In this section

U.S. Supreme Court Blocks Broad Use of IEEPA Tariffs

| General Government Relations

On February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Trump Administration exceeded its authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by imposing sweeping tariffs.
 
“The Supreme Court’s decision today on the IEEPA tariffs is an important ruling on a topic that is of great importance to our members. We are closely watching how the Court’s ruling will be implemented and its impact on U.S. tariff and trade policy over the coming weeks and months,” said Frank Hugelmeyer, President and CEO of NMMA. “Approximately 95 percent of the boats sold in this country are made right here in America. Boat manufacturers contribute $230 billion to the U.S. economy and support more than 800,000 American jobs, many in small communities. Their continued success depends on stable access to global markets and a trade policy framework that is predictable and strategic. As we approach the nation’s 250th anniversary, we urge the Administration and Congress to advance policies that strengthen legacy American industries like recreational boat manufacturing.”
 
The Court affirmed prior rulings by the Court of International Trade and the Federal Circuit, which noted that certain tariff powers are reserved to Congress and that the Administration’s use of IEEPA does not explicitly authorize tariffs.
 
The decision invalidates the 10% baseline tariff and related measures imposed under IEEPA. This decision does not affect measures issued under other trade laws, such as Section 232 (national security) or Section 301 (unfair trade practices). Existing tariffs on autos, steel and aluminum remain in place. 
 
What’s Next for IEEPA and Potential Refunds?
  • The Administration cannot impose new tariffs under IEEPA, but could impose licensing measures.
  • Customs will need time to adjust collection processes. 
  • SCOTUS’ decision sends the case back to the U.S. Court of International Trade, which will now oversee the next steps.
  • Uncertainty remains on how IEEPA tariff revenues will be refunded. Additional litigation could unfold as businesses seek repayment.
 
Other Tariff Options the Administration Could Consider:
  • Section 122, Trade Act of 1974: Raises tariffs to 15% on countries for 150 days due to trade imbalances, BUT Congress must approve an extension beyond 150 days.
  • Section 338, Trade Act of 1930: Imposes tariffs up to 50% for “unfair practices.”
  • Section 301, Trade Act of 1974: Targets specific countries for “unfair or discriminatory” acts, members would be most familiar with these tariffs on products from China as it has remained in place since the first Trump Administration.
  •  Section 232, Trade Act of 1962: Imposes tariffs or quotas, BUT requires an investigation within 270 days (e.g., aluminum and steel tariffs).
 
NMMA will continue to monitor and share updates as they become available, including any developments concerning tariff authority or trade policy. For questions or feedback, contact Clay Crabtree, Senior Director of Public Policy, at [email protected].