The Senate advanced a bipartisan sanctions bill this week that would expand President Trump’s authority to impose tariffs on imports linked to Russia’s energy sector, as well as enacting new financial penalties on Russia and Iran. The legislation, championed by the late Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, aims to demonstrate congressional unity in punishing Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. However, the bill includes provisions granting the president broad discretion to levy steep tariffs on goods from major economies, including China, India, and members of the European Union.

If enacted, the legislation would enable President Trump to impose tariffs as high as 500 percent on Russian imports, primarily fertilizers, and up to 100 percent tariffs on the largest importers of Russian oil and gas. Countries that aid Russia in circumventing sanctions could face similar tariff rates. The measure returns certain trade authorities to the executive branch that were curtailed by a Supreme Court ruling earlier this year, which found the president’s earlier use of tariffs on national security grounds unlawful.

The bill also allows President Trump to waive sanctions by issuing a national interest exemption with an explanation to Congress, offering the administration increased flexibility. This aspect has sparked concern given the president’s mixed stance on Russia sanctions to date.

Trade experts and industry groups have raised alarms about the expanded tariff powers. Scott Lincicome of the Cato Institute cautioned that ambiguous language in the bill might enable the president to broadly apply tariffs, warning that Mr. Trump has demonstrated a willingness to exploit such statutory ambiguities. Meanwhile, a coalition of nearly two dozen trade associations, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Retail Industry Leaders Association, appealed to Senate leaders to remove the tariff provisions. They argued that imposing broad, high tariffs could increase costs for American consumers and businesses, disrupt supply chains, and create uncertainty for companies managing pricing and sourcing decisions.

The measure’s final version made some revisions to mitigate impacts on U.S. trading partners, limiting tariffs to the five largest importers of Russian oil and gas. Tariff rates could also be reduced or eliminated if countries significantly reduce their purchases of Russian energy.

The legislation comes as President Trump has intensified his use of tariffs over the past year, placing duties on goods from more than 80 countries under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, often citing issues such as forced labor and unfair trade practices. The Supreme Court struck down his previous reliance on a national emergency statute for tariff enforcement earlier this year, ordering refunds of roughly $160 billion in collected duties.

The bill faces uncertainty in the House, where some Democratic leaders oppose broadening the president’s tariff powers. Senator Maggie Hassan, a Democrat from New Hampshire, criticized the approach on social media, stating that tariffs paid by American consumers are unlikely to aid Ukraine and expressed concern over Mr. Trump’s history of aggressive tariff use.

Ben Harris, a former Treasury official involved in recent U.S. policy on Russian oil sanctions, welcomed the bipartisan effort to strengthen enforcement, yet noted confusion about the administration’s objectives given its inconsistent stance towards Russia.

As Congress moves forward, the legislation represents a significant shift in trade authority, reflecting ongoing debates over the use of tariffs and sanctions as tools of economic and foreign policy amid global tensions involving Russia, Iran, and other key international actors.