Who will repay the $170 billion in tariffs after they are lifted? - Politico

3 941 6

By striking down most of the tariffs, the Supreme Court dealt a painful blow to the Donald Trump administration and, likely, taxpayers. In their 6-3 majority decision, the justices did not order the White House to reimburse importers for duties already paid or specify the procedure for their reimbursement, but it appears they will have to do so.

As Politico reports, the U.S. Court of International Trade will likely be responsible for resolving the many legal issues surrounding the potential refunds of these massive amounts of money. Under U.S. customs law, duty refund claims are typically heard by this specialized court in New York and processed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The tariffs, made illegal by a single stroke of the justices' pen, amounted to $175 billion. And everyone who incurred these expenses is eager to get them back, Reuters reports. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated that the court's decision would likely have serious practical consequences in the near term, including refunds. He noted that oral arguments acknowledged that distributing the refunds would likely be "chaos." But, as is known, the decision was made nonetheless: policy outweighed the economy and norms.

Corporate America has literally lined up to recoup President Donald Trump's emergency tariffs. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Retail Federation were among the industry organizations that immediately sought reimbursement for billions of dollars in duties paid since Trump's tariffs went into effect last year.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent echoed Trump's sentiments, hinting that refunds are unlikely to be paid anytime soon. While they likely won't be immediately, they will be paid out – few will tolerate the extra expenses, and few will pursue legal action against the government.

Financial analysts warned that it would take years for the government to return funds to businesses, noting that the process would be "decided on a case-by-case basis," meaning not all companies would necessarily receive their money back.

Most large American companies have never been involved in lawsuits challenging emergency tariffs. In this regard, Trump could be a pioneer. Now, companies that overpaid will likely turn to the Treasury Department, its agencies, and the courts. Trump's tariffs of last year were too high to tolerate the loss of such large sums.
6 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Paul3390
    Paul3390
    +2
    21 February 2026 08: 42
    Interesting – it was essentially ordinary Americans who paid the duties, but the corporations are supposed to get reimbursed? What a funny scenario!
    1. Ales
      Ales
      0
      22 February 2026 10: 09
      And a good reason to challenge the court's decision if there is no mechanism for returning money to the end buyer.
      When there's demand, consumers always pay more than the product's actual price. Without demand, there's stagnation. Ultimately, people pay for progress, always, until they consider whether they really need it—perhaps they're looking for "paradise in a hut."
  2. Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev
    0
    21 February 2026 10: 23
    IMHO, it looks like someone is lying.
    Trump imposed higher tariffs on imported goods. This meant that foreign capitalists suffered losses.
    and the text talks about some internal corporations.
    If you don't want it, it's not profitable - don't import it. They abolished duties - now import it.
    capitalism, profit, happiness...
    1. Ales
      Ales
      -1
      22 February 2026 10: 21
      A very simplified view. Only a few manufacturers can avoid raising the price of their goods (by eliminating customs duties), i.e., operating at their own expense. The majority of sellers have factored this increase into the price of the goods, and the end consumer will pay for it.
      A highly competitive market and large margins are meaningless (unless there is a monopoly agreement), therefore (there is no excess profit) the manufacturer has no opportunity to fully bear the costs, but the state will most likely lose in income taxes on both sides (lower margin (profit) and lower demand (volume)).
      With a monopoly position in the market, there is even less reason to take on the costs - they will buy it anyway.
      1. Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev
        -2
        22 February 2026 10: 43
        That's understandable. Everyone is passing on the costs to customers, everyone is looking for other suppliers, etc.
        But, for example, have we ever had anything similar, a refund to buyers from the state due to increased tariffs, VAT, customs duties, or prohibitions (for example, importing tangerines from Turkey or wine from Georgia)?
        I haven't heard anything. Although there's a lot of blah-blah.
        And they are rather similar.
  3. kriten
    kriten
    0
    21 February 2026 13: 43
    Getting even $100 back from Trump is an impossible task, no matter what the courts decide.