The tariffs ruled "illegal" by the US Supreme Court are coming to an end! The seamless transition of a 15% global new tax.

The United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced that it will stop collecting retaliatory tariffs imposed by the U.S. government under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) starting at 12:01 am Eastern Time on Tuesday - more than three days after the Supreme Court declared these tariffs to be "illegal." The government agency stated in a message sent to shippers through its Cargo Systems Messaging Service (CSMS) that it will deactivate all tariff policy codes related to previous executive orders by President Trump under the IEEPA. The official halt of IEEPA tariff collection closely coincides with President Trump implementing new 15% global tariffs under a different law to replace the IEEPA tariffs that were ruled invalid by the Supreme Court last Friday. CBP did not explain why they continued to collect these tariffs at ports of entry after the Supreme Court ruling, and their official statement did not provide any information on potential tariff refunds for importers. The message indicated that the cessation of collection does not impact any other tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, such as those based on Section 232 national security regulations or Section 301 unfair trade practices regulations. "CBP will provide further guidance to the trade community through CSMS messages based on specific circumstances," the agency stated. The so-called "reciprocal/harmonization tariffs" introduced on the April "Liberation Day" in 2025 that triggered a global stock market crash were one of the tariffs implemented by the Trump administration under the IEEPA. However, strictly speaking, IEEPA tariffs include not only the "Liberation Day tariffs" but also other tariffs imposed under the name of IEEPA (such as certain tariffs/commands related to fentanyl). Media reports on Friday indicated that according to estimates from economists at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School Budget Model, the Supreme Court's tariff ruling could potentially lead to over $175 billion in tariff refunds from revenue generated by the IEEPA tariffs. Their estimates based on a bottom-up forecasting model suggested that IEEPA tariffs brought in over $500 million in revenue daily. Despite President Trump telling reporters after the Supreme Court ruling that the U.S. government would soon impose 15% global tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, it is unclear whether the government will need to refund the tariffs already collected. The market's concerns about a significant deterioration in U.S. finances due to tariff refunds led to a notable rise in long-term U.S. Treasury yields following the Supreme Court's decision, signaling a collective negative response from traders when assessing the risks of expanding U.S. budget deficits. The Supreme Court justices did not address the issue of whether importers have the right to receive refunds, leaving it to lower U.S. courts to decide, potentially leading to a prolonged legal battle over tariff refunds. Trump criticized the Supreme Court for not providing guidance on how to handle refunds. "It was not discussed. It means we will just sue in court for five years," Trump said in a White House press conference last Friday. After announcing the 15% global tariffs, Trump stated that he would retain existing import tariffs under the framework of Sections 301 and 232, hinting at initiating more trade investigations. According to the latest fact sheet from the White House, Trump has instructed the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to initiate investigations under Section 301. For Asian economies heavily reliant on exports, a study from the economic team at Wall Street financial giant Morgan Stanley showed that the weighted average tariff rate would decrease from 20% to 17%, with the average tariff rate for Chinese goods significantly dropping from 32% to 24%. However, given that the Trump administration is seeking to rebuild its tariff system through industry-specific and economic entity-based tariffs, this relief may only be temporary, meaning significantly higher than 10% current tariffs on countries like China, India, and Vietnam may be maintained or adjusted through other specific terms. Nevertheless, Wall Street analysts generally believe that replicating the retaliatory tariff pattern previously deemed illegal by the Supreme Court may pose difficulties for the Trump administration, suggesting close attention to changes in the attitudes of the U.S. Congress and voters.