On February 24, 2026, the Supreme Court struck down the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). It was the most significant US trade court ruling in decades — and the headlines largely got it wrong. The ruling did not end US tariff exposure for most businesses. For many importers and exporters, it changed the nature of the risk rather than eliminating it.
This guide walks through what actually happened, what is currently in effect, what is coming, and what the practical business impact is for companies with trade exposure.
What the Supreme Court actually decided
The Court ruled that IEEPA — the statute the Trump administration used to impose broad tariffs starting in 2025 — does not grant the president authority to impose tariffs unilaterally. The specific tariffs at issue included the across-the-board duties on China, Canada, Mexico, and most other trading partners that went into effect in early 2025 and drove margins down across US import-dependent industries.
The ruling was not narrow. The Court rejected the administration's broad reading of IEEPA and held that tariff authority of this magnitude requires explicit congressional authorization. Existing tariffs imposed under other statutory bases — Section 232, Section 301, Section 122 — were not affected by this ruling and remain in effect.
What is currently in effect
As of April 2026, three major tariff regimes remain in effect and were not touched by the Supreme Court ruling:
- Section 232 tariffs on steel (25%) and aluminum (10%) remain in full effect. These were imposed under national security authority and have been in place since 2018.
- Section 301 tariffs on specific Chinese goods — imposed during the first Trump administration, maintained through Biden, and expected to be extended and expanded — remain in effect for covered categories.
- Section 122 tariffs, imposed after the IEEPA ruling as an emergency measure, are currently set at 10% and are authorized through July 24, 2026.
For Canadian exporters in particular, the Section 122 tariff means that 10% duties remain on US-bound goods until at least late July. The 25% IEEPA tariff that hit hardest in 2025 is gone — but it was not replaced by zero.
What is coming: Section 301 reimposition
On March 11, 2026, the USTR formally opened Section 301 investigations into trade practices across multiple countries. This is the statutory precursor to Section 301 tariffs — the same mechanism used to impose tariffs on Chinese goods during the first Trump term. Treasury Secretary Bessent confirmed in public statements that Section 301 reimposition is the administration's expected policy path after the IEEPA ruling.
The USMCA review window opens July 1, 2026. This creates a natural inflection point: Section 122 tariffs expire July 24, and USMCA reviews could trigger renegotiation of US-Canada and US-Mexico trade terms. The practical effect is that businesses face a summer 2026 period where multiple tariff regimes are in flux simultaneously.
The rate, scope, and timing of Section 301 reimposition are all unknown. The investigations are ongoing. Rates could be calibrated to match or exceed previous IEEPA levels — or they could be targeted at specific categories. Businesses that are planning around a specific outcome are taking on scenario risk they may not recognize.
Refunds and the CAPE portal
On April 20, 2026, US Customs and Border Protection opened the CAPE (Customs Automated Processing and Enforcement) portal for IEEPA tariff refund claims. Businesses that paid IEEPA tariffs between early 2025 and the February 24 ruling date may be eligible to file for refunds on those payments.
Filing for refunds is the right step for businesses that paid IEEPA tariffs. But it is worth being clear about what refunds do and do not provide: they cover the past. They do not provide any protection for forward exposure under Section 301 or the tariff regimes that remain in effect. A refund of tariffs paid in 2025 does not insulate a business from tariffs imposed at unknown rates in the second half of 2026.
The real business impact: uncertainty is the risk
Most coverage of the Supreme Court ruling focused on the tariffs that were struck down. The more important business story is the environment it created: businesses now face a period of genuine uncertainty about what rates will be, when they will go into effect, and which categories will be targeted.
That uncertainty has direct financial consequences. Importers writing purchase orders today are pricing inventory without knowing what the landed cost will be when goods arrive. Exporters signing contracts with US buyers are locking in margins against a rate environment that could shift materially before delivery. CFOs building 2026 plans are modeling tariff scenarios across a wider range than at any point in the past decade.
For businesses with concentrated supply chains — particularly those sourcing heavily from one country or region — the combination of tariff risk and geopolitical supply disruption risk creates a compounding exposure that no traditional insurance product addresses.
What to do now
The practical steps for businesses navigating this environment:
- 1.File for IEEPA refunds. If you paid IEEPA tariffs, the CAPE portal is open. File for refunds on eligible payments before the window closes. This is a near-term cash recovery step, not a risk management strategy.
- 2.Quantify your Section 301 exposure. Run your BOM and sourcing data against Section 301 category lists for your primary sourcing countries. Understand which of your goods would be covered under an expanded Section 301 regime and at what rates your margins become unviable.
- 3.Identify your concentration risk. If any single country represents more than 50% of your supply for a critical input, you have concentration risk worth modeling. This applies to tariff risk from Canada and Mexico as well as geopolitical supply disruption risk for Taiwan and Asia-Pacific sourcing.
- 4.Put financial protection in place before rates are announced. Once Section 301 rates are published, the forward protection cost increases immediately. Businesses that put protection in place during the uncertainty period pay less than those who wait for clarity. The timing asymmetry favors acting now.
The Supreme Court ruling changed which statute the government uses to impose tariffs. It did not change the direction of trade policy. For businesses with material trade exposure, the question is not whether tariffs are coming — it is what rate, and when.