Here's a twist in the long-running saga of U.S. trade policy: one set of tariffs is getting switched off, while the administration says the deals they helped forge are still very much on.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency announced it will stop collecting tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as of 12:01 a.m. EST on Tuesday. This comes just three days after a Supreme Court ruling that struck down the legal basis for those particular duties. The agency says it will disable all the tariff codes connected to former President Donald Trump's IEEPA-related orders.
But before anyone starts celebrating or panicking about a total tariff unwind, it's crucial to note what's not changing. All the other tariffs introduced during the Trump administration—including those enacted under the Section 232 national security provision and the Section 301 statute targeting unfair trade practices—are staying right where they are. This isn't a blanket repeal; it's a surgical removal of one specific tool.
So what happens to all the trade agreements that were negotiated, in part, under the shadow of those IEEPA tariffs? According to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, they're still valid. Greer said the White House will "stand by" the trade deals it has reached with partner nations, despite the Supreme Court's ruling. He argued that the countries that finalized deals with the U.S., including the European Union, Japan, and South Korea, did so independently of the Court's decision. The agreements were "not premised" on its outcome, he said.
It's a bit of a diplomatic tightrope walk. Greer acknowledged that the administration now lacks the "same flexibility that IEEPA" offered. That law gave the president broad powers to declare a national emergency and impose economic restrictions. Without it, the playbook is different. Yet, Greer anticipates "continuity" in the president's overall tariff program. The message seems to be: the goals haven't changed, even if one method of achieving them has been taken off the table.
The political and economic reaction to the court's decision has been swift. President Trump framed the ruling as "anti-American" and announced a countermove: hiking the baseline global tariff rate to 15% from 10%. This appears to be an attempt to maintain pressure and revenue through other channels. The political calculus here is interesting, as a YouGov poll indicated that 60% of Americans actually supported the court's decision, largely associating Trump's tariff agenda with higher consumer prices.
On the fiscal side, the ruling creates a massive accounting headache. It struck down billions in tariffs collected under IEEPA, potentially forcing the government to refund an estimated $130–175 billion. That's not pocket change, even for the U.S. Treasury.
Yet, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent offered a surprisingly calm assessment on Friday. He said the Trump administration expects U.S. tariff revenue to remain "virtually unchanged" in 2026, despite the ruling. How is that possible? The implication is that other tariffs—the surviving Section 232 and 301 duties, plus the newly announced global rate hike—will pick up the slack. Bessent noted that authorities have not yet been instructed to repay the funds collected under IEEPA, acknowledging the situation remains "uncertain." In other words, the money might be owed, but the process for returning it, or perhaps legally avoiding it, is still up in the air.
The bottom line? Tuesday marks the end of a specific chapter in U.S. trade enforcement, but not the end of the story. The administration is signaling that its trade relationships, forged in a more aggressive era, will endure. And it's already deploying other tools to keep the pressure on. For businesses and trading partners, it's a reminder that in the world of tariffs, when one door closes, another one often opens—sometimes with a higher rate attached.
