President Donald Trump laid out his plans for imposing a host of new tariffs on imports to the U.S. Wednesday — a day his administration touted as ‘Liberation Day’ and vowed would restore the American dream. 

Trump unveiled the new tariffs in a ceremony at the White House’s Rose Garden for a ‘Make America Wealthy Again’ event, where he declared that these new duties would usher in a wave of jobs for U.S. workers. 

‘For nations that treat us badly, we will calculate the combined rate of all their tariffs, nonmonetary barriers and other forms of cheating,’ Trump said Wednesday. 

‘And because we are being very kind, we will charge them approximately half of what they are and have been charging us,’ he said. ‘So, the tariffs will be not a full reciprocal. I could have done that. Yes. But it would have been tough for a lot of countries.’

The Trump administration’s tariff plan sets out a baseline duty of 10% on all imports to the U.S., while customized tariffs will be set for countries who have higher tariffs in place on American goods. The baseline tariffs of 10% will take effect on Saturday, while the others will take effect on April 9. 

The Trump administration previously imposed a 25% tariff on imported auto vehicles, up to 25% tariffs on certain goods from Mexico and Canada, as well as a 20% tariff on shipments from China. The White House said that tariffs already imposed on Canada and Mexico remain unaltered. However, new tariffs on China will be coupled with existing duties on Beijing. 

Here is a look at the tariff rates that the Trump administration imposed as part of Liberation Day:

China: 34% (not including previous 20% tariffs)
European Union: 20%
South Korea: 25%
India: 26%
Vietnam: 46%
Taiwan: 32%
Japan: 24%
Thailand: 36%
Switzerland: 31%
Indonesia: 32%
Malaysia: 24%
Cambodia: 49%
United Kingdom: 10%
South Africa: 30%
Brazil: 10%
Bangladesh: 37%
Singapore: 10%
Israel: 17%
Philippines: 17%
Chile: 10%
Australia: 10%
Pakistan: 29%
Turkey: 10%
Sri Lanka: 44%
Colombia: 10%

The Trump administration provided a chart of the tariff rates other countries charge on U.S. imports, suggesting that the tariffs the U.S. was imposing were not nearly as stringent as they could have been in order to reach reciprocity. 

For example, the chart says that Japan has imposed a 46% tariff on U.S. goods, while the U.S. is only implementing a 24% tariff on Japanese goods imported to the U.S. 

Why Trump wants tariffs

Trump and his administration have long railed against other countries’ trade practices and accused them of engaging in unfair trade practices against the U.S. — and argued that tariffs will help return manufacturing jobs to the U.S. As a result, he and his administration have called for employing tariffs to address the nation’s 2024 record $1.2 trillion trade deficit. 

‘For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike,’ Trump said Wednesday. 

Tariffs function as a tax that governments collect on foreign goods and services that manufacturers import. They are collected while undergoing customs clearance in foreign ports, according to the International Trade Administration. 

The tariffs are expected to affect a host of goods, ranging from electronics, like iPhones that are predominantly manufactured in China, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, to wine and other alcoholic beverages originating from European Union countries, like Italy. 

Trump’s new tariffs prompted backlash from members of both parties in Congress, who have warned that the tariffs will raise prices for American consumers. 

Specifically, the Senate moved to approve a resolution by a 51–48 margin Wednesday evening following Trump’s announcement that would rescind the emergency declaration on fentanyl trafficking that Trump used to justify duties on Canada. Four Republicans joined the voting with Democrats in support of the resolution, although it has low odds of passing in the Republican-controlled House. 

Meanwhile, other countries have spoken out against the tariffs, including allies like Canada and Australia. 

‘In our judgment, it will be negative on the U.S. economy that will have an impact on us,’ Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told reporters Wednesday. 

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese characterized the Trump administration’s new duties as ‘not the act of a friend’ during a press conference Thursday. 

Meanwhile, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent cautioned other countries against retaliating in response to the new tariffs, warning that the U.S. would not hesitate to take action again. 

‘My advice to every country right now: Do not retaliate,’ Bessent said in an interview with Fox News on Wednesday. ‘If you retaliate, there will be escalation.’

The Associated Press and Fox News’ Emma Colton and Caitlin McFall contributed to this report. 

