Supreme Court Invalidates Global Tariffs, But Tariff Story Far From Over

After months of legal challenges and mounting uncertainty, the Supreme Court has struck down the Trump administration’s global tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), including reciprocal tariffs and targeted import taxes tied to fentanyl enforcement.

For manufacturers, distributors, middle-market importers, and other business owners who may have been impacted, the ruling is significant. But it is not the end of tariffs; there is still much to be determined. After analyzing the current landscape, our tariff specialists have shared their perspective on what happens next.

A ruling, not a resolution

While the Court invalidated the use of IEEPA for broad-based tariff authority, it did not establish how previously collected duties should be handled. That responsibility now shifts to lower courts, setting the stage for additional litigation over refund eligibility, procedural requirements, and timing.

In practical terms, that means uncertainty remains. Companies may have a pathway to pursue refunds, but the process could be complex, slow-moving, and highly technical.

Meanwhile, tariffs imposed under Section 232 (national security, such as steel and aluminum) and Section 301 (trade practices, including many China-origin goods) were not included in this decision.

Those authorities remain available and could continue to shape the trade landscape.

Can alternative tariff tools be used?

Yes, and likely will be, as the White House has indicated that they would replace the tariffs included in the ruling with other legal measures.

The Supreme Court’s decision limits one use of executive emergency authority. It does not eliminate existing trade tools. Section 232 and Section 301 remain viable, and Congress could also revisit statutory frameworks.

In other words, trade policy volatility remains a structural risk. The possibility of refunds is enticing, but it will require technical expertise, including analysis and document review, potentially requiring defense and substantiation.

Next steps for impacted businesses

Businesses should prepare for several possible scenarios:

• Tariffs replaced under new authority. The administration pivots to Section 232, Section 301, or other statutory mechanisms, resulting in revised, but continuing, tariff exposure.
• Partial refunds. Specific time periods or tariff categories may qualify for recovery, depending on how lower courts interpret the ruling.
• Broader refund opportunities. If courts determine duties were unlawfully collected, companies could pursue larger claims, though likely with significant administrative burden and strict documentation requirements.

Each path carries implications for cash flow forecasting, financial statement treatment, duty drawback strategies, transfer pricing, and customs compliance.

What you should do now

Regardless of the direction of future policy, companies should act proactively:

• Assess potential refund exposure and preserve documentation
  • Specifically review all tariff payments made dating back to early 2025 and identify which were made under IEEPA tariffs, because they are the primary tariffs
• Model financial impacts under multiple tariff replacement scenarios
• Review customs compliance processes and internal controls
• Evaluate sourcing strategies and contract pricing provisions
• Today’s ruling reshapes the legal framework, but it does not eliminate operational complexity.

Clarity will come in stages, but you should start preparing for them now. Fill out the form on this page to analyze your position and strategize for the next phase.

Discuss with Our Tariff Support Team