Vietnamese makers of batteries and charging equipment exporting to the United States face a tariff picture that changed repeatedly during 2026. One point must be stated clearly at the outset: the reciprocal tariffs based on IEEPA, once applied at 20 percent to Vietnamese goods and 40 percent to goods treated as transshipped, were struck down by the US Supreme Court in Learning Resources v. Trump on 20 February 2026, and collection ended in late February 2026. This article analyses the remaining tariff framework and the substantive origin requirements, which are the largest surviving risk for batteries and chargers from Vietnam.
Legal basis
- US Supreme Court judgment in Learning Resources v. Trump (20 February 2026): the tariffs imposed under IEEPA exceeded statutory authority; Executive Order 14389 then terminated their application, and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) stopped collection from 24 February 2026.
- Remaining US duty bases: Section 232 national security measures, Section 301 unfair trade measures, anti-dumping (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD) by specific HS code, and anti-circumvention investigation under the EAPA.
- 19 USC §1592 on penalties for false customs declarations and origin fraud, and the CBP substantial transformation test for determining the origin of goods.
IEEPA reciprocal tariffs: terminated, and must not be priced in
During 2025, goods of Vietnamese origin entering the US bore a 20 percent reciprocal tariff, and goods treated as transshipped through Vietnam bore 40 percent, under executive orders based on IEEPA. On 20 February 2026 the US Supreme Court in Learning Resources v. Trump rejected the legal basis of those tariffs, Executive Order 14389 terminated their application, and CBP stopped collecting from 24 February 2026. The practical consequence for battery and charger exporters: at the time of writing (21 October 2026), the IEEPA reciprocal tariff is NOT a current cost item to build into export quotations for the US. Enterprises that paid the duty during the application period should follow the CBP and US Court of International Trade refund mechanisms; enterprises negotiating new contracts should not accept a default clause adding 20 or 40 percent reciprocal duty into the price. Policy risk can still change: the other US duty bases below remain intact, so long-term export contracts should carry a tariff-change risk sharing clause rather than locking one fixed duty level into the price.
The framework still applying to batteries and chargers
After the end of the IEEPA tariffs, batteries and charging equipment from Vietnam entering the US bear: MFN import duty by HS code as usual; Section 232 measures where the product falls within a sectoral list in force at the time (the enterprise must check the current list for the specific HS codes of cells, battery packs and charging piles before each delivery phase); anti-dumping and countervailing duties where an order applies to like products from Vietnam or from a third country involved in the supply chain; and the risk of an EAPA circumvention investigation where CBP suspects the goods in substance originate in a country subject to AD or CVD but were transshipped or lightly processed in Vietnam. The common feature of these risks is that they attach to the substantive origin of the goods, shifting the exporter compliance focus from the duty rate question to the origin proof question.
How Vietnamese origin is determined: substantial transformation, no percentage threshold
This is the point Vietnamese enterprises most often misunderstand: US customs law sets NO fixed local content ratio (no 30, 40 or 60 percent threshold) for goods to count as Vietnamese origin. The test is substantial transformation: goods take the origin of the country where they underwent a production process that fundamentally changed the name, character or use of the input components. For batteries, assembling cells from anodes, cathodes, electrolyte and casings in Vietnam through substantive manufacturing steps will usually effect a substantial transformation, while mere repacking, labelling or minimal assembly of complete imported kits will not. For charging piles, manufacturing circuit boards, assembling power modules and testing in Vietnam carry very different origin weight from importing finished units and rebranding them. CBP decides case by case, and an enterprise may request a binding CBP ruling on origin for its production model before exporting at scale. This must be distinguished from regional value content thresholds in FTAs such as the EVFTA or RCEP, which apply only when claiming preferences under those agreements (to the EU or Asia), not as the origin test applied by US customs. False origin declaration or fraud to evade duties is heavily penalised under 19 USC §1592 and is a ground for opening an EAPA investigation.
Chinese components in the product: where is the impact?
Components of Chinese origin (cells, management chips, power modules) do not automatically strip the finished product of Vietnamese origin if production in Vietnam achieves substantial transformation, but they raise risk at three points. First, circumvention risk: where the decisive value and character-forming steps sit mainly in China, CBP may conclude there was no substantial transformation in Vietnam. Second, measures aimed specifically at Chinese supply chains (Section 301 on Chinese goods, AD and CVD orders whose scope covers components) may apply depending on product structure. Third, traceability duties: US importers will require the Vietnamese manufacturer to produce component origin traceability files down to supplier level, and export contracts increasingly condition payment on those files. A durable compliance strategy is to build genuine production records (material norms, process logs, component invoices) from the day the plant operates, rather than assembling an origin file only when an order arrives.
Recommendations for exporters
Three priorities: obtain a CBP origin ruling for the main production model before signing long-term contracts; check Section 232 and AD/CVD status by specific HS code at quotation time instead of using expired reciprocal tariff information; and include in the export contract clauses allocating tariff-change risk, circumvention investigation risk and cooperation duties on origin traceability files.
Frequently asked questions
Are Vietnam-made batteries entering the US subject to duties?
The IEEPA reciprocal tariffs of 20 and 40 percent were struck down by the US Supreme Court (Learning Resources v. Trump, 20 February 2026) and CBP stopped collection from 24 February 2026, so they no longer apply at present. Batteries still bear MFN duty by HS code, and Section 232 measures plus anti-dumping and countervailing duties for the specific product code must be checked at the time of export.
What local content percentage qualifies as Vietnamese origin?
US law has no fixed local content percentage for origin. The test is substantial transformation: production in Vietnam must fundamentally change the name, character or use of the input components. Repacking or minimal assembly of imported kits does not meet the test; enterprises should seek an advance CBP ruling for their production model.
Do Chinese components affect origin?
They do not automatically remove Vietnamese origin where production in Vietnam achieves substantial transformation, but they increase the risk of a circumvention finding and an EAPA investigation, and they trigger component traceability demands from US importers. False origin declarations are penalised under 19 USC §1592.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council