By M Firoz Al Mamun | February 20, 2026
Just days after the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs, President Donald Trump announced a new 10% global tariff on imports—this time relying on a different statutory authority in an effort to preserve his protectionist trade strategy.
The court ruled that Trump exceeded presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), concluding that emergency powers could not be used to impose broad, long-term import taxes.
Rather than retreat from his trade agenda, Trump responded by invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits temporary tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days without immediate congressional approval.
A Rapid Policy Pivot
Speaking at the White House, Trump criticized the ruling but framed the new tariff as legally sound. The 10% global levy took effect immediately following the executive order.
Section 122 provides limited-duration authority designed to address balance-of-payments concerns. Administration officials argue that this framework places the tariff within clear statutory boundaries, distinguishing it from the emergency powers previously rejected by the court.
Tariffs imposed under Section 232 (national security) and Section 301 (unfair trade practices) remain unaffected and continue alongside the new measure.
Refund Questions and Legal Battles
The Supreme Court’s ruling did not clarify whether importers are entitled to recover duties paid under the now-invalidated IEEPA tariffs.
Businesses have collectively paid more than $130 billion since those measures were introduced, and refund claims could lead to prolonged litigation in trade courts.
Legal experts anticipate a wave of administrative and judicial challenges, particularly concerning the process and scope of the earlier tariffs.
While electronic filing systems may streamline claims, smaller firms could face financial and procedural hurdles in pursuing reimbursement.
Business Community Reacts
Many small and mid-sized importers welcomed the court’s decision as a signal that abrupt tariff shifts may face constitutional limits. However, uncertainty persists.
Some analysts suggest the new framework offers at least a measure of predictability. Unlike the emergency-based tariffs, Section 122 actions involve defined time limits and procedural steps, giving businesses clearer timelines for planning shipments and managing supply chains.
Still, the 10% tariff represents a continuing cost burden for import-dependent sectors, with potential downstream effects on pricing and consumer spending.
Political and Trade Implications
The ruling and subsequent policy shift have sharpened divisions within Republican ranks, particularly between lawmakers favoring economic nationalism and those representing export-driven states concerned about retaliation.
Vice-President JD Vance criticized the court’s decision, arguing it restricts executive flexibility in responding to trade imbalances. Meanwhile, some members of Congress are calling for clearer statutory guidance on presidential trade authority to prevent future disputes.
The Road Ahead
The administration’s swift pivot underscores Trump’s commitment to tariffs as a central economic instrument. Yet the legal landscape remains unsettled. Courts are expected to address refund claims, while Congress may confront renewed debate over the limits of executive power in trade policy.
For businesses and global markets, the immediate result is a shift from one tariff regime to another—less vulnerable to constitutional challenge, but still disruptive. As litigation unfolds and the 150-day clock under Section 122 begins ticking, the next chapter in the tariff saga is already taking shape.
➡️ Read more:
https://thereporter24.com/news/retroactivity-debate-can-trump-s-new-10-tariff-apply-to-the-past
https://thereporter24.com/news/us-supreme-court-blocks-trump-s-liberation-day-tariffs-a-constitutional-rebuke-with-global-ripples
https://thereporter24.com/news/legal-battles-ahead-challenges-loom-over-trump-s-new-10-global-tariff
No comments: