IEEPA prohibits its use to regulate or prohibit any personal communication “which does not involve a transfer of anything of value”, humanitarian donations, informational materials, and any “transactions ordinarily incident to travel”.
Duty Drawback Unavailable. The Executive Order implementing the China tariffs notes that no duty drawback will be available for duties paid under this Order.
U.S. Foreign Trade Zones. The Order also states that goods subject to the China tariffs and admitted into a U.S. Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) fall under a “privileged foreign status”. Thus, the new tariffs will not apply until and unless the articles are later withdrawn from the FTZ for consumption.
Entry of Mail. The federal register notice states formal entry would be required for all mail shipments from China and Hong Kong. After suspending service for those regions, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) announced it would resume accepting inbound mail and packages from China and Hong Kong. USPS posted a notice that it was working with Customs and Border Protection to “implement an efficient collection mechanism for the new China tariffs to ensure the least disruption to package delivery”.
2. The Canada and Mexico Tariffs
2.1 Canada (10% on energy and energy resources and 25% on all other goods of Canadian origin effective March 4, 2025)
Imports from Canada will be subject to an additional 25 percent tariff on “all articles that are products of Canada” other than “energy or energy resources”, which will be subject to a 10 percent rate of duty. See Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address The Flow of Illicit Drugs Across our Northern Border (February 1, 2025). Energy and energy resources means “crude oil, natural gas, lease condensates, natural gas liquids, refined petroleum products, uranium, coal, biofuels, geothermal heat, the kinetic movement of flowing water, and critical minerals”. See Executive Order 14156 (January 20, 2025). The effective date of these tariffs was delayed from February 4 to March 4. See Executive Order Progress on the Situation at Our Northern Border (February 3, 2025).
The federal register notice was initially posted, but later withdrawn.
2.2 Mexico (25% on goods of Mexican origin effective March 4, 2025)
Imports from Mexico will be subject to an additional 25 percent tariff on “all articles that are products of Mexico.” See Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address The Situation At Our Southern Border (February 1, 2025). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will publish a Federal Register notice shortly with additional details and an update to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but these tariffs appear to apply to all items country of origin Mexican imported into the United States. The effective date of these tariffs was delayed from February 4 to March 4. See Executive Order Progress on the Situation at Our Southern Border (February 3, 2025).
Because of the temporary suspension of the two tariff regimes, we will save further details of those prospective tariffs for another article.
3. International Reactions
3.1 China – Retaliatory Tariffs and More
On February 4, 2025, China announced its own set of countermeasures. Effective February 10, 2025, China will impose a 15 percent tariff on liquefied natural gas and coal and a 10 percent tariff on crude oil, pickup trucks, agricultural machinery and large-displacement cars.
China will also impose additional export controls on several critical minerals essential to U.S. economic or national security including tungsten, tellurium, bismuth, molybdenum and indium.
Other U.S. companies may also get caught in the cross-hairs. China’s State Administration for Market Regulation announced an investigation into a U.S. company and China’s Commerce Ministry placed two additional U.S. companies on its unreliable entities list.
3.2 Canada – Measures to Precipitate a Suspension of Tariffs
On February 1, 2025, Canada announced imposing a 25 percent tariff on an initial list of American goods to be effective February 4, 2025. A second extended list was also reportedly under consideration. Other retaliatory measures were in the process of being implemented in different provinces, such as a ban on American alcohol. However, Prime Minister Trudeau announced that Canada would increase personnel at its border with the United States to combat the flow of fentanyl. Trudeau will also appoint a fentanyl czar and list cartels as terrorists. It appears that those actions precipitated a suspension of the U.S. tariffs which resulted in Canada pausing its retaliatory tariffs.
3.3 Mexico – Measures to Precipitate a Suspension of Tariffs
While Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum did not initiate any retaliatory tariffs, Sheinbaum announced the deployment of 10,000 National Guard members to Mexico’s northern border to reduce illegal migration and drug trafficking. That action appears to have precipitated a suspension of the U.S. Tariffs on Mexico.
4. What Comes Next
The ever-changing landscape will make it difficult for companies to insulate supply chains from the impact of these new tariffs. The new tariffs may lead to alternative sourcing from non-targeted countries. But for products like batteries, machinery, and toys, we might not see these tariffs soften Chinese imports. We also expect to see CBP increase enforcement on circumvention attempts regarding declared country of origin.
We may expect to see further tariff developments over the next month should the Trump administration determine that the Canadian and Mexican cooperative actions are not sufficient.
In fact, there could be more tariffs on other countries in the horizon.[10] We will continue to monitor developments in tariffs and report them here. For a broader scope on all of Trump’s Executive Orders, please see our dedicated tracker.

FOOTNOTES
[1] Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address The Flow of Illicit Drugs Across our Northern Border (February 1, 2025).
[2] Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address The Situation At Our Southern Border (February 1, 2025).
[3] Executive Order Imposing Duties To Address The Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China (February 1, 2025).
[4] In fact, we apologize for the delay in publishing this article, but we kept having to go back rewrite the piece a fair few times over the course of 24 hours!
[5] Implementation of Additional Duties on Products of the People’s Republic of China, available here.
[6] We note the executive order and federal register notice imposing tariffs and other measures on China include Hong Kong.
[7] Amiti, Redding, and Weinstein; The Impact of the 2018 Tariffs on Prices and Welfare; Journal of Economic Perspectives vol. 33, no. 4, Fall 2019
[8] 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.
[9] Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974, Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, and Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. We note that Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 does not require any related investigation or procedural steps, but only allows the president to impose up to a 15 percent tariff on imports for 150 days.
[10] President Trump has recently threated 100 percent tariffs on countries that are members of the BRICS coalition (which includes Brazil, Russia, India and China) should they follow through with their plans to create a gold-backed currency alternative to the U.S. dollar.
Listen to this post