Dr. Mehmet Oz will serve as the next administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services after the full Senate voted along party lines to confirm his nomination on Thursday. 

The former daytime TV doctor turned politician will be in charge of nearly $1.5 trillion in federal healthcare spending. His duties will entail overseeing Medicare, Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), including directing decisions related to how the government covers procedures, hospital stays and medication, as well as the reimbursement rates at which healthcare providers get paid for their services.   

Medicare is a federal healthcare program for seniors aged 65 and up, and currently provides coverage to about 65 million Americans, according to the Center for Medicare Advocacy. Medicaid, a public health assistance program for people with low incomes, covers roughly 72 million Americans, according to Medicaid.gov. Meanwhile, CHIP, which provides free or low-cost health coverage for eligible low-income children and family members, assists around 7.2 million individuals. 

A graduate of Harvard University, Oz received medical and business degrees from the University of Pennsylvania. He is a former heart surgeon who saw his fame rise through his appearances on daytime television, including ‘The Oprah Winfrey Show,’ and 13 seasons of ‘The Dr. Oz Show.’

Oz later transitioned into politics, launching an unsuccessful bid for Pennsylvania’s open Senate seat in 2022. He lost to John Fetterman, then the state’s lieutenant governor.

‘Dr. Oz has a strong desire to modernize CMS and encourage healthy lifestyles for all Americans, including by focusing on the underlying causes of chronic disease and implementing innovative technologies,’ Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said Thursday.

Crapo, who led Oz’s nomination process at the committee level, commended Oz for his ‘diligence and accessibility’ throughout the process, including his willingness to answer ‘hundreds’ of questions for the record.

Those questions came from both Republicans and Democrats. They included asking about Oz’s stance on abortion, transgender medical treatments, Medicare privatization, prescription drug pricing and more. Potential financial conflicts of interest were also a concern among Democratic lawmakers throughout Oz’s confirmation process. Oz has committed to divesting any holdings that may pose an issue. 

Thursday’s confirmation comes as the Trump administration continues to work to finalize the rest of its political appointments, including notably the president’s pick to be the next United Nations ambassador and his pick for director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

Per The Washington Post’s ‘political appointee tracker,’ there are currently still 233 nominees being considered by the Senate.

Two senior lawmakers have introduced a bipartisan bill that would reassert Congress’ powers over U.S. tariffs, a day after President Donald Trump announced a new wide-ranging tariff strategy during his ‘Liberation Day’ speech on Wednesday.

Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., on Thursday introduced the Trade Review Act of 2025, which would require the president to notify Congress about any new tariffs within 48 hours of imposition. 

The bill also requires that Trump provide an explanation of the rationale along with an analysis of the tariffs’ potential impact on the U.S. economy. Congress would have to approve the new tariffs within 60 days or allow them to expire.

If enacted, the bill would shift certain trade policymaking powers from the executive branch to the Congress. 

‘For too long, Congress has delegated its clear authority to regulate interstate and foreign commerce to the executive branch,’ Grassley, a Trump ally who is skeptical of tariffs, said in a statement. 

‘Building on my previous efforts as Finance Committee Chairman, I’m joining Senator Cantwell to introduce the bipartisan Trade Review Act of 2025 to reassert Congress’ constitutional role and ensure Congress has a voice in trade policy,’ he continued.

Cantwell said in a statement that Trump’s tariffs would hurt sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing and technology and have reverberating effects on consumers.

‘Ultimately, consumers will pay the price,’ Cantwell said in a statement. ‘It’s time for Congress to take action to counter the president’s trade war.’

Grassley’s home state of Iowa heavily relies on farm crop exports, while Cantwell’s Washington state is home to many export-heavy companies such as Boeing.

Trump on Thursday compared the tariffs to a medical operation, and said the ‘patient lived, and is healing.’ ‘The prognosis is that the patient will be far stronger, bigger, better, and more resilient than ever before,’ he wrote on Truth Social.

Thursday’s bill was introduced after four Republican senators joined Democrats in approving a separate resolution on Wednesday that would repeal Trump’s emergency declaration levying tariffs on Canadian imports. Grassley was not one of the Republican defectors. The resolution is likely dead on arrival in the House.

A 1947 agreement outlining obligations as host of the United Nations continues to give employees and their family members relatively unfettered access to the U.S. 

