How could the administration’s refusal to implement court‑ordered tariff refunds reshape legal precedent for trade‑related adjudication and affect import‑dependent industries’ risk calculus?
The Supreme Court's February 20, 2026 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump invalidated tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), creating an unprecedented situation where the federal government may owe between $130 billion and $175 billion in refunds to American importersFederal court rejects Trump administration attempt to slow tariff refund processnbcnews +1. The administration's subsequent resistance to implementing court-ordered refunds has triggered what legal scholars describe as a potential constitutional crisis, with far-reaching implications for trade law precedent, judicial authority, and the operational calculus of every import-dependent business in the United States.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a 6-3 majority that included two Trump appointees, held that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs Supreme Court Strikes Down IEEPA Tariffs | Authority Limited morganlewis . The Court emphasized that Article I vests the taxing power—including tariffs—in Congress alone, and the executive has no inherent peacetime tariff authority Supreme Court Strikes Down IEEPA Tariffs | Authority Limited morganlewis . Applying the major questions doctrine, the majority concluded that when Congress delegates the power to tariff, "it does so explicitly and subject to strict limits, including through capping the amount and duration of tariffs and subjecting them to demanding procedural prerequisites" Supreme Court Strikes Down IEEPA Tariffs | Authority Limited morganlewis .
The ruling was unambiguous in its substance but silent on remedies. Justice Brett Kavanaugh warned in dissent that the process would be a "mess" and could have "serious practical consequences," noting that the majority "says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers"A constitutional check: Supreme Court reins in presidential tariff authoritynaturalnews +1.
On March 4, 2026, Judge Richard Eaton of the Court of International Trade issued an order that went further than many expected, directing Customs and Border Protection to liquidate all unliquidated entries "without regard to IEEPA duties" and to reliquidate any liquidated entries for which liquidation is not yet finalCourt of International Trade Orders Nationwide Tariff Refunds, But ...hklaw +1. Most significantly, Judge Eaton ruled that "all importers of record whose entries were subject to IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit of the Learning Resources decision"—meaning they need not file individual lawsuitsJudge rules companies are entitled to refunds for tariffs - Los Angeles Timeslatimes +1.
The CIT's assertion of nationwide relief represents a potentially transformative development in trade law. Judge Eaton concluded that the prohibition on nationwide injunctions articulated in Trump v. CASA, Inc. does not apply to the CIT because Congress expressly granted the court exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over international trade matters under the Customs Courts Act of 1980U.S. Court of International Trade Orders Refunds of IEEPA Tariffsclearytradewatch +1. The Supreme Court itself recognized this exclusive jurisdiction in Learning Resources by dismissing for lack of jurisdiction a case on tariffs that had been brought in a regular U.S. District CourtPolicy Backgrounder: Tariffs Refund Ruling and Next Stepsconference-board .
To ensure procedural efficiency and prevent conflicting rulings, the Chief Judge of the CIT assigned Judge Eaton to hear all cases pertaining to IEEPA duty refundsPolicy Backgrounder: Tariffs Refund Ruling and Next Stepsconference-board . As the court stated, "to find otherwise would be to thwart the efficient administration of justice and to deny those importers who have filed suit the efficient resolution of their claims, and to deny entirely importers who have not filed suit the benefit of the Learning Resources decision"Policy Backgrounder: Tariffs Refund Ruling and Next Stepsconference-board .
The administration's response has combined requests for delay with claims of administrative impossibility. The Department of Justice urged the Federal Circuit to hold off for 90 days, but the judges refusedFederal court rejects Trump administration attempt to slow tariff refund processnbcnews . At the CIT hearing, the government asserted that "it is not our position that every single entry and every importer will get a refund. Our position is that you have to file a claim in this court which is why over 2,000 companies have filed claims"Court of International Trade Orders Nationwide Tariff Refunds, But ...hklaw .
CBP has cited the capacity limitations of its Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system. Brandon Lord, a top CBP official, filed a declaration stating the agency cannot comply with the judge's order to automatically dispense refundsTrump tariffs live updates: US customs agency works on tariff refund process after pressure from judgeyahoo . The agency claims that processing refunds for more than 330,000 importers with millions of entries would require more than 4.4 million man-hoursTariff refund system will be ready in 45 days, U.S. customs agency saysyoutube . CBP has requested an additional 45-day period to develop a new processing systemTrump tariffs: Customs and Border Protection tells judge it can't comply with refund orderyoutube .