Tariffs Loom on Natural Gas Imports: Be Prepared

If you are a seller or purchaser of natural gas imported from Canada or Mexico, or exported to either country, under an NAESB Base Contract for the Purchase and Sale of Natural Gas (NAESB Contract), you should carefully review such agreements, including any special provisions or transaction confirmations to consider the impact of potential tariffs that may be imposed by the United States on natural gas imported from Canada or Mexico or imposed in retaliatory tariffs by those countries on natural gas exported from the U.S.
On February 1, 2025, the president announced the imposition of tariffs on goods imported from Canada and Mexico. The general tariff would be 25% for goods imported from both countries; however, a subset of defined energy resources imported from Canada would be subject to a 10% tariff.
Originally, the tariffs were scheduled to be effective on February 1, but on February 3, after discussions with both Canada and Mexico, the president announced that the tariffs would be effective March 4, 2025. Although it is not yet clear whether interim negotiations will affect the imposition of these tariffs, it is important to be prepared if the tariffs do go into effect as planned on March 4.
Many purchasers and sellers of natural gas use the NAESB Contract to buy and sell natural gas. Several base provisions of the NAESB Contract, or added Special Provisions, could affect which party is responsible for tariff payments, whether through a posted increase to the applicable published index price or as a tax to be paid in addition to the index price.
If the index price in your NAESB Contract is on the U.S. side of the border with either Canada or Mexico, that posted index price may take into account any U.S. tariffs since the gas has been imported. It is important to note that it is still unclear whether the cost of an import tariff on natural gas will be included in the posted index price, whether the NAESB Contract’s index price is at or near the border, or at a liquid trading hub. Special provisions or transaction confirmations under the NAESB Contract also may address this issue. Further, if your NAESB Contract includes a Canadian Addendum, that should be carefully reviewed as well.
Section 6 of the NAESB Contract defines “taxes” to include: “taxes, fees, levies, penalties, licenses or charges imposed by any governmental authority.” An argument can be made that tariff costs are government-imposed “taxes” under this definition.
Section 6 provides two options for responsibility for taxes. Either the buyer pays taxes at and after the delivery point, or the seller pays taxes before and at the delivery point. We suggest you review the selection box on page two of your NAESB Contract to determine which option applies.
Also, some parties have added a definition of “Applicable Laws” or other special provisions to their NAESB Contract for the purposes of addressing responsibility for new taxes. Accordingly, you should also review any special provisions or transaction confirmations to confirm the agreed-upon structure.
Finally, Section 14 of the NAESB Contract addresses market disruptions and defines “Market Disruption Events.” The definition includes, among other things, “(e) both Parties agree a material change in the formula for or the method of determining the Floating Price has occurred.” This provision may open the door to negotiations if the appliable index prices are adjusted by the index publishers to reflect any tariffs on imported natural gas.
Please note that this alert does not specifically address the terms of the ISDA Gas Annex, frequently used in connection with gas-fired power generation, or bespoke agreements. If you use an agreement other than the NAESB Contract to buy and sell imported gas, you should carefully review the relevant provisions of such agreements to determine the implications of or responsibility for any tariffs.

Mexican Government Announces Incentives in Support of Nearshoring

On January 21, 2025, the Decree granting tax incentives in support of the national strategy known as “Plan Mexico,” to encourage new investments that promote dual training programs and innovation (Nearshoring Decree) was published in the Official Federal Gazette (DOF), with the primary goal of stimulating the relocation of companies and the reconfiguration of supply chains closer to the U.S. market, particularly in the manufacturing sector in Mexico. The Decree became effective on January 22, 2025.
The Nearshoring Decree extends incentives currently offered to foreign companies that relocate to Mexico and domestic companies with capacity to integrate into value chains (Decree published in the DOF on October 11, 2023 and its amendment published on December 24, 2024, which will no longer be in effect after the publication of the Nearshoring Decree) to allow all domestic or foreign companies, regardless of industrial sector, to benefit from these incentives.
The tax incentives provided by the Nearshoring Decree include:

Accelerated depreciation for new investments in fixed assets ranging from 41% to 91% (depreciation rates currently set by the Income Tax Law range from 3% to 35%). Higher percentages will apply to investments in high technology sectors and research and development.
New assets are defined as those used for the first time in Mexico.
Immediate deduction will not be available for furniture and office equipment, internal combustion vehicles, armored equipment, non-individually identifiable assets, or aircraft other than those used for agricultural spraying.
Fixed assets must be used for at least two years (except in cases of force majeure) and a specific record of the investment must be kept.
Additional deduction for expenses related to staff training (25% of the increase in expenses over the average of the last three fiscal years). A collaboration agreement with the Ministry of Public Education regarding organizational training is required.
Additional deduction for expenses associated with the promotion of inventions to obtain patents or initial certifications that enable integration into local/regional supply chains (25% of the increase in expenses over the average of the last three fiscal years).

