The court heard arguments in early November. Both conservative- and liberal-leaning justices asked skeptical questions of the method by which the president imposed his most sweeping duties. Trump imposed his tariffs by invoking a 1977 law meant for national emergencies.<\/p>\n
The Trump administration also made appeals to the court last year, and in recent weeks Trump has frequently expressed<\/a> concern over the ruling, saying losing the ability to tariff other countries would be a “terrible blow” to the US. On Monday, he went even further.<\/p>\n “If the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE\u2019RE SCREWED!” he wrote on social media.<\/p>\n US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview<\/a> that if the high court rules against Trump’s tariffs \u2014 which he still views as unlikely \u2014 the US Treasury has more than enough funds to cover the costs of any refunds. But Bessent said he thinks businesses won’t be passing those refunds back to consumers.<\/p>\n “It won’t be a problem if we have to do it, but \u200dI can tell you that if it happens \u2014 which I don’t think it’s going to \u2014 it’s just a corporate boondoggle,” Bessent told Reuters. “Costco, who’s suing the US government, are they going to \u200bgive the money back to their clients?”<\/p>\n Read more: What Trump promised with his ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs \u2014 and what he delivered<\/a><\/p>\n LIVE 18 updates <\/p>\n Trump says ‘we’re screwed’ if SCOTUS rules against tariffs <\/p>\n President Trump on Monday was characteristically blunt as he reemphasized the stakes he sees for his administration and the US as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on the legality of his most sweeping tariffs.<\/p>\n “If the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE\u2019RE SCREWED!” Trump posted on Truth Social.<\/p>\n Trump has gone on the warpath since the case was argued in November, painting the high court’s decision as critical to his economic policy agenda. Both conservative- and liberal-leaning justices asked skeptical questions of the method by which the president imposed his most sweeping duties. Trump imposed his tariffs by invoking a 1977 law meant for national emergencies.<\/p>\n Trump on Monday cited trade agreements the US has struck with a number of countries that have included pledges for the countries to invest in the US. Combined with other potential “refunds” \u2014 most prominently to companies that have already sued the government in the lead-up to the Supreme Court’s ruling \u2014 Trump said it would add up to a “mess.”<\/p>\n He wrote: “Anybody who says that it can be quickly and easily done would be making a false, inaccurate, or totally misunderstood answer to this very large and complex question. It may not be possible but, if it were, it would be Dollars that would be so large that it would take many years to figure out what number we are talking about and even, who, when, and where, to pay.<\/p>\n The one-year trade truce between the US and China risks derailment after President Trump on Monday announced new tariffs on goods from countries trading with Iran. China, the world’s largest buyer of Iranian oil, could be affected, raising concerns that the move may strain the truce with China’s President Xi Jinping.<\/p>\n These latest threats come a few months after a deal between Washington and Beijing was clinched, which led China to remove export restrictions on rare earths and the US, in return, paused its tariffs on Beijing.<\/p>\n Bloomberg News reports:<\/p>\n Read more here. <\/a><\/p>\n The AP reports:<\/a><\/p>\n Read more here. <\/a><\/p>\n President Trump tweeted on Monday:<\/p>\n The move is set to increase pressure on Tehran as its government has faced mass protests in recent days. Trump has threatened military action against Iran, saying the US would hit Iran “very hard” if it continued to use force against protesters.<\/p>\n The order would risk complicating trade relationships with several partners that also trade with Iran. Notably, those countries include China and India.<\/p>\n The US has announced it will hold a G-7 meeting this week to discuss rare earths, underscoring the need to develop alternative supplies away from China, which currently dominates the industry.<\/p>\n In the recent one-year trade truce established between the US and China last year, Beijing promised to lift export restrictions on rare earth materials. However, China’s spat with Japan has led it to restrict supplies to Tokyo, leading to concerns among other countries that rely on rare earths for crucial technology and automotive components.<\/p>\n Bloomberg News reports:<\/p>\n Read more here.<\/a><\/p>\n Bloomberg News reports:<\/a><\/p>\n Read more here. <\/a><\/p>\n European Union countries have approved the Mercosur trade deal with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay, a massive free-trade agreement aimed at countering the EU’s dependence on the US and China for trade, the Wall Street Journal reports:<\/p>\n Read more here.<\/a><\/p>\n The widely expected impact of President Trump’s tariffs on prices for everyday goods imported from overseas has yet to materialize (with some notable exceptions). But as CNN reports, the tariffs have already had a chilling effect on the job market, with job growth at its lowest in decades and unemployment creeping higher<\/p>\n Read more here.<\/a><\/p>\n Sat, January 10, 2026 at 12:55 PM UTC Bessent says US Treasury has enough funds to cover potential tariff refunds <\/p>\n Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Friday that he still doubts the US Supreme Court will rule President Trump’s tariffs to be unconstitutional, but that the US Treasury has more than enough funds to provide tariff refunds if that’s what the high court orders. Any such repayments would be spread out up to a year, Bessent told Reuters:<\/p>\n Read more here<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Supreme Court said Wednesday, Jan. 14, would be the next time it issues opinions \u2014 and therefore the next time it could rule on the tariff case.