At a time of increased national security fears and immigration enforcement by the Trump administration, experts are urging a re-examination of the host nation agreement with an eye to the functional immunity granted to U.N. staff and the limited vetting given to those with U.N. visas.

‘The United States appears to have taken a relaxed view of the individuals entering the country associated with the U.N., either as employees or as representatives of various country missions. And yet we know that U.N. employees have had, and continue to have, close, direct relationships with terrorist organizations, like UNRWA and Hamas,’ Anne Bayefsky, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and president of Human Rights Voices, told Fox News Digital.

Bayefsky said there is ‘a disconnect between the welcome routine and the significant harm to American interests. Hosting the U.N. does not require the host country to facilitate or endure threats to its national security.’

The federal government grants G visas to employees, spouses and children of international organizations, including the U.N., who reside in, or are visiting, the U.S. According to the State Department’s website, ‘if you are entitled to a G visa, under U.S. visa law, you must receive a G visa. The exceptions to this rule are extremely limited.’ The Department of State also explains that ‘Embassies and consulates generally do not require an interview for those applying for G-1 – 4 and NATO-1 – 6 visas, although a consular officer can request an interview.’

Hugh Dugan, a senior advisor to 11 U.S. former ambassadors to the U.N., told Fox News Digital that it ‘appears to me that the issuance of the G visas for [U.N. employees] is a relatively rubber stamp exercise.’ While not requiring interviews of personnel has ‘become a matter of convenience, frankly, we should always be able to assess a threat to our country.’’

Dugan, a former National Security Council special assistant to the president and senior director for international organization affairs, said nations like Russia and China are only allowed to travel a certain distance from U.N. headquarters. ‘We are mindful of our adversaries’ activities and presence here, but the door is open to participate in the U.N. and the host country agreement makes that possible so that no country would be barred because of a certain political atmosphere or issue that might be brewing between us and them.’

Fox News Digital asked the State Department whether it requires interviews for staff from adversarial member states, including Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, North Korea, Iran and China, but received no response. A State Department spokesperson reiterated that consular officers ‘have full authority to require an in-person interview for any reason.’

Peter Gallo, formerly an investigator with the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), told Fox News Digital that he is particularly concerned about the functional immunity granted to U.N. staff participating in activities related to their employment. Gallo explained that ‘U.S. legal system has come to accept that pretty much it’s a blanket coverage.’ He added that ‘immunity breeds impunity.’

Gallo claimed that there is an epidemic of sexual offenses and misconduct among U.N. staff. He cited an incident in which a U.N. employee outside the U.S. sexually harassed ‘a young female in his department.’ Gallo said it took two years after receipt of the investigation report for an investigation to be completed, which resulted in the demotion of the offending employee. Gallo said the employee who was harassed, and her harasser remained in the same organization.

Gallo said that if employees take part in misconduct while based at U.N. headquarters, the U.S. government should be able to examine cases and determine whether staff should retain their G visas. 

Dugan said that if U.N. personnel ‘knew that [immunity] could be lifted at any time by us… they might start behaving a lot differently.’ 

In response to questions about whether U.N. staff have been accused of sexual misconduct in the U.S., or whether U.N. staff who engaged in misconduct have had their G visas revoked, a State Department spokesperson explained the department ‘generally does not provide’ revocation statistics. They also said that ‘all visa applicants, no matter the visa type and where they are located, are continuously vetted.  Security vetting runs from the time of each application, through adjudication of the visa, and afterwards during the validity period of every issued visa, to ensure the individual remains eligible to travel to the United States.’

The spokesperson said officials of the U.N. ‘are expected to respect applicable laws of the United States, including criminal laws. Failure to do so may constitute an abuse of privileges of residence.’ They added that this ‘applies for those who hold diplomatic immunity for their positions as well.’

Among staff who have raised internal alarm bells is U.N. special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese, who traveled to the U.S. in 2024 to deliver a report before the Third Committee of the General Assembly. Albanese, whose antisemitism has been condemned widely by senior U.S. diplomats and the State Department, was allowed to tour multiple U.S. college campuses while in the U.S.

In addition to qualifying for ‘rubber stamp’ G visas, staff of international organizations like the United Nations can qualify for green cards if they have spent half of at least seven years of employment inside the U.S., or have been in the U.S. for a combined total of 15 years prior to retirement.