When Trade Meets Property: How Tariffs Are Rewriting Global Real Estate
The latest virtual meeting of WLG's Real Estate & Construction Group focused on how rapidly shifting tariff policy is affecting real estate, construction, and supply chain planning. Randy Rucker (Faegre Drinker), Co-chair of WLG's Trade Practice Group, provided an overview of the current U.S. administration's approach to tariffs and the challenges it creates for companies navigating cross-border projects.
Randy began by revisiting the trajectory of tariffs over the past several years—from the sector-specific steel and aluminum tariffs implemented in Trump's first term to the sweeping Section 301 actions against China, all of which remain active today. He explained that the second Trump administration has maintained the same underlying philosophy but is moving faster, applying larger and more frequent tariff measures across trading partners and product categories. The group spent time discussing the administration's shift from an exemption-based model to an "inclusion" process, which allows competitors to petition for products to be added to tariff lists, creating an even less predictable environment.
A central theme of the discussion was the increasing complexity companies face when trying to plan major real estate or construction projects. Multiple tariff regimes, layered statutory authorities, and the possibility that different tariffs may "stack" on top of one another make it difficult for businesses to establish stable cost assumptions or commit to long-term timelines. Some companies are now extending due-diligence periods in large transactions simply to see how potential tariff actions unfold.
Participants raised a number of practical client concerns throughout the conversation, including how much notice companies can expect before tariffs take effect and whether shifting production or sourcing remains a viable mitigation strategy. Randy noted that while some investigations allow time for public comment, others—particularly those issued under emergency authorities—can be immediate. This unpredictability has become a defining pressure point for global real estate and construction planning.
The group also examined the status of ongoing litigation related to this year’s emergency-based tariffs. Lower courts have ruled those tariffs invalid, the Supreme Court has heard arguments, and a decision could come at any time. In the meantime, duties continue to be collected. Randy explained that while some companies have begun filing their own protective cases to preserve potential refund rights, there is no immediate deadline, and the availability and scope of refunds will ultimately depend on how the Supreme Court structures any remedy.
Another theme was the number of misunderstandings clients often have about U.S. tariff rules. Randy highlighted recurring issues, such as who is legally responsible for paying the tariff (always the U.S. importer), the specifics of classification and valuation, and the substantial transformation test that determines origin. These gaps frequently result in unexpected exposure when suppliers' representations do not align with U.S. requirements.
The conversation closed with a brief look at whether international frustration—such as informal boycotts or tourism slowdowns—has any meaningful influence on U.S. trade policy. Randy noted that, from what practitioners are seeing, those pressures are not altering the administration's strategy, which remains focused on revenue generation, leverage in trade negotiations, and broad tariff application across industries.
The group acknowledged that this continues to be a fast-moving area with direct implications for construction feasibility, material costs, supply chain planning, and large-scale investment decisions. Members plan to closely monitor developments as the Supreme Court's decision and subsequent government actions unfold.