In a decision that reshapes the mechanics of U.S. trade policy, the U.S. Supreme Court has curtailed the use of emergency powers to impose broad import tariffs.
The outcome is not the removal of tariffs, but a shift in how they are applied and a potential window to recover previously paid duties.
On 20 February, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump did not have authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs on general imports, including duties affecting EU and UK exports.
The Court determined that tariffs constitute taxation and therefore require clear Congressional approval. As a result, tariffs introduced solely under that statute are no longer legally supported.
However, the ruling does not eliminate U.S. tariffs altogether. It narrows the legal pathway through which they can be introduced.
Existing programmes remain fully active:
- Section 301 tariffs addressing unfair trade practices
- Section 232 national security tariffs
- Section 201 safeguard measures
Replacement tariff: Section 122 Global Surcharge
In response to the ruling, the U.S. administration introduced a 10% global import surcharge under Section 122 of the Trade Act, effective 24 November.
Unlike the invalidated emergency tariffs, Section 122 is legally defined and time-limited:
- Maximum duration: 150 days (unless extended by Congress)
- Maximum rate: 15% (currently set at 10%)
- Intended purpose: short-term balance-of-payments stabilisation
The UK continues to seek clarity on whether it will remain at 10% under its previously negotiated arrangement, should the global rate rise toward 15%. At present, the majority of existing UK–US trade measures – including sector-specific arrangements on cars, steel and pharmaceuticals – are not expected to change.
The EU has placed elements of its own U.S. tariff understanding on hold pending further developments.
Refund recovery: a potential opportunity
The more immediate operational issue concerns duties already paid under the invalidated measures. Businesses are expected to pursue substantial refund claims, potentially exceeding $200bn.
Depending on entry status, recovery mechanisms may include:
- Post-summary corrections for unliquidated entries
- Formal protests submitted within statutory deadlines
- Litigation before the U.S. Court of International Trade for older entries
Full procedural guidance has yet to be published by federal agencies. Nevertheless, importers should begin preparing documentation immediately, including:
- Identification of affected entries
- Verification of duty payments
- Coordination of any drawback claims
- Preservation of statutory deadlines
Customs compliance in this environment is no longer routine administration; it has become a matter of financial risk management and cash recovery strategy.
How Metro can support you
Metro is closely monitoring federal guidance, reviewing agency communications and assessing operational implications across customs entry processes.
We recommend that businesses trading with the United States initiate an internal review of potentially affected entries without delay. Our U.S. customs specialists can help assess exposure, identify recovery pathways and support documentation preparation to protect your position.
As further clarity emerges, we will continue to provide timely updates and practical guidance.
EMAIL Andrew Smith, Managing Director, to learn how Metro can help you review your refund situation, mitigate new tariff regime, and protect your supply chain from volatility.