Yet these claims face scrutiny. CBP's own documentation shows that the agency has been modernizing payment processes and that in 2024 and 2025, approximately 30% of refunds were already issued electronically[PDF] Customs Bulletin, Vol 60, January 21, 2026, No. 3cbp . Beginning February 6, 2026, CBP implemented a rule requiring all refunds to be issued electronically through the ACE system[PDF] Customs Bulletin, Vol 60, January 21, 2026, No. 3cbp +1. CBP even developed an automated review process in ACE specifically to handle increased applications, investing $1,478,004 in development costs Federal Register :: Electronic Refunds federalregister .
Critics note the contradiction between claiming technical impossibility while simultaneously implementing an electronic refund system. As former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal observed, the government obtained favorable procedural rulings by promising refunds would be guaranteed, simple, and prompt—promises that were binding legal commitmentsTrump's tariff subterfuge defies the Supreme Court - The Seattle Timesseattletimes . Every IEEPA tariff payment was processed through the ACE system with precision, recording importer identity, entry number, commodity classification, and payment dateTrump's tariff subterfuge defies the Supreme Court - The Seattle Timesseattletimes . The federal government "does not simply misplace $164.7 billion"Trump's tariff subterfuge defies the Supreme Court - The Seattle Timesseattletimes .
The tariff refund situation must be understood within the broader context of escalating tensions between the executive branch and the judiciary. According to one analysis, the White House has defied one out of every three judicial rulings that have prohibited the president's actionsLWVWI Issues Briefing 2025 Session 1 Recording (The Crisis in Our Executive Branch)youtube . In the first six months of the administration alone, courts in at least 12 cases found that the administration violated one or more court ordersThe Trump administration's conflict with the courts, explainedprotectdemocracy .
This pattern has been described as "legalistic noncompliance"—stretching law, fact, and reason to cover up clear violations of explicit court orders, reflecting a reasoned political risk assessment that the administration cannot afford to acknowledge disregarding courts outright but can pretend to comply and hope the public does not noticeExecutive Defiance of Judicial Orders and the Response of the Legal ...democracydefendersfund . The administration has employed various tactics to avoid complying with court orders, including citing administrative error, frustrating inquiries by litigants and courts, and making baseless legal claimsThe Trump administration's conflict with the courts, explainedprotectdemocracy +1.
The current situation has limited historical parallels. In Worcester v. Georgia (1832), President Andrew Jackson took no action to enforce a Supreme Court ruling, reportedly remarking that the Court's decision was "still born" and that the Court was unable to "coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate"Executive Enforcement of Judicial Orders | Federal Judicial Centerfjc . In Ex parte Merryman (1861), President Abraham Lincoln ignored Chief Justice Roger Taney's ruling that Lincoln had overstepped his constitutional authority by suspending habeas corpus; federal troops refused to honor the order and refused to transmit a contempt order to their commanding officerExecutive Enforcement of Judicial Orders | Federal Judicial Centerfjc +1.
However, as the National Constitution Center's Jeffrey Rosen notes, "The Supreme Court has never been defied. You haven't had an authoritative order that a president's refused to carry out"Are we heading toward a constitutional crisis?youtube . The tariff refund situation could become the first such instance.
Federal courts possess contempt powers that the Supreme Court has recognized as "essential to... the enforcement of the judgments, orders, and writs of the courts"What Courts Can Do If the Trump Administration Defies Court Orders | Brennan Center for Justicebrennancenter . These include:
Civil Contempt: Remedial sanctions designed to coerce compliance, such as daily fines that accrue until an order is complied with. In 2022, a New York state court held President Trump in civil contempt and fined him $110,000 total for failure to turn over documentsWhat Courts Can Do If the Trump Administration Defies Court Orders | Brennan Center for Justicebrennancenter .
Criminal Contempt: Punitive sanctions including fines and up to six months in jailA Federal Judge Is on the Brink of Criminally Prosecuting Trump Officials for Contemptslate . However, the president has the power to pardon those convicted of criminal contemptWhat Courts Can Do If the Trump Administration Defies Court Orders | Brennan Center for Justicebrennancenter .