The Decree also establishes an Evaluation Committee, composed of representatives from the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit and the Ministry of Economy, with the participation of the Regional Economic Development and Relocation Advisory Council, which will evaluate the investment projects and collaboration agreements submitted and, where applicable, issue the certificate of compliance required to apply for the tax incentives. The Evaluation Committee will determine the maximum amount of tax incentives that may be claimed by taxpayers for each fiscal year.
Taxpayers that have fixed tax credits, are in liquidation, have restricted use of digital stamps, or whose certificates to issue digital tax receipts have been cancelled, among others, will not be able to apply the incentives.
The total amount approved by the Committee will not exceed MX$30 billion during the validity of the Decree, of which MX$28.5 billion will be for investments in new fixed assets and the remaining MX$1.5 billion for deductions related to training and innovation expenses. A minimum of MX$1 billion will be allocated to micro, small, and medium enterprises (those with total revenues of up to MX$100 million in the previous year).
Accelerated depreciation will apply to fixed assets acquired until September 30, 2030, and the additional deduction for training and innovation expenses will apply until and including fiscal year 2030.
The economic support measures implemented by the Nearshoring Decree will promote investment and expansion in key sectors such as manufacturing, technology, automotive, electronics, and renewable energy, boosting economic growth in Mexico, especially in the northern regions and other areas close to the United States, where investment will be concentrated. This will create thousands of jobs in these key industrial sectors.
With this, Mexico could become a more competitive hub in Latin America for the manufacture of high-tech, automotive, and electronic products. This transformation could establish the country as a key strategic partner in global value chains.
This Decree will not only strengthen Mexico as a manufacturing destination, but will also contribute to a global reconfiguration of supply chains, with a greater focus on diversification and reduced dependence on regions such as Asia.
The main challenges for the Mexican government to ensure the nearshoring strategy is effective and sustainable in the long term will be to; (i) ensure adequate labor conditions; (ii) manage the pressure on existing infrastructure and resources, such as roads, ports, and energy supplies, that will result from increased investment and the creation of new facilities; and (iii) establish means to enable micro, small, and medium-sized domestic companies to access incentives and modern infrastructure to avoid being displaced by large corporations.
* * * * *
El Gobierno mexicano anuncia incentivos en apoyo del nearshoring
El 21 de enero de 2025, se publicó en el Diario Oficial de la Federación (DOF) el Decreto por el que se otorgan estímulos fiscales para apoyar la estrategia nacional denominada “Plan México”, para fomentar nuevas inversiones, que incentiven programas de capacitación dual e impulsen la innovación (Decreto “Nearshoring”), que tiene como objetivo principal estimular la relocalización de empresas y reconfiguración de cadenas de suministro más cercanas al mercado estadounidense, particularmente en la manufactura en México. El Decreto entró en vigor el 22 de enero de 2025.
A partir del Decreto Nearshoring se extienden los incentivos que actualmente son otorgados a las empresas extranjeras que se relocalizan en México y a empresas nacionales que tienen capacidad para integrarse a las cadenas de valor (Decreto publicado en el DOF el 11 de octubre de 2023 y su modificación publicada el 24 de diciembre de 2024, el cual dejará de estar vigente a partir de la publicación del Decreto Nearshoring), para que puedan acceder a ellos todo tipo de empresas nacionales o extranjeras, sin distinción de sectores industriales.
Los estímulos fiscales que otorga el Decreto Nearshoring, son:

Depreciación acelerada de inversión nueva en activo fijo (41% – 91%). Los porcentajes más altos se aplicarán a inversiones en sectores de alta tecnología, investigación y desarrollo. Es importante señalar que los porcentajes de depreciación que actualmente señala la Ley del Impuesto sobre la Renta van del 3 al 35%.

Se consideran bienes nuevos los que se utilizan por primera vez en México.
La deducción inmediata no será aplicable respecto de mobiliario y equipo de oficina, automóviles de combustión interna, equipo de blindaje, activo fijo no identificable individualmente, ni aviones que no sean para aerofumigación agrícola.
Los activos fijos deberán mantenerse en uso por mínimo dos años (salvo pérdidas por caso fortuito o fuerza mayor) y se deberá llevar un registro específico de las inversiones correspondientes.

Deducción adicional de gastos destinados a la capacitación de personal (25% sobre el incremento de gastos respecto del promedio de los 3 ejercicios anteriores). Se requiere contar con un convenio de colaboración con la Secretaría de Educación Pública en materia de educación dual.
Deducción adicional por gastos asociados a la promoción de invenciones para la obtención de patentes, o bien, de certificaciones iniciales que posibiliten la integración a cadenas de proveeduría local/regional (25% sobre el incremento de gastos respecto del promedio de los 3 ejercicios anteriores).

A través del Decreto, se crea también un Comité de Evaluación integrado por representantes de la Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público y de la Secretaría de Economía, con la participación del Consejo Asesor de Desarrollo Económico Regional y Relocalización, que evaluará los proyectos de inversión y convenios de colaboración presentados y, en su caso, emitirá la constancia de cumplimiento requerida para aplicar los estímulos fiscales. El Comité de Evaluación determinará el monto máximo de estímulos fiscales que los contribuyentes podrán aplicar para cada ejercicio fiscal.
No podrán aplicar los estímulos los contribuyentes que tengan créditos fiscales firmes, se encuentren en ejercicio de liquidación, tengan restringido el uso de sellos digitales o cancelados sus certificados para expedir comprobantes fiscales digitales, entre otros.
El monto total que el Comité autorizará no excederá de 30 mil MDP durante la vigencia del Decreto, del cual 28 mil 500 MDP se destinarán a la inversión en bienes nuevos de activo fijo y los otros 1500 MDP a la deducción en gastos de capacitación e innovación. Como mínimo, 1000 MDP serán destinados a micro, pequeñas y medianas empresas (ingresos totales en el ejercicio anterior de hasta 100 MDP).
La depreciación acelerada será aplicable para bienes de activo fijo adquiridos hasta el 30 de septiembre de 2030 y la deducción adicional por gastos de capacitación e innovación, hasta, inclusive, el ejercicio fiscal 2030.
Las medidas de apoyo económico que se implementan a través del Decreto Nearshoring permitirán fomentar la inversión y la expansión de sectores clave como manufactura, tecnología, automotriz, electrónica y energías renovables, impulsando el crecimiento económico de México especialmente en las regiones del norte y otras áreas cercanas a los Estados Unidos, donde se concentrará la inversión. Esto generará miles de empleos en dichos sectores industriales clave.
Con ello, México podría convertirse en un hub más competitivo en América Latina para la manufactura de productos de alta tecnología, automotrices y electrónicos. Este cambio podría consolidarlo como un socio estratégico clave en las cadenas globales de valor.
Este Decreto no solo fortalecerá a México como destino de manufactura, sino que contribuirá a una reconfiguración global de las cadenas de suministro, con un mayor enfoque en la diversificación y la reducción de la dependencia de regiones como Asia.
Los grandes retos que tendrá el gobierno de México para que la estrategia de Nearshoring sea efectiva y sostenible a largo plazo, serán principalmente: (i) garantizar condiciones laborales dignas; (ii) gestionar adecuadamente la presión sobre la infraestructura y recursos existentes, como carreteras, puertos y suministros energéticos, que generará el aumento en la inversión y la creación de nuevas plantas; y (iii) establecer medios que permitan a las empresas nacionales de micro, pequeño y mediano tamaño, acceder a los incentivos e infraestructura moderna para no verse desplazadas por las grandes corporaciones.
Nuestra firma cuenta con el equipo y capacidades para asistir a nuestros clientes en el diseño e implementación de estrategias que les permitan aprovechar los estímulos fiscales otorgados a través del Decreto Nearshoring.

