BLOG

BLOG

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the legality of Trump’s tariffs on China; market forecasts suggest a high probability that this ruling will be overturned.

Category: Company News

Release time: 2026-01-09

Overview: On January 9, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue its final ruling on the global tariff policies imposed during former President Trump’s term under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The ruling will focus directly on two key tariff measures: first, the 10% “fentanyl tariff” imposed on countries including China under the pretext of combating fentanyl; and second, the additional tariffs ranging from 10% to 50%, imposed based on the so-called “reciprocity” principle. The outcome of this ruling will have far-reaching implications for U.S.-China trade, global supply chains, and the boundaries of the U.S. president’s trade authority.

  On January 9, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue its final ruling on the global tariff policies imposed during former President Trump’s term under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The ruling will focus directly on two key tariff measures: first, the 10% “fentanyl tariff” imposed on countries including China under the pretext of combating fentanyl; and second, the additional tariffs ranging from 10% to 50%, imposed based on the so-called “reciprocity” principle. The outcome of this ruling will have far-reaching implications for U.S.-China trade, global supply chains, and the boundaries of the U.S. president’s trade authority.

  It is reported that since its introduction, this tariff policy has been mired in legal controversy, and the U.S. domestic judicial system has repeatedly questioned its legality. Previously, both the U.S. Court of International Trade and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that imposing additional tariffs based on the IEEPA “exceeded the president’s authority” and constituted an overreach. During the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in November 2025, most of the justices also raised clear doubts about the government’s defense arguments. Based on these series of pre-judicial signals, numerous market institutions generally predict that the likelihood of the Supreme Court overturning this tariff policy is relatively high.

  If the ruling ultimately finds that the relevant tariffs are unlawful, it will trigger a series of cascading economic repercussions. The most immediate impact will be a potential reduction of up to 20% in the additional tariff rates imposed by the U.S. on Chinese goods. U.S. companies that have already paid these tariffs can apply to customs for refunds, and estimates suggest the total amount of refunds could exceed 100 billion U.S. dollars. This move will significantly improve the cash flow situation of importing companies and is expected to help ease ongoing inflationary pressures in the U.S. in the short term.

  In the face of potential judicial setbacks, the Trump administration has already sent out advance signals indicating that if the IEEPA is ruled invalid, it will consider invoking other trade law provisions to re-implement its tariff policies. However, legal experts point out that these alternative provisions not only involve longer and more cumbersome procedures but also impose stricter evidentiary requirements. This means that, in the short term, the U.S. will face substantial limitations on its ability to swiftly impose additional tariffs through administrative measures.

  Analysts generally believe that if the tariff policies are significantly rolled back, it will have multiple impacts on the global economic landscape. From a U.S. perspective, the growth rate of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) is expected to slow down in 2026. At the global supply-chain level, tensions are likely to ease temporarily. For China, export-oriented enterprises will gain valuable breathing room, and cross-border e-commerce as well as certain manufacturing orders may begin to flow back home. Meanwhile, Southeast Asian countries that have recently taken on industrial chain transfers could face short-term industrial fluctuations.

  It is worth noting that the significance of this ruling extends far beyond the trade policy itself. As the first time since Trump’s return to the White House that the Supreme Court has ruled on the legality of his core policies, this case will, in the long run, define the legal boundaries of the U.S. President’s trade authority and clarify the division of powers and responsibilities between the executive and legislative branches in the realm of trade. Consequently, it has attracted widespread attention from the international community.