Several countries are concerned about the uncertainty of trade with the United States

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to impose large-scale tariffs. What are the reactions from various parties after the Supreme Court’s final tariff ruling? Where will the power struggle over tariff policy within the United States go?

Reactions from Various Parties

Since President Trump returned to the White House in early 2025, he has repeatedly invoked the IEPA to impose large-scale tariffs. Last April, five small businesses and 12 states filed lawsuits against the federal government regarding this issue. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, lower courts had already ruled that the government’s package of tariffs was illegal.

On the 20th, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the large-scale tariff policy was illegal. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing on behalf of the majority justices, stated that Congress clearly defines and strictly limits the authority to exercise tariffs, and the IEPA does not authorize such tariff powers.

Trump said at a press conference that day that he was “deeply disappointed” by the Supreme Court’s ruling. On the other hand, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and others called the Supreme Court ruling a “major victory.” Meanwhile, calls for tariff refunds from the Democratic Party and the business community in the US are growing louder.

The EU, following the ruling, called on the US to maintain “predictability in trade relations.” European Commission spokesperson Olof Gir said in a statement that the EU awaits clarity from the US on “what measures it will take in response to the ruling.” The German Chamber of Commerce and Industry issued a statement saying that it may be more difficult for the US to arbitrarily impose new tariffs again.

Canada welcomed the US Supreme Court’s ruling. Dominique LeBlanc, Canada’s Minister for Canada-US Trade, said on social media that the ruling further supports Canada’s long-standing position that the US tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act are “unjustified.”

Kyodo News reported that the Japanese government is highly vigilant about potential disruptions to exports to the US and is seeking detailed information from the US. Brazilian Vice President and Minister of Development, Industry and Trade Alquemin stated that the ruling is “very important for Brazil” and that he is cautious about its future developments.

The Trump Administration Announces New Tariff Measures

On the same day the ruling was announced, the White House website released an executive order signed by Trump, confirming the termination of the tariff measures previously implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

To replace the tariffs ruled illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court, Trump signed a document on the 20th imposing a 10% tariff on goods from all countries and regions. On the 21st, Trump announced an increase in this rate to 15%. The above decisions were made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This section allows the federal government to impose tariffs for a maximum of 150 days, with extensions requiring congressional approval.

Trump stated that he has numerous “other options,” and the U.S. government will initiate several investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, allegedly for “unfair trade practices,” to protect the U.S. “from unfair trade practices by other countries and businesses.”

U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessant stated that with the Trump administration imposing tariffs through other means, U.S. government tariff revenue in 2026 is expected to “remain virtually unchanged.”

Erin McLaughlin, senior economist at the Conference Board, a US think tank, said the Supreme Court ruling was a “blow” to the Trump administration.

Analysts point out that the Trump administration could invoke Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Sections 201, 301, and 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, and Section 338 of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 to impose additional tariffs, but would face numerous restrictions regarding procedures and tax rates.

Where is the Tariff Game Heading?

Currently, the Trump administration’s tariff policy has not shifted due to the Supreme Court ruling; instead, it has adopted other approaches to continue imposing tariffs. In the future, the battle over tariffs between the Democratic and Republican parties, the government and businesses, and the US and its trading partners will continue.

In response to calls from Schumer and others to “end the trade war,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, stated that Congress and the federal government will decide on the “best way forward” in the coming weeks.

Despite repeated claims by the US government that tariffs are borne by foreign exporters and generate huge revenue for the US, recent studies indicate that the burden of these tariffs is primarily borne by American businesses and consumers. Due to high inflationary pressures, the Trump administration had previously canceled tariffs on imported goods such as coffee and postponed tariffs on furniture.

Another focus of attention is whether businesses will be able to receive tax refunds smoothly. According to budget models from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court’s final tariff ruling involves refunds of up to $175 billion. US importers and the government may engage in a protracted battle over these refunds.

Diana Swonk, chief economist at KPMG, believes that one should not be overly optimistic about the Supreme Court’s ruling. The Supreme Court justices left room for maneuver in refunding tariffs, and the refund process is expected to require a large amount of documentation, “which will be a nightmare.”

Trump stated that he is unclear how to handle the tariffs already imposed and hinted that this issue will be decided by the courts. If the US Court of International Trade ultimately handles the refund process, any importer who wants to get their taxes back must file a lawsuit.

Court records show that more than 1,000 companies in the United States have filed lawsuits demanding the government return tariffs they have already paid. Among the plaintiffs are large corporations such as Costco and Reebok.