- with Senior Company Executives and HR
- in United States
- with readers working within the Oil & Gas industries
On January 17, 2026, President Trump announced that the United States would impose new tariffs on imports from certain European countries unless negotiations result in an agreement regarding Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark. In a post on Truth Social, the President stated that beginning February 1, 2026, imports from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland would be subject to a 10% tariff, increasing to 25% on June 1, 2026, absent what he described as a “complete and total purchase” of Greenland by the United States. See Truth Social.
No executive order, presidential proclamation, or implementing guidance has been issued as of January 19, 2026, and the legal authority, scope, and enforceability of the threatened tariffs remain unclear.
The announcement followed the deployment of limited European military forces to Greenland for a Danish‑led NATO security exercise termed “Arctic Endurance”. See European leaders warn Trump's Greenland tariffs threaten ‘dangerous downward spiral' | NPR. European governments have described the deployment as part of routine Arctic defense cooperation and have rejected any linkage between their actions and tariff threats.
For a comprehensive list of tariffs imposed or revised by the Trump Administration, please refer to our Tariff Tracker.
Scope and Potential Impact
President Trump's announcement indicated that the proposed tariffs would apply broadly to goods imported from the eight named countries, though the nature of the tariffs, including whether they would apply in addition to existing duties or override preferential tariff arrangements, has not been specified. We note that six of the affected countries are members of the European Union, which operates as a single customs territory, adding uncertainty as to whether any measures could be implemented on a country‑by‑country basis. We are closely monitoring this aspect, and will update this blog post as the situation develops.
The United States currently has trade agreements or tariff‑reduction frameworks in place with both the European Union and the United Kingdom, portions of which were negotiated or implemented during President Trump's second term. See Treasury secretary defends Greenland tariffs: 'The national emergency is avoiding the national emergency' | NBC. The Administration has not indicated whether the threatened Greenland‑related tariffs would supersede, suspend, or exist alongside those arrangements.
If implemented at the stated rates, the tariffs could materially increase duty exposure for U.S. importers sourcing goods from major European trading partners, with potential impacts across automotive, industrial, pharmaceutical, aerospace, and consumer‑goods supply chains. We note however that the situation continues to rapidly develop, and that the tariffs have not been formally implemented at this time.
Legal Authority
Senior Administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, have stated publicly that the President could rely on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) to impose the threatened tariffs. The Administration's reliance on IEEPA is legally significant. The statute permits the President to regulate certain economic transactions during a declared national emergency, but it does not expressly authorize the imposition of tariffs. Lower courts have ruled that IEEPA does not provide authority for tariffs, and those rulings are currently under review by the U.S. Supreme Court. As of January 19, 2026, the Court has not issued a decision.
International Response
European leaders responded swiftly to the President's announcement. In a joint statement issued on January 18, 2026, the eight affected countries warned that the threatened tariffs “undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral.” See EU warns of downward spiral after Trump threatens tariffs over Greenland | Reuters. The European Union convened emergency consultations to discuss a coordinated response, and multiple European officials indicated that retaliatory trade measures were under consideration should the tariffs be implemented. See EU scrambles to avert Trump Greenland tariffs, prepares retaliation | Reuters. Several leaders also warned that the dispute risked weakening NATO cohesion at a time of heightened geopolitical tension. See Trump's Greenland push prompts NATO scramble for Arctic security ideas - and survival | Reuters.
In the United States, members of both parties in Congress criticized the tariff threat, raising concerns about the use of emergency economic powers against close allies and questioning whether trade measures can lawfully be used to compel territorial negotiations. As noted above, the Supreme Court has not issued a decision on the constitutionality of using IEEPA as authority for imposing tariffs.
Greenlandic and Danish authorities separately reiterated that Greenland's status is not subject to negotiation and emphasized that decisions regarding the territory rest with its people and government. See What Did the White House and Denmark Agree to on Greenland? It Depends Whom You Ask. | The New York Times.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
