Trump's protectionist trade regime could be rebuilt after a Supreme Court setback

The Supreme Court heard a challenge to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and a ruling is expected in January or February; legal experts say the administration can likely recreate similar tariffs through other statutes while refund processes remain unclear.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard a November challenge to President Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad tariffs, and a decision is expected in January or February. Lower courts previously found the IEEPA-based tariffs exceeded presidential authority, and legal experts say a negative ruling for the administration is possible. The government has collected more than US$130 billion under IEEPA, raising questions about potential refunds. At the same time, trade lawyers note the administration has other statutory routes to impose tariffs. Key facts: - The challenged IEEPA measures include the so-called "fentanyl tariffs" and broad reciprocal tariffs; sector-specific tariffs on steel, aluminum, autos and lumber rely on other laws. - The U.S. Court of International Trade and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled against the IEEPA tariffs earlier, and many legal experts say the Supreme Court appears likely to do the same. - U.S. Customs and Border Protection collected more than US$130 billion in IEEPA tariff revenue overall, and about US$2.4 billion from Canada as of mid-December, creating potential refund claims. Dozens of companies have filed suits in the U.S. Court of International Trade to seek refunds or priority. - The administration has other tools it has used or could use, including Section 232 (sectoral investigations), Section 301, Section 122 (temporary tariffs for 150 days) and Section 338, and a number of Section 232 investigations are already under way. Summary: A ruling against the IEEPA tariffs would directly affect tariffs imposed under that statute and could prompt claims for refunds, while the administration retains several alternative statutory paths to impose tariffs. Legal experts and trade lawyers say the government could move quickly to recreate similar measures using other authorities, and how refund procedures will be handled remains unclear.