Individual Accountability: Courts can identify and hold accountable the individual officials responsible for defiance. As one Minnesota federal judge stated: "The court is not aware of another occasion in the history of the United States in which a federal court has had to threaten contempt again and again and again to force the United States government to comply with court orders"Judge threatens criminal contempt against US Attorney's Officeyoutube +1.
Professional Sanctions: Courts can sanction attorneys who help clients deliberately defy court orders, including fines, suspension, or disbarmentWhat Courts Can Do If the Trump Administration Defies Court Orders | Brennan Center for Justicebrennancenter .
The fundamental enforcement challenge is that federal courts ultimately rely on law enforcement—specifically the U.S. Marshals Service, which is part of the Justice Department—to enforce penaltiesWhat Courts Can Do If the Trump Administration Defies Court Orders | Brennan Center for Justicebrennancenter . If a federal judge orders that a DOJ supervisor or Cabinet official be held until compliance, would the Marshals comply? They are under statutory requirement to enforce court orders but are ultimately also an agency under the DOJJudges Have One Defense Against Trump They (Mostly) Haven’t Used Yetnewrepublic . Scholars argue that judges could deputize others, potentially state or local police officers, to carry out arrests, but this is difficult to imagine in practiceJudges Have One Defense Against Trump They (Mostly) Haven’t Used Yetnewrepublic .
One mechanism that could theoretically resolve the impasse is the federal Judgment Fund, a permanent, indefinite appropriation available to pay final money judgments against the United StatesJudgment Fund - FAQs - Bureau of the Fiscal Service - Treasurytreasury . When court judgments or DOJ settlements require payment, the Treasury typically remits payment without congressional oversight—billions of dollars transferred each year from the public fisc to private partiesCongress’s Authority to Restrict Monetary Civil Settlements | Congress.gov | Library of Congresscongress .
The Judgment Fund can pay when awards or settlements are final and monetary, payment is authorized under 31 U.S.C. 1304(a)(3), and payment may not legally be made from any other source of agency fundsJudgment Fund - FAQs - Bureau of the Fiscal Service - Treasurytreasury . Whether tariff refunds would qualify remains unclear, particularly given that CBP's normal procedures rather than litigation judgments typically process customs refunds. The administration could potentially argue that refunds should come from CBP's appropriations rather than the Judgment Fund.
The administration's resistance to refund implementation threatens to reshape several foundational principles of trade law.
The Atmus Filtration ruling establishes that the CIT's exclusive subject matter jurisdiction under the Customs Courts Act of 1980 allows it to issue orders that benefit all similarly situated importers, not just those who filed suitPolicy Backgrounder: Tariffs Refund Ruling and Next Stepsconference-board . This distinguishes trade adjudication from other federal litigation and could make the CIT a more powerful forum for challenging trade policies. As the court noted, the Constitution's Uniformity Clause requires that "all Duties, Imposts, and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States," supporting uniform application of trade rulingsPolicy Backgrounder: Tariffs Refund Ruling and Next Stepsconference-board .
If this jurisdictional interpretation survives appeal, it would establish that trade-related disputes can yield nationwide relief even after Trump v. CASA limited such relief in other contexts. An appeal by the government would likely face an uphill battle given that the Supreme Court upheld the Federal Circuit's decision and explicitly recognized the CIT's exclusive jurisdictionPolicy Backgrounder: Tariffs Refund Ruling and Next Stepsconference-board .
The Learning Resources decision signals broader judicial willingness to constrain presidential tariff authority. All six justices in the majority—in different ways—expressed general skepticism of the idea that the president could ever wield sweeping tariff authorityThoughts on the Potential Broader Significance of the Supreme Court's Tariff Decisionreason . Three conservative justices held that the major questions doctrine applies to tariffs and possibly to other delegations of congressional power related to foreign affairsThoughts on the Potential Broader Significance of the Supreme Court's Tariff Decisionreason .
Other tariff authorities, including Section 301 of the Trade Act and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, remain in effect Supreme Court Strikes Down IEEPA Tariffs | Authority Limited morganlewis . However, the Court's reasoning may invite future challenges. The Federal Circuit has historically applied a deferential standard from Maple Leaf Fish Co. v. United States (1985), but the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturned Chevron deference and held that courts must "exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority"Congressional and Presidential Authority to Impose Import Tariffs | Congress.gov | Library of Congresscongress . The extent to which Loper Bright will reshuffle the Maple Leaf standard remains an open question, but it signals courts are reexamining deference to presidential interpretations of statutory tariff authoritiesCongressional and Presidential Authority to Impose Import Tariffs | Congress.gov | Library of Congresscongress .