Tax Information for Those Impacted by the Los Angeles County Wildfires

As a Los Angeles-based firm, we are deeply saddened by the devastation caused by the recent wildfires. We remain committed to supporting our clients and friends during this time and are hopeful that the general tax information outlined below may be helpful as those affected by the wildfires begin to consider plans to recover and rebuild.
On January 10, the IRS announced tax relief for individuals and businesses affected by the Los Angeles County wildfires, following the disaster declaration issued by FEMA. The governor announced relief related to California state taxes on January 11, and on January 14, 2025, it was announced that eligible property owners may qualify for property tax relief in Los Angeles County.

Extensions
The IRS and the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) extended certain filing and payment deadlines falling on or after January 7, 2025 and before October 15, 2025, to October 15, 2025. For individuals and businesses with an IRS address of record located in Los Angeles County, the IRS will automatically provide relief. If a taxpayer resides outside of Los Angeles County but whose records necessary to meet a deadline occurring during the postponement period are located in the affected area (for example, non-resident partners of Los Angeles partnerships), that taxpayer will need to contact the IRS disaster hotline at 866-562-5227 to request the extension.
The October 15, 2025 deadline applies to:

Individual income tax returns and payments normally due on April 15, 2025 (federal and state).
2024 contributions to IRAs and HSAs (and note, additional relief might be available in the form of special disaster distributions or hardship withdrawals; each plan or IRA has specific rules).
Quarterly payroll and excise tax returns normally due on Jan. 31, April 30, and July 31, 2025.
Calendar-year partnership and S corporation returns normally due on March 17, 2025 (federal) and PTE tax returns and elective tax payments normally due on March 15 and June 15, 2025 (state).
Calendar-year corporation and fiduciary returns and payments normally due on April 15, 2025 (federal and state).
Calendar-year tax-exempt organization returns normally due on May 15, 2025 (federal and state).
A 2024 estimated tax payment normally due on Jan. 15, 2025, and estimated tax payments normally due on April 15, June 16, and Sept. 15, 2025 (federal and state).
Certain other time-sensitive actions, including those related to Section 1031 exchanges, as discussed below.

Note that while an extension will prevent penalties as long as taxes are paid before the October 15 deadline, the extension does not prevent interest from accruing.
The IRS and the FTB also have provided affected taxpayers until Oct. 15, 2025, to perform other time-sensitive actions described in Treas. Reg. § 301.7508A-1(c)(1) and Rev. Proc. 2018-58, including specific relief pertaining to like-kind exchanges of property (including for taxpayers who are not otherwise “affected taxpayers” under the general relief rule).
Finally, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) has granted a three-month extension on the ability to file and pay taxes or fees for various CDTFA-administered programs, including sales and use tax returns for certain taxpayers, as well as various programs related to natural resources.
Casualty Losses
Affected taxpayers will be able to claim fire-related casualty losses on their federal income tax return on either their current or prior year tax returns (i.e., a taxpayer can elect to treat the loss as offsetting its 2024 income). A casualty loss is typically limited to a tax basis, rather than fair market value, but taxpayers should carefully consider whether a casualty loss deduction makes sense for them, because it cannot be claimed if tax basis is expected to be reimbursed (e.g., through insurance or litigation proceeds). If any portion of a casualty loss deduction is reimbursed, a portion of the reimbursement will be treated as ordinary income (and not eligible for deferral).
For California state tax purposes, taxpayers can only take a casualty loss to the extent it exceeds 10% of adjusted gross income. It is unclear at this time whether a federal law signed at the end of last year will apply to these wildfires, eliminating this 10% adjusted gross income requirement for federal tax purposes.
For property tax purposes, taxpayers may be entitled to both a deferral of payment and monetary relief for property taxes already paid and future property taxes as a result of property being damaged or destroyed. The relevant forms are available on the Los Angeles County website under “Misfortune or Calamity,” linked here for convenience.
Insurance Proceeds and Casualty Gain
Certain insurance proceeds resulting from federally declared disasters (such as certain proceeds for temporary living expenses or personal property, in either case, resulting from a loss of principal residence) can be received tax-free. However, other insurance proceeds may be treated as sales proceeds, resulting first in a reduction in basis of one’s property and beyond that, taxable gain (a “casualty gain”). For the loss of a principal residence, to the extent a taxpayer has casualty gain, up to $250,000 for single taxpayers and $500,000 for married taxpayers can be excluded from income.
Tax-Deferred Exchanges
Taxpayers, including businesses, may be able to defer gain under Section 1031, Section 1033 or possibly both.
Section 1033 allows tax deferral when a taxpayer’s property has been involuntarily converted, including in circumstances involving a federally declared disaster. An election under Section 1033 can allow indefinite deferral on casualty gain. However, the rules relating to involuntary conversions, including the deadlines, can be complex. For example, for a principal residence, the casualty gain must be reinvested within 4 years of the first year in which casualty gain was realized. In many circumstances, a taxpayer can receive insurance proceeds and sell underlying land and use all of the proceeds as part of a Section 1033 exchange.
In certain circumstances, taxpayers may determine utilizing Section 1031 makes more sense, which allows for similar tax deferral. Generally speaking, Section 1031 is more limited as it is only available to taxpayers that hold their real property for use in a trade or business or for investment, and proceeds received as part of a Section 1031 exchange must be reinvested within six months.
Property Tax Relief
For any taxpayer that has had their property destroyed or damaged and decides to rebuild, the rebuilding will not cause an additional “new construction” assessment provided that the property after reconstruction is “substantially equivalent” to the property prior to the damage or destruction. Any reconstruction of real property, or portion thereof, that is not substantially equivalent to the damaged or destroyed property, shall be deemed new construction and only that portion that exceeds substantially equivalent reconstruction shall be newly assessed.
Similarly, any taxpayer that has had their property substantially damaged or destroyed by the fire may transfer their base-year value to a comparable property within the same county, which comparable new property must be acquired or newly constructed within five years after the disaster. Replacement property is comparable to the property damaged or destroyed if it is similar in size, utility, and function to the property which it replaces. As long as the replacement property is not worth more than 120 percent of the value of the damaged or destroyed property (immediately prior to the disaster), the base value will transfer with no adjustments. If the replacement property costs more than 120 percent of the value of the damaged or destroyed property, then the excess will be added to the base-year value.
For taxpayers who had their principal residence damaged or destroyed by the wildfire, they may transfer their base-year value to a replacement dwelling anywhere in California that is purchased or newly constructed by that person as their principal residence within two years of the sale of the original property.

