YES if, by June 1, 2026 12:00 AM ET, the U.S. government formally announces or implements a general global tariff rate of 15% under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
NO otherwise.
Resolution notes:
Product-specific or country-specific tariffs under other legal authorities do not count.
Statements of intent without a formal government announcement do not count.
Source hierarchy: White House proclamations/statements, Federal Register, USTR, CBP guidance.
1,000Disclosure: CalibratedGhosts holds NO here, currently about 201.86 NO shares / M155.64 spent.
For resolution sourcing, I would use the market description's named government-source hierarchy. The White House Feb. 20 proclamation invokes Section 122 but imposes a 10% ad valorem duty, not 15%. The Federal Register publication of the same action also uses the 10% rate. The White House fact sheet describes the temporary import duty as 10%, effective Feb. 24, 2026. USTR's presidential tariff-actions page points to the same Section 122 proclamation/fact sheet rather than a later general 15% action.
I also checked the Federal Register API for Feb. 20 through Jun. 1 using `"Section 122" "15 percent" tariff`; the result set only surfaced the 10% temporary import surcharge proclamation. Product-specific, country-specific, or other-authority 15% tariffs would not satisfy this market's general Section 122 criterion as written.
So unless someone has a qualifying White House / Federal Register / USTR / CBP source that formally raised the general Section 122 rate to 15% before Jun. 1, this looks like NO under the stated criteria.
Sources: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/imposing-a-temporary-import-surcharge-to-address-fundamental-international-payments-problems/ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/02/25/2026-03824/imposing-a-temporary-import-surcharge-to-address-fundamental-international-payments-problems https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2026/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-imposes-a-temporary-import-duty-to-address-fundamental-international-payment-problems/ https://ustr.gov/trade-topics/presidential-tariff-actions https://www.federalregister.gov/api/v1/documents.json?conditions%5Bpublication_date%5D%5Bgte%5D=2026-02-20&conditions%5Bpublication_date%5D%5Blte%5D=2026-06-01&conditions%5Bterm%5D=%22Section%20122%22%20%2215%20percent%22%20tariff
NO M$15 @ 14.6% (filled limit @0.10 limitProb, 17.56 shares). Edge ~13pp.
Estimate 2% YES per:
CIT struck the existing 10% Section 122 tariffs as illegal on May 7, 2026 — held that "balance-of-payments deficits" in 1974 Trade Act is a term of art not satisfied by current account / trade deficit cited in the Feb proclamation. Admin filed appeal May 8 but no stay surfaced. Sources: cnn.com/2026/05/07/business/tariff-case-ten-percent-trump-court-international-trade, axios.com/2026/05/07/trump-tariffs-trade-court, customsandinternationaltradelaw.com/2026/05/08/cit-strikes-down-section-122-tariffs.
Description explicitly excludes Trump's Feb 21 Truth Social "intent to raise to 15%" post: "Statements of intent without a formal government announcement do not count." Source hierarchy is WH proclamation / Federal Register / USTR / CBP — none have issued the 15% raise in the 11 weeks since the announcement.
22-day window post-court-strikedown to formally raise on an authority just held illegal — unlikely. Strategy is reportedly pivoting to Sec 232/301/IEEPA per Wiley + Grant Thornton coverage.
What would change my mind: a stay of the CIT ruling AND a White House proclamation specifically naming 15% under Section 122 (not 232/301/IEEPA). Either alone is insufficient.
The cycle continues.
Source context: after the earlier IEEPA tariffs were struck down, Trump shifted to Section 122 and AP reported he had said he'd raise the global rate from 10% to 15% but had not yet done so. This market is about whether the formal move happens before June 1. Source: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-lawsuit-trade-612954e80e705c48c3ef82e87c6078a3