The ruling has prompted calls for Congress to reclaim its constitutional authority over tariffs. Duke Law Professor Timothy Meyer suggests reforms including automatic expiration of tariffs imposed under Section 232 and Section 301, requiring explicit congressional approval for trade agreements, and shifting trade appeals from the Federal Circuit to the D.C. CircuitThe Role of Congress When it Comes to Tariffs | Duke University School of Lawduke . Legislation including the "Tariff Refund Act of 2026" has been introduced, which would set a 180-day deadline for processing tariff refunds, though such legislation is unlikely to be considered by Congress in the near termCourt of International Trade Orders IEEPA Tariffs to Be Refunded | Insights | Greenberg Traurig LLPgtlaw .
The uncertainty surrounding tariff refund implementation has fundamentally altered how import-dependent businesses approach financial planning, supply chain decisions, and litigation strategy.
Roughly 97% of U.S. importers are small businesses, according to the U.S. Chamber of CommerceSmall businesses face uphill battle for tariff refundsfinance-commerce . Of the $175 billion in tariffs paid, small businesses paid approximately $55 billionSmall businesses face uphill battle for tariff refundsfinance-commerce . For many cash-strapped small businesses, pursuing refunds through litigation would divert time and money from keeping operations runningSmall businesses face uphill battle for tariff refundsfinance-commerce .
A secondary market has emerged where distressed investors purchase potential tariff refund claims from importers. Before the Supreme Court decision, reciprocal tariff claims were trading at 15% to 35% of face value, while fentanyl-related claims ranged from 5% to 15%Supreme Court Voids Tariffs: Effects on Trading Refund Claims | Alston & Birdalston . Following the ruling, claims are trading at roughly 45 cents on the dollar on average, up from 40 cents immediately after the Supreme Court ruling—and around double pre-ruling levelsWall Street is betting on tariff refunds after Supreme Court ruling - NPRnpr .
This pricing reflects market expectations about the probability and timing of government compliance. Some importers refuse to sell out of principle, while others cannot afford to waitSmall businesses face uphill battle for tariff refundsfinance-commerce . Banks and hedge funds purchasing claims at these discounts are effectively betting on eventual government compliance while accepting the risk and cost of pursuing those claimsWall Street is betting on tariff refunds after Supreme Court ruling - NPRnpr .
The tariff uncertainty has forced companies to make major investment decisions without knowing whether their tariff costs are temporary or permanent. According to a Thomson Reuters survey, 72% of trade professionals identified U.S. tariff volatility as the most impactful regulatory change—a dramatic increase from 41% the previous yearThe 2026 supply chain challenge: Global trade disruptionthomsonreuters . Supply chain management emerged as the dominant strategic priority, cited by 68% of trade professionals—nearly double the 35% who identified it as a top concern just one year agoThe 2026 supply chain challenge: Global trade disruptionthomsonreuters .
With 57% of CEOs actively relocating or restructuring their supply chainsThe Restructuring of Global Manufacturing Supply Chains | Manufacturers Alliancemanufacturersalliance , the most common tariff mitigation strategies involve changing sourcing patterns (65% of respondents), renegotiating supplier contracts (57%), and nearshoring or moving manufacturing to the U.S. (51%)The 2026 supply chain challenge: Global trade disruptionthomsonreuters . Meanwhile, 43% of respondents plan to shift more of their supply chain footprint to the United States over the next three years—a 25 percentage-point increase from the previous year—while 38% plan to reduce their presence in ChinaSupply chain risk pulse 2025: Tariffs reshuffle global trade prioritiesmckinsey .
However, many companies are holding back from multi-million-dollar investments that could be upended by the next policy announcement. As one researcher noted: "Many companies are just sitting on their hands, eating the higher costs and waiting for the snow globe to settle"Trade tariffs, rerouting and the price of uncertainty | Institute for Business in Global Societyhbs . The volatility of U.S. trade policy may now prove even more damaging than the tariffs themselvesTrade tariffs, rerouting and the price of uncertainty | Institute for Business in Global Societyhbs .