A BIG LOTS Chapter 11 Lesson: Caution Needed When Doing Business with Chapter 11 Debtors

Vendors, landlords, and other creditors often feel a sense of security when doing business with Chapter 11 debtors. The Bankruptcy Code, and even court orders entered at the outset of a bankruptcy case, seemingly provide a myriad of protections to those engaging in business with a company reorganizing under Chapter 11.
Indeed, Chapter 11 debtors often induce continued business by suggesting that they are “required” to pay all post-bankruptcy obligations in full. Nevertheless, these protections and assurances often prove to be optical illusions, leaving creditors holding the bag with significant unpaid post-petition obligations at the end of a bankruptcy case.
The recent Big Lots Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing is a massive warning signal that exposes the significant risks of doing business with Chapter 11 debtors.
Landlord Protections
The Bankruptcy Code provides heightened protections to landlords when dealing with Chapter 11 debtors. Pursuant to section 365(d)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code, a tenant debtor is required to “timely perform all the obligations of the debtor… arising from and after the petition date” under any unexpired lease. This means they must continue to fulfill lease obligations that come due after the bankruptcy filing until the lease is either assumed or rejected by the debtor.
Essentially, a landlord is entitled to receive post-petition rent payments as a high-priority administrative expense claim if the tenant does not pay in a timely manner.
Pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code, shopping center landlords are entitled to additional protections when a lease is assumed and assigned. In such circumstances, a Chapter 11 debtor must cure any defaults and provide “adequate assurance” of future performance under the lease.
If the lease qualifies as “a lease for real property in a shopping center,” a landlord is entitled to “adequate assurance” for certain specific obligations. “Adequate assurance” is intended to protect a landlord from a decline in the value of the subject premises if a lease is assumed. The assurances include requirements that:

the financial condition and operating performance of any assignee be similar;
percentage rent does not decline substantially;
all other provisions of the lease apply, such as exclusive use clauses; and
the tenant mix or balance at the shopping center not be disrupted.

“Adequate assurance” that a landlord will be compensated for any pecuniary loss is a condition to the assumption of a lease of real property in a shopping center. With such protections, landlords may feel a false sense of confidence when dealing with Chapter 11 debtors.
Trade Creditor Post-Bankruptcy Protections
The Bankruptcy Code also provides various protections to vendors that provide goods and services to Debtors after a bankruptcy is filed. Claims for such services are generally entitled to administrative expense priority status over other unsecured creditors. Further, vendors who deliver goods to debtors within twenty days before the bankruptcy filing are also entitled to administrative expense status under Section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.
Additionally, in many cases, Debtors seek orders allowing certain vendors to be treated as critical vendors. Based upon the doctrine of necessity, Debtors not only commit to paying critical vendors for post-petition goods, but must pay critical vendors for pre-bankruptcy claims.
Finally, to confirm a Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan, a debtor must show that it can pay all its administrative claims in full. Similar to landlords, trade creditors may also feel a false sense of post-petition security, given all of these purported protections.
Big Lots Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Leaves Administrative Creditors Massively Exposed
The recently filed Big Lots Chapter 11 bankruptcy case provides a stark illustration of the risks of doing business with a debtor post-bankruptcy. Big Lots’ proposed creditor protections proved to be mirages leaving post-petition claims substantially exposed to non-payment.
Immediately upon filing for bankruptcy protection, Big Lots provided certain assurances to its landlord and vendor community. To secure its Debtor in Possession financing, Big Lots’ Chapter 11 plan committed to a budget that included payment of landlord stub rent claims. Big Lots also commenced a critical vendor program, offering payment of pre-bankruptcy claims in return for continued open credit terms.
Big Lots also commenced a sale process that proposed to sell its business as a going concern, including over 800 stores, to Nexus Capital Partners (“Nexus”). With representations that a continued going concern business was in process, creditors were induced into continued business with Big Lots.
How the Big Lots Chapter 11 Plan Failed
As part of the sale to Nexus, Big Lots was required to deliver certain inventory value. To achieve the necessary asset value, Big Lots used its post-petition trade credit and incurred over $215 million in debt to build up its post-petition inventory. This was in addition to $38 million in 503(b)(9) twenty-day vendor claims, as well as additional post-bankruptcy landlord claims. Simply put, Big Lots exposed its trade credit and landlord constituents to well over $250 million of post-petition credit to close the deal with Nexus.
Due to Big Lots’ inability to deliver its asset value obligations under the Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) – despite pumping up over $200 million in trade credit – Nexus would not close the sale. This left Big Lots exposed to a complete fire-sale liquidation and a massive administratively insolvent estate, with little, if any, of the post-petition obligations to be paid.
GBRP Saves the Day, Sort Of
“Luckily,” total catastrophe was averted by a last-minute sale transaction with Gordon Brothers Retail Properties (“GBRP”) where between 200 and 400 stores will be saved. However, the GBRP transaction only provides minimal hope for recovery to post-bankruptcy vendors and landlords.
As part of its APA, GBRP will pay select post-petition creditors, leaving most vendors and landlords in the cold. GBRP’s APA protects professionals, certain landlords, and go-forward trade creditors without covering the post-petition obligations accrued to date. The proposed APA terms created categories of preferred administrative claimants, with the balance remaining prejudiced by the sale.
For example, Big Lots’ Chapter 11 wind-down budget increased a prior fee reserve for professionals by $13,438,000 for two months of continued service. In addition, certain landlords will be paid $17 million in satisfaction of unpaid administrative rent and Debtors will purportedly remain current on their rent going forward. This, while the $250 million in other post-bankruptcy claims remains largely unpaid.
Big Lots and GBRP carved out approximately $19 million in assets (tax refunds, litigation proceeds, and a percentage of real estate sales), which will remain behind to pay a paltry dividend to administrative claimants.
The creditor community raised concern that the GBRP sale violated the priority scheme of the Bankruptcy Code, by allowing Big Lots to pick and choose among its creditors. The court overruled the creditor community’s cries that proceeds of the GBRP sale be escrowed with distributions and priority to be decided post-closing. The Bankruptcy Court allowed the transaction to proceed per the terms mandated by GBRP.
Avoiding the Big Lots Chapter 11 Outcome
In sum, while numerous trade vendors and landlords engaged with Big Lots after the bankruptcy was filed, feeling secure that their post-petition claims would be paid, they are now left with over $200 million in post-petition debt, with only nominal distributions on the horizon.
Big Lots’ Chapter 11 provides a harsh lesson that no matter what protections or assurances are assumed, creditors must be vigilant in enforcing their post-petition rights and be wary when extending post-petition credit, or otherwise engaging in business with a Chapter 11 debtor.

