SB1364, the "Supporting American Allies Act," amends U.S. trade practice by barring application of duties imposed under the Executive Order titled "Regulating Imports with a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Practices that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits" to any article imported from Israel or Ukraine. The bill is short: a short title clause and a single operative section that creates the exemption.
This statutory exemption removes those two countries from the scope of the President’s reciprocal-tariff authority under that Executive Order, insulating imports from Israel and Ukraine against duties the Executive Order would otherwise impose. The change has immediate implications for Customs treatment of entries, the Administration’s bargaining leverage in bilateral trade negotiations, and domestic industries that compete with Israeli or Ukrainian imports.
At a Glance
What It Does
SB1364 prohibits the duties imposed under the specified Executive Order from applying to any articles imported from Israel or Ukraine. It operates by statutory command rather than by modifying the Executive Order itself.
Who It Affects
U.S. importers and Customs officials handling goods that list Israel or Ukraine as the country of importation, Israeli and Ukrainian exporters, and U.S. industries that compete with those imports. It also constrains the Executive Branch’s ability to apply the named reciprocal tariffs to those two countries.
Why It Matters
The bill converts a presidential tariff authority into one subject to a two-country exemption, signaling a policy preference that uses trade law as an instrument of allied support. That alters enforcement priorities, Treasury/CBP revenue expectations, and the Administration’s negotiation leverage for reciprocal tariff actions.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB1364 is concise and narrowly framed. It contains a short-title provision and a single substantive section that says, in plain language, that the duties imposed under the named Executive Order "shall not apply" to any article imported from Israel or Ukraine.
Because the bill targets duties imposed under one Executive Order by name, it operates as a statutory limitation on how those specific tariff actions may be applied.
Practically, the bill instructs executive-branch agencies that administer import duties to treat entries from Israel and Ukraine as exempt from the reciprocal tariffs covered by that Executive Order. The statute does not amend the language of the Executive Order, create a waiver or certification process, set a sunset date, or add implementing definitions.
That leaves operational details — how CBP identifies qualifying entries, how certificates of origin or rules of origin are treated, and whether transshipped or materially transformed goods qualify — to agency guidance, adjudication, or future legislation.Because the exemption is unconditional and broad — covering "any article imported from" the two named countries — it would likely encompass a wide range of merchandise categories unless administrative or judicial interpretation narrows the phrase. The statute therefore removes the Executive Branch’s capacity, under that specific EO, to impose reciprocal tariffs against Israel and Ukraine as a policy tool, even where the President otherwise seeks to apply uniform reciprocal tariffs across other trading partners.The bill’s brevity accelerates legal and practical questions about interaction with existing trade agreements, rules of origin, and revenue accounting.
Agencies will need to decide how to operationalize the exemption at the point of entry and whether to issue implementing instructions that address documentation, audits, and potential abuse (for example, attempts at transshipment or misdeclaration). Those implementation choices will determine how broad the exemption proves in practice and how much it affects domestic markets and trade diplomacy.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Section 1 establishes the short title "Supporting American Allies Act.", Section 2 provides that the duties imposed under the Executive Order titled "Regulating Imports with a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Practices that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits" shall not apply to any article imported from Israel or Ukraine.
The bill contains no sunset, phase-in, waiver, or certification process; the exemption is unconditional and open-ended in the statutory text.
The statute does not amend the Executive Order itself and does not specify implementing procedures, leaving Customs, Treasury, and other agencies to interpret how to identify qualifying imports and prevent circumvention.
Because the exemption covers "any article imported from" the named countries, it raises immediate operational questions about rules of origin, transshipment, and materially transformed goods at U.S. ports of entry.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act's name: "Supporting American Allies Act." This section is purely stylistic but matters for citation and legislative drafting conventions. It signals the bill’s intent and frames subsequent statutory language in the context of allied support.
Exemption of imports from Israel and Ukraine from duties under the named Executive Order
The operative clause directs that duties imposed under the Executive Order identified by title shall not apply to any article imported from Israel or from Ukraine. The practical effect is to create a statutory carve-out: if an import is "from" one of those countries, the specific reciprocal duties covered by that EO cannot be assessed. The provision is terse — it does not define "imported from," does not provide implementing authority, and does not address whether the exemption is intended to be retroactive or prospective, leaving a range of administrative and legal implementation issues unresolved.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Trade across all five countries.
Explore Trade in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Importers of Israeli and Ukrainian goods — They avoid the additional duties that the Executive Order would impose, lowering potential landed costs and simplifying import planning and pricing.
- Exporters in Israel and Ukraine — Their products gain price competitiveness in the U.S. market because duties under the named EO cannot be applied to their shipments, supporting export volumes and trade relationships.
- U.S. downstream buyers (retailers, manufacturers using Israeli or Ukrainian inputs) — They retain access to tariff-free inputs or consumer goods from those countries, reducing input costs and supply-chain disruption risk.
- Allied diplomatic and defense suppliers — Firms supplying allied governments or defense contractors that rely on Israeli or Ukrainian-origin components are insulated from tariff shocks under the Executive Order.
Who Bears the Cost
- U.S. producers competing with Israeli or Ukrainian imports — They lose a source of tariff protection that the Executive Order might otherwise provide, potentially worsening competitive pressure.
- The Executive Branch (Trade negotiators and the President) — Congress statutorily removes a lever of reciprocity-based tariff policy for these two countries, reducing executive flexibility in negotiating or retaliating on trade practices.
- U.S. Treasury/Customs (revenue and enforcement) — Customs will need to implement and administer the exemption, and Treasury may see reduced tariff receipts relative to a scenario where the EO duties applied.
- Agencies responsible for anti-circumvention and rules-of-origin enforcement — They face increased administrative burden and potential litigation over how to verify whether goods qualify as "imported from" the named countries.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill resolves a foreign-policy choice in favor of allied protection at the cost of trade-policy flexibility: it protects Israel and Ukraine from reciprocal tariff leverage while simultaneously removing a tool the Executive Branch might use to press for more reciprocal market access or to respond to unfair practices—creating a trade-off between diplomatic support and enforcement options.
The bill’s economy is its chief implementation challenge. By declaring that duties under a specific Executive Order "shall not apply" to any article imported from two named countries, SB1364 answers the high-level policy question but leaves operational questions unresolved.
The statute does not define "imported from," so agencies will need to reconcile the exemption with existing rules of origin, certificates of origin, and the customs concepts of country of origin versus country of export. That ambiguity creates room for dispute over transshipped goods and for actors to attempt circumvention by routing through Israel or Ukraine or by claiming origin status without substantive transformation.
A second tension concerns the relationship between statutory carve-outs and executive authority. The bill constrains a presidential tariff tool by statute, but it does not amend the underlying Executive Order or alter the legal authorities the President used to justify that EO.
That could generate legal questions about whether the statutory exemption displaces the EO’s application fully or whether agencies must reconcile overlapping authorities when, for example, duties are imposed under multiple statutory or regulatory programs. Finally, the bill’s lack of procedural guardrails — no sunset, no reporting requirements, no waiver or conditionality — means the exemption will apply broadly until repealed or clarified, which is fiscally and strategically significant but leaves courts and agencies to fill the gaps.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.