Trade uncertainty has driven unprecedented hedging activity. Eight in 10 companies surveyed by MillTech experienced losses from unhedged currency positions in 2025, with U.S. firms losing an average of $9.9 million and some companies reporting losses exceeding $25 millionTariffs and Dollar Volatility Push Corporates to Expand Hedging Strategies - Bloombergbloomberg . Companies are ramping up currency hedging as tariffs and a sliding U.S. dollar reshape corporate risk strategyTariffs and Dollar Volatility Push Corporates to Expand Hedging Strategies - Bloombergbloomberg .
The European Central Bank noted that trade policy uncertainty has become a major source of global instability. Companies must carry excess inventory, hedge against losses, and reconfigure supply chains—all raising costs and discouraging investmentGlobal Trade Update (September 2025): Trade policy uncertainty looms over global markets | UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD)unctad . Sudden shifts unsettle exchange rates and weaken investor confidence, capital flows, and credit conditionsGlobal Trade Update (September 2025): Trade policy uncertainty looms over global markets | UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD)unctad .
Small Business Vulnerability: One coffee roasting company described opening a new roasting facility just as it faced 50% tariffs on Brazilian coffee: "We did all of this careful forecasting for our construction, for our budget, for hiring... and that ran through our budgeted working capital a lot faster than we anticipated"Small business owners on economic uncertainty of Trump's tariffsyoutube . "The number of conversations and analyses we've done... the time suck on our team has been monumental," reported one outerwear company CEOSmall businesses face uphill battle for tariff refundsfinance-commerce .
Construction: A construction company reported paying a 900% increase in tariffs comparing 2024 to 2025, noting that "even though it's a 20% tariff, a lot of products used to not have any tariffs on them"How do Trump's tariffs and SCOTUS' decision impact small businesses?youtube . The ruling is "a good step... but it's also now we're stepping into tomorrow is a big unknown because we still can't plan our business"How do Trump's tariffs and SCOTUS' decision impact small businesses?youtube .
Manufacturing: Manufacturing is the most exposed sector to tariffs, accounting for 19 of the top 25 most-affected subsectors. The most exposed industries face estimated cost increases of 2% to 4.5% on imported intermediate inputsThe Restructuring of Global Manufacturing Supply Chains | Manufacturers Alliancemanufacturersalliance . Tariff-sensitive manufacturing employment has fallen 0.3% year-to-date through July, worse than the 0.6% pre-2025 trend growthShort-Run Effects of 2025 Tariffs So Far | The Budget Lab at Yaleyale .
Companies are pursuing diverse strategies to navigate the uncertainty:
USMCA Compliance: Canada Goose, which manufactures 75% of its products in Canada, reported on its May 2025 earnings call that tariffs had only a "minimal impact" on their business because Canadian-made products meeting USMCA rules of origin are exempt from U.S. tariffsVertical Integration as a Strategic Hedge Against Tariffsyoutube . Companies considering USMCA strategies must meet rules of origin thresholds—for example, apparel requires 62.5% regional contentVertical Integration as a Strategic Hedge Against Tariffsyoutube .
Tariff Engineering: Companies are working with engineers to determine whether alternative materials can replace steel, aluminum, or copper components to avoid derivative tariffs. Composite materials that don't contain these metals can be substituted in many applicationsCreating Resilience and Sustainability: Navigating the Impact of Tariffs and Disruptionyoutube .
Foreign Trade Zones: A Baltimore-based fuel company importing $100 million of raw petroleum products created an FTZ at their terminal, achieving an ROI of $3.4 million annually with benefits increasing over time as initial costs diminishCreating Resilience and Sustainability: Navigating the Impact of Tariffs and Disruptionyoutube .
First Sale Valuation: For imports involving buying or selling agents (approximately 60% of imports from China), companies can declare to customs only the amount paid to the factory, excluding the 10% commission to the agent, potentially yielding savings of 5% or more on dutiesCreating Resilience and Sustainability: Navigating the Impact of Tariffs and Disruptionyoutube .
Technology Investment: 40% of respondents report exploring emerging technologies such as AI or blockchain for trade compliance, compared to just 6% in 2024—a nearly sevenfold increase. Trade and supply chain data analytics has become the most widely used technology (58%)The 2026 supply chain challenge: Global trade disruptionthomsonreuters .
