Supreme Court to decide fate of Trump tariffs as businesses seek refunds

The dispute centers on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law most often used for sanctions and asset freezes, not for setting trade tariffs. Trump relied on IEEPA to raise duties on imports from a broad range of U.S. trading partners, arguing that the trade deficit amounted to a national emergency. Earlier actions in February and March targeted imports tied to China, Canada, and Mexico, citing concerns about fentanyl and other illicit drugs.

After oral arguments in November, many in the market believe the court could find that using IEEPA this way went too far. A decision could come in the next few days, though the court typically does not disclose in advance which rulings are about to be released.

Even if the tariffs are struck down, companies are not counting on quick refunds. Some importers have already filed claims and lawsuits involving CBP to lock in their ability to seek repayment. The process is also constrained by timing rules. Importers have a limited window to challenge duty assessments before an entry is finalized in the system, after which recovering money becomes extremely difficult.

Against that backdrop, CBP has announced an accelerated shift to electronic refund payments. Starting February 6, 2026, refunds will move from paper checks to electronic transfers through the agency’s ACE portal. The change could make administration smoother, but businesses still do not expect automatic payouts.

The legal fight is unfolding alongside a political debate over what should happen to tariff revenue. Trump has floated the idea of “tariff dividends,” or direct payments to Americans. Economist Peter Schiff has criticized the concept, arguing that such payments could exceed actual tariff receipts and, by boosting consumption, increase demand for imports and widen the trade deficit.

Even if refunds are ultimately approved, the prospect of $2,000 checks for U.S. residents appears unlikely.