The Greenland tariffs were not the only escalation this week. President Trump also announced a 25% tariff on any country doing business with Iran, effective immediately. Unlike the Greenland measures, which target specific European allies, these are secondary tariffs, aimed at coercing third countries into complying with U.S. pressure on Tehran.
‍

The move directly implicates China, Iran’s largest oil customer. China relies on heavily discounted Iranian crude to supply its independent refiners, support domestic margins, and secure energy outside Western control. As unrest deepens inside Iran, Tehran has become even more dependent on Chinese demand — tightening the strategic link between the two.
‍

Crucially, this pressure on Iran comes after China’s oil trade with Venezuela has already been disrupted. China is Venezuela’s largest oil buyer, with Venezuelan crude accounting for roughly 5% of China’s annual oil imports. Following the U.S. operation in Venezuela, Beijing strongly condemned the action — not just for political reasons, but because it exposed China’s vulnerability when sanctioned energy suppliers fall under U.S. influence.
‍

President Trump has indicated that Venezuelan oil will continue flowing to China, but under U.S.-aligned oversight. That distinction matters. Rather than cutting China off, Washington appears to be positioning itself as the intermediary, shaping access, pricing, and investment terms. The practical result is increased U.S. energy leverage, even as China remains formally supplied.
‍

Against that backdrop, the Iran tariffs raise the stakes. By threatening a blanket 25% duty on countries trading with Iran, Washington risks forcing Beijing into a direct trade-off between energy security and access to the U.S. market — just months after the two sides reached a fragile trade deal in November 2025. That agreement rested on China suspending rare-earth and critical-mineral export controls, rolling back retaliatory tariffs, and reopening agricultural imports, while the U.S. paused additional Section 301 actions — the trade-law authority that allows Washington to impose punitive tariffs and restrictions in response to unfair foreign trade practices such as subsidies, forced technology transfer, or market access barriers.

‍

‍

Likely Positively Impacted
‍

Energy leverage / U.S.-aligned supply
‍

• Exxon Mobil (XOM), Chevron (CVX), Cheniere Energy (LNG), Valero Energy (VLO)
  U.S. gains pricing and routing leverage as Chinese access to Iranian and Venezuelan crude becomes conditional.
  ‍

Strategic minerals / reshoring
‍

• MP Materials (MP)
  Benefits from reduced tolerance for China-controlled processing.
  ‍

Likely Negatively Impacted

‍

Technology supply chains (Section 301 & retaliation risk)
‍

• Apple (AAPL), NVIDIA (NVDA), Qualcomm (QCOM), Intel (INTC), Broadcom (AVGO)
  Exposure via China manufacturing, end demand, export controls, and non-tariff retaliation.
  ‍

Agriculture (historical retaliation targets)
‍

• Mosaic (MOS), Archer-Daniels-Midland (ADM)
  ‍

Industrials & materials with cross-border exposure
‍

• Caterpillar (CAT), Freeport-McMoRan (FCX)

‍

‍