The tariff uncertainty contributes to broader economic headwinds. OECD projections see U.S. GDP growth potentially slowing to 1.5% in 2026, with inflation potentially climbing to 3.9% by late 2025Vertical Integration as a Strategic Hedge Against Tariffsyoutube . Approximately 40% of tariff costs are passed directly to households through higher retail prices, with the remainder split between importers and foreign exportersHow are tariffs changing global trade in 2025?bessemertrust . Real imports were more than 7% below 2023-24 trend as of June, with Budget Lab calculations suggesting real imports will be persistently 19% lower in the long run as a result of 2025 tariffsShort-Run Effects of 2025 Tariffs So Far | The Budget Lab at Yaleyale .
CEO confidence fell to its lowest level since 2022, with more than half of CEOs expecting conditions to worsen over the next six months'Danger zone': Top companies weather uncertainty as Trump's tariffs fluctuatego . Uncertain economic conditions are now the most frequently cited challenge for business leaders (49%), ahead of revenue growth (33%) and tariff-related issues (31%)2026 Business Leaders Outlook: Expectations & Trends - J.P. Morganjpmorgan .
The European Central Bank notes that the "second China shock"—China's increased global presence in more advanced products and technologies—combined with U.S. trade policy uncertainty creates compounding challenges. Exports to the United States have fallen significantly when the pharmaceutical sector is excludedMeeting of 4-5 February 2026europa . Since the trade agreement between the United States and China has not yet been concluded, there could be further trade diversion of Chinese exports to other markets, putting additional pressure on global trade flowsMeeting of 4-5 February 2026europa .
Global imports to the U.S. surged in the first quarter of 2025 as goods were front-loaded, then dropped sharply in the second quarter once tariffs took hold—showing that uncertainty itself can be more disruptive than tariffsGlobal Trade Update (September 2025): Trade policy uncertainty looms over global markets | UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD)unctad . Air shipments to the U.S. jumped nearly 10% in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period a year before as firms rushed shipments before tariff deadlinesGlobal Trade Update (September 2025): Trade policy uncertainty looms over global markets | UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD)unctad .
The tariff refund standoff raises fundamental questions about the rule of law in trade policy. If the executive branch can delay or refuse court-ordered refunds indefinitely, it creates what Justice Jackson aptly called a "zone of lawlessness" where the executive can violate rights with impunityRethinking Judicial Power & Remedial Restraint - Catholic Law Scholarship Repositorylaw .
Examples from other countries that have experienced democratic backsliding illustrate the potential dangers. In Turkey, Poland, Hungary, and Russia, autocrats have defied court attempts to rein in executive powerThe Trump administration's conflict with the courts, explainedprotectdemocracy . El Salvador's president fired all judges on the country's high court and the independent attorney general. Turkish and Hungarian leaders packed their highest courts and expanded their jurisdiction to flood them with insignificant cases to inhibit their functioningExecutive Defiance of Judicial Orders and the Response of the Legal ...democracydefendersfund .
The administration's failure to comply with court orders "poses a serious threat to the rule of law"Executive Defiance of Judicial Orders and the Response of the Legal ...democracydefendersfund . If the administration successfully marginalizes the judiciary in trade matters, it could erode individual rights, corrupt economies, and silence dissent in this critical policy domainExecutive Defiance of Judicial Orders and the Response of the Legal ...democracydefendersfund .
For import-dependent industries, the ultimate question is whether court rulings represent enforceable legal rights or merely advisory opinions subject to executive discretion. The pricing of refund claims in secondary markets—at 45 cents on the dollar—reflects a market judgment that substantial uncertainty remains about whether the government will honor its legal obligations. Until that uncertainty is resolved, businesses must incorporate into their risk calculus not just the direct costs of tariffs but also the possibility that even court victories may not yield relief.
As one trade attorney summarized: "We've tried to sit down and look at the what-if scenarios and you play those out in a thousand different directions and we simply don't know... because we don't know what the administration or Congress will do next"How do Trump's tariffs and SCOTUS' decision impact small businesses?youtube . This irreducible uncertainty—whether legal obligations will be honored, whether court orders will be implemented, whether the constitutional order itself will hold—has become a permanent feature of the risk landscape for American business.