IRS Issues Guidance on Federal Tax Treatment of State Paid Family and Medical Leave Contributions and Benefits

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has released new guidance on the federal income and employment tax treatment of contributions and benefits paid under state paid family and medical leave (PFML) statutes. This guidance also outlines the related reporting requirements for employers and employees. There was no published guidance that addressed the taxation or reporting requirements of state PFML statutes before the publishing of Revenue Ruling 2025-4.

Quick Hits

The IRS has clarified the tax treatment of mandatory employee and employer contributions to state PFML funds, as well as optional employer payment of mandatory employee contributions.
Employers can deduct their contributions as business expenses, while employees may deduct their contributions as state income taxes if they itemize deductions and otherwise do not exceed the SALT deduction cap.
Amounts paid to employees as family leave benefits are included in the employee’s gross income but are not wages for federal employment tax purposes.
Amounts paid to employees as medical leave benefits align with Internal Revenue Code § 104(a)(3), which are only taxable in instances where contributions were not included in the employee’s gross income or paid by the employee.
The IRS has provided a transition period for enforcement and administration of these rules for calendar year 2025.

Background
Over recent years, a number of states have enacted PFML statutes to provide wage replacement to workers for periods in which they need to take time off from work due to their own nonoccupational injuries, illnesses, or medical conditions, or to care for a family member due to the family member’s serious health condition or other prescribed circumstance. Many PFML statutes require contributions from both the employer and the employee, with some allowing the employer to cover the employee’s mandatory contribution rather than withholding the amounts from wages (“employer pick-up”).
Federal Income Tax Treatment of Contributions
Employee Contributions
Mandatory employee contributions withheld from wages are treated as state income taxes and are deductible under § 164(a)(3) if the employee itemizes deductions and the deductions are subject to the state and local taxes (SALT) deduction limitation under § 164(b)(6). These amounts are included in the employee’s gross income and wages for federal employment tax purposes.
Employer Contributions
Mandatory employer contributions are treated as state excise taxes and are deductible by the employer under § 164(a). These amounts are not included in the employee’s gross income.
Employer Pick-Up of Employee Contributions
If an employer voluntarily pays part of the employee’s required contribution, this amount is treated as additional compensation to the employee under § 61 and is included in the employee’s gross income and wages for federal employment tax purposes. The employer can deduct this amount as a business expense under § 162.
Federal Income Tax Treatment of Benefits
Family Leave Benefits
Amounts paid to employees as family leave benefits are included in the employee’s gross income but are not wages for federal employment tax purposes. The state must report these payments on Form 1099 if they aggregate $600 or more in any taxable year.
Medical Leave Benefits
Amounts paid to employees as medical leave benefits that are attributable to the employee’s contribution (including employer pick-up of employee contributions) are excluded from the employee’s gross income under § 104(a)(3) and are neither wages for federal employment tax purposes nor treated as sick pay. However, to qualify for medical leave benefits under a PFML statute, the time off from work must relate to the employee’s own serious health condition. Further, amounts attributable to the employer’s contribution are included in the employee’s gross income and are considered wages for federal employment tax purposes. The state must follow the sick pay reporting rules attributable to third-party payments by a party that is not an agent of the employer.
Transition Period for Enforcement and Administration
The IRS has designated calendar year 2025 as a transition period for the enforcement and administration of the information reporting requirements and other rules described in the guidance. This transition period is intended to provide states and employers time to configure their reporting and other systems.

Navigating the Tariff Landscape: Updates on U.S. Imports from Canada, Mexico and China

On February 1, 2025, President Trump signed orders imposing a 25% tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico and a 10% tariff on imports from China. The tariffs are set to take effect on Tuesday, February 4.
Following a discussion with Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum on Monday, February 3, President Trump announced a one-month pause on the tariffs for Mexico. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and President Trump announced that they had reached an agreement for a similar 30-day pause later that evening.
History
A president can raise tariffs without congressional approval in certain circumstances, such as if there is a threat to national security, a war or emergency, harm or potential harm to a U.S. industry or unfair trade practices by a foreign country. President Trump is using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose these tariffs. Tariffs saw their first major resurgence since the 1930s during President Trump’s 2017-2020 term, and President Biden continued to use tariffs during his administration.
Tariffs are generally imposed as a percentage of a good’s value or as a fixed amount on a specific item when it crosses an international border. The tariff is paid by the importer. The increase in cost may cause a variety of effects such as:

Importing companies finding alternate sources for the goods,
Importing companies passing the price increase on to consumers,
Exporting companies lowering the product price to maintain the importer’s business, or,
Exporting companies relocating to other jurisdictions to avoid tariffs altogether.

