""It wasn't discussed," he said. "Wouldn't you think they would have put one sentence in there saying, 'keep the money or don't keep the money,' right?" he asked in response to a reporter's question about refunds. "I guess it has to get litigated for the next two years. So they write this terrible, defective decision, totally defective. It's almost like not written by smart people," he said."
"The court ruled that the president doesn't have the power to "unilaterally impose unbounded tariffs and change them at will." The justices found that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not clearly authorize the president to impose tariffs, meaning the government collected the fees illegally."
"The only time the court addressed refunds was in Justice Brett Kavanaugh's dissenting opinion, in which he said the decision would likely generate "serious practical consequences in the near term." "The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even"
Multiple companies sued in the Court of International Trade seeking preemptive refunds if the Supreme Court ruled against the administration's tariffs. Penn-Wharton economists estimate potential refunds could exceed $175 billion. The Supreme Court held that the president cannot unilaterally impose unlimited tariffs under the IEEPA, finding the statute does not clearly authorize such tariff authority and concluding the government collected the fees illegally. The president criticized the decision and announced a new global 10% tariff. Justice Kavanaugh warned the ruling may produce serious near-term practical consequences, including large refund liabilities.
Read at Axios
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]