<\/p>\n Of course, a decision on tariffs is not guaranteed, as today showed. The court simply says that rulings on already argued cases are possible when it sets these dates.<\/p>\n We’ll keep circling these on our calendars!<\/p>\n The Supreme Court did not issue a ruling in the case centered on President Trump’s tariffs on Friday, the first day the high court is in session in 2026.<\/p>\n Market watchers had circled Friday as a potential date for the tariff verdict. But the court issued only one opinion today.<\/p>\n The court is in session next week, though it is unclear when they may next issue rulings.<\/p>\n From Bloomberg<\/a>:<\/p>\n Read more here<\/a>.<\/p>\n The ever-increasing complexity of the US tariff landscape has been in evidence for months, but the dawn of 2026 provides a direct measure of just how much additional paperwork US importers must wade through one year into Trump 2.0.<\/p>\n The benchmark of tariff complexity is the so-called tariff book \u2014 formally known as the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States<\/a> \u2014 which is the central reference point for importers on what they have to pay the government.<\/p>\n The “basic” version for 2026 was just released and clocks in at over 4,500 pages. That’s more than 100 pages longer than last year (and an 800-page increase from 2017, when Trump first took office).<\/p>\n It’s just one indicator of the increased complexity that comes with a large dash of uncertainty for businesses so far in 2026 as the Supreme Court weighs how much of this new maze of regulations will pass legal muster.<\/p>\n The looming Supreme Court decision, which could be handed down as soon as Friday morning, is already presenting market risks<\/a>. The complexity issue comes in addition to the tariffs themselves, which the Yale Budget Lab calculates at an average rate<\/a> for consumers of 16.8%.<\/p>\n Read more here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Reuters reports:<\/p>\n Read more from Reuters here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Markets are bracing for any fallout that may come from the Supreme Court’s ruling on whether or not President Trump’s blanket tariffs are legal.<\/p>\n Bloomberg reports:<\/p>\n Read more from Bloomberg<\/a>.<\/p>\n The US Supreme Court’s potential decision on President Trump’s tariffs will be a closely watched event on Friday. If the court were to shut down the , it could cause financial markets to roil, as they did in April, when tariffs were first introduced.<\/p>\n Reuters reports:<\/p>\n Read more here. <\/a><\/p>\n Reuters reports:<\/a><\/p>\n Read more here. <\/a><\/p>\n Before President Trump introduced his “Liberation Day” tariffs, the average tariff rate was 2.5%; however, by the end of 2025, that percentage had risen to 15% or more, and experts don’t see that figure coming down in 2026.<\/p>\n Trump may have removed tariffs on staples such as coffee, but the likelihood of the president broadly reducing tariff rates seems slim.<\/p>\n Yahoo Finance’s Washington Correspondent Ben Werschkul<\/a> looks into the rise in tariff rates and whether a US Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s tariffs and even the midterm elections could impact them.<\/p>\n![\"Jenny](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768300090_361_dims.jpeg\")
Trump risks imploding China trade truce with Iran Tariff vow <\/p>\n China and the EU agree on steps to resolve their dispute over EV imports <\/p>\n![\"Brett](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768300090_596_dims.jpeg\")
Mon, January 12, 2026 at 10:34 PM UTC Trump says he’s putting 25% tariffs on goods from countries that do business with Iran <\/p>\n Mon, January 12, 2026 at 12:38 PM UTC US hosts meeting on rare earths as China-Japan spat simmers <\/p>\n Mon, January 12, 2026 at 10:56 AM UTC Europe and China\u2019s feud over chips is reaching a breaking point <\/p>\n![\"Yahoo](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768300090_331_dims.jpeg\")
Sun, January 11, 2026 at 4:57 PM UTC EU countries approve Mercosur deal partly in response to US tariffs <\/p>\n Sat, January 10, 2026 at 4:15 PM UTC Trump’s tariffs are having a bigger impact on hiring than on most prices \u2014 so far <\/p>\n Fri, January 9, 2026 at 6:30 PM UTC The Supreme Court’s next potential tariff decision day <\/p>\n Fri, January 9, 2026 at 3:10 PM UTC Supreme Court will not rule on tariffs today <\/p>\n Fri, January 9, 2026 at 1:30 PM UTC Lutnick: Modi’s failure to call Trump stalled potential trade deal <\/p>\n![\"Ben](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768300091_610_dims.jpeg\")
Fri, January 9, 2026 at 12:00 PM UTC How much more complex Trump 2.0 tariffs are \u2014 and how much the Supreme Court could roll things back <\/p>\n![\"Keith](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768300091_671_dims.jpeg\")
Fri, January 9, 2026 at 8:01 AM UTC Importers brace for $150 billion tariff refund fight if Trump loses at Supreme Court <\/p>\n Fri, January 9, 2026 at 4:00 AM UTC A US trader\u2019s guide to the Supreme Court\u2019s looming tariff ruling <\/p>\n Fri, January 9, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC Market risk mounts as Supreme Court weighs Trump’s emergency tariff powers <\/p>\n Thu, January 8, 2026 at 8:00 PM UTC US October trade deficit lowest since 2009 as imports decline <\/p>\n Thu, January 8, 2026 at 3:46 PM UTC US tariff rates ended 2025 above 15%. Experts don’t expect them to come down much in 2026. <\/p>\n