For a U.S. import compliance director, the decision is whether a congressional development justifies removing the 50 percent additional-duty line from the Canada landed-cost model. A vote to terminate the February 2025 emergency would not, by its own terms, cancel the July 2026 Section 338 proclamations or their Chapter 99 headings.
Keep that line in the model until an enacted measure or presidential action expressly reaches Section 338 or the three proclamations and supplies an effective date that CBP can administer.
The 2025 Resolution Reached IEEPA, Not Section 338
Senator Susan Collins' August 22 statement recalled her support for S.J.Res. 37, the 2025 resolution aimed at the emergency then supporting tariffs on Canadian goods.
S.J.Res. 37 would have terminated only the national emergency declared in Executive Order 14193. The Senate passed it on April 2, 2025, but Congress.gov records that the House held it at the desk. It never became law.
The current status is split. A January 12, 2026 Federal Register notice continued the Executive Order 14193 national emergency for one year. Executive Order 14389, issued on February 20, separately ended collection of the additional ad valorem duties imposed under that order while leaving the emergency itself in effect. Neither development reaches the July 2026 Section 338 proclamations.
Under U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel, 50 U.S.C. 1622, an emergency ends when a termination resolution is enacted or the President issues a terminating proclamation. The special congressional procedure described by Congressional Research Service report R46567, version 12 attaches to that declared emergency. It is not a country-wide disapproval mechanism for later tariffs imposed under another statute.
The August Duties Rest on a Different Authority
The three July 20 proclamations cite U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel, 19 U.S.C. 1338, section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, and the President's delegation authority. They do not invoke Executive Order 14193, the National Emergencies Act, or IEEPA.
The proclamations address three separate Canadian measures. The alcoholic beverage action responds to provincial and territorial restrictions. The dairy action addresses cheese quota allocation treatment. The motor vehicle action addresses Canadian surtax and quota measures.
CBP's CSMS 69606660 implementing the Canada Section 338 duties converted the proclamations into filing instructions. It directs filers to use 9903.03.12, 9903.03.13, and 9903.03.14 at 50 percent for covered goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, beginning at 12:01 a.m. Eastern on August 22. Separate zero-rate headings apply to specified Section 232 and civil-aircraft categories. Other duties and charges can still apply.
The current records produce four different results in the duty model:
| Record | What it can control | Status on August 24 | Treatment in the duty model |
|---|
| S.J.Res. 37 | The emergency declared in Executive Order 14193 | Passed the Senate in 2025, not enacted | No change to Section 338 |
| H.R. 2464 | Section 338 itself if enacted | Introduced and referred to House Ways and Means | No current change |
| A presidential Section 338 action | The three current proclamations | No termination identified | Potential change trigger |
| CBP Chapter 99 instructions | Entry filing and collection | 50 percent headings effective August 22 | Current broker rule |
Congress Can Legislate, and the President Can Modify
Congress can repeal or amend Section 338, but no cited measure has done so. Congress.gov, H.R. 2464 would repeal the authority. As of August 24, it remains introduced and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee.
Representative Don Beyer's August 24 statement lists separate proposals addressing Section 232, IEEPA, Section 338, Section 122, and broader tariff authority. The distinction matters because each measure needs operative text reaching the authority it seeks to change. As Congressional Research Service report R48435, version 5 explains, Congress could repeal or amend an authority, require approval for future action, or impose a time limit. Announcement alone changes no entry rule.
The earlier Traverse Analysis, "Congressional Trade Powers Reform Act Leaves Existing Tariffs Unresolved," on repeal of 19 U.S.C. 1338 addresses what a Section 338 repeal without customs transition language might leave unresolved for old and new entries. That question would matter if Congress enacts a final measure. No such enactment has occurred here.
Congress is not the only route. Section 338(c) allows the President to suspend, revoke, supplement, or amend a proclamation. A negotiated change would still need an operative presidential instrument, an effective date, and administrable CBP treatment.
Keep the Duty Line Until the Operative Record Changes
The Canada landed-cost model should link four records: the legislative text and its official status, any enacted law or presidential instrument reaching Section 338 or the three proclamations, the effective date for entries or warehouse withdrawals, and the corresponding HTS or CBP implementation.
Political momentum belongs in the legislative-watch field. A new cosponsor, committee hearing, floor statement, or one-chamber vote does not justify changing the active-duty line.
The current model should retain the Section 338 additional duty for covered goods. The earlier IEEPA duty line should remain separately marked as ended by Executive Order 14389, while the underlying emergency remains active. Neither status changes the Section 338 line.
Escalate the model when an enacted measure expressly reaches Section 338 or the current proclamations, or when a presidential action suspends, revokes, amends, or reduces one of them. Then verify the effective date, transition treatment, covered products, Chapter 99 programming, and broker instructions.
As of August 24, S.J.Res. 37 remains unenacted, H.R. 2464 remains introduced, and no reviewed presidential action terminates the three Section 338 measures. The 2025 emergency resolution remains relevant to the IEEPA action it names. It does not change the Section 338 duty now carried in the entry model.