Supreme Court ruling against Trump tariffs will offer relief, business owners say
Business owners said a Supreme Court ruling on Friday abolish draconian US tariffs could provide relief by reducing their costs and potentially leading to reimbursements.
The high court ruled that President Trump did not have the authority to impose taxes on imports under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. Last year, Mr. Trump invoked the 1977 law to impose tariffs on dozens of U.S. trading partners, saying trade deficits and the flow of fentanyl and other illegal drugs into the United States were national emergencies.
Beth Benike, co-founder of Busy Baby, which makes baby meal accessories, said uncertainty over the legal status of the IEEPA tariffs has forced her to suspend all imports from China, where the Minnesota-based company’s products are made. It also has inventory in China that its manufacturer holds for it overseas.
“I should have had it shipped last month, but I was waiting for the Supreme Court’s decision because it was the difference between paying $48,000 more [in tariffs] or not,” she told CBS News before the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling Friday.
Not all businesses opposed emergency pricing. Before the high court’s ruling, Drew Greenblatt, owner of Maryland-based manufacturer Marlin Steel, told CBS News on Friday that he supported higher levies on U.S. trading partners because they provided a “level playing field” that allowed Marlin Steel to better compete with foreign steelmakers.
The average tariff rate on all imports is about 17 percent, including the levies Mr. Trump imposed under IEEPA, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
A recent analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that American businesses and consumers bore the brunt of Mr. Trump’s tariffs in 2025, paying for almost 90% samples. The Trump administration disputes this analysis.
Billions in potential refunds
Scott Lincicome, vice president for general economics at the Cato Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, said the Supreme Court’s ruling against Mr. Trump’s tariffs reverses “Trump’s biggest and nastiest tariffs for 2025 and almost certainly requires repayment of duties already collected.”
The Treasury Department collected $287 billion in tariffs in 2025, a 192% increase from the previous year, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. As of mid-December, about $130 billion had been collected through IEEPA rates, although total refunds for businesses could approach $150 billion, according to economists at PNC Financial Services Group.
“I am expecting a full refund, but if for some reason we don’t get them, I would have to raise my prices, which will be difficult for consumers,” Benike said. “People who buy baby products are already buying new products that they didn’t need to buy before having baby, so they’re already in a hurry.”
Rachel Rozner, owner of Elden Street Tea Shop in Reston, Virginia, said before the ruling that a Supreme Court ruling overturning the IEEPA tariffs could make an “astronomical” difference for her business. Most of the tea and other products it sells come from China, India, Japan and Nepal.
“If I can just order and get the product, and I know the price is right, it takes a lot of stress away,” she told CBS News.
Furthermore, some experts believe that the question of reimbursement of customs duties could end up in court.
“[W]We think it is reasonable to assume that a few months will pass before reimbursements begin, and even longer if the retailer faces significant legal difficulties,” Morgan Stanley analysts said in a report.
Although Rozner’s company may be eligible for a refund of the tariffs as a result of the ruling, she expressed fear that she might never see the money.
“What if they run out of money before you can get your refund?” » said Rozner. “I’m concerned that some people will be able to get a refund and others won’t, and that some people will take advantage of the system.”
We Pay the Tariffs, an advocacy group of 800 small businesses that opposes the Trump administration’s tariffs, said the IEEPA levies have harmed small businesses by forcing them to take out loans and freeze hiring.
“Today’s decision by the Supreme Court is a huge victory for America’s small businesses, which are bearing the crushing weight of these tariffs,” the group’s executive director, Dan Anthony, said in a statement to CBS News.
The group also urged the White House to provide “full, prompt, and automatic refunds” to employers who paid the tariffs.
Other prices to fill the void?
The Trump administration has already said it could deploy other import duties to replace IEEPA tariffs, including under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. This provision allows the U.S. President to apply country-specific tariffs at his discretion if the U.S. Trade Representative determines that another country is engaging in unfair foreign trade practices.
Still, Section 301 tariffs have restrictions and cannot be applied to all foreign imports, trade experts say. And replacing IEEPA tariffs with substitute levies could also take several months, according to Morgan Stanley.
The Trump administration could also turn to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows the president to impose obligations on trading partners to protect national security, based on a Commerce Department investigation.
If businesses could benefit from the removal of IEEPA tariffs, consumers may not see a drop in prices, with companies such as Walmart recently saying they are raising prices due to import duties.
“Any consumer seeking relief from tariff-induced price increases did not find that relief before the Supreme Court today,” Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collective, a progressive think tank focused on economic issues, said Friday.
He added that rebates to businesses could take years and that, even if they were ultimately administered, “there is little reason to believe that businesses will pass these savings on to consumers.”
