Trump Tariffs Face Supreme Court Review With 150 Billion at Stake
The Supreme Court is poised to address a significant legal challenge on Friday regarding US President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, as it prepares to determine the lawfulness of the duties imposed. The decision has the potential to transform US trade policy and pave the way for up to $150 billion in refunds for importers. The ruling holds significant implications for company executives, customs brokers, and trade lawyers, as it may dictate whether businesses are able to reclaim billions of dollars previously paid to the US government in import duties.
This marks the inaugural occasion on which the US Supreme Court will directly adjudicate the legality of Trump’s tariff programme. The case centers around the “Liberation Day” tariffs that were announced on April 2 of the previous year, imposing duties between 10 percent and 50 percent on the majority of imports. According to a report, over 1,000 lawsuits have been initiated by businesses pursuing refunds for tariffs that have already been paid. Many of these cases depend on the question of whether Trump possessed the authority to invoke a national emergency law to impose the duties. Judges express skepticism regarding legal authority. The tariffs were enacted pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, a statute historically utilized to impose sanctions on foreign adversaries or to freeze assets in times of national emergencies. On November 5, during court proceedings, both conservative and liberal justices raised questions regarding the extent of the law’s authority in granting the president the power to impose such extensive trade duties. Lower courts had previously determined that Trump’s application of IEEPA exceeded the legal boundaries, leading to appeals from his administration.
Trump has voiced his apprehension regarding the potential outcome of the case. In a social media post on Friday, he stated that a ruling against the tariffs would be a “terrible blow” to the United States. “Because of Tariffs, our Country is financially, AND FROM A NATIONAL SECURITY STANDPOINT, FAR STRONGER AND MORE RESPECTED THAN EVER BEFORE,” Trump said in another post on Monday. Data from US Customs and Border Protection indicates that these tariffs produced approximately $133.5 billion from February 4 to December 14, as reported by news agency Reuters. According to calculations, based on average daily collections in recent months, the total is now estimated to be nearing $150 billion. If the Supreme Court deems the tariffs illegal, the government may be confronted with substantial refund claims. Trump implemented tariffs based on IEEPA in two primary phases. In April, he declared “reciprocal” tariffs on the majority of US trading partners, pointing to trade deficits as a national emergency. In February and March, he implemented duties on China, Canada, and Mexico, connecting these measures to concerns regarding fentanyl and drug trafficking. Even if the court strikes down the tariffs, obtaining refunds may not be a straightforward process.
The outcome will largely hinge on whether the Supreme Court provides definitive guidance on refunds or remands the matter to a lower court, most likely the Court of International Trade. “Any refund process would heavily depend upon whether the Supreme Court provides instructions on refunds,” stated Joseph Spraragen. Importers typically have a period of 314 days to rectify import entries prior to their finalization. Once that deadline passes, refunds are typically not permitted. For imports from China subjected to tariffs in February 2025, that opportunity has already passed. Trump has suggested that even a defeat in court may not halt his efforts regarding tariffs. During a Thursday interview, he indicated that judges may restrict his domestic agenda – including tariffs – only “under certain circumstances”. He also proposed that if emergency-based tariffs are invalidated, his administration might consider reintroducing them in a different format, such as licensing fees.