Updated Tariffs
Mexico Tariffs
Following the one-month pause referenced above, the new tariff will be at a rate of 25% on the value of the good, in addition to any other import fees. The order indicates that tariffs will cover all imported merchandise.
Canada Tariffs
Following the 30-day pause referenced above, the new tariff will be at a rate of 25% on the value of the good, in addition to any other import. The order indicates that tariffs will cover all imported merchandise other than “energy or energy resources” which will be subject to a 10% rate instead.
“Energy or energy resources” includes crude oil, natural gas, lease condensates, refined petroleum products, uranium, coal and critical minerals among other energy sources.
China Tariffs
The new tariff will be 10% on the value of the good, in addition to any other import fees. The order indicates that tariffs will cover all imported merchandise from China.
Client Guidance
The increased costs from tariffs may be challenging for many businesses and the following actions serve as a baseline for navigating the current landscape as you navigate these new tariffs.

Notify customers if increased costs of tariffs will be passed down to them and inform them that any tariff-related price hikes will be reflected on invoices. Failure to pay may result in supply disruption.
Review contracts with suppliers and customers to determine how the cost of the new tariffs will be allocated. Look for price-adjustment clauses, force majeure language or other relevant terms.
Begin negotiations with suppliers or explore sourcing options from different countries.
Importers should review import compliance policies.

Tariffs on Mexico, Canada Paused for 30 Days

Earlier today, President Trump announced that he agreed to delay imposing the additional 25% tariff on Mexican products for 30 days after Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum promised to send soldiers to the US-Mexican border to help stop the flow of fentanyl and migrants into the United States. The two Presidents also agreed to negotiations to be held between the U.S. Secretary of State, Secretary of Treasury and Secretary of Commerce, and certain Mexican government officials.
Similarly, after finishing a conference call this afternoon with President Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that President Trump agreed to delay imposing the additional 25% tariff on Canadian imports for 30 days in consideration for Canada implementing a $1.3 billion border plan to reinforce the border to stop the flow of fentanyl, including appointing 10,000 frontline personnel and appointing a “Fentanyl Czar.”
The 10% additional tariff on Chinese imports are still set to become effective on February 4, 2025 (see China EO).
The additional IEEPA national security tariffs to be imposed on Mexican and Canadian goods pursuant to President Trump’s executive orders have not been canceled. The imposition of the tariffs has been just suspended to allow further bi-lateral negotiations to occur.
Due to current uncertainty, importers of Mexican and Canadian goods may seek to stock up on inventories over the next 30 days, which could cause logistical problems and major traffic at U.S. ports. Importers, however, will likely be exempt from the additional tariffs only if they meet the deadlines stated in the executive orders. These dates will most likely be updated to reflect the delayed implementation of the goods.
But any such imported goods will be exempt from the additional tariffs only if they meet the deadlines stated in the executive orders, which dates may or may not be updated to reflect the delayed implementation of the executive orders. Thus, importers need to closely monitor whether and how the timing for assessment of additional tariffs will be changed in any future pronouncements. The current executive orders provide that, in order to be exempt from the additional tariffs, the imported goods must have either (i) cleared U.S. customs, or (ii) been loaded or in transit on the final mode of transit on the way to the United States as of a certain date and time, as follows:
Such rate of duty shall apply with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 4, 2025, except that goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, after such time that were loaded onto a vessel at the port of loading or in transit on the final mode of transport prior to entry into the United States before 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 1, 2025, shall not be subject to such additional duty, only if the importer certifies to CBP as specified in the Federal Register notice (see Section 2(a) of the Mexico EO and the Canada EO).
In sum, as of the close of business today, the 25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports that were promulgated pursuant to the Mexico EO and the Canada EO have been suspended for 30 days. Thus far, however, the additional 10% tariff to be imposed on Chinese imports still remains intact.

European Commission’s Competitiveness Compass – Is It the Roadmap for Simplification of EU Sustainability Regulations?

On 29 January 2025, the European Commission published a communication on its Competitiveness Compass for the EU (COM(2025) 30). The Competitiveness Compass outlines the European Commission’s proposed initiatives for the next five years as part of its aim to support the EU’s competitiveness and to promote economic growth. In particular, the Competitiveness Compass sets out the European Commission’s key projects to address the following three ‘‘transformational imperatives’’ to support with EU competitiveness (as identified in the European Commission’s Competitiveness report prepared by Mario Draghi in 2024):

closing the innovation gap;
encouraging decarbonisation and competitiveness; and
reducing the EU’s excessive dependencies and increasing security.

One of the ways in which the European Commission seeks to address these three pillars is through simplification of the EU’s current complex regulatory policies. The European Commission’s key project to achieve this simplification is the introduction of its first simplification omnibus package, which will be published on 26 February 2025 (‘‘Omnibus Simplification Package’’). The Omnibus Simplification Package is expected to, among other things, introduce simplification measures for sustainable finance reporting, sustainability due diligence and the sustainable finance taxonomy by simplifying the following sustainability regulations:

Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (‘‘CSRD’’);
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (‘‘CS3D’’); and
Green Taxonomy Regulation (‘‘Taxonomy Regulation’’).

The aim of these simplification measures is set out to better align the regulatory requirements with investors’ needs and to ensure the proportionality of timelines and regulatory requirements against the activities of different companies.
The Omnibus Simplification Package forms part of the European Commission’s work towards meeting its target of reducing reporting burdens by ‘‘at least 25% for all companies and at least 35% for SMEs’’. To this extent, the Competitiveness Compass and the Omnibus Simplification Package have the potential to contribute to significant change in the EU sustainability regulatory framework.
Whilst the Competitiveness Compass is not legally binding, it is very useful insight on the direction of travel for sustainability-related reporting and compliance requirements in the EU under CSRD, CS3D and the Taxonomy Regulation.

