○ In April of last year, President Trump declared "America's Liberation Day" while announcing global reciprocal tariffs. One year later, although IEEPA-based tariffs including reciprocal tariffs were invalidated by a Supreme Court ruling, U.S. tariff policy is being institutionally restructured and continuously reinforced.

• Replacing the IEEPA tariffs, a 10% global tariff based on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 is currently imposed, and investigations under Section 301 targeting issues like manufacturing overcapacity are underway.

• Furthermore, Section 232 tariffs under the Trade Expansion Act are being levied on key items—such as steel, aluminum, automobiles, and semiconductors—with investigations on additional products in progress.

○ Evaluating President Trump’s "liberation" in terms of trade deficits, supply chain reliance on China, deindustrialization trends, and policy constraints suggests that short-term results may be limited; however, it must be viewed as a fundamental shift in the worldview and policy paradigm long upheld by the United States.

• The second Trump administration has expanded the spectrum of tariff policy—which previously focused on import suppression—into a core execution tool for national strategy spanning diplomacy, economy, supply chains, and technology.

• Through this, the U.S. aims to restore national interests and bargaining power, secure control and leadership over strategic industries, and spur a manufacturing resurgence by attracting domestic investment.

○ This shift is replacing an international order centered on global norms, free trade, and efficiency with one where national interest, economic security, and strategic self-reliance take precedence. It reshapes the landscape by elevating the global competitive environment into a "strategic competition" that merges policy, security, and supply chains.

○ While these changes present short-term risk factors for South Korea's highly trade-dependent industries and enterprises, the broader trends of supply chain restructuring and expanded investment in strategic industries offer new opportunities for South Korea, given its strong manufacturing competitiveness.

○ Accordingly, Korean industries and firms must move away from a one-size-fits-all approach and capture new growth opportunities through differentiated, segmented strategies tailored to the policy, regulatory, and supply chain dynamics of each specific market.

• In particular, industries directly impacted by major powers' policies—such as steel, automotive, and semiconductors—must transition beyond mere export expansion toward integrated strategies encompassing high-value product manufacturing, localization, and technological cooperation.

○ Furthermore, with the role of government policy becoming more critical than ever, the relationship between businesses and the government must be redefined from simple cooperation or regulatory compliance into a strategic partnership that jointly designs and executes national strategy and industrial competitiveness.