A Democratic senator and small business owners hold a news conference to discuss the impacts of tariffs on businesses, outside the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on September 18, 2025. (BEIYI SEOW/AFP via Getty Images)
The Supreme Court struck down a swath of President Donald Trump's tariffs on Friday, labeling the duties as an example of overreach from the executive branch.
In a 6-3 decision, the high court was clear on its responsibility to uphold the separation of powers in American government. But the nine justices were silent on a separate — and thorny — multibillion-dollar question affecting U.S. businesses: Are importers entitled to tariff refunds?
For now, the Supreme Court didn't decide either way. It punted the decision in a move that adds to uncertainty for companies wondering if they'll be able to reclaim tariff money already paid to the federal government.
The dissenting opinion from Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged the possible refund process could quickly sink into a bureaucratic quagmire.
"The Court says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers," Kavanaugh wrote. "But that process is likely to be a 'mess.'"
Estimates vary on the amount of tariffs that the U.S. government collected under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, otherwise known as IEEPA. The Yale Budget Lab said the government had collected $142 billion in tariff revenue through 2025 under the disputed executive authority.
Other projections are bigger, accounting for the start of 2026. On Friday, the nonpartisan Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated that $175 billion in tariffs may have to be refunded.
Over 1,000 companies selling imported consumer goods had lined up to challenge the Trump administration's tariff policy in court, arguing taxation powers rest with the legislative branch. The tariffs forced many firms to scramble and reorder supply chains to become less reliant on nations such as China, long a source of mass-produced, cheap products like toys and furniture.
Costco $COST was among the most prominent corporations that filed a lawsuit against the White House late last year. About a third of Costco's products originate from overseas, and one trade expert estimated that the company could get a $1 billion payout from the U.S. government in a refund scenario.
Other corporate household brands involved in ongoing litigation include Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., sneaker company Reebok, and the camera maker GoPro.
But not every U.S. company has the financial heft to withstand hits to their profits or the ability to switch up supply chains. We Pay the Tariffs, a small business advocacy group, demanded the Trump administration issue "full, fast, and automatic refunds" to smaller companies facing enormous financial strain.
"Small businesses cannot afford to wait months or years while bureaucratic delays play out, nor can they afford expensive litigation just to recover money that was unlawfully collected from them in the first place," Executive Director Dan Anthony said in a Friday statement.
Trump first implemented the tariffs in April as a lever to reshuffle global trade in favor of the U.S. and striking new trade accords.
One past wave of tariff refunds had caught the eye of trade experts and other analysts attempting to map out how the process could be structured. The Supreme Court in 1998 struck down a harbor maintenance tax first placed on maritime exports during the Reagan administration.
The high court ordered immediate refunds. CBP's predecessor agency set up a process in which in which exporters could file a claim and demonstrate they paid duties on imports in the preceding five years.
The tariff revenue at stake, though, was much smaller in scope compared to Trump's universal levies. In the event of court-ordered refunds, many businesses will have to jump through additional hoops to secure them since the Trump administration doesn't appear inclined to return the money.