Employers Who Administer PFML Programs Get Much-Needed Guidance from IRS

Takeaways

The Guidance clarifies the federal income and employment tax treatment of contributions and benefits under state-funded PFML Programs.
It does not apply to privately insured or self-insured arrangements.
Affected employers should work with their in-house finance and payroll teams to ensure that payments into the funds are treated consistent with the Guidance and that employee payments and employer pick-up payments are properly reported as taxable wages (taking into account the 2025 transition guidance).

President Trump Orders Additional Tariffs on Imports from Canada, China, and Mexico

On 1 February 2025, President Trump announced that the United States plans to impose additional tariffs on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico to address “the sustained influx of illicit opioids and other drugs” into the United States which is having “profound consequences on our Nation, endangering lives and putting a severe strain on our healthcare system, public services, and communities.”
In sum, the US tariffs will:

Increase tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico to 25% (oil imports from those countries will be subject to a 10% additional tariff);
Increase existing tariffs on imports from China (such as normal customs duties and Section 301 duties) by a 10% additional tariff; and
Should Canada, China, or Mexico impose retaliatory tariffs, the US tariffs will be increased further.

The US tariffs will go into effect at 12:01 am ET on 4 February 2025. Goods in transit as of 12:01 am ET 1 February will not be subject to the additional tariffs.
Duty drawback will not be allowed on subject imports, and subject imports will not be eligible for the Section 321 “de minimis” exception for small shipments to individual consumers valued at less than $800.
Retaliation by the impacted countries is likely to also take effect shortly, pending a resolution of the disputes.
The text of the first of the Executive Orders (EO) to be released, addressing tariffs on imports from Canada, is available here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/imposing-duties-to-address-the-flow-of-illicit-drugs-across-our-national-border/. A fact sheet issued by the White House explaining the rationale for the tariffs is available here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-imposes-tariffs-on-imports-from-canada-mexico-and-china/.
Of particular note for companies and investors with interests in US energy, metals, transportation, and manufacturing markets, the Canada tariff EO defines the scope of “energy” and “energy resources” covered by the 10% duty rate by reference to section 8 of EO 14156 of 20 January 2025. EO 14156, in turn, defines “energy” and “energy resources” as:
crude oil, natural gas, lease condensates, natural gas liquids, refined petroleum products, uranium, coal, biofuels, geothermal heat, the kinetic movement of flowing water, and critical minerals, as defined by 30 U.S.C. 1606 (a)(3).
“Critical minerals” within the meaning of 30 U.S.C. 1606(a)(3), in turn, are currently defined by regulations issued by the US Geological Survey (via determination issued in 2022) as any of:
aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barite, beryllium, bismuth, cerium, cesium, chromium, cobalt, dysprosium, erbium, europium, fluorspar, gadolinium, gallium, germanium, graphite, hafnium, holmium, indium, iridium, lanthanum, lithium, lutetium, magnesium, manganese, neodymium, nickel, niobium, palladium, platinum, praseodymium, rhodium, rubidium, ruthenium, samarium, scandium, tantalum, tellurium, terbium, thulium, tin, titanium, tungsten, vanadium, ytterbium, yttrium, zinc, and zirconium.
Thus, the latest EO has the effect of re-imposing 10% duties on aluminum imports from Canada. It also means that the 25% duties on steel products from Canada have returned (because steel is not currently defined as a “critical mineral.”) In 2018, President Trump imposed tariffs of 25% and 10%, respectively, on steel and aluminum imports from Canada and Mexico under the authority of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Those Section 232 tariffs were withdrawn in 2018 following agreements with Canada and Mexico.
Lastly, in a late-night press conference on 1 February outgoing Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau gave some details on the retaliatory measures Canada will take. These will reportedly include 25% tariffs on $155 billion (Canadian) in US imports into Canada. $30 billion of these tariffs will be imposed on 4 February 2025. A further $125 billion will be imposed on 21 February to allow Canadian companies to find alternatives to US sources. The tariffs will be “far reaching” and will specifically target imports that Canada believes to be politically sensitive in the United States, including Canadian imports of US beer, wine, and bourbon, fruits, orange juice, consumer products, appliances, lumber, and plastics. In addition, Canada is considering with the governments of the Canadian provinces and territories several non-tariff measures including several related to critical minerals. Canada is coordinating with Mexico in response to US tariffs. Lastly, Prime Minister Trudeau called for Canadians to avoid purchasing US products and going to the United States for travel.

5 Trends to Watch: 2025 Futures & Derivatives

Regulatory Evolution in Digital Assets. President Donald Trump’s signing of the executive order “Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology” revoked the Biden administration’s directives on digital assets and established a federal policy aimed at promoting the digital asset industry. This will likely lead to increased cryptocurrency trading and the creation of new digital assets. The establishment of more exchanges dedicated to these assets could enhance market accessibility and liquidity. Less restrictive regulations may also attract firms that previously operated overseas to establish a presence onshore.
Integration of Crypto with Traditional Finance. The integration of cryptocurrencies and digital assets with traditional financial instruments is expected to gain momentum. This may be characterized by the introduction of additional crypto-based ETFs and other crypto-based derivative products.
Adoption of Decentralized Finance Protocols in Derivatives Trading. The expansion of digital asset exchanges may drive the adoption of decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols in the trading of futures and derivatives. Traditional exchanges and financial institutions are likely to integrate DeFi solutions to provide innovative derivative products. This adoption may expand access to derivatives markets, allowing a broader range of participants to engage in trading activities while maintaining the security and efficiency offered by blockchain technology.
Tax and Legal Framework Reforms. As mentioned above, President Trump’s executive order suggests a less restrictive government approach to regulating digital assets. More favorable tax treatment of cryptocurrency trades could encourage greater participation from both individual and institutional investors. Additionally, potential reforms in legal frameworks may address existing challenges related to crypto mining, possibly overriding local restrictions to promote growth in this sector.
Harmonization of Global Regulatory Standards. As digital asset firms migrate onshore, there may be a push towards harmonizing global regulatory standards for digitally based futures and derivatives. This could emerge from the need to create a cohesive legal framework that accommodates cross-border trading of digital asset derivatives.