The US Supreme Court’s decision to strike down President Donald Trump’s global tariffs may have brought immediate relief to many businesses and trade partners – but it might not be the end of story or the sweeping measure that the Republican announced as soon as he returned to the White House last year.
Instead, analysts say the ruling sets the stage for months, if not years, of legal battles, fresh tariff moves and continued volatility in global trade. Traffic latest news in Trump tariffs here
What happens to tariffs collected so far?
One of the biggest unresolved questions is what happens to the roughly $133.5 billion – a figure mentioned in a AFP news agency report -in tariffs collected between January 2025 and mid-December.
The Supreme Court did not address whether the funds must be returned. That issue is now expected to be fought out in lower courts.
ING analysts Carsten Brzeski and Julian Geib said the US Court of International Trade will likely oversee the process, according to AFP.
“Refunds won’t come automatically, as any importer that wants its money back must sue individually,” they were quoted as saying.
“This process has already kicked off, with over 1,000 corporate entities now involved in a legal fight.”
Trump himself signaled the battle could drag on.
“We’ll end up being in court for the next five years.”
10% tariffs imposed
Within hours of the ruling, Trump vowed to impose a new 10-per cent tariff under a different legal authority – Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 – which allows duties for 150 days unless Congress extends them.
Sharing the announcement in a post on Truth Social, the US President said, “It is my Great Honor to have just signed, from the Oval Office, a Global 10% Tariff on all Countries, which will be effective almost immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP”.
The move is widely viewed as a temporary bridge toward more durable tariffs. Trump has also indicated plans to pursue investigations under Section 301 into unfair trade practices, another pathway to longer-term duties.
Josh Lipsky, chair of international economics at the Atlantic Council, said the ruling merely “opens a new chapter” in Trump’s tariff policy, AFP reported.
He warned there will be “more uncertainty, more volatility for businesses to navigate, and more fraught trade deals for countries to negotiate.”
For now, analysts say the court’s ruling removes one of Trump’s most powerful and rapid mechanisms for imposing broad tariffs.
ING noted the decision “removes one of Trump’s fastest tools for imposing broad tariffs,”
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent defended the now-invalidated use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), saying on Fox News, “were custom made for President Trump to assert leverage” against other countries.
“We were able to bring them to the table very quickly,” he added.
But Bessent made clear the administration intends to restore tariff pressure through other channels.
“We will get back to the same tariff level for the countries,” Bessent vowed. “It will just be in a less direct and slightly more convoluted manner.”
Because emergency tariffs formed the basis of recent trade negotiations, some analysts say countries could attempt to revisit their commitments.
Lipsky expects countries that have already struck deals to stick with them rather than “risk unraveling an agreement which at least has provided some stability.”
However, countries still negotiating agreements may see the ruling as leverage.
Asia Society Policy Institute senior vice president Wendy Cutler said abandoning deals outright is unlikely. “Does not seem to be in the cards for our partners.,” She added.
“They know all too well that such a step could end up leaving them in a worse position with the White House,” she said.
Lower tariffs – for now?
According to The Budget Lab at Yale University, the ruling lowers the average effective tariff rate faced by consumers to 9.1 percent – down from 16.9 percent – though still the highest level since 1946 excluding 2025, the AFP report mentioned.
Despite Trump’s push for more permanent duties, some economists believe the ruling may force a recalibration.
Navy Federal Credit Union chief economist Heather Long said Friday’s decision “will force a reset in tariff policy.”
She expects it is “likely to lead to lower overall tariff rates and a more orderly imposition of future tariffs.”
The Supreme Court’s decision has curtailed one pathway for sweeping tariff action, but it has not ended Trump’s trade strategy.
Instead, it opens a prolonged period of legal disputes, temporary measures and renewed negotiations – leaving businesses, trading partners and consumers bracing for another stretch of uncertainty.